The Committee met at 9:00 a.m. in the House of Assembly.

CHAIR (Littlejohn): Good morning ladies and gentlemen, if we could get started.

Thank you.

I would like to welcome everybody here this morning to the Social Services Committee and I would like to welcome the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services.

Good morning everyone. My name is Glenn Littlejohn. I am the MHA for the Port de Grave District and I am the Chair of the Social Services Committee for Estimates.

Just some general comments before we get started this morning. When you are speaking please state your name and wait for the red light to come on because it is being recorded by Hansard.

Minister, I will provide you the opportunity, in a little bit, to have an opening remark if you wish to have it. Then we will follow the standard procedure, Andrew, Gerry, as we have been doing for the last few meetings, fifteen, ten, ten, as we go.

Could I ask that we move the minutes of the Department of Justice of May 1?

Could I have a mover, please?

MR. LITTLE: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Mr. Little.

Could I have a seconder?

MR. CRUMMELL: Seconded.

CHAIR: Seconded by Mr. Crummell.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Contra-minded.

Carried.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Could we call the first heading, please?

CLERK (Ms Murphy): 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Heading 1.1.01.

Good morning everybody.

Could the Committee members please introduce themselves?

MR. A. PARSONS: Good morning. Andrew Parsons, MHA, Burgeo – La Poile.

MS BUCKLE: Joy Buckle, Researcher.

MS ROGERS: Gerry Rogers, MHA, St. John's Centre.

MS WILLIAMS: Susan Williams, Researcher.

MR. LITTLE: Glen Little, MHA, Bonavista South.

MR. CRUMMELL: Dan Crummell, MHA, St. John's West.

MR. CORNECT: Tony Cornect, MHA, District of Port au Port.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Minister, if you would have your staff introduce yourselves and then we will go to opening remarks.

MS JOHNSON: Okay. Charlene Johnson, Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS MACDONALD: Sheree MacDonald, Deputy Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS MOORE: Julie Moore, Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Child, Youth and Family Services.

MR. GRANDY: Paul Grandy, Financial Comptroller, Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS LUNDRIGAN: Wanda Lundrigan, Assistant Deputy Minister, Service Delivery and Regional Operations.

MS COMPANION: Lori Anne Companion, Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Programs, Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS HUNT: Michelle Hunt, Director of Communications, Child, Youth and Family Services.

MR. MOORES: Wayne Moores, Manager of Budgeting, Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS MANDVILLE: Stephanie Mandville, Director of Human Resources.

MS MAIDMENT: Donna Maidment, Executive Assistant, Child, Youth and Family Services.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Minister, it is all yours.

MS JOHNSON: Okay.

Good morning everybody. I would like to point out in our opening remarks that we have not had a full department for a full year. As you know, we transitioned the Regional Health Authorities four stages. Western has been in for a full year because they came in last March 28. We had Central in for part of the year from July; Eastern came in, in two parts in October, November; and then we had Labrador transfer in, in March of this year.

You will see what we have tried to do is, in the past our department would put all of the money into Grants and Subsidies and send it out to the Regional Health Authorities. Now that we have them in, and this is the start of a first year, we have made a best attempt at breaking out that Grants and Subsidies money and putting it into Purchased Services, putting it into Professional Services, breaking out the salaries and all of that.

So, bear in mind that as we go forward this will likely change next year. We have to refine it as we go. We still had bills coming in mid-April. We are still getting a feel for everything that was out there in the Regional Health Authorities. That would be the biggest thing that I would explain.

Other than that, we are really pleased to announce more rounding of our organizational structure; in terms of staff, twenty-nine new positions. Of course, our 10-Year Child Care Strategy is something that we are very pleased to have there, and the continuum of care strategy for foster families.

There is a lot more in it, but I guess we can get to the details and the estimates. It is probably best, because we have Status of Women after this as well. I do not know if you can give me a signal when you are ending so I can have those staff, rather than make them wait a couple of hours. If you can give me kind of a ten, fifteen minute notice so we can get them here.

Okay. So we will get right to it, if that is fine.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister.

Andrew.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to first thank the minister and the members of the department for being here and giving us this opportunity to ask questions.

The first question, I just want to know how many permanent employees in the department?

MS JOHNSON: Seven hundred permanent and about 100 temporary.

MR. A. PARSONS: Minister, of these employees, how many are in your office?

MS JOHNSON: Well, in the office on Elizabeth Avenue, the provincial headquarters office, there is probably about eighty, ninety there.

MR. A. PARSONS: How many of these would be under Program Development and Planning?

MS JOHNSON: Does that include front-line services as well?

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes.

MS JOHNSON: Yes. Oh, I am sorry. Do you mean how many of the ninety are in programming?

MR. A. PARSONS: No, total.

MS JOHNSON: How many? All of them are in programming. It is all of them, all but ninety. So it would be about 610 – or 600, if we are going to round it.

MR. A. PARSONS: Are you able to tell me what you plan to spend this year in the department on your permanent employees, what are the salaries?

MS JOHNSON: Are we what? Sorry.

MR. A. PARSONS: Would you be able to tell me what the salaries are for this year?

MS JOHNSON: The overall salaries, I would have to add up every line.

MR. A. PARSONS: This is that list that we badgering about in the House that was not included this year. The minister did not include it.

MS JOHNSON: It is $44 million for salaries.

MR. A. PARSONS: That is for all of the employees, permanent and temporary?

MS JOHNSON: No, that would just be permanent.

MR. A. PARSONS: Permanent.

How about temporary?

MS JOHNSON: Just give us a minute here.

MR. A. PARSONS: No problem.

MS JOHNSON: While she is looking, if you want to go on to the next question.

MR. A. PARSONS: Sure.

I am going to move under the Minister's Office, 1.1.01, under Transportation and Communications, line 03, only $20,000 of the $50,000 budgeted was spent last year. Why wasn't the rest spent?

MS JOHNSON: Of course, the costs vary from year to year, particularly in my transportation. I have been in this department for a year-and-one-half and the first time I had out-of-Province travel was last week and it was to Halifax. It just depends on where the FPT meetings are and things like that. It was less last year, but you never know what might come this year.

There is $18 million for temporary salaries. I was just handed a note.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you.

MS JOHNSON: My travel was really just within the Province last year for the transitions; we focused on that.

MR. A. PARSONS: I see the same amount is budgeted, so there is nothing out of the ordinary right now planned, but, like you say, it is hard to gauge.

MS JOHNSON: Some of the meetings that we are aware of for this year for FPT – there is one potentially in Manitoba. So you have to budget that every year because it could be on the West Coast, our FPT for Atlantic ministers – I am sorry, that would be Status of Women; that is here in St. John's. It just varies year to year where the meetings are.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

I am just moving down now to 1.2.01, Executive Support.

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: There is an increase between what was spent last year and what is budgeted this year. Are there new positions being added? This is under Salaries.

MS JOHNSON: Under Salaries?

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes.

MS JOHNSON: There is an increase this year from what was budgeted last year, yes. We hired an additional Clerk Typist III and that would also include some of the step increases to the staff in that division.

MR. A. PARSONS: In the same section but line 03, Transportation and Communications, this budget was actually overspent last year. What apprised this overage?

MS JOHNSON: A lot of travel with the regional health authorities transitioning in and a lot of on-the-ground work that had to be done. It is a little more than anticipated. This year we have increased it again because we have two additional positions. We now have the ADM of Service Delivery and we have an administrative assistant.

The plan is to continue with the travel. They are new in our department and it is really getting out there doing the hands-on piece of work, making them understand how government works, and doing the drill down.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Would it be fair to say under line 04, Supplies, it would be the same logic applied to the overage there?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, that would be again due to their RHAs coming in, and more supplies for the two staff I mentioned again.

MR. A. PARSONS: I guess it would be fair to make a general comment here that going into this year, the first year we have everybody under your wing. You will get a better idea next year when you get into the –

MS JOHNSON: Absolutely, these numbers will change around no doubt for next year. We also have Labrador now, so you have more supplies – it is more expensive in Labrador. The travel would be more expensive to Labrador. You have to keep that in mind as well.

MR. A. PARSONS: Under the Purchased Services aspect, line 06, can you give me an idea of what constituted the overage under Purchased Services? It was $15,300 budgeted and $40,300 spent.

MS JOHNSON: Oh, I am sorry. I am on the wrong line.

Yes, that was due to, again, all of the transitional meetings happening. There was an increase in printing, meeting rooms, conference calls, and that sort of thing.

MR. A. PARSONS: Under your Professional Services, line 05, where does your $15,000 go?

MS JOHNSON: That is why you fooled me up. You are going backwards.

MR. A. PARSONS: I skipped lines.

MS JOHNSON: Eight thousand dollars of it went to Vivid Communications, and that was for promotion of our department, the fact that we are now a line department, and talking about what CYFS does. The other $7,000 – could you quickly find that?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MS JOHNSON: I do not have the breakdown of who it went to, the other $7,000. It just says other consultants.

OFFICIAL: That would have been the child care consultant –

MS JOHNSON: Part of it was the child care consultants – Bob Crocker.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Two questions arising out of that. So there are basically two different fees there on your $15,000: one was your Vivid Communications and one was Mr. Crocker. Are these the same ones you anticipate paying this year under the $15,000?

MS JOHNSON: No, we would anticipate whatever might come up in terms of the Child Care Strategy. One of the things we anticipate we would like to do is with the operating grants we announced in our Child Care Strategy. We modelled up in-house different models of child care centres. Some might have forty-eight spaces, some might have sixty, and some might have a combination of part-time and full-time. I would like to hire an outside expertise to have a look at our model and make sure we are on the right track before we go saying what the operating grant would be. Part of it would come out of that. It is not a big piece of work.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

I am going to move on to 1.2.02, Corporate Services and I am going to start under line 01, Salaries. I understand with the transition, this might explain some of it. Last year there was just under $4 million budgeted, but $2.4 million spent. This year you are budgeting $4.4 million.

Can you please explain the changes there? What comprised that?

MS JOHNSON: For the revised budget in 2011-2012 and not spending the full $4 million, only spending $2.4 million that was really due to delays in filling positions. I have the positions here. I can list them for you: financial officer, Management Analyst I, Clerk IV, manager of clients' financial services, administrative officer, Clerk Typist III, program and policy development specialist, quality assurance, we had three auditors, senior policy and planning research analyst, and a statistician. All of those were delayed in hiring.

Then the increase in this year, we have additional funds there for two social worker positions in our training unit. Because we are still doing the transition, Health and Community Services transitioned in $456,000, once we figured out whose share belonged to each department. So, we are not sure where they will fall into salaries.

We call it "fitting the dress", once you are in a particular area and you figure out for your configuration of one social worker, twenty cases, one supervisor, and one social worker assistant, and one clerical for that team approach. So we kind of left that open to give us the flexibility, because we are just looking at Labrador now and finishing up Eastern. That would be more salaries, $456,000 in those salaries, but we are not sure what positions they will be yet.

MR. A. PARSONS: Those two new social workers you just mentioned, where will they be based?

MS JOHNSON: The training unit is in Stephenville.

MR. A. PARSONS: Stephenville.

I am going to move down to line 03, Transportation and Communications.

CHAIR: 1.2.02, line 03?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes, that is correct.

The same question there, Minister, last year there was a fair bit more spent than was budgeted. Can you go through the overage with me?

MS JOHNSON: Again, this was due to the increased travel with the transitional meetings. Also, some of the costs at provincial office were higher than expected. Communication, phone, postage, and courier services for provincial office, they were higher than expected.

MR. A. PARSONS: It looks like you are anticipating – there is an extra, just say $80,000 or so budgeted for this year. What are you anticipating that would cost more this year?

MS JOHNSON: Again, that will be increased travel to the regions, and with all of the staff at provincial office, the communication, postage, and so on. Really, it is just a reflection of the historical data of the money that we have spent last year. We have $201,000 of that will be for travel, $20,000 for postage and courier, and $60,000 for communications.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am just going to move down to line 05, Professional Services. What were you anticipating spending in last year's budget that was not spent?

MS JOHNSON: What we did was we transferred $147,200 to Program Development and Planning. You will see that in the next section, that it was transferred there. Of the $31,000 that was left, we spent that on staff training.

MR. A. PARSONS: This staff training, I guess that is outside. If it is professional services you go outside for training?

MS JOHNSON: That was contracted with the College of the North Atlantic. You will see that $147,000 on the next section. Again, it is just about moving money around with our experience.

CHAIR: Are you leaving 1.2.02?

MR. A. PARSONS: I have a couple small points on that section, if I might clue up that way?

CHAIR: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Under Purchased Services, can you give me an idea of the difference between what was spent last year? There is a decrease this year, what will you not need to purchase?

MS JOHNSON: The increase last year was for additional costs for the lease at Pippy Place. That staff are now down with us on Elizabeth Avenue. We purchased the building on Elizabeth Avenue, so we no longer have a least cost now which is part of the reduction for this year, $65,300 for the lease accommodations. That came out from this year.

We had moving costs last year of $30,000, so that is gone. Last year we provided $30,000 for a child welfare conference here. That is gone for this year, but we have added in $38,000 from Program Development and Planning which you will see on the other page. That is, again, to better reflect how the budget should look.

MR. A. PARSONS: My final question on Corporate Services, under the property section there is a fair bit more spent than was budgeted. Would that be for the new office, I presume?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, it was.

MR. A. PARSONS: In terms of equipment, I hate to get very specific, but are we talking computers, are we talking new couches?

MS JOHNSON: The whole office had to be furnished. It was stripped down to the studs and had to be redone.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Thank you, Andrew.

Gerry.

MS ROGERS: Thank you.

I am very happy to be here this morning. I know you have had a huge challenge ahead of you creating this new department. The work that is covered under this department can be so complex, so very important, and so very challenging. I congratulate you for your work and thank you for giving us this opportunity to meet with you this morning.

I have a few questions about programming as well and some of the challenges that you might face aside from some of the line items, but we can go through some of the line items here now.

In 1.2.03 Program Development and Planning, we see an increase here in Salaries.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, that is the continuum of care strategy we announced. We will have three temporary program consultants and one project manager working on that piece. We have two temporary employees created: a Clerk II and a program consultant in intervention services.

MS ROGERS: Minister, can you tell me a little bit more about the continuum of care and where you see that going this year?

MS JOHNSON: This is going to be a lengthy answer.

MS ROGERS: That is okay.

MS JOHNSON: Well, the continuum of care strategy is completely revamping the way the current system operates. We will be introducing a level system.

Level I would be equivalent to the child welfare allowance homes that we have now where children are placed with a significant other family member. We will be calling them kinship homes under the new system. Really, that is where we want to focus most of our efforts because research shows that the children are better off with a family member, significant other, or a very close friend.

Level II will be pretty much what you see for the majority of our foster homes today.

Level III would be what we will call a specialized or therapeutic foster home. These would be children with additional needs, more difficult behaviours.

Then a Level IV home would be our staffed living arrangements that we have now. Our group homes, all the work that we do through Waypoints, and the ALAs. The whole focus of this strategy is to eliminate ALAs. We have proposed to do that over two years.

Foster families will receive compensation based on their skill level. There will be a lot of training involved. The majority of foster homes will see an increase in the money they receive. Nobody will see less. There are some that are already getting the maximum every which way.

The other big change would be we are going to go to block funding. We have not announced all of the details of this yet, so I am giving you the generalities. We plan to announce it all. The Canadian Foster Families Association is being hosted here in St. John's May 22 to June 3 this year. We provided $55,000 for that as well.

Around the block funding, I talked to a lot of foster parents and the Foster Families Association. It is real difficult when you are interested in becoming a foster parent or you currently are one, and when you call up you wonder what the compensation is. The answer is: Well, it really depends on the child and the needs of the child. It leads to having to label a child to get money.

What we are proposing is to eliminate that and have a block fund. Let the foster parents do what it is we are asking them to do. We trust them to care for our children. Here is a block fund. Go do what you would do with your own child. Those are the major changes, really, in a nutshell.

Is there anything else to add?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible) mention the increased training.

MS JOHNSON: I did mention the increased training, yes.

MS ROGERS: The block funding would be a certain amount of money without assessing the specific needs of a child, unless there is the specialized (inaudible).

MS JOHNSON: If there are special circumstances, yes, that is assessed on a one-on-one. We are talking recreation – kids are involved in swimming or sport – transportation, or respite. We know what the general respite rates and how often you have respite. We are just talking about lumping those everyday and every-month costs that we have an average of into one block fund.

MS ROGERS: For instance, a foster family can choose not to use money for respite and use it for recreation?

MS JOHNSON: Absolutely, or you can choose to not have respite. We certainly encourage the respite, but if you do not want one month to do respite then that is money you might put away for a trip or something. It is letting them do what we do as parents.

MS ROGERS: Great.

Is there a funding differentiation between the kinship homes and the foster homes?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, there is. We are proposing under this strategy to increase the amount of money to the kinship homes. We have not released the details as to how much yet, but that will come out very soon. We currently have 400 kinship homes, CWA homes, and they get on average about $380 a month, plus the Child Welfare Allowance.

A foster family with a child will get – well, it varies based on the age – for a zero to two-year-old to get $915 a month. For twelve years old and up, you get $915. I think if it is from two years old to five years old, it is $715; six years old to twelve years old, it is $815; and then twelve years old and up, it is $915 again. Correct me if I am wrong. So there is a difference.

MS ROGERS: Why the difference?

MS JOHNSON: That is just the way it has been historically done, and that is why we are saying it should change. If that is where we want our focus to be, to have as many of these people with families, and the costs are no different, then –

MS ROGERS: So are you looking at doing the funding for kinship homes on the same level as the foster homes?

MS JOHNSON: Well, that will be announced in June, what the specifics will be.

MS ROGERS: What about money and resources to help keep children in a home before they get to the point of having to be removed? We see the stressors, the economic stressors, and what that can do to a family.

MS JOHNSON: We already do that. We have 7,200 children on our caseload – sorry, 835 of them are in our care, so the other 6,400 are still with their parents and we are working with those children while still in the home. They may need a parenting course; they may need a drug and addictions course. It depends on the family and what the issues are.

With the parenting course, we provide money to various groups to do that – help me with the name, it beings with C –

OFFICIAL: Choices for Youth.

MS JOHNSON: Choices for Youth. They do parenting courses and that sort of thing.

The drug and additions and other mental health type assistance, they have to use the same system that everybody else uses in the health care system. We do not get special skipping the line treatment or anything like that. They have to line up like everybody else.

MS ROGERS: What about respite for natural families, is that available?

MS JOHNSON: Do you want to speak to it (inaudible).

MS LUNDRIGAN: It would not be considered respite in the way that we would provide respite for foster parents to take weekends away or to have the children moved to another family for a weekend just to give them some alone time, but we have put services in place in the home to assist a mom who might be having difficulty coping rather than remove children. That could be to assist with homemaking type services, cooking, child care overall. We would also provide services in terms of assistance for a mom to retrain or go back to some kind of educational program. We have, certainly, some specialized daycare for some of our high-risk children.

MS ROGERS: No specific assistance, like recreation or respite that a kinship home or a foster home might get.

MS LUNDRIGAN: No, you are right.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Thank you.

MS JOHNSON: I guess though, Wanda, it would be fair to say that you might have seen some of these cases in the different regions because the different regions were all operating – well, it was not consistent. So, we are looking for consistency now and we are looking to improve that and have the same level of service throughout the Province. That is one of the areas we are focusing on improving.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Thank you very much.

CHAIR: Gerry, this would be a clue-up question for this, please.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

To be able to eliminate to the ALAs in two years, can you tell me how many children are presently in ALAs?

MS JOHNSON: The number changes. Today I think it is thirty-nine, but they might have more of an update for me now.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MS JOHNSON: Yes, it is still thirty-nine.

MS ROGERS: Can we have a list – certainly not of names or anything like that, but perhaps comparing in the past few years, the number of kids living in ALAs.

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

I can tell you last year it was the highest ever with about seventy-two. We have really put a real focus – there is a weekly meeting that is held in the office. We are really trying to get that number down. I do not have it right here in front of me, but remember the number 211 came in and 250 went out. So, fortunately, we are getting more out into the foster homes and that is why we are down to thirty-nine. That could change Friday. There are some weekends we get a family of four on a Friday evening, so your number goes to forty-three.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MS JOHNSON: With this thirty-nine, that is in twenty-three ALAs because a lot of these are sibling groups and the sibling groups are much harder to place than singles. The average amount of time in an ALA is about four months.

MS ROGERS: About four months?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Great.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Andrew.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you.

I just wanted to move on in the line to 1.2.04, Administrative Support. This looks like something new. There was no budget year and this year there is $560,000 appropriated. What is that for?

MS JOHNSON: Again, last year this just would have been under Grants and Subsidies to the Labrador-Grenfell Regional Health Authority. This $560,000 is to purchase two mini homes – in Hopedale and Nain. This is really a recruitment strategy to try and get social workers to go to these remote communities. We provide the housing.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

If you take that position, you guys have accommodations available.

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Where are you in the purchase process? Have you guys started that?

MS JOHNSON: It has not gone out yet.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just sort of off the topic for a second, you mentioned while I was asking some questions earlier, you guys purchased an office, your new office?

MS JOHNSON: Government, in Transportation and Works.

MR. A. PARSONS: What was the street address? Is that the one where you are now, 95 Elizabeth?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, 95 Elizabeth.

MR. A. PARSONS: What was the cost on that?

MS JOHNSON: I honestly do not know. Transportation and Works purchased it.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: I was just happy to go into a building with all of my staff, because I was in Natural Resources with seven or eight and then Pippy Place had the other – so it is so great.

MR. A. PARSONS: So this houses everybody now?

MS JOHNSON: This houses all of the provincial headquarters, and it is great for doing work.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am going to move on to 2.1.01, Regional Services.

MS JOHNSON: I think Minister Hedderson's is tonight, so you can ask him.

MR. A. PARSONS: I will put that on Eddie Joyce's list of questions.

MS JOHNSON: I will give him the heads up.

CHAIR: I am not sure if that would be order, because it is Newfoundland and Labrador Housing tonight.

MS JOHNSON: Oh, is it Housing? Sorry.

MR. A. PARSONS: Tom knows all those figures off the top of his head anyway.

CHAIR: We will see if he will answer it.

MR. A. PARSONS: Subhead 2.1.01, again I guess the discrepancy here – the first question, from what was budgeted last year to what was revised, what you spent, about $5 million, give or take, how is that comprised?

MS JOHNSON: This is again due to the transition of Eastern and Labrador staff coming in. It is just about not knowing, really, what the costs were until you get them in.

MR. A. PARSONS: Now this year we have a much bigger expenditure for Salaries. This $55 million, how many of your employees within your department do this pay for?

MS JOHNSON: That would be everybody except for the programs – so the 600 or so.

MR. A. PARSONS: The 610.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, 610. Also, though, in that line, the $55 million, that includes $2.2 million for the budget announcement of those twenty-nine staff, the new twenty-nine staff, that is in there as well, and also the money for the social work students that we announced this year is in there as well. We plan to hire about seventy social worker student co-ops. They never got paid before.

MR. A. PARSONS: Good.

MS JOHNSON: Good recruitment piece.

MR. A. PARSONS: This is a lot of numbers we are throwing out here. So, you have twenty-nine new staff that you are hiring, that was announced?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Would you guys be able to provide me with a list of the positions – have they been classified?

MS JOHNSON: Again, we are still trying to work out that piece as to who needs what, but the majority of them are social workers, front-line social workers and supervisors, and there would be a few clerical and a few social worker assistants in there, but more than half are certainly social workers.

MR. A. PARSONS: Is it your goal to have all these positions filled in this year?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

How many of these social workers are student placements?

MS JOHNSON: Seventy.

MR. A. PARSONS: Seventy?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Excellent.

MS JOHNSON: That is not including summer students, because we hire summer student social workers. These are actually for your work term that you have to do for your degree, so they are going to be paid. Summer students are paid anyway, but we never did pay the social work students.

MR. A. PARSONS: That is a good development.

MS JOHNSON: Being a previous co-op student, I know the value of getting paid for your work as a student. I mean, we work them; they do great work. A lot of them are third and forth year so then the hope is that we keep them.

MR. A. PARSONS: Do not work them too hard so that they do not come back.

MS JOHNSON: I do not know our department has some of the toughest social work.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am just going to move down to your Transportation and Communications budget which has roughly doubled in size. What is the plan there for this extra expenditure?

CHAIR: Subhead 2.1.01.03.

MS JOHNSON: Again, we transferred $1 million from Grants and Subsidies to really reflect the transportation costs. There is a lot of travel, particularly for the regional services and with everybody new coming in there is still a lot of training, a lot of orientation and stuff going on. There is also $76,000 in this piece for the completion of the regional operational model. So it is moving around money. You will see a lot less in Grants and Subsidies.

MR. A. PARSONS: Under line 05, Professional Services, there was an extra $50,000 spent. What did this cover off?

MS JOHNSON: This was for the Family Child Care Initiative that we announced last year, so that would have been spent on that. That was actually specifically for the on-line course. We put a lot of training on-line. We partnered with AECENL, Association of Early Childhood Educators Newfoundland and Labrador, so this is a course that is there for people who provide regulated family child care. Things like play-based learning activities, the Canada Food Guide and safety in the home, all those sorts of things.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

I am just going to move down to the Allowances and Assistance.

MS JOHNSON: This is where it gets real tricky.

MR. A. PARSONS: This being my first Estimates, maybe you can give me an overview on – I guess while we are at it because sometimes I have trouble differentiating between Allowances and Assistance and Grants and Subsidies, if you could give me an overview on what that makes up, how it is spent and the difference in numbers there because one went up significantly, one went down, maybe there is a transfer of funds involved there.

MS JOHNSON: In a nutshell, the Allowance and Assistance, that would be the money that goes to a client, whereas the Grants and Subsidies would go to a service provider. So, a foster family for client pay would be under Allowance and Assistance, but a grant to Choices for Youth would be under Grants and Subsidies. Is that fair, Paul?

Again, this is realigning our money as to where – it is our best guess at the time. I am just checking to see if there is any new money in it. Yes, under Allowance and Assistance, most of it is just reprofiling your money in that big heading before, but part of it is new money.

Under Allowance and Assistance there is new money of $200,000. That is for home support increase to the staff that provides that service. Under Grants and Subsides, the new money there in this year's budget – so of the $55 million, some of the new money is $2.1 million; $1 million for Transportation and Communications – no, that is not new, is it?

OFFICIAL: No, that was a reduction.

MS JOHNSON: That was a reduction.

There was an additional $3 million for program growth. We know, historically year over year, that number of kids that are coming into our care is generally increasing and the cost to provide services to those kids is increasing as well, so there is $3 million there strictly for program growth. There is $600,000 for the home support worker salary increase of twenty-five cents; this is the same as the one in health. There is an increase of $240,000 for salary increases to the Open Custody Group Homes; $270,000 – no, that was moved out, sorry. So those would be the new money in that heading.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just looking at these two headings again, if I could make a couple points, and you can correct me. Looking at what was budgeted last year and what was spent, it looks like there was more money going directly to participants and less money going to providers or groups.

MS JOHNSON: Not necessarily, because the money still might have went to the providers and groups in that Grants heading.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MS JOHNSON: Yes, that is what I am talking about. The grant was the Regional Health Authority, what went to the Regional Health Authority, so I do not know how they spent their money. They did not break it out. They obviously spent it the same way we do but they do not itemize it the same way we do. I would not say it was less money, I think it is just realignment, really.

MR. A. PARSONS: When I look at the Grants and Subsidies, there is $40 million less spent last year and then there is a $50 million drop to this year. Explain that to me so I can –

MS JOHNSON: Because that Grants and Subsidies still included the grants and subsidies that went out to Labrador and Eastern, and part of it still for Central. It is in a bulk, block funding.

MS MOORE: Just to explain. What we have done is taken that big block of money, if you look down that was in Grants last year, $145 million. Now we have tried to disperse that amongst the line items for next year to properly reflect how they are going to be spent. It is split between Salaries. See the huge increase in Salaries –

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes.

MS MOORE: - as well as to Allowances and Assistance, and Grants and Subsidies. We have tried to more properly reflect government's accounting process, properly distribute it. Hopefully, next year it will be closer to where we should be in the out years.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just very quickly, if I may clue up, Mr. Chair.

On the federal revenue part, line 01, it looks like we are budgeted to get from the federal government just over $13 million. Last year we only received $3 million. What happened there?

MS JOHNSON: I am going to try. I think what happened was this is the INAC money. Labrador was not transitioned in. That other $10 million, $9 million-or-so still would have gone to Labrador Grenfell and the $3 million, a partial amount of it would have came to us already. It is because they were not transitioned in with us.

MR. A. PARSONS: It is not that we lost money, it is just –

MS JOHNSON: Government received the same amount of money, it is just Labrador Regional Grenfell got $9 million and we got $3 million.

MR. A. PARSONS: What you are basically telling me is we have to come back here next year and we will have a much better idea on how this goes.

MS JOHNSON: Absolutely.

MR. A. PARSONS: All right.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Thank you, Andrew.

Gerry.

MS ROGERS: Yes. I think it is great that social work students will be paid. I remember being a social work student. All of the engineer students were being paid and did not have to pay full tuition when they were doing their co-op year, the same with business students. Social work students and nurses all paid full tuition, worked like dogs, never got paid, had to pay their own accommodations and travels if they were outside of the city. Bravo for that. I think that is a wonderful step forward, particularly when you look at the number of women who are involved in that.

If you are going to be funding seventy social work student placements, does that include all of the social workers from the School of Social Work, or will there be challenges for other groups and organizations to be able to take the social workers if they do not have the money to pay them?

MS JOHNSON: No, that is over two semesters. So it would be thirty-five per semester.

MS ROGERS: Okay. So there will be other students who will not be paid if other organizations do not have the money to pay them.

MS JOHNSON: That depends on the organization.

MS ROGERS: Okay. So, it is not a position of the department.

MS JOHNSON: This is for government social worker students.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: While you are happy, they are a lot happier than you are according to some (inaudible).

MS ROGERS: I can see some challenges with that as well, in terms of if it is not equal or across the board.

MS JOHNSON: It is the same thing when I did engineering, if you did a work term with government you were definitely going to get paid different than if you did a work term with ExxonMobil.

MS ROGERS: Right.

MS JOHNSON: That is the nature of –

CHAIR: - the beast.

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Yes. Except I think in social work where there is not a tradition at all of being paid, so it will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think there will be some challenges, particularly for some community groups or providers –

MS JOHNSON: There are community groups who pay their social workers, though.

MS ROGERS: Students?

MS JOHNSON: Oh, yes.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great. Anyway, a wonderful step forward, and I applaud that.

Minister, at one point you were saying that you see there are an increasing number of kids coming into care. Can you talk a little bit about that? What are the numbers like and why are there more kids coming into care?

MS JOHNSON: Well, in the last, I would say six to eight months we have had an increase of about eighty kids come into our care. I guess there are various theories as to why.

We proclaimed our act at the end of June. In that act is the duty to report, and a real emphasis on advertising the duty to report. So part of it might be the awareness piece, that more people are aware that this is your obligation to report.

Other theories, there is more family violence, there are more drugs. I do not know what the actual reason is. I do not think anybody can put a real finger on it, and it is different for every family, of course. No matter what it is, it is far better to have the children in our care than in the situations that we see some of these kids in, for certain.

MS ROGERS: When we see this increase of more kids coming into care, does that mean kids who are taken out of the home?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, that is what it means to be in care. It is out-of-home placement.

MS ROGERS: Out-of-home placement. This seems to be an unusual bump increase.

MS JOHNSON: No, it is not unusual at all. This is everywhere across the country.

MS ROGERS: You have no theories as to what may be some of the precipitating factors in terms of the department's prevention work in order –

MS JOHNSON: Well, that is where I talked about earlier different regions were doing different things with supports in the homes. We are really trying to focus on that and do a consistent model and helping people as much as we possibly can in their home; 6,400 of the kids, we work with in their home.

It is not taken lightly when you remove a child. It is very difficult, but it is only done when necessary. We do our best to work with them in the home; we do our best to provide the services. In some cases families do not avail of the services and you are left with no choice.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

Okay.

MS JOHNSON: Just to add to that, not just in our department, but there are horizontal strategies in government. Our Violence Prevention Initiative, our Poverty Reduction Strategy, a piece of work being done in Health on mental health and addictions and so on. There are lots of things government is doing, but when it comes down to it, if the child is at risk of maltreatment or is currently being maltreated then we are left with no other choice.

Some of the cases that I read – and I read too many of them, sometimes – just leave you up at night. It is horrific. Sometimes you can give all the supports, you can throw all kinds of supports and unfortunately, the children have to be removed – but, we are working with 6,400 children in the home. I would much rather work with them in their home than to have them in our care.

I sometimes say it is just 10 per cent in our care, just is not the right word. It is still 10 per cent, but it is only 10 per cent of the kids that we work with are in our care.

MS ROGERS: Okay, thank you.

Youth, who are in care after seventeen years old, what happens to them now?

MS JOHNSON: If they were in care before sixteen, they would continue with us under a youth services agreement until their nineteenth birthday, or if they are in post-secondary school they can continue with us until they are twenty-one.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Do you know how many youth you might have in these programs?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, we do have that here.

MS ROGERS: Then a youth is in your care up until eighteen, because I know that Youth Corrections is up to eighteen.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, the new act – before when you hit sixteen, that is it, you were done with us. Now it is up to the person; they can stay with us until they are eighteen, if they want to.

MS ROGERS: Until their eighteenth birthday, is it?

MS JOHNSON: Is it their eighteenth or nineteenth birthday? Nineteenth birthday, isn't it? They can stay with us voluntarily until they are nineteen.

OFFICIAL: It is eighteen under the act, but they can stay on a youth services agreement until they finish school, until nineteen.

MS JOHNSON: Or until nineteen – so if they are in high school and they want to finish school they can stay until their nineteenth birthday. If not, it is their eighteenth birthday.

MS ROGERS: That is a great step forward too.

MS JOHNSON: It is a lot of work to convince them to stay with us.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MS JOHNSON: They are far better off to do it.

MS ROGERS: For those who want to, that is great to have that ability.

The community Youth Corrections Program, how are the thirty-five youth justice committees doing and are they all in place?

MS JOHNSON: Is that Wanda's department, the thirty-five youth justice committee?

MS LUNDRIGAN: They are still in place. The youth justice committees are purportedly working well and they are still in place all over the Province with assistance, of course, from our permanent staff. They are all voluntary committees, as you know.

MS ROGERS: Right.

The restorative justice and diversion programs, how are those going? I know it is broad.

MS LUNDRIGAN: I have not heard that they are not going well. They seem to be moving along. It is not an area that we have had to focus on because it is one area that seems to have been working reasonably well in terms of the way they worked in the Regional Health Authorities. There has not been a significant focus on that particular program yet, Youth Corrections; there might be more this year. Certainly, the last two years, our focus has been in the whole area of protection, our legislation, and our services to families who are on our protective caseloads.

MS ROGERS: Wanda, are the numbers increasing in terms of the number of youth that have alternative court proceedings?

MS LUNDRIGAN: No, it has been fairly stable, Gerry, over the past, I would say, five to ten years. We have very few in closed custody, very few in open custody.

MS ROGERS: That is always a good thing.

MS JOHNSON: Sixty-six youth in care, that was as of January.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great.

Thank you very much.

Addictions and mental health programs for youth, I know some of that is under Health but also what comes under your department?

MS JOHNSON: It is all under Health.

MS ROGERS: It is all under Health?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MS LUNDRIGAN: That is not to say that we do not have children again who are in our care, who we might facilitate transportation and care in an out-of-Province treatment facility.

MS ROGERS: Right.

MS LUNDRIGAN: We do have children in care that we do support in treatment facilities.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

The funding for a youth, for instance, to go out-of-Province for addiction assistance or treatment, would that come from your department or from Health?

MS LUNDRIGAN: If they are in our care.

MS ROGERS: Only if they are in your care. How many children do you have in your care who are out-of-Province treatment?

MS JOHNSON: Fifty-four as of January.

MS ROGERS: Are most of them addictions or mental health?

MS JOHNSON: Both. There are a lot of behavioural issues, emotional issues.

CHAIR: A clue-up question, Gerry.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Where predominately do you send these kids? Are there certain specific programs that you use or –

MS JOHNSON: There is Ranch Ehrlo. They mostly go to Alberta or Ontario, according to the journey authorizations.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: We have to authorize before they travel and a social worker has to go with them, to transport them, so we pay for all of that.

MS ROGERS: For a family to have a child in care, does a family have to give up custody in order for that child to get those services?

MS JOHNSON: Under the act, there is the risk of maltreatment or maltreatment, but there is also a section on inability to care for your child. So that is how they would come in. If they say they cannot care for their child or we see that they cannot care for their child – and they can do it through a voluntary agreement is the other thing.

MS ROGERS: If I were a parent with a child who has severe emotional problems, I cannot get the services I need or the specific help that the child might need here and then I come to your department or through a social worker to say I need help with my child, in order for my child to get that help, for instance, if my child needs to go away, do I have to give up custody?

MS JOHNSON: No, there are lots of parents who have children with behavioural issue, drug issues and they are still in their care.

MS ROGERS: Still in their care, but still with services from your department?

MS JOHNSON: No, they would not have services from our department. That would be Health.

MS ROGERS: That we be through Health, I see. Okay, great.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Gerry.

Andrew.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I guess I can advise that I have completed my line by lines, but I do have some general questions I am hoping I could ask. I am ready to move to the Women's Policy section, but I do not know, Gerry may have some more.

MS ROGERS: Yes, I do.

MR. A. PARSONS: In terms of my general questions, number one, I do not know if I specifically asked for this but I am hoping you can at least undertake to provide – I would like a departmental list of employees and the salaries, as used to be provided. It was not done this year, but maybe you could have that done when you get an opportunity.

MS JOHNSON: My understanding is – I was not here on Thursday, I was at FPT meetings, but I was following Twitter. I thought Minister Marshall said that is well underway, all of the information is in from the departments and that it would be released soon. Maybe it is going to be tweeted on.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just in case the minister overlooks, my main point is to at least put it on the record and I guess get the undertaking that if the minister does not provide that –

MS JOHNSON: We will certainly do it for you, but I have no doubt the minister will provide it.

MR. A. PARSONS: Perfect. Thank you.

Just some general questions, if I may. Now that this department, there has been a lot of changes, do have a revised organizational model that you might be able to –

MS JOHNSON: Organizational chart?

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes.

MS JOHNSON: Completely revised, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Would I be able to get a copy of that just to make myself more familiar?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, I think we provided a copy.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MS JOHNSON: Oh, sorry, that was to the Third Party, but yes, we will give you a copy as well.

MR. A. PARSONS: Perfect. Thank you.

One question – last year in March it was reported that there was a security guard actually posted at the office out in Port aux Basques. There were no details really given, but is that still in place?

MS JOHNSON: I do not think so.

OFFICIAL: No.

MS JOHNSON: No.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Are there any other offices in the Province that have security staff?

MS JOHNSON: Some of our offices are located in hospitals so if the hospital has security, there will be security. I guess if the need arose we would put it in there on a temporary basis.

MR. A. PARSONS: There is none right now as it stands.

MS JOHNSON: None right now.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

I just wanted to ask a question – this is something that has been considered, but I am just trying to get my own head around it. You mentioned Twitter and we talked about social media, especially Facebook now which would probably be a bit of – is that a tool that is used by your department when it comes to investigations or is there any talk about it? I know it is used by other government departments.

MS JOHNSON: I am not saying we would not look at it. The difficulty is, how do you know what is on it is true, or a picture is not doctored? It is probably not the – I should not speak as a social worker – but I would not rely on Facebook only. I might use it in my toolkit for evidence, but I would not base anything solely on it.

Is that fair to say? You are a social worker.

OFFICIAL: It might lead to an inquiry.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, it may lead to an inquiry, for certain, and we may get a referral that somebody saw something on Facebook. We would look into it because they saw it on Facebook, but in terms of solely relying on it for evidence, that would be difficult.

MR. A. PARSONS: I would not say solely, I just did not know if there was a policy. I actually had a matter under Income Support where part of the evidence in the hearing was: You had pictures on Facebook that showed this – which differentiates from what you are saying, and that was used as evidence.

MS JOHNSON: Yes. Again, we are getting into legal stuff. It might lead you to something, but every case is different, I suppose.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

And yes, you should be careful what you put on Facebook.

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: I just quickly wanted to talk about foster care. What are the numbers in terms of actual foster homes for each of your areas?

MS JOHNSON: We have the latest numbers, 641 foster homes with 665 kids. I know that is the number, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Do you have a breakdown by region?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, we do.

I have it broken down by region as of January, and we have it broken out by relative, significant other, and then non-relative. In Metro we have forty-nine relatives and sixty-five non-relatives, so that would be a total of 114. In Central East we have sixty relatives, eighty-two non-relatives, for a total of 142. Western, we have forty-six relatives, ninety-eight non-relatives, 144 in total. In Lab-Grenfell, we have thirty-nine relatives, ninety non-relatives for 129. Then we break it out separately in Lab-Grenfell for the Innu zone. We have ninety-six relatives and sixteen non-relatives for a total of 112 there.

MR. A. PARSONS: Within the department, is this enough?

MS JOHNSON: No, and that is why we have ALAs. That is why we do not want to have ALAs anymore.

MR. A. PARSONS: Do you have an idea – you have given me a number on how many you have. Are there any numbers or estimates on how many you would like to have per region, if you could, this is the number we would be happy with?

MS JOHNSON: Yes. Bearing in mind that it changes weekly, daily, but under our continuum that we announced we are targeting thirty new homes for this year. Twenty would be your foster homes, nine or ten we have for kinship homes. That is our target.

That combined with our staff living arrangements and looking at things like live-in parent model, when we did the strategy in the numbers I think there were fifty-five in ALAs at that time. Today, there are thirty-nine. In order to get rid of the fifty-five we needed thirty new relative and non-relative homes and a combination of staff living arrangements.

MR. A. PARSONS: I know out my way, I do not know if there are many in the Port aux Basques area right now, a lot of these children have to go off to Stephenville or the Stephenville area. What do you do to recruit new foster parent/foster homes? How do we go about increasing that number?

MS JOHNSON: Part of the strategy is we have $500,000 set aside for a promotional campaign. We are going to go big and large. A lot of it will be using foster families that we currently have. The biggest piece for recruitment is word of mouth.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: They talk about their experiences and so on. The other thing that we have done since we have taken over from the Regional Health Authorities is we have made the staff put a focus on it.

I was just in Corner Brook over Easter break, they were so proud and excited – and rightfully so – to tell me that they just recruited fourteen new foster homes. That is huge. They have not even been in the department a year. So it is really putting that focused attention on that.

Everything we do in the department now, there are going to be set targets. We have indicators. We are going to measure those indicators. There is going to be quality checking on the work they do, so staff are really living up to that.

I was really pleased with Corner Brook, but the promotional campaign is going to be a huge part. Our partners in the Foster Families Association, they are fabulous. They do great work promoting and trying to attract more foster families all the time.

Some of the difficult things are the funding, the compensation and the training. Those are the two biggest things that we heard. Under the new strategy there will be increases and there is going to be a lot more training.

MR. A. PARSONS: They need more money and they need more training.

MS JOHNSON: They need more support.

MR. A. PARSONS: This promotional campaign, when do you anticipate rolling that out?

MS JOHNSON: We will go with the RFP now this summer I think it is, and then it will start in the fall. There is $250,000 in year one, $250,000 in year two.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just a short follow-up to when you should be training/support. So there is funding set aside to make sure these new families get the support? If they are new to this process, they are going to get the help they need to be able to do a good job.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, and we will announce the details early June on all of the specifics of that.

MR. A. PARSONS: Perfect.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, in terms of how much more they will receive.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Mr. Chair, that concludes the questions I have on the CYFS section. I have the Women's Policy, but I will defer back to Ms Rogers.

MS JOHNSON: Okay, yes.

Gerry, how much time do you think you have left on CYFS? I just want to get the staff.

MS ROGERS: Forty-five minutes, maybe.

MS JOHNSON: Okay.

Well, we will not e-mail them yet.

CHAIR: I remind members that we are in Estimates. So, Gerry, kind of make some relevance back to the estimates in the Estimates booklet. I do not mind questions, but let's try to make it relevant to the estimates.

MS ROGERS: I would assume that they would be relevant.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Okay. Thank you.

Go forward.

MS ROGERS: In 2.1.01, item 10, Grants and Subsidies, can we have a list of those? I assume that any list or information that Andrew has asked for I would receive and vice versa.

MS JOHNSON: Okay.

Grants and Subsidies, the $55 million for this year, because before the Grants and Subsidies were just a block fund that went out to the Regional Health Authorities.

MS ROGERS: That is right, yes.

MS JOHNSON: We can get you the list but there is a whole host of – family resource centres would come under that. We fund thirty family resource centres in the Province. The child care centres that we fund under our current capacity initiative and Choices for Youth. We will get you the list.

MS ROGERS: Great.

Thank you.

MS JOHNSON: The Family Child Care Agencies, Foster Families Association, AECENL, there is a whole list, Waypoints.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great.

Thank you very much.

I just want to look at some of your goals in your strategic plan.

MS JOHNSON: I do not have that here so I will have to –

MS ROGERS: Okay.

In the Clinical Services Review, it says: Other key areas for transformation recommended in the Clinical Services Review include to stabilize the workforce through the development of a co-ordinated Province-wide recruitment and retention program, implement a system for the management of complex cases and update policies and procedures to ensure they are appropriate, consistent and clear, and a system for workload measurement.

Have these been done?

MS JOHNSON: Yes. The first one is our organizational structure; the 1 to 20 ratio is 1 to 6 and so on. We made a commitment Province-wide to get to a caseload of one to twenty cases and to have more access to supervisors. This is the one thing we heard so much from social workers is that they needed access to supervisors. Now there is one supervisor for every six social workers. Out of all the things we have done in the department that is the one thing we hear back the most from social workers, it is so nice to have access to a social worker and to be part of a line department.

We also said, and Susan Abel also said in her report that it is going to take about five years to complete our transformation. This is not going to happen overnight. There are no quick fixes.

MS ROGERS: It is a big move.

MS JOHNSON: With the $2.4 million this year and the twenty-nine new staff, that will get us now to a one to twenty-two caseload Province-wide. We went from one to twenty-seven, one to twenty-eight, down to now one to twenty-two. Hopefully, as we continue to do our workload measurement we will be able to realign the staff that we need, depending on where the parts of the Province are the busiest and the caseload is highest. If more staff is needed after that workload measurement, then, of course, we will have to go back to budget next year. So that is around the staffing.

I think you mentioned policies, as well. After the introduction and proclamation of our act in June, last year, we completed a very large binder, new policy book for all social workers. All of that is complete.

The protection and Youth Corrections is being worked on. The recruitment piece, again, our social work students, paying them and just giving them support. That is a huge piece in retaining the staff that we have and making their job somewhat easier to manage.

MS ROGERS: Yes. Of the twenty-nine new positions, have they been filled?

MS JOHNSON: No, they were just announced in this year's Budget.

MS ROGERS: Just announced.

MS JOHNSON: We will be starting that process now. We just brought in Labrador in Easter, so we are still trying to figure out what their workload measurement, what they need the most. Is it a social worker, a supervisor, or clerical and so on? Then, depending what the area needs – this was a huge undertaking to go out and count every single case and see what regions had what. Then looking at the different areas, Youth Corrections, adoption and so on, seeing how it is all spread out and where the work caseload was highest. Then we assign the staff based on where the need is.

MS ROGERS: Can you tell me a little bit about the relationship then with the courts and with the increase in the number of kids who are in care? What percentage do we have of parents contesting that, and how is that going?

MS JOHNSON: I am told of the group that we get orders on, 4 per cent to 6 per cent go to court.

MS ROGERS: Four to 6 per cent?

MS JOHNSON: Four to 6 per cent. So say 5 per cent.

MS LUNDRIGAN: Of all our cases that are in care, actually we have to go for court orders on them. It is a small number, but it is often a lot of appearances.

MS ROGERS: Often – sorry?

MS LUNDRIGAN: It is often a fair number of appearances.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MS LUNDRIGAN: There are a fair number of appearances required.

MS ROGERS: For like one case?

MS LUNDRIGAN: Exactly.

MS ROGERS: Yes. So only that number, percentage would actually end up in court.

MS LUNDRIGAN: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Thank you.

In the strategic goals, "By March 31, 2011, the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services will have implemented key initiatives towards strengthened services for children and youth."

The new legislation is in place, yes?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Is the quality monitoring unit established?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Business review of the electronic case management system?

MS JOHNSON: That is underway.

MS ROGERS: It is underway, great.

MS JOHNSON: Yes. There is a lot of work being done on that.

MS ROGERS: The provincial on-call system designed?

MS JOHNSON: That is underway. We have a draft design, but it is not finalized yet.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Plan for continuum of residential care, we have spoken about that.

MS JOHNSON: We just announced that.

MS ROGERS: Great.

Plan for an early learning and child care strategy for future development.

MS JOHNSON: We just announced that.

MS ROGERS: Yes. Can you tell me with the new plan for assistance it is for different daycare centres?

MS JOHNSON: Yes and family child care.

MS ROGERS: And family child care. What would be the rate for families to get child care per child?

MS JOHNSON: What is the cap for the subsidy rate, or what is the daily rate that we subsidize?

MS ROGERS: No – we could have that. With the development and the roll out of a plan, a family needing child care, if their children are not under your care, what do you think the average rate would be for a family to pay for a child in full-time child care?

MS JOHNSON: Okay.

Under what we announced, we said there would be a voluntary operating grant program. If you come in under our system, whether you are private or not-for-profit we will provide you with an operating grant. That helps offset lost revenue because – let me back up. The average rates right now in the Province for an infant is $58 a day, for a two-to-five year old it is $38 a day, and for after school it is $17 a day. Those are the average rates.

Our subsidy rates that we provide to parents who avail of our subsidy, and there are 2,200 children who get the subsidy –

MS ROGERS: That would be parents with low income?

MS JOHNSON: Yes. The cap is somewhere around $50,000. You can still get a portion of the subsidy, but if you have two parents making say somewhere around minimum wage you will get full subsidy. Full subsidy is $44 a day for infants, $30 a day for two-to-five year olds, and $14 a day for after school.

If you are lucky enough to get a child care centre that have subsidy rates that is great, but if not, then you are surcharged. If you are getting $30 a day for a two year old and they are charging $35 a day, then that parent who needed the money in the first place, just by the nature of the fact they are low income, they have to pay an additional $25 a week, $100 a month. That is something we wanted to eliminate under the new strategy, this whole surcharging.

If you come in under our voluntary operating grant system then we will require – if you are receiving public funds you will have to cap your parent fee at the subsidy rate. There will be no more surcharging.

MS ROGERS: I see.

MS JOHNSON: Bearing in mind though, there will be some centres out there that will want to stay operating as they are and not receive an operating grant. They can charge $60 a day if they want to, and if parents choose to do that, then that is fine. We are not in a position to put them out of business because we need the spaces.

MS ROGERS: Right. Yes.

MS JOHNSON: As long as they are quality spaces and there is a market for them, then they can stay doing that. The reality is most of these private operators, well not just private, all of them are operating day to day. They are not making profits, the majority of them. I think that we will see the majority of them come in under our operating system.

MS ROGERS: What is the ceiling for eligibility then for a subsidy for child care?

MS JOHNSON: It is in the high fifties.

MS ROGERS: High fifties for total family income?

MS JOHNSON: Or if it is one person as well.

It is a little higher for two – I do not have the exact number. Fifty-eight seems to ring a bell and fifty-four if you are single, you get partial subsidy.

MS ROGERS: If I were making $50,000 a year and have a child that I want to put in child care then I would get a subsidy –

MS JOHNSON: You would get a partial subsidy.

MS ROGERS: What would be a partial subsidy?

MS JOHNSON: It is on a sliding scale. So it really depends.

MS ROGERS: Can we have a list of those?

MS JOHNSON: You can have a copy of the scale if you want to, but it is going to change because I –

OFFICIAL: It is on the Web site.

MS JOHNSON: It is on the Web site? Okay.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: It will change more than likely because that is one of the things that we are having reviewed this year. I do not know where it is going to go, but right now it is based on your income and it does not matter if you have one child or three children. I just really think that needs a good look. We will give you what is there for now, but we are starting that review this summer. It is already the third best in the country, but we will make it better when we are done.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

In terms of the number of child care spaces that are needed in the Province and the number that can be provided through this program, what is the difference?

MS JOHNSON: Nobody could give me an answer, everywhere I went in the Province. I mean, you have to first realize that there is parental choice. Some people stay home with their children. Others want their child with their grandmother or family, or a friend close by or a neighbour that they trust. Others really like the family child care settings, small groups up to six kids, or up to three kids if it is infant, and others chose to go to a not-for-profit or private. There are lots of choices built in, not everybody needs child care and they may choose to stay home.

The reality is we need more than we have. Right now when we started the work for the strategy, there were 6,760 regulated child care spaces. We are targeting, over ten years, to increase that by 70 per cent. So to add on another 4,830, that is going to be a huge piece of work and a lot of working with municipalities, community-based organizations, and a huge promotion piece working with the schools. One of the things that I really like is having the child care centre in the school, if there is space; if not, very nearby. We announced that in Lab City and there are other examples. We have child care in Booth Memorial, Ascension in Bay Roberts, and in Stephenville as well.

MS ROGERS: That is great.

MS JOHNSON: So doing more of that, but again it is going to be absolute huge piece of work. Our target is seventy, if we can do better than that – it is really about the need that is out there. Then that brings me to how we are going to determine the need. Because nobody around the Province could set a figure and they said it is different in every different part of the Province. We thought we would go into an area and do a needs assessment for that area.

We plan to announce, this year, ten areas where we are going to really focus, and it is going to be around the labour market demand. Labrador is an easy pick. We went to Labrador and there is very little in the way of regulated child care spaces. Parents are paying huge amounts of money for unregulated child care a day. Not a lot of grandparents are there, because when they retire they move on. So we heard it all. That is one area we know – I can tell you before we do our announcement – that will be on the top ten list because there is such a great need there, particularly with the labour demand. So we are going to do a focused needs assessment for each area and we will start with the highest need areas first.

MS ROGERS: When will you be doing that?

MS JOHNSON: We will start this summer, and we will announce the top ten areas. Not to say we are not going to do other areas, because the operating grant that I talked about will not start until 2014-2015, and the reason is we have 182 child care centres, we need to consult with them and look at the different configurations and see what they are going to need for an operating grant. Originally we talked about maybe starting half of them in year one and half in year two, and I did not want to do that. If people are going to come on paying a capped fee, I wanted them all to come on at the same time for fairness, and there is a huge piece of work to do before them.

In the interim, we are continuing with our capacity initiative. That is for not-for-profit groups; they can come forward at any time. Now that there is more of the word out there about the 10-Year Child Care Strategy I am getting e-mails every day from groups – we have a development association; we think we can put a child care centre in the basement. So bring it on. We have the fund there –

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MS JOHNSON: Yes, and the other piece of the child care strategy, the most critical piece, in my view, is quality staff. If you do not have quality staff you do not have quality child care, which is most important for the child, but you do not have spaces either. We have some centres in the city that are licensed for thirty and they are operating with forty-five kids because they cannot find the staff. We do give exemptions, but there is only so far you can go with exemptions.

So, under the new model, you will be a trainee and you will have to come to a Level I within a certain period of time. We are introducing a new Level I certificate. I heard around the Province there should be an apprentice-like program, so we are introducing an on-the-job training component where you will get credit for – some people work in these child care centres for ten years. So you give credit for that, with some classroom portion. People talked about prior learning equivalency, if you are nurse or a teacher, we are going to do that as well. There is still going to be a class component. So the staffing component is huge; the quality piece is huge. So, starting with the needs assessment, but first starting with getting the staff.

Enrolment is up now already. Since we announced the strategy, CNA has seen an increase in the number of people enrolling, which is great because they have thirty seats and typically they graduate nine. They have more applications now than they have seats, but there are also the private colleges as well.

Getting them qualified and trained in one year – because before you could not, there was no exit point to get your level I, you had to do twenty-one out of thirty-three courses which took you into year two anyway. This way, you can get it done in one year, get out, be working, and have your Level I. That is going to be the biggest piece. Our strategy is over ten years, but you had to start with the key pieces first, and the staff is a key piece.

The operating grants, like I said, will not be until 2014, but we are continuing with our capacity initiative in the interim. So if you know any not-for-profit groups – we were just, last week, down at the children's centre on Craigmiller Avenue and announced money under that initiative there. They previously only had part-time spaces. I think it was twenty-four and now they are gone up to forty, full-time and part-time.

MS ROGERS: That is without the assistance of the new program with operating grants?

MS JOHNSON: Well, our capacity initiative is very much like what our operating grants will look like and it is a real good test for us in the interim. We have been doing that since 2006 and that is how we kind of rolled out the operating. It will operate very much like that. Now that they are getting a grant from us, they have to cap their fees. So the rate at the children's centre is only $30 a day for two-to-five year-olds, and they have spaces for September if anybody is listening.

They will get calls – they will be filled up by the end of the day now that I just said that. I probably should not have said that. I should not advertise for a group, I suppose.

MS ROGERS: Too late. It is out there.

MS JOHNSON: I take that back.

CHAIR: Gerry, are we twenty minutes away so the minister can ask her Women's Policy people to come forward?

MS ROGERS: Yes, I would say I am maybe just five or six more minutes.

MS JOHNSON: Okay, tell them to come on over.

CHAIR: Thank you, Gerry.

MS ROGERS: Thank you.

MS JOHNSON: I talk too much too because I get so excited –

MS ROGERS: It is great to hear from you. It is great to hear what is happening and what the plans are and –

MS JOHNSON: Well, we listen to the issues and we have responded. I mean, you have to talk to the people who experience it.

MS ROGERS: We know it is a huge, huge challenge in the Province, the whole area of affordable child care and quality child care.

Can we have a summary and a breakdown of the child care program, the totals, the subsidies and grants, salaries, grants to organizations, quality and inclusion grants, and anything else?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, we can give it to how it currently is.

MS ROGERS: Okay. Then if you have any thoughts on where you see it going –

MS JOHNSON: Well, we will be releasing our 10-Year Child Care Strategy document, I would say in June.

MS ROGERS: Oh, we will be watching.

MS JOHNSON: The plan is to release it in June. You will have the whole document then.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Also, can we have some updated stats on the number of centres and family daycare centres by region, and the spaces by region, family and centre?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, I have that here if you want it now.

MS ROGERS: Okay. Maybe if we can get a copy of that?

MS JOHNSON: Yes. There are 182 child care centres Province wide. We do have it broken down by region, and there are about 100 family child care regulated homes.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

The family resource centres that have daycare, do some of them have daycare?

MS JOHNSON: I do not think any of them have daycare. They would have programs where parents come with the kids, parenting, nutrition, playgroups, and healthy baby clubs.

MS ROGERS: That is great, isn't it? It is great, wonderful places.

MS JOHNSON: All our family resource centres are fabulous.

MS ROGERS: The number of new spaces created last year, when we look at – has there been an increase?

MS JOHNSON: Yes. Under the Family Child Care Initiative we had 156 regulated child care spaces last year. We have forty-seven more applications at various stages of the process. With those there is potential for 282 more. That is just under Family Child Care. It is far surpassing what we ever thought it would do.

Under the Capacity Initiative, we had JRS in Lab West that was sixty spaces. We had Bay Bulls which was forty-eight spaces. I will have to get you the list. The Children's Centre, which we just did, that increased another sixteen spaces. It varies throughout the Province.

MS ROGERS: Yes. If we could have that list, it would be great.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, no problem.

MS ROGERS: The number of children receiving subsidy?

MS JOHNSON: Twenty-two hundred.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

This has just been great. Thank you so very much.

MS JOHNSON: I have to say the staff in this department is fabulous. We could not do all we are doing without the hard work of these people who are here with me and the others in the staff. The Child Care Strategy – lots of nights and weekends, and around the circles. They are very dedicated. So I will put it on record to thank them.

MS ROGERS: Okay. Yes, absolutely.

What are some of your greatest challenges?

MS JOHNSON: Oh my God. I thought you said five minutes?

MS ROGERS: You can take longer.

MS JOHNSON: Actually, I think we are over the big hump. Transitioning in 700-plus staff was no easy feat. You had ten different bargaining units, lots of sharing of body parts, arms and legs. When you are separating from a Regional Health Authority, who gets the upper torso, who gets the lower? Because they were doing both when they were there. The MOU process that we went through with each Regional Health Authority was a huge task. Really, right now the challenge for us is getting our numbers up.

The Auditor General talked about the FCAPs and the risk assessments last January, and those numbers were very poor. Our focus is getting those numbers in line with the industry standard. All of the targets that we are setting, we want to improve. We are not going to be there tomorrow. It is impossible to go from 10 per cent in the AG's report last year – 10 per cent of risk assessments done to 90 per cent or 85 per cent is the industry standard, you cannot get there. Our goal is to take baby steps.

We are already seeing from Corner Brook, they have only been in from a year. The audits that are being done there, they are jumping in leaps and bounds but still, we are not anywhere near the industry standard yet. So, that is the biggest challenge before us.

MS ROGERS: The audits are what exactly? Are they the risk assessments in terms of families or –

MS JOHNSON: Well, I am just talking about that as one example. The AG highlighted in his report last year that we were at 10 per cent of all of our risk assessments.

MS ROGERS: What does it mean that you are 10 per cent of all your risk assessments?

MS JOHNSON: Well, only 10 per cent of risk assessments were being done on time.

MS ROGERS: On time, I see. Okay.

MS JOHNSON: Yes. Like if it is a thirty-day deadline and thirty-day time limit. Only 10 per cent of them were being done on time. That has already improved. It is, again, about putting your indicators in place. The training is so critically important. All of our social workers now have to undergo 244 hours of training, and our managers have to do about 270 or 280 hours of training.

MS ROGERS: Over a period of how long? Once they come to you, to your department?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, once they come to us, and we do it in blocks. There are – how many different cores, six or nine different cores? I am trying to remember.

OFFICIAL: There are eight modules. We are targeting now about eighteen months for everybody to complete it, because we have a bulk – and new employee intake as well.

MS JOHNSON: Because we have so many to get trained off, we are predicting it will be about eighteen months, and you do not want somebody gone from the staff for a long length of time. So you go for awhile, do some training, come back, and rotate like that. Once everybody is trained up, then for new staff who come in we could do it in a year.

That would be our biggest hurdle now, is making sure the proper training is in place so that we can meet those indicators and meet those targets; so really working on the ground with the staff. That is why I asked for an increase in the transportation budget, because we need to be out there working with them, constantly seeing that we are there, we are with them, we support them.

MS ROGERS: Great.

The Stephenville training centre, can you talk a little bit about that?

MS JOHNSON: That is where all of this training would be done. Well, not all of it. If there are clusters in St. John's or somewhere else we would do it there rather than pay the travel for everyone but the majority will be done there. Training started –

MS ROGERS: So you will have social workers going to the –

MS JOHNSON: To Stephenville, yes, and we would take them. You do not want too many people gone from your region at a time. We will take some from various parts of the Province. We usually do it in about twenty social workers per training session. We started in September. It is up and running and it is in full swing.

MS ROGERS: What will the budget be for that training centre?

MS JOHNSON: I will have to get that for you. It is something like $300,000 is ringing a bell but I really want to check. There are three trainers. It is a great partnership with the college.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: I do not have all the details but they do not charge us for the space or the curriculum development. They helped us with all the curriculum development as well and they are allowing us to use all of their seventeen campuses. If we have a cluster at the campus in Clarenville then we can go there and use their facilities there.

MS ROGERS: When we look at some of the best practices in this area across the country there is more of a push to get community resources, community groups to help in the whole area of helping family, providing supports in the community. Is there any movement within the department to look at that, to increase funding to community groups to assist with parenting programs to assist families?

MS JOHNSON: What we are doing right now, because we just got everybody in and we are having a look at all the groups that were funded, why they are being funded, what service they are providing, is it the service that we need. There is a complete review going on of all of that now.

Again, it is about having consistency across the Province because it would be unfair if St. John's was providing something that another part of the Province is not getting or vice versa. That is a complete review that we are doing right now. The parenting course is one example. Who is delivering it? Is it consistent in the modules that they are delivering? Is it what we want? All of that is ongoing right now but certainly the community groups are a major help to us.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Now my last question: What is your wish list, if you have a wish list?

MS JOHNSON: I have to say I was so pleased with the money received, not only in this year's Budget – it was a little over $8 million – but in the last three years we have received $42 million over three years. At a time when provinces are struggling and there is a deficit this year, we have everything we need.

The Premier was on Turner. She totally gets this. When it comes to the continuum piece, she understood that fully. When it comes to the child care piece, she said: Get it done, and get it done right. Not only the Premier, all of the Cabinet colleagues when I presented this at Cabinet were: Let's do it! When we presented, it was like: Yes, we got it. I do not have a wish list, other than let's work with the staff and get done what we set out to do.

MS ROGERS: Great, thank you.

MS JOHNSON: That is very rare to hear, I know, but we have all we need to work with.

MS ROGERS: Thank you.

MS JOHNSON: Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Gerry.

Andrew, do you want a closing remark before we close this session?

MR. A. PARSONS: For CYFS?

CHAIR: Yes.

You are good?

MR. A. PARSONS: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Okay.

Minister, I want to thank –

MS ROGERS: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Gerry.

MS ROGERS: I would like to just close to say thank you very much for your time and I really appreciate it.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister. Thank you and your staff. It has been a very enthusiastic morning, and your openness and frankness has been greatly appreciated by all Committee members. I thank all of your staff for being here this morning and taking the time to do this. We certainly appreciate it here at the Committee. Thank you so much.

MS JOHNSON: Thank you very much.

I thoroughly enjoyed my time in Environment, of course, with my background, but there is no more important work you can do when you are working with vulnerable populations like children, so it is pretty rewarding stuff.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Clerk, could you call it inclusive, please?

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01 to 2.1.02 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall we carry 1.1.01 through 2.1.02 inclusive?

AN HON. MEMBER: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Contra-minded.

Carried.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 2.1.02 inclusive carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Thank you.

On motion, Department of Child, Youth and Family Services, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services carried without amendment?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Carried.

On motion, Estimates of the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services carried without amendment.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Yes, we have to wait for Women's Policy. Why don't we say we will reconvene in ten minutes, Minister, or 11:00 a.m.?

MS JOHNSON: Five minutes.

CHAIR: The minister says five minutes. Five minutes it is, at 10:50 a.m.

CHAIR: I think we are ready to reconvene, if we could, please.

Thank you.

I welcome the people from Women's Policy. I will note that we are doing this under leave. This has been the normal practice. Women's Policy falls under Executive Council and it was not assigned to our Committee, but we will do this as it seems to be the traditional way, Minister. So we will continue.

I have just a couple of general notes for the people who are joining us. Please state your name when you are speaking so Hansard can record it. Please wait for the red light. I will ask our Committee members to introduce themselves.

My name is Glenn Littlejohn. I am the MHA for the Port de Grave district and I am the Chair of the Committee.

MR. A. PARSONS: Andrew Parsons, MHA, Burgeo – La Poile.

MS BUCKLE: Joy Buckle, Researcher.

MS ROGERS: Gerry Rogers, MHA, St. John's Centre.

MS WILLIAMS: Susan Williams, Researcher.

MR. LITTLE: Glen Little, MHA, Bonavista South.

MR. CRUMMELL: Dan Crummell, MHA, St. John's West.

MR. CORNECT: Tony Cornect, District of Port au Port.

CHAIR: Could we call the first heading, please?

CLERK: We do not need to call the heading because we are not –

CHAIR: That is fine. We do not need to do that. We will move on.

Minister, you can introduce your staff and if you have any opening comments, we will start from there.

MS JOHNSON: Okay.

I am Charlene Johnson, Minister of the Status of Women.

MS MACLELLAN: Heather MacLellan, Deputy Minister for the Women's Policy Office.

MS HAYES: Robin Hayes, Manager of Finance and Budgeting for the Executive Council.

MS TRICKETT: Wanda Trickett, Departmental Comptroller, Executive Council.

MS HUNT: Michelle Hunt, Director of Communications, Child, Youth and Family Services and then under Women's Policy Office.

MS MAIDMENT: Donna Maidment, EA to Minister Johnson.

CHAIR: Minister.

MS JOHNSON: I think, due to the time, maybe we will just get right to it, if that is fine with you guys.

CHAIR: Okay.

Andrew.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Firstly I would like to thank the minister and the department staff for taking the time to be with us this morning. I would also add that I am not the critic for this portfolio, but Ms Jones could not be here this morning due to a family situation, so I have taken this on her behalf.

I am going to move right into the line here, under Women's Policy Office, 2.7.01, under Salaries. We see here that the budgeted amount for last year was not actually spent. What would the reasoning for this be?

MS JOHNSON: Somebody left in December, the communications specialist, so that would have been some savings there. We have since filled that. We had delayed recruitment of the Managers for Social and Economic Policy, but they have both been since filled and delayed recruitment of two training positions under the Violence Prevention Initiative – are they filled?

OFFICIAL: No.

MS JOHNSON: They are still not filled, and that would be it.

MR. A. PARSONS: Two questions arising from that. The violence prevention trainers, are they expected to be hired in the near future?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, we had to redo the competition. There was only one person applied. Now we are re-advertising, redoing it again, but the intent is to fill them, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: The second part: There is still just over $50,000 less budgeted for Salaries than last year, would that be due to salary scales from old hires to new hires?

MS JOHNSON: That might be part of it and part of it is where we found some of our 3 per cent cost-saving initiative.

MR. A. PARSONS: Were there job cuts? Was there any cut –

MS JOHNSON: It would not be a job cut. It would be delays in advertising or probably looking at what we may not need part of the year instead of a full year. What is the one position?

OFFICIAL: Business manager.

MS JOHNSON: The business manager position, we are looking at that and some of that can probably be spread out with the other staff, and that has been vacant.

MR. A. PARSONS: So that is a position that has not been filled that you might, instead of redoing that position, farm it out.

MS JOHNSON: Well, to staff within the Women's Policy Office, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: I guess you could say in terms of whether the staff are filled or not, there will be one less position than, say, last year? Possibly.

MS JOHNSON: Technically, but it has not been filled anyway and this is something we were going to do even before the 3 per cent was announced.

MR. A. PARSONS: How long has the position been vacant?

MS JOHNSON: It has never been filled, so it is not a loss of something that has been there.

MS MACLELLAN: I have been doing it.

MS JOHNSON: Heather has been doing it.

MS MACLELLAN: I will continue to do it.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am going to move on to Transportation and Communications.

What transportation and communications did not happen last year to make up the savings of just over $42,000?

MS JOHNSON: Because of the vacant positions, those people did not have to be trained and so on.

MR. A. PARSONS: This year the budget is down to $255,000.

Are you anticipating –

MS JOHNSON: Less need for the training. With transportation, when we are doing our 3 per cent savings, this is one of the areas where we could cut back in this department.

MR. A. PARSONS: Moving on to line 5, Professional Services: What services did you plan to acquire that you did not? There was $391,000 budgeted, but you only needed $144,000.

MS JOHNSON: I have what we did spend it on. Do you have what we had planned there?

MS MACLELLAN: Yes, (inaudible).

MS JOHNSON: Okay, you go ahead and answer that.

MS MACLELLAN: We funded a number of professional services, including supporting a Stats Canada report on measuring violence against women, which was something we were doing at the FPT table across Canada. A very important document needed to be updated. We did some work with the Department of Education about behavioural supports. That was very important.

One of the big reasons why that is under spent is that we planned to under spend it because we wanted to put more money into our Respect Women campaign and our outrage campaign. We had planned that very early and we made that transfer very early so we could do that and so we could get as much air time as we could to saturate and get the benefits we wanted to get.

MR. A. PARSONS: That would be the reasoning why the budget is back.

MS JOHNSON: The Purchased Services is higher. It was moved to Purchased Services to do that social marketing piece.

MR. A. PARSONS: In terms of Professional Services for this year, you are back up to that range of where you were last year. What are you planning or what do you have budgeted for this year in terms of Professional Services?

MS MACLELLAN: Professional Services this year will include our evaluation of our VPI plan of action and we will also be doing some work around gender-based analysis.

MR. A. PARSONS: Those contracts, have they been tendered?

MS JOHNSON: The VPI consultant, that one was – the RFP went out for that. The other pieces would not be done yet, no.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

You will go through the normal process?

MS JOHNSON: Oh, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: You explained to me number 6. That is why Purchased Services was higher than was budgeted, because it was a transfer really of funds from –

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

I am going to move down to Property, Furnishings and Equipment. What was the overage for that section from last year?

MS JOHNSON: We bought a photocopier. We do a lot of fact sheets in the department and it needed to be colour. That was $12,000, and a desktop computer and a laptop. It totalled about – well we thought it was going to be a total of $20,000 but it was actually a little bit less than that because we did not end up spending $7,000 of it. These Estimates are estimates for at that time.

MR. A. PARSONS: Explain to me under this section what Grants and Subsidies consists of, please?

MS JOHNSON: Yes. That would be our eight women's centres. This increase that you see for this year reflects the 5 per cent increase that we announced for the eight women's centres. Eight of them now receive $127,625 each. That is up from $55,000 back in 2004. That totals roughly $1 million.

Then we give ten grants to the regional anti-violence groups. They all get $80,000 each with the exception of Labrador, it gets $100,000. That is another $820,000. We give $105,000 to Transition House Association of Newfoundland and Labrador; $110,000 for the Newfoundland and Labrador Sexual Assault Crisis and Prevention Centre; $100,000 to Multicultural Women's Organization of Newfoundland and Labrador; and we give Aboriginal women's grants $100,000 to the Newfoundland Aboriginal Women's Network, and $200,000 for violence prevention Aboriginal women's grants.

Those are application-based, that they apply for the maximum is $30,000. You go through an application process. We have here who received them last year if you want it, and that would happen soon again this year. We will be going out soon with this advertisement.

MR. A. PARSONS: If I could get that list after, I would appreciate that.

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: This is sort of, not a theoretical question, but there is an increase for the Gateway Status of Women's centre which is a great thing. Do you anticipate, at least maintaining that level on a go-forward basis? That is not going to be part of what they call the core mandate cut down the road is there?

MS JOHNSON: This did not get a cut. This actually got a 5 per cent increase and has every year now for the last five years, or six? At least six years. That has been the historical trend. I would never dare predict what the future trend would be, but the Premier was the previous minister for this department and this is one area where we are really focusing on. I do not know what it would be in the future.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

That is good news for the ladies at the centre in Port aux Basques who are –

MS JOHNSON: In an area where there were cuts and they received a 5 per cent increase that should be good news, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just a quick question on 2.7.02 Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women. There was just a slight decrease there of $10,000 under Grants and Subsidies.

MS JOHNSON: Yes. This is money that, historically, we looked at what they spent and of the $462,000 they had budgeted last year I think they only spent $404,000. Historically, they have not been spending that money. So we just reduced it by 10 per cent as part of our 3 per cent reduction. Really, it was a drop balance anyway so there is no real impact.

MR. A. PARSONS: Last year it was $462,700 budgeted but it was $462,700 spent as well?

MS JOHNSON: No. They only spent $404,000, and that is historically around where they spend.

We still wanted to give them flexibility to have that extra $50,000 that they historically do not spend. We just reduced it by $10,000. The drop balance is normally about $50,000 to $60,000. We did not take away the entire drop balance, just $10,000 of it.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am having a little bit of confusion there because I am looking at the numbers; it looks like it was spent.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, and it looks like we predicted we would spend it but they did not. They only spent $404,000.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: Areas where they did not, council meeting per diems. They thought they were going to spend $7,250, they only spent $3,750. Outreach, they thought they were going to spend $18,000, they spent $10,000. IT software – these are budgeted amounts you think you are going to spend, you have to have it in there in case you do need it – they only spent $1,800. In salaries, one staff member was not there for three-and-a-half months. The office lease, they had budgeted for $36,000 it was actually only $27,000.

MR. A. PARSONS: How many employees or staff people?

MS JOHNSON: There are four.

MR. A. PARSONS: Would we be able to get a list of their names and positions as well?

MS JOHNSON: We can give positions. Are we allowed to give names? I do not know.

MR. A. PARSONS: I do not know if you want to do it on the record. Just positions even.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, you can have positions and salary. I do not think we are allowed to attach names to the salaries, private information.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Mr. Chair, those are all the questions I have on this heading.

Thank you.

MS JOHNSON: Okay.

CHAIR: Thank you, Andrew.

Gerry.

MS ROGERS: I wanted to thank you all very much for being here. It is great to be here. I want to congratulate you on some of the fantastic, very successful work that you are doing. The Respect Women campaign is just stunning. Some of the anti-violence work you are doing is just superb and makes us all proud. Congratulations for great work.

I do not have any particular line to line, except under Grants and Subsidies we see the commitment to honour the 5 per cent increase for women's centres. What about some of the other non-profit organizations, like the Multicultural Women's Organization, the Aboriginal women's anti-violence program, Transition House Association? Are they receiving any increase at all?

MS JOHNSON: No, but they are not receiving any decrease either. They are maintained.

MS ROGERS: Okay. So they are going to be –

MS JOHNSON: There are nineteen other groups, we maintain funding for them all. There were no decreases but there were no increases. We maintained it.

MS ROGERS: That would, for instance, also include the violence prevention regional committees?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Great. Thank you.

MS JOHNSON: We did increase the Inuit capacity. There is an announcement for the Inuit capacity building initiative of $125,000 a year for the next two years.

MS ROGERS: What would that program involve?

MS JOHNSON: This is really to get into the Inuit communities and help them find their –

MS ROGERS: This is women, is it?

MS JOHNSON: Pardon me?

MS ROGERS: Women?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great.

MS JOHNSON: We help them to find their way through all the government programs, and grants and services that are out there. That is one of the things we find is that they are not always aware of what is available to them.

MS ROGERS: Right.

MS JOHNSON: This is getting on the ground and helping them build that capacity.

MS ROGERS: Great.

MS JOHNSON: It is amazing what came out of that. They started a Facebook page. We mentioned Facebook earlier, but they have 400 women signed up through their Facebook page and they get information about all the different government programs.

MS ROGERS: That is a great thing.

MS JOHNSON: You can go ahead and add that.

MS MACDONALD: Last week we did leadership development in Nain. There were eight Inuit women who participated in that. We were delighted.

MS ROGERS: Oh, great.

MS JOHNSON: We partner with IBRD to have different conferences or different sessions on starting up your own business, that kind of thing.

MS ROGERS: Great, wonderful. It is good to hear that. It is heartbreaking to see any women's organization not fighting for every penny they can possibly get and taking advantage of any kind of grants and programming that is available.

MS JOHNSON: Part of the capacity that I just mentioned, we worked with them a lot to work with the federal government. As a result, they received a $300,000 grant. I do not know the group, but it was all for Inuit women. They would not have been able to do that without that capacity initiative and without having our staff on the ground to get that and to leverage the federal funding.

MS ROGERS: That is a great investment. That is good to hear.

What is planned this year for the Violence Prevention Initiative?

MS JOHNSON: Well, the six years are up now. It was $12 million from 2006 to 2012. We just put out an RFP to hire a consultant to start our evaluation process, to talk with all of our stakeholders, and see what the next steps are and where we want to go next. Then we will have to evaluate that, bring it Cabinet, and see where we will go.

MS ROGERS: Is there any money specifically allocated this year for that?

MS JOHNSON: We are still continuing with the $2 million that is in the forecast.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Last year's was –?

MS JOHNSON: Two million. It is $2 million a year for six years.

MS ROGERS: Oh, I see. Six years finishes this fiscal year.

MS JOHNSON: It finishes the end of this year.

MS ROGERS: At the end of March 2013?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great.

I have some specific questions I would like to ask pertaining to your business plan and some of the strategic goals. By March 31, 2012, Women's Policy will have developed a new six-year Violence Prevention Initiative plan for government with measures to prevent violence against each of our vulnerable populations.

Where is that at now?

MS JOHNSON: That is the piece we are at now with a consultant. We had to move it forward a little bit and we will be working on it early in this year.

MS ROGERS: Okay. It is not just the evaluation, but also the new plan as well?

MS JOHNSON: Yes, it is so.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great.

By March 31, Women's Policy will have developed and posted on-line tools to support the natural resource sector in advancing gender-based analysis, women's employment plans, and business access strategies.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, we have posted some materials. This is some really exciting stuff we are doing in the department. I was just in Halifax and I spoke at the CWST – Lorraine is a member of that, right?

OFFICIAL: Yes, a honourary member.

MS JOHNSON: She is a honourary member – trying to promote women in science and engineering trades and technology was the purpose of the conference. We were asked to do a presentation. We lead the country when it comes to women's employment plans.

The one that we are working on with Hebron right now is the only one of its kind in the world for an offshore development. We set targets of the number of women that you have to hire in both the operation phase and the construction phase, and we are stepping that up a notch now. We are requiring the companies to set targets in terms of the women businesses they do business with, in terms of supplier diversity and so on.

There is lots of great feedback from that, and lots of requests to talk to Newfoundland and Labrador to see what we are doing, how we are doing it. Again, when the Premier was there as Minister of Natural Resources this is something that she started in the Status of Women.

Negotiations are ongoing with Hebron. So I cannot get into the details, but there is a major focus on supplier diversity and having women-owned businesses have part of the action as well.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: Vale Inco, just as a point of interest, we require them to hire 20 per cent women at the demonstration plant, and they achieved 37 per cent. They offered all of those women a job in the new plant when it opens because they are all trained.

MS ROGERS: Great.

That was another question I was going to ask in terms of are we seeing increases in the number of women employed in the resource development area?

MS JOHNSON: Yes. In 2006 there were about 3 per cent women in the trades. We are at 10 per cent now. We are not where we want to be, but it has increased 7 per cent over six years. It is progress.

Requiring these women employment plans are critical. We do not tell them how they have to do it; we just tell them that they have to do it. Companies have been very creative. I have to commend the companies, the Resource Development Corporation, the group that represents the unions at Vale Inco, for every single hour worked at the Vale site, and they are at a peak now of 3,500 staff, twenty cents for every hour worked is put into a fund that goes to training women and hiring women.

MS ROGERS: That is great.

MS JOHNSON: They trained sixty-five last year. We have twelve ready for September – not we, they. What they are doing now is going right into the Grade 12 classroom and recruiting the women right out of Grade 12.

MS ROGERS: Great.

One of the problems that I often hear is from women who are looking for their apprenticeship. What is the Women's Policy Office doing about that?

MS JOHNSON: We certainly support AES and the budget they announced. I think it was $9.1 million they announced for apprentices this year. Again, with our women employment plans it is where we are headed in terms of requiring female apprentices to be hired in the first, second, third, and fourth years.

We support the Women in Resource Development, $1 million we provide to them. They match up apprentices with employers. Of course the wage subsidy, they handle a lot of the wage subsidy which is done through AES. They fund 90 per cent of the wages for a first year female apprentice, 80 per cent for second year, and 60 per cent for years three and four, up to a maximum of $14 an hour.

MS ROGERS: What is the uptake like on the program?

MS JOHNSON: They matched 172 female tradespeople with jobs, and the uptake on the wage subsidy is full uptake. That is why in the Budget the minister announced increases for that, because there is full uptake.

I saw the number somewhere from my speech last week of how many women availed of that last year. Sixty-five seems to ring a bell – it is forty-two. It is to continue with twenty-two who were previously on the wage subsidy last year, and twenty new ones. Again, this is all AES information, but we work closely with them and do whatever we can to advance the women.

MS ROGERS: Great.

MS MACLELLAN: When we are negotiating with these companies on women's employment plans, companies like Vale are very supportive. They have achieved targets for women through all phases of their project but they have been very proud to tell us that they have, in terms of apprentices 7 per cent are women, which is what has been available in the workforce over the past. We are seeing employers step up, too. So that is good.

MS ROGERS: Great.

Thank you.

MS JOHNSON: They are also saying they want more women because they are finding that the women – no offence to the men listening or in the room – but they said in their experience the women have been gentler on the equipment. So maintenance costs have decreased. It is just incredible. They would really like to hire more women. It is just the availability of women apprentices for certain trades is not there, but that is where we really need to work now and make companies provide scholarships, training opportunities, whatever. We are not going to tell them what to do, just do it.

MS ROGERS: Yes. Yet, in some areas it is amazing still the resistance to hire women in apprenticeship positions. The number of women that I come across who say, I cannot get a position.

MS JOHNSON: Yes. Well, certainly refer them to the WRDC.

MS ROGERS: The WRDC is great.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, they are.

I think you are going to see a change in that resistance because from what I hear of the companies now, they brag about the fact they have this many women. It is almost a little competitive thing that is starting. So, hey, whatever, we will take it.

MS ROGERS: There is a skill shortage, right?

MS JOHNSON: Yes.

MS ROGERS: It is like Rosie the Riveter during the Second World War.

MS JOHNSON: I spoke to the President of IOC for Canada, Zoe Yujnovich. She brags about the fact that 50 per cent of her executives are women and nobody else can come close.

MS ROGERS: Great.

By March 31, 2012, the Women's Policy Office will have updated its family-friendly policies and practices guide.

MS JOHNSON: That is still in progress, but being worked on.

MS ROGERS: What is that?

MS JOHNSON: Go ahead.

MS MACLELLAN: What we are interested in doing is looking at some of the best practices so we can share that with the employers when we are doing our women's employment plans. Because part of the requirement is not just setting the targets by occupational category, but it is making sure that the environment is conducive for retaining the women.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MS MACLELLAN: What we like to do is be able to say these are some best practices about family friendly, so how are you going to deal with women who are on your workplace and how are you doing your scheduling in terms of what – we find best practices are sometimes the best way to go in terms of trying to present that.

MS ROGERS: Great.

MS JOHNSON: In addition to that, not only do we set targets in our women employment equity plan but we also require them to have friendly atmospheres for women as well. I remember when I did my first degree in forest engineering and I worked in Prince George. It was way up North in a camp and we had to shower at a certain time of the day because there were no female showers. Those types of things, we build into the women employment plans too. Having separate bathrooms for women goes a long way. Things like that, that is just one example, but you have to build that in there.

MS ROGERS: Great.

By March 31, 2012, the Women's Policy will have increased Aboriginal women's capacity to demonstrate leadership on matters of justice, health, education, training, business employment, violence prevention and poverty reduction.

MS JOHNSON: Yes, and we did a lot of those sessions last year and then there is an increase in the Budget this year of $125,000 for this year.

MS ROGERS: That is to do sessions with Aboriginal leaders?

MS JOHNSON: That would be the Inuit capacity. Then under our Aboriginal – we have the annual Aboriginal conference and every year there is a different theme. This year was culture. Every year there would be a different theme and that is to increase capacity as well.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Back to the best practices guide, when do you see that being completed?

MS JOHNSON: The family one?

MS ROGERS: Yes, family-friendly policies.

MS JOHNSON: It will be completed in this fiscal year.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

The Women's Policy Office will have developed an innovative technology plan of action to inform decision making and work of the government, business, and community partners to advance the status of women.

MS JOHNSON: Go ahead.

MS MACLELLAN: Well, we are very interested in social media, especially how it may impact women, and especially how it impacts young girls in terms of their vulnerability. It is just another vehicle by which violence is perpetrated. We set a goal to do some training around some of the innovative practices with respect to technology. We have also started to look at how we can do our work better by using technology.

Information on the status of women is really important. As you know, it covers everything in life. We are trying to look at how we could perhaps use the technology in a way to help our women's groups and to help those whether there is industry. We have two staff assigned and we are having discussions on it. We have not come to any conclusions about what we can do, but the social media piece is the area where we want to do most of our work.

MS JOHNSON: We are also doing the piece of work with the Atlantic FPTs – and that is a huge social media piece on cyber-bullying, particularly for young girls. We will be hosting Atlantic ministers in September is the date right now, and we will be launching at that time the outcome of that work that we have done with the Atlantic partner provinces.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

In terms of your role of policy analysis and advisory, can you talk to me a little bit about the issue of women and housing? We know that with a lot of consultations with the Poverty Reduction Strategy and some of the community consultations that housing was one of the main issues – affordable housing, predominantly as it affects women. Can you talk to me a little bit about that?

MS JOHNSON: We have certainly worked with the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and feed into the gender analysis piece. It is a huge component that goes into housing. We certainly keep an eye on that. It would be outside of my mandate to speak on housing. Those Estimates are tonight.

MS ROGERS: No, except in terms of what do you see as some of the issues or the problems facing women in the area of housing in the Province? What is your work that you are doing then with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing?

MS JOHNSON: It is more of an enabling role that we do with our centres that we have – the eight centres that we have – and if there are consultations ongoing about housing, we certainly make them aware that it is ongoing and encourage them to participate. So it would be more of an enabling and awareness piece that we do with the groups so that they get out there on these issues.

MS ROGERS: I guess when we look at the Violence Prevention Initiative, which is great, that the department has played – and then also in non-traditional work for women as well, that you have a real handle on what the problem is, what some of the challenges are, what you would like to see happen and some of the directions, so you have taken initiatives in that.

When we look at some of the areas, you say, "In particular, this office participates in work associated with poverty reduction, aging and seniors, disability, affordable housing, justice, child care, youth attraction and retention, the volunteer sector as well as health issues of importance to women."

I am just wondering where you are with housing. What is the housing problem? Are you undergoing any initiatives to encourage government to address, as you have with other areas?

MS JOHNSON: We have an advisory role, but the reason why we are so in depth with the Violence Prevention Initiative is because we are the lead department on the Violence Prevention Initiative. Whereas AES would be the lead on poverty and Minister Hedderson would be the lead on housing, so it would be best to speak to him. We would not have any specific initiatives to that. We do for violence prevention because that falls under our mandate, but we certainly advise and do the gender analysis piece. We are aware of the issues, but it is for that minister to speak to them.

MS ROGERS: Yes, I understand.

In terms of your policy analysis and your advisement, what do you see as some of the challenges, for instance, in affordable housing in terms of as it relates to women?

MS JOHNSON: Well, the challenges as you know – there are challenges. In Labrador, there are challenges; we heard that. Single mothers, there are difficulties. Again, there are a suite of programs in the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing division to deal with that. I would not speak to those.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

What do you feel are some of the problems that are facing women in terms of the area of justice? Again, in your capacity as policy analysis and advisory – because I assume that you will look at every government department, every government program, through the lens of the Status of Women. So are there some challenges there in justice?

MS JOHNSON: Yes. I am not trying to hold anything back other than that Minister of Justice has a responsibility and a mandate for Justice. If I look at AES and people trying to get into the workforce, a barrier for them could be child care, but that minister does not speak to child care. I do.

We are certainly aware of the justice issues. We sit on the gender and justice committee. We are part of that. We are very aware of what the issues are, but to speak to initiatives for that would be Minister Collins.

MS ROGERS: In terms of looking at the area of justice or any particular problems or challenges, there are none that you have identified or have any initiatives in terms of –

MS JOHNSON: Government-wide they have certainly been identified. They have been identified in Justice and we feed into them. We sit regularly on this gender and justice committee, provide feedback, work with community stakeholders, and attend sessions and conferences.

We have had some staff from the Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women even go to Clarenville where the correctional facility is and talk about the issues there, but that all feeds back to Justice.

MS ROGERS: Do you know, in terms of the justice system, that from the time of an emergency protection order being served, particularly in the areas of family violence or domestic violence, if a woman has called the police and an emergency protection order is being served, there is often a ninety-day period where first appearance is required? Do you know in different areas of our Province whether or not there is a long waiting period of time compared to other parts of the country for first appearance?

MS JOHNSON: Again, I would refer that to the Department of Justice.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Thank you.

MS JOHNSON: Linda of the Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women writes and informs government of how things should be and the direction we should take, but those questions are very specific to Justice.

MS ROGERS: Right. Okay.

CHAIR: Gerry, I will just remind you we need to relate it to the Estimates of Women's Policy.

MS ROGERS: Yes, and this is about the programming and the initiatives being undertaken by the Women's Policy Office.

In Aging and Seniors, are there any particular initiatives there that you are undertaking?

MS JOHNSON: Under the Violence Prevention Initiative, we do advertising in terms of the Respect Aging campaign. We completed that, and that is still ongoing. We do some training around respecting seniors and so on.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: That would be under violence prevention.

MS ROGERS: There is no protection in our Human Rights Code or in the Human Rights Act for transgendered people. Is this something that the Women's Policy Office has done any work around?

MS JOHNSON: Again, it is Justice. We feed into the papers and any policy or changes that are done, but that would be Justice.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

In the past, the Women's Policy Office has been very active in looking at areas of justice as it pertains to women's rights and have done incredible work for gay rights and for those issues. The Women's Policy Office has done a great job.

MS JOHNSON: We look at and inform and work with other departments, Education, the schools and so on – but Education would be the lead on that particular piece as well.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

I have one more question for you, the whole area of women in addictions – I know that is under health, but again, any kind of initiative that Women's Policy is doing in that area to encourage government to –

MS JOHNSON: Again, we would feed into the gender and justice forum.

MS ROGERS: Right.

MS JOHNSON: We advise and work across government with all of the departments and they always come to us for our advice.

MS ROGERS: I understand that, yes.

MS JOHNSON: Staff are very knowledgeable on all of these issues but we do not have the final say. We feed into a piece of work.

One of the things the Premier did this year, and the first time in twenty-six years of having a Women's Policy Office, was to make Heather – well, not necessarily make Heather – but to have a Deputy Minister's position in that department, which happens to be Heather. Because when the deputies meet all the time, it is critical to have her at that table so she is informing at that level as well. That is really the role of the Women's Policy Office.

MS ROGERS: My last question, the whole area of women and poverty, and we see there is an increased number of people in Newfoundland and Labrador using food banks. They are predominantly women, senior women, and single moms with kids. Is there any work the Women's Policy Office is doing in looking at the issue of women and poverty?

MS JOHNSON: We sit on the poverty reduction committee. The staff provides a lot of background information, get the stats on how many women might use the food banks or how many women are at this salary or this income level. That is the kind of information that we feed in. We make sure that is at the forefront when decisions are being made.

We sit on poverty reduction when they may be making changes to Income Support. We will provide information, how many women are on Income Support, what is the age bracket, those kinds of things. We very much feed in and highlight the issues so that they are considered when making decisions.

MS ROGERS: Is there any role that you play as well in terms of encouraging any particular kind of initiative or – because if we do see that there seems to be a growing gap between haves and haves not and an increase in the number of people using food banks.

Is there any particular initiative or program that you would like to see happen, or that you would encourage happen to address what seems to be a growing problem for women?

MS JOHNSON: We would not comment on that. That is outside of my purview. If there was an initiative on the table we would support it, enhance it, or say why it would not work. We do not have those programs in our department, no.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Thank you, I have no more questions.

CHAIR: Okay.

Mr. Parsons, you are giving me the two sign.

MR. A. PARSONS: I just have two quick questions in the interest of time. I apologize, like I said, I was not anticipating doing this section.

I do not know if I have asked this but I will put it on the record anyway. I will ask the same for this that I asked for CYFS, the list of employees and salaries including the Advisory Council on Women.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes, okay.

The second part, under the Women's Policy Office, were there any reports or studies commissioned in the last year by the office?

MS JOHNSON: I would say yes. Yes, the provincial latitudinal survey was one. That was done in-house. That really gave us a baseline of statistics about how many people are aware, how many people's behaviours changed as a result. It was done very statistically. It is nationally recognized because of the statistical significance of it.

It is great that 60-odd per cent of the people are seeing our ads. It is that kind of work: Have you changed your behaviour because of seeing our Respect Women ads? Have you intervened where you saw violence taking place? It is those kinds of questions. It will be released probably next week.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Do you have any studies or reports commissioned that you think you are going to put out in the next fiscal year?

MS JOHNSON: Heather mentioned that one already with the FPT, about the violence against women with Stats Canada. That will probably come out during the year. That is coming to a close.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

MS JOHNSON: I cannot think of anything else, not off the top of my head.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

I am done this time. I appreciate the time.

MS JOHNSON: Thank you.

MS ROGERS: The Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women, do we know if there are any specific programs, highlights? Is there any specific goal that they have for this year?

MS JOHNSON: To continue advising on all of the issues. They make a lot of presentations. C-NLOPB was the most recent that I can think of, to my mind. It was quite a substantial submission they made which included housing, child care, and all of those things.

They have been really focused on getting out around the Province. It is fantastic, in their office they have a map with pins of everywhere they have been. So they are really trying to get out and talk to people in the community.

They are part of the gender and justice committee, too. They really focus on the justice issues a lot and provide advice to the minister on those things.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Thank you so very, very much. Thank you for your time.

MS JOHNSON: You are welcome.

CHAIR: Minister, I would like to thank you and your staff once again for taking the time to answer all the questions of the committee. We really appreciate it this morning.

I want to remind committee members that we have the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Commission tonight in the House beginning at 6:00 o'clock. For all members, it is 6:00 o'clock tonight, not 5:30 o'clock. We will have the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Commission here at 6:00 o'clock.

Thank you so much everyone.

A motion to adjourn?

MR. A. PARSONS: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Mr. Parsons.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Carried.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.