[Page 447]

HALIFAX, THURSDAY, APRIL 24, 2003

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON SUPPLY

2:31 P.M.

CHAIRMAN

Mr. Brooke Taylor

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Government House Leader.

HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, would you please call the estimates of the Department of Education.

MR. CHAIRMAN: We will continue with the Minister of Education's estimates.

The honourable member for Halifax Needham.

MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, I'm not going to take very much time. I want to follow up with a few questions that I had after I thought more about the department's Racial Equity Policy that I would like to have some information from the minister on. This should be very quick, I would think. I have, essentially, five questions. I'm going to start with three and then two, and that should wrap it up.

Mr. Minister, the Racial Equity Policy for the department calls for the establishment of an advisory committee, chaired by the deputy. I'm wondering if the committee has been established, and will the committee be releasing progress reports? That's one question, sort of two questions but one question. The other thing I want to ask, Mr. Minister, in order to do a program and planning you need good information, we all agree on that, on the students, and in order to do programs in terms of Black and racially-visible and other ethnically-diverse learners we need good statistical information, are we able to collect that information? Is there a process in place now to collect information on the situation that those students are in? The last question I will ask before I take my seat is around the implementation of the Racial Equity Policy at the board level. How are boards going to be supported to implement the parts of the policy which will affect them?

447

[Page 448]

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Education.

HON. ANGUS MACISAAC: Mr. Chairman, there has already been one meeting of the committee the honourable member referenced. There is another one scheduled for next week. I would anticipate that when they feel that they have completed their work, indeed, a report would be appropriate and would be forthcoming. With respect to the second question and the information that the member was inquiring about with respect to the numbers, that is information that the boards would have. I don't believe that we compile it separately, but I do believe that the boards have that information.

With respect to the funding, we have allocated $150,000 as the first instalment towards targeted funding for the RCH at the school boards. This is intended to assist the boards in securing staff and doing the necessary professional development related to that. I believe all boards have in fact taken advantage of this; all boards where it is necessary to take advantage of it have.

MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: I want to thank the minister. I'm not sure that the boards actually are collecting the statistical information, and I will tell the minister that last night I had a meeting with the Inner City Education Advisory Committee in my constituency and the African-Nova Scotian representative to the Halifax Regional Board was there and indicated that certainly in their board they don't have this information. They've recently hired somebody on contract to attempt to sketch out what it is they need. I think that we really do need good statistical information in terms of retention, graduation, those kinds of issues. I would encourage the department to look at that in light of their Racial Equity Policy, because I think in order to test whether your policy is being effective or not, you need to have some evidence and some way of evaluating that.

The other two questions I have - and one does pertain to the targeted $150,000 for RCH coordinators in the boards - I would specifically like to know how the board in which the high school in Guysborough, where there have been some race relation issues, how that is going to be used, whether or not there will be an RCH coordinator who will report directly to the director in that board, and whether there will be any additional RCH resources in that board and for that specific school to work with the staff, given that that's been a bit of a hot spot? That's one question I have.

Then, the last question I would like to ask is about the department's plan for the Africentric Learning Institute, which was a recommendation under the Black Learners Advisory Committee report. I know there has been $100,000 allocated, but I believe that the recommendation was for $300,000 to be allocated. That's a third of what they require just to start to build the foundation. I'm wondering, what are the department plans to bring the expenditures to a level where that recommendation can become a reality? It has a long way to go. This is a learning institute that we very much need to help us develop programs and

[Page 449]

research and do various projects that will help the African-Nova Scotian learner. Those are my final two questions.

MR. MACISAAC: I want to thank the honourable member for the question. Perhaps I will begin with the second and then move to the first. Last year, there was $100,000 provided for the support of the centre. That amount has been rolled into the base, and this year an additional $100,000 has been added for the support. They are, I believe, renting facilities at Mount Saint Vincent, and that seems to be a satisfactory arrangement with respect to the centre. We obviously will want to continue working with them to support in the development of that key component of that program.

Now the second question related to the availability of an RCH person in the Strait area with respect to the school at Guysborough. I can tell the honourable member that it's my understanding that the board will, in fact, be ensuring that there is such a person in place on a go-forward basis. We have committed staff and resources to the board in the short term in order to deal with the situation to which the honourable member refers. We believe that there is good progress being made, certainly not something that's going to be accomplished overnight, but in the short term, good progress is being made.

There's a recognition of a need to address this and there is also a recognition for it to continue to be addressed on an ongoing basis, not just within that school, although it is a very important part of the Strait board's needs with respect to these resources, but on an ongoing basis throughout the board. As unfortunate as that incident was, sometimes situations provide us with the incentive to address real concerns and make progress, and I hope that that will be the case in this situation.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I understand that concludes questions to the minister. If the minister has some closing comments, he certainly has the floor.

The honourable Minister of Education.

MR. MACISAAC: Mr. Chairman, I do have just a few comments, and I will not prolong the committee greatly. First of all, I want to thank the members of the committee for their questions and suggestions. Obviously, this is one element of the parliamentary process that I personally consider to be extremely important, where it is a requirement on the part of the Ministers of the Crown to be accountable to the elected representatives of the people. That process, I think, is essential. Indeed, it provides a focus, not just for ministers but it provides a focus for the Public Service in the sense that it does focus everyone in the Public Service to the fact that there is an annual accountability and that the funds that they are provided in order to carry out their programs are funds where there needs to be an accountability for that expenditure, where ministers can be questioned with respect to that. I consider that to be an extremely important element of the democratic process and, indeed, is very much a part of the history of the evolution of the parliamentary system of government.

[Page 450]

Last week, we started off by talking about our office lease at the Trade Mart building, and we have completed our discussion on a very important topic, race relations within our schools. That, in a sense, provides something of the wide spectrum of issues that are important with respect to the operation of the department. We do, of course, have opportunities to focus on education, and some of the debate during the estimates did allow us to do that. Some of it, at times, seemed to be a bit of a distraction with respect to that, but I'm not going to comment on how members of the committee should in fact conduct themselves with respect to the estimates. We all have our own concept of how that should be done and I'm not going to, at this stage of the estimates, comment on how members do or do not do that.

[2:45 p.m.]

We're very pleased with our Time to Learn strategy of the department. Perhaps I might have had a bit more time to talk about that. Our Active Young Readers and Jeune Lecteur Actif initiative will continue to give teachers the resources and support that they need to help students improve their reading. As well, Mr. Chairman, the fact that spelling will continue to be a key focus in 2003-04 and that the department will continue to support school boards and schools in implementing the Math Matters strategy, these are things which are important. Indeed, I was questioned on that earlier in Question Period, and we're going to live up to our commitment with respect to the additional staff who are required for that.

Now, there was considerable discussion during the debate on the estimates with respect to accommodation, money that was spent to look after our teachers when they come in. We consider our teachers to be an extremely important component of developing programs and implementing programs of the department. We will continue to commit resources to assist in defraying the costs of teachers as they come to various centres throughout the province in an effort to assist us in the development and carrying out of our programs and our curriculum and the delivery of services to our students.

I hope that I have been able to respond in sufficient detail with respect to questions that were put to me. I was very pleased to have an opportunity to talk about the $11 million investment we've made in post-secondary education, an investment that is helping to mitigate tuition increases for students and an investment that will help students to manage up to 40 per cent of their student debt, that is relief to the extent of 40 per cent.

Mr. Chairman, I wish we had more time to talk about our exciting plan to expand the Nova Scotia Community College and the benefits that it will have for about 2,500 students in this province, not to mention the positive impact it will have on meeting the needs of our evolving labour market. The $123 million being invested in the Nova Scotia Community College is part of the government's overall Skills Nova Scotia initiative, another initiative the members of the committee didn't deem important to pursue at any great length. We also didn't get much of a chance to talk about the importance of student assessment and

[Page 451]

evaluations, and the fact that for the first time individual student results will be available for Grade 6 students in the area of literacy.

Mr. Chairman, there was a great discussion regarding our plans to build new schools and to invest in alterations and additions, and we will indeed be coming forward with plans in regard to that in the near future. Managing the capital construction process is complex, and there are many steps to follow before final decisions are made. I'm sure honourable members of the committee can agree to the fact that we have a responsibility to ensure all students, regardless of where they live, are learning in a safe and healthy environment. That, of course, is the major initiative of our program with respect to school construction and additions and alterations. We, of course, are seeking ways to respond to the Auditor General's Report with respect to maintenance and the issue of deferred maintenance. We will continue to work with our partners in addressing that particular need.

We have to balance the priorities of one district with that of another district in the province, and there is a great deal of work that is done to ensure that most urgent needs are met and that we are spending taxpayers' money responsibly. What's important here is to stress the fact that the new schools we announced and the list of schools we are going to renovate is based on priorities developed by both the school boards and the department. I want to remind you that between 2000 and 2003, the government invested almost $200 million in building new schools and renovating existing schools. We are working hard with our schools and our boards and our parents to ensure that the most urgent capital needs are met.

Mr. Chairman, there are more than 460 public schools across the province, and the capital expense is significant and one we do not take lightly. In my opening remarks I started my comments by acknowledging and thanking the staff of the Department of Education. I also want to acknowledge all of our partners in Education for the level of co-operation and work which we receive from all of them. I want to particularly acknowledge and thank staff who have assisted me throughout the estimates debate, staff who have been with me here in the Legislature and people back at the office. I very much appreciate their assistance and their very informative notes and guidance throughout the process.

Mr. Chairman, I will then conclude by moving the resolutions - I believe this is the appropriate procedure.

Resolution E4 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $205,805,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of Assistance to Universities, Department of Education, pursuant to the Estimate.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E3 stand?

The resolution stands.

[Page 452]

Shall Resolution E4 carry?

The resolution is carried.

Thank you for your comments, Mr. Minister.

The honourable Government House Leader.

HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, would you please call the estimates of the Minister of Community Services.

Resolution E2 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $666,414,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Community Services, pursuant to the Estimate and the business plan of the Nova Scotia Housing Development Corporation be approved.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Community Services.

HON. DAVID MORSE: Mr. Chairman, my staff are on their way down. I noticed one of them during Question Period. In anticipation of their arrival, I want to recognize the fact that time is drawing short in the estimates here. There are three departments yet to go. Out of respect for the Opposition, I would like to show my appreciation for the time that is left to them by starting my comments.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The time is 2:54 p.m.

The honourable Minister of Community Services.

HON. DAVID MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to start by introducing two people to the Chamber and, indeed, to Nova Scotians who, in fact, are no strangers to them, George Hudson, who is in charge of the Finance Division, and Clem Henneberry, who is one of his senior managers there. They are well familiar with this Chamber, and I will be relying upon them to assist me throughout the estimates.

MR. RUSSELL MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. A question to the minister, will the deputy minister be joining the minister during the deliberations?

MR. MORSE: No.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. You have the floor.

[Page 453]

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to rise here today to share with you some of the major milestones and achievements of the Department of Community Services. The Department of Community Services delivers a wide range of social services to Nova Scotians in need. We work with other levels of government and many community-based organizations to provide a network of social services. Community Services continues to take steps to build a strong, viable foundation for social services in Nova Scotia. This past year has been an exciting time in our department and we are looking forward to making even more progress this year.

Mr. Chairman, in conjunction with the federal government, we have focused a great deal of attention on Nova Scotia's children over the past year, particularly in the areas of child care and early learning. Today, our children and families are benefiting from significant improvements in early childhood services since the launch of the Early Childhood Development Initiative in 2000. Through this federal-provincial initiative, the province will invest more than $3.7 million this year to strengthen the foundation for early childhood development in Nova Scotia. This has led to new and expanded services that help our children grow up healthy, happy and secure.

Our plan to improve child care started with a major investment in the staff who deliver these vital services. So far, close to $7 million has been provided to recruit and retain qualified staff in centres across the province. A further $1 million in grants is helping early childhood training institutions create new professional development opportunities. Three hundred and twenty-five new full-time day spaces and 74 part-day spaces have been created through new child care start-up and expansion grants.

Low- and moderate-income families have benefited from 200 new subsidized, portable child care spaces, which parents can take with them if they move to another area of the province. There are now more than 2,650 subsidized seats in communities across Nova Scotia. This summer, the province will announce that more subsidized spaces will be made available. Parents are also being supported in finding quality child care in their communities, $450,000 has been provided to create child care resources and referral centres that give parents new resources to access local caregivers, and information to help them find quality child care.

An additional $750,000 has been directed to programs and training initiatives that enhance opportunities for children with special needs to access licenced child care. We are also investing $500,000 to help children who have language challenges through the introduction of an early language and learning program in Nova Scotia communities. In March, Mr. Chairman, I was pleased to join my colleagues from the other provinces and the federal government in agreeing to a five-year funding framework that will provide new funding for provincially-regulated child care programs and services. The new framework also gives us flexibility to make sure we address local needs and priorities.

[Page 454]

Mr. Chairman, my department has also been working to improve services for Nova Scotians with intellectual disabilities. The Community Supports for Adults Program provides a wide range of services, including homes for special care, small options homes, supervised apartments, adult residential centres, regional rehabilitation centres and adult service centres. This year, the province has demonstrated its commitment to improving these supports by increasing the Community Supports for Adults Program budget by $12.8 million for the 2003-04 year. This commitment was acknowledged and supported in a media release from the Nova Scotia Association of Health Care Organizations.

In November 2002, the province launched a comprehensive review of this program recognizing the need to improve the way services are provided for people with intellectual disabilities and long-term mental illness in our communities. Through this review, we will establish a standard level of quality, accessibility and flexible services across the province. The review is looking at all aspects of the current program, including access to services, assessment, licencing, information technology, funding and legislation.

[3:00 p.m.]

The province has already taken steps to improve services by introducing training standards for staff who provide care for clients. These training standards have been supported with an investment of $28 million, Mr. Chairman, in an enhanced wage package, over the past four years. Service providers receive this funding to increase the wages of their staff to ensure there is equity among group home workers across the province. Indeed, this is to stop the situation where the caregivers were moving between the service providers and disrupting the care to their clients. Several larger institutions have also been closed in favour of smaller community-based homes, helping clients to be closer to family and friends, and to take an active role in their communities.

Mr. Chairman, we are working with clients, service providers and other departments to create a program that meets the unique needs of our clients. We know that any new program will need the support of the community. A community committee with advocacy, service provider and consumer representatives has been established to give input into this review. I encourage all Nova Scotians to give their thoughts about these services and supports through the departmental Web site or by written submission. Community feedback and information gathered through the review will result in a discussion paper that will be distributed widely for input later this year.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to report that more Nova Scotians are achieving their goals and achieving greater self-sufficiency through enhanced employment support services offered by our department. In 2003-04, the department will continue its investments in this area. Significant progress has been made. In the last four years the number of people on income assistance has steadily declined from approximately 42,000 to 33,000. I would add that this has empowered those clients to go out, seize the opportunities, get the training, the

[Page 455]

education they need to better their life, something that the old systems, the municipal ones and the old provincial ones sometimes thwarted inadvertently; although the intentions were the best, it did not always open doors for the clients. This has changed with the new Employment Support and Income Assistance Act.

This year, 3,500 income assistance recipients will successfully make the transition to work, through programs that encourage and empower them as they move towards employability. Mr. Chairman, each year more than 10,000 income assistance clients participate in employment supports, including career development services, training programs and job opportunities. Employment support staff work with each client to create an individual employment action plan that helps him or her move towards self-sufficiency, while encouraging clients to participate in lifelong learning - the key, of course, to greater advancement as they move into successful careers.

A wide range of supports are available to clients in their communities, personal development such as life skills, self-esteem workshops and budgeting; job preparation supports including resume preparation, workshops, employment referrals and on-the-job placements; skill-specific training, placements and short-term courses such as first aid, computer programs, and the Educate to Work Program through the Nova Scotia Community College; career counselling, vocational assessments, employment action, and learning plans; office and technology supports such as Internet access, telephone service, photocopy and mail service, clerical services and computer access; literacy and academic upgrading including the Nova Scotia School for Adult Learning, community-based upgrading programs, workplace literacy services and tutoring services.

Mr. Chairman, I am also pleased to report on a project that demonstrates the creative employment initiatives that are being developed by department staff, clients and Nova Scotia communities. A unique project has been created with three community business development corporations that provides clients with opportunities to create their own business, helping them to become more self-sufficient while contributing to their local economies. We have also entered into a partnership with the Nova Scotia Co-operative Council to help income assistance recipients develop and run successful co-operatives.

Other community-based initiatives include partnerships with the 13 regional development authorities which coordinate community development in their areas, and the Halifax Inner City Initiative, which is supporting the development of an inner city neighbourhood in collaboration with residents, organizations and community agencies.

Mr. Chairman, we also recognize that clients may need financial supports to carry out their employment action plans, including housing, flexible child care assistance, transportation allowances to help clients get to education training and employment, and coverage of prescription drugs for one year after the client leaves the system for employment. The department also supports people with disabilities through the Employment Assistance

[Page 456]

for Persons with Disabilities program, a program that was recently extended for another year by an exchange of letters between the provincial ministers and the federal minister. This is a 50/50 cost-sharing arrangement, as the critics would be aware.

By offering a wide range of employment supports, our government is helping Nova Scotians find new ways to reduce barriers to work, improve their education and employment skills and reach personal goals right in their home communities. That said, we know there are some Nova Scotians who will always need our support. This year, the province will provide approximately $230 million in income support to more than 55,000 Nova Scotians. In addition, our government has taken significant steps to help improve the situation for low-income families with children in Nova Scotia. This year, over 60,000 children in Nova Scotia will receive payments under the National Child Benefit and Nova Scotia Child Benefit Programs. By providing child benefits outside the income assistance system, we have made it easier and more financially viable for these parents to return to work. Now, someone on assistance doesn't have to worry about losing their children's benefits if they enter the workforce. Mr. Chairman, know that affordable housing is key to healthy communities. I have just returned from national meetings of ministers responsible for housing, and the need for affordable housing is an issue right across this country.

This government is committed to improving the health, well-being and self-sufficiency of Nova Scotians by providing affordable housing to low-income families, seniors, and individuals with mental or physical challenges. Each year, the province offers a wide range of housing programs and services for about 20,000 Nova Scotian families. Programs include rental housing accommodation and supplements, grants or loans for home repairs and renovations, and mortgages to purchase or build modest homes.

In addition to maintaining expenditures for existing housing and repair programs, in 2003-04 we will work with all levels of government and communities to help people find affordable housing in Nova Scotia. One of our most ambitious programs is the Canada-Nova Scotia Affordable Housing Agreement, a $37.26 million federal-provincial initiative that will provide funding for the construction and renovation of up to 1,500 affordable housing units for low- to moderate-income Nova Scotians over the next five years.

The Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program provides forgivable loans to low-income Nova Scotians who require much-needed repairs to their homes to ensure the safety and adequacy of their housing. This program helps approximately 1,000 families each year and has been renewed for an additional three years as a result of continued funding from both the provincial and federal governments.

The province also plays an active role in the Supporting Community Partnership Initiative, which addresses the issue of homelessness in Canada's major cities, an important program right here in Halifax, our capital. Since this program began three years ago, it has achieved some important results in the province's capital, including the formation of a

[Page 457]

steering committee, the development of a Community Action Plan on Homelessness, and the completion of more than 30 projects to improve and expand existing community infrastructure such as the Metro Turning Point, Phoenix House and other worthy projects. The province will continue to provide a significant level of funding for this initiative to complement renewed federal funding.

Mr. Chairman, in closing, there is much more to say about the activity in the Department of Community Services, but these are just some of the highlights. This government is working hard to provide supports that offer Nova Scotians the support they need to live in their communities. We work in partnership with Nova Scotians in need, to provide programs and services that help them become self-sufficient, as they are able. At the same time, we are committed to ensuring our most vulnerable citizens have the supports needed to live safely and securely.

Mr. Chairman, while there are challenges, we see many more opportunities. We will continue to invest in Nova Scotians, to work in partnership in communities and to seek out creative ways to help all Nova Scotians reach their full potential. With those brief opening comments, I look forward to the questions and the comments from the Opposition critics.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister, for your comments today. The time being 3:12 p.m., I recognize the member from the NDP caucus.

The honourable member for Dartmouth North, you have the floor, one hour in turn.

MR. JERRY PYE: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the minister and his staff who are present for budget estimates, for their comments. I want to tell the minister that he certainly is living in a different world in Nova Scotia than I am. I want to tell the minister, although he boasts about the significant decline in the number of clients who are income supports in this province, there is a real serious problem out there, because it doesn't reflect or jive with the metro food banks saying there are more individuals who are relying on food banks in this Province of Nova Scotia. Also, the kind of jobs in the initiative programs, I don't want to get into that now with the minister, because during the questioning of this budget I will get into specifics with respect to what kind of employment services those individual clients who were formerly on income assistance, through the employment supports program, are receiving.

Mr. Chairman, I also don't know if the Minister of Community Services has had any input with respect to the $155 tax rebate that the Minister of Finance has offered to all Nova Scotians. There are many Nova Scotians, as this minister is very much aware, who live in poverty in the Province of Nova Scotia. As my Finance Critic, the member for Halifax Fairview, has indicated, 300,000 Nova Scotians will not benefit from the $155 cheque the government is going to give back as a tax rebate.

[Page 458]

I want that minister to know that those people in this province who are living in poverty could have very well better utilized those dollars than the individuals who are going to receive it, particularly those in the upper-income brackets in this province. I want you to know, Mr. Minister, that those individuals will probably take that money and spend it outside of this province, going on a trip or buying some antiques, while the individuals who would have been the benefactors of these tax dollars would have supported the small businesses in this province because they would have been out there buying the consumer goods that they so desperately need.

[3:15 p.m.]

I don't know if the minister has had any input with respect to those dollars, but I want the minister to know that that is one red flag that I identified very quickly, that in fact there is a need for his department of social services. When people are going to benefit from this province's success with respect to the deficit-cutting and with respect to receiving profits, then every Nova Scotian should benefit as a result of that, Mr. Minister, not just a few. Every Nova Scotian has contributed by paying into HST taxes, particularly the poor; the poor who have to go out there and buy baby clothes, clothing for their children, supplies, household needs and so on. Those are the individuals who continue to put that money through the economy and continue to keep those businesses flowing.

Mr. Minister, I would like you to respond at a later time during budget estimates with respect to your input on the decision of your government to give a tax rebate of $155 to individuals who are much better off than those who are impoverished in this province.

You go on to say that your government has made great strides with respect to individuals who are on social assistance. You made the comment that it moved from, I believe, 42,000 down to 33,000; that's a change of about 9,000 people who were on the income supports role. As a result of employment supports coming in, you credit employment supports with a lot of that, Mr. Minister, which we, you and I, both know differently. Some people were removed from social assistance primarily because they were encouraged to apply for Canada Pension disabilities and receive the disability benefits and because their incomes were at a particular level they were no longer on social assistance. I don't know if you count those individuals, but those 9,000 people are probably counted somewhere.

Also, Mr. Minister, if you look at the previous Liberal Government you will have noted that since 1996 there has been a continual decline in the number of recipients on social assistance in this province. That happened even during the time in which municipalities - because of the potential growth that was happening as a result of offshore development in this province. You boast about your government's track record. Your government introduced a bill, Bill No. 62, which provided employment supports. At the end of that, Mr. Minister, one should also note that as a result of that, many people have been shifted into jobs that they normally would not have gone to.

[Page 459]

At the same time, you grandfathered those individuals who were in university and continue to support them, but any new individuals who wanted to go to university, other than community colleges, would no longer be supported by the Department of Community Services. Yet we have a nursing shortage, and many of those individuals would have gone into nursing programs in this province.

Mr. Minister, your government is also the government trying to cut $900,000 last year from transition houses and transition centres across this province. I would say today, when I look at this budget, there is still a small decline in the transition allotments to your budget, which indicates that you place very little emphasis on the importance of assisting people who are disadvantaged in this province.

Mr. Minister, also, when you spoke about persons with intellectual disabilities, I note the Kendrick report. For example, the Kendrick report was a report that was commissioned by the provincial government, also the provincial government had a commitment to the Kendrick report. There are 47 advocacy groups who are members of the Kendrick report. Their only objective, to initially get off the ground, was to set up a blue ribbon committee. This government has completely ignored that.

There was also the issue with respect to workload, caseload overload. The minister has not looked at that issue, and I will be bringing up questions about that at a future time. There's also the moratorium on small options homes, which the minister had made some comment with respect to where there might be some direction. I don't know if the minister intends to lift that moratorium or not.

Right now, Mr. Minister, if I can, I want to move over to the housing issue. We do know that in September 2002, the Nova Scotia Government was one of the last governments to sign the Canada-Nova Scotia Affordable Housing agreement with the federal Government of Canada, and that is the $37.26 million that was agreed upon, jointly shared by the federal and provincial governments. I want to tell you that you have a very capable housing manager in this district by the name of Mr. Harold Dillon. He's been there for an extremely long time. He knows exactly how much emphasis has been placed on housing in this province. As a matter of fact, during the previous Liberal Government and during the four-year reign of your government, Mr. Minister, not one single thing has actually been done to address the serious crisis issue of housing in this province, with the exception of the most recent development of a 15-unit, I believe, complex that is slated for Middleton. I don't know when that's going to open but there is a 15 unit there. I might also mention that the provincial government did have some input with respect to the homeless units that had been built on the corner of Gerrish and Gottingen, but that was a three-party commitment, that was the municipal government, the provincial and federal government. As a matter of fact, the municipal government offered the property.

[Page 460]

Again, Mr. Minister, it was during your government's reign - and I believe it's the first time in the history of the Province of Nova Scotia - that your government actually sold modest housing, there were two modest housing units in the Halifax Regional Municipality. Rather than your government taking the opportunity to repair and fix those modest housing units and to put them back into the program so that individuals could be the recipients of those modest housing program, they were sold on the market. Also, your government was responsible for making an application to a municipality to re-zone a parcel of land that was slated for a seniors' housing development. It would have been the first seniors housing development in some 10 years in this province, but your government made the application to the municipality to re-zone the parcel of land to single family residential development. Those historically are things that your government has done.

There has been very, very little emphasis placed on this, Mr. Minister, and I know that I talked to you about the modest housing program and you are very much aware of that, and I will do that during budget estimates again. There are also reports that I don't believe your government or your Department of Housing has even bothered to look at, and those are reports that were placed under the former Liberal Government and those reports were New Directions for Social Housing that was produced in July 1997. Also, Housing For Tomorrow: new directions for provincial housing action of 1998, and the reports on senior citizens, pensioners and what they had recommended to your government with respect to housing.

Mr. Minister, you may at some time be able to tell me just exactly what your government has done in this particular field, but there has been no evidence to me and to those individuals out there who in fact the government has had the opportunity, or should have had the opportunity, to work with, and I know that they did. They've worked with individuals with respect to housing programs out there. The coalition on homelessness, the Nova Scotia coalition on housing and I believe that they have also sent letters off to the minister with respect to that issue as well. Mr. Minister, I want to, and you will have to excuse me a minute, some things have slipped off my desk, I will just pick them here. I was hoping a Page would slide by.

What I want to do Mr. Minister, is I want to go to a very pressing issue of today and that's an issue that in fact has confronted us and has been placed before you and the Premier during Question Period, and that is the issue with respect to the Regional Residential Services Society counsellors. I just want to ask the minister, now the minister knows that obviously this has been an issue prior to setting the budget. The minister knew that this issue would need to be budgeted for. He did know that there was some difficulty at the negotiating table, that in fact obviously he communicated with the board of directors of the Regional Residential Services Society, the RRSS for an acronym, makes it shorter and much easier to manage. The minister is obviously aware that he has had communication with the board of directors on how negotiations were going on and probably long before this budget has come forward.

[Page 461]

My very first question to the minister is this, if in fact you were aware that there was this potential, that there would not be an agreement, have you given any serious thought to how your department might very well try not to make this a protracted or prolonged strike or cessation of work?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I thank the member opposite for his comments. I may not entirely share his point of view on all of them but I respect his right to his opinion and I will endeavour to try to respond to his question. His question is with reference to the Regional Residential Services Society strike which is currently ongoing. It is affecting 178 adults generally with intellectual disabilities and it is very difficult on them. I did meet with the Premier and the families in fact just a few short minutes ago and one thing that came out of that meeting which was wonderful to hear again, is how well this program is working for them when there is no interruption in services. It has made a dramatic difference to them and I think the member opposite and I both welcome that and appreciate that that has been brought forward by enhancing the programs and indeed not the least of which, to recognize those employees that I know would prefer to be caring for the residents today and not out on the picket line.

They represent about five per cent of the community supports for employees in the province, there's about 5,000 of them. The service is delivered by a number of non-profit organizations scattered throughout the province and many with volunteer boards of directors that may perhaps have family members on them or other people with that sort of professional expertise. This is something that we've discussed in Question Period before but I think it's important to put it in perspective. There was a recognition with the upload of Community Services which included a lot from the municipalities, which included a lot of these homes, group homes, small options homes and other, supervised apartments as the member opposite points out. They came up to the provincial government at a total price tag of about $44 million initially but what we soon discovered is that the level of care across the province was not consistent, this was a concern.

I'm going to give some credit to the former government. I will assure you, Mr. Chairman, that I've had many opportunities to criticize them and rightly so, but in this I would like to give some acknowledgement that they also played a role in this. A system was put together that standardized the care from one end of the province to the other, that recognized that a higher level of training was needed for those employees to deliver that standardized service and that a more appropriate wage should be struck that should be uniform across the province, in fact, to prevent employees from trying to better their financial situation because it might be advantageous to them to move between one care provider to another one because there could be a wage differential. So by going with a uniform provincial wage which works out to a FTE allowance to that care provider of $28,500 per year or $13.70 an hour, the intention was to try to recognize the additional community college training courses that were required to deliver that type of care.

[Page 462]

Mr. Chairman, I would tell you that in addition to that, coming into these negotiations which have been going on since the contact expired on March 31, 2002 there was a recognition that there could be problems. I appreciate the member opposite bringing up that point because indeed he's absolutely right. There was an attempt to try to work with the sector, not just RRSS but in fact all the service providers in that sector, to try to get a sense of what would be acceptable to the employees and still be sustainable to government.

[3:30 p.m.]

With regard to that, there was a proposal put forward in addition to the two per cent, two per cent two per cent, over three years, there was provision made to the tune of about $5 million, I understand to be the number, for a pension plan and also an enhanced level of participation in picking up the cost of their group plan benefits. We felt that we had been successful in striking a balance that we could sustain as a government and that would be acceptable to the employees. A number of unions did accept that agreement, it was incorporated in the budget, the largest increase in the budget is in the area of community supports for adults and the budget number that's in there, honourable member, is $12.8 million and I thank you for your question.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, I suspect, through you to the minister, that the $12 million that is there, the increase, was in anticipation that there would be some collective agreements or wage settlements that would have to be negotiated and that the province would have to ante up those dollars in the pot. When you tell me, Mr. Minister, that those 250 counsellors represent only five per cent, is this a move by your government to just simply hold out and not provide the wage parity with those development workers as a result of your negotiating agreements that had been settled prior, or are you prepared to put additional money on the table and negotiate that package with these individuals?

The question is this (Interruption) Mr. Minister, I know that you're receiving advice from the Minister of Justice not to negotiate on the floor of the House and I'm not asking you to negotiate on the floor of the House. What I'm asking you is to have clarity with respect to this particular situation that's out there. You've recognized that individuals with intellectual disabilities are going to be a primary concern to your government. You have recognized that you are going to provide additional supports to that segment of your department's program.

What I'm asking you, Mr. Minister, is not to negotiate on the floor of the House, but are you using these individuals as an example of your tough stance by not providing additional dollars on the table when in fact you know that the board - and they're a capable board and they're volunteers - has to negotiate with the RRSS counsellors. My question to you is, once again, are you simply using the 250 counsellors that are out here now on strike as an example of a tough stance by your government and its unwillingness to move because you have settled previous agreements?

[Page 463]

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, to answer the member opposite's question, his concern is that this is a different approach that's being taken by the service provider with their union. I would suggest to the member opposite that there are many service providers and, in fact, the package that is available is available to all service providers right across the province.

Just to add a little more focus to where we came from four years ago - indeed it was more than four years ago - for that classification of worker. The proper name is residential rehabilitation worker. The average wage in the sector back before we started this process was about $16,000 - it is now $28,500 - we have put more on the table. This represents approximately a 78 per cent increase over that time, although I do want to recognize that it is an average and that would not be necessarily the case for every employee. For some it would be more, for some it would be less. To answer the member's question, this is something that we provide to the sector and it's available to everybody who works in the sector.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, the minister talks about bringing this parity across the spectrum in the Province of Nova Scotia. I keep telling the minister that that was a commitment through the service exchange, that there was a commitment of the Department of Community Services. Many of these small options homes and group homes and supervised apartments were the responsibility of some municipalities, as the minister is very much aware. As a result of service exchange there was a commitment that this government would, in fact, much the same as social service rates across this country, bring some sensibility to the levels of services, increase the training programs where those training programs were needed, provide the additional dollars to bring the wage structure up so that it would be consistent across the province with respect to the job that they do. There's no question about that.

The minister is very much aware that the counsellors in these small options homes, group homes and supervised apartments do one tremendous amount of work that is not done by a development worker in an institution and the minister knows very well that a development worker in an institution, if he or she needs a doctor or a nurse or something, calls up a porter and goes. That doesn't happen with a counsellor in a regional residential services society centre. They do that themselves and that's the reason why there needs to be - and if this government believes in fairness - there needs to be a wage parity issue looked at.

The other question is, I'm wondering, and I hope that this is not true and I know the Minister of Community Services would never do this, but is this an opportunity for the Minister of Community Services to slide institutionalization of individuals back in? Maybe not on the scale that we have seen in the villas in Sackville and in the Nova Scotia Hospital or something, but on a smaller scale whereby you've got 15, 25 or 50 people in a residential unit and this is a way of having your backroom lawyers and people who are doing the administration and who are providing you with the advice to slide this through in a manner that tries to justify a way to provide a service to individuals. I hope that this is not a direction

[Page 464]

in which the minister is looking and I certainly hope that he is not using the counsellors who are now on strike as an opportunity to reintroduce a program such as that.

MR. MORSE: The answer is no and I would like to point out that what we have here is a very difficult labour dispute. Difficult for the residents, difficult for the families and difficult for the union members that are out picketing when they would rather be caring for the residents.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, the minister is very much aware that every one of those counsellors out there do not want to be on strike. They want to be in there, providing the services to those individuals with intellectual disabilities. Many of them have been there with the same person for 10, 12 years. They know the behaviours of those individuals, they have lived with them constantly on a 24-hour basis in some cases. I'm saying to the minister that is something that you ought to seriously look at.

The point is that the minister can do something with respect to this issue and the minister can do it very quickly. Your government - when in fact there was this Bill No. 68, I believe, on the issue of paramedics - was going to legislate the paramedics back to work. Your government quickly came to the conclusion that it was not the appropriate thing to do, thanks to a lot of debate and late night debate on that Bill No. 68 by our Party and by the Third Party, so you weren't successful in introducing that legislation. As a matter of fact it was dropped, and wisely so, and your government introduced binding arbitration. What are you afraid of by introducing binding arbitration to the group of counsellors that are out there now?

MR. MORSE: I think that the member opposite would know that the nature by which we fund community supports for adults through the many non-profit service providers does not lend itself to this. We have committed to geographic wage equity and we have followed through on that commitment. We have bargained in good faith through the service providers by providing funding to the sector and as such agreements have been reached with a number of the unions.

Substantial additional monies have gone into providing care for the residents in community supports for adults and in fact the member opposite made reference to the fact that this was part of the service exchange with the municipalities. In this case it was more of an upload because the province took it over without a corresponding commitment on the part of the municipalities and it was originally estimated to cost $144 million. Actually because of the improvements that we made to the program that standardized levels of care and many of the things that we're speaking about, the actual cost was more in line with $53 million. So the municipalities are no longer responsible for funding those services and we feel that a better service is provided to the residents.

[Page 465]

MR. PYE: The minister knows that that was a commitment years ago. The time is now to move on. I don't know if the minister is free to make comments with respect to some of the families and their children, I mean they're adults with intellectual disabilities, if in fact he has met with those families, if he's able to tell this House just exactly what had transpired with respect to that meeting? I believe it was a most recent meeting, it might have been very well this afternoon and it might have been just shortly after Question Period. If in fact that is the case, is he prepared to tell me what transpired through that conversation and if in fact the Premier was there and if there were any commitments made?

MR. MORSE: The honourable member I think would approve that such as I'm able I have tried to meet with the families when they have requested it of me and indeed there was a meeting held this afternoon with them. They, first of all, wanted to express how appreciative they were of the new program and what a difference it had made either to their children or to their siblings, or whatever the relationship was with them, and clearly they're very distressed by what is going on. They were concerned by the effect it is having on their family member, the residents, and it's a concern that I share with them, the Premier shares with them, and that the honourable member opposite shares with them. They wanted to make sure that we understood their frustration with the current situation and to go further than that, I feel I would be betraying their confidence. I really think that that should be coming directly from the family members, but that was the gist of what the meeting was about.

MR. PYE: I guess the minister obviously after having conversation with the family members would agree that it makes no sense for the government to harden its position and stay the course with respect to this strike. I would ask the minister if in fact he would agree to that, and as well would he agree that there has to come a time, so does he have anything up his sleeve with respect to bringing both Local 66 and the board of RRSS back together to do some negotiating?

MR. MORSE: I would tell the member opposite that probably one of the most difficult items I had to include in my budget was the substantial increase in community supports for adults and to explain that to my colleagues and, as such, I feel that I have recognized the value and the government has recognized the value of the excellent work done by the people who deliver those services, including those in RRSS.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, the minister still evaded the question. The question was, as I asked the minister, does he have anything available at his disposal to bring both Local 66 and the board together to start negotiating again to resolve this very serious crisis that's out there? Every day that the minister leaves the person with intellectual disabilities in a different environment, there will be behavioural changes. There are mood changes, there are special needs and then there is the loss of attachment by the counsellor as well and there has to be a reintroducing of all that when the strike is over and it takes some time to bring that back together whereby the individuals the counsellors are looking at have gained the trust and support again. These are very personal environments. They're very closely attached

[Page 466]

environments to individuals and the minister should know the longer that this protracts, the more difficult it is going to be.

[3:45 p.m.]

I don't want to bring up the Eddy Sheppard issue with respect to small options homes, but that can happen if in fact people are moved. What's going to happen if a serious crisis occurs while this strike is on? Who is going to be responsible? Mr. Minister, is your department going to be responsible or are you going to lay that blame on the agency or the organization that now has the responsibility to look after that issue?

MR. MORSE: I would say, honourable member, going back to your concern about trying to find a solution to this impasse, that in terms of the government's commitment, it reads in the estimates that $12.8 million, a very substantial commitment on the part of the government because we felt that we did have a viable agreement with the sector and, as such, that was the commitment, but what you are speaking of, of course, is the collective bargaining process, the labour laws of the province, and as the member pointed out, this can be difficult. We've been there before when it comes to health care and we are going to respect the collective bargaining process and the labour laws and we hope that with those additional monies that we put on the table that that will be sufficient to lead to an agreement.

MR. PYE: Mr. Minister, I know that you're probably in a position - not probably, you are in the position - of closely monitoring the impact on the residents and the family members with respect to this continuing failure to get both sides to the table to negotiate. I'm wondering if you can tell me how you're monitoring that impact and are you getting daily responses, weekly responses, or what the responses are, and who are you receiving those responses from, if you possibly can?

MR. MORSE: The answer would be daily and the ones that are most vivid are from the families although clearly the department is advising me several times a day with every new development as the care coordinators are out there trying to monitor the care that is being provided to the residents. That is a function that is provided by the department, as they meet with the people who are in care of the various non-profit service providers and, yes, we are watching it constantly. I'm very concerned about it, but the reports that mean the most to me are the ones that come from the families.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, I also will ask the minister another quick question. Mr. Minister, can you tell us who's providing the support services now and what their qualifications are?

MR. MORSE: Honourable member, before the commencement of the strike there was an attempt on the part of RRSS to get some sort of sense as to how much notice they would be given if there was going to be an interruption in services. They were not successful,

[Page 467]

at least initially, in getting that assurance from the union leadership. As a result of that, a contingency plan was struck that was shared with the department. I, personally, had a lot of questions and wanted the assurance that it was the best that it could be under the circumstances and I went over actually to Simpson Hall, which was one of the temporary locations to provide care initially for some 27 residents, to inspect it myself and to meet with some of the staff who would be providing those services. I was very impressed, in particular, with the nurse who was in charge of the home and while it would be my wish that there was no labour interruption, I did feel that under the circumstances they were getting the best care possible. (Interruption)

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, I'm hearing words across this Chamber floor saying tell him he didn't answer the question. I'm very much aware, Mr. Minister, you did not answer the question. I asked you who was providing the services and what their qualifications were. As a matter of fact, Mr. Minister, I would go one step further and suggest that you table who's providing the services and table their qualifications as well so that we can see.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Before I recognize the minister, I want to explain to the gallery that there are to be no gestures or expressions to express either support or no support and if there are any more, then I will ask the gallery be cleared.

The honourable Minister of Community Services.

MR. MORSE: Honourable member, I would start by saying that the responsibility for the contingency plan rests with RRSS. However, to answer your specific question, as I understand it, the employment agency that is providing the workers who are caring for the residents along with management is RJF.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, RJF is an acronym for?

MR. MORSE: Honourable member, I would again suggest that the responsibility for putting the plan in place was of the service provider which is RRSS and they have done this. I did inquire about the qualifications of some of the key people there and took comfort in them. In fact, the person who is in charge of Simpson Hall, who was basically moved in there, is a very experienced RN who has spent I understand her entire career caring for adults with intellectual disabilities. The people at RRSS, and clearly my staff and the care coordinators would be aware of the people who are also involved with delivering the services, but this is what I saw when I went there personally and I was comforted to meet the manager who was caring for the residents at Simpson Hall.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, the minister, once again, is being a ghost at the table here with respect to his responsibility as the Minister of Community Services. He also is very much aware that, yes, the board of RRSS is responsible, in the event of a dispute, for making sure that the individuals under their care and under their support programs are in fact looked

[Page 468]

after, but the government is ultimately responsible for knowing the level of service that the substitute company is providing as well as the qualifications of those individuals in the event that there might be a liability to the government. So the government ought to, and should be able to, table in this House the qualifications of the service provider and the employees who are hired by the service provider to provide the services to the individuals under their care. So my question to the minister is, please.

MR. MORSE: As the member opposite would know, we are responsible for the licensing. That was done. The 7^th floor of Simpson Hall did pass the scrutiny of the appropriate persons in my department, but it is up to the service provider, RRSS, to provide the plan. The department did approve the plan and I suppose that if the member opposite is making the point that I cared enough to go over there and look at it before the strike actually began and when they were first moving in, that is true, but I in no way am suggesting that I am any kind of substitute for the trained professionals that I have working for me in the department, or actually I'm going to correct that, they are not working for me, they're working for our clients and Nova Scotians.

MR. PYE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the minister, when you cited or the RRSS board of directors cited the location of Simpson Hall, did you give any serious consideration to what kind of connotations that might bring out with respect to its location on the campus of the Nova Scotia Hospital and next to the Nova Scotia Hospital and if there would have been any connotation implied there that you were moving them back into an institutional setting? Under the conditions that I see in the Nova Scotia Hospital location, I see very little difference and I would have great concern that those individuals are located even in Simpson Hall on the campus of the Nova Scotia Hospital because in the 1960s, Mr. Minister, you know that's when we started deinstitutionalizing individuals in this province.

MR. MORSE: There were a number of questions and comments in there. I would tell the member opposite that we did look at a range of potential locations that were brought forward by RRSS and that this was a nurses' residence, it is not the Nova Scotia Hospital. I know that it was referred to earlier as the Nova Scotia Hospital, that is not the case. It's a nurses' residence and it seemed to have the basic necessities there that would best be able to accommodate the residents under these difficult circumstances. So I would just say that best efforts were made to find a suitable location and this is the best one that was available under the circumstances while we all work through this difficult time.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, to the minister again, Mr. Minister, I believe that you did indicate that you actually visited the facilities at Simpson Hall and you saw the operation for yourself and you've obviously had conversation with the providers. You've spoken with some of the individuals who are now taking the place of the counsellors and so on who are providing the support program. I guess my question to you, Mr. Minister, when you were there, how many residents were at the facility?

[Page 469]

MR. MORSE: It was early in the morning. There were people there as part of a contingency plan. There was staff who were still there. Most of the residents had gone during their usual daily regime which could be to go to adult service centres where they perform work or they went to other facilities in Dartmouth where they spend their days. As much as possible an attempt is made to try to keep their routine normal, such as you can under the circumstances, but the member opposite is quite right, the residents find it very difficult not only with the changes and the changes in service providers, but also the picketing is very difficult for them, it's difficult for their families, and it's difficult for the picketers. So it's not a wonderful situation, but under the circumstances this is the best we're able to do.

[4:00 p.m.]

MR. PYE: I don't know if the minister has received phone calls or persons contacting him with respect to some of the concerns that may be going on - maybe even today - there at Simpson Hall, but I'm wondering if the minister is aware and if his department is looking at the level of services that are provided. I understand that there are some persons who are under the care of RJF, some of them are wearing different clothing and it's not theirs, they're getting the clothing mixed up, they're wearing hearing aids upside down, there's a whole host of behavioural functions that are going on in there, and I'm wondering if your department is - you did indicate that you are being kept abreast daily on this - if you visited, I believe on day one you were there, have you actually gone back and visited the facilities unannounced at any other time since this strike has been taking place?

MR. MORSE: I would like to point out to the member opposite that actually this is not the only place where the residents are staying. On that day there were 27, and I think that number fluctuates up and down depending on the circumstances. About half, 20, of the small options homes are still open although they've been licensed to accommodate more people in them and the supervised apartments program continues. As the member opposite would be aware, the families, as best they can and with the support that is made available to them from the service provider RRSS, also have taken back some for the duration of the strike. But with reference to your comment, most of the feedback that I've had since then has been through the families and through staff. If I was to go out again and look at some of the sites, it would not necessarily be to Simpson Hall because I would also have an interest in the group homes and the supervised apartments and indeed the families. There's a lot that one would like to do and I'm doing what I can.

MR. PYE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Earlier the minister had indicated that there was a contingency plan, so the minister obviously knows that the union gave sufficient notification that there was going to be a strike and that strike action was going to take place on such and such a date, and that the minister or his department must have met with the board to discuss this issue, and obviously there must have been a crafted contingency plan which the minister referred to earlier. My question to the minister, if there has been a crafted contingency plan in which the minister and his department went over to make sure that that

[Page 470]

plan was going to stand the test of time, could that minister table that contingency plan to this Legislature?

MR. MORSE: Again I would point out that the RRSS is the one that produced the contingency plan and in fact it was the notice, consideration that led to the setting up of alternative arrangements. That was the whole point of it because of the vulnerability of the residents and the difficulty in accepting change, not only in their home but also to some extent of course with the service providers - and I say to some extent because the management would still be there and providing service, so there would be some continuity but not nearly the continuity that was there before the strike. It was in fact the possibility of a sudden disruption and the lack of specified assurance that the RRSS would be given sufficient time to put this in place by the union that led to the moving out of the residents prior to the strike.

MR. PYE: Again, your department - not yourself directly, but your department - has obviously been involved with the board on this contingency plan. Surely somewhere there must be a plan that has been crafted, written, and a procedure which you're going to follow. I guess my question is once again to you, Mr. Minister. If there has been such a plan, or if there isn't and if it was just a conversation or talk with the board, and we know that the board is responsible for crafting a plan, but obviously the minister would have a copy of the plan to make sure that nothing would go awry. My question, is there a plan that can be tabled in this Legislature?

MR. MORSE: Again, the plan would be owned by RRSS and it would not be appropriate for the department or the minister to interject themselves into these difficult labour negotiations, and the plan is part of RRSS's attempt to manoeuvre through difficult times in assisting the residents through the labour disruptions, so I think that I would refer you to RRSS.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Member for Dartmouth North, you have a little over five minutes remaining.

MR. PYE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Minister I know the role that the Board of Directors of RRSS plays in this. The question is, now that RJF is involved, is the money going from the Department of Community Services to RRSS and then off to RJF? And if it isn't and it's coming directly from the Community Services purse and bypassing RRSS, then the minister is responsible and the minister should have a copy of the contingency plan which can be provided to this Legislature - and what is the plan is the question. We want to know what rates are being paid, we want to know the competency of the staff, and we want to know how you devised that plan. We can sit here and talk about whose responsibility it was, or whose responsibility it is, but ultimately, Mr. Minister, it comes to your department to make sure that such a plan exists and such a plan is workable and such a plan here should be able to be tabled.

[Page 471]

MR. MORSE: Yes, and not to belabour the point, but I think that I'm going to direct the member opposite to RRSS. If they wish to release their plan to the honourable member, then that would be their decision. He's right, they're a non-profit agency providing community supports for adults, and I think that Bev Wicks and her staff, management, and union members, have provided a wonderful service to those residents. In terms of the funding arrangements that you're asking about, I would advise the member opposite that it's done on a per diem basis and, as of this point in time, we have not had any requests from RRSS for anything different than the regular per diem.

MR. PYE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess that we do know that this costing a lot of money to the Department of Community Services, and we do know that it's week three into the strike. I guess my question is, does the government have any idea of what this arrangement is costing them to date, and can you tell us the cost to date of that arrangement with RJF?

MR. MORSE: Again I would point out that the arrangement between RJF, an employment services company, and RRSS is between them, just as the labour dispute is between the union and RRSS, not the Department of Community Services. To reiterate my earlier comment, there is a per diem arrangement that is in place for those residents and, as of this date, I am advised that there have been no additional requests for more financial support from RRSS.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, to the minister. The minister knows that this is a line item in the budget, this is costed. The minister knows that if he had not anticipated a strike - and obviously he would not have - he would have hoped that the negotiations would have gone on the way they normally would and there would have been sufficient money in the pot to address the issues that were brought to the bargaining table. Now I guess my question is to the minister, what impact did this have on the budget, what's the additional cost to the Department of Community Services for this three-week strike?

MR. MORSE: As I indicated to the member previously, as of this date we've had no indication from RRSS that they will be looking for anything more from the Department of Community Services. I would also point out to the member opposite that his point about there being sufficient monies to fund the sector, that three other unions did settle previous to the strike and there were a number of others that we felt were close to settling on that package that was put forward. So it is not that everybody was not agreeable with what was put in the budget. It's just, regretful in this case, possibly because RRSS was in the higher end of the wage scale when the new $13.70 was put in place that they have not been able to come to an agreement, but that clearly is between the union, its members, and RRSS.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The member for Dartmouth North has 10 seconds to wrap up.

[Page 472]

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, in that case what is your department prepared to do to get negotiations back at the table?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The time has ended for the NDP caucus.

The honourable Leader in the House of the Liberal Party.

MR. WAYNE GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I want to start with the budget Supplementary Detail, Page 4.6, and I want to go to Community Supports for Adults. Mr. Minister, on Page 4.6 of the Supplementary Detail there is a reduction of $81,900 in Long-Term Care. Could the minister please explain this reduction?

MR. MORSE: A couple of the large institutions, Scotia ARC and Halifax RRC, were funded out of that, and so with the institutionalization it has shifted off into small options and other areas of the budget.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, also on Page 4.6, under the budget line Community Based Options, we note that this budget line has increased by $4 million. Could the minister provide us with a breakdown of this $4 million increase?

MR. MORSE: The member opposite should be aware that some of it is because of residents who had moved into that area, part of it was wage increases and actually - the member speaks of a $4 million increase, but actually in estimate to estimate it's a $9 million increase.

MR. GAUDET: Maybe the minister could clarify - residents moved in from where?

MR. MORSE: From the two facilities that were closed in that fiscal year that I mentioned in my first answer.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, could the minister please indicate how many community based options service providers are currently going through contract negotiations?

MR. MORSE: I would like to advise the member opposite that there are 27 unions involved in this, and of course there are also non-unionized employees, and covering about 5,000 careworkers in total with various qualifications.

MR. GAUDET: I guess my question - and I will try to be a little clearer - could the minister provide us with an indication of how many community based options service providers are currently going through negotiations?

[Page 473]

[4:15 p.m.]

MR. MORSE: There is a total of 27 unions - and again that does not cover all the care providers into the sector - three have settled thus far and there were a number of others that were close to settlement prior to the strike.

MR. GAUDET: Well, Mr. Minister - through you, Mr. Chairman - if I understand this correctly, three have settled out of 27, am I correct? So currently we still have 24 outstanding providers that need to go through negotiations?

MR. MORSE: To be absolutely specific on that, that would be the unionized providers, that's not the entire 5,000 - there's a mix of union and non-union.

MR. GAUDET: So if I understood correctly, the minister indicated there were 27 unionized providers, right? Is that correct, 27 unionized providers?

MR. MORSE: There are 27 unions. Now it is conceivable that there could be more than one union with a provider, and I would be pleased to get the member that information if that was important to him.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I certainly would appreciate if the minister, at his convenience, could provide us with that information. My next question, could the minister please indicate whether he has indeed provided a cap on salary negotiations with Regional Residential Services?

MR. MORSE: Of the 378 providers all over the province, a package has been put together which, as the member opposite has heard from me previously, provides geographic wage parity right across the province, so that would be the package that has been made available to them.

MR. GAUDET: I just want to be clear here, Mr. Chairman. We've been hearing the minister for the last couple of weeks talking about a 2 per cent - is this the cap that the minister is referring to? I guess that would be my first question. My second question would be has the department, through the minister, put a cap on salary negotiations with Regional Residential Services?

MR. MORSE: I thank the member opposite for his question. There is provision for an increment in the budget, but that is the budget line item and the member opposite would know what that would mean.

MR. GAUDET: I will try again. I would like to know, through you to the minister, Mr. Chairman, if the minister could indicate to the committee members if through him and through his department a cap has indeed been indicated by his department through these

[Page 474]

salary negotiations with Regional Residential Services. So I will try again, has a cap been indicated by this minister through these salary negotiations?

MR. MORSE: The wage package, of course, honourable member, has been conveyed to the sector and they would be aware of the package.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I will try something else. Could the minister please describe the directives that his government has given to RRSS and other similar agencies for appropriate wage increases?

MR. MORSE: The increments are 2 per cent, 2 per cent, 2 per cent, a pension plan cost-shared between the employer and the employees, and an enhanced benefits package in terms of the employer picking up a larger percentage of the premiums.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, we've been hearing this for the last several weeks. We've been hearing that the department has no involvement with these individuals who are on strike. At the same time we know that the funding comes directly from this minister's budget in order to provide that service to these residents. At the same time, if I'm reading this correctly, the minister is indicating that there is a cap of 2 per cent for this year, 2 per cent the next year, and 2 per cent for the following year. Does that cap apply right across the board to all service providers?

MR. MORSE: The honourable member would perhaps be aware that the way that we fund the service providers is through a per diem allotment. So as a resident or a client is assessed for needing a certain level of care, that is made up in a per diem which would include primarily wages, but also other operating expenses. That is what is provided to the service providers and it is then up to the service providers to take that per diem and negotiate with their employees, whether they be union or non-union.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, could the minister please indicate whether any small options agencies plan to increase the number of small options homes this year?

MR. MORSE: This is something that would be negotiated between the 378 providers and the department and they would make application to do so through the department, so it is part of the budgeting process.

MR. GAUDET: So at this stage, as I understand it, there's no request before the department to increase the number, is that correct?

MR. MORSE: With the deinstitutionalization, particularly with those two large facilities in Halifax, there was some growth in the small options area as a result to accommodate those residents and, of course, as emergencies come up, we make provision for them.

[Page 475]

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, could the minister then indicate whether any agencies are planning to close any small options homes this year? Is the department aware of any agencies planning to close any small options homes this year?

MR. MORSE: I'm not aware that there are plans to close any of them.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I want to go back to the Regional Residential Services Society. As we have been debating in this House for probably the past two weeks - and probably a little more - we know that these counsellors, these group home workers have been asking for wage parity. We know people who do the exact work in institutions here in HRM are earning $4 or $5 more than they are. You know these individuals are currently earning $13.70 an hour and others are working, especially at Emerald Hall here at the Nova Scotia Hospital and they are earning somewhere around $18 - I think it's $18.90 or $18.95 or thereabouts. My first question is, could the minister please explain why he feels that workers who are employed by an agency directly and fully funded by his department should make less than a person doing the exact same job working in a position that is funded directly by the Department of Health?

MR. MORSE: There are a number of clarifications that should be made here. First of all I want to make it clear that the various service providers are not employees of the Department of Community Services, although the Department of Community Services does fund the sector. That would be my first qualification. The second one is the assumption that those employees in Emerald Hall have a comparable job description, and that is something that is being advanced, I understand, by the union as part of their negotiations. I would suggest to the member though that the 32 people who work in that facility are not the comparator; the comparator would presumably be the 5,000 who work in community supports for the adult sector.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, does the minister agree that the RRSS workers are not entitled to wage parity?

MR. MORSE: As has been pointed out many times in the last number of weeks here, in fact they do have geographic wage parity amongst community supports for adult workers right across the province.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, again, we know that there are individuals in this area who are doing the exact same work who are being paid a lot more per hour than these counsellors, these group home workers, are earning - my question to the minister is, does he believe that these workers are not entitled to wage parity? Does he agree or doesn't he agree?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, again I would point out that this government came up with the $28 million to provide that geographic wage parity and, as I mentioned earlier with the NDP Critic, the regional residential workers in fact, on average, got a 78 per cent increase

[Page 476]

in their wages from the start of this initiative to the conclusion. So that's what happened with the $28 million and, of course, that continues on and we are prepared to augment that in our funding to the sector.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, this strike has been ongoing and it certainly has been disrupting many lives of loved ones. A question to the minister, and we have been asking it for quite some time now, I'm wondering if this minister is planning to do anything to help to get management and these workers back to the bargaining table - yes or no?

[4:30 p.m.]

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, as I've indicated before, substantial monies were put into the sector and indeed, again, in this fiscal year there were substantial additional monies put into the budget in a line item for the purposes of bringing about a successful conclusion to negotiations in the sector by properly funding the various service providers.

MR. GAUDET: I will try to put it a little clearer. Is this minister planning to do anything to bring this strike to an end?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, again I would point out that in fact substantial monies have already gone into this sector to fund the various service providers and, indeed, I would remind the member opposite that collective agreements have been reached with three, there were others that were close, and a great many of the 378 service providers are without unions and they would have been afforded the same package.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, the minister is fully aware of some of the anger and some of the frustrations of some of these families, of some of the residents, even of some of these group home workers. What does he plan to do to resolve this impasse - I guess - during this ongoing strike?

MR. MORSE: In anticipation that there could be a disruption in services, as has been discussed with the honourable member for the NDP, a contingency plan was put in place on the part of RRSS and at this point in time they are focused entirely on trying to make this as easy as possible on the residents and the affected families, and the department has care coordinators who are visiting with the families, visiting with the residents, under difficult circumstances, to try to do whatever they can to make this less disruptive for them. This is the best that we can do under the collective bargaining arrangements that are in place.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, could the minister indicate to the members of this committee who is funding this contingency plan, is it RRSS or the Department of Community Services?

[Page 477]

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, this would come from the per diem that is assigned to each of the residents and, as I indicated earlier, thus far we have no requests from RRSS for any additional monies.

MR. GAUDET: So, Mr. Chairman, if I understand this correctly, if the strike goes on and on and on, does that mean that the contingency plan will be funded by the agency and not by the Department of Community Services?

MR. MORSE: As the member would be aware, we fund the sector and it is done through a budgeting process, where the cost of caring for each of the residents is worked out. In this particular case a full-time equivalent for a residential care worker is at $28,500, plus there are additional increments that have been factored into this and, based on the level of care for the individual resident, a per diem would be derived from this and it is that per diem that goes to the non-profit community supports for adults' care providers.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I'm sure that the department is much aware of the contingency plan that's in place, we've heard the minister a number of times standing up in this House and talking about visiting some of these residents - could the minister indicate to us how much has been spent, additional I guess, in terms of additional costs, how much has it cost for the last two weeks?

MR. MORSE: Again, as I think I may have indicated previously, to the best of our knowledge there have been no additional requests coming from RRSS and so, therefore, we have continued to pay them the agreed per diem.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, we know that this strike is ongoing and probably will continue tomorrow. We don't know for how long. We hope, and I'm sure everyone in this House hopes, that this strike will come to an end soon, but in order to do this the Premier is going to have to step in. I just want to refer back to an article that appeared last week in The Chronicle-Herald and one of the family members indicated it's time for the Premier to step in, she said he's the only one that can bring these two parties together and get all these helpless, vulnerable people back into their homes.

Now, my question would be has the Premier been requesting from this Minister of Community Services to try to resolve this strike as soon as possible I guess - has the minister been advised or requested by the Premier, or the Premier's Office, to try to resolve this current labour dispute?

MR. MORSE: As the former Minister of Environment and Labour, I have some appreciation for the labour laws in this province and, as the member opposite would be aware, this labour dispute is between an employer, RRSS, and their union. So, as such, there is no place for other parties to be getting involved at the negotiating table.

[Page 478]

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, as we're all aware, there's an impasse, you know the residents, the families and the workers are looking at this Premier and this government for leadership. We are at an impasse and we need to resolve this strike hopefully in the near future. Now, to do that, as I've indicated earlier, this family member who was quoted in The Chronicle-Herald indicated it's time for the Premier to step in and either tell this minister, to give this minister or provide him with some direction, but so far we have seen nothing.

So, of course, Mr. Chairman, we have heard many people indicating that unfortunately the workers don't want to go back to the bargaining table, but it takes two sides to resolve this dispute. We're aware that talks have broken down. We have a lot of people who are extremely frustrated in the past couple of weeks. Nothing is moving. There doesn't appear to be any movement on this government's part. My question to the minister is, what is the department now prepared to do to help to resolve this dispute or to get those two parties back to the bargaining table, what is the department planning to do?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I thank the member opposite for his question, because in fact the department's concern is entirely focused on the care of the residents, and our preference would be that that care be provided by the union members who are currently now out on strike. I think that there is absolute agreement all around that they would provide the best level of care but, given that, we are in a situation where there is a disruption in services, that the best that can be done from the point of view of RRSS is to try to care for those residents, and give whatever comfort they can, by doing so, to the families. From the point of view of the department, we are in there with our care coordinators. As part of their job, they're trying to assure that the appropriate care is being provided to the residents and is liaising with the families. In the meantime, that is what's being done by the department.

MR. GAUDET: Alright, Mr. Chairman, I'll try again. We know there is an impasse, nothing is moving. My question again to the minister is, what is this minister, this government, planning to do to resolve this dispute?

MR. MORSE: Again, this is a dispute between an employer and a union. The best we are able to do is to provide whatever assistance we can to the residents through the care coordinators and their families. Hopefully, this difficult time will work its way out between the two parties that should be at the negotiating table.

MR. GAUDET: I agree with the minister. These two groups belong to the bargaining table. Unfortunately, there has been a breakdown in those talks. The minister is fully aware of that. My question simply was, what is the department planning to do to resolve this labour strike?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I try to make a point of it, when a former government has done something right in their time, to acknowledge it in my comments. I think the member opposite would acknowledge that there was some recognition that the government

[Page 479]

that he was part of played a part in coming together with the uniform level of care that is enjoyed across the province. Indeed, that would involve coming up with the $13.70 as an appropriate wage for the training that is required by those employees, by those caregivers and the responsibility that is borne by them. So I want to acknowledge the member opposite as a member of that government that worked on coming up with the $13.70 an hour. He came up with a lot of other initiatives which added $3.6 billion to the provincial debt which has made it more difficult to fund other programs, but I do think that it was a good thing that was done in the Community Services Department during that time. It is this government that has come up with $28 million and has put more on the table to fund those wages.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I know what our former government did for the small options homes. What I want to know, and a lot of people want to know, is what is this minister, this Tory Government planning to do to help resolve this dispute?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, as I've indicated on a few occasions, we honoured the commitments to the employees, we came up with another $28 million to fund a proper wage package that recognizes the responsibilities and the training of those caregivers. We have not only done that, but we have also been prepared to put more on the table to the sector. This has been done. Some of the unions in the sector have accepted this, and the other non-unionized employers would have the same available to them through their per diems.

MR. GAUDET: We're all aware that we may need some additional funding brought to the table in order to resolve this walkout. Mr. Chairman, as you're aware, this government has been able to find all kinds of new funding. I'm not going to sidetrack at this time. My question to the minister is - and more than likely the answer is yes - if more funding is needed to resolve this strike, is the department willing and ready to provide some additional funding to help to bring this strike to an end, yes or no?

MR. MORSE: I would like to confirm that substantial additional resources have been provided to the sector and, indeed, that is why we are seeing settlements in three other unions and, of course, those others that were close to settlement and plus all the other non-unionized service providers would have also had that made available to them through their adjusted per diems.

MR. GAUDET: We have seen settlements, I agree. Unfortunately, we have an impasse right here that has been going on for probably 16 days now. What is this minister planning to do to help resolve this labour dispute, anything?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, as I indicated earlier in my comments, there is substantial additional monies put into Community Supports for Adults Program. It was something that I had to explain to my Cabinet colleagues when we came forward and produced these estimates. I would suggest to the member opposite that those concerns have been brought forward and they have been recognized in this budget.

[Page 480]

[4:45 p.m.]

MR. GAUDET: Again, we are at an impasse. We are hearing some individuals outside, and you can't blame these individuals who are calling upon this minister, upon this government for some real leadership to help. We have seen parents, we have seen family members calling upon this government to step in because nothing is moving right now. We don't anticipate anything will be moving in the near future. My question to the minister is, what is he planning to do to help move these talks forward in order to try to resolve this strike?

MR. MORSE: Actually, I think that perhaps it should be pointed out that there has been a conciliator who has been in place for some time. He filed his report, but that conciliator would be available to the parties should they wish to call on him again. I certainly hope they choose to do so.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, I guess the obvious question is, what happens if either party decides to call in the conciliator to help move these negotiations forward, what is this Minister of Community Services planning to do?

MR. MORSE: I would be very pleased to see the parties make use of the conciliator again. During my time in the Department of Environment and Labour, I saw the wonderful work of those conciliators often bringing about successful conclusions to very difficult labour negotiations. Sometimes I found them to be just amazing. I certainly hope that both parties make use of their conciliator and it leads to a negotiated collective agreement agreeable to both sides.

MR. GAUDET: I guess we have been asking the minister for quite some time now - the obvious question that these workers out there have been asking for is wage parity. They are doing the exact same work as other people in that same line of work are doing. These individuals, there is no question about their dedication to their profession and the loving and compassionate care they provide to these residents. Again, to the minister, does the minister agree or disagree that these individuals, these devoted, dedicated individuals deserve wage parity? Yes or no.

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, once again I would remind the member that, in fact, they do have geographic wage parity. There are about 5,000 employees involved in providing community supports for adults across the province and, in fact, that geographic wage parity has been funded by this government and it's being funded in a way that is sustainable. In addition to that, we were able to make substantial additional allocations to allow for the collective bargaining process for those that have unionized employees and for the appropriate increase in the per diems for those that have non-unionized employees.

[Page 481]

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, when you look at the responsibilities of these individuals and the type of work they do compared to other individuals within the Halifax Regional Municipality, the same type of work is being provided by these group home workers as other individuals are providing at the Nova Scotia Hospital yet there is almost $5 difference in wages per hour. My question to the minister is, does he or doesn't he agree that these group home workers deserve wage parity with some of their colleagues who are doing the exact same work here in HRM? Does he agree or doesn't he agree?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, the member opposite is making reference to, I believe, 32 workers who are employed by the Department of Health. What he is suggesting is that they have a comparable job description. It's a different sector, there are different circumstances. We think a more appropriate comparator is the other 4,750 people who are involved in Community Supports for Adults, who do have geographic wage parity at a cost of $28 million that has been funded fully by this government. We have, again, made additional allocations that have led to successful collective agreements with several other unions.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, when you look at the responsibilities of these individuals, the type of work that they do, yes, I agree with the minister, they are in different settings, but the work is practically the same, the same responsibilities for one as the other, yet there is roughly $5 difference between what these group home workers are earning and what these other counsellors are earning. My question, again, to the minister is, does he agree or doesn't he agree that these workers deserve wage parity?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I would point out to the member opposite that, in fact, prior to this government providing wage parity across the Community Supports for Adults sector and all the training that went into it and the improved level of care for the residents - which the families tell us are so important to them, and clearly the residents are responding well to it. It's a joy to see them when they're well cared for they're happy, and it's just a pleasure to meet with them, but, clearly, we have to look at what is the appropriate comparison. I would suggest that the 5,000 people who are involved in the provision of services for Community Supports for Adults would presumably be the appropriate comparator. We are providing that geographic wage equity that the member opposite is speaking to, and I am sure he's very pleased that we have honoured those commitments.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, if the department does not lift the ceiling of 2 per cent, 2 per cent, 2 per cent which we have been hearing about for quite some time now, this strike that has been ongoing for 15 days, what purpose would there be for these individuals, for these workers to return to the bargaining table with their employer without a change in their mandate, with a conciliator or a mediator to come to the table with no additional money, apart from their 2 per cent, 2 per cent, 2 per cent? I'm just trying to find out what exactly is the incentive for these individuals to get back to that table.

[Page 482]

MR. MORSE: Clearly, the difficulty in a strike is nobody likes the situation. I know those caregivers who are on the picket lines miss the residents, they have become family. This is difficult for them. Clearly, it's difficult for the residents. It's certainly difficult for the families; I think it absolutely troubles everybody, including all the members in this Chamber. I would encourage the union to consider what is going on in the sector and look at how we have substantially increased the funding to this sector, how some who were once making $6 just a few short years ago and perhaps did not have the training to provide the level of care that's necessary for these residents, are now making $13.70 an hour, and more has been put on the table for them.

I would suggest to the member opposite that we are not only providing this for them but we're doing it within the confines of a balanced budget, which gives us the confidence, it can give Nova Scotians the confidence that they will be able to continue to sustain these services for the residents.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, for the few more minutes that are remaining in our time, I will be passing the floor to my colleague, the member for Cape Breton West. In closing, I don't believe that I'm the only one who can't understand why this minister, why this Tory Government refuses to make an investment in the care and protection of our most vulnerable citizens here in the province. I just can't understand. Yet, they can go borrow $118 million to try to fund an election platform that will be coming out very shortly, to fund $155 cheques that will cost $68 million. Mind you, not everyone in Nova Scotia will be getting those cheques. There are over 300,000 Nova Scotians who will not be getting these cheques. This Tory Government can go ahead and borrow $68 million, they can borrow $118 million, but when it comes time to try to provide the care and the protection that these vulnerable people in our society need, this government, this minister, is nowhere to be seen.

Mr. Chairman, I will pass the rest of my time to my colleague, the member for Cape Breton West.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to thank the member for Clare for his comments.

The honourable member for Cape Breton West. You have 14 minutes in turn.

MR. RUSSELL MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I have two issues. One is a constituency-related matter with regard to a constituent. She is an elderly lady - well, she's not quite 60. I have been given permission to raise this with the minister and I will provide whatever appropriate detail is required to confirm my permission to discuss this on a future moment. She is a lady who is very sick, she has cancer. She has no indoor toilet facilities. I believe the minister is familiar with this case. She has been, in my view, jerked around by the Department of Community Services for the best part of five or six months. As the minister well knows, this lady who has cancer and who has been receiving radiation

[Page 483]

treatment has lost her hair, she was forced to go out, the indignity of going to an outdoor privy through these winter months, which were absolutely terrible by any measure.

[5:00 p.m.]

At the local level, the local caseworker did her level best to try to have an indoor washroom facility. It all came down to a few hundred bucks. Then when it started hitting the higher levels, the bureaucratic levels, the hierarchy within the department, everything stopped dead. This lady to this very moment does not have an indoor washroom facility. She has to go outside. She had no problems when she was healthy, but when she developed cancer and pleaded for help from that department, they jerked that poor lady around and put her through the indignity of even going through an appeal process, of which she was told we will not give you your indoor washroom facility but we will give you a chemical toilet because that's what we can provide. This lady cannot be exposed to chemicals. Officials within the Department of Community Services said too bad, this is what we're offering you.

When you figure it out, Mr. Chairman, the differential on the cost was negligible. That's why I asked if the deputy minister was going to be here today, because she was involved in that case directly. How can the minister say that this is a compassionate government helping disadvantaged individuals? The minister, himself, stood in this House not more than a week ago saying that one of the great things that this government does is provide financial assistance to help seniors and those who need indoor washroom facilities upgrade their septic, installation of on-site sewage, yet this is the way you treat a very sick lady.

I say, shame on you minister, shame on your department and shame on the Government of Nova Scotia for treating this lady in such a cruel, harsh, dishonourable manner. I attended the hearing with this individual who, by the way, had to go through the indignity of trying to get a neighbour to change a tire on her car. She only had the donut, the spare tire, and drove 35 kilometres through harsh winter conditions to get there, if she wanted to have her case heard. A one-man appeal, one-person appeal. What happened to the old tribunal where three people would sit there? Everything was revamped so as to make it more difficult for those who really need help.

The minister knows what I'm talking about. This is a genuine case. This lady, and from what I understand, even her doctor will confirm she should not be exposed to chemicals. Not only that, Mr. Chairman, there are problems with these chemical toilets. They're new on the market. I can speak with some authority on this - the minister only has to check in the Department of Environment and Labour to know this - with my licence. You don't expose somebody with cancer, who is receiving chemo treatment, to chemicals, toxic chemicals, which she would have to regulate herself.

[Page 484]

Where is the compassion and where is the heart in this department? Mr. Chairman, I cannot emphasize how cruel this case is. When I attended the hearing on this lady's behalf do you know what I found so disheartening, to discover through this process the department officials saying, oh, we want this individual out of her home. Even though she has been there all her life. It was her father and mom's home. It was good enough a month before Christmas when they installed a new oil tank, a new chimney. When it came to this here issue they say, no, we can't give you that because this house is condemned, you shouldn't be there. Well, why did they install, and encourage her to stay there with a new heating system?

There is something wrong in that department. There is something even more wrong, Mr. Chairman, when a senior official at the local level will try to entice this lady to drive all the way from her home - she can hardly walk let alone drive, she can't afford to drive - invite her into town so she can be tested to see if she's mentally stable to stay in her own home. Yes, she will confirm this, publicly or privately.

Now, I would ask this minister and this department to get a handle on what the heck is going on. You got $11 million from the federal government and you only spent $2 million, and you're going to dilly-dally around as to whether you're going to help the disadvantaged in this province? Take some of that $9 million and put some compassion back in the Department of Community Services, get some help for this lady where it's needed, prevent her from the further indignity that you and your department officials have put her through.

Mr. Chairman, I find this process absolutely sickening when I see the vulnerable people of this province being treated in the manner that this government and this minister's department has treated this lady. It's not her fault that she has found herself in this predicament. God forbid that we should treat people who are sick with a terminal illness to be exposed to chemicals that they should not be exposed to over a few hundred dollars.

I dealt with the caseworker at the local level on this lady's behalf. It came down to arguing over 25 feet of sewer pipe. That was the difference. That's how close we were to having a contractor fulfill that lady's request. I look across and I see all the bravado, we're going to give $155 back to everybody to see if we can get elected. How sickening, when you see cases like this. She won't get it. She won't get anything because she went there, she was forced the indignity at just about every step of the way.

Now, why was it so good for the department, one month, to help her install a new heating system, a new chimney, a new oil tank, and then come back a month later and say oh no, that place should be condemned? Is there something disconnected? Does something not add up here? I find that most disturbing, when I sit here and I listen to the government muse, and that's what's happening, the minister will muse - about the $9 million that he has in hand, federal money that was sent down - not provincial dollars - to help people like this lady, the disadvantaged, those who need help. She has running water in her home. It's good. They had a new well installed. They have a cistern well. They have electrical, they had the

[Page 485]

electrical upgraded about 10 years ago. I spoke with the local councillor for the area and he seems to agree that it's as good as any home he's been in. I've been in her home. It's clean, you could eat off the floor. She treats you with the greatest of respect. What little she has she's the first to go to the cupboard and put it on the table for you.

Where is the compassion? There was more money spent on bureaucracy trying to prevent this lady from getting help than there was putting the money where it was needed the most. That's what I find very disheartening. It defies all logic, over a few hundred bucks. That would have been the rebate for two or three Nova Scotians who you're trying to buy a few votes with. How can we in all conscience sit here and support a budget in that department knowing full well that this is what's happening?

Mr. Chairman, I always try to deal with the staff at the local level. I think that's proper protocol, because MLAs shouldn't be involved at that level unless there's a breakdown in communication or process or whatever. In rural Nova Scotia, many constituents come to their MLA because that's their only conduit, at least they feel that's their only vehicle of access to government and the bureaucracy. I tried to steer this lady in the right direction. I give full credit to the caseworker who worked on this on the front lines, but when it went up to her superiors, oh no. Yes, I did speak with the deputy minister, because of the foot-dragging, because at -28 degrees below zero she's forced to go out to the edge of the woods on her property, after receiving chemo treatment. It's great to sit in the Eiffel Towers, in the nice cushiony offices collecting big salaries, but what about the people who we were sent here to protect?

I've listened to the rhetoric regarding all the issues on both sides of the strike out here, but if ever there was a day that would convince me to stay in politics, it was the day that we got the word that your department said no to this lady. That, to me, was the turning point, in many respects, of my political career, knowing that people like this are still being abused. I don't care what politics you are, get a handle on what's going on in that department. If you have $9 million to spare, put it to good use and stop making people like this lady suffer unnecessarily.

Mr. Chairman, I realize my time has come to a close. The minister knows the case that I'm speaking of, and, when I have an opportunity to grab my file, I will provide the documentation that allows me to speak publicly on this.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your comments.

The honourable member for Dartmouth North. The NDP caucus' time being 5:12 p.m., you have until 6:00 p.m., the moment of interruption, then we will carry on from 6:30 p.m. to 7:01 p.m. You have the floor.

[Page 486]

MR. JERRY PYE: Mr. Chairman, I want to begin where I left off. I don't want to spend a whole lot of time, because in the budget estimate hours there are not many hours left and there is a tremendous amount to be covered under the Department of Community Services' budget. You know we are concerned, Nova Scotians are concerned, and it doesn't serve anyone's interest to keep those counsellors out on the picket line or to make the family members more vulnerable than what they are with the residents in that service and to simply leave them on the edge of suspense with respect to addressing this issue.

Mr. Minister, you sit alongside your Cabinet partner, the Minister of Environment and Labour, I'm wondering have you ever talked or communicated with the Minister of Environment and Labour to try to get both the union and the board back to the negotiating table in the best interests of the families and the vulnerable residents of RRSS and the union?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, what the member opposite is referring to is the conciliation services that are provided through the Department of Environment and Labour. I guess I would have to say that it does not require the intervention of the Minister of Environment and Labour to provide the services of a conciliator. In fact, a conciliator has been assigned to the case, and that is what I think the member opposite is referring to in terms of that department's role. As was mentioned earlier, they do wonderful work in conciliation and I hope that conciliator has a chance to do so again.

MR. PYE: Mr. Minister, in the Supplementary Detail Book, Page 4.6, there is a definite increase in the Community Supports for Adults. I guess there is somewhere close to about $4.5 million. The minister had indicated in his speech to the House that there was some $12 million in this budget this year for persons with intellectual disabilities, unless I misread the minister. I am wondering if the minister is aware of the fact that there has been no significant increases in approximately 10 years for individuals who live in these homes, with respect to the food budget, and there has been no increase in approximately 10 years with respect to the clothing allowance and/or the comfort allowance that they normally receive. I am talking about the vulnerable residents.

To the minister, can the minister enlighten me, if there has been increases, what years those increases happened, and what the status of the comfort allowance, the clothing allowance and the food budget is for those individuals?

[5:15 p.m.]

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, this is going back a time but I think what the member opposite is referring to are the components of the per diem as it's put together. I believe that it's well understood that the wage component in providing the care, which is the largest component that makes up the per diem, has increased substantially in the last few years. You're talking about the other living expenses such as food and clothing. There was an increment in 1997, I'm advised it was approximately 2 per cent. Where it is necessary to

[Page 487]

make adjustments, it's done on a case-by-case basis, as they tailor the per diem to the care of the resident.

MR. PYE: So what you're telling me, Mr. Minister, is that there has been no increase in at least six years, and, in fact, this is based on a judgment call by someone who is responsible, and in this particular case it might be one of the providers for small options homes and those individuals in that small options home. I guess what you're saying is that this doesn't go directly to the client, this is something that is reviewed by the board or even possibly by the counsellor. I'm not clear, and I would like to have some clarity with respect to how this happens and why there hasn't been an increase since 1997.

MR. MORSE: The member has a good knowledge of how the services are delivered through the per diem system and, indeed, it is one of the 378 service providers that would be aware of the specific needs of each of their residents. Through that service provider, they would speak with a care coordinator and they would look at the per diem for that residence to ensure that it is meeting the requirements of good care.

MR. PYE: To the minister, the minister knows there has been an ongoing review with respect to Community Support for Adults. I guess I would ask the minister where is that review and progress today, what's the progress of that review today with respect to community supports, how is it being done and what is its budget? That would be my question to you.

MR. MORSE: I would like to acknowledge that the member opposite is a very caring individual, he's very passionate in watching out for the less fortunate in the province. I would like to say that we would all try to emulate that trait. Along with that, he's very passionate about the Community Support for Adults Program, and this is something that flows, I would suggest, from the Kendrick report and what's happening with the Kendrick report. As the member would be aware, because he has given me an opportunity to speak to this, the Community Support for Adults Renewal Initiative is something that is being embraced by not only the residents, the families, the caregivers, the advocacy groups, and are involved in using things like the Kendrick report and the other huge volume of knowledge that is out there to look at the whole delivery of that program. I think the member opposite would know that it has been many years, certainly long before I ever thought about getting involved in politics, since this was last done. The budget is contained within that division of the department, but having attended at least one of the working sessions of the Community Support for Adults Renewal Initiative, I was certainly very impressed with the enthusiasm that was being embraced from all participants in this process. I thank the member opposite for bringing this up, I think it was a wonderful initiative of my predecessor and staff in the sector and everybody else involved.

[Page 488]

MR. PYE: The minister is aware that the government went through great expense to have Dr. Kendrick prepare a report called the Kendrick report. The minister is aware that there were many, many recommendations within the Kendrick report with respect to this very issue of community support for adults. My question is, why is this review being done when the Kendrick report was submitted to this government some two years ago? Why are the advocacy groups who were involved in the Kendrick report somehow being left out of this, or it gives me the impression that they're somehow being left out of this? I would ask the minister to entertain those questions.

MR. MORSE: The Kendrick report is one piece of evidence that is being used to address the Community Support for Adults Renewal Initiative. It is just one of many. I would suggest to the member opposite in fact, a lot of the advocacy groups that participated in that are involved with the renewal initiative. There is a committee within the renewal initiative in fact that will screen everything before it comes to me for my consideration. This is a way of ensuring that valuable input from the people who are closest to delivering the services, or the families, or some of the residents that are involved in the program, have input into ultimately what should come out of this later on this year.

MR. PYE: The minister is very much aware that as I've said, this Kendrick report came at great expense to the taxpayers. I don't know what the government has done with respect to the response of the Kendrick report. My question to you would be, have you reviewed the Kendrick report? What is your government's response to the Kendrick report? Is it possible to table your responses to this report?

I have heard no responses from this government in over a year with respect to the Kendrick report. This government under the former Minister of Community Services has indicated that there would be a response. He had stated that in time this government would review the Kendrick report, they would have a response to it and that the stakeholders of those organizations who came together - those 47 advocacy groups - would be informed. So my question is, I guess, to the minister once again, what is the government's response to the Kendrick report and can you table the response to that Kendrick report?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, in response to the member's question, the Kendrick report was commissioned by the department. There were certain things that were looked for in Dr. Kendrick's report. We are anxious to get best-practice models in place, also to be able to move towards a regulatory system. Some of the things that were asked for in that report are not included in the report, although I would suggest that there is a lot of really good information that Dr. Kendrick did provide us. As such, it provides a valuable tool in moving ahead with the renewal initiative and we look forward to the people served by the Community Support for Adults Program and their families, and indeed, the whole province because we are judged by how we treat those that are most vulnerable in society. I think that we will all reap benefits from the time and the money that was invested in producing the Kendrick report, but, through the Community Support for Adults initiative and to finish

[Page 489]

addressing some of those things that were not covered over in its entirety in the Kendrick report.

MR. PYE: I guess the minister is telling me that the Kendrick report is encompassed within the initiative of support for adults. That comes to the table when there's a recommendation that can be adopted from the Kendrick report and funnelled into the community support initiatives and then enacted upon. Is that what the minister is telling me?

MR. MORSE: That is one of the sources that the people involved with the renewal initiative looked to for guidance. Yes, in essence, the Kendrick report is one of those references that they will be relying on to come out with recommendations to bring forward to the Minister of Community Services.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, the minister today spoke passionately about the government's Bill No. 62 which brought in employment support and income assistance. That bill was designed specifically to move people from the welfare roll to work, to make them self-sufficient. The previous minister said there could be nothing better and we agree - there's nothing better than someone having a job. Those employment opportunities are great, but they must be meaningful jobs and there must be meaningful employment so that individuals at a future date can find themselves completely off the welfare roll without having to be income supplemented and so on.

My question is, the minister said that during the four-year term of his government that some 9,000 people had been moved out of income assistance. I would assume that when he says that, he means that they may have gotten employment because of the growth in the economy and so on and there were employment opportunities. He did say that the employment counsellors do a one-on-one assessment of the individuals and prepare them for the employment field. He did say that there's some 3,500 individuals involved in such a program, I believe he said that.

I guess what I would say to the minister is this: can he elaborate on what type of jobs these individuals are now employed in and if they're jobs that shove them above the low income level that is considered in Canada?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I thank the member opposite for that question because the member has made a lot of the points that I would like to make about this program. Just to give a little bit of background in terms of what's happening with the drop in the numbers, in actual fact, those who, for whatever reason, find that they have to come to the Employment Support and Income Assistance Program and their caseworker represent a group that is fluid. They flow through so because there are 9,000 fewer cases now since we've come to government is not an indication that there are 9,000 particular families that were there and are no longer there. In actual fact I would suggest that the turnover has been much greater. I think what it indicates is that more are going through the program and finding a chance to

[Page 490]

get meaningful employment and, as the member opposite echoed my opening comments about the opportunities provided to get education so that they become a career and something more than a subsistence job, this is exciting I think for the people who benefit from it.

[5:30 p.m.]

I know it's certainly exciting for the caseworkers who before were frustrated by the fact that they would have maybe single parents who would come to them and there were jobs out there for them, but the system thwarted them from taking them because the supports were not there, whether it was for child care, or whether it was for travel, whether it was the fear of moving off the system and losing the Pharmacare support because maybe they're a diabetic, or their child had asthma. Those supports have been put there that have opened doors for people who previously, I would suggest to the honourable member, were trapped in the system. They wanted a chance to get off and speaking with some of them and the pride that they have by being able to work their way off the system and some of them are just so passionate about their achievement and, of course, that speaks to their self-esteem and where there are children involved in the family, the benefits trickle down. I mean it is really a wonderful evolution of this program.

Of course, the program goes back to the uploading to Community Services because this was the combination of the 66 municipal assistance programs with the Family Benefits Program. I also know that some of the residents in my community who whatever reason find that employment is not as sustaining as they would like it to be - through the wintertime it used to be on the old municipal assistance program - the additional benefits that are provided certainly mean a lot to them. So, therefore, it means a lot to me. I think it means a lot to this government and I think it means a lot to the member opposite because the member opposite would know that some of those municipal assistance rates were troubling in terms of the amount that was provided to a single, unemployed man or woman and that has been a very positive change.

The member opposite asked me a question and I think that I'm starting to perhaps digress, but as I have had the chance to travel about and speak to some of the caseworkers who are trying to assist their clients in bettering their lives, the passion by which they speak of how it has assisted them in being able to help clients and the appreciation that has flowed back through them really speaks to the success of the program and while it may not be successful for every single person, I think it has substantially improved the circumstances of a great many Nova Scotians and, as such, has allowed them to make a very positive contribution to the community, to society, to our economy. I think that it's very important to recognize that for those who are able, and not everybody on employment support and income assistance is able, there are some who are disabled and not able to accept full-time employment, or any employment, but for those who are able, they want to make a contribution. These are good people and they just need to have a chance and this in many cases has provided them with the chance.

[Page 491]

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, the minister didn't answer my question, if the individuals who are employed through the employment support programs receive incomes that are above the low income level and I mean the low cost of living that it would be and the low income level as we suggest there ought to be, my question is this. Last year your department, Mr. Minister, believed in putting people back to employment and making them self-reliant, your department cut some of the necessary items that people would need to go back to work, like steel-toed boots, like clothing, sometimes tools and so on, and my understanding is that some people have not been able to get those types of items that are needed to put them back into the employment field. My question to you, Mr. Minister, is this true and if it isn't true, is there some policy in the department to do an assessment on individuals to see if those needs are there or not?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I thank the member opposite for asking the question because I want to assure the member opposite that things like workboots, gloves, appropriate work clothing, is still something that would be provided through the employment support program and, in fact, I am advised that the largest employment support program in the province is, in fact, the employment support and income assistance component of Community Services. When you think of manpower, you think of HRDC and in actual fact we do partner well with them in terms of assisting clients to be able to go to community college to work on a career. They will pick up the tuition, but we provide I think the lion's share of the funding to make that possible. So that is there and, of course, with that they are able to keep 30 per cent of whatever they earn and that's their net earnings, that's not the gross earnings, which is very important.

So as the member was inquiring about how they were bettering their situation, if let's say they were a family, and I'm just going to use round numbers, a family of two and perhaps the circumstances allowed them to get by on a budget of $1,000 a month and because of the child care that's made available to them, $400 a month, that the parent, whether it be a father or a mother, is able to go out and earn $1,000, they would get to keep 30 per cent of that. So it would dramatically increase their disposable income and greatly enhance their situation until eventually through experience and promotions and the self-confidence that comes from being able to go out and obtain your own job and all the other things you can do to improve your circumstances, their situation allows them to earn more than what they would on the system. So this would be one example where they would add $300 a month to their budget and that is all over and above what they would have gotten from Community Services.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, to the minister, Mr. Minister, would you agree that after the year is over and when the Department of Community Services starts providing the supplements, such as Pharmacare, additional day care funding and so on, well, not necessarily day care funding, but additional Pharmacare and special needs supports, what occurs after that initial year? Can the minister explain what happens then to make sure that the individual continues to stay employed?

[Page 492]

MR. MORSE: I think that the member opposite is probably referring to those cases where they've got, shall we say, catastrophic drug costs and that the loss of the Pharmacare would be devastating for them. We do see this in Nova Scotia, let's say with type one diabetics who may have to spend $300 or more a month, not only for the insulin, but for the strips and the other supplies, but it's not confined just to diabetes or things like colitis and Crohn's which can be extremely expensive and many other conditions. What I would assure the member opposite, in fact Nova Scotians, that share that same concern for the care of those least able to provide for their medications, is that they would still be able to go back to their caseworker in those cases and if it was a catastrophic drug case, that would be factored into their budget to determine whether there was a budget surplus and they could stay on and in fact keep the Pharmacare coverage.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, I want to go to Page 4.9 now and it says Income Assistance Payments and I see that there has been a significant decline in the Income Assistance Payments, somewhere around approximately $6.2 million and that's in the Supplementary Detail, Mr. Minister. I guess that may be as a result of some individuals moving off the welfare roll into employment, I'm not sure, but the minister will certainly explain to me and can the minister explain to me why there is such a significant drop?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I thank the member opposite for the question and one of the benefits to society of helping somebody get on their feet and acquire a career, and besides all the wonderful things that flow to that individual, is also a social dividend to society. You're right, there are fewer people who are on social assistance. I would suggest that those who are on there are probably provided for in a more substantial sense than they were before this Act came into place. I spoke of municipal assistance on some of the skimpy rates there. Also the special needs that is now available to all the families which is so crucial so that if, for instance, somebody needs a wheelchair, as an example, in order to secure employment, as I understand it, that is something they can apply for under special needs. There is also money that has gone into the employment support component of the program and so while the income assistance portion is down, other components such as the employment support is up and that is, of course, all to empower those clients who are able to pursue a career to have that opportunity, or in the interim, to go back to school so that ultimately they can pursue a career.

MR. PYE: So I guess there's a combination of events that caused the $6 million drop in the income assistance program and that means that the minister shifted from that department into Community Support for Adults an additional $4 million. There is still $2 million missing so, if that's the case, Mr. Minister, and there is a decline in the number of individuals on income assistance and that income assistance payments are reduced as a result of that, I guess my question is, those individuals who are now presently on income assistance, who have not received any shelter increases or shelter allowance increases I believe in the last four or five years, it may even be longer, and I guess to the minister, since the economy in the metro area creates a huge problem with respect to the amount of one's

[Page 493]

budget that is spent on shelter, particularly because of the low vacancy rates in the metro area, I guess I would ask the minister what process exists to examine the appropriateness of the current shelter allowance?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, just to be sure that I am clear about the monies that are going into helping those on employment support and income assistance, yes, there is a reduction in the absolute amount of income assistance that's going out on a gross basis. On an individual basis I suspect that one would find that there's actually more going out per family as a result of the new Act, but the shift that I was referring to there is in the employment support portion. Now, that is not something that would necessarily show up as an income assistance component. So I'm trying to keep the divisions in perspective, yes, so it's not that the money has necessarily gone to Community Support for Adults from there or it has gone to Family and Children's Services, it's still being focused on those people who would qualify for employment support and income assistance.

[5:45 p.m.]

With regard to the shelter component, I think the member opposite would agree that a lot of the municipal shelter components were not particularly generous and there would have been an increase there, but he makes a point about the tightening housing market and the low vacancy rate which has a tendency to drive up rents which becomes problematic if you have limited means when you go looking for a place to rent. I think that's the member's point and there is an ongoing review now looking at that, in fact, across the province. There's an internal review within that division of the department.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, the minister knows that there can be an ongoing review, but he knows the crisis situation that exists now. When a person receives income assistance in this province, the person is allotted a budget and the budget is allotted specifically to a shelter component and the other allotment is to personal allowance and because of the cost of shelter, many people take out of the personal allowance budgets in order to offset the costs of their shelter. They don't want to live in slum landlord housing units and that comes back to the Department of Housing, but I will deal with that at another time.

What happens here is you can do an ongoing review, Mr. Minister, but if the ongoing review doesn't meet the areas of crisis now, it does very little for those individuals. Many of those individuals then, in turn, have to go to the Department of Community Services, get an overexpenditure on their budget because they can't meet the period of time in which they did in turn have to pay back out of their allotted monthly allotment and when you think there has been no increase, and if you're talking about back when municipal government provided this, that's some 10 years ago, and I do know that even for single persons that, in fact, there has been a reduction in their shelter component and the maximum is $235 for an ABU, an able-bodied unemployed individual. There is not a place in this metro area that you can rent for

[Page 494]

$235 a month, there's not a place. A family with a maximum of three in the family, the maximum allotment is $600 a month.

Now, we know that we don't have the public housing stock available so they're out there in the private market. There might be some rent supplements available to them, but we do know that they have a specific budget and in that specific budget they're requested to provide x number of dollars for their shelter component. It's a need, it's a must. It's a place that keeps them safe. It's a place that shelters them. There is no alternative to having a roof over one's head. So when the minister stands here and says to me that we're reviewing it, then I'm wondering how long is the review going to take and what does your department do when they consistently see that individuals on income assistance are paying more than the allotment that they're given by the department?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, the member opposite is speaking actually of a Canada-wide problem because now you're talking about the housing shortage and indeed this is one of the things that I think encouraged the federal government to get back involved in housing and this was the agreement that we were one of the first provinces to sign last year, the affordable housing initiative. Money has been put into the housing corporation and as the member pointed out, I believe it is the 31^st of May will be the opening of the first of those units that he mentioned in Middleton. This is just a start - it's a move in the right direction.

The member opposite is quite correct in that there is a shortage of housing. It is driving up the rents. That is something that the caseworker tries to work out with our clients that are there. For those that are single, able-bodied, unemployed, yes, the amount is for a rooming house. It is substantially more for a family and appropriately so. Actually, with regard to the difference between what we're paying the single, unemployed now and some of the municipal rates I'm familiar with from my time as a councillor, I would still regretfully suggest that this is much better than it was. At least, in some municipalities in southwestern Nova Scotia.

MR. PYE: The minister implied that he was reviewing the shelter component of this allocation to persons on income assistance. He said that he understands there is a need to review that because of the cost of shelter. What I'm asking the minister is, if he understands that there needs to be a review and the department hasn't provided an increase, what are you doing now to assist those individuals to have decent shelter so that they don't have to take from their total basic allotment?

MR. MORSE: I would suggest that the first step to identifying what should be done with the shelter rates is to identify those areas of the province that are experiencing some duress and to try to come up with what would be an appropriate amount for those areas. I think that the member opposite is probably referring first and foremost to HRM because this is an area that's experiencing considerable growth and it is more difficult to get proper

[Page 495]

housing here in the city. As it becomes increasingly scarce, the rents are rising, that is a concern. That is one of the reasons why we're doing this.

In the meantime, we would hope that the clients would confer with their caseworkers. The caseworkers and the supervisors are wonderful when they're presented with situations that allow them within policy and they feel that the need is legitimate, I have found, from the time before I was elected to the Legislature, that they're very compassionate and if they felt that the need was justified and they could find provision under the policy, that it would be done.

MR. PYE: I want to say to the minister that the staff of the Department of Community Services and those caseworkers whose responsibility it is to implement policy and to work within policy, do a fine job. So do the supervisors of the department. But, they work within the policy set forth and if the policy does not allow them flexibility, then there's no flexibility for them to move. If the budget item says for a family of two, you're $525, for example, or a disabled person, $535, or whatever the case may be. That's developed within the policy. That's as far as they can go. There is no flexibility, from my understanding and with my working, within policy. You can compensate in other areas, but when it comes to the shelter component, the policy is quite clear and often quite rigid.

So, my question to the minister is, are you telling me that there's flexibility by the department staff to work within policy and there's flexibility to move within that policy if individuals find a need for additional monies to provide for shelter?

MR. MORSE: The honourable member points out that there are provisions in the policy that determine what can be made available to a family or an individual for shelter allowance. That is one of the components in their budget. I think the member opposite would welcome though the special needs provisions that have come forward. This does not speak specifically to the shelter, but what it does is that many times under the old policy, there was no flexibility there to handle other things that were perhaps taking away from the shelter allowance. So there is an improvement in that area.

I accept the member's point though that there is pressure on the rents, particularly in HRM. It is becoming more difficult for people that rely on Community Services and this is where we're partnering with housing services within the department. We're trying to increase the supply of public housing stock and rent supplements and the other mechanisms that are available to assist people with obtaining affordable housing. It's not something that will happen overnight, but the process started before I became minister and it will continue on. We look forward to an improvement in the stock of affordable housing in the province.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, I did tell the minister that I would address my questions with respect to housing at another time. Hopefully I will have time during these estimates to do that.

[Page 496]

The personal allowance of $180 to each individual who is on social assistance is totally inadequate. That personal allowance covers everything from food to clothing and other personal items that are needed. I don't know when the minister's department has reviewed that $180 allotment or how it has arrived that this is the number that will sustain a person on social assistance for one month. My question is to the minister, can he elaborate on how you arrived at $180? When was the last increase in the personal allotment to individuals on social assistance? When can they expect an increase since Nova Scotians are benefiting from this government's ability to balance the budget?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Community Services has approximately one minute until we reach the moment of interruption.

MR. MORSE: When the new Act came in, that's when we set the $180. In the event that that would be to the detriment of the client, there was some grandfathering at that time to make sure that nobody lost as a result of the new system that came into effect August 1, 2001.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. We have reached the moment of interruption. We'll pick this debate up again at 6:30 p.m.

[5:59 p.m. The committee recessed.]

[6:30 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to call the committee to order.

The honourable member for Dartmouth North. The time will be 7:01 p.m. when we are finished estimates this evening. Member, I believe you have the floor. Mr. Minister, is staff coming? (Interruptions) Member, would you like to ask a question while waiting for the staff, or would you like to be seated until staff takes their place?

MR. JERRY PYE: Mr. Chairman, I will take the opportunity to sit until staff arrives.

MR. CHAIRMAN: That was quick, gentlemen. Thank you.

The honourable member for Dartmouth North has the floor.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, I was questioning, prior to the moment of interruption, the Minister of Community Services, particularly on the individual budget allotments given to persons on income assistance. The minister consistently referred to the old municipal welfare scale and the significant benefits that had been moved from the municipal welfare scale and so on. I want the minister to know that when the municipalities were responsible for delivering a portion of social assistance to Nova Scotians, it was called income assistance,

[Page 497]

and at the time there was another branch called family benefits, it was managed by the Province of Nova Scotia. There was, in fact, some flexibility by the municipalities, through the income assistance programs. The reason why I say that is to inform the minister.

I asked the minister with respect to the shelter allowance, the minister did respond, did indicate that there was a review going on with respect to shelter allowances. He indicated that at some time in the future, there would be a report or the minister would make an announcement or his department would make the adjustments through policy, whatever the case may be, to hopefully provide adequate shelter to those individuals who are on income assistance.

When I asked him about the personal allowances and how the minister arrived at the $180 for individuals on social assistance, how that number was arrived at as being the fixed number that would allow people to live adequately, the minister tended to avoid the question and didn't give me an answer on how they arrived at that, and how the department had actually come to the conclusion that that was the kind of dollars needed to provide someone with food, clothing and all other personal items for a month.

Now, there is the issue of special needs. The minister knows very well that his department provides some funding towards dental and vision, that's eyeglasses and so on. The minister knows there is an allowable fee structure being used that I believe is somewhat archaic and many years outdated. I want to know how the minister has arrived at the fee structure for dental and vision needs as well.

Mr. Chairman, through you to the minister, the minister knows full well that if, in fact, the money isn't fully covered that the money comes out of the individual budget, and that's out of the personal allowance, once again causing the person to have to pay for a portion of those dental programs and for eyeglasses. There is no other place left for the individuals to go. At one time service clubs and agencies would assist in providing money but there are very few of those available now to individuals seeking those kinds of special needs. So my question to the minister is, how do you arrive, again, at the allowable fee structure that is designed by your department for dental and vision care?

MR. MORSE: The dental, through quick card, is 80 per cent of the Nova Scotia provincial dental fee structure, and that is what is provided through that program. In fact, that's an enhancement, and I think the member opposite would concur that is an improvement over what was there previously. The member opposite is asking questions about the adequacy of these rates and what I would advise the member opposite is that the review that is going on is not confined specifically to shelter, it is looking at all the rates. The member opposite has also made reference to some of the flexibility for the special needs, and that is a wonderful component of the new Employment Support and Income Assistance program that was not there previously, as I understand it, with the Family Benefits Program, at least in my dealings with the Family Benefits Program as a municipal councillor.

[Page 498]

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, the minister still hasn't answered the question. If, in fact, 80 per cent of the dental costs are covered by quick card, and that's based on the premise of approval, then the client, who is on social assistance, has to pay the other 20 per cent. Even if that client goes to the Dalhousie Dental Clinic, the Dalhousie Dental Clinic or no other dental service will pay to have the client's restorative dentistry done unless the client is prepared to pay up front, the 20 per cent of that cost. Some of these costs range over $100 and some of them may even range in the thousands of dollars, depending on the particular cost of what's needed.

My question to the minister is, what happens to the client who is on social assistance, because the Department of Community Services, for this special need and this vital need, does not pay the total cost? What happens is the individual then takes it out of the personal allotment. Much the same as with the rent for decent shelter, out comes the additional money that's required for eyeglasses, out comes the additional money that's required for dental. There are no agencies out there today that can offset this cost.

I ask the minister, if you're doing a review, have you seriously considered the implications today? And since you're doing a review, can you give me a time frame on when that review might be coming forward?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, with regard to the dental, the member points out that the client may have to find the means to pick up the 20 per cent, which is difficult if you're on community services. It is common with all group plans that there be some sort of co-pay, but I think the member opposite would also realize that some of the clinics about, in fact, waive that 20 per cent. There are some out there that will provide service for the 80 per cent. I just make mention of that, that it does occur and that's between the service provider, in this case the dentist or the dental clinic, and the client.

With regard to the timelines as to when we are going to have completed the review of the rates, I am not able to provide that today. I have been aware of it for some number of months, so it's an ongoing process. I am not able to give you a definitive timetable, other than I would expect it to be done before the end of the year.

MR. PYE: Mr. Chairman, the minister has enlightened me. I was totally unaware that there are some dental services out there that will in fact waive the 20 per cent fee. I can tell you, last year I had negotiated with the Dalhousie Dental Clinic on an individual who was required to pay $120 up front. It was fortunate that after a long period of time, we finally got three or four agencies together who would lend the individual the money in order to have the work done through the Dalhousie Dental Clinic. Now if there are some private dental services out there that will waive the 20 per cent fee, in consultation with the client and themselves, then I would like the minister to at least table them so that I can take advantage of those dental services out there, so that when people come to me, we know who they are and who we might be able to refer them to.

[Page 499]

There was one time when the Department of Community Services, at the municipal level and I don't know if you do it now or not, but at least negotiated - this is particularly with respect to eyeglasses - with a particular firm to provide eyeglasses to those individuals who needed them. I don't think this happens now. Individual clients are expected to go where they can get the eyeglasses, and the department funds a certain level, I think it's 80 per cent again on eyeglasses or up to a maximum, I think, of $120. The rest then has to be provided by them.

If the minister could provide me with dental companies out there who are prepared to waive that 20 per cent fee, then I will be better enlightened and I am sure I will be able to serve my constituents better. Could the minister tell me what his department does with respect to eyeglasses, as well?

MR. MORSE: Actually, I know another member in this House who had the same question and asked his local Community Services supervisor for that same information. The information that came back from that Community Services supervisor was that it was felt to be inappropriate to be giving out the lists of those dentists who waived the 20 per cent, but he indicated to me that, in fact, there were some that would do this. The person I'm referring to, honourable member, is myself in my own constituency work. This is really how I learned about this, not during my time as minister. As much as I would like to be able to provide you with that list, I gather it's been deemed to be inappropriate to be providing lists of service providers that waive the 20 per cent, but I do understand that they are out there.

As to the cost of eyeglasses, something else, I would tell the member opposite, that I suspect we both worked on on behalf of constituents because there is an amount up to which the department will fund. I think it is more than $120, but I think I would be remiss in recalling from memory the number that was last shared with me when I was inquiring on behalf of a constituent. The member opposite is quite right, quite often it's the service clubs that end up making up the differential. That might be in conjunction with their local MLA who is trying to take care of their constituents.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The time has expired in turn for the NDP caucus.

The honourable Leader in the House of the Liberal Party. The time is 6:43 p.m. We will be finished for the estimates tonight at 7:01 p.m. You have the floor.

MR. WAYNE GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, every week I receive calls from constituents looking for assistance, income assistance or housing needs, and I am sure I am not the only member in this House receiving those calls. I am sure all members of the House receive those types of calls. Before I begin with my questions, I want to first acknowledge the tremendous hard-working, dedicated individuals in the Department of Community Services who are, time and time again, ready to help in any possible way they can. Of course, many times, many constituents blame the caseworkers. Again, we have to remind some of these individuals that

[Page 500]

these caseworkers are employees of the department, they have policies to follow, directives to follow from the department, so many times it is not their fault that they can't help out. Halifax, basically, tells them how far they can go, what they can do and what they can't do.

[6:45 p.m.]

I want to acknowledge some of these individuals, working out of the Community Services office in Digby and the Housing office in Yarmouth. These people, any time you call in, are certainly more than willing to help out in whatever capacity they can, and I want to acknowledge their dedication and their assistance.

I want to begin, Mr. Chairman, with the Income Assistance and Employment Support Services. In the Budget Speech, Mr. Chairman, we saw, on Page 19, that income assistance payments are actually declining, year after year, due to a reduction in the number of caseloads. I guess my first question to the minister is, could the minister indicate how many families and individuals depend on social assistance in our province?

MR. MORSE: The member opposite would appreciate that that number is somewhat fluid, as there are always people coming on and leaving Employment Support and Income Assistance. The most recent number we have is 33,166 cases. The member opposite would appreciate that in some cases that may be a family and in others it may be a single.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, again, to try to understand the decline from year to year, would it be possible for the minister - I don't know if he has the statistics with him - at his convenience, to table these numbers to show the members of the committee exactly that decline that he made reference to earlier, in the budget? I know the minister certainly has made reference to that. I am wondering if it would be possible to get some numbers to show that reduction trend across the province? At the same time, could he provide us with some numbers for each county, so that I could understand or see better, have a closer look, in terms of exactly what that reduction represents for Digby County?

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to provide the numbers for the last approximately 10 years that I have available here to me. It is a happy story. I think the member opposite would recognize that some of this decline started before we took office. It does become progressively more difficult to assist people to get off, because there is a core faction on Community Services that, for whatever reasons, may not have the same employment prospects as those who have been able to move on and off the system quickly. I have asked my staff to photocopy this page, and I would be happy to share it with the committee.

MR. GAUDET: Mr. Chairman, as the minister indicated, these numbers fluctuate. Everyone understands that the number of caseloads, especially throughout the year, fluctuate for whatever reasons, sometimes jobs are lost, jobs are cut, sometimes it's for health reasons.

[Page 501]

I'm just wondering, would the minister have some numbers to give us some kind of trend, especially in the last year? How many new caseloads were accepted by the department? Is that information available?

MR. MORSE: What I would suggest to the member is that because it's fluid, there are people coming onto the system and there are people leaving the system, so it's kind of a moving target. I do not have the specific numbers readily available to me, but I would assure the member opposite that the number that could be on Employment Support and Income Assistance throughout the run of a year would be more than the 33,166, it would be considerably more. That's a good thing, because it's showing that people are not staying on the system and they're pursuing their career or they're going back to school, so that, ultimately, they will be able to find proper employment.

MR. GAUDET: I want to talk a little bit about the assessment. I understand intake workers are responsible for assessing possible clients in determining if the department can help or not. I had a number of individuals, especially in the last several months, who came to see me, who basically told me that the department refuses to help them. They were unable to work, they had medical reasons. I'm just trying to understand what the department policy is if someone goes to see an intake worker for assistance, do they need a medical note or do they have to sign some type of waiver so that the intake worker can have access to their medical file? I'm just trying to understand what the in-house policy is.

MR. MORSE: There's a process by which the intake worker would be asking them questions about their income. For instance, if they were already on a pension, that would be taken into consideration and that would be compared against the budget that would be made up for them to see if there was a deficiency. Assuming that there was a deficiency or there was no income, then one would presume that they would qualify for assistance, unless there were some extenuating circumstances that, for some reason, precluded this.

MR. GAUDET: I guess I wasn't clear. I have some individuals, because of health reasons, sometimes you do get some of these calls from individuals because of health reasons, they are unable to access any support from Community Services. I'm just trying to understand. Do these individuals need a letter or a medical note before they go in to see their intake worker for assistance? I'm just trying to understand or find out what the department's policy is when an individual is unable to work because of medical reasons.

MR. MORSE: I thank the member opposite for his question. These are the very things that we all learn when we're first elected to public office as we try to assist those that are less fortunate in our community and try to understand the programs that are available.

To answer the member's question, yes, clearly, if somebody brought in a letter from their physician that said that for whatever reason they're disabled and unable to work, then that would be taken into consideration. But I have to qualify that with the statement that, let's

[Page 502]

say they're on a long-term disability plan and that was sufficient so that it meant there was no budget deficit. Or, they were on Canada Pension Plan disability pension - that would be another reason why they might not qualify because there already is a pension or an income there.

In cases where there was no alternative income and presumably not large assets sitting in the bank account, then with that note, my understanding of the system is that the intake worker would accept them and they would be assigned to a caseworker and presumably be put on assistance.

MR. GAUDET: I guess I forgot to indicate, but the minister did clarify - I was looking at, especially an individual that has no income, none whatsoever coming in and basically, in need of some type of support.

Unfortunately, as you are aware of Mr. Chairman, and I'm sure the minister is aware, some people get caught in the system. They're waiting to see a specialist and unfortunately they don't have that medical record with them - their appointment is a number of months out. They're home, unable to work, they have no income coming. I'm just wondering what can the department do in that interim period before the individual gets in to see the specialist? I guess my question is, does the department have a policy in terms of trying to assist some of these individuals that are caught in the so-called waiting system?

MR. MORSE: Thank you for the qualification, honourable member. Basically, we're talking about somebody that comes in, that has no income and for all intents and purposes, has no assets or readily financial assets that they could use to buy groceries and the other necessities of life. That in itself, would presumably - I'm being a little cautious here because every case is individual - by and large, the fact that there's a budget deficit for what is judged to be the basic necessities of life, which they should get through the income assistance part of the plan. If there's a budget deficit, then they should qualify for assistance, regardless of whether they have a note from the doctor or not.

In those cases, the intake worker is going to inquire about their prospects for employment and want to talk to them about that. I would suggest that if clearly there's some sort of medical impediment that precludes the ability to pursue employment, that would be taken into consideration and I would anticipate that they would be put on assistance.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the honourable Leader in the House of the Liberal Party with five minutes left in turn.

MR. GAUDET: Again, I want to thank the minister for his response. I know some of these cases are pretty well individualized and they all have their own circumstances around them. To have a general policy to deal with all of them, I understand it's very difficult.

[Page 503]

I want to talk a little bit about special needs. I have one individual at home that's living in public housing, currently on community benefits. He's receiving $384 a month - that's his total income. He's on no pension, unfortunately this individual cannot work. That's technically how much money is coming in - $384, $204 is actually spent for his rent and heat so that leaves him $180 for everything else, for his personal allowance. This individual had to have some dental work done and he was told by his caseworker that Community Services would pay some, but he would as well be responsible to pay some of the dental bill.

So, speaking with this individual - a personal allowance of $180, trying to cover everything else, food, clothing, transportation and still come up with some money to help pay for his share of the dental bill. I'm trying to understand how someone living in these circumstances, bringing in $384 - how can he afford using some of his personal allowance money to pay for his dental work? I guess my question is, why is the department insisting that clients need to come up with some of the money to pay for their dental bill?

MR. MORSE: I think, reading between the lines, I sense that this client is on a disability pension? The member opposite has said he's just on straight income assistance, but to assist me in answering the member's question, would I presume that he does not qualify for employment support because there's something that precludes him from pursuing a career?

MR. GAUDET: Just to be clear, this individual unfortunately is unable to work. He is living on strictly income assistance from the department, trying to make ends meet on $384 a month that he's receiving from Community Services. At the same time he needed some dental work done and he was told that he would have to pay some of this dental bill himself. Obviously, the question was, where do you want me to find that money? And, he was told by the caseworker you are receiving $180 a month for your personal allowance, you will need to find some money out of that in order to help pay for your dental work. My question was, why is the department insisting that some of these individuals have to come up with some money to help pay for their dental bills?

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the minister with one minute.

MR. MORSE: I think that what I'm hearing though is that he's got shelter through public housing which is covered by the income assistance to the tune of $204, but the value of that housing is probably substantially more. So in actual fact, we are assisting him greatly more than the $384. The honourable member is suggesting that the $180 makes it extremely difficult for him to cover anything else. There should be some other allowances made for somebody that medically is unable to work - for instance, trips to the doctors and whatnot, I would think would be covered under transportation. The member opposite is asking on behalf of . . .

[Page 504]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Thank you minister. Time has expired for this evening's estimates.

The honourable Government House Leader.

HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I move the committee do now rise, report considerable progress and ask to sit again on a future day.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The motion is carried.

[7:01 p.m. The committee rose.]