HALIFAX, TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 2011

 

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON SUPPLY

 

2:49 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Ms. Becky Kent

 

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The Committee of the Whole House on Supply will now come to order.

 

The honourable Government House Leader.

 

HON. FRANK CORBETT: Madam Chairman, we will continue with the estimates of the Minister of Energy.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Inverness, with 53 minutes remaining.

 

MR. ALLAN MACMASTER: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'd like to thank the minister and the department for being here today to provide an opportunity for us to ask questions about the budget and some of the matters in the Department of Energy.

 

The biggest issue in the constituency of Inverness this past year has been discussion on whether or not there would be hydraulic fracturing in West Lake Ainslie, and my questions today focus on that issue.

 

Just by way of background - this has been an issue of concern to many people. We're not very familiar with fracking, as it called here in Nova Scotia, because it's a new initiative, and I think there are a lot of people concerned about the environmental impact of the activity, the potential impact on drinking water, property values, at least in the sense that if there was damage to the environment the property values would decline and there would be a possible risk to other industries like tourism and whatnot.

 

 

 

343

 

Madam Chairman, my first question to the minister would relate to the review that was announced, because we do know there is going to be a review on hydraulic fracturing, and I think that is a prudent thing for the government to be doing at this point in time. The number-one question, I think, on people's minds is now that they know there will be a review, when can people begin to participate in that review? When can they start to ask questions - if they have scientific evidence they want to put forth, either for or against fracking, when would they be able to have a chance to participate in the review process?

 

HON. CHARLIE. PARKER: Madam Chairman, I want to thank the honourable member for giving me a little bit of a heads-up on some of his questions he is contemplating here this afternoon. If you'll just indulge me for a second, I want to reintroduce my staff. There is a new person here with us this afternoon. I guess he actually appeared here with us last night for a little bit. Sandy MacMullin is on my right, he's our director of Petroleum Resources. I didn't get a chance to introduce him last evening, so I'm pleased to have him with us and also my deputy minister, once again, Murray Coolican.

 

Now the issue you address, honourable member, is certainly an important issue in your community, as it is in mine, along the north shore of Pictou, Colchester, and Cumberland Counties. There has been a lot of concern expressed about natural gas drilling and any activities that might come from that. The Department of Environment and the Department of Energy have announced a review of the process involved in natural gas drilling, including activities like hydraulic fracturing. Certainly the last thing we want to see is any damage to our environment or any damage to drinking water. That's why we're undertaking a review, because there has been concern expressed and we want to be absolutely certain there will not be any unintended consequences.

 

The review is being conducted by members on our staff in both the Department of Energy and the Department of Environment. We do have a lot of expertise in-house in both of those departments, on petroleum exploration in the Department of Energy and on groundwater protection and other environmental issues in the Department of Environment.

 

We've indicated all along that the public will have a chance to participate in the scope of the project, what it is that we should be looking at. I've heard from a number of individuals that groundwater protection is right up there, is as important as any, but there are some other issues included as well.

 

Starting next week, on both the Department of Environment and the Department of Energy Web sites, there will be the opportunity for the public to participate, to let us know what they feel should be studied and what should be looked at. Is it the groundwater, as I mentioned? Is it the type of chemicals that are used in the process of hydraulic fracturing? Is it drilling techniques? Is it environmental impacts on the land or the soil or on the rivers or other waters? Whatever they feel is the most important is certainly wide open to public input.

 

If you go on our department Web sites, either through Environment or Energy, just follow the links from the regular government department Web site to the study. We'd welcome that input, and I'd encourage the member to let his constituents and others know how they can reach the study group and have their say on what should be studied.

 

The second opportunity for the public to participate will be after the review is done. That might include in-house expertise, but it also could include experts from outside on any particular topic that the scope might identify. Before any regulations are enacted or come back for consideration, the public will again have a chance to comment on those regulations - or recommendations, I should say, that could become regulations.

 

So, like I said, there are two opportunities for the public to get involved, but the first chance is to have input on the scope, starting as early as next week.

 

MR. MACMASTER: I expect there will be a lot of information from people, issues raised about things like the water and different types of drilling techniques. My next question to the minister is has a methodology been devised to evaluate the concerns that are brought forth throughout the review?

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, I guess the methodology is relying on the expertise within our Department of Energy and the Department of Environment. We do have some very qualified geologists and hydrogeologists and environmental scientists in both departments who are knowledgeable on many of these issues. I know that in the Department of Energy we have somebody on staff who has had experience working on a drilling rig that was involved in hydraulic fracturing.

 

Again, we'll be relying on expertise. If we don't have it in-house, if there's somebody who is very knowledgeable - for example, when I was doing a fact-finding mission with a member from my staff in the Department of Energy, we went to Oklahoma, met with regulators down there, met with industry people, but also met with the Ground Water Protection Council and a gentleman by the name of Mike Paque, very, very knowledgeable on protecting groundwater, so that might be an example of somebody that we could draw in to get his expertise on that particular topic, but there may well be others.

 

So the scope of the project is being finalized now and, as I said, next week we'll be looking for public input on other aspects of the study that should be undertaken. We'll see what others have to say, what the public has to say, and we'll be moving forward from there.

 

MR. MACMASTER: Madam Chairman, I thank the minister for that and I certainly respect the expertise in the department on these issues.

 

If somebody does bring up an issue, that they feel they have some science behind it, where there's potential harm to the environment, is there going to be a response given to every person, or would all the responses be themed? I can appreciate this is early on, we may not have the specifics yet, but I know that people are going to expect a specific response. If they've put together information making a certain claim or recommendation to government, they'll likely expect some kind of specific response, and I'm just wondering how that will be responded to.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, I'm sure we're going to get lots of thoughts and ideas They are in the scope phase of the project and some of them will be suggestions on what to study, others will be information, I'm sure, on pros and cons of gas drilling on the land. I would think at this point - and some of that is still being worked on and what will be provided - it may not be possible to respond to every single e-mail, or letter, or whatever comes forward. In general, if there are particular categories or themes that are occurring, I'm sure we would be able to respond on-line to those responses in a general way. It may not be possible to respond to every single response that we get, but we'll try our best and certainly try to keep people informed on the process as it moves along.

 

MR. MACMASTER: Madam Chairman, there has been some concern about the potential for fracking to happen before the review is complete. The question has been posed to me: Is it possible that there could be any permits approved for fracking between now and say eight to nine months time when the review is complete? I'll let the minister answer.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, certainly the review period, as we anticipate, it will be several months in length and it will probably run into early 2012 before it's complete. During that period of time - well, presently, we have no applications for hydraulic fracturing and we don't anticipate any during that time period. We've had some discussions with companies out there that have exploratory licences and none of them are in a position where they're going to be moving forward with any applications for that process, so we feel quite confident that there will not be any applications come forward and, therefore, there will be no hydraulic fracturing during the period of the review.

 

I guess we're fortunate in that respect, we're sort of on the front end of the concern and the issue here, and there's not a lot of activity that has been occurring, perhaps unlike other states and provinces. For example, in the Province of Quebec, they've had a lot of drilling going on and a lot of activity in those wells, including hydraulic fracturing, and while they've put a stop on any new applications, I understand they have about 31 wells with activity, including hydraulic fracturing, that will continue, whereas here in Nova Scotia we have none.

 

MR. MACMASTER: Madam Chairman, one of the issues that people have raised is the opportunity cost of moving ahead if, in fact, a company did decide to - and we do know that in Lake Ainslie the company has not applied for a permit to use hydraulic fracturing, but if the case became so that they did, some people have raised the question, well, why would we risk our environment, why would risk our tourism industry, the fishery, and whatnot, for an oil and gas industry?

 

I guess the question I'd like to ask is around royalties. We know the province sees some benefit from these projects, and just out of interest, could the minister provide some commentary on how the royalty system works? We know there are potentially two sides of economic benefit from this kind of activity. One is the jobs that might be created locally, but we do know that with a junior project - if it did happen in Lake Ainslie it probably wouldn't be a lot of jobs, but there would be a few.

 

The other side to it would be royalties. Could the minister give some indication of how the royalty system works and provide some examples of potential revenue based on some hypothetical cases? They don't even have to be real cases, hypothetical is fine, to give us some conservative estimates of what kind of royalties would be generated from a junior project like this for our province.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Speaker, the honourable member raises two or three good questions there. Over the history of oil and gas exploration on land in Nova Scotia - I believe the first well was actually in the Lake Ainslie area, going back to 1869 - since that time, I believe there have been about 134 wells that have been drilled onshore throughout the province, but none of them at this point have ever been a producing well. Exploration goes on. It's costly to companies to be able to look for petroleum but, as I said, none of them have gone on to a production licence at this point in time.

 

Certainly during the exploration stage there are jobs created working on the rig, and supply and services that are provided in the local community. It helps rural Nova Scotia. I can recall one well that was explored probably 30 years ago in the Pictou County area. There was a lot of excitement at the time - is there oil out there? Is there gas out there? And the work crew was coming to the local restaurant and they were buying from the local store. There were some spinoffs into the economy, but the main aspect is the services or the supplies that they need to buy for the work they're doing - but good jobs, and good- paying jobs for those who work on the rig itself. This is a side benefit - an important side benefit though if there are any jobs that are created in the economy and, goodness knows, we can use any good jobs we can get in rural Nova Scotia that pay well.

 

You mentioned about royalties so, again, in light of the fact that there have not been any producing wells ever in the history of our province onshore - but we do have a royalty structure in place, and I'm hoping that there may be some production and therefore some royalties coming to the province.

 

The structure that we have set up on conventional wells is a 10 per cent royalty structure on the wellhead value of the petroleum that is produced. The wellhead value really is the market price at the time, minus any production or processing costs that might be involved. It's a little difficult to say exactly how much that might be, but that's the structure we have - 10 per cent.

 

In addition, as it was raised, I believe, in Question Period the other day, we're trying to encourage jobs in rural Nova Scotia; we're trying to encourage production here. There is an incentive to exploration companies who work toward production, and if they get there there is a two-year holiday, you might call it, in the exploration agreement, that they don't pay royalties, because that's their start-up, that's their time when they have their largest investment. Really, we see it as an incentive to be competitive as a province, to encourage more exploration and, hopefully, production in the province. For natural gas it's 10 per cent once they get up and producing after that two-year period.

 

Now for coal methane production it's a little different. The royalty there is 5 per cent of the wellhead value, whatever the market value is at the time, minus any processing or transportation costs. However, there is not a two-year incentive. It starts right away once they're in production, but it's 5 per cent compared to 10 per cent on the other gas.

 

As far as potential royalties, again, we've had no producing wells in the province so it's a little hard to look at hypothetical situations of what might happen out there. We're encouraging exploration, we're encouraging development, and we really can't say what might be or might not be because we haven't got that first producing well yet, but in time that will happen.

 

MR. MACMASTER: Madam Chairman, just a point of clarification, does the department track the production costs of companies once they're at the production stage? I guess I kind of envision the potential for a company to, say, show increased production costs to reduce its profits, and then if the province is getting a 10 per cent portion of that, they would be getting a 10 per cent portion of a smaller pot of money. If there's anything the minister could offer on that for clarification, it would be helpful.

 

MR. PARKER: It would be similar to what we're doing in our offshore petroleum production right now. We do have producing wells there, as you know, through the Sable Offshore Energy Project and soon to be with Deep Panuke and we're hopeful there may well soon be others. So we have a structure there. We very carefully monitor their cost of production, and written requirements and information is mandatory. We can sit down with a company and get a full explanation of what their costs are and why they've done this or done that to see what their actual production costs or transportation costs may be.

 

I know we have some dedicated staff who have worked very hard on that to make sure we're getting our fair share for Nova Scotia; in fact it has meant occasionally going to the company's head office in Calgary and sitting down with their financial people and making sure that we're getting what's due and right in the royalty structure for Nova Scotia. It's a different type of structure, percentage-wise, from the offshore but, no, it's carefully monitored.

 

Actually, we have people on-site when wells are being drilled just to make sure, from the environmental and safety point of view, that the rules are being followed, so we would always have somebody there during that production or stage. On the financial side, we're very careful and, again, any royalties that are due to Nova Scotia will be fully paid by the company.

MR. MACMASTER: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you, minister, and the department. I just want to add some closing comments before turning the floor over to my colleague from Cape Breton West.

 

The issue of hydraulic fracturing has, as I mentioned in my introduction, been a very significant issue in the constituency of Inverness over the past year. I'm really pleased to see that the government is going to do a review on fracking because the public needs to have a chance to participate in the discussion on this subject.

 

The actual review of what is put forth is going to be very important. It's been my sincere hope that whatever happens with this that people feel like they've had an opportunity to have their say, and they feel that if they have had concerns they are addressed. I'm hoping that if people have concerns and the government sees it as such, that the government is prepared to act in that direction as well because a lot of people are upset about it. Very many people are upset about it in Inverness County, and I'm hoping that this review is going to do something to make things better as far as that goes, and I look forward to people's participation in the review.

 

So, Madam Chairman, I would offer the minister, if he wishes, to comment, otherwise I'll turn it over to my colleague, the member for Cape Breton West.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, I thank the honourable member for bringing this issue forward. We've had some conversations, he and I, on this issue and it is an important one to his community and to other communities here in the province. As the member knows - we talked about it a few minutes ago - the offer by our staff in the Department of Energy to provide a briefing to the member's caucus and to the Liberal caucus as well, and that offer, I understand it's in the final stages of something coming together, for your caucus at least, and we would certainly offer it to the other Opposition caucus as well. So, hopefully that will happen. There's a lot of expertise in our department that can answer all your questions and can help you then answer questions from your constituents.

 

The review, I believe, is going to be good. It's going to give Nova Scotians an opportunity to be heard on this issue and to get their questions answered. It's going to take several months using in-house expertise as well as outside experts, and in the end we're all hopeful that we can move forward here in the right direction that will address the concerns around groundwater and environmental issues. If it can't be done, or if companies cannot meet those standards, they're certainly not going to be allowed to drill.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton West.

 

MR. ALFIE MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, I would like to ask, through you to the minister, could he give us some indication of just where his department sits when it comes to geothermal? When I think about geothermal, I think about the mine water in Cape Breton and all the potential that there is there, and I'm just wondering if the department has a strategy and if he could share that strategy with the committee.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, I welcome the honourable member here again, back to the discussion here in estimates. We had an interesting conversation last night on a number of issues and I'm sure we will here this afternoon as well.

 

In our department there are a lot of good things going on with renewable energy, as the member would be aware, around wind energy, tidal energy, biomass, in-stream tidal river technology. We're always looking at new initiatives and new ideas. Geothermal is one of those that has a lot of potential. When our plan further rolls out this Fall, that's certainly one that could be considered. I do know that not far from your district, honourable member, in Glace Bay, there are a lot of coal mines and water underground that could be tapped into for that.

 

As you probably know, we had the debate here earlier in late debate on BAYplex and the potential there for geothermal. Certainly it is a success in Springhill; they've been using it up there for a number of years, another coal mining town in our province. I guess they're a step ahead of other coal-producing areas where there is this potential, so I wouldn't rule it out. I think it has got a lot of potential and, as we move forward with constantly reviewing our renewable energy potential, geothermal is one that has a lot of potential.

 

Honourable members have mentioned in the past to me about solar and that's another one that - well, we have some initiatives already in that regard. Again, there's certainly a tremendous amount of potential in that renewable as well. As we move forward we'll be looking at any other possibilities that are not being tapped into at the present time.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I appreciate what the minister had to say. There's no question that geothermal is something that has potential. However, the question was: Has his department a strategy to deal with geothermal? Is there anybody in his department identified as looking at the potential and dealing with the different communities in our province where geothermal might be available?

 

MR. PARKER: Again, this Fall we're going to be coming forward with some other initiatives or ideas around renewable energy, around district heating, perhaps around more potential in solar, and certainly in geothermal as well. We actually have somebody within our department who's very knowledgeable in geothermal, and that person will be advising us on how we move forward. All I can say is stay tuned. And I appreciate any input or thoughts that you or your community may have in that regard - the more information we have, the more likely we can move forward with something.

 

MR. MACLEOD: It's good to know that there is somebody in the department who's working toward that. I wonder if the minister could tell the House if indeed the department has a working relationship with Cape Breton University, their new Sustainable Energy Chair who is there, and the work that they are doing.

 

MR. PARKER: I'm a little bit knowledgeable about Cape Breton University's program there. They have their Centre for Sustainability in Energy and the Environment. In early March I was in Cape Breton and had the chance to sit down at a luncheon with some of the folks from Cape Breton University. I recall particularly sitting beside Dr. Harker and Annette Verschuren, who are involved with that project, and made the commitment that at some point, probably after the House was out, we'd have an opportunity to sit down and visit their centre and learn more about the sustainable initiatives that they are undertaking.

 

It sounded exciting; it sounded very good. Over lunch you learn a few things, and it was good to get that information. I also know that department staff from the Department of Energy and the Department of Natural Resources have had a chance to sit down with Ross McCurdy and learn first-hand some of the plans they have there in that sustainable energy centre.

 

We've had discussions - I've had initial discussions with some of the folks there and have made a commitment to get together with them and see where we can move forward. They had a lot of good ideas and initiatives using the Cape Breton expertise and knowledge, and I look forward to learning more from them.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I want to thank the minister for that answer, because I think what CBU has to offer and what Ross McCurdy brings to that position is very valuable. It will be on the leading edge of what needs to be done when we look at renewable energy in the Province of Nova Scotia. We're known to be pioneers in many different areas, and I think this would be an area that, indeed, we'll also be seen as pioneers. I think that's great that the department is working there, and I encourage the minister and his department to work with them, as I know they will, as time moves forward.

 

I just wonder if the minister could give me an indication - and I may have the wrong hat on him right now - as to where the Department of Energy sits when it comes to open pit or strip mining in Nova Scotia.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, perhaps it is the wrong hat here we're wearing, but I do know that there is an interchange, a sort of cohesion between lots of government departments. I'm quite familiar with strip mining in Pictou County, in the Stellarton coalfield and Westville, before that, with the Pioneer Group, and certainly they've been in Cape Breton, in Point Aconi, and elsewhere. Really the regulatory authority for that is with the Department of Environment.

 

I'm sure my colleague, when he's up on his estimates, will have an opportunity to explain some of those environmental guidelines that are in place. The Department of Natural Resources, because it's mineral, certainly is an overseer as well. We monitor those mines and we collect the royalty that is paid on an ongoing basis, but that coal is being used in Nova Scotia, going to our power generating stations in Trenton and in Lingan. It's a natural resource; it's a benefit providing jobs and providing product to produce electricity here in the province.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I guess the question is, when it comes to strip mining, when it comes to open pit mining, does the Department of Energy have a strategy as to how that fits into their overall plan for providing energy for the Province of Nova Scotia? We had a considerable chat yesterday about how coal mines fit in and how coal-fired generation was working. This is part of that whole feed system and I would like to know if the minister has a strategy within the Department of Energy as to how this type of coal fits into the long-term goals of this government.

 

MR. PARKER: As far as the Department of Energy, maybe I got off on a rabbit track with the Department of Environment or Department of Natural Resources, all three departments have a bit of jurisdiction. As you are well aware, our goal within the Department of Energy is to eventually replace fossil fuels with renewables. Our goal by 2015 is 25 per cent of our electricity production from renewable resources, 40 per cent by 2020, and we'll see what the future holds beyond that.

 

The reality is that we are still going to be very dependent on fossil fuels over the next number of years. When we reach the 40 per cent goal by 2020, that means 60 per cent is still from non-renewables, including coal. A lot of our coal right now is being imported from South America, and as I mentioned there's the strip-mine product that is coming from both Cape Breton and the mainland at this point in time. It's a small amount in the total picture, but it's significant in that it's providing a local resource for power generation as well as the jobs that go with it.

 

We talked last night, I believe, about new technology that's being developed, or new ways to use our coal to make it cleaner, to try to get some of the impurities out of it so it can be used more in our generating facilities here in the province. There is also potential in New Brunswick, our neighbouring province, for some of that coal. It is an important source of jobs and a natural resource product that is being used, and it will continue to be for many years to come, perhaps more so as the technology develops to allow it to be used in a cleaner way.

 

MR. MACLEOD: The Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board has been around for some time and the provincial budget for this has been pretty constant - around $3.3 million over the last number of years - could the minister explain to us just how this money is used, besides salaries?

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board has been established here for many years and it certainly is the regulatory authority in our offshore. It also regulates other jurisdictions, like for Newfoundland and Labrador and other provinces, in their offshore territory. Their budget primarily, as you mentioned, is for salaries and their day-to-day operations, but they do undertake some professional studies from time to time to get more information. I'm aware that some of their money may be going in that direction.

 

They have a mandate to make sure that our offshore is safe. They put a strong emphasis on safety. I was invited by the board chairman to go out and have a look at our offshore, on a drilling rig, in the Sable offshore project, but she said you're going to have to go through a training course, you're going to have to do the submersible roll in a tank, just in case. That is now required of everybody.

 

The safety aspect is very important. That's where part of their emphasis is, on proper safety training for all workers who are flown out of here by helicopter to the offshore, or even on safety supply vessels. Nobody goes out there without full training. That's the regulatory authority they have in that regard, and environmental protection as well. They're making sure things are done in not just a safe manner, but protecting our natural environment out there as well.

 

I'm not sure if that answers the member's questions entirely, but that's some of the role of the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, I appreciate the minister's answer to that question. I guess one of the other things I'd like to know, if he could supply the House, how many employees does the offshore have in this department and are all of those positions filled?

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, as I mentioned, I did meet with the chairman and one other board member about a month or so ago, got an update on what the role and responsibilities of that board are, but I don't have, right off the top of my head, the number of employees, but I will undertake to get that information for you.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I thank the minister for that answer. In the Energy Department, in Business and Corporate Services, the budget is increasing by over 100 per cent. It is going from $1.5 million to over $3 million, and the number of funded staff is also increasing, from 9.5 people to 24. I was wondering, could the minister advise the House why the large increase in staff and budget for this section of his department?

 

MR. PARKER: I believe you are into the actual financial pages of the budget estimates now. I wonder if it might be possible to give us the page that you're looking at so that we can probably better answer your question.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I'm afraid that I don't have the number right in front of me as well, because I, like you, was going around searching for different information. So I don't have that in front of me, but I would be happy if the minister would just take an undertaking to get back to us at a later date with that information - that would be fine by me, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. PARKER: As I mentioned in my opening remarks yesterday, there is certainly some reorganization going on within the department. We're actually advertising for three new executive directors for each branch of our department right now, so it's a little difficult to say the numbers exactly. We can get back to you on that information or, if you have an exact page, we can probably . . .

 

MR. MACLEOD: Page 9.4.

 

MR. PARKER: Page 9.4. Well, give us a minute and we'll have a look at it.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton West, you have eight minutes remaining.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I think the minister asked for a few minutes to look up some of that information for Page 9.4, so with the chairman's indulgence.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. We'll patiently wait.

 

MR. PARKER: I need to clarify where we are, Madam Chairman, so I'm going to ask the honourable member again. Is it in the supplementary information?

 

MR. MACLEOD: It is.

 

MR. PARKER: And it's on Page 9.4, so is it possible that you can ask your question specifically again, now that I have the page in front of me?

 

MR. MACLEOD: I want to thank the chairman for her patience. My question is, of course, why has the budget increased by over 100 per cent? It went from $1.5 million to a little over $3 million, and the number of funded staff has gone from 9.5 to 24 - would the minister advise the House as to why we have such an increase in staff and budget in Business and Corporate Services?

 

MR. PARKER: I see now that we're on the same page, so that's a good thing. The reality is that, as I mentioned, there is a reorganization within the department and there are going to be some adjustments in staff, moving from one business area to another. That's what is happening here. There's an increase in the dollars, an increase in the staff going into Business and Corporate Services, but there will be a reduction in other areas.

 

Overall, our budget is down this year, I think by approximately $5.5 million. You'd have to get all the other departments here together, but you see in total the number of employees is up slightly, as we talked about last evening, but our budget is actually down by about $5.5 million.

 

MR. MACLEOD: So what we're looking at here is actually an internal movement of people to change the direction of where certain parts of your department are going - is that correct?

 

MR. PARKER: Yes.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Thank you very much for that, minister, and I just want to thank the minister and his staff, again, for their time and their answers. I look forward to hearing more as we move forward.

 

I want to thank you, Madam Chairman, for your patience with me.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you. There is five minutes remaining in the Progressive Conservative's allotment. Would anyone else like to speak? If not, I will revert to the Official Opposition. (Interruption)

 

Okay, you're happy as well.

 

The honourable Minister of Energy.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, I just want to take half a minute to thank the honourable members for their participation here in the estimates debate for the Department of Energy. We've had an interesting and lively debate by times, and informative, both for myself and, I'm sure, for the honourable members.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E6 stand?

 

Resolution E6 stands.

 

We'll take a short recess now so that we can change departments and we'll move forward. Thank you.

 

[3:41 p.m. The committee recessed.]

 

[3:47 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The Committee of the Whole House on Supply will come to order.

 

The honourable Government House Leader.

 

HON. FRANK CORBETT: Madam Chairman, would you please call the estimates for the Minister of the Department of Natural Resources and Resolution E15?

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Resolution E15, the Department of Natural Resources.

Resolution E15 -Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $92,845,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Natural Resources, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Natural Resources.

 

HON. CHARLIE PARKER: Thank you, Madam Chairman. It seems like I was just up here not long ago. I'm feeling a bit of déjà vu here, but I am pleased to be here this afternoon to tell you about the budget estimates for the Department of Natural Resources and pleased to have a few minutes to introduce you to some of the good initiatives and the projects that are going on within the Department of Natural Resources.

 

Before I begin, I'd like to introduce a couple of my staff members who are here with me today. My right-hand man, I guess you might say, is my Deputy Minister, and to my right is Duff Montgomerie. On my left is our Director of Financial Services, Weldon Myers. We're pleased to have both of them here and I'm sure they'll be able to assist and participate as we go into some questions or thoughts you may have during the estimate process.

 

Madam Chairman, first I would like to speak about the department and some of its responsibilities, and following that I'll highlight some of the recent activities in the department, as well as some of the key issues that we're facing in managing our natural resources here in our province.

 

The department has broad responsibilities relative to the management of Nova Scotia's biodiversity - our forests, our geological resources and our parks around the province, as well as our Crown lands that are located here in Nova Scotia. Biodiversity and wildlife-related responsibilities include promoting and implementing policies and programs to support the conservation and sustainable use of wildlife populations, habitats and our ecosystems in Nova Scotia.

 

The Department of Natural Resources has many responsibilities related to our forests on both Crown lands and on private lands. I just want to give you a brief outline of what some of those are. Certainly the forest management planning and research comes first to mind, developing and implementing strategies that support and contribute to sustainable forests, and certainly not just for forests, but we have sustainability goals within all aspects of DNR - maintaining the provincial forest inventory; producing data on the province's forest resources; monitoring primary forest production; coordinating extension programs and support for forestry sector development; and delivering programs to protect our forests from fires or pests or diseases.

 

Among our geological resources and those related responsibilities, our role would include implementing policies and programs that help to ensure the best use of the province's mineral, groundwater, and geo-heritage resources; collecting and managing geoscientific information; monitoring compliance with regulatory requirements; also administering the mineral rights and royalties here in Nova Scotia, and promoting and understanding the risk that geological hazards might pose to Nova Scotians.

 

In our parks system our related responsibilities include planning, developing, designing and operating a system of more than 120 camping and day-use parks and natural area parks, as well as park reserves, in addition to supporting facilities on Crown lands, various trails, and other outdoor recreational opportunities.

 

The department is also responsible for approximately 1,200 kilometres of abandoned rail corridor and for beaches designated around the province under the Beaches Act. Stewardship and outreach activities are undertaken to provide accurate natural- resource-related information to Nova Scotians to help them make informed decisions and choices with respect to the conservation and use of natural resources. More than one-quarter of the province's land base is administered and controlled as provincial Crown land and protected territories, so in addition to managing this land the department administers inland submerged land, as well as submerged lands along the province's coastline.

 

The Crown land administration responsibilities include a number of initiatives. They would include items such as enforcement of laws and policies; management and development of our resources on Crown land; maintenance of Crown boundaries through our survey operations; protection and conservation of Crown land through designations and agreements; administering Crown land licences for timber and other resources; investing in silviculture on Crown land - again, in order to work toward sustainability in our forests; and maintaining a network of access roads on our Crown lands.

 

It would also include such things as the acquisition, leasing, and disposal of interest in Crown land; the registration of the Crown land titles; clarification of interest in unacknowledged ungranted lands - and there are certainly a number of those throughout our province; and, finally, control and management of Crown land records.

 

Our trail and off-highway-vehicle-related responsibilities include overseeing Crown land trails, creating trail development policy, establishing trail networks, and managing trail issues as they arise. Off-highway-vehicle-related-responsibilities include establishing and monitoring safety and training standards and requirements, and monitoring and addressing issues and conflicts as they arise.

 

The Department of Natural Resources has an enforcement role as well. Enforcement-related responsibilities would include achieving compliance with all the Acts administered by the department, and promoting a better understanding of resource and Crown land protection issues and concerns. Activities include directing the development, coordination, implementation and delivery of departmental resources, law enforcement, and compliance programs.

 

That's a brief outline, Madam Chairman, of some of the responsibilities within the department, and I want to take a few minutes now to talk about some of the initiatives underway at this time. Perhaps the most well-known of those is our Natural Resources Strategy and we are working towards the completion of the Natural Resources Strategy, and implementing it will be a very significant part of the department's work this year.

 

The strategy is a commitment of the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act and it is also part of the jobsHere strategy. The plan is to grow our economy, and it also has links to several other government strategies. The new strategy will guide the management of natural resources in our province for the next decade or more.

 

Madam Chairman, I just want to take this moment to express my sincere appreciation to the thousands of Nova Scotians who contributed to the development of the strategy, and that would include the volunteers who gave their time and their expertise to serve on the panels during the citizen engagement and during the stakeholder engagement phases. I also appreciate the work of our department, our staff who took all that information and used the values that were identified in Phase I and the recommendations that were made in Phase II to prepare a strategy that is guided by those values and those recommendations.

 

Last, but not least, I very much appreciate the many citizens, the stakeholders and the partners who provided their opinions and their expertise. Achieving long-term economic gains while ensuring a healthy, natural environment for current Nova Scotians and future generations will not be easy, but by working collaboratively with our partners we can find innovative solutions that will balance the economic, the environmental, and the social impacts of resource development, conservation, and use.

 

Madam Chairman, it is time in this province to do things differently, to spur opportunities to support the economy, our social well-being and the natural resource stewardship and sustainability. Nova Scotians have sent a clear message through the strategy process that we need to change forest harvesting methods. In December we announced the six strategic directions that become part of our future forest policy in this province. Nova Scotia needs a more balanced approach that provides for increased environmental protection, as well as providing a wood supply that sustains a viable industry in this province.

 

I want to take a moment, Madam Chairman, to talk a little bit about our mining industry here in Nova Scotia. The mining industry has been important to Nova Scotia's history and it continues to be an economic pillar in the province, especially in the rural parts of Nova Scotia. The recent economic crisis has adversely affected our mineral industry, especially for minerals like gypsum and base metal commodities, but I am confident that these sectors can, and will, recover.

 

Just to give you a little heads-up on some of the projects that are presently underway in our province at this time - there are several advanced projects that have the potential to grow our mineral sector in our province. These would include the Donkin coal mine project in Cape Breton - this certainly has the potential to double the value of mineral production in the province, and provide jobs in an area of the province with high levels of unemployment. We talked about that project in our energy estimates, and I am sure it may well come up here again after these few words.

 

Another project that is well advanced is the Atlantic Gold's Touquoy Gold Project near Moose River. This project has received environmental assessment approval and is the most advanced gold project in Nova Scotia - and this will represent the first modern, bulk surface gold mine in our province.

 

Another project underway is by Selwyn Resources. They had a recent announcement of its intention to purchase the assets of ScoZinc and to reactivate the Scotia lead zinc mine near Gays River. This would represent a return to base metal mining in the province. There is also a number of encouraging exploration projects for gold and for other commodities including rare earth elements, rare metals, base metals, and industrial minerals that have the potential to diversify and help sustain our mineral industry.

 

There's continued interest, Madam Chairman, in Nova Scotia's potential for the development of deepwater aggregate quarries for export market. As we all know Nova Scotia is strategically located along the eastern seaboard of North America and has good- quality aggregate deposits near deepwater, ice-free ports. These factors give Nova Scotia a competitive advantage for the shipment of bulk mineral commodities including aggregate.

 

Turning now to parks - Nova Scotians and out-of-province visitors continue to take advantage of our provincial parks for their attractions and activities. Our research has reaffirmed that Nova Scotians are using the parks more than ever to visit and to explore the scenic sights for the nature-based experiences that they provide.

 

Our reservation system continues to exceed expectations. The computerized system allows us to note that there were more than 55,000 overnight stays at provincial campsites during the 2010 season - that's up by almost 1 per cent from the previous year. The number of reservations continues to climb upwards with an increase of 5 per cent in 2010, with more than 16,000 tourists taking advantage of the service. That trend is continuing just this year, in 2011 - on the opening day of the reservation system, which was April 2^nd, we saw a 54 per cent increase in the number of reservations for that 24-hour period compared to the year before.

 

The province, with support from our federal partners, continued its commitment to ensure visitors have a chance to enjoy our natural park settings by updating campsites, including a redeveloped Laurie Provincial Park. Some of you may be familiar with that, with its new visitor service area including an administration building and parking. It will also provide tourists with updated walking paths, campsites, and a seasonal floating dock.

 

The Mira River Provincial Park, in Cape Breton, will also offer new campsites, washroom facilities, and service sites. Also, Cape Chignecto has upgraded trails, and at Whycocomagh Provincial Park we added service sites and the first-ever yurts - yurts are a tent-like structure with nylon and canvas covering over a steel frame. So I must thank and encourage the volunteer efforts of our campground host and our Parks are for People program, which provide visitors with insights into our park and surrounding areas.

 

In May of last year the province and the federal government announced that the necessary steps will be taken to designate Sable Island as a national park in conjunction with the Canada National Parks Act. The national park designation will give Sable Island the highest level of protection of its natural and cultural features, which will allow future generations to appreciate it as we do today.

 

Public consultations have been held on the conservation, the management, and the operational issues associated with the designation, and the two levels of government have negotiated an establishment agreement to designate the area for protection under the national act. It's now in the final stages of that process with the federal government. Once protected, Sable Island will be a significant and a recognizable piece of Nova Scotia in the portfolio of sights that will make up our 12 per cent commitment under Nova Scotia Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act for protecting land and recognizing that the island is a critical piece of our offshore interest. Nova Scotia will remain committed to being an important voice in the management of the island and, certainly, as a partner with the federal government.

 

Madam Chairman, this past year our department continued its work to help secure land for Nova Scotians with the release of a discussion paper to consider the creation of a Community Lands Trust. In the fiscal year 2009-10, this government invested an unprecedented $77.5 million to purchase provincial land. Over this past year we were complementing that effort by asking Nova Scotians how they'd like to participate in the land purchase process. We consulted with Nova Scotians on government's pledge to establish a Community Lands Trust to protect traditional community uses of private lands. We want to determine if the establishment of a Community Lands Trust would be the best way to help communities and individuals get involved in buying land. This was part of our government's commitment to be open and transparent in its decision making and to make life better for families in every region of our province.

 

The discussion paper that we developed opened a dialogue on how to develop a mechanism to help individuals and communities who are interested in making a purchase when privately held land holdings that are valued by the community come on the market. This is a situation that occurs frequently in our province, and we recognized it as a concern for people and consulted with them to find a way to help. So over the next year we'll be consulting key stakeholders on legislation related to easements for community access, working forest and the protection of agricultural lands, and we will work towards the establishment of the Community Lands Trust.

 

I want to take a moment to talk about treasure hunting regulations. Last year our department brought in legislative changes to ensure ownership of Nova Scotia's underwater cultural and heritage resources, to make them more secure. The legislation repealed the Treasure Trove Act, amended the Special Places Protection Act, and also created the Oak Island Treasure Act. The repeal of the Treasure Trove Act brought the province in line with other Canadian provinces and the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. The Special Places Protection Act was amended to remove references to treasure, and the Oak Island Treasure Act was created to allow for regulated treasure hunting on that island. These changes were introduced to ensure Nova Scotia's artifacts, and our cultural heritage, are not exploited for commercial gain; instead, cultural materials extracted from future excavations will be kept here in Nova Scotia.

 

Another topic that has created quite a bit of interest in the Department of Natural Resources is around coyotes. This past year, our department has been very active addressing issues that arise from the coyote population in rural and, also, in urban areas of our province. Our response to concerns raised about these animals began immediately after the tragedy on the hiking trail in Cape Breton that I'm sure we all recall - that was in October 2009 when the young and talented Taylor Mitchell, from Ontario, was attacked and killed by coyotes showing unusual aggression towards a human being. It was certainly a very rare event and nevertheless was a very sad event.

 

Right after that, our staff with our department immediately began visiting schools and community organizations to deliver educational presentations on how best to avoid coyotes and how to stay safe should aggressive encounters occur. These educational presentations focused on key facts and important tips with respect to living with coyotes in rural or urban Nova Scotia.

They emphasize, Madam Chairman, these animals are a fact of life in our province, and they have been for quite a long time, therefore we all need to learn to live with a healthy respect and better understanding of these animals. Our department officials have been very busy providing that education to Nova Scotians. They have visited over 100 schools and community organizations so far, delivering presentations about coyotes. Fact sheets about coyotes were also created and provided, and about a year ago we announced that we would be creating a position for a conflict wildlife biologist to specifically assist with programs to help control the coyote population and to provide public education.

 

That biologist was hired; his name is Mike Boudreau. He has been in place and is now working diligently on many matters related to the coyote issue. He was with me last month when we rolled out the latest component of our ongoing public education efforts on this matter. I know he has done a lot of media interviews and is keeping Nova Scotians informed on our program.

 

We also released educational bookmarks and pamphlets on how to live safely with coyotes and how to respond if an aggressive encounter occurs. Now, these colourful materials were designed in a way that makes them very attractive to young children and to teens, and they were provided to every elementary school in the province. They're also available to other schools and to a long list of groups we contacted to make aware of these educational materials including municipalities, trail associations, community organizations, wilderness groups, hunter and angler groups, and others. The information is also available on an expanded section of the Natural Resources' Web site, and some of the materials can be printed off that Web site for anyone to use. That Web page encourages people to be coyote smart, and I would encourage Nova Scotians to visit that Web page by going to our department site. That site, Madam Chairman, is www.gov.ns.ca/natr.

 

The media reported extensively on these materials and the valuable safety information that they contain. Our biologist, as I mentioned, continues to do media interviews on a regular basis. As well, this educational campaign includes colourful, durable outdoor signs. They're quite large and they're available for posting in parks or on trails where appropriate. Recently we've been working closely with the Halifax Regional Municipality and some of those signs have been posted in Point Pleasant Park.

 

So we'll continue to work with that municipality and others by providing advice, expertise and educational materials so that Nova Scotians will know more about how to avoid encountering coyotes and how to respond if faced with an aggressive encounter. I should also mention that the department has trained 15 trappers to effectively respond to aggressive coyote incidents across the province - and several of these trappers have put their skills to good use over the past year.

 

Yet another component of our work on coyotes, Madam Chairman, was the pelt incentive program. The program was open to trappers only, but it was conducted during the usual trapping season, which runs from October 15^th to March 31^st. The pelt incentive program was designed to encourage trappers who are used to taking furs to market to target the coyote - we paid a $20 per pelt incentive if they provided proof that they had successfully sold the pelt on the market.

 

Some have referred to this as a bounty on coyotes, but a bounty, Madam Chairman, is really quite different. This program was restricted to only the trapping season; it was not year-round and it was not open to anyone with a licensed rifle, only to trappers. The incentive ensured that pelts went to market and that they were not wasted, and it provided some economic gain for rural Nova Scotia trappers.

 

The program was also not a coyote cull; it was not intended to simply thin the population. The pelt incentive was based on the biologist's knowledge of the best way to influence an animal's level of fear for people. A trapped coyote is a message that is understood by others in his family group to avoid that area. Experts know that coyotes are skittish and shy of humans, and in some areas where they have grown a bit too used to a human presence the animals may need to be reminded to be wary of people, so our pelt incentive program was developed to help do that.

 

I want to take a minute, Madam Chairman, to talk about the moose hunt. The Cape Breton moose hunt is a very popular tradition and I'm pleased to report that this year's hunt was another successful, bountiful and safe hunt. The annual lottery was held, just like moose hunting licences last Fall, and 325 licences were made available in the four moose management zones within Victoria and Inverness Counties in Cape Breton. As you may know, these are the only counties in the province where moose hunting is permitted - the moose on the mainland are protected. Those taking part in the Cape Breton moose hunt must pick a zone and one of the three seasons in which to hunt. Also, applicants could apply on-line for these licences, which is a new enhancement of the application process. They are making more and more use of the department's various services to the public. The hunt resulted last year in 223 hunters successfully harvesting a moose during the 2010 season.

 

There is also a successful non-motorized hunt for moose in the Polletts Cove-Aspy Fault Wilderness Area, also in Cape Breton, in the northern tip of our province. This hunt is conducted using traditional means to enter and exit the woods and to remove the harvested moose if the hunter is successful. Twenty licences were available and twelve animals were harvested. This was a trial run that relates to changes made to the wildlife regulations announced last June. Because the moose are being hunted within a provincially protected wilderness area, the non-motorized hunt was a way to allow a hunt that would have minimal impact on the sensitive natural landscape of the protected area. This trial hunt was a way to gauge interest in a non-motorized hunt before a scheduled band of motorized vehicles in the protected area will begin next year.

 

The Departments of Natural Resources and Environment have been working with the Mi'kmaq and with provincial stakeholders to achieve a successful transition to a viable moose hunt there, a hunt that avoids significant safety and environmental risks associated with the use of off-highway vehicles in that area. This trial hunt was also designed to reduce human impact in the area, which is consistent with the objectives of a designated wilderness area. It ran last Fall, from September 20^th to 25^th, and it resumed again on October 11^th and then ended on October 16^th. It's worth pointing out that non-motorized hunts for large game are conducted in other jurisdictions throughout North America, in both Canada and the United States. In those areas usually guides and hunting parties operate from remote camps and utilize pack horses, wheeled carts, and backpacks to transport equipment and game over a difficult terrain.

 

Speaking of hunters, there's a program I want to bring to the members' attention - it's called the Hunters Helping the Hungry. During the past year, my staff, along with Feed Nova Scotia, the Nova Scotia Federation of Anglers and Hunters, Eastern Woods & Waters Magazine, and NovaScotiaHunting.com again contributed to support the greater needs of Nova Scotians through the Hunters Helping the Hungry effort. It was the fifth year for the program, which allows hunters to donate deer and moose meat to Feed Nova Scotia simply by dropping it off at one of 18 participating licensed meat cutters. I'm pleased to say that, since the program's inception, more than 2,800 kilograms of meat, representing 22,000 servings of protein, has been made available to food banks across the province, and we look forward to continuing this worthwhile effort.

 

I also want to mention the Habitat Conservation Fund. The primary goal of the fund is to help projects across the province that protect and enhance wildlife habitats. The fund is financed by the $3 wildlife habitat stamp when you purchase a hunting licence in our province. Project applications are reviewed by an independent board of directors consisting of representatives from hunting, naturalist, and academic associations. In May of last year the department announced 15 projects that are being supported with more than $200,000 from the fund. Since 2001, more than $1 million has been invested in wildlife conservation through this program.

 

One other item I'll mention that the department undertakes - it's been a tradition now for a number of years in our province - is the donation of a Christmas tree to the City of Boston. Our Christmas tree experts this year, once again, found a wonderful choice for the annual Boston tree. Throughout the year, Department of Natural Resources staff from across the province join in the search for a special tree that is worthy of this honour. This year we want to thank Gary and Roseann Meisner for their generous donation. We were able to send a remarkable 15-metre white spruce from their property in North Alton, in Kings County, to Boston.

 

Since 1971, we've been thanking the people of Boston in a special way for their help here in Halifax in the aftermath of the Halifax Explosion by giving them a unique gift that represents our province. Each year we send them the biggest and most beautiful Christmas tree that we can find. This tradition is about history, about gratitude, and about the generosity of the holiday season.

 

Madam Chairman, I've outlined a few of the programs and the mission and the departmental responsibilities. I'm going to wrap up here now, and I just want to say that I'm very proud of the department's accomplishments over the past year. The year ahead will be an exciting one, offering new challenges as we begin to implement a new strategy. I believe that we are prepared for those challenges ahead. The Department of Natural Resources is, I believe, a great department, and we look forward to working with our partners to build a better future for Nova Scotians through responsible and sustainable natural resources management.

 

Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you to the members for listening.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Kings West.

 

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you, minister and staff, for being here for estimates. I want to start off with a few line items in the budget, if you could provide some explanation as to why the changes have taken place. In Estimates and Supplementary Detail, on Page 19.3 under Programs and Services, Office of the Minister and Deputy Minister, the numbers show that last year's Estimate $444,000, and the Forecast $361,000, yet next year the estimate greatly exceeds last year's estimate at $516,000, and I'm wondering what the reason is for increasing the estimate for next year by over $70,000.

 

MR. PARKER: I welcome the honourable member for Kings West to our discussion here this afternoon. I'm sure over the next hour we'll have a fruitful conversation.

 

As you know, when our government came to office there was a reduction in the number of ministers and there was also a reduction in the number of executive assistants who worked with those ministers. A number of our ministers have more than one department, and the previous minister was responsible for this department as well as the Department of Agriculture, and marketing. The executive assistant in that case was assigned to the other department, and that is what has happened here in this case - the previous minister's executive assistant was assigned somewhere else but, in this case, now is going to be assigned here to the Department of Natural Resources.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Next, both Financial Services and IT Services came in under what was estimated last year, yet both are estimated to be higher in 2011/12 - why is this and what initiatives are you embarking on to increase the estimate when the forecast was considerably less?

 

MR. PARKER: This relates to the number of staff that we have in that particular Corporate Services Unit. We were short-staffed and some of those positions were not filled - as you can see, there were 47 positions there, the estimate had been 57. We are estimating that it will be a full complement of 57, so that's why the figure would be higher than the actual forecast from the previous year.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Minister. On Page 19.4, under Programs and Services, for Renewable Resources Administration there appears a discrepancy, but I'm sure there's an explanation. First, under Program Development, the estimate goes from $1,464,000, forecast at $1,426,000 to $3,722,000. What is the purpose of increasing the budget for this section by $2,258,000 - what improvements are you making and can you elaborate on those here today?

 

MR. PARKER: My understanding is there is a plus and a minus here that adds up to that larger amount. Primarily that's the cost associated with the additional funding for the Natural Resources Strategy and that's a program development cost of about $3.2 million, and then coming out of that the Community Trust money of the Forestry Joint Task Force, almost a million dollars - so subtract one against the other and it allows for that increase shown there.

 

MR. GLAVINE: The next line, Forestry Administration, the estimate for 2010/11 was $437,000, but the forecast came in higher at $550,000, yet in next year's estimate the budget goes back down $451,000 - why did the forecast come in $113,000 higher than last year's estimate?

 

MR. PARKER: My understanding on that change is that last year there were some additional grants that were payable to the forest products innovation, so that would account for the variance - and this year we're budgeting for lesser amounts of those grants.

 

MR. GLAVINE: That was going to be the second part of the question in relation to the actual for last year. Again, in the next line, Reforestation was estimated last year at $780,000 but the forecast came in at $828,000, yet the estimate for 2011-12 is actually lower than last year's estimate at $733,000 - why did a forecast come in nearly $50,000 higher for 2010-2011?

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, I'm just trying to get the final information on that. It's up a little bit, I guess it is $48,000. It's not significantly over, but obviously it's over a little bit, and maybe within a variance perhaps there's a little extra work that the weather allowed to happen and then this year it's slightly lower.

 

I understand also that this year there's going to be a reduction of one foreperson at the provincial seed depot, so that's why it's down. I should mention also it was mentioned in our budget that there is $5 million extra for silviculture programs and we'll be rolling that out, so there may be some additional money in there for reforestation or for other good silviculture work.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Madam Chairman, a little further down the list, under Park Design, the estimate for 2010-2011 was $42,000 but the forecast came in at $20,000 less, at $22,000 - why did it come in so low and why is next year's estimate the same as in the previous year, at $42,000?

 

MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, my understanding on that is that there is some of that money that was allocated within Regional Services Administration, so it's still within the Natural Resources Department's budget, but it will show up under a different category. It's not necessarily under Renewable Resources Administration, but it will be in another part of the department's budget.

 

MR. GLAVINE: I'm wondering, Mr. Minister, do those funds then move into another part of the department's program if, for example, in this case $20,000 was left over? I'm just wondering if you could identify the movement of those funds.

 

MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, again I believe some of it has been allocated under Regional Services Administration and some of it is here under Renewable Resources Administration, so it's not a surplus, it's just a reallocation to another branch with the department. Sometimes parks are very close to the regions they serve and it probably makes more sense that the budget money would come from the local regional office rather than from the global budget.

MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Minister, you may have referred to perhaps some of this in your opening remarks, but I was in the Red Room doing Finance estimates. The next line has Park Development at $738,000 for 2010-11; again, the forecast came in at $715,000. Next year's estimate is $832,000, and that's $100,000 more than what was forecast. I'm wondering, rather than just the numbers, what is the department planning for parks in Nova Scotia in the coming year?

 

MR. PARKER: As you know, honourable member, our Natural Resources Strategy will be coming out shortly, sometime this Spring, and in that will be a component around our parks strategy, amongst biodiversity, forests, and minerals. I guess in that regard I'll say stay tuned and you'll see more details on our park plans as that rolls out. We do have some extra money still available under the federal stimulus program that we can use toward the parks, so there will be some dollars available there for that type of work, but really the details will come out in our Natural Resources Strategy.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Under Wildlife Administration the funds allocated for 2010-11 were $436,000; the forecast came in at considerably higher at $562,000, just over $100,000 - why did it come in much higher than was estimated?

 

MR. PARKER: I think it was up partly because we had various grants to support the wildlife conservation fund. I mentioned in my opening remarks that there were a number of grants that were given out, so that would allow for it. I think it's down for this year because we have a manager who has been transferred out of that section and is going to the Furbearers and Upland Game Division. The full-time position there is not being budgeted for, which it had been previously, because that individual has been moved to a different division.

 

MR. GLAVINE: That partially provides an answer for the next part of my questioning. With Furbearers and Upland Game, the estimate last year was $192,000, and the forecast came in at $432,000. That's a difference of $240,000 - why the large discrepancy?

MR. PARKER: Well, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, you know I put quite a bit of emphasis on our coyote program and there are a number of good initiatives there including education, the hiring of a trained conflict wildlife biologist, the pelt incentive program, and the hiring of experienced trappers to deal with conflict situations as they arise. So my understanding is most of that increase is to allow for the coyote management program.

 

MR. GLAVINE: In this year's budget it's estimated to be $231,000 - an increase of just $39,000 - so in many respects then, are you now saying that the coyote program is winding down, that the pelt incentive program won't be moving forward next year, that you've done most of the education program in our schools, most of the brochures and the materials have been produced, and now we're hoping that will end the main thrust of the department's effort in this regard?

MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, this issue with the coyotes came along pretty suddenly and it was a very important issue that had to be dealt with. The money was found to address that problem and the program was developed and moved forward on the four points that I mentioned a few moments ago.

 

Certainly the training has been done for the experienced trappers now to deal with the conflicts as they arise, so that's one cost that shouldn't be there this year, and a lot of the educational materials have been produced and distributed to schools and elsewhere, so that one-time cost should not be there either. We have not made a decision on the pelt incentive program as of yet - we're still waiting to get the proper information available on how successful that was.

 

Whenever a major issue or problem arises, the money will be found to deal with it and so the program is ongoing at this point until further decisions are made, but some of the upfront costs are certainly not there in that particular program. We're going to continue to have the program in place, continue to have the wildlife biologist and trappers on retainer as necessary. Hopefully, that explains a little bit of why that number is down.

 

MR. GLAVINE: What is happening with the division for Wetlands and Coastal Habitat? Last year there was nothing allocated, but the forecast came in at $82,000 - why is that the case?

 

MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, I understand that the amount for the Wetlands and Coastal Habitat is often integrated into other parts of the division or other parts of the budget, and this year it was separated out on a separate basis. There's still money being spent, but it had been spent in other parts of the division in past years. It looks like that's probably what's going to happen in this coming year - it will be absorbed within other parts of the budget.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So next year the estimate is $2,000. I guess I'm wondering why there would be such a large difference between last year and what is planned for this year - that is a pretty small dollar figure on a very, very important part of our natural system, our ecosystem in the province, and I'm just wondering, could you provide an explanation for that?

 

MR. PARKER: The wetlands and coastal habitation protection, as the member alludes to, is certainly a valuable and important component of what our department is responsible for. I guess the only explanation I have is that most of that cost is in other departments. There are other sections of the division that are listed there above it, as it was in the previous year. I guess that's the explanation, it's already absorbed into other divisions of the department.

 

MR. GLAVINE: On Page 19.5, under Programs and Services, Mineral Resources Administration for last year was estimated at $241,000, but the forecast came in nearly $120,000 higher, at $360,000 - why the large discrepancy in the funding for this division?

MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, I understand the reason for that increase is that last year there were a number of IT software maintenance costs incorporated into that, as well as extra expenditures related to the Geology Matters Conference that is held once a year - as the honourable members attended, along with myself, from time to time. Those costs are usually fully recoverable under that conference, but they would still pass through the budget and be recovered on the income side.

 

MR. GLAVINE: For Mineral and Petroleum Titles, the estimates and forecasts are off again - the 2010-2011 estimate was $369,000 but the forecast has it at $436,000 and, again, I am wondering, what would make up that difference?

 

MR. PARKER: I understand the difference is there was funding in there - or will be - for the term position, the Clerk 4, that was not included in the estimates. So that's the difference.

 

MR. GLAVINE: On Page 19.6, under Regional Services Administration, I see that was estimated at $4,680,000 for 2010-11, but the forecast came in at $2,396,000, a difference of nearly $2.3 million - why is the forecast so much larger than the actual estimate?

 

MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, the reason that money wasn't spent is we had hoped to have gotten some work done on some bridges in the western part of the province. Those bridges were the Sissiboo River, the Bear River, and the Moose River. We are hoping to get those done this year, so that's why the number is back up. We're very much planning to repair those bridges.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Minister, under Enforcement, the estimate for 2010-11 was $786,000, the forecast is $625,000, and again I am wondering, what would account for the difference - did we actually underfund enforcement in the province?

 

MR. PARKER: The reason that enforcement dollars were down is that we recouped some of our money for services provided to the Inland Fisheries Division. Enforcement officers are flexible enough that they can enforce the regulations for hunting or fishing, and there is some interchange between the departments - that's why that figure would be less. We're not sure if that will happen this year, so we've set a reasonable figure that's a bit higher, but we'll see how it develops in this fiscal year.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Does this part of enforcement include the officers assigned to enforce ATV regulations in the province, or is this part of enforcement in our parks as well - are there separations here around enforcement?

 

MR. PARKER: Yes, that would include our officers who are assigned to patrol the highways and byways for off-highway vehicles. You'll also notice, down further in the estimates here, some of that money is also under Enforcement - Central, - Eastern, or - Western. You'll see it in different sections, but certainly it's included in all those areas.

MR. GLAVINE: Under that area of enforcement, one of the roles of our park attendants is dealing with complaints and issues that arise. That would be in a separate area, I would think, as I've probably already mentioned, under parks - or are there any enforcement officers who work in our large provincial parks?

 

MR. PARKER: Our off-highway vehicle enforcement officers also, from time to time as necessary, can look after hunting enforcement or fisheries enforcement. Their primary duty is OHV responsibilities, but if needed at the start of a hunting season or a fishing season they can be called upon to provide enforcement in those areas. In reality, a lot of them are interrelated. If an off-highway vehicle is out toward a remote lake, it's usually because they may be fishing, so there is some synergy between their enforcement duties.

 

MR. GLAVINE: In this year's budget, 2010-11, we have that difference on estimate forecast, but did we hire - in essence, did we change the number of enforcement officers? The forecast is at $625,000 versus the estimate of $786,000 - are we actually working with fewer enforcement officers or is there something within that envelope that would explain a difference of about $140,000?

 

MR. PARKER: Probably, honourable member, it might be best if I take your question under advisement. I know the number of officers who were originally dedicated to the program of off-highway vehicle inspection and, as we just talked about, some of them have other duties in enforcement. Let us get that answer for you and we'll get back to you.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister, and I do appreciate that. On Page 19.7 there's another difference here in figures - the 2010-11 estimate for Planning Secretariat, subsection Planning, was $483,000, but the forecast came in at $704,000. That's a difference of $220,000 and I am wondering, why the large difference in this division's budget?

 

MR. PARKER: That reason, as you know the departments been working very hard on finishing up Phase 3 of the Natural Resources Strategy and that's the extra cost incorporated in there. It's a one-time cost but, as was mentioned earlier, the strategy will soon be released and the development work over the last number of months, in the previous fiscal year, would be incorporated there.

 

MR. GLAVINE: So now next year's estimate is actually lower than the previous year at $435,000 when we then take a look at this year at $704,000 - why is that the case?

 

MR. PARKER: I understand there is probably less equipment costs that will be required for this year, but it's also - as you know, all government departments were asked to look at cost savings and were asked to look at a 5 per cent reduction over a three-year period, and we've chosen to take at least a 3 per cent reduction where we could in the departments. Certainly that reduction of living within our means would be reflected throughout the department, but this is one area where you see that reflected in reality.

MR. GLAVINE: My final specific question in this part, on Page 19.8, Land Branch Administration for 2010-11 was $344,000 and the forecast came in at $532,000 and, again, a sizeable difference of $190,000 - why is there such a large difference?

 

MR. PARKER: My understanding is the figure is up because there were increased costs for consulting services and also IT hardware expenditures at one time in that particular year that shouldn't occur again for a period of time. So, for those two reasons, it's up.

 

MR. GLAVINE: I think you've essentially answered - the next part of my question was when we have $200,000, why would next year's estimate be even lower than the previous year's estimate? So if that is the answer that you just gave, that's fine.

 

MR. PARKER: That's correct. There were some exceptional costs this past year that shouldn't occur this year. Also, it's down slightly, by $8,000 - again, part of the 3 per cent reduction across various aspects of the department, and coming Back to Balance and living within our means.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, to get on to some of the topics that are now at the forefront of the department, the biomass issue is one that will, I'm sure, continue to be a major topic in Nova Scotia. I guess the first indication that we were going to go very heavily in this direction, of course, was the NewPage project. At the time it was seen as a project that would be done on a pilot basis, to see how we could live with and deal with, especially in the eastern part of the province, Cape Breton - again in particular, Guysborough, Antigonish, those counties with Crown lands and private lands and lands owned by NewPage, where most of the biomass would have to draw from.

 

In the first instance, I guess I need some background - why did government create a regulatory framework to promote one million tons of new forest biomass harvesting without an accurate account of the available supply of forest biomass? That's where the direction was originally going, so I'm wondering why that figure - I know where we've moved, but why that figure?

 

MR. PARKER: Certainly the issue of biomass has been an issue of interest and perhaps an issue of concern to many Nova Scotians. We want to make sure we're getting it right. Last year the province came out with its Renewable Electricity Plan for wind power and tidal and hydro projects, as well as for biomass. It's all part of that portfolio, all part of the mix.

 

In that Renewable Electricity Plan it was mentioned that we would have to take a cautious approach - and that was also reflected in the Phase II panel reports of the Natural Resources Strategy - that if biomass moves forward it would have to be done in a very cautious fashion. There are some guidelines outlined in the Renewable Electricity Plan; for example, no whole-tree harvesting and a 50 per cent reduction in clear-cutting. That very much impacts on any biomass production.

Certainly it would also be strictly regulated. Those regulations are contained in the Department of Energy under the Renewable Electricity Plan, but it is actually this department, the Department of Natural Resources, that has control over setting up the regulations that are in place to make sure they are sustainable, that we are not overharvesting.

 

The figure chosen was based on the best modelling techniques we have in the Department of Natural Resources, looking at an overall annual allowable cut. Based on that, the models indicated a certain amount that could be available to meet our wood requirements to our mills and our pulp mills, but also a certain amount that could be renewable product that could be used for biomass.

 

It fits in well with our strategic directions that were announced in December - again, that there would be no whole-tree harvesting and a 50 per cent reduction in clear-cutting. If you remember in the budget that was introduced by the Finance Minister here just recently, there is a $5 million allotment there for more forest mitigation and a lot of that will be around silviculture and around sustainable harvesting. As we get away from clear-cutting, towards the 50 per cent goal, we'll be encouraging more selection harvesting, more Category 7 silviculture work - and that type of forestry allows more opening in the forests as you go in and look after quality young trees to make sure they can grow, and take out competing species around them.

 

Some of those species are ready to harvest and they're mature wood. They might make good veneer logs, stud wood, pulpwood, or firewood, but some of it is just an unused species and that's what can go to improve the woodlot, that can be used for biomass, and that material could be a pin cherry or some other species that really has no other marketable value in the fibre industry, but again it's only the stem that can be removed - the tops, the branches, the roots and the stumps are left to provide nutrients for those other good- quality young trees.

 

So, really, it works towards sustainable forestry and allows for more, like I said, the Category 7 type of silviculture and more selection harvesting. That by-product of good forest management is the biomass and that is diseased stems or crooked stems, decayed in some respect. Really, it's the highest and best use of the forest product that allows the biomass to be a product that the woodlot owner can still market and actually improve his woodlot at the same time.

 

MR. GLAVINE: We all know, Mr. Minister, that, yes, the strategy will come, but as we sit or stand in our places here in the Legislature this evening, we know that whole-tree harvesting continues to go on. There was a commitment that by December 30^th we would have the strategy out and that some new, needed practices would emerge in Nova Scotia's forest. It's long overdue. Nova Scotians are now very impatient. What we had happen here at Province House last week was really just representatives of tens of thousands of Nova Scotians who want to see the strategy come forward.

 

So we had a framework for one million tons. We are now saying that the cap will be lowered to 350,000 dry tons, and there is every indication that this is going to put an enormous strain on the forests of Nova Scotia. I'm wondering, where was the science to have a framework for one million tons? Why are we now looking at 350,000 dry tons exclusively around the production of electricity?

 

MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, I should mention I am now joined here at my side by Julie Towers. Julie is our Executive Director of Renewable Resources and will be a backup here to me - I'm sure a good help.

 

When I became minister in January, the Natural Resources Strategy was being worked on. I've had the opportunity since that time to consult, to sit down with a number of stakeholders in the environmental movement and in the woodlot owners and forestry industry companies, and just interested Nova Scotians, and we continue to dialogue with people who have an interest in forests and have an interest in the forest industry. We're almost there - also, we're consulting with the Aboriginal community and we're just taking the time to get it right.

 

It's going to impact on our forest industry perhaps for decades to come and it's important that we do it right, and that's why the final consultation had to be held. I'm excited, really, about a number of the things that are in there. I've seen many aspects of the draft report, so we're just in the final stages of that now and it will be out this Spring.

 

You mentioned the tonnage of biomass product that we felt was sustainable. We're being very conservative, very careful. It had originally been set at 500,000 dry tons; again, based on the modelling within the Department of Natural Resources - I think it's called a SaaS model - we looked at that, and we recently looked at it again just to make sure we were okay. Additionally, we had asked - because we had a lot of good information on the environmental impacts of the strategy, we appreciate the work done by the Phase II folks on the panel who brought us a lot of good information, we had good information from Phase I on the social impact of the strategy, but we didn't have a lot of good information on the economic impact on the important forest industry. So we had the forest impact, we had the environmental and social - so we did go out to get more information.

 

We invited a number of companies to bid on a process that would give us that economic impact, especially after we had announced the 50 per cent goal for clear-cutting within five years. How would that affect the forest industry? How would that impact our strategy? We were fortunate to contract Mr. Woodbridge, and just this month he brought back that report showing us some of the impact on the industry. After looking at that and after looking at our own modelling within the department, we decided that we would reduce the tonnage that would be allowed for biomass production. So it was reduced by 30 per cent, from 500,000 to 350,000 dry tons. Again, we think we're being ultra- conservative - we're being ultra-careful here and erring on the side of caution - but we think that's doable, based on the information that we've received most recently.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Honourable member for Kings West, I'll just remind you that you have about nine minutes left in this segment.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, I'd like to go back to take a look at that regulatory framework to promote one million tons of biomass use in the province. I'm wondering where the science is coming from - who has done the studies to give us the best science, the best information available, that we can have the numbers here that you have brought forward around the one million ton framework and the 350,000 for electricity use?

 

MR. PARKER: We based it on the best knowledge and best information we had. I think the modelling that we do use is consistent with other jurisdictions across Canada. We have some very experienced people in the Department of Natural Resources who are knowledgeable, who know how to do this modelling exercise, and we rely on the expertise that we have in-house. Again, on occasion, when we need more information, that's why we contracted Mr. Woodbridge, but the original amount was based on the best knowledge that we had within the Department of Natural Resources.

 

MR. GLAVINE: In specifically taking a look at the 350,000 dry tons, it is my understanding that 160,000 will be required for the NewPage project. Is the 190,000 currently allocated, or will it be for projects that are on the drawing board? For example, the mill in Pictou and a proposal that they're starting to develop - is that future electrical use or is 190,000 already allocated for some electrical generation currently?

 

MR. PARKER: The 350,000 dry tons is, as I mentioned, a very conservative, careful goal, and, again, based on our modelling we believe it's being realistic, but not overharvesting. Again, if the forestry is done right, it's a by-product of good forest harvesting.

 

I neglected to mention that another determinate of the characteristics of what is required of a forestry company is FSC; that's a requirement that the forestry companies will have to follow those practices and policies. Certainly the only project that has been approved to date in Nova Scotia is the NewPage project. It will be around 160,000 dry tons and, again, they'll have to have strict regulations they'll have to follow, including FSC requirements that they have on all their lands that they occupy. Some of that will come off of Crown land and some of it private land, but more and more woodlots are going to FSC certification.

 

The balance of that, the 190,000 dry tons, none of that has been allocated yet. There is certainly interest in other forestry companies, pulp mills and saw mills like Northern Pulp and Minas Basin Pulp and Paper. There are also, under our Renewable Electricity Plan, a number of small projects that could come forward under that, under the COMFIT program, the Community Feed-In Tariff process, and those rates are just now being determined by the URB. We're hopeful that a number of small projects will come forward under that program and, actually, preference is given to small projects. When we reduced the cap on the tons, it went from 500,000 to 350,000 tons. What was taken away was the cogeneration amount that was allocated to Nova Scotia Power. Again, we're going to encourage small, rural, community-based enterprises to come forward under the COMFIT, so there is some room in that additional 190,000 dry tons.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Let's see if we can get a little bit of a picture here as to where we are currently, 2011, with biomass. It's not new to the province by any means; it has been around for quite some time. We have biomass in Liverpool - we have Brooklyn Energy, we have the regional hospital; we have Ste. Anne's; we have a greenhouse in Lawrencetown, and on we go. What is the Department of Natural Resources estimating as the tonnage of biomass currently used in all of those projects in the province?

 

MR. PARKER: My understanding is the total amount of fuelwood and firewood that is harvested right now in the province, of the total cut that's out there - and there are about 100,000 homes in Nova Scotia that burn firewood, and I happen to be one of them - it's a small amount in the big picture, but it's approximately 1 per cent, or just slightly over 1 per cent of the total cut of all wood products, all fibre, that is harvested in the province. I don't have the exact tonnage, but we could get that for you if you wish. On a percentage basis it is around 1 per cent fuelwood and firewood that is used for biomass or for heating sources in the province right now.

 

MR. GLAVINE: At this stage you're talking about modelling. Currently it is estimated that we have only about 17 per cent intact forest in Nova Scotia, and included in that would be a very significant area in the Chignecto wilderness - again, some decisions to be made there as to what will be protected.

 

What kind of analysis has government done to clearly know the effects, as we move to the 350,000 dry tons of use?

 

MR. PARKER: I apologize, Mr. Chairman, and to the member, I was a little bit distracted here - I wonder, would it be possible to repeat the question?

 

MR. GLAVINE: No problem, Mr. Minister.

 

When we take a look at moving to the 350,000, we know that we will be chipping hardwood forest stands in the province. We have seen Groupe Savoie leave the province, and their stated reason was around the fact that hardwood supply was a significant problem for them. What analysis has DNR done to give assurance that our forests . . .

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time allotted for the Official Opposition has expired.

 

Before we move on, I would ask the minister if he requires a break, or would he be fine until the moment of interruption?

 

MR. PARKER: I'll be fine.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Thank you.

 

The honourable Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party.

 

HON. JAMIE BAILLIE: Mr. Chairman, I have a number of questions for the minister, both of a programs nature and of a financial nature. I'd just like to say in introducing my line of questioning that I appreciate the high quality of staff that the minister has in his department, some of whom I know from a previous life, on the government side, and some whom I have gotten to know in my riding of Cumberland South. So as we work our way through the estimates, I just wanted to recognize that I know that the minister and, through the minister, the people are well-served by the staff of the Department of Natural Resources - of course I say this to butter them up for when I get into some of the harsher questions, that people will understand where I'm coming from.

 

I'm not going to start with the financial information - I'll get to that in a moment - but I do want to talk a little bit about program delivery and the way that people are sometimes treated, as departments - and I don't mean any particular department rollout programs across our province.

 

Mr. Chairman, as the minister will know, and as his staff will know, and I'll use this as an example, the government owns Crown land and in some cases there are individual Nova Scotians, or Nova Scotia families, who have camps or cabins on Crown land that have been in place, through a proper lease, for many, many years - some up to 90 years and beyond, through many generations.

 

The government also is in the process, in the last few years, of acquiring land from private landowners that it is using to hit its targets in natural woodlands and so on, and in some cases ends up acquiring land which has a camp or a cottage that belongs to a Nova Scotia family. The government, in that sense, acquires a lease and then has to decide what to do with it. I'm going to ask the minister a few questions about what the department is doing with those Nova Scotians in a moment - I just raise that as an example.

 

Secondly, in the area of provincial parks, there is a beautiful park in Cumberland County, Cape Chignecto Provincial Park, which is managed and operated by the Cumberland Regional Economic Development Association. The minister and his staff will know this, but that park is in part funded by the Department of Natural Resources - or the operations of that park, I should say, are funded. I want to ask the minister a few questions about that as well, which I'll do in a moment, and then of course the issue of trails management. We've talked about off-highway vehicles, and I'm not going to use the estimates for that today, but I am interested in the development of hiking trails throughout our province and what the department is doing to support hiking trails, which are a source of physical activity. They're a great opportunity to promote rural economic development, rural lifestyles, health promotion, and so on.

In one particular example there's the Cape to Cape Trail, which is intended to run from Cape Chignecto, in Cumberland County, to Cape George, in the Antigonish area, which is a great opportunity for this particular department to work with volunteers and private woodlot owners on the development of this trail.

 

Having said that, Mr. Chairman, I think I will start with the issue of the Cape Chignecto Provincial Park, which I identified as being operated and managed by CREDA, the Cumberland Regional Economic Development Authority, under a multi-year management agreement with the department.

 

Just a little background for the minister and his officials, the department has signed an agreement with CREDA for the operation of that park, not unlike an MOU that the government signs with our municipalities and others. This might be almost too much like the municipal MOU that we've been talking about in this House in recent times, because it certainly appears that the department is not honouring its agreement with CREDA.

 

I'm open to interpretation on this, but the agreement provided for $100,000 in funding for operations from the department for 2009 - that amount remains outstanding and it has not been paid. CREDA has had to carry that deficit on its own books. And the same for 2010, a $100,000 grant under the agreement from the department - that amount has not been paid and remains outstanding and, therefore, is a deficit that's being carried by CREDA. Now the department is proposing not to provide $100,000 for the current year, or for next year, but to half that amount to $50,000 for 2011-12.

 

CREDA will have no choice under that scenario but to severely curtail the services it provides in the Cape Chignecto Provincial Park, and so I guess I'll just start my questioning with this, Mr. Chairman, to the minister: What is the department doing to ensure that the Cape Chignecto Provincial Park remains open and viable? Will the department honour its past commitment and provide funding for years that are now long over with, as it had intended to under the agreement that it signed with CREDA? Will the minister share with the committee the department's plans to bring that funding up-to-date?

 

I certainly understand the financial constraints of the province, but this is a very small amount and it is subject to an actual signed agreement - so where is the department headed in terms of its commitment to the Cape Chignecto Provincial Park? I'll start there.

 

MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, I welcome the honourable Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party to our discussion here this afternoon, and I appreciate his comments about the hard-working staff that we have within the department.

 

I'm familiar with the Cape Chignecto Provincial Park - it's a beautiful park, right on the headland of Cumberland County, overlooking the Bay of Fundy. It's a beautiful area to walk and hike and, au naturel - it's just a handsome piece of property. It is certainly visited by a good number of Nova Scotians and tourists from around the world and a good place to get away from it all and just enjoy a break from the House or whatever line of work you may find yourself in.

 

I know CREDA has done good work there in managing the park. The RDA is committed to it and they've been managing it for a number of years. I realize it's a difficult situation, not having enough money to operate with; there is a shortfall there and, moving forward, it makes it not easy.

 

I don't have the details of the agreement in front of me. It is a signed agreement of some type, but I'm not sure what, exactly, it stated or who was responsible for what, but obviously there's some difference of opinion, perhaps, on what the responsibilities of each party may be. I just recently became updated on this file and I do know we have to work towards finding a solution. We've made a commitment that we want to sit down face- to-face with the CREDA directors and see what is feasible, what is workable.

 

The last thing we want is to see that park not operate; it's a beautiful park and it's important, so we are working toward an arrangement to have a face-to-face meeting and see what is possible. It's all about money, but it's also about the park and what the balance is here that will make it work for the Province of Nova Scotia, for CREDA, and for Cape Chignecto Provincial Park.

 

MR. BAILLIE: I do realize I'm asking the minister a pretty detailed question, and I appreciate that he may want to take a look - there is a management agreement between CREDA and his department, where CREDA provides the operation and maintenance of the park and the department provides some funding. It's an agreement that began in 2008. I'd be happy to chat more about that at another time, but the minister has suggested a meeting should take place, and I appreciate that. I think that is the right step forward. I just want to reiterate that funding under that agreement is outstanding for both of the past two years and is proposed to be half for the current year, as the agreement envisioned. Perhaps when we get to the meeting we can discuss that.

 

I also should say that I would be delighted to go on a walk and tour through the provincial park with the minister. He clearly has an appreciation of how beautiful it is. My only condition would be - the minister indicated in his answer that he thought it would be great to walk through the park au naturel, and I sure hope he was referring to the quality of the park and the scenery of the park, and not the method by which he wanted to walk through the park. Or he's on his own, if that's the case.

 

In any event, I will perhaps come back to Cape Chignecto Provincial Park at another time. If there is further information, maybe I'll ask if the minister or the department could provide me with an update on its commitments under the management agreement in writing at a future date - that is probably good for today - I would appreciate that.

 

Moving on to an issue that I think is of concern to many people throughout our province, and it is a big one in Cumberland County - the issue of camps or cabins that exist on Crown land under lease, or maybe under an expired lease, and camps or cabins that the department acquires - or the land that the department acquires - under its land acquisition plan. On that land often is a camp or cabin or cottage that perhaps was leased by the private owner prior to the department's purchase. The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of people in that situation who are stepping forward - certainly in Cumberland County, and I'm sure in other places - who have received eviction notices or the equivalent of eviction notices shortly after a transfer of ownership or upon the expiry of a long, long lease.

 

I know of one particular example - and it's just meant as an example because I know it has happened more than once - where a long-time camp owner has been given 90 days to remove his camp or it will be burned down by the department at its expense. I'm certainly open to the minister telling me that's not the case - I hope he tells me that is not the case - but these are the reports that are coming in, and it strikes me that that's a pretty harsh way to treat a Nova Scotia camp owner.

 

I'm wondering if the minister could share with the committee the policy or process that the department has for dealing with camps or cabins that are either on existing Crown land or that come into the realm of the department when it acquires the land under these camps. It would be great to know, as the department meets its targets for land acquisition, that the continuing usage of those lands by camp owners isn't inconsistent with the department's aims. If the minister could tell us why it is necessary to sometimes terminate these leases or threaten to burn down the camps in order to meet these targets and, if it's not necessary, what is the department's policy in that situation?

 

MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, again to the honourable member, certainly the enjoyment of a camp out in the wilderness is a special privilege and a lot of people, especially on weekends, will go and just get away from it all. Perhaps they like to fish or like to hunt, but lots of hunters I know, if they can just get to the camp, that's the real bonus. They may never come home with a deer or any other game; it is just the chance to enjoy their surroundings.

 

The policy, my understanding, within the department is if the owners of the camp have a lease from the former owner, then that can be transferred. They would be allowed to keep that lease arrangement in place. If in the meantime the area under discussion becomes a wilderness protection area, then they are issued a wilderness area campsite lease. So that works out quite well but, on the other hand, there are campsites out there that don't have a lease and maybe they've just been there for a short time - I guess they're considered as a squatter, in some respects, they've only been there for a few years.

 

And there is a law in the province that if somebody has squatted or been on a piece of property for more than 20 years, then they have some rights under the laws of the province, and if they can prove that then they may well be allowed to stay, but I understand that those who don't have any proof of ownership, or can't prove they were there for at least 20 years and didn't have a lease from a former owner, then those are the ones who often can be asked to move when a wilderness protection area is set up.

MR. BAILLIE: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the minister's answer. In many cases there are actually leases, just for the information of the minister and then I'll move on, but there are actually leases in place. Some of them are in the records of the department; some of them are in the records of the leaseholders themselves. They expire or they come to the end of their lease period and then there's a renewal, and the department is asking people to incur the legal expense of drawing up a whole new lease, and this can run into actually hundreds or small thousands of dollars.

 

I'll just make this suggestion to the minister and the department - that I think it would be appropriate for the department to establish a standard lease that will not require the camp holders themselves to incur the legal expense of having a lawyer draw up the lease in order to ease the transition from one lease to another, without the need to make it too burdensome on camp owners.

 

Mr. Chairman, I'll move on now to a couple of financial questions, if you don't mind. The minister has talked about back to balance and also about the need to manage government expenses wisely - something of course that we would all support. There have been any number of program cuts, and the Cape Chignecto Provincial Park operating grant may well be an example of that - we'll determine that at a future meeting. But, consistent with that directive, I know that all government departments were asked to identify their own targets for expenditure control.

 

I say to the minister we're asking this of every department, so he should not feel singled out in this case. But the directive to the central departments of government was that they identify minus 5 per cent and minus 10 per cent scenarios for their own expenses. Using the lower target, the minus 5 per cent target, that was a three-year plan - minus 3 per cent this year, minus 1 per cent and minus 1 per cent. The Estimates Book does not seem to show that the department has done that, has met that directive, and so I'm wondering if the minister can reconcile the Estimates Book numbers - which appear to show a growth in areas of senior management and administration and corporate services and so on - with the directive to find minus 3 per cent this year and minus 1 per cent and minus 1 per cent in the two subsequent years.

 

MR. PARKER: You are correct, all government departments were asked to look at various exercises on a reduction to try to bring the province back to balance and try to live within our means. I'm glad to hear the honourable member thinks that's a laudable goal. We, in the Department of Natural Resources, did our share to try to meet those requirements. The 5 per cent goal is achievable, but it took a lot of work and a lot of effort. We went through every line in our budget and every division within the department to come up with those numbers. It varied from within the department and some areas were able to absorb a larger amount, some a smaller amount, but it is 3 per cent for this year.

 

You may notice on the bottom line of the budget that it doesn't look like it is 3 per cent, but we actually did do that, and then there are additional monies under - and you may have heard it announced in the Throne Speech and then again in the budget on Budget Day, there's an extra allotment of money to deal with our Natural Resources Strategy and we're trying to mitigate any concerns it might have on our forests or our forest industry. So there's an additional $3.2 million that has been added back into the budget to help mitigate some of the costs of the strategy, in particular around the goal of 50 per cent clear-cutting within a five-year period and the impact it may have on the forest industry.

 

That amount is rolled back into it, that's the main additional cost that went back in, but the 3 per cent goal was met previous to that coming back in. That's almost like a special cost, but we realize the importance of the forest and our forest industry. So that needs to be taken into account in the total bottom line that you see there in the budget.

 

MR. BAILLIE: Mr. Chairman, I think what I'm hearing the minister say is that if you back out the amount for the new forest strategy then the department has achieved its 3 per cent target for this year, just to put it in bottom-line terms.

 

The amount of the forest strategy that has been budgeted for this year is $5 million.

I'm wondering if the minister could break down that $5 million for us - is the $5 million all for the development of the strategy? I think the minister mentioned there are some remediation monies around clear-cutting, and if we could hear that breakdown of what that $5 million is, how much just for the document itself and how much for the ramifications of the strategy, that would be helpful. Thank you.

 

MR. PARKER: Of course the strategy, as you know, has not been rolled out as of yet, but the $5 million in the budget is split two ways - $3.2 million, as I mentioned, in the Department of Natural Resources and the balance is in the Treasury Board budget, but it is a total of $5 million. Our hope is it will help to work towards our goal of more sustainable forestry. That would mean more silviculture, and as we get away from clear-cutting towards more selection harvesting, silviculture practices, that will encourage that type of forestry, perhaps more certification of woodlots, a goal towards sustainability - probably some educational programs, too. Those details really have not been finalized yet, but that's the general direction in which we're heading.

 

MR. BAILLIE: Mr. Chairman, I'm just going to turn to the capital plan for a moment, Page 14 lists the capital plan items by department. In the case of Department of Natural Resources, on Page 14 it indicates three items: Land and Resource Asset Management System, Annual Fleet Renewal, and Land Purchases for Land Protection Priorities and Conservation Goals. I'm wondering, could the minister provide us with the dollar amounts for each of those three items?

 

MR. PARKER: My understanding on those capital costs, it breaks down to Land Purchases of $5.5 million, Land Asset Management System is $1.5 million and, finally, the Fleet Vehicle Purchase of $800,000, so that adds up to about $6.8 million in total.

 

MR. BAILLIE: I'd like to conclude my line of questioning for now with one more, and then I'm going to share my time with another member over here.

I do want to conclude on the issue of trails management. I mentioned, as an example, a moment ago, the Cape to Cape Trail. I don't know if the minister is familiar with that exact trail and it is okay if he is not. It is a planned trail. Pieces of it are in place now that will allow for hiking, walking, travelling, and camping all the way from Cape Chignecto in Cumberland County, to Cape George, in Antigonish area. I'm wondering if their department has plans to work with the volunteers of the Cape to Cape Trail on its maintenance, and also whether the department is working with the various private property owners, the biggest example being Northern Pulp, on the assembly of the trail for the use of Nova Scotians for such a significant area of our province.

 

MR. PARKER: I am fairly familiar with the Cape to Cape Trail, it's a great project. It runs, as was mentioned, all the way from Cape George to Cape Chignecto. It runs through Antigonish, Pictou, Colchester, and Cumberland Counties. There are a number of people in my riding who have been working hard on that particular trail and volunteers who go out and bush-cut, clear the trail and make it flatter, easier to hike. I know Dr. Gordon Young, from the Town of Pictou, has been particularly spearheading the project in our area and I'm sure there's somebody in each of the counties who has some responsibility for it. There is a dedicated group of volunteers that have been out on various Saturdays to help clear the trail.

 

It's going to be a wonderful hiking trail. It's not something you walk on a Saturday morning. It's probably a long-term project, if you're going to cover 400 kilometres. I just happened to hear on CBC Radio, there's a trail in Spain and southern France that is a spiritual walk for a lot of people and I'm sure that our Cape to Cape Trail will take on some meaningful significance in time. Portions of it are open already and I know through the Millville, Scotsburn, Durham, Greenhill area there has certainly been some work done on the trail in that area in Pictou County. I understand Colchester County has a lot of work that has been done as well, and perhaps in Cumberland County also.

 

The specifics of funding, I'm not sure on those details. We will endeavour to try to get you some information. I'm not aware of any particular dollars that have gone towards that project. One of the largest challenges that they face is getting landowner permission, working with landowners and their deeds and trying to make sure that they can get the trail through a particular piece of property. I certainly would be willing to get more information and see if there are any grants or money available for a very worthwhile project.

 

MR.CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Hants West.

 

MR. CHUCK PORTER: Mr. Chairman, I'm glad to have an opportunity, for a few minutes this afternoon, to ask a few questions. It was interesting listening to the minister speak of spiritual trails. I don't know that I've ever heard of that terminology before, but I guess in thinking about some of the people I know who are really dedicated to the trails and the walking or biking and hiking, et cetera, I guess maybe for them it would be just that - and you can probably tell from looking at me that I'm not one of those people, although I do believe in the exercise and all that good stuff.

We have some great trails around, through some of the towns. I know Windsor has a bit of trail, but I'm not even sure a lot of people know it exists.

 

Back a couple years or more there was some development down through the Valley on trails, I don't know where that ever went. I know that there was a group, the Hants County Snow Dusters as an example - now you can get on a trail in Falmouth and you can skidoo, I don't know how many miles, for a long ways, as you always could. Now there's a designated trail, for lack of a better term, but they do use it. They maintain it all on their own. Are there funding opportunities here for these organizations to apply, and is any money in the budget for this and, if so, can you explain just exactly how that process works - what kind of money is there for them to get, and how many years have to go by before they can apply? Just a little detail on that for me.

 

MR. PARKER: I think we're all in support of hiking trails, walking trails, and you mentioned they're good recreation. They're good for our health - our physical health, our mental health, and maybe even our spiritual health.

 

The Department of Natural Resources, as far as I know, doesn't have any particular grant programs for that type of development, but certainly the old department known as the Health Promotion and Protection, now rolled into the Department of Health and Wellness, has provided grants in the past to groups and organizations to develop trails and to maintain them. I would suggest if the honourable member wanted to contact the Department of Health and Wellness, perhaps even your local department, if there is one in Windsor to make contact with, there are certainly grants available through that, even through the Sport and Recreation Nova Scotia programs. That would be my suggestion on where to go.

 

MR. PORTER: Thank you for that, I guess I was just looking for clarity. I knew that was there in the past and I thought, with you talking about that, perhaps there was some new program, with opportunity to apply through your department, I had missed here.

 

I want to move on to a couple of different things, one being animals who are hit on the side of the road. I don't know about you, minister, but I know I get calls if there's a deer or if there's maybe another larger animal, small animal, whatever it might be, if they are looking to get them removed. I've had calls for even small animals to be removed from certain areas. Is that handled through you and your department and, if so, what's the process for that? We have had people say they've called the Natural Resources Office and they tell them it's not their job. But if you talk to them, give them a call, sometimes they'll go out and pick it up, or Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal has been known to on occasion, if it's out on the 100- Series Highway, to pick it up as well. Is there policy within your Department of Natural Resources to look after that?

 

MR. PARKER: DNR doesn't have a policy around going to pick up every road kill that's out there, whether it's a chipmunk or a bear, but certainly from time to time we get requests for a road kill animal. Unfortunately accidents do happen. We hope it's not serious for the car driver or the passengers in the vehicle; unfortunately it is quite serious for the animal, in many cases. But things happen, high-speed vehicles on a busy crossing, unfortunately animals are going to be hit.

 

As far as I am aware, and I know certainly in the area that I serve, in Pictou County, DNR has been very co-operative. If a deer is hit on a road and somebody calls, they'll come out and pick it up - or a large animal, and particularly deer. I know in some areas of the province deer are really a danger, they're a real problem, and many of them are hit on our highways and byways. DNR will usually respond and pick up the animal and dispose of it, but not for smaller animals. I've seen people occasionally stop and move a porcupine or a racoon off the road, just as a safety precaution. If there is a difficulty, call your local DNR and they'll usually respond to the situation.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: At this time we are approaching the hour of interruption, so I'm going to suggest that we stop here, give the staff an opportunity to leave the Chamber so we can move on to the moment of interruption. We will continue back after the time has elapsed for the moment of interruption. We will now have a short recess while staff leaves, and then we'll reconvene for the moment of interruption. Thank you.

 

[5:55 p.m. The committee recessed.]

 

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

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The Committee of the Whole House on Supply will come to order. We'll resume the estimates for Natural Resources.

 

The honourable member for Hants West for the remaining 28 minutes.

 

MR. CHUCK PORTER: Madam Chairman, it's good to be back. I have a couple of questions, and then I believe my honourable colleague, the member for Cape Breton West, is going to pick it up for a few moments.

 

Mr. Minister, thanks again for the opportunity. I want to talk just a bit about staffing and how it changes from season - with the summer coming on, we have the fire crews, I guess, for lack of a better term. Are there additions in the summertime, and if so, what are those for local regional offices? I'll just use mine in Windsor for an example. We now see the truck back on the road doing its grassfire thing and other seasonal - working in the parks and things like that. What's the difference in the seasonal employment numbers?

 

HON. CHARLIE PARKER: I don't have an exact number on your own local regional office, but province-wide, I understand that there are approximately 400 casual part-time - would be on for parks, would be on for fire service, seasonal duties. If you want the specifics on your Windsor office, we could get those for you. That is the best I have at the moment: approximately 400 in total over the whole province on a seasonal basis.

 

MR. PORTER: That's fine. I don't need a breakdown by region; I'm just kind of curious as to how much of a shift there really was. So that I've got it clear, there are 400 in total annually or there are 400 additional who come this time of year for the season? I'm not sure that I clearly understood the answer.

 

Let me make it simple for you: total employees, maybe winter versus summer. They're two different seasons. I know it's slower - or I'm assuming it's going to be slower - and I know it's busier this time of the year with parks opening up and the fire crews and so on and so forth. I'm just looking for the difference in those seasonal employees, and I do understand there are a number of casuals and part-timers and so on. I was just kind of curious as to the shift.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, that number I gave you of 400 is our casual seasonal employees. They come on in the Spring to Fall period of the year. We have a number of full-time employees in the department, from Founders Square to Truro to Kentville and at the various depots around the province, but as additional seasonal staff come on at about this time of year, it would be approximately 400.

 

MR. PORTER: And just for clarity as well, the staff who work in Smileys Park - I'll just use that as an example - are provincially-funded staff? Is that correct?

 

MR. PARKER: I'm hoping to get a tour around the province come this summer when it's not quite so busy here in the House, and I'll get out to some of the depots and some of the provincial parks. I assume Smileys Park is in your area, in your riding, so I'm not familiar with it, but there are many, many parks around the province. Your question was around - I got distracted thinking about Smileys Park. (Interruption) That's correct. They're seasonal, unionized staff of the Department of Natural Resources.

 

MR. PORTER: Madam Chairman, I'll build on that now a little bit. I just wanted to be clear that that was in fact the case. A lot of my calls and complaints are with regard to booking at the campground. Smileys has a wonderful campground there. People call in and they have to book on-line. I'm sure you can appreciate that people who are getting in their camper and heading out for a couple weeks of vacation aren't interested in booking on-line. They're touring, they're doing their thing; they're not on anybody's timeline but their own, and wherever they end up, they end up. So they pull into Smileys tonight, and one of the questions they are asked is, well, did you book on-line? There is a fee for booking on-line, and this was where - it may be a small fee in some people's minds, and sometimes it doesn't matter how big or how small that fee is. The simple fact that they have to do it and book it on a credit card really ticks people off, to be kind. Is this something that's controlled by your department, and do you foresee any changes or options around that?

 

MR. PARKER: The department has gone to a booking system where people can reserve on-line and they can be assured that their camping spot will be there at whichever provincial park around the province they want. It's a central booking system and allows them to reserve their spot so that they know on the long weekend in May they want to be at Smileys Park, Laurie Park, or Mira River Park, and they can book their space and make sure that it's there.

 

The other option is people just show up, it's a spur-of-the-moment decision - let's go camping this weekend - and it's a little more difficult. It's a newer system for us in the last few years, and it's not perfect. I understand there was a large uptake on the first day that the reservation system was open. Maybe we can try to work with it, try to perfect it, make it better, and find some way to balance between long-term appointments and spur-of-the-moment decisions. So I will continue to work on that system.

 

MR. PORTER: Just for clarity, the option still exists. You can book it on-line or you can pull in and take your chances. I want to make sure that that's clear, and I believe that it is.

 

The other one - just on the parks before I do pass it off - is that generally, those diehard campers will tell us that you close the parks way too soon. What is that date and why so early? That is the question that comes to mind that I'm asked fairly often. We have beautiful Falls. Generally, you could camp well into November without any problems. You can talk to them and you can tell them, well, they have staff for a certain period of time. They don't buy that. They'd like to see the park open. It's provincially funded, it's tax dollars, et cetera. Back to you with the question.

 

MR. PARKER: It's always a challenge to decide when a park should open up in the Springtime and when it should close down in the autumn. We sort of have a staggered system: some open sooner, stay open longer; others open later and perhaps close sooner. There's quite a variance, starting in May and right through to June, and then closings in September/October area. Some are day-use parks and some are camping parks, and generally speaking, of course, all parks are available if people wanted to go for a hike or walk at any time of the year. They park their vehicle outside the park boundaries, and most people I know will walk in and take advantage of the hiking trails.

 

It's also a fiscal challenge for us. It costs money to keep a park open - for staff, in particular, or maintenance. We're trying to live within our means. We're trying to find that balance that serves our communities, but also helping to bring the province back to balance.

 

MR. PORTER: I appreciate those answers and your comments, and I understand it does depend on the fiscal abilities and things like that. It's always dollars and cents, but I would think right now people are looking for us to be responsible. I agree with that, but it would be good for tourism and certainly good for the economy with a sign that says, "Welcome to Nova Scotia. We're Smileys Park. We're open for business."

 

With that, Madam Chairman, I'm going to pass my time over to my honourable colleague from Cape Breton West.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton West.

MR. ALFIE MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, it's a pleasure for me to stand here and ask a few questions of the Minister of Natural Resources. I want to welcome him and his staff, and I look forward to some meaningful dialogue here this afternoon.

 

Going along the vein of my colleague from Hants West and talking about provincial parks, one of the provincial parks in Cape Breton that is quite well used is the Mira River Park. The Mira River Park has undergone substantial work over the course of the last couple of years through an infrastructure program that was put in place by the former government to improve the quality of that campground.

 

One of the reasons that the campground is so successful is a group called Friends of Mira Park. It is a volunteer group who are very active in keeping the park alive and well. I'm just wondering if the minister is familiar with the group and if there are other such groups in other parks around the province?

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, we have a lot of great provincial parks around the province. I can't say I've had the opportunity to visit the Mira River Park, although I hear good things about it from the honourable member. I think the day we had a visit to the Two Rivers Wildlife Park, we had a little discussion about Mira River Park and, in particular, a need there by the church group to be able to purchase some cemetery land that is contained within the park, or an expansion of their property, if I remember correctly.

 

That's something the department is looking at and is working on. It is in contact with the community group. Hopefully we can find a workable solution there that will maintain the integrity of the park but also allow for the church group to have access to a bit more property. I can't recall if you asked me something more in particular about Mira River Park, but anyway, that's an update on that situation at least.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I want to thank you, Madam Chairman, and I do want to thank the minister, because the last time he was in the Sydney area he did take time out of his very busy schedule to come and visit us at the Two Rivers Wildlife Park, which was formerly run by the province. It is now run by a community group, but the assets do belong to the Province of Nova Scotia. It is a group of very loyal, dedicated volunteers who help keep that park open. Actually, their numbers are quite good for visits; their numbers last year actually were higher than the number of visitors who attended the Fortress of Louisbourg, so the volume of people who are going through that park is quite amazing.

 

The minister was very gracious in coming and meeting with the members of the board of directors and talking about their needs to become more self-sufficient. One of the things that they talked about at that time was doing some rough camping on the property so that they would be able to increase the amount of dollars that were brought in. Since the meeting with the minister there has been a meeting with officials in his department to talk about that very item, and it seems to be going in the right direction.

I certainly want to give my congratulations to the minister for his patience and his involvement, and hopefully we'll see this come to a successful conclusion for that group so they can maintain that quality park. I have a vested interest in it, because my grandson thinks there's no place like the Two Rivers Wildlife Park and he loves to go there any chance he gets. Actually, he had his last two or three birthday parties there, and my oldest daughter got married on that site, so it's a site that holds a spot in my heart.

 

Getting back to the Mira River Park, there is a group there, though, over and above what we were saying about the church group. There is a need there, because when that property was given to the province to become a park, there was a cemetery already located in it, and right now there are some challenges there. Again, the minister is aware and he has been trying to address it, and again, we appreciate that.

 

There is also a group in the park known as the Friends of Mira Park. That group works with members of the department to enhance the park, to bring quality to the park, and to make sure that the family camping that takes place there is done in a safe way, where a lot of the families can enjoy themselves. It was an initiative of the department, initially, to get this Friends of Mira Park group together. My question is, are there more of these groups around the province? I've seen the success that this one has had at this particular park, and I think that it has a formula that would bring some successes and help other provincial parks and make them more successful. When you have the community involvement there is a certain pride that goes along with the property, and therefore the people who are enjoying it take ownership of the park. I was just wondering if the minister is familiar and if there are other such groups in the area.

 

MR. PARKER: The model of having a community group in conjunction with the province to help manage a provincial park is a great idea. I think it's something that we could probably use more around the province, because there is local ownership, more or less - you know what I mean. They feel it's their park, their community. As the honourable member mentioned, you do get an attachment to a spot where you have fond memories, whether it's your grandchildren or your daughter's marriage or whatever, so those things are a great way to develop partnerships between our provincial park and our communities.

 

Earlier the honourable Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party and I were talking about the Cape Chignecto Provincial Park, and again, there is a community group there through CREDA that helps to oversee the park and to manage it. Maybe that's a larger park and a bigger responsibility than a smaller provincial park, but the model is right, to have a good group in the local community to help manage it. I understand approximately 60 of our provincial parks are under some type of community management or some type of arrangement where there is a community involvement to help oversee them. The ultimate responsibility still comes back to the Department of Natural Resources, but it's great to have that on-the-ground support from a local community organization.

 

I commend the Friends of Mira Park for taking responsibility for that particular provincial park, and commend others around the province that are in that model. It's something that maybe we can enhance and move to other provincial parks. It seems to be working well.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I would like to also point out that not only the Friends of Mira Park but the staff that work at the Mira River Park go above and beyond. They're a very dedicated group of people who make it easy for the community to work with them and to make it a pleasant experience. As a matter of fact, there is even an observatory there where they do their stargazing. I don't understand it all, but it is a group that is very dedicated, and with the help and permission of the department they've been able to build an observatory and they've been able to enhance the camping experience with playground equipment for the children who might be there with families. They have a small - for lack of a better term - community centre where they gather and have barbecues and sell ice cream.

 

The whole camping experience is a wonderful experience, but it is also an experience where the staff is engaged with the community to make it happen. I would like the minister to take our thanks and congratulations to his staff for the way that they maintain and handle themselves in that park.

 

On a different note, I just want to talk a little bit about the fire suppression that is done by the department. Over the course of time, we hear sometimes that the trained men and women that we have in our fire services here and the Department of Natural Resources are called to go to other provinces to help out with situations that are there. I'm just wondering what kind of an agreement the department has with other provinces. Is there any type of reciprocal agreement or transfer of personnel? Is there is a funding cost to the department, or is there a way that this funding is reclaimed by the province? What kind of a challenge is it for those types of things to be met?

 

MR. PARKER: We also have some very dedicated staff in our fire service in the Department of Natural Resources, as we do around the province through our volunteer fire departments. I think we have over 300 volunteer fire departments, and many of them work on a great system they call mutual aid, as you're well aware. If there's a fire in the community they come to each other's help. I think in Pictou County there's something like over 24 or 25 volunteer fire departments in the various rural communities. If there is a fire in New Glasgow or Barney's River or River John they all pitch in. There are three, four, or half a dozen departments. So that model of mutual aid is working well, and that's similar to what we have in the Department of Natural Resources between provinces.

 

If there is a fire here in our province there are often firefighters who can come in through New Brunswick or from other provinces to assist, as they did when we had some major fires here in the recent past in the HRM area over the last couple of years. Vice versa, when there's a need for fire help in Alberta or British Columbia or other provinces, our staff are able to go, as long as there's nothing happening with fires here in Nova Scotia. Lots of times we've sent trained staff to go out and assist in the forest firefighting service in those other western provinces. It's a mutual aid system, I guess you might call it - the same as volunteer fire departments within our own province.

There is an established system as far as the pay rate or who pays for what. I don't have those details right with me - you help out in one spot, and another time they're coming to help you - but if the member so wished I could get some details on the structure of the financial arrangements. More than anything it's good to know the help is there and they're available and that at a moment's notice they come and help fight fires within another province.

 

MR. MACLEOD: My interest was that there is some kind of a way, that there's a reciprocal agreement so that the cost is not borne by the Province of Nova Scotia. You're saying that there is an agreement, and that's good enough. It is important that our people have an opportunity to go to other areas, and I'm sure while they're at these different fires in different provinces - although it's a tragic time for the communities - there's probably an opportunity there for them to pick up new skills that will help them when they come back home.

 

We have seen some devastating fires around the area, and I know in our community back in mid-1970s we had a fire that burned for a number of days. We've seen the community of Main-à-Dieu where the church and a number of homes were burnt, and it reached as far away as Marion Bridge, where there was a home lost as well. It is important for the mutual aid, and that was going to be part of my next question. When we talk about mutual aid - we have the volunteer fire departments that come to the aid of the province and the Department of Natural Resources for fighting fires. My understanding is that there is some kind of pay that goes back to the department, and I'm just wondering if you can give us an idea of how that system works and what portion of your budget that would include.

 

MR. PARKER: Again, our fire service is based on trust and helping each other out in time of need. If there is a forest fire in a local area, many of the local fire departments come in and help out. There is some type of cost recovery program; I just don't have the details on that. But I do understand that there are some arrangements. It's not going to be out of pocket for the local fire department. Again, I can get you those details on the mechanism and how that works, but I do know in the past we've had major forest fires in certain areas and the local volunteer fire departments come in, as well as staff from DNR and lots of times staff from forestry companies like NewPage or Northern Pulp, depending on where the fire is.

 

I can recall one major fire that occurred in the Guysborough-Pictou County area way back in the mid-1970s. It was a huge fire - I think it was around 35,000 acres that burned at that time in the Trafalgar fire in 1976. There were forestry companies there, there were volunteer fire departments, there were staff from DNR - it was really everybody pitching in to try to get that fire out. It was in June, it was very hot, and it burned a huge area. It was a tremendous loss to the whole forestry economy and to the area. Everybody pitched in and did their best to get it out, and eventually it was achieved.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, just for the minister, what happens usually is the volunteer fire departments are paid an hourly rate for the manpower and equipment rental rate. I believe that that's a great program, and I was actually trying to give you an opportunity to take a bow, because I think it is something that helps out the volunteer fire departments. At the same time, when they are doing their job and putting their lives on the line, it is good that the contribution that the volunteer fire departments are making is acknowledged by the province.

 

It is also important to recognize the work of the men and women involved in the fire service in your department because, again, most people run away from fires and these people run toward them to try to make sure that other people's lives are safe and their homes and properties are safe. It is a very worthy profession that they are in, and I would again wish that you would congratulate them on behalf of all members of the House for the work they do.

 

I'm getting close to the end of my time here, Mr. Minister, but I will be back tomorrow. I have a whole lot of other questions that I would like to ask you. I'm sure you'll be on the edge of your seat until that time comes, but you are now going to have to wait until tomorrow before I'll be able to ask more questions - or Thursday, so two days of suspense.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The time allotted for the Progressive Conservative Party has now expired.

 

The honourable member for Kings West.

 

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Madam Chairman, I don't know, estimates are great, but I'm not sure if I've been on the edge of my seat. As my colleague says, we may be the next day.

 

Continuing on the theme of biomass, since it is a pretty significant topic that we're dealing with here in the province, I finished off with asking about what analysis has been done in looking down the road 10 years, because there's every indication that not only is biomass in terms of the 350,000 dry tons for electrical production, but we're also going to see institutions pick up to a greater degree than where we currently are. That brings us to not just a long-range view of things, but also the annual allowable cut and monitoring of those practices. So I'm wondering, are we doing some real analysis on where the biomass piece can go, in terms not just of electricity, but as the minister has already alluded to, other small community projects that are definitely going to be in the works?

 

We're going to see high oil and diesel and bunker C fuel prices and those kinds of conversions are going to be taking place. I think it's going to add pressure to our forests at a time when every indication is that our forests are already under a great deal of stress. I'm wondering about what kind of analysis is being done, if we take anything from the Ecology Action Centre and about 50 stakeholders who are concerned about this. I thought it was a great monitoring voice from across the province, and it's looking like we're pulling numbers here. We can fluctuate with the numbers and we can talk about them being somewhat conservative in nature, but do we really have an analysis of where biomass is going?

 

MR. PARKER: This issue of biomass and trying to determine the right amount that we can harvest from our forests and still have it be sustainable so that it really is a renewable resource - that is what was identified in the Renewable Electricity Plan. It's one of the portfolio of items that could be used for electrical generation: wind and tidal and hydroelectricity and in-stream tidal and so on, plus biomass. It's the mix of all these together that provides a balance, and one offsets the other. For example, if the tide wasn't coming in or the wind wasn't blowing, then biomass is one of those steady, solid sources of power generation that is continuous.

 

You talked about the modelling and how we came up with the figure. We decided that we wanted to be careful and we wanted to be cautious. The original model was 1.5 million tons. I guess that's 750,000 dry tons. That was considered possible under the modelling program that we had, but to be conservative we set it at less than that. We set it at 500,000 dry tons, and department staff were working on the old SaaS model; it was one of the methods that was used. They have a newer model now called Woodstock. These are recognized nationally and internationally as proper modelling techniques that can give you a proper cut on an annual basis and the amount that could be used for various types of fibre.

 

These are trained foresters and technicians and people who we put our trust in, who know what they're doing, and that's the model they came up with. There was one level - they came down to a more conservative level, and then when the economic impact analysis came to us it was decided that we should be even more cautious, and so it was reduced by a further 30 per cent to 350,000 dry tons.

 

One of the unique challenges we have here in Nova Scotia is that while companies are looking for logs and pulpwood and fibre of one type or another, we still have a lot of land that is growing trees, but really is not available. It's perhaps not being managed at all. I'm talking about the land that belongs to private woodlot owners. We have approximately 30,000 private woodlots in the province. Some of those folks are great. They're managing their land sustainably and they're harvesting wood on a continual basis. Through our strategic direction that was announced, we're going to get back to a model, a 50 per cent goal in clear-cutting. That then provides some opportunity to look at other types of forest management, other types of harvesting techniques. As I mentioned earlier, selection harvesting is one of those that we're going to be encouraging, especially through silviculture techniques like Category 7.

 

We're hoping to encourage and engage more private woodlot owners to take some pride in their land and to perhaps consider a management plan and look at ways to not clear-cut - unless it cites a specific reason that would have to be - but more sustainable management around selection harvesting. That would allow more trees to improve and to grow better, and also more trees to harvest on a continual basis, and therefore it would free up some additional wood for logs, for stud wood, for pulp wood, and yes, even biomass.

MR. GLAVINE: I guess the Department of Natural Resources has done some work in terms of wildlife populations - and again, not just biomass - but many would put forth the current state of our forests. I'm wondering how this has been accurately addressed to make sure that all of the diverse requirements - where we're talking about biodiversity, and the Natural Resources strategy was to address that aspect as well as the economic factors that a new Natural Resources strategy would have, new practices of how we would go in a different direction. Nova Scotians have clearly indicated they want a different direction, so in terms of wildlife population, is there a true accounting and accommodation for that as well?

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, certainly in the Natural Resources Strategy one of the key components was biodiversity, as well as minerals, forestry, and parks. One of the four legs of the chair on the strategy is biodiversity. We heard loud and clear in Phase I that people value wildlife and the diversity of plants and animals that we have. We do have a lot of common species, but we also have some rare flora and fauna in this province, and they're worth protecting because they are so rare. We had some expert panels during Phase II of the strategy that advised us on how to protect some of that diversity and how to move forward. I think as you see the strategy come out, you'll see some interesting developments there. I mentioned earlier that I'm excited about the strategy, and that's certainly part of it. You'll see that as the strategy rolls out this Spring.

 

Within the Department of Natural Resources we have our Wildlife Division that's located in Kentville. We have some specialists there who look after big game and small game, study endangered species like the mainland moose, and help set our seasons and our bag limits for hunters around the province - like the deer management zones, for example, based on the statistics that we get on the numbers of wildlife that are in a particular area - but small game and small fur-bearers, from weasels to bear, there are seasons and bag limits on all those various species.

 

Incorporated within our forestry regulations, certainly there's protection there for wildlife. You've probably heard of wildlife clumps. They're left in stands of forests and also riparian zones around streams to allow protection of the stream, but also a wildlife corridor in some ways for game to pass. So there are a number of issues that are developing. We have a strong Wildlife Division, but we also have a goal of moving forward with our biodiversity leg in the Natural Resources Strategy.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Minister, one of the areas that my colleague, the member for Dartmouth North, brought forward around biomass and electrical generation was the issue of greenhouse gases. We know that these large-scale projects, in particular, have a very, very poor efficiency conversion, and therefore do substantially add to greenhouse gases. In fact, some jurisdictions are retracting from the amount of biomass that they had planned as part of their total energy fit. Again, I'm wondering if the department has done some true accounting in terms of taking greenhouse gases into consideration.

 

Here we are working in Nova Scotia to reduce greenhouse gases with our coal-fired generating plants, and in the process of working toward renewables we may actually not make a significant difference. We're now hearing the voice of experts who have some great data on this after having some of the large biomass projects in place for a couple of decades.

 

MR. PARKER: You referred to the member for Dartmouth North, and I think probably you meant the member for Dartmouth East. I know the member for Dartmouth East has asked me some questions on this; that's why I had to clarify it. Greenhouse gas emissions - we have a cap that we've set, one of the most aggressive caps - a hard cap - I think the first jurisdiction in North America to try to reach that target by 2020.

 

We were commended at the world meeting that was held in Copenhagen in Denmark last year on setting that cap, and the Premier actually accepted an award in that regard, so I think we are recognized as a leader in the greenhouse gas emissions battle and we're making good progress on that. I think we're on course to meet that target.

 

This is an across-government initiative, and certainly we work with our partners in the Department of Environment and the Department of Energy. The three departments meet jointly to discuss these types of issues and to see how we can best move it forward.

 

The issue of greenhouse gases and biomass that you raised initially - I guess there's different opinions on this topic. It seems to be a developing science. Some people say we were carbon neutral, and a number of countries around the world recognize that standard. Others have something different to say on it, so we're continuing to monitor what is out there and what scientific information is available, and we'll continue to look at that as we move forward.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Madam Chairman, one of the other areas that is talked about, and certainly stands to reason, is that we're not going to be using much softwood, if you wish, as hog fuel. This is going to be hardwood in order to derive any benefits - or real benefits - from biomass. One of the possible unintended consequences could be a rise in the price of firewood. Some of the small woodlot owners in particular are pointing this out, and that will be a next question.

 

Has the department again looked at what may be a very high demand on our hardwood, when we take a look at Groupe Savoie, who seemed to be very successful but left because of hardwood supply availability? Is this a possibility for 100,000 Nova Scotians, that the cost of firewood could again go up at an incremental level, much more than a normal inflationary cost?

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, when the modelling was done within the Department of Natural Resources we looked at all the present demands on our fibre, whether it is hardwood or softwood. In an answer to an earlier question, I think I mentioned the amount of fibre that goes toward fuel wood and firewood right now - firewood primarily for individual homes across the province - and the number of projects that are underway, whether it is at Brooklyn Energy, universities, hospitals, or whatever, that are presently burning biomass. It is about 1 per cent: approximately 1 per cent of all the fibre that is produced is firewood or fuel wood.

 

We continue to look at our models, but at this point we believe there is adequate fibre out there - and we're being very conservative, as I mentioned, very cautious - and that there's enough to meet all the demands, whether it is fuel wood or firewood or biomass, whatever you want to call it.

 

You mentioned the Groupe Savoie a couple of times in your questions. I know them quite well; they are in my neck of the woods, so to speak. I've met regularly with those folks, and I understand that they are hoping to get back into business by next month. They've been talking with suppliers, such as NewPage and Northern Pulp and others. Actually, they feel that there will be some benefits to biomass production, because one of the requirements in the Renewable Electricity Plan is that the producer of that product has to make sure that there is separation - that the best quality logs are going to mills that require hardwood - so I know there is going to be an arrangement between those mills and the Groupe Savoie. We're very hopeful that they will be up and running sometime in May, and the biomass production, when it does come on-stream, will actually provide more hardwood logs for them to saw in their mill.

 

MR. GLAVINE: I'm wondering what discussions you've had with the small woodlot owner, the independent operators, and how they see themselves in this equation in terms of biomass. It's going to be a very low return, at least from the prices that are being talked about right now, and perhaps they have no interest in the current model for biomass unless they're really more bordering on a large-scale operation. I'm wondering what the small woodlot owner, the independent operator, is indicating to you as far as their participation in biomass projects.

 

MR. PARKER: I've had the opportunity since I became minister to sit down and meet with a whole variety of groups, whether they're environmental stewards or whether they're forestry industry companies or woodlot owners. Some of them have approached me on an individual basis, and I've had a chance to talk to them. Some of them are private contractors who work in the woodlots. I can think in particular of the Nova Scotia Woodlot Owners and Operators Association, who are very environmentally conscious; they're looking more at selection management and Category 7 type of forestry. We had a great meeting with them. They're keen on participating in the woodland business as we move forward, and they have a particular interest in Category 7 silviculture management.

 

I had the opportunity to sit down with the Federation of Nova Scotia Woodlot Owners, Andrew Fedora and some of those folks. Again, there is a keen interest in working - especially amongst small private woodlot owners who are the groups that they represent. There's the group at the Strait of Canso, the Nova Scotia Landowners and Forest Fibre Producers Association, I think - they have a long handle. They have some sound advice to pass on to us. There's the Association for Sustainable Forestry, through David Sutherland and his group, that are into a lot of silvicultural work. So there is a strong interest out there in small woodlot management, in developing our forests sustainably, in looking at proper silviculture methods, looking at certification of their woodlots, and looking at management plans to best develop on a sustainable basis. I think there is some excitement out there amongst the private woodlot owners as we anticipate rolling out our strategy within the next little while.

 

MR. GLAVINE: One of the other concern areas that comes up now when we're taking a look at the NewPage project - one, I guess, on the drawing boards for the Pictou mill and the new owners there, and perhaps some others that will be coming forward, with 190,000 dry tons available for electrical production - but so far when we take a look at the mill operations, NewPage and Paper Excellence Canada Holdings from Indonesia, the real potential benefits to Nova Scotia here - you know, we value the jobs in those communities, but profits from electrical generation could very well end up leaving the province. I mean, this is a concern. NewPage out of Miamisburg, Ohio, and the other company, Paper Excellence, give Nova Scotians an uneasy feeling about who the real winners may be here. I'm just wondering if you can again give Nova Scotians some sense of assurance that these are in Nova Scotians' best interests and not in these multinationals'.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, certainly there has been a changeover in the ownership of many of our pulp mills, but the truth is that almost all of the pulp mills in our country are owned by very large corporate interests. In the case of NewPage and AbitibiBowater and Northern Pulp, as it's known - or I guess it's owned now by Paper Excellence, but it's still known as Northern Pulp - those are three major large forest interests in our province. They have provided good jobs in the mills and in the forests for generations now. I think AbitibiBowater has been a strong corporate citizen here since the 1920s, and certainly since about the 1960s for both Northern Pulp and NewPage. They provide good, well-paying jobs in the mill and excellent paying jobs in the trucking and the forest industry in the woodlands.

 

Paper Excellence is the new owner of Northern Pulp and we've had some discussions with them. I had a chance to meet the new owners and ask them some tough questions about air quality and about forest sustainability. I was pleased to get some answers that they're on the right track. We've also had an opportunity to talk to some other provinces where they operate, in British Columbia and in Saskatchewan. Every report we've got back is that they were conducting their forest activities in a sustainable manner and were good corporate citizens. So we're looking forward to working with that company as the years unfold. It's the nature of the forest industry that the large pulp companies, I think worldwide, are owned by corporate interests, and we just hope that they'll be good corporate citizens and continue to provide good jobs, in this case for Nova Scotians.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Minister. That's an issue that we hope does unfold satisfactorily, because there is a lot at stake for our province and its future and forest potential. Noting that we can't do much about the geographic location of where our mills are, there seems to be an inordinate demand on the forests of eastern Nova Scotia, central Nova Scotia. Again, out of concern, I'm asking, is the department working to deal with the heavy strain in that area? I don't think the business of bringing wood in from Anticosti and New Brunswick is because it's a cheap product. I think there's a real need for that wood in those mill operations. I'm wondering how the department is addressing and plans to address the strain on the forests of that part of the province. It's no secret that that's where we do have challenges for those mill operations.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, that's a good question. It's reality that right now we do have a lot of pressure in the central part of our province for wood fibre, with Northern Pulp right in the centre of that region and also NewPage at the Strait. There's more pressure on both woodlot owners and Crown land within the central region. I guess the department has looked at that, and we also realize that there's actually less pressure in the western end of the province, both on Crown lands and on private lands. We're looking at what might be possible to take some of the pressure off the central-eastern region and perhaps allow more harvesting in the western region. Of course, the difficulty is the cost of transportation, to truck fibre all the way from Shelburne or Yarmouth or Digby County or whatever to the mills where they are located.

 

You mentioned that we can't change the geography, but we're trying to address if there's some way to look at accessing the wood in the western region. I think again, as the Natural Resources Strategy unfolds, you may see something in there that will address that particular concern.

 

We also have identified in our six strategic directions the working toward an annual allowable cut, and that may also be a way that we can control the amount of harvesting, if we feel there's too much in a particular area of the province.

 

Previously, I mentioned the idea that there's a lot of private woodlots out there that are not being managed - not being used at all, from a fibre point of view. Perhaps they're great refuges for other forest uses that are important, like wildlife or recreation, but carbon storage or water retention. There is some opportunity for private woodlot owners to become more engaged, and we may be able to free up some fibre forest products on our private woodlots. It's really a combination of an annual allowable cut strategy mitigation and engagement of private woodlot owners.

 

MR. GLAVINE: Madam Chairman, all Nova Scotians know that we're struggling to get more renewables in place for electrical generation. When we take a look at the need in our forests for quality-improved forests - new forest practices, as I know the minister will be addressing in the forest strategy - but the need for value-added manufacturing, obviously affordable firewood - biomass is the lowest of the low, in terms of true value.

 

We can talk about a crooked tree and all those kinds of aspects of what will be used, but we all know that good hardwood - hopefully not trees like mature yellow birch and so on - will go into biomass, but that we'll still be continuing to look for value-added. This is of real concern to Nova Scotians, that we have decided to go down the road of hundreds of thousands of tons of our forests going into biomass. There's a place for some, no question, but we seem to have moved very strongly in that direction. Why wouldn't we take some time and look at where we can go with value-added?

 

We have Third World countries now that are actually surpassing Nova Scotia in terms of moving so strongly toward no whole logs going out of their countries, no chipped logs going out, everything moving toward value-added. Perhaps if we had really done some good work during the development of the strategy we would be at a closer point of being able to announce other value-added projects. I'm wondering what the department is doing to address this important concern.

 

MR. PARKER: Madam Chairman, that's really what the forestry aspect of our Natural Resources Strategy is all about. We're getting away from clear-cutting; we're getting away from whole-tree harvesting. The status quo as we know it is just not acceptable, and we have to learn to do things better. That's why we're coming out with new strategic directions; that's why we're coming out with a good strategy that's going to bring that balance between a healthy forest and a healthy forest industry for generations to come. If we do our forestry practices right we're going to have a better forest. We're going to be encouraging young species. You mentioned yellow birch and sugar maple and other good, valuable hardwoods by going in and selection harvesting, taking out the rot, the crooked stems, the undesirable species. It allows those other good-quality hardwood trees to grow so they can be harvested in 30, 50, 100 years from now or whatever to allow for good value-added products, whether it's making good quality hardwood furniture or flooring or musical instruments or whatever. Those are the most valuable logs that we'll have.

 

Part of the rules under the Renewable Electricity Plan is that any company harvesting biomass, as a by-product of good forest management, has to find a market for high quality logs. That's a requirement under the regulations. As I mentioned earlier, Groupe Savoie will be in line for some of these better quality logs, and as we move forward, more stands under sustainable management, there should be more good quality hardwood logs for value added, and more and better sustainable forests as we move along.

 

MR. GLAVINE: One of the concerns that Nova Scotians are now raising in the last couple of weeks is the deal with Paper Excellence from Indonesia, and I know the Canadian holdings and Canadian mills here. This may be more - and the minister can state clearly if it's more the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism as opposed to the Department of Natural Resources - when a mill is sold, it's a big deal; it's a lot of money, it's a lot of millions involved, and the province felt that in order to perhaps secure the jobs, modernize the mill, help with wood supply, about $90 million went to Northern Pulp. When will Nova Scotians see that money returned to the province?

 

MR. PARKER: I understand, you're right. The deal is with the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism. For that amount of money, most of it was a loan to purchase standing woodland out there. I think it was around 450,000 acres that were purchased back from Wagner, primarily. It allowed them a land base and to be able to develop some harvesting and some sustainable forestry practices. Some of the money was to go to work with First Nations communities. Some of it was also to improve the air quality in the Pictou area from their stack on the mill. I know the Town of Pictou folks and Braeshore throughout the county are very much looking forward to that - I understand it will be about a 70 per cent improvement in air quality emissions - for local and for tourism.

 

I understand my time is just about up, but I think we've had good discussions with Paper Excellence and we'll move forward from there.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time allotted for consideration of Supply today has elapsed.

 

We stand adjourned.

 

[The committee adjourned at 7:34 p.m.]