HALIFAX, THURSDAY, APRIL 28, 2011

 

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON SUPPLY

 

2:40 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Ms. Becky Kent

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The Committee of the Whole House on Supply will come to order. We'll resume estimates for the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism.

The honourable member for Yarmouth, with 10 minutes remaining.

 

MR. ZACH CHURCHILL: Madam Chairman, it has been a great conversation so far that the minister and I have been able to have on a number of key issues. We've talked about the jobsHere program. We've talked about the Yarmouth ferry, the various economic development teams - Team Southwest, Team West, and Task Force Southwest. We've talked about the need to have a new RDA in Yarmouth and, of course, we've reviewed some tourism numbers.

 

I will shift focus a bit to another topic of economic development in the province, and that's the IEF. I have some pretty specific questions on this that I would like to ask the minister, and I look forward to hearing his comments. Now while in Opposition, this government seemed to be fundamentally opposed to the existence of the IEF or the way that it operates in terms of having business decisions that are made amongst Cabinet without the review of this House or of the public in any way.

 

I have some quotes here, Madam Chairman, about some of the comments that members of this government made in the past. I have a few quotes here from the Minister of Finance, who was adamantly opposed to this IEF in Opposition. He said that when it comes to the Industrial Expansion Fund, it seems like anything goes. That's from the ChronicleHerald, yet now that the Finance Minister has had a taste of what this fund can do politically, perhaps, he's actually put an additional $75 million into this fund.

 

 

513

 

Here are some more quotes that the members made while they were in Opposition: The problem here is that government can allocate itself a very large amount of money, in this case $50 million, without ever informing the House, without requiring the approval of the House, without any accountability to the House. That can't be right, and the Auditor General has said so. Again, that's from the now-Minister of Finance, who said that when he was in Opposition.

 

He also said: The government knows that it's the only fund with virtually no controls, and when they want to spend a lot of money quickly, it's the Industrial Expansion Fund they turn to.

 

Another quote from the now-Minister of Finance: It's very worrisome to see the roof being blown off spending limits. It doesn't bode well for provincial finances. They've just given themselves money to spend whenever they want and however they want.

 

These are the things that have been said by members of this government in the past, and these are things that were echoed in reports done by the NDP members of the Public Accounts Committee. This is concerning Economic Development loans from April 5, 2006: We are not in a position to say whether the financial assistance offered to S&J Potato Farms was a good use of public money, although we readily acknowledge that some form of public policy response to S&J's operational concerns was appropriate. We're prevented from drawing a firmer conclusion because too much information has been withheld from the committee, including any OED staff analysis.

 

It seems that these problems are actually continuing under this current government. More money is being put into this fund. People have criticized this as being a political slush fund. I'm not in any position to make that assessment myself, and I think it's important to give the minister a chance to respond to this.

 

Fundamentally, I believe, the issue here is around accountability and transparency. We're in a time and place where there is not just an appetite but a serious need and push from the public to have more transparency and accountability within government. While in Opposition, this Party actually pushed for more transparency and accountability with the IEF, but is now doing the same thing as the previous Progressive Conservative Government did regarding this fund, and actually putting more funds into it.

 

My question to the minister is, why has this government's position changed on the IEF from when you were in Opposition, and if there is a desire from you and from your government to make this fund more accountable and open to public scrutiny, what are you prepared to do to make sure that happens? Thank you.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Before I recognize the honourable minister, I'd like to remind the honourable member from Yarmouth that there is a requirement to table the documents which you quoted from, and I believe a report that you read from, as well as the quotes you had referenced in your comments. Thank you very much.

The honourable Minister of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism.

 

HON. PERCY PARIS: Madam Chairman, I do acknowledge through you that the member has raised a number of issues. I guess my first response is to say that I don't recall - certainly in my years in Opposition and my close association with the current Minister of Finance, I can't actually recall anyone from the NDP saying we should get rid of the IEF. What I have heard, and I know that I've said it myself, is around accountability - that what we were looking for was accountability and transparency.

 

I'm very pleased that the member has raised this as a concern, because it actually provides me with an opportunity to boast about some of the things that we have done. Too often we hear, especially when it comes to governments, that we hear you talking the talk but can you actually walk the walk? I think when we formed government, we did put in place some initiatives not only around controls, but more about that transparency and that accountability.

 

I will first say - I mean this very respectfully - that the member maybe will self-admit that a greater understanding of the IEF may be required. I'll try to provide some of that in a very collegial way. First of all, we just went through a time when things were tough globally. That would be a time when more emphasis would be placed on the IEF, that there would be a need for more money to be invested in the IEF in order for this province to secure and save jobs in the Province of Nova Scotia, especially jobs in rural Nova Scotia.

 

One of the purposes of the IEF is to do just that. It's about job retention during tough economic times. We've had some tough economic times in the Province of Nova Scotia, and so the IEF has served us well and continues to serve us well. Controls - first of all, this government has - as every government has - a Cabinet. All transactions related to the IEF have to be vetted through and around the Cabinet table before they get the final seal of approval.

 

I'm sure that when the current Minister of Finance in his wisdom criticized the IEF at the time, it was around transparency. One of the things we did almost immediately - I will say we worked on this immediately, but it took us a while to get this established - we put in place what we call an oversight committee to review all transactions coming to the IEF: an independent group of individuals who are well respected in the Province of Nova Scotia and have a wealth of not only experience but also deep integrity.

 

It's a committee of five, and because it's a committee of five I can also boast that the committee is somewhat diverse, taking into consideration we're working with five individuals. I think it's important to add that they are volunteers. They were approached by this government; we approached them to serve the Province of Nova Scotia, and I'm very pleased to say that they have done so and they have done so very well. What happens with respect to the IEF is that it's all vetted through this independent, arm's-length committee, which allows us that transparency and that accountability. They make a recommendation that comes forward to Cabinet along with the application.

What we've also done, when the member raises a concern about accountability, is restructured Economic and Rural Development. Now what we have is Economic and Rural Development and Tourism. Part of that restructuring was also targeted around the IEF, in part because when we look at the whole concept of the IEF and where we were going, we recognize also that they needed some more in the way of dedication of certain staff members to do certain things related to the IEF.

 

In my opinion, Madam Chairman, we have addressed various grave and severe concerns around accountability, around transparency, and around controls. The IEF, I reiterate, has served us well, and when I hear any member in the House talk about the IEF and money being invested in Nova Scotia, it always raises the question on the other side of the coin: what would one recommend that we not do when it comes to securing jobs and saving jobs in the Province of Nova Scotia?

 

I think one has to be very careful when we talk about the IEF and talk about money that is invested and maybe about the possibility of doing away with some things. The IEF will continue to serve the Province of Nova Scotia well into the future, and when we talk about sustainability of jobs and the retention of jobs, the IEF has a very important and significant and major role to play in that. I wouldn't want that to be lost by any member in this House. I trust I've answered all those questions, Madam Chairman, that the member was raising.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you. The time allotted for the Official Opposition has expired. Before I recognize the Progressive Conservative Party, though, I do want to check in with the honourable member just to be sure about the articles that were supposed to be tabled. We did receive the report, but there was a reference to the Halifax ChronicleHerald and other quotes by members. I just wanted to make sure that you understood that we would need a copy of those as well.

 

MR. CHURCHILL: Yes, we'll get them tabled. I only have them in my notes right now, Madam Chairman, but to get the documents over here I've requested that our staff bring them over. Is that acceptable?

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you very much. Good.

 

The honourable member for Inverness.

 

MR. ALLAN MACMASTER: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I thank the minister and the department today for giving us an opportunity to ask some questions. It's funny - I guess it was this morning that I ran into a gentleman I know on the street, by the name of Jacob Deng. I think he's working for the department right now, and I congratulate you on your choice. He's a good man; he's built of a lot of strong character.

 

I'm sure you're aware of his story - he was actually in this Legislature not long ago. Growing up in war-torn Sudan, it's really kind of a miracle that he is still with us. I know his heart is focused on helping people in his homeland as well. If you have a man like that, who has gone through what he has gone through and who cares so deeply about people, I think somebody like that is an asset in our government. I'll just open by sharing those comments with you.

 

I would like to thank the department. I work with people like Lisa Dobson in Port Hawkesbury and also with Albert LeBlanc, Port Hawkesbury, and many others over the years. I thank them for their help. I know Sandra, who has been a help to me as well; we've tried to do some work on call centres, which has been a significant issue. I know, Mr. Minister, that you've taken a strong interest in that as well, so I'm appreciative of that. I just wanted to open my remarks by thanking you for that and thanking the department.

 

I'm going to ask some questions on some numbers, and then I'm going to move away from that a little bit. My first question is around - and I'm hoping that you can follow me here, because there's something I noticed on Budget Day, and there's probably a good reason for these numbers being the way they are.

 

When we look at the Department of Economic and Rural Development, which has changed, and Communities, Culture and Heritage has become its own department and Tourism is now with your department - I was looking at the budgets in the departments before and the budgets after, and I'm sensing this might have something to do with an increase in the IEF, the fund that we've just been speaking about here. Previously, the Department of Economic and Rural Development budget was about $80 million and now it's about $125 million. Communities, Culture and Heritage, when it was under the Tourism Department, used to be about $62 million, and it has dropped to about $55 million. I could see that because Tourism has left that department.

 

The net result, from what I can see, is that amongst all these departments the budget has gone from about $142 million up to $180 million. I know I'm just throwing these numbers out at you here and it's probably not so easy, so I'll keep talking a little bit, so you'll have a chance to find them.

 

AN HON. MEMBER: Ask the question and then keep talking.

 

MR. MACMASTER: Yeah. I guess what I noticed was it's understandable, you've had a different vision, you want to change the departments around. We see nothing wrong with that, but I guess what I picked up on - I just wanted to make sure that if everything is the same, it would seem to make sense that the budgets should be closer, all added up to about $142 million. So they're up, but it could be because of added funds to the Industrial Expansion Fund. Of course, there could be a good reason for that.

 

I'll let the minister comment. Perhaps he disagrees, or perhaps there is a reason for it.

 

 

MR. PARIS: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and through you to the member opposite, I think probably the first point of clarity, because when you said a number - I don't think it was an accurate number, because our base budget, the figure that you should be looking at, should be $107 million. That was based on last year's budget, and also the increase in budget - and I want to make this clear, Madam Chairman, to the member - has nothing to do with the IEF. The IEF is sort of a separate identity all on its own.

 

The budget has increased to $125 million and some change. One obvious reason for the increase is through Tourism. Since we've added Tourism to an already existing department - we also added Intergovernmental Affairs and we also added the Atlantic Gateway Initiative, with the jobsHere strategy. That was another add-on to that number. Also, with respect to the agencies, boards, and committees that come under Economic and Rural Development and Tourism - that would be InNOVAcorp, NSBI, Film Nova Scotia, and the Waterfront Development Corporation - that's what would add up to the new figure of $125 million. Again, I'd like to reiterate, just so that there's no confusion, that that would have no impact whatsoever on the IEF.

 

MR. MACMASTER: Madam Chairman, I'd like to thank the minister for the clarification around that. That's good information to have. I think my original figure was coming from - I was using a figure from even earlier, because I was trying to find a base year to compare changes to, and I was looking at the Spring of 2009. I'd like to compare budget figures to the budget that was introduced that year. It was defeated when we went to the election, so I try to use it as a base year, but I also respect that there may have been some changes. We'd be going into a year previous. It's not a point of contention that I want to spend much more time on, but this clarification does assist in what I've asked for today, so I'm pleased with the answer.

 

My next question, and I'm going to get into less about the numbers - my intent with these questions is not to be confrontational. It's more of a sharing of ideas. Because the area I represent is a rural area and we have a lot of rural areas in the province, I've always felt that government should be focused on hubs in the province - hubs of economic activity. If we can build a hub where people in the province, anywhere they live, have maybe an hour's drive to work, perhaps, at the furthest - if we could build hubs throughout the province - then that gives a future for rural Nova Scotia. If people can live within that proximity to a hub, where there is increased economic activity, there are going to be spinoffs from that. Otherwise, Madam Chairman, I know that we'll just see more of the same. We'll see more people leaving the rural areas and either coming into Halifax or actually even just leaving our province.

 

I'd like to get the minister's thoughts on that, and perhaps if that's something that he sees value in. To put some more structure on what I'm asking about, we have a hub around the Sydney area; we could have a strong hub in the Strait area. They kind of exist already, and I realize that, but sometimes I see things happen in the province - and I respect that the government can't be controlling everything and shouldn't be controlling where development happens, but sometimes we see development happen more centrally, and I often wonder, could we be - and I hear it from people, too, they wonder if we could be doing a little more to try to target areas, target hubs, to build the economy, say, in the Sydney area, in the Strait area, or in the Antigonish-New Glasgow area.

 

Those are the areas that I drive through back and forth every week, so those are the ones that come to the top of my mind. I think this gives the minister some perspective on what I am asking about here. To phrase it in the form of a question, what is his feeling about having a vision to develop hubs in the province as a means of improving the economy in rural Nova Scotia? Thank you.

 

MR. PARIS: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I thank the member opposite for the questions. One thing I did neglect to mention, when the member mentioned Jacob's name - through you, Madam Chairman, I just wanted to let the member know that I did meet Jacob. We met this week and I had a brief chat with him. I welcomed him aboard and he did tell me a little bit about his background. He also mentioned somebody from Windsor who I am good friends with. He sent, via Jacob, a hello to me. I have met him and was very much impressed with him. I'm sure he'll be - well, he is a valuable asset to the department, and I'm sure that because of the diversity of what we do in Economic and Rural Development and Tourism it'll be a great experience for him as well.

 

Madam Chairman, through you, the member raises a point about hubs and I'm going to try and connect some dots here, because what you call a hub and what I call a hub may be - I'm sorry. Through you, Madam Chairman, what the member opposite calls a hub and what I call a hub may be two different things.

 

I'm going to use the Cape Breton Partnership as an example, because in my mind, I think we already have a hub in place. If I use the Cape Breton Partnership as an example, what we have with the Cape Breton Partnership is all those entities coming together. We have the municipalities, we have the RDAs, we have the First Nations Aboriginal community involved in that as well. We have ECBC. There may be some others that are involved there, but they are there. What happens with that Cape Breton Partnership is that they are able to come out of that with a solid, unified, single voice which can speak to all the dynamics of that particular region.

 

If I may - and we talked about this very briefly a couple of days ago - I don't think I can overstress the significance and the importance of RDAs right around the Province of Nova Scotia. They are such a valuable resource.

 

With that, I should also say that the Cape Breton Partnership also involves Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, so I'd like to think that if we're on the same path here, those hubs that the member refers to, Madam Chairman, may already be in place. If there's a difference of opinion or view, then through you, Madam Chairman, as the minister responsible, I am certainly more than willing to flesh that out with the member or any member of the House, because ultimately we are all here for the same purpose: to make Nova Scotia a better place in every region of the province. I'd be more than willing and interested if the opinions of hubs are different, but I think to some degree we may already be doing that. Thank you.

 

MR. MACMASTER: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Minister, for the response. I would agree that, yes, there are certainly hubs in place.

 

I want to touch on a couple of points. The Cape Breton Partnership does good work; in fact, I know a gentleman who is from Mabou, who is within my constituency, who works there. I guess one of the things about Cape Breton - and this is something I've noticed over the years - a lot of times we'll see things come out of Cape Breton as "Cape Breton initiatives," but they are often more Sydney-centric.

 

It's funny, I was talking to somebody yesterday about something completely unrelated to economic development. We talked about migration of peoples from P.E.I. to Antigonish County and to Inverness County years ago. This person said to me, yes, they even made it as far as Cape Breton. It amused me because you can see a lot of people see Cape Breton as Cape Breton County, which would be the Sydney area.

 

It's a very strong theme. I notice it in the language in the Legislature when people refer to Cape Breton, and it's something that I know people in the Strait area and up Inverness County, going up the western coast of the island - we've always felt we have more connections with Antigonish County, in a lot of cases. You'll even see that the district health authorities, when it was bought to a decision about where areas would locate, the southern end of the county wanted to locate with the Guysborough Antigonish District Health Authority and the northern part of the county located with the Cape Breton District Health Authority. So although we may be an island, there are sometimes stronger cultural links between, say, Antigonish County, that side of the mainland, and Inverness County, whether it be the culture of the people or the historic background.

 

I guess the point I'd like to make is that what I sometimes see happening is there are initiatives - and I think of the tourism levying. We won't go into it in too much detail, but I know in Inverness County there wasn't buy-in from that, at least from the operators. There was from people working for non-profit organizations that are providing attractions for visitors. I certainly recognize that and the good work they do. But you can see this is one example where sometimes what might come out of - and I suppose there will be somebody listening to this who will take exception to it - not in this Chamber, but in the Cape Breton Partnership. I'm not trying to discount the work they're doing, and that tourism levy was only one example, but I know I've often heard over the years that people in the area don't feel as connected to the Sydney area.

 

I'll give you another example, a very high-profile example that I have remained quiet on. This would be the dredging of Sydney Harbour. Around Christmas time I took the time to go around to the businesses in the Strait area, and I heard very loud and clear from them that they weren't pleased. So we heard a lot of comments in the Legislature here from all sides of the House of what a great development this is for Cape Breton. However, we have a port that we're proud of in the Strait of Canso, which I believe has - and I'll speak selfishly for a moment - much greater merit over the Port of Sydney because it's a natural harbour. With a causeway in place, it's naturally deep; it never needs to be dredged.

 

Getting back into the discussion about hubs, I think if we wanted to do something for the Strait area, if we could do something to support the private sector development there - and it might not even cost us any money - what a great thing we could be doing there. That's another example of how sometimes we hear ideas in the Legislature and through the media that I would say almost masqueraded as good for Cape Breton, yet they are not serving the interests, say, of the Strait area. So if nothing else, I'd like to express this to the minister today.

 

I'm talking quite a bit here, but I feel like this is valuable to be getting on the record. I heard it loud and clear from the business community, and it's a good survey when you go around business to business and you start hearing a consistent theme. I can tell you that in the Strait area what they are most excited about is this private development of the port, and what I mean by that is Maher Melford. I know some people would say it's a long shot, but as the world economy recovers, as the shipping activity increases around the world, we could start to see bigger ships landing on our shores.

 

I know the government - and it was supported by all sides of the House; I'm not pointing my finger at this government - but we look at the money being put into the dredging project in Sydney and its significant resources, which essentially, in my mind, competes with the business case in the Strait area, because there are people behind that business case who have referenced a container terminal. In my mind, why would the government be spending public dollars to compete against a private sector development who hasn't asked for public dollars?

 

To me, it doesn't make sense, but I'm from the area and I'm going to stick up for my constituents and for our region. I also know that in Halifax here we have a port and people can be very defensive about losing any business, and they make the case, well, we're not at full capacity. Why should we be moving business to other parts of the province?

 

What we see in the Strait area, we don't have - we have the street right behind us here on Hollis Street; we have trucks running up and down the street, going through a residential area. To me, it doesn't make much sense. If we really saw a significant future for port development in the province, why wouldn't we choose the Strait area, with the greenfield site? It's fresh; it can be built in a modern, efficient way. We're talking about almost a bigger ball field, too, because with a greenfield site, you can bring in much bigger ships - there are no dredging requirements, it's close to the great shipping circle, it's close to the people. In most cases where it is going is down into the United States.

 

I raise that today because a hub for the Strait area is critical for the area I represent, and if you go out, it's good for the people in Guysborough County; it's good for people in Antigonish County; it's good for people up Route 19, which travels the western coast of Cape Breton Island; it's good for Richmond County. To me, that is a hub. I appreciate what the Cape Breton Partnership is doing, but there are just a couple of examples.

 

I'll let the minister comment, and I hope I'm being fair to him, because I'm talking about a lot of different things here. I think it's valuable to share the opinions of the people of the area that I represent and allow the minister to comment, and I appreciate anything he has to say.

 

MR. PARIS: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Again, the member brings forward a number of things, and I'm trying to think about what the best way is for me to talk about this and not leave anything out. The first thing is, I think it's important - through you, Madam Chairman - that the member knows that I understand when he talks about regional associations. As most members may know, I live in Windsor Junction, and Windsor Junction is part of HRM. I can tell you this, that Windsor Junction is a village, a community, that has some independence and has a deeper association with Fall River and Lakeview and Waverley, more so than it does with Halifax, and even more. As I spread out, it would have a better association with Bedford than it would with what we used to know as Halifax.

 

I feel like I understand about regional development and that regardless of where you live, your association may not be with what has already been labelled as the centre of that particular region. I understand that completely.

 

I don't want to - and I will not, Madam Chairman - spend any time on the dredging of Sydney Harbour. I say that with all due respect, because that's a TIR initiative, so it wouldn't be appropriate for me to go down that path. I will spend a little bit of time talking about the Canso area, and in particular, not only with respect to Melford but also with Point Tupper. The member raised the whole idea of container transportation; I think even as we speak here today, that's an industry that is evolving.

 

We just heard a recent announcement - I think it was last week - by the Port of Halifax where they are looking at some expansion of their own. I know that - I shouldn't say I know - I'm going to assume, Madam Chairman, that the member and I will agree that Nova Scotia has so much to offer when it comes to container traffic, just by the fact of those natural, deep harbours - not only with respect to Halifax. Everybody always thinks of Halifax, but I agree with you. We've got deep harbours in the Canso area as well that sometimes get overlooked by the fact that we have so much activity going on here in Halifax.

 

I think again, in fairness, we have to recognize and we have to acknowledge that Halifax is the economic driver for - and I'm going to be really bold here and I'm going to say Atlantic Canada. I know there may be some people in Moncton who may not like that, but I don't think this is about competition. I think that Halifax is the largest city on the east coast, and with that comes a certain amount of leadership.

With respect to the container ships, yes, they are getting bigger. The only thing that Melford has requested - and I don't want to go too far into this, because I think this is more under Natural Resources, but I will mention this - the only thing in my recollection that we received - Melford has been very good at keeping us informed, keeping us posted as to what they're going and where they're going and what their aspirations are. I commend them for that.

 

We've co-operated with Melford. There's been a land transaction which was led by Natural Resources that we facilitated for Melford as they pursue their aspirations, so we've been more than willing to co-operate for Melford. One of the things that Melford boasts about at all the meetings I've been to - and I can tell you, even dating back before we were government, that there have been a number of meetings that I've attended related to Melford, and there has never been a financial ask from Melford. They've been very independent, and I give them credit. To the best of my knowledge, and I think I would know about this, there has never been a financial ask coming from Melford.

 

Also, when the member talks about the Canso area, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Point Tupper, because here, again, with what Point Tupper has to offer - and I've had recent discussions with people from Point Tupper who are in the container business, here while the House was in session. We met one day downstairs, and again, I think all Nova Scotians will be pleased that Point Tupper isn't standing still, that the Strait area, that Canso, has a lot to offer when it comes to container traffic.

 

I'm quite confident, Madam Chairman, that the member opposite and I will agree on that. We recognize all of these things, and so far, the meetings have been one of sharing information with them, sharing information with myself and with members of staff, and keeping us updated as to where they are going and what is on the horizon for them.

 

There are some things that we would know, and I know that maybe at some point today or over the next couple of days you might even get into a discussion about Cape Breton Rail. Even though we provide that subsidy, the potential of Cape Breton Rail hasn't been fully realized yet, so as container traffic increases - and I think it's going to increase, and the member, Madam Chairman, brings up the size of these container vessels getting larger and larger.

 

We know, and soon the world will know, that we can accommodate these vessels. We don't have to dredge the Canso area. We don't have to dredge Halifax Harbour. The proximity that we have ownership for when it comes to the closeness of the largest market in the world, the North American market - and we're so close to the U.S. There's a lot of container traffic in New York City.

 

I've learned so much from this portfolio, and I also learned that as big a city as New York is and the harbour that New York has, it's at capacity. It cannot accommodate these ships, and even if they could accommodate them, or even if they dredged the New York Harbor, the land transportation system that they have in New York creates another huge problem. I don't see how they would overcome that.

 

Madam Chairman, I think - I hope - that the member and I are on the same page. We recognize the potential that container traffic has for Nova Scotia. We are always more than willing, as a government, to sit down with those partners and explore and listen to and certainly dialogue with, and I don't see this changing. I just hope that Point Tupper and Melford continue the dialogue with us, so that we can work together toward the same end.

 

MR. MACMASTER: I can assure the minister that we are in agreement, and I know that the proponents behind the Maher Melford project are very confident. They have some world-class partners, Maher Terminals - they run the Prince Rupert port, but they also are in Port Elizabeth in New Jersey; they run that operation and they are significant players on the world scene. They are respected, and they've got financial backing as well. I've met with them all. It's an impressive project and an impressive group. I think we can begin to leave this topic.

 

I do want to just put this out there as well. I know that back - and I'm not trying to press the issue, but I just want to mention the impact that government can have on decision making, on the direction of business. Back in 1999 I met a gentleman who had worked on the bid for Nova Scotia because Nova Scotia was putting a bid for Maersk Sealand. It was New York City that won that bid, and they dredged the New York Harbor to do it. I'm sure there were a lot of reasons why they chose New York, probably primarily because if they could get the ships in there, they were closer to market. We know that it's better to keep things on a ship as long as you can because it's a cheaper way to transport goods.

 

He told me - and I thought this was very telling - he said, Allan, knowing what I know now - he felt the province should have been promoting a port in the Strait area, because he felt it would have had a better business case. He lives away from here now, so I don't mind mentioning this story, and he's retired, so it's not any impact on him personally at this point, but I thought that was very telling because most of our government is located here in Halifax. I've spent time here in the city; I know people when I go out on the street. It sometimes doesn't take long to realize that you have people who are working in the same community, they are supportive of their port here locally - which is good, nothing wrong with that - but I think sometimes there are other areas of the province that might get overlooked because of that.

 

Maybe it's just a cultural thing. It happens; it's natural. I'm not trying to put the blame on anybody, but I just wanted to put it on the record to be recognized, because - and even little things, like the bridges, are going to be - one of the bridges, I believe the rafters are going to be raised. I don't know who is paying for that - I suppose the Bridge Commission, so it will be paid for through tolls.

 

They're going to be doing work on the bridge anyway, but one of the reasons they're doing that particular aspect of the work is for container ships to get through. It's just another small example of where government is working to try to facilitate the Port of Halifax. That's fine. I'm sure the government will be there to help facilitate rail links for Melford at some point maybe, or what have you, or road links, although from my knowledge they've actually said that they're looking to be able to pay for that themselves.

 

I don't want to press the issue, because I think the minister and I are in agreement, but I just wanted to put that on the record, that sometimes there are little things that government is doing that in a way - if you took the view of Maher Melford, and I'm not attributing this to the proponents - but just as somebody who is from the area and supportive of what they're trying to do, I would almost say, well, why is government helping one group over another in my province? I know a lot of people in the Strait area have expressed that to me, and I just want to put it on the record.

 

I'll move on from that topic, Madam Chairman. I'd like to get the minister's thoughts on what the government is trying to do to create a vision for creating a competitive environment for private business.

 

MR. PARIS: Before I go right to answering the question, you talked about promotion and you talked about hubs. One of the things that I think is important for me to mention is that one of the roles of the Atlantic Gateway Secretariat - a significant role - is to promote Nova Scotia. That's another - with our realignment I don't know if "inherited" or "adopted" is the right word, but it is now part of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism. It's where it should be, so certainly the Atlantic Gateway Secretariat has a very, very prominent and significant role to play in promoting Nova Scotia.

 

When I hear the member talk about promotion, it raises a very interesting point to me, and one that I think is somewhat dear to my heart, because I like to promote Nova Scotia. I think I've already proven that in the last few months. I say that because one of the things, whether it be around economic development pertaining to business or whether it be around tourism, all those things connected with economic development - and I mention tourism purposely because I don't want us to lose sight of tourism. So we - I - seize every opportunity that we can to promote the Province of Nova Scotia.

 

One of the things I've got to say is that through Innovacorp and through the Atlantic Gateway Secretariat, they have, I guess, illuminated some things for me when it comes to promotion, and have really generated a lot of thought within myself and a lot of debate in myself about the promotion of Nova Scotia. We have to realize that in Nova Scotia, we compete globally now. We are a million people; we are very small.

 

I've been fortunate enough to do a lot of global travel as minister, promoting Nova Scotia, and when you mention Nova Scotia in the world market, not a lot of people know where we are. They may know where Canada is, but what we've got to do is we've got to put Nova Scotia on that global map. What we have to do, and one of the things that we should be doing in our promotion, is to be looking for that leader. I don't mean an individual - when I talk about a leader I talk about that - it is word association. If I said to the House "the Golden Gate Bridge," people are going to automatically think of San Francisco. If I said something like "Big Apple," I don't think the first thing that would come to the minds of Nova Scotians would be Berwick. I think they'd probably think New York first, and then maybe Berwick.

 

The point is that we need some things to hang our hat on. Hopefully we've got some things going on, and I'm not sure - the highest tides in the world. I mean, we're up for one of the seven natural Wonders of the World. If people can think in the context of tides, and not only having the highest tides but also being a world leader in the harnessing of those tides, when people think of energy we want them to think of Nova Scotia.

 

It's a 24/7 job. We've got to be constantly promoting Nova Scotia, but I think that it's also important to us to find something - and it could be a number of things - that we can hang our hat on. We need something that people are going to identify with Nova Scotia right away. We need that, so I just want to say that about the promotion, since the member mentioned it.

 

We talked a little bit about hubs. I mentioned Halifax being a natural hub by virtue of who Halifax is. I think we have to give credit, and one of the members behind me, who is always reminding everybody of things - oh, he's gone - when I think of cruise ships, and we set a record in the cruise ship industry for Nova Scotia last year. Here we just signed on seven new cruises, I think, that are coming to Halifax from Disney this year. When that happens in Halifax, that has spinoff impacts in other jurisdictions, because that cruise ship that is coming here to Halifax is likely going to go to Sydney or somewhere, maybe Shelburne. I know we've experimented with Shelburne in the past. There are certainly benefits that are spinoffs - again, the hub reaches out to other regions within the province and we all benefit.

 

Now the real heart of your question was around business; I think that's how you ended up. Well, when it comes to Nova Scotia being competitive, I think our first job is to change a mindset in Nova Scotia. First of all, we are competing on a global scale, so that our markets are no longer in our backyards - our markets are overseas, they are in the U.S., they are on the other side of the world. Those are markets that we have to have businesses thinking about - how can you be more competitive in that global market? That's something that we've tried to encourage, and are encouraging, through the jobsHere strategy.

 

You know, I hear members get up in the House and knock jobsHere. I can say this in all sincerity - and I've heard members joke about jobsHere. I'll say this in all seriousness, if we don't start thinking in that global context, we are doomed, because the market is not across the harbour in Dartmouth or vice versa when you are in business. It's a global market now, so it does bother me, whether it's during Question Period or during late debate, when we take shots at jobsHere, because there is so much depending on jobsHere. Our future is depending on jobsHere, and I don't see that's something that we should be joking about. I take it very, very seriously.

 

What we've done through jobsHere is we've recognized that through the PIP initiative - the Productivity and Investment Program - we now offer incentives so that companies can compete in the global market. That competitiveness comes from investing in technology, investing in equipment, and also - very importantly - investing in employees so that we can have individuals who are trained in the workplace, that compete on a global market - good people, skilled people for good jobs. The PIP initiative does that. It's about investing in technology equipment and investing in human resources.

 

We've lowered the corporate tax. We did it twice, Madam Chairman, and if I can use a term that the honourable member used - and I'll piggyback on it - this is not about pointing fingers at past government. We've done that, and it was the first time that it has been done in a number of years. We see that as not something that we want to boast about. It's just a fact. It's a fact that we do these things so that Nova Scotia can be more competitive in the global market.

 

We don't showcase this as a feather in our hat. It's just something that we said - how can we compete? How can we improve the business climate in the Province of Nova Scotia so that we can compete on a global basis? We have international strategies now, international strategies that are all the time trying to develop that international market.

 

When I think of international strategies I'd be remiss - and I'm going to put another plug in for NSBI, because no one does it any better than NSBI. NSBI are our eyes, our ears, and our intelligence on the ground in that global marketplace.

 

I gave a plug the other day about a company that is in the private sector, and I have to mention this because it also plays a role. I mentioned Tri-Star Industries down in Yarmouth; I mention them again because they do good business all over the world, and that enhances the presence of Nova Scotia wherever they are - whether it be in Cuba or whether it be in India, it doesn't matter. They are there on the ground serving their client base, their customer base. All those things add up together, and again, probably at some point - if not today, then maybe tomorrow - we might get into a more thorough discussion about NSBI.

 

I know that I have NSBI staff in the gallery, so when we get ready to do that, they'll be more than willing to come down. Madam Chairman, I hope that provides some information for the member opposite.

 

MR. MACMASTER: I appreciate the minister's comments, and we've been supportive of the small business tax and the corporate tax rate reductions because we think that's good. We're not going to get into a big ideological debate today and I don't intend to do that. I respect the minister's jobsHere program, his approach, and his feelings on that. I guess one of the things (Interruption) Touched a nerve, yes.

 

I guess one of the things, and maybe - it is okay, Madam Chairman, for people to have different viewpoints or different perception of things, but I know that there are two things I would change about Nova Scotia if I could. The first is to try to create - and we're always going to struggle with this, as is every other region of the world - a more competitive business environment. Lower taxes help. We can't completely get rid of all government regulation, but I know business often cites to us the importance of trying to reduce paperwork for them, make things easier.

 

Sometimes in government I don't think we think the same as people in business do. I think we can always try to improve that; I know past governments have. I guess it's something almost like the Japanese, I think it's "kaizen" - isn't that "constant improvement"? I may be mixing up the term, but that's the approach they took in Japan, and of course we see a lot of Japanese cars on our roads now. That was something that took place in the 1980s - constant commitment to improvement and high quality.

Back to my train of thought, if we could make the environment as competitive as we can, one of the ways I believe we can be doing that - and we're getting into a bigger picture here - it is by making government a little bit smaller. The fewer resources that government is drawing out of the economy, the more there are left for the economy to feed off.

 

I know that we create jobs in government all over the province, people working for government, and that's a good thing. But the more government we have, the more taxes we need to support it and the less money that is left out in the economy to be spent domestically. Also, this is an interesting thing I've thought about: the culture that we have in the province here. A lot of people grow up working for - a parent might be working in government, and that kind of - every family is different, and when you grow up you often look at, what do your parents do? My father worked for the railway and my mother actually worked for the Department of Finance across the street before she was married, and she worked down in Boston for an insurance company, but every family is different.

 

I know there are people - I think of the Van Zutphens back home in Inverness County, a very enterprising family. Those children, they came here - I read a resolution here the other day. When they came here they were very entrepreneurial. They came from a farming background; they came after the Second World War. They weren't afraid of hard work, and they built successful dairy farms.

 

It wasn't just the Van Zutphens. There were other peoples from the Netherlands who came as well, and they built successful farms. They built construction companies on the scene in Nova Scotia - Zutphen Construction.

 

My point is (a) I think we need a good environment for business, so when business looks at Nova Scotia they see it as competitive, but (b) we need to start trying to build a culture so that when young people are growing up, they see the insights that you would see if you grew up in, say, the Van Zutphen family. When you see that, you are automatically drawn to it and you might not look at starting a business as something to be feared, but as an opportunity to be embraced and something where you can make a good living and make a good living for others.

I know we don't have a lot of time left, so I'll let the minister comment on that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

 

MR. PARIS: We've talked a little bit about this with the member for Yarmouth. Through you, Mr. Chairman, to the member, I'm glad to hear you talk about difference, and I'm glad to hear that you recognize, in your words, that families are different. I'm very pleased to hear a little bit about who you are, because for me, one could say obviously difference is very important to me. It's a large part of my life.

 

Not everybody - and certainly I will say not everybody in the House of Assembly is on the same page when one talks about difference. Part of difference is about the way we treat or don't treat people, and that's one of the things that has always been a bone of contention to me, whether it be in the House of Assembly, whether it be out on the street, whether it be in the classroom, whether it be in the sporting arena, or whether it be just in life in general. We fall down in that category. It's nice that as we are Nova Scotians and as a society and as much as we boast about and brag about who we are and how welcoming we are, sometimes we forget about the basis for those reasons.

 

When I hear the member, through the Chair, talk about his life experiences, I kind of get a lump in my throat. I think growing up in a small town in Nova Scotia and being the only family of African descent living in the town, with a father - and a mother - but a dad being the sole breadwinner for the family, who went through - who was born in 1920. He has experienced some things that weren't - what I will say is, that weren't very complimentary to the society that we live in. I stand in my place today and think about how pleased my father and my mother would have been if they could have seen one of their sons rise to occupy a Cabinet post with the provincial government.

 

So difference is something that is very near and dear to my heart; difference is a good thing. When the member talks about even that collaboration and listening to different points of view, certainly as a Minister of the Crown, I am very interested in hearing different points of view and various perspectives.

 

One of the things I've learned is that sometimes it's hard when you are a person of African descent to separate the personalities from the pure facts. We often know that - I myself, and I think individuals from certain targeted communities, recognize things for what they are more times than what people who don't look like me do. We recognize that, so we recognize difference.

 

Through you, Mr. Chairman, the member mentioned - and I think the terminology was "red tape" and "cumbersome for businesses," and how we can have less of that and how we can promote business in such a way that we can add to their productivity.

 

I'm going to go back again to jobsHere, and I say "back" here because there is so much in jobsHere. When I start talking about jobsHere I think I'm an easy read. One can see - I hope that one can see that I get a little animated, I get a little - the adrenaline starts to flow because I feel so passionately about jobsHere. What jobsHere has also done with the Web portal, what we are trying to do, is eliminate some of the red tape that the member talks about. We want to eliminate that. We want to make it easier for companies, regardless of the size, to access the information and the data that they need to increase their business.

 

The member, through you, Mr. Chairman, also talked about the government and the size of government. We also have - and I'm not going to say goals, but there are targets based on analysis. Everybody now knows where the employment numbers are going to be when it comes to government employees X number of years down the road. We recognize those things, but it also comes back to the training and the education. When we talk about the realignment with the jobsHere strategy, we have to ensure that those individuals who are currently on-stream, who are going to stay with us, the young and the bright talent that we have, is going to be with us and stay with us so that we can benefit from the expertise - not only that they have now, but the expertise that they're going to learn over the next X number of years.

 

Through you, Mr. Chairman, the member is right on. We're not getting any disagreement here. In fact, I think we are probably very much on the same page when it comes to eliminating some of that, dare I say, bureaucratic red tape and making it easier for companies to be engaged - not only here locally with government, but also when it comes to the global competitiveness.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The member's time has expired.

 

The honourable member for Yarmouth.

 

MR. ZACH CHURCHILL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do want to take issue with the minister's assumption that the IEF is somehow accountable because there is an arm's-length group of individuals that was appointed by the government to oversee some of its activities. The fundamental question remains, who are those people accountable to? They are, of course, accountable to the people who appointed them there. That's how governance works.

 

The people of this House are accountable to the voters because they put us here. Folks who you appoint to boards will probably be accountable to you or could be accountable to you. So the fact that there's this arm's-length board that is in place, that has been appointed by the government - perhaps Cabinet or the department itself - to assume that that now makes this program more accountable, I don't think is accurate. I think that has been reflected in what we've seen happen with the Auditor General actually coming forward and asking to audit the IEF to see what's going on, to look at the numbers, to explain to the House and to the public what's happening, and that hasn't happened. This is a fundamental shift of what the NDP's position was in Opposition.

 

I've tabled comments from the now-Minister of Finance, who in Opposition referred to this fund as a slush fund. These sentiments were also echoed by the now-Minister of Health in Opposition, who was Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee in 2006. According to The ChronicleHerald, she said: It's not rocket science that this should be in the public domain. It's shocking, really. It makes my blood boil when I see that stuff not there.

 

This is actually quoted in an editorial written by The ChronicleHerald, which is very critical of how this government has tackled the IEF file: Darrell Dexter probably doesn't think he's an obstacle to open and accountable government after just one year in office, but when you square right up to Auditor General Jacques Lapointe's scathing report yesterday, what other conclusion can you reach?

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I'll just remind the member not to refer to the Premier by name, but by his position.

 

MR. CHURCHILL: Thank you for reminding me of that, Mr. Chairman. I'll continue: The Premier's office just isn't throwing up the usual tired excuses, Cabinet confidentiality and solicitor client privilege, in preventing Mr. Lapointe from seeing what he needs to see to evaluate a quarter of a billion dollars worth of business loans approved by Cabinet. The Premier is actually taking the province backwards by giving the Auditor General less access to confidential documents than his office has had in the past.

 

So not only did this government, while in Opposition, criticize the previous Progressive Conservative Government for a lack of transparency and accountability with the IEF, but it seems they've actually made it less transparent and less accountable - and this is according to the Auditor General. What we've seen the now-Minister of Finance do was actually ensure that the Auditor General couldn't have access to these documents.

 

In Opposition he was upset all the time; he was opposed to the IEF and how it was being handled. He said it was a slush fund. He said it was a lot of different things, but of course when he's in government, he brought in a new Auditor General Act to Province House to ensure access to confidential Cabinet documents and files that are protected by solicitor-client privilege. According to this article in The ChronicleHerald, the government had denied more than 200 such documents to the Auditor General during his attempt to audit the Industrial Expansion Fund and the Crown Corporation, NSBI. This is, as I said before, a fundamental shift from where this Party was in Opposition.

 

My questions to the minister are, how does having an arm's-length group of individuals appointed by him or his Cabinet - that isn't accountable to this House, that isn't accountable to the public - make this IEF program more transparent and accountable to the people of Nova Scotia, especially in light of the fact that this government has actually proactively moved to keep information from the IEF out of the hands of the Auditor General, whose job it is to ensure that the funds brought into government by taxpayers are being used in the way that they say they're supposed to be used?

 

MR. PARIS: Well, the member raises some things, I guess I'll say, that I take issue with. First of all, first and foremost, the oversight committee that was appointed by this government - those five individuals - I've stood here in my place and I've talked about the integrity of those individuals.

 

For the record, I will reiterate that the integrity of those five individuals who represent the oversight committee, as far as I'm concerned, is beyond any sort of criticism. They are honest volunteers who dedicate their time and their efforts to a state of fairness that, in the opinion - even when we were in Opposition and certainly when we were in government - thought that was necessary. I've got to say that and certainly stress that to the highest degree possible, and they would never, any one of them, compromise themselves in such a way as to either damage the reputation of themselves individually or of government or of the Province of Nova Scotia. I want to make that very, very clear. I would be more than willing to stake, and I have staked, my individual reputation on that.

 

Also, I think for the record - and I think it's important, through you, Mr. Chairman, that the member opposite knows that it was this government - when I hear talk about the Auditor General not having access to certain documentation, well, we have to be clear on this: it was this government that came in and changed the Act so that the Auditor General could have access to all that documentation.

 

You know, I'm enjoying the dialogue, but I think it's important that if we are going to have good, productive, and beneficial dialogue, we can agree to disagree but we also have to have the facts straight, right, correct, and accurate. So it was this government that changed the Act which would allow and permit the Auditor General to have the information that's required and requested and needed.

 

It was also this government that recognized the lack of transparency and lack of independence by the IEF; hence, we appointed an oversight group. On top of that, every transaction is up for public scrutiny, because - through you, Mr. Chairman, and I want the member to know this - all of those transactions are as public as they can be. They are on-line - you can go on-line and look.

 

Every year we submit to the members of this House an annual report. That annual report breaks everything down. It's not like we've got something to hide; in fact, it's quite the opposite. We want every member in this House - and every citizen in Nova Scotia has the right to see how their money, through the IEF, is being spent. We make that available in an annual report and we will continue to do that. I don't know how much more transparent we can be beyond that.

 

Mr. Chairman, if somebody or if the IEF did something that I didn't like - because a lot of this is putting some onus on me, as minister - can you imagine the outcry of these five well-respected individuals, who take a backseat to no one? Can you imagine what their response would be if I came in and said, okay, you're all gone, you're out of here? It wouldn't happen. Common sense tells me that's not going to happen.

I'd like to think that the reason that I, as minister, and all of us as MLAs - we take an oath. I took that oath seriously, and the thought or even the hint or the suggestion that if something happened that didn't sit well with me, as far as this independent body is concerned, there would be the wrath of somebody to pay - I think it's inappropriate, and I really don't think it's an area that we need to go into. I have to say that, Mr. Chairman, and again, if this is sticking up for those five well-respected individuals who sit in that group, so be it.

 

MR. CHURCHILL: Mr. Chairman, I'll be very clear: not once in this House or outside of this House did I question the integrity or the character of anybody in this government or anybody this government has appointed to any board. I have never done that, and I take exception to the fact that that position was put forward.

 

This isn't about the characters around the table. This isn't about their integrity. I have all the faith in those individuals to do the job that they were assigned to do, and I have the utmost faith in the members of the government and all MLAs in this House to uphold the quality and character, and to act in the ways that they feel are best for Nova Scotians. I've never questioned anyone's intentions or anybody's character.

 

What this is about is accountability, an arm's-length group of people who do not present the business cases that come forward to the IEF to the public, to this House, or to anybody else. Of course we hear afterward where the money went, but there's no scrutiny about how that money is being dished out. Those people - no matter how wonderful they are, and I'm sure they are - aren't accountable to the public. That's fact, they're not accountable to the public, they're not accountable to this House, and they're not accountable to taxpayers.

 

That's what the issue is here. Putting this group of five together to oversee this doesn't change the fact that the public doesn't know what the business cases are for these hundreds of millions of dollars that are being dished out annually by the IEF to various organizations across the province. We still don't know what the business cases are.

 

I'm sure that a lot of businesses have benefited from this money. I'm not saying that shouldn't happen; I'm not saying the IEF has done bad things. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that there is a discrepancy between what this government said in Opposition about the process and the transparency and the accountability of the IEF and what their position is now. There seems to have been a fundamental shift, and when it comes to people being able to see the business cases for these companies that are receiving hundreds of millions of dollars, that hasn't happened. That is why this caucus is still critiquing how the IEF is functioning.

 

It has nothing to do with any of the personalities involved, nothing whatsoever. It has to do with the process itself. What I'm wondering is why, in Opposition, was this government so adamantly opposed to the process of the IEF and the level of transparency and accountability that it had, and now that it's in government, why is it taking a fundamentally different position? Why?

 

The Auditor General still can't get in to see everything that's happening, everything he has wanted to see. According to the articles I've tabled, he has said that's actually against the law, in his opinion. So my question to the minister is, why has the position of this government fundamentally changed from when it was in Opposition to where it is now, and when can Nova Scotians actually expect to have an IEF that is completely transparent and accountable to the people who are elected in this House and to the people of Nova Scotia?

 

MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, I will say once again, the Act has been changed. I can't make it any clearer than that. The Act has been changed, period. It can't be any simpler.

 

Mr. Chairman, what I've also said, and I've already explained, is that when we were in Opposition, we complained about some of the logistics around the IEF, around transparency. I've already said that, but it seems like we're going around the mulberry bush now, because I've already responded to those. For whatever reason or reasons, we keep coming back to the same questions, and I'm ready to move on. When I hear the member raise issues about public scrutiny, I'm thinking to myself, well, is the member asking that every transaction that goes in front of the IEF should go public and that the public be involved in the decision-making process?

 

When I hear the word "accountability" - you know, let's not go back to that oversight panel. Do you know who's accountable, Mr. Chairman? I'll tell you who's accountable - I'm accountable. I'm accountable, Cabinet is accountable, government is accountable. I can't make it any simpler. I don't know, if my voice - I might be getting a little frustrated here. I'm not getting upset, but frustrated is the word, because I've answered the questions but for whatever reason something simply put is not sinking in.

 

MR. CHURCHILL: Mr. Chairman, I just want to remind the House that every conversation that we have in here isn't personal. This is about an Opposition trying to keep a government accountable based on our principles and values and what our desires are from our constituents. My job is to get up and ask questions until I believe they're answered. I don't feel that the questions have been answered in this case, because I've asked why this government had a fundamentally different position on the IEF in Opposition than they do now.

 

That question hasn't been answered to a level that's satisfactory to me. I'm still not sure what changes in the Act that the minister mentioned have made this program, the IEF, more accountable to the taxpayers. I haven't seen that. I haven't seen those details, so that's why I've asked it again, and I'm still not sure how an arm's-length group of people are accountable and who they're accountable to. Those are simple questions that were asked, and I haven't gotten simple answers.

 

With that said, Mr. Chairman, I have very much appreciated my dialogue with the minister over the course of this last number of hours. As he knows, I do respect him, and I respect the folks in his office who work for him and on behalf of the taxpayers across the province. I feel that this conversation has been very helpful in bringing to light a number of concerns that I've had as an Opposition Critic, and I hope it has been helpful to the minister as well to hear what the concerns are from the Opposition and to do it in a way that's not just the back-and-forth style of Question Period. I find that this exercise has been very helpful to me because I've been able to be a little bit more substantial about some of the things that we talk about.

 

I hope that in passing the time over to one of my colleagues, Mr. Chairman, we can recognize that this conversation has been helpful to those on the government side as well. With that, I will hand it over to the member for Preston. Thank you.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Preston.

 

HON. KEITH COLWELL: I have just a few questions for the minister regarding tourism. The minister may not be aware, but some time ago I spent a lot of time in the riding of Eastern Shore trying promote tourism in that area.

 

The tourism numbers, as the minister is probably well aware, are very dismal in my riding and Eastern Shore, which actually makes up the whole area. For a long time it was the worst tourism record in the whole province, with our annual growth in single digits. For a while we had worked very hard on it and managed to get double-digit growth - still not where it should be, but again, double-digit growth.

 

When the Progressive Conservative Government took over they took a change in path and the numbers dropped to single-digit growth again. I know the minister knows the importance of tourism and the economic benefit from tourism in the area; he has spoken about that before when I have talked him about it.

 

I want to ask a few questions around the Antigonish Eastern Shore Tourism Association. I'd like to know how much the province funds them annually in their budget.

 

MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, you have to excuse me. Even though we're all one department with the realignment, Tourism has to join, and NSBI and the Crown agency, so it takes some time. We were just switching some chairs around here.

 

Through you, Mr. Chairman, the member is absolutely correct when it comes to tourism and it being a large industry in the Province of Nova Scotia. I've had a number of conversations since I've been minister, in the past two years, with that whole Eastern Shore and Antigonish dynamic. We have tourism associations there, as we do in every region of the province, so there has been some dialogue and there have been some requests.

 

Tourism in general, although it's up overall right across the province, there are some regions in the province that have benefited. The question about money - I can't tell you right off the top of my head, but certainly I will commit to finding out that number and I'm certainly willing to table it.

 

While I'm at it, it just reminds me of something else - one of the things that I committed to do with the member for Yarmouth and I think the member for Hants West. I hope it's acceptable for me to do that. But since we are now back to Tourism, I think I committed to table some information and data with respect to visitations by origins - in other words, where they came from - and also some tourism indicators. For the benefit of the Chair I would like to table that now. I will endeavour to find out what the exact number is, and that shouldn't take all that long. Well, it's 4:22 p.m. now, so sometime tomorrow I should be able to provide that information.

 

MR. COLWELL: I appreciate the answer from the minister. I understand that it's difficult to know all the answers to all these questions. There are a lot of activities that you supervise as minister. When you get that information, could I get it for the past eight or 10 years? I want to see if there are any trends in funding. Also, a breakdown of where the money is supposed to be spent and the rules around the spending of the money that's given to AESTA, to ensure that the information is correct - could I get a commitment for that, please?

 

MR. PARIS: My response is that we will provide that data, and I suspect that we would have it available for the last eight to 10 years. The member can do his individual analysis or whatever.

 

MR. COLWELL: One of the reasons I'm asking for this funding is because, as I said earlier - and the minister and I have talked about this before - the tourism numbers are really low in that area. I've never been able to get a handle on exactly how much money went into AESTA to actually create those - I'll be polite - very poor tourism numbers. There didn't seem to be a plan and a path. I believe their board is a very, very good board at AESTA, but I don't believe that the approach that was taken for tourism development in that area - I don't believe the department is getting a really good return on your investment.

 

I would also ask the minister to review that and see if, indeed, when he does review the numbers and he provides them to us, the staff could have a look at that. Based on the actual percentage of tourism in the province and the bed nights stayed in that area for the dollars that were invested in that particular organization, it just doesn't seem that the investment was a good, wise investment.

 

I know this has been going on a long time. It was there when we were in government and it was there before we got to government. It was there after we left government and the PC Party took over, and now with the NDP there.

 

I would like to get that information and to review all that, because I think it's an important issue that needs to be addressed. I know the staff in Tourism work very, very hard to ensure that we have the best tourism we possibly can in this province, but this is one area that I'm very, very concerned about. There's no other area in the province that does so poorly in tourism yet has money continually poured into that organization every year, and it doesn't seem that they get very many results. So could I just ask the minister for some comments on those, please?

 

MR. PARIS: Yes, I welcome the opportunity to make a few comments. I do have some information just for last year. It's interesting to know that when we talk about overnight stays, on a provincial level it was pretty well a flat line and it was up 2 per cent in the Eastern Shore. I found that somewhat interesting.

 

I think it's important for me to mention, Mr. Chairman, that certainly the MLAs responsible for further along the Eastern Shore, as we go up toward Antigonish and certainly when we get into Guysborough County - I know that the MLA for part of the Eastern Shore, I met with him at great length. Staff and I went on a tour. I met with the tourism associations there early in my tenure. I've had a couple of meetings with them. I saw some things in the area - and trust me, I'm not an expert. I rely upon staff to make the recommendations. I saw some things that I thought certainly had some potential. I know that I've mentioned some things that possibly could be done. I know there is one initiative going on that my ministerial assistant is playing a very lead role in, in developing something around the (Interruption) A little sense of humour going on in the House this afternoon.

 

With the able assistance of my ministerial assistant playing a lead role, I know where we're looking at some things, along with the Department of Natural Resources, as to what we might be able to do in the area to increase the tourism. For the member opposite - through you, Mr. Chairman - it is a legitimate concern, but I've got to say that tourism in general all over the province is a concern to me, and we will work individually and collectively with everyone to see what we can do about boosting those numbers. We are aware of it; we've looked at it. I've looked at it personally. There has been ongoing dialogue. Let's keep our fingers crossed for the whole province to get those numbers up there.

 

MR. COLWELL: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the minister's interest in this very important topic and his interaction in the community. I've heard some very positive things from people within my community who you've met with on occasion, and on at least one occasion they were quite pleased that you took the time to sit down and talk to them about their concerns.

 

The issue with tourism all over - aside from the Antigonish and Eastern Shore area - like you say, it has flat-lined. What kind of plan do you have in the future to try to improve that? I realize the Canadian dollar is high, so that means our biggest customer to the south is probably not going to travel here. They've got a bad economy. The truth is, the matter with the Yarmouth ferry has definitely caused some problems for tourism. I've heard that in my own area, where people who did live in the U.S. or planned to go across on the ferry last year and this year, who had previous bookings, called and cancelled them because the ferry wasn't there. The overall economy in Nova Scotia and the rest of the country has limited some travel by some people, and indeed, it doesn't take many people to decide not to go to a destination to do it. What plans do you have in place to try to counteract this and get more dollars spent on tourism here in Nova Scotia?

 

MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, I got a little excited, a little ramped up, when I heard that question, because actually, there are a lot of things. I know, over the next minute or so as I go through some of those things, that there are going to be some things that I'm going to miss.

 

The Bay of Fundy is one of the Seven Wonders, and certainly tourism has played a very prominent and lead role in exercising that. I would say that for every member of the House, if you haven't done so yet, text FUNDY to 77077. You can do that as many times as you want, and it's 77077. That's one of the ways that we are promoting Nova Scotia, and if we are fortunate enough to win that and become one of the Seven Wonders, I think that will do wonders for our tourism industry in the Province of Nova Scotia. So that's one thing.

 

We've also broadened the My Nova Scotia campaign. I think that's a campaign that's very, very familiar now. I'm going to give a number - I always hesitate to give numbers, because mentally I can only hold so many, but 88 per cent of the tourists who come to Nova Scotia come from Canada, and so we also have a large population of that number who come from Atlantic Canada. The My Nova Scotia campaign, which we've built on from last year and I trust we will build on again in coming years, is built to attract more people to the Province of Nova Scotia.

 

I look at one of the things that I said even two years ago - and it has taken us a while, but we are getting there - that we have got to look also in the area of tourism around niche marketing. By that I simply mean that we are reaching out more to other targets that we haven't done before - non-traditional targets - and one of those targets is African-Americans. We've got a huge market to the south of us that we haven't tapped into, yet now, through the Routes to Roots campaign, we have not only African-Americans but individuals of French descent from the Acadians who are now able to trace their roots to Nova Scotia and make those connections.

 

We do advertisements - we do magazine advertisements and newspaper advertisements - not only south of the border, but also in the United Kingdom, in Germany. We do trade missions. We are constantly looking at trade missions where we can promote Nova Scotia and the tourism industry to the world, to that global market. We are doing so much.

 

When I think about the niche marketing - it was last year that we even, at the national level, through the First Ministers, provincial and territorial ministers, started to look at Mexico and China. This is part of the national initiative. We are now working more closely with tourism at a federal level than I think we've ever done in the past. So we've got a number of things that are on the go, all going on at the same time.

 

One of the problems we have is that globally, when it comes to tourism, there are so many of us competing for the same market, competing for the same dollars. One of the things that we certainly recognize in Nova Scotia, some of those markets that we would like to get into - we don't want to put the cart before the horse. I say that because some of those markets that we would like to get into, we have to make sure that we've got the air transportation so that people who want to come here can access us.

 

I think we've got a real opportunity in the future, because there are jurisdictions overseas that would love to come to Nova Scotia because of what we offer. We offer things collectively that, as far as I'm concerned, are unparalleled anywhere in the world. We may knock our weather, but our weather during the summer is a nice temperature. We have individuals who want to travel from their homes because the summers are too hot, whether it be in India or Saudi Arabia or any of those countries.

 

A lot of these jurisdictions that we talk about are countries where people have money and can afford to travel. One of the problems we have though is around getting here. There are all sorts of ways and initiatives that we are pursuing to attract people to Nova Scotia. We will continue to look at new ways. The African Diaspora Heritage Trail, hosting that conference in September where we will be exposed globally, everybody will focus on us and the fact that this is the International Year for Persons of African Descent around the world and the things that we are doing, we've partnered with the Mi'kmaq community on initiatives. We had an event last year for the first time here in Halifax where the lead was certainly the Mi'kmaq community of Nova Scotia, it was a huge success.

 

It's things like that, some things that we are doing for the first time that are bringing results to the Province of Nova Scotia and we have to continue to build on those, create new markets for ourselves and just go, go, go. Those are just some of the ways that we're trying to improve tourism in the province.

 

MR. COLWELL: Just switching back for a second to the AESTA funding that you committed to provide for me, I think I neglected to ask for a copy of the agreement that the province has with AESTA, to provide that service on behalf of the province or however the funding is structured. Could I get a copy of that signed agreement between the province and AESTA?

 

MR. PARIS: I just received some information with respect to numbers. To me, writing those numbers down now with respect to the Eastern Shore, what I'd rather do instead of putting something in my own handwriting, I'd like to get something a little bit more legible, if that will be acceptable to the member opposite?

 

Also, I think the question was around some type of written agreement, written partnership; certainly I'd be more than willing to provide whatever is available.

 

MR. COLWELL: I'd like to thank the minister for that. I look forward to getting the information. One other thing I want to talk about here, among many things, I understand there's a reorganization underway in the province of the tourism associations in Nova Scotia to make them more streamlined and work better. I don't know if that's an initiative of the department or if the organizations themselves have come together and said let's work together to provide a more directed operation towards promoting tourism, the work that they do to promote tourism. I would like to know what the minister knows about that reorganization and the parameters that have been set by the department for that to happen and how far along - well, maybe let's just go from there and then I'll ask further questions.

 

MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, in response, we don't drive that, we look towards the RTIAs to come up with certain efficiencies on how things are going to be run. We do encourage them; we meet with them on a pretty consistent basis. We are there to be very supportive of the RTIAs but we leave a lot of the work - they are the experts in their area, we don't try to come in and be the driver, sort of, we don't play that lead role. They generally come to us with strategies, whether those strategies are around events or whatever and also with respect to efficiencies, when it comes to tourism. We take them very seriously and we consider them as one of our partners.

 

MR. COLWELL: Mr. Minister, I realize there is a reorganization in place of the tourism organizations within the province and your staff would be aware of this happening. I would like to know what areas of the province have been reorganized and what areas have yet to be reorganized, whether it is driven by the department or driven by industry. Your staff would know this information inside out and backwards.

 

MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, again we don't drive this but there are a couple of regions in Nova Scotia that, I guess, are reorganizing themselves. Certainly in southwest Nova Scotia, in the Yarmouth area it is already pretty well a done deal with respect to the Yarmouth Evangeline Trail and the Lighthouse Route have combined and they now are known as Destination Southwest Nova Scotia, so that's a change. Also, along the Eastern Shore and Pictou County they have been working together with respect to a reorganization, as well, and I think they're still in the process and nothing has been finalized yet.

 

I've got to say, I've also received some correspondence - and I might have mentioned this earlier, Madam Chairman, to the member - that the Eastern Shore, Antigonish, there has been some dialogue with me in the way of correspondence about what the future looks like. There's nothing definite there yet, I guess it's still a work in progress.

 

MR. COLWELL: I understand that your department isn't driving this and that's fair enough but the department does fund these organizations and unless they meet the criteria for the department, they won't get funding. In this process in the Antigonish and Pictou area and the Eastern Shore, when that's all coming together, how far along is that process and has every tourism association been involved in this process?

 

MR. PARIS: I respect the questions that are being asked and I've been very careful in delivering my responses, my answers, because I don't think I want to speak for any one particular organization. I don't mind talking about tourism in general but you're talking about organizations that do exist, they are a body, and I don't think I'm the designated speaker for those organizations. I can say - and I've already said this - yes, there are some organizations around the province that have amalgamated service. I don't have a problem, which I've already mentioned, who those are. I don't know what stage during that work in progress that some of the other organizations are but I think it would be inappropriate on my part to speak for those organizations and I hope through you, Madam Chairman, that the member can appreciate that.

 

MR. COLWELL: Mr. Minister, I can appreciate that. Really the information I was hoping is to ensure that the process goes through and I know that the Department of Economic Development and Tourism is sort of on the sidelines as working with the organizations and I just want to be sure that all the organizations that are out there in tourism have an opportunity to participate in this amalgamation. I don't think the amalgamation is a bad thing; it's probably going to be a good thing when it's all done. If your department is doing anything to encourage that, I think that is positive but I just want to make sure that everybody has a chance to voice their opinions on this and participate in it so that when it's all finished, everybody will work together and indeed help improve tourism in our province which we so desperately need for employment, especially in our rural areas.

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, I can say with all sincerity that certainly for those associations and for the department the cause is the same, and that is to improve tourism throughout all regions in the Province of Nova Scotia, and we will continue to work with them and co-operate with them. We pretty well take our lead from them and we will continue to be at the table with them. I don't see that decreasing at any level and their interest is our interest and we're working towards the same goal. So I hope you feel confident with that.

 

MR. COLWELL: I am confident with that, that's not the issue. The issue I really wanted to be sure of - and I have a great deal of faith in the staff in your department and the work that they do - is to be sure that all of the tourism associations within the province, when this new process is taking place - or as it takes place - that they have an opportunity to meet with those groups and all the groups come together, so at the end of the day they're all working together for a change, because in the past that didn't always happen and because that didn't happen, it really left a void in many areas. I know the department has the same goal, I just want to make sure that the department is encouraging these organizations to work together and I'd just like to get a comment from the minister to know that's the direction that the department is going. I want it for reassurance as much as anything.

 

MR. PARIS: I could give a very short one-word answer to the member's question and I will, and maybe I'll just piggyback on that one word, but absolutely, I'll elaborate a little bit. We look at these collaborations and if you look at the whole of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, one of the things, when I came into the department, I recognized - because we work with municipalities, tourism associations - the first thing that comes to my mind is something I'm sure the member would be very aware of with respect to RDAs, that the theme of municipalities working together is a common theme throughout all we do with respect to the department.

 

I'm throwing tourism in there as part of the department so the short answer is absolutely. We actually try, I guess in our own unique way, to inspire and encourage and at every opportunity embellish, collaborate, and enhance that whole idea of partnership and working together; there is strength in numbers, as I always say. It's important to make sure everybody is on the same page.

 

One of the things that I know the RDAs - I use them as an example because the RDAs in their wisdom wanted to make sure there was some consistency with what it is they do. So they've tried to ensure that if any municipality of the RDA got upset that they wanted to put something in place, that dialogue would continue and nobody would ever leave the table.

 

MR. COLWELL: How much time do I have left?

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: You have approximately one minute.

 

MR. COLWELL: Okay, I just want to thank the minister for his answers. I'm going to come back with some more questions but my further questions will be in Economic and Rural Development rather than Tourism, so he can be prepared for that if I get a chance to speak again. Thank you.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton South.

 

HON. MANNING MACDONALD: Madam Chairman, I'd just like to make a few observations and ask a few questions of the minister regarding a situation that presently exists in the CBRM, Cape Breton Regional Municipality.

 

Mr. Minister, when you came into office the unemployment rate in the Cape Breton Regional Municipality was around 14 per cent. Today, it's 18 per cent; those are Statistics Canada statistics, not mine. I guess I could start by asking how do you account for that?

 

MR. PARIS: We are making a few changes here with respect to staff. How do I account for that? I would explain it this way: as everybody is well aware - and I've often used the term in the House - tough times all over Nova Scotia. There has been a recession that has hit us globally. We were not an exception to that. As we all know, we've lost some jobs in Nova Scotia. In the same breath, we've gained some jobs.

On the whole, have we done as good and maybe in some cases better than other jurisdictions? Well, I'd like to think that we did. Through any recession there will be job loss and I don't think anyone in this House looks upon job loss as something that's welcome. I think it's something that I and this government have taken very, very seriously and I certainly know that Crown agencies have as well.

 

You know, it's a tough world. The world has changed. The way we do things now in the world of employment is so different than what they were. It's a global market and I would say that - did we lose a step or were we a little slow getting out of the starting blocks when it comes to the global economy? Well, I think maybe we were. So things have changed. So with that change has come some job loss.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Madam Chairman, it's interesting that the minister would talk about a recession that he obviously feels is happening here in Nova Scotia at the present time. That's just what he said. That sentiment is certainly not shared by the Premier and the Finance Minister. So the minister must know something that they don't know about the economy in Nova Scotia, because on the one hand he's saying that the economy is in the tank, and his Premier and the Finance Minister and other ministers who have been talking in this House are of the opposite view.

 

Now, the facts are that I'm not talking to the minister, Madam Chairman, about globally in Nova Scotia. I'm talking about the Cape Breton Regional Municipality, which has an unacceptable unemployment rate of 18 per cent. My question to the minister was, how did he account for that and my further question to him would be - when I put it to him - is that today in Nova Scotia we have the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, we have the Industrial Expansion Fund, we have NSBI, we have the RDAs, and perhaps there are some others out there giving out money. But all of these collectively have not been able to solve the problem of unemployment in Cape Breton.

 

The problem that I have with where we're going here is that we seem to be top-heavy in the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism with salaries, with staff, with huge bureaucracies in that department, but the money that they're spending, Madam Chairman, is not getting out there in terms of jobs on the ground - and again, I'm talking about my area, the Cape Breton Regional Municipality.

 

I would like to know from the minister if he can give me some figures as to the funded staff of the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism and also what the mandate is for the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism as a department in terms of creating jobs in the province. When you do that, Mr. Minister, I'll ask your people to also look up the funded staff of the Industrial Expansion Fund in Nova Scotia and how much money they're giving out to create jobs in Nova Scotia. While you're at it, Mr. Minister, your people or yourself - you may have this information - I would like to know the funded staff of Nova Scotia Business Inc. and how much money they're giving out to Nova Scotians for business purposes.

Finally - and then I'll let you take over, Mr. Minister - last year I made the comment in this House that in regard to NSBI there were 11 executives at that corporation who were making over $100,000 a year - in that one department. There was a funded staff of somewhere around 75 and they were giving out, I believe at that time, around $15 million a year and their total administrative budget, I believe, was up around $6 million to $7 million - I'm not sure of the exact figure - disproportionate to the amount of money that NSBI was giving out in Nova Scotia and precious little of it, by the way, in Cape Breton. So maybe the minister, if he has that information - if he doesn't, he certainly should - if he could give it to me.

 

The last thing is, would the minister make an observation about the salary of the CEO of NSBI, that he's the highest paid employee of the government - the taxpayers of Nova Scotia - even though sometimes I feel that entity doesn't believe it is responsible to the taxpayers of Nova Scotia - how much the CEO is making, including expenses, and also, Mr. Minister, whether or not the CEO of NSBI and his executives are responsible to you, Mr. Minister, or to the Deputy Minister, or to their board?

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, I just want to clarify some things and I don't want someone to put words in my mouth, things that I didn't say. I don't ever recall using the words "in the tank". What I do recall is that I said tough times (Interruptions) what I said - you know what, Madam Chairman, I didn't interrupt him when he was up . . .

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The honourable minister has the floor.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: What?

 

MR. PARIS: You heard me.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The honourable minister has the floor.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Just answer the question.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order. The honourable minister has the floor.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: He just told me to shut up.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Both of you, please.

 

The honourable Minister of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: You'll regret that.

 

MR. PARIS: I think I've just been threatened.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Perhaps the minister can take a seat, please. I'll just take a moment and confer with the Clerk on procedure.

 

Thank you. I would ask that all members remember that parliamentary decorum is of the utmost importance here in the Chamber, and speaking with threatening tones or asking each other to shut up - although I understand that emotions can get the best of you at times, this is an opportunity for dialogue, it's an opportunity for comments, and I would ask that each respect the other in the Chamber. Thank you.

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, what I have here - and it took a little bit of time for NSBI staff to come down because there are so many units involved with Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, so forgive me for the time delay - there were a number of questions that I wrote down, and I guess the first one was around FTEs for Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, which is 256. For the IEF we have 6 FTEs. NSBI FTEs are in the range of 75 employees - and with respect to the salary paid for the President of NSBI, my recollection is, and I think it's a pretty good one, it is $220,000. I might add that that was a contract that when we came into government that was already in existence - it was a five-year contract.

 

I've got to say, and again with respect to NSBI, it's my opinion and certainly the opinion of government that they perform a very valuable task for the Province of Nova Scotia. They are the arm of the Province of Nova Scotia that does those things when it comes to foreign investments in the way of job opportunities and getting businesses to come to Nova Scotia. They also play a role, I guess more regionally, when it comes to job retention, so they are a valuable resource for the Province of Nova Scotia.

 

I would say, Madam Chairman, it's certainly my opinion that we are a better province as a result of their activities.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Madam Chairman, so what the minister is saying is that four agencies in Nova Scotia, employing - well, with the four of them, the RDA is over 400 people who are involved in economic development in Nova Scotia, and I return again to my statement that the unemployment rate in Cape Breton is an unacceptably high 18 per cent. So if that's performance, I would hate to see what would happen in Nova Scotia if we didn't have 400 people involved in economic development and the RDAs and also the other two agencies I talked about - the Industrial Expansion Fund, and economic development itself.

 

I asked the question about the salary. If his memory serves him right, like he said, that perhaps it was $220,000 - I believe it was $260,000 last year with some expenses but, more importantly, another question I asked is that ten others in that department are making over $100,000 a year and it begs the question, are we getting value for the taxpayers' dollars here? We're paying out huge sums of money to these people and they're not accountable to anybody apparently. The CEO doesn't come here and answer questions. He's probably making more than the deputy minister is, of that particular department. Who is responsible overall - is it the deputy or is it the president of NSBI?

 

Also, and I believe those are legitimate questions because I'd like to know, Madam Chairman, where we're going in Cape Breton. I'm concerned about Cape Breton because the initiatives that have taken place in Cape Breton so far, regarding the number of jobs that we need down there to get that unemployment rate down - and it shouldn't be hard to do because the Premier and the Finance Minister have been talking about what a wonderful place Nova Scotia is and that there are all kinds of opportunities here and we're going in the right direction.

 

Well, I beg to differ. Cape Breton is going in the other direction in terms of unemployment. The one stable that we've had down there over the past few years is starting to crumble, that's call centres. I would like to know from the minister - what plans does his department have to provide jobs to take the place of call centre jobs that are being lost in Cape Breton?

 

I'll bring this to the minister's attention - he may not know this - one of the major call centres at one time had 900 people working for it in Cape Breton and it's now down below 400 and projected to go down - we've lost 500 jobs in that one industry alone in the last number of months. That industry was brought in on the payroll rebate system.

 

There are other call centres in the area that are rethinking their position in Cape Breton because of the Canadian dollar and because of what's been happening in technology in the world of call centres. That you can't blame on the government, but what you can blame is if the government doesn't have a strategy to get those numbers down that are surely going to go higher as we lose jobs in Cape Breton, then I just wonder if the minister is aware of the problem down there and, if he is, what strategy does your department have to get that number of 18 per cent unemployment, that's surely going to rise if something is not done, because we're losing call centre jobs - what's the strategy of the minister in doing something about the unacceptably high unemployment in the Cape Breton Regional Municipality?

 

MR. PARIS: A couple of things that were mentioned and have come to my attention. The first thing is that - because this is part of the answer to the question that's being asked, the president of NSBI is actually out of the province. I spent some time with him yesterday, along with the board of the NSBI. He's out of the province and he's doing what he should be doing, he's out of the country trying to secure more business for the Province of Nova Scotia. I know that the salary that the president of NSBI has, that's one thing, that $220,000 - someone obviously thought that was worth the investment - and his expenses are not part of his salary, expenses that are used up in his travels.

 

With respect to contact centres, there have been questions on the floor of the House around contact centres. I know I have gotten up a number of times and responded to contact centres. Again, I'm going to reiterate - times have changed. What worked well for contact centres 10, 15 and 20 years ago doesn't work so well now. I, also, in the same breath, I recognize the value in those jobs, because those jobs - currently in the Province of Nova Scotia there are about 14,000 people who are employed in contact centres, and most of those are in rural Nova Scotia.

 

Are those important jobs? Well, I think they are. What we do when we see companies in trouble or we're aware of companies in trouble, with the able assistance of the Minister of Labour and Advanced Education, we go in there and we work with the companies, with both the employer and the employee, because what we try to do is we provide strategies.

 

Also, what I want to mention when we talk about what we're doing for the future, jobsHere is part of the future, because what we are doing is we want to - and I've said this earlier today - it's about investing in people, investing in one of the greatest resources that we have and that's our human resource, so that people who are currently employed, that we can work with them, invest in them so that they can learn better skills, so that they can become better educated, so they can be looking towards the future.

 

We have many employees around the Province of Nova Scotia who lack some things in the way of skills training/education, so through jobsHere we are attempting to address that. We recognize that as an issue and as a concern, so we are working on that, Madam Chairman.

 

We recognize that times have changed and I've already mentioned this, yes, we might have been a little slow, in the Province of Nova Scotia, getting away from the starting box but we realized when we came into government that the way we do business in Nova Scotia has not kept pace with what is going on globally, so we are trying to address that, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Madam Chairman, I'm listening with great interest to the minister. I'm not really interested if the CEO of NSBI is out of the country, although I'd like to know, maybe taxpayers would like to know, where he is but, anyway, he is out of the country and that's fine.

 

What I wanted to know is will the minister assure - and I asked him this question last year - that the president and CEO of NSBI sits next to the minister during his estimates and answers questions directly through the minister on his department. That didn't happen last year and it's not happening this year - and that's a pretty substantial budget.

 

The minister talking about the future of Nova Scotia, that they're working towards solving a problem in the future, and I'm sure that the 18 per cent unemployed in Cape Breton would take great solace in that fact, that somewhere down the road there's going to be an economic boom in Cape Breton. Well, I've been waiting for a while for that.

 

We have at least 400 people working, supposedly working toward that end to improve the economy of Nova Scotia, Madam Chairman. The economy, I say again, the unemployment rate is going up in Cape Breton, not going down. As we speak, we are losing jobs in the one stable industry that is providing a huge amount of jobs down there, other than government jobs like the hospital and the university and others, and public sector jobs; the economy is not doing well - something has to be done about that.

 

I asked about the strategy because obviously with the number of people that the minister employs in his department through all these agencies I'm talking about, including the RDAs and NSBI and the Industrial Expansion Fund and Economic and Rural Development as its own entity, surely somebody in that parade of entities that I've just talked about is talking about a strategy - surely somebody is, about the future of industrial Cape Breton or what is known now as the Cape Breton Regional Municipality and its high unemployment numbers, way too high in this day and age.

 

When you hear the Premier talking about the good things that are happening in Nova Scotia, and the Finance Minister is saying that everything is wonderful and yet the Minister of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism is saying we're in a recession. What are we supposed to take from that, except to say that the problem is now, Mr. Minister, and I'd like to know, what is your strategy?

 

You mentioned call centres. Call centres are good jobs, but you can't live on them. I reject the premise that anybody in Nova Scotia can live on $11 or $12 an hour. There has to be a long-term strategy. They are great second jobs and they are great jobs as a buffer towards something else . . .

 

AN HON. MEMBER: The working poor.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: They are the working poor, that's what they are. And they're working in these conditions for very little money - those call centres, most of them are there because they're getting a provincial rebate on salaries. That's the only reason they are there. Even that is not good enough now, because of the Canadian dollar and the way the economy is going and the way the technology is changing in the entire call centre industry.

 

They were good and I applaud the call centres for a variety of jobs in Cape Breton, but the jobs are starting to move away, substantial jobs, Mr. Minister, in the last number of months, Madam Chairman. One call centre, the largest one down there, is on the verge of closing - very quietly, you haven't heard much from the government on it, but very quietly they are laying off people and it is becoming a concern for us in Cape Breton.

 

I guess what I'm saying, Mr. Minister, with the huge bureaucracy that you do have, with the kind of intellectual resources you have in your department, with the number of people who are making six-figure salaries, surely to heavens somebody can figure out a strategy that is going to reduce the unemployment in the Cape Breton Regional Municipality. In this day and age it is not satisfactory that the unemployment rate is 18 per cent and rising. I'd like to know, Mr. Minister, how are you going to address that?

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Before I recognize the minister, again I would remind the member that the questions would be better directed through me to the minister, and likewise the comments back. I just want to keep things at a reasonable tone here. Thank you very much.

 

MR. PARIS: Thank you, Madam Chairman. With respect to the strategy, I've already mentioned, and I'll mention it again, the jobsHere strategy. One of the things that we did with respect to jobsHere is jobsHere is applicable to every region in the Province of Nova Scotia. We purposely did that, so that it would be inclusive.

 

Madam Chairman, the jobsHere strategy talks about training and education in the workplace, it talks about productivity, increasing the productivity for those companies that exist here so that those companies can be more competitive in a global market. JobsHere certainly recognizes where we have to go, not only in order for us to be more sustainable but for us to build for the future.

 

We recognized as soon as we got - well even before we got in government, that things had changed, so when we did come into power one of the very, very first things we did, besides looking at the realignment of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, Communities, Culture and Heritage for the good things, so that we could be better positioned, so that when I hear things about what are we doing - well the president from NSBI, Madam Chairman, was here for a couple of days waiting to be called, but work called him out of the country so he is doing what he is getting paid to do - to get people more interested in Nova Scotia to help us and assist this province in putting Nova Scotia on the global map.

 

We've already talked about this at some length today - in order for us to compete and in order for us to be competitive, well we have to be at the table. The president, along with the RDAs and along with field staff from NSBI, along with good staff from Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, that's all part of what they do - so that we can improve the circumstances for Nova Scotians, create more and better opportunities in every region of the province, Madam Speaker. JobsHere is about that, and we will continue with that strategy because we know it is the future of tomorrow.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Madam Chairman, again I repeat - I'm not interested in where the CEO of NSBI is these days, I'm interested in the general accountability of that particular part of Economic Development to the public. I'm concerned that that particular part of Economic Development is being treated as a private business. But there's one difference - it is the taxpayers who are funding NSBI. It is not a private sector entity; it's a government entity.

 

They can call it whatever they want; they can call him the president and CEO or they can call him whatever they want - I'm saying that he's responsible to the taxpayers of Nova Scotia. By the way, I think he's a pretty good executive. I'm not saying he isn't, but I'm saying that Nova Scotians have a right to know whether we're getting value for money from NSBI. I mean the amount of money that is being spent on salaries versus the amount of money that they are distributing in the province, and the success and failure rate - I believe, Madam Chairman, that NSBI corporation has to be evaluated.

 

The way it could be evaluated is if we could ask some direct questions of those, instead of getting a lecture from the minister about the problems in trying to grow the economy - and the minister, I believe, made reference to the number of jobs going forward, that they're going to be created in Nova Scotia, 2,200 to 2,500. Before I sit down, Madam Chairman, I would ask the minister: How many of those jobs are going to be in the Cape Breton Regional Municipality, and when could we expect those jobs?

 

Also, the Cape Breton Regional Municipality is concerned - and by the way, Madam Chairman, you talk about contracts, he said last year and he is saying again this year that NSBI have a five-year contract - or the president of NSBI. Now I'm wondering why he is bringing that up last year or why again is he bringing it up this year.Is it because he's uncomfortable with the way that things are happening with NSBI, or with his whole fiefdom over there, with four different entities involved in the one department and hundreds of civil service people trying to get the economy kick-started in Nova Scotia?

 

If that's the case, that he's concerned about it, and the government wants to do something about it, they have the avenue to do something about it. They could shift direction there and perhaps make a deal with the president and CEO or that whole department to move on. It's not something that hasn't been done before - they didn't have any problem getting rid of the Chief Clerk in the Speaker's Office, for example, when it was to their advantage to do so. He had a contract, too, but that was done away with in a heartbeat - all it took was the right incentive, Madam Chairman.

 

So what I'm saying is I would hope the minister is not trying to defend the reason why they are keeping all of these things together, the Industrial Expansion Fund is separate, Economic Development is separate, NSBI is separate, the RDAs are separate - and anybody telling me that the RDAs these days are being successful in kick-starting the economy of this province is dreaming. I say again, Mr. Minister, through you, Madam Chairman, that the unemployment rate is 18 per cent in the Cape Breton Regional Municipality and rising. We're losing more jobs than we're getting, and I want to know how many of those 2,200 to 2,500 jobs you talked about as your target are going to be in the Cape Breton Regional Municipality, and when?

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, through you I will say this - I'll spend a minute or so on Cape Breton. Through the Credit Union Small Business Loan Program, we've invested, or I should say $1.255 million has been invested in Nova Scotia. That's the Credit Union Small Business Loan Program. We also have in Nova Scotia, CEDIF, the Community Economic Development Investment Fund. We also have the strategic co-operative student program which just - I think it was in November I was at Mount Saint Vincent and made an announcement that we were going to increase that fund. It's a fund that we're now able to double the number of co-op students in the Province of Nova Scotia. We all know that the co-op student program was well received by those students who are enrolled in universities.

 

We've invested in Cape Breton, there have been six investments that we've made in Cape Breton. There was Copol International, Halifax Bio-Medical Inc., there was Polysteel Atlantic, North-Air Window and Door Ltd., there was also Northside Processing Ltd. and there was Techlink. I think I heard this afternoon during Question Period, I think one of the responses by one of the ministers certainly involved Techlink that is on the leading edge.

 

So we have made significant investment in Cape Breton, Madam Chairman. Will we continue to do that? Absolutely. We want to see Cape Breton grow as well as we want to see every region, every jurisdiction in the Province of Nova Scotia grow, and that's part of our mandate. We will continue to do that through the efforts of those agencies, and those six companies that I just mentioned were all clients of NSBI. NSBI should be complimented on the work that they do for Nova Scotians and they will, again, they will continue to do their due diligence, work hard for the Province of Nova Scotia and the people who live here, so that we can create a better atmosphere, create more jobs, grow the economy and have good solid jobs here in the Province of Nova Scotia.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Well, again, Madam Chairman, that's a fine speech about the economy and particularly when he zeros in on Cape Breton. I might remind the minister, in case he doesn't know, he's getting figures on businesses that were already there before he took over. I'm talking about the future of 2,200 jobs in Nova Scotia, not what happened in the past. Some of those businesses he mentioned have been there for 10 years and he's still trotting them out as an example of renewed economic development in Cape Breton, and there is only a handful of them. I want you to look forward, Mr. Minister, and tell me what your strategy is for the Cape Breton Regional Municipality.

 

In terms of the call centres, Madam Chairman, we have a huge bureaucracy bringing call centres to Nova Scotia when, in fact, I said it way back years ago now that all you need to bring the call centres to Nova Scotia under the payroll system is a letter to them with a finance clerk and one executive. You don't need 75 people working on a call centre that gives a payroll rebate, that's a financial thing you give, and you get on with doing the job. The problem is that we create these huge bureaucracies and it's not manifesting itself in good long-term, stable, paying jobs on the ground.

 

Now, the government, Madam Chairman, can say whatever they want about moving forward with a target for jobs, but unless it happens soon in my area there will be nobody left down there to take the jobs because the unemployment rate, it's projected to be over 20 per cent in the next few months when more call centre jobs are lost in our area and nothing is there to take its place.

 

Madam Chairman, let me tell you, if it wasn't for the regional hospital jobs and the university jobs in Cape Breton, and a smattering of call centre jobs, we have no economy down there. We have no economy. Sure, in the future there may be an economy if we can compete, once we dredge Sydney Harbour, for jobs in that regard. It's funny the minister never mentioned that, it must have slipped his mind. But I'll mention it for him, that we're out to dredge Sydney Harbour, but those jobs, if they come, mean that we have to develop, once the harbour is dredged, a book of business for post-Panamax vehicles to come in and load and unload out of Sydney Harbour. And that's not going to happen tomorrow - we're talking at least four or five, six years away, if we can get business that we expect will be there.

 

I'm talking about, what strategy does this government have to create new jobs in the Cape Breton Regional Municipality as we speak? Surely, with the number of executives who are working over there, somebody is turning their attention to the fact that we have 18 per cent unemployment in the Cape Breton Regional Municipality and very little is being done about it, at least publicly. If there is something being done about it, I'd like to know that, Mr. Minister.

 

MR. PARIS: I don't know how to make this any clearer. As we look to the future and certainly part of the future, I mentioned six investments. Not only did I mention six investments, but I also talked about the credit union's loan program and I mentioned some other strategies, and I talked about jobsHere.

 

Yes, some of those companies have been around, but the future is about sustaining what we have as well. Without those investments - those companies came to us and we were able to provide them with assistance, and because of our investment and belief in them, they're still in business and they'll be in business next year. What we have to do, one of the things that we are concerned about, the reason I mention those, it's about retention of jobs as well. We have to hold on to what we have. We have to increase more job opportunities, so through the IEF, through the jobsHere initiative, we are doing those kinds of things that we want to do. By lowering the corporate tax for small businesses, all of these things add up so that we will enable companies - companies in Cape Breton, companies in every region of the Province of Nova Scotia - to be in business, for them to move forward.

 

It's not rocket science. It's not rocket science, Madam Chairman. Those are companies that have come to us seeking our investment and we invested in them because we value those jobs. I keep hearing contact centres, call centres, being mentioned. This government has not invested a whole lot of time in creating new call centres. We have been fortunate, through hard work and some good luck, we were able - and I can remember one case very vividly where a call centre in Hants County went out of business and we were able, within weeks, to replace that with another call centre in the very same spot that the old one was. That comes from hard work, due diligence, and I will say it comes with some luck as well.

 

Sometimes in the world of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism - I'm a believer that sometimes we create our own luck. We create our own luck through that hard work, by having the NSBIs of the world, by having the IEF, by having the CEDIFs, by having those credit union loan initiatives, by having that jobsHere strategy, by having the RDAs, by having the Cape Breton Partnership, by having them on board and working with us towards the good of the whole.

 

Without that kind of effort, without those kinds of initiatives, can you just imagine where we would be? Can you imagine where we would be today if we weren't investing in those kinds of initiatives, in sustaining those jobs, retaining those jobs, and offering education and training to employees of companies? If we're not going to do that, we might as well throw in the towel, what are we doing here? It's not rocket science, it's a little bit of common sense, but we have to and we will continue to do those things to grow the economy in every region of the Province of Nova Scotia and that, without a doubt, absolutely, includes Cape Breton.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: What I hear the minister saying is that they're in the mode now of sustaining what they have in Cape Breton. Well what they have is 18 per cent and what he's saying to me is that they're going to try and sustain the 18 per cent - that's what I get out of that. I don't see anything on the horizon that's going to reduce the numbers anywhere down from 18 per cent, but what I see are some predictions that are happening now, that perhaps those numbers may go up.

 

Again, he makes reference to the businesses that were brought to Cape Breton and I'd remind you, Madam Chairman, most, if not all, of those businesses were brought to Cape Breton by previous governments, not this government.

 

I was wanting to find out whether this government, this current NDP Government in Nova Scotia, had a strategy or has a strategy for Cape Breton and the 2,500 job target that he talks about in the future. I want to know, simply, how many of those jobs that he's targeting for Nova Scotia are going to the Cape Breton Regional Municipality?

 

What is the strategy for industrial Cape Breton or Cape Breton Regional Municipality or, for that matter, all of Cape Breton in those 2,500 jobs - the figure that was chucked around here the other day? Surely with the number of executives who are over there at NSBI, the Industrial Expansion Fund, Economic Development and the RDAs, with the kind of salaries we're paying them and the kinds of academic qualifications and the business qualifications that they all have, surely somebody in those outfits can come up with something that's going to provide some hope for the people of my area that the unemployment rate is going to go down and not continue to go up.

 

I can see the unemployment rate in the next few months going past 20 per cent, and that is simply unacceptable in light of the fact that the Premier and the Finance Minister have said on a number of occasions that the economy looks good for Nova Scotia. Well, I'm sorry, but if 18 per cent means it looks good and we're continuing to lose jobs and all of those businesses that he talks about were in on government subsidies over the years, I'm just wondering whether or not they are going to continue, how many call centre jobs we are going to lose in the next few months and perhaps into next year.

 

All I'm asking, and the people in my area are asking, and the member for Glace Bay is asking, what does the future hold for us with this NDP Government? What does the future hold for the Cape Breton Regional Municipality? Is there going to be a job for myself or my children or my grandchildren in Cape Breton in the future?

 

Or are we going to continue to give platitudes, Madam Chairman, about we're creating 2,500 jobs in the future. The Premier and the Finance Minister say that the province is in good shape; the Minister of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism today admitted that we're in a recession. That's great news to hear from the Minister of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism in answer to my questions - that we're in a global recession and we're in a recession here in Nova Scotia.

Well, somebody should tell the Premier and the Finance Minister that, because they're not talking about that when they are answering questions in Question Period. They're talking about how great things are in Nova Scotia. Well I'm sorry, they are not great in my area. Every time I've asked the minister to answer a question directly about Cape Breton he starts talking about the global economy in Nova Scotia.

 

I'm here representing the residents of my area, and the member for Glace Bay is here doing likewise, representing our Party and representing the interests of our people. To date we've seen very little about what has been happening in our area of Nova Scotia, the industrial Cape Breton area and, indeed, all of Cape Breton, because very little is happening in the rest of Cape Breton as well.

 

Again I would ask, Madam Chairman, if the minister could tell me how many of those 2,500 jobs that he's projecting are coming to Cape Breton?

 

MR. PARIS: Thank you, it's good to get on my feet again. We've made significant investments in Cape Breton. Part of the investments we've made is laying the groundwork for the future.

 

I'm going to name some things and a good example would be, I'll start with one, broadband - the Internet for people all over Nova Scotia, including Cape Breton and southwest Nova Scotia and everywhere. The Internet is available especially for those home-based businesses. We've made a huge investment in that. We've made a huge investment in the vicinity of $16-plus million in Cape Breton.

 

I consider Seaside, some of those companies that I mentioned previously; I think I mentioned six. Part of that - and I mentioned retention - is about retaining what we have in jobs but also part of that investment is creating opportunities as well. It's about creating opportunities and in some cases there might be - might be - up to 75 jobs created by investments. We've made a significant investment in the future of Cape Breton with Cape Breton rail, which again is a significant investment. That's about the future.

 

We know that without some of this investment in infrastructure, it's all for naught. If we don't have the infrastructure in place to accommodate and to woo companies to come to regions of the province, then it's all for naught. We make these investments for reasons of building towards the future. I think it is strategic planning, it's good planning on the part of this government, and we will continue to do that. All these investments are part of what the future will look like, along with putting all the pieces together - the investment in infrastructure, having those individuals, organizations out there selling Nova Scotia to the world is where we have to be.

 

I stand here in my place and I acknowledge that the world has changed, the way that we do business has changed as well. We're building to the future and I think jobsHere is the promise of that commitment.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: How much time do I have?

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Four and a half minutes.

 

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Thank you very much. Again the minister is looking backwards. We're talking about CP Rail, that's only a one-year agreement and very tenuous but there was an agreement that was there, the CP Rail was there before this government and this minister was sitting over there. As well, broadband was started in Nova Scotia before that minister got there.

 

The point I'm making is that I want to know what the government strategy is for Cape Breton as we move towards the future. What's the future for Cape Breton? He mentioned those companies, some of which have gone under and then resuscitated in another way and are back up working again, particularly in the drug industry down there. We had some situations that weren't very good; because of that, they closed and then some others opened up again.

 

Again, he hasn't answered me on the question of how many of the 2,500 jobs - I think I heard the figure 75 jobs maybe on something he was talking about there, but I'm not sure. The broadband, that's cold comfort to those who are waiting for jobs in Cape Breton that there may be 75 jobs created with broadband in the future. I'm talking about the thousands of people who literally have no hope in my area unless this government comes up with a strategy, a strategy that perhaps is accompanied by a federal strategy, as well, to try to do something for the unemployed in my area and certainly in the area of the member for Glace Bay, who has been pushing this issue in this House as well.

Madam Chairman, I'd like to see the unemployment rate - and I don't think that's too much to ask - in my area and all of Cape Breton to approach somewhere near the provincial average. Right now we're double the provincial average and that tells me that we're dealing with two Nova Scotias here. In my particular part of Nova Scotia we're hurting and we have to do something about it. This government has to act immediately. If anybody in this government would suggest that's not an emergency in Cape Breton when you have an unemployment rate of 18 per cent and rising and we're losing jobs, then they're just not thinking straight.

 

The bureaucrats that are working for the minister should be telling him that there is a serious situation in Cape Breton and something extraordinary has to be done by this government to solve it. Not to have what we see here in the House day in and day out that the economy is on the mend here, said by the Premier that the economy is looking good; we have some bumps, but the economy is looking good down the road, and the Finance Minister says the same thing. Yet the Minister of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, answering my question earlier, what does he say? He says we're in a recession in Nova Scotia. The only place that there's a recession, to my knowledge, is in my area of Nova Scotia right now and that's because we don't have - and in the Yarmouth area as well.

 

My statement was that there were two Nova Scotias and Nova Scotians have to realize that this government has a responsibility to address the economic problems in all of Nova Scotia, not just part of Nova Scotia. As a matter of fact, where are the majority of the bureaucrats housed that are dealing with economic development in Nova Scotia? Here in Halifax. Now that's great. Where they should be is in the areas that need them, in Yarmouth, down in the Valley, in Cape Breton; not in Halifax. Halifax, as far as I'm concerned, is a great city, but it's got a buoyant economy and can probably survive.

 

In winding up, Madam Chairman, I'm telling you that unless this government adopts a strategy - and a lot of those 2,500 jobs that the minister brags about that are going to happen in the future, unless those jobs come to areas in Nova Scotia that are have-not areas, then I don't think this government is serving the people of Nova Scotia as it should. Thank you very much.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable Acting Deputy Government House Leader.

 

MR. MAT WHYNOTT: Madam Chairman, I move that the committee do now rise, report progress, and beg leave to sit again.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The motion is carried.

 

The committee will now rise and report its business to the House.

 

[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 has come to order.

 

The honourable Acting Deputy House Leader.

MR. MAT WHYNOTT: Madam Chairman, we will continue the estimates of the Minister of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, Resolution E4.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Preston, with 45 minutes remaining.

 

HON. KEITH COLWELL: Madam Chairman, I have just a few questions here for the minister, to start with. When I started, the honourable minister indicated that the credit union program, if I heard him right - and if I didn't hear right, please correct me - that they gave out about $1.3 million in loans in the last year, would that be right? If not, would you please tell me what the correct number is and what it was this year, last year and the previous year - the last three years that the credit unions have given small business loans and what the amounts of those small business loans were?

 

HON. PERCY PARIS: Madam Chairman, I guess there are a couple of things and I recognize the question from the honourable member. I think it was for the last three years. The figures that I have: in 2004 it was up to $6 million; in 2005, $25 million; and in 2010, $30 million.

 

Madam Chairman, if I may, since I didn't get to respond fully to some of the questions before we had the moment of interruption, I think when I hear that we've got high unemployment in Cape Breton, I just want to - I'll read this if I may and I'll table this for the House. The Cape Breton region reported an increase of 1.0 per cent in employment for the first quarter of 2011 over the same period in 2010. The labour force had a 3 per cent increase for the same period. Thus, the net impact was a net increase of 1.8 percentage points in the unemployment to 17.2 per cent for the first quarter of 2011. I certainly will table that.

 

I also would like to say that I've got to - when we talk about unemployment and the unemployment rate in Nova Scotia, I find it quite interesting that in 1996 the unemployment rate in Cape Breton was 23.5 per cent, in 1997 it was 19.8 per cent, in 1998 it was 18.8 per cent.

 

Now, there has been a lot of toing and froing about the unemployment rate today. I would like to - you know, I'm not going to ask a question but it struck me as rather curious, I wonder who the minister at that time was, Madam Chairman. I'm speaking out loud and I think my information, you know, those are percentages that I guess are probably significant and I mention them because I think they're worth mentioning.

Madam Chairman, it would be interesting for people to know that the minister appointed in 1996 with 23.5 per cent, the minister of the day of Sydney Steel was the representative from Cape Breton South; and those subsequent years - 1997, 1998, and 1999 - with unemployment of 20 per cent, the Minister of Economic Development was the member for Cape Breton South. So, do you know what? I'll table that for the House.

 

Do you know what? I would like to say that, you know, as we move forward, we have to be in a position of being able to connect the dots - those dots about what we do when it comes to unemployment, about laying the groundwork for the future. Without those things in play and in place, so that we can work towards the future, one of the things is that the last thing we want to do as a government, and certainly that I want to do as a minister, is to put the cart before the horse.

 

As we continue under the jobsHere strategy to address the unemployment in the Province of Nova Scotia, we have to ensure that we have the groundwork laid, Madam Chairman. We have to make sure that our people are learning about the changing world, about the changing technology. We have to invest in our people. We have to have those things in place so that we can advance job creation in the Province of Nova Scotia. That's exactly what we are doing - we are laying the groundwork for now and well into the future.

 

About jobs created - what we have is we have projections. NSBI, the IEF, when we do loans and through the credit union all of our loans are also involved with projections - and I got into this discussion, I think it was on the first day with the good member for Yarmouth and he kept saying about targets, and I was saying that, well, at the high end that we certainly have some projections and, you know, it would be nice that we go beyond what those projections are.

 

Finding employment, getting companies here, creating jobs, good jobs in Nova Scotia, comes with a lot of hard work; it comes with a lot of planning; and it comes with us, and all those agencies, doing due diligence, so that we can plan for the future and look forward to the future, so we can grow the economy and improve living conditions in every region of the province for Nova Scotians, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. COLWELL: Madam Chairman, that was a long answer to my very short question.

 

Back again to the credit unions, so if I've got the information right, in 2004 it was $6 million, 2005 was $25 million - was that per year or is that accumulative? Accumulative. I would really like to know what they were like from 2010, 2009, and 2008, each year, not accumulative, because accumulative doesn't really tell me anything.

 

MR. PARIS: For the member opposite, Madam Chairman, those are accumulative, but the difference would be just in the basic arithmetic and just subtraction. So when I give the 2004 at $6.2 million up to $25 million, it would be a difference of $19 million.

 

MR. COLWELL: I'll ask the question again, and I'll make it very clear. What was the amount of the loans in 2008 alone, not accumulated; the amount in 2009, not accumulated; and in 2010, not accumulated - for each year? I can easily do the math between 2004 and 2005, but that only tells me one year of what it was, but I want to see it in those three years.

 

MR. PARIS: We don't have it broken down. What we do have is the accumulation and what we have is the accumulation that I've already just given. It's not broken out, so what you're getting is when I say $6,000 in 2004, that's the ceiling, and the $25 million and the $30 million respectfully, those would be the accumulated ceilings up to those dates. We don't have it broken out.

 

MR. COLWELL: I think they'd be very important numbers for the department to have, to let us know how these programs are working and, indeed, if they are - and I've got a lot of faith in this program, it is a good program - how we're progressing each year and to see if we're making progress with this. If the loans go up, it's an indication each year that, indeed, there may be more employment unnecessarily.

 

I'd like to ask some more questions about this specifically for each year, but if you don't know what the loans were, the loan value each year, it's hard to believe that I can even ask any more questions about this.

 

MR. PARIS: Again, what I'm saying is we don't have them right here. What those are is those are the accumulations. Can we break them out? Yes, we can. Do I have them right here at my fingertips? No, I don't. Can we break them out? Absolutely. And, Madam Chairman, the member is right - one of the things that we pride ourselves on is evaluation. You can't evaluate if you don't know what has gone out through the door, so we evaluate all the time, right from the very beginning. As part of the evaluation we have to know what money has gone out in any particular year. What I've said and what I maintain is the numbers I gave were accumulative numbers. I don't have the break-out numbers right here at my disposal. Can we break those numbers out? The answer to the question - yes we can.

 

MR. COLWELL: That sounds a little bit more encouraging because with those numbers goes an idea of how many people would have been either employed, new employees or jobs that would have been maintained because those loans were in place, because some of these loans are really there to maintain jobs. In each year we should know what the loan amount was and how many jobs were maintained, and how many jobs were added to the economy in Nova Scotia.

 

I really believe this is a good program. I'm not here to say it's not a good program because it is a good program. It's one that should be probably expanded even further to help more small businesses in this province because I understand it is capital expenditures doing this and cash flow. Cash flow in a business is the hardest thing that you can get. You can be making money, but if you don't have the cash to pay that day's bills you can go bankrupt. So do you have that information?

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, I hope this helps the member. What we have right here in front of us is, again, an accumulation. I can tell you this - we have, right now, 475 loans that are active. I believe the member is asking for some very detailed stuff, which we have on file, but it's certainly not right here. What I can do is give you cumulative numbers when it comes to jobs created and jobs maintained and that would be dating back to 2003 because the total jobs created were 1,554; the total jobs that have been maintained, 3,255. Again, I repeat, that's a cumulative number, it's not broken - we don't have it here broken out, but certainly, and again on file, we break those out so that we know how we're doing and, again, it's part of the evaluation process for Economic and Rural Development and Tourism.

 

MR. COLWELL: The numbers are good and they're quite impressive, and I realize those are small businesses, people who have the hardest time raising money. The problem with that is these are cumulative numbers and, indeed, with 255 jobs really maintained, they might have been maintained the day or that year that the loan was given, but are they still maintained today? That's an issue.

 

The new jobs - are those new jobs, the 1,554 new jobs? Were they still active today or did some of those companies go bankrupt, did they have to reduce staff because of the ever-increasing costs they're facing in the province? That's a number, I think, that the department should know, they should know on a daily basis exactly what is happening and to make sure that they know where investments are going well - and I believe they are with the credit union because, what I understand, the defaults on the credit union loans are very low. I give the province and the credit unions a lot of credit for that, but I really need to know these numbers because it's important. It should be very important to the minister, too, when he is struggling to try to create jobs in Nova Scotia.

 

I'll just leave it at that, I don't really want a reply from the minister, and I'm going to turn it over to my colleague, the member for Richmond. He has some questions he has to ask and I will continue tomorrow.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Richmond.

 

HON. MICHEL SAMSON: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. It's a pleasure to have the opportunity to raise a few issues with the minister. I haven't had the opportunity to hear too many of the minister's responses, but I can tell you we just finished the Justice Estimates and it appeared that in about half an hour I probably got about 20 questions in - in half an hour. My questions were brief and the minister's responses were brief and it all worked very well. I can only hope that that could possibly continue in this Chamber with this minister.

 

Yesterday, in Question Period, I raised the issue of the summer students skills employment program - more specifically, I raised the issue of the fact that in Richmond County in 2009 we had 15 positions and now this year we are told it will only be nine positions. As I indicated to the minister, this is an important economic tool for our county - it allows students to get career-related job skills; it gives them a sense of what it is to work in our community; and at the same time it provides these organizations with much-needed assistance and relief during the summer months.

 

As I indicated yesterday, many of our students, our best and brightest, are going off to university, community college, and they're not coming back. We're seeing that even more now - they're not even coming back during the summer because there are no employment opportunities for them in the summer.

 

If I can look back at a bit of history, in the summer of 1999 we had 48 student summer positions in Richmond County. So we've gone from 48 down to nine, so students aren't even coming home anymore for the summer months because there are just no opportunities there for them - and a reduction from 15 to nine will have another devastating blow for our community.

 

The minister indicated yesterday there may be an opportunity to review that, and I'm wondering now that he has had a night to reflect on this and speak to his staff, could he indicate whether there's any possibility of seeing more positions being made available to Richmond County non-profit organizations to provide for summer employment for students in our county?

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, the student employment initiative, what I recall and as I recall it, is that we have 535 summer employment positions, which is an increase over last year, but at the same time the demand for that program has increased significantly. So what I recall is, I think I invited, during Question Period, the member to come to talk to me if he wanted to pursue the reasons why. But I was proactive with respect to that. I didn't wait for the member to come - 24 hours has passed, I hadn't seen him yet, so I was thinking you were going to come.

 

Right after Question Period, Madam Chairman, a couple of other MLAs have come to see me about their particular area, but I was proactive and I did mention this to a staff member, namely my executive assistant, to run it by the appropriate person and come back with some answers for me. I also mentioned yesterday, during Question Period, that if anyone who traditionally, or new, was part of that program in the past and if they applied to the program and if they were denied, there is an appeal process. So I would certainly also encourage all members of the House to pursue the appeal process, as well, because that's what it's there for. So if anyone in any of the jurisdictions feels that they've been hard done by, or unjustly denied, then there is an appeal process and, again, I encourage all the members to use that mechanism.

 

MR. SAMSON: Well, the appeal process, I guess the question is, is there funding remaining that would allow for additional positions to be granted based on this appeal process? The last thing I would want to see - these organizations, they're volunteers, they give a tremendous amount of their time to start off with and the last thing I want to be suggesting to them is doing something that really has no hope of success. So I guess, being we're talking about budgets and monies, will the minister confirm that there are monies remaining in that program for organizations that had been initially denied, that there is a realistic hope they will be granted funding should they submit the appeal, as recommended by the minister?

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, since the member likes short answers, I'm going to say yes, because what we do with that program, and certainly for the almost two years that I've been minister, there's a percentage that's always held back so that if there's an appeal made and if the appeal is successful, we have money left over in the kitty to address that need. So the short answer is, yes, there's money held back.

 

MR. SAMSON: Well, thank you, I certainly appreciate the short answers.

 

Yesterday I gave the minister examples of two organizations, for example, the Telile community channel, which has historically always received a position and, in fact, it gives a great opportunity to students in the vast amount of tasks that are available to them, as well as the St. Peters Lions Club, which runs both the community cable station in St. Peters as well as the marina which is at the entrance of the Bras d'Or Lakes, and one of the most successful marinas that we have in Cape Breton. Again, it has always historically received the position, so needless to say those were two that immediately contacted my office as they were quite shocked, if I can use that term, they were denied this year. So I will certainly encourage them, based on the minister's advice, to submit appeals as soon as possible in order to, hopefully, have that reconsidered.

 

While I don't expect the answer and the information today, as the minister knows, on the Web site it clearly states that the criteria used to determine how these grants are awarded for counties looks at both population and unemployment rates. If we were to look at Richmond County, for example, to go from 15 positions in 2009 to nine positions in 2011, I just don't see where our population has changed to the level of justifying that decrease, nor do I see that our unemployment rate has so significantly improved to justify that decrease as well.

 

The minister has said there's a formula used; I'd love to see that formula. I gave the example of Lunenburg County, which my belief is that Lunenburg's population has remained stable and that their unemployment rate has probably remained stable, yet they've almost tripled the amount of student positions they had from 2009 to 2011. In Antigonish, for example, which is close to me and, again, I believe their population has remained stable and their unemployment rate has remained stable, has doubled from six to 12. So obviously something has taken place.

 

I'm sure the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism has the numbers, that is a bit of a surprise to me, but I'm wondering if the minister would at least commit today to providing me with the formula or whatever it was that was used by the student summer skills program, especially in the counties that saw significant increases in the last two years - if he could provide the numbers just to show on what basis those increases took place.

 

MR. PARIS: What I am committed to doing is I'm committed to continue with the work that I've said I would do, and that I would raise this. My first advice to the member would be to continue to encourage those organizations to continue with the appeal process.

 

I don't know the formula; I wouldn't be able to get down into the weeds of the formula, so to speak. I do know that it's based on the employment numbers in a particular region; I do know that. I will commit to do my due diligence through staff and I will get back to the member. I know we've got a recording of the - I think it was two projects in particular. I certainly will commit to having a look at that.

 

Again, I want to emphasize, Madam Chairman, I encourage the member to have those agencies also go through the process of appeal.

 

MR. SAMSON: In that vein, I appreciate that and I certainly look forward to the minister - I know it's a very specific area of his department, I wouldn't expect him to have the answers on the tip of his fingers. I do look forward to receiving either through the minister or directly from the director of student skills program the explanation for my own benefit of why there were those significant increases and decreases in certain areas of the province - it would certainly make it much easier for me to understand how the distribution of those grants took place.

 

One of the challenges, and I'm sure the minister as an MLA would understand, is I've had at least two organizations, that I've mentioned, that have contacted my office. The challenge is that I'm not aware of who else has applied who has been denied, so I'm wondering if the minister would commit to providing me with a list of the applications that were made from Richmond County, so that I may convey the exact information and exact advice that the minister has provided and be very clear to see which ones didn't get approved based on the list of approvals - just to let them know as well. I'd hate to have them afterwards come back and say what could have been done, only to tell them, well, you could have appealed, but I didn't know you had submitted your application.

 

I'm wondering if the minister could commit to providing the applications that came from Richmond County for that specific program - and there would only need to be the applications that were refused basically.

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, if I understand the question, I guess my immediate concern would be around confidentiality. I can't commit to something that I don't want to breach confidentiality with respect to anyone who has applied.

 

I don't know if this helps, but I've got to say that as the minister responsible, I appreciate the position that not only the member opposite is in, but I would say I appreciate the position that all members in the House are in when it comes to the Student Employment Program. I speak from experience because I have organizations within my own riding that also fall under the same category that the member for Richmond has already mentioned. So as the minister responsible and having organizations denied something that I'm responsible for also, I know it's a tough position to be in. Unfortunately, we have only X number of positions, we only have X amount of money to go around and, as I said, the demand for the program has made quite an increase, so that has impacted on the number of placements that we can agree to.

 

MR. SAMSON: I'm not sure either if there are some concerns about privacy; maybe you can check with the director - I can't remember her name off the bat, but I know I've dealt with her before. Maybe you could check with her to see if there is an issue with that. I guess the other option is putting out a press release and encouraging any organizations that may have been refused to appeal, as per the advice of the minister.

 

I realize that governing is all about priorities; it's about trying to figure out how to spend money and where to best spend it. I would simply encourage the minister as we move forward, when he's sitting around the Cabinet Table and discussing finances you can't have enough positions in that program and you can't have enough funding in that program. I would certainly encourage the minister to do everything he can - along with his colleagues - to increase the amount.

 

I can tell you, I see, myself, some of the students who work on these summer grants with different organizations and have come back home because they took a vested interest in their community. They may not have had the same appreciation while they were in high school and when they went into university, but having had the opportunity to work with a non-profit organization for the summer made them a direct part of the community, some of the ideals and the goals of what the community is trying to achieve, and many of them have chosen to come back home. We are seeing success. It's a great retention tool for us and certainly I hope to see the day where those numbers are increased rather than seeing decreases take place. I certainly encourage the minister on that.

 

One of the other issues I wanted to raise as the member for Richmond is the status of the former federal gypsum plant in Point Tupper. It's my understanding that a buyer has been found. There are currently efforts to arrange a meeting between myself and the new buyer - which I look forward to - but I'm wondering, could the minister briefly give us an update as to what the status of that specific project is?

 

MR. PARIS: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and sorry for the delay but it takes some time for staff to come down and I want to make sure that the information I provide is not only accurate but it's up to date.

 

For the member for Richmond, that particular asset has been sold. NSBI was very instrumental in the sale of that asset and it continues to work with the new owner. The intent of the owner is to reopen the facility at some point in time, but there still remains the question around supplier and the market, but right now it has changed hands. They are still moving forward with it - "they" meaning the owner of the asset - and to date we don't have a timeline on when we can expect something. I know that there was an issue, there was a water issue around that asset and my understanding is that NSBI again helped the owner of the asset take care of that. So the good news is that there's a new owner. The good news is that the new owner is thinking about the future and having it up and running.

 

Oh, I should also mention - when I heard the member, Madam Chairman, talk about the Student Employment Program, we always recognize a need for seats because one of the things that we did do, and this is for information sake, is that with the strategic co-op program, what we were able to do is we were able to double the seats in that area. So, you know, if money wasn't an issue, even though we increased the seats in the Student Employment Program, I am in agreement that I would like to see more seats made available there, but it's being driven by what finances we have available to us.

 

MR. SAMSON: Does NSBI still have any interest at all in either the facility or the property on which it is located?

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, yes, NSBI owns the building, NSBI owns the land. There is a long-term lease and what the purchaser has purchased is the asset, so the short answer to your question is yes and yes.

 

MR. SAMSON: That's why I was a bit confused when the minister said "they bought" - it was sold, that's why I was a bit confused. My understanding is that NSBI still owned the land and owned the actual building that it was on. Am I correct in saying that when they bought the assets, you basically mean the equipment inside is what was bought, but other than that, NSBI - so it's a lease arrangement on the building and on the lands, so NSBI still has a vested interest in that property?

 

Can I also ask, is NSBI or any other government agency a funding partner with the new operator of that facility?

 

MR. PARIS: In the spirit of co-operation, my answer is no.

 

MR. SAMSON: And again, keeping our questions very brief, is there any proposal currently in front of either your department or any other government agency, provincial government agency that you are aware of, from the new operator, requesting any funding for the operations of that facility?

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, as of right now, or I should say as of this morning, the answer is, not that I'm aware of. Nothing has come across my desk at Economic and Rural Development and Tourism, there's certainly nothing that we are aware of as far as NSBI is concerned.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Richmond, with less than three minutes remaining in the time allotted today.

MR. SAMSON: I'm good for about a dozen more questions in three minutes at this rate. The payroll rebate program has been used on a fairly regular basis for employers. I'm just curious, has NSBI been under discussions with the new operator regarding the potential for a payroll rebate to be offered to the operator, once they are up and running and ready to start producing and manufacturing a product?

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, generally speaking, I don't think we discuss negotiations with a client because of issues around confidentiality. If we make some things public, then it may put negotiations at risk and I'm sure the member can appreciate that. There are just some things we'd like to remain confidential until it's an appropriate time for it to come out in the public domain.

 

MR. SAMSON: Madam Chairman, certainly we're looking forward, as I said earlier, a meeting is being arranged for myself with the new operator and I certainly look forward to hearing what the plans are and certainly any support we can give on seeing that facility be successful because there is a trained workforce in the Strait area that worked at the previous facility, at the facility before that and at the facility before that. There have been a number of operators there but many of them have gone to work out West in the meantime and they're certainly looking forward to the opportunity of being able to come back home and work at that facility, and that's certainly going to be a major employer again for our area and we're all looking forward to that.

 

I'm wondering if the minister could indicate whether NSBI or the Department of Economic and Rural Development and Tourism is having any discussions or has approached what was formerly known as Statia Terminals, which now is called NuStar - it's the old refinery in Point Tupper, which is now a fuel holding and transfer facility - regarding the possibilities for a future expansion of that facility, in light of the heightened demand that is taking place there and the increased opportunities for that? I'm just curious if there are some discussions taking place with that company.

 

MR. PARIS: Madam Chairman, I heard two things there and the first thing is with respect to the new purchaser of the land - I'm sorry, of the asset. I can say that we are very, very optimistic. And that's the word coming from NSBI, that we're very optimistic, the future does looks quite good. With NuStar, I think it was last week - it was during this session - that I met with them. We had a meeting here in Province House - downstairs, and I've got my fingers crossed. So we have met. I met with them face to face and I have my fingers crossed.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time allotted for Committee of the Whole House on Supply has elapsed.

 

The honourable Government House Leader.

 

HON. FRANK CORBETT: Madam Chairman, I move that the committee do now rise and report progress.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The motion is carried.

 

The committee will now rise and report its business to the House.

 

[The committee adjourned at 7:16 p.m.]