HALIFAX, THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 2021

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY

3:02 P.M.

CHAIR

Hon. Ben Jessome

THE CHAIR: Order, please.

The honourable Deputy Government House Leader.

HON. KEITH IRVING: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will continue with Resolution E39, the Estimates of the Department of Transportation and Active Transit.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Dartmouth North.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I am happy to be back to ask some more questions of the Minister of Transportation and Active Transit.

The first set of questions I’m going to ask have to do with the potholes program. Even though Dartmouth North doesn’t have a whole bunch of provincial roads, we do have a few and certainly have our share of potholes, but I’m asking this on behalf of all Nova Scotians because this is a really important issue.

In 2019, our caucus filed a freedom of information request that revealed that very few claims filed through the pothole program, which is meant to help when vehicles are damaged by potholes or hazards on the provincial roads, are successful. Only 47 of the 910 claims made that year were accepted.

My first question to the minister is: Can the minister provide the percentage of successful applicants for the year 2020-21?

HON. LLOYD HINES: I am unable to provide an answer because it’s not our departmental responsibility. That data rests with the Department of Internal Services, under the Risk Management Group, and they essentially are the insurance company for the province, which de facto is self-insured.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Okay, but the program is administered through the Department of Transportation and Active Transit, Mr. Chair. We can certainly ask the Department of Internal Services for that particular answer but I have more questions related to the program that I am sure the minister is able to answer.

My next question to the minister is: Is there an appeals process for the pothole program and how does it work?

LLOYD HINES: Once again, Mr. Chair, our department has nothing to do with this particular program, so the answers to the questions lie with them, not with us.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I guess the question begs to be asked: Why then, if the department has nothing to do with the program, why is it that when a claim is made, when someone damages their car on a pothole on a provincial road, why do they make a claim through the Department of Transportation and Active Transit?

LLOYD HINES: We are simply the portal for the intake. We receive the complaint, as it were, and then it is passed immediately to the Internal Services folks.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m going to change my line of questioning to Active Transit. We started with Active Transit on Tuesday and I have a few more questions for the minister. I’m wondering if the department can please provide a list of the organizations that received grants from the Connect2 program.

LLOYD HINES: As the member would be aware, we’ve just received the responsibility in the department for Active Transit and we would be looking on a go-forward basis. We don’t have the history that she is looking for but that probably would be available with the former department that had managed the program.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Since the former department will likely tell me that it’s within a new department now, I’m wondering if the minister could commit to providing us at a later date with that information. That is the grantees to the Connect2 program.

My next question is: On Tuesday, the minister mentioned that there’s $5 million of capital funding for Active Transit and I’m wondering, could the department please provide a list of projects included here? This is the budget coming up, for which he is now the minister. I’m hoping we can get a list of the Active Transit projects included in that $5 million.

LLOYD HINES: I’m very happy to undertake to provide that information to the member once we dig it out.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I just want to clarify if the minister is talking about the list of grant recipients or is the minister now talking about the list of projects for the $5 million of capital funding going forward for active transit. If he’s referring to both, that would be great. Maybe he can still provide me with the second thing I asked, which is: What, going forward, is the list of projects?

LLOYD HINES: The response I gave to her last question referred to the capital that we’re talking about.

SUSAN LEBANC: On Tuesday, as well, the minister mentioned $7 million in operational funding for active transit. I’m wondering if he can provide a breakdown for that $7 million.

LLOYD HINES: I am able to give a breakdown of the distribution of the $7.033 million: Public Transit Assistance Program - $2,925,000; Community Transportation Assistance Program - $1,824,000; Strategic community transportation investment - $953,000; Accessible Transportation Assistance Program - $840,000; Nova Scotia Transit Research Incentive Program (NS-TRIP) innovation funding - $301,000; Sector-led body - $150,000; Transportation promotion - $30,000; Rural Transportation Association (RTA) - $10,000.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m starting to feel like I’m in Wonderland or something. The world is a little bit upside-down in this Estimates session so far. So far, I’ve asked the minister six questions that he couldn’t answer and then the next one that I asked, he answered very fulsomely, which I appreciate.

Those are not projects that are active transit projects. I’m happy to hear about those investments for community transit, but that’s another discussion. Active transit. I’m not talking about anything that’s powered by machines. I’m talking about bicycles, walking, mobility aids, and those kinds of things.

[3:15 p.m.]

First of all, I just want to clarify that we are working with the same definition of active transit because if we’re not, then I need to know that. I’m wondering if the minister can clarify that $7 million in operational funding for active transit - is that for active transit or is that for community transit? If it is for active transit, what is the breakdown of costs?

LLOYD HINES: The question that I answered was, I thought, the question that was asked, in terms of what is the disposition of the approximately $7 million, which I outlined where it is going. There is in the Connect2 program another $400,000, which we expect we would have in the field before the end of this year, probably in the late Fall.

SUSAN LEBLANC: One person who advocates in the field of active transit explained to our caucus that she felt that throughout last year there was some politicking going on with the infrastructure funding in terms of active transit but no overarching vision.

I guess my question to the minister is: What is the strategy or vision for active transit across the province? We’ve heard a lot about how important it is. We know that active transit is important for climate change mitigation, for health, and for enjoyment, for tourism, ecotourism. There are all kinds of benefits of having a vision, a strong and detailed vision for active transit in Nova Scotia, and we have a province that could be an oasis for it. Except for the hills, of course.

I’m wondering if the minister can talk about his strategy or vision for active transit in the province.

LLOYD HINES: I thank the member for the question, because it does give me an opportunity to highlight the wisdom of bringing this particular section of transportation activity into the purview of the former Department of Transportation. There’s a congruent path there that will further enable our department to put an active transportation lens particularly on capital construction and expenditures that we undertake for the citizens of the province. It will give us a real good opportunity to work closely with the stakeholders that have done such a great job to promote this particular important imperative in the other department.

Active transportation - I’m reading from my mandate letter here - incudes walking, cycling, other modes of self-propelled transport. It is one of the best ways to increase physical activity and it contributes to the overall health of our citizens. It reduces carbon emissions and makes neighbourhoods more attractive and enjoyable for families and businesses. A province that includes active transportation improves the quality of our lives.

I think that sums up the wisdom that I was talking about of housing the active transportation section with the Department of Transportation and Active Transit, which is responsible on a macro level for delivering safe highways to Nova Scotia and safe means of transportation.

A good example of the Province’s participation in that particular highlighted section of the mandate letter would be the - some people are calling it the flyover that has been proposed for HRM through the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP) program. The provincial government has committed approximately $8.33 million to facilitate that mostly bicycle-driven innovation coming off the Macdonald Bridge.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I have to say that I am excited about the Macdonald Bridge project, because I use that bridge and cycle over it, and it’s a heck of a hill to get up when you’re going home. When you’re coming home from Halifax to Dartmouth, boy oh boy, it’s a pain in the butt to get up that hill, so I can’t wait until that’s all fixed up.

That begs the question, when is all that happening? The minister mentioned that twice. I’d love to hear an update on that, but I’d also like to take the time to say that our cycling enthusiasts and people who want active transportation as a way of commuting to work, but also to stay healthy throughout Nova Scotia, would like to know from the minister what the provincial vision is.

HRM is one thing, and I have lots of thoughts about that, and there’s some really good stuff happening. Lots more could happen, so I guess the A part is: What is the update on the Macdonald bridge flyover project? Secondly, if the minister can talk - well, no, I’ll just ask the Macdonald bridge question first, Mr. Chair, and then I’ll get back to the other part.

LLOYD HINES: We don’t control that agenda. It would be between the Halifax Regional Municipality and the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing that will be administering the timelines. The good news is that it has been approved and the province is committed to spend over $8 million on the project.

I might suggest to the member that she can always move to an electric bicycle for those big hills she is encountering on her way home.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m saving the electric bicycle for the Cabot Trail trip, Mr. Chair. That’s what my colleague from Dartmouth South suggested. No, I’m going to challenge myself to do it without an electric bicycle.

Here’s a big question: If the province is spending $8 million on a project, how come the province doesn’t know anything about where that money is going? I’m worried about that. As a member of the Public Accounts Committee, I’m worried about that.

The minister should be able to tell me a little bit about that project. If he approved it and approved $8 million of spending, which I am totally grateful for, I would love to know a little bit about it. That being said, I’ll let that go for now, but maybe we could talk about it offline.

I’d like to ask a couple more questions about the Blue Route, because the minister has been talking about the Blue Route for a couple of years now, since I’ve been asking questions. Is there a plan, with targets, for more Blue Route construction? That is, how many thousands of kilometres will be built in a year, for instance? Is there something that lays out the long-term plan for the Blue Route?

LLOYD HINES: I only wish that we could do thousands of kilometres in a year. Last year, we had a particularly good year because of the COVID-19 stimulus funding that we were able to get, and we were able to do 65 kilometres of Blue Route. It’s a little bit more than what we normally do. We’re normally in the 45 to 50 range.

The program, or the philosophy, of the Blue Route is that we look to the opportunities through a lens of connectivity, to be able to create logical connections for the Blue Route as we go forward, and the Blue Route per se is not signed until that particular segment of the route is completed and it makes sense.

[3:30 p.m.]

Obviously, we do in the vicinity of 500 to 600 total kilometres of paving in a year, but it’s not all Blue Route. As an example, I think we are almost ready to sign between Wolfville and Windsor as a significantly completed portion of the Blue Route, which has been done according to the Blue Route specifications. That will give the member some idea of the progress that we’re making on the Blue Route, and we are looking at all our projects with that connectivity lens to emphasize the connectivity for the Blue Route users.

SUSAN LEBLANC: To the minister: I misspoke. I asked my question in the wrong way. What I meant to say was: How many thousands of kilometres by a certain year, not in a certain year. I do understand that thousands don’t get paved each year, but thanks for the clarification.

In terms of the Blue Route, for instance, on Prospect Road, which is a road that I travel quite often, and the current Premier didn’t waste any time reminding me or pointing out to me that Prospect Road had a big repaving project done to it recently. There are wide shoulders now, and it’s much safer for cycling. It’s not the safest, of course, but is that considered Blue Route standard, or is that simply just repaving, wider paving when it’s possible? I guess my question is about that. That’s an example, and I’m wondering in terms of other places in the province, if wider paving is part of the Blue Route.

The second question about the Blue Route before I run out of time is: Does the minister hope and dream that eventually all of Nova Scotia would be cyclable with a Blue Route?

LLOYD HINES: The section the member is talking about is designed to Blue Route standards, and the intention is to get all the way to Peggys Cove with that standard. As I mentioned, the lens that we use now when we are designing and building new roads is to apply the Blue Route standard where we can. Obviously, in some instances, with some of these highways, it’s physically difficult to get the extra metre on each side due to the topography and geography of the area, but that’s what we look at, to try and accommodate the active transportation opportunity throughout the province. Eventually, and it’s going to take some length of time, but eventually we would see that all the roads would be at that standard.

THE CHAIR: Order, please. Excuse me, folks. The time has elapsed for the NDP caucus.

The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition.

TIM HOUSTON: My question is for the minister about the status of the Brookfield Road in Pictou County. This is a road that is in pretty rough shape and the residents travelling that road put up with quite a bit trying to get to and fro on that road.

I would like to ask the minister: Can the minister update the House on what the plans might be for the Brookfield Road and when?

LLOYD HINES: We are highly aware of the Brookfield Road. We received some correspondence from the municipality and also a petition. We’re aware of the petition that was tabled.

It’s a gravel road and we don’t project those out in the five‑year plan, but it is definitely on our list for future activity and repair.

TIM HOUSTON: I appreciate the minister’s acknowledgement of the petition and the concerns of the residents. It was a gravel road, but I think it is more of a dirt road now. It is certainly in need of some gravel.

I appreciate that the department is aware of it, but is there any way that the minister can give us any insight as to whether that might be something that could be done this year or even maybe next year, or is that just something that is not possible to say at this time?

LLOYD HINES: I want to commend him for taking the time to come and meet with our staff earlier in the year to talk about what the priorities might be for the MLA in the area.

It’s difficult to answer that question with any finality. One technique that some MLAs employ is to collaborate on the gravel road program with their municipalities and involve them in the selection, and once they agree as to what the priority is, to write the minister and lay that priority out. It adds a lot of support in terms of getting the gravel road program applied, and this might be a candidate for that. It’s done in the manner that ensures that everybody gets an opportunity at the municipal level to really understand, particularly, the gravel road requirements, to have some valuable input.

In the meantime, sometimes there is some slippage in the programs, and depending on what the priority is, we might be able to get to a road like this - which we know we have identified - a little bit earlier than it might otherwise be done. It’s good that you’re bringing it up here, and it helps us understand what the priorities are in the area.

TIM HOUSTON: I’d be happy to gather some other colleagues and residents to apply more pressure to the department, but I appreciate the acknowledgment of the issue there.

On Route 348 between Sunnybrae and Caledonia, there are quite a few areas of shoulder, where the shoulder has completely slipped away, in at least one area that I’m aware of. I’m just wondering about maybe some shouldering activity that might be in the cards for Route 348.

LLOYD HINES: I appreciate him bringing up the maintenance requirement there. We’ll immediately take a look at that and determine what is needed, and we will dedicate some of our rim activity to improve the shouldering along that section.

TIM HOUSTON: I’m going to disappoint the minister and tell him I have no questions about the ferry today or anything else. I’m going to cede the rest of my time to the member for Truro-Bible Hill-Millbrook-Salmon River.

[3:45 p.m.]

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Truro-Bible Hill-Millbrook-Salmon River.

DAVE RITCEY: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and through the Chair to the minister, first of all thank you to your department in developing and taking the time to answer questions.

I have a couple of local questions, one being a possible opportunity or some support from the province in respect to an intersection on Willow Street and McClures Mills Road. There’s lots of traffic coming through there off the Highway No. 102 Exit - the increase in infrastructure, with the new hospital and the Rath Eastlink Community Centre, in-and-out traffic coming into the town. I understand the wear and tear on the road is the responsibility of the municipality, but 250 metres away from the intersection, or from the lights, is a provincially owned culvert bridge.

I just think it would be a great opportunity for all three levels of government to consider partnering in the development of a possible roundabout or another piece of infrastructure to help with the increased flow of traffic coming from the area into town.

LLOYD HINES: We have actually dealt with this particular intersection before and the truth of the matter is that it is not a provincial responsibility, it is a municipal responsibility. It is in the Town of Truro. However, we would be happy to entertain any feasible application that the municipality might put forward that would involve that partnership that the member spoke of, if we had a suitable federal program that would entertain the project. Of course, that would be a decision for the new Department of Infrastructure and Housing.

I would encourage the municipality, the town, to work with and through Municipal Affairs to explore the opportunity for some tripartite funding for this undertaking. In the meantime, this department has no responsibility for that particular intersection, it is owned by the town.

DAVE RITCEY: My next question is on the Village of Bible Hill and the Municipality of Colchester. Back in February 2017, there were three concepts presented to the village and the municipality from engineering consultants and through the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal, with the first option to add an extra turning lane to both College and Pictou Roads and traffic lights at both intersections. Option 2 included a roundabout at the bottom of Pictou Road, and Option 3 is another roundabout, this time centred between two different roads.

I guess my question is: The properties were bought up by the Province. They’re assets now of the Province. What is the plan for that area of Main Street and Pictou Road and College Road for the residents of that community?

LLOYD HINES: The art of highway construction does involve long lead times, and we buy a lot of property to be able to reserve the option for future development when the time comes. The member is correct. We are acquiring property. We do it all over the province all the time for future development. We try and do it with a long lead time so that we can get access to these properties at a reasonable rate at the time, but they might sit for a decade or more before we actually do anything with them.

In that instance, we are purchasing properties with the vision that we will be doing improvements at both those intersections, but at the present time, the traffic counts that we have don’t justify that expenditure. Once we get to that level, we’ll certainly reach out to the member and to the community to talk about what could be coming down the pike and hopefully by that time we will have assembled the properties that we need to execute the roundabouts at those locations.

DAVE RITCEY: Thank you to the minister for answering those two questions that I did have. I will follow up with you at a later date.

I’d like to pass it over to my colleague for Dartmouth East.

TIM HALMAN: Good afternoon, minister. I’d like to chat a little bit about Highway No. 111, which the minister is fully aware is arguably one of our busiest highways in Atlantic Canada, arguably one of the busiest highways east of Montreal. There are thousands and thousands of cars that utilize that stretch of highway, which services the residents of Dartmouth, Cole Harbour and Eastern Passage. That’s why, Minister, especially during the Spring when we get potholes and things of that nature, with that many people using that highway, certainly MLAs in the area hear about that.

I have to say that staff at the Department of Transportation and Active Transit have been very responsive to meeting the needs of that highway. I remember a couple of years ago we had a massive pothole on Highway No. 111 right near Lake Banook and Lake Micmac. It was like a Scud missile had hit that part of the highway. It was a massive pothole and TIR jumped into action and fixed that, so we’re certainly appreciative of that.

It’s a busy highway and in the last couple of months, I’ve heard concerns from residents living along that highway, specifically residents along Lake Micmac, about the increase in noise with those modified mufflers that are on vehicles.

Given how busy that highway is, the amount of noise that comes off the highway, my question to the minister is: Under the new Traffic Safety Act, are there any regulations to deal with those modified mufflers? I know that consultations have been taking place. I’m curious through those consultations if you’ve heard from residents about those concerns, along with, of course, are there going to be regulations to manage that?

LLOYD HINES: I thank the member for the question. I particularly want to thank him for the great compliment he has paid our staff in his introduction.

In the Traffic Safety Act, we have been putting out pieces for public consultation over the last while. The section he is asking about is the Vehicle Standards and Equipment Section. That consultation has just closed and we’re parsing the information currently that’s being gleaned from the stakeholders who took the time - and there have been quite a few of them - to have some input into the various sections of the TSA.

[4:00 p.m.]

We don’t have a definitive answer with regard to the member’s question. However, the Motor Vehicle Act currently in place covers the issue of modified mufflers and noise, particularly Sections 187 and 188, which cover the devices that the member is referring to in terms of modified sounds from vehicles, which we do get a lot of vexatious complaints about.

The member is right. That highway is one of the busiest highways that we have in the province. I am happy to report that we did five kilometres of paving on that highway last year and we have another 3.7 kilometres scheduled for this year’s improvement plan.

THE CHAIR: Order, please. We have arrived at our regularly scheduled COVID-19 recess, the first one for this Estimates period. We will be back in 15 minutes.

[4:01 p.m. The committee recessed.]

[4:16 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

THE CHAIR: Order, please.

The honourable member for Dartmouth East.

TIM HALMAN: In your remarks, you indicated, of course, that part of the reason why the department was restructured was to address the reality of climate change. Certainly, I know in Dartmouth we see that manifested in many ways, in particular in the stress and strains on our lakes.

I know my Dartmouth colleagues mentioned this today in Question Period, a very important question. So with respect to the amount of salting that goes on Highway No. 111, does the department track how much of that goes into our lakes? If not, is there a government department that tracks something like that, especially in the context of climate change and the pressures that are put on the environment as a result of human activity such as this?

LLOYD HINES: Over probably the last decade or so, the department has been very aware and judicious about the use of salt on our highways. Particularly on a highway like Highway No. 111, the sole most effective method to control ice and keep the highway safe is the application of salt.

There are two techniques that we have used and are using currently to limit the amount of salt that is in the environment as best we can. First one is pre-wetting the receiving highway prior to applying the salt, which means the salt tackifies and sticks to the road surface and limits its spread and its migration into any water courses.

The second technique which is being used quite a bit is generally known as brining, where the salt is dissolved in water and it is applied as a liquid solution. That has worked out quite well. We’re doing quite a bit of that process.

In terms of the monitoring, we rely on our partnership with the Department of Environment and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, which do monitor any contamination of waterways that might be in proximity to the highway system. They have the responsibility and are in very close contact with us if a problem is identified or detected.

TIM HALMAN: Just one final question before I hand this off to my colleague from Queens-Shelburne. With respect to Highway No. 107, specifically the Forest Hills Extension, are there any plans in the future to twin that highway? I know I’ve had residents in my constituency and residents in surrounding constituencies ask me about that. I know my municipal colleagues in HRM have asked about that.

Could the Department of Transportation and Active Transit provide us an update if there’s a plan to twin that part of Highway No. 107, the Forest Hills Extension?

LLOYD HINES: The planning for that eventual bypass of Main Street is well underway. The Department is purchasing property in the area in order to facilitate the construction. Essentially, we’re looking at from the 118 to East Preston. As I mentioned, the alignment is almost executed or complete in that particular instance.

The only thing that is not nailed down at this point is the funding. As the member probably is aware, the current twinning program that we have was amply supported by funds from the federal government and currently there is no additional program to facilitate that. These kinds of projects get quite expensive, obviously, and if we have support from the federal government, we can more easily accommodate them within our own resources.

We are quite confident that we will find the funding as time goes on for that. We are quite confident that there will be a replacement federal program down the road, but in the meantime we are going ahead as if we had the funding, so that when the time comes for us to pull the trigger on that particular rebuild and address what we see as a very oppressing traffic congestion, we will be ready to go.

TIM HALMAN: I appreciate the minister’s response. Certainly, I know residents in the area are keeping an eye on that, as are all the MLAs in that area, along with my municipal colleagues in HRM. So thank you for the update.

I would like to now pass the torch to the MLA for Queens‑Shelburne.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Queens‑Shelburne.

KIM MASLAND: Good afternoon, minister. It is a real pleasure and privilege to be able to have a few minutes of your time this afternoon. Although I’d like to spend hours with you, I have to share my time with my colleagues.

I also would like to say how much I do enjoy working with the department’s staff. I am very fortunate to have such great local staff here in Queens‑Shelburne and, of course, I enjoy my conversations with the deputy and the chief engineer. They are always quite willing to help.

Some questions. My first one, of course, is going to be on Carters Beach, one of the top destinations actually in the province, one of the top beaches. Sadly, I have asked questions about Carters Beach and supporting infrastructure now every time I have had an opportunity to ask them, for four years.

It’s a very small, narrow road that goes in to Carters Beach. It is a residential area and there are serious public safety concerns. This beach is seeing hundreds and hundreds of people visit every day and, quite frankly, the residents who live on that beach are frustrated and they are worried about their public safety.

I would like to ask the minister: Can the minister tell me today, because here we are, we have another season upon us and we don’t have any type of infrastructure, what the plan is for Carters Beach to deal with the amount of traffic it sees on a daily basis in the Summer months?

[4:30 p.m.]

LLOYD HINES: I thank the member for the question. I also want to thank her for her compliments to our staff. We really appreciate that. They do work diligently and sincerely to try and execute their duties. I agree completely with the member’s assessment of Carters Beach. I’ve had the pleasure of visiting it and it is just a gem for all Nova Scotians.

The matter has been around for some time and in conjunction with other departments of government, we are working on a comprehensive plan to alleviate the traffic congestion there to make it safer for people who are using the access and also to help unravel the frustrations that the local folks are experiencing.

I’m confident to tell you that in the not-too-distant future, the finalization of what is going to be done - the engineering is being worked on as we speak - we’ll be able to have some consultation with the member, with the municipality, and with the community about the solution to the Carters Beach road problem.

KIM MASLAND: It certainly has gone on way too long. It has been a football that’s been kicked around from department to department. Sadly, the beach suffers, and the residents suffer. I look forward to finally having some resolution.

I’d like to now quickly speak about a road in my constituency. My colleague for Dartmouth East talked about Scud missiles hitting and making potholes, and I know that’s a term that we’ve used a lot in the department. Well, I’d like to introduce the minister to Bangs Falls Road, which is out in Greenfield, Queens County.

I don’t think it was just one Scud missile that hit there - it was a convoy of Scud missiles that have hit there, because there’s nothing left of the road. It’s a disaster. I don’t think it has seen asphalt in all the years I’ve been alive and minister, I’m getting old.

I’m wondering if you could tell me the plan to see some asphalt on this road out in Bangs Falls. This is a road that is travelled by many of the local mill workers and health care workers.

LLOYD HINES: I thank the member for the question. I also want to compliment her on taking the time to come and meet with our folks and bring forward the priorities that she sees in her riding.

We do have something scheduled, I think, for the Medway River Road - it’s what we’re calling it - which, I think, intersects Bangs Falls Road but we don’t have anything that we can identify for Bangs Falls Road. It’s a local road and it is essentially on a year-to-year basis. Now that it has been surfaced, we will take a closer look at it and see if there’s anything we can do in the current or upcoming season.

KIM MASLAND: One last question, although I’d love to sit and talk to you all day with priorities, but I need to give over some time to my colleague for Pictou West.

One last question, which is on a very dangerous section of Highway No. 103. We’ve seen multiple accidents, 18-wheelers hauling fish through to Shelburne County. I’ve written to you, minister. I’ve spoken to staff about the seriousness of this site. I’m talking about Highway No. 103, Granite Village. Not only is this a dangerous site but there’s no other way to detour traffic if there’s a collision scene on the highway and it can be blocked for several hours for people travelling east or west.

Can the minister please advise as to what the plans are to address this very dangerous section of highway at Granite Village?

LLOYD HINES: She’s absolutely right. There is no available detour for that particular section of Highway No. 103, so it is actually with our design group now. It’s been run up the ladder a bit, and we are reviewing what our options are in first of all creating a redundancy there so in the instance of any kind of blockage of that particular section of Highway No. 103 that there is an alternative route available. We’re reviewing the situation. There is no section of Highway 3 that we can easily get to, but we’re going to, in the review and observation that’s being done by our design group, look at what the possible alternatives might be for the bottleneck in that particular section of Highway No. 103.

KIM MASLAND: May I suggest that maybe until you look, it’s going to take some time to go through the planning of trying to detour that bottleneck, so maybe it would be a good idea to even look at maybe some increased signage or something to try to slow some traffic down. Pretty inexpensive compared to the cost of a life.

In closing, before I hand it over, I would like to extend an invitation to the minister to come to my constituency anytime. We’ll bubble wrap you, put you in the back of my Jetta, and I will take you over some of the roads that are high priority in my constituency. That invitation is open anytime, and now I will pass my time over.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Pictou West.

KARLA MACFARLANE: I want to thank my colleague, but I must tell her that don’t hold your breath for the minister to come visit you because he has stood me up numerous times already, so don’t hold your breath. Maybe he favours you more.

Thank you, minister, for your time and to your colleagues that are joining you. We always appreciate your wisdom and insight. As well, I do extend my gratitude to the different employees in plow sheds in my area of Pictou West. I think we have probably over 400 roads, and many of them are gravel. However, we do have an island in Pictou West, and that island is called Pictou Island. Pictou Island is a fantastic gem. If you have never visited the island, I would highly recommend it. There is a ferry, as you would know, because there’s provincial funding for that ferry.

My question is around the fact that this island is - on a yearly basis, there are a number of permanent residents, and there are only two roads: the main road, which is like six, seven kilometres long, and then there is a road, one road called Factory Road. It has probably eight to 12 residents, but I think about eight permanent residents. The pictures that they sent me two weeks ago were horrifying.

A couple of questions. I want to know when we are going to get gravel to the island. I’ve been advocating for gravel to Pictou Island since being elected in 2013. We need gravel this summer. I hope you get a chance to look at the pictures. We did send them. I don’t know how their fire truck would ever make it up that road. It wouldn’t, so it’s truly a safety issue. It kind of negates - I totally believe that they need a Department of Transportation and Active Transit person there. There’s one employee on the island, but what’s the purpose of that position if they don’t have the tools to do their job? So again, when are they getting gravel?

[4:45 p.m.]

LLOYD HINES: With regard to visiting Pictou West, I think if I got an invitation to be bubble‑wrapped, that might convince me to go down. That’s what the member for Queens‑Shelburne is offering.

Yes, Pictou Island, as just a paradise of a spot, does provide challenges for the department in terms of providing maintenance and improvements in the area. We do have a grader and a backhoe that is permanently stationed there, and we are aware of the conditions of the road. As a matter of fact, this year on Factory Road, we had a person who wintered there which resulted in Winter maintenance being applied to the road and, of course, that allowed the frost to penetrate more deeply and resulted in a poor outcome for the Spring.

We are seriously looking at ways we can make some improvements on that particular road. We had constraints previously about having to make improvements ‑ significant improvements to that road. It does require some significant improvements because the gravel must be barged to the area and that, of course, increases the cost versus trucking.

I think we may have found a solution to that which would permit us to capitalize the expenditure so then it wouldn’t be coming out of our thin maintenance budget where otherwise it would have to be funded from. So we are looking at that now and we are going to be reaching out to the member to discuss how we might approach this and look for some support to have that particular road qualify for the gravel road program, which would make it easier for us to fund than if we had to fund it out of our maintenance budget because, obviously, it is going to cost significantly more because it’s an island and having to transfer the gravel to Pictou Island.

We are spending some time trying to figure out the conundrum and what way we can do this. I’ll have the chief engineer or some executive staff reach out to the member and talk about what the options might be.

KARLA MACFARLANE: I want to thank the minister for his answer. It is well overdue to get gravel over there. I know it’s an investment. I’m glad to see that there’s some thought into putting it into capital. It needs to happen, and it needs to happen now. I didn’t recognize anything in this budget, so I hope that there’s reconsideration so that we can get it over to them before Fall.

To the minister, I probably wouldn’t bubble wrap you, but if we took the ferry to Pictou Island, I would certainly put a life preserver on you. I care that much.

I want to just move on. I’ll start off with asking about the Pictou Library. I’m not sure if it has moved departments, but last year when I asked the question with regard to infrastructure and . . .

THE CHAIR: Order, please.

Excuse me, folks. The time for the PC caucus has elapsed. Thank you to the honourable member for Pictou West for her questions.

The honourable member for Dartmouth North.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m happy to be back. I’d like to start by asking the minister some questions about community transit. I see in the budget that there’s $8.3 million under grants and contributions for community transportation. That’s why I was somewhat confused when the minister was talking about the $7 million, and then when he listed those projects, they seemed to be community transit.

First of all, I’d just like to clarify: the $8.3 million that’s in the budget under grants and contributions for community transportation, is that the entirety of community transit in the budget, or is there money in other categories that might not be obviously for community transit?

LLOYD HINES: The difference in those numbers represents a transfer which is coming into the budget of $1.3 million on top of the $7.033 million which is COVID-19 PPE available for public transit. That’s an application-based program and part of it would be available for the public transit side.

SUSAN LEBLANC: The way I understand it, then, is that normally - or there’s $7 million that’s regular money and then $1.3 million that’s extra money for PPE in public transit.

I guess then I’ll ask about the $7 million again. That seems to be for community transit programming. I don’t need the minister to go through the list again but I just want to confirm that that’s all of the money. I’m also wondering if it’s an increase or a decrease from last year’s budget.

LLOYD HINES: Because we have just received the transfer of $8.3 million from Communities, Culture and Heritage in the current year, I’m unable to speak to whether or not it’s up or down because we do not have that history with us. We just got the budget amount transferred to us, so I am unable to say if that was an increase or a decrease. I would suggest that probably with the addition of the $1.3 million which is COVID-19 related that it is a boost.

SUSAN LEBLANC: The other questions I’m going to put out there, if the minister is unable to answer them now I guess my request is that, like the other question before, if the department could just provide those answers to us once they get their community transit feet under them, that would be great.

The other question is, how much of that $7 million which is for community transit is core operational funding and how much is for grants and can a list of the grantees be provided?

LLOYD HINES: I think what the member is referring to as “core” does actually not appear in this budget, which is the staff that came across with this, is in our policy and planning budget. So the $8.3 million is all grants and most of that grant is application-based.

In terms of the list, we would endeavour to get last year’s list, which should be available from the Department of Communities, Culture and Heritage, but obviously this year, we can’t supply that information yet.

[5:00 p.m.]

SUSAN LEBLANC: In speaking with social service providers across the province, it’s raised again and again, and particularly in rural and suburban areas, how absolutely critical transportation options are for Nova Scotians. The point is we cannot be successful in providing services like health services, employment services, shelter, mental health, child care, social services in general, if people cannot reach them. It’s a foundational issue. It has to do with populations living in rural areas and there not being enough rural infrastructure and that kind of thing.

Considering that community transit is so crucial to folks in rural areas and suburban areas, I’m wondering if there’s a thought to expanding the support provided to municipalities and organizations that provide the community transit. We have an amazing community transit network in Nova Scotia, and until now it has been supported through grants by the Department of Communities, Culture and Heritage.

I’m wondering if the minister can speak to that at all, and about how he thinks that we are able to improve those organizations in the municipalities, and I guess further to that, I’m wondering - I’ve spoken about this a lot in the House in a variety of different critic roles, but the idea of not-for-profits who are providing foundational services or necessary services to Nova Scotians like, for instance, community transit or women’s centres, for instance, or for that matter theatre companies - the idea that they would have to continually be asking the government for support through granting programs, where they have to continually be thinking about where their next little pot of money is going to come from and writing the next grant, and all kinds of their energy and their administrative capital is put into writing grants, so they just continue to write more grants.

I’m wondering if the minister has given any thought to an approach of shifting to core operational funding for these organizations over granting.

LLOYD HINES: You know, representing the largest riding in the province in Guysborough‑Eastern Shore‑Tracadie, where the largest community probably would be in the 700‑people range, and with the population density on a comparison with the far north, I am very aware of the challenge that transportation represents in the day‑to‑day lives of people who are in need of any kind of services, but particularly health‑related services. So I agree with her completely in terms of how important the availability of transportation is.

You know, once we get ourselves settled here, take a look at it, and understanding what it is we are getting with the active transit file, I can tell you that we will be tearing into that problem to try and find solutions and bring our expertise to bear on solving some of these rural infrastructure challenges that we have.

I think that we can find innovative ways to enhance what is being done. I think the Department of Communities, Culture and Heritage has done a great job in nurturing the community transport system. We have 19 organizations now across the province in existence and more to come. As a matter of fact, there is a move afoot to introduce another one to serve, again, my constituency on the eastern part of the constituency.

I would just point out, however, that of the $7 million, the CTAP, the Community Transportation Assistance Program does provide $1.8 million of that $7 million in core funding for those 19 organizations. The anticipated good news is that the federal government has announced an additional program for community transit which we are hoping will enhance what we are able to do but, of course, now that is our sister department, the Department of Infrastructure and Housing, that will administer that process, determine what our share is from the federal government, and see how that is going to be distributed between the three levels of government.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I really appreciate that answer. I am glad to know ‑ I mean, yes, I was looking at the electoral district map the other day and I remember noting how big Guysborough‑Eastern Shore‑Tracadie is as a riding and how it must be very challenging to cover all of that space, so I know that the minister understands what I’m talking about. It’s good to hear that this is something that the department is ready to tackle.

I’m wondering if the minister can talk about any plans yet to support community transit providers in electrifying their services.

LLOYD HINES: I can say that obviously when we look at community transportation, we are thinking about solving that problem that the member talked about earlier, which exists mainly in the rural areas.

The decision on electrification would lie with the community groups that run the 19 services that are currently available throughout the province. I really think that is an inevitability but it’s not a tomorrow inevitability because of the availability of charging stations in rural Nova Scotia.

Now we are upping the ante on that. I know that there are several now in my riding, which as you mentioned is pretty big in the populated area, but eventually we’ll get to that.

On a macro scale, we are working with the larger transportation system providers on their options going forward around electrifying the transportation system. Also, I’m sure the member realizes that the Premier just announced a rebate system for electric vehicles which should work towards the greater availability. The more electric vehicles we can get on the road, the greater the demand will be for charging, so it will come as a natural fit.

It’s generally available in a low penetration across the province now but we expect that will grow and our Department of Transportation and Active Transit is working on also integrating that into our plans going forward.

THE CHAIR: Order, please. We’ve come to the next regularly scheduled COVID-19 break. We will be back in 15 minutes.

[5:15 p.m. The committee recessed.]

[5:31 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Dartmouth North.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’d like to just finish this section of questioning by asking about the Maritime Bus Company. Maritime Bus is facing challenging times with travel restrictions in place but it is a critical regional service that many people rely on.

Is the department in conversation with Maritime Bus about what they might need to continue operating?

LLOYD HINES: In the fiscal year ended March 31^st, we extended support to Maritime Bus in excess of $800,000 to help sustain that extremely valuable transportation system that operates between the three Atlantic provinces and that contribution was supplemented with contributions from the other two provinces in that general area of value.

We recognize how important it is to maintain this particular arterial system, that it is very important to our citizens throughout the Atlantic region and certainly in Nova Scotia. Our various populations, in particular our student population, rely heavily on that particular service. Also, they act as a very efficient courier between destinations throughout the Atlantic region and that’s very important to our business sector and our medical sector, also. That is the extent of support that has been afforded to Maritime Bus in the fiscal year ending the 31^st of March.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m wondering if the minister can comment on funding that is provided directly to Halifax Transit.

LLOYD HINES: The number she’s looking for is $2 million through the Public Transit Assistance Program in the current operating year.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Just going back to our discussion about electrifying systems. I’m wondering, in terms of charging stations, is that something that the Province is looking at in terms of public infrastructure? Is there a plan for the Province to install charging stations on provincial highways or whatever? Not even just provincial highways - what’s the plan there, or is it, like, do they have to be at gas stations or in private businesses, and that would be up to the private busines owner?

LLOYD HINES: I guess we’re at the beginning of the electrification of our transit system provincially. We know that the contribution that transit makes to greenhouse gas emissions is quite high - it’s either the highest or the second highest emitter. Anything we can do to green the system is good. We’re just beginning that.

Internally in the department, we’re turning our attention to providing charging stations at any new installations that we might be doing. The funding for the existing proliferation of charging stations - and I know, as I mentioned earlier, I have a couple in my own riding - I believe that the funding for those was a combination of municipal and Department of Energy and Mines funding. I think that the program as it exists now, I believe strongly that it is with the Department of Energy and Mines.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Just to clarify what the minister just said, that the Department of Transportation and Active Transit is looking at charging stations when they are doing installations, I just don’t understand what that means. Does that mean new overpasses? Or transportation projects? What does an installation consist of?

LLOYD HINES: What I was primarily thinking of is that we are currently involved in providing a couple of rest stations on the Cobequid Pass, which will be new builds, both of those. The planning at this point is considering the installation of charging stations going east and west at those facilities.

The department also has the responsibility for approximately 3,500 public buildings across the province, and there’s an opportunity that we are beginning to assess currently the feasibility of providing some charging stations at some of these facilities right across the province.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I think that’s a great idea. I mean, wherever we can capitalize on existing infrastructure we should be, in terms of ways of thinking about greening our province and our economy. I was just thinking about those, the TIR bases that we were asking about yesterday in Public Accounts Committee. I know that some of those are off the beaten track, though, so maybe that doesn’t make as much sense but those might be locations to consider as well.

I’m going to turn my questions now to the Traffic Safety Act. The Traffic Safety Act is being overhauled, which we have been hearing about for a couple of years now. It is a very large undertaking.

First, I just want to thank the staff at the department for really doing an excellent job in responding to my questions. I have had lots of constituency questions about the Traffic Safety Act, about ideas for it where I just fire them off to Royden Trainor and he always gets back to me quickly. If he doesn’t have the answer right away, he moves it up and tries to find an answer, or at least puts it into a pile - I think he is putting it into a pile where he is considering the ideas from people.

I also want to thank the staff for keeping us informed as the regulations are being released. I would also like to say that as much as I believe that it can be problematic for bills to be passed without regulations set already and then to have us vote on bills where the regulations will be set later, I get it with the Traffic Safety Act because it is such a massive Act. I do think in fact that if it has to be done that way then the way it is being done seems to be really good, where the regulations have come back to the community for feedback before they actually get passed. I understand that was a request on behalf of the department for that to happen and I think it is a really great commitment to make that happen. I’m hoping that when we see the official regulations that they will reflect some of what the community has said in terms of the feedback sessions and the surveys and sending your online feedback and all that.

I’d like to ask a couple of questions about the process, though. As the minister would know, people and organizations have stepped up to the call for feedback. The Halifax Cycling Coalition is one such group that has compiled recommendations upon recommendations, based on many years of work, as well as the public consultation and engagement in partnership with the Atlantic Active Alliance, the Ecology Action Centre, Walk ‘n Roll Halifax and Bicycle Nova Scotia. Those organizations have developed a comprehensive set of recommendations that I would like to ask about now.

Some of these are things I have been asking about for many years now and when I’ve asked about them before I have been told to wait for the Traffic Safety Act. So here we are. I’d like to ask about them again.

[5:45 p.m.]

One part of the feedback that was submitted about the TSA is that it should recognize bicycles as mobility aids. A U.K. organization called Wheels for Wellbeing found that 75 per cent of disabled cyclists use their bikes as a mobility aid. People who use a bicycle as a mobility aid may not be able to dismount, for example, to use a crosswalk, as is currently required in the TSA.

I’m wondering if this is being considered, and if not, why not?

LLOYD HINES: Again, I have to thank the member for her compliments for our staff.

The gargantuan undertaking of revamping the Motor Vehicle Act in Nova Scotia and introducing the TSA has proven to be a formidable task, but one that we feel has to be a very deliberate process and in that deliberate process, it also has to be an open process so that the public is given every opportunity to understand what lies ahead in the regulations.

That in itself takes some additional time, but we are hopeful and feel strongly that the outcomes will reflect the ideas of the community. The other thing I want to say is that it’s amazing, really, even in the short time that I’ve had the privilege of serving as minister here in this department, the changing nature of the transportation business.

You know, a couple of years ago I visited Washington, DC and saw all these business people ‑ ladies and men ‑ dressed in business attire zooming down the streets in Washington on their way to work on these electric scooters. So I’m saying, just what the heck is going on here? Because the last time I saw those devices was when I bought them for my kids when they were eight years old. Now they have the batteries concealed in the stem and they are a new mode of transportation and in a place like Washington that is flat, they are very practical and perhaps a little bit more than in the hilly city that we have come to enjoy and love here in Halifax.

There is that and, of course, there are the Segways. We know that you can rent one of those vehicles on the waterfront and drive all over the place with them. They have been out probably almost a decade since they’ve been there and there are all kinds of new and innovative modes of transportation that will require us to shape regulations and accommodate those into our system. You might say they are sort of disrupters in a way, in the same way that the Airbnb has been and all the other food delivery apps that are out there now.

In order for us to be nimble and be able to change quickly, that completely antiquated the Motor Vehicle Act because every time we wanted to do something with that, we had to go into the Legislature to do it.

That is the philosophy behind the TSA and the development of the regulations and therefore the need to spend a lot of time working with the public to test our assumptions of the regulations. Boy, has the public ever come through. We have thousands of comments on various sections of the Act that we have had out there. We have another section that’s before the public currently.

I am familiar with the recommendations that the member has spoken about. We are reviewing those recommendations and these types of problems are opportunities that might exist that maybe weren’t considered. That’s what the value of the consultation is. We’re human. We can’t think of everything. This gives us an opportunity to contemplate these particular unique situations and try and accommodate them in the regulations.

That, again, takes a bit of time. We’re into reviewing these comments and it’s going to take a little while before we’re able to shape the regulations in the way that best reflects the input that we have received from the public. But by the volume of input that we’re getting, we’re gratified that we did the right thing and provided the opportunity for the user group and the people who are affected and the changing nature of transportation globally, but certainly here in Nova Scotia to have some input into the new regime.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Yes, I do understand that with the changing nature of how we move around our communities, this will allow the Act to be more flexible and responsive and I hope that is the case.

I have a few more questions about certain regulations. It sounds like maybe the minister won’t be able to give me answers right now, but I’m going to ask them anyway. I’ll ask them as a group, and then we can talk about maybe when we’ll be able to find answers for them after.

Another recommendation is to give a person riding a bike more freedom to choose the safest part of the road to travel. Currently there’s a requirement to cycle in a bike lane if there is one available. Sometimes, for different reasons, someone may judge that being in the bike lane is actually not the safest place to be or the most convenient option. If we want to encourage active transit and active transportation for all of the reasons we’ve discussed many times over, I’m wondering if that is being considered.

Another recommendation is that the municipalities be able to - and we’ve heard this one many, many times before and I believe it has not changed - decrease, on their own without the special application currently required of the province, the default speed limit of 50 kilometres an hour. Is that being considered? It’s a big, big issue in many areas of the city and other areas as well. I feel like I heard either in Question Period or in a member statement today where one of the members worked with their community to have the speed limit lowered. I can’t remember who it was, but anyhow, to be able to be nimble with that kind of lowering of speed limits on certain streets would be really important.

Also, another recommendation is to increase the passing distance between a motor vehicle and a bike on high speed roads. I’m wondering if that’s being considered.

Also recommended is to implement the Idaho Stop. That is - I have to say I love this one - for people cycling at stop signs and red lights. The Idaho Stop is the common name for a law that allows people who are cycling to treat a stop sign as a yield sign and a red light as a stop sign. The general consensus among stakeholders in Idaho, such as transportation officials, urban planning staff, law enforcement, and cycling advocacy groups is that the Idaho Stop Law has helped to facilitate the ease and convenience of cycling without causing any risks to people cycling or increasing the number of collisions. I’m wondering if that’s being considered.

There are a number of other recommendations from the Cycling Coalition. Those are a bunch that have been recommended by the Cycling Coalition and those other organizations that I mentioned. I’m wondering if the minister can speak to any of those ones, and if he can’t, when we will know when those regulations will be available.

LLOYD HINES: I think she correctly forecast my response on those particular matters. As I mentioned, we have a significant amount of input that we are processing, including those recommendations from the Cycling Coalition that we haven’t considered or made any decisions on yet. They’re absolutely things that we will take into our account as we move forward, but in fairness and honesty, we haven’t processed those particular questions or formed any opinions on them yet.

SUSAN LEBLANC: This is a take on a different regulation and a different question on it. I have a question around the regulations that govern licensing for ride-hailing services. In September last year, regulations were released for consultation proposing a new restricted Class 4 licence that no longer requires taxi or ride-hailing drivers to retake the road and knowledge tests.

A few days later, these changes were then announced by the department as fact. I understand the reason for the changes. I don’t need the minister to go into the rationale behind the changes, but my question is around the consultation process here. How come in this case the regulations were announced for consultation and then a very few days later, it was announced that those changes would be taking place? I’m wondering why the department did not wait for public comment on that draft regulation before announcing it was final.

LLOYD HINES: Essentially, the change in the Fall was to the regulations under the Motor Vehicle Act, and we had been engaged in extensive discussions in particular with HRM around the desirability of finding a safe way to protect its public interests of permitting the ride‑hailing services. In particular, we had meetings with Lyft and with Uber and the expedient change was a way of expediting the advent of those services should they wish to come into the province and in particular to the HRM area as a primary target market for those services.

Then, in an overlap with the consultation of the TSA, input will be able to be received on the decision that was made to make the adjustments in the Motor Vehicle Act Regulations to permit the advent of these services so people have an opportunity, in the consultation of the TSA, to comment on those changes that were made back in the Fall.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m going to change subjects again for a minute. Does the department track the greenhouse gas emissions of its vehicle fleet currently?

LLOYD HINES: The short answer to that question is no, but the aggregate emissions would be tracked and estimated through the Department of Energy and Mines, which would know what the average vehicle per kilometre would emit.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Can the minister explain if there is a strategy or a timeline for the electrifying of the Province’s vehicle fleet? Now I understand it connects to our question before, which is the charging station issue, but I am wondering if it is on the radar and if so, if there is a goal in mind and how it would work to transfer our fleet to electric vehicles.

LLOYD HINES: In our world, speaking of the department’s fleet, we are taking the opportunity for our smaller vehicles. We have a lot of pickup trucks. Currently, there are not a lot of options for all-electric or hybrid vehicles. Ford has one that they’re introducing this year. We intend, as we replace these lighter vehicles and as charging stations become more available, to move in that direction.

On the other side of the coin, for the major part of our fleet, which is our heavy equipment - graders, loaders, plows - there are no options currently for electrification of vehicles like that that we’re aware of. Eventually, as the technology improves and the battery storage capability increases, which seems to be happening every day, then we would be moving to those vehicles. The average shift, for example, of one of our plows, is nine hours in a snowstorm. We don’t have anything but an internal combustion engine at this point that can provide that kind of performance.

On the smaller vehicles that we use as service vehicles, as the opportunity presents itself - we have a lot of half-ton trucks - we intend to go to hybrid and electric vehicles, but for the larger vehicles, that’s a ways down the road.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m just going to finish my time with this question. The federal government has developed a Green Choice Program that allows federal government buildings to be powered by 100 per cent renewable energy. I’m wondering if the provincial government is looking at a similar framework for our public buildings. If so, by when?

THE CHAIR: Order, please. The time for the NDP questions has elapsed for this hour. We’ll now turn to the PC caucus.

The honourable member for Pictou West.

KARLA MACFARLANE: We were going to start off with talking about Pictou Library, the new infrastructure that was to be taking place this year. Basically, I just want to ask the minister, at any point in time were there ever blueprints that your office received to go over and endorse as capital funding? Last year, this time, when I asked the question, I was given the impression that it was all set to go, shovel-ready, and that you guys had the plans and everything was good, and then all of a sudden, everything was taken away. I’m just wondering what information you have on the Pictou Library through your department.

LLOYD HINES: I actually had an opportunity to check Hansard as to what I did say last year, and my indication is that we had not been stimulated for that particular project. At that point in time, there wasn’t any commitment made around blueprints or a commitment to the project.

The reality is that there has not been a call for social infrastructure. An application did come in, and we get all kinds of applications at this time and it is in the inventory of applications that we have. Beyond that, at this point, I would suggest that the member address that question to the new Department of Infrastructure and Housing that would be handling any federal top‑ups or any new calls for social infrastructure that would be issued. That would not be in my purview any longer.

KARLA MACFARLANE: I certainly will be following up.

Moving just quickly to Hedgeville Road. It has not been paved since, I think, the early 1970s. Basically, we’ve been advocating to get this road paved since 2013 and I think, even before me, Charlie Parker, the past MLA, was trying to get it paved as well. I don’t understand why it hasn’t been recognized for maintenance for pavement, really, but at this point you cannot even really drive on it. It has basically just gone down to gravel.

I’m wondering what the plans are. If you are not going to pave it, will you commit today to at least going and turning it into gravel? I think the residents have decided just to turn it into gravel because we are just being ignored. What is the status?

[6:15 p.m.]

LLOYD HINES: I’d like to thank the member for taking advantage of the opportunity to come in and speak to her road requirements during the annual opportunity we provide for MLAs to discuss what their wishes would be with the province. We’re aware of the request to return this road to a gravel road, and that is under consideration presently, and we’ll follow up with our staff to reach out to the member and try to put a timeline when that might occur.

KARLA MACFARLANE: Just quickly on the Trenton Connector, we know that it’s in the capital budget, it’s going to happen. Can you just quickly give me a date of when?

LLOYD HINES: That particular project is just in the final design stage. We expect that we will be issuing a tender very shortly and it will be under construction in the current construction season.

KARLA MACFARLANE: It’s the right decision to change that into a rotary and save lives. I think in total there were six lives lost there over the years, the decades, and so it’s good to hear that.

Last of all, before I turn it over to my colleague from Northside-Westmount, I just have one last question with regard to calcium fluoride. Was there an increase in overall investment into what you would be acquiring for this season? When you have constituencies in rural areas that half the roads are gravel and getting it sprayed once a season in the summer, it’s not enough, and folks don’t deserve that, so I hope the minister has a large increase in investment for that product.

LLOYD HINES: We just got a very humorous text here, Madam Chair.

On the calcium chloride, the budget is elastic on the calcium chloride. We did run into some significant calcium chloride supply issues last year which were associated with the supply chain which got interrupted by COVID-19 which resulted in uneven distribution and supply throughout the province. We don’t anticipate that occurring this year, so we’re hopeful that we will return to a normal distribution process in the upcoming season.

KARLA MACFARLANE: I’m all set to turn it over to my colleague from Northside-Westmount.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Northside-Westmount.

MURRAY RYAN: I’d like to start off by first thanking the minister and his staff for their time this afternoon, as well as, of course, recognizing all the year-round hard work of the local transportation staff here in industrial Cape Breton.

Spring is here and our annual highway work is soon going to be beginning down here on Highway No. 125. As I’m sure the minister is aware, Highway No. 125 is a primary connector between residents of the Northside and Sydney and, more important, the Cape Breton Regional Hospital. This highway has been subject to chronic issues with rutting.

To this end, there are two sections of the eastbound lane that the Department of Transportation and Active Transit is going to be resurfacing this year with asphalt, and one particular section is from Leitches Creek to the Frenchvale exit. It’s approximately 2.4 kilometres. My concern related to this section is that it’s about one to 1.5 kilometres too short. Just past the Frenchvale exit is an area called Campbell’s Hill. These eastbound lanes on the hill have developed ruts that will literally autosteer your vehicle up the hill. They’re bad enough when the road’s dry, but when the road’s wet, they’re even more treacherous.

I would like to ask the minister if the minister could have his department review this short section of Highway No. 125 and add it to the existing 2.4 kilometres that are already planned for this coming year.

LLOYD HINES: I think we’ve had a conversation about this in the past, and we’d be more than happy to take another look at the section that he’s talking about, with an eye to extending the contract to capture that additional section of which we are aware.

MURRAY RYAN: I’d like to thank the minister for that information. He is having a bit of déjà vu. Yes, this time last year - or last March, to correct myself - we had a conversation, but it was about a section in the westbound lanes and that was taken care of during last year’s construction season and I thank the minister for that.

Another area that is of concern in my constituency is the community of Westmount. The community of Westmount is in the former Cape Breton County - well, it’s still in Cape Breton County, but it’s now part of the Cape Breton Regional Municipality. Anyway, through Westmount, the streets, avenues, the roads, they are quite literally falling apart. Madam Chair, I was hoping the minister could provide some information surrounding what agreements are in place with the CBRM with regard to J-class roads in this area.

LLOYD HINES: The roads in question in Westmount do fall into the J-class category. The way that the J-class roads work is there is an amount put forward by the province which the municipalities have the option of matching on a 50-50 cost-shared basis, at the discretion of the municipality as to what roads they would like to have resurfaced.

We are just finalizing our J-class requests for the upcoming season, so they haven’t come to me yet. They are being filtered by our senior staff and it may be that the CBRM has placed some of the Westmount roads on that list but I can’t say that with certainty at this point in time. But on a go-forward basis, the member would be well advised to liaise with the municipality to raise the priority of the roads. I’m sure the councillor for the area would be well aware of the requirements and urge the municipality to put them on the list of J-class roads they would submit to the department for the 50-50 cost sharing.

MURRAY RYAN: These J-class roads are a bit of a hot potato and I’m glad to have that clarification from the minister related to the province’s position on these roads.

One last question before the break. Over the past year, the Department of Transportation and Active Transit has been holding consultations related to the Traffic Safety Act regulations. I’m curious - when does the department anticipate that this process will be completed?

Secondly, Madam Chair, to the minister. I have been approached by several constituents regarding the licensing of their three-wheel vehicles, like those Polaris-type vehicles. I was hoping the minister would be able to provide an update on these new regulations and how and when it will impact these vehicles which are currently restricted from our roads.

[6:30 p.m.]

LLOYD HINES: We expect that the end of the TSA consultations will be by Summer. Then we will start parsing the thousands of comments that we have received. However, with the three-wheel vehicles, we are looking at doing a pilot on the three-wheel vehicles prior to that, to expedite the answers that people are looking for there. We would say that that pilot would be introduced before the provisions in the TSA would take effect. There’s work being done on the three-wheel vehicle front.

THE CHAIR: We will now take our 15-minute break. We will return at 6:46 p.m.

[6:31 p.m. The committee recessed.]

[6:46 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

THE CHAIR: Order, please. We will continue with the questions from the honourable member for Northside-Westmount as soon as I see the minister.

The honourable member for Northside-Westmount.

MURRAY RYAN: I just want to take a moment to thank the minister and his staff for his time this afternoon to provide some information surrounding my questions. Now I will pass the baton on to my colleague from Argyle-Barrington.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Argyle-Barrington.

COLTON LEBLANC: I also want to thank the minister and his staff for the opportunity to ask him a few questions this evening. I do also want to recognize the work that staff locally here in both Yarmouth and Shelburne Counties are doing year-round to ensure that our roads are safe; as well, recognize the efforts of the senior staff at the department, I do appreciate speaking with them on occasion.

I guess it probably won’t come as a surprise to the minister of what my first question is going to be. It is going to be on Exit 32 on Highway No. 103. Last year during our discussions, I left Estimates quite elated having learned from the minister that Exit 32 was going to be included in the five year plan that was expected in December. I’ll quote for the record from Hansard, from the minister, that: “It’s our intention to have it enter the Five Year Plan, and the next Five Year Plan, the one that will be released in December. Where it fits into that picture, somewhere in that next five-year period, will be dependent on the final design in terms of what the costs are.”

We’ve learned since then, obviously it wasn’t included in the five year plan that was released earlier this year, unfortunately, and that was based on - I understand that the department hadn’t had approval to add this project to the major construction envelope of projects and had yet to see cost-sharing under federal infrastructure programs.

I guess I’m looking for an update from the minister in broad terms, whatever he wants to tell me, regarding this important project to the constituency of Argyle-Barrington.

LLOYD HINES: Thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank the member for the question. He was absolutely right; I was quite certain he was going to ask me about this particular important project. We know that safe transportation is really important for connecting our communities and this is an example of that. We know that and have been in discussion on this one for some time.

I can share with the member that we are deeply involved in the design process for the new interchange, and we are also purchasing property that will enable the interchange to be completed. There would be three at‑grade intersections that would be replaced by the interchange that would go in. We are now at the point where we can do stakeholder meetings but, of course, we are speaking with the member and with the municipality.

The estimate we have for construction that will be driven by the final design - which we are very close to completing - is in the vicinity of $30 million. We currently do not have the funding approved for the project and we can’t publish projects in the Five Year Plan when we don’t have the funding in place to execute them. Nor can we jeopardize the expectation or hope that we would be able to receive some federal funding by prematurely announcing that we have put this particular project on the plan.

So, it is progressing. It’s slow. Our intent is clear on the intermediate term, short term, that we want this to happen. We are focusing on the next steps for the project which would be the completion of the preliminary design that is very near; continuing with the land acquisition, which we have under way; and then the environmental impact assessment that we would need to do. Down the road, the issue of federal participation will be, of course, at the discretion of the new Department of Infrastructure and Housing.

COLTON LEBLANC: I do thank the minister for his response and for the facts that he did present in his response. I was sort of hoping that the minister was going to come down with his senior staff a couple of short months ago to discuss some of his concerns and could have toured him around the constituency. I’m not sure if I would have made the same offer of bubble wrap to the minister, but the offer still stands if he wants to come down and maybe offer him some fresh seafood instead.

In correspondence with the department staff, it was acknowledged, and it has been previously acknowledged, that the project has been incorporated into the major highway design program. Recognizing that this project has been talked about for many, many years, even before my time as MLA for Argyle-Barrington, and recognizing the fact that there are other projects across our province, I’m just trying to gauge on the priority scale, where does this project here fit: Is it on the top of the list, is it in the middle of the pack, or is it at the bottom of the barrel? If the minister could provide some clarification on that, it would be appreciated.

LLOYD HINES: My senior staff advises me that this project is in the top three of the major projects that we have on the drawing board at present.

COLTON LEBLANC: I guess top three is better than the bottom three; hopefully, we can make it to the top one. I do still want to continue working with local and area staff to implement medium- and short-term solutions for that area because recognizing that the delays, whether they’re foreseen or not, does not change the significant safety issues and hazards present at that site. I guess that covers Exit 32.

I want to pivot a bit to talk in one bubble about Winter road maintenance and gravel road maintenance. Southwestern Nova Scotia is well known to be the banana belt of the province. The effects of climate change are real in our province, including here, whether it be coastal erosion, flooding, droughts in our summers. The point that I do want to make is the practices that have been previously implemented over the last I don’t know how many years - I guess maybe the minister, in one of his history lessons on the history of roads in Nova Scotia could clarify - what I do want to state is that the Winters that we’re having now aren’t the same as what they used to be 10 or 15 years ago. You would grade in the Fall; you would have frozen or significantly cold weather and the side roads would stay in relatively decent or fair condition. What we’re experiencing now is freeze, thaw, freeze, thaw to the point [Inaudible] that the minister has spoken about previously in committee would be able to make it through these roads.

[7:00 p.m.]

I’m very curious to see if it’s on the government’s radar to look at the current practices, to see if they can be modified to adapt to the current environment, the current weather conditions that are being experienced here in southwestern Nova Scotia.

LLOYD HINES: I thank the member for the question. This particular Winter here, we finished our Winter budget pretty well right on target, which is the first time in a number of years that we weren’t $5 million to $8 million over. It’s not that many years ago that instead of $60 million in the Winter, we spent as high as $88 million. Certainly, this year we’ll lower the rolling five-year average, which is what we sort of look at to assess whether or not we need to make changes on what the assumptions are.

I think it is abundantly clear that we do have impact from climate change and that is a combination of the milder Winters and also the coastal erosion. I’m sure the member would be able to point to lots of areas in his constituency where the roadway and particularly the guardrail - I know I have it in my riding - is eroded and falls off because of the encroaching ocean.

There are definitely impacts being felt because of climate change; we’re no different than anybody else, we’re trying to look at ways to mitigate that and to prepare for the outcomes of that. We do, though, have to gather the data and look at a minimum of five‑year averages so we can make sensible decisions about what our posture should be in terms of dealing with the change that is occurring in the environment throughout. There’s no doubt about that.

We find that we are getting a lot of our coastal roads that are being threatened by erosion and heavier storms that are putting water over them that we hadn’t seen before. We need to understand that so that we can adjust our budgeting process to be able to compensate for what the requirement is, based on the changing environment that we find ourselves in.

We are planning for that, we are watching it all the time, and we are taking it into consideration in everything we do. The tale eventually ends up on the expenditure side and what it costs us to implement our Summer and Winter programs. We are finding that the Winter program is decreasing somewhat, and we figure that that is the result of milder Winters due to climate change.

COLTON LEBLANC: I guess the practices that we currently have in Nova Scotia - what may work for Winters in Cape Breton may not be practical for Winters here in southwest Nova Scotia - what works today may not work forever and that’s where I am at right now. That’s what I’m led to believe when I travel the roads in my constituency along my way to Halifax; that’s what I hear from constituents who are expressing concern whether it be damage to vehicles or frustrated constituents who have to travel on roads that are pitted with holes; or home care or VON workers who are trying to get to work or go to see clients; first responders who have to do their jobs.

So, I call upon the department to have a serious look at the practices that are currently being implemented and have a review to see if there are improvements that can be made when it comes to Winter maintenance and Summer maintenance.

One of the topics I did want to discuss briefly but I’m running out of time, is coastal erosion. I've discussed it with staff a number of times and have sent correspondence to the minister a number of times. There are, in fact, like the minister said, a number of roads and areas that are susceptible to coastal erosion. Unfortunately, we may not have the luxury of having car trails like the minister may have, but one of the last questions I do want to bring up is the Cape Sable Island causeway which was previously brought up due to structural concerns.

I’ve worked with department staff to have access to the technical assessment, but at present there are environmental concerns. The causeway has been present, connecting Cape Sable Island to the mainland in the Barrington area, for a number of decades.

What we’ve seen - you can go on Google Earth Timelapse - I’m not sure if the minister has done that before - you can see from Google satellite images the changing environment. So, whether it is new developments in an area, you are actually seeing changes to the environment; whether it be sandbars growing, and that’s what we are seeing from North East Point northerly towards the mainland, as well as [Inaudible] Beach, you can see very well over the last number of decades it seems to have happened and progressed exponentially quicker along that area. There are reports of erosion to that and the concern or the question being raised is: Is it because of the causeway?

With correspondence received from the department, I recognize the department’s infrastructure itself, but I am just wondering is it ‑ and I have written to the federal Minister of DFO, I assume there is a DFO responsibility here because it’s in salt water, is it Environment Nova Scotia? I imagine it’s a conglomerate of agencies and departments that are essentially responsible for the future of the Cape Sable Island causeway. I was just wondering if the minister could provide a few comments on that.

LLOYD HINES: From our perspective we’re responsible, obviously, for the integrity of the causeway and as the member knows, a study was conducted. I believe the member has a copy of that study and aside from some issues around the surface condition of the causeway, the foundation integrity was found to be good.

Now I believe what the member is asking is a very valid question and it extends to the effects that occur when we alter an ecosystem which, when the causeway was built – I’m not sure but it might have been in the 1940s, probably the member would have a good idea - the understanding and the rules that governed those kinds of alterations were significantly different than what we see today.

An example of what I’m talking about is the Avon River, the tidal turbine that I believe is on the Avon River that is now going to be taken out and replaced. That piece of infrastructure has been there for quite a long time. There’s a discussion going on about whose responsibility it is and what will happen when the river is returned to its natural state. So those are issues, that and what the member is bringing up here, which is the effects of having constructed that particular causeway on the adjacent waterways and fishing grounds that are there.

I completely agree with him in that that is a slippery slope because of the number of agencies that are involved. I can think of, right off the bat, the first one would be DFO, Lands and Forestry would have something to say there and of course, Department of Environment and Climate Change.

In terms of the sandbars and the effects that putting a causeway in place has had on the environment and the marine environment in that area, that particular side of the business is not really our responsibility. Our responsibility is to ensure that it’s a safe passage for the folks who use it and depend on it for their living and for their commerce in the area.

So, I really can’t offer too much advice about how you untie that knot that’s there, but I think it’s a real consideration.

[7:15 p.m.]

COLTON LEBLANC: I do appreciate the minister’s response and understand the complexity of this issue. I appreciate it’s the department’s responsibility for the infrastructure itself, but at the end of the day, who is essentially responsible to say something needs to be done? The minister listed off a number of departments, so I guess we’ll continue that discussion maybe with those departments and see where our discussions go.

I could go on and list a number of local roads, but I’m happy to have the opportunity to speak with local staff and the senior staff at the department and appreciate their efforts to collaborate on the needs of those here in Argyle-Barrington.

Recognizing that our time today is slim, I’m going to pass it on to my colleague from Inverness. I thank the minister and his staff for their time this evening.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Inverness with about seven and a half minutes.

ALLAN MACMASTER: I would like to start with a quick snapper, if I could. We had a lot of rain on the Easter weekend, and we had a lot of rain the weekend before that as you know. There was a lot of damage done and a number of road washouts. I’m wondering if it’s possible that the damage has triggered the threshold for us to be able to gain federal disaster assistance relief.

LLOYD HINES: I anticipated that you and I would have this discussion through the Chair. The amount of rain that we got in the Inverness County area was quite staggering; it overwhelmed a lot of our infrastructure in the area. It was quite localized. There was some in Victoria County, but it was pretty intense in Inverness County.

Inverness is one of the larger counties in the province at 3,800-odd square kilometres and being one of the counties that settled early in Nova Scotia, you have lots of gravel roads in the area. We are under way to try and repair the infrastructure that was destroyed, and I think in some instances that’s the right word to use, in Inverness County.

I was very pleased with the response time from our folks who service Inverness County to get the roads to a passable condition on an emergency basis. It’s going to take us a little while to get a cumulative assessment of just what the total overall costs to trigger the federal disaster relief would be. We believe that the magic number is $3 million, which can be a consolidated number between the department and the federal and provincial governments who may have incurred damage.

If the cumulative total can get to $3 million, then we can apply for the disaster relief. It will be probably the better part of a month before we get to a full assessment to be able to determine just exactly what our expenditures will be to restore this particular road infrastructure in Inverness County.

ALLAN MACMASTER: Let’s move on to another subject now, the roundabout that is going to be constructed in Port Hastings to replace the rotary. I know last year during Budget Estimates, we were discussing the value of consultation, and I know the pandemic kind of uprooted plans perhaps to consult locally.

I know we’re still in the pandemic, but there are different ways that the public can be consulted. One of the most important groups I think about is the local volunteer fire department first responders in Port Hastings. Their station is right above the roundabout, or what will be the roundabout, and their members not only have to be able to leave the station and sometimes navigate through traffic delays caused by bridge openings at the causeway, but also they have to get to the fire station before they can do that. Sometimes they’re getting caught in the traffic jams that are accumulating.

Is there an ability, despite the pandemic, to do some consultation, and I think particularly with that organization?

LLOYD HINES: We’re anxious to get rolling on this project. The design is pretty well complete. We’re digging in deep now into the details, and we expect to have the tender out this year, probably by mid to late Summer. The consultation, which will be imminent, will be conducted online due to COVID-19.

There will be ample opportunity for people to participate, and we will undertake to reach out directly to that fire department and make sure that our staff fully understand the implications that exist for them. That’s a very good point, and I thank the member for raising it.

THE CHAIR: Order. That concludes the time for the PC caucus. I’ll now pass it back over to the NDP caucus.

The honourable member for Dartmouth North.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Great to be back. I’d like to start by asking the minister about environmental remediation. In the budget for 2020-21, there was an almost $22 million jump for environmental remediation.

I’m wondering if the minister can provide a breakdown of that amount?

LLOYD HINES: I thank the member for the question. The number she speaks about includes $19 million for the Boat Harbour sludge remediation, $3.4 million for the Harrietsfield remediation, and approximately another $1 million for sundry and other projects.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m wondering if the minister can tell us if the Province expects to recoup any of the cost of the Boat Harbour cleanup?

LLOYD HINES: The total liability that’s been booked on the cleanup is currently at $311 million, of which $100 million is recoverable from the federal government.

SUSAN LEBLANC: To clarify, then, the minister had said $19 million earlier. I guess $300 million is the total cost and obviously not budgeted for only this year?

Can the minister just explain how many years that $300 million spans, and will there be any recuperation of costs from Paper Excellence?

[7:30 p.m.]

LLOYD HINES: The recovery on the gross value, which would include the $19 million in question, is $100 million from the federal government. The matter that the member brings up with regard to Paper Excellence is part of the ongoing negotiations that will occur and the bankruptcy court action that is currently in place with the company. We can’t make any comments about anything further along those lines.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Does the department have responsibility for remediation of historical mines? If so - well, that’s the question. Does this department have responsibility for remediation of historical mines?

LLOYD HINES: Our subsidiary organization called Nova Scotia Lands is the service provider who will oversee the implementation of the cleanup for two sites that have been announced - Montague Mines and Goldenville. The actual client there is the Department of Energy and Mines.

SUSAN LEBLANC: In the minister’s opening remarks, he said that the province will not absorb any legal liability during the cleanup of Boat Harbour. I’m just wondering if the minister can elaborate on that comment. I don’t really totally understand what he means.

LLOYD HINES: Mr. Chair, I thank the member for the question. That could be characterized as a without-prejudice statement on behalf of the government, in that for expediency and to maintain our schedule and plan to execute what we have committed to do there, we needed to move quickly to begin the process and the company did not move at the same pace. We wanted to avoid having two entities in there at the same time - the proverbial tripping over each other phase - so we moved ahead with that particular piece of the expenditure with the intent to recover during the legal phase of the process.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Is there a cost to the Department of Transportation and Active Transit stemming from the federal ruling that the province must improve fish passage at the Windsor causeway?

LLOYD HINES: Mr. Chair, the short answer to that question is no, there is no additional cost to the department. We have that project fully estimated. I’m quite confident in the numbers and we have it fully funded and committed to with a combination of provincial and federal funding for both the roadway and the replacement aboiteau that will be under the auspices of the Department of Agriculture.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Can the minister elaborate on the provincial portion of that cost?

LLOYD HINES: We’re pretty solid on the replacement aboiteau cost, which is estimated at $65 million, of which 50 per cent is coming from the federal government, I believe.

Because of the nature of the road there, the piece of the roadway that is near the aboiteau is in the bridge, is in the $20 million range, but the entire project was subsidized through our partners at the federal level. I don’t have that total number for you just now, but I can undertake to provide you with that total number, which will make the thing a little bit clearer once we get it figured out from our staff. We don’t have it in front of us just now.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I would appreciate that. That would be great.

Also, if there is compensation being budgeted for farmers for damaged crops due to the increased salinization of water, I’d love to know if that’s also being budgeted for.

I will move on right now, because I’m running out of time for this section.

In October of last year, the CEO of Breton Ability Centre wrote to the director of Accessibility Services to describe an issue with negotiations with the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. From what I understand, TIR procured a parcel of land from BAC to build a roundabout at the newly-named Inclusion Drive, agreeing to replace 200 metres of sidewalk.

Can the minister let us know if this situation has been resolved, and has the entire length of sidewalk been funded and built by the department?

LLOYD HINES: I can’t say with certainty that that has been executed, but it’s my understanding that we did commit to that. We have another roundabout starting up very shortly, and if it isn’t done, it will be done.

SUSAN LEBLANC: The letter that was written on October 29^th to the director of Accessibility Nova Scotia explained that though the department had committed to the 200 metres, which was basically - there was a quote saying: what we take, we will replace - 200 metres of sidewalk, the department has only put back 80 metres of sidewalk so far.

I’d just like a clarification, in terms of that missing 120 metres, if that is what the minister is committing to right now. If so, can he provide a timeline on when that will be completed?

[7:45 p.m.]

LLOYD HINES: We will undertake to get that information precisely and provide it for her, but rest assured, what we committed to doing will be done. As I mentioned, there’s another large project right there that’s being done and can be easily mobilized when we’re in the area there. We’ll do it.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m running out of time. I’m just letting the minister know that I will ask him tomorrow about the Lancaster intersection.

THE CHAIR: Order, please. The time for Estimates for this evening has elapsed.

The honourable Deputy Government House Leader.

HON. DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: Madam Chair, I move that you do now leave the Chair and report progress to the House and beg leave to sit again.

THE CHAIR: The motion is carried.

The committee will now take a 15-minute break.

[The committee adjourned at 7:46 p.m.]