HALIFAX, FRIDAY, APRIL 22, 2022

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY

11:34 A.M.

CHAIR

Lisa Lachance

THE CHAIR: The Committee of the Whole on Supply will come to order. It is now 11:34 a.m. There are three hours and 20 minutes of Estimates remaining. We’ll continue on from where we left off.

The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition.

HON. IAIN RANKIN: I have just a few questions for the minister. I appreciate the opportunity and want to thank staff. There are a lot of tremendous staff at the department now called Public Works - Transportation and Active Transit before that. I’ve gotten to know many of them at the local level and at the senior leadership level. I have a lot of respect for the current Deputy Minister, Peter Hackett. He knows the area that I represent well throughout his career, and the other staff who might be with the minister to help her today.

My questions are all essentially local, and I won’t take too much time. My area is about half situated with provincial roads and the other half are municipally owned. As soon as I was elected in 2013, I pushed to try to get more transferred to HRM because they have stricter standards that take into account snow removal and things like that.

I know we are under way to transfer the roads between Exit 5 and Exit 4, the Hubley area and Upper Tantallon. I just want to get a confirmation of when, the date, that actual exchange will take place and if there are any other details that the residents in that area should know.

HON. KIM MASLAND: I thank the honourable member for his question and for his kind comments about the incredible staff here at the Department of Public Works. We are very fortunate in this province to have such dedicated folks working every day to make sure that our roads are safe, and our buildings are safe.

As I said earlier in my opening statement when we started Estimates, I consider myself very privileged to be able to work in this department, surrounded by such incredible people.

The answer to the question is that the transfer is going forward as planned. It looks like that transfer will be done effective June 1^st. If there are any other specific details that the member is looking for, I am certain if he wanted to reach out to our Chief Engineer Mark Peachey, we can follow up. But as far as the question, June 1^st is the date you are looking at.

IAIN RANKIN: Thanks to the minister. I appreciate the work. Mark Peachey is another one who does great work. I can almost envision who is in the room with her, probably Don Maillet and perhaps Guy Deveau - all outstanding public servants. I definitely appreciate the work they did to look at this section and the need to ensure that there is more consistency between Hammonds Plains and Timberlea with the snowplows going back and forth on the highways. It just made sense.

Now I’m left with essentially the Prospect Road communities, which are significant geography. We still have a lot of roads provincially, but specific to Prospect Road, that main artery, we’ve accomplished a lot with around six or seven turning lanes to help with safety.

The next one we had on the docket was the Terence Bay Road intersection, which was in the capital plan for this year. We had some land that needed to be sorted out with Suncor, I believe, in that intersection - some environmental studies and so forth. I’d like to get an update on the Terence Bay Road intersection, if that will be complete this year, if there are still any obstacles to look at before that is complete.

KIM MASLAND: Again, thank you to the member for the question. As the member knows, I am very familiar with that area. I spent a lot of time there in my teenage years and driving that Terence Bay Road. I understand the safety concerns there.

As the member has alluded to, that project is in our published plan. We are expecting to move that forward. We can check to see if there have been any other issues or if those outstanding concerns have been resolved. But again, it is in the published plan, and we will be moving it forward as soon as we can.

IAIN RANKIN: Thank you to the minister and yes, I did know that. Terence Bay is a very special place. If any of the members haven’t been there, it’s really incredible vistas. I believe Peggy’s Cove doesn’t hold a candle to the places around Terence Bay, Lower Prospect, and Prospect Village. I know some of the members know a lot about that area as well.

Having said that, still relative to the Prospect Road, we continue to work with the department to ensure active transportation lanes, we called them, widening the shoulders essentially. So we did two phases, Goodwood into Hatchet Lake. Very interested in ensuring that we continue down through Whites Lake into Shad Bay, and ideally, all the way to Peggy’s Cove, with it obviously being the tourism draw. I’m just wondering if we’re able to ensure that we can continue.

I guess especially specific to the question - I don’t believe the Terence Bay Road intersection will be complete this year. That’s my sense. Given that there’s always slippage in the budget, I wonder if we could continue with the widening of the shoulders with a tender this year instead of waiting until next year, given that there will be some room if Terence Bay Road intersection is not completed.

KIM MASLAND: What I’ll say to the member is that I can appreciate his concerns from his constituency, but as the member would know, in our most recent budget we have invested $507.8 million. It’s one of the largest investments into Nova Scotia roads, highways and bridges that this province has ever seen. Another $30 million in our envelope for bridges - that’s $60 million to be put into our bridge rehabilitation, new bridges; $20 million more for gravel; $11 million more for RIM - so doubling both of those programs, $20 to $40 million and $11 million to $22 million for RIM.

I cannot commit to the honourable member on that road project right now, but certainly I will make sure that it is added to my list to take a look at.

One thing I do want to reassure the member is, as the Minister of Public Works, one of the things that I take very seriously is the safety of our highways and many of our trunks and routes in rural parts of our province as well. We’re not just going to be looking at the 100-Series, the twinning. We have to make sure they’re safe, but I also understand the importance of making sure our trunks, routes and local roads are safe as well. I’ll make sure to take a look at that, but I can’t make a commitment at this time, I’m sorry.

IAIN RANKIN: I have just one more question. There are two signs that still say Lakeside Business Park - highway signs owned by the province, the green signs. I wrote to the department some time ago. They should be changed to Beechville Industrial Park. The HRM changed the name of that for reasons that it’s in the Black community. I’d like to know an update to ensure that those two signs are changed, please. Thanks.

THE CHAIR: The time for the Official Opposition has now expired. It is now time for the NDP.

The honourable member for Dartmouth North.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I was going to cede two minutes of my time to the Liberal caucus, so I’m hoping that the minister could just answer the question that the honourable Leader has asked, and then I’ll start with my questions.

KIM MASLAND: To the member, absolutely, I will look into that signage change and make sure that happens.

[11:45 p.m.]

SUSAN LEBLANC: I have a vested interest in the Prospect Road as well, so I’m happy to know that things are happening over there. Also, I want to know from the minister, how old she was and what year she was hanging around Terence Bay, because maybe we were going to the same parties. We can talk about that offline.

I just wanted to start by thanking the minister and the staff of the Department of Public Works for all of the good work they’re doing, and especially the folks who work with us in Dartmouth - Gary Rafuse and Mark Peachey - for their timely responses to questions and whatnot. Thank you again for that.

I wanted to ask my first question to the minister about late payments or the prompt payment situation. Late payments are an ongoing challenge in the construction industry. The Construction Industry Association of Nova Scotia has conducted a survey of members. Respondents said that 58 per cent of late payments were on private projects, 26 per cent were provincial government projects, 25 per cent were municipal projects, and 14 per cent were federal projects. Nearly half of the respondents said, “all of the above.”

In March 2019, the Nova Scotia Legislature introduced Bill No. 119, proposing amendments to the Nova Scotia Builders’ Lien Act to include prompt payment. The bill passed, but to date has not taken effect. In the past, the effort to implement prompt payment legislation has been a joint project between Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal, - which is now the Department of Public Works - and the Department of Justice. I’d like to know if the minister can please provide an update on the work. What is the timing of having the prompt payment legislation put into effect?

KIM MASLAND: Thank you to the member for bringing up this question. I know this is something that she has also brought up when we had the opportunity for the member to join me here at the department and to sit down and talk about some issues that she wished to bring forward to me as the minister.

As the member knows, this is something that’s very important to me. In Opposition, I had the opportunity with my caucus to meet with members from CANS and members from the Prompt Payment Coalition. I’ve done that since I have become minister as well.

I understand the importance of this legislation. What I can tell the member is that we are continuing to work very closely with the Prompt Payment Coalition. That includes folks from CANS and others who are in the construction sector. We will continue to work through the varied options for regulations. We expect to work through those very diligently over the Summer and move this legislation forward.

I can’t give an absolute time commitment right now, but I do want to reassure the member that this is very important to me. I will continue to work with the sector to make sure this goes forward.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m going to turn my questions to active transit and active transportation. I know I’ve been talking a lot about this, and I know I brought it up with the minister in that very generous meeting, but I just want to get some things on the record, I guess.

There have been a number of changes to the name and organization of the department over the last couple of years. Can the minister please confirm that all active transit work remains in the Department of Public Works?

KIM MASLAND: Thank you to the honourable member for the question. What I will say is that just because the name has changed, nothing has changed within the department as far as strategy going forward for active transportation.

Active transportation is the responsibility of several departments though. Public Works staff - we continue to work with our departmental partners to make sure that we’re developing and implementing an active transportation strategy. I’ll tell the member that here at Public Works we’re very committed to realizing that and realizing government’s goal to establish an active transportation strategy that increases active transportation options by 2023. We’ll continue to work with our partners to meet that commitment.

I think about - in just the short time that I’ve been here as minister - the work that we do with our municipalities and applying for ICIP grants. I look at the Blue Route, the expansion. I mean, we’re going to do another 30 kilometres of Blue Route this year, which is incredibly exciting. We support grants. We work with DNRR for trails.

The November 5, 2021, Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act - which I know the member is very familiar with - there is a strategy in there to increase active transportation options by 2023. We’ll continue to do that.

We’ll continue to work with departments - the Department of Health and Wellness; Municipal Affairs and Housing; Natural Resources and Renewables; Communities, Culture, Tourism and Heritage; Environment and Climate Change; Education and Early Childhood Development. We all play a role in ensuring that we have a good active transportation strategy and one that we can implement.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I just want to be clear that I do believe the minister and take her words to heart about her commitment to active transportation. I just want to get a few detailed questions. I am not in any way challenging what the minister is saying. I just want to get some clarity on a couple of things in the budget.

I also want to say I appreciate - because I don’t see this in every department in the province - the acknowledgement that an issue like active transportation does span several departments: Environment, Education, Health and Wellness, Public Works. Obviously, we’re here today talking to the Minister of Public Works so I’m going to ask about the Public Works part of the active transportation work that is happening.

I’m wondering if the minister can tell me what the budget line is for active transit in this budget in her department and if it’s an increase or a decrease from last year.

KIM MASLAND: It’s hard to just point to a budget line, but what I can say is that the Connect2 program is a $400,000 program. That would be a direct budget line.

From a capital perspective, it would be under the Blue Route, which would be into like our capital programs for roads, like widening the shoulders to make sure we can make them active transit projects. As I mentioned, we have 31.2 kilometres more that would be involved in our capital program to make sure we have Blue Route. That is seven different sections throughout the province. It’s hard for me to give you a budget line for that because it’s included in our capital program.

The other thing I’ll say is that we also continually support projects throughout the province - community projects for active transit - by leveraging funds through the federal government as well.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Yes, I was going to ask about the capital funding for Active Transit, so if you have a number for Blue Route expansion that would be awesome.

I’m wondering if you also might be able to say how much of the funding for Active Transit is for grants versus departmental work, like grants to other organizations? Also, while you are there, what was the federal contribution to active transit last year and what is expected this year?

KIM MASLAND: That’s a loaded question, so I’m going to see if I can break it down here. The first question was active grants, the amount to organizations. As I mentioned earlier, the Connect2 program is a 100 per cent grant program that would be issued to organizations outside of government and that’s $400,000.

The second question I think, if I have written them down correctly, is the federal contributions to active transit last year and was expected this year. That’s very difficult for us here at the department to give you a breakdown between the two because these are multi-year projects.

What I can tell the member is that right now we have projects approved to date through the ICEP program. There are approximately 10 to 12 active transit projects that have been approved, and those projects go right across the province. They would total approximately $90 million, so that’s a huge investment. Those are funded one-third, one-third and one-third. The feds would fund one-third, the municipalities, and then of course our share would be approximately $30 million.

As far as the Blue Route goes, our investment here from our capital plan - it costs approximately $100,000 per kilometre to do Blue Route. As I mentioned earlier, we’re doing 31.2 kilometres, so that’s an investment here coming from our department, from the Province, over $3 million in our Blue Route.

[12:00 noon]

SUSAN LEBLANC: Thanks to the minister - that’s very helpful information. The government included the following targets for active transit in the EGCCRA legislation. The minister has already referenced that to date. One of them is “to establish a Provincial Active Transportation strategy to increase active transportation options by 2023,” and “to complete core active transportation networks that are accessible for all ages and abilities in 65% of the Province’s communities by 2030.”

The minister referenced the strategy and did reference the year 2023, so I’m wondering if the minister can provide an update on where we are with that active transportation strategy. Who is involved in the work of that strategy, and what’s being considered for inclusion in the strategy?

KIM MASLAND: The strategy is led by the Provincial Active Transportation team, PAT, being led by the Department of Public Works. It also consists of the five other departments that I had mentioned earlier: Department of Health and Wellness; the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing; the Department of Natural Resources and Renewables; the Department of Communities, Culture, Tourism and Heritage; the Department of Environment and Climate Change; and the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.

We are working through the draft, and we will be going back to each of the departments that I have outlined to validate what was put forth by those departments and to make sure that the draft that we have come up with is still workable with each department within their budgets.

We do know that there will be more consultation that will be required, but we’re committed to this, and we will continue to work going forward.

SUSAN LEBLANC: That’s great news. The Ecology Action Centre’s 2022-23 budget submission states that in order to meet the active transit goals in the Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act, the Province needs active transportation plans for every municipality or Mi’kmaw community. I’m wondering if there’s anything in the budget to address that need.

KIM MASLAND: Again, I thank the honourable member for the question. I personally am not aware of the Ecology Action Centre’s budget, but I’ll commit to the member that I certainly will take a look at that, and the staff here at the department will also take a look at that.

Once we look at that, we’d also have to consult with other departments that we would work with, such as DNR, as I mentioned, Communities, Culture, Tourism and Heritage, and Municipal Affairs and Housing because we work very closely with them in delivering these active transit projects.

SUSAN LEBLANC: It was a budget submission, just to be clear, that I was going to ask a bunch of questions about that relate to the active transportation part of reaching the EGCCRA goals. I’ll just quickly list them and then certainly can follow up with the minister to make sure she has a copy of that budget submission.

There are active transportation plans for every municipality or Mi’kmaw community; allocate $2 million in provincial capital funds for missing municipal or county active transportation plan, i.e., leverage federal funding in this fiscal year; active transportation planners to support and liaise with municipalities or Mi’kmaw communities; allocate $1 million in provincial operation funds to hire a team of regional active transportation planners - that would be 12 full-time equivalents a year for the next five years; and dedicate at least $180 million for active transportation infrastructure funding over the next five years in order to achieve the EGCCRA goal of active transportation networks in 65 per cent of the province’s communities by 2030; and lastly, the EAC has also recommended by 2030 having 90 per cent of Nova Scotians having access to public community transit or active transportation within 400 metres of their homes and destinations.

That’s a lot of information for the minister. I understand that she won’t be able to absorb it and also reply to it at this moment, but certainly we can follow up with that.

I wanted to backtrack for a second and ask - when the minister was talking about the active transportation plan, will there be a public consultation aspect of the strategy? A shout-out to the amazing public consultation that happened with the Traffic Safety Act. Can we have something similar that takes less time but something similar for the active transportation strategy?

KIM MASLAND: We have not received that public consultation here at the department. I would assume that this has gone to another department, likely Environment and Climate Change, or Communities, Culture, Tourism and Heritage, or maybe Natural Resources and Renewables.

What I will commit to the member is that I will try to find out where this submission has gone. I certainly will direct the member to the department where it is. Hopefully they will be able to answer the list of questions that you have about that budget submission from the Ecology Action Centre.

As far as the question about public consultation, there will be some element of public consultation for the active transportation strategy. What that will look like, I don’t know yet.

I also would like to thank the member for mentioning the TSA. There has been a tremendous amount of public consultation on that. It is a bit of the reason why it’s taken so much time. I know the member has been very critical about the time it’s taken to get the TSA regulations all developed, but I guess that’s what happens when you take the time to do things right. That’s certainly one of the things that we’ll be doing with active transportation too.

[12:15 p.m.]

Again, I don’t know what that public consultation will look like, but there will be some element involved.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Okay, that’s great. We will follow up about the EAC submission.

Just for the record, I’m not actually super critical about the length of time the consultations have taken on the TSA. In fact, many times in public I have said, on the record, that I appreciate how detailed the consultations have been.

What I am disappointed about with the length of time for the implementation of the Act is the three years that it’s going to take for the IT system. I also have been on the record saying that I get that. I understand it.

What I don’t understand - and I think I’ll just skip to this now, since we’re talking about it - is why some parts of the MVA can’t be opened up. I think last Fall and this session, we’ve had two openings of the MVA because of the length of time it’s going to take for the new TSA. Again, totally sensible. I’m asking for the MVA to be opened up again, or the amendments that I have suggested to the MVA when it’s been opened have been around, literally like life-and-death, life-saving regulations that are going to be in the TSA anyway, but could be implemented now to save the lives of and serious injury to cyclists.

I guess my question to the minister on that is: Why is the minister or the department reticent to make those changes when things like the regulation of e-scooters - which are also life-saving regulations - can be done? Why can’t we just do those other ones, like the Halifax Cycling Coalition and cyclists have been asking for, when they’re going to be in the TSA anyway? Why do we have to wait the three years?

Would the minister explain why those regulations can’t be tackled now?

KIM MASLAND: In response to the member’s question, every time we open the MVA to change it, it will create a change in the IT component or the IT scope. I can’t really speak to the IT, as that’s a different department. Every time we do make a change, and it changes the scope of the work for the IT system, it is going to delay the TSA even further. So we’re very cognizant and very limited on the number of times that we can open the TSA.

I will commit to the member that we will look at the topics that she has discussed. She brought them up when we had our meeting here at the department as well. We will look at those going forward.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Thank you to the minister for committing to looking into those. Again, I hear the minister’s explanation, but I still think that it’s worth it if we can save the lives of vulnerable road users - not just cyclists, but other vulnerable road users - or save life-changing injury from happening. I think it’s worth a second look.

Our caucus has spoken for a long time about the long-standing demand from municipalities to be able to lower speed limits without special application to the province. I was dismayed and I am critical of the fact that the request from municipalities was not reflected in the new traffic safety regulations.

Can the minister confirm that she does not intend to allow municipalities to make these changes without application to the province?

KIM MASLAND: When it comes to road safety, I want the member to understand that here at the department, we will always make sure that we can do what we can to make sure that roads are safe for all users. Lower speed limits have some safety benefits for vulnerable road users, but there are other ways beside speed limit signs to do traffic calming measures, which would help reduce speeding.

We have a very competent traffic authority within the department that I have the utmost confidence in. I can tell the member that we get very minimal requests at our traffic authority division here to lower speed limits. The requests that we have had, there are no outstanding requests right now.

For me as minister, when we’re looking at legislation, I want to make sure that we are making legislation that is reflective to the needs of all. When we’re talking about speed limits, we’re talking about municipalities. We have 50-plus municipalities right across the province, and I want to make sure that the legislation will reflect the needs of all of them.

Not all municipal units have their own traffic authorities. Some do, but the majority don’t. Going forward, that will be the vision or the lens that I will look under, making sure that the legislation reflects the needs of all of our municipalities across the province.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Thanks to the minister for that answer. I’m going to move on to some questions about community transportation. The minister mentioned community transportation investment in her opening, but it feels like a year ago that that actually happened, after the last couple of long days in the Legislature.

I see that there is $7.2 million in the budget for community transportation. I’m wondering, in the same way that active transportation might be over various budgets and various departments, does the minister know if that’s the entirety of funding for community transit that’s in the whole budget?

[12:30 p.m.]

KIM MASLAND: Thank you to the member for bringing this up. As I mentioned in my opening remarks - and yes, it does seem like it was a while ago now - community transit is something that is very important to me and I’m very passionate about.

Before I became a member, I worked for a short time with the Queens RCMP detachment, dealing with vulnerable seniors. Many areas in my rural constituency are geographically isolated, and time and time again, I would find seniors who were cut off socially because of lack of community transportation. At that point, before I became the MLA, we had no community transit in the constituency of Queens.

It’s something I’m very passionate about. I have seen first-hand the importance and the success of having community transit in rural communities and the ability for people to be connected.

The $7.2 million is our budget line for community transit. It’s broken down into the Public Transit Assistance Program, which assists with public transit services with the purchase of capital assets such as buses and bus shelters and terminals, and the Community Transit Assistance Program, which is to promote the delivery and providing operating support for cost-effective and sustainable community-based inclusive transportation services in low-population-density communities in Nova Scotia. That’s a great program for our community transportation organizations throughout the province.

We also have the strategic community transportation investment, which is funding the development and demonstration projects of community-driven transit solutions in underserviced areas of the province. Of course we have the ATAP, the Accessible Transportation Assistance Program, which helps organizations purchase accessible vehicles - a fabulous program. I was able to see a new bus that Queens transit was able to purchase with this program, and the ability that they had. They were transferring some youth to community college through their bus, and seniors to medical appointments. They were bringing some community members from the north end of my constituency into a hockey game. It’s just incredible what these programs do for community transit.

We have our NS-TRIP innovation funding, our sector-led body fund transportation promotion, the Rural Transportation Association, and our Fare Assistance Program, which is very important to many vulnerable people living in our province who require transportation but simply cannot afford transportation. That means getting to doctors’ appointments, whatever it may be.

Again, $7.2 million is the long answer, but I just wanted to make sure that the member understands how passionate I am about community transportation in our province.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Yes, absolutely. I can imagine that the issue is so much more acute in rural areas like the minister’s. I grew up, as I was saying earlier, on Prospect Road in Prospect Bay. There basically is no way in and out of that place except by bike, which until very recently was harrowing, or a car. When I was growing up, there were some experiments with a community bus that would take you to the mall, Halifax Shopping Centre, which my friends and I did a couple of times in high school, but it was pretty short-lived.

There are many people and it’s only half an hour from the city, but there are many people who literally can’t get around unless they have their own car out there. I know obviously in more rural areas, that issue is even more acute.

Of course, in speaking with social services providers, it’s raised again and again that in rural and suburban areas how critical transportation is for Nova Scotians. People who are trying to access health, employment, shelter, mental health, child care, social services, they need to be able to get to them.

It’s a foundational issue, and I hear and see the minister cares very much about it. I guess my next question is: There are $7.2 million in the budget this year, but it seems like it’s a cut from $8.3 million last year, or at least estimated last year. I’m wondering what might account for that cut. It doesn’t sound like the minister would be in favour of cutting any kind of programs, so I guess that’s my next question.

KIM MASLAND: Good question. No, I would not support a reduction in community transit. The $7.2, the $8.3, the difference was COVID funding that was provided to purchase PPE. That’s the difference. I want to reassure the member that our director of community transportation - absolutely incredible - shares the same passion that I do as minister, for community transportation in our province.

The federal government has just come out with a program called Rural Transit Solutions Fund, and it provides up to 80 per cent funding. One of the things that we’re looking at doing in the department now is trying to use money within our fund, that 20 per cent, to leverage that 80 per cent funding. That’s one of the things we do in this department all the time. We’re constantly flipping the rocks to try to find more money from our federal partners in Ottawa. I’m hoping that we will be successful in accessing more funds through this federal program.

SUSAN LEBLANC: That’s great news, 80 per cent is a nice percentage, so hopefully there will be some access of those funds.

In terms of the $7.2 million - and the minister listed a bunch of different granting programs and that kind of thing - I’m wondering if the minister can let us know how much is core operational funding for community transit organizations and how much is grants. Can a list of grantees be provided?

KIM MASLAND: The CTAP Program would deal with the core operation - that’s $1.9 million. We also do funding for the support sector body, which is the Nova Scotia Community Transportation Network. They actually coordinate all of the bodies together - $150,000 would go there.

As far as a list of grantees, there are 20 Canadian transit groups and eight transit authorities. Those are located all over the province. I know just a couple of weeks ago, I signed funding letters to these organizations or associations. That list of grantees and the amounts that they would have received went out in a press release. That would be available online. I don’t have them all right in front of me, but certainly I can get that information for the member if she would like a complete list. If she can’t find them on the internet, I will provide that to her.

SUSAN LEBLANC: We can probably find that list, but if we can’t, then we’ll let the minister know. Thank you.

It does seem that if there’s $7.2 million dedicated to community transit, $1.9 million is for the CTAP organization, and another $150,000 is for the other organization, then a lot of that $7.2 million is grants. Here I will make my case for a shift from granting to core operation funding for those organizations.

When these not-for-profit organizations are providing such an important service to folks in Nova Scotia, and they have to spend a good part of their time writing grant applications, and looking for money every year, and not knowing if they can plan for the future because they don’t know if they’re going to be successful with project grants, it’s an extremely inefficient use of funding, in fact.

Whereas if we were able to properly fund their operations, there would be some stability in the organizations. Then they would be able to properly plan, maybe even fundraise outside of the government. So I hereby implore the minister to consider a shift from granting to core operational funding.

In my last 22 seconds, I will say that my next question to the minister - when my time comes back up - will be about any grants that are being awarded to community transit providers to electrify their services. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.

HON. BRENDAN MAGUIRE: I’ll be quick. I have just a few questions for the minister and then I’ll pass it on to my colleagues. First, I want to say thank you to the minister and the entire department. Any chance to get publicly, the department knows I always sing their praise. It’s an extremely professional and knowledgeable department, and they have a great minister to go along with that, so thank you to all of them.

I’ll start quickly - she probably knows where I’m going - with the dam on Williams Lake. This is a promise that was made during the election. Again, we have video evidence from the Progressive Conservative Party saying that, once elected, they would fix this. In fact, all three parties said they would fix it.

We know that if that dam, which was built in - well, it’s hundreds of years old - gives way, there’s potential destruction to not only Purcells Cove Road and Williams Lake Road, but the dozens, if not hundreds, of homes in the area.

This was a promise that was made by the Progressive Conservatives, the Liberals, and the NDP - a non-partisan promise. I just want to know if the minister could give us an update on this, and if they do intend on keeping that promise to the people of Williams Lake and the surrounding area.

KIM MASLAND: Thank you to the member for the question. It’s something he has been asking for a while. I am sad that I wasn’t part of the video, but I was out door-knocking down in Queens County.

As the member knows, the province is responsible for approximately 40 of the 600 dams in the province. We in the Department of Public Works know that these structures play an important role in the communities where they are located. I know the member has expressed that to me several times since I have become the Minister of Public Works.

I have shared very clearly with the member that the ownership of Williams Lake dam is unclear at this time. But for safety reasons, my department is working very closely with the Minister of Natural Resources and Renewables and we’re working on a plan internally within government to look at the future rehabilitation of the Williams Lake dam. I would like the member to know that this may include reaching out to HRM to discuss options. We’ll be meeting very soon, and I will certainly update the member on the progress.

BRENDAN MAGUIRE: I want to thank the minister for the update. I know I’ve been a bit like a dog with a bone on this one, but it’s extremely important to my community. I want to thank you for the direct answer, it certainly means a lot. Any time you want to come down to Williams Lake, we’d be more than happy to have you, or any part of our community. We’d love to have you down there.

Two final questions, and I’m just looking for quick answers so I can pass the time on to other members. The HRM amalgamation agreement was in 1996, and there was an agreement of the gradual transfer of roads. That was 26 years ago. We did hear earlier the Opposition speak about the transfer of Prospect Road and that area. He and I actually met with your department in 2013 about his section of the community and also my section of the community.

Just a quick synopsis of what it is. It’s called the Sambro Loop. Over half of it is HRM and the other half is old Halifax County. When the plows from HRM come to the community, they leave, they drop their plow, they drive all the way to Leiblin Park, they pick their plow up, and then they turn around and come back.

When the plows from the province come from the depot on Prospect Road, they plow, hit my community, lift their plows up, drive to Leiblin Park. Then once they hit Leiblin Park, they drop their plow, go around the back end of the Loop - the Sambro part of the loop - then they hit Village Road in Herring Cove, and they lift their plow up and they continue on.

Just from an operational standpoint, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. I’ve said this to your department, in fairness to you, well before you were minister. It doesn’t make a lot of sense for provincial plows to drive 30 to 40 minutes in the middle of a snowstorm with their plows up, to drop their plows to do the back end of the Loop just to lift their plows up again. It actually has two different standards.

My question is: In 2013, I asked that this process be started to transfer the back end of the Loop to HRM. The minister may not have an update - and I can fully appreciate that - but I’m just wondering is it possible to get an update on that? I was surprised to hear about the Prospect side of this too.

KIM MASLAND: The transfer back to HRM on the road that we just talked about earlier, that was triggered through population density. The Hubley area has met that population density, so that would be housing and population. That triggered it so that it could be transferred back.

The area that the member is talking about - Halifax Atlantic, the Route 349 and Route 306 - have not met that density area yet, but I’m sure it’s growing. Certainly, my chief engineer is here, and he’s heard your question. You can certainly bring this up at any time to our chief engineer if you want to discuss further and in the future to see where we’re at with population density.

BRENDAN MAGUIRE: I want to thank the minister for the answer. The issue with tying it to density is that there’s essentially a moratorium on density growth in the back end of the Loop, in the community.

We know that there’s no water, there’s no sewer. The community has asked for it. I know this isn’t your issue, but HRM has refused to run water and sewer to the back end of the community. There’s no bus service or public transit. There actually used to be one and HRM cancelled that.

I guess we’re kind of stuck, because if it’s related to density, we’re never going to get there if we don’t get those investments from the municipality.

I appreciate that answer. It’s a very direct answer.

Lastly, I just want to know two things. What is the expectancy - the total for the annual passengers for the Yarmouth/Nova Scotia ferry? How many passengers are we expecting this tourist season, and what’s the total cost that this government will be spending or have put aside for the Yarmouth ferry?

KIM MASLAND: Thank you to the member. It’s $17.1 million that has been earmarked in the budget. What I can say to the member is that the operator started sales early this year. There has been very positive feedback. The boat will be in Yarmouth next week.

There are a lot of variables to think about when we’re predicting numbers. This is the first time the boat has operated in three years. We have a new route. What I will say - what I’ve said all along - is that I certainly wish the operator a good season. We’ll see how we go. Like I said, there are a lot of variables in this to predict, but what I would encourage the member is to take his family when he’s headed down to the South Shore and jump on that boat and take them on a little vacation.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Dartmouth.

LORELEI NICOLL: Hello, minister. I wasn’t here when you first started the Estimates, so I don’t know who is sitting with you in the room. I just wondered if you could introduce them before we start.

KIM MASLAND: I have Gerard Jessome, Mark Peachey, and Brent Pero.

LORELEI NICOLL: Thank you. We heard the Premier this morning saying that he wasn’t going to leave any federal money left unspent. I wanted to ask about the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund, which has $170 million remaining uncommitted by the Province. The federal fund was based on ridership, which HRM would fit the criteria as having the highest ridership in Nova Scotia. Where can this funding be found in the budget?

KIM MASLAND: The money in the budget is the provincial contribution of the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the Department of Natural Resources and Renewables. We do manage the program, but we work very closely with both of those departments because that’s coming from their budgets.

The member is correct, HRM has most of the ridership and I can let the member know that the majority of the funding we have is earmarked for HRM. We are working very closely with HRM, and we have a very significant project that could be coming forth that we are looking at, electrification.

As the member knows, we have already worked with HRM on the Ragged Lake project. That’s a net zero building, you know, electrification. Phase 1 of Mill Cove ferry is done; Phase 2, we’re working on now.

I would say to the member that the Premier is right - we don’t leave any money on the table. We’ll turn the stones over and we’ll make sure we find the money and leverage federal funds so we can make sure we’re putting significant projects forward in this province. Stay tuned because there could be one coming.

LORELEI NICOLL: As we are aware, any of this funding always has a deadline, so it’s critical to have it spent within that time frame. I just wanted to share, as well, that I am a former member of the Canadian Urban Transit Association. At my first meeting, it was very disheartening to be told by this member that historically Nova Scotia has never really regarded Halifax Transit and knowing that they have a regional transit provider in this province. So I’m glad to hear that you’re going to work with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, HRM, and Halifax Transit to determine how HRM can grow its transit as it’s needed.

[1:00 p.m.]

As we know, HRM just put their tax rate up and any funding they receive from other orders of government allows them to be able to keep their tax rate down. Therefore, these funds are critical to a growing city, as we’ve heard the minister say over and over again, so I’m thankful for that and you can reach out to me any time in that regard.

The Province of Nova Scotia also determined during the pandemic that transit was an essential service. Municipalities across Canada advocated to the federal government to respond to this operational shortfall on transit providers such as Halifax Transit. The federal government responded to it recently by committing $750 million to address these shortfalls. Again, this funding is based on ridership, which means Halifax Transit’s share would be $11 million.

This funding can only flow to Halifax Transit through the hands of the Province, which must also match this $11 million. If this funding goes unmatched by the Province and they choose not to participate, the $11 million dedicated to HRM goes back into the pot and is divvied up by all the other transit providers across Canada. So it’s critical that be worked on in a timely fashion.

I just wanted to ask: Where is that in the budget? Thank you.

KIM MASLAND: I’m not really sure where the member was going with the comment about HRM not getting recognized. Maybe I’m not understanding her comment. She might want to clarify that.

My understanding is that they are part of CUTA and they are recognized. They do receive federal dollars and they receive it based on their ridership under ICIP. In terms of the $750 million, I want the member to know and to understand that we certainly understand deadlines here at the department - and so do I. The Province has met its deadline and we’re waiting for the federal agreement.

One other thing to mention is that there are 28 other providers that have ridership in this province, so HRM will get a significant portion of it, but not all of it.

LORELEI NICOLL: Thank you. I’m just standing to clarify because what I meant was it was the members across Canada on CUTA who said to me that historically Halifax Transit was not recognized as a regional transit provider. That was their opinion. When the money sits there, that’s how opinions are formed, and that’s what I was saying.

I just wanted to ask one more question. I think you said in the House when you spoke about creating a regional transportation agency that you were going to follow the Integrated Mobility Plan that HRM already has. Also, in your presentation you said that the budget - you identified $2 million for three staff, plus some consultation for this agency. The current CEO is on an interim basis. I just wondered if the search for a permanent CEO has been advertised, and where might this request be found, and what the pay scale is for that person.

KIM MASLAND: I’m not surprised that I’m getting this question from the member. I know she was quite critical of this Joint Regional Transportation Agency when I introduced the legislation. Again, I’m very excited about this legislation. I think this is fabulous.

As I said before, when you bring people together and you collaborate and you plan, it’s future success - it’s always success. I’ll continue to say that, and I’ll continue to stand behind the great people and the stakeholders who are going to be part of this Joint Regional Transportation Agency.

The $2 million is the budget that is allocated for the JRTA. Right now, there are three staff, but there will be more as we develop the agency. There will be consulting, which will be a large part of the budget. There is an interim CEO right now. The interim CEO is from our department. He is there on an interim basis to basically get the JRTA up and running.

This staff member from our department is very competent. He is very knowledgeable of all the stakeholders involved and of government, and he is doing a fabulous job. The post was widely advertised for the CEO, and we expect that someone will be appointed once we get things up and rolling. The pay scale for the CEO is a competitive framework that is used in government for all CEOs.

I will add that the JRTA has met. They had one of their first meetings a month ago. Stakeholders were involved - people from Halifax Port Authority, Halifax Stanfield International Airport, Halifax-Dartmouth Bridge Commission, HRM, and many other stakeholders.

Again, I’m very positive about this JRTA. I think it’s great. I hope that the member will join me in my comments and agree that it’s very important that when you collaborate, we’ll see success. That’s what we’re going to see out of this JRTA.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Bedford Basin.

HON. KELLY REGAN: I just have one quick question for the minister. Last session, I believe I asked her about the situation regarding Highway No. 102, particularly the intersection at Highway No. 101 and Highway No. 102, which is a problematic intersection. We’ve had some correspondence since that time.

[1:15 p.m.]

At the time - I’m going to paraphrase here, so I apologize if I use not quite the right words regarding what the minister said back to me, but my understanding was they were looking at reviewing Highway No. 102.

I was just wondering from the minister, how is that process proceeding? Where are we now? Do we have any thoughts about that particular intersection, and what is going on with Highway No. 102?

KIM MASLAND: Yes, we did discuss this in the last session. I know this is very important to her. We actually have members here on our staff who drive that every day.

The update that I can provide is that the RFP has gone out to look for a consultant to analyze the entire Highway No. 102 corridor, and to look at the section that the member is talking about in detail, the Exit 0 to Fall River.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Sydney-Membertou.

HON. DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: How are you, minister? I just have a couple of quick questions.

I do want to recognize that you’re probably in the room with a number of staff members who are a big part of really what is - we talk about the health care redevelopment in CBRM, but it’s really the redevelopment of CBRM, the way I look at it, with the projects that have been ongoing. There’s been a lot of work in the community over the last number of years.

It gives me an opportunity just to - a quick way to pay thanks to the folks who are in the room with you and work in the department.

I have two specific questions, and the first one is around rail. We know there has been some work done legislatively around the rail - and I’m talking specifically about the rail from Sydney to St. Peter’s. There’s a lot of talk in the community about what that means in terms of port development in Sydney.

I know that a couple of studies have been done. We secured some funds for a study during our time in government to look at some of the feasibility and ideas around the rail. I’m just looking for an update on where those conversations are. Is there any talk on work around that specific part of our railroad structure?

KIM MASLAND: Yes, the member is right. In 2015 - I certainly wasn’t here then but I think the member was - our department did participate in a study to look at opportunities where the member is talking about.

What the department has done most recently is they have provided funding to the Cape Breton Partnership to support them in going forward with their own study.

DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: My next question goes to some of the infrastructure decisions that you’re going to have to make or think about. Again, this is just kind of a flow-through from our time in government. One of the big projects has been the relocation of NSCC Marconi Campus to the waterfront. Again, a huge thank you to your staff. That’s a generational project that has really changed the game in Sydney, not only for the students who will be attending, but the tens of millions of dollars of private investment we’re seeing because of that construction.

I go to an announcement that was made last week - and I said this on the record, and I’ll say it again - around CBU. They are looking at building a new building out there that will house a number of initiatives.

The other conversation though is that there is a beautiful building across the street - the current NSCC Marconi Campus - which over the years has seen big upgrades in lab space, big upgrades in the cafeteria space, the administrative space, a fully functioning garage for trades. It’s a beautiful building and it’s directly, really, where CBU wants to build this new building.

I guess my question is: Are there conversations - are you talking to CBU about that building? I’m looking for what your thoughts are and where the department is with regard to what the future holds for that facility, which is on the Glace Bay highway next to CBU.

KIM MASLAND: Yes, there are discussions that are happening right now, the discussion about the possibility for that building, and CBU being a neighbour. There are great opportunities there for the future use of that building. What I will tell the member is that the discussions are being led by the Department of Advanced Education.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Bedford South.

BRAEDON CLARK: Thank you to the minister. It’s great to be here at the tail end. We’ve got about 20 minutes to go and then another 11 on the back end.

I’ll echo the comments of everybody else. I think the Department of Public Works might be the most popular department in government, for good reason. There are great people working there. Obviously, I have a soft spot for it, so it’s great to get a chance to ask some questions.

As the minister knows, and as staff know, I personally have very little in the way of provincial roads in my riding. There is a project happening this Summer at the Larry Uteck roundabout that the department has been very helpful with in terms of pedestrian safety issues, so I’m really happy about that.

I don’t need to rehash - the minister knows this - but the Mill Cove Bedford ferry is, of course, a massive issue in my riding. I’m really excited about that and encouraged to hear the minister’s comments on that over the last several weeks.

I did want to start by just asking a little bit about active transportation. As the minister knows, for a brief window of time the department was known as the Department of Transportation and Active Transit, I believe.

There is an effort to have a provincial active transportation strategy in place by next year, in 2023, at some point. I’m just wondering if the minister could update us on whether that’s on track and when we might expect that active transit strategy.

KIM MASLAND: Thank you to the member for his kind words about the department. I know that he has spent some time here and he has as much love for this department as I do. I thank you for your kind comments for the staff to hear.

Active transportation is the responsibility of several departments. Yes, you’re right. We have as a government committed to realizing the goals established and the active transportation strategy in that we have a draft in place right now.

We have been working very closely with other departments within government that include the Department of Health and Wellness, the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Department of Natural Resources and Renewables, the Department of Communities, Culture, Tourism and Heritage, the Department of Environment and Climate Change, and the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.

We continue to work very closely together but we certainly expect to meet that deadline.

BRAEDON CLARK: Looking forward to seeing that strategy. I understand that there are a handful of departments at least that would be involved in that. That’s exciting.

I also wanted to ask the minister a little bit about net zero and low-carbon provincial buildings. As the minister knows, the Department of Public Works is the landlord for government essentially - manages the leases for every other department. Many of these buildings, of course, are very old. The building that the minister is in right now I think was a department store from the early 20^th century originally. It’s a beautiful building, but it’s of course not designed anywhere near the standards that we have today.

The current stock of rented commercial space that the department manages is about $50 million in rent annually, so a significant amount. As I said, many of the buildings are older and require significant investments to meet a net zero, low-carbon standard.

I’m wondering if the minister can tell us what the cost of bringing all of these provincial buildings to a net zero standard by 2030 might be.

KIM MASLAND: The member is right. We have a lot of buildings - about 1,800 structures right across this province, and 52 of them are very aged office buildings. There are museum buildings, there are justice centres - I could go on.

[1:30 p.m.]

We as a government have established very ambitious targets for reducing Nova Scotia’s carbon footprint. What I can tell the member is that we are in the process of developing plans. We have started a program of audits on our buildings to determine what resources are required to reduce our energy consumption in embodied carbon right across our current building portfolio.

I’ll be brutally honest here. Achieving these ambitious goals is going to require strong partnership and resource commitments, but I will tell the member that we’re committed to that. I think our commitment shows. We’ve already started the process of doing our audits.

BRAEDON CLARK: I thank the minister for the response. I agree with the minister - it is a significant job that will require a lot of time, effort, and money, I’m sure. Over the next couple of years, I look forward to getting more details on that project, because I think the minister would agree that government needs to set the standard and be the lead on these issues. I’m sure that they will be.

I just wanted to switch gears a little bit to another project that dates back to the previous government; that’s the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia in the arts district here in downtown Halifax - not far from where we are.

In a briefing note that the minister would have received in October 2021, it was indicated that the Art Gallery’s draft cost estimate was over budget significantly. That construction was supposed to begin last Fall 2021. It has been delayed until Winter 2022.

I’m just wondering if the minister could give us an update on when we could expect a start on construction for the Art Gallery and perhaps where things are at in terms of a draft budget.

KIM MASLAND: The team that is working on this continues to work very collaboratively to get a more realistic budget for the project. They also - a very competent team here - continue to complete the design, get tenders ready to hit the street, and move the project forward as soon as possible.

BRAEDON CLARK: I thank the minister for that response. Again, I think it actually speaks to the breadth of projects that the department takes, that we’re talking about. One member is asking about potholes, and they’re asking about art galleries, and net zero buildings. I know that there’s a broad spectrum of responsibilities that the department has.

I think this is a really significant project. It could have a fantastic impact not just in Halifax but province-wide, so I’m really looking forward to further details on that as it develops.

Another massive project that the department is involved in is the QEII Redevelopment - biggest infrastructure project in the history of our province, in fact, as I am sure the minister knows. Just looking at some of the tasks that are needed to get this project over the finish line.

There are dozens, of course, but one in particular would be the completion of the Halifax Infirmary third and fifth floor renovations. That work was expected to be completed in the Winter 2021. We are past that time, of course. I haven’t seen any public information on that that we could find. I’m just wondering if the minister could give us an update on the third and fifth floor renovation project at the Halifax Infirmary. Thank you.

KIM MASLAND: Good news for the member. Construction work is pretty much complete on the third and fifth floors. We’re still working on commissioning, but expect to turn over for use in the Summer.

BRAEDON CLARK: That is great news, so I’m happy to hear that.

Just quickly - I’ve got a little under six minutes here - I just wanted to ask about another significant project the department is involved in and that’s the remediation of Boat Harbour. It’s a very complicated and very important project, of course.

I have an information note here suggesting that the goal is to begin the cleanup either this year or next year, subject to a federal environmental assessment approval process. Obviously, there are a lot of moving parts on this project. I was actually up there to visit it several years ago to see the technology that is being used to clean up Boat Harbour. It’s pretty amazing stuff. I am just wondering, Mr. Chair, if the minister could update us on the cleanup at Boat Harbour.

KIM MASLAND: I want the member to know, and actually all members to understand, that we are certainly very focused and committed to returning Boat Harbour to its original state. Nova Scotia Lands, which is within my department, continues to work very closely with Pictou Landing First Nation, local residents, and federal and provincial regulators, technical advisors, and scientists to address the needs of the site.

Right now, we continue to be going through the federal environmental assessment process for approval. We have a goal to begin the cleanup procurement but, again, we’re still in the process of the federal assessment approval.

BRAEDON CLARK: One quick question here, a specific line item in the budget for Public Works - Public Works Special Projects - mysterious, perhaps, but it’s up $3 million this year, from $7.7 million to $10.7 million. I’m just wondering if the minister could explain what that line item is and why it is increased - Public Works Special Projects. Thank you.

[1:45 p.m.]

KIM MASLAND: The two special projects are broken down. The first one is $1.9 million for the relocation of artifacts in the industrial museum until that gets sorted out. The second one is the Michelin Middle River pump station. We have a contractual obligation with Michelin to provide water to them. The current water supply that was shared with Boat Harbour has aged out. It was oversized. Northern Pulp is no longer using that, so we are fulfilling our contractual obligation to build Michelin a water supply. Of course, that wouldn’t be an ongoing expense.

BRAEDON CLARK: I thank the minister for that response. The more you know - right? It’s good to get that information. I appreciate that those are one-time costs in a lot of ways.

My time has now expired, and we will move over to the member for Dartmouth North.

THE CHAIR: The member for Dartmouth North.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I thank the member for Bedford South. I’m going to continue on with the last question I asked the minister before I ran out of time. What support, if any, is being made to community transit providers to electrify their fleets or their services?

THE CHAIR: Before we pass it on to the minister, could we please have the clock updated here in the Legislature to indicate how much time the member for Dartmouth North has - unless the minister wants to go all night long?

KIM MASLAND: I do not have a Brendan Maguire [Inaudible], sorry.

THE CHAIR: Before I recognize the honourable Minister of Public Works, I just want to indicate that the member for Dartmouth North’s time started at 1:46 p.m. We’re not seeing the clock, so we’re going to have that fixed, but I just wanted it to be put on the record that her time did start at 1:46 p.m.

The honourable Minister of Public Works.

KIM MASLAND: We continue to support electrification with HRM, CBRM, and Kings Transit, which are three of our main transit providers. When we talk about community transit, our focus really has been on just being able to provide them with funds to get a vehicle. Of course, we would look at hybrid vehicles and electric vehicles.

What I can tell the member is that there is a federal fund, the Rural Transit Solutions, which would allow funding for electric vehicles. They’re more expensive, so this is an opportunity. My understanding is that there have been some organizations that have accessed this fund. Going forward, absolutely, that’s something we’ll keep looking at. Our community transit program is more about getting them funding so they can actually get the wheels on the road.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I have a number of questions that are sort of all over the place. Some relate to each other, and some don’t, so hold onto your hats, Mr. Chair and minister.

Documents obtained by CBC News show that Nova Scotia’s Department of Public Works continues to use its equipment and staff to maintain some private roads across the province as a legacy of political favour from the past. The minister has said that she is not prepared to stop the practice, even though there is a policy against it. This is understandably concerning to the people who believe the government should either comply with policies or change the policies.

I’m wondering if the minister can square the circle. Is that policy being looked at? Are practices going to change for the upcoming Winter? I’d love to have some thoughts from the minister on that.

KIM MASLAND: There are a number of private roads that historically receive minimal services, such as Summer grading and/or Winter plowing. The department does not provide any type of significant maintenance on these roads, nor have they become or will they become owned, public roads.

When I came to the department, this was something that was brought to my attention and was one of the first things that I asked to be looked into. I will tell the member that we are maintaining status quo for these 95 kilometres of road. Staff are reviewing the process. I’ve asked for clarification on the practice of servicing these roads and if there are any changes that are going to be made. When the staff come back with the clarification of the practice, there will certainly be adequate notice given.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Thanks to the minister for that answer. The Joint Regional Transportation Agency was created last Fall by this government. Our caucus, as well as active transit and equity advocates, were concerned because it does not explicitly include active transit, accessibility, climate change or equity as principles or modes that must be considered as part of the work.

I understand that the agency is currently taking shape. I’m wondering if the minister can tell us about its progress and how these important ideas are being included in the founding terms of reference or the scope of the agency.

KIM MASLAND: Thank you. Do I only have a minute left?

THE CHAIR: Fifty-one minutes.

KIM MASLAND: Oh, 51 minutes. I couldn’t see on the computer. I was going to try to do it fast so I could get the response to the member.

The Joint Regional Transportation Agency Act, I mentioned earlier - I’m really excited about this agency and the work that is going to come out of this. I can assure the member that active transportation will certainly be part of this planning. As I mentioned earlier, they had their first meeting approximately a month ago, bringing in stakeholders from HRM, from Halifax Port Authority, Halifax Stanfield International Airport, Halifax-Dartmouth Bridge Commission, and many other stakeholders. I can see those stakeholders being Bicycle Nova Scotia.

Again, the first meeting just a month ago, interim CEO in place - very competent, someone who understands government, who understands transportation. I can see this coming together very well. I think we’re going to have great success in developing a plan together, collaborating, that is going to improve the flow of goods and of people now and in the future.

THE CHAIR: Order. There is an awful lot of chatter in the Legislature right now. It’s extremely hard to hear. I ask that everybody respect the time for the member for Dartmouth North.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. The minister just said that the agency has met. I’m wondering if the minister can table terms of reference for the agency.

KIM MASLAND: I would have to check with the CEO and get back to you on that.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I guess I have one clarification on that answer. Is the minister checking to see if there are terms of reference that are a publishable document, or is she checking for permission?

KIM MASLAND: What I’m checking on is to see if they’re completely developed and if I can release them, if they’re shareable. If they’re shareable, I will make sure the member can get them.

SUSAN LEBLANC: That’s what I thought - I just wanted to make sure. Thank you very much to the minister for that.

Here’s a question that I sort of asked at committee a couple of weeks ago. I think it was Public Accounts Committee, when we were talking about gravel roads. The Migratory Birds Convention Act, which is a federal Act, lists bird species whose breeding areas aren’t supposed to be disturbed. It lists species like finches and thrushes. The Endangered Species Act, which is a provincial Act, lists species whose habitat should have a protection plan.

When I asked about trimming along Nova Scotia roads, or provincial roads, the department - some of the folks from the department mentioned that they don’t have a mandate to take into consideration the nesting patterns of migratory birds. I’m wondering how the department’s trimming plans do align with these two very important laws. That’s the Migratory Birds Convention Act and the Endangered Species Act.

[2:00 p.m.]

KIM MASLAND: I guess one thing I would say is that, as a rural MLA, I love it when the brush is cut alongside the roads. When you’re driving on many of the rural roads - and I hear it all the time from my constituents - we need more brush cutting because it is a safety issue.

It is a safety issue. It’s a safety issue for the motorist and it’s a safety issue for the wildlife itself, so it’s very important that we continue with the brush cutting on the trunks and routes. Actually, I was quite pleased that we had doubled our RIM budget from $11 million to $22 million so we can do more of that brush cutting.

One thing I will say is that when it comes to the work we do at the Department of Public Works, we follow all of the permitting processes that are required by the regulator.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Absolutely, the trimming along the roads is a very important practice and an important safety issue. I would not disagree with the minister.

It’s great that the budget has been doubled or whatever - it has been increased. However, we can’t break federal laws. The minister has mentioned that everything has been done according to permitting processes, according to the regulator. I’m wondering if she means the provincial regulator or the federal regulator.

When I asked this question of the staff at the Public Accounts Committee, they said they do not pay attention to the migratory patterns or the nesting seasons of birds. If they’re not doing that, then very likely at least the federal law could be being broken.

It’s really important that we don’t break conservation laws. They are there for a reason. I don’t need to get into how important migratory birds are to our entire biodiversity and our entire natural ecosystem in Nova Scotia.

I just want to clarify the minister’s answer. Is she talking about the federal regulator or is she talking about the provincial regulator? If so, how is it that they can trim whenever they can or on whatever schedule without paying attention to when the birds are nesting?

KIM MASLAND: I will follow up on what was said at the Public Accounts Committee. I haven’t watched that Public Accounts Committee session, but again, I can tell the member that at the Department of Public Works we follow all provincial and federal regulations.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I know that everyone in this room and the minister knows that climate change is going to have a significant impact on our infrastructure costs and planning in the coming years. I do know that the department, in planning now, is always considering the impacts of climate change.

I’m wondering if the minister can explain what climate change analysis is undertaken during the planning of infrastructure projects. Would the minister be able to table a copy of the climate tool or framework used to assess impact?

KIM MASLAND: The climate change tool that the member would like me to table is actually the national design code. It’s a national government document, and that would be continuously updated for climate change.

As far as climate change in our department, we have a strong capital plan. We are constantly upgrading and improving infrastructure across the province. Whenever we do that, we do that with a climate change lens. We look at when we’re designing our bridges, when we’re doing highway upgrading, and new construction projects - everything is always constructed with a climate change readiness in mind.

We also work to ensure that we have spare culverts and pre-built temporary bridges on hand to react to storms. We’ve seen what happened in the storms in Cape Breton. Much of our infrastructure is old, so we need to react quickly to fix it when things go badly. We understand that we are a coastal province and very vulnerable all around, but when we are building the fabric of our design, it includes climate change.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m wondering if the minister can detail the infrastructure projects in the five-year capital plan that are under the heading of Housing. Is it new housing or redevelopment or renovation of existing housing units?

KIM MASLAND: I’m just wondering if the member could clarify the question. She’s talking about housing - I’m not really sure what her question is. Is she referring to the Nova Scotia Community College campuses? I’m not sure what she’s talking about.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Sure. That might actually be an indication of the answer.

My question is: What in the five-year capital plan is housing? There’s hospitals, there’s schools, there’s roads. What housing is being built that’s scheduled in the five-year capital plan? I mean that as residential housing, but sure, if college residences fall under that too, I’d love to hear about that.

My question is: What in the five-year capital plan is housing for people to live in, and is it new housing or is it renovation or redevelopment of existing housing?

KIM MASLAND: I’m sorry, I’m struggling with this question. I’m sorry that I’ve created some chatter, whatever’s happening there - but in the Department of Public Works we have a five-year highway plan. We don’t have a five-year housing plan in the Department of Public Works. Maybe the member’s question should be directed to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

SUSAN LEBLANC: My understanding is that the Department of Public Works is also in charge of infrastructure other than highways, like the hospitals that are being built - the Cape Breton redevelopment and the Halifax Infirmary, and the schools. They’re all under the auspices of the Department of Public Works. My understanding is that the money that’s allocated towards those infrastructure projects is listed in the capital plan.

[2:15 p.m.]

I’m wondering if there is anything in the capital plan for public housing. Maybe it’s hard for the minister to understand that in previous years, in fact, governments of Nova Scotia historically have actually built public housing for people to live in, like the ones in Dartmouth North on Lahey Road or Demetreous Lane.

I’m wondering if there’s any housing - public housing - in the capital plan, and if there is any money for public housing, is it new housing being built or is it renovations or retrofits of existing public housing? I guess the B part is, the minister herself mentioned the community college residences. Is that in the capital plan? That must be in the Department of Public Works, as well, or maybe it’s not. Maybe I’m confused.

KIM MASLAND: When the member was talking about housing, I thought she was talking about housing units, but now she is talking about hospitals . . . (Interruption) She can yell all she wants, I’m trying to answer the question.

The capital plan for government, there is funding linked to housing in that. That would be the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The Department of Public Works does not build public housing. We’ve worked with the Department of Advanced Education to build three residences - one at the Akerley, one at the Ivany, and one at the Pictou Nova Scotia Community College campuses, but we do not build public housing.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I guess, Mr. Chair, that is my point. Perhaps the Department of Public Works should be building public housing. It’s shocking to me that the idea of the Department of Public Works building public housing that that’s surprising is shocking to me. Maybe that speaks to this government’s priorities. I will check in with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing the next time I see him. Thank you very much for that.

I wanted to ask another question about bird habitat that I forgot to ask earlier. I’ve heard many stories about communities that are concerned about the Department of Public Works tree trimming and tree grinding activities. I understand that the minister is a rural MLA and these concerns have come from rural communities, Mr. Chair.

For example, many people have brought concerns about white ash trees that are about 100 years old, slated to be cut. The community has rallied around the trees to save the trees and the local MLA - I have to admit I don’t know which MLA that is - has confirmed that the trees would not be cut down. They were then told that there would be community consultation before any cutting took place.

Is there a requirement to consult communities when cutting established trees from the roadside is happening? How does that work?

KIM MASLAND: I think the member is referring to black ash trees. Absolutely, there’s a duty to consult with the DNRR. Again, we follow the regulatory process.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I guess to clarify that answer, does that mean that DNRR manages the community consultation? The question was actually about not the actual cutting of the trees but the community consultation that would precede the cutting.

Does that mean that the Department of Public Works does not manage or does not deal with public consultation, but that that would be the DNRR?

KIM MASLAND: The level of consultation that would be done by the department is what would be required by the regulatory process.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m wondering if the minister can please share the amount of capital investments that have been made, or are scheduled for Cape Breton this year by category - and for each category, does it represent an increase or a decrease in the investment?

KIM MASLAND: I don’t have that information at my fingertips. Many of these are multi-year projects and they’re in different categories - municipal-led projects, health infrastructure, education, and of course highway infrastructure - but we will gather that information and make sure that the member receives it.

SUSAN LEBLANC: The minister may be aware that there are ongoing complaints across the province about ditch maintenance near provincial roads. Without proper draining and maintenance, ditches can cause flooding and then freezing on the roads. I’m wondering: What is in the budget for ditch maintenance this year, and is it an increase or a decrease?

KIM MASLAND: Again, I’m very pleased that our government recognized the need of doubling the RIM fund. It was desperately needed in this province, and I can tell you very welcomed in this department and in our field, where we have our maintenance supervisors and our operators and our employees out there working every day on draining issues, brush cutting, whatever it may be. Of the $22 million that has been allocated for RIM, $2.5 million is for ditching.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Thanks to the minister for that answer. I’m wondering if the department tracks the greenhouse gas emissions of its vehicles fleet. I’m wondering if the minister might be able to provide a timeline or even a strategy around electrifying the province’s vehicle fleet.

KIM MASLAND: There is a commitment we’re working on with the Department of Natural Resources and Renewables to develop a greening government fleet strategy, and we will work with all the other departments within government.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I look forward to a report on that sometime as it continues, because I think it makes sense that we could be leaders in electrifying vehicles. Certainly, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and the Minister of the Department of Natural Resources and Renewables have talked excitedly about electrifying the province, so hopefully that will happen soon.

[2:30 p.m.]

I want to ask: Is there a cost to the Department of Public Works stemming from the federal ruling that the province must improve fish passage at the Windsor causeway?

KIM MASLAND: We have been working with design and costing from the very beginning for fish passage on this project.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m assuming that’s because that was part of the federal ruling. If I’m wrong about that, then it would be great for the minister to clarify.

I’m wondering if the minister can provide a general update on the causeway situation. I’m wondering if there is compensation allotted to farmers for damaged crops due to the increased salinization of the water. If so, where is that in the budget?

KIM MASLAND: An update on the project - we are still working with the federal government for approval of this project. As far as compensation for agriculture, there has been no discussion within our department, but I think that question could be better suited for the Department of Agriculture.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Thanks to the minister for that. This question may come as a big surprise to the minister, and definitely to Mr. Peachey, but I want to ask for an update on the Lancaster intersection. I know that Mr. Peachey did explain some of the updates to me when we had our meeting. I just wanted to get the latest.

KIM MASLAND: I thank the member for the question. As the member knows, we all want to improve the safety and traffic flow at Highway No. 118 at the Lancaster Drive intersection in Dartmouth. I know it is a concern, but I can assure the member that it is under design this year and our intent is to go to construction next year. Then we will own and maintain that road for a short time before it goes to the HRM.

SUSAN LEBLANC: Thank you to the minister, thank you to the staff. This is exciting news, can’t wait.

I also wanted just to get a quick update, if I could, on the Burnside Connector. Where are we at right now with the Burnside Connector? What is the plan for this calendar year?

KIM MASLAND: The project is currently on track to be completed in Fall 2023. We know the new Akerley Boulevard interchange in Burnside was opened in Summer 2021. This is an $80.5-million project - a very significant project. I look forward to it being opened in Fall 2023.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I’m going to circle back to the housing question just for a second. I got a little bit of clarification. In that capital plan, there is a headline under Housing Nova Scotia Renewal. If that does not pertain to the minister’s department, that’s fine, cool. So that she knows what I’m specifically asking about, I’m wondering how much money is allocated to that Housing Nova Scotia Renewal and what is entailed in that project.

KIM MASLAND: I’m looking at the Capital Plan 2022-23. In there, it says Building Other and below it, it says Housing Nova Scotia renewal - Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing. It’s not in the Department of Public Works.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I wanted to ask a question about a road in the minister’s riding. I’m wondering if there’s been any consideration to paving Sand Beach Road in Western Head.

KIM MASLAND: I thank the member for a question about a road in my constituency. I wonder if she’s travelled it lately. I do know that road. I was actually married back that road. It’s a lovely spot - a lot of residents there. I think we were just out there a couple weeks ago and filled some potholes.

Is there a plan right now to pave that road? No, but I certainly will continue to have conversations with the residents who live on that road in my constituency and look at what we may be able to do to help going forward.

SUSAN LEBLANC: I appreciate the answers the minister has provided me today. I’m going to pass the rest of my time on to my honourable colleague from Cape Breton Centre-Whitney Pier.

KENDRA COOMBES: Thank you, Mx. Chair. Hello, minister. The redevelopment in the New Waterford area - I’m just wondering, what is the timeline for that redevelopment to be finished?

KIM MASLAND: I thank the member for the question. The school will be completed in 2024 and then the health care facility will be determined after that. I would like to say to the member how fortunate you are to have such a fabulous project in your community. You are very fortunate. This is an innovative project and I’m sure the constituents in your area are very grateful for this.

This school and the health care facility together - I can just see the positivity and the learning that will be able to happen with the children learning about health care. I think you are very fortunate to have this fabulous project in your constituency.

KENDRA COOMBES: I thank the minister and, actually, that leads me to my next question. The fact that since the project was announced four years ago, there was no real consultation with the people in the community. Only a handful were actually consulted. Mostly, people had to come in at the end to talk about the issues that they had.

[2:45 p.m.]

As great as the project is, that aspect of it left kind of a bitter taste for some people in our community. Those residents have asked me - there are several questions. The one I want to ask is regarding fencing around the soccer field and if there’s going to be more fencing there for the residents?

THE CHAIR: Order. The time allocated for the NDP has elapsed. There are 11 minutes remaining for the Liberal caucus to pose further questions.

The honourable member for Bedford South.

BRANDON CLARK: Thank you, Mx. Chair. I thank the minister and the staff for hanging in there. I don’t know if the answer to the previous question was forthcoming or not, but if the minister has it, I’d allow her to hear it. Thank you.

KIM MASLAND: Thank you to the member for the question. I’m sorry to hear that there are some members in your community who have a bitter taste in their mouth about the project. What I can say is that it is my understanding that there was consultation done. There has been work done with the school steering committee in Cape Breton, our Cape Breton-Victoria Regional Centre for Education. There also was consultation. There was an open house held with the Cape Breton Partnership to discuss design and to allow input. I’m sorry this has happened but, again, I just think this is such a fabulous project. I’d love to have one like this in my constituency.

THE CHAIR: The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Dartmouth.

LORELEI NICOLL: Thank you, Mx. Chair. I just have a follow-up question. It’s about the Integrated Mobility Plan. I know and I can understand your excitement for the Regional Transportation Plan because as a former councillor with HRM, it was an exciting day when its integrated mobility plan was approved by council.

I just want to let you know that this plan was very relevant. It’s a regional transportation plan. It had 22 public meetings and workshops. It developed an integrated plan that was for all the people in HRM - developed by the people and interest groups. It recommended 135 actions to be taken that helped give the public travel alternatives to the single-occupant vehicles that prevail in HRM. They involved provincial staff in the consultation, focusing on the ministries of transportation, energy, and health.

The Medical Officer of Health dedicated one of their staff to the IMP team and they had a realistic 15-year strategy. I just wanted to confirm, will this Integrated Mobility Plan be implemented by the new Joint Regional Transportation Agency?

KIM MASLAND: Thank you for the question. As I’ve said many times when I spoke about the bill, the Integrated Mobility Plan that HRM has - this is an opportunity to build on the success of that plan. The other people who are involved in the Joint Regional Transportation Agency - the Halifax Port Authority has a transportation plan. We have a transportation plan here at the Department of Public Works. The Halifax International Airport Authority has their own plan for transportation.

The Joint Regional Transportation Agency is a way to bring people together to collaborate and to build on the plans that every stakeholder has, and to see how we can leverage, together as one, the most funding to ensure that the plans that stakeholders have can go forward.

There has been no indication that anyone is hijacking anyone’s plan. Stakeholders will still be implementing their own plans. This is an opportunity to collaborate for future success.

THE CHAIR: Before the member’s question, I just want to remind the minister that we’ll leave about three minutes to read the resolution at the end of this question and hopefully a quick answer.

The honourable member for Bedford South.

BRAEDON CLARK: I will be quick. We’ve got about a minute and 45 seconds here. I wanted to ask the minister quickly - the proposed or potential Highway No. 113 is something that a lot of people in my area and beyond are interested in because the potential route does go through the Blue Mountain-Birch Cove Lakes Wilderness area. I’ve been told that the highway is way down the line, if it is ever to happen at all. I just wondered if the minister could confirm that is not imminent in any way.

KIM MASLAND: It’s not in our five-year highway plan.

THE CHAIR: I would now like to recognize the minister to provide any brief, closing remarks that the minister may have and also to read the resolution.

KIM MASLAND: Thank you to all of my honourable colleagues for the questions over the past couple of days. I certainly have enjoyed answering them. I hope I’ve been able to provide you with answers that you can take back to your constituents.

I want you to know that I will always be a very accessible minister. I am here to serve the people who live in this province. Certainly, anything I can do during my time as Minister of Public Works, I want your constituents to know that.

Very quickly, again, I love to brag about this department. I consider myself extremely privileged to be able to work in a department and to be surrounded by incredible, dedicated, brilliant people who work very hard for Nova Scotians every day. I am extremely proud to be able to stop into highway sheds, to talk to the people who work in our fields, who are out there cutting our brush, who are digging our ditches, who are doing whatever they possibly can to make sure that our roads are safe.

Thank you to the staff - to all of the staff here in Halifax who support me every day. I have never worked with people of such a calibre as what is at this department. Nova Scotians are well served by them. Thank you to them.

A quick shout-out to my two kids who I know never thought they’d be watching their mother debate a budget. I know they sat through these Legislative TV videos watching me talk about building roads. They find it all pretty interesting. Hard to believe, from owning a yellow Tonka grader in my backyard building roads with my brothers, I never thought I’d actually be building roads with such incredible people in this province. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Shall Resolution E36 stand?

The resolution stands.

That concludes the consideration of the Estimates. (Applause)

We will pause for a couple of minutes while we wait for the subcommittee to join us.

[2:58 p.m. The committee recessed.]

[3:04 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

THE CHAIR: Order. The honourable Chair of the Subcommittee on Supply.

DAVE RITCEY: Mx. Chair, I am pleased to report that the Subcommittee on Supply has met for the time allotted to it and considered the various Estimates assigned to it.

THE CHAIR: Shall all remaining resolutions carry?

The resolutions are carried.

The honourable Deputy Government House Leader.

JOHN WHITE: I move that the Committee of the Whole on Supply do rise and report these Estimates.

THE CHAIR: The motion is carried.

[The committee adjourned at 3:05 p.m.]