[Page 633]
HALIFAX, MONDAY, MAY 16, 2005
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON SUPPLY
1:14 P.M.
CHAIRMAN
Mr. Mark Parent
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I have two documents that were tabled at the request of the Opposition members from the Minister of Natural Resources. One is an overview of Nova Scotia Wood Supply analysis 1996-2070, and the other is a chronology of attempts of the province to get the federal government to do something about the spruce longhorn beetle. These were tabled at the request of the member for Hants East. Do you want me to get photocopies of these for the two Parties? I'll get one, and they'll be tabled here if you want more copies.
[1:45 p.m.]
It is now 1:45 p.m. We will welcome and call upon the Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations to begin his opening remarks.
The honourable Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.
Resolution E30 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $96,384,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, pursuant to the Estimate and the business plan of the Nova Scotia Municipal Finance Corporation be approved.
HON. BARRY BARNET: Mr. Chairman, today I'm looking forward to answering questions on the budget estimates for Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, and for the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs. With me at the table is Cameron McNeil, Acting
[Page 634]
Executive Director of Program Management, Corporate Services; Nathan Gorall, Acting Executive Director of Municipal Services. Joining us later will be Wayn Hamilton, Acting Executive Director of the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs. Also watching are a number of other folks. We have Gretchen Pohlkamp, Director of Registry and Information Management; Kathy Gillis, Director of Assessment Services; and Graham Poole, Executive Director of Service Delivery.
I would like to tell you a little bit about Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, but first I will touch on a few of our budget highlights. By comparing the estimate of funded staff from last year to this year, you will see a difference of about 17 positions. We will be adding five new IT staff to enhance development capacity for program support applications and to address the emerging needs of our client database.
We have also committed to ensuring consumer protection by hiring three new staff to help support fair marketplace objectives. This will address issues, including funeral arrangement trust accounts, consumer complaints, and questionable business practices. In addition, we will be strengthening the internal control function by hiring three new staff. This will help improve financial accountability measures and document management processes in the business registry unit, the Land Registration offices, and Vital Statistics offices. This will also help improve control over internal processes and revenue management.
Lastly, we have assumed administrative responsibility for the Senior Property Tax Rebate Program. We will be adding two senior property tax rebate clerks, who will be transferred from the Department of Community Services. Another line that should be explained is the distinction between the gross-funded staff estimates and the provincially-funded staff estimates.
The first number, 905, refers to the total number of full-time equivalent positions in the department. Of the 905 FTEs, about 166 are funded by outside organizations. Approximately 165 of these positions are in the Assessment Services division, which undertakes property tax assessment for municipalities, and are funded by the municipalities. The remaining position is funded by the federal government as part of the Canada-Nova Scotia Infrastructure Program. The lower number, 739, refers to the positions funded solely by the Province of Nova Scotia.
Our department is an interesting mix. Virtually every Nova Scotian at some point in their lives has a direct contact with our department, from registering the birth of a child, registering the ownership of a car, to filing a deed to a home, all of these major milestones in a life involve contact with our staff.
This year, our staff will have about 2 million interactions with Nova Scotians throughout our network of offices, the call centres, Assessment Services, Access Nova Scotia branches, Registry of Deeds, and Registry of Motor Vehicles. We view our roles as one of
[Page 635]
making every one of these 2 million transactions as easy and convenient as possible. Our staff also play an important role in the development of communities. We foster strong municipalities with information and advice and with financial support. We also provide property assessment data to municipalities and to over half a million property owners each and every year.
Municipalities use that assessment role for levying property taxes, which are the foundation of municipal finances. An important development in Assessment Services occurred in January of this year - the Assessment Management Board, with nine of its 10 members appointed by municipalities. The new board's responsibilities include approving Assessment's business plan and its budget for 2005-06.
Through the Registry of Deeds, the department provides a vast array of geographical information and property registration services. Like most government departments, Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations has seen its 2005-06 estimate increase; in our case, the increase amounts to $4 million over the previous year's estimate. While this increase will help us address the many pressing demands on our services and programs, our organization must continue to strive for maximum efficiencies to keep pace with our client needs.
At this time, I should explain the differences between last year's estimates and the forecast. The $9 million increase is mostly attributed to the Keep the Heat program, which was not budgeted for this time last year. We've completed the implementation of the new land registry system throughout the province this past March. This system will transform our 250-year old paper-based property registry into a state-of-the-art electronic land registry system. This is a major undertaking in our department and will benefit property owners for many years to come. Staff continue to accelerate the migration of land parcels into the new system in 2005.
I would like to go over some of the highlights of our business plan for this year. This coming year will be a busy and challenging one for us. This year's budget estimates is higher than last year's; however, it must be measured against increasing and more sophisticated demands being made of the department.
Among the many other initiatives this year, Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations has been selected to pilot the province's first French services language plan, in partnership with the Office of Acadian Affairs. The department's strategy will comprise of recruiting bilingual staff and French-language skills training for existing front-line staff to offer more French services for Nova Scotians. The first priority will be translating our Web site content, translating commonly-used forms and publications in French, and hiring bilingual staff in the call centre and customer services offices in French communities. The department's ability to implement these initiatives is dependant on the availability of federal cost sharing.
[Page 636]
We will continue to improve Nova Scotia's infrastructure by partnering through the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund. This is a six-year program with a total provincial commitment of $37 million. Through this program, the Province of Nova Scotia, the Government of Canada, and municipalities, will fund a variety of green projects, primarily sewer and water, and solid waste. Negotiations continue with the federal government and we hope to sign an agreement in the not-too-distant future.
We will also continue helping Nova Scotians who have disabilities, who are on low incomes, for our elderly to find safe, affordable and accessible transportation through the Community Transportation Assistance Program. CTAP funding will increase by $153,000 to $550,000. More specifically, the per capital contribution will increase from $1.41 to $1.60, to help with fuel, maintenance and insurance for vehicles participating in the province's Dial-A-Ride program.
In addition, the program's capital component, which is used to assist in the purchase of accessible vehicles, will double to $20,000 per vehicle from the current $10,000 level - I would point out to members of the committee requests from Nova Scotia LEO, the League of Equal Opportunities, to government and Opposition members to increase that contribution from $1.41 to $1.60 has been fully complied with. These programs offer a wide range of services, including wheelchair-accessible vehicles for people with special mobility needs.
In 2004-05, the program provided more than 90,000 rides throughout the province, most of these people with disabilities seeking employment opportunities, and seniors who need access to medical services. Since the program's inception in 2001, the number of counties with accessible community-based transportation has increased from three to nine: Kings County, Pictou County, Clare, Colchester, Annapolis, Shelburne, Yarmouth, Digby and West Hants.
I would also like to point out at this time that we recently, Friday, announced a program for the Halifax Regional Municipality that would see four proponents receive a $10,000 grant towards the purchase or retrofit of an accessible taxi to operate in the Halifax Regional Municipality. As members of the committee would know, Halifax lost its last accessible taxi in November or December of this year. The disabled community brought this to our attention and we attempted to work with the municipality to provide a short-term solution, and in the end a long-term solution, that would see accessible taxis able to provide services to the Halifax Regional Municipality.
The announcement was made on Friday and the four proponents will work quickly to get their vehicles on the road. I understand it may be just a matter of days before they are actually up and running and providing services to the disabled community here in the Halifax Regional Municipality. This was a one-time program that was designed specifically to meet a need, that has fallen by the wayside, that was addressed by private companies.
[Page 637]
We will be enhancing our in-person delivery channel by adding new resources to our Access Centres to ensure the continued delivery of these important services to Nova Scotians. We are increasing promotion of e-services available to Nova Scotians. We have created a "service.ns.ca" Web site to provide an easy-to-remember Web site to direct Nova Scotians to all of the department's online services. The department will continue to add to the number of, and the function of, online services during the year to further grow the number of electronic services offered to the department's customers.
One of the areas that has been brought to my attention, as the minister, is the use of Internet banking. It's my hope and expectation that we will move in that direction as well. Currently, people can access services through the Internet but Nova Scotia is not listed as a payee through most Internet banking, and we're looking at ways in which we can do that.
[2:00 p.m.]
Mr. Chairman, these are a few of the many areas that Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations employees will be acting on behalf of Nova Scotians throughout this fiscal year. Every day the employees of this diverse department go all out to help and serve their fellow Nova Scotians. They are fine, hard-working civil servants and I am proud to be their minister.
As you know, Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations is one of my portfolios. A much smaller operation, but equally important responsibility is the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs. Establishing the office in 2003 was a historical and progressive step for this government to undertake, and it demonstrated the province's commitment to issues of African-Nova Scotians. In the Fall sitting of the House, legislation was passed to officially establish the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs.
The office has identified a mission, a mandate and areas of interest by consulting with community organizations and individuals. We continue this practice and have also held meetings with various government departments and organizations to begin the process of creating mutually useful initiatives that benefit African-Nova Scotians. To that end, I'm pleased to say that we began the process of public consultation to establish what it is the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs would have for a mandate right at the very beginning.
Within a week of being sworn in as minister, I began a process of moving from community to community, talking to a variety of interest groups. I think I have said this on the floor of the Legislature in the past, but I'll say it again, I met with groups and individuals, as small as one person in their basement rec room, to as large as hundreds in a community meeting. We talked to people on issues from community economic development, social development, we talked to people on issues of health care, issues related to education, both post-secondary education, vocational training, as well as public school system education.
[Page 638]
We talked to people about tourism, heritage and culture. I met with groups like the Birchtown Black Loyalists Society - I've been there on five difference occasions, I believe, to meet with the executive director, their board of directors, and their hard-working volunteers, to look at their initiative that they have for preserving and protecting their heritage and their culture, as well as their thoughts around tourism development for other African-Canadians and African-Americans to see, and to experience the heritage and the culture here in Nova Scotia.
I can tell you that my travels took me to Guysborough County where I met with groups from Sunnyville, Lincolnville, and Upper Big Tracadie, where we talked about things like needed infrastructure. We also talked about community health and the need for affordable housing and housing initiatives in those communities.
I can tell you that in Sydney, one of the first big accomplishments of our office - in my mind - was in Sydney. We had a call from the local economic community development group in Sydney who were concerned about the loss of a local hall - the UNIA Hall in Glace Bay was scheduled to be sold at a tax sale. This hall has historic significance, not just for the community of Glace Bay, but for all of Nova Scotia, and maybe even all of Canada.
Marcus Garvey, who was a civil rights activist, spoke at this hall, and it was believed by the African-Nova Scotian community and CBRM that there should be some protection for that hall. As a result of the discussion that I had with the group, I was able to approach Mayor Morgan, who approached council and that hall has now been protected and preserved for future use for the community. The community is now rallying around, raising funds to do some development around that hall. So it was one of our earliest accomplishments.
Since that time we've been able to work with other groups and organizations, for example in Whitney Pier, where we were able to provide some support to a community hall there that had issues related to the Fire Marshal's Office, where they would lose access to their hall because of the declining condition of the facility.
I can tell you, of the work that I've been able to do as an elected representative both in the former County of Halifax, Halifax Regional Municipality, as a backbencher and now as a Cabinet Minister, some of the most rewarding work that I've done has been with the new Office of African-Nova Scotian Affairs. Often, people will show their appreciation in different ways but I can tell you that the warmth, generosity and the kind words and support that I've been able to receive from many African-Nova Scotians, with respect to the work we've done, have helped me along the way.
We've had a lot of work to do to develop this office. Wayn Hamilton, who is our interim executive director, and Vangie Williams, our secretary from the beginning, have worked extremely hard, many hours. All of the consultation I did as minister was followed up by Wayn and Vangie throughout the province. They went around and did a second round
[Page 639]
of consultation and reaffirmed a lot of what it was that I heard, and they documented that and developed our business plan.
At this point I'd like to recognize specifically Vangie Williams, who will be retiring from the Province of Nova Scotia - she's not here, I don't think - after 30 years as a civil servant. Her work brought her to the Office of African-Nova Scotian Affairs, I think she was the secretary to Treasury and Policy Board, or something like that. She has been a tremendous asset to me, as a minister, and to Wayn, as executive director, in helping us establish this office.
We have a couple of other milestones we will be moving forward on in the next little while. One is that we actually have a permanent home. We've been housed temporarily in Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. There will be an opening of a new office, we expect, in the near future - a number of staff positions will be filled; I just recently signed off on a number of positions to help us fulfil our mandate. Our office has grown in terms of numbers of people by 50 per cent - we've gone from two to three. We now have a communications person who is working full time with us and also doing an excellent job, I would add.
The office has identified a mission, a mandate and areas of interest by consulting with communities, organizations and individuals. We continue this practice and have also held meetings in various government departments, organizations, to begin the process of creating a mutually useful initiative that will benefit African-Nova Scotians. We are currently pursuing partnerships with the Department of Education, the African-Canadian studies division, Tourism, Culture and Heritage, Immigration, Justice, and Health. As well, I would also say that we've pursued partnerships and discussions with Dalhousie University, Mr. Divine, who is the chairman of African-Canadian Studies, and I have met on a number of occasions, and I will be speaking at an upcoming forum at the end of the Summer.
As well, I've met with a number of ministers, federally, to talk about initiatives that I believe they can utilize to help me, and us, in the work we do. Most recently I met with the Honourable Raymond Chan, the Minister, Department of Multiculturalism, but I've met with a number of other federal ministers as well. I've also met with Consul Generals for Canada, a couple of them actually, to talk about initiatives that we can partnership with the United States of America as well.
Keeping the office in the forefront of African-Nova Scotian communities and within government has been one of our key priorities during the initial start-up phase. To that end, we have produced an information booklet on the office, its background and potential initiatives, and we are now working on our Web site.
I'm very fortunate to have Wayn Hamilton and Evangeline Williams oversee the daily operations of the office. As I said, in January, Angela Johnson has joined our team as
[Page 640]
communications support staff. We hope to be in our permanent home by the end of the Summer and will begin hiring our permanent staff very soon. I believe I speak for the current staff when I say we look forward to the rewarding work ahead, addressing the needs of and developing programs for African-Nova Scotian communities.
I'm sure the committee has some questions and, with the assistance of my staff, I'll attempt to answer them. Before I do that, Mr. Chairman, I want to take a quick look back through my notes, because I made a couple of little notes as I went along.
I spoke earlier about the assessment management board. For some time, municipalities have been asking for a say in the operation of assessment. This year we have established the assessment management board. As I indicated, there are nine members who are appointed by municipalities and one member appointed by the department. John Cameron is the department's representative and, as I understand it, the municipalities have a number of members who are part of the Association of Municipal Administrators. Actually, I'll read the members of the management committee: John Cameron is the interim chair of the Assessment Management Board, appointed by us; Charles Crosby is the President of UNSM this year, the Mayor of Yarmouth is an ex-officio member; Russell Walker, who is a councillor for the Halifax Regional Municipality, he represents the regional caucus chairman; Lloyd Hines, Warden for the District of Guysborough and represents the rural caucus chair; John Prall, Mayor of the Town of Berwick, represents the town caucus chair; George McLellan, president of the Association of Municipal Administrators, is also an ex-officio member.
The membership goes on to include Amery Boyer, CAO for the Town of Annapolis Royal; Delphis Comeau, the Clerk Treasurer for the District of Clare; Bob McNeil is the management analysis and internal auditor for the Cape Breton Regional Municipality; Ken Simpson is the executive director of UNSM; and Kathy Gillis is the director of assessment. That consists of the management board of the assessment services division. They have developed a business plan, as I indicated, approved an operational plan, they've approved a budget, they've approved a communications strategy, established rules of operations, have reported to the deputy minister, and have met four times since they've begun.
As I've said in the past, municipalities pay for this service, it's a service that in the past has been provided by the Province of Nova Scotia. I believe that they should have a say in how the money they spend is spent; therefore we've moved in this direction and I think it's the right approach. I've heard nothing negative from municipalities and I think it's the appropriate way for us to continue into the future.
Just going through the rest of my notes, I think I've pretty much covered it. I would like to say, before I conclude, that like the tradition of consultation for the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs, I've also undertaken extensive consultation with respect to municipal affairs as well. The first 12 months of being sworn in as minister, I met with every single
[Page 641]
municipality in their municipality. It took quite some time. I can tell you that there were occasions where we left very early in the morning and came home very late at night and drove through some blinding snowstorms to accommodate as many municipalities as quickly as we possibly could. Many of them indicated to me that it was the first time they had seen the minister in their own community. I was very proud when we finished our tour to be able to say that we had provided the opportunity directly to each municipality for me to meet with them. I might add it was without staff, initially. So they got to know me on a more personal basis and were able to bring up issues directly to me, in that first year.
Since then, however, we've begun another process of consultation where I, as minister, have taken senior staff and the municipal advisors around to municipalities. We've done it a little differently this time. In an attempt to try to save kilometres on the car and to try to make it a little easier for everyone, we've actually started a process where we've brought together a number of municipalities. Our first meeting was in the Valley, and we met with Kings County, Kentville, Wolfville, we met with Berwick, I believe, and the villages; for the first time we've actually included the villages as part of the consultation. We met with the Village of Canning, the Village of Port Williams, New Minas, Kingston, and the Town of Hantsport. I think there's one other village we're missing.
That was our opening round of consultation. Since that time, we've been to Pictou County, and we've met with Pictou Town and Pictou County, Westville, Trenton, Stellarton, and New Glasgow. As well, I omitted to point out that on a number of occasions that I've had the opportunity to meet with the federal minister responsible for municipalities. In addition to that, I've had a number of occasions where I've sat down and had meetings with the executive of the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities and the table officers of the UNSM. In addition, I've also met with the president of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, who happens to be from Nova Scotia this year. We've had a number of discussions primarily focused around some of the initiatives around the federal government's new involvement in municipalities, including things like the gas tax and the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I'm more than happy to accommodate questions at this point in time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We'll now turn to the NDP caucus.
The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MS. MICHELE RAYMOND: Mr. Chairman, through you, I would like to thank the minister for the very comprehensive statement, trying to tie up all the many loose ends which I know comprise Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, African Nova Scotian Affairs and so on. I realize that you have many hands full most of the time with this.
[Page 642]
Certainly I think we all realize that Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations is the gateway through which many people interact with the government, and that 2 million transactions covers a wide variety of interactions with the government. Of course, with such a complex and various array of services being delivered, there are always those issues, which I think you've touched on a little bit, about accountability and measurement of services.
I'm going to be very brief right now, because I'm going to start by turning my time over to my colleague who has a few questions before I leave. Thank you very much, and I'll speak to you again.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth North.
MR. JERRY PYE: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the honourable member for Halifax Atlantic for giving me the opportunity to speak to the Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations and his staff here today. What I want to say, Mr. Minister, is that unless I'm in a different department of government, I must say that there has been a serious omission from your ministry with respect to talking about the Residential Tenancies Act or the residential tenancies component of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. I don't think that I'm in the wrong department. Maybe I might ask the minister before I start, am I in the wrong department?
MR. BARNET: You're here.
MR. PYE: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister. The reason I say that is simply because we know the substantial growth that is occurring in the metropolitan area, particularly the urban Halifax Regional Municipality. We do know that the out-migration that's existing from larger towns and communities and hamlets throughout Nova Scotia place an unfair and unusual burden upon the metropolitan area with respect to providing housing and housing facilities. The minister is very much aware that in 1998 there was what was called a review of the Residential Tenancies Act. Then in October 1998, all the stakeholders had provided submissions and provided reports to the then-minister responsible.
I do want the minister to know that I had brought this issue to his attention back in the last sitting of budget estimates. I have heard very little to what I consider a very serious and real problem, particularly in the metro area, and that's around the need for changes in the Residential Tenancies Act. I don't know how many complaints the minister and his department have had on this very specific issue, but I do know as an MLA representing a constituency where approximately around 80 per cent of my residents live in high-density residential development, that I do have a significant number of calls and concerns around residential tenancies.
There are many issues relating to boarding house issues, legislative changes with respect to unsavoury tenants, legislative requirements that need to be reviewed and looked
[Page 643]
at with respect to the length and period of time of rental arrangements, changes in what a landlord and a tenant can expect from government to protect both entities here in this particular case. I do know that IPOANS, Investment Property Owners Association of Nova Scotia - that acronym relates to most all Nova Scotians who may be listening or may on some future day read my comments in the budget estimates - has probably made some contacts with your government, Mr. Minister.
I know there's a whole host of issues. I also know that many of the stakeholders, including mobile home owners, had participated in that review and study. We are now seven years into that review and study, and the most vulnerable Nova Scotians who need the protection of government, because this is a shelter component, recognized as a determinant of health, recognized as one of the United Nations standards of one for living, is one of the very departments that you, Mr. Minister, had not made one single comment about in your opening statements today.
To me, I find it rather striking, because you know the kind of pressures that are placed upon Nova Scotians, particularly. I would say, in fairness, that this is not consistent across the province, but it certainly has placed the pressures upon residents seeking shelter in the Halifax metro area. You know the level of the vacancy rate much better than I. For example, my understanding is that there was a disabled person who, a couple of years ago, had wanted to build a shed on his Sackville mobile home property and was denied by the property owner because he wanted to be able to store his scooter. It was a large scooter. In that particular case, there's no legislation to protect this individual. I do believe that it's going to court, and it's going to court within a couple of weeks. It might even be very well going to court in June. I don't want to mention the name of this particular individual.
I know there are individuals who, I just recently found out on Friday, live in hotels and motels under fixed-roof accommodations. Some of those people live there for eight and 10 years, simply because they can't find the kind of shelter that is needed for them in the marketplace. We do not, under any circumstances, protect those individuals. I actually called Service Nova Scotia on Friday - I won't name the individual employee who I was speaking with. I also called what was called Quality Service and Signature Resorts Director for the Province of Nova Scotia under Tourism. No protection for this individual. I did get assurances from the Director of Quality Service and Signature Resorts that he would go back and talk to the new property owner, and try to make some accommodation to assist this individual until such time as the individual might find a place. But this individual is living in a hotel, in this city, for eight years. I do know that exists in Dartmouth as well. There's no protection for these individuals.
Mr. Minister, I do want to take advantage of the time that my good colleague has given me, because I have a couple of other areas that I want to touch base on, but I do want some response from your department with respect to what we can see in the future with
[Page 644]
respect to changes in the Residential Tenancies Act and the need to address this very serious issue.
MR. BARNET: A couple of things. First of all, let me address the concern that you raised about the fact that in my opening remarks I neglected to mention residential tenancy as a responsibility of the department. I did speak for about 45 minutes, and I recognized the fact that we had only four hours of debate remaining. There are a lot of areas that my department actually interacts with the public, and I believe there are a lot of questions that members would have with respect to that interaction. So I took it upon myself to only highlight some of the areas that we actually deal with.
I didn't talk about, for example, our department regulates funeral homes and the funeral home business. It's a huge piece of business for our department.
MR. PYE: Excuse me for interjecting, Mr. Minister.
MR. BARNET: I didn't talk about graveyards, I didn't talk about our consumer protection element, I didn't talk about the fact that we regulate, in our department, accountants of all things, the CMAs, the CGAs and the CAs are all regulated and licensed under our department. Real estate agents, as a point of interest the real estate agents Act falls under our department, and the Residential Tenancies Act, as was pointed out, the Municipal Finance Corporation Act, the list goes on and on.
The other thing I didn't speak about is the services that our department provides to other departments of government. We provide services to the Department of Transportation and Public Works, Community Services, Department of Education, nearly every department of government we provide a service to. We are the government call centre, for example; we are the government collection agency, for example; we are the department that when there's a new program, like Keep the Heat, that the government comes to to administer that program.
So there are a lot of areas, member, that our department deals with, and a lot of elements of government services that we provide to not only the public but to government as well. It would be difficult for me, and we'd probably run out of time. I could speak for four hours with respect to that. I said to somebody one time, I think what happened when they made the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations is they went around and picked departments, and then everything left over came to this department. We're kind of like the department of all the other things combined.
[2:30 p.m.]
That's why I had to limit what it was I was going to say in my speech. I expected, member, that I would get questions from yourself on residential tenancies. So I would like to address a couple of the questions that you raised. First of all, with respect to mobile
[Page 645]
homes, as the member would know, I represent probably more people who live in mobile homes than any other member of this Legislature. I have one, two, three, four, five mobile home parks; I used to have seven, redistribution took away one with 700. In fact, at one point in time, about a third of the people who I represented lived in a mobile home park.
There have been issues that have been raised by landlords and tenants with respect to mobile homes, and since becoming the minister, we have established a minister's advisory committee on mobile home issues. The committee is comprised of tenants and landlords, and they advise the minister on issues. They began meeting early this year, and have met on a number of occasions. The appointments were made through the Human Resources process. We now have an up-and-running advisory committee that will bring to government's attention issues around mobile homes. It's my hope and expectation that we will be able to come up with solutions that will benefit both the landlords and the tenants.
With respect to tenants in rented dwellings, we've run across a number of issues over the past year, particularly of concern to me and to some members of this Legislature are issues where tenants have been forced to leave a property based on a fire or a review of the Fire Marshal's Office, determining that the property was not fit for human habitation. When we were coming across these issues, we found it difficult to respond because there didn't seem to be any clear direction on where we could go. So we have established an internal task force that deals specifically with this issue. In the event that the Fire Marshal's Office has to declare a residential dwelling no longer fit for human habitation, we have a task force that consists of a number of government representatives, both provincial and municipal, that will be able to meet and determine the best process and how we can move forward.
I can tell you that Gerald Hashey from our department is on that task force. The concept was one that was driven by me, and seemed to get acceptance. We've got representatives from the Department of Community Services, we've got representatives from the Fire Marshal's Office, and from the municipality as well. It's primarily an issue here in HRM. We're now able to respond, because we have this task force. These are new initiatives that I think will benefit Nova Scotians and will provide us a vehicle for response, so that when, for example, an apartment building is determined no longer safe, with simply one phone call, the task force will come together. They will find the best approach, they will utilize the services of Emergency Measures, of Community Services and be able to come up with an approach that is fair and reasonable.
In addition to that, the government also supports the Canadian Red Cross through a grant. That will help us bring the NGOs into the mix as well, so that we can respond in a coherent way. Frankly, I was disappointed with the way that it appeared as if we weren't able to respond as well to a number of incidents, particularly in the peninsular part of Halifax. Because of those incidents, we've established this task force, and I think it will be beneficial.
[Page 646]
MR. PYE: Well, thank you, Mr. Minister. I want you to know that Gerald Hashey spoke before the District 9 Citizens' Association because, as I told you, there was a very important and real concern around rental units, and the concern with respect to residents who sign leases and so on. The task force as I understand it appears to be relatively new, no one knows anything about it. I certainly didn't know anything about it. This task force appears to be internal, and it appears to be - maybe, Mr. Minister, I'm wrong, but this task force looks like it's a troubleshooting committee rather than a task force out there looking for the real needs of what Nova Scotians want in changes to the Residential Tenancies Act.
What it's doing is receiving information internally. In my opinion that's troubleshooting, and then trying to address it internally without seeking from the community what needs to be done and what the community's view is on this particular issue. Again, as well, I'm wondering, do you have some stats on the number of complaints that have come through the Residential Tenancies Board?
MR. BARNET: Cameron will check to see if we have complaints, but I just want to respond to a couple of things. One is, member, you're right, the task force is new, it has only been up and running for a number of weeks. In fact, I'm not even certain if they've actually come together to meet as a task force yet. This is a new concept, a new idea, to try to provide for a seamless level of service so that when an incident like the Cogswell Street incident occurs in the future I, as minister, and Nova Scotians, will have a resource at our fingertips that will enable us to be able to respond to those types of things.
It is not a task force that is going to involve ordinary citizens. The idea is to provide for a seamless level of service through government, so that when government needs to respond to an issue like the Cogswell Street property, then we have a go-to resource to respond.
With respect to amendments or changes to the Residential Tenancies Act, I will say there are a couple of ways we can amend the Act, or amend the force and effect of the Act. One is by amending regulations within the Act. We are and have been in the process of doing that. I believe there are regulations coming before Cabinet, in the very near future, with respect to the Residential Tenancies Act. In areas where I, as minister, have the authority we will be doing that as well.
We have been analyzing the concerns that we received and we'll make those adjustments as are necessary to improve the Act, as you indicated, not only for tenants but for landlords too. It's in our best interest that we have those people who are served by this piece of legislation, served to the best that we possibly can.
With respect to the answer, do we have the number? (Interruption) We will have to get back to you with the number of complaints that we received. I don't think we actually
[Page 647]
track that in a single spot, we will have to determine through the appeal process how many there are. I can assure you, member, we will provide you with that information.
MR. PYE: I just want to say for the record I am not impressed with this action that is taking place, but I accept that you are, in fact, looking at amendments, not to the Act, but to the regulations, as you have said. Any amendments to the regulations don't necessarily require approval of the House, as you know, and if they don't require approval of the House, I need to know - as well as other members of that Legislative Assembly - what regulative changes have been made. Hopefully, we will be kept up to speed and will be informed on changes with respect to the regulations.
Like other members, I could certainly take a great deal of time and as you know there are only four hours. I want to make brief comments with respect to persons with disabilities. I want to commend your government with respect to meeting the per capita rate, as CTAP had requested, from $1.41 to $1.61, I think that's admirable. I want to comment with respect to the additional $153,000 this year to CTAP, although one gets the impression that disabled people are somewhat an interest group and they're coming forward seeking funding. I would say to you that disabled persons are no interest group, it is a method of mobility for disabled people and it's their only way to get transportation to and from their business, events and so on. I want you to know that that should be watched very closely.
Another area that needs to be watched very closely is because as you had indicated that it was a one-time commitment - I don't know if it's actually your department or if it comes from the Department of Community Services, flows through to your department and then passes on to HRM - of the additional $40,000 you gave to the Halifax Regional Municipality, I want to say that the Halifax Regional Municipality is not living up to its commitment under the 1995 service exchange.
The 1995 service exchange said that Halifax and municipalities, some 55 across this province, would assume, in exchange for community services, people's transportation and they would assume the cost of public transportation, and that is not being lived up to. I'm wondering if you could talk to the diversity management consultant, not within your department but it's within the Department of Human Resources - or maybe he crosses a number of different departments - and keep a close eye on the commitment from the Halifax Regional Municipality to provide public transportation for disabled persons.
I think that what you have done is just simply stepped in here because you know and I know that we could not leave the disabled community in the lurch with respect to having no transportation services available to them. That, to your government, is admirable but I don't think this addresses the issue at all. You and I would certainly not accept the notion that we need to set up appointments two weeks in advance of having some sort of transportation provided to us. As a matter of fact, Mr. Minister, there would be hell to pay.
[Page 648]
Many people who fall under the diversity group, I can assure you that that would not be acceptable.
Sometimes, because we don't recognize the challenges that disabled persons have, we take it for granted that they're another interest group coming to us seeking assistance and support. I just want to make that as a comment, Mr. Minister, you may not want to respond to it.
Also, with respect to the seniors' property tax rebate, I think you have reached the maximum now, because when your government first came to power you had committed to bringing in what the Liberals had taken away from seniors in this province. You committed to gradually phasing in the seniors' rebate. I think now the seniors' rebate is at its maximum committed level by your government.
MR. BARNET: A couple of things. First of all, with respect to the seniors' property tax rebate, we simply deliver the program on behalf of the Department of Community Services. As I indicated earlier in the answer to another question, our department provides a lot of services to other departments. That is just one of those areas where we actually deliver a program on behalf of another department. I think in my remarks I mentioned we had a couple of staff people who were moved from Community Services to our department to help us with that delivery.
With respect to your comments around the initiative to provide for accessible taxis in the HRM, back in early Winter, November or December, an opportunity came by that we would have some money we would be able to provide for the delivery of a grant-type program to accommodate the loss of the accessible taxis. At the same time we actually had an additional $40,000 dollars that we provided for a one-time top-up to CTAP recipients, the different community groups and organizations that provide community-accessible transportation. That was a top-up that enabled us to give additional money to groups like the Kings County group and the Clare-Digby group.
We recognized what was being said by NSLEO and others, the fact that there were cost pressures that were creating concerns and issues around insurance and around gas, and the top-up helped them address that. Even though it shows this year that we're making an adjustment from $1.41 to $1.60, I think it would be fair and safe to say that we actually retroactively made that adjustment with that top-up grant, which provided for additional revenues to those groups and organizations. They were able to take advantage of that money right away and it was able to offset some of those pressures that they were faced with.
But you're right with respect to municipalities' roles. Under a service exchange agreement a number of years ago, municipalities have the responsibility and jurisdiction to provide public transportation to the able-bodied community and to the disabled community. It's their mandate, it's their responsibility.
[Page 649]
[2:45 p.m.]
As minister responsible for this program, and as a representative from the Halifax Regional Municipality, and somebody who is concerned about disabled Nova Scotians' ability to travel to appointments, recreation and to whatever they need to travel to, I was not prepared to simply stand by and allow nothing to happen. I believed it was important that we do something, so as a government we looked at how we could invest that $40,000 to get the maximum benefit, even though it isn't our responsibility, even though we could easily point the finger back to the municipality and say, this is a municipal matter, HRM deal with it. In fact, we met with HRM on a number of occasions and as a partner they came in and helped to some extent, to the greatest extent that they could at the time, by enhancing their Access-A-Bus program.
We recognized that there was a need to be played and a role for us. That role was to develop a new, one-time program that saw these four new accessible taxis receive a grant towards the retrofit of an existing vehicle or the purchase of a new vehicle, so that we would have a level of service out there for the constituents. The people who I talk to on a daily basis do not care which level of government often is responsible for a program, they just care that first of all, the politician cares about their concerns and is able to address it. In this case we cared about their concerns and were able to address them, and that's why we did what we did.
I would point out that at the time of development of that program, Charlie MacDonald, who is the individual you are talking about, the staff person with the Province of Nova Scotia, worked very closely with us. This initiative came as a result of a meeting that we had with the Nova Scotia Disabled Persons Commission that a number of ministers sit on: myself, the Minister of Environment and Labour, the Minister of Education, the Minister of Health, the Minister of Community Services chairs, along with representatives of the community. We talked about the loss of an accessible taxi, we talked about how we could address that. We actually set up a strategy that included myself, Charlie MacDonald and others, approaching the municipality.
At the end of the day what we came up with was a program that we believe is prudent and responsible, and provides not only the level of service that was lost as a result of losing that last accessible taxi, but quadruples it, because we didn't believe that there was enough service provided, even with that one taxi. That's why on Friday when we announced this I was so proud and pleased to be able to say that we were able to resolve this. I don't care that it's the municipality's responsibility, I care that people are able to be mobile throughout this community.
MR. PYE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Hants East.
[Page 650]
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Mr. Chairman, minister and staff, I appreciate a little time. I really only have one question or one comment. Thursday I went down to the Aliant building to the Access Nova Scotia office. I think the Business Registry Section was where I was aiming so I think I hit it. (Interruption) No, not literally. A nice woman was behind the desk and I wanted to put in my farm registration application. Anyway, she took it and after a few minutes came back and said the person who dealt with that wasn't there but there was a two-week backlog. It seemed to me to be a bit excessive and I was really just hoping I could pay them, particularly because my sheep flock is part of a scrapie monitoring program with the Department of Agriculture . . .
MR. BARNET: I'm sorry, what was that again?
MR. MACDONELL: It's called a scrapie monitoring program. Scrapie is a prion molecule disease similar to BSE. There is a genetic component and you can actually breed resistance into your flock, and so this will be the third year that I participated and my lambs have to have blood samples taken and then their DNA to see if they have the resistance. Part of that cost is reduced simply by having a registered farm because the veterinarians will charge you for the farm call if you're not, so that was kind of why I was trying to get ahead of the game. Anyway, I want to leave that with you as my front-line occasion with Access Nova Scotia, just to say like most people, I can appreciate a little bit of time to get something but I thought a two-week backlog, there must be a fair number of other farmers who would be encountering that as well. Anyway, if you have a comment on that, I know you don't micromanage the system, so . . .
MR. BARNET: Oh yes I do. (Laughter)
MR. MACDONELL: Well, I'll really come onto you then.
MR. BARNET: Again, this speaks to the fact that our department provides services for other departments. As I indicated in my speech, one of the areas that we have been enhancing services to Nova Scotians is through the use of on-line services. We have just implemented an on-line service for farm registry so individuals can go on-line to register their application. There is no wait for that, you would simply have to fill it out and then we would respond later with your permit after the fact.
I will say this, one of the things that we do, and I think it's important for us to do, is we monitor things like wait lines and wait lengths within our department. We also monitor customer satisfaction, and although I haven't seen numbers lately, I can tell you that I was very impressed with the customer satisfaction and for the ability for us to deal with millions of transactions annually in an efficient and effective manner.
I can tell you as minister, there are many times that I receive correspondence from individual Nova Scotians who have written to me to say how pleased they were with the level
[Page 651]
of service they received at an Access Nova Scotia branch. I can tell you about a recent letter that I received from a new immigrant to Canada - I forwarded it to the Premier - that went on to say how incredibly pleased this person was with not only the nature and ability of the person that they come in contact with, but the knowledge they had, and the ability to go above and beyond the level of service to provide for and accommodate this person's request.
As a result of that, and a number of other letters, and correspondence I have received over the past, we are in the process of developing a program that recognizes our staff who go above and beyond the call of duty. I think it's important to do that. Too often as politicians, we're so focused on our own constituents and sometimes so focused on the negative that we forget to look at these good-news stories.
I can tell you that there have been many occasions where people have written to me directly to tell me about how satisfied they were with the efficiency, the knowledge and the way they were served at an Access Nova Scotia branch. I can tell you that the letters that I have received, and the correspondence and the e-mails I have received, to the positive far outweigh the negative ones. As minister of this department I am immensely proud of the fron-line staff.
I can tell you, sometimes it's pretty tough - particularly at an Access centre - when you're literally dealing with hundreds of people an hour, and often people who have left an application to the last day, and sometimes to the last minute, and sometimes after the last minute. There have been occasions where people who needed an application processed, who were able to get that application processed after the Access branch had closed. At our branches, if you're in the door, you get served. It doesn't matter if it's five o'clock and the branch closes at five o'clock, you get served even if it takes the staff until seven o'clock. That is something a lot of businesses can't say happens, but here in government where you don't expect it to happen, it does.
So with respect to the overall length of wait time, we're taking on new business from other departments all the time. Although we try to manage our wait times, often some of these applications are so specific we need an individual staff person to deal with it, somebody who has the local knowledge. Therefore, when they're away on vacation, it does create some delay. But now that we have put this on-line and so many other initiatives and applications it enables people who have access to computers or access to a CAP site to be able to go on-line and to determine the best and most efficient way to do it.
For those who aren't all that computer literate, they are very easy to use processes. In fact, we have developed in our department the Ask Joe Howe feature of the on-line service, so if you don't know how, you can simply look up at Joe Howe and click on him and you can ask him the question and Joe Howe will tell you how.
[Page 652]
MR. MACDONELL: Well, I guess considering the length of the minister's answer, I'm not surprised by the two-week wait. (Laughter) I'm not really taking a swipe at your staff. I'm just thinking that perhaps they are under-resourced, and that's the responsibility of the minister. I think the people there do quite good work and actually the woman who I dealt with was a former constituent of mine so I certainly held no grudge against her. So I just leave that with you, that it seemed to be inordinately long. I'll build up my computer skills. It's one of those cases where the virtual world seems to have outpaced reality. I thank the minister and his staff for their time.
MR. BARNET: If I could just respond to the staffing issue. In my speech, I referred to the fact that we have 17 new staff as a result of this budget. Some of that will enable us to provide for enhanced service to the public. Much of that is for internal controls and auditing, but we continue to manage our full-time equivalents and it's always difficult to be able to manage our staff resources. We have a department that is not all that different from the rest of government where we have people who are approaching and/or nearing their retirement ages. It's always hard for us to be able to manage new people in, develop the skill sets so they can do that kind of work and you're right, it is the responsibility of the minister and I can tell you that it seems like a daily task of signing off on new employees as old ones retire so that we can ensure that long, excessive waits for an application like that are either eliminated or mitigated to the greatest extent.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MS. MICHELE RAYMOND: Mr. Chairman, before I really move on to the substance of some of my questions, I may have overlooked it but how many staff are there actually working at Access Nova Scotia centres at the moment, do you have any idea?
MR. BARNET: I'm sorry, what was that, at the Access Nova Scotia centres?
MS. RAYMOND: Access Nova Scotia, I mean literally front-line service delivery at this point. Do we know?
MR. BARNET: We have 900-some total staff. We have 100-some who would be people in assessment. It's a difficult question to answer because some people, although you wouldn't refer to them as front-line staff, like they wouldn't be at a counter, they may be at a telephone and they may be multi-task people.
MS. RAYMOND: Okay, 900 total, though, for the entire department. Is that right?
MR. BARNET: In our Service Delivery section, we have 269.9 people, but there are people in other divisions who would be considered front-line staff. So in that section alone, that would be like the people you would meet at the Access Nova Scotia office.
[Page 653]
MS. RAYMOND: The other part of the question was, you mentioned that as part of those 17 new staff, you are adding three people in internal controls. How many internal control staff does that bring it to? How many were there before and how many are there now?
MR. BARNET: That's a difficult question to answer again because some of the internal control function of our department is actually through the Department of Finance. These would be three internal control that would be exclusively to our department in our department.
[3:00 p.m.]
MS. RAYMOND: Did you have any before who were exclusively your department?
MR. BARNET: On the consumer protection side, we have one individual who would be in that element as you described. We also have a number of people who are in the tobacco and gas tax area who would simply audit tobacco tax and gas tax. These three individuals will be exclusive to our department to add to our complement. In addition to that, we also have access to auditors through the Department of Finance who would work with us as well.
MS. RAYMOND: This is a really significant addition then, in fact.
MR. BARNET: This is a significant addition.
MS. RAYMOND: That's really what I was getting at. That's sort of just a coda to the question about staffing. There are so many things that come up when you're dealing with municipal relations, and the relationship of the municipalities to the province is one that is constantly changing, obviously, but it's one of the ones that is most central to the way people live in the province at this time. We have 40 per cent of the population of the province living in the Halifax Regional Municipality right now and I think that proportion is expected to grow. We have a regional planning exercise underway. We have questions about an equalization formula and about the issues around the gas tax agreements with the federal government and on occasion, as well, the issues around the actual sizes of municipal units.
One of the things that I'm wondering about first off, I guess, is, where exactly do the current negotiations stand between the province and the federal government around the gas tax distribution formula? I know that agreement has been signed with at least one province. Are we close?
MR. BARNET: We are very close. Unfortunately, I could probably speak for an hour on this. We have been in constant discussion with the federal government. More importantly, we have treated our municipal partners as partners with respect to this. This particular initiative, from the very beginning, we started a process of immediate dialogue with UNSM because we believe it's important that this money that is intended for municipalities, that they
[Page 654]
have a role to play in terms of helping us determine what is the best approach in terms of sharing but with respect to the negotiations with the federal government, a year or so ago - maybe less - the Ministers of Municipal Affairs met, and then met with the federal minister and laid out a parameter that we would work from in terms of how we would move forward. We, at the time, said if we agree as provinces that if you can meet these parameters, then we can move forward and the federal government agreed. There have been ongoing discussions now with individual provinces.
The recent media around British Columbia reaching an agreement, in reality they reached an agreement to agree to something. I have a copy of the agreement in my briefcase. It seemed to me - no disrespect to the lawyers - that there were a lot of lawyers in the room when they reached that agreement, because it is really described as an agreement in principle but it doesn't talk about the principles. So it's really a wide-open approach.
Until now, the federal government has not had approval to develop a template on how they would reach this agreement. We understand that on Friday, the Government of Canada and the Province of Alberta have reached an agreement. We understand now that they have agreed on a template. We have been waiting for that template. We have indicated to the federal government our position on that and we expect that template today.
MS. RAYMOND: Is there a solid agreement on the distribution formula to be used among Nova Scotia municipalities? Is that something that you have been able to sign off on?
MR. BARNET: We have a formula that is a relatively complex formula. It was established and developed by the UNSM working group. For the most part we agree with what's there. There's still an outstanding issue. But it would look essentially like this: 50 per cent of the money will be divided based on the overall budget of municipal units, 25 per cent of the money would be divided based on the population inside that municipal unit, and 25 per cent of the money would be based on the dwelling units inside of that particular municipal unit. So, essentially, that's how it works.
The outstanding issue that we still have not resolved, and I remain open on, is an issue around how we deal with villages. We've had, and I've had, representation from villages that are saying, we may not be described under the Municipal Government Act as a municipality, but we're still a village. As someone would say, no village is too small. Many of these villages provide services to their taxpayers, the same as a town does, the same as a rural municipality and a regional municipality. So we need to resolve that. I have committed to members of the UNSM, the villages, that we will work towards a resolution of the village issue very soon, and that at the end of the day our goal is to make sure we have a fair and reflective process that enables us to share that money so that the benefits of the gas tax deal provide for services to taxpayers, things like sewer and water and the stuff that we all need.
MS. RAYMOND: So that sign-off isn't there yet?
[Page 655]
MR. BARNET: We're very close.
MS. RAYMOND: How much time do I have left?
MR. CHAIRMAN: You have 12 minutes.
MS. RAYMOND: One of the other things, of course, that has been coming up - you talk about villages and what their status is as municipalities, and I know that there have been some recent discussions around amalgamations and so on, whether that is just sort of noise that's out there or whether there are real discussions going on. I've heard mention of Antigonish County and Town amalgamation, and of course there's the question around Canso at the moment. Could you tell me about what municipalities, at the moment, are there discussions ongoing of the possibility of merging an amalgamation?
MR. BARNET: None, but I will say this, it's my belief that efficiencies that can be achieved through amalgamation can be achieved in other ways as well. As the Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Affairs, as long as I'm the minister I don't believe it's appropriate for me to go out and say, you two need to come together, you two need to come together, and you two need to come together. If the municipalities come to us with a clear plan, we will review it and consider what they bring to us. We're not going out asking them to do that.
There is a process, however, through the Utility and Review Board where municipalities - not even municipalities, residents - can request a municipality to examine its boundaries. That's the process that is currently underway in Antigonish. With respect to Canso, Canso asked us if we would support their initiative to have a plebiscite. It wasn't our initiative, it was their initiative. We agreed to allow that to happen, and we agreed to follow through on that process.
I'm not saying that amalgamations aren't going to happen. I think you could argue both for and against amalgamation. I'll say that I firmly believe the best approach is through a shared-service approach, where municipalities look at ways that they can work together. We have many examples of that in Nova Scotia. I'll point to, in New Glasgow - a lot of people aren't aware of this - the CAO for the Town of New Glasgow is also the CAO for the Town of Westville. The same person does both jobs. It's a shared position.
You can go around this province, and you can see, literally from one municipal unit to the next, where in one way, shape or form there is a sharing. It might be like a CAO or it could be like a mutual response for a fire department, or it could be a recreation department in jurisdictions where, like in the Valley, recreation services are shared, for example. Transit is a big one. Many people aren't aware of this, but the longest transit route, probably in this country, exists here in Nova Scotia, and it's Kings County Transit. It runs from one end of the Valley to the other end of the Valley, and it provides service to Kings County, Kentville,
[Page 656]
Wolfville, the Village of New Minas, Annapolis County, Middleton, Berwick, I believe, as well, and Aylesford. All those communities are all served by Kings County Transit, and it's a shared service.
There isn't a need for amalgamation if they can work well together, and the experience in Nova Scotia is that when municipalities see a benefit that is mutual, they will work together. As I understand it, that's unique to Nova Scotia. There aren't a lot of jurisdictions, a lot of provinces that can say we have this level of interaction from municipal unit to municipal unit.
Solid waste is another example. The biggest and best example, and most recent example, of municipal co-operation exists in the whole northwest corner of Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island, where I think it's 17 or 19 municipal units have come together and partnered with Guysborough County to develop a solid waste solution that encompasses a huge geographic area and will solve all of their problems around the operation, location and solution to a solid waste initiative.
MS. RAYMOND: This is good and these are informal arrangements, and that's excellent. I should perhaps rephrase my question about discussions around amalgamations. Are there any municipalities which have been offered disincentives to remain their own entities or incentives to merge with any other municipalities? I think there was some discussion around that with Canso initially, that they were . . .
MR. BARNET: No, there have not been. It would be unfair to characterize Canso as that. Canso requested that they have an opportunity to have a vote to determine whether or not they were a town. As we all know, Canso has struggled for a decade or more, trying to resolve its financial problems, along with some huge infrastructure problems, including a water treatment facility. They have an outstanding debt with the Province of Nova Scotia on what was described as a transition loan that would enable them to be able to transition from the situation where they found themselves in the late 1990s to where they expected to be as a vibrant community.
At the time, the minister of the day loaned them $400,000 with the expectation they would develop a business plan and work towards a repayment schedule. Not one cent of that has been repaid. The business plan obviously hasn't worked. We provided them an opportunity for a way out. They said okay, well, maybe we think we can still do it. So after they had their vote and they agreed to remain as a town and continue to try to resolve their outstanding pressures, we also provided them with some additional help. What we said to them was that because they see this as a huge weight on their shoulders, we will provide you with an opportunity to reduce that weight over time. If you remain as a town and you have a balanced budget, and you meet predetermined criteria, we will reduce the burden of that $400,000.
[Page 657]
[3:15 p.m.]
In addition to that, we also said to them, it's one thing to be able to get out from underneath that $400,000 burden, but you have other things that are problems, too. One is they didn't have a CAO. The last CAO they hired didn't make it through the first day. What we said, and what I said as the minister is we will identify a person and we'll pay for that person and we'll send them down there to help you, so you can get re-established. That person is now in place. He's working down there, he has been there for a number of weeks. The Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Affairs has covered the cost, identified the person and sent him down there, and he's working out very well as I understand, and they're working towards developing a budget and a plan that they can move forward.
In addition to that, Canso has an electric utility. They're one of three or four municipal units that still have an electric utility. They needed an evaluation of that utility to determine what the economic value of it is and whether or not they need to continue operating it as a municipally-owned utility. We offered to cover the cost and identify a consultant to determine that with the view that if there was an economic value in that, maybe they may need to look at that as an opportunity to address other issues, like their water.
We have an outstanding commitment to the Town of Canso of $2 million - $1 million provincial and $1 million federal - towards the construction, design and opening of a new water treatment plant. But where we've had the problem is that they don't have their $1 million, and no one knows how big to make this thing, because we have a town that has an industry that uses a fair amount of water, and whether or not it's going to be there for an extended period of time. So do you build the plant that accommodates everybody there now and this industry, or do you build it for a different size?
We've been wrestling with those things, the same as the Town of Canso, and we've tried to support them the best we could. We supported them with their initiative to hold a plebiscite - I forget the results, but the results were in favour of remaining as a town.
MS. RAYMOND: As I say, the question was really about incentives throughout, not just with Canso. I would have to say that loan forgiveness was a fairly strong incentive in the early days of that negotiation, and I wondered if there were other similar discussions taking place. But that's great, and I'm very glad to know that Canso, at least, has a fighting chance at the moment to fulfill the desires of the citizens who voted in the plebiscite.
I'm probably not going to really have a chance to ask these questions in such a brief period of time, but as you know, of course, there's also a lot of discussion right now going on between the province and the various municipalities, or some particular municipalities, about grants in lieu. I'm just wondering if you could tell me, either now or in the next hour, whenever that may come, about the progress of discussions, particularly around residential
[Page 658]
properties of hospitals and universities. I know that the UNSM would like to see an eventual full taxation instead of grants in lieu. I know that there has been a slight increase of grants in lieu at the moment, and I wondered, is that a step along the way to full taxation or where are we going with this?
MR. BARNET: Well, I won't say it's a step along the way. What I will say is it's the first step in the direction that has been requested by the UNSM and by member municipalities in a long time. They have been talking to me since I've been minister, almost two years, have brought to me this concern. I recall, when I was on municipal council, both at Halifax Regional Council, and not so much the county, we only had one small area where there could have been a grant in lieu of taxes for residential, but this has been an issue for a long time.
The UNSM has requested this. I can tell you it has come up at Spring meetings, it has come up at the Fall meetings. They've asked for it to be addressed. So for the first time in history, that I'm aware of, of the program, we've increased the percentage from 40 per cent to 50 per cent in recognition of the fact that those folks who live in those dwellings require and use municipal services. On the flip side of this, when you turn this whole thing over the other way, I can tell you there are many municipalities that would say they get the benefit of the economic impact of having those facilities in their community, they get the benefit of the cultural impact of having those facilities in their community, and that you shouldn't necessarily look at a university residence purely from the taxation point of view, you should look at it from the creation of a whole community.
Interestingly enough, when we increased the grant in lieu of taxes to those 11 municipalities, that's all there are, I heard from a number of other councillors on the side, saying I'd take one of those - St. F.X. or Dalhousie - for 0 per cent, because they recognize that they are tremendously important to communities and that adds value. The other important . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. I'll have to . . .
MR. BARNET: I don't get to finish my answer?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think I need to move on in fairness to the Liberal caucus whose hour has started, and it's starting to tick away.
The honourable member for Halifax Clayton Park.
MS. DIANA WHALEN: It's a pleasure to be here today to ask a few questions and get caught up. I've got a number of areas I wanted to ask you about: some are in the Estimates Books but most of them are to do with policy and programs, much as we've been talking about for the last hour. Carrying on where we were just at with the grants in lieu for
[Page 659]
residences, the UNSM has said that they'd like - at least those members who have those facilities are saying - full taxation, not even just the residential. I realize you've moved up to 50 per cent for the residential facilities, but I think that in speaking to some of those different municipalities, they feel that there are significant costs in servicing the universities and the student population. I just raise that.
Can we go to another one of the UNSM's similar areas which is Nova Scotia Power and the fair taxation that they should be paying? My understanding is that they have increased greatly the amount that they're paying now over the last two or three years, and the actual millions that they pay in taxes has increased, but it's going into a central pot with the province and being redistributed to municipalities. I wonder if you could talk about that, because that's not really giving the full benefit to the host municipalities. I wonder if you could talk about that program, is that the way it has always been done, or do we have any plan to change it?
MR. BARNET: I believe that's the way it has been done, for the most part, for a long time. I will say this, Nova Scotia Power is unique. It's one of those corporations that has a direct impact on every single taxpayer of the Province of Nova Scotia, regardless of where you live. Simply because a municipality may be the host site for a hydroelectric generation station doesn't necessarily mean that it would increase its cost to that unit equal to the amount of taxation if you were to give them 100 per cent of the taxation.
We utilize a portion of the - 50 per cent of the taxation from Nova Scotia Power provides for an equalization program to enable municipalities that need the support to get the support. The balance of that goes directly to the municipal unit that hosts the site. When the adjustment was made, we saw some municipal units - and I'm thinking about Annapolis Royal and Trenton - see huge increases in their revenue as a result of that change. In Trenton I believe the number was probably $600,000 or $700,000 a year. In fact the first year they received it, they didn't know what they were going to do because they weren't sure how they could spend it or what they could spend it on. It's a relatively small municipal unit that happens to have a relatively large power plant. One of the things that that formula did is it actually saw them get a substantially larger amount of money. Annapolis Royal was exactly the same. I think it's $400,000 or $500,000.
Having said that, there have been issues raised by UNSM and by member municipalities around the distribution of the money within the asset base itself. I've asked our staff to review the asset values of the Nova Scotia Power large components to determine whether or not there is a fair or fairer way to distribute that amount of money.
MS. WHALEN: Could I ask exactly how much you're getting now from Nova Scotia Power? I understand it has almost doubled, but I don't know the total amount.
MR. BARNET: How much who is getting?
[Page 660]
MS. WHALEN: Well, you get in the pot to distribute 50 per cent as you see fit, and 50 per cent to the host communities. So the total amount that is collected from Nova Scotia Power.
MR. BARNET: The 2005-06 taxation for Nova Scotia Power is about $32.4 million, half of which goes to the municipal units and half of which is distributed to municipalities through a formula. It's not how I see fit, it goes through a formula that has been predetermined, and these municipal units receive a variety of grants. I can tell you that, from memory, Cape Breton Regional Municipality, I think, is $15 million.
MS. WHALEN: Can I ask how that formula was derived, or how long it has been in place? I know the amount of money from Nova Scotia Power has almost doubled. So do we have a new formula, or is this the same old formula we've always used?
MR. BARNET: In 2001-02, there was a process that involved the Minister of Municipal Affairs and the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities that included the distribution of the NSPI grants. As we've already indicated, 50 per cent goes to the municipalities and 50 per cent goes through the grant program. At the time the amount of taxes paid by Nova Scotia Power was around $15 million. The next year it went to $26.4 million, and subsequently it has reached $32.4 million. It actually has an escalator clause in their taxation, and I believe it's CPI, it increases by CPI annually. There is predictability for Nova Scotia Power, and there is increased revenue for municipalities.
The formula includes assessment-based grant in lieu to the host units. It includes a municipal HST offset; it includes an equalization grant; it includes a $50,000 foundation grant to towns; and it includes an HST-offset recovery. It is a complicated formula that was structured through the UNSM and the department that saw those factors determine who gets what and how much.
MS. WHALEN: Is it possible to get a copy of that formula? Could that be tabled at some point? It doesn't have to be today.
MR. BARNET: We don't have it with us, but we could probably get you a copy of that.
MS. WHALEN: That would be helpful. I would appreciate that. On the assessment office, I'd like to ask a few questions about the assessments and how that is run. You related the nine-member board is a new governance feature of the Assessment Services Branch. I think that was just set up this year. You were talking about the composition of the board. I wonder if you could talk a little bit about why you've gone to that model. The municipalities took over the payment for assessments for that Assessment Services office several years ago. I know they did complain that they didn't have much say in it, but the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations still has the Assessment Services Branch very much
[Page 661]
as part and parcel of the department, there are still provincial public servants. So I'm wondering how this new governance looks. How does it look, and how does it actually play out? Who's responsible for assessments?
MR. BARNET: Let me say, in response to your question, I found myself not long after being sworn in as minister, knowing that municipalities were now paying for this service, approving relatively large expenditures on behalf of municipalities, without a whole lot of direct input. I believed that it was appropriate and reasonable to have municipalities involved in the development of their budget and their business plans and how they moved forward. We were able to look at initiatives that will enhance and strengthen the Assessment Services Division. We did that as partners with municipal units.
My approach is to, where and whenever possible, involve our stakeholders. In this case we had a stakeholder that was not only a stakeholder but a bill payer. I think that the approach we took is one that meets with the satisfaction and the expectation and understanding of municipal units. It's the right approach. If a municipality is paying the bill, in my mind they deserve to have a say.
[3:30 p.m.]
MS. WHALEN: Just as a follow-up to that, we had the new bill passed last year for the assessment caps which had a significant impact on the cost of running the assessment service, and yet passing the bill was contrary to what the UNSM was asking for. That would be the majority of municipal units speaking out against an assessment cap across the province. So that kind of runs counter to what you just said, which is that they are the bill payer and that we have to listen to them, they're active stakeholders.
MR. BARNET: I appreciate what you're saying, but there's another payer, too, and that's the taxpayer. One of the things that we have to be careful of is to develop a process that doesn't exclusively look at the bill payer, because, in essence, what we need is somebody to advocate on behalf of the taxpayers as well. The board that we have now is an interim board that's set up to provide advice to the minister and to move forward, but also to look at different delivery models so that when we can find an approach that works for Nova Scotia, we will be able to move in that direction.
I can tell you that to characterize Bill No. 40 as a bill that wasn't wanted by municipalities would be unfair and not true. There were municipalities that certainly didn't want it, but there were others that did. When you look even deeper, from councillor to councillor, it changed. I can tell you that people who spoke to me against Bill No. 40 when we were developing the bill and bringing it into the House now speak to me about the benefits of Bill No. 40. When we heard from municipalities like HRM, many councillors were saying to me that this is not a great idea, we see this as an erosion of our assessment base, and this is wrong, they're also the same municipal unit that asked me as the minister
[Page 662]
to bring forward an amendment to the Municipal Government Act that will enable them to do essentially the same thing.
So we have a number of interests that we have to protect. The interest of the bill payer is the interest of the municipality; the interest of the taxpayer, at the end of the day, is the interest that we all have to respect. The one thing that we have to remember is that the bills that are paid for by assessment are paid through tax dollars. We walk that line. This interim board will hopefully find us a delivery model that will see Nova Scotians satisfied and municipalities satisfied with the way that we deliver assessment services here in Nova Scotia.
MS. WHALEN: I'd like to explore that a little bit. I had written down, when you said that this board will be looking at different delivery models, what exactly do you mean? Are we going to look at some fundamental shift in the way that we make assessments or that we delivery that service? Could you give me some specifics around what they're thinking?
MR. BARNET: Well, they've only been together for four meetings at this point in time. There are a wide range of options that they could consider, depending on the jurisdiction that you're in, some jurisdictions have a completely divorced Crown Corporation or something to that effect, some have a completely government-run service. They can look at a wide range of delivery models. I can tell you that in Ontario, for example, they have one model; we have, currently, a model where it's delivered and run by the government right now with this interim board.
I am not going to tie their hands and say you have to go in this direction or you have to go in that direction. We'll allow them to do their work, and we'll allow them to report back to me, so that we can understand from them what they believe is the best approach.
MS. WHALEN: I guess the question would be, is that a key function of the board, and is that in their terms of reference?
MR. BARNET: That is in their terms of reference.
MS. WHALEN: And could we get a copy of the terms of reference for that board? At some time, again not today, if you could table it another day.
MR. BARNET: Yes.
MS. WHALEN: That would be very good. Would you say that's their key function? I imagined that they were there now so that the municipalities could feel they had some say just in how that branch is managed because they're paying the bill. I'm kind of surprised to see that they would be there, really, to be looking at changing the way we're doing it. Our model has been touted as being one of the best, that people come here to look at how we do it. So I'm just a bit surprised that we might be re-examining it. Anyway, perhaps if you give
[Page 663]
me that, that will be helpful. Could you tell me the total budget to run the Assessment Services Branch? That's a pretty direct one.
MR. BARNET: I want to respond first of all to your earlier comment. One of the things that a lot of people do come to see what it is we operate, in terms of an Assessment Services Division, we use the market value approach, and we will continue to do that. We're not looking for a different approach other than market value. What we're looking at is a different approach in terms of governance.
MS. WHALEN: Okay, that makes more sense.
MR. BARNET: The key function of the board is to do just that, to bring back to government a long-term solution.
MS. WHALEN: That makes more sense to me, that it's more governance-based. I wasn't sure because of the way you were talking about it, it could have been either. I appreciate that.
MR. BARNET: Our overall budget, $14.2 million.
MS. WHALEN: And the cost to administer the assessment cap?
MR. BARNET: Last year it was around $400,000, something like that.
MS. WHALEN: I had heard, I think it was the UNSM saying, $700,000. Would that be way off base?
MR. BARNET: It's going higher this year. It will be determined as the year goes through.
MS. WHALEN: So last year wasn't a complete year, maybe?
MR. BARNET: Yes.
MS. WHALEN: And so $700,000 might be an accurate figure?
MR. BARNET: We'll see.
MS. WHALEN: We'll leave that open, but I throw that out there, that that has been quoted to me. In terms of not only the assessment cap, but also the bill that saw the taxes on the Imperial Oil Refinery controlled by legislation, again, one could say interfering with the municipality's ability to set their own tax rates and make decisions, I'm wondering, would
[Page 664]
the Assessment Services Branch have been consulted in any way for advice on how that sets a precedent for the province?
MR. BARNET: One could also say that it was protecting a valuable asset here in Nova Scotia, preserving jobs and ensuring that we have a stable, predictable, reliable source of fuel. I would prefer to describe it that way. Yes, as minister, I did consult with our staff to determine what's the best approach. The one thing that we have to remember with Imperial Oil is that we did not reduce the taxes for Imperial Oil. What we did with that bill was we moderated the increases, and we used a different approach. So with Imperial Oil, it's unfair and not accurate to describe it as a reduction in taxation. It is fair, however, to say that it is a moderation of the increase in taxation.
MS. WHALEN: And it is fair, too, to say that it does alter the market value assessment base.
MR. BARNET: We still continue to evaluate that as an assessment. We just use a different approach for determining taxation. I can say it's not unique. There are other examples where we've used a different approach to determine taxation.
MS. WHALEN: Here in Nova Scotia?
MR. BARNET: Yes.
MS. WHALEN: By legislation?
MR. BARNET: Yes.
MS. WHALEN: Can you give some other examples, or refer to them?
MR. BARNET: The Sempra pipeline. The calculation of the value of the pipeline was done based on volume, the size of the pipe and volume. It's a similar approach that we used with Imperial Oil.
MS. WHALEN: Any comment on the suggestion that we should have a separate bill for the ice rinks that are privately owned and proposed for Bedford?
MR. BARNET: That's a piece of legislation that's currently before the House, and we'll see what happens with it.
MS. WHALEN: So at the moment, no particular position on that? Just wait and see?
MR. BARNET: Wait and see.
[Page 665]
MS. WHALEN: Okay, I'll accept that. In one of the budget books, actually the Supplement to the Public Accounts for the end of last year that has staff salaries and travel and grants, I had a couple of questions relating to that if we could go there.
MR. BARNET: Are we finished with assessment for now? Is it still assessment?
MS. WHALEN: I might go back there, but I think I'm done. I have a whole raft of things. Your department is so broad, I appreciate that.
MR. BARNET: I understand, but for ease of support.
MS. WHALEN: My notes are a little bit scattered. I may go back there yet. I had a few questions, having gone through this, so I just wondered if we could look at that. Again, some of the grants - and this will just help me and I think perhaps others in understanding some of the nature of the work you do. As I've said, it's a very broad department, and you've said yourself that anything that doesn't fit elsewhere falls under you. In that one, there are grants in here to all the different municipalities, it looks like just about all of them, mixed in with other organizations.
I guess I want to know what those grants are all about. CBRM has grants of $18.333 million - and that's on Page 152, just so you can be at the right page - and HRM has only $8.5 million, so there's quite a difference in the grants going to those two municipalities. Of course it's all over the map for all the other smaller municipalities. I'm just wondering if you can explain to me what those are, because I don't think we have a lot of programs where we support municipalities. I'd like to know, what is this?
MR. BARNET: Well, CBRM's major component of their grant would be the equalization grant. In the case of 2003-04, it would have been around $14 million. So of that money, $14 million of that would have been through our equalization formula. The balance would be picked up - I have a spreadsheet. We have equalization, $15.62 million; grant in lieu of taxes, that would be things like UCB, $664,000; we have a fire protection grant of $53,000; a farm acreage grant of $26,000; a one-time contribution through the Canada-Nova Scotia Infrastructure Program towards the Glace Bay Water Treatment Plant, $1 million; Sydney Harbour Sewage Project, $212,000; Birch Grove sewage collection, $632,000 - I believe that is also Canada-Nova Scotia Infrastructure Program; Kings Road reconstruction, which is the straightening out and widening of Kings Road, that one year's contribution was $126,000. It's a much bigger project than that, but that's the amount of money that was expended during 2003-04.
MS. WHALEN: So quite a bit of it comes from the Canada-Nova Scotia Infrastructure Program. Then the equalization grant, would that also include the money we talked about under Nova Scotia Power? That goes into that bigger pot for equalization?
[Page 666]
MR. BARNET: When you're looking at that total, $18,333,253.84, the vast majority is $15.6 million. The balance of that is through the Canada-Nova Scotia Infrastructure Program. In Halifax Regional Municipality, the $8,546,281.34, it's grant in lieu of taxes, $3.5 million; fire protection, $432,000; farm acreage, $40,300; North Preston Community Centre, $648,000, and again that's only a portion of the cost because it was spread over more than one year, many of these are spread over more than one year; MacIntosh Run sewer, $284,100; Beaver Bank sewer and water, $2.7 million; Beaver Bank trunk services, $21,800; Beaver Bank area waterline, $757,500; Beaver Bank waterline, $264,000; Beaver Bank Community Complex, $15,000.
So a number of these are Canada-Nova Scotia Infrastructure Programs, but in the case of HRM, $3.4 million is from the grant in lieu, which leaves the balance for a variety of other projects.
MS. WHALEN: Would it be possible to get that breakdown as well, just for our own knowledge, for those two main municipalities?
MR. BARNET: I can.
MS. WHALEN: Those are the principal ones we would like to look at. They stand out, far and away, above the others.
MR. BARNET: And depending, member, entirely on the construction schedule, it really can shift this thing a lot. The one thing I didn't see here with the HRM that should be included is the Halifax Harbour cleanup.
[3:45 p.m.]
MS. WHALEN: I was wondering about that. You should have $2 million per year for that, right?
MR. BARNET: In that particular year there was a couple million dollars.
MS. WHALEN: Maybe we should find out where that rests.
MR. BARNET: We know where it went because I took the cheque up myself.
MS. WHALEN: Maybe it should be $10.546 million. (Laughter) I did wonder about that one as well. On the travel budget you have there, I'm interested to see it is really quite high for travel in the department. Your total for that on Page 151 is $1.4 million and some change, and when you compare it to, say, the Department of Transportation and Public Works, where you know their trucks are on the road all of the time, when I looked at theirs it was $2.8 million. So theirs is double yours, but they have a lot more employees and they
[Page 667]
certainly have a lot more trucks that are marked Department of Transportation and Public Works, you always pass them on the highways. I was wondering why your department, which a lot of it is on-line and a lot of it is service centres where people are coming to you, why do you have $1.4 million in travel?
MR. BARNET: We have a number of areas where we have front-line staff people who are actually on the road providing services. Our assessors, as an example, do most of their work out on the street where they're actually moving from community to community, house to house, evaluating properties. Our tax and fuel auditors, most of their work is on the street where they're out there moving from outlet to outlet ensuring that the government gets its fair taxation. My guess is that the Department of Transportation and Public Works - I don't know this for a fact - budget would be much more than $3 million for travel and transportation. They likely have it broken down in a different way. That amount of money that you see for us, covers off all of our staff travel and transportation.
The other thing is we've had a number of new initiatives that required a significant amount of travelling. Registry 2000 is one that's big and new, it involved a significant amount of staff time and staff travel. As well, I can tell you as minister, in the year 2004 I put pretty near 40,000 kilometres on that car of mine, just moving from municipality to municipality and consulting with folks.
MS. WHALEN: Your name doesn't appear on this list of the travel, these are done by individual employees. I did look to see if the minister might be included in that, and I know you've travelled, you told us in your opening remarks, to many of the municipalities, but I think it is important.
On the issue of where the Harbour Solutions funds are resting, I'm wondering if you can identify that today because we wouldn't like to think there was a $2 million discrepancy in your budget. Can you identify where it might be resting in the budget instead?
MR. BARNET: It's in the Municipal Relations, Grants and Programs area.
MS. WHALEN: So it doesn't appear in this book at all. This, of course, is the end of last year, so can you point to it by page number so I can just have a look at it?
MR. BARNET: Got it. I know why it's not there. The payment was 2002-03, the land component of that agreement was 2003-04, so we're $2 million in 2004-05.
MS. WHALEN: Is the land recognized somewhere as a transfer to the province, in terms of value? I mean you're giving away a significant asset valued at about $2 million.
MR. BARNET: I wouldn't say we gave it away.
[Page 668]
MS. WHALEN: You transferred it.
MR. BARNET: Yes. I'm just being told the actual transfer happened in May 2004, so it shows up in the 2004-05 budget.
MS. WHALEN: So what would have happened in 2003-04? You gave a cheque, as you say, in 2002-03, and in 2003-04 there doesn't appear to be anything in that grant.
MR. BARNET: Because of the delay of the transfer, nothing appears in that fiscal year. It was transferred in May, so therefore it doesn't show up as a financial transfer in that one fiscal year.
MS. WHALEN: Can I ask one other question, then? In 2004-05 will we see both the transfer of land and the $2 million cheque?
MR. BARNET: Yes, you will.
MS. WHALEN: I think that's important just given the time value of money, and so on, not to have that held up further.
MR. BARNET: You can rest assured that if we didn't transfer the land and didn't transfer the money, the mayor would be right down here and he'd be talking to you and me about that.
MS. WHALEN: I'd like to encourage you to increase the amount you are giving to the Harbour Solutions, especially this year where there were extra funds to distribute to the province.
MR. BARNET: Well, interestingly enough, we gave them everything they asked for.
MS. WHALEN: I heard you say that in the House the other day and I think that maybe their expectations had been exceedingly dampened to the point where they didn't ask for enough, if that is the case.
MR. BARNET: That may be the case, but I can tell you that when the former deputy mayor appeared before our caucus on behalf of the HRM and made a passionate plea on behalf of HRM for a contribution, our entire caucus supported Larry Uteck's request. Not just because it came from Larry but because it was the right thing to do. It was based on some sound principles.
What the HRM did at the time was calculated the tax value of that project and asked for the tax value of that project back from the provincial government. They also asked for
[Page 669]
the tax value of that project back from the federal government. Although we gave them the provincial tax impact, the federal government did not give them the federal tax impact.
MS. WHALEN: How about in the current situation where they've given them double that now, $60 million?
MR. BARNET: That's still not there. As I understand it, it was $74 million and ours was $30 million and depending on where you look at that $30 million that they gave them, the second $30 million, it depends on whose money you're talking about anyway.
MS. WHALEN: The one question I would have on your contribution is the fact that the province chose to spread it over 15 years. That definitely takes away from the full value of what you're giving because the time value of money there, if you do the net present value, it comes back to about $19 million in today's dollars, it might be $20 million. Maybe staff have some better idea but it certainly discounts the amount.
MR. BARNET: The municipality asked for it over 20 years and we upped them by five years. Again, when I say we gave them what they asked for, we actually exceeded that because they didn't include it in the overall contribution, they didn't ask for the land. We threw in the $2 million for the land and shortened the amount of time, so we were more than accommodating to what the municipality was requesting.
The difficulty they found themselves in was that the federal government was asked, I think, for $72 million and they came up with $30 million and at the last minute they took $30 million from a fund that would have ordinarily gone to support projects in your riding and in many ridings across this province. That was intended to be spent on municipal infrastructure and they used that money to enhance their contribution.
We're proud of our contribution, $32 million. They asked for $30 million, we gave them $32 million. They asked for it over 20 years, we gave it to them over 15 years. I think it is very difficult for anyone to criticize us because we gave them what they asked for and then some.
MS. WHALEN: Does that leave the door open to a future request for more support, because it sounds like you're very willing to support that project?
MR. BARNET: The project is moving ahead very fine right now. I don't have to open up a door for municipalities to ask for things, they do that with the door closed or open, they never stop doing that. The difficulty I have is trying to accommodate the ones where and when we can help.
I can tell you that the requests for improvement and for investment in infrastructure in Nova Scotia is huge. I think we added it up one day in our office and I think - Nathan,
[Page 670]
correct me if I'm wrong - it was around $650 million in requests that we've had from municipal units to satisfy infrastructure.
I can tell you that we help where and when we can and many of the investments that we've made have been tremendous in supporting communities, protecting the health of people drinking clean water, and treating their effluent in an environmentally responsible way, I think we've done a lot.
The other thing that we've been able to do too is invest in what I described as research, providing study money so that they can identify the scope and the nature of the concerns. We have provided money to municipalities through our programs to help them do that. That has enabled municipalities to determine what the priority list is. It enables me, once they've done that, to determine how it is we can support them.
MS. WHALEN: That's a help, indeed. I wanted to ask a little bit about - and I know my colleague across the way has already begun to ask - any new infrastructure programs that might come into place. You indicated that something might happen soon, but we have been without a new one for some time. I wondered if you could compare it to what's going on in other provinces, are they ahead of us, have they already signed deals, is money being distributed to municipalities that way?
MR. BARNET: There are a couple of new initiatives that are in the pipeline, per se. One is the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund and the other one is what is described as the new deal for cities that has transformed to the new deal for municipalities, and that's the gas tax deal. With respect to the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund, we have recently sent to the federal government our views on how we believe we can reach an agreement. We are awaiting response back. But even if we had an agreement, we wouldn't be able to move forward with projects because both of these programs are reliant upon a federal budget at some point in time passing so that we can move them forward.
I can tell you that we had some concerns, particularly with the gas tax proposal. Early on we were hearing clearly and loudly from the major cities, seven big cities in Canada were saying they were looking for what they were describing as a fuel tax deal - not gas tax, fuel tax - which is different than a gas tax deal. A fuel tax deal actually includes diesel fuel. What they ended up with is a gas tax deal and there is an ongoing dispute between the FCM and the big cities' caucus, and the federal government about which was originally promised, was it a fuel tax or a gas tax? It does mean a significant amount of money in revenue, but they ended up with the gas tax deal.
MS. WHALEN: But several provinces have signed.
MR. BARNET: The Ministers of Municipal Affairs agreed on a framework on how we would move forward, on how we would be treated by the federal government, and there
[Page 671]
has been ongoing discussions and negotiations between us and the federal government, and us and our partners, the UNSM. On the UNSM side, we have worked very closely together with the UNSM, we have been in constant contact with them. We use them as a true partner and had them help develop the process and how we would share that money within Nova Scotia.
We are way ahead of other jurisdictions with respect to that. In fact, the approach that we used is somewhat unique. Now, mind you, we have some benefits because we have a province that is kind of unique with respect to municipalities. We're the only province that I know of that has a single body that administers all municipal units. The UNSM looks after all municipal units. In New Brunswick, for example, they have large tracts of land where people live that are unincorporated municipalities. In British Columbia, as an example, they have three or four different associations, so they had to work through that. We've got a lot of that work done. We now have . . .
MS. WHALEN: Can I ask, are there any provinces that have signed that gas tax deal?
MR. BARNET: We understand from the media on the weekend that Alberta has signed a deal but I'll say this, we understood that British Columbia had reached a deal as well. I just want to bring it out because I'm going to read from the agreement that was reached with British Columbia. I think I've described it in the past as an agreement that there were probably a lot of lawyers in the room when they were developing this - no offence to any of the lawyers who happen to be in the room behind me, if there are any - but it's described as an agreement in principle.
When you read the principles it really is an agreement to agree to a bunch of things at some other time in the future. Frankly, what we're looking for is a document that we can sign that will enable us to get to work and spend money on infrastructure. The clauses that are pertinent to the agreement in principle - and that's exactly what it says - Agreement in Principle, Transfer of Federal Gas Tax Revenues under the New Deal for Cities and Communities. And I would add this, the language coming now from the federal government - new deal for cities and communities - is a direct result of discussions that I as a minister and other ministers had and I would say it is fair to say I led around communities.
Frankly, there were large tracts of Nova Scotia and Canada that were being left out of the original deal. If you look at Nova Scotia and you describe it in Ottawa terms, what's a city, well, we didn't have any as they would describe it and if they did amend the way they described cities, we'd end up with one. So we would have a gas tax that in essence would benefit only one municipality. So in the discussions I had with Minister Godfrey, I said that's not good enough for Nova Scotia, it's not good enough for the UNSM. We need a gas tax deal that shares that revenue.
[Page 672]
[4:00 p.m.]
After all, the tax is collected by all of us, regardless of whether you live in New Minas, New Germany, or anywhere in the Province of Nova Scotia.
MS. WHALEN: So it now will go to all municipalities, all communities as you've defined it.
MR. BARNET: Yes. I'll read this for you. It has five bullets, it won't take long. "This Agreement in Principle (also referred to as "Agreement" hereafter) reflects:
â?¢ the current understanding and intentions of Canada, British Columbia and UBCM;
â?¢ the understanding that the Parties intend to execute a legally binding final contribution agreement once that agreement is finalized as promptly as possible;
â?¢ that all Parties, as appropriate, will need to refer such finalized agreement to their respective authorities for review, approval and mandate to sign a final legally binding contribution agreement;
â?¢ that Parliamentary approval will be required before funding is available and may be disbursed; and,
â?¢ that nothing in this Agreement precludes the Parties from including additional elements to the final contribution agreement."
When I read that, it really doesn't say they have entered into an agreement at all, it just says that if they were to enter into an agreement there are some other things in here that kind of work well for it. The stuff that they're referring to in here on the sharing, we've got most of that worked out ourselves with the UNSM and we don't need the agreement of the federal government. We went ahead without them and we've reached an agreement on nearly all of it with a couple of little things and we're going to be able to get that sorted out soon.
We've been waiting for them to send a template that is approved by Cabinet so that we can enter into an agreement. I know the Prime Minister was in Nova Scotia and Halifax today, and if that was available and it met our expectations - and our expectations are that it's fair and appropriate for Nova Scotia - we would have signed it today.
MS. WHALEN: Back about April 29th or 30th there was a little thing in the paper that said: Kelly lobbies for deal. Mayor Peter Kelly is urging the province to get Ottawa to sign the gas tax agreement, in case the federal government falls in May. The $145.2 million
[Page 673]
promised to Nova Scotia's municipalities is at risk if the Martin Liberals don't officially sign the deal. Do you feel there's a threat to the whole agreement where we have nothing signed, nothing in writing?
MR. BARNET: No, I really don't. Primarily because I know that the three major Parties in Parliament support a new deal for cities and I received a letter from the Leader of the Official Opposition, who has laid out clearly and concisely his view on the new deal that would see gas tax money going to municipalities. So I'm not concerned about it and neither should Mayor Kelly.
MS. WHALEN: As I said, I picked that out of the paper at the time. Also, I don't know where the Bloc Québécois stands on that deal. Are they in support of that deal?
MR. BARNET: I guess it really doesn't matter. What matters is they have more than 152 votes and if we look at the current situation, the three Parties that support a new deal for cities, that I know of - and maybe the Bloc Québécois does too, I don't know. My guess is they would because I know I have spoken to the Minister of Municipal Affairs from Quebec and he's very much in favour of a new deal for cities for Quebec, so I can't see them not wanting to share some kind of an arrangement. I think this is not the kind of thing that has a political wedge, we're all on the same side, we all want more money for municipalities and this is a very good way to do it and all Parties have said that, to my knowledge.
MS. WHALEN: And the concern I would have is just whether or not that is in jeopardy, that's all. Again, the Bloc has said they don't like the Atlantic Accord, so if they have any sway in a future vote, if they're not on side, that could be difficult.
MR. BARNET: This is different than the Atlantic Accord.
MS. WHALEN: It has more broad support, you're saying. I have an interesting question - to change gears again, if we could. That has to do with your new land registry system which I think is a good way to move, to move towards a digital system. At least a month ago - and I don't know whether this has been resolved so I'm just raising it today - the issue of the Crown land that is an overlay of information.
When you moved to the digital system there was an anomaly, I would say, or maybe it was a correction in what was previously being done, but a large number of properties became overlaid with the Crown land designation and in fact a big swath of properties from the Bedford Basin up through Rockingham, right into Clayton Park West and Glenbourne - I think mostly Clayton Park West - in fact, my very own home falls within this swath. I was told by the lawyer who brought it to my attention, because they needed to get a special Cabinet approval or something, dispensation, to allow the properties to be sold. They had to wait and go through the right process, but essentially the lawyers say that froze the purchase and sale of all properties in that area. I'm wondering, has that been corrected?
[Page 674]
MR. BARNET: I would not describe it as freezing the purchase or sale of a property. Whether you're using the old system or the new system, there is a requirement to prove that you have clear title and that requirement is incumbent upon the vendor, the seller, to provide to the buyer, the purchaser, clear title. It doesn't really matter whether it's the electronic system, the new system, or the old system. However, there was an issue with respect to what we describe as the green layer. In those pieces of property that the Crown has an interest in, there is an additional level of work that's required.
The Department of Natural Resources has $800,000 and 14 staff people who are dedicated to resolving that particular issue, so that we don't have people who happen to live in a house . . .
MS. WHALEN: Right now?
MR. BARNET: These are new employees and a new allotment to resolve that.
MS. WHALEN: Is that specifically to resolve that issue through Natural Resources, the many properties that still appear to be Natural Resources?
MR. BARNET: This could be property that the Crown has a legitimate title to, that over time somebody has simply squatted on, or it could be property that has been sold and somebody has guaranteed title on but may not have done all of the paperwork, or there could be a number of reasons why that's the case.
The Department of Natural Resources is doing the entire work on it, they have the 14 additional staff people and the $800,000. As I understand it, the focus is to go to those areas where there are easier fixes first and resolve those.
MS. WHALEN: There are certain properties that would be the most acute and I would say Clayton Park West and some of the new subdivisions are the ones where the problem lies, because if you can prove that you've used the property for 40 years, then the lawyers are satisfied that they've met all the requirements. But in the Clayton Park West area the homes are not 40 years old, so the property has not been in use. There seems to be a legality about the use of the property.
There's also quite a large swath near Bedford where the new homes are going in in Bedford South, whereas at the same time, there's a swath of this going up Ochterloney Street but you could easily show usage for 40 years as you move down Ochterloney Street. So it's those new areas where there's new building and new development.
MR. BARNET: As I've described, those are probably some of the easier ones to do and those are really where they've put a focus on. Every week they migrate a number of those properties back into the system without the green layer on it.
[Page 675]
MS. WHALEN: Can I ask you, are you doing it as blocks or are you migrating them as they're trying to be bought and sold so that you can free up the sale of these lands? It's a peculiarity, it really is.
MR. BARNET: Not that I'm trying to duck your question but it really is a question probably more appropriate to the Minister of Natural Resources, because it is his staff who are doing it. As I understand it, in those areas where it looks like and it makes sense, they are moving as rapidly as they possibly can. They continue to protect the property that they know they own, but at the same time, there's a significant investment by this government, $800,000 and 14 full-time people, who are dedicated solely to resolving this.
The one thing people should be aware of is that Registry 2000 didn't invent this new problem. This problem probably existed and was only discovered as a result of the Registry 2000, and that there are people who live in properties now who may have bought it five years ago and it may have transferred hands eight times, but still may have had a Crown interest, because there wasn't a satisfactory removal of the Crown interest 50, 75, or 100 years ago. When we move to this new digital format and this process that we have, we have to clear all that stuff up, we can't leave the loose ends out there. When people receive a certificate of title that they know it's clear and free and not only is it on a computer, but it's reliable as well.
MS. WHALEN: I understand the Crown wanting to maintain its interests where that makes sense, but where you have large residential areas it's inconceivable that the Crown would ever retake all of those properties. It's inconceivable when you have complete subdivisions full of homes that they would ever come back and try to reclaim that.
MR. BARNET: That's essentially why we invested that amount of money and those people.
MS. WHALEN: Can I ask if at present all the sale of those homes will have to come through Cabinet for whatever process allows you to release the properties?
MR. BARNET: I don't know for certain but my guess is that they don't. I can tell you, without breaching Cabinet confidentiality, I've not done one. I know properties have transferred in those areas, so it's not necessarily an issue. My guess is that they're moving rapidly enough to stay ahead of it and that there is a process to relinquish the Crown interest that does not require Cabinet approval.
MS. WHALEN: I know that the two properties first brought to my attention were released, but there are many others.
MR. BARNET: Unless I missed a Cabinet meeting - and I don't think I did.
[Page 676]
MS. WHALEN: I am curious about what the process is and it would seem ludicrous if, in fact, all the sale and transfer of those properties required going to Cabinet until this was resolved.
MR. BARNET: In Clayton Park West we would be there in Cabinet meetings for hours and hours.
MS. WHALEN: There's a lot of "for sale" signs around, so if it's causing that much trouble to the lawyers I would be concerned. I wanted to ask you about the department itself. In the short preamble to the estimates, it indicates that the department is being restructured. It talks about a new branch being created and this would be reflected in next year's estimates. I wanted to ask why we're restructuring, what is the aim of that?
MR. BARNET: Essentially, as was pointed out in my speech, and as other members would know, we have a department that is wide and varied. What we're trying to do is have a focus on the business delivery model so that those things that make sense are together as a corporate unit. I would describe it simply that way, that we have a department that is efficiently managed and have people who have similar tasks working together. I think that pretty much answers your question.
MS. WHALEN: Is there a cost associated with this study and redesign?
MR. BARNET: For the most part it's an internal process where we have our own staff doing it. We did seek some external advice, a small amount of money - I think it was $34,000 - but for the most part it's people who are doing the work now, people who are providing the service, that are helping us to do this.
MS. WHALEN: I'm wondering about Access Nova Scotia and the hours that they're currently open. My experience with the West End Mall one - I guess that has a new name now, but you know the one on Mumford Road - my understanding is they close about 4:30 or 5:00 every day and I don't think they're open on Saturdays. Can you give us an idea of the hours that they're available and is it a standard one? I assume you would be standard across the province.
[4:15 p.m.]
MR. BARNET: Actually, I'm glad you raised the question because it does provide me an opportunity to tell the committee a couple of things. One is that in direct response to your question, we are open late on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, until seven o'clock on those nights. As I indicated earlier, we stay until everybody is served, the doors close at seven o'clock but if you're inside and there are 20 people in there, they all get served. We have the normal Monday and Tuesday closing hours which is 4:30 p.m. and then the extended hours for Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.
[Page 677]
We recognize, particularly with our Registry of Motor Vehicles, that there were some requirements for enhanced service. A couple of years ago, as a result of a recommendation of the red tape task force, we identified a number of areas that were kind of under-serviced and in those areas we have a one-day service where we have a staff person who comes in to provide service; I think Shelburne, Windsor, Sheet Harbour, Liverpool and Guysborough have the one-day service so that folks who live in those areas can get Registry of Motor Vehicle service in their community.
MS. WHALEN: Is this one day a week?
MR. BARNET: One day a week (Interruption) Two days a week, there you go, double. In the length of time I was sitting here it doubled. It just shows that I don't micromanage to that extent, do I?
In addition to that, we've identified another area where we intend to move with respect to service. As a result of the Capital District Health Authority locating and building a new Cobequid Multi-Service Centre in the Sackville area, it will create a vacancy for the existing location. We have done some analyses and determined that that facility would provide for an opportunity for us to reduce some wait times, travelling for our customers, by locating an Access centre in that former Cobequid Multi-Service Centre site. It's a much larger site than what we would require for an Access centre so the balance of the space will be used and utilized for government offices. It will take a government asset that is owned by the public and provide for enhanced utilization and bring services closer to where the people are.
MS. WHALEN: Can I ask, what's the closest centre right now for Access Nova Scotia for the Bedford-Sackville area?
MR. BARNET: They are both about the same distance, it would either be West End Mall or Portland Street in Dartmouth, but they're both nearly the same distance in different directions.
MS. WHALEN: Again, that property though is valuable if it was left vacant and sold, that would be of some value to the province as well, wouldn't it?
MR. BARNET: I guess you could look at it two ways. Currently we pay leases all over this province and we've done an economic analysis of this and determined that the redevelopment of that property will save government hundreds of thousands of dollars and millions over years. I believe if you're going to need space and you have space, wouldn't it be in the best interests of the taxpayers that you use the space you already have, that's paid for? In this case we have a great building in a great location that will save us hundreds of thousands of dollars every year, that we'll be able to reinvest in providing additional services.
[Page 678]
MS. WHALEN: Can I just ask, I think it's certainly better service for the public and I applaud that because you have thousands of people living in the Bedford-Sackville-Beaver Bank area and even further afield, and that would be a lot closer and more convenient for them. I'm wondering, how is it that you will save money by opening a new service centre?
MR. BARNET: Better service and it saves money. It saves money simply because we're not paying leases on space, where we own the space.
MS. WHALEN: But you won't be closing another space so it's an additional cost, it's a new office?
MR. BARNET: We'll also be able to reduce our footprint of our existing spaces, because customers who are coming from Sackville would not go to another spot. Right now, particularly in one of them, we're in a very expensive mall location, so it will save us some money there.
MS. WHALEN: So over time you might reduce the size of those offices and not be renting?
MR. BARNET: Plus, as I've described, the Cobequid Multi-Service Centre site is much larger than an Access site needs, so there will be people who will be working out of that site who currently are in a leased space somewhere else.
MS. WHALEN: Is it possible to get the analysis that was done to justify opening the new centre, is that available?
MR. BARNET: It was an internal one done through the Department of Transportation and Public Works and I'd have to check to see if it's available.
MS. WHALEN: Could I make that request?
MR. BARNET: You can make the request, but I don't know if it's available.
MS. WHALEN: I'd like it just to be on record, you might send me through another avenue to find that, but thank you, that's very good.
MR. CHAIRMAN: A request has been made. We will now turn to the Independent member.
The honourable member for Cape Breton West.
MR. RUSSELL MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I just have a few questions for the minister, most of which are local in nature. The minister, I heard him explain a little earlier,
[Page 679]
made reference to the Birch Grove project. I suspect that project is pretty well complete or will be completed within this fiscal year, is that correct? The Birch Grove sewer project.
MR. BARNET: We're conferencing with Nathan and Marvin but before I do that, I just want to respond, if you don't mind, member. The member for Hants East asked a question about farm registry and I just now received the answer. We were behind in our farm registry applications by two weeks because of a staff problem. We are now caught up, so if he were to make his way over there today, he'd have his application dealt with right away.
MR. MACKINNON: This is a very efficient government.
MR. BARNET: We believe on that particular project the work is substantially done; however, all of the claims, the invoices may not have been submitted as of yet.
MR. MACKINNON: What's the total estimated cost of that project?
MR. BARNET: It's in one of these books here . . .
MR. MACKINNON: And how much did the province put in all told?
MR. BARNET: There may have been other work besides what this particular program included, but what I'm speaking of here is the March 3, 2003 application for the Birch Grove sewage collection and treatment. It saw a total contribution of $1,299,911, it was shared three ways: $433,303 federal, provincial and municipal. No, actually the municipality paid $2 extra, look at that, bless their hearts.
MR. MACKINNON: Maybe that's why they're suing the province. (Laughter)
MR. BARNET: They want their $2.
MR. MACKINNON: I could take this on notice, if I could get some confirmation on what the total cost of the project was, because I recall back in 1998-99, I believe the province had committed to - and don't hold me to the exact figures but it was somewhere in the vicinity of - $160,000 a year for three years, that sort of thing.
MR. BARNET: That may be the case, but we'll find that information for you.
MR. MACKINNON: That's fine. To acknowledge to all levels of government, that's a very positive project. The minister may or may not be aware of the fact that over 75 per cent of all the homes in Birch Grove had malfunctioning on-site sewage disposal systems and the Department of Health had recommended for several years to have that cleaned up.
[Page 680]
I recall my colleague of the day, who was Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Affairs, Wayne Gaudet, I took him on a tour of that particular village and we used a spade shovel to turn over the sod and six inches below the surface of the earth there were enough maggots there to feed 10 carcasses, that's how bad it was. There were rodents of the most fierce type in the ditches, it's a fact. It's not something pleasant to talk about, but it's one of the realisms. I wanted to acknowledge and compliment all three levels of government for finally coming to the realization that there was a major health issue, and it has been dealt with. I thank past and present administrations for that.
I understand, as well, the Town of Louisbourg is in the process of receiving a water treatment plant. Could we have some indication as to what the total cost of that project is and what the shareholder's contributions are?
MR. BARNET: I understand that the Louisbourg project is an $8 million to $10 million project or request, and currently it's in the application stage. There is some discussion about where it would best fit, whether it may be one of those projects that's appropriate for the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund, or maybe it's appropriate for the new deal for cities and municipalities, or maybe it's a project that is appropriate for both. It is a large project, so it's something that we will continue to work with the Cape Breton Regional Municipality as to what extent we can support them on this particular project and where it is most appropriately funded.
MR. MACKINNON: Another local project and it's something I may have raised with the minister last year - I believe I did, I know I certainly raised it with his predecessor - and that is with regard to a sidewalk project in the Floral Heights Subdivision of Howie Centre. That subdivision, just to recap for the minister, has a population perhaps of about 1,400 people, approximately 450 homes. It has a volunteer fire department which services not only the subdivision but the adjoining subdivision, the mobile home park which the minister is familiar, Heather Mobile Home Park, several hundred homes there, as well as overlapping onto Sydney Forks. It also has an elementary school with a population of approximately 400.
It's very active. The only sidewalk in there to date is a sidewalk on the streets in front of the school and then one small section over from Delta Drive, which is where the school is, one block away from Tometary Drive, which is one of the main feeder streets from Kings Road into the subdivision, passing the fire hall and bringing most residents into the school area.
I had written to the local councillor several months ago, as I had done with his predecessor for several years. The total cost of that project from start to finish would have been somewhere in the vicinity of $380,000 plus or minus. The first little piece was done and there's perhaps between $275,000 to $300,000 worth of work still left to be done along Tometary Drive, to Kings Road, from Villas Street.
[Page 681]
For whatever reason, the municipality refuses to make that a priority. It's a major, major safety issue. I know that the province is somewhat limited in its capacity to do anything if the municipality doesn't take the lead, because that is their responsibility. I flag that with the minister because CBRM has this terrible habit of tearing up what essentially appears to be good sidewalk, curb and gutter sections in other parts of the municipality, particularly in the urban cores. That, plus the fact that I'm quite concerned about the regional development plan, the policy they adopted, to urbanize CBRM.
We have these suburban areas - I do have 33 communities of which 28 are rural and five are suburban - and this community needs that piece of infrastructure desperately. There's not a resident anywhere in Sydney River, Howie Centre, or anywhere in that whole vicinity who would disagree with me, not unless they're smoking orange peelings or something.
I would ask perhaps if the minister could flag that with the municipality as having been a concern that was raised, I've raised it for the last five years and I believe there is a particular bias - I hate to say that - against communities such as Floral Heights Subdivision. I've written to the municipal councillor and I've spoken to him on it but I haven't received any formal response to date. I know they have not included it in their capital construction program for this year.
At one time, the old municipality of the County of Cape Breton would receive 100 per cent of its capital construction dollars. Going into the regional marriage, it represented 45 cents of every dollar contributed, yet they only receive on average between 17 per cent and 25 per cent and in the areas of this type of infrastucture I'm talking about, it's between 12 per cent and 17 per cent. It's very concerning. They're robbing Peter to pay Paul, they're blaming the province for a lot of the problems that sometimes they create for themselves. I'm very fierce in protecting my own community, even if I have to disagree with the province.
I think in this particular case, it's unfair to the province, it's unfair to the federal government. The federal government had indicated that it is more than prepared to move ahead with this project. I know your predecessor indicated during estimates that if the municipality were to make application that they would certainly consider it, but I don't know what else to do to try to flag it to a higher level. I would ask if the minister could perhaps make a comment on that, or what is his general feeling, or what can or can't be done to bypass this myopic view of planning?
MR. BARNET: First of all, I recall that you raised this last year at estimates, I believe, and it is a legitimate concern. I do know that my experience, both municipally and provincially, sidewalks and safe pathways and walkways often rank among some of the highest requirements for communities for municipal infrastructure. Often those ones particularly that are connected to or near schools create a great source of concern for parents. I know I've experienced this in my own constituency and I know the area very well that
[Page 682]
you're talking about. I have been there and I have visited it myself, I know the particular location you're talking about.
[4:30 p.m.]
I will commit to the member to write to the municipality and inform them that this issue was raised in the estimates debates and ask for a response. It's always difficult as a member, as an elected official, to respond to constituents because they don't know the difference between a municipal and provincial politician for the most part, they just know they need a sidewalk and they need it now. They know that it's $275,000 and somebody can approve it.
So to the member's question, I will send correspondence to the mayor, indicating to him that the issue has been raised repeatedly in debates on estimates in my department and I will bring it to his attention. We do have programs that would enable the municipality to apply for support, be it the new Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund, or this new gas tax deal, which would enable the municipality to have some support in terms of financial contribution towards that type of project.
MR. MACKINNON: That would be terrific, Mr. Minister, I would certainly appreciate that. I'm especially sensitive to it because several years back there was a very unfortunate incident, and I know there were other factors attached to this particular one, but I somehow wonder if a sidewalk was there if this accident wouldn't have occurred. It was a very tragic accident and one young chap, who is also a constituent of mine, is now a quadriplegic; there were three boys hit by a truck. There were other factors, as I suggested, but I'm sure if the sidewalk was there it may not have happened.
Another aspect to it is, reasonably, the local councillor made a commitment to the residents on the Meadows Road, which is somewhat more rural in nature, that he would deliver sidewalks there. I may be wrong, I'm going out on a limb on this, but I think you have a better chance of getting hit with a Soviet missile than you do of getting sidewalks on that road in the next 20 years, on the Meadows Road. I'd dearly love to, I'm the MLA for the area and it would only please my heart great but, practically speaking, it's just not there.
Another issue is with regard to this impending law suit. I know the minister may be limited in what he can or cannot say, because I'm not sure of the extent of the law suit at this point. People in the constituency I represent are at a complete loss, they don't know what to think. Their hearts and their loyalty, obviously, is to their community and to the municipality, where they were born and raised, but they are getting increasingly concerned about the cost of all this, where's it going and the polarization that has been created or that has developed between the municipality and other levels of government. There's an air of uncertainty. I've heard business people say that they don't want to invest, because of what's going on.
[Page 683]
As you would recall, Mr. Minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, recently the municipal council held an emergency meeting with the mayor to deal with the lack of - for not knowing the right word - I would say the polarization that now exists in many facets of what's happening in municipal government life in CBRM. Can the minister offer any sense of leadership that would help us see some clarity on this? I know the government has been doing its best to try to create a positive air, but it's concerning when I hear our chief magistrate suggesting that public officials, who I've dealt with for many years and they appear, in my view, to be very honourable people, to be suggested as somewhat suspect, their motive on public policy, for reasons that are other than providing due diligence to public service and with no basis in fact. Perhaps if the minister may want to comment. I could go on and on, but I think the minister gets the flavour of where I'm going with this.
MR. BARNET: I do appreciate your concern. I will say this, that the cost of litigation of court cases is very expensive. The cost of litigation of these types of court cases is astronomically expensive. I believe that it's always in the best interest of the taxpayers to weigh the cost versus the potential outcomes. I don't know if that's been done, but obviously that's up to the mayor and council to determine what's the best approach. I will say this, that the basis - as I understand it at least - for some of their concerns are how they're treated in relationship to other jurisdictions in terms of the level of fairness.
In Nova Scotia we have an equalization program that provides support to municipalities, as we've talked about here already today. There's approximately $30 million of funding that goes towards an equalization formula. Out of that $30 million the Cape Breton Regional Municipality gets $15.6 million. So 50 per cent of the equalization goes to one municipal unit, the other 50 per cent is divided by 54 municipal units. Some don't get any, and some get very little. On that basis, and if we looked at it exclusively on that basis, I'd say that we are more than fair. We do recognize, though, that there are ways and areas that we need to support Cape Breton Regional Municipality; we do recognize that our support can't only be seen as support for the municipal unit in an equalization grant.
That's why we have made significant and key investments in areas like the Sydney tar ponds clean-up project, economic development initiatives through Cape Breton Regional Municipality, investments in Cape Breton University, investments in health care, the list goes on and on. The member is from CBRM, he knows as well as I do that there have been a number of initiatives and investments that would see substantial benefit to Cape Breton Regional Municipality. I know that as the minister responsible for infrastructure programs, I had the opportunity a couple of months ago to visit Cape Breton Regional Municipality for the Vince Ryan Hockey Tournament. I saw first hand the impact of a provincial initiative, and that's the Kings Road Project where the Province of Nova Scotia, the federal government, and the municipality partnered through the Canada-Nova Scotia Infrastructure Program to make a tremendous improvement to what some would describe as the main artery into Sydney core.
[Page 684]
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Minister, I hate to interrupt while you're in full flight there, but I thought at this point, since you've raised that issue, it's important to note that the very first storm that they had, the areas of Kings Road that generally flooded right across four lanes still flood. I'm given to understand that they didn't put larger piping in for drainage - although it's a very positive project - make note of that, before the project is finally signed off. Somebody should call into question some of the issues surrounding engineering, particularly in front of the old Wandlyn Motel because it was a complete disaster. Maybe it's just that some of the old systems are still blocked, but I'm given to understand that they put the same size piping in that was in before. If they were flooding before, putting the same in again isn't going to solve it, and the road has been flooding in that area. It's a real safety hazard, and it broke my heart to see that happen.
If I could, because I have to go to the other Chamber, I would just flag one other issue. I was very pleased to see the minister - you don't mind if I proceed?
MR. BARNET: Go ahead.
MR. MACKINNON: The Minister of Environment of Labour recently refused, and his department refused, to sign that variance for further draw down on the Mira well field. I'm given to understand that, finally, the municipality has come to its senses and decided to go back and look at the Sydney River pumping station, with the possibility of upgrading and putting in a proper chlorination system. It has the capacity for 8 million gallons a day, which is enough to supply the old City of Sydney two and a half times over. It will solve all the problems in Coxheath, Westmount, Sydney River, Sydney and so on.
I'll flag with the minister - it may not be officially raised with the province at this point. I know the mayor has raised it with the local councillor, last week, that they may finally have to come to accept the fact that they're going back to the Sydney River, because the damage is too severe in the Mira area. Over 200 homes out of 800 have either lost - the vast majority have lost - water or their quality of water has severely deteriorated. If I could leave that with the minister, he may want to comment on it, if he wouldn't mind. I'll yield the rest of my time over to rest of the stakeholders at the table here.
MR. BARNET: I'll respond for the record this way. With the Kings Road, I did indicate at one time that I'm a bit of a micro-manager, but I don't micro-manage to the point where I start to look at engineers' drawings and determine what's the appropriate size for culverts, but with the Kings Road one, we can have someone ensure that that may be the case or that the right size is the case. I will say this, that the project at Kings Road is not complete, and that may be more of a factor, why there may have been local flooding, as a result of the fact that it's not finished or hadn't been finished at the time. With respect to the member's other question, we'll check with CBRM on that and find out where we're at.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We'll turn to the NDP caucus.
[Page 685]
The honourable member for Halifax Needham.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Minister, I tabled a bill today in the Legislature with respect to Africville. I have two questions for you. The first question is, is there any money in the budget to deal with the outstanding issue with respect to Africville, the rebuilding of the church and the interpretation centre at Seaview Park? The second question I have pertains to correspondence you've had and communication you've had with His Worship Peter Kelly, Mayor of HRM, with respect to their request that the province participate with them in reaching an arrangement to settle the outstanding concerns around Africville? So, those are my two questions: is there money in the existing budget, and have you responded to His Worship Peter Kelly, and when can we expect to see some provincial commitment to getting this situation resolved and behind us?
MR. BARNET: Let me respond by saying this, not long after becoming Minister of the Office of African Nova Scotia Affairs, I met with individuals who were involved with the Africville Genealogical Society to outline to them that I felt there may be a role that I, as minister in this new office, could do to help facilitate a solution to this longstanding problem. To that end, we offered to establish a meeting between ourselves, the municipality, the federal government and the society. We sent out notification, we invited the mayor and staff, we invited the federal government, we invited the Africville Genealogical Society or a representative group of them, and ourselves.
Unfortunately, the municipality declined our invitation. They chose not to attend, and if I recall the correspondence at the time, they were concerned about the fact that they were in a protracted law suit, that it would have legal ramifications as to the outcome of that potential law suit. Therefore, they wouldn't participate. So, without the municipality at the table, ourselves and the federal government and the society talked around the issues. We tried to explore what it is that the request is, and how it is that we can help, to see if we can find a resolution to this problem.
Subsequent to that, I was able to arrange a meeting between myself, the mayor and the federal Minister of Fisheries. The three of us, again, talked around how it is and what it is that we could do to resolve the issue. There's still no solid resolution. I can tell you that I've continued to meet with Mr. Carvery, who is the president of the society, and talk with other members of the society on an ongoing basis, to determine what's the best approach and how we, as a province, can help support the society to resolve this issue that's been out there for 40 years. We've continued to do that.
A number of weeks ago, and I would say probably three weeks ago, I got a call on a Saturday saying that I was sent a letter by the mayor, and he was waiting for my response. A couple of days later I went into my office and discovered the letter. The letter was actually sent on the Friday, yet the media was alerted to it before I was. The letter roughly says, what
[Page 686]
are you prepared to do? Well, I can tell you that my response back to the mayor, and I haven't sent it yet, will say, what are you prepared to do?
I don't believe this is an issue that the municipality can simply dodge and weave on, there has to be a resolution. They have a role to play. They were the level of government, after all, that relocated Africville. They are the ones named in the law suit. That it does need to be resolved. Time will not allow it to go away. Whatever support we provide will be support designed to - how should I say it - encourage or require the municipality to meet their obligation.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: That doesn't really answer my question, as you're well aware, about whether or not there are any resources in our budget allocated to deal with this. I'm not going to eat up my colleague's time, but I will be asking you this again. I just want to remind you that a former provincial government in fact did commit financial resources toward rebuilding the Seaview Baptist Church in Seaview Park, which many people hope will occur, will become part of the interpretation centre. That site is a national historic site, declared by the federal government. You'll be pleased to know you're not the only member I will be hounding about this. I will go after the federal Minister of Fisheries, as long as he's the member for Halifax West. I'll raise this again.
MR. BARNET: If I could just respond, though, I will say that we have led the discussions that have renewed an attempt to have this resolved. I believe that's our role as the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs. It was an issue that had, and receives, a great deal of attention from time to time, but it needed a push and some leadership. The society was doing all that they could with the resources that they had. So that's why our staff did get involved. We did facilitate the meetings and we will find a way to support that initiative to the best of our ability, but we will do it in a way that it will require the municipality to resolve its outstanding issue. I don't know if this answers your question directly, but without actually spelling out what it is we intend to do, we intend to find a way to require the municipality to contribute and to resolve this issue. We may not have it completely yet, but we are working towards it.
The other thing that I would say is that in meetings with the federal government, I think they pretty much feel the same way we do. They'd like to see this resolved, as well. I do know that I was impressed that Minister Regan and his staff were looking for ways to help to contribute towards a solution. I will continue to encourage them to do that, as well. I understand the issue, I've worked very hard on it, and so have our staff, we will continue to work hard, and we believe a solution is achievable. We believe it's important to Nova Scotia.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: It is, indeed.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
[Page 687]
MS. MICHELE RAYMOND: Mr. Chairman, actually just before we leave that subject completely, I'm very glad that my colleague was able to raise the question of the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs. I know that you have been bolstering the staffing, and I just was wondering, are all the sections going to be staffed at this point? Are the local offices staffed?
MR. BARNET: Not in this particular budget. As we indicated last year, we have a multi-year plan of developing this office. The first priority is to have the central office, the Halifax office, staffed and up and running. We have worked diligently to do that. Our head office staff, we anticipate having six people there, a chief executive officer, an office manager, a communications advisor, a senior policy analyst, a program admin officer and secretarial support. That's our main focus right now. Believe me, as much as I'd like to have this thing all up and running right now, it's been a lot of work. We want to do this right, because it's important.
MS. RAYMOND: It is, and I'm glad to hear that you've had discussions outside the province as well, because certainly the Black communities of Nova Scotia, whether you're looking at the Chesapeake Bay refugees, whether you're looking at the steel mill populations in Sydney, Birchtown, whatever, are populations who are known well outside the bounds of the province, and it's very important that we do, in fact, respect that heritage. Researchers in Australia are looking at the Black population of Nova Scotia. Thank you very much.
MR. BARNET: The interest in this office extends well beyond our boundaries, and it just absolutely shocked me. I was absolutely amazed. Not long after being sworn in as minister, I started getting calls from all over Canada, from parts of the United States, from people who were saying, what is this and what is it about? I had people who thought we were some kind of an economic development thing where we were a trade-off with Africa. The interest from other jurisdictions, I can tell you, and other groups has been amazing. I didn't realize that this was the first office of its type in Canada. I can tell you that there are advocates on behalf of minority groups in other jurisdictions, British Columbia and Ontario - I believe even Manitoba - who are looking at lobbying their government for similar types of offices because of the need, and the fact that we now have what will be shortly a working office that will have tangible benefits that will be able to have the voices and concerns of African-Nova Scotians heard at the Cabinet table, and the results back to the communities. To me, that's the biggest surprise.
MS. RAYMOND: It's not a surprise to me, actually and I think it touches, very interestingly, on one of the things in Municipal Affairs, particularly in Nova Scotia, that is so important and which has really, as far as I can tell, largely disappeared. When the Planning Act was replaced with the Municipal Government Act, I know I was involved with a group which was hoping to have some input into the duration of time that heritage buildings can spend with the Sword of Damocles hanging over their head and so on, which as you know at the municipal level is only a year and I'll raise it with your colleague who is in charge of
[Page 688]
heritage properties. I'd like to flag it too because it's a critical element of our municipalities throughout the province, not just in this area here.
One of the things that was supposed to be in that revision of the Planning Act was the heritage advisory committee, as part of the structure. I'm wondering, has there been any consideration of requiring, as you require a variety of other things in the municipal structure, that there at least be a heritage advisory committee in place in each of the municipalities around the province? Has there been any discussion of that?
MR. BARNET: Again, the member raises an issue that speaks to the balance of provincial interest, municipal interest and a public interest. The Municipal Government Act allows for municipalities to have these committees but doesn't require them. My expectation is that the requirement for these types of things will come from the electorate. The people themselves will drive the need for that, such as has happened in Halifax, such as has happened in other jurisdictions where there is an understanding, an acceptance, and a commitment to preserve and protect heritage properties.
Generally, we allow for the municipalities to lead us in these types of areas, it is their jurisdiction, but I would say that the real leadership with respect to the establishment of these types of committees, primarily comes from the constituents, the voters, the people who are trying to protect these properties.
MS. RAYMOND: These are certainly constituent staffed, these are electorally staffed, as well as electorally driven. I would just like to flag that because this is one of those things you could describe the built heritage of this province as an example of deteriorating infrastructure, if you want to look at it that way. As long as it is deteriorating and permitted to do so, we have that much less to offer as a province in terms of quality of life, as well as tourism attractions which are more closely related than you might think.
MR. BARNET: Can I just add something. I should have known this but I didn't and staff brought this to my attention. Voluntary Planning is beginning a process where they are going to do province-wide consultation to ask Nova Scotians what heritage is and what can be done to protect and preserve it, and it's my understanding that process will start in September. So to the extent that it isn't off our radar screen, it is, it's just that we need to know what Nova Scotians want and can expect. I'll await the report and if the report has specific recommendations from our department, we'll analyze them and consult with the UNSM, and we'll make appropriate changes where and when necessary. Sorry about that.
MS. RAYMOND: No, that's okay. I would hope that it has not completely disappeared off the radar of Municipal Affairs because certainly - my favourite line is - every square inch of this province is included in a municipality and in the country, so it can become only too easy to shuck responsibilities off to another level of government and to let them worry about it. It's very important that we do take responsibility for these.
[Page 689]
Related to this, I think, is the question of there is a little bit of a pattern in that property taxation is one of our social planning tools. Obviously, it's one of these things that is being used to encourage or to discourage certain activities as the case may be, land uses, whatever. It's a crude tool and we know there is certainly dissatisfaction and there's a lot of tinkering around with it. I have been interested to watch a couple of times that there has been the decision to say that something is not a purely municipal asset, but it is also a provincial asset. I'm thinking specifically of the taxation of the LNG plant and of the Imperial Oil Refinery.
One might argue there are certain discussions around the citadel as well and so on. These are things that are being handled as though they are perhaps more than just matters of local concern, they may be a larger concern. Could you comment on that and tell me whether I'm getting that impression correctly, whether this is just a series of coincidences, whether there are other examples of this sort of thing.
MR. BARNET: With respect to the gas lines, we had a new piece of business for assessment and what we did there is actually involved the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities and the municipal units that were involved in this to come up with a new way or a formula that would derive an appropriate amount of taxation from that particular assessment. The approach that we used was one where we involved the municipalities and the union and ourselves to come up with a formula and an approach that would be reasonable and effective, and promote what was, and is, a new industry to Nova Scotia. From the perspective of the fact that it is a new industry that has a wider impact on Nova Scotia than maybe even the municipal units where it's at, and the fact that we look at the use of gas as a cleaner fuel, it has an impact on the environment. It does have a wider impact and a more provincial interest than a bungalow or split entry on West Wind Ridge.
With respect to the Imperial Oil Refinery, we found ourselves in a situation where we had what was once a large industry in Nova Scotia that had dwindled over time, three refineries that had shrunk to one. The last one was left with making the decision of whether or not it was going to make a reinvestment in refurbishing what it has there to enhance the service they provide, or make some other decision. We believe that it was in the best interest of Nova Scotians - particularly those who drive in Nova Scotia - to have a reliable, an affordable, and local source of fuel here at home. The only way that would happen is if the business case worked, and from that perspective we believe the approach that we took saw not a decrease in taxation, and I say this again, a moderation of the increase was the appropriate way that we could encourage the proponent, the developer, the owner, Imperial Oil, to not only stay but to reinvest.
I can tell you that people in my constituency, and people I know who work at that plant, have been very busy and the company has invested tens of millions of dollars, not only improving the environment of Nova Scotia, Canada and the world, but improving the productivity of the plant and the fuel it produces. It will be beneficial to all of us that that
[Page 690]
plant stays there, and is as environmentally sensitive and does the kind of work that needs to happen. Otherwise, I don't know what kind of condition we would be in, here in Nova Scotia. We'd be in a spot where we would have one refinery in the Maritimes providing fuel for all of us.
MS. RAYMOND: Two comments on that, did you in fact receive any guarantees of local supply? I realize that logistically it would seem to make sense that there would be better access for Nova Scotians or Maritimers to the product, but was there any explicit quid pro quo there about preference of local supply and so on?
MR. BARNET: No, I wouldn't say we had a written guarantee there would be a local supply but what I will say is that gasoline is not easy to transport and the investment of $90 million is a lot of money and I think the investment of $90 million in that plant, in most people's minds - would be enough assurance that they intend to stay for a while, so we needed to provide them some predictability.
The other thing we attempted to do with this, and we have done, is we've provided them a fairness in the marketplace. We looked at how similar types of properties were being taxed in other jurisdictions and we looked at the rate of taxation. We are still the highest, but we realized and recognized that we can't simply drive them out because of municipal taxation, that we have to provide some sort of balance. It all comes down to balance and we use that word over and over in here. At the end of the day we made a decision that - in my mind at least - protected Nova Scotia's supply, it protected valuable jobs, saw substantial investment to protect and enhance the environment. I think it was the right thing to do. We did all of that and still allowed the municipalities to achieve more taxation.
MS. RAYMOND: This is related to another thing about property assessment, I believe the majority of the upgrades to the Imperial Oil Plan were, in fact, installing better quality scrubbers and so on and so forth, they were environmental enhancements. Something that a number of people have found concerning is that energy efficiency improvements to property are fully taxable, they increase an assessment, there's an additional disincentive in some ways. Could you comment on that and has that been raised?
MR. BARNET: I don't know if I would describe it that way. I will say this, there has always been an argument - particularly with the industrial component - as to what is a fixture, something that is fixed to and forms part of the property and actually increases the assessment, and what is machinery and equipment. Part of the argument over at Imperial Oil was just that, but with respect to a residential property, if a person changed their heat, for example, from a forced hot air oil to some other form, I can't see how that would impact the overall assessment of that property. Essentially what you're doing is you're exchanging one value for another value; they're not a whole lot different in terms of the actual.
[Page 691]
MS. RAYMOND: I guess the people who have gone to solar power and so on find that that increases their property assessment and that's what the complaint is.
MR. BARNET: It probably only does so because it attracts a buyer that would be environmentally aware and maybe some could say that those buyers are more apt to pay more money for a property of that nature.
MS. RAYMOND: Sure, but we could say that they have gold-plated bathroom fixtures and that increased the value of the property and people are willing to pay more, but do we not want to encourage to some degree things like environmental enhancements, as opposed to purely decorative work.
MR. BARNET: I understand what you're saying. I'm going to stick my other hat on, my old hat. As somebody who spent 11 years selling real estate and worked towards an FRI designation, took a number of evaluation courses throughout my process of being a real estate agent, I don't think that you could actually say a house with solar heat is worth more or less. I think it comes down to supply and demand. If there is a large supply of these types of houses around, then the price may come down. I don't know, in my 11 years, that I had more than two or three clients who were specifically looking for that type of property and would have paid a premium price to get it. Therefore, they're being taxed because they are being environmentally responsible? I don't think that was ever the case, I don't recall that in my experience. It may be the case in isolated cases, but I'm not aware of it.
It does point to the fact that municipal taxation, in some people's minds, isn't always the fairest and most appropriate way to tax, but it's the only way we have and we work on improving it.
MS. RAYMOND: I would certainly say it does need some refinement and if we look at some other jurisdictions, there are certainly narrower categories and so on and ways of making it a little less a blunt instrument. So, I just flag that, I certainly have heard the complaint fairly frequently that various kinds of environmental enhancements are in fact perceived as increasing the value, so I would just add that because that was something that happened with Imperial, as well.
Property assessment, there are these various other things that have come about. The question of taxation on donated land, as well, land which is donated to registered federal charities. In some jurisdictions, that qualifies them for a reduced or even an exemption from property taxes - not here.
MR. BARNET: I'm not aware of that. What I do know is that municipalities have programs where they provide tax exemptions to non-profit organizations. A couple of years ago we amended the Municipal Government Act, that allowed them to do that without
[Page 692]
having to have a separate, stand-alone budget that would offset the amount of money they would have in a grant program, but I'm unaware of what you're talking about.
MS. RAYMOND: There certainly are other jurisdictions in Canada and the United States and I can get some of that to you if you want. One of the other things that came out when the Planning Act was replaced by the Municipal Government Act, there used to be a regular requirement for review of municipal planning strategies. As I understand it, today's Municipal Government Act has lost that requirement. Do you know why that requirement was dropped, whether there is any consideration of reinstating it? The reason I say this is that in some areas of the Halifax Regional Municipality, and probably elsewhere, functioning on plans that are 20 and 30 years old. As when we were discussing heritage properties and so on, community standards and values do change.
If you don't have a regular requirement for review, you can, in fact, find that you are working on the standards of a previous generation. I don't know why that was dropped and there have been some fairly significant issues coming out of the use of aged plans. If you could just answer that one first and then I'll continue.
MR. BARNET: I can't answer that because I wasn't the Minister of Municipal Affairs at the time, but I do know this, as a former municipal councillor, the requirement - the old requirement have a 10- or 20-year review - essentially saw plans that stale-dated themselves, where nothing happened and in 20 years they started this review process and they built a new plan. The way that most municipalities do it now is these plans, although they review them on a basis required by policy, they are evolutionary, that these things evolve over time so they don't simply stand still. The rules that you had in 1979 aren't necessarily the same rules that you would have in 1999; there would be changes that come forth from time to time that will enable communities to have a planning strategy that better reflects what they're looking for. But no, I can't respond to why it was changed or how it was changed.
MS. RAYMOND: So there is no consideration at this point of reinstating regular review, no matter how infrequent?
MR. BARNET: There is no intention to change that. The provincial interest is limited with respect to planning strategies, it really is a local interest for the most part. The process that we have now enables municipalities to, if they want to by policy, and some of it is actually adapted right into their planning strategy - this strategy lasts for 10 years and then you have to renew it - to work at their own speed in changing these things.
I can tell you that my experience as a municipal councillor - and those who were municipal councillors before - our experience was that it was a great deal of time, effort and work for municipalities to review these things. As a former chairman of a planning advisory committee for Halifax County, during all of my time we had on our workload three planning
[Page 693]
strategies out of Halifax's 20-some up for review. Only one during all of that time had ever reached the point where it had been reviewed, went through all of the public hearing process, and approved by council, and that was back in 1994.
It is a lot of work and I know municipalities continue to struggle with finding the right mix of how they utilize their staff and at the same time, they're dealing with applications. So you have a planning strategy, and the work that goes into developing what a community has to look like and should reflect, and how the community expects it. On the other hand you have the developers coming in trying to apply their rules, or they are asked to this strategy, so they're working two sides of the equation all the time and it's a great effort.
We do know that the HRM, for example, is undertaking a huge planning exercise that is ongoing and probably will be for some time. Some municipalities simply only get involved in municipal planning when and where it is absolutely necessary.
MS. RAYMOND: I guess that's what I would say, is that certainly what's going on with the HRM right now, we know that the negotiations have started but there's no idea when or if they'll ever finish. In the meantime, things are happening, there's development happening while the whole thing is in flux. I would say that if there's fairly regular review required, that it's a little bit easier than every now and then having to reinvent the entire exercise, which is certainly what seems to have happened here.
I also would say that it seems to me the province has a very real interest in municipal planning strategies because every municipality is next door to another one, and the kinds of decisions that are made about transportation, about social housing, about everything else inside the bounds of one municipality has an impact on the one next door. The only people who can have the overview, really, are the province and I would say that that would be your department.
I would just like to ask one last question, because I know I have colleagues who are anxious to speak as well, and that is going back a little bit to the question that was asked across the table about Crown lands issue and the recording of Crown lands. Various land swaps take place between levels of government and departments of government. I know I've heard it confessed by at least one municipality that they're pretty well delinquent in recording those swaps, even in the predecessor to LRIS. I'm just wondering what kind of requirements there are around the registration of land trades and what department at any given time is, in fact, the holder of a piece of property? This is an issue in terms of when something moves out of say, Crown lands and it becomes Department of Housing, for instance. That's the kind of thing that precedes a fairly major change, but it's not always a matter on the record.
MR. BARNET: I'm not sure if I fully understood your question but I'll answer it this way and then if I didn't, you can ask it again. If, for example, a piece of property was held
[Page 694]
by the Department of Housing and it was transferred to the Department of Natural Resources, it wouldn't be migrated in or out of the system, there's no change, the province is the owner regardless, in any case. It's only when there's an exchange of value, that type of thing, when there's a deed that moves from one entity to another that we would see that.
As I spoke earlier, the Department of Natural Resources has a significant budget - $800,000 in this particular budget - and 14 full-time staff people, who are dedicated solely towards the resolution of what we call the "green layer" which is resolving those issues around property that may or may not be in dispute. With some of them it's very clear, we have subdivisions that have been subdivided, bungalows are on them, and they've been transferred to five or six different property owners. There are others that are less clear, but there is a great deal of work that is going to be required.
The benefit at the end of the day when that work is done and we have fully rolled out all of the counties and Registry 2000 is up and running, we will have one of the most technically advanced systems in this country, and a system that really is not a whole lot different from the system we have now, in terms of - if you look at it from a laymen's perspective - the way we register our cars, for our land. We will be in the 21st Century, right now we are way back there - well, we were way back there.
MS. RAYMOND: Certainly, if a chunk of land is taken out of one department's hands and moved to another, it is surveyed. If nothing else, it would allay the concerns of residents nearby and so on, and those who are affected by it, if they knew that move, which really do indicate shifts of policy, was something that they stood half a chance of finding out about. I should say, as well, it's between levels of government too, things are regularly bouncing back and forth between CMHC and Community Services and so on without appearing.
MR. BARNET: One of the problems with that is - and I understand with the example you've used - there are times in a government restructure, for example - and we will use a good department, the Department of Municipal of Affairs used to be the Department of Housing and Municipal Affairs - the housing component of it went with Community Services. Oddly enough, my expectation is that if you went back and looked at their land it would likely say land in the interest of the Department of Municipal Affairs, even though we have no interest in that land.
At the end of the day, the public's interest is that the land belongs to the public and that is used for public use, and if it's not, then there would be a process. If it is transferred, there would be a process and that's essentially what we're trying to do.
MS. RAYMOND: Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou West.
[Page 695]
MR. CHARLES PARKER: Good afternoon. I have two or three questions here I want to run by you from my constituents, some concerns they have raised with me. The first one, Mr. Minister, I have raised with you in the past and it concerns a couple who own a recreational vehicle and it's around the licence fee that they're paying, they are very concerned about it. It's Mr. and Mrs. Saunders from just outside the Town of Pictou and they call it "highway robbery" because they're paying almost $600 to register their RV for a year, yet they drive less than 1,000 kilometres on our Nova Scotia roads. They take it from their house to the local campground and park it there for the season and quite often in late Fall they will pick it up again and take it south to sunnier climates. Again, it's parked in a campground for months on end.
I know there is some jurisdiction here with the Department of Transportation and Public Works, but I think also your department has some authority over this. They are being taxed at the same rate as a commercial vehicle on the road that drove hundreds of thousands of kilometres every day and as I said, they're only driving less than 1,000 kilometres on this province's roads. They feel it's unfair and they've done some investigation and compared it to what other people are paying in other provinces. In Prince Edward Island they would only be charged $100, in New Brunswick they would be charged $142, in the State of Pennsylvania they would be charged $81 US. So our registration fee here, they feel, is exorbitant. They are not a commercial business, they are simply recreational campers who like to park at the local campground for a few months and then go down south for a few more months. I'm going to ask the minister, is there some resolution to this problem where they are not a commercial interest, they're simply RVrs who like to enjoy our province? How can we get around this exorbitant fee?
MR. BARNET: First of all, we recognize the fact that they are not necessarily a commercial vehicle but the only approach that we have - to appropriately charge a licence to - is to classify them in that direction. We are no different from many, many jurisdictions.
I know you named a couple that do it differently, but there are many others that do it the same way we do. The charge that we use is a charge based on weight and as we all know, the heavier the vehicle, the more wear and tear it takes on the roads. I know that I've listened in the Legislature, member, as you have talked about roads in your constituency and how there is a need to repair those roads. I know that you know, like I do, that the government's investment and continued investment in more money for more roads and for better roads is a good investment. Well, I would submit that part of that investment comes from part of this expense, from this fee.
MR. PARKER: Well, I can't disagree that many of our roads are in deplorable shape and they need repair, they need work, we can't argue with that, can we?
MR. BARNET: And we need money to fix them.
[Page 696]
MR. PARKER: Absolutely. But on the other hand, commercial vehicles are travelling hundreds of thousands of kilometres every year and they are, in turn, doing some damage to our roads. An RV that maybe gets used the odd weekend, people get the opportunity to get out or they just simply take it from their home to the campground, to me they are not in the same league at all. They are not wearing and tearing our roads anywhere near like a commercial vehicle is, and it makes sense to me that there should be a separate category for RVs as compared to commercial vehicles. I think we need either a lower rate or some type of seasonal permit that would allow them to have a more reasonable rate. So is it possible that it is something the department could consider, to have a rate for RVs that is not the same as commercial vehicles?
MR. BARNET: It's something that we would have to look at. I guess what I tried to explain, and what we have to recognize, is that we have a lot of roads that need a lot of work and some of the money to offset that work comes from fees collected from the Registrar of Vehicles. Both commercial vehicles and recreation vehicles, and as well as motor vehicles that people drive to and from work every day. I understand that there are many jurisdictions that treat these types of vehicles the same way we do and I know Mr. Saunders is concerned. He's written me directly. I know Mr. Saunders, by the way. I would say that it would be unfair for me, as a minister, to treat Mr. Saunders any differently than we would any other RV owner but we need the money to fix the roads. I know I've heard the Minister of Transportation and Public Works say over and over and over again that we do need an investment of money in roads and some of that money from the Registry of Vehicles could cover some of that expense.
MR. PARKER: I guess all I can ask, Mr. Minister, is that maybe, is there some possibility of looking at a licensed structure that's based on mileage for vehicles that use the roads very little as compared to others or to look at what other jurisdictions are doing, like New Brunswick or P.E.I. that charge a much lower fee. They feel that for driving a few hundred kilometres every year, they are being charged $600 and they feel it is unfair and certainly exorbitant for their budget. I just ask that maybe your department could at least look at it or consider a different structure for just occasional users like the Saunders.
MR. BARNET: I know it would be very difficult to develop a system where we charge based on the amount of kilometres that you drove. It would require a great deal of work and effort to ensure that we had accurate information. I don't know how we could do it. I do know that many people, before making these kinds of purchases, investigate the cost and determine, based on the investigation, whether or not it is appropriate or reasonable for them to make these kinds of purchases but I recognize there is a concern. It has been raised to me by Mr. Saunders directly, and by others, and we have responded to Mr. Saunders. At this point in time in our budget, there is no expectation that will change that particular policy. We are making a substantial investment in roads in this particular budget and I would say to the member, and to Mr. Saunders, that I think it's a worthy place for the Province of Nova Scotia to be spending the dollars that we collect.
[Page 697]
MR. PARKER: I guess just one final comment on that, Mr. Chairman, if I could, to the minister, is it possible to have a separate category for RVs. They are not commercial trucks, they are not hauling goods to and from businesses or delivering to people. They are simply occasional users so if RVs could be treated separately from commercial trucks, that would solve the problem.
MR. BARNET: I guess to bring to the member's attention, we do have a separate category for RVs, for the smaller ones. What we are talking about here is the large ones. The smaller ones you can apply for and receive an RV plate or a camper plate. There are benefits as a result of that. It's a different plate and it's a different fee structure. What we are talking about are the much larger, commercial-sized vehicles.
MR. PARKER: Just interested in the license plate number that the Saunders have. They have spelled the word camper on it, c-a-m-p-e-r. While it's a heavier vehicle, for them they class it as a camper. Anyway, we will leave that issue for now.
I want to ask you a little further, if I have time, Mr. Chairman, I think I have a few minutes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes.
MR. PARKER: I want to ask you further about the Heatherdale Memorial Gardens in Pictou County. We have talked about this a number of times and I would just like to get an update on where we are at or where we are going with this. It's been over two years now, I believe, since it's been turned over, or since the death of the previous owner, and the province has taken responsibility for it over the last number of months, but there are certainly some frustrations by people in Pictou County and beyond and I guess there are other cemeteries that this owner from Newfoundland had left when he passed on. The number one concern I'm hearing is probably just around general maintenance, lack of pruning and flower planting and occasional lawn mowing but nothing near to what it had been under the previous owner. So that is number one, the maintenance issue and why it's not being maintained anywhere close to where it had been.
There is a story in our local paper, The New Glasgow Evening News, about a veteran, the daughter of the veteran who had died is ashamed to bring and show the plot and the landscape grounds to the widow, I guess it is. Very concerned about the upkeep or maintenance or lack thereof in Heatherdale Gardens.
I guess the second issue is around perpetual care. People bought plots and they paid for opening and closing of the grave site and they paid for a marker and these things are apparently long since paid for, but now they discover that they are not paid for, they are not able to get the marker or the perpetual care they thought they were getting.
[Page 698]
I guess the third issue is around the ownership. I know you have been talking with a few people but there are still problems, I understand, with the auditing or the dollars or who owns what or what's been paid for. Some of the previous owners, I think, had walked away and some of the money may be gone that we thought was there for perpetual care. So give us an update on efforts to find a new owner.
MR. BARNET: Okay, let me start first of all with our budget. In this budget, we have increased staff in our Consumer Protection Division to enable us to do more work to ensure that there is a greater level of consumer protection here in Nova Scotia, not just necessarily for this industry but for others as well. I'm very pleased with the investment that we've been able to make. I think it's the right thing to do. It will prevent other such or other type circumstances from arising in the future. I'm convinced of that. I believe we are going in the right direction by hiring these staff and enhancing the service that we already provide. I do believe that this budget, particularly in my department, one of the biggest benefits of this budget is the fact that we have recognized and enhanced this service so that consumers in Nova Scotia, regardless of whether they buy a funeral plot or are involved in a number of things that are consumer protection issues, that they have people who are here, in the Province of Nova Scotia to help protect their interests.
With respect to those who purchased services from Heatherdale Gardens, as I have said in the House, the Province of Nova Scotia recognizes the anxiety that that would cause to those family members and we have committed to ensuring that those folks who have purchased services will receive those services, whether it is at Heatherdale Gardens or at Forest Haven Lawn Cemetery. I think all members would recognize that we have lived up to that commitment, but to my knowledge no one has said we haven't done that. That is what I would describe as above and beyond what many people would expect. We stepped up to the plate because people have made a significant investment and the Province of Nova Scotia recognized that it creates a lot of anxiety at a very difficult time in our life, and we couldn't let them, and I, myself, as minister, couldn't allow those people to have to continue on with the existing anxiety of losing a loved one only to be compounded by the fact that the service they provided for, to give them peace of mind that they wouldn't have to worry about it in the future, is lost. So we stepped up to the plate in my mind, in a big way, to make sure those people get the service they deserve.
MR. PARKER: Would that include, Mr. Minister, pre-purchase of markers?
MR. BARNET: On that particular issue, with the pre-purchase of the markets, we are pursuing that with Atlantic Cemeteries Limited. If people can't wait for us to resolve this issue with Atlantic Cemeteries Limited, they can make that purchase on their own and if we are able to successfully satisfy the discussions that we've had with Atlantic Cemeteries Limited, we will be in a position to provide some redress back to them, reimburse them.
[Page 699]
You also mentioned about the condition. One thing that I want to point out is the Province of Nova Scotia is not in the graveyard business, we really aren't. But we stepped up to the challenge when no one else was there. We have a graveyard that no longer had an owner. Myself, as minister, and our staff, went to work and we found people and we made different arrangements in different circumstances, but we found people who would be able to provide a level of service that we felt was appropriate.
In the case of Heatherdale Gardens, we have staff from the Department of Transportation and Public Works doing that work because I know if it was my family that was there, I would feel that somebody needs to do something so that is why we did something. It may not be to the same standard as was there before, but at least we didn't walk away from it and at least we took some responsibility because we understand the emotion that comes along with that. We also have Spring as well, so if it has not been mowed, I can tell the member that I mowed my grass for the first time yesterday and it probably didn't need it.
Two things here, with respect to Heatherdale Gardens, we've had the Department of Transportation and Public Works in and put new gravel down on the roads, but we have also just recently closed a tender. We have tendered out the work so that we could have a private operator come in and provide a more appropriate level of service for that particular site. We understand that Department of Transportation and Public Works are more used to mowing the grass on the side of the roads than they are necessarily in cemeteries, so we need a more specific solution there. It took us a while to get a handle on what these issues were.
With respect to Forest Haven, we now have a new operator there who has submitted an operational plan that we believe will be appropriate, and we have had very little concerns raised by members of the public as a result of that. This was a difficult piece of business but I can tell you, I'm proud of the way our staff handled it and I'm very pleased that, as a government, we were able to step up to the challenge when Nova Scotians would purchase the service, who are at a very difficult time in their life, would have been left pretty much out in the cold. I think we did the right thing. I think it was a good use of taxpayers' money, to ensure these individuals received a level of service that was appropriate and reasonable.
MR. PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Minister, and I just hope that soon there will be a new owner and I will leave it at that. I'm going to turn it over to you, Mr. Chairman. I understand the Third Party may have some questions they want to ask as well.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, actually we have only two minutes left which just gives the time for his minister to do his resolution unless you have a very quick question. It would have to be a very quick question.
[Page 700]
MR. KEITH COLWELL: A very quick question to the minister. We recently met with people at the Black Cultural Centre regarding funding and I appreciate your interest in the Black Cultural Centre. At that time, you indicated there was a committee structured to decide who gets funding for what based on proposals for organizations such as the Black Cultural Centre. I will just leave you with these questions and you can forward the information. I would like to know what the responsibilities and the mandate of the committee is, the list of the members on the committee, how these members were chosen to be on the committee, how much funding they have at their disposal and how they dispense these funds, what's the criteria under which they dispense the funds?
MR. BARNET: I will respond a couple of ways. One is that the . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have actually run out of time, unless the response can be very short, yes. Please go ahead.
MR. BARNET: The committee I was talking about was the Department of Tourism, Culture and Heritage, peer assessment for heritage properties. It would be a question more appropriate to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Heritage. I'm not aware of the details to how that is, but I will point out to the member that on Friday we met with the Black Cultural Centre and provided them with a one-time $20,000 grant from the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs to help them overcome their short-term problem that they have and we will continue to work with them to find a long-term solution to their financial problems.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. We would ask for very brief closing comments and for you to read your resolution.
MR. BARNET: I get a chance to have closing comments? These guys know that I go on too long, so I better just read the resolution. Is that it?
MR. CHAIRMAN: That would be very nice.
Resolution E14 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $22,254,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect to the Executive Council pursuant to the estimates.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E30 stand?
Resolution E30 stands.
Shall Resolution E14 carry?
Resolution E14 is carried.
[Page 701]
Thank you very much, Mr. Minister, and I want to thank the members of the committee and the critics for a very civil debate and discussion. We have finished our 40 hours of debate and our work is completed.
We are adjourned.
[The committee adjourned at 5:46 p.m.]
