[Page 489]

HALIFAX, THURSDAY, JULY 13, 2006

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON SUPPLY

12:42 P.M.

CHAIRMAN

Hon. Brooke Taylor

MR. CHAIRMAN: We will continue with the Estimates of the Department of Health Promotion and Protection.

The honourable Minister of Health Promotion and Protection.

HON. BARRY BARNET: Mr. Chairman, if I may, during questioning from the member for Glace Bay, he had requested some information that we didn't have at the time. We had committed to actually providing that information for him, and I'll leave this. One is the funding priorities for 2006-07, around the food/nutrition area, and the second one is the program summary report of the Sport and Recreation, the recreation facility development. It's broken out by region, so the member for Glace Bay can look to his particular region or any particular project and get the information. As well, he had asked a question around the Childhood Immunization Program that we weren't very clear on, and I would like to just read for the member for some clarity, if I can.

Nova Scotia Health Promotion and Protection received funding from the Public Health Agency of Canada through the National Immunization Strategy in 2003, to expand the Childhood Immunization Program. This funding was for three years, 2003 to 2007 only - I guess that's four years. The OCMOH, which stands for Office of the Chief Medical Officer of Health - a national organization, held a meeting with stakeholders in June to begin the process of developing a business plan for the next three to five years in relationship to Childhood Immunization Program.

489

[Page 490]

This involved a review of the national recommendations for childhood immunization, national and provincial objectives for vaccines, preventable diseases, as well as knowledge of the new vaccines on the market. In conjunction with this planning will be the participation in discussions and negotiations for all vaccine contracts due in the 2006-07 fiscal year.

I hope that provides greater clarity. I'll actually provide that to the member, as well, if he wants that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. The documents are tabled.

The honourable member for Halifax Clayton Park.

MS. DIANA WHALEN: It's a pleasure to have a chance to ask couple of questions today to the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection. I had a couple of things, mostly around sport and recreational opportunities. I'd like to start with the government's plan for trails. During the election, there was an announcement, or at least part of the platform was around offering - I think it was 500 kilometres of new trails for walking and hiking in Nova Scotia. I think it's important, just by setting the stage - I think trails are important right across the province.

[12:45 p.m.]

Often we don't think about our urban trails when we're talking about trails. Certainly as the MLA for Clayton Park, I'd like to let the minister know that the riding of Clayton Park has a trails association, which is relatively new. It's part of HRTAT, I think they're called - the trails association for HRM. They are also part of a group that does look for funding through the different funding mechanisms to develop trails within our region. In fact, the group that's operating, they call themselves the Halifax North West Trails Association, and they go basically from the rotary all the way out to Bedford and cover a wide area. There are trails - in fact there's one that's very neglected around Bayers Lake itself, if you can believe it. In the midst of all of that retail, there is a lake and there is a very neglected trail in that area. They are trying to connect the different little pieces of trail that we have. I think the minister will know just how important that is for health and fitness of communities, that they be connected, and that they get out and walk, which people are doing in the city.

I wanted to know how the plan is being advanced and if you could tell me, is there a name for the program that will be put in place to provide this much additional trail?

MR. BARNET: First of all, I want to point out to the member opposite that she raises something that, to me, is extremely important as the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection, and that is the development of trails here in Nova Scotia. I have said to my staff on more than a few occasions that I'd like to see our province move to become the most

[Page 491]

connected province by trail system in this country. I think it's a goal that is achievable, and it's a goal that will show tremendous benefit to Nova Scotians.

I can tell you, as an advocate of trail development in my own community and around my own community, that I know there is no other type of recreational facility that gets the kind of use that trails do. They attract those folks who are not necessarily involved in sport and recreation but want a leisure activity that combines the enjoyment of nature and the surrounding communities, as well, and receives that health benefit that comes along with a healthy activity like walking on a trail.

In our community, on June 10^th, we opened the first Sackville to Bedford trail. For 30-some years, it has been illegal to walk from Sackville to Bedford. There was no legal way you could do it. In conjunction with and in support of a local trails association and the Sackville Rivers Association and our department and other levels of government, we funded portions of and the development of that trail. Like the member opposite, I believe that government needs to do what we can to support this.

Our government, to that end, I'm very pleased to say, made a commitment during the last election campaign to develop, over the next period of time, 500 kilometres of new trails. We are co-leaders with Natural Resources on that. We will work over the next little while to develop the strategy and how we will implement that but in the meantime, we will continue with programs that we have in place now, including the recreational facility development grants and other grants to work with community groups and organizations to continue to connect pieces of Nova Scotia together, so that we can move to this lifestyle change where people are healthy and active and see the benefit of being actively involved in walking our trails.

I can tell you that in my history of 14 years of representing my community, I have never seen the community embrace an initiative like the new trail that links Sackville to Bedford. That trail, albeit it's only four or five kilometres from start to finish, is a trail that now, for the first time, links two communities so that people can legally walk from one community to another. I think these are the kinds of initiatives that Nova Scotians expect and deserve from their government. That's why we made the commitment, and that's why we intend to move forward in a reasonable fashion to fulfill that obligation that we have to Nova Scotians to build those 500 kilometres of trails, and at the same time we'll continue to do the work that we're doing through the Office of Health Promotion and Protection with our programs that we currently have.

MS. WHALEN: Just a couple more questions on that. The 500 kilometres sounds like an awful lot, and I believe it is and would have a huge impact on many communities. Can you put it into context how many kilometres of trails are currently developed annually, even a ballpark figure of where we would be?

[Page 492]

MR. BARNET: We can, but what I will say is that the one thing I did since becoming minister is, we receive applications for recreational facility development applications. Under the Rules of the House, we're allowed to expend up to 50 per cent of our budget. Knowing that trail development can only occur primarily in the summer and Spring and Fall, I asked our staff to pull forward all of those applications that met the criteria, and we approved those ones first. I believe it's important to get these trails developed. We've approved all of the applications that met the criteria for this year already, knowing that time would be against us in the event that this budget wasn't passed until a later point in time. I think it's the right direction, and I'm pleased with the fact that we've been able to move quickly.

We'll try to get you that information. My guess is that it probably rests not only with us but with Natural Resources. It also likely lies with a lot of non-profit agencies and groups and committees. There are trails, both marked and known and publicly used, and trails that are just ones that have developed.

MS. WHALEN: I'm speaking, of course, of the ones that are more formalized trails. As I mentioned today about Blue Mountain-Birch Cove Lakes, there are trails going into that area, but they're not officially signed or marked, and parking isn't provided, and there's no sort of entry and exit points. So I'm talking about the ones that are really developed by communities and properly marked. I'd just like to get an idea of the relative impact that 500 kilometres would have, that's what I'm looking for.

Also on the timeline for this, you used the word reasonable. You're trying to look for a reasonable time. The commitment was 500 kilometres. Is it over a four-year period, or do you have in mind how many years this will be phased over?

MR. BARNET: While we're looking that up, I'll say this, that it's relatively easy to find, particularly those defined trails that are developed by groups and organizations through Web sites like Trails Nova Scotia and through the Trans Canada Trail System. Many of them are well marked, well developed, and are easily identified through those varieties of groups and organizations. As well, you can find trail information through the Department of Natural Resources, on the Government of Nova Scotia Web site and through Parks Canada, particularly with respect to those areas like Kejimkujik National Park. Their trail system is very well defined and marked and known. In fact, I've walked every kilometre of the trail there.

MS. WHALEN: I'm really going back to the commitment to increase the number of trails by 500 kilometres. Knowing that we do have an inventory of trails already, it's just how we are going to roll out a plan - I guess I'm trying to drill down on your plan to roll out an additional 500 kilometres, timeline. You indicated first that the plan isn't in place yet because you're going to do it with Natural Resources. But I would like to know what your timeline is, because it is a commitment to Nova Scotians. I've had inquiries in my own riding asking, how can we access that, how can we be part of that program.

[Page 493]

MR. BARNET: What I could say is, that hasn't been clearly defined at this stage. We will work with the Department of Natural Resources to define that. There are other issues around trails, including trail maintenance. One of the things that trails associations have said to us is that you have to focus on that. We have some money, a considerable amount of the money that we provide is for trail maintenance.

As time progresses, I'll be able to better answer that. At this point in time, it's a commitment that was made only a month and a half ago during the general election. It's one that both myself and the Minister of Natural Resources, through our various staffs, will be able to better answer, in time.

MS. WHALEN: I certainly want to commend you for moving in the direction. I would like to urge you to bring that plan forward more quickly if you could, simply because there's a lot of demand. There's pent-up need. As you've said yourself, it has huge benefits, socially and health benefits as well that fall under your area.

When you talked about the new trail from Bedford to Sackville, where people can now walk, I'd like to just raise an issue with you that's of a local nature as well, but that would be a harbourfront trail along the Bedford Basin. Although the Clayton Park riding - it used to be called Halifax Bedford Basin - has an awful lot of shoreline along there, but the only point where people can get anywhere near the water is at the China Town Restaurant and there is no trail in that area.

There was an earlier plan by Halifax, before amalgamation, to put in a Birch Cove Trail just in that one area to begin to develop a trail system. I believe HRM is currently looking at trails around all of the harbour, so I'd like to flag that as something that would be historic as well for a good part of Halifax-Bedford to begin connecting waterfront trails. Maybe we'll have an application to you for something along that line at a point coming in the future.

On the issue of trail maintenance which is something that you flagged, in the business plan itself, you do talk about introducing a trail maintenance program and I wonder if you could elaborate for that, how this is going to work and has the fund been established?

MR. BARNET: One of the things, as I indicated, that trails associations and developers of trails, community groups and organizations have indicated to us that it's great and wonderful to build these trails, but there also has to be some consideration to maintain these trails.

It's more difficult for community groups and organizations to fundraise to maintain a trail than it is to fundraise to build a trail. I think people are more inclined to support a new initiative rather than to support an existing initiative. In recognition of that, we have added to our budget $75,000 to support groups and organizations and that money will be utilized

[Page 494]

to support those areas based on needs and application and a process that we will determine in the near future.

MS. WHALEN: So in the estimates this year you have $75,000 dedicated for that.

MR. BARNET: That's an increase of money to our estimates in the amount of $75,000.

MS. WHALEN: Was there any previous fund for trail maintenance?

MR. BARNET: No.

MS. WHALEN: So this is entirely a new initiative. Again, I do appreciate what you're saying. You mentioned that it's difficult to raise money for replacing or maintaining things that we currently have. I think you are aware as well with recreation the tremendous demand right across the province for recreational facilities. In the time that I've been the critic for Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations and attended some of the municipal meetings across the province, it's a theme that comes up regularly. I heard you at the accountability sessions as well where they question you and recreation is a big part of that when you were minister of that department.

What I wanted to ask you about was the funding set aside for recreational facilities. I believe it was just over $5 million last year that was expended. I'm thinking of the strategic initiative funding that was spent through health promotions. I wonder if you could explore that and let me know what plans might be in place for this year?

MR. BARNET: The amount of money that we expended last year through the strategic initiative fund was $6 million, but that's only a portion of what it is that we do. We also added, in this year's budget, an additional million dollars to help meet that infrastructure gap that we have recognized and we believe should be addressed.

The overall budget for this year - the current is $2 million, now $3 million, so that's a one-third increase.

MS. WHALEN: Could you say the total again?

MR. BARNET: The current budget was $2 million, we've added $1 million to it so it's now $3 million.

MS. WHALEN: Then in addition to that, you may get allocations through the Strategic Infrastructure Fund - is that right?

[Page 495]

MR. BARNET: We did last year. We were fortunate enough to be able to have these one-time grants. It enabled us to address a lot of outstanding issues - applications that had been on the table for an extended period of time. I spoke last night about the fact that the Apple Dome project, for example, $2 million, the largest contribution the Province of Nova Scotia has made to a recreational facility in our history that I'm aware of which speaks highly to the hard work and the dedication of the community group and the need in that particular community for a facility.

MS. WHALEN: I certainly welcome any expenditure that goes to recreation. As I said, I've heard from so many places - you mentioned the arena in Canso, for example. When you're in a small community and you have existing facilities, it's very difficult to raise the money, to simply either replace or repair those facilities. They're something that's already in place and you have less of a base to raise the money from.

[1:00 p.m.]

In my own community, I know you're aware of the Mainland Common recreation centre project. The demand there is tremendous, so I would like to take an opportunity to just raise the issue again today and ensure that - my colleagues, I think, already know about it and that members of the staff as well be aware of the importance of that to not just the Clayton Park riding, but to a wide circle of communities in that area. Conservatively, it's 100,000 people that would be very close to that facility when it's built. Even by HRM's figures, a 20 minute drive from that spot on the Mainland Common captures 200,000 people.

Your impact of any investment in a facility that would be in such a dense urban environment would be great. It would have tremendous benefits on health and wellness and the issues that matter to all of us in terms of building community and strengthening community.

I do raise that because it is a very important project and HRM has currently committed almost $4 million to it, but as you know from the cost of construction, that is still not nearly enough to get to the size of a facility that's needed. I wonder if you could comment on that in terms of perhaps progress we could expect or what the community could be doing?

MR. BARNET: I've met specifically with the area councillors to talk about this particular project. I do know that there had been for some time - I'm not sure of the status now - some issues with respect to differences of opinion between groups within the community. I'd like to see that resolved so we can move forward as quickly as we possibly can. I recognize the fact that this project is necessary. This is one of the projects that I believe some of the provincial funding actually comes through Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, I think, through the infrastructure program.

[Page 496]

But the most important thing for us is that we have a meeting of the minds with the community and the municipality so that we develop not only what is necessary, but what is there as a result of a consensus or decision. I've encouraged the councillors and the municipality and those community members that I've spoken to - and I've spoken to a number of them - to work hard to resolve these issues.

At the end of the day - you point out very correctly - that there are recreation facilities needed in that area and that is a highly populated area. Our work in Health Promotion and Protection, one of our goals is to make Nova Scotia the healthiest province in this country, and facilities like that will do so. As long as they take analysis and determination of what it is they want, it takes away from the time these facilities can be built, constructed and utilized by the community members.

MS. WHALEN: Right. Well, we'd like to help, I would personally like to help in any way in resolving differences. I think it would be of interest to the minister that just on July 4^th, the last meeting of the HRM council before they took their summer break, a memorandum of understanding was endorsed by council. It had been signed with the YMCA and the HRM. That was specifically to bring the YMCA in as a partner in terms of community involvement and fundraising and helping in the design of a work program that will come out to define the project.

We feel that's going to play a positive role and I think could perhaps be the catalyst that moves us forward and breaks the - I guess you could call it the conflict that's been there, or the loggerheads. Really, what's been going on is that the project has not had sufficient funding and the scope has been too small. The scope being so restricted has led the community to say, you shouldn't spend that money on something that's going to be inadequate from day one.

So, if we've allocated millions of dollars, let's spend it on something that's going to meet needs and give us more than was there with the old facilities that were built in the 1970s - specifically the old pool that was built about 1975. That's really what's been the trouble along the way - let's get it right before we move forward.

I think the YMCA's involvement will help in that. I raise that because I think that could be the change in this project that's needed right now.

MR. BARNET: Well, I'll say to the member that I was aware that the municipality and the councillors in the YMCA had been in discussions with each other and I encourage them to reach out to any group and organization that would help find a resolution to this. The one thing that I would and have encouraged people who I have spoken to about this and other projects, is to look to the example that the Community of Berwick and Kings County have shown where they've gone out and actually done their own work in advance where they've raised their money, and then came to government looking for support.

[Page 497]

I think those kinds of things actually make it easier to make these types of decisions that we wrestle with. We receive a lot of applications and we recognize there needs a lot of work to be done but when community groups go out and do the leadership and do their work first it makes it easier for us to support these types of initiatives. I can tell you that in Kings County and the Town of Berwick, they did that. They raised over $3 million and one of the contributions was $1 million. That made it very easy for government to support moving it forward because we knew that the communities' work was done in advance.

MS. WHALEN: I appreciate that and I'll take note of what the minister suggested. What I'd like to ask is whether there's any progress in this year? I only have a couple of minutes left, so are you making progress or is there a plan to start looking at population needs in terms of recreational facilities and kind of defining the gaps we have in Nova Scotia? Right now, I know it's all based on applications coming in and getting stacked up but there really is no program that I know of at the department of sport that goes above $100,000. Anything of a major nature gets sort of set aside and dealt with in some sort of other mechanism. I'm wondering if there's going to be a more formal system for measuring and determining the needs and where the needs are greatest and where your value for dollar invested will be greatest?

MR. BARNET: What you have described there is the ongoing daily, day to day, week to week, year to year work that our regional coordinators do. I know that one of their jobs is to understand, in their region, the strengths and the weaknesses with respect to recreational facilities. I know that they do a great deal of analysis and preparation in advance of bringing recommendations to me as minister. I have all the confidence in the world that when they make the recommendation to me that the due diligence has been carried out. I can tell you that I know, for example, some of the things that they've done as projects to prepare for their analysis.

To give you an example, I know that they had a student or an intern at one point in time do a survey of available ice time in arenas around Halifax Regional Municipality where they contacted every arena operator and did a survey where they determined what was available for ice time. That analysis forms part of the planning process that they do, that they provide to me as minister when they make their final recommendation. I don't see all that work. I know that it goes on, I know that it's part of their daily work and that's what helps them provide me with the advice I need when we make these decisions.

MS. WHALEN: Just one final question, I imagine that I am almost out of time but if you could just tell me if there's any program that's coming that will be for larger projects? There isn't a formal program in place for communities to approach the minister for projects that are $1 million or over $100,000 I think is your maximum for defined community projects.

[Page 498]

MR. BARNET: The additional money that we have in our budget may help to some extent with that, but outside of those programs like the Canada Nova Scotia Infrastructure Program and the strategic initiatives through Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. We have what we have but the million dollars may enable us to move forward with some of that. The benefit that we had in early Spring this year through the Strategic Initiative Fund to resolve some of those outstanding large projects, provides us with some space so that we can continue to look towards those projects.

MS. WHALEN: The only problem with the Strategic Initiative Fund is, it's not in the Estimates and you can't count on it from year to year. Even the people that are looking at the gaps and the needs in the community don't have a defined pot of money or pool of money they can depend on even though that it might be inadequate, they still don't have sort of a work plan in a sense with the certainty that the money is identified - that's my concern.

MR. BARNET: Again, I share your concern and I recognize that but at the end of the day, one of the things that we have done as a government for the last five years is we've operated in the confines of a balanced budget approach and that when opportunities became available to us, we took advantage of those opportunities. We recognize that there is a need to address this facility situation, these large facilities, and I think we've done an excellent job so far in addressing these needs that communities have brought to our attention. There are other programs and other departments, particularly through Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. As the former minister, I know that we work very hard to ensure that Nova Scotia was able to receive its fair share of infrastructure funding from the Government of Canada and we matched it dollar for dollar and it's working very well.

Many groups and organizations have been able to take advantage of that program and I do know as well that there are discussions at the federal government level with the provincial ministers and territorial ministers talking about the whole issue of infrastructure. I've spoken directly to Minister Chong, the federal Minister for Sport and Recreation for Canada and Intergovernmental Affairs and I know it's the hot topic at the federal/provincial/territorial ministerial meetings that we had and we will have. We've had one a month ago I guess and another one coming in the Fall.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, minister. That concludes the Liberal time. At this time however, the NDP has loaned I understand a couple of minutes to the honourable member for Kings West and we'll yield to the member for Kings West.

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Yes, we made a little deal in Transportation last night so I'm actually afforded just one question. I don't have too many because I think perhaps the minister may personally know the coordinator in Annapolis Valley - Mr. Trinacty, who does a tremendous job and I get all my questions answered through him 99 per cent of the time. However I was just wondering around the Trans Canada trail system, if the department through either legislation or policy is committed to the concept of a multi-use trail? This is

[Page 499]

the question now which is surfacing among local population, users of the trail. I'm just wondering what way is that likely to unfold? We know we've had some problems in the Community of Paradise, Annapolis Royal and certainly the integrity and so on of the trail is questioned through those communities and if they can't move through the community then certainly some assistance to bypass and so forth. So just that one question I'd like the minister to comment on.

MR. BARNET: First of all, let me say I appreciate the support that you have demonstrated and I know that our staff means demonstrate out in the community and Mike Trinacty who works in the Valley is a hard working staff person as are all our people that provide the services for our department.

What I'll say about the multi-use trails is this, that those are the kinds of decisions that need to be made in the communities and they shouldn't be made by the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection. In many cases, they have to have a great deal of community debate and involvement. To date, I understand that's where those decisions are made and my belief is that's where they should stay.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.

MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to take a couple of minutes before the rest of the hour is taken up by the member for Queens as our critic. My question is just around in the budget, there was a discussion around public health and health clinics being introduced to junior high schools. I know that there's one currently now at BLT - Beechville Lakeside Timberlea School and I know in my community we have actually received money from the federal government towards investing in a teen health clinic. There is interest in the community to have one at our junior high level particularly because, let's be frank, most of the issues that used to arise when we were younger at high school are now arising in junior high and it's very important to be able to have that.

So we have a community with cash ready to partner, I guess I wanted to get a sense from the budget there was talk of increasing teen health clinics at the junior high school level. I was wondering at what stage that's at? Is your department ready to partner with communities that are willing to work with you? I was wondering if you can give me some details on that.

[1:15 p.m.]

MR. BARNET: I'm not aware that we specifically said at the junior high level. I think what we did was actually increased the budget amount by $800,000. Some of that will pick up for the loss of federal funding, but these teen health clinics can be in high schools or junior highs or in the community itself.

[Page 500]

We will continue to look at those areas where we have deficiencies and there is a known and identified need and community partners - as you've described - to assist us with the delivery of these youth health clinics. As you've described, there is - what was the school again?

MR. DEVEAUX: That currently has it? BLT in Timberlea.

MR. BARNET: My guess is that they went through the process with what you've already described.

MR. DEVEAUX: Just so I'm clear, two questions I guess. One is, you said there is federal money that's no longer available. How much money did the federal government have last year that they're no longer providing?

Maybe while he's looking that one up, my other question is with regard to the process. Is it a matter of applying to the local public health under the Capital District Health Authority? How do we identify this process for my community? What can I tell them with regard to how it works? Is there an application process like there is for rec money? Or, is it a matter of it has to be self-identified by the Capital District Health Authority? If you can give me some insight, that would be great.

MR. BARNET: I'm going to tell you, we have no real defined process. They're all funded differently and the process is different in each individual case. What I would advise a community group or organization to do is to write us a letter to spell out a proposal and submit it to us as quickly as possible. We would evaluate it, based on our resources.

With respect to your first question about the federal funding pulling out, it's the primary care program through the federal government that's withdrawing their funds. I don't have that information right now, but I can get that for you.

A very important component of this is that, if a school group, organization, or community group were interested in a teen health clinic, they should work through their district health authority as well.

MR. DEVEAUX: You said apply, write a letter, I'm assuming you would mean a proposal should be presented to the Capital District Health Authority?

MR. BARNET: I would do, to them as well probably, to us as well. I mean, this is one of those areas that kind of is jointly . . .

MR. DEVEAUX: So the funding, the $800,000, hasn't been divvied up for each district health authority, it's going to be on a case-by-case basis. Can you tell me if there has been an assigning of any of that already? Do you already have some of it already assigned?

[Page 501]

MR. BARNET: No. None of it has been assigned. It is as you described.

MR. DEVEAUX: Okay. And, final question, your department's not opposed to an expansion of the junior high school level of teen health clinics?

MR. BARNET: We'll keep an open mind.

MR. DEVEAUX: That's all I can ask. Thank you very much, Mr. Minister. I'll pass it over to the member for Queens.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Queens.

MS. VICKI CONRAD: Thank you. I want to start off by talking about the department's initiatives around disease handling and then I'm going to follow up with questions around preparedness on pandemic readiness in the province.

First I want to just bring your attention to an article that was in the ChronicleHerald on July 6^th in terms of the increased risk of lyme disease in the province. You may be aware that Nova Scotia has been identified for some time as one of North America's hot spots for high risk of contracting lyme disease.

That story in the ChronicleHerald was about a colony of deer ticks that were found in Bedford. Deer ticks are known to be carriers of lyme disease. It certainly is apparent that the tick population is spreading quite rapidly through Nova Scotia. There have been four recorded cases in Nova Scotia, the first being diagnosed in 2002.

I live in the rural riding of Queens and Queens has also been identified as a hot spot for ticks. The question I want to ask is, does the government and the Office of Health Promotion and Protection realize we are at risk for more cases of people contracting lyme disease? The NDP caucus has been receiving calls, certainly more so since this release has come to our attention. People are very worried because they don't know how to assess whether or not they have contracted lyme disease.

I can tell you this season alone, you walk through the grass and you're picking up ticks in rural Nova Scotia, through the woods - it's phenomenal how many. You could be just in a wooded area or a grassy area, perhaps maybe half an hour and you can have maybe three or four ticks. For some people that is a panic, and if they don't know if they've been bitten by a tick or if the tick has latched onto the skin, people are not recognizing how to diagnose that.

I also understand that doctors are still unclear about what the symptoms are around lyme disease, how to deal with possible exposure and other important information around lyme disease, what that will mean over the coming years, and what type of mechanisms the

[Page 502]

province needs to put in place to at least start logging information, tracking and paths these ticks are taking.

When you look at Queens and then Bedford as being two areas that colonies have been found, that's quite a vast difference. We do know the deer population has increased in numbers across the province. Certainly, as habitat is not there for deer populations, they're finding areas closer to the urban cores and in more suburban areas of the city. So, it does become a real concern.

My first question is, is the province going to adopt a lyme disease strategy to ensure anyone exposed to the disease has timely access to the diagnosis and treatment? What type of tracking mechanisms do you think your department will be able to put in place through the public health system to be looking at that?

MR. BARNET: The member brings to the committee an important issue and is right, there was the discovery of ticks carrying the lyme disease bacteria in the Bedford area. What we did in that particular case was, we actually - the medical officer of health has sent a letter to residents in that area and has offered to meet with them. I believe that's actually occurring in the next couple of days - I'm not sure of the exact date.

This is an issue that we continue to monitor. You're right - in 2002, there were two cases in the Lunenburg area. One in 2004 and I believe one in 2005 where people had contracted lyme disease as a result of what we believe was a tick bite. But, we've taken a number of initiatives that we believe will help protect Nova Scotians.

One of the things is that Nova Scotians can find on our Web site and the Department of Natural Resources Web site and the Public Health Agency of Canada Web site, information about how to protect themselves from tick bites and what to do to prevent tick bites from occurring. But as a department, Health Promotion and Protection, we take this issue very seriously and have addressed this through a number of initiatives.

One is, striking an inter-disciplinary tick-borne disease working group to provide advice on the surveillance and control of Lyme disease, conducting annual surveillance of ticks and small mammals for infection with the bacteria that causes Lyme disease - that's partially how we discovered it in Bedford - and providing information about Lyme disease to the public through media and health care workers. We have a pamphlet and a fact sheet that are available on the Health Promotion and Protection Web site and print versions will also be distributed to physicians, offices and other community locations, and a poster is being developed. We also provide articles, letters and press releases about Lyme disease to provincial and local media and health care workers. Special efforts have been made to provide information, particularly in the Lunenburg area and the Bedford area. Those are some of the things we have done to give our health care workers and our citizens information and we continue to work with the media to help ensure that the right message gets out.

[Page 503]

MS. CONRAD: Thank you. Moving on to discussing the province's readiness to handle pandemics - certainly since the SARS incident a couple of years ago, it has certainly brought the attention of being ready for any serious pandemic that strikes Canadians or our provinces, that we do indeed need to be very ready. We are looking at West Nile, influenzas, perhaps natural disasters that, as a result of a natural disaster, could produce different types of viruses being spread through the water systems or other mechanisms that could really jeopardize the province and put us in that total state of panic and state of emergency.

Looking through the report, the renewal of the public health care system, and I have to say honestly that I have not absorbed it fully but what I have been able to gather is, it has been identified that there are many deficiencies in the system as it stands today in terms of the public health - that renewal. Certainly, it's a huge challenge to put together that total comprehensive public health system that is going to meet all of the needs of that system ensuring the health and protection of our citizens and the capacity for the system to handle pandemics.

One part of the plan - and I understand too that one recommendation has been followed through with, and there are 20 more recommendations - I'm wondering about the timing of the whole plan. Do we see this plan and the rest of the recommendations falling into place over the next year, over the next two years, over the next five years? Are we going to be ready in the Fall if we're struck with a pandemic? Are we going to be ready at the end of this summer if something were to come our way? I suspect not because, again, it's going to take a lot of time to really integrate all of the services that are out there that need to be coordinated to move forward with a strategy for Nova Scotia.

When we talk about surveillance and the surveillance systems needed in place to be tracking pandemics as they move through the various countries - if they're originating in a certain country - and the mechanisms to surveil that or to understand those trackings, to keep track of what's happening here, and keeping up with the various viruses and the various other diseases that may be coming our way, so we have to be prepared and I suspect that it's going to take some time for the province and the Department of Health Promotion and Protection to put that in place.

Of course, we're working with many different groups and organizations who already have some processes in place whether it be the EMO teams, whether it be the municipalities, the DHAs, and other health care services certainly have their roles to play, and it's going to be a challenge to coordinate all of those organizations. Are we able to handle the surge capacity in our lab clinics that if a pandemic strikes and we need to have testing happening in an immediate fashion - and our labs currently can't handle any surge capacity at all, we don't have the lab technicians in place to be able to handle such a crisis should that occur. So I would like to know from the minister, what plans are in place over and above - because, again, this is going to be a lengthy process to put this system in place, so what assurances and

[Page 504]

what plans does the minister see the Department of Health Promotion and Protection moving forward? Please give me some timelines, too, as to how that will be laid out.

[1:30 p.m.]

MR. BARNET: That's a very long question with a lot of different areas that you've branched into. First of all, I'm very proud of the fact that we're the first jurisdiction in Canada that has undertaken a public health review post-SARS. As a result of that, we now have a ministerial department of government that is responsible for health promotion and protection. We're also the first jurisdiction in the country that has moved in that direction, and that speaks highly to the vision of our government to ensure that we'll do everything we can to move this province to the healthiest province that we can, but in addition to that provide the level of protection that Nova Scotians need.

This year in our budget, we have an additional $1.1 million dedicated to the public health review. One thing I would say about public health plans is that they have to be evolutionary. They can't simply be a plan that starts and stops on a day and suddenly you've got something in your back pocket that you can go to. My guess is that there'll always be a continual review and updating and evolving of this plan, because things are going to change. Time will change the nature of the concerns that the public have, including the type of influenza or other illnesses that may come along from time to time and the way that it's contracted.

I do know that we will make the necessary investments in things like public health laboratories. One of the highest priorities we have as a department is a renewal of those public health laboratories, as well as simple things like caps, gowns and gloves, you know. Things like biologicals to help with the treatment of things like pandemic influenza. But it would be wrong for me as a minister to stand here or sit here today and say to you and to all Nova Scotians, don't worry, we have everything looked after, you're going to be completely fine. It's unreasonable. It would be the wrong approach.

What we've said all along is, we will plan to the greatest extent we can. We will carry out that plan and it's not just about us in government, it's about the entire province. As I said yesterday - and I continue to say and will say well into the future - a good plan includes all stakeholders, all levels of government, the public. One of the things that we have to consider is that in the event of the outbreak of a pandemic influenza, if a third of the population of Nova Scotia becomes sick, that means a third of the police officers, a third of the firefighters, a third of those people who work in water treatment plants and sewer treatment plants, then they create other health issues. So as important as it is for us in Health Promotion and Protection, and also the Province of Nova Scotia, to do our work - and we have and we will continue to do our work - it's also important for other levels of government and for the private sector.

[Page 505]

One of the things that you have to consider, too, during the outbreak of a pandemic influenza is the supply of our food - it's a private sector that provides food, farmers and retailers. With a third less people working in those operations, it means that there is the risk of shortages and, in addition to that, individual Nova Scotians in their own homes have things they can do to prepare. We would encourage them to do those things, to work to avoid the inevitable, if it is inevitable that a pandemic influenza will happen. What I will say is that we will be as prepared as we can and our staff have done the kind of work that is necessary to make me, as the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection, feel comfortable that at the end of the day - in the event of something - I can stand up before the people of Nova Scotia and say, we've done everything we can.

MS. CONRAD: Yes, thank you. I apologize for maybe putting a lot of questions into my preamble, but reading the report did raise a lot of important things that need to be put in place. I understand that a plan does take a lot of planning, detail and coordination, and that timelines cannot be put in place in terms of when the plan will be ready or we will be completely ready - there are always those unknown factors. Like you had mentioned, certainly if the province is struck with a pandemic - say, one-third of the population has been affected - then certainly that implies that a lot of our services and people who are in various service areas will also be affected. So we do have to rely on the best plan that has been put in place and we have to rely on all of the other components of that to see that plan through.

You had mentioned that investment will be made to ensure that the resources are there. Now in the report, it does state that Nova Scotia is one of the lowest funded provinces in Canada for public health. I'm wondering, how does the government intend to change that and will there be more investment dollars coming into the public health system to deal with pandemics?

MR. BARNET: We have committed to implement that report over the next five years but, more importantly than that, the actions and the deeds and the reaction by government in this budget - we see the increase in our budget of $1.1 million. That is attributed to a number of things, but I think that in and of itself speaks for itself.

MS. CONRAD: Thank you. I talked about surge capacity at our labs and the need for more medical lab technicians to be able to handle a pandemic. Of course, we have a hard job now retaining - we do have a shortage in some cases of lab technicians now - but what plans does the Department of Health Promotion and Protection have in place to handle that surge capacity?

MR. BARNET: In addition to what I've indicated earlier - the fact that our public health lab review is one of our highest priorities - we are working nationally with the memorandum of understanding to work with other jurisdictions to have a mutual aid program, where we'll be able to draw on the resources of other jurisdictions in the event that there's a surge issue. Through that memorandum of understanding, it will impact not only

[Page 506]

us but other jurisdictions - they'll be able to draw on us if it happens in another jurisdiction. That we believe is an important step forward.

MS. CONRAD: The DHAs are already saying that the overload and their capacity for readiness is just a daunting task and to rely on - you had said mutual aid would be available. I'm assuming you were implying that mutual aid would be - I was hearing you, but I didn't quite hear - that mutual aid would be in the labs?

MR. BARNET: I said two things. As I said earlier, one of our highest priorities is the public health lab initiative. But in addition to that, in the event of a surge issue, we are working on a memorandum of understanding with other jurisdictions to provide us with the capacity during an event. It goes beyond simply lab people, but other hospital people as well.

MS. CONRAD: So you would be looking at combining perhaps resources from the occupational nurse practitioners and other service providers within the health system to handle . . .

MR. BARNET: As an analogy, it's not unlike what we do right now in the Province of Nova Scotia in the event of a forest fire in another jurisdiction. When there's a forest fire in Manitoba, as there has been this summer, the Province of Nova Scotia extends support to that jurisdiction and helps with the surge issue, with respect to the human resource side. That's an analogy to explain the concept that we intend to work through this memorandum of understanding.

MS. CONRAD: Yes, and thank you for clarifying that. I recognize that as well.

Again, just timelines for enacting the other 20 recommendations for putting forward this renewed public health plan. What does that timeline look like?

MR. BARNET: It's a five-year plan.

MS. CONRAD: As the recommendations are laid out, are there recommendations that will be more of a priority to enact? In the first year or as they're laid out in the plan itself, do they follow the sequence of, say, this is the next priority, this is the next?

MR. BARNET: The question is, they don't follow the sequence as they're laid out in the plan. There are a number of them that we have identified as first-year initiatives - the public health laboratories, the public health information. There are a number of others, but they're not necessarily in the order that they appear in the report.

MS. CONRAD: Can I get a list of what those priorities are? What recommendations will be moved forward first?

[Page 507]

MR. BARNET: We can provide you with a list. I will say this, our big issue right now is getting our department organized and bringing it together. We'll try to provide you with a list to the greatest extent that we can. It may not be a list that - we'll get you a list.

MS. CONRAD: Okay, thank you. One more question around pandemics and readiness. This is around the surveillance system and the tracking, the information technology that's going to be needed to really track what's happening all across the country, as well as this province, and putting all of that data in place and coordinating that and having the resources in place to do that huge task.

We all remember back when Y2K was an issue with the information technology and how quickly we can be susceptible to that type of crisis. If that type of information technology surveillance tracking system completely wipes out for whatever reason, whether it's a huge power outage and this province faces a disaster where we're faced with an electrical outage - and certainly we have generator capacity to address that information technology - is there a backup plan to have that tracking system developed in another way so that communication and information that's needed to get from one district of the province to the other should that whole information database be completely inaccessible?

[1:45 p.m.]

MR. BARNET: I'll say this work is well underway in that area. The one thing that you have to understand is that - let me use another analogy - this department is like a car, we're building it and driving it at the same time. We're moving forward with the development of a new department, and at the same time understanding that we have emerging issues out there. I think our staff has done an excellent job. We do need some time to develop our office, to get it up and running, but we also recognize the fact that there is work that we have to do at the same time. I hope that answers your question.

MS. CONRAD: And it does, I certainly appreciate that. I know I'm waiting to get some of my new things moving forward, so, yes, I can appreciate that.

I'm going to move on to Health Promotion and Sport. The tax breaks for families, many families really wish to see their children participate in sports, and it can be an overburden, financially, to a lot of families that don't have that tangible income. Sports, as you know, come with all kinds of extra fees, uniforms, the right footwear, travelling allowance for children who want to participate, and the tax breaks for families that enrol children in the physical activities just don't seem to help some of the low-income families. It's still a burden, they just don't have the excess funds to pay fees up front.

The question around that would be, is the government planning to invest in a no-charge community facility so that people of all ages, children of all ages, and income levels can engage in physical activities? I started off talking about children, but we do have many

[Page 508]

families that would like to participate as a family unit. I know in my riding, for example, there are very limited opportunities in some of the gymnasiums that have a fee, if it's an after-school gym or what have you. Is the province planning to invest in community-based activities?

MR. BARNET: Well, let me just say that I'm very proud of the fact that we were the first province in the country to implement a tax credit program. I'm also extremely proud of the fact that we've been able to enhance it to the point where it will have a real meaningful impact on families enrolling their children in sports and recreation. I also applaud the federal government for following our lead and for implementing a very similar program. This means that it reduces the overall cost to enrol in sport and recreation and leisure activities for families.

But you're right. You are absolutely right - there are many families that don't have the money to make that investment in the first place. That's why we have invested with the KidSport Fund. The KidSport Fund was a fund that was developed by Sport Nova Scotia. In fact at the time - I'm trying to remember when it was, it was 15 or 20 years ago, maybe even longer than that - the President of Sport Nova Scotia, Walter Williams, is somebody I know very well and have known for a long period of time, and he along with the board came up with this concept that there were people who were missing out.

They went out to the public and held a number of fundraisers. The very first one - I actually participated in that fundraiser and raised pledges myself as a private citizen to help with KidSport. They've gone along with that program for a couple of decades and always struggled to get money because, as I said earlier, it's easier to fundraise for a facility than it is for a program. It's easier to fundraise for something you don't have than for something you do have.

But, they've struggled along and as government, we've made a substantial investment in KidSport because they didn't have the resources to help the number of kids that were looking for the support. I'm just going to get some advice from my staff to find out exactly how much. We'll have to get it to you later, but it literally is a lot of money, I'm going to say millions - I don't know - over the years. It's probably millions of dollars we've invested. We know that money gets directly to the kids and it helps them with the cost of enrollment in sports and equipment. It's an application-based program that's run by KidSport through Sport Nova Scotia and it does great work.

I know that, as an MLA, I've referred young people to KidSport for support and if it weren't for KidSport and the support of that program, the families and the children that I've referred would not have participated in sport. Some of those children have gone on to become elite athletes in the sport they've chosen. It's the kind of thing we do as a government that doesn't get a great deal of attention and that we do in partnership with the

[Page 509]

non-government organization that, in my mind at least, clearly demonstrates our shared goal of helping young people, particularly families, become healthier and active.

I commend people like Walter Williams and his board of directors who, back 20 years ago, came up with this concept to help young families. I know that since that time Sport Nova Scotia and all of their partners have worked very hard to support that program. It's the kind of thing that does good work here in Nova Scotia and it's something that's unique here and that we should be proud of.

MS. CONRAD: That certainly is a great initiative. I understand that a lot of young people benefit from that fund. Unfortunately, though, to access the fund and to go through that process, there are still many, many children who aren't or haven't been able to access the funds.

I just want to ask another quick question and then I'm going to pass over to my colleague here. Perhaps rather than the question, I'll just make a suggestion and then John can pick up.

It's really important that we look at, too, healthy community design when we're talking about sports, recreation and activity. Perhaps the Department of Health Promotion and Protection could look at creating smaller populations within larger populations so that people are actually able to walk and bike to services and locations and to create that healthy community environment. So I'd like to suggest to the minister that that's something that could be a suggestion to move forward with healthy community planning.

With that, because that wasn't really a question, more of a suggestion, I will pass over to John.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Hants East, 10 minutes.

MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Thank you, minister, and your staff. I really appreciate an opportunity to pick your brain.

A place I didn't have any intention to go, but your comments around a surge and mutual aid. I would raise the flag that if the surge covers a big enough area, there may not be any aid. In other words, other jurisdictions might be grappling to deal with that themselves and have nobody to send.

I think of it in the same way that Nova Scotia Power uses mutual aid from other jurisdictions, which worries me. If an ice storm were to hit Nova Scotia, there's a good likelihood it would hit New Brunswick, Quebec and maybe the Eastern Seaboard in the United States, or part of it. So there may not be much aid.

[Page 510]

In terms of help considerations, I would be a little bit worried that the area could be quite extensive and there wouldn't be any aid coming. I just throw that out there - maybe you've analyzed this 15 different ways.

MR. BARNET: I will say this, if it was the only thing we relied on as part of our plan, it wouldn't be much of a plan. Our plan is much more than just that. That's just a component that will help us when we move forward. If the event happens, our plan will unfold and we will do everything necessary to protect Nova Scotians.

If there is an opportunity to use mutual aid and we plan appropriately, we enter into memorandums of understanding, it's the right thing to do and we will do it. But, as I said, it's just a component of a much wider and larger plan.

MR. MACDONELL: I guess to that end, we'll just say we mutually agree. I want to come to my questioning in Question Period around the sportsplex for East Hants. If you wouldn't mind just walking me through the process and then you can hand me a bag of money before I leave the room. I spoke with the Premier after Question Period and I'm not entirely sure, but I'm thinking this group is also working through the infrastructure fund as well. Can you walk me through the process of attaining infrastructure dollars plus dollars through Health Promotion and Protection?

MR. BARNET: You're asking me to comment on my old portfolio; I don't mind doing that. It's a process that is municipally driven. The municipality identifies its priorities based on a list that council considers, and submits to the province. The province then submits to a joint committee, it's called the Joint Management Committee, which has representatives from the federal, provincial and a representative from the municipality.

They evaluate the projects. It includes things like an environmental assessment, depending on the size and scope of the project. There are criteria where certain things can and can't be considered, and there is a prescribed percentage that is dedicated to green infrastructure and others. There's also a percentage that is set aside as strategic initiatives that enable projects that may not be fundable based on the size of the municipalities - primarily for smaller municipalities and projects that might have an impact over a number of different municipalities. That's generally how it works.

As I understand, having read the package just a few minutes ago that you distributed, the East Hants Recreation Society hasn't submitted their application to the federal government yet. In the package you submitted, it shows that they intend to do that the 15^th - I think that's Monday. That goes through an approval process, it can take as long as a year.

MR. MACDONELL: Okay, thank you. I'm never sure in all of this if it's the chicken or the egg - which comes first.

[Page 511]

MR. BARNET: I know that. It's the egg came before the chicken. Dinosaurs are reptiles; reptiles are creatures of eggs and they pre-date chickens. So if anyone asks you that, the egg came before the chicken. (Laughter)

MR. MACDONELL: Well, I'm going to correct you. An egg is a reproductive cell and a reproductive cell can't exist on its own, it's generated by a living organism and the living organism was the chicken, which came first.

MR. BARNET: I guess what I was trying to tell you is that the dinosaurs predate the chickens and dinosaurs had eggs. So, therefore, the egg was first.

MR. MACDONELL: Well, that seems to be the natural order of things. I think politically, it will be the dinosaurs that will predate the New Democrats when they take power. So we'll be looking forward to that and in terms of eggs, we'll get cracking.

I would like to know then, in terms of funding, I get the impression that the provincial government may be more concerned to see what the federal government is going to do, and the federal government may be more concerned to see what the provincial government is going to do. So it seems to be kind of like a dog chasing its tail.

I think the Municipality of East Hants anted up with $3.5 million, an offer of $3.5 million, purely to show its commitment to this project in the hopes that others would say, well, they're committed so we can move on this. You're saying the federal dollars could be up to a year. So in timelines, in terms of your department, in terms of Health Promotion and Protection - what's a normal timeline for your department to assess an application?

MR. BARNET: Well, one of the things that we do like to have in advance is to know that there is support from other levels of government, but it isn't mandatory. It isn't something that we say yes or no and there are cases where a project has merit, where it meets our criteria and has gone through the process where we've approved our funding in advance of other levels of government. As I've said here in committee, it's always easier when, particularly, the community side of the project has been done in advance.

I've pointed out an excellent example, the Town of Berwick and the Municipality of Kings County, where they raised the money in advance and then went to the other levels of government looking for support. It adds for an additional level of comfort to the decision makers that everything is going to go as planned, that the money is in place, that the project will move forward in a reasonable time fashion, and that there won't be some form of scaling back because the community money wasn't achievable. Often community groups' expectations are higher than they're able to achieve and in the past that has created some anxiety after the fact.

[Page 512]

You know, I can speak only to my own community and point to examples where in our community we embarked on a fundraising effort for the Sackville Sports Stadium that didn't meet its targets and when the original Sackville Sports Stadium was proposed, it was actually proposed as a stadium. If you've ever been to the Sackville Sports Stadium, there is no stadium. There is no stadium seating there. So what happened in our community was we had to start drawing the facility down and bring it back to reality so we cut the stadium seating. So it's the only stadium I know of that isn't a stadium and, you know, that's just one example and there are others around the province.

The important thing is that the project has merit and the important thing is that we have the money in place to meet our obligation when we make that obligation. Those two things are the things that we factor in most, not necessarily whether or not the federal government is going to support it or not. Often, when and if we can, we help the community by utilizing our support to encourage the other levels of government to get on board.

MR. MACDONELL: I'm out of time. I want to say thanks very much. This project does have merit and I'll look forward to the process as it moves along. I'll just keep nudging where I can on behalf of my constituents. Thanks very much to the minister and to his staff, I appreciate it very much.

[2:00 p.m.]

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Queens. The NDP caucus has at this time until 2:12 p.m.

MS. VICKI CONRAD: Before time runs out, I, too, just want to say thank you for this time here and certainly as a new member this is a very good experience and a good way to get my feet wet in terms of getting myself very acquainted with this critic portfolio. I now understand fully - well, maybe not fully - I recognize now I didn't understand how that worked exactly.

I want to talk about colonic disease prevention, specifically colorectal cancer screening. Several groups, including the Canadian Cancer Society, have been urging the provincial government for some time to adopt routine screening for colon cancer by using fecal occult blood tests for all adults between the ages of 50 and 75. It is estimated this screening will be challenging in terms of staffing and getting follow-up screening for positive test results.

But, still, it's a very serious concern and with the rising incidents of colon cancer, it's very important we do take action in taking that preventive measure and identifying cancers early. The question is, when does the minister perhaps see that type of screening and testing in place for Nova Scotians?

[Page 513]

MR. BARNET: The question probably would be more appropriate to the Minister of Health. It more fits with his portfolio. They're the deliverers of health care and it would be a question that he would be more able to answer. I would encourage you to ask him that question. I know his estimates are over, but you may get your question answered by simply asking him either through Question Period or - it really is outside. We don't deliver the health care.

MS. CONRAD: But it is a preventive measure. Certainly screening and testing is about prevention, so that's why I was posing the question here under the portfolio of Health Promotion and prevention.

MR. BARNET: We'll work with Cancer Care Nova Scotia to determine what it is we can do here in Health Promotion and Protection to further the health of Nova Scotians. As I understand it, there's still evidence being collected with respect to this particular issue. When we get clear evidence from Cancer Care Nova Scotia, we'll consult with the Department of Health and the Minister of Health and make whatever necessary adjustments to the program delivery that is appropriate.

But, we don't have that now and it really is - as much as I understand what you're saying - it would be a program delivered by the district health authorities through the Department of Health.

MS. CONRAD: Okay, thank you. One last question. When we were talking about promotion and sport, certainly physical activity does reduce the risk of heart disease and stroke. The province is funding the stroke strategy, with the line item of $500 million. Is it $500 million? Sorry, $500,000.

MR. BARNET: I wouldn't mind $500 million. (Laughter)

MS. CONRAD: Yes, exactly. (Laughter) However, the Heart and Stroke Foundation is indicating that only equates to 53 cents per capita and other provinces have been funding their stroke strategies by 2.38 and 3.2 cents per person. The Heart and Stroke Foundation was requesting $3.20 per person for funding for stroke prevention and that's a significant increase, but are there plans to increase the funding that currently is in the budget in increments?

MR. BARNET: Again, that is a question that would be asked to the Minister of Health. That's under the Minister of Health's budget, it would be something you would have to talk to him directly about. It's about the provision and delivery of health care services.

MS. CONRAD: So then stroke strategy is not about prevention of heart disease and strokes?

[Page 514]

MR. BARNET: Stroke strategy is about the delivery of health care.

MS. CONRAD: Okay. Thank you.

MR. BARNET: Is there time left for me to make a few closing remarks?

MR. CHAIRMAN: There is approximately three minutes left on the NDP's time, so I can turn that three minutes over to you, if you've concluded your comments. Okay.

MR. BARNET: I just would like to get on the record that I'm very excited about being the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection. I am absolutely enthused every day I go to work when I see our staff who are completely committed to the work they do. I think it's in part to the fact they recognize the importance of this work. It's in part the fact that we're a new department with a lot of high energy people who are very committed to ensuring the goals of the Province of Nova Scotia and the goals of their minister to make Nova Scotia the healthiest province in this country and the most connected by trails.

I'm sure every day I come in with a new idea they get a little more worried, but they meet our challenges with a great deal of enthusiasm and vigour. They're all very committed professional individuals who work very hard. These are behind-the-scenes Nova Scotians who work for all one million Nova Scotians. Often, the work they do isn't seen or heard or talked about a great deal, but it's necessary. It may be subtle that they see it through some of our social marketing programs we have to help through our website MomsandDads.ca or our tobacco reduction strategy or our gaming strategy or you name it.

A number of the social marketing programs for our sport and recreation facilities so I want to take this time to thank all of those people who work for Health Promotion and Protection for what they do. In addition to that, the good, hard-working people at African Nova Scotian Affairs and the people who work for us delivering our message and ensuring that communications of the Province of Nova Scotia through Communications Nova Scotia.

And whoever it is that will be working for us in our volunteer capacity.

Resolution E13 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $7,385,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect to Communications Nova Scotia, pursuant to the Estimate.

Resolution E15 - Resolved that a sum not exceeding $25,114,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect to Executive Council, pursuant to the Estimates of the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs, which is a portion of that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E10 stand?

[Page 515]

Resolution E10 stands.

Shall Resolution E13 and Resolution E15 carry?

The resolutions are carried.

Thank you, minister, and thank you to your staff and all participants in the budget estimates on Health Promotion and Protection.

At this time we welcome the Department of Natural Resources. Obviously, we don't have members from the other caucuses, but in the interest of time - this is kind of new ground to me because there always is a little transition period.

Resolution E12 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $65,837,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Natural Resources, pursuant to the Estimate.

MR. CHAIRMAN: So, minister, if you want to start, I think it's okay to go with your comments.

[2:15 p.m.]

HON. DAVID MORSE: In the interest of giving Opposition members the maximum amount of time to ask questions. . .

MR. CHAIRMAN: We could be opening ourselves up to some criticism. I'm wondering, really, maybe we could ask our good communications expert at the back - here we go. The clock did start though, minister.

Mr. Minister, you can begin now.

MR. MORSE: Thank you. I certainly appreciate the chance to speak with committee members today about the Department of Natural Resources. The first thing I'd like to say is that I have learned there's a great culture at the department. This is the one department where the demographics of the country seem to be defied by the staff of the Department of Natural Resources. It's apparently such a good place to be, which I'm rapidly learning as I get immersed in the department, that people are staying well beyond their retirement age. What a great benefit that is, not only for the province, but from a selfish perspective, it's great to have all these very experienced people that love their jobs working in the department.

The staff are a pleasure to work with and as you would expect, they've been very helpful, professional and committed to doing their best for all Nova Scotians. I certainly look

[Page 516]

forward to continuing to work with them in my new portfolio. I'd like to make a couple of introductions as we begin.

I'm joined by my deputy minister, Peter Underwood, who tells me I am his 14^th minister - not 13^th, Mr. Chairman. Would you know the 13^th minister? The Chairman is nodding. Our Director of Financial Services, Weldon Myers, who is going to help us address any interesting financial questions; behind us, we're also joined by the very capable Executive Director of the Planning Secretariat, one Trish MacNeil - who is waving, she also has a great sense of humour which is necessary for working with this minister. And, Communications Director, Richard Perry, who is doing a great job advising me. I know that if there's information that's not readily available, our team will get that information for the honourable members. I'm going to be brief in my remarks so that there's lots of time for questions.

Natural resources are absolutely critical for Nova Scotia's social and economic future. Forests cover over 4 million hectares or 75 per cent of the province. Primary forestry and related manufacturing is the industrial anchor of the Nova Scotia economy. An Atlantic Provinces Economic Council study last year concluded that the forestry industry generated an estimated $695 million in provincial gross domestic product. The industry employees about 11,000 Nova Scotians and exports over $1 billion worth of products internationally. When you consider it's impact on other industries, forestry accounts for an estimated 3.6 per cent of the province's employment in gross domestic product - quite an accomplishment.

Mining is another mainstay of the economy. In May, the department released a report showing the economic value of the industry which supports more than 5,200 direct and spinoff jobs. The total value of mineral production is about $230 million per year with a payroll of about $80 million. In fact, the industry pays out the highest average weekly wage amongst all resource sectors. One of the very positive announcements that has been made concerns the Donkin coal reserve. Mr. Chairman, as you would know in your recent responsibilities in this department, Xstrata has received the special mining licence it needs to continue to explore the feasibility of mining the largest remaining underground coal resource in the Sydney coal field. One day it's my hope that Cape Breton, led by the Xstrata development of the Donkin Mine, that Cape Breton will once again be a major force in the energy field in North America, perhaps known as the Fort MacMurray of eastern Canada. That is a significant economic project, not only for Cape Breton but for Nova Scotia.

I mentioned mining and forestry because they are so important to the livelihoods of people in our constituencies. At the department level, staff is very aware of the long-term benefits that these industries play in our communities. As you know, the Department of Natural Resources has broad responsibilities, it has jurisdiction over the development, management, conservation and protection of forest, mineral, parks, and wildlife resources, and the administration of the province's Crown land.

[Page 517]

DNR is one of those departments that's out there. By that, I mean out there in the regions, in small communities across our great province. That is where we provide many of the services that Nova Scotians enjoy at this time of year especially as families and tourists enjoy their summer vacations. Department staff operates our provincial camping day use and beach parks, they run the very popular wildlife park in Shubenacadie and Mr. Chairman I would say that you are probably familiar with that park because I believe it's in your constituency. They fight forest fires, in fact, two teams were recently asked to fly to western Canada to help them deal with the fire emergencies there because of the extremely dry conditions out West and made possible in part due to the weather we're experiencing today and have so far this season. It has been wet which has allowed us to assist our sister provinces; Manitoba and Alberta.

Our staff deals with infestations of insects and diseases that attack our Nova Scotia forests, they survey Crown land and boundary lines, they enforce hunting laws and off-highway vehicle regulations, they undertake research into geoscience, wildlife and forestry issues. Underlying all of that is a deeply held commitment to the principles of resource stewardship and the sustainable management of those resources. I don't have time here to list all of the accomplishments in the past year or to expand on the goals set this year but, let me touch on a few.

The new Natural Resources Wildlife Resources Card was issued to more than 60,000 Nova Scotians. The off-highway vehicle unit now has 12 enforcement officers and it is one of the best trained and equipped units in North America. Our lands division made a number of significant purchases on behalf of the public such as Andrews Island, Lunenburg County, and the Livingstone property at Cape George, Antigonish County. Sixteen projects were approved for funding under the Habitat Conservation Fund - more than $150,000 in that fund came from hunters and trappers and is used to protect and enhance wildlife habitat. Additions were made to the list of species at risk in Nova Scotia and it's always important to be aware of the populations of our various indigenous wildlife and to do all that we can to protect them.

We're really looking forward to a major announcement this summer when Ducks Unlimited Greenwing Legacy Interpretive Centre opens its doors at our Shubenacadie Provincial Wildlife Park. That is a very successful partnership and one we're very proud of. I would just add for my own involvement and the Department of Environment and Labour and just being a member of the Legislature, I have had the pleasure of meeting the good people at Ducks Unlimited including Mr. McRae, who I believe has been a leading figure in bringing about this Legacy Interpretive Centre at Shubenacadie.

On the forestry side, we also signed the Canadian Wildland Fire Strategy declaration which helps all provinces improve the way they respond to forest fires. As well, we partnered with regional development agencies and the Nova Scotia Forest Alliance to host three successful woodlot conferences in Springhill, Saulnierville, and Whycocomagh. Lastly, I will

[Page 518]

mention that the department continues to make improvements to selected parks as funds are available. For example, there is improved beach access at both Clam Harbour and Melmerby Beach, a new comfort station at Battery Park in Cape Breton and the opening of the restored Porters Lake Campground following Hurricane Juan.

We know that the outdoor experience is one of the reasons why tourists from around the world visit Nova Scotia and we're going to do our best to make it a great stay. That is why our government is committing to enhancing trail opportunities and why we will continue to pursue opportunities to purchase environmentally significant lands including coastal properties.

I could go on but let me say that the department has a very ambitious business plan and it's very exciting for me to be part of this department. In particular we look forward to consulting Nova Scotians as we prepare a natural resources strategy covering forests, mineral development, parks and biodiversity. In closing, I want to thank staff for their contributions day in and day out. With that, I am more than happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. If I might just say, your opening remarks are very well taken. I might say too that the department is very broad and it has a lot of responsibility and during my three month stay as the immediate former minister, I too want to express my gratitude to staff. I may not be around for the duration of the estimates here and I thank my colleagues from the NDP caucus for their indulgence in permitting me just a couple of minutes to say thank you. I haven't had the chance but I really enjoyed the support of all members of DNR staff and Mr. Minister, I can assure you that you are in very good hands.

The honourable member for Pictou East.

[2:30 p.m.]

MR. CLARRIE MACKINNON: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Minister, staff, I am delighted to be here as the Natural Resources Critic. First, I want to congratulate the minister on his appointment and I want to also thank him for being very responsive to an initial request that I put to him and the quick action was appreciated very much. We actually initiated the change from six hours to four hours and I think we do that partially by recognizing that your department has a lot of people in it that we would be delighted to work directly with, and I think we will get some answers on quite a few questions from time to time by that personal contact with people in the department.

Having said that, I've known your deputy minister for over a quarter of a century and certainly have great respect for him as well and look forward to working with the deputy.

[Page 519]

MR. MORSE: I have a lot of great personal stories about him that we'll share afterwards.

MR. MACKINNON: However, having said that, we have five MLAs who want to get a piece of the action from our side of the House, or at least from our caucus. That includes the member for Halifax Citadel who is on my right, and I'm very pleased to have Leonard here as well. To begin, one area that I want to look at is the Bowater Mersey land purchase. On May 12^th, the provincial government agreed to buy 16,000 hectares of land from Bowater Mersey for a total of $26 million. This amounts to a cost of roughly $1,625 per hectare and this is for as yet unidentified lands. Mr. Minister, do you believe buying unidentified lands is a good investment?

[2:30 p.m.]

MR. MORSE: Clearly, the lands will be identified before we buy them. So this is really an exciting opportunity to assist a very important employer in this province to be able to continue its operations but, from the perspective of Nova Scotians, it will allow us to go out and select some areas which I think that the people of this province would very much like to see as part of the Crown land base and perhaps in some sort of protected form. We have an ambitious undertaking in front of us over the next two years and I know that we've got the right staff in place working with Bowater Mersey. There are going to be some exciting acquisitions.

MR. MACKINNON: A press release at the time stated the province will be looking at land with a variety of potential uses but, with an emphasis on conservation. How much of this 16,000 hectares will be going to conservation?

MR. MORSE: We are already working with Bowater to identify the candidate sites and have the appraisals done so it's all done in an appropriate fashion. In terms of whether we've already designated sites that we've not chosen for protection, no, we're not in a position as a department nor am I as minister to be able to speculate on what that will be today. It does provide some opportunities and I think there is an appetite out there amongst Nova Scotians for more protected land.

MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, to the minister, the release further stated that most of these lands are significant ecosites that the company has voluntarily set aside over the years and are now making available to the province for permanent protection. If these lands are significant ecosites, will you make sure they are set aside for permanent protection?

MR. MORSE: Clearly, that is the opportunity before us. There's a happy coincidence of needs and wants here between the province, on behalf of the people of Nova Scotia and many of whom are very passionate about the environment, and the company. Some of those very lands we're speaking of are probably not suitable for forestry and, in fact, by times when

[Page 520]

attempts are made to harvest where perhaps some would say it's not appropriate, we hear from them. So perhaps this is an opportunity to address some of those areas and again, it's premature to be making commitments to protecting specific sites until we've agreed on them but I do think it presents a tremendous opportunity for the province.

MR. MACKINNON: As you know minister, Neenah Paper sold off half of its woodland holdings in Nova Scotia, almost simultaneously with the Bowater Mersey purchase. The company sold a total of 202,350 hectares, about 500,000 acres, to Wagner Forest Management for $144 million, or $711 per hectare.

It was widely publicized and well known that Neenah Paper was looking to divest its woodlands in Nova Scotia, since the deal with Bowater made it clear the government was looking to buy land. Did you enter into any negotiations with Neenah Paper to obtain a portion of their land holdings?

MR. MORSE: No, and I would just add that my understanding is that the Neenah Paper divestiture comes with a contractual obligation that they will continue to harvest timber - the fibre - on those properties that they sold to the new owner.

MR. MACKINNON: But surely, Mr. Minister, if there was an interest in obtaining additional Crown lands in one part of Nova Scotia, was there not an interest in obtaining Crown lands in the other end of the province?

MR. MORSE: The challenges facing the two mills are different ones. This is a coincidence of needs and wants. One, it was a chance to assist a major employer in this province, without setting a precedent that would require comparable assistance to all other employers in the province and at the same time, acquire some very valuable and ecologically sensitive lands. Clearly, it's always nice to be able to buy more, but this was an opportunity that presented itself this year and I am very pleased that we are able to move on this, with this budget and the budget that will be brought down next Spring.

I'm also reminded that we would not be inclined to purchase land with the caveat that we would then have to enter into an agreement with the seller to sell back the timber that's harvested off that property.

MR. MACKINNON: Just flipping back, looking at the hectare purchase price for Bowater Mersey - we're talking $1,625 per hectare and the private sale was $711 per hectare. Do you believe you got a good dollar value in relationship to that purchase?

MR. MORSE: Well, I think we better make the purchase first before we judge the agreement. Clearly, all the lands that we're contemplating purchasing from Bowater first have to go through an appraisal and once we get the appraisal, then it will be by negotiation between the province and the company. From our perspective, we do want to fulfill our

[Page 521]

commitment to the company, but we want as much back in terms of land as possible, from these arrangements.

MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, are we saying there could be more than the designated number of acres which would bring down the per acre amount?

MR. MORSE: That's going to very much depend on the value of the appraisals that are done on the properties. So, the answer to your question is yes and the answer to your question is, no, it could be more or it could be less. The perfect political answer.

MR. MACKINNON: So, although saddened that you did not investigate the possibilities of increasing Nova Scotia's land holdings in northern Nova Scotia by purchasing at least some of Neenah lands, I believe the deal between Neenah and Wagner set the per hectare market price between the two private operations, and I guess you've already answered or tried to answer that, but the difference, the point that I'm going to make is that the difference appears to be $914 per hectare, between the two. What I'm asking is, can you attempt to explain the difference? I guess you've already given me some insight into that.

MR. MORSE: Again, it's got to be pointed out that the Neenah divestiture came with conditions that they would be able to continue to harvest those lands. So, in the case of Bowater, the type of properties we're talking about, I would suggest, are probably not going to be suitable to be harvested by Bowater. So, I'm not sure you can compare the two transactions.

MR. MACKINNON: I have a letter here from the Friends of Nature Conservation Society and in part it reads: Bowater owns the largest roadless area of natural forest in Lunenburg County, namely the land described as Timber Lake North, and which encompasses all the land around the bog lakes. Since Lunenburg County presently has no provincially protected wilderness area, we urge your government to give priority to acquiring this tract of land. Is that one area that you're interested in obtaining?

MR. MORSE: So the question was whether we are interested in potentially obtaining this ecologically sensitive tract of land, and I can just envision that it must be indeed beautiful. We, of course, are not the department that designates the protected wilderness areas, but we have made note of your suggestion and it is going to be followed up through our staff, as we proceed with Bowater.

MR. MACKINNON: Also, in part, however, this is just one additional step in achieving the commitment or preserving at least 12 per cent of our land in its wild state. It is important to also move ahead on converting game sanctuaries to real sanctuaries, by stopping the clear-cutting and preserving major parts of the Chignecto and Liscomb sanctuaries, protecting the Ship Harbour-Long Lake region and transferring all of the

[Page 522]

Blandford Game Sanctuary to the Department of Environment and Labour, as a nature reserve. Are these steps being considered?

MR. MORSE: The question was specific to nature preserves?

MR. MACKINNON: Yes. Actually, converting game sanctuaries to real sanctuaries by stopping the clear-cutting and preserving major parts of the sanctuaries that I identified.

MR. MORSE: The reason I ask that question is that some of this falls under the Department of Environment and Labour. They do the nature preserves. They also have the protected wilderness areas. You have game sanctuaries. There's all types of variance on what you can do with Crown land or indeed private land, if the private land owner wants to enter into some sort of agreement with the government. So, the province has tried to provide an assortment.

In the case of Liscomb and Chignecto, I know that there is a long history of harvesting on those properties. It's done very conservatively. I certainly know with regard to Chignecto it's less than 1 per cent of the land mass and there has to be an approved forestry plan, and it requires the appropriate sign-off by the professionals in our department before we let it happen. We also have to bear in mind though that there's a balance in the province. It's not all about protecting every square inch of the province because if we do that, we've just put 11,000 people out of work, and I know the honourable member is also very conscious of the economic development aspect of forestry, which of course is a very important part of the Department of Natural Resources. So, it requires a balance and I'm sure the member would agree with me.

MR. MACKINNON: I do, Mr. Minister. Mr. Chairman, I'm going to turn a few minutes over to the member for Hants East.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Hants East.

MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Mr. Chairman, can you tell me what the time is right now?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Your colleague began at 2:30 p.m., so we will go to 3:30 p.m., the time allocated for the NDP caucus, and now it is approximately 2:46 p.m.

MR. MACDONELL: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Mr. Minister. I don't know if I sent you any correspondence to congratulate you on your new portfolio and nice to see some of your staff again.

I had been the Critic for Natural Resources and I think in particular for the forestry side because my colleague, the member for Cape Breton Centre, usually did more on the

[Page 523]

mining aspect of Natural Resources. I think from my doorstep, if I'm not mistaken - within 40 kilometres of my doorstep, I think there are 12 or 13 lumber mills operating and this would take us as far as MacTara, certainly, plus Barretts and so on down the Sackville area. So the central region, I think certainly mills a lot of timber and whether it all comes from there, it can't. I know certainly with Hurricane Juan, I know a lot of the mills are starting to move a lot further and probably they have, but I think even some of the smaller ones that didn't necessarily have to move out of the area to find timber, are starting to do that now.

I'm curious, I guess, about your views toward sustainability and wood supply for the future and I want to know what you think - you can correct me. There's no annual allowable as far as I know in the forests of this province and I'm including private and Crown. If there is an annual allowable cut on Crown, you can let me know that, but I would like to know what you would deem to be a harvest that we can sustain in the Province of Nova Scotia.

MR. MORSE: Actually honourable member, I first of all want to say it's a pleasure to see you here and we haven't often had the chance to have this type of rapport as critic and minister.

It's interesting that you would ask me that question because that was one of my first questions when I became minister because I read the papers and I know of the importance of the forestry industry to the province and I was concerned about our ability to sustain the harvest. I was very pleased to learn that we have models within the province that can simulate or predict the amount of fibre that can be grown on our land base, which is about 75 per cent forest in the province. Along with that, I found it fascinating to learn that if you use silviculture, you can increase the yield up to eight to 12 times what you'd get from an actual forest, and of course that means that it frees up more forest for protection. So it provides a balance. So to answer your question, I've seen the numbers for the last five years and as I recall, we were not quite harvesting what we were able to grow. So it was good news to me and furthermore, my interpretation of the information given was that if we needed to basically grow our forests more intensively then the opportunity was there to do it without compromising our ability to still protect an adequate base for parks and protected wilderness areas and other considerations.

MR. MACDONELL: Can the minister tell me, from the numbers that he is using, what the appearance of that forest would be? It would seem to me that the volumes you are talking about would mean that we would be harvesting a fairly young forest. So can you tell me what kind of age class or what you would deem your forest to be, as far as an old forest? I am thinking trees in Nova Scotia won't get to be older than 45. In other words, we will be harvesting every 45 years, in order to meet the volume considerations you are thinking of. Do you have any notion of how old that forest will be?

MR. MORSE: There are all kinds of variables in this. The growth of the tree obviously depends on the amount of light, nutrients, water, distance from other trees, the

[Page 524]

competition they have for those nutrients. Furthermore, I am advised that if you grow them in sort of like an 8 foot by 8 foot grid and then you go out and clear them out after a time - in other words, you do a partial thinning and make use of those ones - that the remaining trees grow disproportionately faster. So there are so many variables that determine the rate of growth that it is going to depend on those decisions as to when you are actually harvesting that forest.

Implicitly in those comments, with the huge portion of this province, which I think is somewhere in the vicinity of 78 per cent privately-owned land in the province, each of the individual woodlot owners are going to have their own plans for their forests - whether they want to grow them intensively by use of silviculture or just nature taking its course, and how they wish to harvest them, whether selectively or through other means.

So one of our natural advantages in dealing with the United States - which, of course, is our major trading partner and the honourable member would know this as well as anybody in this House - that the way we manage our forests has allowed us to have that special treatment is not having the punitive duties applied by the United States as we export so much of our harvest into the United States. We would not want to do anything to change that arrangement. So I am not sure if I answered the honourable member's question but I have embellished his question.

MR. MACDONELL: Well, I am pretty sure you didn't but as far as the status, I know we haven't been treated entirely the same as the rest of the country but the Americans never re-signed the Maritime Accord, as far as I know. That was a signed agreement but it was to be renewed in 2000, some time like that, and they have never re-signed the Maritime Accord.

MR. MORSE: I am happy to inform the member that my understanding of the agreement that has been reached between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States specifically exempts the Maritimes. Of course, the good work of the Maritime Lumber Bureau played a key role in this, as well as support from all levels of government.

MR. MACDONELL: Good, I am glad to hear that. I am just curious about what that means in the real world because my understanding was that the Maritime Accord wasn't a national - the Government of Canada wasn't a signatory to that, it was more local, so maybe I am wrong on that but it would seem to me that it would set parameters that this agreement may not.

MR. MORSE: We are dealing with an area here that probably would be best dealt with by lawyers so it is a good thing that the deputy is a lawyer. The first thing he confirms is that we have been exempt from the countervail in this recent dust-up with the United States and that in essence, I am advised that the agreement being contemplated between the two governments is explicitly going to basically provide free trade for Maritime Lumber.

[Page 525]

MR. MACDONELL: I thought the free trade agreement did that. I am curious to see what other free trade agreements get signed in the future, when this one falls apart.

MR. MORSE: I would just add that so did the Government of Canada think we had free trade with the free trade agreement.

MR. MACDONELL: I want to come back to my previous question on sustainability. Can you indicate to me what the present harvest level is in the Province of Nova Scotia?

MR. MORSE: It is 5.9 million cubic metres. Okay, you want the softwood harvest?

MR. MACDONELL: I will take softwood and hardwood both, if you have it.

MR. MORSE: Okay, we are talking about an average here, I believe, of 5.9 cubic metres of softwood - this is from 2001 to 2005, and 1.75 million cubic metres of hardwood from all lands in the province.

MR. MACDONELL: 1.75 million?

MR. MORSE: I'm sorry, that is wood supply. So 5.9 cubic metres of softwood - that is the amount of fibre that is grown every year - and 1.75 million cubic metres of hardwood. Now that is the supply.

Now here is the harvest; so the actual harvest from all lands for the period averaged 5.45 million cubic metres of softwood and 0.85 million cubic metres of hardwood. So we are harvesting about 90 per cent of our softwood growth, so there is a net gain every year, and we are harvesting approximately 50 per cent of our hardwood growth.

MR. MACDONELL: Okay, those numbers don't make sense, or the word supply is not the right word. So are you saying 5.9 cubic million metres of growth every year?

MR. MORSE: Yes.

MR. MACDONELL: Which would be added to the supply.

MR. MORSE: Yes, so you would add 5.9 million cubic metres of softwood and then deduct 5.45 cubic metres of softwood, so there would be a net gain of 0.45 million cubic metres of softwood. So we are generating more than we are harvesting. That was a great comfort to me.

MR. MACDONELL: Well, it is a great confusion to me. It seems when the province entered into the sustainability fund or the sustainability regulations, it was based on the idea that we were over-harvesting on private land. Now all that really has happened (Interruption)

[Page 526]

It is my understanding that we entered into the sustainability regulations because we wanted to put money towards silviculture because the province felt there was way over-harvesting on private woodlots and, in particular, small private woodlots. Now almost all of what I have seen, in terms of silviculture, is planting, and that only occurs if regeneration doesn't occur properly, then they will go in and they will replant.

[3:00 p.m.]

Now since the sustainability regulations came into place - which is such a short period of time - the trees that have been planted and the silviculture work could not even come close to having an impact on what we would be harvesting. So it would seem to me that either from what you are saying, if we are growing more than we are cutting, then we weren't over-harvesting. So there was no need for the regulation - the road we went down.

I guess I am curious as to - and it still comes to the point of how fast you cut or how old your forest is because I think that because of our forestry practices, we do a lot of clear-cutting; 97 per cent of what we harvest is clear-cutting. That means that we have a lot of young forest. About 100,000 acres a year is clear-cut, when that starts to grow back that is a young bunch of trees and those trees really are growing. If that acreage of really young trees is in our model, then I think we would show significant growth rate that we don't have to harvest.

In other words, we would say, trees are growing, we have a lot of growth in this province and therefore we can harvest x amount based on that growth. But, if you actually went out and looked at the actual trees on the ground that are big enough to harvest, they don't really compare to the growth that you are getting. In the last 10 years, there would be one million acres that have been clear-cut and the oldest of any of those trees in the one million acres can only be 10 years old. So that age class is pumped into a computer model which indicates - and I am assuming that at 10 years old, those sites 10 years and younger are really growing; in this province, they would be. So I think they are throwing our growth projections out of whack and I think we are over-harvesting.

MR. MORSE: I am enjoying the honourable member's questions because I had the benefit of putting my staff through - I think the term is through the traces - with the same line of questions not too many days ago. So we are quite comfortable in this area.

First of all, you make mention about the amount of lumber that was now having to be trucked into the central part of the province because there is a huge concentration of sawmills in your area. This is quite so, actually, and in fact that area of the province is not regenerating as fast as the harvest, but if you go into the, I guess you would say the eastern or northern areas of the province, it is the contrary. So there is more growth there than harvest and it more than compensates for the loss of fibre in the centre of the province.

[Page 527]

MR. MACDONELL: But. . .

MR. MORSE: The answer goes on, unless you want me to stop.

MR. MACDONELL: No, no - I asked a question, so if the answer goes on, I would like to hear it.

MR. MORSE: Plus, you have your private woodlots, and you made reference to them, and yes, that is an area where there was a concern and maybe the price of wood fibre was such that it was encouraging people to perhaps be a little more ambitious with your harvesting plans because you have literally thousands of woodlot owners in this province and they are all going to respond as to what makes the most sense for them, as opposed to a provincial basis. That is why we have brought in some of these initiatives in the last seven years, to try to bring a balance to our harvest. You've got your industrial lands, you've got your Crown lands, so in those areas the growth has outstripped the harvest. You have a geographical issue, you have, okay, what type of forest are we talking about, private, industrial or Crown?

The information I found most interesting, from my staff, was the detail with which the department goes to to actually ascertain the forest inventory - the amount of fibre. They actually not only go and take aerial shots and are able to reduce this to a fibre number, but they also have literally hundreds of woodlots that they go out and take the measures of the girth of a tree and see how much it has grown since the last time they measured it. They're able to reconcile the aerial photographs, and what they've been able to derive is an inventory - I'm going to call it a fibre inventory - with the actual physical measurements that they've taken in these hundreds of sample woodlots.

I think it was 1,500 sample woodlots, scattered across the province. That gave me a lot of comfort, because, yes, you're right, you've got a computer model and this may all make sense, and you gave an analogy where it makes sense but it potentially doesn't lead to a continuous harvest. Based on the information that was given to me, and that I've shared here with the committee, I have every confidence in those numbers.

MR. MACDONELL: Well thanks. I sat here with the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection, and we got into the which came first, the chicken or the egg discussion. I think . . .

MR. MORSE: What was the answer?

MR. MACDONELL: It was the chicken.

MR. MORSE: I always wondered what the answer was. I want to thank the honourable member for that.

[Page 528]

MR. MACDONELL: You're quite welcome.

MR. MORSE: I'll tell my wife this evening when I call her.

MR. MACDONELL: I'm a little worried about the models, only because I guess it depends on where you want to go with them or what you want to get. If I was the minister of this department and information came from my department that said, we're overharvesting, we have X number of mills requiring X volume of timber, and if we stay at this rate, we're going to be out of wood by the year 2000, whatever - the question would be, what can we do to ensure that we can keep 90 per cent of these mills or 75 per cent of these mills going, and maintain some kind of forest? Then people start punching numbers into computers and then we come up with a model that says, well, if you harvest trees every 45 years rather than every 100 years, you can keep your volume levels at such and such.

My thought would be, you should decide what kind of forest you want, and then figure out how much of an industry you can support on that forest. Back in 1998, the Canadian Forestry Service did a report, and they said that we're overharvesting in the Atlantic Region. The only province they picked specifically, to give numbers, was New Brunswick, and they said they're overharvesting by 1.5 times. I'm just not so sure that when it comes to our harvest levels, that the province has done their predictions based on what kind of forest they want.

Back in 1984, there was a Royal Commission on Forestry, and the Department of Lands and Forests, as it was called then, made a submission to the Royal Commission on Forestry. In that presentation by the Department of Lands of Forests in 1984, which is not that long ago in forest terms, they indicated three models; I would say probably different models than the department is working with now. The models showed if we just leave the forest alone and we don't do anything to it, here are the volumes we can project. If we do x amount of silviculture, here's what volumes we can project. I couldn't find the number for the amount of money spent on silviculture, but it was a large investment of silviculture. They said by 2040, we can harvest 3.7 million cords, which is actually - if you look at your cubic metres, we're over the 3 million cord level now, we're at 3.2 million cords or some such thing, and we never did that investment. In other words, we never put that investment into silviculture, and they were talking in 2040 we could harvest that, and we're just over the year 2000 - we're 40 years ahead of that, and we're harvesting just about that level now.

Those are the things that make me think that our level of harvest is not sustainable. So, I guess the confidence that you have in our harvest levels, I don't have. Only because I see that - I'm looking at numbers that were generated by the department for its Nova Scotia Wood Supply 1996-2070. This past winter at the Forest Products Association meeting, Mr. Beyeler from your department gave an update on forest wood supply numbers. I'm just wondering if anybody can tell me - this was 1996 that this was produced for a projection to 2070. Mr. Beyeler's presentation last winter was for 2006, it's 10 years later.

[Page 529]

I'm curious if the wood supply analysis presented here is in step with the analysis that was made this winter, where the department feels that the plan that they had in place here is actually working, or if there was an adjustment to it, looking to the future?

MR. MORSE: The first thing I want to say is that, as has been the case in my previous portfolios, I want to officially say that if you would like to come in and have that same discussion with my staff, after the estimates and assuming that we all pass the budget and we're not into another election campaign which I think is not going to happen - that is the election campaign - you would certainly be most welcome. Of course your colleague, and in fact the NDP critic has made mention that he would like to do that, so I just want to officially get that on the record, that he'd be welcome. I think we could probably make accommodation for alumni critics as well.

MR. MACDONELL: I want to thank you to the minister and to his staff. I really appreciate this opportunity and I want to thank my colleague because I had forgotten that I'm not the critic. (Laughter) In the interest of allowing my colleagues to get a word in, I'll bow out. I'll take you up on your offer, I'd like to come talk to staff sometime.

MR. MORSE: Certainly.

MR. MACDONELL: I appreciate that.

MR. MORSE: But you were asking about the wood supply, the amount of fibre. There's two comments I have to make. Specifically, I understand that it was New Brunswick they pointed out was harvesting at 1.5 times the sustainable level of harvest.

The first point I want to make is that back from decades ago - so long ago it's hard to remember - when I was a student in university taking economics, we talked about econometrics, it was great to have these models, but at some point in time you had to get some empirical evidence to confirm that the models were in fact accurate.

Again, I would make reference to not only the one but the two methods that the department takes to corroborate the models and confirm the provincial wood supply. I guess the models give me some sense of how quickly wood can grow or wood fibre can grow in the province, and that gives me a comfort. But what gives me the greatest comfort is that when we can go out there and using a random sample with these 1,500 woodlots plus also corroborated with the aerial photographs and interpretation of the pictures, that they can confirm the numbers. That's a great comfort to me.

You're right, there are various parts of the province. There's private, industrial and Crown, and it's not homogeneous. Some have been harvesting more intensively, and steps have been taken to try to bring a balance there and an overview. Clearly, that lead has to come from the province, and in this case the Department of Natural Resources.

[Page 530]

The other comment I'm going to make is that - the member would probably be aware better than me - that New Brunswick's forestry harvest is actually three times Nova Scotia's, and I doubt if they have three times the land mass.

MR. MACDONELL: They probably do, but, thank you.

MR. MORSE: We're getting the numbers on the land mass, but I don't think we're going to get it in time for the honourable member.

MR. MACDONELL: Thank you very much.

MR. MORSE: You're welcome.

[3:15 p.m.]

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou East.

MR. CLARRIE MACKINNON: Mr. Minister, I'm having second thoughts about having reduced the time from the six hours to four hours; however, we will hurry along here. We're spending so much time on forestry, I wonder if we could just, with one question, before bouncing over to the member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage, perhaps elaborate just a bit on what mineral resource developments are currently taking place in the province, any of significance? A good chunk of the budget is allocated to the mineral resources end of the department, and I'm just wondering if we could have a little elaboration on a few of the things that are happening, mineral-wise?

MR. MORSE: I'm going to start with a few off the top of my head, and the deputy is busy writing down a long list. Obviously, the most exciting one is Donkin. The prospects of being a major supplier of energy from the Donkin coalfields and hopefully other sources will follow the development of Donkin is very exciting to me as minister, it's exciting to the department, I think it's exciting to the province, and I think it's probably particularly exciting to the people of Cape Breton.

The honourable member would have no way of knowing this, but my grandfather went to work in the coal mines at about age 12, and he was still involved with coal, not mining it, at the time of his death quite some number of years ago at age 81. I have some roots through my mother in Cape Breton and with coal, so that's really exciting. I know that the community is excited about the prospect of the economic development jobs that will flow from this - good paying jobs.

Another one - with the global economy, it has pushed up mineral prices, and that's good news because all of a sudden some of these marginal deposits are now looking attractive. Another would be Moose River - there's a fairly significant gold deposit there, and

[Page 531]

now with gold at over $600 an ounce, all of a sudden this mine is feasible. They are moving ahead with it. Again, you're looking at something like 110 to 120 construction jobs for a year, and then sustaining 90 permanent jobs. That's good news. That's rural Nova Scotia. That's where we particularly need the development. One of the great things that the Department of Natural Resources is able to provide is, hopefully, an environment that encourages rural economic development, and good paying jobs where we need them.

The Stellarton reclamation continues to go on. I know this has been a great success story. Originally, perhaps not enthusiastically embraced by the residents, but I think the member would probably be familiar with that part of the province. I think that today, I suspect his community would say that it was a good thing that they went ahead with that reclamation mining. They've cleaned up some areas; there were some subsidence problems. I think you're getting a Holiday Inn as a result of this project. If you can turn an area which was, for all intents and purposes, a blight into productive land, I think that's welcome by the community. I know there has been some good infrastructure brought to the community as a result of that development.

Black Bull Resources, another rural part of the province, again, good paying jobs - there has been a lot of scrutiny on this particular development. I was Minister of Environment and Labour and ultimately I did approve the environmental assessment. They had to apply three times before they got it right, but they got it right and this is a very positive development - initially was quartz and there is also kaolin there. I've not been following the file since I've been out of Environment and Labour and I'm not aware whether the kaolin is under active consideration, but I know it is a large deposit.

Fundy Gypsum is another one which is actively being explored by the proponent and is something that I understand is wanted by the overwhelming majority of the community. Again, good paying jobs, and jobs in rural Nova Scotia. So there's just a smattering.

MR. MACKINNON: Thank you. With the remaining time, I'm going to turn it over to the member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage. If he doesn't have time to finish, we'll begin with him in our second round.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.

MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: I want to talk about some constituency issues. I have four provincial parks in my riding, for what is a relatively small riding by Nova Scotia standards. I have the Cole Harbour Heritage Park, the Rainbow Haven Beach Provincial Park, MacCormacks Beach Park and McNabs Island Provincial Park. I also have a couple of trails: Salt Marsh and Eastern Run Trails.

Most of what I want to talk about is around McNabs Island. There are a couple of other issues I wanted to bring up. I'll actually start with MacCormacks Beach. A couple of

[Page 532]

simple points - one is, anyway. There was a regulatory change last year, changing the name from "Mc" to "Mac" - a local constituent wanted that, that's the official name. The name of the family that donated the land is "Mac" not "Mc". I was just wondering, when does your department see that sign being changed to reflect the official change in name a year ago?

MR. MORSE: As a David Macdonald Morse, with a small "d" - the Premier doesn't spell his name properly, he's capital "D".

MR. DEVEAUX: Now that you've put that on the record, I appreciate it.

MR. MORSE: I am also sensitive to the proper spelling of "Mc" and "Mac" and I think the present chairman would also like to be known as Alfie MacLeod, not McLeod. We will get the honourable member that answer.

MR. DEVEAUX: Sure. I mean, if you do know, at some point if someone could give me a heads-up because I know it was officially changed last year. I was just wondering when there would be an actual sign change.

MR. MORSE: Yes, and appropriately so. If the people's name was "Mac", then it should say "Mac".

MR. DEVEAUX: The bigger issue around that, and I would encourage you, as the former minister - the member for Yarmouth did - come out and take a look. It's an interesting - it's a boardwalk, it's a very healthy spot, actually. MacCormacks Beach Park is actually a fairly active boardwalk in the community. It's a very nice boardwalk.

The problem happens - and your deputy minister knows that I've raised this before - the problem that comes about is that it's only maintained for five months a year, from mid-May to mid-October. It is used all year-round. I understand there may be liability issues that arise from time to time, but I guess one of the things is even simple - garbage collection. For example, people use it 365 days a year, it's right off the road. It's not like you have to walk in a mile to get to it, it's right on the main road. It is used every day. So for seven months a year, garbage collects and there's no routine garbage collection. At times, it's actually an eyesore and it's a provincial park.

So I guess part of this is a comment and part of it is, if I could get your feedback, what is the feasibility from your department's perspective of - I understand the rules that you only maintain parks for five months a year, but this is an exceptional park, because it is unique. It's in an urban setting, it's a boardwalk and it is used all year-round. What are the options with regard to your department somehow - even just picking up the garbage - to ensure that is done, to ensure it isn't a blight on the community?

[Page 533]

MR. MORSE: The honourable member is indeed much blessed in his relatively small constituency, because it's an urban one, to have four provincial parks. I agree it's wonderful to have access to that for all kinds of reasons, not the least of which would be from an ability to get out and have pleasant walks with your family.

I don't think we should just narrow it down to that one park. You've brought up an issue that may apply to any one of 130 provincial parks. What I am asking the deputy to do is to try to get a sense of whether there are other MacCormacks Beach-type parks that might benefit from perhaps a lighter maintenance schedule in the off-season. I'd be pleased to follow up on that.

If it comes back it's a big number, then it may have to wait until the 2007-08 budget; if it's a small number, we'll certainly give it consideration.

MR. DEVEAUX: I would also suggest that - because it is an issue and I suspect it's not the only one, there are probably a limited number - Health Promotion and Protection may have a role to play somehow, whether or not they have funding that somehow could assist as well. Sort of breaking down the silos and recognizing that this is a place where a lot of people go to exercise and that's a healthy thing; maybe there's an opportunity there as well. So I would recommend, if possible, depending on the value of doing this, that might be something you might be willing to consider.

MR. MORSE: I just want to say that I agree there's a Health Promotion benefit, but I'm not sure we should be looking to slough off responsibility on the other department. I really think this is something for which we should take responsibility.

MR. DEVEAUX: I appreciate that you're willing to say that. I know that your capital budget went up, I believe, this year for parks. Is that correct? Do you remember how much it went up?

MR. MORSE: Yes, actually in two areas. The maintenance budget was $350,000 - some would argue that could have been more for some period of time - and it is now $850,000, so a welcome change. There's an extra $750,000 in TCA, so we have some more capital and . . .

MR. DEVEAUX: TCA, sorry?

MR. MORSE: Tangible Capital Assets. So $750,000 in capital, $500,000 in operating.

MR. DEVEAUX: McNabs Island is a unique park. I know you have others, but it's an island park. One of the main entry points to that park is something called Government Wharf Road, which - I'm not going to get into the long history of that road, because the

[Page 534]

deputy minister's probably somewhat familiar with that as well. It has no ownership at the moment, but the city is willing to take over that road. It is a main entry point to the ferries that take people over to McNabs.

The city is willing to take over this road. We have commitments from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to cover half of the cost of upgrading the road; the city's probably willing to cover 30 per cent. That leaves 20 per cent of the cost that they're looking for the province to cover. I'm trying to be creative in this, but I'm hoping there might be the possibility of recognizing this road as an entry point to a provincial park as to whether or not there is even the possibility of some of that capital funding being accessed in order to cost share.

We have the federal government saying they'll pay for half; we have the municipality saying they'll pay for approximately 30 per cent. If the province was willing to recognize some value towards its own provincial park - and Fisherman's Cove, by the way, is land owned by Natural Resources - that there is a benefit gained from the province as to whether or not - and I'm not asking you to commit to it here today as much as I'm saying, can you tell me whether or not it's even possible for us to access some of that capital for that kind of venture to upgrade the road?

MR. MORSE: Could we just confirm the location of this road? Is it on the island or is it in Eastern Passage?

MR. DEVEAUX: Government Wharf Road is the road leading out to the pier in Eastern Passage, to which the ferries take people over to the island.

MR. MORSE: Where it's outside the park, it would be hard to, I think, make a case within the department - that department budget - but I just wonder if maybe casting a broader net through the McNabs and Lawlor Islands Provincial Park Advisory Committee, if maybe they could incorporate that as the position. It's not an unreasonable request. It's just that I'm not sure it's appropriate for me to be making that commitment, just as I felt it was appropriate to make the commitment with McCormacks Beach, because it is a provincial park. While I agree with the essence of what you're suggesting, I'm not sure it's appropriate to be spending DNR dollars outside of parks.

MR. DEVEAUX: I guess my point is - at this point, I'm not asking necessarily to say yea or nay to it. I understand this is a process the people in the department will have to look at. We've arranged meetings with Mr. Carroll to some extent with this, but I guess I just wanted to get some sense if it's completely impossible to access some of that funding, because it's not actually in the park.

[Page 535]

[3:30 p.m.]

There's a safety issue as well, I may note, that it is the closest access point to the island and if there's ever an emergency on the island, it's that road that's going to be used for emergency services. So just trying to broaden, sort of think outside the box and recognize the possibility of alternative uses that can result in the road being used.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The member's time has elapsed. I will allow the minister to respond.

MR. MORSE: I would just say that my sense is that might be a rather creative use of parks money where it's outside of the park. We're not averse to what you're suggesting is to be done and we would at least ask some questions as to whether that's something that could be considered as a use for that additional TCA.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Kings West.

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm pleased today to welcome the minister to his first estimates on Natural Resources. I want to wish the minister the best in his new portfolio and, being in a neighbouring riding, look forward to working with him.

I think I'll change tack here a little bit - there are a number of areas that I have a strong personal interest in and I've been following in my critic role. The one which occupied a lot of attention for me last year which probably is only, unfortunately, perhaps a fatality away from being back on the radar, would be the ATV issue.

For most Nova Scotians, it has probably fallen off the radar to some degree. I know last year's efforts by all MLAs in the two days that we had, perhaps more than two days, here in the Red Room to outline the regulations or give the background for where we would go as a province in this area, I think even those days had value for Nova Scotians, and with the amount of media attention, I think a lot of parents started to take a look at ATV-ing.

While it is a great recreation, these are wonderful vehicles to have on the farm, to have in our resource industries - for example, I see them used a lot with campground and tourist developments - but they are, as we all know, very, very powerful machines. They can reach high speeds and we, like all other provinces across Canada, have had a number of fatalities. I certainly made my bias very clear last year when I was here as a member of the legislative committee to listen to Nova Scotians.

Certainly I didn't have anything to the contrary passed to me, but I had the unfortunate reality of having taught or coached three young children, three young Nova Scotians, who lost their lives on ATVs. It's one that I've had a real personal interest in seeing us have a better future around ATVs. I think all legislators and the Department of Natural

[Page 536]

Resources and the minister of the day came to the realization that we do have to change some of our practices.

At the press conference in March - I unfortunately was away at the time - they unveiled new regulations for off-highway vehicles. I know a large population were primarily concerned around the age restrictions. I'm wondering now if the minister could clarify exactly what regulations apply to what age groups. Could you just kind of review for me where we are. There was a lot of discussion around closed courses as being one of the ways to provide safe opportunities for young Nova Scotians and I'm just wondering exactly what kind of developments are there, what are the strict age groupings that will be enforced. I do get some calls periodically from my area around observations that people are making and so I'm just wondering if the minister would review that please.

MR. MORSE: So you're looking for the phase-in of the regulations over the next six years. The priority, as I think the member would agree, is children under 14 years of age and as of October 1^st of this year, they're going to have to have taken the safety training and be operating on a certified closed course. Some of this is covered by the Department of Natural Resources which is the lead department, some of it is being shared by other departments, and the actual overseeing of the safety training program and the development of the certified closed course is being led by the Department of Health Promotion and Protection. As the member I'm sure is aware, there certainly has been a lot of activity on their part - I'll give them credit for this. There were not all that many certified instructors at the time we made the decision to pass the legislation and then develop the regulations but, currently, there are now 68 instructors and they are located in almost every county in the province and that continues to grow.

In terms of the phase-in, ATVs and children under the age of 14 will be required to have the safety training and operate on the closed course as of October 1^st, 2006, and of course there's quite an impressive list of other precautions that have to be met before they can operate. The most important of which is, they have to be on a properly sized machine and I think the member would agree that sadly the one thing that's probably consistently been present in these tragic accidents, is that often the children were on oversized machines. The member is right - they're a very powerful machine and if they're built for an adult they should be ridden by an adult not a child.

The next group is snowmobiles and off-road bikes for under-14 and that's October 1, 2007; plus off-highway vehicle operators 14 and 15 years of age, the same date, October 1, 2007. In other words, the next age category which would be 14 and 15. Parents and guardians of off-highway vehicle operators under the age of 16, so it would catch all of the previous groups October 1, 2007, because they also have to take the course if they're going to allow their child to operate them. It has got to be under the approved conditions and they also have to of taken the safety training course. It pushes out a few years, off-highway vehicle operators 16 to 24 years of age, April 1, 2009; and then off-highway vehicle operators 25

[Page 537]

to34 years of age, April 1, 2011. The one before I said, April 1, 2009; April 1, 2011 for the next group; and finally for most of us here in the room, off-highway vehicle operators 35 and older - April 1, 2012. So then it's all in place.

MR. GLAVINE: I guess the area - and possibly it may require some view towards an amendment and further discussion and that - is the 35 and older group, because as we all know in that group we've had some people who have operated an OHV and in particular an ATV since their beginnings here in North America - 20 or 25 years. The calls that I've had since I've been in the critic role - getting up probably for a year and a half to two years - is why not just grandfather that group in. I hear from senior citizens, who've got a lifetime record of safe and responsible driving and feel that they have earned that accountability and proper behaviour and so forth in regard to the use of the ATV. This is a group that certainly I've heard from a number of people, have some letters on file that maybe I can share with the minister, who feel they should be accommodated in a little different fashion here.

I'm of the opinion that we can always learn from training. It's like going back and having a recertification of your driving licence with a professional instructor - you know, gee, there was one or two things that I had bad habits on and you can learn something from. However, there is perhaps some legitimacy from this group of people and this one that I'm hearing from - not necessarily that I'm advocating here today on their behalf, but I wondered if the minister and his department had also been receiving some reaction? I know it's been out some years but people who follow this certainly are taking note. I just wondered if the minister would react to that please.

MR. MORSE: We have the benefit of having Patricia MacNeil here with us who is the province's ATV guru, not necessarily by choice but because we needed her. What she points out is that this is a dynamic situation. We've gone from basically a free-for-all to try to bring in a balanced regulatory system and clearly, as we go forward with this, we're going to learn over the next six years so I'm not closing the door on that possibility. Should I be so presumptuous as to assume that I'm going to be Minister of Community Services in six years time, but it's something that we know that we can always refine any program and as we get out of the starting blocks on this one and that's about where we are, possibly we can consider those a little further down the road.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Minister. I'm not sure if that was a prophetic statement or not that you actually made a few moments ago about in six years time being the Minister of Community Services - you did have that momentary lapse, I'm sorry to have to pick you up on that, Mr Minister, but somebody in your department would probably make note of that anyway.

MR. MORSE: Would you please correct the record for me? To be clear, I meant Minister of Natural Resources - old habits are hard to break.

[Page 538]

MR. GLAVINE: That's right. Just wondering on one other age group and that's why I wanted to have this review here in front of me. The age for youth and snowmobile use will actually change. Is that part of the plan here when we look at what will come into force on October 1, 2007? I'm asking, is that a change from what is currently the regulation for snowmobiling in the province?

MR. MORSE: There were no regulations before so yes, that brings another degree of scrutiny over the operation of snowmobiles and off-road bikes.

MR. GLAVINE: So that will be for under 14 years?

MR. MORSE: Correct.

MR. GLAVINE: One of the areas that obviously will have to be monitored as part of the new plan as of April 1^st, is the enforcement of the OHV regulations and I certainly can confirm pretty strongly that I've had a number of calls to my office - the areas in particular have been East Dalhousie, Waterville, East Kingston and some in the Berwick area. I know with the number of enforcement officers, the 12 that we do have, and I know the tremendous, onerous task they have to provincially carry out that enforcement work. Perhaps you as minister were asked today what you thought of the number of warnings and the number of tickets, the number of fines, that have been given out to date. I was just wondering what your reaction is to that?

[3:45 p.m.]

I'll certainly share my view with you but I'm just wondering how you feel that part of the OHV implementation process is going? I think it's one that will be monitored pretty closely because that work will actually, I believe, hopefully reflect a change in the whole culture around ATVing in this province. I think it's an important part - just as last year we all agreed, education was a critical component but the other was enforcement and I'm just wondering what your reaction is to date around enforcement.

MR. MORSE: The first comment I want to make is that it's not entirely left up to the 12 ATV enforcement officers - that certainly would be a daunting task if they were responsible for policing the 60,000 odd machines that are reported to be in the province. The RCMP and municipal police officers also would certainly be expected to enforce the Act and the regulations, and I want to be clear at the outset that while I can speak for the expectations of my own enforcement officers within the Department of Natural Resources - not the Department of Community Services (Laughter) - I cannot speak to the expectations placed on the RCMP and the municipal police officers. They may take a more rigid approach to infractions and be quicker to charge people that are violating the Act and the regulations.

[Page 539]

From the perspective of the department - and I think the honourable member would be quick to agree with me on this or he'd be quick to tell me if that's not the case - I have abandoned rail lines running through Kings South, they're adjacent to residential areas and subdivisions. Young people who perhaps do not show the same maturity as an adult operating the machines sometimes seem to forget that there are neighbours, and I personally can empathize with those people who don't like to have a noisy ATV running through their backyard perhaps without a muffler. That certainly infringes on their peaceful enjoyment of their property so, if we can solve these problems through education - that word that you used in framing your question - then I think that's very constructive.

I'm pleased that the officers are issuing warnings as opposed to charges if they feel that the warning will get the job done because what we really want is compliance, which this Legislature and our Cabinet have the legislation, the amendments to the Act that we have agreed should be in place. Then the ensuing regulations were passed by our Cabinet. That's what it's about.

It's not that we want to throw people in jail or fine them. We want them to behave in what we collectively agree is a reasonable manner, so we're taking that approach at the outset. Clearly, if the people that we're trying to assist in being good law-abiding citizens resist our attempts to educate them, then there is the alternative of charging them.

MR. GLAVINE: I guess I do take a little bit of a different perspective there. I felt that it wasn't a case of where we often make a law, bring in a regulation or have a by-law because we want to correct the behaviour of the 5 per cent of the population who are the most deviant in terms of any of the laws, rules, regulations that we have in our province or in society. I know as a former educator, sometimes you made rules for the school and as an administrator, I certainly know that it was to reel in that 5 or 6 per cent or 10 per cent of the population, whatever it may have been.

I felt here, and I said this from the get-go, that a number of fines here for blatant violation of the regulations would be really sending a message quickly through the population that perhaps most need the regulations and their enforcement.

At the time last year when this was under discussion, I called the ministry in Newfoundland and Labrador, the minister in the Progressive Conservative Government was Dianne Whalen, by the way, similar name to what we have here, she was the Minister of Natural Resources in Newfoundland and Labrador. They, of course, as you may be aware, have the strongest regulations right now in Canada. They had to have what many felt to be an immense change - again, the medical community, they had five deaths in about a six-month period which really brought the issue to the Newfoundland House of Assembly.

The medical community was outraged at young lives being lost on ATVs. When they brought in their regulations which prohibit the use of the ATV by anybody under 14, it's

[Page 540]

prohibited and they brought in big fines and the big fines changed very, very quickly in terms of how the ministry viewed the effectiveness of the regulations.

That's why, in my comment today, Mr. Minister, I felt that perhaps the department here, and I'm not sure if it's a view shared by the previous minister, that perhaps we needed to be a bit soft here at first. I know you want compliance, but maybe this is not the tack that we do need here in the province.

I can see the first 30 days of its implementation, perhaps, yes, warnings are primary. But we're into more than 90 days now - we're 100 days out since the beginning on April 1^st. I feel the time has come to be very strong in the enforcement of the regulations. I'm wondering if the minister would react to some of those comments.

MR. MORSE: We see this as a two-year action plan. If you would go back to the time that we first amended the Act, perhaps that was the beginning of this cultural change. ATVs have become part of our culture. I was tempted to say part of the rural culture, but it's not just the rural culture, there are people who live in urban areas that like to come out to areas like Kings South to drive their ATVs because I've met some of them. So we're over 25 per cent of the way into this really, I mean we're talking about October 1, 2007. October 1, 2006 is not that many months away.

So we're in the early stages, and I would also point out that the charges that have been laid under the Act and the regulations are at the discretion of the officers. Again, we don't know how the police are handling infractions, but of the 35 charges that have been laid since the regulations came into force on April 1, 2006, as opposed to the 134 warnings, I do not have a breakdown as to the nature of those charges. It may be that the charges are because people are allowing their eight-year-old daughter to go on an adult machine and this is just not deemed as acceptable, and it's not acceptable, and conceivably they could be charging those ones.

The area that I think is still probably creating probably the most friction is the ATV use in close proximity to residential neighbourhoods. I mean that's my opinion, that's what I've seen in Kings South - an urban/rural area combination - and I'm assuming that that's probably got more to do with the work that has been done by the enforcement officers, but that's just an opinion and we could get a further analysis.

MR. GLAVINE: There's no question, Mr. Minister, that in relation to the change in people's approach and patterns to the use of ATVs, the education component and the courses are going to be, I think, a pretty critical aspect, and that was a question that I meant to ask a little bit earlier. Could you give some indication as to how that is actually progressing in terms of the numbers. You told me about the instructors, there are 68 instructors. I'm just wondering, in fact, about how the courses are moving along and perhaps some indication, at least even a ballpark, of people who are signing up for these courses because I think, you

[Page 541]

know, I'm hoping that there will be a connection between certainly the people taking the courses and reduced infractions and greater consciousness of safety and so on around ATVs.

MR. MORSE: And I think that's a totally reasonable expectation and, again, the reason you put courses in place is that you're trying to change the culture.

MR. GLAVINE: Yes.

MR. MORSE: You want people to, (1) be aware of some of the hazards of operating these powerful machines and, (2) you want them to think then what may happen, which is the greatest way of preventing accidents, but this whole safety training piece resides with the Department of Health Promotion and Protection. So, you know, this is one of the hazards of an interdepartmental approach. You may not always get all the answers from the same minister.

MR. GLAVINE: So that is a piece of information that probably his department would have then?

MR. MORSE: Yes. I gave you a little bit, that they've greatly increased the number of instructors. They're taking steps to make sure that the certified closed courses are going to be in place for October 1^st so that participants under the age of 14 will have a place to go, and as long as they meet all the other criteria in place like the right size machine, the proper supervision and equipment and paramedics on duty. It's quite an impressive list.

MR. GLAVINE: Certainly last year when the debate on the ATV issue was going on, where we had the presenters here in the Red Room, perhaps next to the area of safety was, of course, the area of wilderness protection and the destruction by ATVs into sensitive ecological sites. That was probably the second area of concentration of people right from across the province. I remember a Don Rice, in particular - I haven't seen his name on a piece of paper since perhaps this time last year, but it's a name that I remember because he gave one of the great emotional kind of testimonies in terms of the destruction that he saw in the Tobeatic from ATV use. That truly - if anybody hasn't been there, it's certainly one trip that you would almost want every Nova Scotian to make during their lifetime, either canoeing or backpacking in the Tobeatic.

[4:00 p.m.]

That being said, I'm wondering if there is any emphasis being placed on the enforcement officers and their work in that area? Is there any concentration there and what measures the department may be taking to make sure that that area receives the attention that it will need? Now I know that the campsites are still an ongoing issue and there's still some time forward in which these can be purchased back by the province and in the meantime people can use ATVs to go to those sites. I'm just wondering what direction the department

[Page 542]

is moving and the kind of monitoring of the Tobeatic that is being done to make sure that improper ATV use is not continuing?

MR. MORSE: There is a lot of material here and I'm going to do my best to answer your questions. The actual responsibility for the protected wilderness areas falls under the Department of Environment and Labour, although the enforcement comes from DNR officers. The 12 that have been hired specifically for ATVs are actually complemented by the 65 regular Department of Natural Resources officers. So you've actually got a complement of 77 and all of those people would be quite interested in protecting any of the areas that have been designated under the regulations as off limits for ATV use.

You've mentioned marshes and I think that there are certain barrens have been set aside as not appropriate for use by ATVs, or to be specific the ATV use is banned on them. There are blitzes being done in areas. So if there was activity that was suggested within the Tobeatic, as an example, there well could be a very deliberate blitz done in that area to try to catch the offenders and, yes, that is a concern.

I'm just going to branch out a little bit on this because we are going to get a sense of balance back in this province again when the 60,000-odd ATV owners and operators have a place where they can go to practice their form of recreation that's not infringing on residential neighbourhoods, it's not ruining environmentally sensitive areas. In other words, we're already encouraging submissions for potential trails so we can get those trails in place, as was done with the snowmobilers because 15 years ago, we were there with snowmobilers. So we're going to get through this and we are going to find a suitable location for the trails. When they can get to them legally without going over private lands without permission, then I think that this is going to settle down and it will just be another responsible form of recreational activity in Nova Scotia, but we are changing the culture and I think all of us who were here in the last session can take some pride that we were part of making that change happen.

MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Minister, a couple of things that do spark from there. Certainly one of the areas that I am very interested in and, like the minister, feel that perhaps major steps forward will be made around trail development. One of the people who did come and do a presentation last year was a man by the name of Ray Rousseau. His presentation was based on being involved with some of the beginnings of trail development in Quebec and how it has grown, of course, in that province and its integration with the tourist industry is extremely strong. It is a very, very profitable component of tourism there. I think New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador are capturing some of this as well in their development of OHV, both legislation and the other component you talked about, trail development.

I am wondering if you can tell me if the $75,000 in the budget for trail development - is that in the Office of Health Promotion and Protection, or is that also potentially available

[Page 543]

for, let's say, a club? If we have a club in Nova Scotia that is in the process of trail development, and is actively developing either a new trail, fixing up an old trail or whatever - is that available to them? When you talk about submissions and so on for trails, is this being done by the Department of Natural Resources in conjunction with private clubs or Trans-Canada Trail? What is sort of, I guess, the structure that is there for that?

MR. MORSE: With regards to going forward and the actual identification of potential trails, we are encouraging ATVANS, the All-Terrain Vehicle Association of Nova Scotia, to submit suggested trails. We are working with the various groups out there to help solve this mutual problem we have because it is not only their problem, it is everybody's problem. You have 60,000 people who have invested thousands of dollars each in these machines and they want to have a place to ride them, then I think it is incumbent on us to take some responsibility to see that that happens.

So, yes, we are reaching out to the community, we are asking them to make constructive suggestions. You asked about the budget that was put into enhancing, or implementing, actually, our program. There is $70,000 to hire somebody specifically in the Department of Natural Resources to oversee this process, but the budget the member is talking about, I believe, resides with the Department of Health Promotion and Protection. That is the specific monies for acquiring trails, but I am sure that part of these suggestions are going to involve Crown land and we do own 25 per cent of the province. Clearly a percentage of that - about 25 per cent of that is protected wilderness areas and nature preserves and those are not going to be on our list of areas for consideration, but there is still lots of other Crown land and we will clearly have a part to play in the solution.

MR. GLAVINE: I am wondering if all of the attention that has been brought to OHVs and, in particular, the ATVs and the new requirements around registration, has led to a bump in registration and if that is a significant number because, again, a percentage will be going towards trail development? In other words, the person who is put in place should have some funding there to begin their work. So just perhaps first quickly on the registration.

MR. MORSE: I am advised that there was a lot of activity before April 1^st, before the $40 mandatory trail development fee came into place and that puts it off for those ATV owners for a year. But yes, there has been a flurry of registrations, but they were always supposed to register them but we know that, in fact, a lot of them were not being registered with the province and that is part of the mystery as to just how many ATVs are actually out there roaming the trails of Nova Scotia. Again, it is a change in the culture and some of these people are going to probably be a little more reticent to come into compliance.

MR. GLAVINE: One last question in this area. I do thank the minister and his staff for certainly updating and backgrounding a little further on this issue. Certainly I had felt - and I didn't know a lot about SANS until this whole issue developed last year. I didn't know about the fact of their trail grooming and trail development and the system of permission

[Page 544]

because I live in rural Nova Scotia and live next to a few farmers who give permission to use their woodlot areas and so on, along the North Mountain. I would say that SANS and especially its governance under Sport Nova Scotia, has been a really strong advocacy and organizational body for them to be associated with.

I wonder if the department is in any way directing or will work with ATVANS to perhaps move into that same area.

MR. MORSE: Absolutely, and I first learned about SANS - which is the Snowmobile Association of Nova Scotia - when I was Minister of the Environment because we would actually give them special permission to traverse through protected wilderness areas during certain times of the year, as long as it was deemed that it was not going to do any damage to the environment. I quickly learned that this is a first-class organization and that is why I think it is so important to empower ATVANS to replicate the SANS model because if we work with them and through them get a system of trails, then they have something of value to offer other, non-ATVANS members to want to come and join them because that is where they can actually pursue their hobby.

Absolutely, I think that is the model that inspires me and gives me confidence that, just like with the Snowmobile Association of Nova Scotia, in 15 year's time this is going to be forgotten because it is working so well. Everybody is content and nobody is upset with ATVs going in their backyard and we are not getting stories of children ending up in the emergency room because they were driving a machine that was twice their capacity to manage. I also want to mention before the member leaves the topic, that I anticipate that the advisory committee should be in place later this month and, of course, they are going to be the ones who are actually going to be reviewing the suggestions that come forward and making recommendations.

MR. GLAVINE: That will be an advisory group for DNR, just for the ATV legislation?

MR. MORSE: The Minister's Advisory Committee on OHVs, and we are really counting on them to bring the community into the process as we go forward. So I am anticipating working with the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection that between the two of us, we will have that committee in place by the end of the month.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister, and your staff. The area that I will go on to, and just perhaps a few brief questions here in regard to strip mining. Certainly this is a topic that has not just caught the attention of what has happened in Cape Breton over the course of many years of developing and using that resource but in the last number of years, Boularderie in particular has come to the attention of people from Boularderie Island, the mainland of Cape Breton. In fact, it has spread out across the province and people are

[Page 545]

taking different viewpoints, some informed, some uninformed. Nevertheless, it has become one that this Legislature has had raised here on a number of occasions.

[4:15 p.m.]

Perhaps the minister has not had the opportunity to get down to Cape Breton and take a look, first-hand, at past developments and where the situation is now. Perhaps with the co-chairs up here, the minister could get a little bit of sidebar help here from the former minister and a man who lives in the area. That being said, I am wondering , first of all, is the minister apprised of this file at this stage?

MR. MORSE: I want to thank the honourable member for his question. Of course, we have quite a bit of legislation and regulation in place in the province. It is probably not well understood by the average person on the street, unless they have a connection with mining, but in actual fact, of all the mining in the province and just an enormous amount of economic activity that is generated by it, we have the grand total of one underground mine. That is a salt mine in Pugwash. All the other mines are surface mines.

I was asked earlier about mining developments in the province and it was great to talk about the Moose River gold mine, looking at 90 permanent jobs there, again, rural Nova Scotia; Donkin, now that is an underground mine but 300 jobs once it gets up and running; the Stellarton reclamation mine that is going on in the area and again, your counterpart from the NDP would be well familiar with the success of that project.

Originally the community was apprehensive and, as you would be aware, our former Premier actually represented that area so he got to have many meetings with the community but, at the end of the day, I think it has been deemed to have been a great success. There has been infrastructure that has been created as a result of this; there have been areas where there was subsidence and was just basically a wasteland and has been turned back into productive property. Black Bull Resources Inc. - again, I was the Minister of the Environment at the time that I finally approved the environmental assessment. Now they had to bring it to me three times before they got it right; when they got it right, this is a good development.

Fundy Gypsum - closer to our neck of the woods, it is in Hants West. These are exciting developments for the province and bring much-needed jobs to rural Nova Scotia, and high-paying jobs. So if you are looking for a position in terms of the department and the government, as long as it meets the Act and the regulations, we certainly want to encourage development here in Nova Scotia, mining development, and if that happens to be surface mining as opposed to underground mining, then that is fine as long as it meets the regulations.

MR. GLAVINE: To be a little bit more specific, in terms of Boularderie and its development, I'm wondering if perhaps the major concern around Boularderie that people

[Page 546]

were very apprehensive about, was not so much the scars that could be the left on the landscape, because I think now regulations are much stronger in terms of how the site must be reclaimed and so forth, afterwards, what the actual aesthetics or look of the area will lead to be once the resource is taken from the area.

That being said, there was a lot of apprehension around possible contamination of groundwater. This area has mostly wells as a drinking source - agriculture. In fact I was surprised when I went down to Boularderie at the significance of agriculture to the island. In fact I was astounded, to be honest, at how much there really was in the area.

I'm just wondering if the minister could comment on whether or not there's a timeline in place now to go ahead with this project, if all of the environmental assessments have been carried out, and if there is an industrial work permit that has been granted, have the concerns around the 14 hectares of wetlands that certainly would change forever - I'm not saying that perhaps there can't be a good reclamation job done in the area, but certainly a lot of apprehension around water supply. So I'm wondering if the minister would comment on these three areas: industrial permits, the water, and also the wetlands that would certainly be disturbed forever by this project?

MR. MORSE: This is an incredibly important area for Nova Scotia, and there are some parts of Nova Scotia that are particularly affected by the whole concept of reclamation mining. There are some 6,000 abandoned mines in this province, 6,000. Of those, about 1,800 are on Crown land, 500 of which are considered to be a problem. I've been following this whole debate, and I know that ultimately a former minister - in fact I'm going to give credit to both the former Minister of Natural Resources and the former Minister of Environment and Labour for, in essence, targeting the area; I believe it's north of the old Prince Mine site. It's just inundated with abandoned mines, bootleg mines. I've seen some pictures. In one case there was actually an old Volkswagen stuck in the opening to the mine.

It has not been very flattering. And clearly, not only is it a hazard - it's an environmental hazard - but it's also a hazard for anybody who happens to be wandering about that area, whether it's a person going for a stroll in the woods and discovering that there was a mine there when it's too late and they're at the bottom of a mine shaft, or it could be a raccoon that ends up down in the bottom of the mine shaft, which is probably full of water and they're going to drown there. It's just not an acceptable situation, to turn our backs on the scars that have been left on the land.

I think about the work that was done in Little Pond, with windrows of huge waste on one side, and then on the other side there were artificial lakes, if you will, or ponds that were created by the past activities, and it was never reclaimed afterwards. Now, of course, we pride ourselves, and in fact as one of the measures of the department's performance, we like to check on the mines and whether they've got an active reclamation plan in place. We measure that as a means of performance. I'm just thinking of Little Pond; it was dreadful.

[Page 547]

Then I saw the work that was done afterwards - the before and after - and it was fabulous. They covered it over, there's re-vegetation, and it's a very positive development for that area.

I know that in Stellarton, this was probably not met with cheers when they first moved ahead with it, but I think today, by and large, the community would say that it was a good decision for that community. I feel that the decision for the reclamation of this area around the Prince Mine will ultimately be a vindication of the whole reclamation process, and that the community, in years to come, will look back and say, thank heavens that was done.

MR. GLAVINE: Just to follow up, I appreciate the overview from the minister on this topic, and that he is getting versed on it here fairly quickly. I would like to know, specifically, if the final permits are in place for this development? Also how the major concerns around wetland loss, and also has all of the hydrological work around possible impacts on water supply - have they been addressed?

MR. MORSE: He brought up so much material that he whet my appetite, and it was like going to a smorgasbord, I just couldn't stop. The answer has not come back from the Department of Environment and Labour. There was an environmental assessment done. Clearly, part of the industrial permit's purpose is to make sure that the concerns that were brought forward with the environmental assessment are captured in the industrial permit approval. We have given a special lease, but it is subject to getting the industrial approval.

I just wanted to throw in another little statistic, which might be of interest to everybody here. When we talk about active mines, I mentioned that the only active underground mine currently in the province was the salt mine in Pugwash, by comparison there are 10 active surface mines. So, let's be clear, the way that we mine in Nova Scotia, by and large, is by surface mine.

MR. GLAVINE: In terms of Boularderie, I know the industrial permit has not been granted yet, as you have indicated. I am wondering if the concern around water, based on some of the history of this type of mining, whether or not there are final guarantees or is there a plan in place should there be some disruption around water? Will the residents, in other words, have a guarantee if something were to be problematic? That was one of the questions. I know that was raised at the public forum in North Sydney, which I attended. If indeed it should go ahead, was there some guarantee that residents, their water would be again rectified if there was anything?

MR. MORSE: Absolutely. The first step is to make sure you do not create a problem in the first place. So you go in, you do your due diligence - that's part of the environmental assessment - and then you incorporate the findings from the environmental assessment and the industrial approval. However, the member's question is whether there's some assurance for the community that provision has been put in place to take care of them if something goes

[Page 548]

awry - I'm not able to give you the number, but I can tell you that there's a very substantial reclamation bond that's in place for this project. That was a yes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The member has one minute left.

MR. GLAVINE: With my remaining few seconds, in case I am not back to question the minister on the estimates, I know a couple of my other colleagues would like to have the opportunity, I would like to thank the minister and his department for the information and straightforward presentation this afternoon. Thank you.

MR. MORSE: And I would like to acknowledge the member's constructive and thoughtful questions, from both sides.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The member's time is up.

The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.

[4:30 p.m.]

MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: Mr. Chairman, I guess I might as well jump in the love-in. (Laughter) I deal with your department probably more than I do any other department, which I find is very unusual coming from a suburban area. I've always found your staff very helpful, and I've always found that they're very constructive in the way they approach problems as they arise. To some extent, it's funny how many problems arise, in my area particularly. Anything from land disputes to foxes in holes to whether or not there is parking near a beach - it's varied. I've always found the staff very important. In fact, for the record, last hour when I asked a question about the signage, your communications person came to me, immediately as I left, and answered the question. I will say for the record, the sign was delivered to the Waverley office, and they're still waiting to put it up as far as I know. So there you go.

I have a couple of quick questions before I hand it over to our critic and the member for Pictou East to finish off the hour. I was thinking it was when Mr. Olive was the member for Dartmouth South that I asked a question, back in 2003, about the management plan for McNabs Island. I know Hurricane Juan, subsequent to that, has caused a delay. But I am trying to get, for the record, when we are going to see - and I know we have the management plan now - the next phase of development on McNabs Island Provincial Park?

My understanding is the next phase is some form of - I forget what the term is - implementation plan that would spell out how you're going to break up management of the island. Whether it's going to be one single manager, a third-party manager negotiating a deal, whether the concessions will be tendered separately, whether there will be ferry services that will have to tender for the right to go to the island. I don't know, but I'm trying to get a sense

[Page 549]

of where we are with that process. Keep in mind that I do keep in contact with one or more of the members of the advisory group for McNabs Island, and as far as I know at this point they didn't have much information about this either. So I'm just trying to get a sense of where the timeline is for the further development of the park.

MR. MORSE: I would also like to mention that one of the areas that we try to encourage and take as a measure of our own performance is the number of these advisory groups, community advisory groups, that work with us in managing our 130 provincial parks. So, I'm not going to pretend to know exactly what the timelines are or what the final plan is going to be. (Interruptions)

I think the member is probably well briefed on the issue. The latest briefing note, which was July 5^th, just acknowledges that a park management plan prepared by the department staff and the McNabs and Lawlor Island Provincial Park Advisory Committee received ministerial approval in 2005, but this is an interim measure. There is a demand there for camping sites, and maybe not in the present locations, and perhaps maybe not with the present facilities or lack thereof. So I would just say that we value the input of these advisory groups, and I would not want to do anything that in any way would compromise their chance to have full input in what ultimately becomes the management.

MR. DEVEAUX: I understand what you're saying. I guess I'm looking for - let me be clear, as the representative for the community of Eastern Passage, we firmly believe the development of that park is a great economic opportunity for the community. It's a five minute boat ride from Fisherman's Cove and the Government Wharf in Eastern Passage. We know there's going to be certain development there. It's not going to be a highly developed park - it's going to be basically backwoods camping - but there might be some form of a tea house or campgrounds or trail management or anything like that.

We know it's coming, I'm trying to get from you some sense as to, are we talking a matter of six months before we see these things tendered or are we looking at five years, for example? I'm trying to get a sense of the timeline on that.

MR. MORSE: This is my general sense of it. This is not a definitive timeline, but first of all, going back and assessing the initial management plan and what the advisory group would like to do subsequent to this. I think there's going to have to be a sense of how this is working out and what changes they think should be made.

I would think that between now and next year, we should have a pretty good sense of what additional changes should happen. I'm just being advised that the Garrison Pier was completed as of Spring this year, the floating dock is going to be delivered in the next few weeks.

MR. DEVEAUX: Floating dock for where?

[Page 550]

MR. MORSE: The floating dock is for Garrison Pier. I'm also advised that we're going to use some of this year's tangible capital asset money to hire a consultant to make recommendations on the Wreck Cove site and access. I think that's perhaps what you were looking for.

MR. DEVEAUX: Partly. There's more to it. I guess, at this point, given my limited time and the questions I'm asking and you're new to the position, I guess I'll get to Wreck Cove in a minute. But, can you at least commit to me, as the MLA for the area, that your department will keep me informed when it comes to the point in a timely manner, so that my community would have an opportunity to make proposals if there are going to be the tendering of potentially all or part of the activities in managing the island?

MR. MORSE: Yes, I'm assuming you'd like to have that done as MLA. Clearly, the advisory group is going to be aware and you should also be copied on that as MLA.

MR. DEVEAUX: With plenty of time that my community, or parts of my community, want to make a proposal. That's all I ask is that we be given a timely opportunity to be able to make a proposal.

MR. MORSE: As best we can, consider it done.

MR. DEVEAUX: Thank you. I would appreciate it. The one thing I would say about the advisory group, there's one representative from the community of Eastern Passage on it. That was something that I asked for and I received from the member for Cumberland North - the Minister of Human Resources, but the former minister. If there's ever an opportunity to add a second or more members, I would be happy to do it. Because, from our community's perspective, it is a part of our community and we would like to see that continue.

The second point is, thank you for bringing up the point about Wreck Cove. It is a very important point to our community. It is the access point traditionally used by Eastern Passage. It is a five minute boat ride from our community. Compared to, if you take a boat from downtown Halifax to Garrison Pier, you're looking at at least a 30 minute boat ride, which, for safety reasons as well as convenience reasons, obviously if Wreck Cove can be developed, it becomes a lot more potentially accessible from our community. Again, for safety and emergency reasons, it's a lot more accessible.

If you are hiring a consultant, I'm wondering if, for the record, you can make a commitment that the consultant will seek input from the people in the community of Eastern Passage who are actively involved in McNabs Island, including myself and those who operate services and even people within the community. If that could be done, I would appreciate it so we'd have an opportunity to provide some input into the value of Wreck Cove and why we think it's important that it should be maintained in some form.

[Page 551]

MR. MORSE: I want to go on the record and say it's essential we have your input, both as MLA and your community. Clearly, if we want to get it right, we're going to need that input from the community, so I assure the member that we look for that kind of contribution and participation.

MR. DEVEAUX: My last question is, do you have a sense of when that consultant would be starting its work?

MR. MORSE: I'm not able to confirm a time other than it's coming from this year's TCA. We will confirm afterwards with you directly if that's acceptable.

MR. DEVEAUX: Okay.

MR. MORSE: I would also like to acknowledge your very kind comments about the staff at the department. I always appreciate those kinds of comments and it does mean a lot to the staff. Therefore, it means a lot to me.

MR. DEVEAUX: Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou East.

MR. CLARRIE MACKINNON: Thank you Mr. Chairman. To the minister - I want to go back to clear cutting and forest sustainability regulations. DNR's own natural disturbance ecology in the forests of Nova Scotia suggests that 23 per cent of our forests should be managed on a selection basis to emulate small scale natural disturbances and an additional 35 per cent with selection, long rotation clear-cut and shelter wood harvesting systems to emulate infrequent, large-scale, natural disturbances.

The total DNR contribution to silviculture averages around $3 million per year, right? And almost all 98 per cent of silviculture funding is going toward even-age management, including clear-cutting, spraying, planting and thinning. The question, there are no statutory obligations governing how DNR spends silviculture funding so why not address the current imbalance in silviculture spending and dedicate a fair portion of the government, or the taxpayers' contribution to uneven-aged treatments?

MR. MORSE: I am advised that information has been shared with the appropriate people in the forestry section of the department and it is under consideration.

MR. MACKINNON: Can it be shared with others?

MR. MORSE: The information that you just shared with us, in some greater detail, has been shared with the appropriate people in the department, and the Forest Technical Advisory Committee and we are . . .

[Page 552]

MR. MACKINNON: Where is it going from here, Mr. Minister?

MR. MORSE: Well, first of all I would like to hear their recommendation. I guess you're asking whether the door is open and the answer is the door is open for consideration, but I'm not going to pre-empt their recommendation until I hear from them.

I understand the case you're making with me and the answer is we are not dismissing that argument. We're not endorsing the argument today nor are we dismissing it. The argument's going to get fair consideration.

MR. MACKINNON: Thank you. Looking at hardwoods and the forest sustainability regulations, under the forestry sustainability regulations, there is little or no value placed on growing hardwoods and little recognition of the greater costs of selection management. Is that a truth?

MR. MORSE: Your question is, what value do we place on hardwoods in the province? We're only harvesting about 50 per cent of what's grown, but there is clearly an opportunity there. I think that actually branching into the energy strategy, biomass is something that's been identified as a heat source for the future. Clearly hardwoods have a role to play there, as an example, but also the value added, I think - there are a lot of value added uses for hardwood.

[4:45 p.m.]

My expectation is that this is a valuable resource in this province that will be sought after to a greater degree in the future than it has in the past.

MR. MACKINNON: The regulations don't distinguish tolerant hardwoods from intolerant hardwoods, although our provincial forest inventory does. Conversions from tolerant hardwoods to softwoods or intolerant hardwood continues unabated and unchecked and is very damaging to our Acadian forests. The Nova Scotia hardwood working groups 2003 submission to the FDAC states, "The level of clear cutting and apparent lack of management promoting the growth of immature tolerant trees suggests that the saw logs supply is in danger of being compromised. It is critical that this trend be reversed."

The question is, we have a number of hardwood sawmills in this province that are concerned about the long-term supply of quality hardwoods - why do we put all our eggs in the softwood basket and not place greater value on tolerant hardwood management in this province?

MR. MORSE: The member is asking some very appropriate questions and perhaps particularly appropriate because this year we're working on four major strategies, as the member may be aware, within the department - minerals, parks, biodiversity and last, but not

[Page 553]

least, forests and forestry. These are exactly the sorts of questions that we want to ponder as a province. The lead may come through the Department of Natural Resources, but clearly there's going to be a public process here for that sort of input. We're looking forward to looking at our whole strategy and seeing where we go. This is exactly the sort of input that would be welcome during that process.

MR. MACKINNON: Thank you. That jives with my next question. Your department will be creating a new Natural Resources strategy over the next year to 18 months consisting of four parts - biodiversity, forests, mining and parks - as just stated, right?

MR. MORSE: We are agreed.

MR. MACKINNON: We are 100 per cent agreed. During the election, Premier Rodney MacDonald - in response to the Nova Scotia Environment Network's survey of Party positions on a variety of environmental issues - committed to the use of Voluntary Planning to carry out Natural Resource's consultations.

Has the government a plan to implement this promise? And, has sufficient funding been allocated to support broad, inclusive, public participation? Also, will Voluntary Planning be involved in carrying out the consultations?

MR. MORSE: I am aware of the e-mail that was sent on behalf of the Premier. I made the Premier aware and that was the first time the Premier was made aware of the commitment. We are in conference with the Premier's office on that one.

MR. MACKINNON: Thank you. Well, over 90 per cent of harvesting in this province - we're getting back to clear-cutting - clear-cuts are replanted or naturally regenerated and manage to become softwood monocultures. Given the state of the pulp and paper industry across Canada, does it make sense to convert much of the natural diverse Acadian forests - the remaining Acadian forests I guess - of our region, home to long lived pines, spruce and sugar maple, into short lived softwood tree farms? I guess I'm getting back to some of the thrust of the previous question.

MR. MORSE: That actually gives me an avenue to open this up a little bit because there's a tremendous interest in the province and I think there's a tremendous interest globally in having more protected areas, more parks, more game sanctuaries, nature reserves. In fact, I think the honourable member asked me a question yesterday in Question Period, on this very subject; my sense of it was that the member was in favour of more of this type of protected Crown land. In order to make that happen and to still supply the wood fibre that's necessary for our forestry industry and the 11,000 direct jobs that go with it, we need to produce a certain amount of fibre and your colleague and the former critic spent some time talking about the models and sustainability and that leads us into my answer.

[Page 554]

All of these things would be appropriately good consideration for the strategy as we move forward with this. But we have to remember that if we've got an acre of land and we just let nature produce an Acadian forest, we're going to grow one-eighth to one-twelfth of the wood fibre that we could grow if we were in essence to farm it and harvest it intensively with silviculture. So the downside has been well described by the honourable member and it comes at a cost. The upside is it means we need far less acres, either one-eighth or one-twelfth to produce the same amount of wood fibre to sustain our forestry industry, which gives us chances to have more protected wilderness areas and nature reserves.

I suspect at the end of the day that there's a need for a balance, but I'm not going to pre-empt the recommendations that come back as a result of the public consultation and ultimately what's going to be the forestry strategy. I appreciate the member's question and I think we just have to step back and look at the member's question from yesterday. When we look at the two questions, we realize we need a balance.

MR. MACKINNON: Certainly I recognize that there has to be a balance and hopefully the consultations will help to come up with that balance.

In Finland and Sweden, governments have done a thorough assessment of their biological diversity. They've concluded that one of the main factors threatening species is changes to their forests, induced by modern forestry methods including the use of forest biomass to generate energy. In Nova Scotia, forest-dependent species like the mainland moose, lynx and pine marten are all considered endangered. Without a doubt, there are many more species threatened by modern forestry practices in Nova Scotia. What is DNR doing or going to do to access the potential effects of burning forest biomass to generate energy and what can be done to mitigate the potential problems?

MR. MORSE: I'm quite sure not too long ago I was asked a question in this Chamber about making good use of our hardwoods and pointing out that it's perhaps an undervalued species of tree. I believe that biomass in essence is making good use of hardwood which would be a byproduct if we're not completely making full use of a mixed forest when we go in and harvest.

I'm interested in the member's comments because like the member, I have a great interest in nature. I always have, ever since I was a child growing up in South End Halifax for my first 12 years and got to know every inch of Point Pleasant Park, including some of the forts there. It's something that obviously has to be considered as we put these strategies together. We're also responsible for wildlife in the department and it's appropriate that the department responsible for forestry which includes the forest harvest, should also be responsible for wildlife, because there's no department that has more influence after the appropriate consultations with the public and other experts in the area on wildlife habitat.

[Page 555]

Again, that word "balance" comes to mind and you mentioned hardwoods - hardwoods make biomass, I'm not sure how they stack up in terms of CO2 emissions, I'm probably a little suspicious about that one but, it is something that should be covered both in the forestry strategy for making sure that there's an appropriate wildlife habitat which implicitly has got to be a part of the forestry strategy and I think it's also got to tie in with climate change and our energy strategies. It was not a simple question and it does not deal a simple answer.

MR. MACKINNON: It does give me some comfort, Mr. Minister, to hear you talk about balance in relationship to several of the questions and I firmly believe that's what we're all trying to do. I'm sure that your stewardship and others involved with that department will try to find that balance through the consultation as well.

MR. MORSE: Could I just make a comment about the mainland moose? I found it interesting, your comment specifically about the mainland moose. The subject came up of the Chignecto game sanctuary and there is a very modest harvest that's been going on there long before it became a game sanctuary. It's interesting that one of the considerations in the way they harvest is that they want to make sure there's some new growth coming in because the mainland moose depends on the new growth. So you simulate the natural turnover which, perhaps in nature, might have been from a forest fire after a thunder and lightning storm to create an area where new growth comes in and it provides the habitat to support the mainland moose, an endangered species. It's interesting how nature intertwines to create an ecosystem.

MR. MACKINNON: I am going to share some time here in a moment, but just a couple more if I could. Forest Stewardship Council Certification of Forest Management Operations is the most credible widely accepted certification worldwide - right? Will DNR carry out an assessment of certification systems and commit to requiring the most publicly credible, environmentally rigorous certification system for all forest management on Crown lands?

MR. MORSE: Again, I do not want to pre-empt the outcome of the consultations and the advice that are given to come forward with a recommended forest strategy. Clearly, those arguments are going to come forward during the process as should be the case and they will have their chance to make their arguments and if the consensus at the end of the day is that that's the way to go, then we would certainly take that under consideration, but I think it's not appropriate to ask people to come out and comment on a strategy when you've already determined what the strategy is going to be.

[5:00 p.m.]

MR. MACKINNON: I understand fully, thank you. The member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage got some very quick results out of your department today in relationship to signage. I'm going to get a little parochial here for just a moment, if I could - I got a call

[Page 556]

yesterday regarding Melmerby Beach, which is one of the premium beaches in this province and certainly is a provincial beach. We are very, very proud of Melmerby Beach in Pictou County, particularly in Pictou East where it's located, but the call I got yesterday was although this is a provincial facility, there are no provincial flagpoles or provincial flags flying there. I think that's something that could be rectified very quickly and I think the party who brought it to my attention would be very happy and I think everyone who goes to that beach, particularly those of us from Nova Scotia, would feel much more pride in that if we had a couple of flags flying there on the entrance to Melmerby.

MR. MORSE: You very graciously suggested you're being parochial; I'm not sure that the suggestion is necessarily parochial. I'm wondering whether it's appropriate for not only Melmerby Beach but, you know, all of our beaches. I'm advised that we would have those flags flying at 130 provincial parks, or at least the ones with camping facilities; there are 20 which have camping services. I think I'm going to suggest that we're going to look at that one to see if that's something that perhaps could be done because I know I'm very proud to be a Nova Scotian and I'm equally sure the honourable member is proud of his province. I think if we're proud of our province, we should show it not only to our citizens of Nova Scotia, but also those who have the good sense to come to visit our beautiful province and take part in our provincial parks and beaches. So I like your suggestion and it's going to be given consideration.

MR. MACKINNON: Certainly the traffic that would be going there on a decent summer day is one that would far, far surpass the camping facilities, tremendous numbers going in there, and maybe not the numbers that there used to be, but still tremendous numbers visit there on a daily basis. I think, as they say in southwestern Nova Scotia, it would do us some proud if you did that for us.

I'm going to turn a little bit of time over to the member for Halifax Citadel. I'm amazed - I asked at caucus, Mr. Chairman and minister and others, if people would like to share time. It's amazing the numbers that have come forward and I'm surprised that we have three metro-based members who want time and one of them has already had time. So we will continue with the member for Halifax Citadel.

MR. MORSE: Should I take that as a compliment or that I'm on the menu? (Applause) Maybe the member would like to answer that question?

MR. MACKINNON: That's probably a compliment to the department because there's so much interest in the department - and perhaps to you too, minister.

MR. MORSE: I think it's a compliment to the department.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Just by way of information, the time started at 4:30 p.m. so you have about another 25 minutes or so, until 5:30 p.m..

[Page 557]

The honourable member for Halifax Citadel.

MR. LEONARD PREYRA: I believe I'm going to take no more than 10 minutes and I'm sure I'll be stopped at 10 minutes because I see the member for Queens has come in. She has more Natural Resources left to speak of so perhaps I should, if you don't mind, Mr. Chairman yield the floor.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Queens.

MS. VICKI CONRAD: Thank you Leonard. Thank you for some time here to entertain my questions. My first question is in regard to an issue in Petite Riviere that's been an issue of access, traditional access to Sperrys Beach, and this issue has been quite contentious to the residents in the Petite Riviere area.

For the last couple of years, residents there have been trying to maintain their right to traditional access to the Sperrys Beach. This beach area has been used by residents for well over a number of generations. The community committee - the Sperrys Beach Committee - has been in consultation with the Department of Environment and Labour and also the Department of Natural Resources. There's some dispute with a landowner who borders on - there's a fence that runs along the highwater mark; that's my understanding. The landowner who owns the land on the other side of the watermark is claiming ownership down to the high watermark and has blocked off access to the Sperry Beach and it has become a real serious concern for the residents there. They have, like I had indicated, met with members of DNR in the past and the former Minister of Natural Resources, and also the Minister of Environment and Labour.

This community group has documentation that goes back several generations to show ownership of that traditional access point to the beach. Unfortunately, what I'm hearing from the residents is that DNR has kind of just pushed aside that documentation that those residents have gathered through much research and through their own legal counsel. This issue has not come to a conclusion for those residents and this traditional access and the Sperrys Beach issue is reminiscent of what we're seeing all across the province, with communities feeling pressure about whether or not they can have continued access to their waterways and to those traditional beaches. What I would like to ask the minister is, if he would be willing to sit down and meet with this group of residents who have met with the ministers in the past, to give them an update on what the status is?

I understand from the residents that there's been no conclusion. They are waiting for the next step. You know, what do we need to do as residents, to show that this ownership of land does not belong in the hands of the resident who is claiming ownership and is blocking off that access?

[Page 558]

What I heard on this past Canada Day weekend was that there is rumour that one person has been charged for removing some fence material, to get to the beach - which is not appropriate either for that resident to do. I mean, certainly, residents sense this issue has been brought to the foreground. Residents have been coming by waterway to access the beach, or they have been going over the owner's fence, or underneath the fence and apparently on Canada Day weekend, one resident had actually cut the wire to the fence. So residents are getting very frustrated and when these sorts of things are happening in a community it becomes very disruptive and to the point where communities are feeling that they are losing the power or that their sense of community is disappearing. So I'd like to ask the minister if he would commit to meeting with residents of Sperrys Beach of the Sperrys Beach Committee and look at the information that they have gathered through many months of research and to sit down and seriously come up with options to resolve this situation?

MR. MORSE: I'd like to thank the member for her question and some of the background of this. While I'm not professing to be as intimately aware of some of the nuances involved with this particular dispute, that was one of the files that was of interest to me when I became minister. I think the department's position throughout this time is that there was a wish to try to assist the residents, but it was contingent upon the ownership of the sandspit - is that right?

MS. CONRAD: Yes, I'm not sure if it's exactly called the sandspit - yes, similar - but I think we're talking about the same piece of land.

MR. MORSE: Yes, and a lot of arguments came forward and just because you're minister or you're representing the Department of Community Services either in a political capacity - excuse me, I've done it again. Just because you're representing the Department of Natural Resources, or in a political capacity or it's a deputy or an administrative capacity, it does not mean that you automatically have the right to determine ownership of land and specifically the argument here is that that was Crown land. This goes back to the 1990s, and more recently, we've gone out not once, but twice to get independent legal counsel as to whether we could successfully make a claim to that land and thereby assist the member's constituents who want access to that beach - indeed, I'm sure more than constituents because I think it's a lovely beach and that people probably travel from some distance to go there.

Both opinions have very clearly stated that we do not have title to the property and so therefore, we're not able to give what's not ours to.

MS. CONRAD: What about the resident's research that clearly states that the ownership still lies with the Crown, based on the information that these residents have gathered, the stream of land transfers over the years? My understanding from the Sperrys Beach group is that the information they have brought to the table in their meeting with DNR and with legal representatives, has not been looked at - it has been just brushed aside as insignificant research or insignificant evidence.

[Page 559]

What the committee is telling me and has told me over the last year and a half, is that this information needs to be looked at and needs to be looked at in a fair manner and to determine what solutions can be had then. So they're disputing the research that DNR has come up with.

MR. MORSE: I would love to be able to take a responsibility for the conclusion that was reached on the ownership of the access, the so-called sandspit, but all that information, would have been provided to the group's legal counsel. They did engage legal counsel, and as a way of being absolutely transparent in reaching a position, we, not once, but twice, took it to independent legal counsel. On March 29^th of this year, we advised the group's legal counsel and the Sperrys Beach Committee that the report received from outside legal counsel confirmed the Crown does not have an interest in the sandspit or shore front.

So, we've done due diligence. I mean, I don't think that you could do more to try to try to accommodate the concerned citizens. If they had come back and said that we do have a claim, then we could have solved their problem.

MS. CONRAD: One more quick question, my time has run out. This question is around forestry, and it's a yes or no question in a sense. We have a lot of clear-cut areas in Queens, some on Crown land, some on private woodlot owners' properties, some on Bowater's property, et cetera. I'm wondering if the province or DNR has any plans for looking at forest management in a broader way, in a bigger way, more particularly, reforestation of the areas that are stripped? In some areas in Queens, for example, and all across the province, I'm wondering if there are deforestation programs in place that the province will be looking at in conjunction with what perhaps - Bowater certainly has reforestation policies in place and are working closely with private woodlot owners in terms of passing on knowledge and encouraging woodlot owners in terms of reforestation and better forest management practices.

[5:15 p.m.]

I'm wondering if the province does have any clear programs, in terms of reforestation, for Crown land? That's my question, and I think that's a yes or no question.

MR. MORSE: Excuse me, honourable member, can you just confirm whether that was Crown land or private land or a combination?

MS. CONRAD: A combination. Certainly, like I had indicated, Bowater has reforestation policies and practices in place, and they do work with private woodlot owners. I'm talking more specifically, I guess, in regard to Crown lands, but also whether the province is looking at that reforestation program and is working jointly with industries such as Bowater and such as woodlot owners, as well, to kind of mandate reforestation projects across the province?

[Page 560]

MR. MORSE: The activity that you've seen here is in anticipation of your question and trying to make sure that we get you the best information in our answer. Actually, a number of years ago, during the time of Premier Hamm's Government, there was a forest sustainability fund set up to fund silviculture. The fee that's charged is $3 per cubic metre, and in fact that's what that fund is about. I'm obviously disappointed that there are some areas that apparently did not generate their own new growth, and somehow or other it has not been done by either the private woodlot owner or whoever clear-cut the Crown land. In fact, those steps have been taken to make sure the resources were available.

It's not only a blight on the landscape for the community, but it's also a wasted opportunity as it lies fallow. Land should be vibrant, and we want vegetation there whether it's trees or blueberries or grass. We don't want it to just lay barren. That is something that I think should come forward in the discussions, the public discussions, as we work on our forestry strategy.

Just before you joined us at the committee, your colleague and your caucus critic was quizzing me rather extensively on our forestry practices. We're excited about going forward with working on a new forestry strategy, and we do intend to include public consultation as part of that process. I certainly would hope that we hear that message from your constituents, and, indeed, I would encourage the honourable member to participate in that process because clearly something has slipped by us if that has been allowed to happen. My guess would be that if it has happened in Queens, it is probably not confined just to Queens.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Citadel.

MR. LEONARD PREYRA: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I very much appreciate this opportunity here to ask the minister some questions and I am looking forward to getting some of his answers. I know that many of these questions are a little bit off topic but not exactly in the mainstream of the minister's responsibilities but I'll try anyway. I must say that spending the amount of time that I have with the members for Queens and Shelburne and Pictou East have educated me an awful lot about natural resources and the importance of natural resources, I should thank them.

Natural resources are important in Halifax Citadel as well and I wanted to touch on one issue in particular, somewhat related to the issue that the member for Queens was raising - that relates to the North West Arm. In a previous life, I headed up a group called the North West Arm Coalition. We did a lot of research and the conclusion was that the provincial department responsible was the Department of Natural Resources. I am thinking here in particular about submerged lands in the North West Arm. The traditional position of the provincial government has been that everything below the high water mark is a federal responsibility and everything above the high water mark is a municipal responsibility, essentially saying that the provincial government has no role to play in these decisions.

[Page 561]

Subsequent to that, most of the advice we have received is that there is a provincial role in handling these types of issues, especially as they relate to submerged lands. I should note that most of the - actually all of the people I have talked with have said that submerged lands is the proper term for this and not water lots. The difference is that the province and the federal government have a particular responsibility for submerged lands and has historic rights to these submerged lands in the North West Arm.

Essentially, what has happened in the North West Arm, because of this lack of jurisdiction or this essential abdication of jurisdiction on the part of the federal government and on the part of the provincial government, is that most of these submerged lands in the North West Arm are now being infilled and people have started to build large monster homes on these submerged lands. Essentially they are undermining habitat and destroying a very important historic waterway and, in particular, in this case a wharf that has been in continuous use for over 250 years.

I wanted to draw that to your attention to get some advice from you on what our options are. In particular, I want to start by talking about how you understand provincial jurisdiction in this issue, given that the legal advice we have received is that the Department of Natural Resources is responsible for those lands. I want to know if there is a department position on that.

MR. MORSE: We are very interested in the legal opinion. The deputy actually has a background in this area. He is a lawyer and that was his area of expertise. As the member would appreciate, with the offshore and the competing claims for ownership of the resources, whether it is the Donkin coal mine or the oil and gas that we are finding off the coast, it is all clearly of great interest to the province. If we could get a legal opinion that would clear that up, we would be very interested in getting that information.

At the outset, I do want to make it clear that if the honourable member would like to avail himself of some time with the Deputy Minister of Natural Resources, that the deputy has indicated that he would more than welcome that opportunity, plus if you do have a legal opinion that can corroborate that position, that would be of interest to the department. The whole topic of harbours and federal and provincial jurisdiction and what did Nova Scotia bring into Confederation and was it three miles out or was it now 200 miles out or is it to the Continental Shelf - it is probably not going to be determined in this Chamber, although I would like to just give you a "yes", I am sure that currency wouldn't fly outside of Nova Scotia.

Another interesting complication here is that some of those water lots, and I am well familiar with them because that is where I spent most of the . . .

MR. PREYRA: Submerged lands, you mean.

[Page 562]

MR. MORSE: Yes. That was the area where I grew up for the best part of the first 12 years of my life and I am familiar with every nook and cranny there and the starfish and the crabs and the periwinkles and what you can catch off Purcell's Wharf, if it is still there in Point Pleasant Park. Those are pre-Confederation water lots and the thing about those pre-Confederation water lots is that in actual fact, you are right, that the land title actually extends beyond the high water mark into the North West Arm so in those cases, I suspect that the property owners would just simply argue that it is their perfect right to fill in their own land, they have a claim.

MR. PREYRA: We are not going to be able to decide this year but the opinion we had says that a water lot does confer property rights, more rights than a submerged land would. Essentially submerged lands were lands that were granted to these people for their use but not the exclusive use, that someone could land a boat there or cast a net there or fish or do any number of things and essentially it was still public property. They were not privatized and they could not be privatized, that the Crown still had rights to it, people had a right to walk along the shoreline, for example, but we don't have to decide that here.

My point is that it is this confusion of jurisdiction that is allowing that to happen. What the North West Arm did was pressure a number of these stakeholder groups - federal and provincial and municipal bodies - to form this interagency working group that the minister may be familiar with and I believe that the Department of Natural Resources is one of the stakeholders in that interagency group, along with some harbour authorities and the Department of Environment and the Department of Transport and a number of them. I would like very much if the Department of Natural Resources would play a much more active role in that interagency group and exercise a more active, kind of robust provincial role in that process.

I know that you were talking earlier about offshore but this is essentially an inland waterway that doesn't go anywhere, other than - it is an inlet, really. It would be helpful to us if the province said, well, we have a role here; rather than saying, everything below the high water mark is the federal responsibility and everything above is a municipal and so there is no role for us. We would like to see something happen there, especially since at the moment there hasn't been as much development as there could be. We have one development that has posed a great deal of trouble and we would like to see something done.

So in terms of options, we would like to look at the possibility of purchasing some of these water lots, in the long run creating a water park, I think on the North West Arm, given its historic heritage role for over 250 years, but we would like, in general, to see the Department of Natural Resources play a more active role.

I believe I am getting the hook here, so you can treat that as a question.

[Page 563]

MR. MORSE: I think that I want to again encourage the member to take the offer from the deputy and meet with him and please bring that legal opinion. The deputy has some abilities in that area. We would also like to resolve the jurisdictional issue.

The member might be interested to know that the federal government, I guess, claims 12 harbours in Nova Scotia and it has offered the province the chance to take ownership of 11 of them. So they're trying to divest themselves of 11 of 12. Guess which one they want to keep? It is, of course, Halifax which would include the Northwest Arm. So it's a subject that's of interest to, I suspect, all members around this table and also my deputy and his staff. So please, accept his offer and meet with him and perhaps it will make a difference.

[5:30 p.m.]

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou East.

MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, minister and staff, I want to really sincerely thank you for your sound comments to us and so on. The member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage passed out a bouquet and I would like to as well. I think you have done a very commendable job. You have gotten a handle on this department in a very short period of time and you do have very capable staff there. I'm just very pleased with the response today. We have a host of other questions, but I feel very comfortable that we can relay those to you and your staff outside of this forum.

MR. MORSE: Yes.

MR. MACKINNON: You've done such a good job, I will have to be less theatrical when I ask you a question in the House from now on. I'll have to be nicer to you. (Laughter)

MR. MORSE: Mr. Chairman, do you think we could get one of the Clerks to come over and notarize this. (Laughter) I would like to have that signed and witnessed and then I'm going to laminate it and put it up in my office.

MR. MACKINNON: That's the only kiss you're going to get. (Laughter)

MR. CHAIRMAN: The time for the member has elapsed.

MR. MORSE: Well, I want to thank the honourable member for his comments and the constructive and thoughtful questions that have been brought forward, not only by him but by all members of his caucus, indeed all members here at the committee this afternoon. Thank you very much.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Preston.

[Page 564]

MR. KEITH COLWELL: I've got a bunch of questions to ask about provincial parks. Unfortunately, I don't have one in my own riding, I don't have hardly anything in my riding, but anyway.

MR. MORSE: That's the first question?

MR. COLWELL: That's right. When are you going to build one?

MR. MORSE: Well, we have 130 of them in the province, honourable member. Do you think there should be 131?

MR. COLWELL: Definitely, it would be nice to have one right in Preston. The first thing I'm going to ask you about is the canteens that aren't open, one in Lawrencetown on the beach, and what has the department done to try to open that canteen?

Now, the reason I'm asking about that is because I feel that the provincial parks are a tremendous attraction both for local tourists - when I say local tourists, that's somebody who's probably more than five miles away from home - and tourists who visit our province from outside the province. These canteens, although typically in the past, I believe, they've been run independently by independent people rather than the department which is always a good way to approach it. If someone goes to parks, and some of these are reasonably isolated from other supplies, that they can go there and they could run to a local store or something, but some of these aren't that close. Is there any indication or what's the reason that the canteen hasn't been opened in Lawrencetown? That's in the Halifax Regional Municipality, not in the Valley.

MR. MORSE: I want to commend the member on his question because I'm not familiar specifically with that canteen, although I know that it's a very famous beach in this province. Despite the years of experience that I've got around me, nobody was able to answer your question, so we are busily tracking down an answer.

MR. COLWELL: I'm going to ask another one, then, because the answer will probably be the same for the next one. The next one is a bit more isolated - it's Clam Harbour Beach, which is a beautiful beach, not the same sort of beach. That's one beautiful thing about the Eastern Shore, the beaches are all different, which makes it possible for people to go to different beaches on different days. Now, Clam Harbour, I know, has not, and I don't believe Lawrencetown has been open for the past three years either, and Clam Harbour is quite a distance from any kind of services. If someone goes there for the day and they neglect to take some water with them or snacks or food for the day, they have to leave the beach to get that service or to buy something. Could you tell me why this one hasn't been opened?

[Page 565]

MR. MORSE: Unfortunately we were unable to get hold of the person who could perhaps answer that question. The call has gone out. I believe there's a voicemail on the person's answering machine. I suspect that this is possibly a case where the facilities are made available for somebody who wants to lease them for the summer. My guess would be that people have not been coming forward. I'm just speculating that that is probably the reason. It's not an answer and the member will get an answer.

MR. COLWELL: I appreciate that. I've been told what some people speculate the answer is, but I'm not going to speculate, I want the real answer from the department.

MR. MORSE: And you will have the real answer.

MR. COLWELL: While you're getting that information, when you get that information, I would also like to know how many other canteens - and these two canteens, I know for sure, are fully equipped and the facilities are owned by the province, so it's not a matter of someone coming with a mobile chip wagon and setting it up and doing that. Then, how many more canteens in the province that are so equipped also, aren't open? I'd like to get that information. I know you can't answer it now, but if you could come up with that answer.

MR. MORSE: I just want to say that when questions like this have come up earlier, as it pertains to maybe a constituency concern, and you've identified that while it's not your constituency's concern, it's a concern of these two communities - to me, you don't just fix one problem without asking whether the same situation exists in the other 91 provincial beaches, I think there's 92 provincial beaches in total.

Automatically, we ask that question. It's a good question, and it may just be that it's not economical for somebody to lease it for the season and pay somebody for a summer job. We'll get the answer, and implicit in the question is whether it would be appropriate to see that as something that perhaps in a future budget year would require some subsidy to provide a service, because it would be a good thing for the community.

MR. COLWELL: That sounds really good. Another one of the beaches in that area is Martinique Beach. I understand it has no potable water at the present time. I know it was a problem there in the past and evidently there's no water there. That's a real problem on a beach when somebody is trying to either get sand off themselves from being in the water and having to walk on the sandy beach to get out, or water to drink, indeed.

MR. MORSE: Could I just clarify whether there is a faucet there that has historically had water available for the bathers?

MR. COLWELL: Yes.

[Page 566]

MR. MORSE: Okay.

MR. COLWELL: You can come back with the answer on that one, too. The other things I have . . .

MR. MORSE: And is there any water currently available, or is it just not suitable for drinking, not potable?

MR. COLWELL: I'm not sure if it's a quality problem or a supply problem - it could be either in the location. The beach has water places on both sides of it, salt water. So it could be a supply problem or a potable problem, I'm not sure, but there's no water there.

MR. MORSE: I wonder if the new drinking water strategy, which is something that's near and dear to my heart, may have impacted the situation, because it's not meeting the regulations anymore, they could not hold it out as being safe drinking water, and that may have complicated the situation. It doesn't have to be safe drinking water to wash the sand off your feet at the end of the day, but if it comes from a faucet people may just assume that it's potable. That's a problem.

MR. COLWELL: I'm not sure which it is, but maybe you could just get your staff to look at that and see what can be done. There's another issue - it's a little bit of an insidious issue. In all the parks that I've dealt with, there's another issue with staffing, and not the number of staff so much, but when the staff is called back. Now a lot of these parks have permanent staff who work - from what I understand, and you can correct me if I'm wrong on this - part of the year at the park, and then they would go off, typically on unemployment insurance, as a seasonal job, which is fine.

But what's happened this year is in some of the parks, the employees have come back a week later than normal or two weeks later than normal. Now I realize that will save the department a little bit of money, but the problem is that when that happens, the employees sometimes may not get enough time in to make sure that their unemployment insurance carries through until they are called back again. It will mean a reduction in their unemployment insurance through the winter - and other problems associated with not having the income they have at that time - to the point that probably, eventually, you're going to lose some of this valuable staff who has the knowledge and experience working with the park. Personally, I can build almost anything, but I wouldn't want to have to go to one of these parks and say, here's the keys, get everything operational before everybody shows up, and have confidence I was going to do that the first time around without someone there with experience to help me do it.

The people you started late this year who are typically, usually, people you have all the time, who come year after year to work - not casual people you hire, students and stuff like that, that's a different thing. Where some of the people started late, is there any

[Page 567]

possibility of keeping them over an extra week or two weeks so that they can make sure their unemployment insurance is secure and, indeed, that you'll get the employee back the next year?

MR. MORSE: I understand exactly what the member has brought to us at committee. I think his point is that part of the responsibility that we have as a seasonal employer is to make sure that they get a prescribed amount of work. If we want to be able to continue to count on these good staff members coming back during the summer season, that we had better make sure that the total package, both off-season and on-season, allows them to accept the job. The deputy has taken note of that, and is going to look into it. If you could be a little bit more specific as to which ones are affected by this, this is something that conceivably could be right across the province, but if you can identify particular employees who are impacted by this, I would encourage you to provide that either to me or to the deputy.

MR. COLWELL: Yes, I'll do that. Out of this environment, I'll let you know what areas, not the employees but the area that's involved. The other thing with that, if your staff comes back typically later than normal, and I realize you're trying to maintain your budget and do all those things, it means the parks won't open as soon and they could, potentially, close earlier. When that happens, it affects our tourism. As you know, and we all know in this room, our tourism numbers are down. If a tourist comes here and hopes that a park is open, because a lot of people like to come in the Fall when there's not so many people at the beaches and other places and spend some time there, or earlier in the Spring. That also, I think, ties into the overall equation. The longer we can have these facilities open, sensibly, making sure there's going to be some people there, the better off we are in the whole scheme of things.

So for the sake of probably not a whole lot of money - and I know you have a lot of parks - you could have a little bit longer season and have a lot happier workforce that could continue.

[5:45 p.m.]

MR. MORSE: There is a point of diminishing returns, which tracks things like weather patterns, whether we have a hurricane or a wet Spring, as an example, that basically delays the onset of the summer season - I was going to say the tourist season but it's the summer season, because a lot of these parks would be frequented by Nova Scotians who just want to take the family out for a day. So again I think that, as an employer, we have to be conscious that the package that we're able to offer seasonal staff is sufficient so that it allows them to meet their basic needs, that goes to the length of the season. If we could just follow up on that, understanding that this may present an opportunity for us to stay open for an extra couple of weeks, we'll take it under consideration.

[Page 568]

MR. COLWELL: The other thing is, too, some of these parks are getting in worse and worse condition, with a seasonal staff there that's trying to keep up. I know that Public Works also does some major work there, but some of the parks, when you go around and see them, the condition of them isn't as good as it should be when you're trying to impress somebody who is coming here from outside the province or someone else. During that time if they're maybe not quite as busy as they would normally be at the peak time, I would think it would probably be conceivable that the experienced staff you have there could do some minor maintenance, some painting or whatever they need to do to make the park look better, be more presentable and really put a better image on for all of us as Nova Scotians.

MR. MORSE: Actually, the honourable member has pointed out something that we've tried to address in this year's budget. For quite some time, the annual maintenance budget has been capped at about $350,000. There had been some very significant cuts some time ago in that budget, and it was increased from $300,000 to $350,000, and this year the operating budget for park maintenance has gone to $850,000, which, as you would appreciate, is an enormous increase as a percentage. The amount of capital available has been increased by $750,000. So the very things that the member speaks of have in fact been, we hope, at least addressed in part with provisions made in this budget. It's my way of saying that we agree with the member.

MR. COLWELL: I appreciate that. I'm glad to see that you're moving in that direction, because this is an extremely valuable resource we have here in the province. It's not only a valuable resource, but it is protected areas. It's one of those protected areas there's no argument about. They're really wonderful places in the province. I know I haven't been to all the parks in the province, but the ones I've been to are all different, which is very nice, and the staff I've run into have always been excellent to deal with. They really present Nova Scotia very well. Anything we can do to enhance and improve those, I think, is a major improvement for all of us as Nova Scotians and really says a lot for the things that when the tourists come here, they go home with a pleasant experience and an experience of enjoying our beautiful coastline and other areas that the parks are in.

MR. MORSE: I have just asked the deputy to put together a memo from me to all the seasonal parks personnel, making reference to the way the committee has commended their performance as, really, ambassadors for the province and to Nova Scotia, ambassadors for the department. I always appreciate it when members take note of the good performance of the department staff so I really appreciate the member's comments - they're going to be passed on. I think the member knows that when you're out there, probably not making a great deal of money, and somebody gives you a little pat on the shoulder and says, you're doing a good job, they appreciate it, it is important to them.

MR. COLWELL: I'll turn my time over to the member for Glace Bay.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Glace Bay.

[Page 569]

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Minister, I wasn't here for your preamble at the opening of your estimates so I don't know if you mentioned the Donkin coal mine or not - maybe just slightly mentioned it. I have a few questions concerning that subject, if I could.

I'm sure you're aware, even though you're new to your portfolio, that Xstrata is now currently looking at opening Donkin mine and I'd like to know exactly where things stand in terms of the coal leases themselves and any negotiations which have taken place or are about to take place between the federal government and the Province of Nova Scotia. Are the leases - do they still belong to, and are they still in the hands of the federal government?

MR. MORSE: The federal government turned it over to the province. It's rather an interesting situation because the province, of course, collected a royalty from Devco, which is a federal Crown Corporation and operated there for many years, paying royalties to the province. Then they turned the leases back to us and now we have a jurisdictional question as to whether the province is the owner of the coal bed. It's an interesting position that's been taken by the federal government.

But, to answer the member's main concern is, we feel we've reached an accommodation that's not going to compromise anybody and that will let the mine go forward without a bureaucratic delay.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): The jurisdictional question that you're talking about, I know the leases were turned over to the province - I may have phrased that wrong - but there was to the last of my knowledge, a question as to whether or not the leases could actually be mined by the Province of Nova Scotia. Has that been straightened away?

In other words, are the processes that have been followed, the negotiations, are they finished? Is Xstrata capable right now of getting those leases and mining coal at Donkin?

MR. MORSE: With regard to the special lease and the de-watering, we're waiting for the industrial approval from the Department of Environment and Labour.

Oh, I'm advised that we're fine with the special lease, but we still have some negotiations to conclude with the federal government by way of how are we going to solve this. We're talking about potentially putting mirroring legislation in place that basically allows the province to go ahead and be the regulator and also be responsible for Occupational Health and Safety.

These are all areas of potential disagreement and we do not want jurisdictional issues to slow down Donkin. So I think what we have with the federal government is, they will stand back and allow the province to go ahead without doing something that's going to set a precedent that may compromise them on a subsequent project.

[Page 570]

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Okay. I'm going to ask for some clarification on that because, in effect, what you're telling me is that the federal government transferred the leases to the Province of Nova Scotia, but you can't mine them right now unless the federal government says it's okay?

MR. MORSE: No, the federal government conceivably could challenge our jurisdiction, so rather than get into a messy court battle, they're prepared to step back and reach an accommodation that would allow Donkin to go forward without delay but that will not compromise the federal government's claim to offshore resources because the coal beds are under the ocean.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): So, clarification again: the federal government will always have a hand on the coal leases, is that what you are saying? They'll always have the option, if they give you permission and reach an agreement, just as quickly they can take away that agreement, can they not?

MR. MORSE: They're prepared to stand back on this one to let Donkin go forward, but they're not prepared to cede what they may deem to be jurisdiction over other offshore resources. So, they're prepared to make the accommodation for Donkin to go ahead without delay, but if you're looking for clarification, you're not going to get that definitive answer because we don't have that agreement with the federal government. What we have with the federal government is an accommodation to make sure Donkin happens.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Okay, you don't have a signed agreement, you don't have anything in writing?

MR. MORSE: No. We have an understanding with them. Clearly, before you get a signed agreement you have to have an understanding as to how we're going to accommodate this project. I'm pleased with what's been done in that regard, but, again, if you're looking for something that's going to stand up in the Supreme Court, you're not going to get it.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): I'm not looking for it, Mr. Minister, but I would assume the company that's going to want to mine the leases would be interested in whether or not there's something in place. Is this an agreement with the current government? Is this an agreement that was reached with the current Conservative Government? Or, is it an agreement that was reached with the former Liberal Government?

MR. MORSE: I'm confirming my earlier answer, but what Xstrata needs from this that would allow them to invest the millions of dollars that need to be sunk into that mine would be by way of concurrent legislation. That's what's going to give them their comfort.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): That concurrent legislation has not been approved yet, has it?

[Page 571]

MR. MORSE: No.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): When do you expect that to happen?

MR. MORSE: We're anticipating it will go forward in the Fall.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): This Fall?

MR. MORSE: Yes.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): So that there would be legislation introduced here in this Legislature that would be, as you said, concurrent with legislation that would be introduced in Ottawa that would allow for the mining of the coal involved in those leases at Donkin? That still has to be done?

MR. MORSE: Yes.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): As I understand it, Xstrata reached an agreement with the province that they would do - for the lack of a better word - a feasibility study at whether or not they actually wanted to mine the coal. That contract was for a period of about 265 days, I believe. Is that correct? They had a certain period of time in order to determine whether or not they wanted to go ahead to the next stage - is that correct?

MR. MORSE: There's a special lease in place for them and it allows them to mine up to a certain tonnage of coal. I'm just trying to confirm the number of zeroes, it's 5.5 and I'm not sure if it's the number of tons, I have seen that in a briefing note but I'm not sure.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): But the amount of time, in other words, when does Xstrata have to make a decision? When is that special lease that has been signed, when does that expire?

MR. MORSE: We've got the timelines for the project. I know the member has a huge vested interest in this, being the representative for Glace Bay, and if he would like to have those timelines, we can certainly provide them to him.

[6:00 p.m.]

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Please, if you would, I would like to have those timelines. I've seen them myself too, but I can't recall. What I'm wondering is that with those timelines that were put in place, if we're waiting until the Fall to come up with concurrent legislation, whether or not that's going to mean that you're going to have to perhaps renew those guidelines, those timelines with Xstrata.

[Page 572]

My main purpose in asking all this is not to try to trip you up, Mr. Minister. My main purpose is to get the point across that you've got - you know, the estimated reserves of coal in the Donkin seam are huge. In this province right now, you are burning coal that is imported from other countries and at the same time we are sitting on top of millions and millions and millions of tons of coal. There are people who are willing to work and wanting to work in those areas and it has been pretty well greeted with open arms in terms that there was finally a company that was found that's willing to take a look at mining coal in Donkin. I don't have to tell you the importance of this project.

MR. MORSE: Actually, honourable member, I did make some reference to that in my opening comments and my hope is that with Cape Breton getting back heavily into coal mining, and Donkin is the catalyst, that some day people will be coming to Nova Scotia because Cape Breton, and specifically your area of Cape Breton, will be viewed as the eastern equivalent of Fort McMurray. That is my hope for Donkin and Cape Breton. I see this as a catalyst and it's absolutely essential that this happen and I think that all levels of government appreciate the importance of Donkin.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): My hope right now, Mr. Minister and Mr. Chairman, is that a jurisdictional dispute between a Conservative Government in Ottawa and a Progressive Conservative Government in Nova Scotia would not hold up the process that would be necessary to start to open up the Donkin mine and start mining coal again in Cape Breton and putting people back to work. That would be my major hope right now. I'm glad to hear and I will expect to see in the Fall, that there will be legislation that will come before this Legislature concerning the leases and concerning the concurrent legislation with Ottawa. Let me leave that right now.

MR. MORSE: Could we anticipate that the member would be supportive of such legislation?

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): Oh, you can be bloody well assured the member will be supportive of such legislation.

MR. MORSE: Can we take that as a yes?

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): About as big as you can get, Mr. Minister. Just to close out on my time before I turn it over to my colleague, the subject of beaches came up. As I understand it in the Province of Nova Scotia right now, the only actual testing of water that's done is on supervised beaches in the Province of Nova Scotia. This is a beach where people are swimming and so on, you know, these are supervised beaches.

There is a beach near Donkin, Cape Breton, which is known as Big Glace Bay beach. That's how it's commonly known. I don't know the exact name of it but I know, as kids, we all went there for years. Dominion Beach, as you well know, in Dominion, right now has

[Page 573]

experienced in the past a lot of problems - erosion and so on, water quality problems. It has been closed for the better part of years now and because of that, a lot of people from my constituency, a lot of people from neighbouring constituencies, go to this beach near Donkin. It's probably in Donkin, I'm not sure, I should be more sure of my geography. (Interruption) The member for the area probably knows that, yes, thank you very much. Port Caledonia. He's very specific.

Big Glace Bay beach there is now visited by thousands of people during the summer, but it's not a supervised beach. There's no lifeguards there, despite the fact that if you went to Dominion Beach, there would be a few people around perhaps but not allowed to swim in the water - there are lifeguards there but no one's allowed to swim in the water. Where you go to this beach - where people have gone for years and now more go there because Dominion Beach isn't open - it's not supervised, there are no lifeguards, and that's another area to explore, but even then there's no regular testing of the water done because it's not a supervised beach.

My question to you is, would you and your department look into two possibilities: one, perhaps making that beach a supervised beach because of the large numbers of people that are going there now on a regular basis; two, if that were to become a supervised beach or even if it's not, would there be any regular testing of the water quality that's done on that beach?

MR. MORSE: I recall from my time back as Minister of Environment that it in fact falls under the Department of Environment and Labour to do the water quality testing at beaches, so that would be better addressed to the Minister of Environment and Labour. With regard to making it a supervised beach, the Department of Natural Resources does not provide lifeguards, I'm not sure where the lifeguards come in some of our provincial beaches, I can get you that information but I'm advised that's not something we do in the Department of Natural Resources.

MR. DAVID WILSON(Glace Bay): I will further explore it myself but if you would explore it perhaps and advise me what department that falls under. I think it's as easy as putting a lifeguard on that beach to ensure that it gets tested on a regular basis.

MR. MORSE: I will undertake to make sure the member gets those answers.

MR. DAVID WILSON (Glace Bay): I appreciate that. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to turn over the remainder of our time to the member for Kings West.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Kings West. The time is now 6:06 p.m.

[Page 574]

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am certainly pleased to have the opportunity to probably finish out the hour here on Natural Resources - just somewhat of a quick question here. There's been some reference to this area by my colleague, the member for Preston, this afternoon but on this past weekend, this topic came back to light and it was one I had asked about last year. It goes back to our provincial picnic parks and the lack of potable water. I'm in particular referencing the Claremont Park which is in East Kingston, Auburn area, and it's a very popular little picnic park.

When I asked about it last year, I felt that perhaps the water strategy was used as a reason for inaction. This is a case where they had potable water and the well casing had broken or collapsed there. It's an area where it's very easy to get water - people, for example, who don't live in subdivisions, can put a well point down anywhere from 15 to 20 feet and get all kinds of the best water. It's one that, in regard to the water strategy, testing has to occur to make sure that safe water is available for people using it there.

It's interesting that a local resident who lives in close proximity to the park, when we had a recent windstorm, offered his time to be somewhat of a caretaker for the park, realizing that sometimes Natural Resources doesn't get out quickly to do cleanup and saw that it was quite an elapsed period of time and nothing was being done. In conjunction with the department, I asked whether this person could be approved to do some cleanup and because he had all of the safety courses and so forth in terms of handling a chainsaw, and the end product was going to be reviewed to make sure that in fact what he said he was going to do was done and done properly and so forth. It's a little bit of a shame, I guess, in a way that it's come down to private citizens having to do some work on a very appreciated local picnic park. It is good in terms of citizenship wanting to do this.

But the question of potable water really came to light this weekend. It may or may not be reported in the local media, because the Ostomy Society of Nova Scotia have been coming to this picnic park for quite a number of years. They held their 20^th annual picnic there this year. They had come to me about making provision to at least get some water for washup. These are people with special needs. People came from the Halifax chapter, the Bridgewater chapter, the Kentville chapter, the Kingston-Middleton chapter, and I'm not sure what others were attendance, plus Joel Jacobson came down to serve as the MC for the afternoon. So it was a very prominent occasion.

Here you had this group without, not only potable water, but any kind of water even just for basic cleanup. I think it is something that for local residents, but I think of somebody from out of province, from another country who on their visit to Nova Scotia, this is their spot for their picnic, their supper, their lunch, whatever. They go thinking that they're going to be able to get water because, generally speaking, we do have potable water available.

Just like we have river guardians in our area, maybe a system of picnic park guardians who would just have an eye on these places and in fact who would go by and take a water

[Page 575]

sample and have it sent off once a month or whatever. I feel it's a real deterioration for our province that this service is not available, and it was certainly highlighted by this activity this past weekend.

I'm wondering if the minister would just simply commit to looking at whether it's a reasonable, feasible thing to have potable water in this park? I say that not just because it's in my riding, but because when I think of people coming from across the province to visit a small provincial picnic park in another part of the province, I think it's a great service, a basic service to be able to offer.

MR. MORSE: The short answer is yes, but I would like to embellish it just a little bit. With the enhancements that have been made to the park maintenance operating budget - I'm not sure if the honourable member caught these comments earlier in this session - but there has certainly been some difficulty with that aspect of the department's budget for the last number of years. I understand it was cut quite some time ago to about $300,000 a year for the whole province. When you're talking about 130 parks, you take $300,000 and divide it by 130, and that's not an awful lot of maintenance money for each park. Some of those parks are clearly going to be more prominent, and they'll take more than their per park share.

It was increased, I understand, last year, perhaps, by $50,000 to $350,000, which was a move in the right direction, but it was not going to solve the problem, because it had been higher historically. This year we've actually added $500,000 to the budget. That's not going to solve every maintenance problem in our 130 parks, but it's going to solve a lot of them. I've asked the deputy to please investigate whether that can be one of them.

I would also mention that in addition to that $500,000 in additional operating, which we look forward to having incorporated in future years - maybe even coming back for more depending on how we make out in 2006-07 - there's an additional $750,000 in capital for parks. So, the honourable member is right, there have been some deficiencies in that area and this budget, hopefully, will start to address that.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister, and I am pleased to hear that commitment to look into this park in particular, but our parks across the province and their future viability.

[6:15 p.m.]

An area in the budget, and first I want to make sure I am on the right track here, but there is an increase for renewable resources. Now is that also for renewable energy? Is that an area that would be included in that increase in the budget?

[Page 576]

MR. MORSE: Actually, parks are included as part of renewable resources so you have just ferreted out the reason for the increase and explained why it was appropriate for that increase.

MR. GLAVINE: Okay. I was just wondering, under your Department of Natural Resources, does any of the renewable energy sector fall in that area, or is that contained within the Department of Energy dimension?

MR. MORSE: While we have some interest in those areas, we do not have a budget line item that pertains to renewable energy. One of the areas that is of particular interest, and there is an interdepartmental - actually I am going to embellish that by saying it is an inter-governmental committee looking at getting a regulatory regime in place to deal with the tremendous potential we have just to the west of our respective ridings in the Bay of Fundy, that being tidal power. The province does own the seabed in the Bay of Fundy and the means by which you tap that tidal power apparently involves putting a structure on the seabed and letting the changing tides drive the turbines and create the power. We certainly have an interest in these areas but not a direct budget line.

MR. GLAVINE: Along that same theme, because I am still working to get some of the parameters of the department - we all know that one of the major issues and concerns that is now pretty well a global issue is the potential of the avian flu. And again, because it has a tie-in to wildlife potentially, I am just wondering through Natural Resources, whether or not there is either a responsibility in terms of testing of any wildlife - and especially fowl that is found dead - whether or not there is any kind of testing that is a precautionary measure that would be carried out by your department?

MR. MORSE: There is a national committee that is looking at this and provincially, we have an interdepartmental committee working with Health and Agriculture.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you. One of the areas that the NDP caucus brought up and spent quite a lot of time on - I just want to kind of revisit a little bit. If we take a look at Nova Scotia's Forest Sustainability Regulations - DNR's document on the natural disturbance ecology in the forests of Nova Scotia - that report suggests that 23 per cent of our forests should be managed on a selection basis to emulate small-scale natural disturbances; an additional 35 per cent with selection, long rotation clear-cut and shelter wood harvesting systems to emulate infrequent large-scale natural disturbances.

So if we take a look at the arrangement of the silviculture, it averages about 3 million per year, and we have almost 98 per cent of silviculture funding is going towards even-aged management of our forests. My question then would be, there are no statutory obligations how DNR spends silviculture funding, so why not address the current imbalance in silviculture spending and dedicate taxpayers' contributions to this program to some uneven-aged treatments?

[Page 577]

MR. MORSE: This is something that was also brought up, as the member points out, by the NDP caucus, and I think that it's an excellent opportunity to bring those points forward, as we proceed to the public consultation stage of the new forestry strategy. We certainly would welcome those comments and I think that they should be given every consideration before a strategy is brought forth and recommended to me.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Actually, I'll digress here for a moment. That was certainly, I think, one of the response areas last year when people were talking about the delisting, for example. I know there's a tie-in here with Natural Resources and in Environment, as we all know, but there was a lot of commentary made around the fact that there should be more public consultation. So the department and you, as the minister, have committed to a public component. I'm very pleased to hear that, and I'm wondering if you have put some timelines in place for that to occur?

MR. MORSE: We're anticipating the whole process to take somewhere in the vicinity of 18 months. I mean, we want to make sure that there's time to get it right and when you go out for public consultation, as the member would know, that is a somewhat time-consuming process to make sure that people have access to the process and be able to make their contribution.

MR. GLAVINE: I welcome that, Mr. Minister, because there have been some criticisms in the past that there hasn't been a strong enough public consultation process and I'm wondering if there is some framework at this stage, as to how that will be carried out. Will it be something along the lines of the OHVs, where we had Voluntary Planning that did a major piece of work? Is that how you are forecasting and rolling out this public consultation?

MR. MORSE: There's a proposal that has yet to go to Cabinet for approval, so until Cabinet approves the parameters I think it would probably not be appropriate for me to speculate on what they ultimately will be. But I do always appreciate having constructive public input and having been minister of two departments prior to this, both of which often have topics that garner considerable public interest - that being Environment, which overlaps these concerns and Community Services - I've always felt well served by listening to the public and I think it's fair to say that there have been very few times that I did not feel that we did things a little better because we involved the public.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you for that comment, Mr. Minister and I certainly appreciate the recognition of being reflective and conscientious toward public consultation and I certainly look forward at some stage, just as a citizen, if not as an MLA, of having some input there.

I have to shorten my prefaces here and try to get a couple more questions in with about five minutes, I think, remaining, Mr. Chairman?

[Page 578]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Eight minutes.

MR. GLAVINE: Oh, thank you. One of the areas that we no doubt will see in Nova Scotia as we go into a transition toward stronger renewable energy, we have to move down that road where we have 85 to 90 per cent of our energy produced by fossil fuels. That assortment and that mix will change some. There's no question.

Cogeneration and so forth may be in fact a lifeline for our pulp and paper industry. If indeed we move toward burning forest biomass, which we know now certainly in some of the Scandinavian countries is one of the means that they do employ, and not having that allowable limit on our forest resource at the current time, are there some concerns being raised? Is there some policy development around the use of forest biomass for cogeneration of energy?

MR. MORSE: I just wanted to make sure that I answered all aspects of the member's question. We're not contemplating any kind of cap at this time but earlier in the session, we did talk about the various models and ways of corroborating our wood fibre inventory in the province and talked about the growth and the harvesting rates of softwood and hardwood. The interesting thing about the hardwood is that while we may be harvesting 90 per cent of what's grown annually in softwood, which means that there's a gradual enhancement of our forests, we're only at about 50 per cent when it comes to hardwood and I think it lends itself to a lot of opportunities. I concur with the member that clearly one of them could be cogeneration because hardwood is clearly the fuel of choice. I'm not sure if anybody burns softwood in their fireplace.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Minister. One last question and perhaps it isn't one that you have background on at this stage in the ministry, but maybe someone from the department could support an answer here. I was recently at a presentation by CARP - the Clean Annapolis River Project - and one of their people, certainly a scientist, if you wish, who does work for them and he has done quite a bit of work in western Nova Scotia using, of course, satellite photography and forest inventory. He was showing the areas that have been clear-cut and the process over - he probably had about a 20 to 25 year period. In showing this, it targeted quite a rapid increase and its impact, of course, on the lakes, and the recharge of water and so on, into the lakes, and water quality and that.

What hit me right off was that, was this possibly one of the reasons why we had a Weymouth mill close? That, you know, there was lack of the resource in western Nova Scotia, longer areas to truck, or was it simply a business decision? I'm wondering if you could support or make a comment on that, please.

MR. MORSE: The harvest rates in the province and the sustainability of the forest varies, depending on what part of the province we're in. In the central region, in fact, there is a slight erosion of our forests because there are so many saw mills in this part of the

[Page 579]

province - but in the western and the eastern part of the province, the forests are growing faster than we're harvesting them. So, I think that that was probably just, regrettably, a business decision and it may be impacted by things like the Canadian dollar. I believe at that time we were still into our dispute with the United States over softwood lumber and even though we were exempted from countervail we still had the anti-dumping penalty which I think was 2.1 per cent. So, there were a number of things there that I think made it a little bit more difficult for them to continue and certainly I hope it's not a permanent loss to the community.

[6:30 p.m.]

MR. GLAVINE: We're five months away from that wonderful season but I was wondering if you could give this just a little general picture of the state of the Christmas tree industry in Nova Scotia?

MR. MORSE: I'm certainly looking forward to cutting my own. (Laughter)

MR. GLAVINE: I know that you're just getting up a speed on some of these files, if you could just provide me with a little bit of the pattern or the trend over the last five to 10 years. Is it still an area that is of considerable economic importance and what their future is facing?

MR. MORSE: I'm going to ask the deputy if he could share a briefing note with the honourable member and me.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you very much and I thank the minister today for having the opportunity to look at a few specific questions from the budget but perhaps more important the wide range in area that Natural Resources does cover.

MR. MORSE: I just want to thank the honourable member for his questions.

Mr. Minister, we're going to call on you now for your closing statement.

MR. MORSE: Well, I could go on for an hour, but I don't think it's necessary. I thank everybody for their participation this afternoon in the committee. It's been a pleasure.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E12 stand?

Resolution E12 stands.

We'll now call Estimates for Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.

[Page 580]

Resolution E31 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $136,261,000 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.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.

HON. JAMES MUIR: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, and thank you very much to you and your committee members for giving us the opportunity to share the directions and features of the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, and I also am looking forward to answering questions on the budget of this particular department.

With me at the table, on my left here, is Deputy Minister Greg Keefe, who is a long time part of the Nova Scotia Government, probably in more than one department, although, I know him in this one; and Marianne Hakkert-Lebel, who is the Manager of Accounting Services. In addition to that, we have kind of a host of people sitting behind me and because I don't know everybody's names, I'm going to get the deputy to introduce them to the committee.

MR. GREG KEEFE: Thank you. We have Bob Houlihan, one of our municipal advisors; Marvin MacDonald, director of our grants programs; Jeff Shute, policy analyst; Brant Wishart, director of planning; Maxine Wallace, senior financial analyst; Pam Muir, director of finance; and Cameron MacNeil, our executive director of program management.

MR. MUIR: Thank you, I'll thank the deputy. To begin, I'd like to tell the committee a little bit about Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, but just in advance of that, I'm going to touch on a few of the budget highlights.

If people look at the first line in the Estimates Book, Net Program Expenditures, from last year's estimate, to this year's estimate, you're going to see a difference of about $40 million and obviously that's substantial, but the majority of this difference is explained by the fact that the province's HST energy rebate will be administered and funded through Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. So as you can appreciate that's a significant budget item and if it's in our department, then it's going to make a major difference in the year to year expenditures.

Another line that has to be explained, Mr. Chairman, is the difference between last year's funded staff, or full-time equivalent estimate, compared to this year's. Late in 2005-06, this department became responsible for financial institutions and the Nova Scotia Insurance Review Board, and as a consequence to that move the full-time equivalent employees who were associated with those two organizations have now become members of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.

[Page 581]

Since then and also since the Estimates Book was printed, authority for these two organizations has been moved again - this time to the Department of Finance. So you look and see which shell they're under, I guess, but in the interests of simplicity and for the minister's understanding as well as the Finance Minister, at least in this budget year, they're going to keep those positions in our books.

Another reason why the full-time equivalent number is up, is that Service Nova Scotia now has its own financial services unit. The department, because of reorganization and new initiatives over the last number of years, has taken on a number of new ventures that have placed increased burden on the financial services staff. These would be initiatives such as administering the federal gas tax to municipalities and if you remember, Mr. Chairman, that came up in Question Period today. In addition, we manage revenues in excess of about $600 million and because of the large ins and outs that we're having, it just made sense to have our own dedicated financial services unit.

This Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations is really a very interesting mix. Virtually every Nova Scotian, at some point in their lives, will have direct contact with this department. It begins when the birth of a child is registered and continues on to registering the ownership of a car, filing the deed to a home and of course, we're also responsible for the other end, too - which would be the administration and the compilation of the deceased and death certificates.

This year, our staff is going to have about 2,000,000 interactions with Nova Scotians. If my math is correct, that means on the average, just about every Nova Scotian will average about 2.5 interactions with the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. Those interactions come through the network of offices around the province, the call centres, assessment services, Access Nova Scotia, the Registry of Deeds and the Registry of Motor Vehicles. The department views its role as making every one of those 2,000,000 transactions as easy and convenient to Nova Scotians as possible.

Our staff also plays an important role in the development of communities because we foster strong municipalities with information and advice and with financial support. Indeed, I can say, one of the interesting things that I've done in my short time as minister is to be informed by the deputy why I was signing all of these loan forms for municipalities. I didn't quite understand it, but I do that on a regular basis. We currently provide the property assessment data to municipalities and to over one-half million property owners every year. The municipalities, of course, use that information for levying property taxes, which obviously provide the foundation of municipal finances.

To the Registry of Deeds, the department provides a vast array of geographic information and property registration services. We will continue to roll out the electronic filing features of the new Land Registry System into more counties this year. We will also accelerate the migration of land parcels to the new system in 2006.

[Page 582]

At this time, I'd like to go over some background in Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations in more detail. Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations was formed almost six years ago to be the lead government department for improving access for the government information and services for businesses, individuals and municipalities. At the time of its creation, the department was mandated to become the single-window service provider for government services. To provide quality service delivery with convenient access, to reduce the amount of red tape on businesses and individuals through process streamlining and provide municipalities with a single access point to the provincial government.

You would understand this new mandate, or this existing mandate, requires the department to make an extensive investment in technology and process re-engineering to ensure that our systems meet or exceed government and client expectations.

In many service areas, the department has made significant advances in streamlining processes and significantly improving government service. Experience has proven that with careful planning, appropriate development time and the employment of technology, the department can simultaneously achieve more effective and efficient service delivery. Most of the investment to date has been attained by the reallocation of resources and internal efficiencies.

[6:45 p.m.]

Our department is responsible for ensuring results in the following areas. First - effective and efficient policy development, enforcement and program management in the programs and services which are related to consumer protection, driver safety, taxation and business practices offered by the department.

Secondly - effective and efficient access to government information and services through service channels, in person, telephone, Internet and mail. To give you some idea of the number of telephone calls and e-mails that get through the government, I was talking to the Minister of Transportation and Public Works, whose department is responsible for telephone calls and e-mails and all that stuff. In terms of providing the service, the number of transactions would just blow your mind. The number of phone calls, I think, was 20 million or something like that; it was just a phenomenal amount.

Thirdly - the provision of local government-related policy advice to government, and quality advice, support, assistance and program delivery to Nova Scotia municipalities; Fourth - one of the more interesting and more challenging duties that the department has to provide a fair, equitable and defensible assessment roll. Fifth, the provision of streamlined registration, licensing and permitting processes. Sixth - collaboration with internal and external partners to evaluate and improve the quality and effectiveness of government services. Seventh - policy development for the department in the area of data privacy,

[Page 583]

security and access, and integrity of data holding. In this electronic age, I'm sure that the members of the committee can appreciate how significant a portion of government business and personal privacy this is.

Eight, to support government's corporate strategy for e-government services, integrated service delivery and its corporate collections policy. Nine, customer and stakeholder satisfaction with department services. In addition, responsible for quality performance and morale of staff. We are expected and committed to establishing effective and positive relationships with other levels of government, which would include the federal government and, of course, municipalities, other provincial departments, and, also, agencies and other organizations in the private sector.

The provision of geographic information and associated technologies to support decision-making by all provincial departments. Indeed, again speaking of the Minister of Transportation and Public Works, for those of you who were in the other room last night when he was there, you would have noticed that every time somebody asked him about a road, he had a book about that thick. He could look up the exact road, in the exact location, and that is produced under the auspices of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. We would be pleased to sell you one; and effective and efficient management of the department's financial human information technology and information services.

Now most of these responsibilities will be fulfilled by ongoing operations and through the services and programs identified in the department's core business areas. However, a select few of these responsibilities have been identified for added emphasis over the next few years, and really represent the strategic goals that our department has set for itself.

The department has recently completed a reorganization of its operations into four divisions and they are: Program Management and Corporate Services; Service Nova Scotia; Municipal Services; and Assessment Services. The department's four core businesses are consistent with its four divisions. The department is largely organized around the function being performed such as service delivery or program management rather than on a sectoral or client basis.

Program Management and Corporate Services has responsibility for most of the programs offered by the department. This includes strategic direction for the program, program development, enforcement, and public awareness. This division is also accountable for the related legislation, regulations, and policies necessary for each and every program and for human resources support. Currently, major program areas and activities of this division include the provincial tax commission, residential tenancy, corporate collection, consumer and business policy, corporate development, and audit and enforcement in several program areas.

[Page 584]

The benefits of these programs are many and they include a fairer and more efficient tax collection system, better consumer protection, more effective program management by the department, improved compliance by business with licensing requirements and enhanced revenue collection by the department on behalf of government. This division is also charged with administering the Petroleum Products Pricing Act and its regulations. As members of the committee would certainly be aware for the last few days, that their job in this regard is to set gasoline and diesel prices every two weeks until the Utility and Review Board takes over in the Fall; also, very importantly, is to work with the industry to see that fuel price regulation is fully and properly implemented in Nova Scotia.

The Service Nova Scotia branch was established to provide Nova Scotians with seamless access to citizen and business related government information and services. Now this is the government's service delivery arm and it provides the people and the businesses of Nova Scotia with easy access registration, licensing, data and information retrieval services while at the same time it's responsible to ensure integrity, security and privacy of that information.

The Service Nova Scotia branch is organized along four integrated functions. First, Corporate Registries is responsible to lead the modernization and streamlining of the legislation and regulations related to residences, residents and businesses. The areas of responsibility of corporate registries are those, as you would all know, the Registry of Motor Vehicles - we probably all have something to do with that every two or three years - Vital Statistics, which of course, is about births, lives and deaths. The Nova Scotia Business Registry, as people know - every business in Nova Scotia that operates legally is a registered business. It operates the Land Title Registry, the Personal Property Registry and the Registry of Joint Stocks.

Information and Management Services is responsible to develop and implement departmental information management, technology strategies and is responsible to lead the GeoNOVA Secretariat and the geomatics functions.

I had spoken earlier about the need, with all the changes in the department, to become more technological and to bring into the department electronic systems, which not only help us operate but provide better communications to the public and the Information and Management Services are charged with that.

Service delivery is responsible for providing client focus services to a broad range of government services and information. For example, the Registry of Motor Vehicles, Land Registry, Vital Statistics, et cetera. They do this through a variety of delivery channel options and service delivery is also responsible for the efficiency in design of all back office transaction processing.

[Page 585]

Strategy and Innovation is responsible to provide leadership and to be the innovator of integrated service delivery initiatives for government. Also, to be responsible to develop and nurture strong relationships across jurisdictions and with all levels of government.

Mr. Chairman, as the members of this committee would be well aware, our department is responsible for managing government's relations with the province's 55 municipalities. So, Municipal Service provides advice, assistance, prepares policy related to municipal matters for our government and on behalf of the government to municipalities. The division is also responsible for maintaining the legislative framework within which municipalities operate.

This division also operates most of the grant and other financial support programs offered to the municipalities. The programs within municipal services include: advice and support to municipalities in the areas of governance, local government administration, finance, and land use planning.

This division also administers over $90 million in funding programs. Among those, the Municipal-Rural Infrastructure Fund, the federation transfer of gas tax revenues to municipalities, the Community Transportation Assistance Program and the Accessible Transportation Assistance Plan.

Municipal Services also administers programs such as municipal equalization, the grants in lieu of taxes, or, as they are commonly known as, guilt payments; fire protection grants - you remember those Mr. Chairman from your previous days; farmland grants; and the HST Offset Program. Staff in this division help municipalities become more effective at providing services to the residents to see that they are financially viable and better able to support development that provides long-term benefits to the entire province. We all need a little help sometimes. This division also partners with key clients such as the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities to support training for councillors and staff.

[7:00 p.m.]

Finally, Mr. Chairman, Assessment Services is responsible for delivering an annual property assessment roll to each of the 55 municipalities in compliance with the Assessment Act. Now, the property assessment roll provides municipalities with a reliable and a stable basis to generate revenue to fund their services to the residents and because of the stability of the roll and the general trends in the predictions of our department, it also helps municipalities who are reliant on these revenues to do some long-term planning. Uniform assessment is used to calculate municipal contributions, of course, for its education, corrections, and the distribution of provincial grants to municipalities.

Now, the production of this assessment roll is vital to the interests and financial health of municipalities. The Assessment Act also requires assessment notices to be

[Page 586]

delivered annually to each property owner and to provide for an assessment appeal mechanism. The major activities in the assessment area include the preparation of the annual assessment roll, a property inspection program, the new cap assessment program, an appeal process, client relations and technology support.

Since 2001-02, Assessment Services has operated on a cost recovery basis with Nova Scotia's municipalities sharing the cost of its services. Now, another milestone, or an important milestone in the evolution of Assessment Services, occurred in January 2005. At that time, Assessment Services began reporting to an interim management board of municipal representatives. In addition to assuming authority and responsibility for all the decisions affecting the delivery of assessment services for a period of 18 months, the interim management board is also mandated to make recommendations to the minister for a new governance and service delivery model for assessment services. In October 2005, the general membership of the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities passed a resolution of the interim management board calling for the establishment of an independent, municipally controlled assessment agency. In November, the Assessment Management Board requested that the minister begin the process of creating a municipally controlled assessment agency. That is ongoing.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to review some of the highlights in our department from 2005-06. Last year, we saw two agreements signed between the department and the federal government that will result in millions of dollars invested in municipal infrastructure across our province.

An agreement was entered with the federal government in September that will see $145 million of federal gas tax revenues flow to municipalities for sustainable infrastructure over the next five years. On the average, Mr. Chairman, of course, that is $28 million a year - I guess that's $29 million a year. Not only is the agreement important in terms of the positive impacts it will have on improving infrastructure, the negotiations themselves were a model of co-operation with the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities. This organization played a key role in reaching an agreement.

In addition, Mr. Chairman, the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund was signed in November. Through this agreement, $37 million from each of the federal and provincial governments will be provided for municipal infrastructure over the next six years. With the municipal contribution, this program is going to see $111 million invested in much-needed infrastructure in municipalities throughout our province.

Another notable development for 2005-06 was highlighted in the department's progress with the French language services plan. This department hired bilingual staff at our call centre and in the Dartmouth and Yarmouth Access Centres. We've also started translating high-traffic areas of our Web site and the most commonly used forms and publications. These are the beginning steps of a long-term pilot project that will ensure that

[Page 587]

government policies, programs and services reflect the needs of Nova Scotia's Acadian and francophone community.

The department is also establishing new agreements with the United Kingdom, France and Belgium that allow for the mutual exchange of driver's licences for passenger cars and motorcycles between Nova Scotia and these countries. These agreements, of course, support government's immigration plan, and will enable immigrants to obtain a Nova Scotia driver's licence faster. They will also help facilitate the process for Nova Scotians moving to those countries. We are also working with other motor vehicle jurisdictions throughout the United States and Canada to improve the security and quality of driver's licences and photo identification cards.

The department is reviewing the Companies Act to identify potential amendments to build efficiencies for incorporation and registration procedures for Nova Scotia companies. In addition, we are developing improved society incorporation documents, which will help volunteers run their societies more smoothly and help reduce red tape. Our department will continue to provide Nova Scotia with seamless, easy access to government services in a cost-effective manner while maintaining the interest of both the public and municipalities.

Mr. Chairman, I've just touched on a few of the areas where 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 indeed fine civil servants and I'm proud to be their minister.

Now I know members of the Opposition have some questions and so with the help of my staff I will endeavour to provide answers.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your statement.

The honourable member for Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank.

MR. PERCY PARIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the benefit of staff, my name is Percy Paris; I'm the MLA for Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank and I too send a welcome to you for being here this evening. I want to start off by saying first of all, I was glad to hear the minister mention in his opening one word in particular that I'm pretty fond of, especially this evening, and that was around simplicity. I see that as a very welcoming word for me and I say that only because this has been a steep learning curve for me, so I welcome that word and I hope that we keep it simple. Since I am a layperson especially when it comes to not only being an MLA but certainly being a Critic for Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, I hope not only to ask a few questions here tonight but also I trust I will learn a lot as well.

[Page 588]

I want to start off with gas regulation and before I get into your business plan, through the Chairman, I've noticed and I'm sure a lot of other people have noticed that yesterday when gas was $1.14 and $1.16, I know as an MLA I've received a number of phone calls around regulation over the last month. Certainly in the last 24 hours when I looked at my messages this morning, a lot of them have to do with the price of gas. The conversation that I want to have at this particular point in time is certainly not about regulation itself. I think we've been down that road and there's value added in everything, but one of the things I noticed in the business plan when I was perusing it is that - I know I marked so many pages here but - it was around information and informing. One of the things I think about regulation and I guess my question will be is if there's any strategy to remedy this.

I find the public in general don't understand regulation. Not only don't they understand - I think they're well aware of it, there's been good publicity in advising the population that regulation is going to take effect - but I think the awareness around the purpose of regulation and what it's supposed to do and what it's meant to do is somewhat confusing to the consumer. I think a lot of consumers certainly - gas prices are a huge issue in my particular riding because everybody in my riding for the most part works in either Halifax or Dartmouth, so they're on the road every day travelling in. My first question would be, is there any strategy that the minister has in mind that will eliminate some of this confusion around regulation?

MR. MUIR: I thank the honourable member for that question. I guess in terms of the feedback that we have had at the departmental level, if there has been confusion about gas regulation, largely at least to us, has been from those people who were kind of responsible for implementing gas regulation. As you know, there have been two or three well publicized cases where people didn't read the literature and didn't adhere to the policy.

[7:15 p.m.]

In terms of the public feedback into the department on gas regulation, the literature which I have seen, Mr. Chairman, would fall into basically two categories. One is that people support regulation; then there are people who don't support regulation. I might add that they say it a little bit more forcefully than those who do support it. I think the confusion may have come - and obviously this was the first crack at regulation for quite some number of years in this province, I think it was 1990 or 1991 when gas regulation was done away with, and of course at that time there were a lot of other regulatory things around operating gas stations that were removed as well - is that people somehow thought that they were looking at P.E.I. and when we got into the price spike last August and September, if you will remember the case in Prince Edward Island, because when people were going on about high gas prices in the world, P.E.I. lagged a little bit behind us.

I bring that to your attention because I was over in Prince Edward Island, I left here and the price of gas was about $1.30, $1.35, $1.40 or something like that, and when I went

[Page 589]

over to Prince Edward Island it was about 20 cents less. The regulating board was to meet that day. They did meet that day, and I think they raised the price 3 cents or 4 cents, but they had to meet again that night because they couldn't find anybody to ship fuel to Prince Edward Island and lose 20 cents a litre, or whatever it was. So they had to meet very quickly.

There were those two or three days where there was a gap in the gas prices between the regulated P.E.I., and that was well played up in the media, and here in Nova Scotia, where we did not have the regulated system. I think that there were some people, although it was never the position of our government, we never said this, that they felt that under a regulated system you would get cheaper gas. No, you don't get cheaper gas, but what you do get is stable gas prices.

MR. PARIS: What I heard in there, Mr. Chairman, is that that's also a no - when I say no, with respect to any strategy as far as the understanding is.

MR. MUIR: Mr. Chairman, clearly there was some media advertising, print advertising about regulated gas prices, as well our Web site contained that but we did not have what you would call a well-designed public campaign to educate the general public about regulation. The information that we had - all the information that the department had from various sources, people go out and ask the question about regulation - is that people wanted regulation. The Bristol Omnifacts publication in February asked that question, and I think it was 72 per cent indicated they wanted regulation. That, of course, is a publication subscribed to by both the NDP and the Liberal caucuses - you might want to tell your Leader that. (Laughter)

Then subsequent polling that was done by various organizations indicated that what they really wanted in gas prices was stability, they didn't want these up-and-down - they didn't want to see the price change twice a day or go up and down. I can tell you, as well, that the week before regulation took place - regulation came in on July 1^st - the oil companies, or the suppliers, if you'll remember the world price of crude, how they determine their prices, spiked that week, and they made an attempt to raise the price of gas 6 cents, I think it was on Thursday, with regulation, presumably, to come on Saturday. One of the oil companies would not follow suit, so the others dropped their prices back down. That was a little game playing. There are certainly some suppliers who have indicated they don't want regulation, and there's no question in my mind that among some of those people it was a ploy for those who wouldn't raise it, to say, okay, look what happens when you regulate, despite the fact that they lost - I'm pretty sure - money on every litre of gas they sold.

MR. PARIS: I think the minister and I can agree upon some of the things you said when it comes to regulation and the strategy behind the price just prior to regulation, but I think when any survey or any consensus was done, I still think that there are many consumers, and some of them may still harbour the same thoughts, that regulation, for some reason, I think in the backs of many consumers' minds, regulation was going to also not only

[Page 590]

regulate and stabilize gasoline prices, but there also was going to be some magic formula for keeping it at a very low minimum. I don't think the general public is aware now, when we talk about the price of crude and how high it is now. I think I read somewhere it's at the highest it has ever been. There might be a thought that without regulation, certainly, today we would be paying more than the $1.16, as of this morning.

I'm not sure if the general public, again, understands that. I guess my question is, is there going to be a strategy to create the understanding and the education for the general population, or is government simply going to bite the bullet for the next three or four months and see how things unfold?

MR. MUIR: We've committed, Mr. Chairman, to review this regulation program thoroughly. I guess right now, we do not have a program, so to speak, on educating the public about regulation to roll out specifically. We concentrated our efforts on those who would be most directly affected by it. When I say most directly affected by it, if you remember, and people will remember, I commented in the House, I think yesterday, that the department has folders which would be about that thick filled with e-mails from people who wrote last Spring, wanting, demanding regulation when the price of gas went up. They demanded it.

The other group that was very vocal about the need for regulation was the Retail Gas Dealers Association. The public wanted consistency in prices. Their concern, the information was, was they just didn't want it going all over the place, seemingly two or three times a week. The dealers wanted to be guaranteed they could stay in business. The Retail Gasoline Association lobbied government very hard, and I expect lobbied the other two Parties, as well, to support retail gas regulation and guarantee them a margin, and also a wholesale margin, and that was done in the plan which was implemented by the department.

MR. PARIS: I want to move into assessments. Again it's the riding that I live in - assessments are ever increasing, always on the rise. We have families that have lived in the riding for generations, generation after generation, Mr. Chairman, and they're now finding themselves being left out because today my experience has been, and when I look around at the rapid development in the outlying areas, nobody is building the single family bungalow any more. Everybody is building the two-storey home. Property assessments are high. They're going up all the time.

I find, Mr. Chairman, with the Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank riding is that everything that we want to do out there is attached to an area rate. Our area rate keeps going up and up. So it seems like we're taxed and then we're taxed again and then we're taxed again. If we want a simple thing - I say simple, I guess it's not so simple because we don't have it - Metro Transit. The first thing HRM does is they look at our area rate and it's applied to our area rate. Even if we want to have an experimental bus, we can't even - for the residents who have the community bus that runs in Beaver Bank, they can't even get a transfer. It's hooked into the HRM system. They pay for the service to go from Beaver Bank

[Page 591]

down to the Sackville core and they can't get a transfer from one bus to another to get into Halifax.

If we want to build recreation centres, our area rate goes up. In Fall River we want to experiment with Metro Transit. We want to build a recreation centre. So we have an area rate increase for the recreation centre and we have another area rate for the Metro Transit and, heaven help us, if we got a particular area that's going to get water, because then there's another area rate that goes on top of that. So it begins to take its toll. The end result is that a lot of the older - and we have an aging population right across this province - a lot of the older families who have lived in the riding for generations are being forced now to move out because they can't afford to live there any more.

I guess my question is around assessments and around area rates and things like Metro Transit, with Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations - is there any strategy or has there been any thought given to not eliminate but ease the burden on taxpayers in this respect?

MR. MUIR: Mr. Chairman, there is no question that the whole issue of assessment is problematic to municipalities and individual Nova Scotians and it's also problematic to this government. The issue you mentioned with respect to municipal transportation, of course, that was moved over to the municipal governments under service exchange and that indeed is an area, that transportation area, where probably the member for Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank might want to best address to his local councillors, his HRM councillors, and to that municipal structure.

However, I can tell you that one of the intentions of this government is because, you know, you've got it out in your area. They've got it out there in the corridor and, of course, we hear about it down there on the South Shore, in particular in areas where property values have escalated. I was actually talking with one of your colleagues today earlier because he and I both know a particular area fairly well and this was, he had mentioned in his remarks last night about Pictou Island - a road in Pictou Island. Well, I go to Pictou Island every once in a while so I know a little bit about it. Anyway, I was looking in the local newspaper last weekend, and Pictou Island, which is a place you really can't get to and they don't licensed cars over there - they have them over there, but they don't have current licence plates. As far as I know they may still be sending the kids to school in Trenton. They do a little home-schooling there and then ship them off to Trenton for a couple of weeks a year.

[7:30 p.m.]

There was a property listed, and I think sold for $340,000 U.S. I was surprised to see that, but that's an example of perhaps how valuable our assets are here in Nova Scotia, and perhaps that we underestimate - we're in the world market in a lot of things, and land, we're not. The problem with that is, as you say, if somebody is going to pay that much for that

[Page 592]

property - and I guess it's worth it if somebody is willing to pay it - the person who might have, actually, the family cottage down the road that has been there for 65 or 70 or 100 years, they reap the benefit of that if the property is ever sold. But if they're keeping it in the family, there's no question if that property is re-evaluated - and I guess when they reassess things, they take a look at what land and property is worth around it, in a particular area, what sales bring.

So one of the commitments of this government is really to continue that property assessment cap. To be quite frank, we're going to sit down with the municipalities. One of the mandates that I have as minister is to see if we can figure out some way to keep these assessments under control for current owners. I think everybody is under pressure from it. The issue with that, and I've talked to the appraisers about it, is it's not clearly quite as easy as it seems because somebody may have a piece of property and go out and add four rooms and a $100,000 pool and all of these things. So when you are talking caps and controlling the rise in assessments, to just look at blanket, straight across, you have to make allowances in that for the types of things that would add value to the property rather than the normal increase in assessment if the property had not been changed.

MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, when I was reading through the business plan, and since we're on the topic of assessments, something that stuck out for me - again since I'm a layperson, you'll have to bear with me, it takes a little while for things to get through to me - I see in the business plan, when you talked about responsibilities, and as I was following through it, the provision of a fair, equitable, indefensible assessment roll. I wrote there along the side of the page, and the question that came up for me, which I'll ask the minister through the chairman, is, are we talking about market-based assessment here?

MR. MUIR: Well, as I understand it, in the assessment, it is the market value that is used in every assessment. That's how it is determined. If we're trying to get a handle on it, obviously we're going to have to take a base assessment year - there will be a base assessment that's going to have to be established, and then go from there.

MR. PARIS: That leads to a second question . . .

MR. MUIR: Just before you get into your second question - one of the things that I should have mentioned earlier to you is that obviously assessments are driven by two things, property value and they're also driven by municipal rates. What municipalities charge their residents, the rate that they establish for assessment depends on the types of needs they're trying to fulfill. There are, as the honourable member would be aware, and I mentioned them in my opening comments, some of these municipal infrastructure partnership programs which are going to provide external funds for infrastructure, which means that, presumably, if you carry that through, is that will be less money that a municipality will have to extract from its property owners.

[Page 593]

MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, my follow-up question, which I also made note of, and since now I understand that that is market-based assessment, then my question would be, well, is that the fairest way to assess properties? Sometimes I've heard mention of the Consumer Price Index, so I guess, to the minister through the chairman, if you could elaborate somewhat on how market-based assessment is fairer in your estimation, than basing assessments on the CPI?

MR. MUIR: Mr. Chairman, the Assessment Act right now calls for market-based assessments. The government put in a cap last year, it has run the cap for two years and is going to continue the cap, and that is to try to protect people from the sharp rise in some areas in market-based assessments. Clearly, we, as a government, recognize that not trying to control the amount of taxation that would be raised if it was strictly on market-based assessment is something that we're trying to deal with, and this is why the cap was going to be extended.

The fundamental question, you're saying, is market-based - well, I guess even if you started and you were to use CPI, for example, as an add-on every year, whatever it is, you have to start someplace. So I don't think you can avoid, regardless of how you do it, starting from the market base.

MR. PARIS: I still want to continue with your business plan. I have a number of questions around Assessment Services. When I read this, and I'm glad you went through it, sort of page by page, because I guess sometimes when I hear things verbally, I'm a little bit more likely to digest it, or maybe it was just because of the time. I'm the type of individual when I hear or read something, I generally like to take it home and go over it a few times in my head, digest it and then I'm not sure if I'm going to come back with a question or an answer.

I've been given some time. I was in the library, frantically writing some notes as I went through the business plan. Assessment Services - what I understand is that service is the one that's projected to be moving from the province back to the municipalities.

MR. MUIR: Yes, there's negotiation between the province and the municipalities, as I mentioned in my opening comments. The administrative cost of Assessment Services has been borne by the municipalities for four years now, and the intent of that, of course, was, and it's starting to materialize, that the municipalities wished to take over Assessment Services. They'll set up an agency which will basically be administered through the municipalities.

MR. PARIS: I understand - what I've heard is, and I guess it's more one of control that the municipalities want more control over Assessment Services. Right now, that doesn't exist under the current program. I do understand that at one time - this is reverse - they did

[Page 594]

have control, and then the province took it over, and now it's going back to the municipalities.

MR. MUIR: The member for Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank is indeed correct. At one time, each municipality did its own, but this will be a centralized service. It will serve all the municipalities.

MR. PARIS: I understand that now there is a transitional board or a transitional board will be set up to oversee the, I guess they use the word again, the transition respecting the new corporation into the new assessment agency or organization. When is the timeline for this? Did I read or did I hear you say that it's in 2007, that this is all going to be complete?

MR. MUIR: Mr. Chairman, my understanding is that the interim board has been functioning since January 2005 and it provides direction to the assessment function, as is being carried out. The board has also been asked to make a recommendation to municipalities on a preferred option for governance and delivery of services. On the board's unanimous recommendation, the general membership of UNSM passed a resolution at the AGM in October 2005 calling for the establishment of a municipally-controlled assessment organization. The business case to identify the issues and to make recommendations related to the ongoing delivery of assessment services by this independent group, which is going to be municipally controlled - we expect to introduce the necessary legislation in the Fall with the startup date of April 1, 2007.

MR. PARIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to ask this question sort of in reverse. I understand the reason for the municipalities wanting to take over the assessment services, and we've already addressed that around greater control. My question would be, I guess there's always the flip side of the coin, what advantage is this to the Province of Nova Scotia?

MR. MUIR: Well, I guess there's really a couple of advantages. One is, you know, I'm one of those people who thinks that probably less government is better government and if it's a service that somebody else can provide and do a good job, then I'm not really sure that government necessarily should be the one that's involved in it. So it would be government giving up a service which will be conducted well and it's one less thing for government to do, I guess, if you want to look at it that way.

Secondly, this was the desire of the municipalities and, you know, the municipalities wanted to do this. This is an example of government working with municipalities towards a common goal. Inasmuch as the municipalities have been paying for the assessment service since 2002, it's not going to add any more dollars to anybody or really take any away from us. Obviously, we'll still retain responsibility for the legislation that governs how assessments are carried out; it's really separating the legislative and the administrative functions of the assessment process.

[Page 595]

MR. PARIS: Through you, Mr. Chairman, I say to the minister, I know there are no guarantees in life. However - again, my handwritten notes - I've got a number of questions here pertaining to the strategy that I would like to ask and I'm just trying to think how best to ask him, if it would be helpful if I did them all at once, or do we want to do them one at a time?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, honourable member, with the indulgence of the minister, I think if they're somewhat short questions it would be okay. Minister, if he perhaps laid a few out, we could try three and see if that works, if that's okay, honourable member go for it. Try three questions on and we'll see how it works.

MR. MUIR: You'll have to speak slowly because I'm going to have to write them down. (Laughter)

[7:45 p.m.]

MR. PARIS: This is all pertaining to the transfer and I guess the end result or what the end result will be. I think you already answered my first concern to some degree, but maybe you can elaborate a little bit because I think I know what the answer's going to be.

Of course one of the first things that I would be concerned about would be with the transfer of anything from one place to another, would be the quality of service. I'm not clear on accountability for the new assessment service that will be established under the municipalities, it would appear that the municipalities will have no accountability other than to themselves and that's a question that has a question mark at the end of it. I wonder about operational costs as a result of having services in-house because wouldn't this transfer of this service include in-house things such as HR, finances and legal - I think that's three questions.

MR. MUIR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. He asked me about the questions - one was the issue of transferability of this service, secondly was the issue of accountability, the third one which would be sort of a subset of number one was the operational costs.

The transfer thing and the operational cost - basically, what will happen when this new unit is set up is that those people who deal with assessment now in this department will be transferred or moved into this new unit. Now there will be clearly some operational start-up costs for this and I think we've allocated something like $400,000 for it. Things such as workers' compensation, some human resource issues - any time you do that type of a transfer there are always some issues.

I can say that some of these employees are in a collective bargaining unit and of course their unions have been involved in these negotiations and they're going along quite well. I guess if the honourable member is talking about the transfer moving along smoothly,

[Page 596]

the answer is yes and it appears that a good many of the i's have been dotted and the t's have been crossed so I feel comfortable in that way.

The other question that you asked was about accountability, and the municipalities would be accountable to the residents. I say we have simply provided a service for the municipality because the money that's collected in assessment is disclosed to the municipalities anyway. I'm just wondering if there's part of your question that I don't understand because I think if there was an accountability shift, it probably would not be a good thing because every time somebody's assessment went up they blamed government. I mean that's maybe because the people who did the assessment work for the government, but in terms of the actual accountability I can't see that it's going to change that much because municipalities, they're the ones that are responsible for setting the tax rates and the types of services that they're providing to their residents.

MR. PARIS: Mr. Chairman, if we can keep with that theme of three questions, another question I have is around staff itself. Will the numbers be altered in any way with respect to employees? Will there be an increase or a decrease in the number of people who are going to work in the new Assessment Services, question one? And, what effect does the transfer, this new Assessment Services Agency, what effect will that have on the collective agreement?

I'm going to take a risk here, if I may, because I said three, and I'm going to try to put two more in there because they're closely related, with the permission of the Chair. Also, staying on that same line of questioning, will pension and benefit plans be replaced; if they are to be replaced, will whatever is going to replace them be adequate; and, how does this effect long-term disability and Public Service awards, will they remain the same? I might have gotten more than four in there, Mr. Chairman, my apologies.

MR. MUIR: I only got three.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Chair extends a lot of latitude here. (Laughter) So if the minister has no difficulty, honourable member, I'm okay. They are very much related.

MR. MUIR: I've been informed by staff, Mr. Chairman, that probably there will be a very small increase in the number of employees when the transfer takes place. I think that probably has to do with right now some of the - I'm going to use - Corporate Services. There is a Corporate Services Unit that would not only be serving that assessment but they would be serving other sections of the department, as well. So that service will not be given with the government, they're going to have to get that someplace else.

With respect to your other questions involving the transfer of the bargaining unit employees and staff - well, I guess with the Public Service Commission as well as with our

[Page 597]

own department have been working with the bargaining units to see that the transition is smooth and that the employee benefits are maintained and protected.

MR. PARIS: Since we're somewhat informal here, Mr. Chairman, I've been joined by two of my colleagues, and I know I have limited time left on this first hour. So what I would like to do, with the permission of the Chair, is I'd like to cease my questioning now and pick it up after the honourable member opposite has his say and allow my colleagues, at least one of them if not both of them, to speak in what time is remaining. Does that work for you, then that way you won't have to stay for the late hour?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.

MS. MICHELE RAYMOND: Mr. Chairman, I'll be quick. I don't think anybody has ever accused me of being anything less than brief. I really only had one question, and I'm hoping you can clear this up for me. It's something that has come to my attention in my riding, but I'm aware of it elsewhere in the province. I'm just trying to clarify how this works.

It's concerning assessment accounts. I'm just wondering the exact process by which assessment accounts are assigned to parcels of property. So, say I have 25 acres and I decide to subdivide it, what happens? Where do I go, and where does the assessment account number arise? (Interruptions)

MR. MUIR: Just let me get the question so we can think about this, because I'm going to need help with this answer.

MS. RAYMOND: I'm just hoping somebody can give me the answer. I know I go to the municipality, and I apply for a subdivision permit. That is presumably granted. There are now two parcels of land. Who assigns the assessment account number?

MR. MUIR: The Assessment Division assigns the assessment account number. The difference is that sometimes if one person owns more than one parcel of land, there is one account number.

MS. RAYMOND: Although I understand it is the policy of the Assessment Division that every identified parcel shall in fact have its own assessment account number.

MR. MUIR: I'm sorry, I don't hear as well as some people. I don't have the earplug with me.

MS. RAYMOND: The Assessment Division has told me that the policy is that every identified parcel is supposed to have its own assessment account number. I understand that when there's a subdivision that ends up with a scrap of land the size of this table, it's maybe

[Page 598]

impractical to assign it its own assessment account. But there are certainly cases where parcels of 25 acres, 300 acres, whatever - huge, really big parcels of land, a couple of which exist in my constituency and one just stumbles across them elsewhere in the province, don't appear to have any assessment account. I'm just wondering how that comes about?

In one case, I've asked for the account to be assigned, and it hasn't been. I'm just wondering, (a) how that comes about, and (b) when an assessment account number is assigned, is there in fact a recovery mechanism for the years during which a parcel has existed without being assessed?

MR. MUIR: I'm trying to get my head around this. Again, this business of property is a bit new to me. This is property that is not registered - is that what you're talking about?

MS. RAYMOND: It's registered, it has a PID, but it doesn't have an assessment account. (Interruption) I don't know.

MR. MUIR: I've been informed that the department is aware that there are situations like this, that they are working with municipalities to try to ensure that every PIN number is matched with an assessment number. I think part of that, as I understand it, would disappear - the problem that exists, and there's no question they're working on it - we're migrating the titles to an electronic registry. I think when these properties are migrated, I think that will do it, over time.

MS. RAYMOND: I know it's kind of a protean problem. I guess one of the other things is, we're all aware that rising assessments are real problems for some property owners. I also understand that the assessed total value in the province is the basis of the solvency valuation for the province, so that affects its bond ratings and so on, and cost of borrowing on the markets.

MR. MUIR: You'd have to address that to Finance.

MS. RAYMOND: If there's a review going on and if eventually every property has its own assessment account, I shall be very happy. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: There's approximately 10 minutes left in the NDP's time at this time.

The honourable member for Halifax Citadel.

MR. LEONARD PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, I had some questions yesterday in the other place, we were talking about, in particular, Transportation policy. I was referred to the Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, so I'll ask some of those questions again - many of them relate to public transit.

[Page 599]

The first question I had was about rural transit, in particular transit within rural areas and between rural, urban and suburban areas. Rural transit plays an important and vital role in just creating job opportunities for rural residents, especially young people, and it plays an important part in the social and economic life of rural Nova Scotia.

I asked that question of Transportation and was told that really wasn't a Department of Transportation issue and I'm wondering if the minister can tell us what role he sees his department playing in the provision of public transit, particularly rural transit?

MR. MUIR: Under the service exchange with the municipalities, transportation basically went to the municipalities - the local transportation has gone to the municipalities. The member for Preston asked that question the other day, as well. This really is a municipal matter.

On the other hand, one of the good things is the federal government has, there is going to be some money flow through to the municipalities from the federal government which can be used - to the tune of transit funds, about $11.7 million. The bulk of that will be going to HRM.

The role of my department is really as a flow-through organization - we'll flow this money directly to the municipalities, but we don't use it.

MR. PREYRA: Will it be tied to any particular type of transit or are you essentially just passing it on to the municipalities to do as they see fit?

MR. MUIR: There are two parts to it, one is what we'd call municipal infrastructure and maybe I'm wrong, thinking of a public transit system as being part of municipal infrastructure, but I see it as such. I think there's some opportunity there. The other was for accessible transportation. Accessible is not only - we think in terms in my community as accessible transportation, we get an Access-a-Bus. If it's going to be funded, it has to be accessible transportation.

MR. PREYRA: I'm glad to hear the minister say that because it's important. I know there were several conferences in Halifax this year about transit and there appears to be a great demand for public transit - Metro Link for example, has been very popular and people would like to see it expanded.

The criticism, if I can call it that, has been that there just hasn't been enough provincial money to buy buses and the delays in getting buses have been just too long. I'm wondering if there's any provision other than the transfer of these funds to getting - of course, we want accessible transit, but to get more of these, especially in connecting regional clusters outside Halifax to Halifax.

[Page 600]

MR. MUIR: Could you repeat that for me, please?

MR. PREYRA: Has there been any consideration of transferring any more money, other than the money you mentioned to purchasing more buses and more accessible buses?

MR. MUIR: I guess in terms of, let's call it the provincial coffers as opposed to the federal coffers, this was part of service exchange back in 1995. There was a trade-off. For example, long-term care, social services came to the province in exchange for transportation, so, we don't have a budget line to do that.

MR. PREYRA: So, any additional monies that the HRM, for example, gets, will have to come out of its existing revenues.

MR. MUIR: Yes, also there are other cost-sharing things the province enters into - for example with some municipalities, equalization. You know, this money is really untargeted, it can be used for that.

MR. PREYRA: One of the big criticisms has been, certainly in Halifax, or at least one of the problems identified, has been the fact that there isn't a strong transit system to reduce the flow of traffic into the city itself. Many of these people are coming into the city, they would prefer to come into the city by some other more accessible means, in every sense of the word. But, they really are forced to drive and the city says it doesn't have enough resources and the province says that there's been a service exchange. I'm wondering how we resolve that kind of impasse.

MR. MUIR: Well, I have just been informed by staff that there is a community-based transportation line of $550,000 which is available for rural areas to help them with transportation. Then there is an accessible transportation grant of $100,000 which is available to municipalities or organizations, wherever it happens to run these Access-A-Buses, to assist with accessible transportation.

I think the general question that you've asked is, we need more money, will you give it to us? You know, I'll be quite frank, the government, if we had more money - every cent that we get as a government, and it wouldn't make any difference who the government is, I guess, presumably goes for the benefits of the citizens in the province and if to build up a transportation infrastructure in the province was a priority of the people and the government and there was money to do it, then I'm sure the money would flow.

MR. PREYRA: So do I take from what you're saying that it's because it's not a high priority that we're not getting it?

MR. MUIR: Well, it's not so much - clearly transportation is a priority, but you know, the province assumed responsibility for health, it assumed responsibility for social

[Page 601]

services and long-term care. In exchange, the municipalities as part of this - this was a negotiated agreement by the way - the municipalities took responsibility for that transportation. So, you know, there's an agreement in place.

MR. PREYRA: Well, it just seemed that, you know, during the election and I know this was a question that I asked in the other places, we spend an awful lot of time talking about paving roads, widening roads. It was not seen as part of a larger transportation strategy that, you know, the widening of roads in the cities is causing huge hardship to neighbourhoods and congestion?

MR. MUIR: No, I understand that and I would run into it, for example, when I was Minister of Education, including the gentleman over there on the left, a number of letters from him, but there are certain roads that are the responsibility of municipalities, including the ones that were being debated on the floor of the Chamber last night. That's clearly municipal responsibility under that agreement, and to say to the province, well, come and fix this is really not playing fair ball.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I think you've got about 30 seconds there if you want to take it, a short snapper.

MR. PREYRA: Thirty seconds, a really short snapper. A question on just development itself and the kinds of developments that are being funded in the city. Does Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations see itself as having any role in development issues generally, in terms of setting guidelines or establishing the processes for development projects?

MR. MUIR: No, the municipalities have their own bylaws to deal with developments and, of course, they have their own planning committees. I guess each municipality, including my own, where I come from, we have these discussions from time to time about what is appropriate development and what is not appropriate development, but no - if the municipalities wish advice from the province, we have people who can give advice.

MR. PREYRA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: According to my clock with hands, it's 8:10 p.m. I have the old style at least here so I apologize if you're shortchanged a minute or so, but (Interruption) Great, thank you. With that, we will defer to the Liberal caucus.

The honourable member for Preston.

MR. KEITH COLWELL: Mr. Chairman, I've got a whole pile of questions around assessment, a whole pile of them, and I won't get them done tonight, I'll tell you that. I'll just give you a little bit of background. I've got people in my riding who are losing their homes

[Page 602]

because their assessment is going through the roof. My honourable colleague across the way alluded to that in his area as well, but he didn't talk about people losing their homes. You haven't run into that yet but it's coming. People who have had their homes for 200 years - seniors, fixed income, simply can't pay their taxes even with the programs that the province has in place now and the ones that the municipality has and it's a sad, sad situation.

Well, that's bad enough. I got several calls in the last few weeks from people who are not in that category, let's put it that way. They have homes that are very valuable, they admit that. Some of them looking towards retirement, people that have a substantial income, and they're calling me and telling me if the assessment goes any higher, they've got to sell their homes or they can't retire. Now, this whole thing with assessments is totally out of control. You've seen the revenue of the regional municipality in 2003 of about $500 million. In 2005, when they briefed our caucus, it's $600 million - $600 million, up $100 million in two years. There's no way in the world that they needed that much extra money and the money came from assessment rises.

Now, there's no problem as far as I'm concerned if you build a new home and the assessments go up to suit that home, that's not an issue and they need to pay as everybody else pays. If someone expands their home, they should pay. They should pay more of their share of what the costs are. The hidden thing in all this that nobody has been talking about, nobody has been talking about this very much, is that every time the assessments go up, lo and behold, the province gets a windfall because they get a big chunk of that assessment increase in the tax rate.

So the province is also getting - I don't know what that number is. One thing I want to know is how much more money since 2003 to 2005 has the province increased its revenue because the municipality has to do the contribution to education, correctional services, housing, and I think there's one more in there that I can't remember. When I was on council, I had the municipality change their tax bill that they show those line by line actually, what the cost is for the taxpayer for services. In HRM, they're probably subsidizing the whole province with the cost because of the tax base and there's no problem with that, but it's things, and that's a question that you may not be able to answer tonight but that's a number I really want to get and to see how much extra money the province has achieved because of assessment rises?

MR. MUIR: We'll see if we can get that information for you. I know in terms of the education tax, that would be fairly easy to get because you can just look at the Estimates Book and it's a single number in there, the estimate. So the others we can calculate and we will provide that information to you.

MR. COLWELL: And if possible, if you could break it down - HRM only and the rest of the province. Probably the one from HRM would be equal or more than the rest of the province.

[Page 603]

The minister made some interesting comments, which I would like to hear your thought pattern on this and I want you to expand on this a little bit more. You talked about a base assessment year and I think that's a good concept if my thought on that and your thought are the same and I would like you to elaborate on that a little bit. My idea of that is you pick a year, this is what your assessment is and that's what your base assessment is and if you build a piece on your house or add a $100,000 swimming pool, like you used for an example, or whatever you do, your assessment will go up equivalent to that added value on your property. Is that the sort of thing that you had in mind?

MR. MUIR: Yes, it is. That's why I was saying in my response to that question, was that it was fair to talk about, you know, a cap year, but you couldn't just do a blanket for those very reasons you talked about. If a house changes hands and the person buys it at market value and then put a huge expansion, huge improvements on your property, then that has to be, you know, that's a legitimate thing, but I think we, as a government, recognize this.

We're going to extend that cap and we're also going to work, and we have to do this in conjunction with UNSM, to find a way basically so we can get a better handle on these assessments. My feeling is that, somewhere, we have to take a base and say this is what it was and come up with a factor or something; whether it's CPI or whatever might be an appropriate number but, you know, you're right. The province - we've doubled the seniors' property tax rebate for those in possession of the guaranteed income supplement. I know that there are a number of municipalities that had tax breaks, or whatever word, tax reductions for people, particularly the senior citizens who are on fixed incomes, within certain criteria. Clearly, that's not a sufficient answer to the problem.

[8:15 p.m.]

I don't think there is anybody in this government, and probably nobody sitting in the House - as much as the MLA for Preston is getting hammered from the people in his constituency, some of those areas where assessments have really gone up, down there on the South Shore, that waterfront property - I can tell you I have at least two colleagues who, they can take off their shirts and show you the strikes on their back any day of the week.

MR. COLWELL: I can guarantee you, initially it started in those areas, but now in Porters Lake and those areas, it's just as bad: $120,000 increase one year, $80,000 the next year, $80,000 the next year, and it just keeps going each year. The properties around it aren't selling for that much. Some of them are really out of proportion here. The whole thing is a mess. Actually, as far as the bill introduced by the NDP in the Legislature, the consumer price index - that doesn't even need to be done. Really, what you need to do is freeze the assessments and let the municipality raise the tax rate to the value they need. That's the real issue. As a regional councillor in the past, it's the responsibility of the municipality to take the heat for money they spend. Every time the assessment goes up, they just say, well, the assessment went up and we have no choice - heck, they don't have a choice.

[Page 604]

I think it's time that the province said, enough is enough with the assessments. Actually, if you froze the assessments, except for new properties as you suggested, I think that's an excellent idea, and that's one I would definitely support. Drop the consumer index part of it - just freeze the assessments. Anyone who has a house, if the house is assessed at $100,000 and sells for $300,000, they pay tax on $300,000. That's it. End of problem. Turn it over to the municipality, and if they want to put the tax up, they put the tax rate up. Then that's it. Then you can go after the municipality for it and not this convoluted thing.

Not only that, the municipalities could then eliminate the assessment process, saving them in HRM probably about $28 million. Just eliminate it. Then you can hire these private assessors to go out, for a couple hundred bucks, assess that property, set the value on it after it's sold, or just use the value it was sold at, and move forward with your tax rate to cover everything.

It has to be simple. This is crazy. There is more and more bureaucracy. It has already been indicated they're going to add more bureaucracy to this whole mess, making it worse. They're going to add more and more cost to the taxpayers, and the property taxpayers are going to pay for it. It's getting to the point that it's not worth living, for instance, in HRM. I'm not going to leave HRM, but a lot of people are saying, okay, let's go across the property line, and commute back and forth to HRM. Where I live, and if you live in Elmsdale, it's probably about the same commute, but your taxes are $700 a year, instead of $3,000, $4,000, $5,000, $6,000, $7,000, $8,000, $9,000, $10,000 a year. Are you paying taxes of $10,000 a year? I don't think so. This is what people are facing.

It's outrageous what's going on. Another colleague across the way there asked a question that I know the answer to - why isn't there an assessment number with a PID number? Lo and behold, those people don't pay property taxes, because they don't know who they are. So that means that every one of those - and on the Eastern Shore there are hundreds of those properties, hundreds of them - that means the people who are paying the taxes, are legitimately paying the taxes for those people, too.

I think you'd be a lot better off to spend a substantial amount of money finding out who these people are or getting it corrected so if nobody owns it, then maybe the province takes the land. I'm the last one in the world who would ever want the province to take private land away or the municipality take it, but I think it's time we spent money to track these people down and get them to pay their fair share of the taxes, as well. That is a real issue. That's why there is no assessment number. I tackled that when I was in council. I personally owned a piece of property, and I was comparing the property values next to mine, and there was no assessment number with them. I asked the tax people in HRM - we don't send them a tax bill? I'm paying $2,000 a year on a piece of empty property, and the guy with a piece of property next door to me is zero. That was the answer. So I'm telling you, this is a real mess. This has to be fixed and it's gotta be fixed soon.

[Page 605]

This is the kind of issue that's making people really irritated, and from what I'm hearing and what I'm seeing - I'm hearing from other people as well and as you said with colleagues of yours and it doesn't surprise me any - soon there's going to be a tax revolt over property taxes. It's not worth owning a property anymore. Then you go to mobile homes and you go to a trailer park, where people have their homes, very small little piece of land and they're paying - the ones I've talked to, $300, $400, $500 a year, to have their mobile on that piece of property, and then the property owner who owns the park is probably paying that much as well. For that little tiny piece of property, in which the municipality provides, in most cases, zero services. I shouldn't say zero - none of the regular stuff, snow removal, road paving, none of those sort of things. There would be policing, garbage, building inspection and some of the other things there.

So this has got to stop. People are selling mobiles now because they can't afford them and the trouble is, when you sell a mobile, it doesn't go up in value, it goes down. So you're going a negative growth in a mobile home, but your taxes keep going up. That doesn't even fit the assessment model. The thing is all messed up. We really have to look at this thing in detail, all of us in this Legislature, and get this fixed because I can tell you, I have people in my riding losing their homes, and it's not just in my riding. It's all over, and they're losing them in different ways. They have to sell them because they can't pay their taxes. They let them go for tax sale.

Local improvement charges are another thing. They went through Cherry Brook and put the water in 10 years ago. Guess what? They're putting properties up for sale now because they can't pay the local improvement charge. These things have to be more carefully done. I have a question for you - I'm rambling on here, but it frustrates me so bad and I know it does the minister as well, and my colleagues in the other Party.

Area rates, you're absolutely right. When I was on council, I inherited a riding that had the highest area rates, probably in the whole province. We were paying fire department. We were paying a capital improvement charge. We were paying for street lights, and the list went on and on, and actually our tax rate was higher than downtown Halifax and almost no services. Tax rate. Now that doesn't make any sense, plus their assessments are through the roof - you get it both ways. So when I was there, I managed to get the fire department one eliminated and put on the general tax rate. The street light one eliminated and put on the tax rate. By the way, we were paying 4.6 cents for street lights and downtown Halifax was 2.2 cents for street lights and they had them on every pole and we had them on every second pole, where people asked for them. If they didn't ask for them, they didn't get them. It was all out of whack.

Now one thing I want to know and I should know the answer to this and I really don't - are there rules for putting area rates in place, in the Municipal Government Act? And I can tell you if there isn't, we want to put them in there. I've got a problem now in my area, where

[Page 606]

an area rate has been expanded, without going back to the community and asking for permission to do it. They just did it, carte blanche.

MR. MUIR: We need a little help on that one, but I can tell you that in terms, there used to be area rates or the ability for area rates for education, which have been removed with the exception of HRM, which of course had asked to have them. There used to be the local assessment. The Municipal Government Act does permit the area to area rates to be levied.

MR. COLWELL: Now, in the Act or in the regulations - and I should know the answer to this, I really should, but I haven't done my research, I will admit. In the Act itself, are there any rules, in the regulations are there any rules regarding area rates? As my colleague has said, they're out of control in his area. They're out of control or going to get out of control in my area again, and it just seems like some people can go in and say, I need this and council approves it and bang you get an area rate and people in the community don't know anything about it.

MR. MUIR: I know there are no restrictions on that in the MGA.

MR. COLWELL: Would that would be something that the minister would be willing to look at? What I'm thinking about is, sometimes there's a need for an area rate for whatever reason or the community may want it and it's useful and helpful in the community. But in some cases, councillors get carried away and decide themselves that they're going to do these things - it's legal to do it - and all of a sudden the community is burdened with an area rate that they didn't even really know was coming. Would the minister be willing to look at the rules for that and ensure that we can change a regulation or something that has to have a process of public consultation before these area rates are put in place? Accountability with that as well so they can go out and say, okay, we went and we asked the community, this is how we asked the community, these are the public meetings we had, this is the cost that was put in place and the community agreed with this and thinks it's a good idea so therefore they don't mind paying a tax.

MR. MUIR: Certainly I'm willing to raise that with UNSM. The process that you've described for me is not really the process with which I'm familiar. I know that my experience with area rates at home has been about a fire rate - and a couple of these smaller municipalities which is decided by the ratepayers at the annual meeting each year. Similarly when they're building some new schools, they want to enhance the schools and they add a penny or so to the tax rate, but again they have a big public consultation and - at least in my experience - council sort of makes their decision based on the public input and the wishes of the public. I'm not familiar with cases where the council is, I use the word high-handed in this type of thing - I'm not familiar with that.

MR. COLWELL: I can give you some detailed examples.

[Page 607]

MR. MUIR: Maybe.

MR. COLWELL: I'm sure my colleague can too once he really digs into it. The process you described where you have the big public meeting and ratepayers involved - that's the process or that's sort of the process that should be used. It doesn't have to be exactly that process but it has to be accountability. Some of these cases there's no accountability and we're talking major funds. We're not talking $50,000 to put a small piece on your local fire hall, we're talking millions in some of these cases. They're paid off over years and years, and debt that's generated for some very suspicious purposes although the money goes supposedly to where it's supposed to go.

We got one case that a huge amount of money went to one area, almost nothing to all the other areas but the whole area is paying for it - it's totally unfair. When the community finally realizes what's happened, I think they're going to be in an uproar about it - hopefully. That's something that I think should be put in the regulations or preferably in the law that says if you're going to do an area rate it can only be for certain things and the area rate has to be through public consultation and this is the way the public consultation has to work.

MR. MUIR: I said I'm certainly willing to raise it with part of the discussions that I have regularly with the UNSM.

MR. COLWELL: I can give you some ammunition to go there with and I'm sure my colleague across here, when he does some thorough investigation of what's been going on, he'll have the same ammunition. I don't know anywhere else but HRM, but I'm telling you what's happening here.

MR.MUIR: You municipal councillors have a bit of insight that I haven't and I know there's at least two of you and I don't know if the member for Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank. Were you a county councillor as well?

MR. PERCY PARIS: Yes.

MR. MUIR: Were you a county councillor?

MR. LEONARD PREYRA: No.

MR. MUIR: No, okay so we have two right? I know the chairman was so I understand that.

MR. COLWELL: The chairman wasn't part of the new HRM council though.

MR. MUIR: No, he wasn't.

[Page 608]

MR. COLWELL: It's a whole different story - the way their council used to do it was the proper way to do it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: It seems how this is so informal - ratepayer associations are pretty effective in some communities, I think the honourable member's articulating, but maybe not as effective in others. Anyway I shouldn't digress, it's your floor.

MR. COLWELL: In some places, there are no ratepayers, that's part of the problem. If there is, there are several of them in one community now. The communities are so big in HRM - some communities have 20,000, 25,000 voters and they cover huge areas. So, it's quite complex. I can give you more details than this and I know you're smiling sitting back there, but . . .

MR. MUIR: I think I've heard you raise this before, if I'm not mistaken.

[8:30 p.m.]

MR. COLWELL: Yes, yes, you have and you're going to hear me keep raising it until we get the darn thing fixed. The reason I'm so irritated about it is, here we have people losing their homes. We have people that can't afford the assessment rise and at the same time, the people that should be protecting all that are adding more burden to them by putting area rates on. It's just compounding the problem. It's getting worse and worse and I think people have to realize that we can't do this stuff anymore.

If the community says, we're willing to pay, that's one issue - that's fine. But if someone comes to me or any of my neighbours and said, we're going to have to put your taxes up $200 a year to pay for the road in front of my house and if I think that's worth $200 a year to me, I'll say, fine, I'll pay it. But when they fix the road in front of my house, which they don't do - well, the department does pretty good on that - but if they come along and say you're going to pay $200 to keep your road plowed now, I'm going to be irritated. Not only that - that may be okay for me, but the person next door to me may be retired and can't afford that $200 and it's forced upon them. So, that's the point I'm making.

I won't dwell on it anymore. I think I've well made my point here and maybe a bit more.

I really like the concept you have of the base-year assessment, value added to the property going up in assessment, selling the property again and the value of the property goes up for assessment purposes. I don't think you have to tie it to anything else. Let the municipalities put the tax rate up, then they're really accountable to the people for the taxes they collect. HRM has got huge windfalls in this assessment and they only take half the rise, too.

[Page 609]

The policy at HRM is they get a 10 per cent rise, they take 5 per cent as new tax revenue and 5 per cent they give back in tax reduction which is usually about a penny or two on the tax rate. Or at least when I was there it was the case. So, that is, I guess, not bad. But it is still putting our taxes right through the roof.

The other issue on property taxes, again - with the windfall the province gets from this, I'm very interested in that number. I think you'll be surprised by the number yourself when you get that number back - how much it's increased. I think it's increased the revenue of the province and it's in the wrong location, that revenue. I'd rather see other measures to increase the revenue of the province rather than on taxpayers because a property taxpayer - as you go through the process, the life cycle on a property for a family changes.

First, you have young children, then you don't have children, then you retire. The needs for that household change and the input they should put into, you should be paying taxes for services received somehow. That's not always possible to do. I really think we have to take away the education cost and all those costs from the municipality and let them do other services - exchange or reduce the tax rate, or whatever's appropriate to negotiate - I stress negotiate - with the municipalities.

What's your opinion on that, Mr. Minister?

MR. MUIR: Well, certainly, they had the last major, really major consultation in 1995 when they entered the service exchange agreement. I know that the department and the ministers meet regularly with the UNSM and I suppose one example that we're talking about here tonight is the transfer of the assessment service from government to the municipalities.

I haven't been in the portfolio long enough to give you specific examples of other changes that may have happened. You know, one or two changes, whether they're major or small, each year.

The issue of the education tax is certainly - as you know, the UNSM has their report out there that would see the province picking up about another $275 million worth of costs, which would include taking away any responsibility for education from the ratepayers. The municipalities collect that on behalf of the province. That's not a municipal contribution at all although it's always kind of portrayed that way. Clearly the province, to consider going that far with our financial situation, there's going to have to be a lot of negotiation because you've got two things. You can either cut $275 million worth of services or else you get $275 million more in revenue and that's the challenge.

MR. COLWELL: Or you could do another equal service exchange . . .

MR. MUIR: Oh, yes, yes.

[Page 610]

MR. COLWELL: . . . if you can find an equal service exchange.

MR. MUIR: Give back health and long-term care, Pharmacare.

MR. COLWELL: Yes, or give them roads and let them do, then you do education.

MR. MUIR: Yes, I mean there are trades, you know, that probably could be made.

MR. COLWELL: Yes, I think that's probably eventually what they will suggest and I believe they've already suggested that from the documents I've read. So that's an issue.

If you could only fix this assessment thing, I think you would make a lot of people happy in this province. I think you're on the right track, I think with the base year, and let the municipalities move on with the tax rate. Let them correct their needs by tax rate increases because then they're totally accountable to the people who vote for them rather than getting a windfall every year with the assessment going up and the rate goes up. As I say, if assessment goes up for a new house, that's a great thing. That adds to their base and hopefully they don't have costs that affect that too much so they can improve services as they go through the process. How much time do I have left?

MR. CHAIRMAN: I would say about four minutes.

MR. COLWELL: Four minutes. The issue of people not paying property taxes because you can't locate them - I think that's something that really should be worked on by the province and the municipality, maybe jointly, to get that fixed. I know a few years ago that the province stepped forward with the new street naming for 911 in conjunction with the municipality. That was money well spent. A lot of controversy when someone's street name changes, but it was money well spent and I can tell you from being an MLA during that change, I got a lot of heat, even though it was the municipality doing it, but at the end of the day people were very pleased with the improved service they got.

When you did the assessment changeover, that the municipalities were downloaded on by the province - the Halifax Regional Municipality, just so you know, it cost them $14 million for the change in one year. One year, $14 million when that came along, and that was the number brought to council. We had to chop and change $14 million on assessment income that was HRM's share of that. That was at year one. So it did cost the municipality a pile of money when it came. That's why I say if we could eliminate the assessment process all together and get the base year, they could hire people who are trained to do this if they have to assess something and move forward.

So, hopefully, I'm making some suggestions here. I know we're supposed to be asking you questions and getting answers, but this is so frustrating for so many people that

[Page 611]

I think it's an important opportunity to talk about this in a forum that can be recorded and, hopefully, give the department some ideas that can help it move forward.

There are issues again, that area rate thing, I really want to see that addressed. That is a serious, serious problem. The supplementary funding, now, this is really an Education and a Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations issue because you guys collect it, before the Department of Education by a former minister. That has caused some discrepancy in the schools in the regional municipality and, unfortunately, that was set up.

The service exchange was, I think, a big mistake when it was done. Halifax-Dartmouth gets more money than the county does, and again it puts the tax rate up again. It again causes problems, the property tax rate for people who have no kids in school, and they just can't afford to pay for this extra tax burden. So when you look at the tax rate, it's sort of half a penny and a penny here and a penny there. When you add that on the assessment per $100 and then drive the assessment up, then all of a sudden you have an unacceptable bill that you can't deal with - that's really what I'm getting at here.

So every one of these things adds up so when the municipality comes along and says, okay we're going to put a 5 cent rate on for supplementary funding - that's quite an increase on someone's property taxes if their assessment went up $100,000 this year which is happening. When you go to the appeals it doesn't help, the appeals are basically almost a waste of time now. The cap has helped some, but if you have a $200,000 home that goes up $100,000, you put up 10 per cent on it so you go up to $220,000 the next year your 10 per cent of $220,000 so it's not very long and you're up to $300,000 - very, very quickly.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, does the honourable member want to adjourn debate and carry on tomorrow?

MR. COLWELL: Time's up is it?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Your time is up.

MR. COLWELL: Good, I don't want to get any more frustrated.

I move to adjourn the debate.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The motion is to adjourn the debate.

Is it agreed?

It is agreed.

[Page 612]

The honourable member in the Liberal caucus would at least have 28 minutes tomorrow when we commence. Thank you.

[The subcommittee rose at 8:40 p.m.]