[Page 269]
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to call this session to order. The time is now 2:52 p.m. We have the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection, and we will turn to the Liberal caucus.
The honourable member for Preston.
MR. KEITH COLWELL: Thank you , Mr. Chairman. I have a few questions to ask - I don't have a lot of time left here - but I want to ask about the Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs in Sydney, and first of all I would like to know why you chose the location you did for the particular office.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Health Promotion and Protection.
HON. BARRY BARNET: As I answered in an earlier question, one of the things that we wanted to do was have the office accessible to the greatest number of people we possibly could; we recognized the fact that there were larger communities of African Nova Scotians that had a population base that would be probably best served with a more central location.
We went out to tender through the Department of Transportation and Public Works. We identified a fairly wide area where potential vendors could submit a tender on behalf of their company, and at the end of the day only one tender actually was submitted. We chose that particular tender. The idea was to provide the greatest level of service to a variety of communities, to be in a central location. As well, we also believe that it is important for the office to be close to other government offices, so that when individuals or groups come and present at the office we have some reasonable access to other government services so we can work in a more timely manner with the individual group.
[Page 270]
MR. BARNET: I did table it here Friday.
MR. COLWELL: Okay. I missed that part. Sorry about that. I may be asking . . .
MR. BARNET: Again, the process of acquiring leased space wasn't our department, it was the Department of Transportation and Public Works. They actually do the work of identifying the actual square footage required, based on a manual that has been established for government for a number of years. As well, they looked at the type of space that would be suitable, they developed a tender document, went out to the marketplace, advertised it in the local media. One proposal came forward and that proposal was in the downtown Sydney area, which is still central to the community served, including Glace Bay, Whitney Pier and others. In any case, no matter where it was that we chose the location, there are some people who would be close and there are other people who would have to drive a distance. So we recognized that right from the very beginning, that you couldn't locate the office in one community and not have at least somebody who would have to find transportation to get to that office - much the same as our Halifax office.
MR. COLWELL: There are some general questions I'm going to ask - in the Halifax office, how many inquiries do you handle in a year now?
MR. BARNET: How many inquiries?
MR. COLWELL: Yes.
MR. BARNET: One of the things that we have identified in our business plan is that we want to set up and establish a proper tracking plan. We don't have the exact numbers, but it is in the range of 1,500 inquiries per month at our Halifax office. You have to consider that in some cases we have the same people inquiring over and over again and some of them may simply be follow-up, but around 1,500 per month.
MR. COLWELL: Geographically, where do they come from in the province?
MR. BARNET: Everywhere. The calls to our Halifax office come from every county in the province - I think it is safe to say that probably every geographic region of the province.
MR. COLWELL: I know the office does some really good work in my community and I want to thank them for doing that work as well. There are a lot of services, I think, that they have utilizied, and information they received which has been very, very helpful. What is the complement of staff in the office now, has it increased since it was initially opened?
MR. BARNET: Oh, yes. Initially the staff consisted of one person, and we went from one to an office of six, and then the Cape Breton office is three, so our total is five plus three,
[Page 271]
plus one interim position, so there are eight FTEs and then an interim position, which makes nine.
MR. COLWELL: That's good. Now what interaction do they have with the Black Cultural Centre at this point?
MR. BARNET: We actually had, and have, a great deal of dialogue with the Black Cultural Centre, primarily on an issue-by-issue basis. As you are aware, there have been many meetings between ourselves and the centre to help facilitate, for example, tenants. We were able to identify an opportunity for some revenue for the Black Cultural Centre by providing them with a potential tenant of which now I believe, and understand, they occupy space and provide some valuable revenue for the centre. We have assisted them with business planning processes, and we have provided support through other departments to help them cover off some of their capital concerns they had, including replacing the roof, some flooring and some other items they needed to help them progress and move forward.
My understanding would be that probably a week doesn't go by where there isn't interaction with the Black Cultural Centre and/or its board of directors and/or Dr. Bishop. I think it's primarily because of the nature of the work and the business that they do and what we do as an office for the Province of Nova Scotia - we help them interact with other agencies and other departments, so it's probably one of our busiest groups in terms of contacts with the office.
[3:00 p.m.]
MR. COLWELL: That's good, and I just wanted to get that on the record because I know your staff have been working very hard in that regard and it's important. As you know, I'm always after funding for the Black Cultural Centre, some guaranteed funding for them long-term so they can protect the rich heritage and history of the African Nova Scotians in this province. I've worked with your department, and I'm pleased to hear that. What is your plan to work with the Black Cultural Centre - are there any specific things that you have in mind in the future for either displays or any historical things that might be of interest from your department?
MR. BARNET: From a business process point of view, you know we continue to provide them advice and support, particularly around the governance, and board support. As far as initiatives at the centre itself, we've had a number of initiatives over the past year that we've worked together on, one of which was the slave ship, Amistad - and it's my understanding that it will be returning to Halifax again in the summer, and we expect there will likely be some partnership arrangement there. But in addition to that we've also been working with them with respect to the acquisition of war medals from the Construction Battalion. So it really is an ongoing relationship and probably will always be, and although
[Page 272]
we aren't the Department of Tourism, Culture and Heritage we work closely with them and there is that collaboration between departments to support that centre.
MR. COLWELL: On the issue of the war medals, is there any money made available to purchase that one particular one that, unfortunately, drew so much attention and put the price of it up?
MR. BARNET: Well, in fact, ironically enough, as an avid eBayer, I was aware of it before any public attention and contemplated actually acquiring it myself personally and donating it to the centre, but within two weeks - I should say two days of the announcement in the paper, the price went from $167, at the point that I left for Whitehorse - it was well over $1,000. My expectation was it was going to go much higher. I don't know what it ended up selling for, but I do believe there is some work trying to see if that particular medal can be secured and held in the collection.
I do know that there are other medals as well. Probably the most significant medal that has been on display at the Black Cultural Centre is the Victoria Cross. It's certainly one of those things that the Province of Nova Scotia saw and recognized the value of that Victoria Cross a decade or more ago and acquired it from another jurisdiction by trading a significant Victoria Cross medal, and you know from my perspective we should do what we can to protect these things.
I do, as well, support initiatives to move forward with rules that would prevent the sale of these medals, especially the ones with historical significance. I know there is some consideration in the Government of Canada, it may be a private member's bill, but I know that I've heard in the past that there is consideration of passing national legislation to protect these medals and prevent them from being sold.
MR. COLWELL: I think that's really good and I think that should be a national law whether they have historic significance or not, because they're very important to the families. Although at the time they get rid of them they may not think they're valuable, they are of significant value. The Victoria Cross, by the way, is not at the Black Cultural Centre. The Black Cultural Centre doesn't have any facilities there to maintain it, it's too valuable. So they have, I wouldn't say a copy but a mock-up of it on the site.
MR. BARNET: It is a replica. The original Victoria Cross actually gets displayed very seldom. It has been displayed at the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic on a couple of occasions. Some estimate that medal to be worth over $1 million.
The uniqueness of William Hall receiving the Victoria Cross enhances the rarity and scarceness of that medal for a number of reasons, one of which was he was not a British citizen, but in addition to that he was an African Canadian, and in addition to that he was a naval recipient of the Victoria Cross. The medal is actually issued for bravery and it's
[Page 273]
difficult for a naval person to receive that because normally it's a team of people in a mission of bravery, in a naval position, so there aren't very many naval Victoria Crosses, but there are even fewer non-British citizens, and even fewer people of African decent, which makes that probably one of if not the rarest Victoria Cross.
MR. COLWELL: It's the first one, from what I understand, ever given to a Canadian.
MR. BARNET: It may very well be.
MR. COLWELL: That gives it even more significance. Are there any plans to help the Black Cultural Centre get the facilities in place so they can store and display artifacts of that value because I understand they have many more artifacts that are probably close to the value of that, which they just simply can't display?
MR. BARNET: They would have to initiate it. I guess what we would want to do is make sure that we're not duplicating what we may already have, and certainly I know historians are very concerned about the access to these and the security of these types of artifacts and displays - so it would have to be something that would be carefully considered. As you say, we want to remove the risk associated with the display. So it's one of those things that I guess if they brought it forward there would have to be some analysis, the Department of Tourism, Culture and Heritage and with the museum system itself. I don't think they've ever asked for it, to be honest.
MR. COLWELL: Probably didn't ask because I think it's probably a very expensive set-up to do this and they probably thought, with their ongoing operational costs and the limited funding they've been getting, it was beyond anything that they thought they could achieve, so they probably never asked, that would be my guess. It's unfortunate because these do have a rather important significance to African Nova Scotians and to all of us in Nova Scotia. So it's too bad that we couldn't have those very valuable artifacts on display there, from time to time as the display would warrant . . .
MR. BARNET: Pardon me, just if I can add - at one time I encouraged the Cultural Centre and the museum to move William Hall's Victoria Cross medal around the province, to display it here in Province House and to have it tour so that people could actually see it. These things are great. They're very valuable and they're nice to have as part of a collection, but if no one can see it, to me it's almost pointless. I do know that people get nervous when you start doing that kind of stuff, and I understand why, but still I think there's some value in actually having some kind of travelling display.
I've actually spoken to Dr. Bishop about many of the artifacts that exist at the Black Cultural Centre and whether or not there's some opportunity in the future to have a travelling display so that at least a segment of the artifacts can be taken to communities - what I expressed to him is why wouldn't we take the centre to the communities rather than have the
[Page 274]
communities always come to the centre, and I think at some point in time they may look at something like that, but right now they have a lot on their plate and I understand it's not high on their priority list right now - ensuring they have an efficient and well-run operation is their number one priority.
MR. COLWELL: Yes, and enough money to do it with - that's the key. They've got a very efficient, very well-run operation, but again if they don't have sufficient funding it's pretty difficult to do the important work. I really like the idea of a travelling display, but until the situation there improves and gets some long-term guaranteed funding for the centre, I can't ever see that happening. Is your government looking at that?
MR. BARNET: That would be Tourism, Culture and Heritage - and they do receive a significant amount of money, an overwhelming percentage of their budget actually comes from Tourism, Culture and Heritage. I don't remember the amount, I think it's a couple hundred thousand dollars a year, it may be even more than that (Interruption) It's around $200,000.
MR. COLWELL: If my memory serves me right - your staff can correct me on this if I'm wrong - but it's something like $60,000 a year that they used to get several years ago on a regular basis.
MR. BARNET: I don't know if that's the case.
MR. COLWELL: That's the information I have.
MR. BARNET: I don't have that information.
MR. COLWELL: I wonder if you could get me a copy of the funding levels of the provincial government for the last 10 years, year by year?
MR. BARNET: I could, but probably you'd be better off to ask the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Heritage. That's his department so he would be the one - and I don't think he has presented here.
MR. COLWELL: Okay. In your Office of African Nova Scotian Affairs, did you do anything with Education for individuals who may not have had an opportunity to get an education in the past?
MR. BARNET: Sorry, could you repeat that again?
MR. COLWELL: Have you ever done anything in your department with individuals in the Black community who may not have had an opportunity to get an education in the past?
[Page 275]
MR. BARNET: We actually work very closely with the Department of Education; in fact our CEO came from the Department of Education and he has maintained a great relationship with the African Canadian Services Division at the Department of Education. Yes, there are a number of initiatives and I can tell you I do know we have, as an office, assisted with a variety of different programs and services to help facilitate and help bring things together, particularly with respect to education. It has been a big piece of the work that we've done.
MR. COLWELL: Is there a program for older individuals to access education if they want to finish their high school or go on to trades training or university?
MR. BARNET: I believe there is, but it doesn't rest within our department, it would rest within the Department of Education. Any initiative that we would be asked to participate in, we would work closely with them. I just don't have the exact name of the program that's available, but I do know that there are programs through the Department of Education that are available to assist in those areas.
MR. COLWELL: Yes, I realize it is with the Department of Education, but I think it would be the responsibility of your department to initiate some of these things - considering the history, some of the individuals not being able to pursue an education, especially older individuals in the community, that there would be something that would be maybe spearheaded by your department to ensure that people have an opportunity.
MR. BARNET: Well, other than we don't want to become a mini-Department of Education and part of our work does cross nearly every single government department, but we are involved in a way where we provide them with feedback and advice and support when we can. We have assisted with programs and, as an example, we work with the Education Department's African Canadian Services Division and the Nova Scotia Community College to help assist in creation of a transition year program for African Nova Scotians.
This started as a pilot program in the Fall of 2006 and has been effective. We recognize what our role is and we'll continue to do that and we'll continue to work with the government departments, like Education, to help. I guess what we don't want to do is set up a division of what it is that we do dedicated specifically to a department when somebody else is already doing it. We'd just as soon take advantage of the programs and the opportunities that are there, and the expertise where it sits within any government department, not just Education - it could be Community Services, or Health, or Health Promotion and Protection, or whichever government department an issue might arise from.
MR. COLWELL: I understand all that, and that's the way it should be done, but really what I'm asking is are there any particular initiatives identifying some of the problems that have been in the community in the past, that you may look at new initiatives, that you might encourage the Department of Education, or whatever the organization might be, to move
[Page 276]
forward to help people in the community to better their overall education, and opportunities for better paying jobs?
[3:15 p.m.]
MR. BARNET: Absolutely, and the program I spoke about is one of them. Imhotep's Legacy is another one, where we assisted the Department of Education with a science and mathematics program. We also assisted with the Positive Parenting workshop at the Department of Education, so it is what we do - it is just that we don't have a specific budget line for our education programs, we simply work with them.
I just mentioned three excellent examples where we have supported them with some funding, advice, and assistance in actually developing these three particular initiatives to support and enhance the services that exist right now. I like to describe our department as a facilitator and a collaborator with other government departments. We recognize the fact that there are only nine of us - up until a couple of weeks ago there were only six of us - but we rely on the resources of other government departments to ensure that the work that is necessary gets done.
With respect to Education, we have a very, very close relationship. I would give a great deal of credit to our CEO, who comes with an education background. We have worked very closely with communities, and others, to ensure that when people bring concerns and issues to us, we're able to get them addressed. There are three very fine examples where there are new programs now, one of which is in a pilot stage, but the other two, which we expect will continue on, have been put in place since our office has been established as a result of the work that we've done - so the answer to your question is yes.
MR. COLWELL: By the way, I just want to put on the record, too, that I am very pleased with the staff you have in your department. We've made some inquiries through our office and there has always been a very positive response and I think they're doing a great job.
Would it be possible to get a list of all the different things, the programs that you're initiating towards Education or working with Education, so we can have that information?
MR. BARNET: Yes, we could get that for you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You have one minute left.
MR. COLWELL: Also, maybe if your department could as well - I don't know if they've done this yet - come up with a list of the services you offer at the present time, so we could have that as well? I don't know if you've fine-tuned it enough yet because I know you are a new department and it takes time to sort of feel your way around.
[Page 277]
MR. BARNET: We can get you that, in fact most of it exists in our brochures and our newsletters and our business plan. What I think I will do is I will get you a copy of our business plan, our most recent brochure and our newsletters, and that should cover what you've asked for, I think.
Am I getting signalled here?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The time has elapsed. My understanding is there will be no further questions, so if you have your resolutions to read.
Resolution E15 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $8,184,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of Communications Nova Scotia, pursuant to the Estimate.
Resolution E17 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $28,012,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Executive Council, pursuant to the Estimate of African Nova Scotian Affairs.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E12 stand?
Resolution E12 stands.
Shall Resolutions E15 and E17 carry?
The resolutions are carried.
We will recess for five minutes and then begin with the Department of Environment and Labour.
[3:20 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]
[3:28 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. We will resume the Estimates of the Department of Environment and Labour. We welcome back the Minister of Environment and Labour.
The honourable member for Halifax Needham.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, good afternoon, Mr. Minister and welcome to the staff of the Department of Environment and Labour. It's my pleasure to have the opportunity to raise with you a variety of issues that are pressing for working people in the Province of Nova Scotia.
[Page 278]
I want to start, Mr. Minister, by saying that to be perfectly frank I was very disappointed, as the NDP Labour Critic, in the Budget Address from the Finance Minister where he quite candidly talked about how budgets are about choices that reflect the priorities of government. Not once in that entire Budget Address was there mention made of workers in the Province of Nova Scotia. There certainly was no mention made and there are no initiatives that I could find in his address or looking in the budget documents that would indicate any new initiatives on the part of your department that is responsible for the Labour portfolio.
When I think about this and I have also looked fairly closely at the numbers in the budget and I see that it's a "steady as she goes" kind of budget. It would seem to me that the estimates, the forecast for next year, is essentially the expenditures for the department in the fiscal year we've just finished and the year before that, with no new initiatives. I think this is very disappointing and I'll tell you why I think this is disappointing and I will tell you the range of things that we might have expected to see in this budget that we think could have been choices that could have been important choices and would reflect a different set of priorities.
Your department is a very important department, it may not be the largest department of government, but it is extremely important because literally thousands of Nova Scotian workers, women and men, new workers and experienced workers, young workers and old workers, part-time workers and full-time workers, skilled workers and unskilled workers, rely very heavily for their employment rights and the defining of those rights and the enforcement of those rights through your department pursuant to the Labour Standards Code of this province.
The majority of workers, as you're well aware, are in fact workers for whom the Labour Standards Code is the primary piece of governance, law or legislation. I would assume that close to 70, in fact perhaps slightly more than 70 per cent of the workforce in the Province of Nova Scotia is governed by the Labour Standards Code, whether a person works in a small business or a medium sized business or a large business, where there is no collective agreement.
I'm aware, as most of us are, that many employers have their own policies and their own codified set of employment practices. In many cases those policies exceed the minimum standards that are required by the Labour Standards Code, they pay wages that are higher than minimum wage, they provide more statutory holidays than are provided for in the code, they provide greater vacation time than what is provided for in the code. Often, I think what may not be provided for in some of these codified policies are provisions with respect to suspension and termination.
My experience is not extensive in the field of labour relations or labour standards, but to the extent that I've done any work or research in this area, I'm aware that often that's
[Page 279]
where the rubber meets the road for a lot of employees, it's when they get into those situations of conflict in a workplace where they disagree with a disciplinary action that may mean a suspension or in fact a termination of their employment. It strikes me that the Labour Standards Code in the Province of Nova Scotia is one that has not been sort of systematically reviewed and reformed for quite a considerable period of time.
I know that the minister has done some things and may be contemplating tinkering with some aspects of labour standards with respect to lunch breaks, for example, legislating lunch breaks. I have to say that the kind of timidness in which you've moved with respect to this part of your portfolio is disappointing, given that this isn't exactly the way you've moved with respect to let's say, the environment. One might have hoped that the willingness that you've demonstrated to act on environmental concerns would have been reflected more adequately in your approach to labour standards.
I know that there was an announcement not so long ago that your department was undertaking a consultation with the public, probably workers, employers and any other members of the public who cared to share their views on the efficacy of instituting legislative lunch breaks. I welcome on the one hand that initiative but on the other hand I wonder why in the world do we have to go out and consult about something like this? The Public Service Commission in the Province of Nova Scotia has an initiative within the Public Service encouraging civil servants in the province to take some time away from their desks during the day to have a lunch break, to walk around the block and to get up and away from their desks.
We all know that this is a very healthy and important feature of maintaining good health and probably some perspective with respect to work. I'd be very surprised if there aren't workplace studies some place that tell us that that kind of approach would improve productivity in workplaces. While it is an initiative that on the one hand, as I said, we can support, it's disappointing that the steps are so timid.
It is surprising actually to me the number of e-mails I have had as a result of that initiative from members of the workforce who are actually very surprised that we don't already have such provisions in our Labour Standards Code in the province. People who sent me e-mails or sent notes expressed some outrage, I guess I would say, that we don't have these kinds of protections and provisions which in many other places certainly exist and people sort of take for granted that these provisions exist. Certainly, this is one example I think of an area where we were hoping to see an initiative that would demonstrate greater vision, a higher priority for working people.
I think there is another aspect of labour standards that I would like to speak to and that comes out of my own experience, not recent experience because recent experience is here at this Legislature for the past nine years. Before I was elected, as you probably know, I worked as a social worker and was involved in a piece of research with a group of faculty
[Page 280]
over at Dalhousie University in the Economics Department as well as the School of Social Work and in the business school. The research that we were doing was looking at the restructuring of the labour market in Nova Scotia and what the implication of that restructuring was, particularly for workers who were vulnerable to restructuring, workers who didn't necessarily have high educational attainment or very specialized training and skills. That story was really quite a disturbing story and a very eye-opening story.
We published a book called Vanishing Jobs: Canada's Changing Workplaces as a result of that research and I want to tell you about one of the case studies we did that I think made the most impact on me and certainly gave me the commitment to seeing a modernized Labour Standards Code in the Province of Nova Scotia. We did case studies on a whole variety of industries but one of the case studies we did was on the Hudson's Bay Company which sadly doesn't exist anymore, having been sold now to some big American retail conglomerate.
We met with the manager of human relations at The Bay on Mumford Road and she told us of the scenario that she had been involved in where there were in excess of 300 workers working at The Bay. This would have been back in probably the early 1990s. The directive had come down from their head office in Toronto to her, as their human resources manager, that they were embarking on the restructuring of their stores and she was given a list of employees that she was to call in and give pink slips to, to essentially lay off. She had to lay off, out of the 300-plus staff, she laid off everybody but 23 people all at one time. This is back in the early 1990s. So they were left with a core group of full-time workers, around 23 workers out of the 300-plus.
Then she hired back a group of 18 workers and they were hired to work something like 24 hours a week on average. The rest of the employees were offered a maximum of 15 hours a week. The reason for this was that the workers who were offered a maximum of 15 hours a week were then no longer subject to payroll taxes on the part of the company. So the company didn't have to pay into EI, they didn't have to pay into CPP and so on. This was happening throughout the retail sector in particular at that time. The Bay was one of the earlier employers, certainly in the metro area, that went this route but shortly after that, the same could be seen with Atlantic Superstore, Sobeys and so on.
So the thing about this is, of course, that the labour market has changed quite a bit and there is a great deal of part-time work that has been created in this way by taking full-time work and transforming it into the kind of Mcjobs that we see, but our Labour Standards Code has never addressed that. It continues to treat part-time work as if it's the kind of casual employment of people who don't have a strong labour market attachment, except, of course, these folks have a very strong labour market attachment. This is often the work they do in the various communities that they live in.
[Page 281]
[3:45 p.m.]
So, this is a point of concern, that we don't see the vision of the government to make choices to address the reality of those workers who have been significantly impacted and, quite often disadvantaged in a restructuring of the labour force. I noticed that the mission of the Department of Environment and Labour, as outlined in the budget documents, talks about employment rights and the protection of people in the workplace. So this is something I wanted to say to you when I had an opportunity here during the debate, that it is long overdue that we modernize the Labour Standards Code through a process of great public consultation with employers, with workers, with people who do research in this area and who keep track of labour market changes and trends. I think that in the long run we could provide a much better working environment and also an environment that would help us retain our young people and would see higher levels of productivity in our workplaces. So certainly this is something I wanted to raise with you.
Now, the other aspect of this I think is looking at how we define some of the other management rights in the work environment. I know that we can't ask questions about the mandatory retirement provisions that have been introduced pursuant to the bill that's on the floor, but if we can introduce those kinds of changes then I think we can introduce changes that take into consideration the problems that workers are experiencing in workplaces around violence and bullying, for example.
I want to tell the minister that not so long ago I had a woman come to my office with quite a large file of documents around disciplinary action that has been occurring, letters of reprimand, suspension, and what have you over a long period of time - close to a 10-year period of time in her workplace. The woman is a woman of colour. She's an African Nova Scotian woman and she feels very strongly that the kinds of harassment that she has been subjected to has a racial or racist base and that may very well be the case, but in the course of talking to her and talking to other people who are familiar with her workplace, it is becoming increasingly evident to me that there are people who aren't necessarily of African Nova Scotian descent who are also being harassed or intimidated by these letters of reprimand and what have you.
Now, the Human Rights process is a very lengthy process, as you know, and in the last little while we've seen particularly women who have been fired from their employment when they've become pregnant, take their cases before the Human Rights Commission and four or five years later - four or five years later - a decision is rendered. This, to me, is a travesty. On the one hand, it's a good thing that they have a place to go to pursue a claim, but why on Earth would we make that the process for people to have to go through? There have to be provisions within the Department of Labour that would be more proactive to assist people - most people do not have the ability, just the personal stamina, it takes to withstand that kind of a process.
[Page 282]
I'm certainly not suggesting that we eliminate the Human Rights Commission because it's there for a reason and it needs to do that, but it seems to me that we need to put in some greater protections for these workers when they get into this situation, so that there is a process in place that would provide a fair remedy in a much shorter time frame.
These are issues that I think about and that pertain to improvements in labour standards, and the fact that we did not see any reference in the budget to improving labour standards for 70 per cent of the workers in the province is discouraging. I'm aware that your department has quite an eclectic mandate, with responsibility for more than labour standards. There are at least three other issues I want to take up while I have the chance to do that - and I'm pleased to see you busily taking notes so that you can keep track of these because I know we'll have a chance to talk about them again.
The second issue I'd like to take up with you - and I think this is a really important issue and I know you did make reference to it in responses to questions from previous members - and that's with respect to the administration of pensions in the Province of Nova Scotia. Particularly, I think you made reference to some concerns around the solvency issue, the number of groups and organizations, the number of pension plans in the province that are currently struggling with the current solvency requirements and the department's intention to perhaps hold a day-long, some sort of a symposium, on the solvency question, with panels of experts.
Now the reason I want to bring this up - and it's not the only issue, I have three things I want to raise with respect to the administration of pensions in the Province of Nova Scotia. I want to raise the matter of the grow-in benefits as well, the changes that have been made by Order In Council regulation to the grow-in benefits that occurred some time ago that are of serious concern to, particularly, workers in the pulp and paper industry in the Province of Nova Scotia, but perhaps not only workers in this industry.
The other issue is the multi-employer pension plans and the solvency issues with respect to the multi-employer pension plans, and finally the use of the surplus, specifically with respect to the Nova Scotia Association of Health Organizations, I think they call themselves. If I can just get my notes here, I want to specifically talk first about the funding of multi-employer pension plans. It's my understanding that the building trades, in particular - and let me say first of all, the solvency issue, as I understand, is not an issue that's peculiar to Nova Scotia and that this issue is becoming increasingly pressing in other jurisdictions, not only throughout Canada, but in other parts of the world as well.
I'm not an accountant or an actuary, or a pension expert. I've tried to understand what obviously is a very complex area of administration, but as close as I can understand it, Mr. Minister, the situation is that pension plans are required to have assets of a certain amount that is determined through using a formula looking at what the payouts would have to be to
[Page 283]
pensioners if an enterprise failed - if it wrapped up, if it went bankrupt, if it closed, if it disappeared.
Right now what's happening in many plans is that pool of money is not adequate for what the solvency test requires, so what's being asked of pension plans is that they are being given, I think, a three-year window to address the shortfall and in many cases what those employers and the employees who are covered by those plans are looking at are significant increases in their contributions, annually, into those plans. Of course, this will affect the bottom line of the employer and it will also affect the take-home pay of the worker quite seriously - and we've seen this in municipalities, with the Halifax Regional Municipality, we've seen it at the universities, I believe, prior to HRM's pension becoming an issue.
I have correspondence and I believe you probably have correspondence from a nursing home in Meteghan, Villa Acadienne, on this issue, and this issue certainly has been raised by the Building and Construction Trades Council with respect to their multi-employer pension plan. So there may very well be other plans that are facing these problems. I know that the department is responsible for 500-plus pension plans. So this is something that we would like to see addressed and we would like to see it addressed in a way that the employers and the employees aren't at a significant disadvantage. Many of these organizations realistically aren't going to disappear tomorrow and so some flexibility around the solvency test seems to be a sensible compromise, I guess, recognizing that it is important that plans be solvent on some level.
The other group that have recently corresponded with you and with ourselves, in the Official Opposition, is the South Shore Regional School Board. They are also facing some problems under the Pension Benefits Act - and that was kind of a surprise, in some ways, to me because I thought that the regional school boards all had a plan that was administered by the Nova Scotia School Boards Association, and I think they actually do, but for some reason the South Shore Regional School Board doesn't seem to be in that same position.
[4:00 p.m.]
The other issue that I've raised is the issue of the use of the NSAHO pension surplus to cover the responsibility of the employer's contributions over a 10-year period. I will let the minister know, because I see the Superintendent of Pensions is here, that as the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, I've recently received a letter from the Chairman of the Economic Development Committee, Ms. Whalen, the member for Halifax Clayton Park, asking that we have the Superintendent of Pensions come before the Public Accounts Committee to discuss the issue of the use of the Nova Scotia Association of Health Organizations, the surplus in that pension plan. It's an extraordinarily large amount of money that was appropriated by the employer to pay for their contributions. Again, this is an area that is complex, I recognize, and the surplus in pension plans is always a controversial subject, particularly when the contributions to those plans are made equally, from employer
[Page 284]
and employee, but can sometimes be appropriated by the employer to cover certain of their costs.
So I think this is something that I certainly will recommend to the Public Accounts Committee that we examine because it is an important issue and I think that it has been an issue that has affected, on some level, the bottom line of the Public Accounts in the Province of Nova Scotia. And I think that, as members of the Legislature, we will have questions about how exactly did that occur, and what steps have been taken to address it and how can we ensure that it doesn't happen again.
Mr. Minister, you'll be aware that the McGuinty Government in Ontario has announced an expert commission to conduct a review of the pension laws. It's the first review in that province in 20 years, of pension laws, and certainly in the terms of reference for that review they are, in fact, looking at issues such as the use of pension surpluses, the management of pension plans, the multi-employer pension plans, and the solvency issues and the affordability and maintenance of defined pension plans in the Province of Ontario. And while I think it's a great idea, especially if there are pressing solvency issues, to have a day-long symposium, perhaps it wouldn't be unrealistic to think about whether a broader review of pension legislation in the Province of Nova Scotia wouldn't be called for at this time.
You know, one of the things in doing my research that I found that surprised me, and really saddened me I think as well, is that the Province of Nova Scotia has one of the lowest percentage of company pension plans for our workforce. So there is not a very large number of people in our workforce who have private pension plans through their employment and this, I think, is also something that's worth looking at - why, exactly, is that? Is it the structure of our labour market or does it relate to our pension legislation - what exactly is it that's driving that situation? It would be something that would be worth addressing certainly at some point in the future.
There probably isn't a lot of time left in the time that I have to speak, and I have so many other things I would like to raise, so I'll try to do it as quickly as I can. We're now on April 2nd and, tick, tick, tick, we still don't have the workplace violence regulations that I think were promised by the end of March, back in the Fall. So I'm hoping that we'll see those in very short order.
The other thing that I really want to raise before my time expires is the Workers' Compensation Board. I would be remiss if I left here without raising concerns that have been expressed to me about a variety of issues. One of the things that I hear quite a bit about is Columbia Health - concerns have been expressed to me that we not see the board embarking on a process to divert injured workers from seeing their family physicians and right into a program of physiotherapy and rehabilitation, and also I know my colleagues have raised the use of painkillers and medications as a primary response to workplace injury. Certainly this is something we hear over and over again.
[Page 285]
I have a fair amount of correspondence from people from around the province. Many of them are injured workers who suffer from chronic pain, some of them pre-Hayden who really feel that there's a double standard in the way that they've been treated in front of the board, the method in which assessments are determined, and this is expressed to me quite often. Additionally, I've heard recently from injured workers about the manner in which annual assessments and increases to the WCB are handled. I've been told that there was a point when the consumer price index was, in fact, what was used to guide increases in WCB, but I haven't exactly been able to track down that information. But I have no reason to believe that the gentleman who gave me this information wouldn't know - he has been around for a long time and around this issue for a very long time.
So this continues to be an irritant for members of our constituencies, members of the public around the province. I think the board's approach to chronic pain, and particularly the pre-Hayden claimants, is one that's of great concern to many members of our community. People are very depressed and quite discouraged - they don't feel they have a voice in representing that point of view and they often, as well, if they think they can find a voice to represent that point of view, they don't feel there's any point, that they're not going to be heard. I would say that communication from the board on this particular matter needs to be stepped up significantly to explain, in fact, what the board is doing and what the rationale is for what they're doing and why they're doing it in this manner.
As you know, the freeze on processing some of these claims was lifted fairly recently, but nevertheless this has not been communicated very well, in my view, to people who are quite often in very difficult circumstances.
So I think those are the main points I wanted to raise in the brief period of time that I have. I don't know, Mr. Chairman, do I have time for one quick question? I have one minute. At the end of my one minute I want to ask the minister if he attended the Canada Games, by any chance, did you have an opportunity to do that?
MR. PARENT: No, I didn't have an opportunity to do that. I wouldn't be attending anything on the department budget that didn't have some sort of relationship to the work that I do as minister.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: I wasn't suggesting that you had, I just wondered if you had been to the Canada Games.
MR. PARENT: No, I didn't.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: That concludes my remarks, thank you very much.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Preston.
[Page 286]
MR. KEITH COLWELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Am I the last speaker on this topic, do you know? Are we done, after my questioning?
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's my understanding.
MR. COLWELL: Okay, I just wanted to know that, that's all, probably bring some relief to the minister, not that we want to give him any relief.
My first question to the minister is, the RRFB, when we were talking the last time we were here, you indicated at that time that RRFB gives some grants to businesses for innovation and to do with recycling and reusing or whatever structure they want to call it, to help businesses develop new technology or equipment or whatever the case may be.
Do you have a list of all those ones grants that would have been given, say, for the last five or six years, something like that, to businesses, and what products they've managed to develop from that? I realize that all of them wouldn't be successful, which is usually the case when you're coming up with new technology or new ideas. Would it be possible to get that information?
MR. PARENT: Yes, absolutely, we'll have that for you tomorrow. I had it today but we have to reconfigure it somewhat because of privacy concerns for some companies that have applied. In terms of what is being asked for and what awards have gone out, I think that's information that should be available to all members, so we'll be providing that to you tomorrow.
I was speaking at a conference at Acadia University this weekend on the whole issue of the environment. Along with me was Rick Ramsay from the RRFB. Rick mentioned several ways in which that Innovation Fund has been used. I said to him afterwards, could you please get me a listing to share with the members. So I just received word that we have the list, we're just getting rid of the privacy matters and we'll get you that list tomorrow.
He rhymed off three or four different companies and ways it is being used. A recent one was reusing asphalt shingles and a process to separate the backing from the asphalt, in order to reuse that in paving. That was one and he listed about three or four others. Maybe I can give you a few more examples but we'll get you the full list tomorrow. Crushed glass in septic systems is another one, instead of gravel aggregate and people trying to use that, and then construction demolition material, using that for landfill cover, there has been work done on that. So there's a whole variety of them and we'll have that list for you tomorrow. We had it today but our FOIPOP officer told us that we had to strip out the names or she wouldn't let it go out. There's a wide variety and I think it is important that all members see and know and have that information at their fingertips.
[Page 287]
MR. COLWELL: Yes, I'd appreciate that and tomorrow is fine. One other thing, perhaps of the ones that you could release, clear of the grant part of it, maybe some success stories that we've seen from that, I'd like to see those as well, with the names of the companies and what products they've come up with, stuff that would be public information.
MR. PARENT: Sure, the ones we are able to release, we will release with the success stories. The ones that were turned down, we would have to strip off the names, I imagine. We will get that for you.
[4:15 p.m.]
MR. COLWELL: Also, we would like to know yearly, of the total budget of the RRFB, how much money goes into this new sort of technology and if there are any other ways that the money is spent besides applications from individual companies or individuals, whatever the case may be, that would go into new, innovative ideas to help recycle products.
MR. PARENT: It will be about $2 million to $3 million. We will get you the exact figure on that but it's about $2 million to $3 million. The RRFB makes about $10 million in profit but it's not allowed to make a profit so then all the rest of that money, that $10 million or $9 million surplus to the running of the program goes back into the various programs to help in education and various other things, diversion credits to municipalities. But about $2 million to $3 million of that goes into the technology fund.
MR. COLWELL: We talked before about the Enviro-Depots taking a bigger responsibility on - I wouldn't say responsibility - but probably take more items that they could reasonably handle and ultimately get them out of the waste stream and make it easier for people because I still say, and I have said several times in our past hour that we talked here, about making it easier for people. I think that is a key to much of the recycling now. Has there ever been a study done by the RRFB to look at ways that they might really improve these small businesses, because they are small businesses, usually people from the community that are, some of them, just barely making a living from this operation? At the same time, we are seeing all this material being dumped in the woods. So has there ever been a study to see what other things could be done immediately or over a long period of time with some investment?
MR. PARENT: We have been working with them in various different ways, through education programs, through business advice on how to run a business because they are independent businesses. Working directly with Eastern Recylcers Association, I've met with Bruce Rogers several times on issues and programs and goals he has. The Enviro-Depots are very similar but very different across the province. My Enviro-Depot, actually, is a very big one, just up from my house, and takes in a lot of material that other smaller ones can't take. So at times it's difficult for the smaller ones to compete and to make a living as opposed to the large ones in my area and yet we believe it's important to have as much geographical
[Page 288]
spread of Enviro-Depots as is possible and still maintain a good business model for those Enviro-Depots.
There are a few regions where perhaps we have more depots than really the region warrants, which causes some financial pressure on those businesses. We have worked with that to try to get a balance so that the population is covered because your point is right on in terms of we have to make it easy for people to recycle, as easy as we can, at least. So the geographic location of the Enviro-Depots is key to that but the Enviro-Depots also need to make a profit. If you have a small population base, there is one in Caledonia, for example, where she is doing a great job but it's marginal because of the population. We work with her and try to help her out as much as we can. There are some other areas where we have two or three and maybe only one is feasible. Is there a way we can work with them to separate them a bit geographically?
So there are three different ways we work with them and consult with them and try to help them as businesses because without the Enviro-Depots, the RRFB program really wouldn't work and so it's a mutual relationship. Now, I go to the head of the Nova Scotia - on the executive is a member in David Morse's riding, actually, but a good friend of mine who goes to the New Minas Rotary. They run Fritz's and they also run the Enviro-Depot right beside it.
I've been to their annual meetings for the last three or four years, I think, and I know there's not always agreement between the Enviro-Depots and RRFB about what compensation the RRFB is giving. You may remember some years ago there were some pop bottles put in front of Province House. We've worked through that and I think the relationship right now, at the last few annual meetings, has been one where there's a real sense of collegiality.
The problem with the smaller Enviro-Depots is profitability, basically. I think the Enviro-Depot, when you talked about the white items - fridges, stoves, et cetera - many of them couldn't handle it, but some of them could. We maybe should look at having Enviro-Depots that can handle bigger objects. I don't know if we have that.
As I said, it's a question of quite a variation in size between these Enviro-Depots and trying to support them all so that we have that geographic spread that will make recycling easy.
MR. COLWELL: Along the same lines of the Enviro-Depots, this is something I was quite disturbed about, I can't remember if I mentioned it the last time we were here or not, but they used to take cardboard, but from what I understand from talking with some of the people with the RRFB, some of the people at the Enviro-Depot said the RRFB simply wouldn't take it anymore. Could you tell me why the RRFB wouldn't take the cardboard from the Enviro-Depots anymore?
[Page 289]
MR. PARENT: Cardboard is something that's actually a marketable commodity now. What we are finding is in the RRFB we're getting such a small percentage - the municipalities were taking it and they were using it because they can market it. Minas Basin Pulp and Paper, as you know, uses the cardboard for their fibre. They don't use any trees - it's all cardboard. So, we were getting about 100 tons last year and, a couple of hundred tons, it was just too small a diversion because others were using it - municipalities. They were either selling it, there are a couple of places they could sell it to.
That's part of the problem with Minas Basin Pulp and Paper, they recycle the cardboard, but they're having to compete for it against other companies because cardboard has a value to it as opposed to used tires. There's quite a difference between a used tire which is an economic liability, basically, and used cardboard which has economic value on the open market.
That's what happened with the cardboard. It was just such a small stream that most of it was going off to the municipalities, to Minas Basin, to other things, that they decided that they wouldn't handle that stream any longer and concentrated on others where there were greater volumes.
MR. COLWELL: It was a small cash flow item though for some of these smaller facilities. Because of that, it probably brought some people in that had some cardboard boxes and maybe some bottles or cans or whatever beverage containers that they could make more money on. It did stop those visits and it also took away the convenience in being able to get rid of your cardboard, even though you can put it out to the curb if it's not raining. If it rains, then you have a mess and what do you do with it then?
I think they really should have a look at the convenience as well for the residents. Sometimes I think it's worth a little bit to do that and at the same time help some of these Enviro-Depots. Even though they only get a few dollars a month out of it, sometimes it would probably be enough to maybe pay their phone bill, if they can afford a phone.
MR. PARENT: I'll take that under advisement. Again, it was just really a question of the small percentage of it so they decided to just let that go into the curbside collection rather than into the recycling. But, certainly, we'll take another look at it. If there are any geographic variations on that maybe, I'd be happy to take a look at it again.
MR. COLWELL: I don't want a response to this, but I think part of the problem was, a lot of people didn't realize you could take your cardboard there. I just found out by accident one day when I was at the Enviro-Depot and saw that someone was dropping cardboard off and that was just I would say within the last couple of years and then after that I took all my cardboard there as well. Sometimes it's quite a problem.
[Page 290]
Anyway, I'm going to switch areas here. Last year or the year before, I talked about diving regulations in the province. The province has put in place some diving regulations and since those regulations have been in place and from what I understand in talking to the commercial diving industry, it wasn't actually what they were looking for. They've got an unbelievably good safety track record in their business, and it seems like most of the people die from scuba diving rather than the commercial diving system which is a hard hat. What are the stats on diving injuries or in the industry since these new regulations have been in place? Have there been any injuries or any deaths?
MR. PARENT: I can't recall any injuries that have happened since the diving regulations were in place. I've heard from people in the professional diving industry who have complained that the regulations weren't exactly what they wanted. Those regulations were part of a four-year plan that was worked out with the Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee which is made up of stakeholders and they worked very hard to get a four-year plan of what they were going to do. So the first phase was the diving regulations. This year it's violence in the workforce. The next we're going to look at is the whole question of internal responsibility, how to support OHS Committees within governments; and the fourth year target, I can't remember right now but, anyway, this was the first thing that we tackled.
The regulations have been effective in terms of no accidents. There are some people in the industry who have said that the regulations were too restrictive for them and would create problems, but it's difficult for me to speak authoritatively on it because they were brought in before my time as the first of this four-year Occupational Health and Safety plan and our Occupational Health and Safety person, Jim LeBlanc is away right now dealing with other matters. So I'll try to get you further information but the regulations seem to have worked well. Any time you bring in regulations, there's always a balance between bringing in regulations that will ensure safety, and you know this better than I do, and then bringing in regulations that work with small business and don't put an onerous sort of pressure on them financially or in terms of human resources that they can't meet and that's always the dance that we're trying to play.
With violence in the workplace regulations, that's it, for example. I mean larger companies and institutions have no problem with instituting these policies but a two, three, four, five member workforce is saying you've got to give us flexibility. We want to safeguard our workers from violence but we don't have the resources to have, you know, full-time people devoted to it or whatever. So that's always the dance that we're playing to make sure the regulations are effective, they work, and yet are flexible for smaller businesses in particular.
MR. COLWELL: Yes, I know previously, before those regulations were put in place in Nova Scotia, our safety record was pretty poor.
[Page 291]
MR. PARENT: The safety record has improved substantially.
MR. COLWELL: In those new regulations, I believe, and I can't remember offhand, there was some training or mandatory things that the companies had to do to ensure they were in place. I wonder if those have all been done by all the companies that are working?
MR. PARENT: Yes, the word I'm getting is that they've all complied. I'll double-check that with you, but our understanding is it has been done.
MR. COLWELL: Just to bring the minister up to speed, there was a national standard - well the Canadian standard meets the national standard, if I recall, and I'm just going from memory here so I could be wrong - that the commercial industry uses and ever since it instituted that new standard there has not been a death in the commercial diving industry in the world. So, hopefully, there aren't any more deaths in the industry and the new diving regulations do satisfy that safety issue. Is there an automatic clause in your new regulations that if there is a death, the regulations be looked at again?
MR. PARENT: In the workplace violence or the diving regulations?
MR. COLWELL: The diving regulations.
MR. PARENT: No, but it's a good suggestion. With the workplace violence, which will tie in with that in a sense, we're building in a review. If I remember one of the suggestions that came back, there would be various triggers for the review and that would be a very good thing to work in, that if there is a death, that automatically creates a review in the regulations. There isn't in the diving regulations that I am aware of but it is a good suggestion as an automatic trigger. You would have a five-year review but if you had a death sooner than that, that might trigger a review as well. We'll take that under advisement.
[4:30 p.m.]
MR. COLWELL: Considering what's happening in the commercial industry, which is extremely high risk - in some cases very deep diving can lead to some very serious things - and they haven't had an accident. I know the industry wasn't totally satisfied with the regulations the province put in place and I realize it was a compromise. Indeed if those regulations do end up in a death for whatever reason I would personally like to see an automatic review of the whole process immediately. It appears in the past from limited knowledge I have of this - and I stress limited knowledge - that most of the deaths happen with scuba gear.
I know a friend of mine watched his very best friend die and he couldn't do anything to help him. He was sucked in to an intake from a big pump and held up against the grate and he just simply ran out of air and died. They couldn't get the pump shut down because it was
[Page 292]
a long ways away and nobody knew the guy was there except his diving buddy, he couldn't go near it because he would have been sucked in too. With the hard hats you can sit there for days, you can have some odd things happen to you but you still wouldn't run out of air. I think some of the accidents they had were around running out of air, divers getting trapped and not having air.
So the standards you have aren't up to the world standard and I understand for small business but we also want to make sure that our costs to the families and to the industries don't get out of control because the standards aren't high enough. I'd rather see higher standards and a time period for people to put them in place than to see people die or become permanently injured.
Back to workers' compensation now - I'm going to be all over the place today.
MR. PARENT: At least you're giving me a chance to answer, which is nice.
MR. COLWELL: I'm interested in the answers not my questions. Workers' compensation, I just want to get some clarity on this and tell me if I'm absolutely right on this or if I'm all wrong on it. The reason that the time period was picked for chronic pain has to do with the Canadian Constitution, is that correct?
MR. PARENT: It was chosen for that reason.
MR. COLWELL: And that was due to the court case that was before the Supreme Court and prior to that there was no jurisdiction for them to act on this decision, would that be correct?
MR. PARENT: The Supreme Court mandated that we had to compensate for chronic pain so the date that was chosen was the Charter in 1985. That was chosen as a date that fit in with the Supreme Court decision that seemed to make sense. There was slightly different wording between the department and the Workers' Compensation Board - the same intention for both boards, but slightly different wording as to when that chronic pain was developed.
I guess the commonality between the government and WCB was that if you had chronic pain after 1995 then you would be compensated. I talked to the board chairman and the CAO of the WCB just last week and asked them how the chronic pain was going in terms of their ability because they felt this was quite a big challenge to them. You know that the Workers' Compensation Board had an unfunded liability, not long before I took over, of about $390 million and now it's down to, they're telling me, about $340 million. They will be able to then address some other things and return benefits to workers and to employers as a result of having dealt with that. That's quite an achievement really in light of the fact that was done at the same time that they were mandated to pay out chronic pain.
[Page 293]
Now the previous member was telling me about chronic pain and so that gives me a chance to answer her through you because I wasn't given that opportunity before.
Thirty per cent of the chronic pain appeals have been approved. That is about twice as high as most other provinces in Canada, so there has been a fairly high approval rate for Nova Scotia. Now if you weren't approved, that's still not satisfactory to you and some concerns have been brought forward from workers who weren't approved, but in comparison with other jurisdictions it has been a much higher approval rate and yet they've been able to keep the costs so that the unfunded liability has actually started to come down. That's good news because as the unfunded liability comes down, it frees - as you probably know, we have the highest rates for employers and the lowest benefits for employees, not something to be proud of - as that unfunded liability comes down, it allows them to bring down rates a little bit and bring up benefits a little bit, so that we begin to move in the right direction on both sides of the equation.
A large part of that really goes to the staff at WCB but I think a large part of the credit also goes to the new governance structure. As you know, we have representatives - four from labour and four employees on the board. The previous member was talking about how the injured workers across the province don't feel they have any input into the WCB. I didn't get a chance to respond because they actually have a representative on the WCB now, a direct pipeline to the WCB, that's one of the four employee representatives.
So bringing the stakeholders together, because both of them had an interest, really, we were at a stage not that long ago where some of the major companies were threatening to pull out and were quite upset, feeling that WCB was broken. So both employers and employees have a vested interest in a good WCB; the employers because it is an insurance plan for their workers and they want to care for the workers, and the employees naturally because then there's something to fall back on if they get injured at work, if they don't have private plans. So there was a common interest.
Now the employees wanted to get as much as they could in benefits and employers pay as little as they could in fees, so there was a difference there, but because the common interest was to make the WCB work, it worked well to have the stakeholders around the table. That process, I can't take credit for it because it was put in before my time, but it really has resulted in some real benefits, both to employees and to employers. It has been a system that, really, it is good that was put in because the WCB was almost broke not that long ago, because of this unfunded liability, because of the fact that there was a lack of trust because people weren't working together.
The new governance plan saying okay, we'll put you on the board and work it out for the benefit of everyone has worked and as I was mentioning - this may not be a hard figure but I was told they are down to about $340 million now on unfunded liability and it was about $400 million not that long ago. So that will begin to allow them some flexibility as
[Page 294]
they continue to bring that down, but as they bring that down, they'll have flexibility to begin to augment some of their programs and to look at some of the things that came out of the Dorsey report that they've been able to do; the governance piece but maybe the cost of living increases they were not able to do and also, as I said, to benefit both employees and employers.
It has been a good governance model and it has been able to handle the challenge of chronic pain, to get back to your original issue which was quite a challenge because when you're mandated to pay for this and you weren't really planning for it in your corporate plan, how do you do that? How do you do that in a way that's fair to the people who suffer from chronic pain and yet do that in a way that respects the financial pressures you are under?
I know there was some concern - before I took over as minister I had former board members who had resigned, if you may remember not that long ago, and they told me that they thought the chronic pain would bankrupt the Province of Nova Scotia. It hasn't done that, it's at about $180 million, the payouts, and it has been more generous than other provinces, so I think that is really a tribute, again, to the governance system. Now there may be those who didn't receive chronic pain payments who may be mounting another court challenge, I understand - we will just have to see how that plays out.
MR. COLWELL: I must say, dealing with the Workers' Compensation Board over several years, being an MLA, there has been a major improvement in the staff there and it seems to be a new direction they have taken, which I think is very positive.
The only question I have asked them, and I will ask you, Mr. Minister - it is so complicated, the system, I mean I work on a lot of Canada Pension Disability claims for individuals and that is a pretty straightforward system. You are either disabled or you're not, and if you are you get the pension - you have to prove it, of course, and that's it. After you go through the initial process, there are two other levels of appeal, and unless you can get any brand new information after that you can't appeal any further. So I don't know why we have all these different levels of appeal. It seems like it's never-ending. Why can't it be streamlined a lot better to make it easier on the workers?
MR. PARENT: It's a good point you raise and that has been a concern that we have had. There has been progress made, as you said, and as MLAs we have all experienced it, but we need to do more in terms of dealing with that.
There are two pieces to that which have been helpful. One we have in place with Tim McInnis - I haven't heard an MLA who has not sung his praises in terms of helping them help their constituents, and he has certainly done that in my office too - and there is a new navigator program that they are bringing into place as well, and that along with on the other side, not just helping clients work through the system but trying to simplify the system, that is going on as well to streamline the system.
[Page 295]
So hopefully we'll be able to get the two in a good balance, where you have streamlined it, because there is only so far you can streamline - I mean it's going to be a very complicated process by its very nature - but streamline it as well as you can and then provide support. Tim McInnis has been mandated to supply support, particularly to deal with MLAs, but I mean with the general public. But I think he has been very proactive, and then this navigator system that will help people navigate through and support them as they go through the system is going to be put in place, and that navigator system should be in place this summer so you will see some benefits there too, hopefully by the Fall.
MR. COLWELL: What about the never-ending appeal process that seems to be in place - if you lose, you appeal, if you lose, you appeal, if you lose, you appeal again?
MR. PARENT: The WCAT, which is what you're asking about, is under the Justice Department, so it may be a question you want to ask Justice because sometimes to the chairman of Workers' Compensation I ask, why aren't you getting those appeals done? But certainly I will pass that on to the Minister of Justice as well. I don't think, when I first talked to him, he realized he had WCAT under him - he thought it was all under me.
MR. COLWELL: He was hoping.
MR. PARENT: He was hoping, yes. But I will certainly pass on your concern to him. I have expressed that concern already, and you may want to ask your critic, when the Justice Minister comes forward, to ask a question on that.
MR. COLWELL: I definitely will. The other thing - and I addressed this in a letter to you and I appreciate your response, but I would just like to get it on the record here - when someone wins an appeal, sometimes the Workers' Compensation Board doesn't set up the payment plan for them for several months, when indeed, on the other hand, if they owe money to the Workers' Compensation Board, instantly they take the money away.
The reason I ask that is that a lot of people who have been injured at work, and legitimately so, usually when I get to see them - and as MLA you probably see the same thing - they are in the process of losing their home and all kinds of really negative things have happened to them because their income has gone by the board. If they are really fortunate, their spouse may be working or, in a rare case - a very rare case - they may be financially independent enough that it doesn't cripple them. But you see people going through not only the physical and medical problems but also the psychological problems with seeing everything they have worked for their whole lives disappear.
I know you did send me a letter back on that, but I would like to get that on the record here as well.
[Page 296]
MR. PARENT: I appreciate your letter and I remember responding to it. I agreed with you. It is important that that happen because I, as an MLA, have seen the same thing. Oftentimes by the time they get to that place, they have been out of work for awhile and they have used up their family resources, so when they get their decision the money should flow as quickly as possible.
[4:45 p.m.]
I just sort of smiled because I have the same complaint about Revenue Canada - when I owe them money, boy, they are after me right away, and when they owe me money it takes a long time to get it.
With the WCB it's particularly more important because they are vulnerable, because they have been injured and they are out of work. So we acknowledge your letter, agree with you, and certainly have passed that on to the WCB as something we want them to work at and to improve on - and they do as well. It's not that they don't want to do it, but it's helpful now and then to bring it before them and say this is an issue that is being experienced by people who are dealing with WCB claimants who come as constituents to their office. So I appreciate your letter and I think I respond in the vein that I support, and certainly letters like that, you can tell your constituents, are very important because it gets it on file. You know we have a myriad of things to do and so does WCB and so it's important that be on record, and so I want to thank you for raising the issue. I am certainly in agreement with you and we will try to continue to prod on that to get the payments out as quickly as possible.
MR. COLWELL: That will definitely be of assistance and I do appreciate your answer. I just want it on the record here that you did send me that reply.
As you go through this process - and I'm getting less of this now - what about the training of the staff at the Workers' Compensation Board? When I say "staff", I mean the people who actually deal with the injured workers, the caseworkers. I've had some complaints about that, not that the people weren't competent or anything like that, but I think sometimes, from what I could glean from individuals who have been approved, and some who haven't been approved, there is not a really good level of satisfaction with all the workers. Now I am not saying this generally, but with some of the workers maybe not giving them correct information - and I know they are not paid to be sympathetic but I think when someone is injured that is an important part of dealing with an individual - not maybe processing the thing as quickly as possible or as well or whatever the case may be. I have what appear to be good examples of that documented from individuals who have sent the information to me - and I stress "appears to be" because you can't say those things for sure until you know both sides of the story.
I know they made a lot of major improvements, and I think very good improvements, but has there been anything directed in that area, because oftentimes if you have somebody
[Page 297]
who comes in and they have been injured, it's a shock, they may not be able to ever go back to work or they may be off work for an extended period of time, and it's really important to get somebody you are dealing with who can understand that and can lead you in the right direction.
MR. PARENT: There has been work done with the WCB on training of staff and board members have raised the very issue that you have raised in terms of making sure not only correct information is given out, because that is vitally important, but also that the client is responded to in an appropriate, respectful manner.
Tim McInnis has been very helpful in this regard, too. He usually becomes the person of last resort and he has to untangle sometimes problems that were created by maybe a lack of communication beforehand. Not everybody is as good at it as other people - he happens to be excellent at it, but the employees are being trained appropriately in it. The concern has been raised at the board level in terms of the sort of - I mean when you are dealing with injured workers you are often dealing with people who are under a lot of stress for financial reasons, for pain reasons, they are worried about the future and it's important they be treated with respect.
There has been a lot of improvement in that regard but we continue to try to move forward to better that so that people are treated with, I think that the word is really "respect" and some measure of sympathy. We may have to say no to them, but it should be done with a human sort of face to it. Some of our staff are very good at that and some aren't. So there has been training done and the board has asked for some more sensitivity training in that sense to be done, and Tim McInnis has been very helpful in that as well. So progress is being made.
MR. COLWELL: I'm glad to hear that because that seems to be an ongoing concern, again with people who have been approved and people who haven't been approved. So it's something that may alleviate some of the difficulties, if that indeed can be accomplished, and I know it's very difficult and must be very stressful too for the caseworkers who are probably working on many, many cases at the same time and trying to cope with all that - and receiving endless phone calls.
MR. PARENT: Has the honourable member had a chance to tour the WCB facility?
MR. COLWELL: Not in the last four or five years.
MR. PARENT: Maybe we should set that up with the two critics because I've had that tour and, yes, it would be helpful. So we'll set that up.
MR. COLWELL: That would be very helpful. So WCB has been a big problem and I will say that I've been quite pleased with some of the changes that the new CEO is making.
[Page 298]
She seems to be doing a good job and on the right track - I think there's still a lot of work to be done there, but it was a big job to start.
MR. PARENT: One of the things that there has been a big push on, and I know you followed it because I know you keep on top of this file, is prevention, the shift moving towards more preventive education, training, work, and it parallels in many ways the health system where we realize that we can't keep dealing with acute cases - we have to do that, but if we can do preventive health we'll stop some of the acute cases, and the same thing has been happening at WCB in terms of their emphasis on prevention and the work they're doing in prevention.
Employers have a vested interest when it's pointed out to them that if they can prevent workplace accidents they can bring their rates down so there's a direct financial benefit. That has been one of the big changes that has been happening with the WCB in terms of their work with employers, and I think it oftentimes goes unheralded, but there has been a real cultural shift and a lot more effort being put on the prevention side and upon training and education so that you don't get the accidents, which is what we all want. That's good for everybody, you know, the worker doesn't get injured and the employers' rates go down because they have less injuries, because the rates are based upon the classification they're in and the number of accidents they have.
MR. COLWELL: I think that's a really good program too. Has there been any work done by the Workers' Compensation Board to educate employees - it's easy to educate an employer when you say you're going to save some money, but to educate the employees of companies to make sure they follow the safety rules, identify things that have to be rectified to prevent accidents, and to ensure that the accidents are preventable?
MR. PARENT: Yes, we've done some training and there is training mainly through the Human Resources Department which then train their employees. But it was just when I mentioned that maybe it might be good if Maureen and yourself and I went on a tour of WCB, all three people at the head table nodded their heads, and I'm wondering if we should actually set up a session with the WCB for all MLAs who want to come, because I think a lot of people don't realize how many constituents come to us as MLAs, and I know with Workers' Compensation Board they're very complex. So we need more training for people who apply for workers, but maybe one way of helping workers is to help educate MLAs better so that they can help the constituents who come to them. You just twigged something, so if there's a day for MLAs, we'll attribute it to your suggestion.
MR. COLWELL: In order to get me in trouble. Again, I go back to the same trouble. I deal with a lot of Canada Pension Disability appeals and I only ever see people usually when it comes to the appeal stage, and hopefully it's the first stage and not the last stage. With Canada Pension, if you can get a recognized specialist to indicate that a person cannot return to work - and it's a little bit different with Workers' Compensation because it has to
[Page 299]
be a work-related accident or injury, or whatever the case may be, but with Canada Pension it's that way, and the other complaint I get of Workers' Compensation is - and I've gotten this from doctors as well, this is not just people who go there and indicate that sometimes the doctors that WCB employs aren't maybe the experts they should be in the field they're trying to assess and as a result of that some people don't get approved, whereas with the Canada Pension system, if you have a heart condition you go to a heart specialist in Halifax or Toronto, or down in Yarmouth if there's a heart specialist there, and they write up that you cannot return to work because you're not fit to return to work, and 99 per cent of the time you'll get Canada Pension.
But you have to have a specialist - a GP can't write that up and approve it. So why is the board, it always seems to be looking at - they take a GP and they get a specialist's report and they sometimes overrule those?
MR. PARENT: The WCAT can order the appropriate specialist at the final appeal stage. But we'll take your concern under advisement at the preliminary stage as well - are the right specialists being called in? I know there is a problem that WCB's working on in terms of getting appropriate medical care for the workers who are injured. Back to the previous member who talked about Columbia Health and wondering if that was appropriate, and what that was was a second level of assessment for chronic pain to try and help provide that expertise that you're mentioning so that they're getting the right specialist making the appropriate decision.
It can be mandated at WCAT if they felt that in the appeal process there was a GP making a decision about something a specialist should be making, WCAT will mandate to have a specialist look at the worker. But, we'll take under advisement to see if we can suggest to WCB that maybe they might be able to make sure they match up specialists with injury as soon as possible.
Sometimes when the injured worker comes in, it may not be readily apparent what the state of the injury is or where it's going to go and who should be the appropriate specialist, but we'll take that under advisement. But WCAT can mandate that if they felt the person had this problem, that they weren't seen by the person with the right expertise and the decision was rendered by a person who really didn't have the expertise they should have had.
MR. COLWELL: What I'm thinking about is more when the caseworkers come along, you have someone who's injured, something that they deal with on a regular basis - hopefully there are not too many of those, but something that's sort of black and white and they can say, okay, this person was injured on the job and this is what their approval will be, and that case is gone. Hopefully, there are no complications that it has to come back for.
But the ones that maybe they're not sure about, why couldn't they recommend they go see a particular specialist? I wouldn't say a particular specialist, I would say a specialist
[Page 300]
in the field, so it's not someone identified to the workers as being a Workers' Compensation specialist, but a specialist. I think there's an important difference there.
MR. PARENT: We've written down "a specialist in the medical area of the injury."
MR. COLWELL: Exactly. The choice of whomever the family doctor may recommend that the patient go to, which would be a normal process anyway.
That may save a lot of appeals. From the standpoint of approvals, or disapprovals - whichever the case may be - to do that and it could save a lot of aggravation, a lot of time for people and get them approved if the specialist thinks they should be approved or if they shouldn't be approved, why they shouldn't be approved, so there's no guesswork.
There's a lot of distrust of the doctors who actually work for WCB, who are sort of on the WCB payroll as a doctor, that would be fee for services, as would be in a normal situation. If you would look at that, I think that would be greatly appreciated and it could eliminate a lot of this hassle.
MR. PARENT: Sure, happy to do that.
MR. COLWELL: Okay. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have left?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ten minutes.
[5:00 p.m.]
MR. COLWELL: I'm going back to the RRFB again - you can tell this is my favourite topic. Again, I stress, and I said the other day, I think you have excellent staff at RRFB. I think maybe it's time they become a little bit more - how can I put it - "entrepreneurial" perhaps may be the proper word. I think they've done a great job and they work hard.
But back to this grants for business again, and I know you'll send me all the information, but it's important that we get new products and businesses in Nova Scotia. As our population gets older, our working group is going to get smaller and we're going to be in big financial trouble in this province if we don't get some innovation here and stuff that is home grown here. I know a lot of the Nova Scotia businesses - I know when I was running my business - are very capable people and usually end up exporting their expertise and knowledge. Has there been a director from the department for RRFB to really push for business development in Nova Scotia using the resources they have? I'm not talking about building industrial malls but I mean for innovation and for really going after recycling.
[Page 301]
MR. PARENT: We have a branch in the Department of Environment and Labour called the technology and innovation branch. Robert Anderson is one of the workers in there and he works with the RRFB. Lately I've had three or four letters cross my desk praising the work that branch has done and in particular what Robert Anderson has done not just with the RRFB but dealing also with companies. One was a Cape Breton company that got a $3 million contract in Newfoundland and Labrador that they would never have gotten without Robert Anderson working on it, or that branch working on it. So we have the technology and innovation branch and if you'd like to talk to Mr. Anderson - well I think he visited your home. So he has been active with the RRFB, it's important.
I get frustrated that we don't have enough innovation, I agree with you Keith. A lot of the R & D that's being done in this province - as opposed to other provinces where you get a higher percentage being done with private companies - is confined to universities which is good and bad. It's good in the sense that we have great universities but the link that universities often don't make is the commercialization of something that businesses do. So we've been having to work with our universities since that's where most of our R & D takes place and help them to realize that pure research that doesn't end in some sort of commercialization, that it's a process. So that is a challenge. Anything that RRFB can do to help private companies is something that we encourage them to do and we mandate them to do and work with them through the technology and innovation branch.
To be fair to universities, because I wouldn't want this to go on record not being fair to them, I appreciate the fact that they do the R & D and appreciate the fact that many universities increasingly are seeing that as their connection with the business world. CBU, for example, I sat down with the president of CBU wanting to work with the department and with Transportation and Public Works on Sydney tar ponds to get an institute in remediation that could be involved with the cleanup of the Sydney tar ponds and, using the expertise that they've gained in there, be able to export that to other brown fields, other industrial waste sites across North America, across the world. I mentioned to him that sometimes there's a problem that professors say I don't want to be involved in that, I just do pure research and that is beneath me, but he said that the culture is changing and at CBU the professors are eager to get involved in seeing an idea through.
The RRFB is also presently hiring a director of business development and hope to have someone in place within May or June that will also help in this process. Once we get that person in place we'll get you the names so that you can chat with them and give them some insights of what would be helpful out of your experience. I guess when you mention innovation it's absolutely critical that that's where we need to go as a province in agriculture and all sorts of areas. I'm pleased that under the Department of Environment and Labour we have moved over a big chunk of economic development because they realized that the green technology, the green economy was something that we needed to tap into and that was an area in which Nova Scotia could grow.
[Page 302]
I wanted to respond to the previous member but didn't have the chance. He was talking about the changing workforce and was in a sense saying we weren't doing enough to help them. I was going to agree that with globalization you are seeing change, you are seeing outsourcing of jobs that you didn't see before, but in the midst of some of the loss of those jobs there has also been a growing green economy that has gone unnoticed. We now have well over 5,000 people working in environmental industries and about $340 million is the industry's worth. This has come out of really nowhere compared to the past. So we want to encourage that and I know you want to encourage that and that's what lies behind your question. So there is the innovation technology branch in the department. We work with the RRFB. We are going to be hiring a person for business development who will be in place in May/June.
It's certainly something that as a department, and myself, innovation is something that's vitally important and, as I said, the challenge in working with our universities I think is being met, at Acadia University too. Most of the universities now are at the place where instead of getting back, well, we're just a university, we just do pre-research, they're wanting to partner with us and they're wanting to work with us and wanting to work with the federal government. The ocean tracking system at Dalhousie is another example of that. So there has been some real progress made in that regard but the challenge remains, innovation is key to the province's success in the future and I'm glad you put your finger on it.
MR. COLWELL: I found that we have some excellent universities here but they admit themselves that they haven't had the ability to really commercialize a lot of the excellent ideas that come across. It would be good to see that RRFB get an individual there, hopefully it's someone with a business background who understands what a business needs rather than someone fresh out of university, which is good, but unless you've run a business you can't understand what a business needs. Sometimes the funniest little thing can make a lot of money for some business if they develop it properly and have the right kind of support in place. How much budget do you have in that innovation section of your department? (Interruption) It must not be very much money if you don't know exactly right offhand.
MR. PARENT: Oh, I think it's very sizeable. Well, at least for us, we're not a big department.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You have three minutes.
MR. PARENT: The total figure for you, the problem is we get money from industry, I will get money from Economic Development. We have about $400,000 of our own money in there but we get money from the other departments together. So what you're really asking for is the total global figure and that's the problem. It's divided under different areas. So $400,000 from our department roughly but we get NSBI money and we get Economic Development money as well which will make that far bigger. So we'll get you that global figure. It's a good question. I should have known that off the top of my head. Right now we
[Page 303]
have someone working down in Trinidad. Craig Morrison is down in Trinidad right now and he's paid out of that fund. So it's a much bigger fund than $400,000 but because it's spread out and it's not under one tab, we don't have the figure but we'll get that for you.
MR. COLWELL: That would be good because I think any money you spend there, it takes some time for innovation to pay off but it does pay off over time, and I'm glad to see at least you've got some money and some effort into that effort. From what I understand, too, it's a lot of practical research to do as well. When I say practical research - I shouldn't say research - practical applications of technology and development of that technology.
MR. PARENT: We'll have that list to you and as I said, the Chairman of the RRFB, Rick Ramsay was sharing at Acadia University yesterday at the conference I was at and I said to myself, this is great, I'll have to remember all these and the only one I remembered was the separation of the backing of asphalt shingles to reuse the front part for paving, but we'll have that list for you tomorrow.
MR. COLWELL: Okay, that would be good. Along the line of innovation - we're going to run out of time here in about a minute, I think - what about when we talk about green energy because that's really some Energy Department things and would be Environment, but with solar panels and energy like that. Is your staff working on anything along that line of technology-renewable energy?
MR. PARENT: Most of our efforts are going into wind right now and tomorrow I'll be making an announcement with John Baird, the federal minister, about some other . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. The time has elapsed.
MR. PARENT: We can chat later.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
HON. RONALD CHISHOLM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sitting back I was listening to one of your explanations to the member for Preston regarding Robert Anderson and the work that he does within the Department of Environment and Labour. I do know Robert quite well, I've worked with him on a few projects in Guysborough County. I know the Guysborough municipal unit has the second generation landfill. They've, I think, been operating, it's about a year ago in January that it came into operation. Somewhere around there. Can you give us any idea of what the - I know there are different municipalities from right around eastern Nova Scotia, Antigonish, St. Mary's, Canso, Mulgrave, as well as Cape Breton Island are all part of that group that ship garbage to Guysborough. Any other second generation landfills in the province?
[Page 304]
MR. PARENT: Yes, back in the early 1980s, there were about 100 dumps throughout the province, and I use that word deliberately because many of them were dumps. There was a tremendous problem, not only with the visual aspect of them but with the air pollution and the fact that they were leaching into the water table, which was quite a problem. The province went forward to try to deal with that but even in 1995, when the waste management system was coming in place, there were 44 of those.
Since then we've moved to seven of the second generation landfill systems, state of the art landfill systems. I've toured two or three of them and when you talk about innovation and technology, they're really technological marvels when you start asking how it works. The one I remember most clearly that I talk about a lot was in the riding of the honourable member for Cumberland South and the site there is using wetlands that they've created, in order to deal with the leachate, so you have the liners, gravel. You really have to see one, I can't really describe it well enough to tell you all the technology that's involved, but they've added on now these wetlands, the leachate that comes out goes through a series of three wetlands and by the time it comes out of the wetlands, it has been naturally purified.
So we have the seven; Queens, Chester, West Hants, HRM here, Cumberland, Colchester and Guysborough. As you say, Guysborough handles all the waste from Cape Breton. We have moved a long way from where we were not that long ago really to having state of the art landfill systems, second generation, seven of them across the province. That decision was made by a previous government to move in that direction and I always give previous government credit for that because it was quite a visionary one.
[5:15 p.m.]
We are world leaders. I like to tell the story when I was down in Trinidad at the Caribbean Water and Wastewater Association. What was fascinating there is that we were the central province from Canada. You would think from the Caribbean nations' perspective that Canada and Nova Scotia were identical and the companies from Ontario and Alberta got quite angry which didn't bother me one bit. What pleased me the most was the delegate from Puerto Rico came - and I mentioned this in several talks because it really stuck with me - here's Puerto Rico, I don't know if they're a protectorate of the United States, they're not yet a state, but they could access anything the United States could provide in terms of technology or expertise in dealing with solid waste. He came to me and said "usted es lideres", you're leaders in the world in waste, come help us in Puerto Rico. He has been hounding me ever since to come down to Puerto Rico to provide some help. Because of the size of our department and the limitations I had, I've had to refuse the invitation.
Our second generation landfills and our system of waste diversion are second to none in the country We have the lowest disposal rate per person. In Canada we are the only province to reach the 50 per cent, now we've slipped a little bit below that because the construction industry has increased which adds. We're dealing with that by taking other
[Page 305]
items out of the waste stream such as electronic recycling which is coming on stream and we hope to help the municipalities be able to reach a new disposal rate that we set in the sustainability bill that I've tabled. In fact, I got a bit of a chuckle because one of the municipalities phoned me and was a little worried that maybe we were moving too much out of the waste stream into the recycling end. The amount of garbage that's their bread and butter was going down too far which was interesting. So we really have a great system.
Now there are concerns, as you've known, in the press that have been brought up by the Halifax Regional Municipality on the whole issue of what they call flow control, that's before the courts. The court did not uphold HRM's initial challenge, but there is an appeal going forward and we're waiting to hear that appeal in terms of flow control. I can assure the honourable member, as I've assured him privately, that even if that appeal was upheld it wouldn't affect Guysborough because what it would do is really allow municipalities to enter into contractual agreements if they so desire, but it would be up to the municipalities if the municipality didn't want to. In Guysborough's case where Cape Breton and Guysborough County have a very good relationship and Cape Breton wants to use Guysborough County as its landfill site of first choice, that's not threatened at all by this court case that's going forward.
MR. CHISHOLM: I've gone a couple of times on tours of the second generation landfill in Guysborough and I would certainly invite you at some point in time, maybe in the not too distant future, to come down and do a tour with me. If we can set that up sometime this summer we'll do that.
Guysborough Municipality is a very small municipal unit and they're very proud of the second generation landfill that they have in place. They've done an excellent job of managing that and even for them as a small municipal unit to take on that sort of a project is something. I guess they saw an avenue where there were a few bucks in garbage so they grabbed it and ran with it and they've done a very good job.
Down in Little Dover, Guysborough County, as well, the municipality has put a sewer system through the Village of Little Dover. That happened two or three years ago, I guess, now. They've had a truck - well, Robert Anderson was very involved in this, as well - a truck that they had brought in from, I think, Norway. I was down there and they did a demonstration one day and I took part in that with Robert, as well as people from the municipality. Is that truck still around and if so, where is it located? I believe it was called a dewatering truck maybe?
MR. PARENT: The truck's still available. It was in the Eastern Shore, we're now trying to get down to the South Shore. It's still here. The honourable member sitting beside you knows about the truck, he has seen it in operation.
MR. CHISHOLM: Yes, I did as well, down in Little Dover.
[Page 306]
MR. PARENT: And you have, as well. And we're trying to get it to the South Shore. I've been wanting to get them up in the Valley to do a demonstration project there. I haven't seen it but I've heard a lot about it. It can handle, without going back to the discharge station, it can pump 10 or 20 septic systems, while a regular truck pumps about four or five and then has to go back to dispose of it, but because of the process where they separate out the solids from the liquids and then they can pump the liquids back in, they can do up to 20 septic systems. So the advantage of that is twofold. One is that it becomes cheaper for the person getting their septic system pumped out. So it brings the price down and secondly, it helps with greenhouse gases because you don't have this truck going back to the landfill site as often. It's able to be more efficient in its use.
I have talked to Robert about the truck and he was looking at a plan, which I think is a good plan. It's visionary, of course, of maybe working with municipalities to provide a service similar to that to all the people who have septic systems, on the condition that they buy in and he was thinking that that would be able to bring it down to about $60 per household over a three-year period. And when you think of the cost of replacing septic systems, which has risen dramatically and with the regulation we have now on septic systems - in the past, when I bought my house, they were dumping the laundry effluent into the ditch by the road and I put a stop to that - but with our regulations, septic systems are far more expensive than they were before and that question has been raised here about the cost of septic systems, which is difficult for a new homeowner. Difficult for some people. I think it would almost be like an insurance system for septic systems, you'd pay $60 every three years and you'd have your septic system pumped out, and that's his vision. Now we're a long way from adopting that, but it makes some sense to me, actually because of the cost of a broken septic system.
We have the home assessment plan in place. A $1.7 million program, which I just announced recently and part of that program is to help assess the health of septic systems and in assessing the health of septic systems, if the septic system is broken, there's a $3,000 grant toward fixing that septic system. Now if it's only to fix the septic system, $3,000 is a fair chunk of change, but if it's to buy a new septic system, it's not. So anything we can do to help people keep their septic systems in good working order and save money and save them from leaking into the environment and causing problems is something we need to look at.
So we've been looking at the truck and it's going to the South Shore next and I'd like it to come up to the Valley. I don't seem to have any clout on that, for some reason or other. I've asked several times, but I just can't seem to get the truck to go up to Kings County. But I appreciate the opportunity to speak about that issue here because maybe it will get up to Kings County some time.
Also, on the landfill, I do want to compliment you because Guysborough does have a state of the art landfill and Warden Hines and his CAO Dan MacDougall have been very good to work with on the landfill. As you say, it was quite a project for a small municipality
[Page 307]
to take on but I think it's a success story that they're quite proud of and that has been good for the municipality. Warden Hines and the CAO Dan MacDougall had been excellent to work with in our department and certainly I heard from Warden Hines about Keltic a few times although he was fairly gracious and gave me the time I needed to make a decision on that. On the landfill, he has been very good to work with and I think it has been a win-win for everybody.
MR. CHISHOLM: As I said, they're very proud of the operation that they have going there. The Premier and I were there, probably about three or four months ago, so they are very proud of that operation. That dewatering truck - I guess it's what they call it, that one that's in here - I think they got it in Norway, this technology came from Norway?
MR. PARENT: Yes, it's a Norwegian company that we're dealing with and that's the technology they have there. It has a lot of potential and as I said, Robert's plan which he has talked to me about makes some sense. If we could get everyone to buy in then we could use technology like that to make sure that septic systems were pumped on the schedule they're supposed to be pumped on which would save the environment because we wouldn't have as many faulty septic systems, and save people money. The dewatering truck is one of those innovations.
When the previous member talked about innovations and the need to innovate I couldn't agree with him more. That's one of the things I've been pushing as aggressively as I can, that if we're moving to an environmental economy we need to innovate and we need to be first in with many of these things and develop them. We're doing that with many projects but we can always do more - innovate, innovate, innovate.
MR. CHISHOLM: I guess the issue with pumping out septic systems by municipalities, with this truck the municipalities in the province or the regions would probably have to come onside in order to make that viable.
MR. PARENT: The municipality would have to agree. We're also trying to see if at some stage we could get a plan like that, the municipalities would buy in to it, that we could build the trucks here in the province so we would have that added benefit. On almost everything we do in the department on the environmental side, we have to deal very closely with the municipalities. While we mandate certain things the municipalities are the how-to on it oftentimes. So there is a very good working relationship with the municipalities but we couldn't impose that as a department, it would have to be in consultation with the municipalities. I know that discussion has been going on as to whether municipalities see this as something that's valuable to them and whether it might be able to be a model that could be incorporated. So it's not something that's on the horizon right away, but it's certainly worth discussing. You raised the issue with the dewatering truck and I see it as something, with the sky-rocketing cost of new septic systems, that can be a win-win for everybody.
[Page 308]
MR. CHISHOLM: I know in an area like Guysborough County and the eastern shore of my riding, to get a septic system pumped is quite expensive. This past summer I've done my own, I had to get somebody to dig up the top of it but I got a little smart. I put one of these culvert crocks on the top, a 24-inch crock with a cover on it and everything. But it is very expensive and if there was I'd certainly be in favour of the municipality charging so much a year, maybe every third year, whatever it would be, to come have my system pumped out.
MR. PARENT: I think a lot of people would be.
MR. CHISHOLM: I think the closest one for me to Goshen, Guysborough County would be Antigonish, the next closest available one would be in Pictou County up in the Thorburn area. Just to get to my place would be one and a half hour's run either way. There's a lot of people that are a lot worse off than I would be in that situation. If they were travelling from Larry's River or anywhere down along that shore, even into Hazel Hill and the Canso area, it is very expensive and I think anything we can do to get that program going with the trucks, similar to what we have seen, would be great.
The second generation landfills, you say there are seven, where were they again?
[5:30 p.m.]
MR. PARENT: There's West Hants, Queens, Chester, HRM, Cumberland, Colchester and Guysborough. I certainly would like to visit the Guysborough one in the summer. We have that noted down. I have visited the West Hants one and the Cumberland one so far.
MR. CHISHOLM: Another issue that I've thought about, being the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, some of the rivers that we have, for example, the St. Mary's River - does the Department of Environment and Labour have any monitoring programs that they do along rivers such as the St. Mary's River or the West River in Antigonish as to - I know inland fisheries do some of that work, but I was just wondering if Environment and Labour does?
MR. PARENT: We don't have anything on St. Mary's River right now. We do monitor rivers in conjunction with Environment Canada for various aspects of the health of the river. The member for Pictou East has been after me to get a monitor moved from a location where we monitor in his area and I think we're going to be looking at doing that.
If St. Mary's River is a river you feel is under stress or it's changing in terms of the pollutants that are in it that you want monitored, we might want to get that on the list of monitoring that at some stage.
[Page 309]
We're working along with Natural Resources with various groups. I was just talking to a person on Saturday on a salmon river up the Eastern Shore, down in Clare they're working on the Salmon River, on de-acidifying that river so that the salmon will come back. Many of our rivers had good salmon, as you know, and unfortunately with acid rain, a lot of the PH was just too low for the salmon to live. This particular river is now up to a level to where salmon can live, whether the salmon will actually come back, we're not sure.
The one in Clare area is quite interesting; it's an interesting partnership. The cement dust from Lafarge is used by the salmon fishing recreational association down there to de-acidify the river and then the school children at the Clare École Secondaire raised small salmon in the school which then restocked the river.
If St. Mary's is a river that's under stress - and this is one of the reasons why the water strategy which I just unveiled on Friday, we spend about $10 million through the department on various aspects of water. But, in my opinion, at least, we don't have as good a handle a on the water situation in Nova Scotia as we should. We want to be able to assure Nova Scotians of the health of their aquifers, of what's happening with their ground water, river flows - both for recreational purposes, drinking water purposes, for industrial purposes. We depend upon water in so many different ways for the health of our economy that as a province we need to, I think, have a complete picture on water. I have stated in several places and I'll state it again, that water is going to be to the 21st Century what oil was to the 20th Century. I remember listening to a program on the BBC World News where they were talking about Nepal having discovered a $140 billion resource that India was willing to pay for and I thought, my goodness, have they struck oil in Nepal, but it wasn't oil at all, it was water, because vast parts of India don't have access to water.
So for recreational, St. Mary's would be - I assume you're asking for recreational purposes and certainly we're very interested in that, but we're also interested in industrial purposes. Keltic, for example, is going to need a lot of water. So we need to understand and we need to be able to know when our aquifers can replenish properly. We have a drinking water strategy in place, it started in 2002, and we're coming to the end of implementing that. So we want to move to this larger vision on water for its recreational uses, industrial use, the effect of climate change on water.
When you look at every book I've read on climate change, the cover has this dried out field somewhere - I mean The Weather Makers by Flannery, another one I have. Water is the most important commodity really when you think about it and it's something that we all enjoy for personal use, drinking water, but it's something that I think we've taken for granted. Some of our rivers on the flow, what's happening is too much water being taken out. What would recreational life be in Nova Scotia without our lakes and rivers, right? So if you want, we've noted down, that if the St. Mary's River is a river we should be monitoring, we do that with Environment Canada and perhaps we should get it on a list sometime.
[Page 310]
MR. CHISHOLM: I think we would certainly, in the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, if it's an inland fishery, we would want to be part of that as well. We would be prepared to work with you, my staff would work with your staff.
MR. PARENT: And we work on the intertidal zone, too, but your department is the lead on that basically because that's another important area in terms of water - the health of the environment and the health of the fisheries.
MR. CHISHOLM: Down in certain areas around the St. Mary's River there are fairly good size farming operations that go on there and I guess there's some concern there's maybe some runoff from agricultural land and that sort of thing as well. So some of the people have a real interest in the St. Mary's River and there's quite a number of them down in that area who are quite proud of that river. As you know, it's one of the best salmon rivers in the province and known worldwide, running pretty close to the Margaree River where they have done extremely good work - you know, the community there that operated the Margaree salmon hatchery. So anything that we can do to make sure that that river is clean and kept as good as it possibly can be, we want to do it.
When you talk about the water strategy, just where is that? You had a press conference the other day.
MR. PARENT: About the water strategy?
MR. CHISHOLM: Yes.
MR. PARENT: It will be a three-year strategy studying various things over the three years and at the end consulting with Nova Scotians to bring forth a strategy for all Nova Scotia. What I found interesting is that we have been working on moving forward with a water strategy for some years and we have various parts of it in place. We have, for example, 23 monitors across the province monitoring aquifers. We have these water flow monitors on various rivers. So we have parts of it in place and we finally decided that we should launch a provincial water strategy as a whole. What I found interesting is the decision was made without knowing the federal government also had come to the same conclusion and in their new budget they've put in quite a chunk of money to deal with a comprehensive water strategy and they've clearly seen that this is a frontier that they have to work at.
In regard to agriculture, you mentioned that before, we have, on my river, the Cornwallis River, we've been working with the farmers and Agriculture on proper buffering between the farm and the river so that the nutrients don't run off into the river, which can kill the river quite quickly, and the Cornwallis River was one of the worst rivers in Canada. Thanks to some of that work, it now is coming back. That is the nice thing about rivers as opposed to lakes, rivers, particularly if they're faster flowing, will recover faster.
[Page 311]
I had the privilege, as Minister of Environment and Labour, of going to a meeting in New Brunswick at a very famous salmon river. I had never been fly fishing before for salmon. What was interesting is that they are clear-cutting right to the edge of that river and yet that river brings in millions and millions of dollars into the economy of the province. So I think we need to be very cognizant that the decisions we're making on the one hand don't hurt our fishery, our recreational fishery, our salmon fishery, our trout fishery on the other hand because these are not just recreational activities for Nova Scotians but they are also economic generators, particularly in northern New Brunswick they have some salmon rivers that bring people from all over the world. So it is a shame that in Nova Scotia some of those rivers have been lost and we need to bring them back and no one ever really knows if, once it is lost, whether it can be brought back, so the best thing is to not lose it in the first place. I appreciate your comments.
MR. CHISHOLM: Another issue, we talk about the water strategy, rural Nova Scotia, areas like Guysborough County, Eastern Shore, Inverness, Richmond, Shelburne, you could go right around the province, residential wells, people with just a dug well, is there any mechanism in the water strategy or is there any mechanism in place to allow for testing of those wells?
MR. PARENT: Yes, the Environmental Home Assessment Plan that we put out - a multi-million dollar plan - is to help people in the testing of their wells, to give them information in terms of water conservation and the testing of oil tanks because one of the problems that a lot of people have is that if they have a faulty oil tank or septic system, it can cause a lot of contamination quickly and get into the water system and then cause health effects. So we have a couple of programs on that. The latest one available is a $2 million program, roughly. I asked about the uptake on that and it has been quite phenomenal. The letters we've gotten back - I have some of them in my office - in terms of people being grateful for the work that we've been able to do on that.
About 40 per cent of Nova Scotians get their drinking water not from municipal systems but from wells and I'm one of them, and I assume you're one as well. So the department is concerned about how we can help well owners. It is a slightly different challenge than working with municipal units to get in water treatment facilities and the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund, the federal fund has been targeted mainly for green technologies. We need to help well owners and that's why we were very glad to put in place this multi-million dollar plan and we hope to do more of it because our efforts to date have been concentrated mainly - there's a cookie, I see the honourable member is eating a cookie.
This honourable member was not allowed to eat a cookie. More seriously, we have to do more to resource the 40 per cent of Nova Scotians on wells and that's why I was very glad to unveil this program and hope it will continue and help people. The water strategy as a whole, we've had problems - for example with Sydney well field, there have been people outside of that well field complaining about losing their water so we need to get a handle on water tables.
[Page 312]
Boutilier Island - one of the concerns of the people with the surface mining that's going on there is what will be the effect on the water system. We've done studies on that and we feel that things are in hand there but we want to have as good data as we can. To know whether the aquifers replenish themselves, how much water can be taken out of a particular aquifer. It's a very expensive process when you have to dig a new well or get one done, as you know. I mean they're gone up to, what, $5,000 or $10,000, depending on how deep you go. I just had to put one into my house and you also want to make sure you hit good water, too.
So we have unveiled this $2 million program and we hope to continue with that. The uptake has been phenomenal on that and the response of people has been gratifying to see the letters coming in, thanking the department for the work. So it is something that we need to continue. I am glad you raised it because it affects 40 per cent of Nova Scotians.
[5:45 p.m.]
MR. CHISHOLM: Is there funding allowed there for seniors, for low income families, that will pay for that cost of the testing of well water?
MR. PARENT: I'm not sure if there is money for the testing of well water. With low income, particularly with Community Services, it is one of the priority items if they lose a well. I know I have dealt with members, with constituents in my area who don't have access to their wells gone dry, or it hasn't worked and have been able to get Community Services to come to their aid. They seem to be successful in regard to that or they seem to view it as their priority area. I'm not sure about testing, though, I'll have to get back to the honourable member on that.
MR. CHISHOLM: Another project in Guysborough County - the Keltic project - as you mentioned earlier, you had lots of discussion with the Warden of the District of St. Mary's when that whole issue was moving forward, through the environmental process and the committee hearings. The environmental assessments have been done, the approvals are there but the 59, I believe, recommendations - where do you see that project heading now? Is it basically with the company?
MR. PARENT: Well, it's quite a complicated project, as you know, because it has a co-generation site, it has an LNG site and it has - oh, the petroleum, petrochemical plant, so there's three really in one. It was interesting, the panel asked for an extension of time, which I gave to them, not as a routine matter in the sense that we didn't think it was important but in order for the work to be done properly because there was so much data that they had to look at. There are really three industrial approvals, three environmental assessments in one.
[Page 313]
There are some - with the conditions that were put on, we've heard roundabout through the media and maybe some staff have heard directly, that Mr. Dunn, who has been involved in this project, is quite happy, he said there were 30 of those he was planning on looking at anyway. Some of the new ones that have come up, I think of the Bear Head cemetery, for example, which has been an issue for the Nova Scotia Black community down there and some of the conditions relate to that and from what I'm hearing, people think we've struck the right balance on that.
In fact I was quite interested in the fact that the Leader of the Liberal Party - the MLA for Richmond - stated in the paper that he thought our department had done an excellent job of balancing concerns for the environment and protection of the environment with appreciation of the company's need to go forward. Also I understand Elizabeth May gave verbal credit to that as well. So clearly the project is going forward in a way that meets the approval of the vast majority of people on all sides of the issue.
There are some federal issues that have to go through, particularly they'll be looking at the effect on fisheries but also at the ability for the tankers to be able to turn around in the area, whether there's enough room for them. Then the long-term issue, I think that any LNG plant phases - I'm just separating out the LNG now from the petrochemical and the cogeneration - is supply of liquid natural gas, which they will have to, but I understand that the Keltic plant may have a leg up on others, in terms of that.
I do know that the economic forecast for the Province of Nova Scotia was upgraded, in part because of Keltic. I think our growth has gone from 2 to 2.5 because of the Keltic plant being there, so I assume that the economists who've made that upgrade are quite bullish on the ability of the Keltic plant to go forward, but they'll have to deal with the conditions we've put on. As I said, 30 of them, Mr. Dunn already said they're in the process of working at.
Federal environmental approval, which I suspect is to come out this summer, I think is the timing for that. The green light has been given to them to move forward. I know there is a lot of expectation up in the area and I think we struck the balance and, as I said on the Department of Environment and Labour, my main concern was protecting the environment, making sure the environment would be protected. To have that approbation from the Leader of the Liberal Party and from Elizabeth May that they've done a good job of balancing the two, I think indicated the environmental concerns that people had, that there's satisfaction that the department did a very good job in terms of our department's mandate.
MR. CHISHOLM: That project, I guess that was one of the first meetings I had after I became an MLA in 1999 was with Kevin Dunn and the Keltic petrochemical project. We've been having meetings ever since, so it has been quite a while in the works. It's very important to Guysborough County that project does proceed. It means a great number of jobs
[Page 314]
for the county and for the province. As you said, it's a tremendously big project with the LNG, the petrochemical as well as the cogeneration portions of it.
There is a wetland, I believe, in there, maybe some gold mine issues with that project. Where is that at?
MR. PARENT: There are some gold mine tailing. That's one of the conditions that they have to meet - what they do with the goldmine tailings. With the wetland, our policy on wetlands is basically if you can avoid it, you avoid it. That's the first thing. If you can't avoid it, then we look at some mitigation - that means you'd have to create another wetland that would compensate for the use of the wetland.
The wetlands really are the lungs of nature in many ways. As I was mentioning before in response to a previous question about the wetlands in Cumberland South, where they actually naturally purify the water. They also contribute to the biodiversity in the province. We're committed to have no net loss of wetland. That doesn't mean that wetlands won't be disturbed, but what it means is where they have to be disturbed and the approval is given from the Department of Environment and Labour, there has to be a compensating wetland created.
That can be done and wetlands can be created. That's the policy we have and that's what we're dealing with with Keltic. If it can be avoided, it will be avoided. If not, if it can't be avoided, then there has to be compensatory wetland built that would perform the same function.
MR. CHISHOLM: Another issue that I would like to talk about a little bit - the wilderness areas that we have provincially. I know it's a hard subject, after all the ATV issues that we went through over the last couple of years. In Guysborough County, I do have a couple of areas - probably three areas - that are in wilderness protected areas. I have one in Guysborough that has been used by the local people for a lot of years, old trails that go through that wilderness area, they probably go back 70 to 100 years.
Then down in the Canso area, the Canso barrens, the people in Little Dover - as soon as they come out of their back door, they're into the wilderness protected area. Go to Port Felix, that community as well have absolutely no way of getting to any snowmobile trails or ATV trails other than the trail they have through the wilderness protected area. I know there has never been any permission given to anyone to operate ATVs in wilderness areas.
I've had meetings in those three areas of my riding and it's a great concern to people. Nobody wants to do anything to damage the wilderness areas and I guess all they are asking me - and I guess asking government - is that in these wilderness protected areas, there be at least one designated trail that they can use to get to the Trans Canada Trail or get to other areas.
[Page 315]
One of the guys I have been talking to, he has a camp on the other side of the wilderness area and the only way that he can get to that camp is by going through that wilderness area. There is a trail that has been there for 70 years that they have used for years and the only way he can get there, I guess he can get permission to go there but he is going to be awful lonely. He is going to be there by himself, basically.
I guess what I am asking is if there is any way that yourself, your department, as well as maybe some people from DNR - maybe the committee that is set up for the ATV use - we can sit down, have a meeting and I will bring maybe three people from those three areas, one person from each one to sit down and talk and see if there is some common ground that we can come to, to be able to offer this because there are some circumstances there that I think we have to take a second look at. If that could be possible, it would be great.
MR. PARENT: We would be happy, honourable member, to have a meeting. Probably DNR would be the lead one to set it up but we would be happy to participate in that because I am very strong on protecting the protected areas. We have the Wilderness Protection Act, which was brought in 1998. I'm sensitive to the fact that you have a special situation because of the amount of protected area in your particular riding. We are committed, as a province, to increase our protected areas to 12 per cent, as you know, a minimum of 12 per cent by the year 2015. That is a goal that is set out.
It was interesting in regard to protected areas. I was doing some research on the Department of Environment and Labour and the environmental focus of Nova Scotia just recently. The modern environmental movement really began in the United States, well in Europe as well, in the late 1800s. The concern there was the conservation of land and also the effects of the industrial revolution upon air pollution as well as water pollution. So you saw some of the leaders in the environmental movement at the start. Really, their focus was on the protection of land. In the 1960s, that broadened out to the environmental movements being involved in political Parties. The first environmental political Party was in Tasmania and in New Zealand in the 1970s, although the first member elected, in at least a national Parliament was in Switzerland in 1979.
The Green Party in Germany was perhaps the most successful of these environmental Parties and then the next phase was sort of a global concern for the environment and you saw a lot of United Nations movement on it, starting in 1979, I believe it was and perhaps the best known one was the Rio Summit in 1982 down in Rio de Janeiro. We participated as a province in that.
The reason I give this sort of long run-in to the protected areas is that it is quite interesting to see the global trends in the environment and how that has affected us as a province. Certainly the move under a previous Minister of the Environment, John Leefe, was the one who, under Premier Donald Cameron, really began the movement toward protecting 12 per cent of Nova Scotia's land mass. That very much fit in with what was going on
[Page 316]
globally and within Canada at the time and commitments that were made by the federal government in that regard. We are at about 8 per cent now. With the Bowater Mersey acquisition, we expect that many of those lands will come into the protected area network which would bring us up to close to 9 per cent.
The problem that we have is twofold. One is that we have very little Crown land in the province, as you know, and so it is a challenge for us compared to other provinces because we're an older province where much of the land was given away and settled early on; we don't have that land base that other provinces have. And secondly, our protected areas are concentrated in certain areas of the province and there are other counties and areas that don't have protected areas. I know in Cumberland South, for example, with the Chignecto Game Reserve, I had met with a delegation who would like to protect part of that and claim that there are not enough protected land in Cumberland. In Lunenburg, there has been quite a bit of pressure from people on the Blandford lands, which I'm hoping to have an announcement on soon.
[6:00 p.m.]
These are areas in the province where there isn't enough protected area. In your particular riding, there's a fair amount of protected land and you're rich in that capacity. It may cause some problems with recreational ATVing, but it is an asset to your county. In Kings County, there's not much protected land mainly because it was farmland and so it was given away. But also, the other thing is that it has to be ecologically valuable. We'll conserve land through the Department of Natural Resources but the protected area has to be representative and have some ecological significance that makes it worthy of protecting. But our goal is to protect 12 per cent. I'd be very happy to meet with your people, maybe DNR can be the lead on that, in terms of working with them on trail development. We have a $1 million fund in there and my suggestion has been to look at areas and ridings such as yours and I'll put that on the record. I've said that to my colleagues several times that should be a priority - to look at areas such as yours where there are certain challenges in regard to protected areas.
There are many other areas in the province, who want more protected land. Our colleague for Eastern Shore has wanted the Tangier area to be brought into the protected area network because of its ecological significance. But getting back to the environmental movement and the influence that the environmental movement and the stress on the environment has played, as I said, because of the Rio Summit and the commitment then under John Leefe and the federal commitment, we made this goal of 12 per cent. I think it also was part of the spark behind the solid waste program that came in, in 1995, that is a world-leading solid waste program and we're the only province to reach the 50 per cent diversion.
[Page 317]
Another significant milestone - and I'll state this on the record because I think when people look at the environmental history of the department, they'll look at the movement under John Leefe as a significant step forward - the creation of the department in the first place, back in the 1970s. So we were late in creating a department but in the 1970s, the creation of the Department of Environment - then John Leefe's advocacy - protected areas coming in large part out of what was going on globally. Then the solid waste program in 1995. But I think they'll also look at the environment and economic sustainability bill that's before the House now. We can't talk about it because it's before the House. But I think they'll see that as a significant step forward as well that builds on much of the work that has been done in the Department of Economic Development and the Department of Environment and Labour.
So that's a sort of long answer to your question. The answer is, yes, be happy to meet with DNR and to sit down with representatives from your area but I wanted to put the protected areas in context of what has been happening globally. Really, in my department, it's interesting when they talk about Environment Ministers - and I assume that happens in your department as well - who are the key ministers who have made their mark, two names come forward and one is Wayne Adams, because of the work on solid waste and the other John Leefe, because of the work on protected areas. These two are seen as people who have made a real contribution to the environment of Nova Scotia.
MR. CHISHOLM: I think it's a situation where the people in Guysborough County, the people who are looking to get access to these trails, they want the protected areas. They want to see that they're maintained but it's just the fact that they're basically landlocked from doing anything else. In Port Felix, for an example, they got a trail that took them right through to Guysborough then hooked up with the Trans Canada Trail in Guysborough and, you know, it was a Sunday afternoon outing for them to do that, head to Guysborough and have lunch at the restaurant and make their way back. As it stands now, they have absolutely no way of being able to do that. So I certainly appreciate you committing to a meeting with them and I will set that up as soon as I can.
I would have to say too that we set up a meeting in Little Dover and met with staff from DNR as well as staff from Environment and Labour. They had a real good presentation. They were very helpful to the people in that community and as well as myself, I was there as well. They did a very good job that day and, you know, a lot of the things that we talked about that day, from a community point of view - they agree with a lot of the things but the way that it's set up now is, there's no access to those areas. Anyway, I certainly appreciate getting that meeting together. I'll look forward to when we have it and I'll bring those people in. So, anyway, I'll pass my time to the member for Argyle.
MR. PARENT: Just before we go further, it's interesting on this environmental sustainability bill that's brought forward that the media in other provinces are phoning and asking about it and clearly it has been a case where this province is showing leadership on
[Page 318]
the Atlantic level and I think that's a real credit to our Premier. I want to put that on record because he really is providing leadership across the Atlantic now and I'm getting phone calls from media in other provinces saying, why isn't our province moving forward like your province? It's really one of those questions you can't answer because you don't want to be negative towards other provinces but I think it is a credit to our Premier and I would like to have that on the record.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Health.
HON. CHRISTOPHER D'ENTREMONT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I apologize for the cookie incident. I know the honourable member is probably getting a little hungry and I know it's getting on in the hours, but I do have a couple of questions. Basically staying on line with the issue of protected areas insofar as the Tobeatic protected wilderness area, of course, is a big part of my riding, in the northeastern part of my riding.
The question I have is in around the issue of the special licence insofar as those cottages or camps that are there today - the ones that are remaining, the ones that decided not to take the $20,000 move-out fee. There are a number of those camps that have been there for, you know, well over 50 years and in some cases even longer. The question I have around this special licence is the idea of transferability to other family members if the time comes because what we have seen is that they're probably on the fourth or fifth generation for some of these camps and there are some family members who have been asking me and contacting my office, as well the office of the member for Yarmouth, on what will be the transferability of those licences and if we're thinking of allowing that to happen. As far as we understand at this point, there is no transferability there because it comes to a basic of, you know, the environmental rights and environmental stewardship of that land but also the heritage of what those camps represent in the Tobeatic wilderness area. I could have spoken a little longer.
MR. PARENT: No, and that was certainly one of the things we considered with the Tobeatic management plan which had quite a long history of discussion. For the first while I think there was a lot of consensus on what needed to be done but near the end it seemed like there were different groups; one wanted one thing and one wanted another. The plan that was approved and put before me, we looked at the issue of the camps. As you know, there was an agreement that was worked out under a previous Minister of Environment and Labour that anyone who wanted to move their camp would be given a $10,000 amount of money and a piece of land in Crown property elsewhere so they could have a piece of Crown property and money to help move their camp. Quite a few people took that, others didn't want to. While we wanted to protect the environment, we also wanted to consider them. So the compromise that we looked at was the fact that those who wanted to stay could do so under an environmental agreement. I don't know how many we have, I think about six people who signed that agreement and are willing to be helping us in caring for the Tobeatic.
[Page 319]
We did look at the issue of what we do with transferability of that. The problem that we had really, in a sense, was we are quite comfortable with the environmental stewardship of these people, many of whom - I could name names - I met who care for the land in a way that we are not able to with the lack of staff. It becomes an issue, when it is transferred, is that same level of environmental stewardship there. So we decided that the camps would be able to stay with the family for the life of the person but that they wouldn't be able to be transferred. I think that was a factor in some people saying that they would take the $10,000 and move to another piece of Crown property because they wanted to be able to give it to their children.
Certainly, it's an issue that we looked at. I will take it under advisement in terms of your questions. We have had two cases where people signed or wanted to move out and now have rethought and we are taking a look at those cases. What we are trying to do is recognize that these individuals had, over time, developed a lot of environmental expertise and care for the environment that we didn't want to lose and yet balance that with protection of the Tobeatic.
The Tobeatic is, as you know, along with Kejimkujik, the heartland of the UNESCO Biosphere, the only one in Atlantic Canada. I really didn't know this before I became a Minister of Environment and Labour, how spectacular - I had to been to Keji a few times but I hadn't been to the Tobeatic. It really is quite a jewel that we have there and the only UNESCO Biosphere site in Atlantic Canada. So certainly I am willing to take a look at that issue. I am not willing to lead the member on to think that there is much possibility of change there but I will take a look at that.
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister. I know this has been a difficult file to inherit and I know when you became Minister of Environment and Labour, that this was one that had been stewing around for a while. I know from the people I talk to in the area that it was very important that we did have a decision, whichever way it would go because I think we had looked at it for a very long time. The options were sort of growing few and far between. If you can consider the issue of transferability at a later time, I think the community would appreciate that as well.
The other point around the Tobeatic, before I move on to maybe another couple of questions, refers to the issue of in-holdings and the properties that are either completely covered by a wilderness area or those that are in such remote areas touching the Tobeatic that the traditional route was one that went directly through the wilderness area. Specifically, there is a place called Billy's Hill which is just sort of off - it is one of the last expansions of that Tobeatic, sort of toward the southwest corner of the Tobeatic. There have been some issues around exactly what is happening in that area and how we are going to allow or if we are going to be able to allow some of these property owners access to their properties.
[Page 320]
I know this is a difficult question because I know there have been some questions or limitations on the movement via ATVs or via some other mechanism through the Tobeatic Wilderness Area. Again, you sort of run into the issue that this has been a property that has been underused for a number of generations because of hunting and fishing and other wilderness activities that the families, of course, still want to continue to travel to Billy's Hill and other communities or any other in-holdings around the Tobeatic Wilderness Area. I'm wondering what will be the plans on allowing access, even temporary access or whatever it's going to be, for those in-holding properties?
MR. PARENT: The Tobeatic management plan allows for that on an individual basis. What I'd encourage you, as the MLA for the area - with constituents, encourage them to talk to us. We have that, it's written into the Act on Page 28 on the management plan if you want to take a reference to it, but it's done on a case by case basis. Each case is different. That is permissible according to the management plan and we'll work with anyone in that situation.
[6:15 p.m.]
We also have a policy where possible - and people want to sell infillings, particularly ones that are totally surrounded by the Tobeatic - of buying that from them and some landowners have taken us up on that. But where landowners have access problems, we'll work with them on an individual basis. I know of one older lady, for example, where it was simply 100 feet at issue, so the management plan gives us flexibility.
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Let's move on to another issue that you and I have had the opportunity to talk about, when it deals with the issue of pits and quarries. Specifically, for me, it has to do with a pit, or quarry - I don't know the distinction between the two but I think it's a pit - owned by a company by the name of Amirault and Surette. Basically what we have here is a pit that has been underused for probably over 100 years because it was utilized for the construction of the railway through my riding back in the 1880s, I think.
Since that point, then subsequent constructions of highways and what have you, this pit has been underused since that time. Amirault and Surette own about half of it, I would probably guess from the footprint that I see from the highway and from the road that accesses it, but I know it does go further back into that property. I'm wondering what the pits and quarry planning is going to be over the next bit and what kind of focus are we going to do, especially for some of these pits that are the livelihood of some of these small excavating or trucking firms? Especially in the specific case of this one.
I know we've spoken of this one before and I know we're waiting for probably some further information on it, but I'm just wondering what the new policy, or how the process is, on the new policy for pits and quarries?
[Page 321]
MR. PARENT: Thank you for the question. It's something the department has been working at. On quarries that blast - and that's the definition of a quarry versus a pit - we have a certain set of regulations because of blasting that goes on. In terms of pits, the department divided below four hectares there's a certain regulatory regime and above four hectares there's another one.
In order to come up with some sort of even policy that would be doable with the under four hectare pits, we have a pit consultation group that are meeting right now and will be putting some sort of recommendation before me that I'll be bringing back to Cabinet. I think they're due to report back to me sometime this summer.
With regard to your specific location, it is interesting because you have one under the four hectares on one side and one over on the other side, yet they're sharing the same piece of land. So we're looking at some flexibility with that - not so much with the four hectare rule as with the use the person on the other side may be making. They may not be using more than four hectares really. We're looking at that situation as a unique situation.
I'll be bringing back the discussion paper and there will be opportunities to respond. The working group is a group that includes about 20 people - municipal leaders, et cetera. It's quite a good working group and I'm looking forward to see what they bring back.
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister, and I appreciate the time you spent on this issue and a number of other ones.
My final question revolves around the issue of wind power. As you know, in my riding as well, Pubnico Point is at this point the largest wind-generation site or wind farm in the province. There still are some issues, from one resident in particular, on the safety of those windmills, the issue of ice flying off the turbines to low-frequency sound that might be impacting his family.
I know there has been a lot of study done on this particular issue. I'm just wondering, could you maybe explain to us the responsibility of the Department of Environment insofar as the industrial permit and the other permits that it does have to give to the company, and how it works and how the monitoring might work over the next period of months and years?
MR. PARENT: Thank you for the question. We're aware of the situation. Natural Resources Canada has done a study and found that the noise levels are acceptable, within acceptable parameters. I do know that the house owner is claiming that while the noise level may be acceptable, there is an infrasound - I think is what he calls it - a sort of radiated sound that is a problem with wind turbines, and the affected landowner has done research stating that this is a growing problem in wind turbines in other parts of the country. Certainly I've done some research and my assistant has looked at it as well, in terms of wind turbines.
[Page 322]
There is another case, in another part of the county, where the person is complaining about setbacks, that the setbacks from wind turbines aren't enough. So we've monitored, Natural Resources have done a study that's showing that the noise levels are not unhealthy or not a compliance issue, but the person is investigating new sort of fields, in terms of infrasound, which is a new and growing sort of field of concern with wind turbines.
Any time you use a new technology there will be some concerns; for example, tidal is a technology that I'm quite bullish about, but I have lobster fishermen already setting up meetings at my office, concerned about the impact upon the lobster fishery. We need to manage that and that's what my department does - it manages those environmental issues in a way that protects the environment and yet is sensitive to industry.
In terms of wind turbines, I have to admit that of all the assessments I sign off on, or all the approvals I have to give, wind turbines are the easiest to sign off on because there's about 80 per cent public acceptance of them, but regardless of whether or not 80 per cent of the public want wind turbines, that's not an excuse for me or for my department not to take seriously the concerns that are brought before us in regard to those who have environmental concerns or questions or issues.
We have done that with the constituent in your area, through Natural Resources, and to the testing that we have to date there is not a problem. Now I'm not saying that the person doesn't have a problem, they may well have a problem that our testing technology is not able to adequately capture, but with the most advanced testing that we have right now the noise levels are acceptable.
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister, and I know this has been a continuing issue for this resident and one that I know there has been a lot of work done on testing and reviewing and working through that technology. I know at this point there has been nothing that has been shown to be necessarily off the curve or anything like that. I appreciate knowing that further research is going into it and the ongoing monitoring will continue to happen.
MR. PARENT: We'll keep an eye on that because as I said there are other concerns about infrasound coming out in other jurisdictions. My department monitors that information, and if new information comes forward then certainly we would be sharing it, as appropriate.
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Right, and I just want to thank the minister for taking my questions, and I know that I'm done with mine so I'll be passing it on to the member for Pictou Centre.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou Centre, and the time is 6:24 p.m.
[Page 323]
MR. PATRICK DUNN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have just one question, Mr. Minister, I am curious about. There has been a trend across Nova Scotia over the past number of years, a lot of garages have closed down. For example the Irving garage in Sutherlands River, which is on the outskirts of New Glasgow, just recently closed down due to the twinning of the highway - the continuation of it from the Thorburn overpass to Sutherlands River - and I'm just curious as to what type of regulations are in place with regard to facilities, like that, that have been there for years and the many, many years of gas deposits and oil in the tanks and the ground and so on?
MR. PARENT: It's an important issue you raise. The company is really responsible, when that land is sold, to make sure that it's environmentally clean. I know PetroCanada, for example in my area closed down the station in Canning, put an awful lot of work and worked with my department to make sure that the pollutants - and there were pollutants that had spread - were cleaned and taken care of in a safe fashion, and the property, and the oil tanks were taken out. And the municipality, the Village of Canning, was quite concerned about it, too, because they didn't want to inherit an environmental problem.
My cousin, who is on the Supreme Court of New Brunswick, remarked to me once that it is interesting that a gas station whose property would be worth $100,000 if it was sold - all of a sudden, if you find environmental contamination, it becomes a multi-million dollar liability.
The problem that we're having basically in that regard is not with stations that are closing where you have a company like PetroCanada that knows the rules and is co-operating with our department, but where you have abandoned stations. We have quite a few of those across the province that the Premier has raised to me, personally, as an issue on how we can remediate and deal with these.
So abandoned gas stations are a problem. Many of them didn't have the environmental safeguards that new stations have, they didn't really realize the impact upon the environment, and we didn't realize how far pollutants can spread and travel and migrate, so we have a concern there that we're working with.
So with the stations where the company is there, we work with the company, as already stated and I gave an example - where we can't identify, the company has walked away from it, it is an abandoned one. Sometimes we work with Transportation and Public Works who have, in various cases - and I can think of one that was a junkyard really - put in quite a fair amount of money to help remediate the land where we can't find a landowner or a company that is responsible, and our particular concern is with drinking water and the effect on drinking water, so that's where we prioritize putting government money, but we try, as best we can, to hold the company accountable for the cleanup of its land. The major oil companies understand their responsibility.
[Page 324]
I have another one in Kentville, with the Irving Oil company. It was an old, old contamination, but they wanted some sort of assurance that it was from their site and, when the specialist proved that, they were willing to come to the table and say yes, we have a responsibility. So most companies, I think, nowadays realize that they have a responsibility for any contamination they may cause. The problem is with abandoned garages, where we can't trace it back to a company and those we'll work with TPW, particularly on the ones where there's a threat to the water system and to drinking water, which is a concern.
[6:30 p.m.]
We're also setting up an on-line monitoring system of contaminated properties so people can, on the Internet, check and see the history of that property. We're working with industry on the setting of new standards for contaminated sites. There's also a federal program to help with contaminated sites, to help relocate industry that may be inappropriately placed now with urban growth. So there are things that we work with on the federal government side.
But it is a problem. I have to admit that there are sites across the province where there is some contamination. We can't find a company to demand responsibility from, and on those ones we triage them by using government money - it's a risk management system in a sense where the potential detriment to the drinking water is the one that we have to look after.
MR. DUNN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. One more question - I have three or four more questions, but one that I'll ask now and, if I get a chance later, I'll come back - and it's concerning emissions from places like Nova Scotia Power, and in particular reference to the Nova Scotia generating plant in Trenton, which is part of my constituency in Pictou Centre. They made an announcement that they were going to make some improvements. I believe it went to the Utility and Review Board and, right at the present time, I think there's a stop sign up - they're looking at the longevity of the plant and so on. We also are aware of a group there, chaired by Peter Boyles, the Hillside-Trenton Environmental Watch Association, that have been closely monitoring that particular area for quite some time.
I guess my question is what's happening right now, if anything, with regard to the Utility and Review Board as far as having the systems that were announced a number of months ago, with regard to Stack No. 5 - are they going ahead with it, are they still negotiating, wondering over the longevity of Stack No. 5?
MR. PARENT: Thank you very much. I know that this is an issue that you've been very active on and I had the opportunity to visit with you to see some of the concerns of the residents. I was pleased after that meeting, which you initiated, that Nova Scotia Power came forward with an announcement that they would be putting a baghouse on that plant to the tune of about $20 million, I think. That then went before the URB and as you correctly
[Page 325]
mentioned, the URB didn't say no to it and they didn't say yes to it, but what they wanted to do was look at the integrated resource plan for the whole NS Power to see if maybe Trenton would be mothballed. If there was enough life in Trenton, in that particular power plant, then I'm sure the baghouse will go ahead; if there isn't, then it will be mothballed. So either way the citizens' concerns will be met.
I've also made a commitment through your initiatives, and you've been very active on this file, for our air-quality person - who's been trying to get in touch with Mr. Boyles, and has made three or four attempts , so if you're talking to him, please tell him to give me a call - to sit down with the group and talk about the air-quality monitoring. Specific companies monitor themselves for their specific industry - we monitor air sheds as a whole. And so it may be - I know Mr. Boyles had wanted to know if we could move some of our monitoring equipment to different locations and I've wanted him to meet with our air-quality specialists in that regard on the monitoring because it's important that we monitor property for the air shed, and what may be an ideal location for a layperson may not scientifically be the best place to put the monitor. So I've asked for that discussion to go forward.
Our air monitoring branch has grown from two people to about, we're at ten now. It's grown over the past few years and our air monitoring system scattered across the province has grown dramatically. I recently was able to increase the budget for that by about $400,000 - and I appreciated the support I got in Cabinet for that - so that was able to add on some new monitoring stations, one in the Aylesford area, I believe, in particular that is monitoring trans-border pollution. But our air monitoring systems - and I would be happy to provide a tour of some of them for you if you would like to see - monitor for air sheds rather than specific industries because it is the health of the air shed that we want to examine.
Now there is a challenge with air sheds as opposed to watersheds. It is far easier to define the geographical limits of a watershed and to be able to study it more exactly. With air sheds, it's not quite as easy but that is really where we are going in trying to define specific air sheds, much like watersheds, and then being able to manage the health of that air shed. That's what we are doing in the Trenton area, in your riding. So the person in my department has been trying to get in touch with Mr. Boyles and has just not been able to make contact but would very much like to sit down with him, and the group, and talk about it and maybe give them a bit of a tour of what we are doing there and discuss how we monitor. The company self- monitors itself and we audit that for their specific industry and then we monitor for the air shed.
One of the problems we have - and this is beyond Trenton but I mentioned it - is that some of the pollutants coming into Nova Scotia are transborder, and we found that out in the mercury in Kejimkujik, et cetera. So we have been working with the New England States and one of the things that I have been active in is in meetings with governors from the New England States, with the Premiers of other provinces and their Ministers of Environment, to deal with this on a regional basis because we can't deal with air pollution, with sulphur,
[Page 326]
mercury, NOx, VOCs, any of that totally by ourselves because the air shed doesn't respect provincial boundaries, as you know - and the same with the greenhouse gases, even more dramatic in that regard.
So we will be sitting down with Mr. Boyles and his group, showing him what we are doing, why we are doing it, giving him some sort of sense of certainty that it is being measured properly because I know that was his certainty. One way or the other, Mr. Boyles' concerns and the concerns of the citizens in that area will be taken care of very shortly, either through a baghouse which will take well over 90 per cent of emissions out, and the discharge, or through the plant not being used any longer because it has gotten to a certain age where it is taken out of the system. Either way for the citizens of that area, their problem will be solved.
In the meantime, we want to manage that and make sure that there are no pollutants. I have looked at the monitoring data from around that area. Two of our stations report data that is coming close to the level where we don't like to see it - none of them have surpassed it yet, but there are two stations where they are slightly below the allowable level, and certainly, when that happens, we take a closer look at it.
In Trenton in particular, we went back to Nova Scotia Power because, as I said, the industry monitors their own industry and we monitor the air shed which could include that industry, other industries, the emissions from cars, all sorts of things. So the two of them complement each other, if you can understand - well, I know you can understand how that works but the two of them complement each other. In this case, we have also asked Nova Scotia Power to look at the adequacy of their own monitoring of their own industry and we are checking on that and they promised to do that. If Mr. Boyles doesn't - if they don't connect with my department, please, as his MLA, get him to phone me so we can make that agreement work properly.
MR. DUNN: Thank you, I am finished for now.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I recognize the honourable member for Preston, and the time is 6:39 p.m.
MR. KEITH COLWELL: I have an hour, Mr. Chairman?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, you have an hour, but the time will elapse at 7:01 p.m.
MR. COLWELL: I have a few tougher questions to ask here now - not a whole lot. You talked earlier about the landfills and one thing I would like to get from the department is you indicated, I believe, there are seven second- generation landfills and second generation is the highest level of landfill you can get in Nova Scotia at the present time?
[Page 327]
MR. PARENT: There are some tertiary landfills in other provinces, but second generation is the level, the standard, and a very good standard.
MR. COLWELL: I wonder, could I get - I would like to get a document from your department indicating where all these landfills are and indeed that they are second generation?
MR. PARENT: If you want a copy of the approvals which had to be given to them, we can get you copies of that. So you can have the approval, and the approval states very clearly that they have to meet certain conditions to be considered second generation. We'll get you that data.
MR. COLWELL: Okay, that would satisfy what I need.
I know the transfer of garbage is a municipal issue as much as it is a provincial issue. When you look at the landfill that HRM has as compared to say one in Queens, and they're both second generation, so would there be an equivalent - is there anything else that would make them non-equivalent or are there any of them more advanced? In other words, is the one in HRM any more advanced than any of the other ones?
MR. PARENT: No, the standards are all the same. The cost for the HRM one, they would claim that because of the placement of it, because of the terrain that they had to deal with - it increased the costs, but in terms of the technological standards that second- generation landfills have to meet to be considered second-generation landfills, Queens and HRM would be the same. I know HRM has made arguments that because of the terrain - I think it's in rockier terrain and other reasons - the cost of theirs to construct was higher, which means that to recoup the money they need they have to charge more than say Queens would charge. But in terms of what we demand to be a second-generation landfill, all the landfills are under the same standards.
MR. COLWELL: So from what I'm understanding, basically HRM's argument is that it cost them more so they should get more?
MR. PARENT: Basically the argument that they've made to me is that it cost them more. The other argument that they made is that HRM, because it has such a large percentage of the population, is responsible for us reaching our 50 per cent reduction in disposal rate and therefore they deserve some recognition for that - that's the discussion they have had with me. When we talk about flow control and one talks about the different prices that are charged by different landfills - the HRM, the cost is higher than other landfills and the rationale for that is not because it's technologically better than any other landfill in the province, but the cost for them to construct it was higher because of the terrain and because of the situation on the land, et cetera.
[Page 328]
MR. COLWELL: But that was the choice by HRM to build it where they built it and how they built it, put the interchange and all those things in, would that be correct?
MR. PARENT: Yes, it was not something that we mandated; it was a choice that they made on their own.
MR. COLWELL: In other words, what I'm trying to get at here is HRM is making an argument that they can charge $165 a ton, I believe, for garbage and other municipalities charge $65. They're basing their argument - it's like if you bought a car that was a piece of junk and you paid a lot of money for it, you can't blame someone else because you bought the car.
MR. PARENT: Yes, we don't set the tipping fees. The tipping fees are a municipal responsibility, and there's a fair variety of tipping fees. I looked at them recently across the province, ranging from $60 to about $120 being the upper end, but those are set by the municipalities themselves, not by us.
MR. COLWELL: Would you have a copy of all the different tipping fees in the different areas that we could get?
MR. PARENT: Yes, we can get that data for you. I've seen that information so it must be on file somewhere.
MR. COLWELL: I would appreciate that.
MR. PARENT: And the member for Cumberland South would like that as well. But they do range from $60 - West Hants I think is the least expensive, and it may be $57 actually - up to $120, which is HRM.
[6:45 p.m.]
MR. COLWELL: What role does the Department of Environment and Labour have with monitoring these second- generation landfills? Do you inspect them every now and then, or how is that done - what's the department's involvement ?
MR. PARENT: We try and do a comprehensive review annually that goes through their whole operation, but then we also do random inspections when they don't know we're coming. We will do one where we've worked out with them - the comprehensive one where we're going to sit down with everyone and go through the whole operation, and then from time to time we'll do random ones, where no one knows we're coming, to make sure the compliance is there.
[Page 329]
It's easier for them if they know we're coming, to sort of tell everyone that the inspectors are coming, let's pull up our boots. So we do random inspections as well on all the landfills. Annually we do a comprehensive one and then in between we'll do some as well on a random basis, that they don't know we're coming so that we can see the operation without anyone knowing we're there, and that gives us a chance to see how they operate.
We haven't found any problems in our landfill operations - all of them are top-notch. We have, to date, not found any issues that we're concerned about. The main issue that seems to face me with regard to the landfills is the fact that we may possibly have extra landfill capacity than the province is able to sustain at this time, which is causing some of the issues that HRM has brought forward.
But it was interesting, I got a call from a municipal person about our disposal rate in the environmental and sustainability bill that I brought forward and worried that perhaps maybe there wouldn't be enough garbage going to their site to keep it functional. I'm not sure that will be a problem, but it's an interesting change that I've had to sort of wrap my head around, that in the new environment in which we live that waste disposal is actually something that's a profit maker for companies.
The previous member was asking about the landfill site in Guysborough, which is a very good site, and they've contracted with Cape Breton to take the garbage from Cape Breton and it's been an economic generator for the Guysborough area - and also environmentally taking care of the environment. So it's been a win-win, but it's a question of balance in all those things.
Some people have made the argument that the province probably has more landfill capacity than a province our size needs. I don't know if that's true or not - I haven't fully studied it to be able to respond to that. I do know that our landfill sites are second generation, they're top sites. The only problem that I'm aware of in landfill sites was the one here in HRM and the member - I know who the member is, but I forget his riding - was complaining about odour problems and those have been taken care of, I understand. We work with the municipalities as well with the haulers on the separation of various things and continue the educational process.
So we have the annual audit that's done basically with the knowledge of the landfill site, we have unscheduled visits, and we also work with haulers who are hauling to these landfill sites and work co-operatively with municipalities in that regard.
MR. COLWELL: Now what is dumped in the land site is controlled by the Department of Environment and Labour, is it totally, or is it up to the municipality?
[Page 330]
MR. PARENT: Yes, that's a good question. I got into a little trouble when I announced the environment sustainability bill because I maybe wasn't as clear on this as I should have been.
We set regulations and standards that the municipalities have to meet but there are various ways of meeting them, and some municipalities take one approach and others take another approach and they have the freedom to do that as long as they meet the standards. The incident I was referring to was in terms of clear garbage bags, for example. That would really be a municipal decision if they wanted to go that way, if they felt that would help them meet the standards that we set.
The department sets standards and regulations, but because we work in partnership with the municipality that's really the one that has to take care of the solid waste, and they have flexibility within those standards of how they want to meet that. Some jurisdictions have, I understand, gone to clear bags because they feel that helps keep householders honest in terms of their garbage and how they separate it; others haven't, but that's really their decision on how to get there. What we set is the actual standard they have to meet and we work with them to help them meet it as well.
MR. COLWELL: When you say "standards" that means what? Does it mean the amount of garbage that actually goes in the landfill or the types of garbage that goes into the landfill?
MR. PARENT: It's the types of garbage that has to be removed - plastics, organics, things like that - that can't go into the landfill. That has brought down the disposal rate per person, as you know, and we're trying that system even more by finding other recycling streams that will help divert more garbage from the landfill.
The latest one - we're the first province in the Atlantic Provinces to go forward with this, although I know my colleagues in the other provinces are looking at moving in this direction as well - is electronic waste. As we mandate what needs to be streamed out of the landfill system, it brings down the disposal rate. So with organics, with bottles, with e-waste within the year, with those sorts of things, those are mandated out. So it's the types of garbage more than the actual quantity that we set the standards for.
The clear bags or the number of bags in my municipality - you can put out four garbage bags and one recycling bag every second week they come around, and that's all you can put out, and that's really the municipality that makes that decision, not us.
MR. COLWELL: I want to make sure I have this information correct because there are all kinds of issues the regional municipality has with their garbage going outside - I don't agree with them, I'm a firm believer in free enterprise.
[Page 331]
Basically what you're saying - and I want to make sure I have this very clear - is the municipality decided themselves where to locate this garbage facility, they made the decision to build the expensive roads, they made the decision to do everything associated with that, and the only thing the Department of Environment and Labour did was give them approval once they decided on that location. Is that correct?
MR. PARENT: Correct.
MR. COLWELL: Okay. The regional municipality, do you know - and this is probably a question I should ask the municipalities - do all the municipalities have companies operating their landfills or do they do it themselves?
MR. PARENT: Some of them do it directly. HRM has a contract and West Hants has - well, actually West Hants was built by a private company out of Houston so West Hants is slightly different from all the others again. All the other landfills are municipally owned, but some contract with some other company to handle the landfill for them rather than them doing it directly.
MR. COLWELL: Does the department keep any information on that that I could get - which ones are managed, which ones are owned, or is that strictly municipally?
MR. PARENT: We don't have that information for you. We might be able to - we could call around if you felt it was important to get that. I do know that West Hants is through a company from Houston called Waste Management. The others are municipally owned but HRM hires a contractor, MIRROR. So we can probably get you that information. It may take a little while, but we can probably get it for you if it's valuable information.
MR. COLWELL: It would be valuable, I think. It all relates to the cost of running a landfill, I believe. I think that's important information maybe the minister should have as well when you are approached by some of these municipalities that have a view one way or the other on where the garbage should go.
I have a lot of concerns about this because as taxes get higher and higher and higher, property taxes and costs of doing business get higher and higher and higher, it means that businesses aren't going to locate here and when businesses don't locate here, our economy stalls or goes backwards. I'm really concerned about that, and garbage is becoming a looming problem in that direction. The more costs you put on businesses - although I believe doing the garbage, as has been dictated by the Department of Environment and Labour, is a very important way to handle this and indeed we don't want to let off on this at all. I think that it's important that we get the most cost-effective way to do this. I know that the Department of Environment and Labour doesn't control that, the municipalities do.
[Page 332]
Going back to your sort of economic development part of your department, I think that is something that perhaps that section, or your senior staff, should look at because as this gets more and more expensive and when the municipality indicates we are mandated to it this way, that is why it is so expensive, the other ones were mandated to do it that way too and they are not quite as expensive.
Just one of the last questions I want to ask, because my time is just about up, is indeed there would be nothing that the Department of Environment and Labour did in any municipality that would have caused the municipality to cost them more to set up their landfill than any other municipality - is that correct?
MR. PARENT: There is nothing, as a department, that we have mandated that would change the cost. They are all to the same standard, so the variability in cost would be something beyond the department's mandate.
MR. COLWELL: Those are all the questions I have on landfills.
On the septic systems that are in the province - I know there is a really good system for that now and the program that you have for the $3,000 for repair on septic systems isn't, for the record, enough money to do the repairs most of the time. Just to replace a field, if you can keep the same tank and everything else, it's probably going to cost you twice or three times that at a minimum, maybe more, depending on how old the system is and what you have to do with the material you remove. I know there are budget restraints, but is there any movement toward putting more money into that campaign, that process, where people could actually get more money from the government to get this fixed - with income limitations, of course?
MR. PARENT: No, I would love to be able to do something that would see more money go to that and maybe in future years there will be. Certainly the programs prove to be a great success and I have had requests that we're not able to meet, and so I would like to enrich it if possible but it is really budgetary limitations at this present time. So we will get it started and certainly hope to keep it going and maybe be able to enrich it to a certain degree on the septic side, because $3,000 isn't a lot of money now.
MR. COLWELL: It is a big help and I know some people in my area who I believe have used it and found it very useful because they simply wouldn't have done the repair, and if you don't do the repair then you have all kinds of major problems down the road that could be created from that.
You also spoke about some solar energy before - what is the department's involvement in that?
[Page 333]
MR. PARENT: We are not really doing much in solar energy. Most of the work is in wind energy, and I'll be making an announcement tomorrow that will tie into another form of renewable. But in terms of solar energy, we're not probably doing much as a province. There is a company in Newfoundland and Labrador that actually makes an innovative product which is made out of recycled pop cans that are beaten down, painted black, and they go onto the side of a house - they will heat a room with the energy that's produced. But we're not doing as much as we should be on solar, in my opinion.
[7:00 p.m.]
And we need to do more passive solar - we need to work more on educating people to take advantage of passive solar. I was talking to a developer today who is developing a hundred unit - and he was telling me the roads will be constructed in such a way as to take advantage of passive solar rather than just sort of, you know, a grid light. But they'll actually look at, okay, how can the passive solar - so we're not doing as much in solar. Most of the money that we're spending has been going into wind energy, and we'll be doing some more money in another renewable, which I'll be announcing tomorrow up in Stellarton.
MR. COLWELL: Yes, I'm glad to hear that because I think that's the answer. I can remember many years ago I was down . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: The time has expired for today.
MR. PARENT: Will we be coming back, Mr. Chairman?
MR. CHAIRMAN: We would love to have your company again tomorrow.
MR. PARENT: I'll be making an announcement with Minister John Baird in Stellarton in the morning, but yes, I will be pleased to come back tomorrow.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We look forward to seeing you again around 2:00 p.m.
MR. PARENT: I'm getting tired of questions from our own members here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You wait until I get mine. We only had 22 minutes with him so we've got the rest of the hour - about 38 minutes at least. There might be more questions from some of our own members or the NDP might be back.
Thank you. We are adjourned.
[The subcommittee adjourned at 7:02 p.m.]
