[Page 439]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I call the Subcommittee of the Whole House on Supply to order, and the Progressive Conservative caucus has 35 minutes remaining.
The honourable member for Cumberland South.
HON. MURRAY SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Madam Minister, and your staff.
Before we start, just to clarify - last night when I asked the minister to have a look at the Access Nova Scotia centre in Amherst and I made some comments, one of your staff came to me afterwards and he said that I said I felt seven hours was a bit long to keep people waiting and maybe it was. I don't want to mislead the minister or the House, nor do I want to overemphasize the issue, but I can tell you I've had numerous people come to me and call me to say they've waited several hours - by saying seven hours that maybe wasn't correct. I certainly don't want to mislead the minister or the House.
I've been in there myself, and I've had people tell me they've waited hours and left and came back. I believe it is an issue and I would ask the minister on behalf of the people of Cumberland County if she would have her staff at least review the issue of the Access Centre in Amherst and see if there's anything you can do to help the staff with the levels of service they see they're providing and, as well, the residents who find it a bit cumbersome on occasions when they have to wait so long to receive that service. For the clarification of the House and for yourself, Madam Minister, I just wanted to put that on the record.
[Page 440]
I noticed in the estimates, the funded staff estimate is 872, up from 767 in the actual 2008-09 numbers. Could the minister explain these new positions - where they are and what the intent is?
HON. RAMONA JENNEX: First I'd like to respond to the honourable member's comments. I would like to also wish him good morning and thank him for his questions and also his first comments today.
Staff actually did get back to me on the Amherst Access Centre. In the month of September they served 3,094 customers - that averaged about 147 people a day and the average wait time during the month of September was 18 minutes. There might be a perception of people waiting, but I want to let the honourable member know that even though I've given those figures for September, we will be monitoring that on an ongoing basis, as we do all of our Access Centres.
I also would like to make a comment that I don't know if it's the acoustics in this room, but I'm having trouble actually hearing some of the words and the questions, so when I ask for a question to be repeated it's because I actually didn't hear it correctly. I don't know if it's the way that the sound system is working, but I'm having trouble, so when I ask for a question to be repeated it's because I'm not hearing some of the words.
MR. SCOTT: Sure, Madam Minister, maybe I had the microphone too far away.
MS. JENNEX: Oh, that's better, thank you.
MR. SCOTT: Thanks for that, and I'm very appreciative of the quick response with regard to the service there in Cumberland because it is quite important to the area. I know that you said an average of 147 a day, but if there are days of the week or days of the month that 147 is 400, 150, or 250, as opposed to another day that's only 60 there may be an issue over particular days of the month or what service the people are actually seeking there as well.
While I appreciate that information, the fact that 3,094 for the month and 147 a day is average, again there may be certain days that it's overloaded, or there are particular days of the month that for whatever reason - I believe truckers as well can seek service there now at that centre that they weren't able to seek in the past. I believe that's correct. If you're reviewing it and at least looking at it, I appreciate that.
The question I had was around the funded staff estimates. My understanding is it's up this year from 767 to 872 and I just wonder, could the minister explain those positions - where they are, the cost, and the reasoning for it?
[Page 441]
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, there was a change, a casual conversion and so the full-time change due to people who had been working in a casual position actually were now changed, the name of that position, so it's called the conversion - so around the conversion, that's where you'll see those changes.
MR. SCOTT: Madam Minister, can you explain then the additional cost for that conversion?
MS. JENNEX: Well, I'm going to actually read the rationale around that:
On November 30, 2007, the Province of Nova Scotia announced that collective bargaining rights would be extended to seasonal and casual workers who do bargaining unit work. After 10 weeks of continuous service, those employees doing bargaining unit work would become civil servants. The Service Delivery Division uses casual employees extensively in the Access Centres, the Registry of Motor Vehicles, and Land Registration Offices. With this change in legislation, most of these casual employees were converted to civil servants, which increased the department's full-time equivalent count and the cost of conversion was $1.6 million.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you for the answer. I noticed as well that the salaries and benefits are up from $48.2 million to $51 million - does that include the number you just gave?
MS. JENNEX: Yes.
MR. SCOTT: So there's roughly $3 million additional there?
MS. JENNEX: Half of that would be due to the conversion aspect and the other would be other changes.
MR. SCOTT: So other changes - do you know what those other changes are?
MS. JENNEX: Collective bargaining increases would be one of the components of that, and also new positions in Collection Services to administer the EnerGuide loan program, services for new motor vehicles, and vital statistics applications.
MR. SCOTT: So additional for the EnerGuide, the administration of the EnerGuide - can you explain what additional there will be for that program?
MS. JENNEX: There would be a new position to administer the program.
[Page 442]
MR. SCOTT: So that's an additional position, is it, over and above what you already had in that program? This is a new additional position to administer the EnerGuide?
MS. JENNEX: Yes, it's the EnerGuide loan program and they would be new positions to administer that.
MR. SCOTT: It appears that the operating costs are down from $35.9 million to $33.25 million in actual 2008-09 expenses - can you explain that change as well?
MS. JENNEX: Could you repeat the question, please?
MR. SCOTT: It appears the operating costs are down from $35.9 million to $33.25 million in the 2008-09 actual expenses.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Does the honourable member have the page number? I know you might not, but it might assist the staff.
MR. SCOTT: These are actual notes - I went through yesterday and made notes as I went through.
MS. JENNEX: It's very hard, I don't know what it is, but it's very hard to hear today.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think it's because of the size of the room.
MR. SCOTT: These are actual numbers that I took, when I made some notes myself. I probably can go back later and find the page I got them off. I went through these yesterday and I noticed these changes and I just made some notes of each one, rather than thumbing through all the pages today, I just listed them here.
MS. JENNEX: So your question is . . .
MR. SCOTT: Yes, the operating costs appear to be down this year.
MS. JENNEX: The operating costs are down about $2 million. There's a number of reasons for those costs to go down, but I guess the major component was, we moved some of our program over to TIR and we reduced professional services' budgets.
I do know that the department has been very cognizant in making sure that money is well spent and effectively spent, so I do know that there have been cost reductions, too, in making sure that any outside training and travel are things that are really necessary to go to; instead of two people going, one person is going. They are really streamlining it to make sure that the biggest bang for the buck is made within the department. They have been very
[Page 443]
cognizant of making sure that money is extremely well spent, which they always have, but even streamlining it a bit more.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you, minister, I appreciate that answer. Am I right in saying that there are more employees, but the operating estimates are down? Right?
MS. JENNEX: Yes, that's correct.
MR. SCOTT: And you are saying there are savings within the department to allow for that?
MS. JENNEX: Well there are savings within the department. I know that there has been some streamlining, as I said, in terms of training and travel, but also there was a transfer, part of the program went over to TIR, so that would be the reduction from the department.
As I said earlier, we've taken our casual employees and moved them up to permanent employees and that would reflect in looking as if we've added staff, but it's a change in classification of people.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Grants and Contributions appears to be up as well this year. Could you explain? It seems to be substantial.
MS. JENNEX: The gas tax transfer and the Building Canada Fund are - that's why grants are up, through those grants.
MR. SCOTT: So it appears that it is up from $165.5 million to $219 million?
[9:30 a.m.]
MS. JENNEX: Which page are we on?
MR. SCOTT: Again I should have indicated which page, but I went through it last night and wrote these down so I just highlighted some of the changes, the major changes I've seen in your report.
MS. JENNEX: We also are looking at grants to the increase to the HARP program. So you're asking if the increase is in those, an increase in the grant to the HARP program would be one component of that.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you. There are staff within your department who are assigned to be liaisons between yourselves and the municipalities. How many are there?
[Page 444]
MS. JENNEX: We have three municipal advisors and then we have 40 staff who would be interacting with municipal components, so there's approximately 40 staff who work with the municipalities.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you.
MS. JENNEX: I apologize, but I'm really struggling, actually, to hear the questions so if I ask again, I don't mean any disrespect.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you. So the three that are assigned, are they assigned to coordinate with a specific number of municipalities? Are those the three? I'm trying to get at the ones that are - for example, in Cumberland County, is there one for all of Cumberland or a larger area than Cumberland?
MS. JENNEX: Yes. Of the three, each would have their own geography. Looking at the province, they would be looking at their certain component of the province.
MR. SCOTT: So are they mandated to meet on a regular basis or do they just respond to concerns of the municipality? What's the process for that? How do you coordinate that service between your department and the municipalities?
MS. JENNEX: To answer your question, it's sort of multi-faceted. The three advisors respond to the needs and to questions and working with staff and municipalities, but they're also proactive, also going in and making sure that needs are met and helping them. So it's sort of a - it's a back and forth, but it's proactive and reaction, they do both components, and they look at the province as a whole.
I know they are very busy in their work and making sure that municipalities have their needs answered and working with any of the challenges that they have.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you. I wasn't suggesting that - I think they do a great job and I'm not sure if there are enough of them, but I think they do a great job. I think the work they do is very important in the fact that a lot of times - and I use the municipality as my own area - for example, when you have new, particularly newly-elected people, councillors or mayors, who aren't aware of the services or the programs that are available through your department, a lot of times they'll call me, or they'll call other individuals, when I think the proper place is for them to be talking to that person in your department who would coordinate with them.
I know they do a great job and I think they are tasked, probably, with a large area and I was just trying to find out - for example, the one from my area - how big an area that person would actually have. How many municipal units did they need to contact and are they doing this on a regular basis? So I guess I'm wondering, the one for my area, Cumberland, how big an area would that individual have?
[Page 445]
MS. JENNEX: I'll get that information to you in a minute, but I do know that - I say a minute - I know I have actually seen the breakdown and I just don't have that at my fingertips right now but I do know that this department is very good at dealing with any new elected officials in municipalities around the province and any of the questions can be answered by staff, I know that.
We also have the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities, which is extremely proactive in making sure that the people who work in municipalities - there are 438, I think, elected officials around the Province of Nova Scotia - that they get the training and the knowledge that they need to do their work effectively and efficiently. We're in an ongoing basis dealing with the UNSM and any of the needs and concerns of any of the elected officials that we respond to.
I know just recently we were asked to do, I guess the word is a training session or an orientation session, with some elected officials coming up, so we respond to the needs as they come in and also we're in constant contact with the UNSM.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Minister, and thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to go back to - I know it was discussed yesterday and I think my honourable colleague had brought it up, in regard to motor vehicle inspections. Your predecessor had made a commitment to review the motor vehicle inspection process, so I'm wondering if that review is still in place, if you've allowed any money in your budget for that and if you're going to be in consultation with the motor vehicle repair people throughout the province in that regard?
MS. JENNEX: I'm just going to go back to answer the question. The municipal advisor in your area literally has one-third of the province and it goes from Cumberland to Colchester Valley down to Digby.
In answering your question on the motor vehicle, you asked if our government is looking at reviewing that. Yes, as soon as the House rises we're going to be having discussions as we pull in resources, and looking at our resources, looking at the Motor Vehicle Act as a whole. As you know, it has been amended over the last number of years, and I would say in the mandate of the last government, when there were changes to bring it in line with national and international standards, some things didn't quite make a good fit for us here in Nova Scotia, so we will be looking at the Motor Vehicle Act as a whole.
In terms of discussing with industry and talking with people who actually do motor vehicle inspections, as an MLA, I've had many conversations with people who inspect cars and I have heard their concerns and their particular needs associated with that. I've also heard consumers with various concerns and any of the correspondence that has come through the department. Yes, we are looking at making sure that the Motor Vehicle Act is a
[Page 446]
contemporary piece that meets the needs of consumers today, keeping safety as our utmost priority for people in Nova Scotia.
MR. SCOTT: So the review is still ongoing.
MS. JENNEX: After the House rises we are going to be having a discussion and looking at our resources to move forward on that mandate, yes.
MR. SCOTT: The reason I ask is because I was interested to see whether the review was continuing but also - you said you've heard yourself from the residents at large - I think one thing we tend to do as government, sometimes we know what we're doing ourselves in our departments, and I've been there myself and I'm probably guilty of it as well, so I'm not saying it's just this government or just yourself, but I think a lot of the time we forget that the people who are most affected by any changes we make, sometimes we forget to do full consultation with them to give them an opportunity to actually have input in regard to what the changes we're contemplating may mean on the ground.
The changes to the Motor Vehicle Act, I think the one that comes to my mind most readily is the issue around pulling the wheels for checking your brakes. I'm not saying whether I think it's a good thing or a bad thing, it's something that has to be done, and is being done, but I don't know how much consultation there was at the time with folks in the field that I spoke to that actually were tasked with doing the motor vehicle inspections. Two things - how onerous a task it is, but also the cost for them in regard to time and whether they're actually reimbursed to what they should be, reflecting today's operating expenses for them.
I'm just hoping that, as this review unfolds, you will give the people in the field who are licensed to do these motor vehicle inspections an opportunity to explain to someone what changes are being contemplated, or could be contemplated, what it will actually mean to them in the every day, when someone comes to them with a vehicle to be inspected, because it does have a huge impact on these small operators, particularly in rural areas. There is only so much business for them, so I'm hoping there will be some good consultation with them to give them an opportunity to share what their concerns may be.
MS. JENNEX: I appreciate those remarks. Of course I don't know exactly the full scope of what transpired before I came into office in terms of training or consultation. I do know that the department that I work with here is very cognizant of the owners/operators of the motor vehicle stations and I'm sure that there was some level of education around that. Of course, as you know, we're always dealing with people's perceptions and so therefore I can't answer to the scope of what happened, but I do know that the staff of the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations would have been forthright in making sure that everyone would know the rule change. In terms of your comment about moving forward, that's very well taken, and as we move forward with that, making sure that any changes we
[Page 447]
make - and of course, there will be changes - will be clearly articulated to the owners and operators of the facilities that do the inspections.
MR. SCOTT: Madam Minister, again, my colleague last night had brought up the issue around motorcycles versus other types of vehicles that are operated on the highways. I actually had a call from a dealer - I guess this is probably about a year ago now, maybe it's a little longer - who was wanting to bring in - I think they're Bombardier Can-Am Spyders that are built in Quebec. He actually did bring two in and put them on the floor of his showroom, only to find out that they couldn't be licensed here in Nova Scotia because of the way the Act was designed.
So that was changed, and that allowed for those vehicles to be registered here in Nova Scotia, but Spyders are the vehicles with - they're a motorcycle but with the two wheels in the front, and that's what was stipulated, I believe, in the Act. It said that two wheels were in the back with one steering wheel in the front and so we had to change that, but what I'm wondering is, in regard to motor vehicle inspection, two wheels on the front versus two wheels on the back for motorcycles versus doing the other, whether it's trailers or trucks or cars - why is it that some dealers are able to inspect some but not others?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, I think that you've hit on one of the reasons why it's very important that the Motor Vehicle Act needs to be updated to fit our society today. It has been patchwork; it has been amended. The foundation of it is based totally on safety for people in Nova Scotia. That's what it's about, and of course, when things change in our society, people come forward with new kinds of vehicles. The Act does not have that reflected in there, so of course there's going to be a disconnect. We're going to have an Act that doesn't reflect the current marketplace.
With the review we'll be able to make sure that those newer vehicles, or vehicles that are coming on the market - we don't even know, there are probably other things that are going to be happening over the next number of years, new vehicles that are coming in the market - that will make sure that those are covered under the Act appropriately. I understand that there would be a frustration level when you have a new vehicle coming in and the Act in Nova Scotia does not have it, but as you know, when those concerns come forward, this department works quickly to try to mitigate that problem so that the dealers in Nova Scotia will be able to pursue their industry in an appropriate manner.
[9:45 a.m.]
MR. SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to switch gears a little bit now to property taxes and assessments, so I'm sure you'll want to switch seats here. There's a cap on property assessments in the province. Obviously it has a huge impact on property owners and municipalities. I know we've heard a lot of - some people like it and some people don't. It's like everything that the government will do, I guess, and the decisions this government will
[Page 448]
make - there will be people on both sides of the issue. What I'm wondering is, a review was requested of the CAP, or one of the previous ministers had talked about a review. Can you tell me the status, if in fact there is a review of the CAP underway, and what you anticipate may happen as a result of that review or what type of consultation you're going to undertake?
MS. JENNEX: You're correct, there is going to be a review. It's not a review that's taking place, but in 2010 there will be a review of the CAP and that is something that I inherited in taking office. It was something that was put in place around bringing in that program, that it would be reviewed in 2010, so that will go forward.
MR. SCOTT: You're anticipating in 2010 that you will initiate that review of the CAP.
MS. JENNEX: Yes, that is something that we are moving forward on in 2010, absolutely.
MR. SCOTT: Two things from that. One is, do you have an amount of money in your budget to allow for that and what do you see is the process for that unfolding in regard to consultation?
MS. JENNEX: I can't answer what the budget piece will look like in an ongoing budget and the process around the review is something that I haven't started having any discussions around with staff. That is something that we will be doing in the new year, we will be having discussions and looking at what that process will look like. At this time, I haven't had discussions about what the process will look like, I just know that we will be, in the new year, looking at having a review around that.
There have been concerns brought forward, comments brought forward and so those will all be taken into account as we undertake the review around the CAP.
MR. SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, I guess what I was asking Madam Minister was, have you budgeted an amount of money to conduct that review this year?
MS. JENNEX: No, not at this time. I have not had consultation with my staff around putting forward that as a budget piece for an upcoming budget.
MR. SCOTT: Just for the record, I personally believe that the CAP is a good thing. I lived through the times where people had to apply for a CAP. It was a 10 per cent CAP, I believe, at the time that people could apply for. If you were aware of the CAP and you knew where you could apply, great, if you didn't then it was basically, too bad, unfortunately. A lot of seniors who just either weren't aware or didn't have the ability to apply so I really felt that this CAP reflected what really needed to happen. It's fair to everyone, whether you're aware of it or not. Unless you made major alterations to your home, unless your home sold
[Page 449]
at a higher rate than what it was assessed at, unless something unusual happened in a year, then people were eligible for a CAP that to me seemed to be fair. I know there are people that are opposed to that and I know a lot of municipal units are but I still believe that it's a fair process for people and it's fair to everyone. Whether people are aware of it or not, they at least can have the ability to take advantage of that.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out because there was a lot of chaos, I believe, in regard to assessments. Where assessments would be done, they would some places go up to 40, 50, 60, maybe even higher than that per cent in a year, only because there was possibly no assessment done for the previous number of years. I remember one lady - she was probably in her 90s - called me and hers went from, in the Town of Springhill, which maybe had low assessments, went from $30,000 or $40,000 I believe up to probably $80,000 in one year. For her, when you're in a community that has a high tax rate it's a substantial increase for someone who's on a fixed income. Through no fault of her own, maybe the assessment should have been gradually increased over the years, it didn't but then she got hit all of a sudden one year for once. I think that the CPI CAP for everyone is a fair way to go. There must be a different way to ensure a fair assessment to represent a community - a better way to have assessments fairly represent a community - as opposed to just happening on a one-on-one basis or whatever instead of . . .
Anyway, I just think the CAP works well for me. I think the last couple of years, in regard to the response I received from people, nowhere near what it was prior to that.
The assessment process itself has actually changed, hasn't it? Can you explain that a little bit how that transition has worked and what kind of response your department sees as a result of that change?
MS. JENNEX: I appreciate your comments and the CAP program was supported by all Parties when it did come in and it was addressing needs for Nova Scotians to benefit Nova Scotians.
At this time, as the honourable member mentioned, the assessment process goes through a program. It's at arm's length from government and I'm just going to be, I've met with them but I'm just, their name is the PVSC, and they are the ones in charge of doing the assessments for the province. We have a very good relationship with them, it works well, and I just want to go back to my comments on the review. In any program that anybody does in public or in government, or in private, any program needs to be reviewed or evaluated after a number of years. So the review that's going forward in 2010 will be looking at the benefits, any difficulties, and the long-term look of that program. As I said, it was supported by all Parties at the time and at this time the assessment is done by an arm's length group and that is working well for our department and for the government at this time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time for the PC caucus has expired.
[Page 450]
MR. SCOTT: Thank you very much, Madam Minister and your staff, and thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth East.
MR. ANDREW YOUNGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning, Madam Minister, and if you can't hear me, just let me know.
MS. JENNEX: They've moved the microphones so I'm good.
MR. YOUNGER: That's fine. I think I actually might as well start where my honourable colleague here left off and that's with the CAP because I recognize that there are obviously some good things. There was an issue but there also have turned out to be some major issues particularly affecting seniors and low income families who have been negatively impacted by the CAP. I just want to know where you're going with that or whether you have any thoughts on it and maybe I'll preface it by starting with the first problem, which appears to be - and it's only showing up now because the CAP has been in long enough that the difference between the actual market value assessment and the CAP assessment on some properties is quite substantial.
Especially in metro we've learned that there are quite a few seniors, in particular, who have decided that they need to downsize their home or wish to downsize their home and can actually end up paying more tax on a smaller house than they were paying on their larger house because, of course, when they sell their home, they have to start paying at market value assessment. So the market value assessment of the new, smaller, less valuable home is higher than the capped assessment on the home that they just sold. So you can probably understand where I'm going with this. What ends up happening is somebody who decides they're going to downsize - because the kids have left, or they've lost their job and they want to downsize, whatever the case - is downsizing to reduce the overall expenditures of their house but their tax bill actually goes up. Is your department looking at that issue at all and working with the municipalities on how to address that?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your comments and that situation has been brought to my attention. As with any program that's brought in, of course, some of the long-term implications of that are shown as the program moves forward. So as we said, we are reviewing that in 2010 and all of those considerations will be taken into account during that review.
MR. YOUNGER: It strikes me that, I am told by someone in Toronto, which had a cap for awhile and had to drop it in the end because of this very issue and then may have had to bring it back and it became a really messy situation a number of years back. That review is going to start in 2010 and how long do you expect that review to take?
[Page 451]
MS. JENNEX: We're looking at having that review done within a matter of months in the year 2010.
MR. YOUNGER: I'm happy to hear that it will be done that quickly because I think that this is an issue. I don't think any of the three Parties really foresaw that being an issue, I'm sure staff in the department didn't as well. But it is an issue that's going to get worse and worse each year and I honestly don't know what the solution is to that but I think we do have to look at a solution.
My colleague talked about the assessment process and I am familiar with the new municipal assessment board. One of the things that I have wondered about, and I know HRM made representations to the previous government on this, is HRM, well, every municipality pays this on their property tax bill or through their property tax bill and in the case of HRM they're charged about $5 million to help run the assessment service, I think it's in that range. Yet, really, we're not using assessments anymore, so I'm wondering whether either your department is now looking at this or as part of that review whether you will look at just taking - if you are going to keep the CAP - just taking the sale price of the houses and applying the CPI to that, which you track anyway, and abandon doing these assessments, which would be a major cost savings to the taxpayers.
MS. JENNEX: I can't speculate to what it will look like at the end of the review. We'll take all situations and scenarios into account and, also, we'll take all suggestions on ways we can make sure we move forward in the best way. I can't speculate what it will look like at the end, but I know all considerations will be discussed and looked at so that we have a good program at the end for people in Nova Scotia. What that looks like I don't know.
MR. YOUNGER: Do you, then, going at that in a slightly different way - and I appreciate that you want to see what the review ends up being - what is the value of doing an arbitrary assessment on a property, which I think most people will tell you very rarely reflects market value? I've been through a few appeal boards and I can tell you even the appeal people will tell you it doesn't reflect market assessment. Nobody's really quite sure what it reflects.
If we're going to cap the assessments, and we are going to move them to market value on the sale of the home and just put them on CPI - and CPI is obviously determined by Statistics Canada - in your opinion, what is the value of the assessment process?
MS. JENNEX: Well I have great value in the work that the PVSC does. They're professionals and they have a formula in place that they do that assessment. I guess I'll have to disagree on the terms that you used. I do value the work that they do and they're doing good work. Under that review process that will be going forward in 2010 we can look at what they bring back to us in terms of any suggestions that they're going to make.
[Page 452]
At this time, they're doing good work and the assessments that they're doing are fair and appropriate assessments for residents in Nova Scotia.
MR. YOUNGER: I don't dispute that the staff there are very good and they know how to do their jobs and they follow whatever the formula is that they've determined that these should be.
My concern is that every property taxpayer in this province is paying a portion of their tax bill that is to fund a system that we're really not using anymore because we're capping assessments at CPI anyway, when in fact we track on the land property database, the sale prices through the mortgages and deeds of all the properties anyway. So we're collecting the market values in one system, we're creating another value for the property in a second system - both under your department - and they're almost never the same value. I don't know of a single case where the two property values are the same.
[10:00 a.m.]
We're doing CPI anyway so why not save taxpayers and people of all incomes and municipalities a whole lot of money and just get rid of the assessment system altogether?
MS. JENNEX: We have a process in place and that process is the process that will continue. We'll be looking at a review in 2010.
I want to say that times have changed and no one foresaw that the economy would do what it is doing. What that looked like when it was formulated and capping it and having CPI, no one anticipated that CPI would be flat or even lower. The situation that we're looking at is based on the economic times that we're living in, so the misfit that you're describing is based on factors that would never have been able to be foreseen at the time of the formulation of this.
At this time, we're going to go forward the way that we have been going forward and we will look at all of that during the review. It's the times and it would be one of those things that we would have considered that CPI would continue to increase for that, but as it turns out, this year - and I think from my data, it is at zero - who would have said that we would be sitting here, a year ago or two years ago. If we had said that, people would not have believed we would be saying that, because that is something that is extraordinary, just to tell you the truth.
So, the issues that you're bringing up, I hear you and I appreciate what you're saying, but that is something no one would have been able to foresee, but as we said, we're moving forward. We're going to be looking at all factors and all information as we go through with the review, to be able to make sure that we have a good process in place for Nova Scotians.
[Page 453]
MR. YOUNGER: Mr. Chairman, I certainly agree with you that no one would have foreseen this. I guess what I would ask - and I don't want to suggest that I know what the answer should be. But what I hoped that review would consider - I see there are two major issues. One, you have a department that is collecting property values, even when we didn't have this issue of zero per cent CPI, the values were different. I mean you could go to downtown Dartmouth and see properties regularly selling for $500,000 that are assessed at $150,000 or $120,000 and they're capped down there, yet until they sell, that value won't change.
It creates another problem that you have when somebody sells on the same street. You can up ending up having people on the same street, with the same services, in any municipality around the province, paying widely divergent property tax bills at the end of the day.
The third issue is, as I mentioned at the beginning, you could have people trying to downsize their homes and save themselves money, or going to buy a new home that may be more energy efficient or whatever the case may be, or young people buying their first home and end up now, in Nova Scotia, paying the greater proportion of the property tax base, which a number of studies have now shown is a deterrent to young people staying in Nova Scotia and setting up homes.
Then the last issue on that is that we're paying - I don't know what the total cost of the assessment corporation is, but split among the municipalities, in HRM alone taxpayers are paying $5 million for a system that they're really not using. I can tell you right now that I won't sell you my house for the market value assessment of my home, I also won't sell it to you for the capped value, but I will sell it to you for the amount that if you go on Property Online and figure out what the costs, the value would be, I will sell it to you for that and they are all collected by your department.
So I hope that review will not only go to those issues, but look at if we're duplicating things and charging people in Nova Scotia for services that, maybe, if we're going to stay with a capped assessment system - which may, very well be important to do - that we don't charge people then for a system we don't need any more, because we are going to a capped CPI. So I would just ask that, at least, the review address those questions or look at them. I'm not saying that's the answer.
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, yes, it is always interesting that we're able to pick out what is problematic with the program, but what is the answer? I appreciate all of the comments that you have made and they are valid comments, I've heard them from other sources too.
We have a process in place at this time and there are some anomalies, obviously, but we have to look at it in a holistic way. We have to be very careful which way we tread. We
[Page 454]
will be going through the review process in 2010. We will take your comments and they will definitely be considered during that process. Not particularly your comments as you said them, but the issues that your comments bring forward definitely will be a part of that review.
In any new program that comes in, a review needs to take place. Times have changed in Nova Scotia. Probably something that hadn't been fully thought out, for 10 years out or 20 years out, things change, so as we move forward into that review process we will be looking at all aspects and making sure it's a balanced, well-designed process for Nova Scotians.
MR. YOUNGER: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that, and at this point, all I ask is those sorts of issues do be considered because I agree that there is probably no perfect system. I don't think that whatever your department does you'll end up with a perfect system - there will always be some weird anomaly. The key, I think, is that in the rush to solve one problem we seem to have created a whole lot of other unintended problems.
All three Parties can take some of the blame for that, because I know all three Parties came in supporting it as the solution, and the CAP system may still be the solution as long as we see if there are ways to at least minimize those anomalies. I think the unintended consequences were hurting the very people we were trying to help the most, which was people on fixed incomes. People who are struggling to pay for things seem to be the ones that we're hurting the most over the long term. I'm sure there is a solution, but I don't know what the solution is, myself.
I would like to move on to a related topic, which was the Fair and Equitable Funding Report done by the UNSM, submitted to the previous government - it may have been two or three ministers ago now. I'm not sure how many ministers we've been through. Are you familiar with the report from UNSM on fair and equitable funding?
MS. JENNEX: Am I totally familiar with every aspect of that report? I can honestly say no, but am I aware of the report? Yes. I also would like to go to the honourable member's comments earlier. I do appreciate what you had to say and take that matter very seriously.
We're here because we want to do the best for Nova Scotians, and all Parties can agree on that. So even though the honourable member made a comment that we're all kind of to blame on the previous one, I don't think there is any blame intended on any of that. It was an issue that, yes, we were moving forward to make sure that we are going to be meeting the needs of the most vulnerable in our society. A few years out, there seem to be some anomalies and some concerns. There are parts of that program that are working well and parts that need to be looked at very, very carefully, so I just want to reassure the honourable member that I take that very seriously and that we will be moving forward. I'm sure that we will have all-Party support on making sure that we protect the interests of Nova Scotians as we move forward with that.
[Page 455]
I'm going back to your comment on the Fair and Equitable Funding Report. As I said, I can honestly say I have not read the full report and analyzed it, but I am aware of that report, yes.
MR. YOUNGER: I wanted to ask you if you were familiar with it - I certainly don't expect you to be an expert in it - before I ask my next question, because I don't think it would be fair to ask you a few questions about it if you didn't know what I was talking about.
I know my colleague for Glace Bay - or at least I understand that he spent quite a bit of time on Cape Breton and CBRM last night, and I'm not going to go there other than to say that I was, obviously, on a municipal council when this report was done. I sat with the folks from CBRM and municipalities from across the province when for about six months UNSM debated whether they were going to endorse this. Ultimately this was, as I'm sure you know, endorsed by UNSM as a position statement on the ways to solve these issues, including the issues of CBRM in terms of addressing equalization. The previous government moved on some of the recommendations. They certainly moved on reducing some of the provincial charges on municipal tax bills.
The basis of this report really is around the idea that a municipality should pay for the things that cost them money and the province should pay for the things that cost them money, each through their own revenue sources, whereas at the moment you have charges on property tax bills for provincial services, such as mandatory Education charges and Corrections and things like that. Do you agree with that general philosophy?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, I know that last night I did get quite a few questions around CBRM.
MR. YOUNGER: You can't help it, having the member for Glace Bay here. (Laughter)
MS. JENNEX: And that's fine. I just want to also say that every municipality in Nova Scotia is important to me and to the department, and making sure that things are going well for Nova Scotians overall is very important.
The report that you're discussing, as I said, I know of the report but I haven't read it in detail and so I can't comment on any aspect of it, if I agree or disagree around it. But I do know that we are now looking at the process of uploading the Corrections and housing costs for all municipalities and that would be $17 million in Corrections costs and $6 million for housing costs, provincially. So I think, if I'm correct, honourable member, that would have been one of the recommendations coming through the UNSM.
MR. YOUNGER: Yes, in fact, that was part of the recommendations. Of course, the big cost in the whole thing is the mandatory education, that's the largest of the provincial
[Page 456]
charges. I believe in that - I don't know what it is today - but at the time the report was $160 million that the municipalities turned over to the province for education. I think we all agree that education is important, but this is really a debate about who should be paying for it.
Is there a plan to move - and I know the education amount was capped and it was capped, ironically, I think it was capped at CPI as an increase each year, it seems like everything is capped at CPI lately, it must have been the buzzword of the year - I'm just wondering, is there any plan to now move into the other direction as recommended by the report and start to phase that charge out and just have that picked up by the province?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, at this time I'm not in any discussions around that particular issue. As I have said publicly and as I have said in here, we're committed to reviewing formulas based on a balanced budget as we move forward in our mandate. But that particular piece, I'm not in any discussion at this time and I can't speculate where we're going at this time.
MR. YOUNGER: I guess in principle, you can't speculate where it is going and I understand, without having discussions, but in principle, getting back to the original question, do you feel that the province should be funding its own expenditures, and the municipalities should be funding their expenditures, through their own revenue sources?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, at this point, I'm having discussions with UNSM, they're having their conference in November, I think it is November 6th and 7th, and one of the things that I really like to do is, in any of the things that I move forward with in the municipalities and through that department, I like to listen to the recommendations coming from UNSM and I like to have discussion with the president and the council around that. So, after discussions with UNSM and their recommendations, then I will move forward with discussions within the department and with my colleagues around any of their recommendations.
[10:15 a.m.]
I know 100 days sounds like a long time; this is a big department; there are 55 municipalities; there are 22 villages; there is a lot to learn in this particular department and the funding and all of that. This particular piece, I don't want to make any comment in terms of speculating which way we're moving forward.
My own personal feelings aside, because this is where I need to take recommendations coming forward from the UNSM, also working with staff and working with my colleagues, so, in terms of any way we're moving forward, I can't answer at this time. But as you know, this government, as we make decisions, we are committed to making sure that we inform your Party and the other Party, which ways we are moving forward.
[Page 457]
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you, minister. I agree you have to consult with UNSM and discuss with them, but this is their official position, I think their official position has been well known by your department. Obviously you are new and I respect that, but I don't think this is necessarily a situation where you need to go and ask the president of UNSM what their position is because this is their official position; it is still on their Web site; it has been submitted to your department; it's been reviewed by your department and so, the previous government had made some strides to move forward on a couple of items, but it never actually answered the question of whether - don't get me wrong, I do not believe for a second that you can do this. Even if you agreed with this report, I don't think it could be implemented overnight because I recognize that there's a large cost shift. The municipalities pick up some, the province picks up some, so it would have to be phased in. We know what their position is. I'm glad you're going to the conference, but you don't have to go to the conference to find out what their feeling is on this, because that's why they submitted this document, because this is their feeling.
MS. JENNEX: Thank you and I appreciate that. I have been in discussions with the president and this is not a topic that the president and I have had a discussion about. I remember early days, I know that there was a presentation, but in terms of discussion around any of these issues, we haven't had a discussion. We have had discussions on other things. I think that when a new government comes in, and what goes up to the top and needs to be discussed - we've been very busy and the department will be rest assured that I have been busy dealing with all sorts of issues. This one particular one is not one that I have had discussions on. We've had discussions on many other issues but for whatever reason, time probably would be the biggest one, I haven't moved forward in having myself brought up to that at this time.
MR. YOUNGER: I accept that and I would encourage you to discuss it. Obviously you're busy with the House sitting at the moment, but perhaps after the House recesses. It's not something that can be accomplished overnight, and if the government is going to move on it, I would suggest the government wants to be moving on it sooner rather than later because it might take 10 years to implement; it might take five years, but it's certainly not going to be in one year, so the longer we wait, the longer we don't address solving these problems.
Getting back to my colleague from Glace Bay's comments and concerns around CBRM, CBRM signed on to this as the solution as well in those meetings and it might help go a long way in terms of addressing those issues as well. I do respect the fact that you have had a lot to do and it takes a while to get up to speed.
One of the things that has come forward as a request to your department - I guess everything from a municipality comes through your department at some point - is a change to the Heritage Property Act, which would increase the protection of heritage buildings from one year to two years before demolition would happen. Has your department reviewed that?
[Page 458]
MS. JENNEX: Actually, that is one piece that, from what I understand, is through the Department of Tourism, Culture and Heritage.
MR. YOUNGER: Moving along then, payday loans. I know there was some discussion in the previous session of the Legislature about that issue, and different provinces have taken different steps, but where do you see going on the payday loan issue?
MS. JENNEX: Very early in my mandate we came out with very strict regulations around payday loans. That regulation would have gone into effect - would it have been the end of July? August 1st. I don't know if the honourable member is aware that those regulations have been put in place.
MR. YOUNGER: I am aware, I'm just wondering if you plan to go any further because those regulations don't go as far as some other provinces have gone, but they go further than some.
MS. JENNEX: I don't mean to sound like a broken record. This was a new program, new regulations and I definitely hear you in terms of - they don't go as far as some provinces. We put these regulations in place and they will be reviewed next year. We are letting a year go by to see how the marketplace responds to that because, of course, we didn't have them capped at a level, as some other provinces, but we were waiting to see what's actually going to be happening. It was well received by the industry itself. The industry itself was pleased with the regulations and also in terms of protecting the consumers. If it can be strengthened or if we need to do more to that, there's definitely going to be a review. We're going to see how things work out for this one year.
We're reviewing the timeline. The Utility and Review Board will be holding the hearing in June-July 2010. We'll see what comes out of that review.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you. I am glad it will be reviewed next year and I will wait for that. I always get a little bit nervous - especially on an issue like payday loans - when I hear that the industry is happy with the recommendations. I'm not sure that I want the industry to be happy with the regulations, particularly in the payday loan area. I'm willing to wait and see how these pan out and you might want to respond to that.
I really think that's an industry - there are some really good payday loan lenders - honestly, there really are - but there are also some who make their business out of preying on people who we really ought to be trying to help.
MS. JENNEX: Thank you for the opportunity to make sure that I use my words very carefully, that you understand how I feel about this when I said that the industry is pleased with the recommendations, because you are absolutely right.
[Page 459]
The payday loan industry fills in a gap that we have in our society right now for people to get small loans. The banks have gone out of the business of small loans and there are some people who find themselves in a position of having to borrow small amounts of money. Industry in this sector, that are providing an appropriate service, like the regulations because it is keeping those people that you are describing, who prey on our vulnerable, at bay. If a company can't abide by these regulations, they're going to go out of business in Nova Scotia.
You said you were nervous that you hear the industry was comfortable. I understand where you're coming from on that. These regulations will make sure that the companies that are actually providing a service are happy with those regulations because the service they're providing is filling in that gap. They like the regulations because it's keeping the shadier operations - I hope I can use that word appropriately - the operations that are preying on people who are vulnerable - if there are any loopholes that they were able to find in the regulations or anything, that's one of the things that will come up for the review.
The most important thing that we can do is to make sure that we are protecting Nova Scotians and Nova Scotia interests. We need to make sure that our population who need to use payday loan companies for short-period loans or for small amounts are protected.
The new regulations that we've put in place will probably be strengthened after we have that review. We want to make sure that no one has to pay any more than they should. When they do go into a payday loan company, all of the fees that are associated with borrowing have to be told to them and demonstrated to them - not only orally but also in print - that this is how much it's going to cost you. For example, if you borrow $300, you will have to pay this amount back, so they know up front how much it's costing them.
Also, there can be no rollovers through the regulation. They have to make sure that they're not asking for the money to come back before their paycheque comes to them. The regulations are there to protect the consumers. When I said that the industry was happy - the industry that's working to fill that gap are happy with the regulations because it's keeping the other part of the industry that would prey on people who are vulnerable at bay. We don't want them in Nova Scotia.
It's unfortunate that we have to have this kind of an industry in Nova Scotia to fill in that kind of service, but in economic times when people are struggling and they need to have small amounts loaned out to them, it is filling in a service that is necessary.
MR. YOUNGER: I'm glad that's going to be reviewed in a year, and I think it probably makes sense to just see how that works out. Is your department talking with the credit unions or the banks to see whether they might be willing to start looking at filling that gap again? Or is that not a road you're going down?
[Page 460]
MS. JENNEX: There were consultations early in the process with the credit unions. Now I'm going to go back - I mean, we're in a position in Canada and Nova Scotia that we've fallen on difficult economic times and banks and credit unions are not in the business of small loans where they were many years ago. They're in for bigger business pieces so there is a gap in services for Nova Scotians and so we have done our very best here with good regulations going forward for this first year with making sure that payday loans, and any companies that fall under that, are regulated.
MR. YOUNGER: In the consultations with the banks and the credit unions - and I recognize this would have been before you were minister - but do you know if your department had any discussions with banks around the government being a guarantor for small loans?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, what I can do with that question is I can get back to you after I consult with the department, because that is not one area where I've asked what has gone on before, around that. When I stepped in we were moving forward with making sure that the regulations were in place around payday loan companies. I can get back to you about consultations around that, but at this time I can honestly say I have nothing to offer you on that one.
MR. YOUNGER: That's fine, if you would get back to me. I'm just interested to know what sort of options we're looked at along the way, so if your department can get back to me, that would be fabulous.
I'd like to move on and talk a little bit about - when I was reading the business plan, I noticed that your department has some responsibility for the Building Canada Fund and how it - I assume your responsibility on that is how it relates to the municipalities. CBRM and HRM have expressed some concern that while in the Building Canada Fund there were two agreements, there's one for small - federally they call it one for rural and one for urban municipalities and in Nova Scotia that didn't really make a lot of sense because, obviously, HRM is both rural and urban; Cape Breton Regional Municipality has rural and urban. As it happened, CBRM and HRM were in the urban category and everybody else was in the rural. Both municipalities have expressed concern again this week that the federal government's done and the urban agreement is still not signed by Nova Scotia and that's delayed flowing monies. I know some monies have flowed, but what's the status on the signing of those agreements?
MS. JENNEX: I think before I answer your question, I want to say that when you were using the terms urban and rural, my understanding is based on population, so it's actually numbers that they look at, so it's not necessarily urban or rural.
[Page 461]
[10:30 a.m.]
The communities component is for where the population is under 100,000, so we're looking at population bases as opposed to distinctions around rural or urban, in my mindset. I haven't used those terms when discussing the Building Canada Fund. Now that I've distracted myself, and I see you're a little distracted, I'm just going to actually wait for you to re-ask the question on that because I was making a clarification and I've lost the question, I apologize.
MR. YOUNGER: I'm just wondering what the status is on the signing of the agreements federally. I'm asking you because it's in your business plan and I was surprised that - maybe I shouldn't have been surprised because I guess I wasn't clear what department actually signs these agreements. Mayor Kelly seems to think that the agreement impacts his municipality and Mayor Morgan thinks the agreement impacts his municipality, which they call the urban one, but I got the clarification, that's fine. Their feeling is that agreement between the federal government and the province to allow the money to flow hasn't been signed. I'm just wondering, has it been signed, or if it hasn't, when it would be?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, I guess I'm just struggling with the agreement because it would be project based.
MR. YOUNGER: But there's one overall agreement - I guess there's an umbrella agreement?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, I guess there's a bit of a confusion because the money that you're talking about actually is in TIR.
MR. YOUNGER: Okay.
MS. JENNEX: So I have a component of that in this department. I know that the way monies are moved can be a bit confusing but that big amount of money that you are discussing, that you were talking about, that Mayor Kelly is talking about, actually sits at TIR. We have a component of that in our department and those are based on projects - so a project would go forward and that would be funded out of federal and provincial. If you want to reframe the question under that bit, are you asking the question under the big pot that is the TIR?
MR. YOUNGER: Yes. I guess as I understand it, Mr. Chairman, is that for all of these agreements there's an umbrella agreement between the federal government because municipalities, of course, aren't recognized by the Constitution so arguably the federal government can't give money directly to municipalities.
[Page 462]
So what ends up happening, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it, there's an umbrella agreement that says these are the types of projects that will be eligible. Although we hear a lot of talk federally about this is what they want to fund, what really happens is that every province, I know Quebec has their agreement on their Web site, Ontario has the agreement they've signed on their Web site, and they're slightly different. So what qualifies for funding in Quebec doesn't necessarily qualify in Ontario and that might be different in Alberta. I know that the province had their agreement on the Web site. The feeling, maybe incorrectly, by those two municipalities I referenced is that the umbrella agreement for Nova Scotia and the federal government hasn't yet been signed.
MS. JENNEX: All have been signed. Can I just ask my honourable colleagues, I just find it very difficult to hear with side conversations. I don't mean to be rude, it's just I want to make sure I can hear all of the words that the honourable member is presenting to me. Thank you.
MR. YOUNGER: I agree, it's like Question Period in the House sometimes. That's twice in two days the honourable member for Halifax Citadel-Sable Island has got in trouble from you - that's not good.
MS. JENNEX: I didn't even recognize who it was, I apologize.
MR. YOUNGER: That's okay and that was meant as a light-hearted joke, Mr. Chairman, and not as a criticism.
Continuing on with these agreements, the 4Plex project in Bedford, I know you share the frustration of the municipality on the federal government's response on that one. We've seen it in the House go from the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. Then the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection was referring to it and now we're seeing that it's being shuffled over to your department by those ministers. So what department is the department that we should be asking about that project because I'm looking at a letter from the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal forwarding it to you for an answer.
MS. JENNEX: I guess the very simple answer is I feel it does sit with this department and we're very supportive of the project.
MR. YOUNGER: Do we have a timeline? I know we've heard from your government and I know everybody is very appreciative of that. I know the member next to me is very appreciative that your government is supportive and has said they're going to fund it. Do we know what level of funding, or you might not want to spill the beans on that at the moment, but when that announcement might come?
[Page 463]
MS. JENNEX: I can't answer that at this time, I don't know. I would imagine there's lots of discussion going on around that. We're sitting right now so I haven't been back in the department working the way I usually am so I don't know where we are on that file at this time.
MR. YOUNGER: I know with some funding programs that once you break ground you can't get money any more from some programs and some you can. Is there any concern with that with this project?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, the answer is under a federal program that would be problematic but under our funding that's not a problem.
MR. YOUNGER: I know it has been alluded to that people in government were still talking to the federal government about that project. I assume that we've all given up on the federal government on this project at this point. Am I correct in saying that?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, at this time our discussions are with the project.
MR. YOUNGER: And that's what I assumed and I think we're all equally disappointed in the federal government on their stance on that. I will say that we're eagerly awaiting and I know the municipalities are eagerly awaiting and looking forward to an announcement. Hopefully sooner rather than later, so that they can make their decisions because they're on a bit of a time schedule as well in terms of the ice time. I would like to ask about fees and I realize not all fees are under your department but your department seems to have the lion's share of fees for services.
MS. JENNEX: That's what we do.
MR. YOUNGER: That's what you do. Somebody told me this morning that the book of fees is 728 pages long for the province and, obviously, they're not all in your department. A number of years ago, and I can't even remember how many years ago this was, there was an Auditor General's Report that said that there was a problem with fees in that you can't call something a fee and charge more than the cost of the service that you're delivering for that fee. So if you charge, I think my licence plate renewal this year is $199 or something like that, it's in that range and that's for two years. Is your department doing a review or is there any ongoing review to make sure that the fees actually reflect the cost of the service that's delivered?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, I thank you for that question. My colleague has informed me that those fees are in a constant state of being looked at. You are correct that if a fee charged is more than the service, then it has to change its configuration basically. So, yes, my colleague said that that is something the department is extremely cognizant of and is continually reviewing. I just am going to repeat, you say that the book of fees is 700 pages?
[Page 464]
MR. YOUNGER: Somebody told me that this morning, a reporter told me that on the way in. He said it's 728 pages long, the book of all the fees that the province charges, not all your department mind you, so I don't know where he gets that.
MS. JENNEX: It must be good bedtime reading.
MR. YOUNGER: It doesn't surprise me it would be that long because, you know, you look at campsite fees and stuff that wouldn't even be in your department, hunting fees and so forth. So let's take the example of a driver's licence or a motor vehicle registration or something like that. What is included in the cost of that fee? Because when I went and got my licence renewed, obviously part of the fee is the little plastic card but how far do you go in terms of assessing costs for that fee?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, looking at each one of the fees and all of this, the components that would add up to the cost of that fee isn't something that I can answer at this time. You just brought up the situation with a licence and you get a plastic card and you're charged a certain fee but, of course, you've got people hours, you've got rent on the facility. You have the software that's needed, that this department pays, I think it's in excess of $1 million just for software fee each year in Nova Scotia.
When you start adding up all those components, maybe if we looked at those fees, maybe we're not charging enough. That might be a slippery slope if we start actually analyzing the fees. I know this department is very cognizant of making sure the fees are kept at a level that is an appropriate fee for Nova Scotians. Looking at each fee, if we start actually analyzing them out, it would be like at what level would you analyze it? Is it the cost of the laminated material that's on that licence plate? Is it the cost of the software to get to that point? Is it the cost of the person who is at the counter or the on-line service that we're talking about?
When we start analyzing that, that would be a very big piece. But I know this department is extremely cognizant of making sure the fees are reflective of the service that is provided to Nova Scotians.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you. It's okay if you can't get me the information right now, but what I'd like to get a sense of is - obviously somebody decides that a licence plate renewal is going to be $199 or whatever it is. Somebody makes that decision. This has hit right at exactly where I was going with it - do we go as far as saying, this percentage of the minister's salary is tied to getting a driver's licence, do we just go as far as the building, or do we not even go that far? I guess I want to find out, when they calculate all these fees, where is the line between what my income tax pays for and what the fee pays for? If you can't get the answer right now, that's fine, but I would like to get that answer at some point.
[Page 465]
MS. JENNEX: I appreciate that question because sometimes the question the honourable member presents is just one more piece in that, of my understanding, around some of the things. My colleague just brought forward something that I actually was aware of, and that is that some of the fees that are associated with the Registry of Motor Vehicles, the revenue coming from that actually goes to TIR, which then goes toward maintenance of our roads.
As you can see, each fee, based on where it's coming from, would be based on a different criterion. I'm going to repeat that. Registry of Motor Vehicle fees, there's a component that's actually revenue, which then goes to TIR. One of your honourable colleagues did bring that comment forward last night that it's collected by Service Nova Scotia and it goes over to the Finance Department, for the want of a better word, and that goes into general revenue and then that is transferred over to TIR.
As you know, as people who drive motor vehicles, we are also making sure those fees are for the roads that our vehicles are driving on.
[10:45 a.m.]
MR. YOUNGER: I'm surprised to hear that actually. I am not a lawyer, I'm not going to pretend to be one, but my understanding of the decisions around that was that was not allowed. The cost of any fee - otherwise you have to call it a tax - can only be for the cost of registering your vehicle or producing that driver's licence.
MS. JENNEX: I agree with the honourable member. I'm not a lawyer and you're not a lawyer, and I think that maybe there might be a misunderstanding of what you're asking. You have to prove a direct linkage to the cost of the fee to what it's used for. In this case, the department is cognizant of the report that you are bringing forward, but I think there might be just a misunderstanding of the interpretation of that. However, I will ask, making sure if you need to have that clarified any further, the department would be able to do that for you, if that doesn't answer your question.
MR. YOUNGER: I think probably for me - I don't want to monopolize your department's time for the next six months trying to get answers for me. Otherwise you won't be able to get anything done. I think that if we could leave it at - because I can go get that decision and read the decision and the details, because obviously I've seen the summaries but it's probably in the nuts and bolts of it, so I can do that. I guess if I could just get from your department at some point in the next month or two months or whenever they have time, just where they make that dividing line for most fees on what is income tax and what is a fee. I don't really need the income tax. I'm just trying to find out how far back they go for fees. I understand that some of them are going to actually go to TIR, but there's a whole wide range of fees for all kinds of - I could walk into an Access Nova Scotia place and there must
[Page 466]
be thousands of different fees that I can end up paying depending on what service I'm looking for.
I'd just be interested in - I don't need to know the exact details for every fee, but just what guideline they use when they're setting that fee. That would probably suffice for me. Is that doable?
MS. JENNEX: I appreciate your comments around my staff. The staff at the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations are extremely hard-working, and I've been cognizant of not putting too much on them to answer some of the questions that are coming forward. I think that one, though, is not a time-consuming part. I think that's something that we would be able to provide quite quickly for you. I appreciate that you also recognize the good work that they do for Nova Scotians.
MR. YOUNGER: When my colleague, the member for Cumberland South, was asking about the Motor Vehicle Act you mentioned modernizing it, which I think is a great idea because it seems like all the time we're doing a three-word text amendment to update something. It probably just needs a complete replacement with an updated Act. One of the things that's intrigued me in the House is that all of the amendments thus far have been introduced by your department, yet the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal has written letters saying that he's the minister responsible for the Motor Vehicle Act. I'm just trying to find out, is part of the Act your responsibility and part of the Act his responsibility or is it all your responsibility?
Obviously we have him coming up next week, and I just want to ask the correct questions to you and not bother you with the questions that really should be asked of him.
MS. JENNEX: This department is unique because the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations is partnered in many aspects with other departments in government. In this particular piece, we are the administrators of the Registry of Motor Vehicles. If you came over to the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations and actually did a tour of our facility, you would actually see many of our staff, what they're doing around the Motor Vehicle Act - but we administrate.
MR. YOUNGER: If we were going to talk about - and I don't want to talk about this - regulations like what colour traffic lights are or something, is that your department or is that TIR?
MS. JENNEX: That would be TIR.
MR. YOUNGER: I'm just trying to get my head around so that we ask the right people the right things. I only have a minute left, so I'll ask this question and then the answer may end up coming when I come back a little bit later, because apparently I have to run out
[Page 467]
and talk to somebody. In your short time here, what do you see as the major problems with the current Motor Vehicle Act?
MS. JENNEX: I don't like to use the word major, but I would like to use the word . . .
MR. YOUNGER: Challenges.
MS. JENNEX: . . . challenges, and I would see a disconnect. I think that industry has changed over the years and products have changed, and so therefore the Act isn't reflecting what's happening currently in our society. It would be in trying to amend the Act to bring it up to national and international standards certain pieces got missed and those certain pieces impact on industry and on consumers. So the challenges that I've seen since stepping into this office are just making sure that we fit in the things that were missed through the amendments.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time allotted to the Liberal caucus for questions has ended. I will ask the minister, does she need five minutes?
MS. JENNEX: That would be appreciated, thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So we'll take a quick break, if we could come back in five minutes so we can wrap up the day at a good time. We'll be back in five minutes.
[10:52 a.m. The committee recessed.]
[11:01 a.m. The committee reconvened.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I would like to call the Subcommittee on Supply into session again. I would now like to recognize the honourable member for Cumberland South and you have one hour.
The honourable member for Cumberland South.
HON. MURRAY SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So did we find out, is it me or the microphone that you're having a hard time hearing?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, actually they moved the speakers. I was getting a little worried there earlier this morning. The acoustics aren't the best in here, but once they moved the speakers, I was fine because I was fine last night. So, great, and I appreciate your concern around that, thank you.
[Page 468]
MR. SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, when we left off, I had asked about the grants and contributions and there was an explanation of the increase. I'm wondering if the minister can explain - can you talk a bit about the programs that are available through your department, particularly grants, what type of grants, and who those grants would be made available to?
Mr. Chairman, while she's looking, I just wanted to say I will be sharing my time with a colleague of mine who will be coming shortly - just so you know.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MS. JENNEX: I'm just going to go through the grants provided by Municipal Services. We have the equalization grant. Now, do you just want the names of the grants?
MR. SCOTT: Just the grant with the programs and I'll have something further after that but, yes, that would be fine.
MS. JENNEX: Okay, so we have the equalization grant; then we have the town foundation grant; we have formula grants; we have the NSPI HST offset; we have grants-in-lieu of provincial property taxes, that's in two components here; then we have also Grants-in-lieu of the NSPI Taxes; we have a fire protection grant; special projects; we have a farmland tax rebate; a water supply protection assistance program; a community access and ability program. I'm just going to stop there, and actually there was an Access-A-Bus that was partially funded through this program that I'll be cutting a ribbon on tomorrow in my own constituency, which is really nice.
We also have community grants; an Emergency Service Provider Fund; then we have special projects also as an e-Government, that's to support the municipalities; we have the Municipal Internship Program; the Provincial Capital Assistance Program; the Community Transportation Assistance Program; the Canada-Nova Scotia Infrastructure Works Program; the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund; the Federal Gas Tax Transfer; the Federal Transit Transfer and the Federal Transit Trust; the Public Transit Capital Trust Fund.
We have the Building Canada Fund, the communities component; we have the Building Canada Fund, the major infrastructure component; and then we have the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund, which has been generating a lot of stimulating conversation over the summer and into the Fall. We also have the Building Canada Fund, the Communities Component top-up; the Transit Incentive Program; we also have grants provided to Municipal Services for local government studies, and I think that might not even be all of them.
MR. SCOTT: Madam Minister, what size of grants would you actually sign off yourself? In other words, what can staff actually sign off on versus what is required for the minister's signature, the amounts, I guess, I'm thinking?
[Page 469]
MS. JENNEX: I know that anything that is over $5,000 comes across my desk and I make sure that I read all of the information around that before signing it. But I also have to say that I always have a conversation with the deputy around anything that is over $5,000 and I get a full briefing on what the project is.
MR. SCOTT: So you would receive a recommendation from staff, for example, for a particular grant under a particular program and a cheque for $5,000 for your signature?
MS. JENNEX: Yes, that is correct.
MR. SCOTT: So, when those come to you and have been recommended by staff, would you always sign them? If you have the funds in your budget and it was recommended by staff, are they always signed off on?
MS. JENNEX: At this point that is correct, I have to say that I have a great deal of faith and trust in the staff. The work that they have done beforehand, before it gets to my desk for signing is always extremely comprehensive. I will say that, because early on I wanted to make sure that due process was followed, I did ask questions and needed some further background information which was always forthcoming. But everything that has come across my desk that needed a signature that was recommended by staff has been signed with my full agreement.
MR. SCOTT: Madam Minister, would you be able to provide to the Legislature a list of those projects that have been approved since you have taken over the department, since June?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, yes, I will direct staff to pull that list forward for you that I'm sure is in a database that shouldn't be too problematic to bring forward. Absolutely, we will get that to you in a timely manner.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Minister for the answer. Just so you know, I just saved them a bit of work there by agreeing to what they just told me, some of the work that I asked for earlier won't be required so this can take the place for that. Now, I appreciate that, that's really important to me.
MS. JENNEX: I apologize for interrupting you, I just wanted to clarify that I will be asking staff to provide you with the grants that went to municipalities but not grants under the HARP and to individuals, it would just be grant information. I just wanted to clarify that for the record.
MR. SCOTT: Madam Minister, what I was asking you was if you could provide me with a list of grants that went to municipalities or to organizations, the ones you signed off
[Page 470]
in excess of $5,000. But would a list be available as well for the ones below $5,000, not to individuals as you said, just to organizations or municipalities if it is possible?
MS. JENNEX: Yes, that wouldn't be a problem and I just wanted to clarify that I did not want to give authorization for things that went under programs where individuals would be named.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you and I appreciate that. You had mentioned provincial facilities, are there grants- in-lieu given to municipalities for provincial properties that are owned within the boundaries of a municipality?
MS. JENNEX; Yes, we do have grants- in-lieu for courthouses and grants-in-lieu for Nova Scotia Power facilities.
MR. SCOTT: When you say courthouses, does that include correctional facilities as well?
MS. JENNEX: I will be really good at this in a year's time. (Laughter) There are grants-in lieu for other provincial assets too. But the ones that stand out foremost in my mind, of course, are the new ones under the courthouses and Nova Scotia Power grants-in -lieu but there are others for other provincial lands and properties.
MR. SCOTT: The ones I'm wondering about are provincial correctional facilities, would it be grants-in-lieu?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, courthouses are grants-in-lieu and federal corrections are grants in lieu. We will be able to, in about one-half hour just clarify if there are any grants-in-lieu for provincial correctional. I can't answer that at this point.
MR. SCOTT: Madam Minister, I would really be interested to know if there are grants-in-lieu for provincial correctional facilities, if you could tell me the amount for the Cumberland Correctional Facility in Amherst?
MS. JENNEX: Yes, staff will be getting that to you as quick as they can.
MR. SCOTT: The Access-A-Bus program - I believe Kings County, which would be your area, is probably a good example of a program that has been held on high and as a good example used around the province and I know that my area has been as well.
A few years ago a volunteer group - actually it was headed up by a lady whose name is Dora Fuller. She was adamant that she was going to start a formal bus program for residents of Cumberland County and on her own started this whole initiative in Cumberland County. I'm kind of sidetracking, I know, but she used to come to see me quite often when
[Page 471]
I was doing my hours in Parrsboro. She was that adamant, she kept trying and trying and couldn't seem to get the organizations behind her to work and tried to organize it herself. She actually went, and out of her own pocket, bought a bus thinking that she could put this bus on the road. I believe that bus is still sitting in her driveway.
Anyway, she then became part of a larger community organization, the Cumberland County Transportation Service Society. They, fortunately, with a lot of help from your department and with monies that were made available - and also locally that, I believe, I don't know, maybe you'll have to ask staff this - but there was one larger bus that was purchased and the program was unveiled here within the last year. They then moved on to the second vehicle, which I believe your department approved further monies for. I'm just wondering if you have any information about that next vehicle, or could you tell me if there is any annual operating money they will be able to be eligible for?
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, I know that the honourable member will appreciate that I will direct that question to staff (Interruption) The honourable member will appreciate at this time we don't have our fingers right on the exact amount but there is money available. As you know, this colleague who is to my right, is a wealth of knowledge around those areas and would have that sitting on his desk, but he doesn't have it here right now and we'll get it to you very quickly. I am talking about Marvin. (Laughter)
MR. SCOTT: You mean you weren't talking about Nathan. (Laughter)
[11:15 a.m.]
MS. JENNEX: I'll give him kudos in a few minutes.
MR. SCOTT: I will have some comments about your staff when I'm finished my time but I concur with what you just said. I'll have a little bit more to say about that in a few moments. But that will be great.
I believe they have the second vehicle as well, but I'm wondering what they may be eligible for, annually? As you can appreciate, this Access-A-Bus is having tremendous success in Cumberland County, it is a large geographical area where - Madam Minister I don't know if you have ever been to Advocate, for example - but it is a long way from the neighbouring communities. The weather and the roads are real challenging and we have a high rate per capita of seniors and disabled people in Cumberland, I believe the highest in the province, which would probably make us the highest in the country, per capita. So there are some huge challenges there.
They have done a phenomenal job. The service has been so well received that they're actually trying to reduce some of the costs to make it more affordable. I would be really interested to know if there is anything this organization - besides capital money - if there is
[Page 472]
anything that may be available to them on an annual basis for operating? I'm just wondering if there are any programs they might be able to apply for that might help them?
MS. JENNEX: I'm going to answer the question by - we will have staff give you those figures, but I also want to ask you a question again, if you wouldn't mind repeating - it was "Flora" - what was her last name?
MR. SCOTT: Sorry - Dora Fuller.
MS. JENNEX: I have to say that it is people like this in the community who just warm my heart, when you have someone who sees the need and moves forward. They just don't talk about it. Obviously this woman put things in action, and now you have that service down in Cumberland County. I appreciate having her name and I appreciate that she has moved forward on this project. I would like to hear a little bit more about her after we've finished our forum here today. Thank you for that. I appreciate hearing those kinds of stories.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I could take some time now and tell you all about her, if you wish. (Laughter) No, she is a very young senior, this lady. She is on the District Health Authority, she runs the seniors program at Parrsboro, she organizes suppers for the seniors on a monthly basis, she organizes a Christmas dinner for about 200 seniors - a phenomenal lady with more energy than I could ever dream of having. Again, she is a senior, but she's a wonderful person. It was her dream, this bus for Cumberland County. I think when she first started talking about it in the community there were a lot of skeptics. She didn't have a lot of support because it's quite an undertaking. But there is a bus service in place today in Cumberland County that I give full credit to Dora Fuller for making that happen.
Anyway, I do appreciate it if you could have staff at least see if there is anything further that may be available to that organization.
I would like to talk for a minute about the emergency responders program that was available. I know over the last couple of years there have been many fire departments in Nova Scotia, for example, who have been able to take advantage of that. I know some in my own area - smaller amounts probably than some were - but I believe this year you indicated that you budgeted $500,000 for that. I'm wondering what the process is for applications, when they can apply and what the criteria will be? I'll leave it at that because I do have another question about other emergency response organizations.
MS. JENNEX: There are a number of applications in for that, and we're just waiting for the budget to pass before they come on my desk for approval at this time.
MR. SCOTT: Is there a maximum amount that they can apply for out of the $500,000?
[Page 473]
MS. JENNEX: Mr. Chairman, thank you for your patience around this. Because we're in budget process, the maximum amount for the grants that can be applied for is under review. So my staff has just informed me that as soon as the budget passes, we will be looking at reviewing the application process.
As I said, they have applications for that money, but we're just waiting for the budget to pass before staff moves forward in briefing me on what applications have come forward. So unfortunately, I'm not really answering the question in the way that you would like to have it answered, but I guess it is because we're in a process right now. It will be reviewed after the budget.
MR. SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, am I right - the $500,000 is in the budget for this year for that program?
MS. JENNEX: Yes, you are correct.
MR. SCOTT: The reason I'm asking is, under previous budgets when there was more money available and departments could apply for, I believe, up to $250,000 normally for a new facility - obviously, if someone could apply for that same amount when you only have $500,000, it would be quickly gone. That's why I was wondering if you're going to have a cap on what departments - because smaller departments may only need $10,000 or $15,000 and $0.5 million is a lot better than nothing, it will help a lot of departments, but if it's taken up by a department that takes a good portion of it, then I think it eliminates the opportunity for smaller departments that may only need $5,000, $10,000 or $20,000. That's why I was asking if there was a cap.
MS. JENNEX: You actually encapsulated the reason why it is under review, because the budget line is different from what it has been in the past. Because of that, the former cap will have to be re-evaluated. We will have discussions after the budget passes to address exactly what you have just brought forward that we make sure the money is utilized across the province in a most appropriate manner to serve the needs.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you. Can you tell me what services actually will have the ability to meet the criteria to apply? Obviously fire departments - can you tell me anyone else?
MS. JENNEX: It will be first responders, so we're looking at fire departments, we are looking at ground search and rescue, search and rescue components. So, first responders' organizations will be able to apply for that.
MR. SCOTT: One group I'm wondering about - I believe I'm right in saying that the program did allow for, and I think there are only two such teams in the province - and they would be downhill ski hills that have volunteer response teams who have radio systems and the things they would require in the event a skier gets injured on a hill and needs to be
[Page 474]
rescued. (Interruption) Ski patrol, thank you. I believe they belong to a national organization, but something tells me they were allowed to apply before, and I'm wondering if they will be allowed to in the future.
MS. JENNEX: Absolutely, yes. This grant is for our first responders. They meet the criteria of being the first on the scene to respond, so yes, they can apply for funding under this grant.
MR. SCOTT: That's great, thank you, I think they're very limited. I know there's one in Wentworth and they approached me, we called the department, and I believe at the time they may have qualified. I don't remember what they were looking for at the time, whether it was radios or what it was. That's good to hear because there aren't many programs that they would be eligible for, so when something like this comes along - you know $5,000 or $10,000 to a small group like that means a lot.
With the upcoming Winter Games that will be happening a year from this February, they're going to be asked to do quite a bit. They are volunteers, and they do a great job, but I believe they're going to be tasked quite heavily. Once the budget passes, you're looking at reviewing this program, I hope if there are any needs they have, they'll be able to apply.
Just moving on to the Residential Tenancies issues, one thing I've heard about an appeal process with regard to tenant and landlord disputes - I believe some people perceive it as being a long, tedious, hard to understand process. I'm wondering if the staff can tell you whether - maybe you haven't had any concerns about it brought to your attention yet - but it may be time to review that process, or maybe it's something the department's already doing.
MS. JENNEX: We have reviewed that particular component, but I just want to say that since coming into office and speaking with staff and listening to concerns and also bills that would have been coming forward or legislation around the Residential Tenancies Act, I remember the day that I sat in a briefing that it was slide after slide of problems associated with the Residential Tenancies Act, suggestions around improving the Residential Tenancies Act, or components that needed to be added to the Residential Tenancies Act.
It was an overwhelming amount of amendments and adjustments that needed to be made to the Act. I know many Parties, yours included, probably had some legislation that they wanted to have carried forward as soon as possible around that, and I know that the other Party did too. I know my own Party had a vested interest in having some things move forward. I thought very carefully around what that looked like in the long term and I made the decision and staff did listen to me very carefully that I felt that it was a much better piece for Nova Scotians if I didn't move any amendments or any suggestions forward at this time in the Legislature.
[Page 475]
That's why you will see nothing that's associated with the Act separately coming forward. There are other things coming forward but not associated with the Act. Because I want to make sure that we have a Residential Tenancies Act that is a strong piece for both tenants and landlords. We need to make sure that all interests are taken care of and that procedures are looked at that work for Nova Scotians. So after the House rises, we will be undertaking a complete review of the Residential Tenancies Act. There has been, as you know, discussions province-wide. There have been groups that have had time in public hearings and so all that information has come forward.
We are going to be doing some targeted consultations. We have people who have a great deal of knowledge and interest around this. So that's why I put a stop and I want to make sure that we move forward and we have a Residential Tenancies Act that is reflective of what we want to see as government to protect the interests of all parties and is a good piece of legislation for Nova Scotians. So at this time nothing is moving forward and when the House rises, we will be moving forward to pulling the Residential Tenancies Act into proper alignment for people. That's why bits and pieces of things that you might have wanted to have seen come forward are not coming forward. It's not that I'm being disrespectful to anyone's suggestions, it's I just wanted to make sure it was a good strong piece that we can be proud of for Nova Scotians.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Minister, for that. So you're doing a comprehensive review of that and that does make sense. I just have one more question and then I'm going to share my time with my honourable colleague, the member for Victoria-The Lakes.
I'm wondering if the minister has had the opportunity yet, and I know it has only been a short time since June, but have you had the opportunity yet to meet with many municipal units throughout the province? Have you had the opportunity to meet with municipal units? I see you're sitting up straight so it's probably a long list, but I'm wondering if you have. I know they would be anxious to meet and talk to you about many issues, but do you expect over the coming months to be able to kind of do a circuit of the province because if you were in our area, I would certainly welcome you to come to Cumberland County. I know they would love to have an opportunity to talk to you about issues that they face on a daily basis.
MS. JENNEX: Thank you for that. When I took office at Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, I remember looking at my briefing book and it said 55 municipalities and I just was, oh, my goodness, 55 municipalities. That just seemed to be overwhelming. I was afforded the opportunity to meet with Ministers of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations from across Canada with the deputy and with Brant Wishart, that would be the second week from taking office. It was the week after the funeral, I was able to leave the province and go to Newfoundland and Labrador and spend three days with ministers from across Canada.
[Page 476]
[11:30 a.m.]
Having that time with ministers and listening to what they had to say and being the new kid on the block, they were extremely respectful of giving me very good advice. I listened in on concerns from across Canada and that afforded me the privilege of seeing this mandate through a different lens. I really felt very comfortable when I came back to Nova Scotia that Nova Scotia, the way that we're structured and with the work the municipalities are doing, we're doing a good job. I have a great deal of appreciation for the elected people - our councillors, wardens, mayors - across the province and for the work they do within the municipalities.
So that 55, when I came back to Nova Scotia, was extremely doable for me because I found out from Jim Watson, the minister from Ontario, that they have over 1,000 municipalities, and Newfoundland and Labrador itself has 300. Since taking office, I have met with a few of the municipalities, and I want to meet with all of them, but of course I need to make sure that I do it in - it will have to be done over a time period. I met with HRM very early on. Mayor Kelly afforded his time to me very quickly, and actually he made an appointment quickly so I was able to see him. I've been out and about and have met with many of the municipal units. I've met with villages since I've taken office too.
I have to say that Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations is where the rubber meets the road. I mean, that's the nuts and bolts of government, but when you're with Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, those are the people that you're dealing with. Like I say, it's where the feet hit the street; it's working with the municipalities and the elected people that are there for the people and their municipalities. I don't think that Nova Scotians have the appreciation to the work that the municipal people are doing - the staff and also the elected officials - what they do for municipalities. I think they're the unsung heroes in Nova Scotia.
I have already sent a letter to Cape Breton because I'll be there visiting family when the House rises, so hopefully I'll be able to meet with the mayor and council there. The deputy and I are going to actually look at the province and start doing a road trip around the province so that I will be able to meet with municipal units. I'm looking at it as maybe not going into each specific unit, but coming to a certain area and inviting people to come, because with 55 I want to meet as many people as I can in a timely manner. Over my mandate, it is my personal hope that I will meet with every single one of those 438 elected people and also the staffs that work at the municipality, and also to walk about the communities to see the different things that have happened.
I know that the mayor in Wolfville is - I spend quite a bit of time because he's in my constituency and he's able to show all of the things that have happened in the Town of Wolfville because of the support of the provincial government with those projects. I've met
[Page 477]
with the mayor of Kentville and he has done the same thing, because geographically that's in proximity to where I live, but I wanted to do that across the province.
Again, I just want to very clearly state, I have so much respect and admiration for the people who put themselves forward to be elected in municipal government, because they are doing such incredibly good work for the people in their areas.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you for that, and I appreciate your answer and the great work. I'm going to make a comment in closing and you can answer if you wish or make a comment - you don't have to, but just two quick things. One is that - and I know we agreed we'd let the EMO staff go and that's great - I just want to, for the record, mention to the minister that you and I have had a couple of conversations about Advocate Harbour. Advocate Harbour is a small community in the Bay of Fundy. There is a seawall that protects that little village, and last December, as a result of a 28-foot tide and really unusual weather, there was a breach of that seawall, which basically was destroyed and actually put right through and right out onto the road and made a real mess.
I want to say, first of all, that Craig MacLaughlan and the staff at EMO were tremendous. I know that there was some discussion as to who was really responsible for that area and who really would take charge. Really, there was no department you could actually put your finger on and say, there, it's yours. Craig and his staff actually did come to the area with myself and with the previous Minister of Agriculture, I believe, at the time, and he viewed it and he came back and started organizing meetings in the community with other provincial departments and federal departments as well.
I believe as a result it has been determined - at least those at the meetings agreed - that the Coast Guard actually had jurisdiction over that land mass where that wall was. I know the minister has written to the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans asking that they act under the agreements between the province and federal government and actually fix that problem, which I really appreciate. As a result of that - and I appreciate you sending me a copy of that letter - I wrote to the federal minister as well. In fact, Global did a story on it the other day, and the federal minister as well and, in fact, Global did a story on it the other day. The federal minister's office called me from P.E.I., they hadn't yet received your letter, so I faxed it through to them. They're anxious to find out who's responsible here and what can be done.
What I'm hoping is that before winter sets in - if there's not a fix to this problem, there's a really good chance, with a high tide like we had last winter in December, that village could be completely flooded, which means people would lose their homes. I know it's not the responsibility of EMO as it stands today, because there's not a disaster there today, but to me it would be a lot easier - I always like offence as opposed to defence. I think that if we can't convince the federal department, very soon, that something needs to be done there, I'm hoping, Madam Minister, under your direction, that EMO can coordinate with
[Page 478]
other departments and try to find money that I know is very tight, but if that's not fixed before winter, the cost will be substantially higher and you're also putting people's lives, I believe, in jeopardy, and their health. They are all on their own wells and septic systems, so a flood of that magnitude could actually be devastating to that community.
I'm hoping that if we can't get the federal government to act soon, that we can coordinate through EMO and some departments provincially to try to fix that problem. I've actually asked the minister, I'll go to P.E.I. or Ottawa to meet with her to ensure that she understands the magnitude of this problem. She has actually been to Advocate herself because there's a fish farm there. I'm hoping that if we don't get action from them soon that your department can use some influence as well, through EMO, to convince the federal departments responsible to do something before winter. I think it would be devastating what could happen to that community if it's not fixed before winter.
In closing - as I said, I'm going to share my time with my honourable colleague for Victoria-The Lakes - I just want to say that I think you're quite fortunate that you've been assigned a department that is a wonderful department. I've had a lot of experience in my 12 years, almost, as an elected MLA, for many reasons. Some of the questions I have asked you now are actually questions I have called the department on, whether it's Nathan or Marvin or so on, and I can tell you that the response I've received, personally, as an MLA, has been fabulous. I didn't always get a yes answer, but I always got an answer in a timely fashion and I always had the courtesy of a response back as to why they could help, why they couldn't, what programs were available, why they did fit or didn't fit. I think that your department is a great department and I think you've got great staff there and I agree with everything you said earlier about why we need to ensure that we support them, because I think they do a fabulous job.
Thank you for your candid answers to me, as best you can, and I appreciate anything you said you would get for me later, I appreciate that as well. Just in closing, I would ask that you do keep in mind about Advocate Harbour, because it is very important to those people. Thank you, very much.
MS. JENNEX: Thank you for your remarks. I know that this is Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relation's estimates, but I'm going to put my EMO hat on. Just for the record, I did send a letter to the Fisheries Minister, Minister Shea, and it is my understanding that TIR would have done some work in that department, but because it's owned by the Coast Guard, they couldn't. It's just one of those situations where ownership of land and federal-provincial and getting that clarified.
What we need to do, though, to move forward on this, is at sometime over the next couple of days we should actually have a meeting to see what our next step would be. I don't know which hat that I would wear, or which person should wear what hat to move forward on that, but I agree and I take your remarks very seriously. You are correct, it is always better
[Page 479]
to be in front of something than to try to clean up after it. Thank you. And thank you for your kind remarks, too.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Victoria-The Lakes.
MR. KEITH BAIN: Madam Chairman, I certainly welcome the opportunity to be here this morning to ask the minister a few questions. First of all I want to congratulate her on being appointed to this very important portfolio.
I'm going to apologize up front because I know a lot of the questions I'm going to be asking have been asked previously, but I hope you'll forgive me for that. The first one is going to be one that's very near and dear to my heart and that's the Emergency Services Provider Fund. Being a volunteer firefighter and a fire chief for over 25 years, I certainly witnessed the benefits of the Emergency Services Provider Fund to, I know, the 16 fire departments in my constituency and indeed fire departments throughout Nova Scotia.
I understand that there's $500,000 in the budget, and we know that initially this program started off as a $5 million one that went to $8 million. Again, I can't stress enough the benefits that have been derived. On the $500,000 that's in the budget I'd like to ask about the eligibility. Is this for those departments that hadn't previously applied for funding under the Emergency Services Provider Fund or is this open money that all departments, even though they have received funding previously, can reapply?
MS. JENNEX: First I want to thank you for your kind remarks, and I also want to thank you for being a volunteer for over 25 years. That's commendable. It is people like you and other first responders who are really keeping Nova Scotians safe, and we really appreciate the work that you do. The line item that you're mentioning is $0.5 million and it is my understanding, since I'm new to this department, that that is significantly lower than it has been in the past. We are just moving that line item from the Spring budget, so I'm in an interesting position to be defending the line item from the budget that came from the Progressive Conservatives. It is a lower number, from what I understand.
The criteria for applying under this grant would be first responders in Nova Scotia, and after the House rises and we get back into the department, the department will be reviewing the cap on the amounts of projects coming forward because the line item is different than it has been in the past. At this time there are applications. They haven't come forward to me because the staff have been waiting for the budget to pass before I look at them.
It would be first responders in Nova Scotia who would be able to apply for money under that program. I don't know if that answered the question that you were seeking to have answered. It would be fire departments, ground search and rescue - anybody in Nova Scotia who is a first responder.
[Page 480]
MR. BAIN: Are medical first responders included in this funding as well?
MS. JENNEX: It is my understanding that any first responder - so if it's a first responder in terms of ground search and rescue, if it's a first responder, as the honourable member mentioned earlier - the patrols on a ski slope would be able to access that fund through application.
MR. BAIN: You say you have a number of applications. I guess, Madam Minister, my question to you would be, are these applications that have already been in the mix for some period of time now?
[11:45 a.m.]
MS. JENNEX: At this time I have not seen the applications that have come forward, so I couldn't answer how long they have been there. I do know that the criteria will be changing based on this line item being different, so the criteria is under review. Staff have not given me any information on the applications that have come in already, and the reason for that is they were waiting for the budget to pass before we look at the applications that have already come in, so I don't know how long they've been there.
My colleague shares with me that some of them have been there for quite a while.
MR. BAIN: Madam Chairman, my final question would then be, although you haven't determined the full criteria as yet, are fire departments as first responders who have already applied and received funding through the Emergency Services Provider Fund - will they be entitled to reapply?
MS. JENNEX: As I said, criteria is under review, so I wouldn't be able to speculate on answering that definitively. At this time I see no reason why they wouldn't be eligible to reapply because each application would be looked at on its own merit, so therefore there might be some pressing need that they would need to reapply for it. At this time criteria is under review, so I wouldn't be able to definitely answer yes or no, but I can't see any reason why not.
MR. BAIN: Madam Chairman, once again, with such a small amount in the budget compared to previous budgets and the funding that was there, I guess the biggest fear to me would be that the $500,000 is going to be gone with just the applications that are in the queue already. I guess we'll just have to wait and see that.
I know there are numerous departments asking, is there any more money available for us? I appreciate that I can at least get back to them to say that the department is reviewing the criteria and they'll be made aware of it once that is set in place.
[Page 481]
MS. JENNEX: I just want to add that the staff have informed me that they have written to the federal government to ask that fire departments be added under the federal funding and at this point, that request has been refused.
MR. BAIN: Thank you, Madam Minister for that. I'd like to move on now to the seasonal tourist property rebate. I'm going to be specific and I'm sure your staff is quite familiar with the concerns that have been expressed by the Municipality of the County of Victoria.
The biggest employer in Victoria County is tourism and we do have a lot of seasonal businesses in Victoria County. As a result of the rebate that the seasonal tourist property owners get, the revenues have fallen, I think they lose in the vicinity of $200,000 to $250,000 a year. Realizing the only way they're going to be able to obtain that would be to raise their tax rate. I know council has expressed a grave concern that in order for the seasonal tourist property owners to get that rebate, it's going right on the backs of the everyday citizens.
Madam Minister, I don't know how familiar you are with that particular case, especially as it relates to Victoria County, but I'd be interested in hearing your views on it and where we might be going further down the road related to seasonal tourist property rebates?
MS. JENNEX: You are correct in assuming that maybe I'm not familiar with that specific piece. That is one area that I can't answer, so what I will say is that I will direct staff to bring me up to speed on that particular issue. If you're agreeable, I will be able to have a conversation with you later about that after I get a full understanding around that. If you require any information from staff, I know that they will do that. If you will allow me to speak with staff so I get fully informed on that, then as the House is still in session we could maybe take a few minutes to have a conversation around that.
MR. BAIN: Thank you, Madam Chairman and thank you, Madam Minister. I look forward to meeting with you and I'm sure when you meet with the warden and councillor from Victoria County, it's one of the items that will be discussed because, like I said, it has been a concern for them over the last few years.
Earlier I apologized for being repetitive on some of my questions. I'm going to go now to the new home construction rebates. I realize that the announcement for the rebates was made on July 7th and because of the downturn in our economy, housing stats, new homes have been low and I think that was the purpose of it, to reinvigorate home building within the province.
There are only 1,500 homes eligible under the program and I guess my biggest problem is that it is retroactive to January 1, 2009, which would discourage a lot of home builders who may not fit into the program. A lot of those could be used up from January 1st
[Page 482]
to July 7th; although they're eligible, they could form the biggest part of that 1,500. I would like to hear your comments on that, if I could, please?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Honourable minister, I would just like to note that there are about five minutes remaining in the Progressive Conservatives' time limit.
MS. JENNEX: Thank you, Madam Chairman. The New Home Construction Rebate is a commitment that we made during the campaign that we would be bringing in. The reason behind that was to stimulate the economy. At that time, the industry was down about 32 per cent to 35 per cent, in Nova Scotia, and the announcement by the Premier came out in July that we would be moving forward on that commitment.
This is the department, as you know, that formulated all the criteria around that. We had a great deal of discussion about what the time parameters would be to best serve and be able to work with people in Nova Scotia. So, if we had the time period at the date of the announcement, it would have looked a certain way, and I felt very strongly that if we put it to January, the industry that had been working over the winter would be able to move their inventory that they had and once they sold their inventory, they would be able to start new projects. They would be able to stimulate that economy at that level.
We had a target. It was a targeted program. It was 150 and we looked at - based on all of the information that staff was able to give me, it looked as if that would be a good time to move some stranded inventory and also would be able to provide incentives for people who were considering building their own homes. We felt it was a balance based on all the statistics that the department gave me.
As it turns out, at this time, I think there are approximately 900 applications that have been approved through that rebate. The staff, at the time that I asked for this information, did the information based on 896 at that point, that snapshot, 17 per cent of those permits were dated before April 1st. That would have been the stranded inventory piece - 83 per cent of the permits have been issued since April 1st. So you can see that the stranded inventory took up less than 20 per cent of those rebates, 83 per cent is obviously a stimulus of people who have permits to build new homes.
In terms of the idea of that program, our commitment was to stimulate the economy, to kickstart the industry. As I said, 32 per cent to 35 per cent below where we should have been at the time that program came in and staff were able to provide me with the statistics coming that we are now back, in Nova Scotia, to our current levels of employment in the construction industry.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Victoria-The Lakes with three minutes remaining.
[Page 483]
MR. BAIN: Madam Chairman, I guess my biggest concern would be those who built, say, from January to April, or from January until July, were going to build anyway. There wasn't a lot of incentive except for the federal program that was out there for home renovations with the tax credit. So, I'm just wondering about the true benefits. By making it retroactive - and please, I'm not trying to go against those who built and I'm glad that they did and it is good for industry - but I guess it has taken away some of the incentive that is there for going further, because, as I say, those who built early were going to build anyway. That's my biggest concern.
MS. JENNEX: I recognize your concern and there had to be a balance. I felt very strongly that we wanted to make sure that there was an incentive for people to be working in the industry. Because we provided the date to January, that inventory that was there was able to be sold and moved, and the industry was then able to move forward to break ground on new projects.
Money that is rebated did not go to industry. The money that's rebated goes to the owner, so the incentive is to have people purchasing homes, new homes, so that meant that people in Nova Scotia who might not have been considering buying a new home, it was an incentive for them to say, oh, this is the time that I should actually be looking at new construction. People then went out and purchased; the industry was able to then have their money to move forward and build a new home in Nova Scotia. So really, the incentive is provided to the homeowner.
The other nice thing about this program is that if you are a homeowner who was buying your home for the very first time, you're a new homeowner - and if you're a new homeowner buying a new home, you were able to actually tap into this rebate and also the new home one, because they were stackable. So a new home buyer who was buying a new home could be rebated up to $13,000. There was an added incentive not only for a person buying a new home but those people who never even thought of buying a home - or maybe thought about it, I apologize, but thought about it and didn't feel they could afford it. This one added to that incentive, so they were looking at $13,000 that they were able to offset, moving into a new home. This was actually a very good incentive for the first-time home buyer.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Madam Minister, and thank you very much to the member for Victoria-The Lakes.
MS. JENNEX: I'm sorry, I hope you don't mind, we have another hour left and instead of breaking halfway through, I would appreciate just taking three minutes. Thank you.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes, we will recess.
[Page 484]
[11:59 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]
[12:09 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. At this point I would like to call the Subcommittee on Supply back to order.
The honourable member for Dartmouth East.
MR. ANDREW YOUNGER: Madam Chairman, I think the minister had asked if she could begin with a clarification. So I'm okay with that.
MS. JENNEX: Thank you very much, honourable member, for that. Last night the member for Kings West asked a question around mixed use and the YERP - Your Energy Rebate Program. So I just want to clarify that under the Your Energy Rebate Program, mixed usage, there is a four page application process and I did say the first page was just instructions. Then the second page, if it was 100 per cent usage for residential, if it was classified as a mixed use property, if it was at 100 per cent, they just had to click that it was 100 per cent. It wasn't an arduous process of filling it all in. If it was mixed use, then the full documentation had to be filled in.
What I said last night, if they clicked that it was 100 per cent residential, the rebate would be at point of sale, I was incorrect. It is not at point of sale. The properties are under a classification and we can't change that but the resident, if they're using it for 100 per cent residential, can let us know that each year. They still would have to apply for the rebate.
Now, there has been some confusion around the rebate and I think I clarified that last night that when a person needs to apply for the rebate, it's not done on any specific timeline, it's up to them when they submit their receipts to have it rebated to them. But my comment last night that I made a mistake on, they still have to apply for the rebate. It is not at point of sale even though they're considered 100 per cent residential. I know the member last night was talking about if we could work around that and, unfortunately, this program is based on the classification of the property. As everyone knows, a property, if it's sold, could go back into another kind of a commercial or mixed use. So, therefore, that process is in place but I just wanted to go on the record to clarify that - that they're considered 100 per cent residential but they would still have to go through the process of applying for the rebate. If anyone has any trouble with any application, Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations personnel will be there to assist them in doing that. Thank you and I appreciate the member allowing me to clarify that.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Madam Minister, and our thanks for the clarification.
[Page 485]
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you, Madam Minister, I'm going to try in the next hour to cover all sorts of little things all over your areas of responsibility that I haven't gotten to, or that my colleagues haven't gotten to or didn't finish getting to. One of them is one that I've been from department to department and I think I finally determined that it's your department and that's the sustainable community plan and we've discussed that briefly.
In your business plan it would seem to indicate that there are 32, if I do my math correctly, municipal units still waiting to do their integrated community sustainability plans, which seems like a lot because according to your department, there were 23 at the end of fiscal 2008-09 that were completed and the target is to have the rest of them done by the end of this fiscal year. So I just wonder if I can get an update on that?
MS. JENNEX: At this time 54 of the 55 municipalities have submitted their plans to the department. There is one outstanding one and the department is working with them to support them through the process.
MR. YOUNGER: So quite a few of them must have submitted them by April 1st then, I'm guessing?
MS. JENNEX: Yes.
MR. YOUNGER: Good, all right. Now, they've submitted them, are they sufficient to be signed off by your department and approved? They're okay in that respect?
MS. JENNEX: Yes. They were asked to come in on a deadline and that's why I think that's not reflected in this. They were to meet a deadline to come into the department so that they could be assessed to make sure that everything was appropriate with them so that they could meet the further deadline that they need to be submitted by. They are being reviewed and processed with one of our staff and I'm going to make sure - his name is Graham Fisher - and at the same time we're making sure that the Climate Change Action Plan is actually going to be incorporated with these plans. I have to say that Nova Scotia is way ahead of the curve on this one and the work that Graham Fisher has been doing has actually been recognized at a national level. I don't know if you were aware of that, and I think CBC will be doing a report on the work that he's doing.
[12:15 p.m.]
As far as I understand, the plans that have come in are very good plans and they've also added that Climate Change Action Plan as a component to them. There is one outstanding one and the department is working with that municipality at this time.
[Page 486]
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you, Madam Minister, it's good to hear that all but one are in. It's certainly a concern that I've had ongoing, I think you heard me outline them in Environment estimates, so I won't go into that but tied in with that is the plan for green infrastructure projects. Something that I noted in your department's business plan which just seemed to be strange to me was that there was a trend going up of the per cent of federal and provincial funding for infrastructure that would be used for green infrastructure projects. It went from 60 per cent to 80 per cent, to 85 per cent, but then this year we're going down to 75 per cent and I'm wondering why we would want to go in the opposite direction.
MS. JENNEX: That is actually a target, and if you look at your plan, we've been going over the target in previous years. It's a target and that plan that you're looking at is from four years ago. The target was set four years ago.
MR. YOUNGER: I understand that, but the business plan is revised every year, so I'm just wondering why you wouldn't then - I'm glad to hear that you'd probably go above that, but I'm just wondering, why wouldn't we revise that target in this year's plan and say, well, we know we can achieve 85 so why don't we just revise our target to 85?
MS. JENNEX: I hope that this answer clarifies that. The federal government mandated those targets, and so therefore it's a minimum. Did I clarify that? Just one second.
I have it clarified, so I feel more comfortable, and thank you very much. This was based on four years and the target on each of those years was set at 75. In 2007-08 and 2008-09 the target was 75, but you can see they surpassed it. The target for this year is 75, of course, and it will be surpassed again. It's a matter of the paperwork involved. That was the target; it looks again that we will surpass that. That was a minimum target and we aim for higher.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you. I'm glad to hear that we're surpassing it. I think that's great news. I think if we still have one more year of target left - I'm not sure if we do because it says base year in 2006-07, I'm not sure that was the year we had a target or not - if there is one more year with this 75 per cent, it might be worth considering saying we routinely exceed 75 per cent, why don't we adjust the target to 85 and celebrate the fact that we're doing that well in the province?
The funny thing I find about this, mainly out of the federal government, is when the federal government defines green projects, they're not always really green projects. How does your department define a green infrastructure project?
MS. JENNEX: Our green projects would include water and air and waste water, any of those criteria, for a green project. What you're asking me right now is to provide the criteria for our department based on a green project. I'm sure that is actually in a document somewhere that I would be able to provide for you. I know that "green" can be a buzzword
[Page 487]
in our society now, and everyone wants to jump on "green." I know that what you're looking for is the criteria that we're using, and so I will have the department clarify what we mean by a green project. I also hear what you're saying, that sometimes green is not what we consider a green project.
MR. YOUNGER: I look forward to getting that. Maybe just one example, and they can send me the overall criteria. If you're funding municipal water projects as a green project, it's an important project, but I'm not exactly sure why a municipal water project qualifies as a green project. I'm not necessarily sure. There is a fundamental difference, and I'm sure the member for Halifax Chebucto may agree with me on this - if you have a 40-foot wide lot and you're going to provide municipal water or municipal waste water services to 40-foot wide lots, or for that matter to a condominium project, it's fundamentally different how sustainable and green that is than if you decide you were going to provide water service to five-acre building lots, which may not be quite as sustainable in the long run. I'm just wondering how you decide if water and waste water are just automatically a green project, and maybe they're not, but if they are, do we differentiate between the ones that actually contribute to continued sprawl and unsustainable situations where you have to build bigger roads and we have more greenhouse gases from heavier commuting, we can't provide transit service because the cost deficiencies are there, or do we not make that kind of distinction?
MS. JENNEX: What I'm hearing is, your question is sort of expounded into another area. What you're talking about is planning, because when you're talking about - yes, so it is actually planning.
MR. YOUNGER: But it's the funding of the project that - to clarify, Madam Chairman - it is a planning decision, but there are certain planning decisions, which are more environmentally friendly than other planning decisions and I'm wondering whether you consider that in determining whether that qualifies as a green infrastructure project or not. When somebody comes to you and applies for money for a water system, do you look and say, well, that's great that you want the money, we'll give it to you, but we're not going to qualify that as green infrastructure because it's not a sustainable community design, or, we are going to give you money and call it green infrastructure because it is a sustainable community design?
MS. JENNEX: You know, you have a very good point and it's a very good question. Under this program it's to assist areas of the province to promote clean-water strategies so therefore I think that what you're talking about falls under planning and the infrastructure projects that would promote clean water would look different in different places. If I say clean water in rural Nova Scotia, or a community, it would be different from HRM, so the projects are based on a clean water strategy, clean air strategy. The federal government and the provincial government would have a criterion around what they consider to be a green project. As I said, it might look different from what you and I personally would look at as a
[Page 488]
green project, but this funding is to assist communities in providing clean water, clear air infrastructure, so it would be based on that criteria, and as I said, I'll get that criteria to you.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you for that. I guess what I would like to encourage the department to do - and I recognize that these were not your words that you put here, these were programs created before your time - I would like to encourage the department, when they go forward, to be very careful about jumping on the green bandwagon and using the word green for everything, because I'm not convinced that it always is, and it sounds like this may be a case where it's not necessary. It's like when I read that, I look and I say, oh, well that's great, 85 per cent of the projects are things to improve the environment and arguably some of that is, but some of the projects that potentially could be funded through that - I'll wait and see the criteria when it arrives but it may actually - I'm not saying they'd do anything bad for the environment, but they may not contribute to a greener environment.
I think we want to encourage groups. Maybe that's a good lead-in to my next question, which is, it's my understanding that you have the dubious responsibility of having to sign off on municipal planning strategies when municipalities change them. One of the things in the integrated community sustainability plans that we were talking about earlier is, I would hope that a lot of these plans talk about looking at their municipal planning strategies over time and amending them, making changes to them, and hopefully making decisions, which encourage more sustainable and energy-efficient choices.
Before I ask my question, let me preface it by saying that on the one hand I agree with the notion that people get to choose where they want to live, but on the other hand if you want to live in an area or in a manner that is more expensive or less sustainable, then you should be responsible for the costs of that. That, in my view, is the solution to freedom of choice, but also dealing with the other so when you're looking at those municipal planning strategies, is your department doing anything to encourage municipalities to consider those factors in terms of subdivision design in the municipal planning strategies?
MS. JENNEX: Under my mandate that would be a criterion that I would be moving forward to making sure, because we have a new government, we have a new lens and so, therefore, we want to make sure that any planning takes all of those things into consideration. The climate change strategy must be implemented in the planning. I hear what you're saying, you know, that the freedom versus what is sustainable for Nova Scotians, and when other people are left holding too much for someone else's freedom, we have to be looking at how that makes the fit.
In our planning we have to be cognizant of allowing people to live where they want to live in a certain way, but we have to be very aware that in this economic time, and the way our climate is changing, that any of our new development looks very carefully at water, how we're delivering services, are we living in a way that is working with the environment, that we're not making too much of an imprint in our society. This is a new government and any
[Page 489]
of the planning and things that come forward from now on will be looked at through our lens, and that is in no way saying that any past government wouldn't have had those criteria looking at things. But as you know, we move through our lives, and our society, and times and things are ever-evolving and ever-changing. We have to be cognizant of that, but I have to say that I'm delighted to be in a position that we can actually make an impact through our lens with this government to make sure that we move forward appropriately, for many reasons, at this time.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you, Madam Minister, and I'm very glad to hear that. I wonder then, it strikes me that one of the limitations is, if a municipal planning strategy meets the Municipal Government Act or the Halifax Charter, depending on where it's coming from, you probably are in a situation where you almost have to - and it addresses the climate change issue - you probably have no choice but to sign off on an MPS, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I think your department, and you through your department, are really determining whether it meets those regulations. So are you envisioning any changes to the Municipal Government Act and the Halifax Charter to strengthen the requirements for sustainability in municipal planning strategies?
[12:30 p.m.]
MS. JENNEX: There are two components to this and one is that we're going to be mandating that the climate change strategy has to be included in any of the plans in order to receive any federal funds that would have to be a component of that. The second part is, and I know that you would be aware of statements of provincial interests that we already have within the Municipal Government Act, and we have them under agricultural land, that provincial statement of interest, we are going to be amending that and adding one around planning.
MR. YOUNGER: I'm glad to hear that and I look forward to reviewing those amendments. Hopefully they will have some teeth to them and they'll actually be able to make a change in that, because it's often one of the challenges, and this is something your department hopefully will tell you, that sometimes you find that you get a - the example I'll give you is Dartmouth's municipal planning strategy which has a whole lot of preambles and everybody thought they had a whole lot of power in them and they went to court last year and found out the preambles mean nothing and it's really what comes after it.
So I would just encourage you to make sure that - and I'm sure you will - however it's worded that it ends up being sufficiently strong. On that note, and really just for my own interest, you would have been sworn in, probably as HRM by Design was coming across the minister's desk. So have you signed off on that or was that signed off by the previous minister?
[Page 490]
MS. JENNEX: I did not sign off on it because I would not have had to - unless there was a problem, it would have come forward. So the staff have reviewed that and have signed off on that.
MR. YOUNGER: Okay, so they're signed off by staff.
MS. JENNEX: Staff, yes.
MR. YOUNGER: I would like to go on to a couple of other - maybe the good one to go to next is funding of water and waste water projects. I did notice that you had a press release out on September 23rd announcing funding for some. I did ask some questions in the Environment estimates around this, and I got part of my answer there and the minister suggested that part of my answer had to come here.
So I'm here for the other half, which is the federal Minister of Environment has essentially made it known that secondary treatment is what's going to be expected for waste water treatment systems in Canada on freshwater and saltwater systems. I mean, I don't think we have a date yet when that's going to happen, but we know it's happening. In Environment estimates the minister was talking about getting municipalities up to a primary treatment on all these systems and it bothered me at the time, and this is where he said I would have to come and ask the rest of the question.
Are we doing anything to work with municipalities to maybe bypass - if they have nothing - the primary treatment and just go right to secondary, knowing that that's where they're going to have to go? The second part of the question would be, the ones that have primary treatment, are we working with them to come up with plans to go to secondary? I think it's going to be very expensive, very necessary but very expensive, and if we don't start planning now, I would suggest we're in deep trouble.
MS. JENNEX: I'm going to answer that in two parts, and the first is that all new approvals have to meet the standards. I'm just looking at my colleague's notes over here, and I agree with you, the program that you're talking about is going to be very expensive but I have to say that the oversight of that is good, because it's putting a plan in place that we need around communities to make sure that we are taking appropriate action around our water and our waste water. It's a 33-year implementation process. It's not something that is going to be happening overnight. So I've answered that in sort of two parts. Yes, all plans have to be at a certain level, and our implementation is over a 33-year plan.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you, minister. I guess where my concern is - and that does answer a good portion of it - is you have 33 years, which sounds like a long time.
MS. JENNEX: It's not.
[Page 491]
MR. YOUNGER: Now, I'm only 35, but I can remember as a kid my mum complaining about the waste water charges in the City of Dartmouth to fund the Halifax Harbour Solutions Project, which is still not completed. So 33 years isn't all that long in the waste water world. There are 55 municipal units. I know HRM has over 20 sewage treatment plants on rivers, little ones and big ones. I have no idea how many there are in the province, but I would guess there has got to be over 100 different size waste water treatment facilities in Nova Scotia, at least. So even if you did three a year between now - and that alone would be very expensive, but that's a short timeline to deal with what must be well over 100 waste water treatment facilities.
Are you trying to work with your Cabinet colleagues to develop a funding strategy? I'm guessing that HRM is going to have a hard time too, but HRM is going to have a much easier time paying to go to secondary treatment than the Town of Truro or Shelburne or CBRM or somewhere like that, that has much greater financial difficulties.
MS. JENNEX: You've raised extremely important points - 33 years does sound like a long time to some people. It doesn't - I have to look around the table, yes, it probably does to some at the table, but to others 33 years can pass quite quickly. You're right, we need to be targeting certain areas too, so your question is do we have a plan, do we have concerns around that.
What we're doing is the provinces are writing the federal government. We need support with that. We're putting some pressure on the federal government too, so that we could have some dedicated funding just to facilitate that implementation. If we don't have that, that 33 years is going to be passing and the next group of government will be sitting here discussing the same things. We can't have that, so we're writing for support.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you. You have my complete support in asking the federal government for money on this. I think they're going to have no choice because it will be a national issue. I suspect the provinces will still be required to put a good chunk of change in into this as well.
I won't ask whether Cabinet has discussed this because Cabinet conversations are confidential, but has there been any discussion around a multi-year capital funding plan? Perhaps starting as early as next year's budget to start putting money in place for this so that the province doesn't have a multi-billion dollar hit in one year or two years?
MS. JENNEX: This department is very well aware of the challenges. They would be putting forward any of the pressures that I need to be carrying forward. Risk assessments will be done across the province over the next couple of years and the highest risk areas will be done first so we have to look at the province as a whole. We'll be doing risk assessments and those areas, the plants that need the support, the highest risk ones, will be given top priority.
[Page 492]
People in the department are very aware of what's happening on the ground in Nova Scotia. They'll bring those pressures forward to me and then I will move them forward and that would be the procedure.
MR. YOUNGER: There are a couple of small issues and then I'd like to move on and ask you a few questions about immigration before my time disappears.
Some provinces have implemented a travel support program. What I mean by travel support is when an airline goes bankrupt and travellers get stuck in airports or they couldn't get their money back because they didn't pay for it with their credit card or their credit card didn't have an insurance program. Ontario has implemented a program of some kind, I'm not terribly familiar with it, has Nova Scotia been looking at that at all?
MS. JENNEX: I have to say you ask extremely interesting questions so thank you for that. It has been looked at and from what I'm picking up from my colleagues, there's really no interest in proceeding with that. I don't want to misrepresent. This is a brand new piece for me - when I get two pieces of information, the first piece dropped out first so I would just like to clarify that. We have looked into it and if a charge goes on a charge card for an airline and it doesn't get fulfilled, then the consumer has the ability to have it reversed. The second piece, there was no interest in getting funding available for that piece. So, there was no interest in setting up the fund, but the first piece there is consumer protection around the credit card.
MR. YOUNGER: So, we have the protection around credit cards, and I have to assume that 80 per cent or more of these kinds of transactions are - I don't know what numbers, but it has got to be pretty high - are on credit cards. I think university students and I guess a lot of universities have credit cards now, but they'll go into Travel Cuts and they'll buy their Spring break package or something, maybe don't have a credit card. When you say there is no interest, does your department (Interruption) Yes, so there is no interest from the industry. That's not terribly surprising because they probably don't want to put money into it, because they would have to fund that.
Here is where my concern is, and maybe my concern is unfounded, but the people who don't have the credit cards, and have that credit card protection, are probably the people who can least afford to be stung by a large bill, or be stuck stranded somewhere because their airline goes bankrupt, or whatever the case may be, are sucked out of pocket, even before they leave, having lost money and got no benefit, because the people who don't own credit cards are generally the people who don't have the credit history to get credit cards or have a bad credit history. So I just wonder if there is anything that could be done around that to help protect that small group of people or is it just not logistically feasible?
MS. JENNEX: This is the first time that this issue has been brought forward for me to think about under this context, so I appreciate that. We have an open dialogue with
[Page 493]
industry around any issue and also have an open dialogue with consumers if they have any concerns that we can be addressing. So, what I can say is that this is something that we can look at and maybe I can have a chance to meet with staff later just to see where we are in this. This is the first time that this has been brought forward.
This department is great. This department is for service of Nova Scotia, what we can do to best serve the needs of Nova Scotians to make sure that, one, they're safe and that there are protections for them, that they get the service that they need, so we can have that discussion around that, absolutely.
[12:45 p.m.]
MR. YOUNGER Okay, thank you, Madam Minister. I know it is a bit of a challenge because there are so many things in your department, and so many small things like this, that I certainly don't expect you to be necessarily aware of them all.
The next one may be a similar one. It strikes me that the department has a small role in on-line shopping in terms of consumer protection and that sort of thing, I'm wondering what your department is doing to adapt to that whole new world of increased on-line consumerism.
MS. JENNEX: Actually, I knew a little bit about this question and I have actually had discussion with staff around that, because as you know, on-line shopping can be taking place from anywhere in the world. So, therefore, to provide all the protections that are needed would be at a national and international basis. But here in Nova Scotia, we do have regulations around on-line shopping and the ability to reverse the charge for what is available and full disclosure. So we do have protections and regulations around on-line shopping but they are limited to what on-line shopping is, as you understand. Because on-line shopping is one of those ever-evolving industries taking place from anywhere in the world, and in anyone's living room in the world or anyone's facility. So the regulations that we have in place would be limited to our Nova Scotian component.
But we are working with industry and are looking at that at a national and international basis. To protect consumers on that one is a big piece, because that is an area where there could be an awful lot of fraud or inappropriate things happening. So consumers have to protect themselves too and the Nova Scotia Government is there to do the best they can around the regulation piece on that. But more work needs to be done at the national and international level to protect consumers around on-line shopping.
MR. YOUNGER: Madam Chairman, I certainly agree with you that the role you can take is limited because the store could be in Barbados for all you know and you really don't have any control over that. Have you or your department looked at it from an economic development point of view and I can almost ask the same question in the Chamber at the
[Page 494]
moment, but from an economic development point of view, one of the great advantages some of our Nova Scotia businesses have, especially small business, is tapping into this on-line shopping market it strikes me, because then they have a worldwide audience. I know there is someone up in Cape Breton , I noticed in the Protocol Office that they have handbags that are hand made in Cape Breton and I didn't even know that business existed until I saw them in the Protocol Office, but they have an on-line store it turns out.
One of the opportunities may be to identify that Nova Scotia businesses are among the safest and most trusted on-line destinations. Now obviously we would have to create those conditions, which would be a joint advertising opportunity that could be a page in the Doers and Dreamers Guide. That only would happen if your department or somebody's department actually built the case and worked with all of those businesses to say, here's the code of conduct or something. Has anybody in your department looked at maybe developing a set of guidelines for that, maybe not mandatory, but there may be an opportunity there.
MS. JENNEX: Thank you, I have to say that I really admire my honourable member's brain and his forward thinking. I agree with you, that would be an absolutely wonderful piece but it is really outside the mandate of this department. But I hear what you have to say and the vision around providing that economic piece for Nova Scotia businesses is very well taken. I appreciate that. But what you're asking, actually, would fall outside the mandate of my department. But I appreciate your comments and it is something that just because it falls outside my mandate, it is something we should not stop thinking forward with.
MR. YOUNGER: I appreciate that. I'll move on to something else. One of the items in your business plan was around illegal tobacco. Which, to be honest, I was surprised it was in your business plan because I actually thought it would be in Justice and maybe it is also in Justice. But I guess you have at least part of the responsibility in terms of tobacco smuggling and that sort of thing. Can you tell me a little bit about - and we all supported it in the election campaign - the increase in tobacco taxes? I don't think there was any Party that didn't support that, but that, obviously, does come with the problem of increased tobacco smuggling. So what is your department's strategy around that?
MS. JENNEX: I wanted to just say that I met the compliance officers who work within the department, and they have a hard job. Without being an alarmist, it's a dangerous job that they're involved in, any time there's any issue of smuggling, because you're dealing with a criminal element. They're highly trained individuals; they do work within the building at the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. Their mandate is to make sure that Nova Scotians' interests are protected in that area.
We work in conjunction with Crime Stoppers, and if you've seen those ads, that actually comes through this department to do that, we work with them. I think just in general safety, we don't talk too much about what that department does. It's sort of under the lock
[Page 495]
and key because they are actually within the justice system, but they work from our department, and they do hard and dangerous work.
Tobacco smuggling is an illegal, criminal element and we have to be very cognizant that the people who work in this department are doing dangerous work and we fully support them and it does fall under the mandate of the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. We network with the RCMP, the local police, there's a lot of networking going on. We're represented at a national level and I admire the people who are working in this department. It's not easy work, and of course dangerous, so we stand behind them. Thank you for bringing that up. It is one of those unknown things that fall under the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations. I have to say, I'm extremely proud of these officers. I've met them all personally and they're doing good work.
MR. YOUNGER: I can tell you it's certainly a job that I would not want. I know we hear lots of rhetoric from the media about smuggling is increasing or decreasing. Do we actually know, as it relates to Nova Scotia, is the smuggling problem increasing and how are we doing in terms of combatting that problem?
MS. JENNEX: At this time the statistics that we have - it's sort of stabilized - that's about all I can say. I know a lot of stuff around this tobacco smuggling and I find the whole issue extremely problematic and sad, to tell you the truth, that we're still dealing, on an ongoing basis, with smuggling and that criminal element in Nova Scotia. We would like to be putting our resources in other areas, but this is an area that we still have to be very vigilant and work toward trying to mitigate all the damages around that.
I do have statistics. I just would like to provide just one little bit more. As the honourable member would know, and all the rest of the people in the room, that this smuggling actually takes place outside of Nova Scotia in central Canada, so it's outside our jurisdiction. Statistics that we have are that one in five cigarettes in Nova Scotia right now has been brought in illegally.
MR. YOUNGER: Wow, that's even higher than I would have thought. Before I decide which avenue I'm going to go - I've got two sheets of paper that I've written some questions on - are you able to answer any questions on immigration in my last 10 minutes? Do you have anybody here? If you don't, that's okay, I'll stay on the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.
MS. JENNEX: We were told that EMO or Immigration, that there were no questions coming forward, but I do want to say that if the honourable member has questions to do with immigration that definitely, maybe next week, if you would like . . .
MR. YOUNGER: I could submit them in writing to you.
[Page 496]
MS. JENNEX: It's not that I don't want to answer them but I don't have staff here with me. I might be able to answer them - I would imagine that I should be able to answer but if we want to do that in an informal setting, I'm meeting with another member on another issue informally next week. If you want to ask me those questions outside of this forum then I would be pleased to answer them. I have to say too, that the staff at the Department of Immigration do an excellent job and are very dedicated to the work that they do. I would be pleased to answer them for him.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth East. I note there's about 12 minutes left.
MR. YOUNGER: I have some stuff left in Service Nova Scotia but I also had Immigration. That's perfectly fine.
I wanted to ask you a little bit about paperwork, which is going to sound funny with the amount of paper that I have in front of me at the moment. There is an initiative to reduce the amount of paperwork for businesses and individuals by about 20 per cent by next year. How are we coming on that target?
MS. JENNEX: I have to say that I agree we are using far too much paper. The initiative - I will get staff to give me the statistics on that, but I have to say, since entering this job I have never seen so much paper. The business of government seems to be fraught with paper. If you have one day of Hansard put off on hard copy, we're looking at a couple of centimetres thick. In terms of the initiative though, we're looking at these statistics around the administrative burdens you were talking about, is that 20 per cent is the target by 2010 and government is at 15 per cent-ish at this time. This department is at 17 per cent. Not quite there, but close.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you. You're certainly getting there and you still have a year to go, I'm confident you can make it. As an aside, there's far more paper in municipal government - you've got nothing on the HRM Council and the amount of paper they go through.
What are the next set of changes you're looking at to try and achieve continuing to reduce that paperwork?
[1:00 p.m.]
MS. JENNEX: One of the things we're looking at is fleet registration. As you know, right now if you're in any kind of business that would have a fleet of vehicles, you would have to come into an Access Nova Scotia centre to register them singularly. Right now the department's working on a fleet registration for business. That also impacts municipal work too.
[Page 497]
MR. YOUNGER: One of the things the Canadian Federation of Independent Business brought up to me on this paperwork issue was they were concerned that we'd hit the 20 per cent - they were confident you'd probably be there or be close for 2010 and it sounds as though you're on target - and then it will stop. It will plateau there and then that will be it. What's the strategy after you hit 20 per cent?
MS. JENNEX: I too have met with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and the department has just this last week. What we're looking at is moving forward and I hear what you're saying around this percentage but they're looking at moving forward into the next, I hate to say century but you know what I'm saying, into the next couple of years. So there's always that moving forward and always a reviewing, revising, evolving. Rest assured, we wouldn't be stopping at getting to a target and once you achieve it, stop.
I have to say that this department never stops in looking at revising, reviewing. Any customer or consumer or client that comes in and discusses anything, it's always added to the piece of what can we do to make things work better for Nova Scotians. There's that ever-evolving process within Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations to meet the needs and to respond to the needs. So that will be carried forward. So you don't have to worry, when we get to a certain point, don't worry, we'll be setting another target.
MR. YOUNGER: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you, minister. One of the things that frustrated me on that, I used to have a small business and one of the things that frustrated me was, one, there were a lot of forms that I couldn't submit just electronically. I know my counterpart, the member for Kings West, I think he started down that road yesterday - but then the second part of that was that filling out the same information on form after form after form instead of being able to link the forms. Now, obviously, that also requires it to be able to be done electronically probably. How much work is being done on that front because that seems to be an easy way to reduce the time burden as well as the paper burden?
MS. JENNEX: Well, one of the things, as I know you would be aware about BizPal and the municipalities using that service electronically, there is a component now for businesses. It's the one portal that goes through. So that would be diminishing the burden for businesses.
I know that this department is looking at every aspect of the administrative burden that it places on business or customers across Nova Scotia. Now, I know that you're probably very aware that the federal government and the provincial government worked at bundling the birth registration and that just rolled out this summer. So, therefore, that is when there's a new delivery, the family gets one piece of paper at the hospital. They fill it out one time. That's passed in through the nurse, that is all facilitated, we facilitate that for the federal and provincial, and so the family receives five services from that one piece of paper where before it took three separate transactions. Now it's all done through one. So that's one example of
[Page 498]
what has been done. There has been discussion and I know they're very forward-thinking people at Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations in looking at what else can make things easier for Nova Scotians, so looking at life events. But as you understand, any time that any of these things take place, it means that there has to be a change. So people hours have to be allocated to do that and software.
So it's something that is being moved forward but it's not something that can be done just easily. I think your comments said it would be an easy thing. It sounds easy but there are procedures and processes behind that. I have to say though that it is in the works and everything is moving forward as resources are available but these things do take time and we, I say we, the staff are working at things, one component at a time, but the fleet registration I think is moving forward very, well, it's moving toward being able to launch that. So those things that you brought forward, they're being looked at and this department, once they get one piece done, they're forever moving into the next piece to provide good service.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The member for Dartmouth East, just to wrap it up.
MR. YOUNGER: Yes, I will wrap it up and this will be my last question. Then we're done, the Official Opposition, but I think the Progressive Conservatives have a few questions before they let you go and, hopefully, you'll have a good weekend, a good Thanksgiving Weekend, and a bit of a break.
The last question I'll just ask as a follow-up, my son is two and a half years old so I went through this birth certificate thing that you were talking about where it was linked. One of the things I still thought was funny was that I couldn't fill it in, there was no way to fill it out electronically. What happens when a baby is born, they hand you a stack of papers and, oh, here is this about this, and this about this, and this program and, oh, by the way, fill out this form and you'll get your SIN number and the birth registration and isn't it great that it's on one form - and it is great. The staff of the department deserve a lot of credit for making that happen, but is there a way to move those electronically, over time? I guess that would be my last question.
MS. JENNEX: Madam Chairman, I just want to clarify that this summer we actually did implement exactly what you're talking about - that bundle of birth registration. So what I'm saying to you, you need to add a new member to your family and then you will have the benefit of getting one piece of paper filled out once, and the rest is done for you. So it's like one-stop shopping, but to fall under this particular bundled registration, you're going to have to add to your family, but we're looking at that. So you know the frustrations of a new parent, that you ended up with paper, paper. You also ended up with a new baby, sleepless nights, and you wanted to register your child for registered education savings and all of a sudden you found out you needed a SIN number and then you had to go fill out another form. Now that is all done for you, one piece of paper, your SIN number will come, all of that, five services
[Page 499]
on one piece of paper, and that was all done through the federal and provincial government through Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Madam Minister, and would you like a quick recess before we go to the Progressive Conservative Party for the remaining 25 minutes?
MS. JENNEX: Is everyone else okay? I'm fine. Thank you and I appreciate you asking.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Victoria-The Lakes.
MR. KEITH BAIN: Thank you once again, Madam Chairman. I'm pleased to be here for the rest of the time today to ask the minister some more questions. I would like to follow up, Madam Minister, on some questions that were presented to you yesterday by my colleague, the member for Cape Breton North. I guess the first of those is, can you inform the committee of what the debt service levels are for the HRM and the CBRM with Municipal Finance Corporation?
MS. JENNEX: Yes, I can and if you don't mind, we'll just have a few people move.
MR. BAIN: Yes, sure thing.
MS. JENNEX: Madam Chairman, the Cape Breton Regional Municipality's debt ratio and Halifax Regional Municipality, I have the debt ratios here. The staff has informed me that they're quite comfortable with the debt servicing ratio at this time. Would you like me to read off what the ratios are?
MR. BAIN: I guess those could be provided to us at some point.
MS. JENNEX: Absolutely. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I apologize for the back and forth chat that we're going through now. Yes, absolutely, you can have this copy or we can actually get one that I haven't written on.
MR. BAIN: Sure.
MS. JENNEX: But we're quite comfortable with the debt servicing ratio and I'm looking at, for example, in Halifax Regional Municipality the debt ratio is 16.35 per cent and for Cape Breton Regional Municipality it's 17.46 per cent. So there's a difference of 1 per cent between CBRM and HRM in their debt ratio at this time, oh, excuse me, I'm into next year's. This year they're actually almost the same, they're 15.75 per cent and 15.39 per cent. So Cape Breton and Halifax debt ratio is almost exactly the same for this year.
MR. BAIN: Thank you, Madam Minister, I appreciate that.
[Page 500]
MS. JENNEX: We certainly will get that to you.
MR. BAIN: I guess probably, to be more specific, how does CBRM's debt level compare with other municipalities outside HRM? Is that too much of a question to ask at this point?
MS. JENNEX: It's a comparable amount for their ability to pay.
MR. BAIN: I'm assuming by what you're saying when looking at the 15.39 and 15.75 that the debt service levels of CBRM are not of great concern to the department.
MS. JENNEX: The department is comfortable with the debt ratio at this time.
MR. BAIN: Have you received any recent requests for further loan proceeds to the CBRM, or more specifically, can you advise how much credit the CBRM would be eligible for?
MS. JENNEX: I can say that I haven't received anything, and I'm not comfortable answering that because I don't have the knowledge to be able to answer that question at this time. That is done in a case-by-case manner and the staff would advise me if they had any concerns around any of the requests.
MR. BAIN: Is there a limit, though, as to how much credit they would be eligible to receive?
MS. JENNEX: Yes, there is a limit, and it's 30 per cent.
MR. BAIN: Realizing there has been a recent round of federal, provincial, and municipal infrastructure announcements, would you be able to provide the committee with a regional breakdown as well as the details for CBRM?
MS. JENNEX: The Infrastructure Stimulus Fund in Halifax Regional Municipality have had the Highway No. 102 Overpass, City Hall restoration, Herring Cove Fire Station, Hubley Fire Station - there's some buildings under that - Waste Stabilization Facility Roof, the Ernst Mill Bridge, Point Pleasant Park upgrades, Burnside/North Dartmouth Trunk Sewer, Sheet Harbour sidewalk paving, and the Chester Spur Line Regional Trails.
In Cape Breton Regional Municipality the projects are Alder Point Road, water and waste water; Ashby Road, water and waste water; Broadway Street, water and waste water; Church Street, water and waste water; Cottage Road, water and waste water; Helene Street, water and waste water; Henry Street, water and waste water; and Hinchey Avenue, water and waste water.
[Page 501]
[1:15 p.m.]
Then we have Kings Street rebuild, water and waste water; Liberty Street, Mitchell Street, and C-200, water and waste water; Memorial Drive, water and waste water; Pierce Street East, water and waste water; Pierce Street West, water and waste water; Pond Road phases I and II, water and waste water; Shore Road, water and waste water; Tometary Drive, water and waste water; Townsend Street, water and waste water; Upper Blowers Street, water and waste water; Victoria Road, Sydney, water and waste water; and Victoria Road, Whitney Pier, water and waste water. We have CBRM Main Street in Louisbourg here.
Did you need the cost breakdown? I have more. Across the province we have Annapolis waste water management upgrades; Annapolis water main replacements; Chester, the Kaizer Meadow Landfill Expansion; Lunenburg-New Germany sewer system improvements; and Bible Hill sanitary and storm sewer realignment. I met with the people up there, they were very happy with that. In Pictou - the Colburn waste water extension and New Glasgow East River Road infrastructure renewal. The number for HRM, the total project costs were $33 million and extra, and under CBRM totalled almost $12 million. For the rest of the province, including one for the rest of the province outside CBRM, it does include Cape Breton, that works to almost $12 million too.
MR. BAIN: Thank you for providing that. I won't get you to break down every one of them or we'd be here for quite awhile. It's understood that municipalities borrow to fund infrastructure projects, both physical and built, I'm just wondering if you could inform the committee, how many infrastructure projects were nominated but not funded in the recent stimulus round for the CBRM?
MS. JENNEX: I'll be getting that number here in a minute. We will be a few minutes getting that information, or it might be next week if you don't mind, but I do know that the staff - any applications or anything that came through - work with municipalities in making sure that their projects would be in the application process and in an appropriate manner to receive the federal funding.
I've been in this department a couple of months now and there's a very dedicated team to make sure that municipalities are getting their applications processed in a manner that they can move forward. The support is there for municipalities as we go through the process.
MR. BAIN: Thank you. Indeed, you do have an excellent staff in your department. I don't think anybody would ever question that, but would be more apt to praise the department than anything else. You have listed the types of projects that are going to be taking place in CBRM. My question is, do you have other infrastructure partnership agreements in place, or partnership negotiations underway that will benefit municipalities such as CBRM?
[Page 502]
MS. JENNEX: As you know, the gas tax goes out to every municipality. Underneath the Building Canada Fund there were two components, one is the Communities Component and that would be for areas under 100,000 in population. Then you have the Major Infrastructure Component and that would be HRM and CBRM and that would have that major infrastructure component. That comes in through TIR, but coming from that funding there is money available for HRM and CBRM. The balance of uncommitted funds at this point is $25 million at the federal level, we would match that to make a total of $50 million. That's an uncommitted balance at this time.
MR. BAIN: The reason for these questions is to emphasize that infrastructure investments and community supports based on partnerships is the most effective way to address some of the equalization concerns that are also raised by the CBRM. I'm wondering if you'd agree that those partnerships would address some of those equalization issues that CBRM are facing?
MS. JENNEX: Madam Chairman, to the honourable member, I know that you know that I'm new to this job, and it's a new government, and when I stepped into this position I found out that there is a lawsuit that we've inherited.
I've been very sincere in my comments on the floor of the House that it's very important that we begin a dialogue as a new government with CBRM, so I don't know if I'm answering your question in the way that maybe you want it to be answered, but my answer to you is that we want to have an open discussion, an open dialogue and be able to work in partnership. I guess I have to be very careful, because there is a lawsuit there, that I don't step over any boundaries of the due process that needs to take place, but it is my commitment - and I know it's our government's commitment - to be able to talk with CBRM, looking at equalization issues under balanced budget criteria.
Dialogue and discussion is definitely something that we need to be engaged in at this time, but I have to be careful not to step over the parameters of involving myself or mis-saying something around the lawsuit that's now before the courts.
MR. BAIN: I appreciate that and I know it places you in a difficult situation as far discussing anything that might be going on, but you also planned on meeting with the mayor and council of CBRM. We know that the equalization is on the table and it's in the court system, but I'd be interested to hear other commitments - I guess that would be the fairest way to put it - and what level of commitments you would be prepared to make to the CBRM when you do sit down and meet with them.
MS. JENNEX: What I'm going to do as my very first step is to meet with the mayor and council in an informal way because I want to hear what they have to say to me. I'm not going up with a bag of commitments or expectations, in terms around this process. What I want to do is to meet the personalities, the people behind the names - I haven't met any of
[Page 503]
the folks yet - to meet with them, listen to their concerns, so that I can have a deeper understanding of what the issues are. After I have that informal dialogue - and I'm not going with staff, I just want you to know, I'm going with my EA who is from Cape Breton as you know, but I'm not taking staff, I'm going myself to meet with the mayor and council and I want to hear what is being said.
This is an informal meeting and I hope people don't have greater expectations than what I've offered - I want to go and get a deeper understanding, meet the people. I want them to know that I'm sincere in listening carefully and appropriately. At a later time then I would be able to answer how we can move forward, after that discussion and further meetings around that.
I know you can appreciate I'm new in the job, I don't know the people, I have heard lots of issues, and I have read newspaper articles. I'm going myself, with my EA, to have an informal time with the council and the mayor and I hope at that time that they're able to articulate their concerns to me, their hopes around a process, and that would inform me to, when I come back, meet with staff - then I would have that level of understanding coming back from Cape Breton.
MR. BAIN: Madam Chairman, you reference your EA being a Cape Bretoner - he is also a resident of Victoria-The Lakes so he has another good thing he can use on his resumé from here on.
I appreciate your meeting is going to be more of an introductory meeting than anything else, and that's certainly very acceptable because you want to familiarize yourself with the goings-on of all the municipal councils that are out there. I'm sure your staff, prior to you going, will be making you aware of some of the large issues - and they are large issues in the eyes of the CBRM. So I'm sure you will be going with an open mind. This whole process is something that could be - we don't know, it could be dragged out for a long period of time with it being in the courts and everything else.
At the same time, we have to realize that business still has to be conducted and there will be requests coming, and I guess that is basically where I was going before realizing that there are things that can't be talked about until the legal dispute is settled.
Are you prepared to make any commitments, I guess - and I realize that I'm putting you on the spot here until you're familiar with them - but beyond the court case that is going on? Do you see anything in your magic glass that is going to be of particular benefit to CBRM in the meantime, because we know that one way or the other this equalization dispute, whatever we might want to call it, will be settled. I guess I'm looking at the interim between now and whenever that may be - and I don't know if that is a fair question to be asking you, but I would like to get your opinion.
[Page 504]
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Honourable minister, you have about two minutes to look into your glass. (Laughter)
MS. JENNEX: I just wanted to say that I'm honoured to be the minister around this portfolio of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations because there are 55 municipalities and we have funding and appropriate ways and manners of getting funding out to the municipalities to support them. So my commitment is to be there to do the best I possibly can for every municipality, so CBRM is in my commitment. There is, I see, a balance uncommitted that is designed under the major infrastructure component for CBRM and HRM. Those applications as they come forward will be honoured the same as every other application. So my commitment is to be fair, open-minded, and to do the absolute best job that I can do for all municipalities in Nova Scotia.
I have to say that I am honoured to have this portfolio, because as you heard me say earlier on, people who are working in municipalities, the elected and the staff work hard for Nova Scotians. So I definitely value them and honour them, and it is unfortunate that I stepped into the position that there is that situation that is going on in the CBRM. So I'm hoping that it doesn't drag on for years; I hope that we can have the bridge crossed during my mandate so that we can move forward. And I have to say that I am looking forward to getting up to Cape Breton for many reasons - to meet with the council and the mayor, and to meet with family, and also just to drive to Cape Breton, which is absolutely beautiful. You have a beautiful constituency - I'm familiar with it, having spent my life in Nova Scotia. I value the whole province, but I have to say that Cape Breton is especially beautiful at this time of the year, as I'm quite sure that you can agree, too.
I hope that sort of gives you some reassurance. It probably didn't answer the question, but be reassured that all of the requests of municipalities are going to be honoured appropriately and fairly.
[1:30 p.m.]
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Madam Minister, and thank you to the member for Victoria-The Lakes.
My understanding is that this is the conclusion of the Progressive Conservative time and the Liberals are not returning for questioning, and that the minister would be moving the resolution at this point.
MS. JENNEX: Madam Chairman, before I read the resolutions, I want to thank the chairman, and the other chairman who was here earlier, and I want to thank the honourable members for their very good questions and the dialogue that we have had here for the last two days. It is especially nice, sort of getting to know them at another level than just on the floor. So I appreciate the good questions and I hope that I've been able to answer people with
[Page 505]
a reassurance that this department and myself will move on in the most appropriate manner for Nova Scotians.
I also want to thank my colleagues who have been sitting here with me over the last couple of days, and before I read the resolutions I have to thank this absolutely wonderful staff at Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations and I don't think I can say it often enough, the amount of work and the dedication that they have to their job. Nova Scotians are extremely well served by the staff at Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations and I feel honoured that they are here with me today, and I appreciate their time. Thank you.
So, with no further ado, I would like to move the resolutions.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E33 stand?
Resolution E33 stands.
Resolution E18 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $6,007,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Emergency Management Office of Nova Scotia, pursuant to the Estimate.
Resolution E19 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $43,489,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Executive Council, pursuant to the Estimate - Office of Immigration $4, 691,000.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolutions E18 and E19 carry?
The resolutions are carried.
Thank you, Madam Minister, and a thank you to all the members of the committee for your patience throughout this.
We stand adjourned for the day.
[The subcommittee adjourned at 1:33 p.m.]
