HALIFAX, MONDAY, APRIL 15, 2013

 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON SUPPLY

 

4:51 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Mr. Clarrie MacKinnon

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon, minister, members, staff of the Department of Community Services, and others who are in the Red Room. We will continue with the Subcommittee of the Whole House on Supply. We are, of course, dealing with the Department of Community Services.

 

When we finished on Friday, the Progressive Conservative caucus had used 21 minutes of the hour that is currently before them, so we have 39 minutes remaining.

 

The honourable member for Victoria-The Lakes.

 

MR. KEITH BAIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and again thank you to the minister and staff for being here this afternoon as we discuss the estimates of the Department of Community Services.

 

I left off with a question but I'm going to change my structure a little bit - I'll ask that question eventually. I'd just like to talk, if I could, about Page 5.2. The first one that I'd like to mention is the Employment Support and Income Assistance. Minister, your estimate for 2012-13 was significantly lower than the actual so I guess my question would be, why was it so much higher?

 

HON. DENISE PETERSON-RAFUSE: The reason for that, as I mentioned on Friday, was the change in our accounting practices to step in line with the national standards, so the number of payments will be reflected differently because of that change in accounting standards.

 

What happens is that you are required to pay out the income assistance dollars the same month that the recipient receives those dollars, so April needs to be paid out in April is the reason. What we've done, we will make a change - we haven't selected the month at this point but when we make that change, people on income assistance will not be affected financially whatsoever, because of the fact that we have invested an extra $1.5 million to get over those transitional days, which will probably be three or four days.

 

MR. BAIN: So in effect what you're saying is that the actual dollars received by recipients are still there. I guess my question is, with the change of accounting, does that mean it's possible that April payments might have been included in the March figures - is it fair to say?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: What we'll be doing is when we decide on the month - we haven't selected which month we will make the transition - we will ensure that - right now the standard has always been to pay three or four days before the end of the month because people liked having the dollars early. So what we need to do in order to make the transition is to ensure that they have those dollars there. Then once they're on that monthly cycle that the payments are paid at the same time each and every month, in that month there will be no difference. People won't even really truly notice it; it will just be that transition stage. But we will ensure that they have money in their pockets per se, to be able to get through those three or four days in transitioning this over.

 

In fact, we've actually increased the dollars; we'll be going up $17 more a month for income assistance recipients, which equals $47 since 2009, so you'll see that reflected in the budget also, that increase.

 

MR. BAIN: I think I have it now; it's just that some part of the added cost is the fact that three or four days that we'll be changing this, it's the gap that exists as a result.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: What you'll see in the budget is that the different figures are reflective of the number of payments within that year. So you have 12 and 13 payments and then it will be down to the 11 payments as you make the transition. Those are what the - so there are absolutely no cuts whatsoever in the budget for income assistance recipients. I think that's the important part, that there's actually an increase. It's just the change in accounting standards that has been requested of us to do.

 

MR. BAIN: Operating costs, I guess the straightforward question is why do you anticipate they'll be lower this year?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: The reason for the reduction is that we have been very focused on what we can do in order to save tax dollars for the people of Nova Scotia. What we have initiated is a procurement process that is looking at bulk buying rather than the system that we typically followed. We're already seeing a positive result of joining forces, doing bulk buying, doing our procurement in a different way. That's why we can estimate that we will have a slight reduction in our cost in that area.

MR. BAIN: Could you give an example of what you might be bulk buying?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: A lot of the bulk buying now is being done in our technology, so it would be printers, computers, paper, and things like that - more in the technology areas is where we are seeing savings by doing that bulk purchasing.

 

MR. BAIN: Thank you, minister. Again, still on Page 5.2, Gross Expenses, under "Less: Chargeable to Other Departments" it shows you estimating a significant decrease this year. What's the reason for that?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: The difference in those budget lines come from the restructuring fund, through Treasury Board. One of the main factors with respect to that would be the case aides that we used to contract and now are actually part of Community Services.

 

MR. BAIN: What things are you able to charge to other departments? Maybe a little bit further, which departments can you do that with too?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Justice, because we utilize their services, and there would be Health and Wellness, because a lot of the programs and things that we do can sometimes be health-related, and so forth, so there are charges to Health and Wellness also. The big one in there is the restructuring fund out of all those.

 

MR. BAIN: With the changing of daycares, would that become a chargeable as well? Again, licensing and everything falls under your department, as you mentioned earlier, so I guess I'm just wondering if that would be chargeable to Education for the services.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Actually, under Grants and Contributions is where you would find the daycares. Of course, we do not charge daycares for licensing and things like that, that would be seen there.

 

MR. BAIN: Now I'll go to where I left off on Friday: Funded Staff - again, we're still on Page 5.2. You're estimating the need for more than 100 more FTEs this year. I guess the reason for my question is given certain services that once fell under Community Services have been moved to other departments, why do you anticipate the need for more FTEs?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, there are two important points with that: (1) we are moving some of the responsibilities with respect to the early years to Education, but that's not reflected in the budget because we're still in the planning stages; and (2) the case aides I had spoken about that we had contracted to do work, they would do transportation and a variety of tasks for persons with disabilities, et cetera, so they would be support as a case aide.

 

Those individuals - there are about 120 of them - have been moved over into Community Services as part of our staff now; whereas before they would have been under a different budget line because we were contracting them out, so they wouldn't have been within that staffing budget because we contracted them. They weren't actual staff members of Community Services and now they are.

 

MR. BAIN: Just to make sure I'm clear - please forgive me, it's probably because it's Monday afternoon - contracted staff are now included in the FTEs of Community Services, is that correct?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Yes, that's correct. I can give you a few more details. The increase of 260 staff is the result of increases, plus decreases that we've had in staff. I'll break those down for you. Since 2009-10 we have integration, the delivery of the child welfare services, so that was bringing in those agencies as part of Community Services. That increased our FTE count by 234. That was an improvement in delivery of our services to families and children and it was a direction that had also been initiated before we became government and we just continued on that process of bringing in the child welfare agencies.

 

We have also opened - and you may be aware of this - a new Level 3 treatment centre as part of the child welfare residential redesign. That would be Wood Street in the Truro area. This has increased our FTEs by 47. The most recent, as I mentioned, would be those 120 case aides who have provided paraprofessional services for such things as transportation, access to facilitation, family support, and youth alternative work. That's why you'll see a fluctuation.

 

We've also been very focused on looking at what efficiencies we can make within the department with respect to staffing. In a department the size of Community Services, in the changes that we're making, you're going to see a fluctuation in staff coming in and staff going out, that we are not rehiring under FTEs in areas that we don't feel we have to. That's where you see the fluctuation.

 

MR. BAIN: So once the changeover from daycares to early childhood development takes place, we could expect to see a decrease in the FTEs?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Yes, because of the fact that . . .

 

MR. BAIN: Transferred over to.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Yes, and that change hasn't taken place yet.

 

MR. BAIN: On Page 5.4, the first one I'd like to talk about is Senior Management. I see the increase in the budget for Senior Management is significant, under the Office of Minister and Deputy Minister. So given that the FTEs are increasing slightly, is that due to higher salaries, or what would be attributable to that increase in the budget?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: That increase is a result of five new positions in total. Two of those positions are with respect to an associate deputy minister that is focusing on the transitional changes that we're making within the department. We have undertaken so many different changes like a total redesign of ESIA, the Employment Support and Income Assistance program; we've also done an adoption strategy; and we're doing changes with respect to the housing strategies. These are huge work projects that we're proceeding with.

 

The other area where we're making changes is with respect to the Disabled Persons Commission. Three of those individuals will be assigned to the Disabled Persons Commission for a period of time to help in developing a framework for a disability strategy.

 

When you look at the variety of projects, including changes to our SPD division and we're transforming that particular division - actually, I don't think there's a division in Community Services that's not being changed in some manner - some slightly, some are major changes in the way we do business - and to look at restorative approaches and single-entry systems, along with being very focused on individuals and working with people on individual bases and not looking at it in a sort of systematic basis, so that if you apply for income assistance and you didn't fit quite into what the system approves, that you're basically left out in the cold. So we're trying to really make changes in all those areas. Those require specific skills in project management in order to meet the deadlines, the goals, and to develop the strategy.

 

In that area, the reason we have the new assistant associate deputy minister and a support person for her, and the three individuals for the Disabled Persons Commission, as I mentioned, is to work towards a framework for the first time in the province for how we go forward with the disability strategy.

 

MR. BAIN: Thank you for explaining that one. You mentioned the five new positions, so it's three in the Disabled Persons Commission and two relating to the associate deputy minister.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: And the support person - exactly.

 

MR. BAIN: Thank you. Staying on Page 5.4, Commissions and Agencies, which commissions and agencies are you including under this year's budget?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Under that category it's just one, and that is actually the Nova Scotia Disabled Persons Commission.

 

MR. BAIN: So is the increase of $173,000 significant?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: That particular increase is to support the efforts to go forward with the framework for the disability strategy; as I said, we need to be able to have more people who are able to have the professional skills and the ability to support the executive director.

 

MR. BAIN: Under Corporate Services Unit, Human Resources, we see the actual for 2012-13 was higher than the estimate for last year. I'm just wondering, what's the reason for this?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: That is with respect to support payments like workers' compensation. Last year we saw it as being an unusually high year in terms of the cost factor. If you look at the previous year beforehand, you'll see we're estimating that it will go back to what it was the year before.

 

MR. BAIN: Page 5.7 - I'm trying to follow it so that we can go along the sequence rather than having to go back and forth between different pages. Family and Children's Services, under the line item Community Residential Services, we see a significant drop of more than $1.2 million. I'm just wondering, what's the reason for this drop of $1.2 million?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: This particular drop reflects the transfer of the funding for the recovery house program. That would be $1.25 million and that has, as you know, been transferred to the Department of Health and Wellness.

 

MR. BAIN: Funded Staff, on Page 5.7 - another increase and this one is 105 FTEs in this year's estimate, so I guess two questions: where will those positions be located and what is the reason for the increase?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Those are, once again, the case aides, and those positions are now within the Department of Community Services. Those positions are throughout the province; they're not just in the central office. They're case aides throughout because they work directly with clientele.

 

MR. BAIN: On Page 5.9, Return to Work Initiatives, I was surprised to see a decrease in the budget of $864,000. I guess with so many individuals and unemployed seeking employment support, why has this been cut, especially by $864,000?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: That's because we're working very closely with LAE. They are actually taking part of that work initiative's responsibility, so that's why we can reduce it in our budget - because they will be taking up the responsibility for that amount of dollars in terms of the work initiative programs that they're implementing.

 

MR. BAIN: But wouldn't your department still be responsible for Department of Community Services clients who are interested in those initiatives?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Certainly, that's part of the ESIA redesign; we will still have work initiative programs and we'll be very focused on that. We have been working very closely with our caseworkers and we have set targets for our caseworkers in terms of the number of individuals we're hoping can assist into employment and take a different approach to helping find employment in terms of more of a holistic approach; that they would also be more involved in the community and with businesses; and more of a relationship and interaction with local businesses to see if we can set up opportunities for our clients.

 

Also, because we're taking a different approach in terms of being very client-focused, this will mean a change in the information, too, that the caseworkers will be obtaining and will be developing work plans and life plans with our clients. On the other side of that with the LAE, that's about a million dollars or so of federal dollars that they're utilizing. That's why, as I said, there's the reduction for us because they're taking up the responsibility of particular target markets or target individuals to help support them in the return to work program.

 

There are different levels that individuals find themselves in terms of being employable. Some individuals need just a little bit of support and others have been on income assistance for quite some time. We want to focus on that - it has sort of been the forgotten individuals who still have that opportunity and we want to work with them and develop a life plan that is not just focused on employment but on their entire life, what direction they can go, and what supports they need to get them to their goal of employment. That's an initiative that we're focusing on in the department, whereas LAE has their own set of standards and criteria to assist individuals who normally have not been on income assistance for a very long period of time.

 

MR. BAIN: A place like Summer Street, would a change in the decrease of funding affect programs that Summer Street has? They go out into the workforce, as well, and some of them end up getting employment as a result of it. Will it have an effect on places like Summer Street?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: No, what we're looking at is in terms of - there will not be any types of cuts at all. That's what I have talked about in this budget. The fact is that we will not see any clients or families affected by our budgets in any way in cuts, and actually in some areas we have increases.

 

With what I'm talking about, it is actually taking individuals who have been on income assistance for a fair amount of time, and so often they have lost their confidence and they have lost their skill sets for being employable. We want to do a real focused pilot project around that; whereas I mentioned LAE is more focused on a set of criteria that they follow and it's usually people who have not been unemployed for a really, really long time. So they have a different mandate than the Department of Community Services and that's why we have had a lot of discussions with LAE to see how we can work together, how we can support each other, but at the same time who we can target in terms of helping them seek employment.

 

MR. BAIN: If I could, in this round I have one more question and I'd like to provide the opportunity for the member for Cape Breton West to ask questions.

 

We're still on Page 5.9, before I wrap up and turn it over to the member for Cape Breton West. The budget for the Pharmacare Program has been cut by more than $2.5 million. So I guess I have three questions; first of all, how many individuals do you currently have enrolled in the Pharmacare Program?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I don't have the exact number here but we can get that number for you.

 

MR. BAIN: Would you have any indication whether the numbers have increased or decreased from the previous year? Or would it be fair to just leave . . .

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, I can tell you the reason why the prediction is that it will cost us less is because we're saving a lot of money on the generic drug program and all the efforts that have been put into the availability and the use of generic drugs. That's how we can estimate that we will actually be getting a reduction in our budget, a savings in our budget because of that.

 

We've already seen that trend so we know that because of the work that has been done around that area, we can say that we can forecast a reduction in our budget.

 

MR. BAIN: So you feel that the introduction of the generic program is going to save the Pharmacare Program $2.5 million this year?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Yes. We spend approximately $50 million on that particular program, so out of the $50 million it's reasonable to say that we would have that particular reduction, especially with the savings there's such a difference. You may be aware that there's a great difference between what generic drugs cost and the actual original drugs; it's reasonable to say that we would be able to reduce it by that amount.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: I usually give a 10-minute warning of time running out but the Progressive Conservative caucus has approximately nine minutes remaining in this round.

 

MR. BAIN: Okay, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I'll turn it over to the member for Cape Breton West.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton West.

 

MR. ALFIE MACLEOD: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to say hello to the minister and her staff, and thank her for the opportunity to ask a few questions this afternoon. The first question is about seniors' units and the availability of funding for elevators in those units, because as you know, there are a number of aging homes with a number of people who are having challenges making their way up and down the stairs. I know the custom in our area is at least if there's somebody like that, they try to move them to the first floor, but unfortunately, that can't be the case for everybody.

 

I'm just wondering if there's a program you're planning right now, or in the very near future, for elevators to be placed in these different structures around the Province of Nova Scotia.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I know that has been an issue ever since I became minister, with respect to the elevators and the cost factor, they're extremely expensive. So what we're actually looking at is the housing strategy and if there are opportunities in some areas that perhaps we can have new, affordable housing for seniors built senior-friendly, then those other structures could be utilized for other purposes under our housing strategy.

 

That will be an integral part of what we will be looking at, because you're right in the fact that it makes it very difficult in those structures that were built years ago that there was no thought towards aging in place. It is an issue that faces our province and all provinces across Canada. It is our hope that through the housing strategy we will be addressing that.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I want to thank the minister for that answer. The challenge, of course, is that the housing strategy is going to take a while to be implemented and put in place, while these individuals are still struggling to deal with these stairs. Has any thought been given to even doing something like - and I don't know the proper terminology - the chair lifts that you set on the side of a stairway and allow people to go up? I understand they're very reliable and reasonably cheap, especially compared to an elevator because elevators are very expensive. I was wondering if there has been any thought of doing something like that, again to assist these individuals.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, we're always willing to look at every case that is presented to us. I do know that we would have to ensure that the difference between an elevator and one of the chair lifts is its sustainability and how long it would last and the ability of the usage of it.

 

It's like anything in life: every situation is different. If there is a particular site that you're interested in, we can certainly have a discussion and look at that. I know one of the most difficult things is you're trying to transition to doing business in a different manner; it's the here and now that's the most challenging. That's why we have to look at those cases on an individual basis to see if there are any opportunities to do something about it.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Well, I thank the minister for that and I will bring forward something to you very soon. I do understand the challenges your department has, as all levels and all departments in government these days, it's very challenging. Again, when you're thinking about these seniors, and it's a safety issue as well as just a mobility issue, I worry - and I'm sure you do, too, because I know you do care - I worry about the people who have to try to negotiate these stairs.

I guess since I've had my own hip replacement, I have more of an appreciation of that challenge than I had prior to. I guess that's part of the aging process.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: It's tough; my dad had his hips replaced too. My dad jokes that he's hipper than anybody else in the family now because he had his hips replaced. He provides comic relief all the time.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Thank you for that, minister. I just wonder if you could elaborate a little more on the housing strategy that you hope will help seniors and give us a little better idea of a timeline that we can expect those things to start to come into place and help these individuals as well. We'll never be able to meet all the challenges that are before us, but if we have some kind of a timeline to work towards and a better understanding of that, I think that would be helpful.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, the actual housing strategy will be announced very shortly. It has taken quite a bit of work to get to this point, because I travelled throughout the province and it was a great opportunity to discuss with communities and local governments and individuals their particular needs. So within this housing strategy there are different pillars that we feel have needs that are out in the community and it's from the senior housing, being able to focus on aging in place, what we have to do to provide services and supports so individuals can stay at home longer, if that's their choice.

 

I find with a lot of seniors that that's what they want, to be able to stay in their own home or their own apartment. That will be announced in a very short time frame. From there, the other important part about the housing strategy is that we know these things will take time: to build infrastructure, to make changes. We're being very frank with people that it will take time, but we have to be able to move forward and set goals.

 

We also want the housing strategy to be a working document that people and community and a variety of levels of government have input, because it is a work in process. The senior aspect is a very important part of that and that's why I say that in the meantime, what we need to do is have those individual discussions and look at a particular situation to see if there's any resolution to that. You're more than willing, so I invite you to bring those forward to me and then we can work with our staff to see if there are any opportunities to resolve a particular issue.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't think there's time for a question and an answer but probably time for putting something on the record for 45 seconds or a minute.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I guess the only thing I would ask, minister, is if we could have a timeline, and that may come with the announcement . . .

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: It will.

 

MR. MACLEOD: . . . but there must be a timeline to this project so that people have an understanding of how long the wait times are going to be. With that, I want to thank you for the opportunity to ask a few questions; thank you, Mr. Chairman.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: We will now go to the Independent member; Mr. Zinck has one hour.

 

The honourable member for Dartmouth North.

 

MR. TREVOR ZINCK: Madam Minister, staff - welcome; I'm always glad to sit and have a conversation. Following the Progressive Conservative and Liberal caucuses, they pretty much had you answer most of the line items so I'd like to go through an exercise of actually just having a conversation about a number of issues over the next hour.

 

I want to first begin by welcoming Deputy Minister Wood. For seven years of being an MLA, staff knows, as does the current minister over the last four years, that I've mentioned each time we come to a budget session that the deputy for some reason or other has never shown up for this department so I'm very pleased and was pleased last week to see Mr. Wood show up, so welcome.

 

I won't go into much detail like I did last year but I want to continue to say that the staff - you commented in your opening comments about the wonderful staff you have and the number of staff who assist Nova Scotians every day. Some of the stories they have to hear and the work they do on behalf of those individuals who come to the department in need. I want to again this year say that our work in Dartmouth North consists of daily contact with staff, whether it's housing, child welfare, or the number of issues that we deal with. I can honestly say that it has been nothing but supportive in our efforts to get those folks some help.

 

You have a couple of folks here in the room, Dave Ryan and Dan Troke, who know - and I won't recite their numbers, they know I know it right offhand. I do want to let you know that they have again this year gone to remarkable limits to give us the help we need in some of the very intense situations that we have brought to our attention.

 

Going into that, last week in your opening remarks you made the comment about the fact that Nova Scotians don't hear about the positive stories that come out of the Department of Community Services. Oftentimes it is the reactionary news stories that get the headlines and you're thrown out in front, representing the government on some real difficult cases. Unfortunately, even as MLAs, we have the opportunity on a number of occasions - pretty much every day in my office - to help individuals, to really make a difference in their lives. Sadly, those aren't the kinds of stories that you see on the front pages. Whether they're not newsworthy or media-worthy, we know that we're making a difference. I think there's an opportunity for us to celebrate some of those successes, so I agree and concur with you there.

 

There has been mention about some of the numbers and the switchovers of FTEs and full-time staff and the comings and goings of the transition homes, the child care to Education. You mentioned in your opening remarks about changing the department inside out, becoming person-oriented, not policy-oriented, and changing the mindset. I know that you and I over the last four years have had a number of conversations about that very thing, that mindset change, when an individual approaches a department, to really look at that holistic approach.

 

Everyone who comes to us has potential but it's up to us to exercise the conversation where we peel back the layers and actually find out the reasons individuals come to us or come to the department for help, but it is a mindset. With the recent conference over the last year around restorative approaches, good communications throughout the department, I think we can get this done. I think it's very, very important, because as your government has made improvements through different programs, there are still people who are really struggling, people who try to enter into the system and find it very difficult to get through the different steps, even sometimes with the help of an MLA.

 

We have a number of caseworkers who are carrying tremendous caseloads. I think over the years they've become burdened with the fact that there are a number of folks on their caseloads that they don't really get to see moving forward in a positive way. That being said, we are still dealing with human beings, and every day we hold their lives in our hands to try to help make that difference.

 

I encourage you to continue on. The switchover with child care into Education, I think that's a wonderful thing to have happened. It will free up you and staff. You made mention of the associate deputy minister, some of the real initiatives around the ESIA program and the redesign, those are really important things for you, as a minister, to be focusing on. I think over the years with child care advocates that it has always been about making them feel that their work is worthy, and also the wage disparity that they've complained about.

 

One of the things that I've heard over the last seven years has been the fact that there are a lot of advocates who believe that early childhood learning and child care should have been in the Department of Education, so I'm really pleased to see your government move that through.

 

As far as the transition homes, we've seen this come and go over the years, moving things from the Department of Health and Wellness to Community Services. Around the addiction piece, I think a good spot for that to be is in the Department of Health and Wellness as well.

 

We're excited obviously, and I'm going to touch on it in my further comments, the housing strategy. It's one of those things where your government has taken the steps to go around the province and consult. I had the opportunity to sit in on a couple of those consultations and you were there for every one of them, as well as your staff, and you were listening. I know there are a lot of pieces around this strategy: intellectually challenged, physically challenged, small options homes - that really important piece. I know on Friday afternoon past you put out a press release that there's going to be a further consultation in regard to that.

 

I know there's some talk in the future around the co-op housing agreements that are going to come up over the next number of years that are obviously going to be looked at, hopefully during this strategy as well.

 

I can tell you that overall, our office in Dartmouth North continues to be very busy. We see, as I made mention, a lot of intense, extreme cases. A lot of times people don't know where to turn. I look at some of the recent advertising that your government has put out in regard to the 211 system. Folks need to know that they can make a connection and that the person on the other end of the line is going to listen to them and hopefully guide them toward steps that are going to alleviate the problem.

 

Unfortunately, we still continue to see people in crisis. I think in large part it's those life lessons that somebody might have missed out on that don't allow them to make the proper, informed decision. When they call up the department they're speaking to an intake worker, a caseworker, we need to take that time and we need to make sure they get the proper information and have everything fully planned out for them and help them through those steps.

 

Madam Minister, my questioning will be around the ESIA program. As I've mentioned in the last seven years about the deputy minister not being here, I'm going to mention an issue that you know in the last four years each session I bring up a question in the House, each budget over the last seven years I bring up this question. Again, your government has increased the personal allowance by $17 and many of the recipients, when July 1^st comes, they will be looking forward to that and it is much appreciated. It's the largest dollar figure we've seen in a number of years, probably ever at one time.

 

One concern I have is that as we sit here tonight deliberating over this budget, the URB meeting is going on around the water increases. There was a press release that came out last week from some of the landlords who had been petitioning their tenants and informing them of the possibility that this water increase will be passed on in their rent. So as we're increasing the personal allowance by $17, the majority of the 44,000 folks on income assistance will see a rental increase go up, probably equating to about $25 a month.

 

The question that I've always asked over the years is why as a government - and not just your government but governments past - why can't we wrap our heads around increasing the shelter allowance?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: First, before I answer your question, I want to put on the record that you, as a Member of the Legislative Assembly, have been very co-operative to me, as a minister, and identify the issues that you're dealing with that we work them out together. I think that's a very good lesson. I think that as you know, at the end of the day it's about the person or people you are trying to help. I know you're extremely passionate about that and do whatever you can and your whole life revolves around the next case that you're working on and the one you're presently working on and the one that you've worked on to make sure that those individuals or family are still being looked after.

 

I want to congratulate you and thank you very much for the work you do in your constituency, because for me it's all about - I look at you and I see the word "care" because I know you really do care. Thank you for also recognizing the staff because it is a very difficult job to be in and they work diligently to try to help people.

 

We do know, too, that the system itself has created the monster that we have today. That's why we have to take Community Services, sort of flip it inside out, look at it, and work together on how we make those changes and how we allow staff to have the freedom to make the decisions they need to make on an individual basis and be person-oriented. That's not an easy thing because there's always a fear that if they do that they're going to get themselves into trouble.

 

I think the biggest challenge is the system that exists today - and we're just sort of chipping away at those changes but yet, at the same time, you're trying to make a transition and you're trying to educate your staff, you're trying to educate the public that you want to take a different path. It's human nature to hold onto the old ways that we've done things or business, and even though we know it's not the right way or what we want, it's a comfort zone.

 

It will take time, it will take senior management enabling those who are on the front lines to make those individualized type of decisions, not be as structured in terms of if we have to follow policy - there's a reason for accountability in policy - but have the system designed that staff have the freedom to question those policies and be able to have flexibility as long as the outcome is to support the needs of the individual on whose behalf they're advocating.

 

With respect to the shelter component, that is a really difficult one to look at. There are different theories in terms of increasing the shelter rates. I don't know what the golden answer is to that because there is the theory and philosophy that if you do that, then what you will find will be an increase in rental rates by the landlords. That could very well happen. I think there have been precedents in other places in North America where that exact thing happened.

 

If you are an individual who is on income assistance, I mean certainly you will struggle with what the shelter rates are because they are not enough. It amazes me, I don't know how people do it; it's really difficult. That's why we've tried to take this approach when we first came in as government: a sort of multi-program approach to enable our clientele and those on low income so that there are a variety of opportunities for them to be able to increase their resources and increase the dollars that they have. That's why we created the Affordable Living Tax Credit, the Poverty Reduction Credit, along with increasing child tax benefits; the rebate for seniors' land taxes has increased twice.

 

Many areas have increased to help individuals with the overall income that they have. For example, I know that if you took a working-poor couple with two children, they would have approximately $2,300 annually more in their pockets today than in 2009. That's quite a bit of an increase, but yet at the same time you're dealing with economic crises throughout the world. All you have to do is go to the grocery store and what you used to be able to get for $100 is now $150. It's amazing how you can even see the increase in food pricing within a month sometimes; you go to the grocery store and see something that has gone up $1 or $2. For people who are on income assistance, that $1 or $2 means an awful lot.

 

What we're hoping and what our strategy has been is to continue on the route of having multiple programs that individuals can receive more income. The housing strategy, however, will also be an integral part of this because we are going to be analyzing and looking at what we need to do to assist people. It's always about the finances, too, and the difficulties we face with the dollars. That's why it has been so important to get the province back in a balance position. It's critical because we, as government, are no different than being an individual.

 

As I mentioned in my opening speech, the fact is that if we are on balance in terms of our finances - if it's spiralling downwards in your life, in order to be able to do other things in your life that you want to do but you can't afford to do, you have to get yourself on a good financial track. That's no different with government because we are not in the backroom producing dollar bills or loonies or $20 bills. The money that a government has is revenue and then where do you get that revenue? Some areas of revenue go down, some areas go up but, at the same time you have expenses. There's a lot of need, particularly in Nova Scotia with our aging population; 1,000 people a month turn age 65 so there are many, many pressures.

 

With respect to the shelter component, would it actually resolve - I guess that's the question and I don't have the answer - would it be resolved by increasing shelter rates or would it be a double-edged sword that, in turn, the landlord would increase the amount? Or is it better - one of the directions that I personally feel is better - is to design a system where we do not structure the money, what the income has to be used for. We do not say oh here, you get X number of dollars for your shelter, X number of dollars for your transportation, X number of dollars for this, and be so specific.

 

I think the direction to go is a direction where we make sure that we look at the income level that an individual or family needs to have in order to exist in our society, in a better manner than below the poverty line. We want them to be above the poverty line, so how do we analyze those statistics to look at what the level would be above the poverty line and how do we reach that? That means being strategic and developing plans and working with all levels of government, but also working within our department, interdepartmental work, to be able to work towards that particular goal rather than just specifically say okay, we're going to increase that shelter rate.

 

I have a fear that a majority of individuals would find themselves in a position that their rents will just go up. So is it better to give people an envelope of money and support them in terms of understanding the importance of financing and give them some tools and education - is that where our focus should be: help them become employable and also, in turn, the financial aspect? That's one thing that even in schools we do not learn. We really don't learn how to balance our budgets and do our own personal accounting and financial investments. Maybe that's a gap area in society that we need to look at in the Department of Community Services and see that as one of the needs that we also need to be addressing.

 

MR. ZINCK: Thank you for that answer, Madam Minister. I'm going to keep on that theme as I continue on. I do want to say that yes, along with staff contributing to a lot of the successes that we experience every day, you're right in saying that I have your ear, or I'd like to think that I have your ear. We've been able to come together on a number of occasions over the last number of years and achieve those good stories.

 

Again, I think it has never been - we're dealing with people's lives. It should never be about political motivation, it should never be about parading somebody out in front of the media to get a sound bite. The real success is getting together at the table. It really empowers the individual to see everyone working together, as well, because then they, as a result, get a feeling that our government really cares and the people who are influencing government actually want to see something done to help us.

 

So yes, I do want to thank you for that and for allowing me to call on you when I have to, and I'll continue to do so.

 

The real issue with the shelter component - and I guess there's no easy solution, obviously, or we'd see an increase. You know, you talk about balancing the books, very important, the debt burden of the province, and the amount of money we spend out each year dealing with the debt and paying the debt down. We balanced the books this year, why not raise shelter allowances? We could say that - we're not going to say that though.

 

I agree about getting the fiscal house in order. The last increase was in 2006 and I look over the last year at the number of articles that have been written about this one particular component, everyone gets it wrong, they still don't know when the last increase was, how much it was but it has been a long time. It was a long time with the previous Progressive Conservative Government that raised it in 2006. So obviously there is no easy fix.

 

I like what you said about - and I think we talked about this a little bit last year, the two pieces - the personal, the shelter component: are we moving or looking towards down the road, if we are able to continue on this path of getting back to balance, of having a guaranteed income? Then it would actually become, I think, about budgeting skills.

Realistically, when we're looking at it, even with the increase - and I just had the number down - a lot of the folks I deal with are dealing with mental health issues or dealing with addiction issues or have been in and out of the prison system, so they're qualifying at the $535 shelter rate. Throw the $17 onto the $238, that's another $255. But overall and realistically, folks are looking at paying anywhere from $600 to $700 for a one-bedroom in a somewhat safe, somewhat decent apartment in metro.

 

When you're dealing with an addiction or you're dealing with a mental health issue, part of successfully coming through that process is having the ability to eat healthy. I'll touch on this over the next hour or so, the special needs and the special diets are there. But it has been a difficult process over the last year and a half with regard to that. So when I look at somebody - and this is where we are - somebody realistically is taking the balance of their personal allowance to top up their rent so that they have a decent, safe place to live.

 

I know in the last session in the Fall I commented on the wording of the consultation around the housing strategy. You're right: everyone deserves to have the right to choose where they live. Unfortunately over the years, based on the amount of income that we allow people, we're pigeon-holing people and telling them where they can afford to live.

 

That being said, the problem that I have and the problem that government has, the problem that the taxpayers have, the problem that the justice system has, the problem that the mental health folks have is that individuals are taking from their personal allowances and their special diet monies to top up their rent and it's not allowing them to do the things they have to do to get well.

 

Obviously it's not an easy fix. I know that with this next increase in the water rates, heat and hot water included, we're going to see rents go up at least $25, I would imagine, as a minimum. I'm fearful for a lot of folks, unfortunately, like I said, if we're to move them beyond the point where they are, where they've come to us for help, where we're trying to get them to become employable, not being able to afford the rent is a real difficulty.

 

As you know, the wait-list of housing - I guess I'm talking mostly about single people. I know you mentioned the $2,300 figure with families and whatnot and I think we've done a good job in that part. I know single parents with a number of kids, I often talk to caseworkers and caseworkers will tell me that if you're a single parent with kids, there's a lot more out there for you now to help you be successful but I'm talking about the individuals who are single - we see a lot of folks who are aging - and they're just not able to get well, based on the fact that they can't afford their rent.

 

The power increases, we've talked about that. Each time the power goes up - and I guess it's an education for the public - when we say $535, we're talking about everything included. Interestingly enough, we have a landlord who has bought up a number of buildings in our community and in different parts of HRM. There are two particular buildings very close to my office and the rents, I'll give them credit, they've gone the route of making them affordable, to the point where some bachelors are $535, everything included. We get excited when we hear that.

 

I have caseworkers saying, well, why don't they go with this particular company because the rents are geared and the power is included? The first thing I say to them is have you seen those places, have you seen those apartments? I give them credit because over the years the buildings have been full of folks who are dealing with really bad addiction problems, whether it's the hard core street drug but more so prescription drugs.

 

We've gone through that cycle where we've moved them out and now a new owner has come in and said we're going to gear this up and we're going to keep the shelter rates and we're going to put people in there who can afford this. But the caseworkers don't see the condition of the building; they don't see the fact that there are a lot of mold issues. If you walked in there you would say, I don't care if it's $535, because I still have to get well - how can I live in this situation?

 

I'll let you comment on that. I'm not going to give up on it, I think we really have to find a solution to this because people will say in the mental health field when somebody is dealing with an addiction or a mental health issue, the key factor is finding them safe, secure, adequate housing that they can afford. This is the initial step to them moving forward and getting well.

 

If we're not able to accommodate that or if we're not able to get the extra funding because a doctor doesn't want to spend the time filling out the forms and substantiating the issues the individual is dealing with to get them the extra funding for special diet - again, you've heard me say that in Dartmouth North we eat our bus passes and we top up our rents with our special diet money - that has become an issue since the department has really gone back and asked the doctors to substantiate the claims of the individuals' health conditions.

 

I bring it up, and I'll continue to bring it up, because for me I look at it from the taxpayers' perspective. If I have somebody who has an addiction issue or a mental health issue, I'm allowing them this much rent and I'm putting them in a certain neighbourhood, I'm only allowing them to get so well. If they're not allowed that opportunity to get well and it comes down to brass-tacks dollars, they become part of the system again, or another department: the Department of Justice or the Department of Health and Wellness.

 

I encourage you, as you go through the process of revamping some of the things in the office, to go back to your caucus colleagues, the Executive Council, for as long as I'm around I'll beat the drum on this one, I really will, because it's an important piece. If I can get somebody well enough to become employable, they're off the taxpayers' dime, now they're paying taxes. If I can get somebody well enough that they're able to eat properly to deal with their addiction, they're going to become employable and then they're off the taxpayers' dime.

 

I think it's an education and an opportunity that we have, as MLAs and as poverty advocates, to go out there and lobby you and your government to make the necessary changes to get people what they want. I think it's an education for greater society to understand that the majority of single people who rely on this system are living on $800 or less a month. Whether you have an Affordable Living Tax Credit every three or four months, it's great, it's a bump, but the power bill has to get paid every month, the rent gets paid every month, you have to eat, and like you said, food costs have gone up dramatically.

 

It's an important issue for me because that right to choose where you live, that right to have a safe, healthy environment to live in is really an important step to move these folks to the next step, which is actually becoming employable.

 

I'll let you comment on that and once you comment, I'm going to move away from it. I need to bring it up, as I have in the past, and if you check Hansard, I've broken it down, when you take the rent and the personal allowance and you balance it off, I've often said people are living on less than $100 a month. I can tell you that my day began actually last night with several calls that said, can you take me to the food bank tomorrow? Whether it's a young man who just came out of the prison system a month ago who I started working with in Spryfield, who needed to get to the food bank today, that's an important step. Or a single mom who's just getting her three kids back from child welfare and needs food in the house, or it's a single man who is dealing with an addiction issue - it's the middle of the month and I need food.

 

I can tell you that Parker Street Food Bank was lined up today but the number of individuals that I had to serve today got to eat. As long as we can't wrap our heads around that one piece - and that's the important thing, this is about getting well. This is about getting employable. But if we're living on less than $100 a month, it's just simply not going to happen. I think it's an advantage for the taxpayer to understand that piece and then governments - and not just yours - any government that wants to fight poverty, we need to come up with a solution around this piece. What it looks like, it doesn't matter. The realistic part is that we are losing people. We're not being as successful as we can be with people to transition and move forward if we don't come up with some sort of fix.

 

I'll let you comment on that and then I'll move on to some other things around ESIA.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Thank you very much for your insight. I know that this is dear to your heart and you have a lot of knowledge in this area. There's always more that needs to be done, we know that. We have been in government only three and a half going on four years, so you're taking in decades and decades of a particular system and the way things were done, the way the culture was, and trying to make that change.

 

I'm going to go through some of the increases that we have in our multi-program approach and what that means to the single person, because you mentioned about that. The reason I'm doing that is so people can actually recognize that we have made some significant investments but part of the issue that everybody is dealing with, and those on lower and modest income get hit harder, is the speed of the cost of living is going quite rapidly to what we can try to keep up with. That's why it's so critical to take the services of Community Services and redesign them, and also the housing strategy will have huge implications to help individuals, as you said, to have a home and be healthy.

 

We have the oldest housing stock in Canada so that is a challenge that we're dealing with. We're looking at how we can develop mixed communities, healthy communities that enable individuals to have the opportunity to live in a safe environment, a nice environment. There may be somebody who is in the same residential area, mixed housing that's paying $1,500 a month, and then there are low-income individuals who are paying $600 or $700. The goal of having the mixed housing is so people have the opportunity to live and thrive in a community, in a setting that is no different than somebody who is actually better off socially and financially.

 

So when I relate to you these increases, I'm not relating them to you to say we've done enough and here it is, this is just to be able to give the recognition of the enormous amount of work that we've done to date and to show that we truly have shown a commitment - it hasn't been just in words, it has been in the dollar amounts. For example, a single person who would be employable and is in receipt of income assistance - and I won't go through all the breakdowns of what the Affordable Living Tax Credit is giving them and the increase in rate, et cetera, but when you look at the increases since 2009, that would leave that individual with $1,069.32 more annually than before 2009. That's a fair amount of increase in income. It's still not enough because if you look at the bottom line of what it means for their total income, you and I would never be able to survive on that.

 

But it's important to note that I think the multi-program approach is a workable approach, it's just as we're moving along that continuum that we ensure the housing strategy fits nicely and our financial and budgeting plans fit in that. What's very exciting about the housing strategy that is the changes we want to do and are planning on doing will actually give us an opportunity to generate revenue. That is key to this housing strategy, because in 2034 we're going to be dealing with the federal government totally being pulled out of housing, which scares everyone.

 

Every person in Canada needs to be pounding the drums on that one because that's going to be really critical to lose those dollars. So it's not only for us to look at a way we can create revenue to put back in those dollars we're going to lose, but also where we can make revenue so we can actually reinvest in social programs, so we can increase the amount of income for those who are struggling in our province, and at the same time provide them with a safe home environment, in a home that they're proud of, in a community that they're proud of.

 

As you know, the ramifications and domino effect of that will create healthier individuals and healthier families. This is not just the work of Community Services; this has to be the work of many different government departments, different levels of government itself, and also individuals like you who have given so much to the cause. It has to be a part of community too. So there's an educational component to make sure that people understand and realize - and I would encourage every MLA of every political Party to make sure that they support and educate people - that when you invest in people you are investing in your economy. It's not investing just in business; it needs to be a balanced approach. Investing in people, in turn, gives you a stronger economy, a stronger province.

 

The other area that has been dear to my heart is people with disabilities. Right now a single person with a disability who would be receiving income assistance would also receive that same increase of $1,069.32. It's still not enough, those with disabilities is another whole topic of how you expand the services of persons with disabilities. They presently sit under income assistance. I'm not convinced that that's the place because people who have disabilities have higher needs, they have higher special needs, special diets. I think there are services that we're not providing because of where they sit within the system, so that's for discussion and to look at the ability and the consultation with people and community groups and advocacy groups on making those types of changes.

 

If you took a single person with a disability working within income assistance, that means they're employable part time, their total increase since 2009, on an annual basis, is $2,542.80. Also, if you look at a single parent with two children and they're in receipt of income assistance because of our increase in child tax benefits, in the Pharmacare Program, those other programs that I've mentioned, you're looking at a $1,299.22 increase and a single parent with two children, working within income assistance, now would be receiving $3,852.60 more annually than they did in 2009.

 

As I said, I know it's still not enough, all you have to do is look around and all you have to do is talk to you and the cases that you're dealing with. In any of our communities throughout Nova Scotia people are finding it very difficult. But I have to also stop and think what would have happened if we, as a government, did not get elected because we've been so focused on assisting low-income, modest-income individuals, the people who have great needs in our province, where would they be today?

 

As we know, in the past you saw maybe the increases were for income assistance, $3 to $4 a month each year. That was basically it. There was some Pharmacare thrown in there but there wasn't a concentrated effort on a multi-pronged approach to help reduce that cycle of poverty. I think along with reducing that cycle of poverty is the consultation process that has been ongoing.

 

I've heard people say well, you know, you don't have a strategy. Well yes, we have a strategy, the strategy has been that multi-pronged approach not just within Community Services, but within other departments: the Health and Wellness Department, the Education Department, et cetera. We have actually analyzed and will soon be providing this information, we have analyzed the poverty reduction strategy of 2009, and we have well exceeded the goals and the objectives of that particular strategy.

 

My good deputy minister is throwing to me these investments. Once again I'm going to go through these investments, because as you know, it's very difficult to get the message out there - understanding that this is not the typical media-type story because it needs to be a crisis, not a good story.

 

By all means, as I've said, I will sit here and say it's still not enough. We've still got a lot of work to do but we want to make sure that we go forward with this work and we don't go backwards. That would be a really sad commentary for all the people of Nova Scotia if we did not go forward with these changes and the framework and the laying of the foundation that we have been very strategically doing, because people are always saying hurry up with this and hurry up with that.

 

It's like building a house: if you do not take the time to be very precise and strategic in deciding what kind of home you want to build, how do you make sure that you have the means to build that house? Then, when you're actually physically building it, you want a solid foundation; you want a foundation that will hold that house up for many, many years. It's the same as what we're trying to do: we're trying to be very strategic to make sure that it's like a puzzle and all the pieces are fitting together and we're not trying to force a piece into part of that puzzle that doesn't fit. That takes time and it takes consultation and it takes strategic planning and it takes financial planning, that's the key part.

 

I think what I've seen over past decades is there has been a lot of ad hoc-based decisions on political pressures rather than looking at what is the best for Nova Scotians and how we can make sure that we are planning and financially providing those resources as we plan.

 

Here are some of the supports for children: $7.3 million has been invested for approximately 40,000 children in 23,000 low- to modest-income households. This is also a benefit from a 20 per cent increase in the Nova Scotia child benefit, the first increase in over a decade, believe it or not, and about 7,000 more children became eligible for the child benefit and the Pharmacare benefits. So those programs opened up to 7,000 more children; and $5 million has been invested in approximately 1,000 new child care subsidies, which is a huge amount. I believe that part of our platform was we were going to increase it by 250 and we have 1,000.

 

Of course, the accessibility for families to child care is a critical part of this puzzle, so $7 million has been invested to strengthen or expand the child care sector. As you know - and thank you for your support - the move to Education is critical. From the time a child is born they're a working computer; it's amazing, when a child is born, how quickly you can see them developing and the speed that they develop, so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that that's an essential part of their life, when they're forming their personality and their knowledge base and their brain is growing, and the need to be able to support that age from birth.

 

As a society, you kind of wonder why we haven't done that; there has been so much scientific research around that, yet we haven't made that kind of investment. So I'm really excited about the part of child care - early years - moving to Education. But when I say they moved to Education, it's not going to be isolated from Community Services or the Department of Health and Wellness, because the strategy includes those departments to work in concert as we develop the strategies around the early years, and I think that's really important to note.

 

For 800 foster families, $2 million has been invested; they received an increase of about 20 per cent. That has also been the first time in decades. I'd love to be able to have another increase with the foster families. My heart goes out to foster families and parents; it's incredible what they do for our society. They're sort of the ones behind the scenes and hidden. They don't rally in front of the House of Assembly here; they quietly go along, doing what they do. It's incredible work to be able to help a child who needs a family.

 

Of course, we want to work towards a forever home and that's why we have developed an adoption strategy that is actually focusing on adopting older children. We are seeing an increase in our adoption rates. We have to make the system and the process easier and not such a long time frame. We're working at that, we recognize that.

 

I have been very fortunate, as a minister, to be able to work with foster families, meet foster parents, talk to foster parents, talk to children who are in their care. They do incredible work, and I don't think they get recognized enough in our society for that. If we did not have them, the challenge is, where would those children be?

 

Another one is $8 million that's invested in the long-term treatment centre for 18 children, and it's for youth. That would be the Wood Street treatment centre, which is much-needed. Because of the lack of that type of facility, we've had to rely on sending many of our high-risk children outside the province. We still need to access those resources. However, this will make a dent into the need to keep our children within the province, to be provided with the services that they deserve to have right in the province.

 

Another investment is the $5.2 million in the mental health strategy, as you mentioned, the importance of the Mental Health and Addictions Strategy. That's a first for our province and more than ever in our society, with the pressures that people face, whether you're a child, a youth, adult or senior, it is critical to have that mental health strategy and to continue on the path to expand that strategy. This would be $34.5 million in the last three years, so that would be in terms of supporting children.

 

Under income supports, our investments have been $3.6 million for approximately 15,000 income assistance recipients. They started receiving the new Poverty Reduction Credit. That will equal about $200 a year in their hands. There was another increase to $250, in 2012-13, in that Poverty Reduction Credit.

 

For 31,000 income assistance recipients, $13 million has been invested. That has been the increase in their personal allowance. That's an even higher increase because of the extra $17, which equals that $47 since 2009.

 

And $70 million has affected 240,000 Nova Scotians as they're in receipt of our Affordable Living Tax Credit - that would equal a sum of $255 per couple or individual and $60 per child in 2012-13; $12.5 million is meeting the needs of 18,000 low-income seniors and that's with respect to those who receive the GIS, as you know, that now they do not have to pay provincial taxes, which is somewhat of a help and it equals out of our provincial budget a $12.5 million investment; and $99.1 million is for over 250,000 Nova Scotians who have benefited from - this is the total amount of what I just went over. So those are supports in income, supports over a three-year period - we have invested $99.1 million.

 

Under training and employment, $100 million has been invested in training for EI qualified individuals and non-EI eligible clients. In this area, 6,000 Nova Scotians are also benefiting from the jobsHere program; $1.6 million was invested to expand workplace education programs; $22 million was invested for 52 community agencies, and that is for those agencies to deliver the employment services to unemployed persons; $7.5 million was for the Skills Up! pilot program that we're doing, and that helps 300 African Nova Scotians to return to school, to get the training they need to pursue good jobs; and $1.5 million was invested to expand access and to strengthen day programs for persons with disabilities. That was another area that was very dear to my heart because the day programs did not see any type of financial investment for many, many years. That's another area that I would like to work in the future, to be able to increase the financial support.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Minister, I'm sorry to interject, but I usually give a 10-minute warning on time running out for a caucus or for the Independent member. There is a little less than five minutes but continue with your response - just a time warning.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I don't want to take all the member's time but I think it's really important for people to understand these investment levels. I'll try to go through this quickly: $3.7 million for about 3,000 income assistance recipients who are working part-time; and a $620,000 investment to ensure that income tax refunds received by income assistance recipients are no longer treated as income, which benefits almost 3,000 income assistance recipients. Of course, you would know that the minimum wage has increased in three years from $8.10 to $10.15, and it went up again on April 1^st to $10.30. That's a total of $136.9 million.

 

The last one - I'll do it quickly - is housing support: $27.4 million for new housing, about 196 families; $20.6 million for 1,100 families who live in housing co-operatives; $18 million for over 1,500 households that received the repair assistance program; $1 million in programs to address homelessness; $13.3 million for 409 affordable housing units that have been built or renovated; $48.1 million invested in repair and energy efficiency upgrades; $12 million for 50,000 seniors and low-income Nova Scotians, to help with their heating costs; $2 million for 14,000 seniors receiving the rebate for their property tax; $5.28 million to help low-income seniors, or more seniors, to stay in their homes and increase the caregiver benefit; and $5 million to allow more clients with disabilities to live at home, in their apartments, or with a foster family. That's a $152.7 million investment in housing initiatives.

 

I'm sorry to use up your time for that and I thank you very much for your patience, but I think it's extremely important for people to know that there have been substantial investments to eliminate or reduce the cycle of poverty. We do know there's more to be done and more planning and strategizing, and with your support and all the work that you do in your constituency, we can work towards success.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: There are about two minutes remaining, probably not time for a question and an answer, but do you want to take about a minute and a half and put something on the record? I understand you're coming back for another round as well.

 

MR. ZINCK: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

 

So here's my issue, a single lady, no kids, single individual who has been deemed disabled, $535. We've been working with this individual for about a week, she needs to be housed. So we found an apartment, the rent is $570. We were informed today by the department that they will not assist her with the move, albeit a damage deposit, because she is considered over housed.

 

It's a bit of a dilemma because where am I going to put her for $535? Again, it was an education for the caseworker who said to move her to one of these two spots that this new company has taken over and again, have you seen these apartments? Therein lies my frustration. If I'm getting $575 or $570 for rent, based on the $535 shelter component, that's pretty good, we're close and yes, it's only a minimal amount of $40 or $45 that that individual would have to take out of their personal allowance. But now I have a bigger dilemma: I'm being turned down by the department because she's considered over housed.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: I think we'll have to pursue that in your second round if you don't mind. Sorry to cut you off but you're a wee bit over the one hour that has been allocated - not much. We are ready for the Liberal caucus for one hour.

 

The honourable member for Bedford-Birch Cove.

 

MS. KELLY REGAN: Mr. Chairman, thank you to the minister and staff who are here today. I'd like to move on to housing and I guess my first question is sort of a big one - where is the deferred federal contribution for the social housing agreement? Is it in Finance? Is it in DCS? When I look at it, I'm not sure where that is.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: It's in the housing corporation financial statement.

 

MS. REGAN: So what are the parameters for these monies?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Parameters are within the social housing agreement and I'm just going to provide a little bit of background information.

 

The fund for the future social housing expenditures, the deferred federal contribution, the Nova Scotia Housing Development Corporation has an agreement with CMHC in which we will receive a total of $1.35 billion over the life of the agreement. Under the terms of the agreement, money received must be used for qualifying program expenditures which include social housing, housing renovations and affordable housing, stimulus, and operating.

 

The provincial and municipal governments also contribute to these programs. If the provincial government chooses to increase its contribution, thereby reducing the amount of federal money required to cover the costs, the federal money remains in an account earmarked for future social housing expenditures. It cannot be used to fund other programs.

 

In the past, when the province has been in a favourable financial position, it contributed more to the total cost of housing which increased the amount of the money in the deferred account. This was considered prudent given that once the funding ceases, the corporation will still own the assets, and all operating costs associated with these assets will have to be borne by the province and the municipalities.

 

Our housing stock is old and as it continues to age will require more funding to maintain and upgrade to meet the changing needs of the tenants. As of March 31, 2013, the fund had a balance of $58.6 million.

 

MS. REGAN: Do you get a certain amount each year from CMHC that goes into that? Did it all come at once? How does that work?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: We get approximately $52 million, almost $53 million a year from CMHC.

 

MS. REGAN: What's the amount of deferred maintenance and capital improvements needed in social housing in the province at this time?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: What we did with that particular funding pot that you're referencing is that most of those dollars were used in terms of the stimulus package that was received from the federal government. Those are cost shared 50-50.

 

MS. REGAN: Actually, I asked, what is the amount of deferred maintenance in capital improvements needed in social housing?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Can you ask the question again?

 

MS. REGAN: How much deferred maintenance and capital improvements are needed in social housing here in Nova Scotia?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: We don't have an actual figure because most of the money in the stimulus project or package was utilized in order to renovate and fix the needs in the housing stock.

 

MS. REGAN: The question I'm asking is not how much has been spent but how much is needed - do we know how much is in bad shape?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I guess what you're asking is whether there has been an assessment of all the housing stock and a prediction in terms of what it would cost to fix that.

 

MS. REGAN: Yes.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: What we're looking at is that each year staff has said that $20 million has been spent in the maintenance and capital, but I think that what you're asking is if there's a projection. We don't have that particular figure of what is projected because they have invested $20 million each year to fix up what needed to be done.

 

MS. REGAN: So what I'm hearing you say is that we have been spending $20 million a year to do deferred maintenance and capital improvements but there's no indication from you how much - if you were going to repair all of the stock that needs to be repaired, how much you would actually be spending.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: That particular specific information we can provide you but we don't have those dollar figures here today, so I will make sure staff provides you with that.

 

MS. REGAN: Thank you. When I go back to Nova Scotia Housing Development Corporation Grant, that comes from your department and it goes over to the special account, is that what you were saying - that segregated account that has money from CMHC, is that correct?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: It goes to the housing corporation account.

 

MS. REGAN: So we would have about $83 million a year going into that account, if you include the $53 million from the feds and the $30 million from us, is that correct?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Are you referencing last year, 2012, because there was $73 million federal, and provincial-municipal equalled a little bit over $40 million.

 

MS. REGAN: I'm looking at Page 5.8, and if you look at Nova Scotia Housing Development Corporation Grant, the forecast - so the actual was $30.5 million and the estimate for this year is again slightly less, $30.345 million. Then you told me there was also $53 million from the federal government going in, so is it correct that we're talking $83 million a year?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Federal dollars would be separate from provincial and municipal funding.

 

MS. REGAN: So they would go into two separate accounts, run by the Nova Scotia Housing Development Corporation?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: They go into the housing corporation account and then they would identify them as a line item within that account, but it all goes under the housing corporation.

 

MS. REGAN: So there are two separate accounts.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: It's just one account but it's the line items, like how they list, but it's just one account.

 

MS. REGAN: Okay, so it's one account. Do we have any idea what the anticipated cost is of major repairs needed to keep seniors in their homes longer in the province?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: In the present system that we have, we do not have an overall dollar figure. What happens presently is that each property is reviewed on a regular basis, and property managers will review that and then provide us with that information. But that is one area that we are changing within the housing strategy because we have seen that there's a need for that and it's like anything when you're planning: you also need to plan for the maintenance cost, so we are developing a management process to be able to address that.

 

MS. REGAN: How many households - and in what income ranges would they be - can enjoy home ownership with assistance through these purchases or shared equity programs?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: We don't have that information yet because some of the questions that you're asking are in areas where we have realized that there needs to be more work and more specifics around. That's why our housing strategy is critical for the Province of Nova Scotia and that's why it's very exciting that this will be the first housing strategy in Nova Scotia, so we can address those particular needs and those particular questions and forecasting in terms of repair needs and the maintenance needs of our housing stock in the province.

 

MS. REGAN: So just to be clear here, I will make sure I understand that we don't know - we don't have an overall figure for the anticipated cost of repairs to keep seniors in their homes longer and we don't have information on lease purchases or shared equity programs, we don't have any overall program information at this time, is that what you're telling me?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: The second part that you mention is a program that we're actually looking at building over the years in the housing strategy. I think what's important to note is that there are accountability structures in place, presently. We're not allowed to use the federal government's funding if we do not meet the criteria that they set forth, and this is what has been the system for many years in the province.

 

We have recognized that we need to do more in those areas and that's exactly what the housing strategy will provide us the opportunity to do.

 

MS. REGAN: Can you tell us what the anticipated need is for affordable rental housing and where in the province the particular need exists?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Once again, that's what the housing strategy is offering us. I travelled around the province and we presented the concept of the strategy. We presented to the public the different areas, the different pillars that we want to build on and also within that will be housing for seniors, what opportunities we can pursue in terms of making homes more affordable for younger people.

 

We're also looking at what partnerships we need in the province in terms of municipal, non-profit, different levels of government. We're pursuing what we need to do to address the needs of community living since we do not have enough of the infrastructure to allow. There was a lack of planning over the years to get to that point.

 

We also work very closely with CMHC and we'll be doing more of that in the future and as part of our housing. They do a lot of analysis and work with us, so we work with them to identify where those core housing needs are presently but we will be doing a lot more in the future with the housing strategy to have more specifics, identify where the needs are, what those needs are. That's part of the housing strategy in itself and that's part of going around the province, consulting with community leaders and individuals, and identifying what their needs are. We are building upon that in terms of the housing strategy.

 

MS. REGAN: So to recap, we don't have an anticipated cost of major repairs needed to keep seniors in their homes longer, we don't know what that is. We don't know how many households in the province can enjoy household ownership with assistance, we don't have those figures. We don't know what the anticipated need is for affordable rental housing, we don't know where the need exists, yet I keep hearing that we're going to have an affordable housing strategy announced any day now.

 

I just keep wondering, how can we possibly put together a plan that addresses the needs if we don't know what those needs are or where they are?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, over the years the department and staff have been working with CMHC to identify those needs. They have worked with the housing authorities, and they've worked within the department itself to identify those needs. So that's not saying that we do not know and have not addressed the needs in Nova Scotia but to get down to the intricate details of each and every community in the province, that is exactly why we're doing a housing strategy, that's exactly why we're consulting with the people of Nova Scotia and the municipalities.

 

I think it's a very good thing that we have taken that initiative. Over the years we have been able to address the needs that we have in the province, not at the level that any one of us want to because there's always more work to be done. I think it's very important to know that we have recognized that we need to have more specifics, but it needs to come from the community. We can sit in Halifax and assume what needs to be built in Windsor or we can assume the needs in Cape Breton based on the system that we have in place today, but that's not enough for this government. This government wants to be able to get to the grassroots level and to discuss with community members, advocacy groups, and municipalities to identify the needs they feel are in their community because we need them as partners.

 

To date, it's important to know what we have done for people in public housing, and this is in terms of supporting these individuals for public housing. Seniors in public housing, the numbers are 18,400, total allocated public housing units - I'm going to give you the total rather than the individual breakdown. Affordable housing created under the agreement for investments in affordable housing - this is for 2012-13 - is 2,508; housing units assisted under provincially funded programs, the total units assisted through mortgage and loan programs, 41, and that includes 38 households assisted through the small loans program; and households assisted through Access-A-Home, 33.

 

Homes in need of major repair, we have rural and native housing, total units at 620; homeowner units, 154; and renter units at 466. Under co-op and non-profit housing, the total number of units is 4,800 and then there's a breakdown with respect to that. We do have numbers in terms of the housing needs that we have addressed, but as I said several times, the housing strategy is a key component for us in order to get more specifics from the community level.

 

Also, it's important to note the practices that we have been doing in the Department of Community Services are the same throughout Canada, that there isn't any jurisdiction in Canada that would be able to provide you with those specific numbers. As I said, we are working towards having a better system and I think that is important to be noted.

 

MS. REGAN: In terms of the affordable housing strategy, what would be the measures for affordability? How will you determine what's affordable?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: That's part of what the strategy is about and working those through. I think I need to explain that the strategy is not a final document and it is critical to understand that. What we are doing as a government for the Province of Nova Scotia is initiating the first housing strategy in the history of this province. We're doing it in collaboration with the people of Nova Scotia, working through the definitions, and we're working through what our goals are. So that's what we did. We went out to people throughout the Province of Nova Scotia, gave them an opportunity to be involved in the presentations that we were making, and gave an opportunity for those who wanted to utilize the Web site and e-mail to inform us what their thoughts are.

 

This is a collaborative effort with the people of Nova Scotia and I really, truly believe that's what they want because there have been too many governments that just say this is what we're going to do and you live with it. Well, we're not doing that. We are working with partners, businesses, non-profit groups, and governments to develop a strategy that is for the entire province, but yet each community has the opportunity to work with us to develop a strategy that fits for them.

 

I think that's another very important factor to remember, that what may work here in Halifax, may not work in Yarmouth or may not work in Sydney. So we are designing this housing strategy so that there is continued engagement and involvement from the grassroots level in community, along with the leaders of communities in terms of government and business, to participate in this. I think the excitement I saw while travelling around the province was enormous. It was really a motivator for myself, who is taking a lead on this, and also the staff that have worked diligently to formulate a framework for this housing strategy.

 

I think we are going to be very successful with the strategy. It's not an overnight thing, nobody could even expect that we're going to have the results that we want in one or two or three years. We have to be honest with people and that's part of this, being transparent and working with people to say okay, we want to move towards community living, we want to provide you with that option if you have a loved one with a disability, an intellectual disability.

 

Unfortunately, the reality is the infrastructure is not there today because there has been such a lack of planning by previous governments over the years that there has been no framework to move towards that goal of community living and support it with financial planning along the way. So that's exactly what we're doing: we're working with the interest groups, and I think it is critical that they approve it and they're excited about it. So when we announce the housing strategy, that will be a framework of going forward in the future in the province and for us to be able to address the many, many needs that are there.

 

MS. REGAN: Thank you. So when I look at the supplementary information here, I'm just wondering - because we keep hearing about the affordable housing strategy and how it's going to be wonderful - I'm just wondering, where's the money for that coming from? Where's the budget for the strategy's implementation? Is that in the housing corporation's financial information? I just want to figure out where that's coming from.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, as I have said many times over, when you are managing a project and when you are planning and strategizing, you have to develop your strategy, your plans, and to be able to set objectives and goals. We are in the planning stages so that's why you do not see it reflected in the budget. We are not a government just to try to get political points. Our goal is for the future of Nova Scotians, so we take the time to plan, to consult, and that's what this housing strategy is about.

 

Also, as I have said many times, as you are developing a strategy of actions, you also have to develop what the financial needs are. That's exactly what we'll be doing, and as we find out what the needs are in communities - our first step will be to do pilot projects within the envelope of dollars that we already have. We have communities that have stepped up to the plate and are very excited about this, and we're looking at different projects throughout the entire province.

 

It's very important to do those pilot projects because you're testing the market per se, if you were a corporation, to see if what you were doing will work. You do not want to make major, major public investment and just say, well, we're going to blanket this across the province and this is the way we're going to do our housing strategy; this is what we're going to put in Chester and this is what we're going to put in Bridgewater. That's not the way to do it if you're going to be successful. What you need to do is you need to come up with what works in each and every community, is there community interest?

 

It does not work if government just comes in and says this is what we think should happen here. It needs to come from the grassroots level, up. That's what we're seeing with different municipalities and communities throughout the province that have come to us, they have identified a specific need for housing in their community. They know best, they're at the grassroots level, they know their needs in their community. So they're identifying those and we're working with them, too, to take the information that we have, consolidate that information and to develop what the strategy looks like, what a pilot looks like, how we will fund that, and how we will fund that over the years.

 

You have to be able to plan and you have to be able to forecast what funds you will need in order to make those plans a reality. So in this budget the funding for projects, the pilot projects we will be doing are within our normal course of budget under the housing corporation. Also, the changes that we are addressing within the housing corporation will give us opportunities to generate revenue that can go back into social programs such as our housing, so we will have the opportunity to generate revenue, which is really critical because we're looking at the federal government reducing the amount of dollars that we receive by 2034 to zero.

 

We have to be strategic in working now for that time frame of what we are going to do when we do not have that envelope of money, so we have to look at how we generate revenue. Also, the opportunities when we generate that revenue, that we can fulfill the needs in communities and look at providing mixed housing in order to support a healthy community so people have an opportunity to live in the same setting as somebody who may make three times as much annually than they do and everybody has that opportunity that we are looking at developing hub models, and people can live in communities where they can access health care, child care, those services that we require as individuals and as we move towards our senior years, what kinds of supports can be provided?

 

Yes, it is a very exciting time for us, an exciting time for Nova Scotians. We're not just going to go on a political bandwagon and say look, this is what you're going to get and this is what we're going to throw at you and give you false hope. We do it in real and transparent terms and work with community. It is very exciting and people are very motivated to go forward with the housing strategy.

 

The things that we will be able to do under our restructuring of the housing corporation will be some of the first in all of Canada and I think we will be able to stand very proud, not only as a government but every Nova Scotian, to know that there is this type of initiative taking place in our province.

 

MS. REGAN: So what would be the time for the rollout of the strategy? We're hearing that there's going to be an announcement any day, I'm wondering if you have an announcement on day one, when we would realistically expect to see bricks and mortar.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, as I said, it will be very soon that we will be announcing this strategy. I'm not going to give a time frame for bricks and mortar because I think that that's not the proper thing to do. We have a goal and we will be working with communities to set those goals.

 

There will be different goals and time frames in different communities. For example, if we are working with the Municipality of Lunenburg - I'm just taking that as an example - and there's a particular project that they have an interest in and we decide that we can work together in developing a pilot - I know they have a few schools that are vacant now that they're wondering if there can be some opportunities there, can we look at doing some housing projects around that? That's where we'll be working with community, to identify their needs. Then we will set a time frame with them in terms of the capacity for us to work with them to make those changes. There will be partnerships and those partnerships will have to be identified, and not only identify the partnerships but also be able to look at the time frames that work best with them.

 

I think to say, okay, this is the first time that these are the dates that you will see, would be premature for me to say. Those are the things that we're working on and we know that one of the other projects that we're working towards is the Bloomfield school so you'll see some announcements surrounding that. We also have to make sure, as we make the changes in the corporation that we're very clear with what that plan will be and we will set performance objectives around that.

 

MS. REGAN: I just want to make sure I understand what you're saying. There's no time frame for bricks and mortar yet, that when the strategy is announced it won't be announcing specific projects, it will be announcing a set of goals and intentions?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: We have been working with a variety of communities that have interest on projects. Some of those communities we will be identifying. The reason we won't be identifying all of them - because we have quite a long list, communities have been so excited about this housing strategy that they've been bringing forth their recommendations, their opinions, and they've been rallying their municipal leaders and their businesses. I think it's very important to note that we will be identifying some of the projects that will be going forward, and then within those, that's where we will be developing the actual timelines for those projects.

 

I do not believe that the significance here is to be able to say, okay, the Fall of 2013 we're going to have five of these particular units built, because that's not what this is about. This is a long-term plan and this is to build a very solid foundation that when we go forward there is a plan, and that plan is not a short plan of two or three years - you're looking at a plan that's 5, 10, 15, 20, 30 years down the road. No one can predict a plan and give a specific date that's 10 years down the road.

 

Once again, as I said, this is a plan that is going to be a continual work in progress - and I say "work in progress" as a positive because there have been too many past government plans that just said here's what we're doing and that's it, live with it. This is not what we're doing as a government. What we're doing is we're engaging community, partners, and government at different levels to work with us, to fulfill the needs of their community, and I think that is vitally important in all of this housing strategy - that communities have an opportunity here that never existed in this province, and it's the opportunity to be involved in a process that builds something that they want or need in their community and it will take a very different look in each community.

 

The other part that's important to note is that communities will want to be able to use their own community resources, their own contractors, and their own businesses to make this into a reality for them in their community. So there is much to be done, there will be a lot of work going forward, and we will be working with these communities. Some we have further ahead because some communities came out of the starting blocks very quickly, they've done a lot of work themselves over the years, identifying the needs that they have in terms of housing, supporting aging in place.

 

We have a number of municipalities throughout the province that have adopted the aging in place - the Positive Aging Strategy through the Department of Seniors. That will be a very good fit for those communities that want to explore increasing their senior housing units. We'll have some communities that will say they want to expand more on the community options. There's a variety of opportunities there, so that is what we are working towards and working with. But when we make the announcement we'll be identifying some communities that are further along in what their needs are - and our relationship and our planning with them that we've been doing over the months since I travelled through the province doing the consultation process.

 

MS. REGAN: So what I'm hearing is that I guess sort of similar to the jobsHere strategy, there won't be any goals or targets or anything like that. It'll just be what comes forward. Is that correct?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if you take any strategy or any plan, there is a point where you will identify your targets and your goals. We are not totally at that part yet, and that's because we're at the initial part of developing a strategy. As I said, I think it would be very wrong of any government to say, okay, here's what we're going to do in the Province of Nova Scotia: we're going to do X number of senior units in Bridgewater, we're going to do X number of senior units in New Glasgow, but in other communities we're not going to do that, we're going to do some more public housing here, we're going to do mixed housing there. That would be wrong.

 

That's what has happened in the past, where governments have gone forward and said, this is what we're going to do, this is what we want to do, and you live with what we're providing you. That's not this government. This government is a government that consults with people, it's a government that consults with community, and it's a government that consults with advocacy groups. And that's exactly what we're doing. So we are developing a plan that, as we go forward, we will be able to identify the targets and then put those targets in.

 

I don't know of any successful business that exists, or a major corporation, that would not do the same in terms of if you have a product that you want to offer to your target markets, you're going to do a lot of work with your target markets to find out what they want first. You just don't take a product and throw it out there and hope that they will use it. What you do, if you're successful as a major corporation and as a business, is you identify who your markets are and then you work with those markets, do focus groups, get information of what their needs are, and then after you do that, you see if there's support for that particular product - are you going to be able to have the market to consume that particular product? Then from there, you set marketing targets, you set sales targets, but you don't arbitrarily just say, as a business, we're going to sell 50,000 units of XY because we think that we should sell 50,000. You have to identify if there's that need there first, work with the consumer, and then set what those realistic targets are.

 

That's exactly what we're doing with the housing strategy. We're being realistic, we're being transparent, we're offering consultation, and as we work through this strategy, we will identify those targets when it's appropriate to identify those targets.

 

MS. REGAN: With all due respect, that is my point. I asked you what the need was in various different sectors of the housing market, and you can't answer that. So how can you actually turn around and provide what is needed if there is no research, no concrete evidence to say, we need this, we need that. I don't know how you can figure out what it is that you're going to do if you don't know what the need is. You're telling me you've consulted, which is great and important, but if you can't tell me what the need is, how do you know what it is that needs to be built?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, we know what the general needs are. This is what you have to understand. We know what the general needs are in our society and in our province. What you're missing the point on is that each community has different needs; some will have common needs, some will have very different needs. We do know that in Nova Scotia we have the oldest housing stock in Canada, and that's a need that needs to be addressed. All you have to do is take a Sunday drive in the rural communities and look at how many homes there are that you can obviously tell need maintenance.

 

We have the Department of Seniors so through the Department of Seniors we're able to identify those communities that have come forth with positive aging support and a strategy that they want to move towards that direction.

 

Over the years, we know though our advocacy groups that there's definitely a need for community option. We have waiting lists so we can identify that obviously from those waiting lists we have needs. I think the part that you're missing is the fact that we want to work with the individual communities to fulfill those specific needs.

 

I do not think that we should be in the position of telling communities what their needs are, we need to hear from them. That's what we did, we travelled around the province but we want to find out more specifics. We got a general interpretation of what the needs are because we heard from Nova Scotians, we listened to Nova Scotians, and they identified their needs as individuals, as community non-profit groups, as a local business, as a local government. So those needs on a general basis were identified. They fit with the needs that we have seen as a department from our waiting lists, from the needs that we hear in every community, as MLAs, and we worked with CMHC. They do research and analysis. So you take all those and put those together.

 

We certainly have a very good sense of what the needs are but we should not assume that, so that's what the next step is in our housing strategy: to work with the individual communities and the advocacy groups to take that further and to identify on more specifics what that community's needs are and how we can address meeting the goals of those needs as a support system to that particular community.

 

We certainly know the needs, what we feel are the needs, but we want to have that qualified again with the communities as we go in and address those particular needs on an individual basis. We have some communities that have multiple needs in them but we do also know in this province that because of past history that the housing has been very segregated and that people want to move towards more healthy hub models. We hear the terminology all the time, we have the expertise in our Department of Community Services, our staff, in terms of knowing and doing research on what the needs are in Nova Scotia, what we see as general needs across Canada, so those have certainly been identified.

As I said, now we're taking it the next step in order to make it more localized. I think that is very important and I think we are getting a lot of support. What I have seen as I travelled through the province is that people are absolutely thrilled and excited that we are taking the time to talk to them and address their needs, rather than coming in and saying okay, here's what we're going to do for you. We're asking the people of Nova Scotia what we can do that they want, not us telling them what we think they want.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Just a point regarding timing - just a shade over 10 minutes remaining in the time for the Liberal caucus. Then, if the minister so wishes, after those 10 minutes we could take a break, if you would like.

 

MS. REGAN: So if I hear correctly, what you're saying is when the housing strategy is announced, there's going to be more consultation at that point. There may be some projects that will be announced but you will still be doing a lot more consultation; I'm assuming you're going to be doing more than just driving around. You've identified general needs, but specific needs in specific communities have not been nailed down. Is that correct?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: No, I will explain again. This is a large province; there are many people in this province and there are many communities in this province. Communities are different from each other, they have commonality but they have differences. It's not just about me driving around the province and talking to people, I think that's a very unfair analysis of what our department has done. We have done extensive consultation, and part of that consultation was to have the minister go out into communities and talk to the communities about their needs, present to communities what we feel is a framework, different pillars of needs that we have identified - does that line up with the needs that they see in their community - and from there, as I mentioned several times, we have communities that were a little bit further ahead in identifying what they felt were their needs in their community.

 

They have done work either through non-profit - they have strong non-profit groups in their community that have identified issues with respect to housing needs. Some communities are not as far along so we do not want to leave those communities out because they may not have the resources or support to get them to the same level as another community. We want to be fair to all the communities in the Province of Nova Scotia to have the opportunity to address their housing needs - whether those are housing needs with respect to aging population, that they want to be able to offer programs through the provincial government, even municipal levels, that supports and through non-profit groups that will support seniors being able to stay in their homes longer.

 

Whether it is a community that sees that's important plus also it may be a community in a more urban or suburban area and that they are looking at one of the issues that is for young people, how are they enabled to purchase their first home or able to get into a first-home situation? We have many young individuals or families and that's stressful and difficult with the economic downturn in North America and the housing issues that were faced, especially in the United States. Thank goodness our criteria and restrictions on mortgage lending were tighter in Canada but it's still very difficult to be able to build the resources for your first down payment or have the understanding of home ownership. That is one area that we're looking at too.

 

You're focusing on the bricks and mortar, and this housing strategy is more than bricks and mortar. This housing strategy is looking at not only the community needs and what needs to be built there, but how can we help educate and support families and individuals with their needs? If you're talking about a young family, most of us in our life as a young family - what do you want? You want a home. Everybody wants a home - a safe, secure place to live and a place to say: this is my home.

 

There are many banks that when a young couple comes in, if they don't meet certain financial criteria, they're turned away. What we want to do in our housing strategy is look at what kind of assistance we can provide those couples to help them reach their financial goal, and if that means some financial education programs, some financial assistance that enables them to stay in the province and buy or build their first home - that's what we're looking at. We're looking at different philosophies, also different strategies. So it's not just about the bricks and mortar, it's about community and developing and supporting a healthier community - is that a hub model?

 

As we're looking at all the varieties of opportunities, we're also looking at the housing corporation itself, what that structure is and how we can utilize that structure in a better, more efficient manner, and are there opportunities for us to generate revenue so we can put back into housing and we can also put in social programs? Then the other component is the bricks and mortar and how we get there in terms of strategizing.

 

It would be very premature to just come out with a strategy, because that's what has happened in the past. You come out with a strategy, everybody is excited and then it ends up in somebody's filing cabinet, getting full of dust, and nobody knows what to do with it. We're not going to do that with this housing strategy. This strategy is a starting point for years and years and years to come, so to come out and say, because we want some political brownie points, well, we're going to do this here in this community, we're going to do this here in that community - that's not what we're about. What we're about is what is in the best interest for the community and the people of that community, and that is consultation on a continual basis.

 

In a project of this size and nature, for the first time in the history of Nova Scotia it is vitally important that people understand that this is an ongoing engagement process. It's no different in our own lives when we're planning for the future. When we're 10 years old we don't say, you know, when I'm 30 I'll have this, this and this. We don't know those specifics because we learn as we go along and we plan as we go along. So to be able to come out with a major strategy and say, well, this is what it's going to look like, no more discussion - I think that would be totally irresponsible of any government to do.

 

I think what we're doing is exactly what people want in this province and exactly what communities want. They want engagement, and they want to be able to be part of the process and see how the housing strategy is developed on a provincial basis and how it develops and fits into their community so that they can get the resources and the support that they want in their community.

 

As I have said, we will have pilot projects, we will identify some of those pilot projects because those municipalities and those communities are at the readiness point to do that. There are others that are not ready, so do we discriminate against those that are not ready because we say you're not ready, I'm sorry, you're going to be left behind? That's not what we're all about. What we're all about is community people and let them be part of this process as we go forward developing the first - and I will say it again, "the first" - housing strategy in this province.

 

It will be a starting point to a brighter future for people of Nova Scotia because we will be looking at all different areas in terms of housing support. It's not just about building public housing and saying here it is, you go live there. It's about their life plan, it's about incorporating what we do in Community Services to support those who are homeless, to support those who are low or modest income, it's about the Department of Health and Wellness and what programs they can intertwine with our housing strategy to support seniors to live longer in their homes, because many seniors I know - there's no way I'm going to get my mom out of her house because that is her home, and as she ages, she wants to be there.

 

There are many seniors who are in that position, so what kinds of supports can we provide for those seniors so that they can live at home longer. And that's not just health support, that's maintenance and repair support in the province, how do we integrate that into the housing strategy to provide them with that support? It is the same as what we're looking at in terms of community living.

 

As I mentioned many times, it's unfortunate we do not have that structure here in Nova Scotia, but that's what we're working towards. That is why we have brought in Michael Bach who is in charge of the Institute for Research and Development on Inclusion and Society. We are not sitting here saying we know it all. Nobody knows it all, there's not one government or one political Party that knows it all. That's why we need the input of Nova Scotians, that's why we need the input of experts like Mr. Michael Bach who's going to be able to work with us: how do we move and how do we finance more community living options in our province? Also, with our homeless project . . .

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Our time has actually expired for the Liberal caucus. We can come back to the Liberal caucus, but we will move on to the Progressive Conservative caucus, but I think the minister would probably like a five-minute break.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Can we make it 10?

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, a 10-minute break.

 

[7:31 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

 

[7:43 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I call the subcommittee back to order.

 

The honourable member for Victoria-The Lakes.

 

MR. KEITH BAIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I doubt I'll be using my full hour, and in the event that I don't, I'll be sharing my time with the member for Dartmouth North, to give him the opportunity. Again, thank you.

 

I have just a few quick questions, minister. These are more general in nature, they're not related to the budget, so I hope you'll bear with me. The first one is the small options homes. I'm just wondering, what is the wait-list for a small options home in the province? How many people are on it?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: We're looking to see if we have the number for you because it's not just specific to small options, it's put together as placements for residential care. So I'll just see if we have the specific on small options.

 

It's the number of homes and the number of beds but that's not going to give you the actual number that are waiting. (Interruption) The deputy minister said there are 133 - that would be 133 individuals waiting for small options.

 

MR. BAIN: That's 133 waiting?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Yes, for small options placement.

 

MR. BAIN: Does the department have any plans or desire to move away from privately-owned small options homes?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: No, we haven't had any discussions of moving away. We know that the private small options homes play a very important role for us. Part of the housing strategy in the work with Michael Bach will be looking at what infrastructure we have to date, which we know is not - we don't have enough to fulfill, as you can tell, we have 133 individuals waiting for small options. So that is a work in progress with Michael Bach, but the privately-owned small options are an important component of what we do with respect to small options.

 

MR. BAIN: Mr. Chairman, that's good to hear. What about the funding model? Do you propose any changes for the funding model?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, I think that's what we'll discover through our housing strategy, plus the work that we're doing with Michael Bach. With Michael there's a committee of individuals who are advocates for small options homes and living in small options. So that is part of the work they'll be looking at and they'll be able to see what our budget is and how you transform into providing more small options opportunities, because at the end of the day the goal is to be able to provide services that individuals and families want and look at those individual needs.

 

We know there are many people and families who prefer the small options opportunity. If an individual has the ability and we can provide the supports for them to live in that setting, that's the goal that we have.

 

MR. BAIN: Of the 133 that are on the waiting list - it's province-wide, I know, but do you break it down into regions where the demand might be, or is it just a broad picture?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: We wouldn't have that information here but we could get that information because we would certainly know where those individuals are.

 

One of the things that we've moved away from and we don't want to do is - and this makes it more challenging for us - we do not want to say that somebody in Cape Breton has to move all the way and be placed in Halifax, if that's not their choice. But that makes it even more of a challenge for us to develop the infrastructure and the financial resources to make that happen.

 

I think probably one of the most difficult parts of my job as minister is the now and we have so many needs. I get excited about the future and the plans for the future, but it is really difficult when you're talking to a family that has such a great need and a desire for their family member to be in a small options setting and they want to be in their community, and we don't have that.

 

There's no magic wand that I can find that will produce that overnight. I think that's probably - there are a lot of emotions that go with this particular job and it's really hard to look at family members and say look, I'm sorry, we don't have that right now, we're working towards it. That doesn't mean a lot to the individual who is in crisis and wants their loved one to now be in a small options home.

 

MR. BAIN: I realize that the 133 is, indeed, province-wide but if you could provide sort of a regional breakdown . . .

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Absolutely.

 

MR. BAIN: . . . just so we could see if the needs are higher in one certain area than they are in others. If you could do that, I'd appreciate it.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: It's a good question.

MR. BAIN: I'm going to move to child care. As you're aware, there have been some questions asked in the House concerning funding for child-care centres. The minister hasn't come out one way or the other and spoken of what changes might be coming. I know that your department would have been involved for quite a while in the overall child care and the funding issue because it's something that has been talked about. Can you provide any details of what funding changes might be announced?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: No, I don't have any details presently about any funding changes. What I do know is that the child-care sector is an extremely important sector for us and the service that is provided. We had a panel brought together and we did consultation throughout the province and there has been a desire for quite some time, and we transitioned early years into Education because of the significance of the educational component. We also know, as we make those changes, that the Departments of Health and Community Services are still very important players so there will be interdepartmental consultations.

 

With respect to what you're asking in terms of the financing, there has been no change in that area whatsoever. We know that we have to do some strategic planning; both the non-profit and the profit are very important to the services that are provided in Nova Scotia. I know that you have an interest in terms of the profit sector and that's something that we have been very supportive of. We know that they provide a large amount, quite a number of spaces and services in this province to families. I don't think there needs to be a division between the two because I think both of them are providing the services we need in this province and they're working very hard at it.

 

MR. BAIN: The topic of men's intervention - can you tell me what line item includes funding for men's intervention programs?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: It would be the information that's provided on Page 5.7, under Transition Houses and Intervention Programs. You can see the estimates and also the forecast.

 

MR. BAIN: Are there any plans to expand intervention programs for men, to make them more available in different areas of the province?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: At this point we haven't had any specific discussions in expansion of those services. As you know the recovery houses were transferred under Health and Wellness to be more of a medical model. Certainly that's an area - there are a variety of different areas within Community Services, and we've made many changes and we've increased funding, but there are some areas that still need work done in terms of looking at their funding model.

 

As I've always been very transparent about, the dollars are not there right now but what you have to do is be very open to discussions and planning. So if you have any particular concerns in those areas that you want to address with me, that we should be looking at, I would invite you to have that conversation. You may have something in mind that you want to offer as a suggestion or a recommendation or what you're seeing in your own community or the needs that you have identified that you feel there should be some more focus on.

 

MR. BAIN: I bring that up, especially where it falls on the line for Transition Houses and Intervention Programs. I think I'm looking at the broad picture, if you will - the transition houses for women. A lot of the discussion that takes place is ways to counteract some of the things that are happening out there and the importance of men's intervention programs in cases like that, which could make the overall picture of the use of transition houses lower. So it goes beyond just addiction services and everything else but I'm talking about the large picture, I guess.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I think you make a very valid point. I mean, we've been working through the domestic violence strategy with the variety of ministers, but I think your point is well taken, that certainly we could be discussing more in that area. There's always more that can be done, and I think that as a minister you need to be very open to learning and to take those suggestions. So if you have anything in terms of - you know, I'm getting from you about the overall intervention and work that can be done on the other side to curb the violence that may be happening, and I think it's a very good point that has been looked at under the domestic violence, but it is something that we could look at a little bit more. I think that's a very good point.

 

MR. BAIN: I thank you for that, at least the invitation to present anything that might be coming our way.

 

Over the past while the PC caucus, in its out-of-town caucuses, has been visiting places like Truro and New Glasgow. The need for homeless shelters, especially in those areas - Truro is a great example. What we found in Truro is that they're struggling because of a lack of volunteers, and some of them even say that next winter they won't be able to operate because of the stresses that are on them. So I'm just wondering if the department has had any discussions about addressing, let's say, the needs in Truro, and the broader needs. Is there anything about those needs in Truro that are being discussed?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, I know the issues with homelessness are ones that we have certainly taken very seriously and have been working towards what steps you need to take to make a difference, and you may be aware of the model that we provided in Halifax by supporting outreach workers to work with homeless individuals in a more holistic manner and provide them with information on the supports. Now, with respect to Truro, I had a bit of awareness that there were some issues there as I was doing the housing consultation, one lady had mentioned it to me, but I haven't received anything on a formal basis. But once again, we certainly can discuss that further.

 

I think the best way to resolve these issues is a more restorative approach by getting the community together and having those discussions. I know within the housing strategy that we'll be doing work in that area and focusing on communities, and when I was in Truro I expressed that - that if it's something that's identified as a community challenge, then part of our housing strategy is exactly looking at homelessness. So what do we have to do in Truro differently? What kinds of plans do we have to make?

 

You're absolutely right, one of the challenges, not only in Truro but throughout the province, is the reduction in volunteers that we have. It's because we are an aging society and there are fewer volunteers, and we don't have, I don't think, as many youth coming up through the ranks volunteering. I think that we live in a different culture. People are becoming older and not able to volunteer, and we have fewer youth that are stepping into that role. So I think it's an important issue to identify and work towards.

 

So once again, the specifics of Truro, we can certainly have those discussions in respect to our housing strategy. I know that we're looking at some projects in that area.

 

MR. BAIN: I guess one of the things that we found in our trips is that it's usually the church community, more of an inter-faith community that's looking after homeless concerns that are there. Volunteers are one aspect of it because they're limited in their numbers to serve the people who are coming, but their finances are also very limited as well. Churches today, as we know, are facing difficult financial times but they open their doors. In a lot of cases you have maybe two or even three different denominations providing the service on a rotating basis - I don't know, it's something that they work out between themselves.

 

In one particular case the cost of heating one of the churches to provide that service just became beyond for them, so they had to give up the service and that, in turn, put more pressure on another church and it just increases. So the need is there and the situation has to be addressed because in a lot of cases, and in particular areas, the homeless problem is not improving - if anything, it's getting worse - so I think it's important that it be something addressed by the department.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I think you're correct in the terms - I think there has been a lot of focus over the years in more of the urban areas, and although Truro is not "rural" rural, it's outside of the urban - what we usually term Halifax-Dartmouth as our more urban areas. In rural communities there's more of a silence about homelessness.

 

I've discovered over the last few years that you seem to be hearing more stories about homelessness in other communities outside of the cities here. So I believe that the housing strategy is one part that we'll certainly be addressing, as I mentioned earlier, that the housing strategy is to identify individual community needs and what those needs are. I know that Truro was one area during our consultation process that identified affordability as an issue, and Truro has been very active in terms of working with us: is there something that can be done? That is important to us because we have to be looking at all the communities in the province and there certainly is a need to address.

 

Through the housing strategy, we also want to be able to provide more housing opportunities so people are not homeless. Of course, that is a key factor in this housing strategy, that there will be enough housing available throughout the province, but it's going to be very individualized, depending on the community, what they address as their particular needs, but once again, more than willing if the community is part of this housing strategy, and an identified need with the churches is to have discussions with us to see what we can do and how we can strategize going forward to help them out.

 

MR. BAIN: Mr. Chairman, just a comment. Of course the churches, and other shelters, provide more than just a shelter. There's usually a hot meal included and it goes beyond that. When you look at the increase in the use of food banks, you can almost tie everything in to areas where that's happening. Again, I can't stress enough the importance of having that consultation with the community, with the broader community, to see how homelessness should be looked at.

 

My final question if I could, Mr. Chairman, before I turn it over to the member for Dartmouth North, is concerning income assistance overpayments. My question is, has there been an increase or a decrease in the number of overpayments made by the department in the past year?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: We'll need to provide you with the specifics. We don't have that here today.

 

MR. BAIN: But you're willing to provide those . . .

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Oh, absolutely.

 

MR. BAIN: I think that's everything for me at this point, Mr. Chairman.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Mr. Chairman, may I answer a question that the member asked earlier, with respect to Pharmacare?

 

We're looking at approximately 32,000 cases and 42,000 individuals being served through those cases. Thank you for bringing those issues forward.

 

MR. BAIN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank the minister for being open, and hopefully she'll be able to get that information for us.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Absolutely.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: We have 37 minutes left in the time frame for the Progressive Conservative caucus, which Mr. Bain has given to the member for Dartmouth North.

 

The honourable member for Dartmouth North.

 

MR. TREVOR ZINCK: I'd like to thank my honourable colleague from the PC caucus for this extra time.

 

Madam Minister, I would like to go back to the comment that I ended off with, and I guess also for the deputy minister, his first time here and hearing my line of questioning. You know, your last answer some people would say was quite long-winded. You looked at it as an opportunity to be the spokesperson for your government and talked about the acknowledgements and some of the nice things and the monies spent in regard to helping those in need.

 

As you know, over the last four years I've never been one to not acknowledge some of the things that your government has taken upon itself to do for Nova Scotians. That being said, I look at this opportunity during budget not necessarily to criticize government or criticize departments, but to go through an exercise where I feel it's necessary to educate the department, department staff, and the minister as to what's going on at the grassroots level. It's not necessarily, as I said, to criticize but to point out that these are areas we need to continue to work on, or these are areas that as MLAs we hear concerns with.

 

Yes, I'll acknowledge that your government has taken some really good initiatives in trying to help Nova Scotians over the last number of years. The issue I presented you with in my closing comments, the single female - $570 was for the apartment. She was turned down by her caseworker today because she was considered over housed.

 

I want to assure you that tomorrow a call will go into the supervisor - and the caseworker is abiding by policy, I understand that - but a call will go into the casework supervisor and we'll have a conversation around effectively allocating half of the $535, which we have done in the past. It wouldn't be half of the $570, the young lady will have to come up with the additional monies, but we will make the effort to have a conversation about getting half of the $535 to go towards the damage deposit. If that doesn't work, I will definitely have a conversation with you and your staff but I don't think it will be an issue. That's the problem we have with the shelter allowances.

 

I'm going to keep with the ESIA. I asked a question last week in the House around the Target 100 program. I know this was a really good initiative to begin with. I know in recent conversations I've had with staff that there have been some revelations that we've had at the department level in regard to our ability to link people up with employment through the Co-operative Council.

 

I'm being told that even though it was a pilot program, we still are looking at perhaps just tweaking some things. I know at the time of the press release the Co-operative Council said they had hundreds of jobs that they were looking at filling. My question for you today is, are we indeed looking to go beyond? We are at the three-year point of this project, or just a little past; are we looking at continuing on developing this relationship with the Co-operative Council?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: With respect to Target 100, I know they will reach that target. We have 48 to date, and I'm sure the Co-operative Council plus Community Services wish it was higher and that they would have met the 100. I think it's like any initiative: you're going to find things that you can do differently. This was also an initiative - we cannot forget that 48 lives have been changed for the better because of this program. The initiative set high goals for those particular individuals; these types of jobs that they were being placed in and being supported in obtaining were jobs that were like at an assistant manager or a manager level. That's very important to note because of the fact that it's a target that actually increases an individual's income more so than getting a minimum wage job.

 

We know that although we have increased the minimum wage, it's still a struggle to live off of minimum wage, too, so it's like any of the projects that we get involved with - and this is a collaborative approach. It's being driven by the Co-operative Council and being supported through Community Services, in that we work with them to identify the client that has the ability to move on to that particular type of work plus the supports that client may need. The Co-operative Council takes the initiative to try to source out those types of positions.

 

I have to give credit to the work that they have done; it has been a lot of work in terms of identifying those jobs that are available and then developing the relationship with the potential employer. There are many people looking for work and you have to encourage the employer that this is a good opportunity for somebody that may need a little bit more support than another person that has the ability to find that kind of work on their own.

 

There are a lot of factors that go into Target 100, but I think you should also note that we are looking at the whole division of ESIA and we are designing what that looks like and what approach we need to take in terms of assisting people to find employment, and what kinds of supports and what kinds of resources. Also, I think one of the areas that we have neglected over the years is we've been very good in providing supports on how to write a resumé, how to do your cover letter, and how to be able to apply for positions. I think the area that we need more work on is actually the relationship with the business community in identifying what types of jobs are available - not just a one-time identifying, it's like a relationship that you need to build with the business community.

 

A particular business may not have a job available tomorrow, but who knows that maybe six months down the road they're planning for an expansion, so it's relationship building. For our caseworkers that are working on ESIA to be able to have those relationships in each of their communities so when an employer is looking for somebody, they know they could go to Community Services and they will have the supports to help them employ an individual that may need a few more supports or be able to help them in this position. I think it's a collaborative effort, and I think we need to do a better job in that area of identifying those potential employers and building that relationship.

 

MR. ZINCK: At the time of the announcement - February 24, 2010 - it was a three-year initiative; we've moved past that time frame now. I agree with you, the fact that we've been able to link 48 individuals to an employer is going to give them a decent wage and be removed from the government payroll per se or off the ESIA program. I think that's one of the successes that we need to celebrate. But because we've moved beyond the three-year pilot program, my question is simple: are we going to continue to work with the Co-operative Council?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Yes, absolutely. What we'll do is monitor and we will assess it as we go along. We have been doing that and they've been very supportive of that. Their goal is the same as ours: to meet that target of 100.

 

MR. ZINCK: I think we found a solution to an earlier question that I had. During my time off debate I had a conversation with Dan Troke in and around how we can get people some more money for the shelter allowance. It's keeping in line with the comments that you just made about the employability piece and linking up with employers and folks in the business community.

 

So an individual gets the $535, they're entitled to make up to an extra $150 a month before we present them with what we call the "clawback". A lot of individuals with mental health or addiction issues are still capable in some part of working. Maybe five or 10 hours a week, maybe some can do 15 hours a week. There's an incentive there for them to make that extra money which would at least allow them to enjoy safe, adequate housing at a rate of $600 or $650 a month.

 

I guess the real initiative then becomes trying to link those individuals outside the realm of regular folks who can maybe normally work a full workweek. Your comment about linking up and building relationships with employers in the business community, I think, is the key. I know over the years, sadly not recently, we've had employers come to us and say, do you know anybody that can do this or we have some openings, let me know if you have some folks that might be able to partake.

 

Sadly, in the last two or three years we haven't had that. I would encourage the department to go that route because that might be - as Dan had said, if the individual finds they are capable of working more, then we have a real solution and they're off the system. They've proven themselves and I think I would encourage your government and your department to go out and work at that. We know labour studies, we know where we're lacking as far as jobs and filling those roles. Maybe we should look at putting some tools together and allowing caseworkers - and I know that we have started a process through the initial intake with individuals dealing with their caseworker, where we go through a list of employability questions and we decide whether or not we're going to pass them on to an ESIA program or we're going to do that initial in-house - maybe a resumé, a cover letter, depending on where they are. So that's a good first step.

 

I would encourage the department to work with Labour and Advanced Education to go out and find employers that might have a need that we can fill. Then it becomes a lesson where we have to go out to each individual caseworker and say, let's start picking off our roll, evaluating each individual as far as their basic skills and who can benefit from it.

 

That being said, I have a question around the 70-30 split that a couple of years ago the government changed and saw fit that we were able to allow individuals who were linked with a program to make that extra - to have that bumped up to $300 instead of the $150.

 

Can you tell me, because there wasn't a clear explanation - and even today there are folks who don't understand the benefits of this - is it just folks who are intellectually or physically challenged who can benefit from that, or would I be able to offer that opportunity to somebody who may be classified as disabled because they have an addiction issue or a mental health issue?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Once again, this brings us back to moving towards that individualized planning and what works best for that particular individual. The earning exemption you speak of is something that we did increase and also through our ESIA redesign, that will be analyzed again to see what kind of stepping stones you need to have in place that enable and provide a person with the confidence and the motivation to move towards independence, rather than penalize them for moving towards independence.

 

I mean at some point you have to ensure that it doesn't become attractive to be on income assistance - I can't imagine it ever being like that - but if you take individuals who are the working poor, there's a real balancing act there, but you also need to provide those incentives that build confidence so that if you do work X number of hours that you are able to keep a percentage of those earnings. Then there's another step that if you reach that particular goal, it may be that final step into full employment. Or if the case is that because you have a disability you can only work part time, you shouldn't be penalized for that. So the individualized planning, to me, is key, and as I said, one of the biggest challenges is making that transition and making sure that transition is continuing and it doesn't stop somewhere as you're trying to make that change.

 

As you commented on your other situation, a caseworker making a decision based on policy, we are trying very hard at our senior level to get that information right down through to the grassroots front-line level, there's an ability to think outside the box and to be able to identify those policies that are restricting people to do that individual work. There are so many policies in Community Services that we need to tackle that I even still hear of some that I didn't realize because there are so many.

 

What we also have to do is ensure that we have a consistent service across the province. That is a key element because sometimes I've heard it depends on who your caseworker is and where you live. I think those are natural because we're all human beings and people do things a little bit different, but how can we make sure that our caseworkers have freedom but there's a consistency throughout the province?

 

We're working on that and we're open to any suggestions from somebody like yourself who is so grassroots. I work very hard to be out in the community and talk to people, go to the homeless shelters, talk to individuals who are on income assistance. I know that you live and breathe that every day in your job so you have a really good perspective and understanding. I think the information you have provided me since I've been a minister has been very useful and good information that I have taken back and discussed with the staff to see if there's the ability to make changes in the policy.

 

You know you and I have also been able to really do some things, thinking outside of the box, that have resulted in a positive outcome for a family or an individual, and that door is always open to do that. But I want to see it throughout the entire province, that no matter where you live or who you are that you get those same types of services. People are very, very fortunate in your constituency that they have you, and that you have that knowledge base and you have that open door with myself and you have the ability to offer recommendations and suggestions, and you don't politicize it - you know, you don't take the political side, your concern is for the person that you're working for. So you will bring it to me and we have those discussions, and we stretch the limits to make sure that you have the ability to help the individual that you're working for.

 

MR. ZINCK: You're correct, Madam Minister. You know, as MLAs we deal with a variety of issues. For the office in Dartmouth North, I'd have to safely say that 98 per cent of what we deal with is social services, and it's simply because I represent an area that has the highest concentration of low-income people in any one area in all of HRM. And it's a very transient area. So as we transition somebody into moving forward positively, they move out of the community, but another person moves in because of the amount of multi-unit dwellings. So we're never at a loss for work, that's for sure.

 

Understanding the policies and trying to move people, you know, towards a better life, is something that we do, we practise it every day. I bring up the 70-30 split, because over the years it's one of those things where we've always said, how much incentive do people have getting off the system? You know, we look at the minimum wage now, it's a lot higher than it was a number of years ago; there's an incentive. You're right; nobody wants to be on income assistance. It's half a carrot, not a whole carrot, but there are some people that rely on it.

 

I'm sure you know, initially when somebody approaches us, if it's an issue of housing, we try to find them housing; if it's an issue of getting them linked in with the system, we help them go through the paperwork process, putting all the files together, and we get them to go through the intake. Then it becomes a situation where it's that next step: what do you want to do? Do you want further education? Do you want employability? I need as much incentive as I can have to dangle out there to that individual, because we're not shy about letting people know that this is not where you want to be, and a lot of the conversations we have are real tough conversations. It boils right down to: what do you want? So if I have an incentive of saying, okay, if you can do 10 hours a week, and that's 40 hours a month and you can make up to $300, it's a little bit more of an incentive if I can do that to a wider range of individuals.

 

It's kind of like when we had the Harvest program a number of years ago, where we let individuals go and there was a certain niche in the Valley, obviously a lot of the farmers had to bring in foreign workers. I remember at the time saying to a former minister, I wish I had that ability to take individuals from Dartmouth North and say, here, you can make up to $3,000 if you go to work at Tim Hortons or at the local gas station, because transporting somebody to the Valley from Dartmouth North, you can't do it. It's too much additional cost. So those are the kinds of things that I would look at in the future if we can expand it.

 

I know there is a portion of Community Services recipients that are benefiting and do appreciate having that extra bump in income. One gentleman in particular, who is very close to both of us, definitely knows that if he can elevate himself to getting some more sales, that extra $300 allows him to eat a little bit better or to enjoy himself - maybe go to a movie, whatever, or get a haircut and buy some clothes. So I would encourage you to look at those in the future, as you go through the expansion and adjustments of ESIA, to look into that.

 

I'll end off on ESIA with one simple question: is there a Career Seek anymore? Career Seek was a pilot program a number of years ago. Does it exist? I know we have some spots that we have allocated to us from NSCC, which is great, but is there actually a Career Seek program?

 

Before you comment, one of the things I'll say about pilot programs is I think we need to do a better job at communicating some of the initiatives that your department takes on, not only to folks who rely on income assistance but to caseworkers. When somebody comes in and presents themselves to the department, we should be doing that holistic approach like we're doing now with some of the homeless in the homeless shelters. I think it was Paul Craig that you commented on how he said: I'm with this individual through every step to ensure that they're getting what they need and getting to the point where they can then do it on their own.

 

When we come up with these pilot programs, the caseworkers, even though the employability piece is separate, they are just kind of like the funder and the financial purse. I think if they knew that and knew what was going on - because I have had something recently happen around the Target 100 program that I was a little disappointed that the worker didn't know about the program or suggested to the individual that she should go back and check her sources because that program doesn't exist.

 

We need to communicate that piece, especially when we're going through the step where in the initial intake they're going through not just their budget, but that new list of employability pieces. If they knew there was potential they could red-flag that individual and say we have to move a little bit quicker to the employability piece with you because there might be something that is of interest and you could gain from.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: If I could jump in for a moment, the 10-minute remaining time in the Progressive Conservative allocation of time to you is less than 10 minutes - it is about nine minutes. It's my understanding that you have another hour, as well, of your own time.

 

MR. ZINCK: Yes, I do but I don't think I'll be able to get that whole hour in this evening, will I?

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: No, you'll have 21 minutes tonight.

 

MR. ZINCK: So we'll finish with this and then just continue on.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. I'll cut you off and then start you again.

 

MR. ZINCK: Thank you.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Yes, I want to answer the question. Career Seek still exists, but we're finding that more of the clients are moving to LAE programs. I will wholeheartedly agree with you about communications. We have 2,000 staff, it is a challenge, but I believe we need to be more strategic in that manner and that's something that I want to move towards. There is always so much that is going on but I think being more strategic in terms of our internal communications, we are working on that with our restorative approach and all the changes that we are making because we do realize with so many staff and so many people at the front lines, we need to make sure that they're well informed. We also have to encourage them to take that initiative to be well-informed.

 

We're dealing with humans so sometimes there are challenges there, but I believe that you should never think that your communication is top-notch in anything that you do in terms of government or a business, that it is something you work at each and every day. I do agree with you in that respect, that's work that we still need to continue and always be conscious of.

 

MR. ZINCK: There's an old adage: communicate, communicate, communicate, and when you think you've communicated enough, communicate some more. I bring that up because I was really interested in seeing the Target 100 program come out. I remember early on in my tenure as an MLA, the Career Seek program came out and outside of the Chamber, because I had criticized some of the restrictions around the program, the minister at the time said to me probably only 1 per cent of the people on income assistance could qualify. I looked at her and simply said, let's go get that 1 per cent. It's simply that.

 

The taxpayer is out there saying everybody is living this life of luxury on income assistance. Well, that's a myth, but I'm sure the taxpayer would appreciate a program that's going to really benefit an individual to maybe see them move on.

 

You know, I look at one of the programs that the Department of Justice just recently brought out - I think it was at a cost of $28,000 - and it was around the dogs in the prison. There was some criticism of that. Burnside Industrial Park is my very first poll at election time and I get a lot of calls out of the prison system. Unfortunately, but fortunately, there are some people who are reaching out for help for when they get out, so that's great. I talked to a lot of the guys up there and a number of them have benefited from that program. I think if there's some healing that can allow somebody to move on and move forward positively, the taxpayer wants to know that that is there for somebody.

 

I encourage you again, as I said, to continue on with Target 100 and the employability piece, because as Mr. Troke said to me earlier, if we can get those folks just to that level, there's that extra money they need to put them in a better place, a better home, maybe that incentive of coming off the system, once they know that they're able to do what they need to get done.

 

I'm going to move on to the press release on Friday. Friday afternoon there was a press release put out about the disabled community, the housing piece, and I know you heard it when you went around the province: where are folks who are intellectually challenged and physically challenged going to fit into this housing piece? I know on the Dartmouth side, when you came to the NSCC, you tried to address it and you mentioned the Kendrick report and how you're working with Mr. Kendrick.

 

This has been very close to me over the years. I had success within my first three years in helping a number of families have a small options home supported, three or four families who had individuals - they went out and bought a home and they wanted some supports and some funding put in there by the government. I lobbied the then Progressive Conservative Government, helped through that process, and we were successful in having a small options home built.

 

The press release, the consultation piece is great. Again, your department is going out and you're asking Nova Scotians what they want. I know that over the years in dealing with the disabled community, I've heard but one thing - and again recently, I believe in the Pictou County area, there was a meeting around folks living with disabilities in rural communities and some of their challenges. I've got one simple question, do you see it as an initiative - and one thing you'll hear, I think, in the feedback you'll get, the one consistent message you'll get is about deinstitutionalization. Do you see this as something that your department, and more importantly I think, your government will be willing to look at if that, indeed, is the main theme that comes out of some of this consultation, which I really think it will be?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: With respect to this whole area, as you know, all the different areas that I'm responsible for are dear to me, but this has a personal ramification because of my sister-in-law having an intellectual disability and having the opportunity to be supported through the Bonny Lea Farm, which has changed her life and our lives for the great positive of what it has done for her.

 

With respect to deinstitutionalization, our Premier at a Chamber meeting did make a comment, an announcement that we're moving away from institutionalization. I think, though, that what we have to respect is it is a very complex situation. What has happened with other provinces, some have not done a really good job with moving away from institutionalization because they made the decision very quickly, which has resulted in not enough infrastructure or supports in their province to assist those to live in the community, so they found a higher rate of homelessness and huge issues because that support network wasn't there.

 

One of the things that I have discovered, too, is the definition of "community options" in terms of numbers of individuals, because I know that there are advocacy groups that will use three, if you have more than three individuals. That number, if you really look at history, where that probably came from was we used to not license any homes that had under three individuals. So when I look at it, that's where that definition was born, which is really the definition of a community option because many of us have grown up in families that are more than three individuals.

 

There's a lot of work that needs to be done in terms of bringing people together on what the definition is, how we work to ensure that the real complex needs are met. There are individuals who will say that anybody can live within a community setting, but then others from a clinical perspective and a professional perspective may say that there are individuals who can be very complex and are very violent; how do you move them into a community option and be able to ensure the safety of others in that community option facility and also with respect to the community itself?

 

I believe everyone has the right to be able to live in the community if they have the supports that are there and if it's feasible - I think we have to be realistic. It also depends on your definition of "institution" because I know those same advocates that I work with would probably say that Bonny Lea Farm is an institution because there are more than - and my sister-in-law lives in a small options home that is in the community, and at Bonny Lea there are more than three people in her small options home; there's a residential setting at Bonny Lea itself, which would be more than three individuals.

 

I spend a lot of time at Bonny Lea and the participants there are good friends of mine. When I visit Bonny Lea it's just so heart-warming when they all come running, and I get all my hugs that will last me until the next visit. They are a family so they've done an extraordinary job there, where some people would define them as an institution. So I think we have to be very open-minded in what we define.

 

Now, when you see the types of institutions that you have seen in movies and stuff over the years, the real large ones, and the issues that have been created in those, seriously, those are not what any one of us want. I think we have to look at what that definition is and we have to work with community, once again, and individuals. That's why we have, as I mentioned before about Michael Kendrick being involved - and those were very early days that I was introduced to Michael and I felt that instead of being adversarial from a Department of Community Services level because of the fact that he did quite an extensive report that didn't at that time in the past fit in with the philosophy of the government of the day, that he was more or less seen as an outsider.

 

I brought him in very early to be part of the table of conversation and other advocates but I also brought in individuals from a clinical perspective, too. It's all about the balance in the discussion and the give and take that people need to understand the complexity and the importance of moving towards community options; that's why Michael Bach from the Institute for Research and Development on Inclusion and Society is involved today. He will work with us, and we have created a committee around that that Wendy Lill will be involved with as one of the co-chairs. She has personal experience in her life with this issue too.

 

I know that people say are you taking action, because they want to see those facilities built today and tomorrow. We are taking action because you have to plan that and you have to be realistic, so what is your other option? To put your head in the sand and say we never can get there so we're not going to address it - I believe you have to stand tall and say to people - I hate asking for patience, because the problem is most of these families and those individuals, like the 133 we talked about being on a waiting list, they've been on a waiting list for some time, they've had to deal with it in their lives for many years, and then we haven't been in that long.

 

I look at it from that perspective, we need to be able to have that time, build our resources to get what you want, but then I also empathize with those individuals who have family members who have been waiting. No wonder they don't have patience. So that's a balancing act and what I have to do is be very open and honest with people and say I am not going to promise you that these community options are going to be there right away, because this is going to take time; I'm sure you want us to move in that direction, so support us in moving in that direction.

 

What can we do? Is there anything that we can bring in in the meantime as a transitional stage to help you? We have increased the dollar amount on a monthly basis for families who have the ability to keep their loved ones at home and we have increased that quite a bit. But once again, we can do more in that area.

 

Also, with the housing strategy focusing on the needs for more community options, I think as a minister I have been able to prove my commitment to that, because when I first came in there were two major issues for small options. One was in Halifax, L'Arche not being open and I was able to move that along quite quickly. The other one was L'Arche Antigonish, that had been basically promised dollars that were announced probably five times and those monies were not there, so we were able to move that along. I'll tell you, it was really exciting and rewarding for me, with all of the issues that I need to deal with as Minister of Community Services and for persons with disabilities, to be able to see the faces of the individuals when we did the sod-turning and then come back within a year and see their home and their excitement. That makes all those bad days worthwhile.

 

I hope people see there's a commitment from myself and our government to move in that direction. That commitment wasn't there five years ago. You brought up about deinstitutionalization, moving towards community living, and nobody talked about it or wanted to hear about it and we have publicly come out very strongly to commit to that. It's a huge step for any government to make that commitment, because there's a huge financial commitment that needs to come. Once again, we need to work towards that direction so we can strategize for the financial needs to be able to support what we want to do.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: The minister's answer used up all of the time for the Progressive Conservatives and actually went into your own time, as well. You have until 9:03 p.m. and that will be the four hours for tonight, so you only have about 11 minutes remaining. Starting tomorrow you will have 39 minutes before we go to the Liberal caucus.

 

MR. ZINCK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to thank the minister for her comments. I know your personal ties to this issue - absolutely, I can appreciate it.

 

I bring this up, and you're absolutely right, the former government, it wasn't even on the radar. I had the opportunity to meet with a lot of these families. Autism is a huge one now, the families are getting older, and they're scared of what's going to happen to their child. You're absolutely right - other jurisdictions over the years have done it kind of haphazardly, even with Nova Scotia Rehab we found ourselves in a real difficult situation. So there are some lessons to be learned. I was encouraged, though, to hear the Premier mention that word. There's absolutely no doubt it's a huge statement to make to Nova Scotians, Nova Scotian families that are affected by this, individuals who are affected by this. I proudly wear my People First pin consistently.

 

I think again, going through this consultation piece and you mentioned it, the frustrations of families because it's 20 years now. They look at it and the former minister didn't like me saying there's a moratorium on small options homes and they would argue that point. Then we talk about deinstitutionalization, they didn't want any part of that.

 

So you will hear that during this consultation piece and I think you're right, it's going to take a government that's committed to it, it's going to take time, but what people want to know after 20 years of going through this exercise is that we are actually going to start something. I'm looking forward to the consultation pieces and hearing from families. I know it will be tough because you're going to hear from some families that are really, really struggling but again, they want to know that any government is going to work, any stripe of government is going to work towards this important piece - what I consider to be an important piece as well.

 

Quickly, child welfare has been a big concern of mine over the years. I deal with a lot of families, I have in the past, I've always brought it up during Budget Debates and interestingly enough, of late I've been contacted again by families in the Truro area, families in the Pictou area. Over the years it has become an exercise, as an MLA, to not get involved in some of these cases because our line is: well, it's before the courts, there's nothing you can do.

 

What I've done over the years is I've listened. I've sat down with families that have had their children removed, for various reasons, and I've come to see some of the inconsistencies in practice and policy and I've questioned some of the very issues and brought them forward to ministers. I've dealt with a lot of young people who have been involved in the system itself and sadly, of all the young men who come to me out of the prison system - which I'll touch on tomorrow - if we trace back some of the steps, these young folks that are involved with the prison system, we find out a lot of them have been involved with the system.

 

You made mention earlier about Wood Street and I'm encouraged, I've been waiting for this expansion for a number of years. It was announced quite a long time ago, but the fact that we're going to have the ability at some point to no longer send our kids out of province or out of country, I think that's going to be really good, it's going to be really beneficial. So maybe you can give me an update as to where the Wood Street situation is.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: The Wood Street facility has opened and there are eight youth in there now. We're just doing the intake process and it will make 18 spots available. I have visited Wood Street and that was before this was all finalized, but I had an opportunity to go through the facility.

 

You're right, it is much-needed, whatever we can do to keep our youth here is very important and to have those services, because there are a lot of families that are in crisis with family members who are youths and we didn't have that type of treatment available and now we do in the province. So it's something that we all should be proud of and hopefully, with all the work that we're doing in Community Services, someday we'll decrease the need to send the children outside of the province.

 

MR. ZINCK: That's good to hear. Again, having the ability to still connect with family, you know when we send a young person out of province or out of country there are attachment issues that are so important that they still feel part of something.

 

I know over the years of talking with folks within government and staff about how these processes take place and we have somebody on the ground on the other end where the kids go, I think we have the ability to do it here. It has just become a cost initiative, having the right facility, obviously, to treat some of these folks.

I'm glad to hear that the Wood Street situation is going, especially with some of the mental health issues that our young people are dealing with. Oftentimes it's very difficult for parents to deal with children who are really in a bad way. I can only tell you there was a really bad situation that ended up in a very bad way in Dartmouth North. It was a young fellow who I had known for a number of years who actually lived in my backyard; it was my neighbour's son. We didn't have that ability, we didn't interject, we didn't do enough, whatever, we didn't have the facility, and that young man is now serving time for murder.

 

It's funny because I was going through files the other day and I found an actual case plan that his mother presented to me and I had taken to a previous government. I look at the ramifications of where this individual was at one point and all the people involved and the service providers and the local police who had come to know this young person. Now I see the end result and someone lost their life and now we're paying a greater cost to warehouse him in a prison facility. Then the question obviously is, while he's spending his years there, is he actually going to get the help he needs? In the end he became a very tormented young man and it was really sad to see.

 

I'm looking forward to having the opportunity to see that we're going to work with these young folks here and get them to move on.

 

I wonder if you can tell me - and if you can't, you can get the numbers for me tomorrow - how many kids do we have both in temporary and full-time/permanent care?

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: We can get that number for you now. I just want to make sure that I provide you with the correct information. Children in care, 1,365; that breaks down to 899 in permanent care and we're looking at 466 in temporary care.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: Honourable member, you probably have time for one quick question and one quick answer from the minister.

 

MR. ZINCK: I think you announced a new adoption strategy the previous year. I know that in large part the majority of those individuals that fall under the category of permanent care are usually youths over the age of 12. When we look at adoption we understand that everybody wants that newborn baby and that the adoption rate for the older children is difficult. I know it has only been a short time, but I was wondering if in closing you could maybe elaborate on whether or not we've been able to achieve some success in linking some of those older children that have been in our care, some for a long time, with some families.

 

MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: As you mentioned, it is quite new, this particular part of the strategy. We are starting to see some success. Actually, there will be more promotion around that. Sue Mercer - Rick Mercer's sister - has been very much involved and we thank her so much for her commitment and all the work that she has done. It's like anything: it's going to take us a bit of time to make sure it is promoted, marketed, and that people are hearing it - just as you said earlier about communicate, communicate and continue to communicate. But I think it's positive that we have somebody of that stature that has involved themselves in this strategy for adopting and finding forever homes for older children.

 

MR. CHAIRMAN: That concludes our full four hours. We will begin tomorrow with 39 minutes remaining in the time for the member for Dartmouth North, and I think the Liberal caucus is looking at returning because the honourable member for Bedford-Birch Cove was back in a little while ago to check on the time frame.

 

We are adjourned.

 

[The subcommittee adjourned at 9:03 p.m.]