HALIFAX, THURSDAY, APRIL 24, 2014

 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY

 

1:48 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Ms. Patricia Arab

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I'd like to call the subcommittee to order. Good afternoon everyone. This is the Subcommittee of the Whole on Supply. Today we have the estimates of the Public Service Commission and the Department of Internal Services.

 

I'd like to start off by reminding those in attendance if they could please make sure that their cellphones are switched off or on vibrate, and also remind anybody who is observing that there can be no chatter or appreciation, either positive or negative, in response to what's happening in the committee. We ask you to be observers and not participants.

 

I also would like to address the members of the committee. We have been a little informal in terms of how we have run the estimates here in the Red Chamber. On the direction of the Speaker, we have been told to proceed as we would in the main Chamber. All questions are through the Chair, and responses or a new set of questions can only be asked or responded to when you've been recognized by the Chair. So the same way that estimates happen on the main floor, we are going to continue in that respect in the Red Chamber.

 

We will start off - I believe the minister would like to have opening statements and then we will take questions in regard to the Public Service Commission portfolio first.

 

Resolution E35 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $18,190,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Public Service Commission, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of the Public Service Commission.

 

HON. LABI KOUSOULIS: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and greetings to my colleagues. It is my pleasure to be here today to address the Subcommittee of the Whole House on Supply. On October 22, 2013, I was honoured to become the Minister of the Public Service Commission and soon thereafter, the Minister of Internal Services.

 

I am pleased to be joined today by Gordon Adams, Executive Director of Strategy and System Performance; Deputy Minister Jeff Conrad; Diana Surette, the Executive Director of Finance; Sandra Cascadden, Chief Information Office; and Greg Penny, Executive Director of Finance for the Public Service Commission.

 

On March 7^th of this year government announced the realignment of departments to provide better service to Nova Scotians. This included the formation of a new Department of Internal Services. This department will combine various support functions to government, under one department, with a focus on improved client services. The moves involved in the creation of this new department became effective April 1, 2014, and it was with great pride that I was sworn in that day as the first Minister of the Department of Internal Services. I look forward to this new role.

 

I will start with the Public Service Commission. I would like to begin my remarks today by talking about my role as Minister of the Public Service Commission. A strong Public Service is essential for delivering the programs and services that Nova Scotians expect and deserve. Strong economic development, support for health and education programming, and many other provincial priorities depend on having knowledgeable and skilled public servants developing and delivering programs that provide the greatest benefits to Nova Scotia families.

 

The mandate of the Public Service Commission is to ensure that the Nova Scotia Government has the human resources required to create and deliver high-quality programs and services to citizens. It is responsible for developing, implementing, and evaluating human resource policies, programs, services, and standards. It is responsible for ensuring high-quality corporate human resource management principles, values, and practices. The Public Service Commission is the government's agent for collective bargaining for direct government employees.

 

Our new vision for the Public Service Commission which was developed in recent months with input from staff across the department is captured in the following statement: Inspired, client-focused professionals delivering innovative HR programs to advance employee engagement and the work of the Nova Scotia Public Service.

Our mission at the Public Service Commission is to provide expert, respected human resources advice, services, and solution. Through our mandate, vision, and mission the Public Service Commission works to support the core priorities of government which are: consumer-focused energy solutions, including a regulated, competitive energy market; prosperous businesses of all sizes creating jobs across the province; responsible fiscal management; investing in students' success with a renewed and strengthened education system; accessible, responsive health care; and helping all Nova Scotians meet their fullest potential by supporting vulnerable communities, including seniors and persons with disabilities.

 

As an internal service provider to government departments and agencies, the Public Service Commission will support these corporate priorities by working towards two main outcomes: an engaged, productive workforce; and improved service delivery through accountability and engagement. In other words, the Public Service Commission supports government's priorities by creating the environment for an engaged workforce and by delivering superior human resources related to programs and services to government departments. These programs and services are responsive to the needs of our clients and assist departments in recruiting, developing, and retaining an engaged and productive Public Service.

 

In the year ahead the Public Service Commission will focus on key initiatives such as the development of strategies to support employee engagement, diversity, and social equity, as well as the recruitment and retention of youth in the Public Service. We will work to improve online human resource support, and enhance training and career development to ensure our employees have the skills and learning they need to help government departments and agencies meet their objectives.

 

We will also continue to refine our organizational structure and business processes at the Public Service Commission and complete a five-year strategic plan, both of which will support our newly-created vision. It is our desire to provide inspired leadership, be smart with our resources, and celebrate and recognize our dedicated team.

 

For 2014-15 the Public Service Commission has identified several strategic objectives that link our vision and mission to government's core priorities. We have developed some key initiatives to undertake in the year ahead that will support the fulfillment of our mandate. Our first objective is to create an efficient, high-performing, competent, and engaged Public Service that is responsive to employees, client departments, and the public. We will accomplish this by focusing our efforts on employee engagement, a diversity and inclusion strategy, and employee development programs.

 

Employee engagement is a key focus of government and the Public Service Commission. In collaboration with key stakeholders, this will begin the development of a corporate employee engagement strategy. Some of the objectives for the strategy will be to identify systematic barriers to engagement across the Public Service and work to address them in the context of engagement, and allow for knowledge exchange in order to build the government's engagement capacity. The goal is to improve conditions for attracting and engaging employees by having a better understanding of the corporate issues and their impact on employees and through enhanced support for engagement.

 

In 2014-15 the Public Service Commission will focus our engagement efforts internally and work closely with the department's employee engagement committee to implement the recommendations identified in its employee engagement plan. We will focus on the main engagement drivers identified in the PSC's "How's Work Going?" employee survey result, such as improving and enhancing internal communications. We will work on how we as a department can make improvements in each of these areas.

 

The PSC undertook the development of a corporate diversity and inclusion strategy in collaboration with the human resource policy and programs working group of the diversity and social equity steering committee in 2013-14. The strategy is based on research, engagement, and analysis. Its objective is to help support government's commitment to being a workforce that is inclusive, culturally competent, free of discrimination, values diversity, and is representative at all levels of the population it serves. During 2014-15 the Public Service Commission will continue work to finalize the strategy and develop ways to communicate it and implement its recommendations. This will help enable the Public Service to have a more focused consideration of the value of diversity and all of its contributions to improve decision making and ultimately better service to the public.

 

Employee development is one of the key drivers of engagement, and in 2014-15 the Public Service Commission will continue to grow and enhance employee development programs. These programs will support talent and succession management, and enhance government's ability to attract, retain, and build the capacity of our early career employees.

 

Specifically, we will be focusing on initiatives that respond to recommendations from GoverNEXT, an internal network of employees, including an enhanced new employee orientation program with online and classroom content delivery; a mentorship program that will connect early career employees with mentors, to help guide through their development; and a renewed focus on career management led by a dedicated career development specialist who will provide career support, services, and leadership development programs. This incorporates 360-degree assessments and modules focused on coaching, team leadership, and employee engagement.

 

Our second objective is to adopt superior HR management principles, values, and practices. The main focus of our work for this objective will be absence management. We know that the level of support and care offered to an employee before, during, and after an absence has a direct impact on engagement. The PSC is reviewing absence management practices and processes to improve support for managers and employees and to improve absence tracking. The benefits of these improvements will include consistency in absence management processes, enhanced capacity and service levels, greater support and assistance for ill or injured employees, reduced costs associated with absenteeism, and increased employee productivity and engagement.

 

In 2014-15 the Public Service Commission will review government's absence management processes and develop an integrated absence management model that will incorporate all workplace health and disability programs including prevention, wellness, attendance, early intervention, health and safety initiatives, claims management, recovery resources, and return to work.

 

Our third objective is to develop, implement, and evaluate effective policies, programs, services, and standards. This will be accomplished through organizational restructuring and process improvement, a review of corporate human resources policies, and a human resources service delivery project.

 

In 2014-15 the Public Service Commission will undertake a review of all corporate human resources policies contained in the management manual, conduct a gap assessment with input from staff and clients, and develop a plan to ensure that all policies are current and relevant. The result of this work will be vital as the Public Service Commission moves forward and begins to revise existing policies and develop new ones.

 

Another initiative that will support this objective is the Human Resources Service Delivery Excellence project, known as Knowledgebase, which aims to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of service delivery across government. The goal of the project is to provide a single point of contact for employees and managers to obtain quick and consistent answers to routine human resource questions and issues, while ensuring responsive support is available when they need it. As a result, employees will be in more direct control of their employment experience and able to quickly resolve routine issues with the support of human resources while human resources will benefit from increased resources and flexibility, allowing them to complete complex activities more efficiently and effectively.

 

Our fourth and final objective is to provide effective collective bargaining advice and services to direct employees of government. Employee relations will be the focus of our work in this area and it is an important part of the work we do at the Public Service Commission.

 

In 2014-15 the Public Service Commission will prepare for and commence negotiations for the next round of bargaining as NSGEU Civil Service, Crown Attorney, and highway worker agreements expire during this fiscal year.

 

Madam Chairman, this summarizes the strategic objectives and key initiatives for the Public Service Commission for the 2014-15 fiscal year. The Public Service Commission has also developed performance measurements for its two main outcomes for 2014-15. We will know that we will have contributed and accomplished these outcomes by completing the following strategic actions for an engaged, productive workforce.

Our corporate-focused strategic actions include develop a corporate employee engagement strategy, with the Public Service Commission as the lead, working in collaboration with the other stakeholders; communicate the corporate diversity and inclusion strategy and implement its recommendations; create employee development programs that support talent and succession management and enhance our ability to attract, retain, and build the capacity of our early career employees - initiatives include an enhanced employee orientation program, a new mentorship program, a dedicated career development specialist, and enhanced leadership development programs and tools; improve the Public Service Commission's approach to strategic planning and measurement - this will include a client satisfaction survey, Public Service Commission Scorecard, and Human Resources Dashboard; and prepare for and commence negotiations for the next round of bargaining as collective agreements expire during the fiscal year.

 

Our Public Service Commission focused strategic actions will include the senior leadership of the Public Service Commission working collaboratively with the department's employee engagement committee to implement their recommendations as they relate to the engagement drivers from the Public Service Commission's 2013-14 "How's Work Going?" employee survey result.

 

For improved service delivery through accountability and engagement, our corporate focused strategic actions include reviewing government's absence management processes and developing an integrated absence management model that will incorporate all workplace health and disability programs, including prevention, wellness, attendance, early intervention, health and safety initiatives, claim management, recovery resources, and return to work; reviewing the corporate human resources policies in government's management manual, conduct a gap assessment, and then develop a plan to ensure corporate human resource policies are current and relevant; and developing access to online human resources support and information to improve service delivery.

 

Our Public Service Commission focused strategic actions include completing the implementation of the Public Service Commission's organizational restructuring, including implementing earlier process improvement recommendations and exploring further opportunities for continuous process improvement; and in response to the Auditor General's Report in January 2014, the Public Service Commission will review its records management practices.

 

Madam Chairman, by aligning our objectives with government's core priorities, we will be able to improve productivity and engagement, strengthen how we deliver essential programs and services, and operate in the most sustainable ways possible. This will allow the Public Service Commission to meet the needs of our client stakeholders with more timely responses, consistent and efficient transactional services, and effective, consultative, and advisory solutions in safe and respectful work environments.

 

Ultimately by attaining these objectives, we will succeed in achieving our stated outcomes for ensuring an engaged, productive workforce to support government's priorities and improving service delivery through accountability and engagement. Madam Chairman, I am confident in the Public Service Commission's ability to deliver on this plan, which is outlined in its Statement of Mandate for 2014-15.

 

To conclude my remarks on the Public Service Commission, I would like to reiterate that we are committed to creating a dedicated and diverse Public Service by providing excellent support to departments and employees alike, through human resource policies, programs, service, and standards. I would also like to say how impressed I am with the calibre of the staff at the Public Service Commission and their commitment to the Public Service. As minister, I have gained a tremendous appreciation for the complexity of the work they do.

 

Now on to the Department of Internal Services. Madam Chairman, I would now like to turn my attention to the new Department of Internal Services. It's my privilege to be here today to discuss the 2014-15 budget for the newly created department. We know that this year's budget painted a challenging fiscal picture and it challenged us to be innovative and creative in tackling budget issues. That's why I'm excited at the prospect of being on the ground floor for the creation of this new department, a department that is uniquely positioned to support the best deliveries of services to government.

 

We need to take a close look at how and why we do things in government and make sure that the way we deliver services makes sense. Internal Services is now responsible for many of the delivery mechanisms and supports that help civil servants deliver the programs and services that matter to Nova Scotians. Indeed, it is the mandate of this new department to identify opportunities for efficiencies across government. I think it's a critical responsibility, given that we are spending taxpayer dollars to deliver services.

 

Internal Services is made up of 520 proud employees who are responsible for the following government services previously housed in seven other departments: Chief Information Office; procurement; Payment Transaction Services; Operational Accounting; Payroll Client Relations; SAP support; Internal Audit; Queen's Printer; Access and Privacy Services; Real Property Services, with the exception of land acquisitions and disposal; Public Safety and Field Communications; Building Services; Environmental Services; Insurance and Risk Management; and Nova Scotia Lands Inc.

 

I'd like to take just a few minutes to touch on some of the budget highlights and priorities that we have in place for the new department for this fiscal year. One of the largest pieces of our new department is the Chief Information Office - large because it employs 255 staff and because it accounts for $60.6 million of our $150 million budget.

 

The CIO creates, plans, organizes, and directs the efficient and effective use of information and communications technology for government. It is also responsible for managing government's information and assets. The CIO underpins most of government's business in some way. Today the CIO serves about 11,600 government employees, hosts over 1,000 servers across 345 sites and over 600 applications, while maintaining a safe and secure IT environment. CIO staff are involved in everything from online vehicle registration in partnership with Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, to working with health information technology service in managing health information with the Department of Health and Wellness, the district health authorities, and the IWK Health Centre.

 

Focused on transforming its organizational structure, creating a more enabled workforce and advancing foundational tools to allow better and cost-effective access to information and services, the CIO is striving to deliver excellent service and enhanced communications. The CIO is also striving to leverage IT solutions for today through mobile, social, information, and cloud technologies.

 

The CIO's many initiatives for this fiscal year will contribute to greater productivity, efficiencies, and cost savings, while also enhancing online access to government services. This year we will invest an additional $250,000 to enhance security services for government information. This additional investment will support us in adding new tools and two additional staff, to reduce the risk and meet increasing demands for security.

 

We will also proceed with securing a secondary data centre for government. A secondary data centre for Nova Scotia is a key component of the CIO's ongoing strategy to protect and safeguard the provincial data network. This data centre will protect all e-mails, files and drives, including information such as provincial medical records, land registry, and birth and death information. This project will ensure the protection and recovery of data in the event of a disaster or technology failure.

 

This year's capital plan has considerable investments to help ensure the province continues to leverage the latest technology to keep government's data network secure and build in flexibility to incorporate any future improvements. This includes addressing recommendations put forward by the Auditor General.

 

The CIO recently put a mobility task force in place in a project that has been formalized to prioritize and deliver even more mobile services to government employees. This year we will continue to focus on providing new service offerings and more technology options to help employees work effectively no matter where they are.

 

One of the many projects being led by the CIO is a multi-year initiative known as Signet. The goal of this project is to enhance government's ability to deliver online citizen transactions in a secure and private way. The result will be a single, business-driven, electronic, government-wide identity and access management service that will benefit government employees, citizens, businesses, and our partners with easy, secure, online access to information and services while respecting privacy.

 

Another key division within our department is Procurement Services. This division manages the procurement process for provincial departments, agencies, boards, and commissions. It ensures that goods and services are procured through an open and fair process that maximizes competition while supporting our environment, economy, and society to obtain the best value for the province.

 

Every week hundreds of small businesses interact with the province through procurement, whether they are accessing tenders, attending a workshop, or fulfilling a contract. Through the procurement governance initiative we ensure all public sector entities such as hospitals, schools, municipalities, and government departments work together to get the best value for the goods and services they buy. We expect this initiative to help public sector entities procure more than $2 billion in goods and services during 2014-15. This division is now also responsible for Queen's Printer, which supplies not only high-quality print documents but also promotional and specialty products for the province.

 

Public Works is a significant addition to the Department of Internal Services. Public Works employs 169 staff that provide management and maintenance for the province's infrastructure, and environmental remediation projects such as purchase and disposal of property, including buildings and furniture; support for field communications for Public Works and public safety organization, including volunteer fire, search and rescue, and RCMP throughout the province; the design, construction, inspection, and renovation of new and renovated building projects and all assessment, management, and remediation of environmental and health risks associated with certain government properties; and provides insurance coverage and security planning for the province's buildings, vehicles, and operations.

 

This year priority projects in this area include continuing to identify and implement measures to increase the energy efficiency of government-owned buildings. We remain committed to ensuring all new government construction meets LEED standards and certification, where applicable, and that we lead by example when it comes to reducing energy use.

 

We will continue to work with users, service-providers, manufacturers, and other government departments to manage the implementation of a next-generation mobile radio system for the 6,500 users of the current Trunked Mobile Radio Service, with implementation to be completed by May 2015.

 

We will continue to improve accessibility within government buildings by incorporating improvements as we do upgrades, renovations, and new building projects.

 

Last but not least is Corporate Financial Services. The 76 employees who work in payroll, payment transactions, and corporate accounting are part of the machinery that keeps the 10,000 other government civil servants happy by making sure their pay and benefits arrive on time. They also process billions in payments to thousands of vendors over the course of the year. They take care of tax slips and prepare the figures that appear in the budget documents that everyone is so focused on here in the House of Assembly and throughout the province this time each year.

Madam Chairman, that brings my remarks on the new Department of Internal Services to a close. In concluding my speech today I would like to acknowledge all public servants who provide high-quality programs and services to Nova Scotia families, communities, and businesses each and every day. I would also like to thank you and your fellow members of the Subcommittee of the Whole House on Supply for your attention. I would be happy to address any questions you may have. Thank you.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Northside-Westmount.

 

MR. EDDIE ORRELL: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you, minister, for your opening statements and your staff for being here today. I know they are hard-working staff and the Public Service people have to do a lot in government and have to do a lot for around the province, and I congratulate them and thank them for all they do.

 

In your opening statements you talked about efficient and high-performing staff, which I know we have, but you also talked about responsible fiscal management. In the Estimates Book, in the very first few pages of the book, I see that under full-time equivalent staff, we have an increase of over 550 or 500-some-odd staff this year. Can you explain that to me and what departments they were hired under?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Which page are you on?

 

MR. ORRELL: Page 1.14.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Within the number there, the total FTEs - full-time equivalent employees - is 567.4. They would have been transferred in from other departments across government, within the other departments.

 

MR. ORRELL: So there are no new hires there?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: No.

 

MR. ORRELL: Madam Chairman, to the minister, the estimate from 2013-14 to the estimate from 2014-15, it looks to me like there's over 200 new hires from estimate to estimate. Is that true or is that people brought in from other areas?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, I don't think we're looking at the same information. I have within the Department of Internal Services one new FTE hired for this fiscal year.

 

MR. ORRELL: Page 1.14, under the Public Service Commission, the total funded staff of 10,297 to 10,402.4, there are no new hires involved in that and that looks like over 200 in that one there, just to me.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, that's a question for the Public Service Commission so we're going to get the proper people up here because we have Department of Internal Services staff here at this moment.

 

Madam Chairman, the data is being misinterpreted by the member. The estimate for 2013-14 to 2014-15 is an increase of 105 FTEs, not 500.

 

MR. ORRELL: So there are no new hires in those 105 FTEs then.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: This fiscal year, 105 FTEs have been added to the Public Service Commission.

 

MR. ORRELL: So the forecast - and I missed the education lesson yesterday when we were doing estimates and forecasts. I'm not an accountant by any means because I heard a lot of that yesterday as well. So the forecast is the actual use, which is 9,851 employees, so this year we're going to estimate we're going to use 10,402 employees, which is an increase of over 500 employees. Am I not correct in assuming that?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, no, he is not correct in assuming that. If you actually look at last year's number for - not estimates - if you actually look at the forecast, the number would be 9,851. When you look at estimates last year, which is what the amount of FTE positions we had available but possibly not filled, that was 10,297. What we are comparing that number to is this year's number, which is how many positions are available but might not all be filled, and that is 10,402. That is a difference of 105 FTEs.

 

In terms of how many FTEs we had last year, we had 10,297 and this year we have 10,402. That is an increase of 105 positions within the budget.

 

MR. ORRELL: You estimated you would use 10,297 employees but you actually used 9,851 employees, am I correct in that?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, yes, he is correct in that. There are always positions within government that are not filled and there are always vacancies. When you have 12,000 employees you can't have every position filled at once. Departments in good fiscal management sometimes leave positions vacant as they try to reorganize departments to perhaps eliminate a position in the future. That is why we do have some vacancies across all government offices.

 

MR. ORRELL: So the 10,297 people were funded for last year? You estimated to use that, they were budgeted for last year, correct?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Yes, they were, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. ORRELL: So you used 9,851 people.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Correct.

 

MR. ORRELL: The budget money from that estimate to that forecast, what was done with that money? If that hasn't been used, 200 staff are there so I will say if we average probably $50,000 a staff person, that's a $2 million - math is not my favourite either, I'm not an accountant. So where did the money go that was budgeted that didn't get used?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: That would be a question department by department. What happens within departments is that as departments face budget pressures and they do not want to end the year over and above their budget, what they do is as they experience vacancies, they might hold a position vacant so that they're not spending taxpayer money, they're staying within their budget, and by the end of the year they come within their budget.

 

MR. ORRELL: So this year you're estimating that you're going to use 10,402 people?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Correct.

 

MR. ORRELL: So did the jobs not get done last year, if you used 9,851 people?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: All jobs got done.

 

MR. ORRELL: So why would the estimate this year not be - even just go with 10,000 people instead of 9,851 people, if the jobs were done with that many people last year, why are we going to need that many more people to do the jobs this year?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: If you actually look at the percentage, it comes out to about 2 to 3 per cent, which is what our vacancy factor is. As departments try to manage that vacancy factor, they do it for cost savings. They also do it for flexibility, that they might in the future eliminate a position.

 

They also take time to find the right employee because it's not just a matter of filling a position for the sake of filling it; it's a matter of getting the right employee into the position so that we can execute what the department's goals are.

 

MR. ORRELL: So 500 are either left vacant or you can't find the right 500 people to do the jobs from last year to this year? I don't get it, if the forecast was only 9,851, and that's what you used and the jobs got done . . .

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'd like to remind the member that all questions should be directed through the Chair. I understand the temptation for informality in this setting but again, my directive has been from the Speaker's Office and it's in support of Hansard.

 

The honourable member for Northside-Westmount has the floor.

 

MR. ORRELL: So 9,851 people did the jobs last year; 10,400 people are estimated to do the jobs this year. So the jobs either didn't get done or they don't need the people to do them. If the jobs got done, why do we need 500 more people to do those jobs again this year?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The jobs got done because we have a dedicated staff that a lot of times would have worked overtime, taken on more responsibility and gone over and above what they were expected to do to get the work done, but we cannot expect our staff to do this throughout a career. When there are some deficiencies in departments, people step up and they take care of the work that has to be done. When we have the opportunity to hire the right employee and put them into a position, we put them into the position and we keep operating smoothly.

 

MR. ORRELL: I appreciate that and I understand that people work hard and I understand they work a lot of overtime so if that's the case, 500 new people, your budget must have been way over for last year, I guess, was it?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The member would be incorrect because the budget only showed an increase of 105 FTEs, not 500. Thank you.

 

MR. ORRELL: So if you only used 9,851 and you need 10,401, because people were overworked, they were overworked by 500 people? The people in the Public Service Commission were overworked by 500 people last year?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: There are other adjustments in that; there are seasonal workers. The FTE account is actually a full-time equivalent so it doesn't represent every single worker we have; there are part-time workers, full-time workers, and seasonal workers. So in terms of a finite number, that would be just a rolling average.

 

Again, our estimate is approximately 400 people, and that is less than 4 per cent of the total Public Service Commission.

 

MR. ORRELL: As I say, I'm not an accountant but an FTE is one full-time equivalent, so two part-time people would make up one full-time equivalent.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: If an employee is 50 per cent of a full-time equivalent and we have two of them, it would make up one full-time equivalent.

 

MR. ORRELL: So exactly - 9,851 employees are full-time equivalents. That could equal 18,000 employees - am I not correct in assuming that?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Hypothetically it could, but it doesn't.

 

MR. ORRELL: So we're going to need 500 more full-time equivalents to do the job that was done last year without that many people? That's the only question I want to get clarified.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: There is constant vacancy within the Public Service Commission. When you're talking about a 3 to 4 per cent vacancy, we'll put it into the context of a smaller organization that might have four or five employees, and when they lose one employee and they're down 20 per cent they still operate. This is just a common vacancy factor within the Public Service Commission.

 

MR. ORRELL: So why didn't we hire these people at the time, if that's the case? If we needed them and the vacancies were there and the money was there, why didn't we hire the people to do the job instead of putting a ton of pressure on the Public Service people who are there now that didn't necessarily have to be there?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: In the past it might have been the operation of companies, organizations, even government to just give a job to someone they know just by - as soon as they have a vacancy - calling them in and saying I've got a job for you. Currently with the fair hiring process, we go through a process - we advertise jobs; we receive resumés; and we screen the resumés. Most positions that we advertise get 300 to 500 resumés.

 

As we screen those, we narrow them down; we go through an interview process, which is not just one interview, but multiple interviews; and it goes through a screening process within the PSC and the department that is doing the hiring. This is not something that takes weeks or even one month; it could take multiple months. Depending on if the position is more senior, the time frame takes longer because it's that much more important to get the right person in that position to ensure we're delivering government services.

 

MR. ORRELL: So potentially out of 300 to 500 applications you can't find the right employee within a reasonable time frame?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: We do find it within a reasonable time frame. I don't understand what is unclear about having to advertise a position, collect resumés, having a closing date - you can't just advertise on CareerBeacon for one day and close the job the next day. It has to be up for a period of time and then you have to collect the resumés and review them.

 

MR. ORRELL: Four hundred jobs difference from last year actually used in the budget - adding 500 this year just doesn't seem like that's a good use of our present employees' time. If they're working that hard and there are vacancies and there is funding there, and there are 500 applications for a job, you've got to be able to find - you're saying it takes time to find the right employee. I understand that, but out of 500 people there has got to be the right employee. You have to narrow it down somehow that you could interview 40 or 50 and not put the extra pressure on our Public Service people. They're getting an extreme amount of pressure if they're doing the job of the necessary 500 more equivalents - they're doing that job, they have to be doing a ton of work.

 

I just don't understand why, if they did it with 9,851 - you're projecting they're going to need 10,402 this year, and there are vacancies left open because you might cut somebody. If the budget is there and the people are there, I think it's necessary to hire them.

 

I'm not getting the answer of why they're not hired. I wish I could get that answer, please.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: What might clarify the answer a little bit is if you actually look at the last two years that the Progressive Conservative Party was in government, which the member is part of, the difference between estimate and actual FTE count in 2008 was 584 FTEs and in 2009 it was 979 FTEs, and now we're at 400.

 

MR. ORRELL: We're also in 2014.

 

I'll leave my questions at that; I'll let Mr. Houston take over.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou East.

 

MR. TIM HOUSTON: I appreciate the minister's time and I appreciate the staff for being here today.

 

It may seem that we're kind of focused a little too much on the staffing, but we're worried it's a symptom of a bigger issue of what is happening here. I'm not aware of any businesses that when they go to manage themselves going forward the next year - or any households for that matter - I'm not aware of any people, when they look forward and say how are we going to manage ourselves for the year going forward, they base that off of what might have happened before. They actually base that off what actually happened before, and they prepare their budgets going forward based on actual things that happened.

 

It's disappointing to us that we can't get a straight answer on a very simple question that if the operations of the government were managed with 9,851 people, which I thought I heard the minister say everything got done just fine, then if that number needs to be increased to 10,402 to perhaps operate better, I don't know, but that would just be a subjective decision of the people who make those decisions, but if more people are required, more people are required. We can say that, but the simple fact of the matter is that if it was done with 9,851 - you're now calling for 10,402, that's a very simple fact that the number for the coming year is bigger than the number for it the last year by the difference by the number of people it actually took to run the government by what you're projecting.

 

I wish we could just accept that as a fact as it is so plainly written in front of us. I hear all the talk about vacancies and different things over time and all this type of stuff, but it's just noise around a simple thing - the simple thing is these are FTEs that incorporate all the vacancies, all of the overtime; all of that stuff is incorporated in there.

 

I guess I would ask the minister, based on his experience prior to life as a politician, which I believe I read in his bio that he was a small-business owner - if you're running a business and everything is being just fine, running good with the number of staff you have and you don't expect your revenues to increase, which is the situation that this province unfortunately is facing - if everything gets done with the staff you have and you're not going to have any more coming in the front door, that's a pretty dramatic hiring increase. I just don't know a lot of people who would logically make the decision to do that. I guess what we're struggling with is why - I guess maybe I'd have to go back and ask at the very beginning - my question for the minister is, will there be more people working in the public service in the coming year than there was in the past year?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, if we want to look at last year's actual, what we'd have to do to have a proper comparison is wait until the end of this fiscal year and look at what actually happens. You cannot start comparing budgeted versus actual and try to go over multiple periods. If you want to have a proper comparison, you need to look at the estimates versus estimates and actuals versus actuals.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Unfortunately, that is so entirely misleading; it's embarrassing that I heard it said on this floor here. The fact of the matter is that there were a number of employees who worked for the government last year and that number is 9,851 - that's the number of people. The number of 10,297, which was the last year's estimate, is now completely irrelevant because it never happened. What happened was 9,851 people were employed and did the job. Whether a year ago people sat at this table and thought they're going to need 10,297 does not matter to me at all. What matters to me is how many people were actually needed, and the amount of people who were actually needed was 9,851. That's a fact.

 

The year coming forward I'm hearing from the minister that he believes the government will need 10,402 people. The only thing we can possibly do in the face of the reality of the numbers written on the page is say that there are actually 9,851 FTEs and there are forecast to be, estimated to be, for the coming year 10,402. What the minister is telling us is that there will be more people required to run the government in the coming year than there was in the past year. That's a simple fact, and my question was a very simple one: will there be more people required to run the government in the coming year than there was in the past year?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The current estimate to run the government is 10,402, and as history has proven, with vacancies we never ramp up to the full FTE factor, so the amount of people we require to run the government will be less than the 10,402.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Perhaps just a final question on the estimates of staffing. So the number that is written in front of us as the number of FTEs that are required to run the government for the coming year is 10,402 - did the minister just say that they don't actually need 10,402 FTEs to run the government for the coming year?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: As I've said before - and I don't want to be misquoted - not that we don't need 10,402, not that we haven't budgeted in estimates for 10,402, we will not use 10,402 because there are always vacancies across the Public Service Commission. You can't expect to have 10,402 positions filled at all times of the year. I'm sure the members have worked in an organization before in the past where they might have had a vacancy of a position; it's no different in government.

 

MR. HOUSTON: For the 10,402 estimated FTEs, there are dollar amounts in every one of these departments that relate, that are calculated based on 10,402 FTEs. Is it correct that there are dollar amounts associated with all of the budgets for these departments based on the number of 10,402 FTEs?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: That would be correct. As we account for all of the FTEs, there is a budget number associated with those FTEs.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So if there is a dollar amount that has been budgeted for 10,402 FTEs, my question is, how much of that dollar amount does the minister believe is not necessary because it won't be used?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: If the dollar amount was not necessary, it would not be in the budget. All of the budget was done comprehensively - we looked at departments; we built our estimates up; and we provided an accurate reflection in what each department would be - and if the member has any concerns with a specific department, he can drill into it and we can answer the questions.

 

MR. HOUSTON: The member does have concerns and that's why he is sitting here today drilling into them.

 

Next year, when we're sitting here looking at the actual number of FTEs - for the number of employees that it took to run the government - should I suspect that if your budgeting was accurate, would that actual number be 10,402? That is the number that has been budgeted this year. If your budget is perfectly accurate, which I concede rarely happens, but suggesting that your budget is perfectly accurate, would that estimate number move over to the actual number a year from now?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, as I've explained, we run vacancies in government and the vacancies have been there for decades - they're not going away any time soon. When you have over 10,000 employees, you cannot have every single position filled. That is impossible; it is never going to happen; it never has happened. Therefore, by next year, the actual FTE count will be lower than the estimate, which is 10,402.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So next year when we're sitting here, the actual number will be less than 10,402? I'm hearing that part of the reason that it will be less is because of vacancies. Since there are dollars associated with every single one of those 10,402, do I understand the minister's statement to be that he's budgeting and allocating money for vacancies - is there money put aside to pay people who won't be in jobs in this budget?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: In every budget the amounts are made up from programs, from rents, from people within a department, and as departments manage their budgets they sometimes have cost pressures which they manage by not spending money on items that they might not feel necessary at the time. They might free spending on other items and they might hold a position vacant for a little while longer while they try to reorganize and take care of that budget pressure.

 

Budgets are fluid - they're not static - and the actual results that are going to happen move up and down based on pressures. Some pressures that are hitting departments now are increases in salaries, which most departments are facing a 3 per cent increase from the last collective bargaining agreement.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I believe I understand the minister's understanding to be that the number of staff budgeted to a department becomes kind of a slush fund for managing the operations of the department - so that we give them 10,402 FTEs spread across the government and we say we recognize today that you won't need all of these, but we will allocate money to you that you can use at your discretion should you have issues in your department.

 

I find it very disingenuous to sit here today and say that we're putting money aside for something that we know we just will never need, and then to try to coverage that around hiring processes and all the other stuff of estimates versus estimates and stuff like that. Really, I think what we did is we just drilled down to what's actually happening here - it seems to me that what's actually happening here is the numbers put on the page, that are known to be, today, overstated, with the understanding that the departments can then manage that and come in less than that but use that money elsewhere.

 

So I guess I go back to my question. If the 10,402 is known to be too big - I was going to use another adjective there - how much of the overall departmental spending is allocated to the portion that is too big? In other words, if you said it's too big by 500 people, how many dollars are allocated to those 500 FTEs that we can then say, well, that's kind of the cushion room inside the budgets? That's all I'm trying to find out - so that's my question on that.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, calling a vacancy factor a "slush fund" would be a little inflammatory. What I would like to add - and as a member of Treasury Board, when we went through the process of budgets there were lots of pressures within departments that came to Treasury Board, and understanding that there are vacancies within departments, and I will give a prime example, in funding budget pressures for adolescents receiving dental care, which was not fully funded, we did not give the money to the Department of Health and Wellness; we actually asked them, over the period of the next year as they experience vacancies, to fund the shortfall.

 

We do this across all departments. I'll give another example - in my department of the Chief Information Office we have a program that actually saves money for the department and it was not funded, and we moved forward with the program because in the end it does save money. And the way we do this is as we see that we have vacancies, we can fund other programs. The budget is an envelope that departments work with and what they do is they manage it. Part of managing it is if they have a vacancy and they're saving money there, then they have the opportunity to use that money within a department to fund any shortfalls or any budget pressures that they might have.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So it does sound like the staffing numbers for a department is an area that comes into play in lots of different situations. You gave an example there where you said . . .

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'd just like to remind the member to please direct all comments and questions - just avoid terms like "you" or "your" department.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I'm sorry. If it becomes the practice of government to say to departments that you need to spend money on this, just leave a position vacant for a little bit to fill the difference and keep yourself within budget, I don't think that's fair to Nova Scotians. I'm particularly upset that Nova Scotians who may be reading this document and are under the impression that there will be hires made in the Public Service to the extent of 551, are now hearing that, well no, actually we never intended to hire all those people; we're just putting a number down there for another purpose. So let's leave it at that. I think it's unfortunate.

 

What I would like to do now is I'd like to move to some questions on procurement, if we have the correct staff for procurement. Is it the Department of Internal Services we have here? I can ask some questions on the Department of Internal Services before that.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: If the minister wouldn't mind letting us know which members of which department are sitting next to him.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, as you had stated earlier, we started with the Public Service Commission and then when we finished with the Public Service Commission we're going to move on to the Department of Internal Services.

 

MR. HOUSTON: My apologies - we did have a few people jockeying around there, so which ones do we have at the table right now?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: We have Internal Services at the table.

 

MR. HOUSTON: For the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, I notice that there is an increase in the estimate for the coming year - I'm just curious as to what's driving the increase in budget for the coming year.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, there is some confusion over here - the Department of Aboriginal Affairs is not a part of the Department of Internal Services.

 

MR. HOUSTON: The confusion is on my part - I thought we had the Public Service Commission there now. Let's talk about the Department of Internal Services - are we good to talk about Internal Services?

 

So this is a new department that has been formed by the government . . .

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: We would like to make sure that the member has adequate time to address any staff, so if you would like to go back to the Public Service Commission and continue that, we can do that for you. If the member for Pictou East could let us know which department he'd like to continue with.

 

We have the Department of Internal Services next to the minister right now.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Well then that's fine by me if it's fine by them. Good?

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I think I brought that on myself by asking so many questions about staffing.

 

So the Department of Internal Services is a new department that was effective from April 1^st, and I believe the goal of the reorganization was to try to capitalize on some efficiencies and maybe find some efforts that were duplicated in various departments and bring them into one department.

 

My initial question for the minister is, in the budget for the coming year, is there any savings compared to what it would have been had those departments not been merged or, just as a number or benchmark, if you look at the actual dollars that were spent in the various different departments and compare that to what is budgeted for the combined department, is there a savings recognized by the government this year?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Within our budget, the budget amounts were brought over from the other departments. There were no savings directly in what was budgeted to operate the department. Where the savings are going to come from is as we reorganize the department in the coming years there will be savings there. The major savings comes from procurement because currently we are buying products separately, and as we did an analysis as to how government purchases we saw that there were great savings if we combine our purchasing power between the hospitals, education, and government - and we anticipate quite a substantial savings there.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So there were a number of areas from various departments consolidated into one new department. It sounds like - I believe I heard - that's not creating a savings to the government; it may in the coming years. I want to hold procurement to the side for a second, and if I could just ask the minister specifically: various areas were brought under the new banner of the Department of Internal Services and is it the minister's expectation that while no savings will be realized from bringing them together this year - I think he used the term "in the coming years" - there will be a savings from that, and I'm just wondering how far out is that savings?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: That is correct. As we move forward in the department and reorganize the department, there will be savings in the coming years.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Will the savings come from needing less people to do the same jobs?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: It is possible that savings could come from needing less people; savings could also come from being more efficient in how we deliver services. As we have more demand for more services and we become more efficient, we do not have to hire more people. As we share resources across the department, we do not have to purchase resources separately, and as we house people within the department together we can save on overhead as well.

 

MR. HOUSTON: While no savings are forecast this year - how many years out? What type of savings do you think you will recognize in terms of dollars and how many years out until that savings is realized?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: There is not an exact figure as to what the savings would be next year. We are anticipating savings as we reorganize the department and we're collapsing the department within itself. That's when we will be recognizing the savings, but to put a dollar amount on it at this point would be premature.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So the minister feels like it may be more efficient, but we're not sure yet?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: No.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I understood that to mean no, he's not sure if it will be more efficient, which would be consistent with some of the things I've seen, particularly along things like merging health boards and not knowing if that will save money, or merging people and not knowing if it will save money, so I thank you for your honest answer on that one.

 

I understand the minister is most excited about the opportunity to save monies from the procurement process. I'm just looking at the estimates for the coming year and the Department of Internal Services has a budget of $115 million, of which $2.5 million relates to procurement. So procurement is a very small expenditure of the overall department, but it seems to be the part that the minister is most excited about.

 

I would like to ask the minister, how much does he think he could save from bringing the procurement areas together?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Procurement Services actually does the procurement. It actually doesn't spend the money itself, so I'll give an example. If we buy, let's say, paper - we buy it in government; we buy it in health care; we buy it in the education system. Procurement Services would put out the RFP, they'd collect the RFPs, open them, give the contract to the lowest bidder. But the dollar amounts do not sit within procurement, the dollar amounts are actually across all of government. Our procurement is $1.2 billion per year, so if we can move that approximately 3 per cent to 4 per cent, we could see a savings of $30 million to $50 million.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I may have my numbers wrong, but I'd just like to clarify something in the minister's opening statement. I understood him to say that every week hundreds of small businesses interact with the government and procurement totals up to $2.5 billion in purchases. I just heard a number there now that procurement makes up $1.2 billion. I'd just like to clarify the dollar amount that the procurement area of the Department of Internal Services, how much is it - $2.5 billion that they procure over the course of a year or is it $1.2 billion?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: To clarify that, the $2 billion that was mentioned in the opening speech includes all the dollar amounts that go through the department. That also includes purchasing for municipalities, which does not fall under the provincial government's budgets. That is where the member is misled on what the difference is.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So the opening statement was $2.5 billion and that I understand now is a number for government purchases, plus universities and municipalities that are all together, and of that $1.2 billion is goods and services procured for the provincial government - is that correct?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: If I'm not mistaken, I believe in my opening statement I said $2 billion, and I believe I also specified that it was for the MASH sector, and government's amount of purchasing is approximately $1.2 billion, but that amount is fluid - it changes; it goes up; it goes down. It's not an exact, specific amount.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Is the minister confident in the number that hundreds of small businesses interact with Procurement Services every week?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Yes, I am. We have RFPs go out on a daily basis, a weekly basis, and we have multiple bids that come in on them, and those are companies across Nova Scotia and across Canada that are bidding on them to get the right to sell to the Government of Nova Scotia.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Of the $1.2 billion - assuming that number is somewhat representative of what happened in the year just finished, could the minister maybe shed some light on how much of that $1.2 billion was sourced from Nova Scotia small businesses?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The breakdown of how much money within procurement is spent with Nova Scotia companies is 80 per cent. So 80 per cent of our procurement is awarded to Nova Scotia businesses.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So 80 per cent is the estimate of the interaction of the amount of procurement that is sourced from Nova Scotia small businesses or Nova Scotia businesses?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Yes, 80 per cent of purchasing comes from Nova Scotia businesses.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I'd like to focus on one of those procurements that is a current situation now and that's the tendering around the provincial land line contract. I understand that there was an evaluation team in place to review the bids on that tender. I'm just wondering, could the minister provide us with a list of the individuals on that evaluation team?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: I don't know who is on that panel, so I cannot provide any list of who is on it.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I believe I've read in the media at least that this provincial land line contract could be in the range of $64 million over an eight-year term. I'm just wondering, does the minister believe that a $64 million tender is significant?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Yes, it's a large dollar amount, and I do think $64 million is significant - I haven't met too many people who would not think it was significant.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I guess that very succinctly leads me to my next question. That would be a significant tender released by the minister through his department - I'm wondering, why doesn't he seem to know who was on the evaluation team that was going to determine how that contract was awarded?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: As the minister of the department I do not get involved and try to interfere with processes such as procurement. I would never interfere with the individuals who are dedicated, knowledgeable, and have experience with phone contracts. I'm not an expert in telecommunications; my background is accounting, finance and investment banking. I didn't see what value I would add in terms of reviewing RFPs and contracts, and specifically getting into the nitty-gritty and then putting my bias into a contract.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I guess maybe my question might have been a little misinterpreted. I believe that leaders lead and they are kind of aware of who around them is making significant decisions and that's how they place their trust in people to operate.

 

I understood in this case that although the minister just stated that he doesn't get involved in these types of situations because he leaves that to other people - in this case the minister did get involved and he stopped the entire process which, to my mind, would undermine the evaluation team. I'm just wondering, what led the minister to believe that he should step in and stop that evaluation team and stop the process, if that is indeed what happened, without knowing who they were?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, I am in constant communication with all of my departments. I am physically there on a weekly basis, constant meetings. The Department of Chief Information Office has a very qualified Chief Information Officer in Sandra Cascadden. Through our discussions and looking at the tender, and wanting to get the best contract for Nova Scotians, that is when we looked at the process and decided that we did not want to have the department moving forward with the process and we wanted the Internal Audit Committee to look at it, which is independent of myself and independent of the department.

 

To be even more independent, we tendered the process out and Grant Thornton was the accounting firm that won the contract and they will be taking a look at it. At the end of the day, we just want the best contract for Nova Scotians - we want to deliver the best services at the lowest price that we can possibly get to fulfill that contract.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Did the minister, in conjunction with his staff, develop a concern that perhaps Nova Scotians weren't going to get the best deal from the process that the evaluation team was undergoing or did somebody complain about how the process was going? So did the minister just suddenly feel that the process wasn't running correctly and that he should step in or did a separate company approach the government and say, hold on, something is wrong here? Which one of those happened?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The decision was arrived at by me and my staff in the CIO. We looked at the process and we just wanted to ensure that we were going to get the best deal for Nova Scotians, and that's what we did.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Did one of the companies bidding on the provincial land line contract complain to your department that they were unfairly treated by the process?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Actually, two of the companies complained that they weren't happy with the process. That is why we looked at the process and we moved it over to Internal Audit, and they felt it was best to move it outside of government and they moved it to an independent company in Grant Thornton. Grant Thornton bid and won the RFP. Grant Thornton, I'll go further to say, do not do any consulting work for any of the three bidders and have no conflict of interest.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Member for Pictou East, you have five minutes left.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Thank you, Madam Chairman.

 

Will the minister undertake to deliver any correspondence between the department and the two bidders surrounding their complaints about the process?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: When we get the report back from Grant Thornton, which will be in June, yes, we will have discussions with the bidders. It's a fair, transparent, open process and I look forward to the review coming back, and it will be shared with the bidders - there were three bidders as well, Madam Chairman, just to clarify.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Did somebody in the Internal Audit Department say to you that they didn't believe they were qualified to address the complaints raised by the two bidders?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The Internal Audit Department is an audit department and we did not have the expertise for telecommunications in that department. We felt that we should tender the process and we had strict guidelines around the tendering process as to who could bid and what capabilities we were looking for. I'm happy to report that Grant Thornton was successful and I look forward to their report.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So we had a tender process to determine somebody who could look at the tender process?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Could the member repeat the question, please?

 

MR. HOUSTON: Did I hear the minister say that we had a tender process to decide who could look at the tender process?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: We had an RFP done and requested bids from companies to come and look at a specific tender, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I find it unfortunate that with over 10,000 civil servants - you want to say 9,851 or however many you want to say - we weren't confident in the staff of the departments enough to say whether or not they went through the proper tendering process on the provincial land line contract, and that Nova Scotians then have to pay for a third party to come in and say whether your department was fairly treating the bidders that were tendering on that process. That's kind of what happened, I guess, is it?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, what happened is we put out an RFP - Grant Thornton was successful in it, and we are waiting for a report from Grant Thornton. At the end of the day we're going to get the best contract for Nova Scotians. As the member had indicated earlier, $65 million is a very large contract and I think Nova Scotians would want us to ensure that contract goes to the company that is going to execute the phone contract most efficiently and at the best price with the services that we require moving forward.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I guess the question is, if the two companies hadn't complained, would the process have just gone through? My further question on the Grant Thornton situation is if there was an evaluation team in place, going through the process, what made the minister lose confidence in that team's ability to properly award the tender? The first place I might have looked was - who is on the team? I guess the minister didn't do that.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: I can't comment on hypotheticals of "what if" and "if this happened, what I would do." All I know is with the information that was presented in front of me and with discussions with the department, we felt that the process we took was the fairest to Nova Scotians, the fairest to the companies bidding and, at the end of the day, is going to get us the best contract that we can get on behalf of the taxpayers of Nova Scotia and for government.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Is Grant Thornton now awarding the $64 million tender on behalf of your department?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Grant Thornton is replying to the tender. At the end of the day, the awarding of the tender will be within the government.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So the department will be guided by Grant Thornton. Is Grant Thornton going to make a recommendation as to who should get this tender?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: At this point, I don't have the report from Grant Thornton; I can't speculate on it. The objective of the report was not for Grant Thornton to award the tender; it was for Grant Thornton to look at our processes and review them.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.

 

HON. FRANK CORBETT: Madam Chairman, we congratulate the minister on his position and his great staff. I had the great pleasure of working with many of them, and in spite of me, they are still a good staff.

 

I'm comfortable going whichever way you feel comfortable, Mr. Minister. You've got the folks from Internal Services, so we'll stay on that track a little bit, if the chairman doesn't mind and if the minister doesn't mind. I really don't see this thing lasting in the vicinity of an hour or so depending on the quality of the questions and the quality of the answers, I guess.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: If it suits the minister and his staff we will start with Internal Services, since they are the staff currently next to you.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Yes, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. CORBETT: Thank you again, Madam Chairman. So, minister, probably the same as us, you see this like almost getting hit with a big wave, trying to figure out what's going on in your department, it's relatively new . . .

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I remind the member to please direct all comments and questions through the Chair.

 

MR. CORBETT: Absolutely, that's why I said it, Madam Chairman, thank you very much, thank you for your guidance.

 

I'm sure, Madam Chairman, the minister would have seen the creation of this department as getting probably nailed in the face with a very large wave. When you kind of reconstruct your other departments of government it's not simple, there are issues about relocation and so on.

 

A question to the minister through you, Madam Chairman, is who in government decided to make this - what I would call a very large change would be the easy way to put it, I guess - this very large change in how government operates and how did it come up with the departments and agencies that ended up under the purview of Internal Services?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The decision for the new department came out of Cabinet, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. CORBETT: I asked that because this is a government that is fond of sending things out and having people study it and all of a sudden when you see a very large shift in how government operates and how it spends its money and, more particularly, I tend to agree with the minister in this way, Madam Chairman, is how you save some money.

 

It seems for a relatively young government to take that step without finding out that all these aren't necessarily round pegs and they're not necessarily round holes, some of them are square. So was he comfortable then with this huge shift in government procurement and others, like CIO and so on, Madam Chairman?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: I'm very comfortable in the department. I'm very excited with the challenge ahead. It is going to be a challenge, Madam Chairman, but we look forward to streamlining government, how we give services within government. We look forward to cost savings on behalf of the taxpayers in Nova Scotia and look forward to improvements in delivering services within government as well.

 

MR. CORBETT: Madam Chairman, can you give me an update, minister - through the Chair - on the status of where we are with our trunked radio system, both in procurement of it and the cost and also the status if we're working with any of our other Maritime Provinces?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: In our trunked radio system there's a new 10-year contract for the system. It was signed October 2013 with Bell Mobility. The system contract is an extension of the existing TMR contract and the contract will commence in 2015-16.

 

The system is the province's trunked mobile radio service and there are currently 8,000-plus users of this system, including 12 provincial departments and agencies, the RCMP, and volunteer public safety community use. With the expiry of the existing TMR system in June 2015, the funding was required for the new TMR2 system implementation. The implementation started in 2013-14 and will finish in early 2015-16. The total implementation costs are $3.3 million.

 

The implementation budget in 2013-14 was $610,000; in 2014-15, $2.04 million; and in 2015-16, $575,000. The main components of the implementation costs are professional project management services - this is approximately 60 per cent - as well as equipment purchases, computers, travel, and office rental.

 

The current budget in 2014-15 for the TMR system is $3.5 million and the new contract costs starting in 2015-16 will be $12.3 million.

 

New funding required starting in 2015-16 is $7.3 million for the system, with an increase to $8.8 million by 2016-17. The costs of the contract are partially offset by the recovery from the RCMP for the new TMR2 system, and the recovery will be $3.2 million annually once the system is in place. As well, from my understanding, as the system is rolled out in other provinces across Canada, we could experience rebates from Bell Mobility as they get other provinces to jump onto the same system, we will get a benefit back in terms of rebates.

 

MR. CORBETT: Before I go off that, part of the question, minister, you may have thought you answered but I just wanted to know, more and more we're working in conjunction with New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, so has there been any thought by your government to doing a trunked radio system that would be usable or interfaced, or whatever phrase you want to use, with those two other provinces?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, as we are the customer for the technology, the actual technology is executed by Bell Mobility and they are in talks currently with actually HRM, CBRM, P.E.I., and they are currently very close to signing a deal with New Brunswick. If those deals are signed, because we are the first ones with the technology, there could be a cost saving as the costs for the system are spread out across provinces.

 

MR. CORBETT: So would it be reduced because of a licensing issue, minister, or would it be just because of more people that are on it, the costs come down? That would be my question to the minister, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: It would be a revenue recovery so it would be as more people are on it, then the costs would come down.

 

MR. CORBETT: Some of the other programs that come under this office are Real Property Services. Madam Chairman, of all the moves that have been contemplated in what's now going to fall under your roof, have they all been made? Is everybody housed in one house now?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: That's an excellent question, Madam Chairman. We're actually under a review as to how the department will shape, moving forward. Not only are we looking at the requirements for office space for this department, we're actually rolling it out across all of government and forecasting five and 10 years ahead, so that we don't have excess office space that we're paying for that we don't require.

 

MR. CORBETT: I guess that kind of goes to the direction I wanted to ask. One of the issues, as I'm sure the minister would know well, Madam Chairman, is if we move too fast into these things you're criticized because you have to break leases and government is on the hook and so on. Is it part of the function here that we have to - I'll use the term - "ride out" some leases until we could get people out of buildings they're in now or even holding of machinery in buildings that we would hold the lease on now, is that part of the rationale? Does he also see that one day they would need a location other than the Trade Centre where they are at, to house the employees of this large department?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: That's exactly what we're doing with our review, Madam Chairman. We currently haven't moved people around. We're looking at when our leases are expiring before we move staff around.

 

I'd also like to point out that most of the staff in the department are already in provincially owned buildings so if we did move them from one provincial building to another, we still have that cost. So we're looking at it as more of a long-term plan, not a short-term plan. That's why we're looking at what our needs will be going into the future.

 

Is it possible that we're going to need a new provincial building? That hasn't been determined yet. Is it possible we're going to need all the current locations we have? That's part of the review process. At the end of the day we want to have the right size of buildings, both leased and owned, to execute all of government.

 

MR. CORBETT: Madam Chairman, through you to the minister, will you see the need for housing a portion of your offices in other, what we would call, provincial buildings throughout the province? I'm thinking primarily like the building that we refer to again as the Provincial Building on Prince Street in Sydney, or will your office stay - I mean it in a polite way when I call it Halifax-centric - will it be centred here in Halifax?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, as the department executes its duties, we will need staff where they currently are. As we have computer support in Cape Breton, we're going to need staff there; as we maintain buildings, we'll need staff there.

 

There is no plan for a centralization of services or decentralization. We are in the communities and the only plan is to provide better service and to find efficiencies and execute them.

 

MR. CORBETT: Madam Chairman, through you to the minister, you talked earlier in questioning, I believe, from one of the members from the Progressive Conservative Party about secure storage of documentation. I would like to know when we're talking about that, are we talking just about a storage area that one would perceive as paper storage or is it the larger complexity of government of issues that may be stored, our own computer, our own backup systems and so on, is that part of what we're talking about when we're talking about storage?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: It would be both, Madam Chairman. The secondary data centre that we're talking about would be for digital data and it would be a secondary site, which would back up the main one. When we're talking about our physical data, which is what we have in paper, it is currently stored in a facility that has dry fire suppression in place. It is a secure facility to ensure that these documents are there for our future use.

 

MR. CORBETT: In today's world we've seen this winter and we've seen storms and we've seen all types of natural disasters, beyond what many of us wouldn't have thought of 20 or 25 years ago. In looking at secure facilities, are you working in conjunction, say, with Justice and emergency services to see where best to locate these systems and backups to the backups, as they say? Is that process going here? Could you put a little meat on the bone there?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Yes, it is, Madam Chairman. Currently we have a data centre which is located in Halifax here on the peninsula. This all comes out of an Auditor General's Report for a secondary data centre. What the report recommended was to get that data centre - I believe it was either 15 or 18 kilometres away from the current one. More important, we would get it on a separate power grid and get it off the peninsula so if we did have a storm occur that could possibly wipe out our current data centre, which would be a very low likelihood so I don't want anyone to be alarmed, we would have a secondary data centre.

 

I want people to be rest assured that our current data centre already has redundancy built into it. We have backup generators. If we did have a loss of power we would immediately switch the battery sources and we also have diesel-operated generators there that would keep that data centre running to make sure that our records are secure and accessible in times of emergency.

 

The secondary data centre was just viewed from the Auditor General as adding more security to the current secure system. We are underway now looking at where that data centre will be. As well, with technology changing ever so quickly, we're looking at what type of data centre we can have because there are remarkable changes happening in that technology. If you walk into a data centre currently, versus 10 years ago, the racks are about one-tenth the size, the data storage has increased exponentially. The flip side of that is that we're actually storing more data currently than we were in the past.

 

I look forward to the department continuing its hard work and bringing options forward for a secondary data centre and I look forward to executing that. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. CORBETT: Another area that had fallen in this minister's lap is Nova Scotia Lands, which is of some interest to me personally in that it would take in the areas of the Sydney tar ponds cleanup. I'm wondering through you, Madam Chairman, if the minister could give us an update on - I believe they were under TIR previous to his office taking them over. What do they see as the future use of those lands?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, I would refer that to the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. The tar ponds are currently under his portfolio.

 

MR. CORBETT: So I'm wrong that Nova Scotia Lands did not go over to Internal Services?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, there is no budget for the tar ponds in the 2014-15 budget, the project has been completed. I believe the tar ponds might be their own agency, I believe they're still under the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal.

 

MR. CORBETT: Okay, I may be confusing this so I apologize if I am but it's my understanding that Nova Scotia Lands is now under this minister's jurisdiction - am I correct or incorrect on that one?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Could the member repeat the question?

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The member is correct; Nova Scotia Lands Incorporated is under this minister's purview.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Good Chair.

 

MR. CORBETT: Through you, Madam Chairman, I'm hoping the minister can understand that that adds some excitement, anxiety, however you want to roll it out, when the transfer of land will happen from one department to another because there have been musings of the municipality wanting to buy those lands. There have been issues with the federal government and its position with the remediated lands.

 

I would fully expect that this minister hasn't had time in his schedule because it happened when the House opened and so on, the transfer of responsibilities, but I would like if the minister could, at his earliest convenience, tour those lands and then, if his department has any insight into the future use and the future ownership of those lands.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, I have actually had a chance to go through the lands a couple of months ago when I was up in Sydney and I must say they are a vast improvement from when I was up there in the 1990s. It was absolutely remarkable, I would never have guessed that was the Sydney tar ponds from before. It really blew my mind, it was just incredible.

 

I will add that I believe part of the question is in terms of the lands. Currently Harbourside Commercial Park continues to do economic development on the lands and I believe that will continue. I believe that answers the question for the member.

 

MR. CORBETT: It partially does. Again, the question not being answered fully is more because it's a bad question put forward by me, than a bad answer. I'll assure you, minister, on this point. I guess what I'm trying to get at is that there has been some discussion about future ownership of that land. The municipality would say that they may want to look at having all or a portion of those lands. I'm wondering if the province was to relinquish the ownership, there are federal dollars involved with that and would we lose those federal dollars if the province was to relinquish ownership of that, even if it was to another government entity, like a municipality, particularly CBRM?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, thank you for the question, to the member. More discussion would have to happen, in terms of the lands, because it's not our decision. Currently there's a long-term monitoring process on-site for contaminants; that process is going to be over 25 years and we have not reached that point yet.

 

The federal government would have to be part of the discussion for us selling the land and they'd have to agree to it as well.

 

MR. CORBETT: Through you, Madam Chairman, I'd like to thank the minister for that answer. Let's move on to a question we discussed and the minister was kind enough to give to me a list of cleanup sites. We talked about it in a question and answer in Question Period about a week ago, I guess. The staff identified 18 TIR bases that are now known to be contaminated and are presently above the ministerial protocol levels.

 

Staff have estimated the work would take just over $7 million to clean up. How much money will be allocated in this year's budget to clean up those 18 sites?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: For those sites in particular, Madam Chairman, in the current budget there's $1.6 million for the cleanup for this year.

 

MR. CORBETT: Now under the new regulations that came in, you have two years to clean up those sites, or the minister does, Madam Chairman. I would ask him, wouldn't that fall short of the regulations as set out by the Department of Environment?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: I'll clarify the statement, Madam Chairman, we don't have two years to clean them up, as government; we have two years to assess them. Then we can either clean them up or put a management process in place on the lands. Many parts of the land are still ongoing use for commercial use, and as long as we put a management process in place on those lands, that would suffice with the legislation.

 

MR. CORBETT: Again, through you, Madam Chairman, so what you would do is they would be identified and you would have to put that protocol forward - they would have to then put that protocol forward to the Department of Environment and it would either be obviously accepted or rejected and you would move forward or whatever, from that point?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: That is correct, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. CORBETT: I thank the minister for his clarification. I have a few more questions on the Department of Internal Services, Madam Chairman, then I'll probably move on to some PSC questions. The FOIPOP advisory service now falls under this department; what role does this section of government play with other independent FOIPOP officers in their departments? What's unique about this, I guess?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, within the Department of Internal Services we have two staff. They are technical staff and their role is to assist all FOIPOP staff throughout government on the more complicated and technical issues that are faced in regard to privacy and information.

 

MR. CORBETT: I realize that this is often a tender issue within departments so would it be the minister's position that he will hopefully see this as one that departments can use as a resource, as opposed to as an enemy?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Absolutely, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. CORBETT: Let's move on to risk management and claims. Now this group, this section, Madam Chairman, would handle insurance claims for the provincial government. I'm assuming that; if I'm wrong, I would stand corrected. What else would risk management claims do? What would their role be?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The department that is being asked about, they would execute claims, self-insurance within government, insurance claims as well. They also do a security audit and fraud investigations internally within the government as well.

 

MR. CORBETT: I know we self-insure in government but this section, would that also include such things as when someone makes a claim against TIR for damage to a vehicle or that such thing?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Yes, it would. As we're self-insured, any accident that one of our vehicles would be in, we are the insurance agent. So if there was a claim and within our own investigation we deemed that we were responsible, then we would pay out that claim to the party that put the claim against us.

 

MR. CORBETT: I'm going to move on to PSC, and thanks to the staff. While we're waiting for staff to get into place, Mr. Chairman, I will assure you and this House and this room that I will not go on about estimates versus actuals. I only wish our good friends in the governing Party were so understanding of what that meant four years ago. Such is time, as we'll all find out.

 

Mr. Chairman, to you, the areas of questioning will be fairly high level and will speak about employee engagement type of things, so the minister will know, I'll probably spend very little time on line-by-line issues. The little phrase I usually start with is that at some point I hope we all in the House can come up and reform what we do in estimates, because people talk about government being inefficient and I think this is in many ways a colossal waste of time. All these hours are, I look at my friends on the other side who could be doing things more productively. I think of the senior members of government who are here so that's usually my rant that I forgot to say today.

 

Minister, while you're gracious enough to take these questions, I know they can be - it's irritating because I think again - well no, the point is that I think you could be doing more productive things. But whatever your answers are, I thank you for coming here again.

 

We've just seen come through the House and I think it might even be in Committee of the Whole now, the bill regarding the apprenticeship program in Nova Scotia. My time in government I suppose some people could say there's lots of things we did wrong, but one of the things that always bothered me was that in looking at the apprenticeship program - and I notice you use words like mentorship and so on, which can come close to what we're talking about - but is government, particularly the PSC, looking at areas where we could actually get involved with apprenticeship? I'm particularly thinking in areas like the Department of Natural Resources would have many of those types of employees and more probably in Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal.

 

Through you, Mr. Chairman, my question would be thus to the minister: is the PSC considering a strategy around the apprenticeship program, seeing that this is a centrepiece now for this government's Department of Labour and Advanced Education?

MR. KOUSOULIS: The department is doing extensive work with the Department of Labour and Advanced Education with apprenticeship. It is an area that we need to support. There is a lot of upside to it and we need to get our skilled tradespeople with the qualifications to do their jobs and to advance in their careers.

 

There actually have been six new positions approved in Internal Services this year for apprentices as well, Madam Chairman, so I'm very happy to report that as well.

 

MR. CORBETT: Today's debate about what's good or what's bad but do you know what? I can honestly say if you created one more apprenticeship you're going in the right direction. I've got to applaud you and your department on that because government should lead by example. Your moving forward on that is a very good thing.

 

I think one of the phrases in your opening statement talked about - I'll paraphrase it - it was about succession management and so on. Government for too long has been focused, in my mind, on playing catch-up and not realizing that we're going around here, Madam Chairman, and we get a minutia of some of what are estimates and what are real. The reality is we see good people go out the door and someone says wow, where did all that knowledge go and we've lost them.

 

This may be a bit of a lob ball to the minister but could he give me his department's vision of combining these mentorships to get the knowledge of the brain drain that is leaving these departments and put a real kind of shape to mentorship?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Mentoring is very important and the passing along of intellectual knowledge from more senior Public Service employees to our newer ones is very important within government so that we can continue to provide great service.

 

What this would fall under perfectly is GoverNEXT where we do actually assign senior mentors to junior employees. We also assign career support specialists to help the junior employees navigate their careers and move up through government and become more senior and more productive in their roles. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. CORBETT: The minister had mentioned, Madam Chairman, in his opening statements that collective bargaining is to begin soon, I believe with what I would call the greater civil service and with Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. I also see in the room now people from Justice, the Crowns also, who just signed an agreement.

 

When do you see and is there any order in which you will see them coming to the table for bargaining?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: There are three agreements in 2015 and they all come due at the same time, March 31, 2015. That would be for the NSGEU, Crown Attorneys, and CUPE highway workers. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. CORBETT: Is there any thought of starting bargaining earlier? If so, would there be a group of choice that you would like to start with - they would like to start with?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, at this point we have not made a decision which agreement we would negotiate first but we will start our preliminary talks with the unions in the Fall. Our target for beginning of negotiations will be January 2015. We will reach out to them and at that point we'll have a better idea of what the time frame will be in January/February 2015 as to who is negotiating first. Preferably we'd be negotiating with more than just one at a time and not allowing three contracts to lapse for too long.

 

If they do lapse, there is a continuation of the contract. We will be moving forward in the Fall of this year, which is six months before the end of the contract expiry, which in most of them is what is written in.

 

MR. CORBETT: Madam Chairman, through you, at which point will you be settling on a wage pattern? Can you tell the Chair that?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, at this point we do not have a wage pattern in place and we have not made a decision on what our wage pattern will be going forward.

 

MR. CORBETT: You can't blame a guy for trying. Let's talk about two things that I find many times are inextricably linked, but they're often viewed differently so I'll ask them kind of differently. You've been in the position in the PSC for about six months now - the minister has, Madam Chairman - and I want to know what his view is on the absenteeism rate across the - and I will refer to it again as the greater civil service, if that's not confusing things.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, we've had many discussions with absenteeism as it's a concern for government and it would be a concern for all employers throughout the world. Our objective with absenteeism is to support the employee, get them back to work as soon as possible, and ensure that they are working and not off sick or any other reason. If they are, then we have programs in place, such as EAP, to help them get back sooner, as well as other supports within the department.

 

We are constantly managing this and moving forward to assist the employees and reduce absenteeism as much as we can.

 

MR. CORBETT: Madam Chairman, through you, has government looked at a department or a piece of work that government does specifically where they have spikes in absenteeism, whether it's across a department or specific to one area in a department?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The Public Service Commission, on behalf of all departments in government, has been doing analyses on absenteeism. Then with the analysis, we pass it on to managers within their department. At the end of the day it's up to those managers to manage their departments. We do not go into other departments and manage employees. We support all departments in government in executing support services and HR functions for their employees.

 

MR. CORBETT: Madam Chairman, I appreciate the answer but the reality is that they're getting that information across the breadth of government. I want to know from the minister then, they're not compiling - say there's more absenteeism in Department A versus Department B, it's a universal absenteeism. Is that what I'm led to believe?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Well there's absenteeism across all departments, Madam Chairman, and we're providing that information to the departments and giving them the information of who is absent and for what periods of time. Then as they have that information, it helps them manage their absenteeism.

 

MR. CORBETT: Madam Chairman, through you, at the end of the day the proverbial buck stops in the minister's department. For clarity, I'm trying to find out here that it's no sense just sending off a note and saying here it is. I'm not getting a feeling here that they're giving any advice, only that last month you've had 10 absenteeisms or 12, or whatever.

 

What I'm trying to get to here is, if you're not going to take a holistic approach to it, then you're not going to, if there's an issue with it - and maybe there's not an issue with it, that's what I'm trying to get to. How are we going to grapple with it if there was an issue with absenteeism, if we're just going to keep departments in silos and not give them true direction from PSC, how are we going to stop those issues, if they don't exist, from getting there and being an issue?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, the PSC does actively support their departments with their absentee management. As well, we are currently reviewing our Absence Management Program and we hope to have even further improvements under that new program as well. Thank you.

 

MR. CORBETT: Through you, Madam Chairman, could the minister set out what the protocol is for somebody who is absent for, we'll say, less than five days and then is there a different protocol if someone is absent for more than five days?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: If an absence is under five days, then it's just handled as an absenteeism; when it goes over five days, it's looked at as being a short-term absenteeism. If the absenteeism is as a result of an injury on the job, then it falls under the Workers' Compensation Board.

 

MR. CORBETT: Okay, thank you, Madam Chairman. So we would know what the WCB would - and I believe the government is the self-insurer when it comes to the WCB. If it's a work injury or if it's an injury that may have been caused outside the workplace, what protocols does government have in assisting the worker back to the workplace? I suspect there would be two protocols, maybe more, but at least one for the WCB issue and one for outside the purview of the WCB.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: When an employee is absent for a longer period of time and if it's a result of an injury, each case is unique. If the case is under the Workers' Compensation Board, we work with the Workers' Compensation Board as well as with the employee. If the employee is just absent, we work with the employee.

 

Each case is different and unique. Some examples I have seen within my department is where an employee might have a back issue or an issue of sitting for many hours in one chair, which I'm sure we've all felt sitting in the Legislature. We give them flexible options in terms of seating positions and desks that can actually go from counter height up to a much higher height, so they can actually work and stand. They can sit and stand and they can actually move around during their work day. This is all done on a case-by-case basis because everyone's health is different and everyone's needs are different as well.

 

MR. CORBETT: I've got just a very little bit of time left, so with all due respect to the minister, that wasn't the answer or as full an answer as I would like but that's the prerogative.

 

To the Public Service Commission, Madam Chairman, do you know how much overtime the province is on the hook for every year?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: On a cost basis, overtime within all the Public Service employees is less than 2 per cent.

 

MR. CORBETT: Madam Chairman, through you, I wonder if the minister would have a breakdown of that. I mean 2 per cent seems small but when you look at the actual number, would he have the dollar figure plus the reasons for that overtime? Is there a breakout of, say, overtime as it relates to unexpected workloads or overtime as it relates to an employee being off and another employee having to fill in, that type of situation?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, we don't have that information. That would be answered department by department. I can say that there are various reasons why you would have overtime. Overtime would not apply to managers as managers are on a salary and as they work extra hours, they do not have an increase in their compensation. That's all the information we have at this point on it.

 

MR. CORBETT: So what I'm hearing then, Madam Chairman, is that within the next six to eight months we're going to go into collective bargaining with the major union that the government deals with and it can't tell me what's the kind of snapping point that causes our overtime? I'm sure that some of the unions when they come to the table will be looking for issues as it relates to overtime, whether it's moving from time and a half maybe to double time and so on. If the employer cannot give them reasonable statistics of why they should or shouldn't be compensated in a different way, I find it hard to believe that the employer has been around this long and we can't track that.

 

I guess through you, Madam Chairman, my question to the minister would be, is overtime a bonus or a penalty?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, overtime is neither of those two things; it's not a penalty and it's not a bonus. Overtime is a recognition that we need an employee to work beyond what they have in their bargaining agreement, and as they work those extra hours, it has been negotiated that they will be compensated for them.

 

I can comment as to the overtime within the Public Service Commission but a question like this should go to each department, as they manage their overtime. Within the Public Service Commission there is no overtime. I can't go through department by department as those departments are not under my ministerial authority. Thank you.

 

MR. CORBETT: I appreciate that, Madam Chairman, but in his opening statements the minister discussed that they are the lead agent when it comes to collective bargaining for the Crown, Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal, and what I keep referring to as the greater civil service. So I appreciate - and no disrespect meant here. I realize that the minister isn't going around every Thursday morning and collecting the pay cards of all the employees within government, but there has to be a point where that information is centrally garnered.

 

These are things that I would want to know when doing collective bargaining of what bearing this is going to have on us going forward if a large group of employees came knocking and said one of their prime concerns was the rate of overtime, or maybe the stress of the overtime and how we're going to alleviate it if we don't know the root cause of this problem, if we're going to do government in silos which I believe the wholeness of this minister's office tries to do the opposite but I'm hearing back now that this is all in silos. That bothers me because I believe that in the coming months and years for this government, one of its largest issues is going to be how it compensates its employees, both directly and indirectly.

 

If we do not have available to the negotiating teams the amount of pressure that is going to be put on them, such as absenteeism, such as overtime, then I think in the vernacular we're starting behind the eight ball, Madam Chairman, and I would hope that we get these things in order between now and when we start our negotiations with these groups that we make sure we're looking after the public purse in its proper perspective. Thank you.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Unfortunately our allotted time has elapsed.

 

The honourable member for Pictou East.

 

MR. TIM HOUSTON: Madam Chairman, I guess in the interests of people, movements and stuff, I have two questions on tendering. I believe the minister can probably answer those without the need of staff, but while I ask those I do have just a couple of questions that will be of the staff of Nova Scotia Lands.

 

Maybe as the staff get ready, I would just ask the minister with respect to the Grant Thornton Report, which I think is due on June 6^th, my question on that would be, will the minister table that report for the benefit of the members of the House when it is received?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, I'm already on the record saying that report would be public. To table it in the House would delay it actually until the Fall sitting so the report will be made public much longer before the House sits again. I won't be tabling it in the House as it will already be public and it will be available to the members for their review. Thank you.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Thank you very much. I'll glean two bits of positive information from that, the first being that we won't still be sitting on June 6^th.

 

Just in terms of tendering in general, I mean I was a small-business owner prior to being elected and I've lots of thoughts on the government tendering process, as does the minister, I'm sure. I'm not an advocate for protectionism but I am an advocate for common sense. I know of examples from business owners telling me of one example where somebody was bidding on a $50,000 tender but they lost, it was awarded to a company from another province who bid on a roughly $50,000 deal $2 cheaper.

 

I know in some of the minister's comments earlier he was talking about tendering and he said you kind of get the bids and you open them up and you see what's the cheapest and that's how you award it. I know that was taken out of context because I certainly know it's not as simple as that.

 

I'm just wondering how the minister sees the need to balance common sense with rules on a page because obviously if that's a $50,000 contract in that case, if that would have been awarded to a Nova Scotia company, with this type of business he would have hired a local trucker, he would have been a guy in his shop, and there are other spinoffs.

 

I'm just wondering, I'd just like a couple of general comments from the minister on his thoughts of those types of situations because I'm sure he's aware of those situations himself. Thank you.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, I can't comment specifically to this as I have no information other than a brief overview that was provided. What I can comment on is that the Province of Nova Scotia has interprovincial trade agreements and we need to be very careful with them. If we do not live up to these agreements, we could have backlash from other provinces.

 

In many sectors the Province of Nova Scotia is a net exporter of goods and trades so the last thing we would want to do is actually harm any of our other many companies in Nova Scotia. This is a fine line. I can't comment as to how a bid was a $2 difference. I do know that bids are not just awarded solely on price, yet every RFP is different. Some of them are awarded on price, if you're buying a type of commodity, for example. Other ones are awarded on price and on performance, as well, if you're executing a service because sometimes it's hard to make an apples-to-apples comparison. As people come forward with various solutions, price can't be the only factor.

 

I will say that moving forward we will be as open and transparent as possible. We will ensure that we are not violating any trade agreements with other provinces and going to have any backlash to it. We will support Nova Scotia companies where we can. We currently work with Nova Scotia companies and offer them training support, helping them through the RFP process.

 

I'd be more than happy to take a look at that if the member would like to bring that RFP forward, I'm more than open to it. At the end of the day what we want is to support Nova Scotia companies, but we will not violate any interprovincial trade agreements and we also want the best deal for taxpayers. That's what the department will continue to do moving forward. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I thank the minister for his comments. I certainly wasn't looking for feedback on the specific example but I'm aware, as I'm sure the minister is, of these types of situations happening, where things are awarded and it's a fine line. As I started off, I'm certainly not an advocate for protectionism. We do have to respect the rules of the different jurisdictions, but we also need to be mindful that respecting those rules should be a two-way street from other provinces.

 

I know it was on the minister's mind anyway but I just want to bring it to the forefront that we need to be careful with these types of situations.

 

My final questions for today have to do with Nova Scotia Lands. I wonder if the minister would be able to tell us how many contaminated sites now fall under provincial jurisdiction.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, this question actually falls under the Department of Environment, but due to the very competent and highly professional and great staff that I have, we actually have the answer for it. Nova Scotia Lands has declared 26 - well, the Department of Environment has declared 26 provincial parcels under the new Environment Act. Our job is to either manage the site or to clean up the site, at the direction of and working in conjunction with Environment.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Madam Chairman, thank you for having the answer because the Minister of Environment referred us to you. It sounds like it must work that the Department of Environment would declare a site and Internal Services would then be responsible for taking it from there, I guess?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The Department of Environment writes the regulation. We then declare the site and may approve it, and then we do the cleanup.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Can the minister provide us with some insight as to how the department decides which sites will be cleaned up first? How do you prioritize which sites?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, we review each site and as we review them and they go under a comprehensive review, we look at many factors. The primary factors are, are we still operating the sites for commercial use? Is there a chance of future contamination or is that site no longer used? Where is it in terms of the vicinity of any water sources? When a site is no longer being used that takes a higher priority than a site that's currently being used.

 

Sometimes a cleanup could be something at a TIR facility, where as they're filling up gas, some gets on the ground. In those instances we could come in and clean up but that could very well happen the next time they clean up as well. Therefore, each one is done on a site-by-site basis and it's dependent on many factors.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Is the list of contaminated sites public?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The sites are not listed on a public website for everyone to see. The ones that are under remediation are public and I have a list of them here. Currently for this fiscal year we're looking at a site in Baddeck, Shebrooke, Barrington, Wentworth, and that's it.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I thank the minister. My next question was going to be which ones are going to be committed for this fiscal year, so I appreciate that. We have a thing going now, right, you know what I'm going to ask before I ask it.

 

Just a follow-up to that, how much has been budgeted in the budget for this year for the cleanup of those sites?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: $1.6 million.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Yesterday we had some talk - well, there has been some talk in the last little while - about the Boat Harbour site. I'm sure the minister would have been disappointed if I left this table without asking about Boat Harbour.

 

There has been a lot of talk about Boat Harbour and we did hear the Premier saying yesterday that the government is gathering information as to what types of contaminants may be in Boat Harbour. I just wonder if the minister's department has had any involvement in that process.

MR. KOUSOULIS: Yes, Madam Chairman, it is our staff that would be overseeing the cleanup of Boat Harbour. We have already booked $12 million towards the future cleanup of that site as well.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So that's $12 million. I'm glad we found that, I was looking for that. I thought it was $10 million but I was looking for that the whole time through estimates. It's under your department - so the $12 million has been booked for a couple of years, I think, at this stage?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Madam Chairman, I'm not specifically accurate on a date but we believe it was booked in 2005.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I'd just ask the minister kind of which area, which sub-department - where would that have come from? If it's in Internal Services now, it kind of merged in from somewhere, I guess.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: That would have come from Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Does the minister have any information as to whether $12 million would be sufficient for the remediation of the Boat Harbour site?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: The amount of liability booked is reviewed on an annual basis. We have been reviewing it annually, we will continue to do so. Currently it's on at $12 million. We are doing a more comprehensive review with what the cleanup would be in this coming fiscal period so I do look at that number adjusting. Hopefully it would adjust down, but I'm guessing where it was initially booked back in 2005 and as inflation has occurred, it would probably be adjusted upwards.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I've been looking at the Auditor General's Report, I'm happy to hear that that number will be reviewed. One of the things the Auditor General pointed out was under liability for contaminated sites. The Auditor General's Report went on to state that "The liability for contaminated sites standard provides guidance on how to account for and report a liability associated with the remediation of contaminated sites . . ." - this was a new standard that was effective for fiscal years beginning on April 1, 2014. At that time management advised the Auditor General that ". . . no significant impact on future financial reporting is expected as a result of adopting this standard." That was in January.

 

I don't know if the minister would have been involved in those discussions with the Auditor General around the new accounting standards for liabilities for contaminated sites. Did the minister have any discussions with the Auditor General's staff on the accounting for liability for contaminated sites?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: At the time of that report I was not the minister of this area of the department and, therefore, I had no talks with the Auditor General regarding the new accounting processes. Because of those processes, that is why we are looking at a more comprehensive review, which I stated earlier, and why we will be adjusting our estimates on the cleanup of Boat Harbour.

 

MR. HOUSTON: I've heard reports that it could cost anywhere from $80 million to $100 million-plus, to remediate the Boat Harbour site, so I think that by any standard that could be quite a significant change from the $12 million. I'm just curious as to what time frame the minister has from his staff for coming up with a new estimate for the Boat Harbour site.

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: Part of the review will determine a more accurate reflection of what the cleanup will cost. I will state that in my previous profession as a consultant to Wilson Fuel, whenever we were purchasing lands in our Esso acquisitions across Atlantic Canada, remediation was done on sites. I know one thing with remediations, until you actually get into it, you do not know what the costs will be. In many instances they are a lot lower, but in most instances they're quite a bit higher.

 

What we are committed to, and as we have stated, we will clean up Boat Harbour and regardless of whether the cost is going to be $10 million, $12 million or $20 million, it will get cleaned up, whatever the cost comes in at.

 

MR. HOUSTON: So I guess I'm going to give the minister the benefit of going away and looking at the standard, but I would certainly interpret that by the time we have our next budget, we'd have to have a full and accurate accrual of a liability for that site. Maybe the minister can share with us, as that process goes, can he put a time frame around what he knows at the moment? I appreciate it might not be much since he's new to it, but could he put some time frame around when the government expects to have a better understanding of how much it will cost to clean up Boat Harbour?

 

MR. KOUSOULIS: As I stated earlier, Madam Chairman, before the question came, we are reviewing what the amount of liability will be. Although I'm new to the department, I've been very well versed by the excellent staff in the department. They have me up to date on all aspects of the department. As I did state earlier, before the question came, we are reviewing it and we will have the new estimate in next year's budget, as I stated earlier.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Thank you to the minister. We did hear throughout the course of the questions this afternoon and even in the minister's opening statement about quite a number of different types of reviews that are being undertaken by the department, a lot of human resource reviews around procedures. We just heard about one around absenteeism and obviously there will be a lot of reviews around the remediation of contaminated sites.

 

I'm just wondering, and obviously I'm bearing our Grant Thornton situation in mind, does the minister expect that most of these reviews would be conducted by internal resources or is the minister expecting that a lot of these will be done by third parties?

MR. KOUSOULIS: Our plan is always to do reviews within internal resources. Only at those times that it's deemed we do not have a specific expertise within the government do we look at outside sources to complete a review or consulting services. So the answer would be yes, we always would strive to do reviews internally, within the government.

 

MR. HOUSTON: Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I thank the minister and his staff for their time this afternoon. We have no further questions.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E35 stand?

 

Resolution E35 stands.

 

Resolution E12 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $115,022,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Internal Services, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

Resolution E22 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $565,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the FOIPOP Review Office, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

 

Resolution E26 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $22,756,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of Legislative Services, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

Resolution E49 - Resolved, that the business plan of Nova Scotia Lands Inc. be approved.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Shall the resolutions carry?

 

The resolutions are carried.

 

I thank the minister and his department. We will take a two-minute recess and ask that the Minister of Justice and her department come forward.

 

[4:42 p.m. The committee recessed.]

 

[4:46 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'd like to call the committee to order. If everybody could please take their seats.

 

This is the Committee of the Whole on Supply. We have before us the Department of Justice. I'd like to remind those in attendance who are observing today's committee to please refrain from chatting during the proceedings and also if you can make sure - and this applies to our committee members as well - that all cellphones are turned off or switched to vibrate.

 

I'd also like to remind the members who are just joining us for this new department that under the direction of the Speaker, we need to have this committee run in the same manner as the main Chamber. I have allowed it to be informal up to this point, but today and subsequently, until our time is up, all questions and comments need to be directed through the Chair, and both the ministers and the members asking questions need to wait until they are recognized before speaking.

 

Resolution E13 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $322,476,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Justice, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'll ask the minister to start with her opening statements.

 

The honourable Minister of Justice.

 

HON. LENA DIAB: Good afternoon, Madam Chairman and everyone. Thank you very much for the opportunity to be here with everybody this afternoon. I'm here to talk to you about the departments that I'm involved in, essentially the Department of Justice and the Office of Immigration, as well as all other responsibilities that I have.

 

I have to say that I'm really looking forward to this and again very much appreciate the opportunity of being allowed to be here. Before I commence I want to introduce everyone here to the very capable staff that have been sort of the bloodline for me for the last six months, because without them I don't think I would have survived.

 

On my left is my Deputy Minister of Justice, Judith Ferguson, and on my right is my CEO of the Office of Immigration, Catherine Blewett. Beside Catherine is Martin Herschorn, Director of Public Prosecution of the Public Prosecution Service. On my left again is Greg Penny who is the Executive Director of Finance and Administration. He's in charge of the finance for all the departments that I am responsible for, thank God.

 

With the remarks that I have I'm going to let you know what I am responsible for and hopefully have an opportunity to chat and answer any questions you might have, not only with the Department of Justice and the Office of Immigration but also the other responsibilities, which include the Public Prosecution Service, the Human Rights Commission, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Review Office, and the Office of the Police Complaints Commission.

 

At the end of our presentation, whenever that happens to be, whether it's today or tomorrow, I'll be presenting and asking for your approval on six resolutions related to these departments and agencies.

I now want to begin by summarizing what I am responsible for in my role as the Minister of Justice and Attorney General. The Department of Justice is responsible for five adult correctional facilities: in Dartmouth, Antigonish, Amherst, Sydney, and Yarmouth; a sixth adult facility is being built in Pictou County. It also operates two youth facilities, in

Cape Breton and Waterville, and two community-based attendant centres, in Halifax and Waterville.

 

There are 13 justice centres across the province: in Amherst, Antigonish, Bridgewater, Digby, Halifax, Dartmouth, Kentville, Pictou, Port Hawkesbury, Sydney, Truro, and Yarmouth. The department provided admin support to the courts, including the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia - including the Family Division - Provincial Court, Family Court, Small Claims Court, Probate Court, and Bankruptcy Court.

 

There are 11 municipal police forces in Nova Scotia and a total of 875 officers sworn under the Police Act. While municipalities pay for policing, the Department of Justice provides oversight. We also provide oversight for approximately 1,000 RCMP officers. The RCMP are the province's provincial police force for which Justice funds 30 per cent and the federal government funds 70 per cent.

 

Also, in addition to several agencies, boards and commissions, I'm responsible for a number of independent agencies. Three of those I mentioned a few moments ago and will be addressing shortly. The others include the Public Trustee, the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, the Serious Incident Response Team, and the Workers' Compensation Appeals Tribunal.

 

I'd also like to take the opportunity to outline my role as the Attorney General. It is this role that I take very seriously in the Legislature, on the streets, and everywhere I go. The reason is this role makes my position in Cabinet somewhat unique to that of my other Cabinet colleagues. As the Attorney General, I'm a guardian of the public interest. I have a responsibility to see that government's administration and duties are carried out in accordance with the law. I'm also the official legal adviser of government. It is these unique functions that make this Cabinet role unlike that of any other minister or any other lawyer.

 

I'd now like to turn your attention back to the financial picture for 2014-15. Estimates debates have been ongoing for some time and I'm sure you've heard a great deal about the challenges and the economic conditions that face our province. Departments and agencies, to no surprise of anyone around here, have been asked to look very seriously and very hard at reducing and doing more and better with less resources in determining our priorities. We need to critically assess what we're spending on and how we can do things as cost effectively as possible.

 

First, I'll discuss the Department of Justice's budget, followed by the independent agencies I'm responsible for as the Minister of Justice. Then I'll finish by talking about the Department of Immigration.

 

You're all aware that the budget of the Department of Justice increased by over $18 million this year. I'm sure this sounds like a significant increase, particularly since most departments were asked to save 1 per cent, but the budget pressures facing the government made it very challenging to find savings this year. The increase was simply to fund pressures that had been going on for years, and I stress "for years"; these were not new pressures this year or last year but we accounted for them. Those pressures include things like sheriffs in metro Halifax - these positions have been underfunded for years and are necessary to keep our courtrooms safe; relief correctional officers and costs associated with the conversion of correctional officers to the civil service; and running existing correctional facilities and covering increases in heating, electricity, and food.

 

The budget also includes the opening of the new correctional facility, the Northeast Nova Scotia Correctional Facility in Pictou and the operation of the new CyberSCAN unit that was created to investigate incidents of cyberbullying and is available to all Nova Scotians who need help. I believe these are all necessary expenses. These are some of the people, programs, and services that keep our families and communities safe in Nova Scotia.

 

There are also additional costs that are somewhat beyond our control. We were obligated through labour contracts to increases of 2 per cent, 2.5 per cent, and 3 per cent. As a result, the cost of wages and salaries will rise by $4.7 million alone in 2014.

 

I want to assure you that we explored various mitigations, but they were all challenging, and I can tell you I went home several nights in a row crying over some of the things that we were trying to figure out how to do and what to cut. At the end, we decided not to make serious impact on service delivery, and with our serious budget pressures we didn't want a quick fix that would lead to bigger problems down the road.

 

We simply weren't willing to put safety and security in our courtrooms and correctional facilities at risk. Those are environments where risks are inherent to start with and we need to do what we can to mitigate the risks to staff, offenders, and the public.

 

I'll highlight to you some of the reductions that we were able to make. We made almost $1 million in reductions this year. Some of this has been done through internal reductions. We eliminated five positions through attrition and not filling vacancies.

 

The Domestic Violence Court - I think most of you know that this was a pilot court program that was to run for three years out of Sydney. It was supposed to expire at the end of March. We were very lucky to have been able to allow it to continue for one more year, but reducing the budget significantly by finding ways to continue to provide the same level of service with a reduced budget, by using some of the same court facilities that we have in Sydney. We will continue the same level of support in probation, treatment services, legal aid, and public prosecution services.

 

I will ensure that the Department of Justice continues to do its part to look closely at programs and services and help government meet economic and fiscal challenges head-on. That means working closely with staff and partners and across government, thinking critically and having honest conversations about our areas of focus. I know that my deputy minister and all staff have been looking very seriously and trying to focus our attention as much as we can on these items. We are making progress, and I'd be happy to talk to you in questions about anything that you have that surrounds that.

 

One area that we're actually working on now is video conferencing example - actually talked to judges and went to court, and if we use more video conferencing to bring offenders before a judge, we'll save transportation costs and sheriff costs, not to mention the entire process moves more quickly on video conference than it would if we actually brought the offender physically to court. That's just one example that we're looking at doing.

 

Now I'll address what you may have heard about our FTEs at Justice. Our FTEs are up, but again, the increases are driven by the staffing pressures noted earlier. We're receiving FTEs for sheriff positions that were casual or part-time. This has been a long-standing issue since the occupational health and safety ruling several years ago that made an order that we must hire more sheriffs for safety reasons. We're also hiring more correctional officers to staff our new jail in Pictou County.

 

The Northeast Nova Scotia Correctional Facility is a larger facility than the two aging facilities that it will replace. It's creating about 130 jobs for the community and that's almost 90 more than exist today, so it's not only going to be the facility for the two aging facilities that it will replace but we will also be bringing offenders from Dartmouth to it.

 

Our FTE count also includes the investigators for the new CyberSCAN unit that was created to investigate cyberbullying complaints. Again, I believe these increases are non-negotiable and necessary to ensure the safety and security of our courts and correctional facilities and to protect Nova Scotians from the growing problem of cyberbullying.

 

One of the most important things we do at the Department of Justice is keep Nova Scotians safe. To do this there are 1,600 staff who work across the province in our regional offices, courthouses, correctional facilities, and communities as probation officers, victim services caseworkers, and more. There's countless lawyers, judges, police officers, and community groups that are part of the justice system. We work collaboratively with many partners, including the judiciary, the Public Prosecution Service, Nova Scotia Legal Aid, Nova Scotia Barristers' Society, police, community crime prevention organizations, and other community groups. We also work with the federal and municipal government as well as provincial government departments.

Without these partnerships, amazing things like the Mental Health Court in Dartmouth, the Domestic Violence Court in Sydney and the restorative justice, and now our court-monitored drug treatment program that we rolled out yesterday in Kings County would not exist. There's no doubt that the dedication and commitment of all these people, their focus on safety is integral to keeping our cities and our communities and our homes safe. This year we're going to focus on evaluating our specialty court programs, including the Mental Health Court and the Domestic Violence Court, to be sure that they're doing the job of providing better services and supports to people in our justice system with unique needs.

 

Monitoring and evaluating the impact that the Cyber-safety Act is having on the issue of cyber safety, of cyberbullying, and opening our new correctional facility in Pictou County, improving access to justice and continuing to make the system more efficient, client-focused, and cost effective.

 

Access to justice, what does it mean? There's a lot of talk on it between lawyers and judges but what it means is we want Nova Scotians to have access to a justice system that is timely, efficient, and sustainable. I want people to understand the system's processes and how they can access support to help them resolve issues outside the courtroom. Most importantly, I want them to believe and have confidence in their justice system and know that appropriate resources are available to them when they need it.

 

We have to put our public first, we have to work together, we have to educate to prevent, we must make our system efficient and sustainable, we have to take action, and we have to evaluate our performance.

 

We are making positive changes. Sometimes you hear only the negative but I thought it was important that I stress the positive because I'm a person who likes to stress the positive and likes to learn from mistakes and how you can change things and make sure that we do better and improve.

 

Now I'll talk to you about the Public Prosecution Service or the PPS. As you know, I'm also the minister responsible for that agency. The PPS represents the Crown in criminal proceedings. It was established in 1990 under the Public Prosecutions Act as an independent prosecution service - well, it was established as the first independent prosecution service in Canada. It employs 94 Crown Attorneys who handle about 48,000 Criminal Code charges every year.

 

In addition to prosecuting all Criminal Code offences in Nova Scotia, the PPS is responsible for prosecuting some 10,000 violations of provincial Statutes annually. At the end of the day Nova Scotians want to know that people who commit a crime will be held accountable in a court of law. It's important that they understand that the Nova Scotia Public Prosecution Service helps to make that happen.

 

For the last several years the PPS budget has not been sufficient to cover the expenses associated with prosecuting the volume of Criminal Code charges and regulatory offences handled every year. For the last few years we've seen additional appropriations for the PPS to cover operational costs. Last year the PPS budget was increased by $1.2 million to $20.7 million. This year the PPS budget is set at $21.1 million. It's a more realistic budget and will continue to allow the PPS to effectively prosecute Criminal Code charges and provincial regulatory offences.

 

I'm very pleased the PPS received $161,000 in additional funding this year to continue with the electronic disclosure project. This initiative standardizes the format of electronic disclosure coming to the Crown from all police agencies across the province. What it means is that rather than gathering dozens of boxes from police and Crown, you get files on a searchable CD. We're very close to implementing e-disclosure, and this will greatly improve the efficiency of preparing files for court.

 

Briefly on the Human Rights Commission, which is another independent government agency - under the authority of the Act, the commission focuses on two core business functions: resolving complaints of discrimination, and public education and outreach. Reforms have been made to the Human Rights Commission in terms of conducting its affairs. I've met with the current CEO and with some of the staff and we're continuing to work with the commission in consultation with the academics and evaluation experts to evaluate the changes and ensure the commission is serving the people of this province the way it needs to be.

 

The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act is another Act that I'm responsible for and this is an independent arm's-length agency that has mandates under Justice, Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, and Health and Wellness, but it's funded wholly by Justice. The review officer is mandated to oversee all access to information and privacy complaints in the Nova Scotia provincial public sector; access to information complaints in the Nova Scotia municipal public sector; as well as all access to information and privacy complaints relating to personal health information held by health information custodians.

 

Custodians include everything from hospitals to private sector health care practitioners like doctors, dentists, chiropractors, physiotherapists, and optometrists. This is an important role and there's no doubt it's a busy office. In 2013, the review office received 110 reviews and 2,059 inquiries.

 

Finally, the Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner - this is an arm's-length agency as well, but it's funded wholly by the Government of Nova Scotia. Its mandate is to maintain public confidence in our municipal police agencies by delivering judicious, timely, and impartial service to the public and to the police services in Nova Scotia. The office handles allegations of professional misconduct against municipal police officers in Nova Scotia. Allegations by members of the public are overseen by the commission and it also monitors investigations into internal disciplinary matters. The office can also order independent investigations into police misconduct. The commissioner determines whether a hearing before the Police Review Board is warranted and the board has the power to discipline officers with any penalty including dismissal. The decision of the Police Review Board is final. In 2013 calendar year, the office opened 153 files.

 

Now I'll switch and talk a little bit on the Office of Immigration. To me, this office is crucial to our province. This is what makes our Nova Scotia the way it is. It makes it vibrant and the success of our cultural communities is an essential part of the economic future of our province. Quite simply, immigration is important because it helps Nova Scotia's declining population. Working-age people constitute most of the labour force. They're the ones who buy houses, have children, pay a greater part of our tax revenues, but it's also much more than that. It's also cultures and backgrounds, and a place welcoming people of many cultures and backgrounds has a tremendous edge in being able to attract the minds that we need to have the competitive advantage that we need in the province.

 

We need cultural diversity, new ideas, and new traditions which have found their way to Nova Scotia through our immigrants. Nova Scotia has been enriched by immigrants in this province.

 

I feel it's important to emphasize that immigration and economic development go hand in hand. If we wish to attract skilled workers to Nova Scotia we must have good jobs for these workers. Individuals will only be interested in coming to Nova Scotia if there is good and viable employment waiting for them.

 

Here in Nova Scotia we've been fairly consistent over the past number of years in terms of the number of immigrants we have been able to attract. In 2010 we had 2,408 that immigrated to Nova Scotia; in 2011, 2,138 people; in 2012 we had 2,341 people; and in 2013, last year, we had 2,552 immigrants to this province Also of interest might be the 10 source countries, which include the Philippines, India, China, the United Kingdom, Israel, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, and Nigeria.

 

I could tell you that this government is committed to a future that highlights growth and prosperity and it takes the work of all Nova Scotians to make that happen. A cornerstone of our efforts will be a new path forward on immigration. We need more immigrants to come, work, and make their lives in Nova Scotia. Recognizing the importance of immigration, my government has placed a priority on the work of the Office of Immigration - to attract, integrate, and retain immigrants and promote a welcoming culture for immigrants by raising public awareness on immigration and diversity issues. We need to market this province as an attractive immigrant destination and to strengthen immigration and settlement planning, policy, and programming and ensure planning and capacity for the effective delivery of immigrant settlement and integration programming.

 

The Office of Immigration facilitates and promotes a coordinated approach to immigration within the government. It develops advice and provides support to the government in policy, planning, research, and coordination in matters related to immigration and settlement. Last year, in 2013 - and we keep talking about numbers and I thought I would throw in a few numbers here - Nova Scotia nominated 630 people and had a total of 2,552 permanent resident landings. It is important to point out, Madam Chairman, that these numbers are better than what we had seen in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012.

 

To support this work the Nova Scotia Office of Immigration has a budget of approximately $7.5 million. Part of our budget this year will go towards supporting our nominee streams, including the regional labour market demand stream. As an aside, this particular stream that we opened up on March 6^th has had 3,000 applicants who were interested so it's keeping our staff busy and that's a good thing.

 

Another key element of Nova Scotia's renewed approach to immigration includes exploring options for a business stream. Although we're in the preliminary stages, I know the development of such a stream will benefit our immigration efforts.

 

Another important area for Nova Scotia is the linkage with international graduates who are ideal candidates for immigration to our province. We have more than 7,000 international students from more than 100 countries studying here. We need to ensure that they see Nova Scotia as a viable option to live and work. To that end, I'm looking at options under the provincial Nominee Program for a new stream, focused on international students who can demonstrate the ability to attach to the labour market.

 

While immigration is a federal responsibility, its impacts hit much closer to home, making it a provincial concern. I wish to emphasize that we must work with the business community to convince Ottawa to lift our immigration cap and work with us to break down other obstacles to immigration. I also understand building networks is essential for immigrants. We'll keep the doors open for future international business opportunities by beginning the creation of an international alumni connector program. This network will keep us in touch with the 6,300 international students that attend our universities annually. By creating ConnectNS to network with Nova Scotians who have moved out of the province to study or for employment, this will open the door for future business and recruitment opportunities. I'm excited to see work on these projects begin.

 

It's worth noting that during my first four months as Immigration Minister I made it a point to meet with a wide variety of stakeholders. I had the benefit of receiving different perspectives on immigration from organizations, businesses, economic leaders, Nova Scotia's honorary consul community, and university presidents as well. I look forward to further productive dialogue with all these individuals.

 

I do want to stress though that under Canada's Constitution, responsibility for immigration is shared between the federal and provincial and territorial governments, but I must emphasize that the federal legislation is paramount. The federal government holds the lion's share of the decision making and responsibility and largely sets immigration policy.

 

Through the Nova Scotia Nominee Program, our province can nominate potential immigrants, but Citizenship and Immigration Canada makes the final decision. The federal government also determines how many immigrants each province can attract through its nominee program. I want to assure you that Nova Scotia will continue to work collaboratively with the federal government on all aspects of immigration growth. To that end I've met with Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander on three occasions so far after taking over this portfolio. I expressed my government's commitment to immigration and to our desire to work together with the Government of Canada to boost immigration in Nova Scotia. It was a productive meeting and one I hope signals a positive way ahead.

 

The Nova Scotia Nominee Program - as I just explained, there's both provincial and federal responsibility that go toward attracting and attaining new immigrants. People can become citizens of Canada through a number of different federal government streams. I believe this is one thing that seems to be missing in terms of people understanding that. So from the provincial perspective, Nova Scotia is permitted to nominate foreign nationals who meet the labour market and economic needs of the province and intend to settle in Nova Scotia. This is the Nominee Program and this program allows the Government of Nova Scotia to recruit and select immigrants who intend to settle in this province, but they must have the skills, education, and work experience needed to make an immediate contribution to our labour market.

 

Once Nova Scotia has nominated a particular individual, the Government of Canada makes the final decision on admissibility after doing the health, security, and criminality checks. It's important to note that all people applying under the Nova Scotia Nominee Program need to meet minimum requirements. They need to be of working age - 21 to 55 - and they need to have a minimum education level equivalent to Canadian high school. This is consistent across all three of our immigration streams.

 

Any person wishing to settle in Nova Scotia needs to have the ability to speak, understand, read, and write either English or French. They need to have qualifications and experience to do the job that they are applying for and they need to have sincere intention and ability to permanently reside in Nova Scotia.

 

Once the person has decided they want to live and work permanently in Nova Scotia they can apply to one of our three different Nominee Program streams: the skilled worker stream, the family business worker stream, and the regional labour market demand stream. If you want I can explain them now, or if you have questions later on then I can tell you what they are later. (Interruption) Okay.

 

In my conclusion, I want to thank all the individuals and organizations who have worked with me for the last six months and who are helping Nova Scotians across the province in both my Justice and Immigration portfolios. I look for the opportunity for you now to ask me whatever questions are on your mind. I will attempt to do the best I can to answer what you would like to ask, and those that I have no answers for I will endeavour to provide them to you at a later time. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Sydney River-Myra- Louisbourg. We have approximately 33 minutes left before we have to end estimates today.

 

HON. ALFIE MACLEOD: Thank you, Madam Chairman. My first question to the minister is, how many minutes do you need to wrap it up at the end?

 

MS. DIAB: There are six resolutions to read for approval.

 

MR. MACLEOD: So we have about three minutes for questions. I'm just kidding. (Laughter) First, I want to thank you for that opening and welcome you and your staff today to estimates. I know it's a new experience for you and we're going to try to be as gentle as possible, starting out.

 

One of the things you talked about, especially in Justice, was looking at ways of saving money and doing the video conferencing for trials and those types of things. One of the things I think has been of great interest to our caucus over the years is that too many offenders thumb their noses at the court-ordered conditions. Ankle bracelets are one of those things that we have a lot of questions about. I sort of see my questions as a bunch of short-snappers, and hopefully we'll be able to get through a lot of them.

 

The first question, Madam Chairman, through you is how many offenders are being monitored by electronic ankle bracelets at this time?

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, between 30 and 35 with bracelets are being monitored at this time and a lot more with voice monitoring. So there's the ankle bracelets and then there's - we have more than just ankle bracelets.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, how many offenders are waiting for electronic monitoring devices, besides those 30 to 35? How many are out there?

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, zero are waiting. It's a constant turnaround process.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, how many devices are available for the monitoring programs?

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, 35. People come on and people go off so it's constantly shifting, so it's not the same person who is on all the time.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Thank you for that, Madam Chairman. You said earlier you had 35 people who were on ankle bracelets and then you also said you have people who are on voice monitoring and other different types of devices. So in total, all the devices that are available are just 35? Is that ankle bracelets and voice - that's what I'd like to know. How many devices are available and what types are they?

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, we have 120 voice monitoring devices and 35 ankle bracelets.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, could you tell us what is the cost for electronic monitoring of offenders? I'm guessing that there's a different cost for ankle bracelets versus voice monitoring, so if there's a different price I'd like to have both, please.

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, for the GPS device - that's the ankle bracelet - it's $13.85 a day, and for the voice verification it's 89 cents per call.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, the Liberal Party has criticized the NDP cutbacks to the ankle bracelet program as short-sighted. Are there plans to reverse the 2011 cutbacks by the former government?

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, there was no cutback. The program you're referring to was implemented for a specific period of time. When it was assessed by the department, the assessment and evaluation came back that it was not being utilized, so it was not continued.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, we'll move on then to the bail supervision program that was also eliminated in 2011. Since offenders out on bail are no longer being monitored electronically, how often are they visited by Justice officials while they're awaiting trial?

 

MS. DIAB: Again, the bail supervision program was a pilot program with the electronic monitoring for those who were out on bail in the Halifax area. Again, when it was assessed, it was deemed not to be cost effective to continue when the courts used it so infrequently. Therefore, when the program's term ended, it simply was not renewed.

 

I'm sorry, Madam Chairman - what was the other part of that question?

 

MR. MACLEOD: Well I guess my next question, Madam Chairman, would be is if, indeed, that program has been cancelled because it wasn't being utilized, how are people on bail monitored while they're waiting to go to trial? How do you monitor them?

 

MS. DIAB: When people are out on bail, it's a case-by-case basis because each offender has specific provisions in their release, so depending on what their release says, they're either monitored by probation officers or police. It really depends; it's case-by-case and what the court ordered in their release.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, there must be a minimum standard of monitoring people when they're out on bail because if they have been charged with an offence and they're still innocent until proven guilty, I understand that, but how does the department monitor who is where and where they are in the system if there's no follow-up?

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, there's nothing in the Criminal Code or any regulatory Statute that gives you a minimum or a maximum or anything to do with that. It's very much according to the judge and what the court probation officer - they may have given recommendations to the court or to the solicitors involved. That's pretty much what it is. I've been in courts and I've seen some of those. It's not mandated, there's nothing in writing in any document that specifically says what has to happen, so it's very much case by case when you're in court.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Well I haven't been in court, on either side of the bench, which is a good thing, but I am very curious if somebody is put on bail as to how the follow-up is to know that they're doing what they're supposed to be doing on bail and they're going to show up when they're supposed to show up. It goes back to my initial belief that most offenders just thumb their noses at what conditions are ordered to them by the court, so there must be some way of looking at or monitoring or keeping a way of like - and again, I'm not trying to be hard to get along with, I am trying to understand the process.

 

MS. DIAB: Each offender is assigned a probation officer and there are conditions when they meet the probation officer that they have to meet. Now having talked to probation officers in the past life, it depends on what the offence is. They determine, in terms of whether you're supposed to report weekly to a specific office - I don't know if the probation officer would see them in their home or they would call them on the phone. It's very much a case-by-case approach.

 

MR. MACLEOD: That being the case, do we have any idea how long offenders are typically out on bail before they go to trial?

 

MS. DIAB: The answer is no. There are no specific deadlines or limitations or anything of that nature whatsoever. When you're talking courts and what you're talking about, it's very much a case-by-case basis between the offender, their solicitor, the Crown, the judge, whatever happens in that courtroom.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'd like to remind the minister and the members to direct all statements through the Chair so if we can avoid using terms like "you" or "your office" that would be awesome.

 

The honourable member for Sydney River-Mira-Louisbourg has the floor.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I must say that it's kind of hard to adjust after the last 10 years of doing it one way and then in the last hour trying to change it around, so you'll have to bear with us.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: As I said earlier to the committee members, I understand that it is very tempting to have an informal discussion, but again I have to abide by the Speaker's ruling on this.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Maybe we'll just switch to another area because time is marching on. If I could, I just wonder how big an issue firearm-related violence is in Nova Scotia. How does the department see that?

 

MS. DIAB: You said "firearm" - do you mean guns? Madam Chairman, is that what that means? (Interruption) I mean that seriously because actually I was asked the same question in the House today and by the media yesterday when the stats were released on gun violence, and my answer to you will be the same as I answered in the House this afternoon as well as when I answered to the media yesterday.

 

Gun violence is serious, specifically in Nova Scotia - it's alarming. We have a serious problem, particularly in the Halifax area, and that's why we have worked as hard as we have to bring CeaseFire to the Halifax area. It's the first jurisdiction in Canada to offer that program and we secured $2.1 million in federal funding for that program that was announced two weeks ago in Dartmouth.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Halifax is recorded as having the highest rate of firearms related among the CMAs for the second straight year. Now this is a problem that is continuing. What is the Minister of Justice going to do besides bringing this committee, what other steps are planned to help address this problem?

 

MS. DIAB: I noted Chief Blais commented in the media yesterday that it has actually gone down, not up, within the last year so that's a good-news story. Justice is working very, very, very, very hard with our police partners in trying to combat gun violence and everything else to do with public safety. At the end of the day, policing is - we're working together and we are continuing to work together on these issues.

 

MR. MACLEOD: It is a very serious issue, and I'm just wondering what extra tools or resources the minister is providing to HRM police that will give law-abiding Haligonians more confidence as to their safety in their community and how much priority you put on the safety of the residents here in HRM.

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, I'm happy to report that actually we're doing many wonderful things, some of which includes working with our departments like Education, Health and Wellness, and Community Services. We're also working tremendously with our community organizations across the province in crime prevention. In fact we presented awards and hosted a conference here about two weeks ago. It was attended by so many tremendous people who are all working to ensure that we reduce these crimes.

 

I also spoke to Halifax Regional Police and to the RCMP through their integrated police service, who actually are just starting what is called a hub model in three areas of the city that will bring various stakeholders together in a community-based location to address issues of violence and crime. They're bringing all of the players in location in three areas in HRM.

 

There's a lot of work and a lot of planning that is being done to ensure that crime and violence is reduced.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Hand guns seem to be more prevalent around HRM but not only around HRM - more and more crimes that you see in other parts of the province seem to have guns involved with them. Just yesterday there was an incident in Sydney where the local mall had to be shut down because of somebody being spotted with guns.

 

We hear incidents of home invasions and we hear of all kinds of different issues that are getting more and more violent. I respectfully say to you that three help lines in Halifax is probably not going to help solve this problem and that somehow along the way, collectively, we have to get a little bit more focused on this issue.

 

I know it's a hard issue to deal with and I certainly don't know how to deal with it myself. I just know that times when people felt safe they could walk on their streets in their communities, there's less and less of that going on. It's not just in HRM anymore, when you go to surrounding communities and further away, still people are concerned now about walking on the streets and they're concerned about the violent actions of individuals that are brought on by many things. It could be the economy and the fact that there's no jobs, or it could be the drug issue.

 

I'm just wondering what kind of an overall strategy the department is looking at for the province when it comes to dealing with the issue of people using firearms for illegal purposes.

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, I think the honourable member said "help model" - it's the hub model, so it's not a telephone; it's actually bringing all social services players together to deal with high-risk youth and their families, to get to the root of the problem. It's dealing with the situation on the front end, before there are any issues, to help these high-risk youth and their families.

 

CeaseFire, I guess, is catching them on the other end, so there's a lot of work happening in this province.

 

MR. MACLEOD: I would never challenge you on the amount of work that's being tackled in the province. We have a lot of good people involved in the justice system and we have a lot of very professional law enforcement officers.

 

My question to you is the hub - and I was having trouble hearing you so I apologize for that - but the hub lines that you talked about, where are they located? The CeaseFire process that you talked about, where is that located? Are they just in the HRM? If that's the case, what are we going to do in the rest of the province to help address this very serious issue?

 

MS. DIAB: CeaseFire is in three locations in HRM. As I said to you, we secured $2.1 million in federal funding so they obviously had a stake in where this goes. They studied all of Canada, I guess, and we were picked because we have a problem. We know we have a problem and we're trying to address that problem.

 

Now in terms of what else we're doing, let me give you a few examples. Correctional Services and Community Corrections are starting a youth services initiative in Cape Breton. Advertising and appointing a forensic case manager is near completion and the case manager is going to provide direct service to Correctional Services. This was realized through part de-funding of the youth criminal justice.

 

The youth services initiative will provide Cape Breton youth with immediate mental health and addiction intervention, with a dedicated forensic case manager. The youth services initiative is in the process of advertising for a teacher to provide dedicated services to youth who are not attending school or are at risk of being dismissed from school.

 

The youth services initiative will continue to enhance collaborative efforts between Community Corrections, Access 808 - which is a hub service delivery model, with a co-location for a variety of community-based services; Island Community Justice Society; Education; Health and Wellness; the Department of Community Services; and police. There are currently 86 youths subject to court-ordered supervision in Cape Breton.

 

The youth services initiative will also provide youth and their families with evidence-based programming through a collaborative approach, utilizing enhanced partnership within the community. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, I guess the way I put this is like it's a good start but there's a lot more that needs to be done. I think places like Cape North - and your deputy would be familiar with that - you all know some of the challenges that have arisen in those types of areas where there's minimum police services, there's minimum services that you talk about, and yet gun play seems to be something that we hear and see a lot more of lately.

 

Again, respectfully, I'm trying to get a handle on how we protect those citizens the same way we protect the citizens in the areas where there's high population, because there's no life that's not valuable. I'm not suggesting that you said there is, but there is no life that's not valuable and yet those parts of our province need to have some kind of reassurance as well. I wonder, through you, Madam Chairman, if the minister has any thoughts on that.

 

MS. DIAB: Madam Chairman, on Cape North itself, Justice has provided funding to help with the crime prevention in that area as well.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Again, Madam Chairman, I'm not disputing that they've supplied funding but how effective has it been? The question is that it's not about just giving money, it's what the net effect has been at the end of the day - has the violence in that area gone down? Is it better than it was before? Is it the same or is it escalating? That's the question.

 

Just because we put funding in place at any given challenge doesn't necessarily mean that the problem is not there and it's not getting worse. My question really is, because the funding went there, has that improved the statistics or the numbers in that area or is there still a decline going on - or an increase going on I should say - in the type of violent crimes that have taken place in that area? It's about trying to get a handle on - like even though we're putting money into the system, what's the end net effect, a positive effect or negative effect? If the money is not working, Madam Chairman, then maybe we find a different approach.

 

MS. DIAB: A couple of different answers. We also are providing 152 additional officers to all police agencies across Nova Scotia - so you're quite right, providing funding, providing additional police, we have the CeaseFire that we've now started in the Halifax-Dartmouth area, we have the hub model, and these are all new initiatives that are very much new to Canada, not just Nova Scotia.

 

We are all thinking outside the box, because you're right - what we've been doing in the past hasn't worked well enough so we have to do things better.

 

I believe one way that we can also do things better is through our education system, through our schools, through our teachers, through our homes, through our parents, through our grandparents, and through our social networks. This is not a government-only problem and it's not a government-only solution. This is a problem we all face collectively in this province, and if we're going to fix it or at least make it better, we need all the players to be working together.

 

What I've been doing since I've been in this position for the last number of months is the co-operation that I've seen from regional police, from RCMP, from school people, whether they are principals or university presidents, from community organizations, from justice centres, from the judiciary - for goodness sake, I've never seen in my life that judiciary would come to a public announcement, as the Chief Judge did yesterday morning, because they, too, are concerned, they see what's happening in their court system.

 

We're building more jails because we have more people and we don't have room for them. So yes, we definitely have a problem and we all have to help in solving the problem. It's not a problem that the Justice Department alone is going to be able to fix - everybody has to be part of the solution.

I'm seeing a lot of positives. Is it going to get fixed next year or the year after? I don't know, but I think we're going to see improvements. Again, if anybody has any suggestions, it doesn't matter who they are or what suggestions they have, or what organization they come from, our doors are open.

 

MR. MACLEOD: Madam Chairman, I know the time is winding down, but two things I'd like to say - again, I have more understanding and experience of what's going on in Cape Breton than I do here in Halifax, I don't seem to be here a lot, I just wanted to point out that I think we have one of the finest police services in all of Nova Scotia and probably in eastern Canada in Sydney with the Cape Breton Regional Police Service.

 

Thinking outside the box, I'm just wondering, the puppies for prisoners program - how effective has it been and what's the cost of that? If we're putting them in jail then we've got to try to help them to be able to adjust to get back out.

 

I wonder, Madam Chairman, if we could just run through that and that will be our last question today.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: And it's my understanding that both caucuses are now finished the questioning for this minister, so, minister, if you wouldn't mind answering the honourable member's question and then we'll go into your motion.

 

MS. DIAB: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I have two comments on the last question.

 

First, I agree with you, I actually met your Chief of Police in Sydney. He took me on a tour of the facility and took me down to the basement - I'd tell you the stuff I saw but we don't have a lot of time here - he took me to the basement where he actually introduced me to all the staff there. He thanked me and at the time I wasn't 100 per cent sure why, but I found out - for the e-disclosure that I talked about in my statements here that we got funding for, because it has benefited him and his staff tremendously.

 

He brought this little thing, and I'm not a computer whiz by any means, this little CD disc, whatever, and he says to me, thank you. I said, what's this for? He said that we used to take boxes and boxes and do copying and everything else. This thing here has saved us a lot of money and a lot of time and that's the e-disclosure I spoke about, so that's one thing we're hoping to implement all over Nova Scotia because it hasn't gone through the whole province yet. That's one statement.

 

The second thing I think you were talking about was the WOOF Program. Okay, I visited the correctional facility in Dartmouth first-hand. I went in and saw the offenders with my own eyes, handling those little puppies. Had I not seen them, I probably would have been scared to go near some of the offenders there. I saw the difference it was making because it was actually teaching them skills that I may not even have.

 

In terms of costs, I'm told $60,000. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E13 stand?

 

Resolution E13 stands.

 

Resolution E22 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $565,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the FOIPOP Review Office, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

Resolution E24 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $2,509,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Human Rights Commission, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

Resolution E28 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $432,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Nova Scotia Police Complaints Commissioner, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

Resolution E31 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $7,588,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Office of Immigration, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

Resolution E34 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $21,137,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Public Prosecution Service, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Shall the resolutions carry?

 

The resolutions are carried.

 

Before we adjourn, I have one question; is the Office of the Ombudsman under your purview, minister?

 

MS. DIAB: Not the dollar amount.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: All right, thank you. I thank the minister and her department and members of the committee.

 

We are adjourned for the day and we'll meet again tomorrow.

 

[The subcommittee adjourned at 5:55 p.m.]