HALIFAX, MONDAY, APRIL 13, 2015

 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON SUPPLY

 

5:04 P.M.

 

CHAIRMAN

Ms. Patricia Arab

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. We have before us the estimates of the Department of Communities, Culture and Heritage.

 

            We finished off questioning - time elapsed before your hour was complete, so I'm going to bring the questioning back to you. You have 11 minutes remaining in your hour.

 

The honourable member for Chester-St. Margaret's.

 

            HON. DENISE PETERSON-RAFUSE: After the 11 minutes, if the Progressive Conservatives do not continue, then I get another hour, is that correct?

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'll have to check on that.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I believe that's the way it . . .

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: We'll focus on this first 11 minutes.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Thank you very much. On Friday we were talking about the Special Places Protection Act. I want to revisit that, I have a few more questions about it. What I'm asking is - I know that there has been work by your department for a number of years to make changes to that Act. Can you tell me how many years they've been working on changing that particular Act?

 

            HON. TONY INCE: Well, there have been several changes within the Act over the past number of years and we are currently looking at the changes again but they're going to be with consultations. As you might recall, I mentioned on Friday that there is going to be a consultation process, so we'll have to wait until that consultation process.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I know when you're looking at changing legislation, once it's open, once you open legislation, it can be challenging to just change one area because it's open for entire changing of that legislation. So I'm wondering, what areas of the Special Places Protection Act are you looking to change because you said it had changed over the years? Can you tell me two things: what has been changed over the last - how many years have the changes been taking place, I guess, like has it been over the last three years or five years, and when were those brought to the floor of the House to change; and what are you looking at specifically to change with the next presentation in the House, are you looking at a total change or are you just looking at specific areas of the Act?

 

            MR. INCE: Currently, as I've mentioned, we're going to be working on a plan, so I can't give you any specifics with regard to your question about those changes and what changes we're going to be making most currently. The Act itself - and I will look at the dates - since I've been involved in the department, no changes have come to the Act. The changes that happened prior, I can get you those details and when it was brought to the floor but currently, as I said, we are looking at having consultations and those consultations will help us look at some of the changes. If you would like the details around what we're looking at, we will pull that together once we start the consultation process and provide you that information. Is that okay with you?

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Yes. Can you provide me with what the framework of the consultation is going to look like, because on Friday you had said that the legislation would be ready for the Fall of 2015? Being in the position of a former minister, I kind of know how it works in terms of how far ahead you have to develop a framework for a consultation process and who would be identified in that process that you would be speaking with. Who is going to be speaking with those individuals? How is that consultation going to be taking place? Are you travelling the province and talking to archeologists? Are you talking to the Aboriginal community? Are you talking to community members? How is that framework going to be, could you explain that?

 

            MR. INCE: Well, what I can do, as I mentioned, we are just in the beginning stages of all that so the minute that we have that all worked out - no, let me backtrack a bit, not the minute, but when we have that worked out I will provide you some of those details.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: So do you believe that you will be able to say 100 per cent that the legislation will be brought to the floor of the House this Fall, in 2015? Because I know the consultation process, just even organizing that takes a bit of time so I know that you were basically guaranteeing it would be brought to the House in the Fall. Can you tell me if that is feasible, you will be bringing it to the floor of the House in the Fall?

 

            MR. INCE: What I will tell you is that I can't commit to an exact time in the Fall. I think I may have said - and I stand to be corrected - that it was our intent to bring it in this Fall, and based on the consultation process and how we work it all out, I'll make sure that you've gotten the information once we start to work it out.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: My concern is, I brought to your attention that there is supposed to be an advisory committee and that committee hasn't been together since the 1990s. We have issues within the province and that's quite a long time going without that committee. I've been asking about it and nobody seems to know about it. I think it's because it hasn't met since 1990. I do know things change all the time and maybe people didn't feel it was warranted to have the committee operational three or four years ago.

 

I know even the issue surrounding Oak Island, it seems to me that that would be a very good reason for that committee to now be brought together because we're dealing with an issue about definitions of treasure versus heritage objects, we're dealing with issues of the Oak Island Treasure Act where it is under DNR, which is mining and having the whole philosophy of mining, and that's how the licensee is operating, under mining criteria rather than under protection criteria. There are a lot of issues swirling around, as you know, and so I'm wondering, in the meantime, because it takes a long time to do consultation and it takes a long time to get the legislation together and instead of saying we're working on it, can you not, as the minister, call that committee to come together?

 

            MR. INCE: First of all, it is an advisory committee to the minister. I would suggest - let me leave this with you. I will go back to my department and have discussions with my department around this particular ask that you've just put forward here, and we'll be able to come back and I can give you some update on what it is we are looking at planning on doing. Is that satisfactory for you?

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Well, being in Opposition, you know that nothing is satisfactory. It's such a pertinent issue right now, as you can understand. I will say that you've been very, very good to me in terms of understanding the urgency of the fact that each and every Spring and summer and early Fall that goes by, there's more, I would say, mining activity taking place on Oak Island rather than it being proceeded in the way that it should under an archeological basis. As I've expressed to you, I know that if you talk to archeologists, some do not see Oak Island, in particular, as a place of protection just because there has been such a free-for-all for many, many years so there's a feeling that there has been so much in terms of the searching not being appropriate for what archeologists would find.

 

My point being is that they're actually now searching in areas that I would say are virgin areas that have never been searched before, like in the swamp and so forth, so it's more imperative than ever . . .

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I have to stop you, your time has lapsed for this.

 

            The honourable member for Hants West.

 

            MR. CHUCK PORTER: Thank you, I'm pleased to have a few minutes. I just have a couple of questions for the minister, and I appreciate the opportunity and the Opposition giving me a few minutes this afternoon.

 

            Minister, we talked briefly on Friday after I realized that your department has taken over a part of what was Economic and Rural Department and Tourism, part of that file that would have dealt with rural economic development, is that correct? I just want to clarify that.

 

            MR. INCE: Yes, to a small degree.

 

            MR. PORTER: Great. As you're aware we had submitted a project to Economic and Rural Development for consideration which was a new birthplace of hockey arena in the Town of Windsor and had presented actually to the government back a while ago. This project already has $3 million that we come with; the Town of Windsor, the Municipality of West Hants, and King's-Edgehill School are actually all putting up $1 million for this. Basically we're really wondering, time being of the essence on this, as I know every project is, can you enlighten me on the status of this project at all with regard to spending and budget? You're just taking over this department now, I appreciate that it's early days.

 

            MR. INCE: First of all I'm going to tell you, the birthplace of hockey, I like it.

 

            MR. PORTER: I'm glad to hear that.

 

            MR. INCE: I will tell you though that we have to look at a number of the projects and where it is in the queue and all those things. I can't give you any status at this moment on that particular project, I have to go back and talk to staff and find out some more details around it and where it sits.

 

            MR. PORTER: I appreciate the fact that you've just taken this on and there's a lot going on, I'm not doubting that at all. I guess our biggest issue really, even more in question than a yes or no, is time frame - you know, are we looking at a couple weeks, six months? The reason I'm really pressing that issue is those stakeholders like Kings-Edgehill who have put $1 million up, we've just had a collapse of an arena in Brooklyn, our other arena, which is now down. We may quite potentially be at risk of having none come Fall as Windsor is in pretty bad shape. The floor and things are really rough there and we're stacking it up with newspaper, actually, to help try to level it out, that's how desperate the situation is.

 

            This project as well, if you're familiar with it at all, really is more than just an ice surface, this project is really a vision for all of Nova Scotia, for Windsor, West Hants, and the province by way of a huge economic driver. We see this as the "Cooperstown north" model in all honesty and signs at the gateway, wherever you come into the province: make sure you come; there's lots to see and do, et cetera.

 

            Kings-Edgehill, being who they are, hockey is a big part of their business; they have five teams that they'll have next year. Of course, like any business, they use that as a huge draw to bring students to their school. This is vitally important to them, as it is to the town and the municipality and all of our hockey people and rink users - not just hockey, but everything from broomball to figure skating, et cetera. I don't need to explain all that to you.

 

            So what it really comes down to, is there anything that you can say by way of time frame for an announcement, even if it's a no, we're all big boys and girls in the game, we just need to know so we can move on to the next phase, minister, is really what it comes down to and time, like I said, is really of the essence. I'm not pressing you today for a yes or no but I'm curious if you can give me some indication of what we're looking at, again realizing you've just taken this file on, staff have to look at things, I appreciate all of that. But it's really the urgency of this just so we can decide what's next with regard to the project.

 

            MR. INCE: I'm going to mention to you that as soon as we finish up here with estimates and I can get my staff back we'll look into it, they'll look into everything. I would suggest to you, and I'm going on record in saying this right now, give your folks that idea that in weeks - I wouldn't say months but weeks - probably a number of weeks before we can take a look at things and get back to you. I hope that helps you.

 

            MR. PORTER: Very much so and I appreciate that. Minister, and to your staff, I'm not going to tie you up any more than that this afternoon, so I appreciate the opportunity. Thank you very much.

 

            MR. INCE: Thank you.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou East.

 

            MR. TIM HOUSTON: Thank you. I would like to go back to talk about a program that we spoke about briefly last week and it's called the Operating Assistance to Cultural Organizations. Are you familiar with that program?

 

            MR. INCE: I am.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: That's a program that I think has a budget of roughly $500,000. Can you tell me how many cultural organizations participate in that program?

 

            MR. INCE: Give me about a minute and I'll be able to give you that.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Sure, just ballpark, how many organizations are in that program?

 

            MR. INCE: There are 61.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Thank you. Is the total amount roughly $500,000?

 

            MR. INCE: Yes, approximately that amount.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: My understanding is that organizations would apply to this program and they would apply to an independent panel that assesses the applications? Is that roughly the way it works?

 

            MR. INCE: That's correct. The external panel reviews the applications and then makes the decisions.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: The external panel will score the applications based on some criteria?

 

            MR. INCE: That's correct.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Is it true that once you're in, you're kind of in, you're favoured to stay in unless the panel adjudicating the applications somehow penalizes your application or unless they cut you altogether? My understanding is it's pretty rare for those 61 organizations, there's not much turnover in those 61 organizations. Is that a fair statement?

 

            MR. INCE: It's done on an annual basis. There might be something to what you're saying in terms of if you're in, you're in. It's difficult for us to really determine right now because it's done on an annual basis, that panel will look at many different criteria and I'm not sure to be honest with you at this point what would, to your words, penalize someone and give another group the opportunity to get in there.

 

            MR. HOUSTON: Okay, thank you for that answer. I guess the thought I'll just leave you with is to maybe just check to see if it is stand-alone on each year, or each application stands on its own, or if there is a benefit to being in there. Obviously there are lots of organizations and events that would like to be in there, so if it's the case that it either needs more money to open up to new applicants or reviewing each application on its own merits each year, that's just kind of how I'd like to try to get my head around that. I'll leave that with you to maybe see if you can find some information on that, where that program is going and come back to me.

 

            MR. INCE: Is there one group in particular that you were interested in, because I can find out where they are?

 

            MR. HOUSTON: No, I think I'd stick to the general because there's a couple of groups that have approached me about this, just wondering. They've applied a couple of years in a row, can't make any headway, and they're the ones who kind of brought it to my attention that they'll never make headway unless either the program expands and gets more money or unless somebody drops out. I just didn't know if the way they were relaying it to me was actually the case and that's why I thought I'd go right to the source.

 

            Thank you, I'm good.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Chester-St. Margaret's.

 

            HON. DENISE PETERSON-RAFUSE: I'm going to return to the curse of Oak Island, okay, for a little bit more. I think it will give me an opportunity to express the interest in Oak Island, and what we have lost in terms of opportunities in the province. My passion for it has not been to stop the treasure-seeking, I understand the desire with regard to that and investments that have been made, it's to ensure that the treasure-seeking, the licensees, are actually following the Special Places Protection Act, not under a mining licensee, right? There's quite a difference in what they can and cannot do.

 

            I think that's the very important thing, that the province takes control over the fact that anything that is found becomes the property of the province until they define whether it's an item that needs to stay here or it's an item that the treasure-seeker or the licensee owns.

 

            As you know, there is a lot of controversy, too, between those definitions. It's not an easy thing to come to terms with, with regard to, say, if a goblet had been found with rubies on it that it would have been manipulated by man. The fact is that it would be presently the treasurer or the licensees who could walk away with that. That would be the same as if there was an Aboriginal spear found on the island, because of the fact that it would have been manipulated by man.

 

            We truly as a province need to have a better definition. I know that it's a great deal of work to go forward. One of the things that as a person who has grown up in the community of Chester and has been very aware of Oak Island and I've actually - my family were friends of the gentleman and the son who died on Oak Island. So a lot of people have invested their lives, they have invested a lot of money.

 

            There are a lot of opportunities with Oak Island on an economic basis provincially. That's what I'm trying to work with you to make your government aware of that and the public aware of the fact that there's an interest around this world on Oak Island, as you saw when I first introduced the Private Member's Bill, you were receiving emails from Norway, Sweden, and England.

 

Sometimes we don't appreciate what we actually have in our own backyards. I believe that's the fact with Oak Island - it's not so much about whether there's actually really, truly a treasure there or whether there is an historical artifact from Shakespearian times, it's about the fact that there's a story to be told, that there's an interest from all around the world that would create economic and tourism opportunities for Nova Scotia and for the surrounding communities in that area.

           

The story of the search for a potential treasure on that island is a huge story in itself that we should be telling people. They take opportunities in other parts of the world. I know that in Holland, what they're doing now, it's a fish hatchery that they're actually developing, and with the fish hatchery they're making visuals like when you go to an aquarium and you can go see the fish. This is what they're doing with this fish hatchery so people can see how the fish travel and where they spawn and so forth, so you can go look through these windows. This is just about fish, and it's a huge thing that their country is investing in to bring tourists there to be able to see how this works and with the dikes and so forth.

 

            I think we've really underestimated the opportunity for Oak Island in terms of telling this story about those individuals who gave up their lives to try to find that treasure, tell the story about the many people who have been investors, famous people who have been involved with Oak Island over the years who have had an interest. As you know, there are many authors. I've had authors from throughout the world contact me and say, I really support what you're doing because you're trying to draw attention to Oak Island and make sure that we preserve, for generations to come, a story to be told.

 

            We've really ignored that in the province over the years. That's why when it came to my attention, again around 2013, that there are other theories there - I had no idea about the Shakespearean theory until I met the gentleman from Norway who was doing his film debut in Chester. His theory is the theory that took the searchers to the swamp. That's Petter, I've referred to his name before. That's when it was sort of an "aha" moment to me - well, maybe there's something there, but if there isn't, we still could tell the story - and that's how Petter feels.

 

            Even though he's the gentleman who has come up with the Shakespearean theory, he looks at our province and says to me, why are we just ignoring a huge opportunity in terms of culture and heritage? That's why I've been so passionate about it and that's why I'm trying to explain it to you because I really believe what I said on Friday - that your heart's in the right place and you really believe in what we have in this province and that we should be singing it out to the world.

 

            It would be fabulous to look at - and not just Oak Island, but around that area. As you're probably aware, there are a lot of shipwrecks and there is the opportunity to bring in diving tourism. It's huge in the world, and to bring it into our communities, I think this all goes hand in hand with the Ivany report. To be able to take resources - because the major theme that I got from that report is that there's no magic bullet out there. What we have to do is look at what we've got already and realize what we have: a real opportunity if we do it right.

 

            I think that Oak Island is part of that and that we could work with those who are still there searching for the treasure. It just has to have some kind of protection framework around it. It's in no way trying to stop it, but it's trying to make sure that we are protected and we take that opportunity to expand on culture and tourism. As you know, people travel around the world to come and see things like that, especially where we've had the TV series that has drawn a lot of attention to Oak Island, but now when they visit we really have very little to offer them.

 

            There's a little museum there that they're just trying to put together, but that's not even a huge museum. It's not open all the time. We're missing many opportunities where we could all come together in a very restorative and collaborative manner and start to do some strategic economic planning. That's why I have been pretty passionate about it. It's not about a silly treasure or anything of that nature. What it is about is an opportunity that we're missing in this province that maybe moves Oak Island to be a heritage site someday.

 

            There's so much to talk about with that particular island and Mahone Bay, the story of the Young Teazer burning, all of that, and there are many stories there. What we keep doing is we think that there's something that we have to create to tell a story about, and that's a little sad because we already have it, we're very fortunate. People see that in other parts of the world, but for some reason we don't see that - and that has been over many different governments that haven't seemed to realize that.

 

I think as the MLA for the constituency and my history in coming from those communities, that's why I'm so passionate about trying to get some protection and working with you in trying to move things out of DNR - it just does not make sense that it would be under a mining licence. There are environmental ramifications, too, that we have to make sure with regard to the swamp area because they have to have an environmental permit to drain the swamp. There's only a certain amount of water that they're allowed to leave there; it has been drained dry a couple of times. We need to take control of all of those things.

 

I just wanted to make it clear that I think we really have an opportunity here and many over the years have missed that opportunity, but I see in you a genuine interest and that's why I wanted to bring it up again today. With the Special Places Protection Act, you mentioned on Friday that you did have some conversations with the Mi'kmaq community. Can you tell me who you spoke with, who you have been consulting or speaking with?

 

            MR. INCE: Thank you. First of all, just to back up, those conversations weren't truly official conversations, they were conversations with parties when I've gone to - I was in Millbrook at a conference and that was brought up briefly. That was the nature of those conversations: they weren't so much official, they were when I was at other functions and people had brought up the conversation around that.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: With the framework of the consultation, is there a framework now that has actually been put together for the Mi'kmaq community?

 

            MR. INCE: Let me go back to last Friday. I just want to make sure that you're aware that when I said that there would be consultations and when all that is developed and put forward, then I can give you some more details. As you can be aware and be sensitive, this has not actually - it has all been conversations. There is nothing that's solid or concrete or there has been no actual framework that has been set up at this moment - yet. This is the intent of the department, this is where we are going, and we are definitely going to have those consultations with stakeholders and community members, but there is not a specific framework at this moment that has been set up.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Is there a time frame in terms of what you want? I'm just going from the fact that I was a minister and I learned that some issues - I guess the famous saying is "we're working on it." As you can respect, I'm trying to pin down some time frames here because this is a very important Act that needs to be changed. I've talked to people in the community and this is what I'm hearing, and I'm trying to pin down when that will be because we're bouncing around from the possibility of legislation in the Fall. I know how long consultations take, so to me it doesn't seem realistic that you'll get there.

 

I'd like to know - time goes by fast - do you think that you'll be sitting down with your department staff this Spring and saying, okay, I'd like to have a framework of that consultation, where it will be, what it will be, when it will be, and have a project management scheduled that gets you to the outcome that you want, which is a change in the Act?

 

            MR. INCE: Yes, I agree with you, this is very important and that's why it's so important that we take the time to do it right, to set up the consultations correctly, to make sure we don't miss certain stakeholders or people within the community. With that, it is my hope that we can begin that in 2015-16 but again, as you're aware, it's a big department, there have been a lot of changes, so we'll just have to take it step by step.

 

            Most importantly for me, as you've noted, it is very important to me and I don't want to be in the positon, through my department, to rush into something and then we make a mistake and forget something. To me this is just as dangerous as not doing it.

 

            Please stay tuned, I will keep you in the loop because I know how near and dear this is to you. I don't believe up to this point I've done anything to the contrary to show you I'm willing to work with you, I've told you that from the very beginning, and I think I've proven that on a few occasions. I will certainly keep you in the loop once we move forward and set up the parameters and the framework and all of it; we will let you know.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I do want to thank you for being collaborative with me. What I would like to be able to do - I'll go quickly to another little topic and then pass it on to my colleague.

 

With the Special Places Protection Act we're talking on a provincial level, and I had a conversation with you about Oak Island which is more specific. I'm just wondering what you can do, or we can do together, for the present with Oak Island in terms of - you know, you wrote a letter to the licensee and said that they should have an archeologist on-site, which they have not done. I believe you have truly seen that - you know, it's kind of concerning in the fact that the items that were passed along to the government, it took a year for them to get to you, and I think that was from all the attention that was being drawn to Oak Island. Those items, as you said the other day, are being looked at now so you can't tell me what those items are, but they are owned by the province and not by the licensee.

 

My concern is if we don't put something that ensures in between the times that you actually get the Special Places Protection Act finalized, the consultation process, what may happen on that island and what might be lost. To me it's almost like having an insurance policy to make sure that this province doesn't lose something that may be of great value, in terms of historical value, to each and every one of us. What can we do, because right now we can't do anything where it's under DNR and the minister has refused to say that he wants an archeologist on-site, so what can we do in this period of time to ensure that Nova Scotians know that we're taking action to protect the island?

 

MR. INCE: I would suggest, first of all, when you say "what can we do," I would ask you to stay tuned because we are currently - and I think the last time you and I and the Minister of DNR had the conversation we said that we would work together, and that means my department and his department, and we'd look at administrative procedures between the two Acts, the Special Places Protection Act and the Oak Island Treasure Act. We'll look at both of those to make sure that we've changed the procedure so that we can better protect both of those Acts. We are currently looking at that right now with DNR, we're working with them to make those changes.

 

            I would urge you to stay tuned and come and ask us. I'll try to give you a time frame, I can't commit to it but I'll try to give you a time frame. Once the House rises, let's meet and try to find out where we are with that particular policy and that procedure through my department and DNR. You can help us by following up and asking us and keeping us on track.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I'd like to thank you very much for that, I really appreciate it, and I will definitely follow up. I would love to have a meeting with you and the Minister of DNR and focus on how we can make the necessary changes to protect Oak Island but also allow for the treasure-seeking to continue, and at the same time maybe we can start having some conversations of how we can develop more tourism, more economic stimulus around such a huge treasure that we have in our backyard. I'm going to say thank you very much for that.

 

            Just quickly, I want to move to the Hooked Rug Museum of North America. Have you had an opportunity to visit the museum yet?

 

            MR. INCE: Sorry, what was it again?

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: It's called the Hooked Rug Museum of North America.

 

            MR. INCE: You have to pardon me, I'm trying to remember all the places I've been over the summer - no, I haven't been there yet.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: May I invite you to be my guest and you can come to see the museum?

 

            MR. INCE: Certainly.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I know your schedule is so busy, but I'd love to have you visit this summer. Is that realistic?

 

            MR. INCE: I would suggest that it is realistic. You can contact my department because we haven't set up my summer tour yet, so there's a possibility we can probably swing that while I'm down in that area.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I'll tell you a little bit about the museum, it is absolutely incredible. It has been designated as the Hooked Rug Museum of North America and there's a huge following with this craft from the past. It's amazing when you learn more because when you first say it, oh, hooked rugs, but if you saw the workmanship and what is there, it will just absolutely blow you away. It is preserving a very important part of our heritage, where our grandmas and our great-grandmas were learning that trade, and that skill enabled them to make a few dollars to put food on the table. (Interruption) Yes, and keep warm.

 

            With the Hooked Rug Museum, that's the approach they have taken. They have been able to get seniors involved and also youth to learn the craft. What amazes me is the number of tourists that travel in rug-hooking groups and they're called hookers - the hooker trade, right? I always say no, it's the rug hooks. But it's amazing, they'll all joke and kind of laugh about that but there are actual tourists, they have bus tours coming from the U.S. specifically to go to this museum in our province.

 

            I know it's very difficult to now be identified as a provincial museum, I know there are a lot of issues around that, and the difficulty, but the question I have is how would I help the museum access the Community Museum Assistance Program and what may be available to them? Would they fit in with the criteria around that particular program?

 

            MR. INCE: First of all, if I may just back up a bit. I see how important rug hooking is and I do appreciate - I would never, as you might have suggested earlier, think that it was funny because I'm learning in this role and portfolio that many things that I would have looked at many years ago as odd and funny, now I don't look at it that way at all. There's so much value to our culture as Nova Scotians on many levels of what people do in our province.

 

I will say to you that I've been in my colleague's riding of Amherst and I got to see a number of hookers at work, so to speak, at one time when I was up there and it was quite interesting to see. I'm not surprised at the interest in rug hooking and the amount of societies and organizations, because when I went into the backroom of this wool place and saw what they were doing, I was blown away. I'm not too surprised by that.

 

To answer your question with regard to them becoming members of CMAP, actually what would have to happen is they would have to apply like most other organizations, but I would like to leave with you the fact that we're going to be reviewing that whole process so I can't really speak to what the parameters or qualifications are because some of that may change, I'm not sure.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Minister, is there someone in your department that could be a contact person for me to work with, in terms of helping the museum go forward, with the possibility of getting assistance and how they do that, so that the department is more aware of the museum and its value?

 

            MR. INCE: Most certainly. I would also recommend that my staff will also put you in touch with the museum board that is also helping us go through this process.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Thank you so very much. I'm going to give my time over to my colleague and if our time runs out, I just want to say thank you very, very much for answering the questions that I have been drilling you with since Friday. I appreciate it and understand how challenging it can be and if my colleague doesn't finish, I'm sure I'll be back at the mike again. But I want to thank you in advance.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable Acting Leader of the New Democratic Party.

 

            HON. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I'm very interested in having an opportunity to talk to you about several areas in your department, and the first area I want to talk to you about is the reduction in staff with respect to Gaelic Affairs. I am the critic for Gaelic Affairs - big surprise. You know what? I think I'm the only MacDonald in the House of Assembly right now, which hardly ever happens, there are always lots of us in here. I feel I have to stand up for the brand, I guess, and ask about this reduction. I noticed that FTEs are going down 5 to 3.5 and I want to know how many people are actually affected and how many people received layoff notices and - I believe that there's more than one office - whether any offices will be shut as a result of this cut.

 

            MR. INCE: Well, first of all to answer the first part of your question there were two people affected by this, two positions were eliminated.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Two out of seven, is it?

 

            MR. INCE: Five.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Five FTEs, but actual people.

 

            MR. INCE: No, five people. And as far as - we've consolidated the office space in Mabou, Cape Breton.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: What does that mean? Is the Antigonish office closing?

 

            MR. INCE: No, that office is not closing. There was one administrative staff in the Mabou office so what we've done is we consolidated because . . .

 

            MS. MACDONALD: So Mabou is closing?

 

            MR. INCE: That's correct.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: And there was one person in Mabou, they were laid off, let go? No, they were kept but they'll be working out of the Antigonish office?

 

            MR. INCE: Yes, that's our intent.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: What about the programs that the capacity of the staff that remain now to deliver the programs that they were delivering - if memory serves me right, Gaelic Affairs had at least three, maybe four fairly robust programs - will there be reductions in those programs as a result?

 

            MR. INCE: No, we've remained committed to providing support to the Gaelic community so there are absolutely no changes in the programs. How the programs can be delivered? We've kept continued support so basically nothing has changed other than, unfortunately, those changes in staff.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: So the number of programs that we have remain in place but they will have to be delivered by fewer personnel. I guess the people who are left will have to pick up the slack is what you're saying?

 

            MR. INCE: What I'm suggesting is that that person in the Mabou office was more administrative, they didn't deliver programs, so we have three highly-qualified individuals who can still provide and deliver those programs within the Gaelic community.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Plus do the administrative work now?

 

            MR. INCE: Yes.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Okay. That is the . . .

 

            MR. INCE: First of all, I stand corrected. The Mabou office - she was a program officer; that position was a program officer so I do stand corrected with that. As I was about to say, a part of the reason for us to eliminate that particular office is because we're looking at administrative efficiencies.

 

Let me back up, if I may, to explain something. When all those cultural offices were brought in under CCH back in about 2011, they were brought in under that umbrella; however, they were allowed to continue to operate and do things as usual. That being said, you can look at the fact now that we have a lot of overlaps with particular services so what we've tried to do is take care of some administrative efficiencies so CCH at that time was still providing supports for all those cultural offices. Even though you had, for example, Gaelic Affairs and they had the people doing that work, they were still receiving support for services and delivery of programs through CCH as well. What we've done is streamline things.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Can the minister tell me how much money was saved by closing the Mabou office, what the rent and the cost of the operation of that office actually was?

 

            MR. INCE: We saved $6,000. If I may add, just so that you . . .

 

            MS. MACDONALD: That's over a full year, you saved $6,000 closing the Mabou office?

 

            MR. INCE: No, that's when it comes into effect, we're allowing for some extension time but it will be $6,000 in savings. If I may state, CCH supports Gaelic Affairs to the tune of $83,000.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: A little bagpipe music. (Laughter)

 

            MR. INCE: Plus there is also an additional support of $1 million that's still going to it. As I said, all of that funding remains intact.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: I'm just trying to understand the magnitude of the savings that might accrue from the closing of the Mabou office. You said that it will be $6,000 but it's not immediate, does that mean that - well, when does the $6,000 start to accrue the savings?

 

            MR. INCE: That will be June.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: In June. I take it there's a lease for the office premises and we will continue to pay the office lease between now and June?

 

            MR. INCE: That's correct.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: What is the monthly rent for that office - well, not just rent but rent and probably telephone?

 

            MR. INCE: The lease is about $500 a month.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: The person who was working in that office has already gone, is that the case?

 

            MR. INCE: No, she is still there. We are going to work with her to provide other opportunities because we are looking at other places so that they can do the work. We're looking at continuing to support and provide her some other opportunities as well.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Can you elaborate on what "some other opportunities" means? Is she going to another department, is she staying with the Office of Gaelic Affairs - what does that mean?

 

            MR. INCE: She's going to stay with Gaelic Affairs, she just may be working out of other locations.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: She will stay in that office until the first of June, is that what you're telling me?

 

            MR. INCE: Yes.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Okay, and the people who have been let go were located in other office locations for Gaelic Affairs?

 

            MR. INCE: Yes, that's correct, two people in Antigonish.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Out of the Antigonish office?

 

            MR. INCE: Yes.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Thank you for that. Now I have a couple of other questions to help me reconcile information with respect to Arts Nova Scotia. There was a little bulletin that we were given in the budget lock-up that indicates that Arts Nova Scotia would be getting $2.6 million. When I look at the line item in the actual budget in our Estimates Book, it's different than that - I think it's on Page 5.3. Page 5.3 indicates $2.93 million, so I'm trying to understand why there was a discrepancy.

 

            MR. INCE: You were quoting $2.93 million, correct? Okay, so let me just go down through the list here. In terms of grants there's $2.67 million - $2.671 million in grants. The discrepancy you're looking at is the $252,000 in salaries that was pulled out of that.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: So there has been a reduction in staff at Arts Nova Scotia, there has been a reduction in salaries - can you explain that to me?

 

            MR. INCE: No. What I'm trying to indicate is that the Budget Highlights did not reflect the salaries, they left that out - that number.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: What the Budget Highlights is referring to is grants that . . .

 

            MR. INCE: Yes, that's correct, $2.6 million. When you add the salaries and then if you also add - well, travel for the program, you're going to get your $2.93 million.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: So is the grants component of Arts Nova Scotia increasing at all or is it decreasing or is it frozen?

 

            MR. INCE: The grants remain the same.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: And it's $2.6 million?

 

            MR. INCE: That's correct.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: And that's what it was last year as well, so no change.

 

            MR. INCE: That's correct, no change.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: The other area that I would like to talk about is the program review items out of your budget. So the program review items, I have this handout that we were given, reduced funding for Gaelic Affairs, which we've talked about. It also reduced funding for Acadian Affairs and African Nova Scotian Affairs. I would like to look at both of those as well and have a better understanding of the reductions in those departments.

 

            When I look at Page 5.6 in the Budget Estimates document it indicates that there has been a staff reduction. It looks like you may have had some vacant positions, is that the case?

 

            MR. INCE: Yes, that is the case. We had a vacancy in African Nova Scotian Affairs, one position that was vacant there, as well as in Acadian Affairs.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: What was the position that was vacant that has now been eliminated?

 

            MR. INCE: In Acadian Affairs there was a secretary and a program admin, and that spot was already vacant. Then if you'd like, again African Nova Scotian Affairs, a program officer, that position was vacant, and a correspondence coordinator is the position that was eliminated.

 

            And to mention, I'm not sure if you caught the conversation around Gaelic, but again, it was administrative efficiencies. As I said, most of those departments were brought in under CCH and were left to run the way they were before, giving us a duplication of some of the services; therefore, we had to make sure that we had to do the administrative efficiencies to make sure that we met what our budget asked us to do.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Thank you. The next area where I think program review saw reductions in your budget, $250,000 from the strategic funding initiative, can you tell me a bit about the strategic funding initiative and how that will, on a go-forward basis, meet the $250,000 reduction?

 

            MR. INCE: We have reduced it by $250,000, and basically this particular program is an application-based program. What it means is that we'll be doing fewer applications.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: How many applications did you have last year?

 

            MR. INCE: There were 44 programs last year.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Okay - 44 programs or 44 applications?

 

            MR. INCE: Sorry, 44 projects that were funded.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: How many applications did you have?

 

            MR. INCE: We'll have to get that information for you.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Okay, thank you. So 44 projects were funded - can you provide me with a list of the projects?

 

            MR. INCE: We certainly can.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: What was the average amount of money per project?

 

            MR INCE: About $15,000 to $20,000.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: They're small projects.

 

            MR. INCE: Yes, they are - significant projects though.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Yes, because they're small it doesn't mean they're not important. So there were 44 of them. That budget now has been reduced by $250,000. What was the global amount of that budget last year?

 

            MR. INCE: That was $750,000.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: So down to $500,000, thank you. I also take note that the other area for program review targeted a reduction to Culture and Heritage Development programs, a departmental operating reduction of $523,000 and a community facility fund reduction, but the information that was provided in the budget lock-up did not segregate that $523,000 in terms of departmental operating reduction and community facility fund reduction. I'm looking for that now, please.

 

            MR. INCE: When we look at this you're looking at the community facility fund, which is what you're addressing, is that correct?

 

            MS. MACDONALD: That, as well as departmental operating reductions. The information we were provided with indicated that $523,000 was taken out of those two areas. They look to me like two separate areas but they don't delineate how much from each.

 

            MR. INCE: I can tell you that the community facility fund had been reduced by $483,000. The strategic funding initiative was $100,000, so that's where you might be looking at that $500,000. But I also have to let you know that the department had a $100,000 reduction in operations - departmental operating was reduced by $100,000 as well.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Can you break that down for me?

 

            MR. INCE: Let me break it down to you this way then. For travel within my department there has been a reduction of $42,000 and then for professional services, $10,000. Staff and training has been reduced to $38,000 and meetings, there is another $10,000 reduction. So we're looking at a total of $100,000 with all those numbers.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: The community facility fund has been reduced by $483,000. What is allocated for the community facility fund?

 

            MR. INCE: What is available now within that fund is $633,000.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Thank you. Okay, one short snapper - my time is really short. Can you tell me how much we spent on libraries last year?

 

            MR. INCE: The expense was $14 million.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: That's what we spent last year?

 

            MR. INCE: Yes.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: I notice on our little sheet it says that the government is investing $14 million for libraries but there isn't an increase, it's the same as it was last year.

 

            MR. INCE: That's correct.

 

            MS. MACDONALD: Thank you.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Ms. Peterson-Rafuse.

 

            HON. DENISE PETERSON-RAFUSE: How much time do we have?

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: There is seven minutes left.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I would like to ask, now that changes have been made with cutting ERDT and some responsibilities that your department is taking over, can you tell me what those responsibilities are?

 

            MR. INCE: Sure I can. I can tell you that the Regional Economic Development Program, which is being transferred over to us, is going to be $880,000; we received the Community Access Program, which is $780,000; le Conseil de développement économique de la Nouvelle-Écosse is $100,000; and on top of that, two staff came to our department.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I know this is new to you but can you explain those programs to me?

 

            MR. INCE: I can give you a little idea. The CAP program - let me start with that - is a federal government program, and you might be aware of the CAP program as it sits in the libraries right now. That came over from the feds - or ERDT, which the feds helped to fund that program. The Regional Economic Development Program supports and strengthens regional capacity to advance economic development in the province. The emphasis is on building capacity with organizations in regions and setting a practical direction for locally-driven economic growth. That's quite a mouthful.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: How does that work?

 

            MR. INCE: Basically we get the money and we provide the grants to help those particular regions; based on applications that they would get, we would try to help to grow those regions economically.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: What kind of grant applications - I'm just trying to get an idea of what they are for?

 

            MR. INCE: I would ask you to stay tuned and we'll get you that information because it's just transferred and I don't have the details at this point.

 

Hang on now, because there is also le Conseil de développement économique de la Nouvelle-Écosse which is $100,000. That program provides funding for le CDÉNÉ, and it's a non-profit organization dedicated to improving the economic well-being and quality of life for Acadians and francophone Nova Scotians.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: I certainly understand the fact that you will need some time to learn about those different programs. How much time do we have?

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Three more minutes.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Okay, three more minutes. I think what I'm going to do, I want to pass it over to the member for Kings North because I'll just start a question and the minister won't have the opportunity to answer it, and then we'll go back from there. Thank you.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Kings North.

 

            MR. JOHN LOHR: I just want to ask the minister a couple of questions pertinent to Kings North issues, and one would be about Prescott House which is a gorgeous house. I don't know if the minister has ever seen it but it would be a Civil War-era home, a very luxurious home that really has a very historic place in the Port Williams area for its connection to the apple industry. I understand that the roof is in serious disrepair in Prescott House, and maybe is not immediately leaking right now but would need significant repair.  I'm just wondering what the minister could tell me is in the budget for Prescott House, and if and when there are plans to repair that roof.

 

            MR. INCE: I agree with you, I've been to Prescott House. I've seen it, it is a lovely place. It is one of our provincial museums so we work closely with Internal Services to look at that. As you can be aware, those types of repairs and issues are now with Internal Services - it used to be TIR, now it's with Internal Services.

 

            MR. LOHR: What I understand you're saying is that the budget to repair the roof, if and when that is done, will not be coming out of your budget but will be coming out of Internal Services.

 

            MR. INCE: That's correct.

 

            MR. LOHR: Would your department have a role in advocating - I would hope - for these types of museums? Would that be correct?

 

            MR. INCE: That would be correct, because as I said, it's one of our museums, a provincially-owned museum.

 

            MR. LOHR: I would also like to ask about the - in Kentville there's the Kings County Museum, which is housed in the courthouse in Kentville and has a very active historical society working out of it. Again, they would have similar issues with maintenance of infrastructure. Can the minister tell me what the annual grant is to the Kings County Museum in Kentville? Is there any assistance available for them to deal with infrastructure issues?

 

            MR. INCE: It is part of the Community Museum Assistance Program. It currently receives $28,000, and under the current system and the way it is right now, I believe there might be some additional funding for that type of work under the Community Facilities Improvement Program. That particular program does help with issues such as what you're talking about.

 

            MR. LOHR: So the Community Facilities Improvement Program, and that's part of your department?

 

            MR. INCE: That is.

 

            MR. LOHR: So the Kings County Museum would have to apply to get that sort of work done?

 

            MR. INCE: That's correct.

 

            MR. LOHR: Again, it's probably a similarly aged building, similar sized building to Prescott House, and similarly, I think the roof is in - maybe isn't leaking but is in need of repair. I will pass that information on.

 

            I have another museum that I would like to ask about - I don't know if you fund it - and that would be the Northville Farm Heritage Centre. Is that part of your funding, and how much?

 

            MR. INCE: Northville? No, it isn't.

 

            MR. LOHR: I would like to take a moment to tell you about that. The Northville Farm Heritage Centre has a large number of volunteers that are seeking to preserve the agricultural history of the Valley, located in the community of Northville on a farm property. I'm sure there are 5 or 10 acres there. They maintain a number of historic pieces of agricultural equipment, and probably have - I'm not sure how many members but I'm sure maybe less than 100 but more than 50. They're a very active local museum that's preserving the agricultural heritage. They particularly host tractor pulls and oxen pulls and maintain these engines that are make-and-break engines - I don't know if you've ever heard of them and that sort of thing - so the agricultural history of the past.

 

            I wonder for an organization like that, if they were looking for Communities, Culture and Heritage funding, how would they go about that?

 

            MR. INCE: Again, I would suggest they apply and look at some of the programs that we provide. If they're looking at some of those changes or repairs, like the kitchen and the furnace, those types of things, then the Community Facilities Improvement Program is the one they would have to apply to. Hopefully they will have success and get some money to help them with that.

 

            MR. LOHR: Thank you. Those are the questions that I have.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Chester-St. Margaret's.

 

            HON. DENISE PETERSON-RAFUSE: Minister, I want to talk a little bit about your interpretation and definition and vision with respect to Communities, Culture and Heritage. Could you provide us with your definition of your portfolio, in terms of what community means to you, what culture means to you, and heritage?

 

            MR. INCE: Well, first of all, let's go with communities. Again, you're looking at some of this, which is quite broad, but if we look at communities, to me that would tie in with culture. Culture is very broad, so if we look at communities, I'm looking at communities that are culturally specific - not only culturally specific, but communities throughout the whole province.

 

            Let me try to simplify it because this is a question that I'm not often asked so I have to put my head around how it is that I'm trying to convey that to you, but when I think about the African Nova Scotian community, I talk about those people who are indigenous to African Nova Scotia and those who also have come and now have landed status.

 

            If I talk about the Gaelic community, I talk about all those who are - now, let me tread lightly - of Scottish descent but who speak the Gaelic language, and there is that division between the Scottish people who consider themselves to be Scottish and then the Gaels, so there is that division.

 

            We're talking about communities. If we talk about the southeastern Asian communities, I could go on and on about my explanation of communities.

 

            Now heritage would be anything that the province has deemed is of historical significance to our province. I'm looking at it from that perspective because heritage also, if you look at it from a municipal perspective, could mean something entirely different.

 

            As far as culture, as I said, that's very broad. I will say to you that I'm very pleased that you've asked that question because it allows me to open the door and talk about the culture strategy, which is a strategy that is going to help the province define what culture is in the broadest sense with consultations with the communities to help us have their interpretation of what their culture is. So I'm looking forward to that and hopefully in June you'll see the launch of this culture strategy that will help us define all of this.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Can you tell me what your opinion is in terms of how tourism ties in with Communities, Culture and Heritage?

 

            MR. INCE: Well tourism ties in to all departments within the government. If we're looking at trying to bring information, bring people to our province, to bring the history, the stories, the culture of our province to the rest of the world, then tourism plays a key role in that.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: And can you tell me how business plays into Communities, Culture and Heritage and tourism?

 

            MR. INCE: Well, I think once we look at this culture strategy and we define what culture is, we define also the economic impact that these particular areas that you've discussed have with the culture sector, and then it will be broadly determined and will show you how our department sees or views the benefits of business and tourism and all the rest of the culture strategy - arts, everything - will affect our society in Nova Scotia.

 

            MS. PETERSON-RAFUSE: Okay, thank you very much. I just wanted to also ask you, I think one of the key elements that you said in your explanation of what this means to you was about the stories that we have to tell to the world. Of course, that's going to bring me to the film and tax credits and the changes that have been made that have devastated that industry, what we're already seeing being lost in our province, and the stories that the film and television industry tells the world about us.

 

If we don't have that opportunity to tell those stories it will negatively affect our tourism industry, there's absolutely no argument about that. I mean if you look at Haven, I discovered this weekend alone from the fact that the gentleman who owns the tavern in Chester, they had a Haven event. I went to that and the lineup was so long that you couldn't even get into the tavern to celebrate with the Haven cast. They actually discovered that people who were there specifically for that Haven party came from England and Germany and other parts of the world to celebrate with the Haven cast.

 

That's something that would cost us to just promote through the regular means of marketing, like through purchasing publications and to put in a marketing budget that we would never be able to pay for that kind of investment that we get back from that industry, and I know how important that industry is to you and I'm sure that you must - I can't put words in your mouth but I'm sure you're struggling with it, too, because of the fact that we're on the world stage and we have been very, very fortunate over decades that the film and television industry has been a focal group for our governments to support so they could get to the point that you would have Haven in the little Village of Chester dropping $50 million in five years.

 

This past weekend people were just stopping me in the streets and saying they just cannot believe what is happening because of the fact that this is an industry that trickles right down financially to the people on the street. I had one gentleman who called me and he said, you know, Haven utilized our home for one week, one week they filmed at this gentleman's home and they paid him $6,000 for one week of filming. Now what an investment that is to - and this is a gentleman who is a businessman, and I mean that money is going to go back into our community.

 

I spoke with the general manager of our rink complex this morning, he came to my office - it was actually the first time he came to my office, and as you know, there have been many issues over the number of years that governments have been in but that's the first time that he has come to my doors - and he said to me, Denise, did you know that approximately $50,000 a year was given to that rink because of Haven using it as a soundstage?

 

That was another area that we had great discussions recently at the Economic Development Committee, the provincial committee, because Film Nova Scotia had come in and had presented to us and that was one area that they would have loved to have seen investment in Nova Scotia. Now it wouldn't be worth the investment but what I discovered in my conversation with the general manager was the fact that because we don't have a film stage, that's why they were utilizing the rink complex in Chester. Actually they did also utilize the Rona business that's in Tantallon, but the problem there was the sound situation. If they filmed at one end of it they couldn't be doing something at the other but with the rink, because it's a complex and it's a separate curling club, they were able to utilize that.

 

We have two little grocery stores in the community and the general manager of the rink said, you know, I can fairly guess that it's probably about $100,000 a summer that was dropped in at the little grocery stores, because this gentleman worked with the production crew and so forth, and one of the most important things they felt was, if the actors and actresses and all the workers were fed well - they worked the long hours so they knew the importance of having good food - he said one of the first areas they look at when they come to the community is the caterers and those who can provide for the meals.

 

            It's an incredible amount of money that is going to be lost. We lost a $12 million production, since the budget was dropped, in the Chester area that was going to be produced by the same producer of Haven. I don't know what we can say to make the government understand the value of that investment to Nova Scotia. I know that they're hearing from many, many people and it is a reality.

 

            The whole concept that the companies are international companies and the money is not spent or the taxes aren't paid in our province is not factual in the sense that - you know yourself that Haven would never come to the Chester area or The Book of Negroes from a company from Nova Scotia. They would never have the resources in the first place to create a production of that level, so those international companies are really the foundation to be able to bring this work to us here in Nova Scotia. So what they do is, even if it's Disney - Jim Henson and Magic Rock Productions had a production on the table - they have the means and the ability to come here and then hire the local production companies, and those local production companies then hire the businesses they need to support.

 

            Right across from my constituency office is Chester Building Supplies and the money that has been funnelled into that business to support the needs of Haven - if something needed to be built, they'd be running in there every second day. The one thing that I've learned, and many people have said to me, is it was money that was paid up front. As you know, small business have such a struggle in terms of often they have people who are owing them money, they're chasing the money, but with the film and television industry, they pay right up front. They go into the building supplies store, and they need $10,000 worth of supplies, the money is given to them at that time.

 

            So my point with respect to that is it's very difficult and baffling to understand - you have a very difficult job because you're the lead in a portfolio that's about culture, about community, about heritage, and the film industry is all about that. I mean, look at the History Channel and how the History Channel has just even grown over the last four or five years. I'd say even five years ago I wouldn't have even known what the History Channel was - the History Channel, the Discovery Channel - but people are very, very interested in learning about other people's lives, their culture, and their heritage.

 

            If you see the lineup of a lot of those shows, that's what it's about: it's focusing on a uniqueness in terms of a culture or heritage. Even if you want to go as far as the reality shows like Duck Dynasty - I mean, that's a whole different culture or reality that we wouldn't even understand until they do the filming. It's very difficult to figure out why a $24 million investment that brings $130 million back a year, at least, is not seen as an economic benefit to the province. I don't know what other investment portfolio anybody could have - whether you're a business or a government - that would give you that kind of return.

 

            What I'm very scared and frightened about is that this industry is an industry that travels where the work is and where the competitive edge is, and once it's gone, it's gone. If we lose This Hour Has 22 Minutes, if we lose that $12 million production, because they have to plan ahead so far, they're already planning where they're going, and then to try to bring them back is going to be incredibility difficult if not impossible. It will take years and cost 10 times to 100 times more of an investment to bring them back, and we've got them here now.

 

            There's still time to save this. As a representative of the residents of Chester-St. Margaret's who have been greatly affected by the film and production industry, and the television industry - and it's from one end of the province to the other, it's not just in my constituency - I really am trying to plead with you, as the minister who is representing culture and heritage and our communities, to try your best - because that's all you can do, to voice your opinion and talk to your colleagues and say, look, we're all human and we've obviously been provided bad advice.

 

I think what's happening is you have a department that is looking at a cheque that they write every year for the cost of that credit but they don't have the vision to know outside of the box what the results are of that $24 million cheque. They're seeing it as a cost to your budget as a province, as a government, and they don't realize how much that's generating. We have figures, there are figures out there, and they're easy to get.

 

Minister, I'm really concerned about the fact that there hasn't been, number one, consultation with the industry. This is a government that promised us transparency and consultation. There hasn't been the consultation at the level, because you've been talking honestly to me back and forth - as I've said, I've worked really well with you as a minister and you really have done what you can in areas that I've had concerns. I know we play that political game in those rooms there but you've been genuine in coming to me with information and trying to help.

 

It is really concerning that a decision like this - I guess what I want to make very clear is that this decision is not about our egos, this decision is not about whether we've made a mistake. I think the public really appreciates a government that can say, okay, we've gotten the wrong information, we're really sorry, we're going to turn the curve here and we're going to now have consultation. We're going to leave the tax credit the way it has been and we're going to consult, because that's what you've been talking to me about with the Special Places Protection Act that this is years coming and that you want an opportunity to consult and you want to talk to the Mi'kmaq community and you want to talk to archeologists to find out what is the best way.

 

You even said to me today, you said you don't want to get down the road and make a mistake because it's hard to go back, and I think that's what has happened with the government. I know having the opportunity to be in that position before it's very easy to put your heels in the sand and just say no because it's an embarrassment to say that perhaps a mistake was made or a decision wasn't thought through the way that it should have been.

 

I guess this is my opportunity because the people of Chester-St. Margaret's gave me the honour to be able to sit here today and look you in the eyes and say that I know of your passion for your department, and I hope that passion flows over into your ability to make some sense of this and change this around. Honestly, I want to tell you I think the people of Nova Scotia would really appreciate that and they would see you and this whole government in a much different light to be able to say that this one wasn't the right decision but we're not going to play the ego game, we're going to play the game that we're here for the people of Nova Scotia. I just want to express to you that I really hope there is a lot of consideration and discussion around the caucus table and around your Cabinet Table to make that change.

 

I want to thank you very much for the time that you have given in the estimates, they're very difficult, and you have new portfolios or new responsibilities. I know that you've tried to honestly give the answers and that you do have a passion for what you're doing, and I just hope that you can voice that throughout your caucus. Thank you for the time that you've given.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Are there any other questions from the NDP caucus or the PC caucus?

 

            The honourable member for Hammonds Plains-Lucasville.

 

            MR. BEN JESSOME: Mr. Minister, I apologize if I missed this along the lines of your estimates here, but I'm wondering if you could talk a little bit about your view, I guess, of how the municipalities' heritage Act is to change. I believe you made reference to that last week and I'm just wondering if you can elaborate on that a little bit.

 

            MR. INCE: I certainly can. Basically we're looking at making changes to the Heritage Property Act. Those changes will not change the way the Act is delivered or it won't affect any - what we are trying to do is realign with the municipalities so that we can be a little bit more in line with what they're trying to do administratively, and get the direction from the municipalities so that the Act better reflects what they're hoping the Act will do for them. This is what we're looking at right now.

 

            MR. JESSOME: Excellent, thank you.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, do you have any closing remarks?

 

            MR. INCE: No, other than to say thank you and I'll see you again sometime.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for your time, to those around the table.

 

            Shall Resolution E3 stand?

 

Resolution E3 stands.

 

We'll call in the staff from the Department of Community Services.

 

[6:52 p.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

 

[6:55 p.m. The subcommittee reconvened.]

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I call the Subcommittee of the Whole House on Supply to order.

 

We will now call for the estimates of the Department of Community Services.

 

Resolution E4 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $915,410,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Community Services, pursuant to the Estimate.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'd like to welcome the Minister of Community Services and her staff from the department. I would like to ask the minister to please start off the proceedings by introducing the staff members that are with her and then she can begin her opening remarks.

 

The honourable Minister of Community Services.

 

            HON. JOANNE BERNARD: Thank you so much. Madam Chairman, it's my privilege to be here today to present the Department of Community Services estimates for the 2015-16 fiscal year. Before I start, I would like to introduce to the committee Lynn Hartwell, my Deputy Minister on my right, and Dale MacLennan, the department's Executive Director of Finance and Administration on my left, who are here to assist me with your questions today. I look forward to sharing our goals for the coming year and how this year's budget will help us get the province on a more sustainable path.

 

Community Services is one of those departments that a lot of Nova Scotians would only think of when they're in crisis. One in five Nova Scotians seek the help of community services at any given time and that makes us the largest direct service provider in the province. To give you a better sense of what our department does on a daily basis, let me provide you with some figures. At DCS we provide income assistance to more than 44,000 people, 8,000 of whom also receive support to help them find work. We provide placement and case management for about 5,200 persons with disabilities. We manage upwards of 10,000 referrals made to Child Protection Services, and as of last month, child welfare staff had conducted about 62,000 investigations into allegations of child abuse this past fiscal year. DCS provides child benefits for about 38,000 children of low-income families.

 

            It's clear that our programs are absolutely essential to the people who use them. That's why we are working to protect what matters to Nova Scotians - like support for our most vulnerable people, including children, youth, and families, sexual assault survivors, seniors, persons with disabilities, and low-income Nova Scotians. Recognizing the fiscal challenges highlighted in the province's budget, we need to make changes to how the department operates in order to protect the programs that the most vulnerable Nova Scotians rely on. To achieve that we need to find a smarter, more efficient and, most importantly, a more effective way of helping Nova Scotians.

 

            Of course, this means tough decisions so that we can continue to support our most vulnerable. Our approach with this budget has been disciplined and responsible, with a focus on our core values, while looking at different ways to deliver services and rein in spending. We know that facing a provincial deficit limits us in terms of growing our programs and exploring the options we would like to explore. As the Minister of Finance stated in her Budget Address, it's going to take an effort on everyone's part, including the civil service, to help us address the province's fiscal challenges.

 

I want to say how much this government, myself included, values the civil service. I know first-hand the incredible work the employees of DCS do on behalf of Nova Scotians each and every day. Most people, even our clients, are often unaware of just how hard they work. We, like other departments, had to face hard news related to staffing and we are eliminating 42 vacant FTE positions with this budget. In addition, a total of 11 FTEs will be eliminated as part of our new operating model. This model will help us improve how we deliver our programs and services to Nova Scotians.

 

            With these changes, we have strengthened our reporting structure and maintained the services and programs people need the most and the ones that provide them with the direct support. We made every effort to ensure that direct clients of DCS would not be affected by these changes.

 

            None of the decisions we made through this budget were easy, but we know that the status quo isn't working - not for our department, not for the rest of government, and in some cases, not for our clients.

 

            The department's budget for 2016 is $915.4 million, an $11.9 million increase over the 2014-15 budget. As part of this year's budget, a grant process review of community organizations has resulted in strategic reductions, and as a result some community groups will see their budgets cut or reduced.

 

            We have given six months advance notice so that groups can prepare for this transition. We are moving away from the historical expectations for funding in order to bring around greater accountability and measurement of results. I made a commitment to this Legislature last year that I would improve the reporting process and outcome measurement structures, not only within our own department but in the groups in which we fund. Quite simply, I want to know, who do you serve and what difference does it make in their lives? As a former executive director, my personal mantra of "if it matters, you measure it" followed me into this position.

 

            The province has a responsibility to evaluate outcomes to ensure that Nova Scotians are receiving the support they need and deserve. These changes will help us maintain support for the groups that provide direct service delivery in support of our priorities.

 

            We are continuing with improvements to our grant process and will introduce several multi-year funding agreements in 2015-16. In other areas, we are maintaining our spending with no increases. While there will be no increase in income assistance benefits in this budget, we worked very hard to maintain this important program to Nova Scotians. We also maintain support through the Affordable Living Tax Credit.

 

            None of these decisions have been easy, but they are part of getting the province back on the right track. There will be a couple of modest investments, including $4 million that will be invested in programs that keep vulnerable Nova Scotians in their homes; $2.5 million will go to support families that wish to keep their disabled adult children at home or in a home environment and another $1.5 million will go towards the Senior Citizens Assistance Program, which helps low-income seniors make health and safety repairs to their homes - this brings the annual increase over the past two years to this program to $3 million. These are smart, strategic investments that we know improve the lives of people who use them, and we want more of them.

 

When we talk about the importance of fiscal discipline, it's because we need the capacity to do more for those who most need our help, and you cannot keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. We have seen year over year that putting more money towards programs does not necessarily translate into better outcomes for Nova Scotians in need. We want a system that gives people the help they need, when they need it, but also allows them to eventually be back on their feet and prosper. So it's not about how much money we invest, it's about how we invest it. For that reason, Community Services is changing how programs and services are designed, delivered, and managed province-wide.

 

            In the Finance and Treasury Board Minister's Budget Address, she said the people of this province feel a duty to support those who are in most need, and I agree. It's an incredible strength and something for which we should all be very proud. Our goal is to improve results for income assistance recipients, persons with disabilities, and children in care - all the people we serve. We want streamlined and integrated services, administrative simplicity and sustainability. We know the Employment Support and Income Assistance - or ESIA - Program needs to be changed and modernized. Community Services has begun the process of reforming this program. We're looking at what benefits are provided through the program and how they are delivered. We want to improve the lives of people who receive ESIA.

 

            The new benefit structure will focus on improved quality of life, health and resilience, increase social and community inclusion, and increase skills for enhancing self-sufficiency and employment. We currently know that 80 per cent of the people who return to social assistance each month have been there before; clearly what we're doing is not working.

 

            Madam Chairman, I'll give an example of what we're trying to accomplish. Last December I announced $60,000 for the Dartmouth Learning Network to support the Moving On Up program. This program helps current clients of Community Services break down barriers to employment so they can enter the workforce and stay self-reliant. Shortly after the announcement I received a letter from a gentleman who said his mother completed education and training through a similar program several years ago. This allowed her to find employment and support her five children. Not only did she ensure that her children completed their high school education, all of them went on to seek higher education and all of them have successful careers. Most of all I'm pleased to say that this young man now volunteers his time in organizations like the Dartmouth Learning Network.

 

            Madam Chairman, this investment in one person's life changed many more lives. That's the kind of outcome we are aiming for with this transformation. This transformation will create a program that is administratively simple, transparent, sustainable, empowering, streamlined, and integrated, and it will be fair and easily understood by clients and stakeholders. We need to protect the things that matter and continue providing supports to the most vulnerable Nova Scotians, such as Nova Scotians with disabilities.

 

            The province has an action plan to help more Nova Scotians with disabilities work and live as independently as possible in their community. Choice and Inclusion: Shaping the Future of Nova Scotia's Disability Support Program is the province's response to a joint government-community committee that recommended transforming the newly- named Disability Support Program.

 

            We're making progress on three key areas: increasing community support so that more people with disabilities can live in the community, modernizing services and programs to make them more flexible and person directed, and reducing reliance on long-term residential facilities. I'm pleased to share substantial progress in increasing community living based options for 70 Nova Scotians with disabilities.

 

            Madam Chairman, I'd like to tell you about Linda MacLellan. Linda is an amazing and vibrant woman who after difficulties finding a place to call home entered our Disability Support Program some time ago. She moved into a home with Metro Community Living. In recently sharing her experiences with us, Linda wrote: At first I was nervous because I did not know anybody and I do not like change. Now I love where I live and I've made lots of friends, I'm a social butterfly. Linda graduated from the work experience program and she wants full-time work, she is now part of the community.

 

            Madam Chairman, access to community supports changes the lives of our clients, that's why we're expanding the Independent Living and Alternative Family Support Programs. Both offer flexibility, choice, and appropriate supports in a community setting. An additional 42 individuals now have the support they need to live independently through the Independent Living Support Program.

 

            As of December 18, 2014, 14 individuals moved from larger residential settings; 22 individuals were in urgent need of residential or other program supports; and six individuals came from other settings, including family homes, which increases their long-term independence. It's clear that programs can really help people, so can changes to legislation.

 

            During this legislative session I will introduce amendments to the Children and Family Services Act. The CFSA protects one of Nova Scotia's most vulnerable populations: children living in situations of abuse or neglect. Discussions about amending the 25-year-old CFSA have been ongoing for more than a decade, and there have been numerous reports and recommendations to government without any changes being made. Many of the amendments being proposed come from previous consultations, the minister's advisory committee reports, a jurisdictional review of best practices, and up-to-date research on early childhood development.

 

            I want to address some of the benefits of updating this legislation. As it stands, the definition of a child ends at age 16. This is a time in life when young people are struggling with crucial decisions, and we need to be involved in supporting them between the ages of 16 and 19. These changes give us the ability to continue support and intervention. We also need the ability to intervene earlier in situations where infants and young children show signs of serious developmental neglect. We know from research that intervening earlier is beneficial for young children. The intention is to support the family to make adjustments and improvements to stay together, ensuring the true best interests of the child.

 

            We need to improve child safety, streamline court processes, replace outdated and hurtful terminology, and incorporate research and best practices. We are open to hearing from the community about the proposed changes. Amendments will be introduced during the Spring legislative session, and there will be opportunities for input on the proposed amendments before we return for the Fall 2015 session.

 

            I want to take a moment right now to focus on the work being done at the Advisory Council on the Status of Women; I'm honoured to be the minister responsible. A number of initiatives are underway to improve the lives of women and girls in Nova Scotia. I'm pleased to report that transition houses, women's centres, and second stage housing have moved to the Status of Women. This will ensure that the work done by these important organizations is always viewed through a feminist lens. These groups will be part of a women's policy directorate that will strengthen the gender-based analysis capacity at the Status of Women. We are analyzing all policies and programs at Community Services through a gender-based lens.

 

Also, earlier this year, I was honoured to represent the Premier at the National Roundtable on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women. This tragedy spanning our country cannot be allowed to continue, and we must do more to understand and address this issue. While this time was productive and informative and we are planning more national round table meetings, they cannot and must not replace a national inquiry on missing and murdered Aboriginal women which this province supports.

 

            Work is also being done to connect with young women in Nova Scotia. One of the ways that we can prevent barriers for our women later in life is to reach out to girls and younger women. On Saturday, April 18^th, I'll be attending a girls' round table meeting, the first of its kind. The Status of Women is co-hosting this event with the YWCA Halifax and four women's centres. Through the mentorship of these partners, 16 junior high girls will present on issues affecting girls to a diverse audience of women leaders. Based on what we learn, a tool kit will be developed on how to facilitate this kind of engagement model with young women. In May, Nova Scotia will be hosting the Atlantic Ministers of the Status of Women in Lunenburg. I'm looking forward to meeting with my colleagues to discuss issues affecting women in our provinces and how we might support each other in addressing them.

 

            Finally, I would like to take a moment to welcome Dr. Wanda Thomas Bernard who became Chair of the Advisory Council on the Status of Women this year. Dr. Thomas Bernard is a well-respected educator and community advocate who brings a rich wealth of knowledge and experience to her role as chair. I'm very excited to see the direction that a robust advisory council will take under her leadership.

 

I'm also pleased to share that we are close to releasing our sexual violence strategy. Government has committed $6 million to this ground-breaking work. As you know, April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month in Nova Scotia. We know that sexual assault and sexual violence can happen to anyone and that we all have a role to play in preventing it and supporting victims. Sexual violence is a complex issue and we're taking our time to get this strategy right. We have spent the last several months engaging with the broader community, service providers, and youth, and conversations are continuing. Their input has helped us identify key areas for improving services and supports for victims and families. Where current gaps exist, and a need for more public awareness and education on the issue of sexual violence, we are encouraged by the volume of respondents.

 

            We heard from Nova Scotians who have been impacted by sexual violence and from those who are interested in this issue that we want to make a positive difference. We have heard that people do not know where to turn to get the support they need. Services are not accessible, visible, or inclusive. We also heard that these services do not rest, nor should they rest, with any one organization. We've had strong feedback about a lack of coordination in providing services and supports to women and families province-wide. We're aware of the diverse experience of sexual violence experienced by men and boys; lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals; Aboriginal individuals; and African Nova Scotians. We need to reflect their experiences in our responses and prevention efforts. We want to ensure that our work moving forward is inclusive and that community is part of the process moving forward.

 

            We know that changing the social norms and the culture in our communities will take time. It will also take the ongoing participation of all Nova Scotians to reduce sexual violence. That has been the focus of work done in the past year as part of developing the sexual violence strategy, which will be the first for Nova Scotia. The strategy will include increased supports for victims, public education, and most importantly, a commitment from this government that we will continue to strive towards a province free of sexual violence.

 

            We also want a province free of barriers for Nova Scotians with disabilities. Less than a year ago, I created the Minister's Advisory Panel on Accessibility Legislation. Creating a Nova Scotia where all citizens have access to opportunities and a life free of barriers is the goal of this legislation. To get a barrier-free Nova Scotia, we need a legislative framework where people, government, and businesses ensure access for all.

 

            Creation of accessibility legislation is the first step to access for all as, through law, it enables the establishment of regulations, standards, and policy. Standards development is the centrepiece within accessibility legislation and it is where most of the work in achieving our end goal lies.

 

            The minister's panel brought together a diverse group with experience and expertise, and will make sure that our legislation ensures all Nova Scotians have equal opportunity to reach their potential. We believe that this work will lead to significant improvements in the lives of citizens with disabilities and all Nova Scotians. I expect to share a response to the report and recommendation before the year passes. We will bring in legislation in 2016 that will include access to information, labour market and employment opportunities, removing structural barriers, attitudes and public awareness, transportation, and housing.

 

            Over the course of the last year, we have done a great deal to help Nova Scotians in need. In July of last year we raised the Nova Scotia Child Benefit income threshold from $25,000 to $26,000, bringing about 1,300 more children under the program's umbrella and giving other families already in the program a modest improvement.

 

            We're increasing direct support to foster parents through an investment in respite funding. This is an appropriate moment to stress the valuable contribution that Nova Scotia's foster parents are making to the children they care for every day. This respite funding means that foster parents are better able to focus on personal, medical, and family priorities as needed. At the same time, we increased holiday allowances for every child. This occurs in December for the busy and economically trying holiday season.

 

            Last year we continued to help vulnerable women and children escape domestic violence or live better lives through an increased investment in organizations that support them. Additional funding of $500,000 was given to transition houses, women's centres, and second stage housing to help provide more support for women and children.

 

            We made a commitment to increase supports to help women and children leave dangerous situations and move to safe housing where they can continue to move forward in their lives. We kept that commitment by providing sustainable funding so that these organizations can continue to provide quality programs and services for more women and children.

 

            We also provided $2 million annualized to every family resource centre in the province, which resulted in a $75,000 increase across the board. Over the last year, I have talked to many staff from these organizations and they are now instituting trauma-based counselling programs; they are introducing programs for dads, to help them with children and raising children - programs that would not have been available without this funding.

 

            Social housing remains a priority for DCS. Last year, social housing for seniors was given a boost through repairs, upgrades, and revitalization thanks to a $5 million government investment. Seniors deserve to live in comfortable, suitable, and well- maintained homes. Investments like this not only improve the living conditions for low-income seniors, they also ensure that they are able to live independently in their homes for as long as possible.

 

            The improvement is improving nine seniors and social housing programs, helping about 1,000 seniors. Upgrades include work on lobbies and entrances, windows, plumbing, elevators, exteriors and interiors, sprinklers, and bathrooms, and funding is through the Canada-Nova Scotia Affordable Housing Agreement. Work has already begun at Alderney Manor and other locations, particularly throughout HRM.

 

            Pathways to home ownership is one of the key pillars of the provincial Housing Strategy. Housing Nova Scotia is committed to supporting home ownership opportunities for low- and modest-income families through partnerships with organizations such as Habitat for Humanity. In 2014, Housing Nova Scotia donated two parcels of land in the community of East Preston and made a $25,000 contribution for the building of a single family home in Springhill. We will continue to do that as Habitat for Humanity comes forward with families in areas throughout the province, we will donate land and we will also help with start-up costs for community groups.

 

Last October I announced that we would be spending $42 million in deferred federal social housing funds as well as $10 million in provincial dollars to support affordable housing. For years previous governments allowed the DFC to build while structural deficits, maintenance challenges, and rent supplements dwindled. I committed to spending these funds with strategic investments, and we did. Some of this funding will go into rental supplements. This is a really exciting program, because by partnering with the private sector we can stretch investments to help as many people as possible. Rental supplements allow us to get people off the waiting list and into affordable housing in a very timely way.

 

Another program that I wish to highlight is our Housing Support Worker Initiative. Housing support workers help people who are at risk or experiencing homelessness to find a place to live and the supports that will help them remain housed. Our eight housing support workers have been able to help over 1,200 people move into a home, and most importantly, 90 per cent of these clients are still living independently two years later. Housing co-ops provide stable, affordable housing for Nova Scotians.

 

Ensuring that the 75 housing co-ops in the province are sustainable for the future is very important. We were able to support housing co-ops to make necessary repairs with up to $24,000 per unit. The province also entered into a new federal-provincial housing agreement allowing more seniors, families, and persons with disabilities in the province to find an affordable place to call home. The $102 million, five-year, cost-shared investment is an extension to the investment in the Affordable Housing Agreement.

 

Last year we introduced amendments to the Housing Act and the Housing Nova Scotia Act that formally established the position of Chief Executive Officer for Housing Nova Scotia. This was an important step to move the Housing Strategy forward.

 

In addition to affordable housing we took the needed steps to act on our promise to help make Nova Scotia a more accessible and inclusive place to live. In fact, last November Housing Nova Scotia was awarded the prestigious 2014 Building Bridges award at the Nova Scotia Home Builders Association Peter Kohler Peak Awards ceremony. The Peak Awards recognize excellence in the residential construction industry, and Housing Nova Scotia was celebrated for its efforts in building partnerships with the private and non-profit development community to create affordable housing choices and home ownership opportunities for Nova Scotia families.

 

As you know, Nova Scotia is known for its hospitality. We are a province made up of caring, giving, and generous people. We're a community-focused group of people who love to give back to our society. The statistics don't lie. Nova Scotians volunteer in their communities at an astounding rate of 54 per cent of the population. I, myself, have had the privilege of working in the voluntary sector and witnessed the commitment and passion of volunteers who gave generously of their time, resources, and skills.

 

Just this month, we had the pleasure of celebrating volunteers from all around the province who give generously of their time and talent at the province's annual Provincial Volunteer Awards. The ceremony celebrated about 70 volunteers nominated by their municipalities, which will also host local volunteer recognition events. The provincial event also included awards for outstanding family and youth volunteer. Simonne Savoury, a Grade 12 student at École Beau-Port in Arichat, is the 2015 Youth Volunteer of the Year. Ms. Savoury says she's inspired by her grandparents' lifelong community service.

 

            The Jones family from Upper Hammonds Plains, the 2015 Volunteer Family of the Year, are described as the backbone of Hammonds Plains. Shirley and her daughters Gina, Melvina, and Sherlene follow in a remarkable family tradition of volunteering that is 175 years old.

 

            Madam Chairman, the non-profit sector in Nova Scotia includes 6,000 non-profit organizations with revenues of more than $2 million. Up to 37,000 Nova Scotians are employed by the non-profit organizations and 450,000 people volunteer their time for an equivalent of an astounding 41,000 full-time positons.

 

            In December, I became the minister responsible for the non-profit voluntary sector group. This allows us to more easily enhance the work that is already underway at DCS in grants administration to improve processes, outcomes, and accountability. Important strategic planning will be done this year to address how we can best support the capacity of the large non-profit sector in Nova Scotia, and this plan will bring together the existing work of the non-profit voluntary sector and community services.

 

            We are exploring specific opportunities to make existing training available to the non-profit sector and to support coordinated training delivery for the sector. We do this now in a variety of ways across government for other sectors. The benefit to all Nova Scotians of extending training resources to non-profits or to support coordination is clear.

 

The grant accountability project initiated last year is putting our own house in order, clarifying staff roles, and doing a better job at setting and measuring expectations for the non-profits we fund. One of the most exciting aspects of this project will result in multi-year funding agreements starting this year. We will work with several of our existing grant recipients, including Phoenix House, to develop these first multi-year funding agreements and we will roll them out to other large grant recipients the following year. This project is also expanding to ensure as we transform DCS programs and services that we have a strong corporate agreement management structure.

 

Madam Chairman, despite a budget that holds the line on government spending and a slightly decreased departmental budget, I have every confidence that with my department's new operational model, we are moving towards a more efficient and effective department for the benefit of Nova Scotians in need.

 

I look forward to standing here again this time next year to talk about our successes that I am confident we will gain through the changes we're implementing with this budget. Thank you.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We'll start the questioning with the PC caucus.

 

The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.

 

MR. LARRY HARRISON: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I am the Community Services Critic for the PC Party, and I just want to make a couple of remarks prior to the questions.

 

One is I appreciate what you have given us so far in how the department will unfold in the next year or so. My job is to ask some questions; some of these questions are going to be Party given and some of these questions are going to be my own concerns, but at no point - and you need to hear this - do I question your sincerity for making these things work that will help Nova Scotians live better lives. So in the questions you just keep that in the back of your mind as it unfolds.

 

The first area that I want to have a look at is child abuse and neglect. With the way society is unfolding there seems to be more and more of this, certainly in certain areas more than other areas. I know the statistics you gave a few moments ago, 14,919 that were investigated of the 25,800-and-some that had been reported, 1,800 cases were open for ongoing services; 519 of those cases saw 819 children being brought into care because of that. How many children were taken into care last year by Community Services?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Right now, going into the next fiscal year, there are currently 1,216 children in care. There are also 16 children who are in out-of-province care right now. We have 624 foster homes that take care of a total of 804. The remaining children are in residential facilities throughout the province.

 

            MR. HARRISON: How many of these cases were actually investigated?

 

            MS. BERNARD: All cases are investigated when they come to us, when a call is made. Not all of them result in a follow-up or anything of that nature. Generally every year there's on average a little over 10,000 referrals made to Child Protection Services. As of last month, 6,200 investigations were meted out by the department.

 

            MR. HARRISON: What would be some of the steps in place now to try to decrease that number over time?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Absolutely one of the steps will be amendments to the Children and Family Services Act which will be introduced next month so that we're able to intervene earlier with families, with a goal of providing supports earlier so that we don't get to a period of crisis, so that we don't wait until the family is down the abuse rabbit hole. That will be a significant shift in the way child welfare services are done with an end goal of having the family unit better supported, with the goal of keeping the children in the home.

 

            Making investments in family resource centres over the last year has reduced tremendously in many areas, including in rural areas, the lack of resources that we had seen before, specifically for families that are looking for parenting support in the non-profit community. We know that many new programs have been available through family resource centres that will support parents through difficult times and help them with parenting strategies within their own homes.

 

            There are a number of areas that can happen in communities in terms of supporting families in trying to erase some of the stigma that comes around so that families will come forward more quickly and ask for the help that they need.

 

            There is a pilot currently happening with legal aid in Cape Breton and in Bridgewater that looks at early intervention, and that's really the path that we want to take. Eventually, in the coming weeks, I'll be making some announcements around children at risk - new positions throughout the province.

 

            All of these incremental things help, but I believe that amending the legislation to truly reflect the best interests of the child will be a huge step forward for families in Nova Scotia.

 

            MR. HARRISON: Many moons ago we had a project in Brookfield called the Fire in the Rose project. I don't know whether you heard of that or not. It's going back probably about 20 years and we were chosen, I think a half-dozen from across Canada, as kind of pilot projects, and what we did was look into the family violence and ways in which we could assist families to come together more to support one another and so on. It was about a year-and-half to two-year project and we did see some improvement in some areas with families on how to deal with children and so on. Raising the age for helping children to 19, do you foresee kind of a huge increase in . . .

 

            MS. BERNARD: We'll see an increase in our department, but we already know that those increases are happening in Health and in Justice because these youth that are not being taken care of by my department are accessing the services of other departments because of conflict with the law and abysmal health outcomes. So this is an investment in younger people who really in our history have been quite vulnerable and not taken care of in the Community Services area, simply because they were not within our mandate. By doing this we really, really hope to alleviate some of the pressure that young people who find themselves not with their family unit at that age, for whatever reason, and really assist them into making choices to reach the potential that they want to reach which has currently not happened in this province.

 

            MR. HARRISON: The cases that you are aware of, do people recommend these people to you or is it picked up through Justice?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Oftentimes they're already in our system and then quite often we lose the ability to support them further in the personal development work that they may need to do. As a former executive director, I literally have seen children dropped from all services at 16 and it really is truly a gap, because at 19 you can walk into the social assistance arena if you need to but it's those three years when we're seeing children, quite frankly, being left to fend for themselves, and oftentimes those are the children that are very vulnerable to predators, to the sex trade in this province, to trafficking, and very serious situations that really imprint negative situations that may rest on them for the rest of their lives.

 

            MR. HARRISON: There's a family I dealt with that had a teen that was doing a lot of damage around and anyway, he was caught one night breaking into a couple of homes and when one of the neighbours came up and grabbed hold of him, he just said, can't touch me, can't touch me. He was right; he wasn't touched. Another case - I guess my difficulty is some of the folks that fall through the holes. I listened to a story the other day of this child who is sexually abusing his two sisters who are younger, and he went to his mother with a knife in his hand and said, I'm going to stab you in the throat and I'm just going to stand here and watch you bleed. He does this a lot. You know how old this son of a gun is? He's eight years old. And she has no idea what she's going to do.

 

She had him at the IWK for that program and they dismissed him and now she is asking me, now what? I wish I could tell her now what. Social services suggested that they take the two girls and look after them, and she stay home with the son and look after him. I wouldn't think that would be an option for the mom who is going nuts now. There are just stories like this where we don't really know where to slot people in to help them and that's one of my concerns, I guess, when I talk about children. I know there are holes and I know you're working very hard to plug up the holes, but they're still there. I don't know if you have any comments on that; I just told you those stories out of frustration.

 

            MS. BERNARD: I hear stories similar to that every day in Nova Scotia and it's difficult for parents, I understand that. I guess one of the drawbacks of the current legislation is waiting for a child to be neglected or abused which in this case, I assume, you're thinking that's not happening. He clearly has behavioural issues that need to be addressed through our health system right now and through youth mental health, but I would encourage this family to continue working with the caseworkers in their area.

 

            MR. HARRISON: Is there difficulty in trying to find places, and maybe even the child that I'm talking about, there are really terrific people out there that can handle very difficult children I'm just wondering, what is out there for families that are able to help?

 

            MS. BERNARD: In the particular case of the young boy that you were talking about, if his behavioural needs are not being met then there would be a call for the department to intervene and take the child into care. In terms of your question, we in Nova Scotia are following a North American trend of foster care families which is unfortunately decreasing by about 25 per cent.

 

I have an amazing amount of respect and a great relationship with the foster family association of Nova Scotia, and as I've said - and I'm sure it's in Hansard from last year in this same room - they are truly the best human resources we have in this province. They take these children, often on a moment's notice, any time, day or night, and bring them into their home and they love them. They become the parent for the province. Often, when I look at some of these foster parents - and I attended an event six months ago where foster parents had been doing it for 50 years - the work and the commitment that they have to these children is incredible.

 

            We have various residential facilities throughout the province that are extraordinary and we have Wood Street which of course is a secure centre in Truro, but also there is a residential component to Wood Street and that is, in my opinion, quite frankly, the Cadillac of services for children in Nova Scotia. They take children as young as eight and always through the court system, they are mandated to go there, and there is tremendous programming that occurs there.

 

            But yes, there are times when children are hard to place, and I hate using that term but it is true. We've really, at this point in time, made concerted efforts over the last year to look for gay and lesbian foster families, younger families, to have different families from the African Nova Scotian community, the Aboriginal community, and we have had some success with that.

 

            The ultimate goal with children that are taken into care permanently is to increase our adoptions in Nova Scotia. I was at an event Saturday night and I had an adoption worker come up to me and was just thrilled to tell me that on Friday afternoon she had placed a sibling group of four children from ages 7 to 2, which is unheard of. She had never placed four. That's incredible. So this family went from one child to five - and four siblings, ages 2 to 7. Her enthusiasm and her hope for these children was so palatable, but then in the next breath she told me of a young 12-year-old boy at Chisholm house who every time she leaves begs her to take him.

 

            So there's a lot of work to be done. There's always recruiting for adoptive families in Nova Scotia. There is no wait-list for assessments. We had hired extra screeners about a year ago and I just toured the child welfare in Dartmouth and there is no wait-list for screening in Nova Scotia for adoptions. We're really making a concerted effort to streamline that process so that children who are up for adoption can be adopted.

 

            MR. HARRISON: So there really is money then to get more people on board? I know they're volunteering, but to find them - to go out there and actually find them.

 

            MS. BERNARD: There was a dialogue for foster parents, which was a report that was done a year before I was minister, and when I came into this role I adopted the recommendations within that dialogue. As money becomes available, we are incrementally increasing.

 

            Respite was a huge need of foster parents and we were able to invest $350,000 last year into that, and also providing more money at Christmastime, which was a real drain on the finances of foster parents. Recently I also found close to $10,000 just to increase the clothing allowance for little ones because they grow out of their clothes so quickly. It's one of those areas that as we find money within our system that the investments into foster care - really, the return on investment is priceless.

 

            MR. HARRISON: I know some foster parents and you're right, some of them have gone through 30 and 40 and 50 over their time and really incredibly good just to be able to drop them and have them looked after properly. In your previous career and in my previous career, unfortunately, we get the ones who are not quite fitting into this program or not quite fitting into that program and they're looking to us to try to find something that's going to work for them. I even think this lady mentioned the Wood Street facility but could not get the child in. I'm not sure what that reason was.

 

            MS. BERNARD: I can tell you the reason. The child would have to be in our care.

 

            MR. HARRISON: That's what I like about this - I get the information, thank you. (Interruption) That's right, unlike Question Period, this is a much easier way to get information. (Laughter)

 

            I'm happy with what you're saying. We are going to try to do our best. There are always going to be folks who will fall through the system, but if we just keep plugging we will eventually minimize those who do, so thank you for that.

 

            Just looking at social workers themselves, and this is an area that is starting to concern me, I guess, is there a certain caseload that a caseworker can have?

 

            MS. BERNARD: There are standards province-wide for the caseloads of social workers and child welfare. When a front-line social worker positon becomes vacant it is filled automatically, so there are no vacancies in social worker, child welfare positions throughout the province. Depending on the complexity of the cases, whether they're short, temporary care or longer care we monitor that regularly and make sure that the caseloads are within the standards that are set within the province. Part of the restructuring of the system was moving caseworkers that had very low cases to areas where it was higher.

 

            MR. HARRISON: Elevating now, going from children into let's say adult care in social services. I met with a couple last week, an older couple - well, my age I guess. Both of them are on disability, I mean really disabled, and they wanted some assistance. I went back to my consistency assistant and I said, look, would you give social services a call and see if they can come out to interview this couple, and they were told that they're not going to be doing that anymore. Is that a policy?

 

            MS. BERNARD: No, that's not the policy. Are they income assistance clients currently?

 

            MR. HARRISON: What happened is they were - he couldn't work but she did. She had a pension and she got $20,000 from that pension that they had to take out and that was to look after all the past bills that they owed in rental and health stuff and so on. Anyway, that $20,000 did get them back on their feet again for a time and because she had that they were taken off for - I think they said it was 18 months that they would be taken off social assistance.

 

Anyway, that money is gone with the other bills and now they're looking to be put back on again, so that is the situation. I was just thinking that if a caseworker went out to see them and assessed them that it would certainly be better than me trying to describe something to them, or my constituency assistant trying to describe a situation to them, and they could actually see the conditions they're living in and their difficulties health wise. But, anyway, that didn't work.

 

MS. BERNARD: We instituted on April 1^st no home visits, but there are always exceptions to the rule, especially when people are homebound. One of the first things I wanted to do when I became minister, and probably every MLA that's sitting in this room right now and in this building will tell you the number-one complaint they get is that my worker will not return my phone call or I can't get hold of anybody. In my case, when I was on social assistance, that was my number-one complaint, and then a secondary complaint was what I felt was an intrusion of my space during home visits. That paternalistic policy, for what it was, existed for many decades in this province and that was one of the changes that I wanted to make. So there are home visits when people are homebound but we prefer to have the caseworkers more available to everybody instead of spending time checking boots at the door.

 

            MR. HARRISON: I do appreciate that and I understand the reasoning for that. I was happy to hear you say though that there are exceptions to the rule. There are always exceptions to the rule. That's something that has frustrated me, I guess, over the last year and half, these are the rules and if they don't fit into their little niche, we can't help. I know the rules are there for a reason, but there are exceptions because of circumstances of people and I hope you let the other folks know that there can be exceptions to the rule if someone deems it necessary. I don't know who's going to deem it necessary, whether it's me or someone else, I don't know how they would get that . . .

 

            MS. BERNARD: I have been very clear in my instructions, as has the deputy and the executive directors within the department, that policy is there but if it doesn't make sense or if doesn't lead to a positive outcome that makes sense, then we ask you to challenge it. That is a cultural shift within a department that has been mired in policy obedience for decades, so that's not going to happen in a year, it may not happen next year, but it is happening because I hear about it every day, as does the deputy, and front-line workers are starting to trust that they can question policies, that they are not going to be reprimanded, that they are being empowered to come up with solutions that still work within the framework that we have but the interpretation has a better outcome.

 

We've seen it in different locations throughout the province. I'm thinking particularly of the member for Lunenburg West where we had a very creative solution to an issue around property taxes and housing, and that caseworker came up with a wonderfully creative solution that fit what we all needed. It takes time. The encouragement and the support is there from the executive directors and certainly from the deputy minister and certainly from myself; it takes time to trickle down but we are getting there.

 

            MR. HARRISON: I wasn't expecting to hear that but I am so glad that I am hearing that, because you and I have both been in professions where there are always exceptions, circumstances that are never the same. I'm encouraged by that so thank you.

 

Again, in my own riding of Middle Musquodoboit there has been an income assistance worker removed. I see where Sheet Harbour closed an office with five workers in it and Barrington as well, I guess. What's the plan for those places getting the attention?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Sheet Harbour had 1.5 staff, and when we tracked the statistics and the caseloads historically, particularly in the last year, they were receiving anywhere from one to two walk-ins a week, with about maybe two or three phone calls a day.

 

            It did not make sense fiscally to keep paying for rent and utilities in a space that simply wasn't being utilized. It made perfect sense for that worker to be placed in Cole Harbour where the caseload is a little larger. There is still a drop-off box in Sheet Harbour. That worker also has the ability to visit Sheet Harbour when needed. People want answers to their questions - they want help. They don't care what office that worker is in, they just want the answer.

 

            In terms of Guysborough, that office in the previous government had been downgraded and was only open half-time throughout the week, I believe. That's another case of cases declining, which quite frankly, is what you want in your area. You don't want your income assistance cases rising in your area. It's not a sign of prosperity. It's not a benchmark that you want to meet. So in that office - five staff members, mostly administrative, and a few caseworkers - there simply was not the work in that area that was needed. I believe those folks have all been placed in other areas.

 

            MR. HARRISON: That was going to be my question, I guess. Are they okay with the change in those areas, are they still going to get help?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Absolutely. We monitor cases through areas - through towns, through offices - very regularly. When there is an historical decline - it's not just a blip, it's not unique, it's historical - then it just makes sense to take the resources from an area and put them in another area where perhaps that decline is not happening.

 

            MR. HARRISON: As a follow-up to that, if the caseload did increase, is there room to move?

 

            MS. BERNARD: There would be a re-evaluation of that, yes, absolutely.

 

            MR. HARRISON: Money-wise - it's not my forte but I'm going to ask the question anyway. Is there a given amount of money that's going to be saved by doing this - these offices, like you're saying, the paying of rent, and so on and so forth - and if there is, where would that money go?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Any restructuring that we do within this huge - it's almost like a ship and we're trying to right it because it hasn't been working well in a couple of decades - it all gets reinvested back into either persons with disabilities or child welfare or income assistance - ESIA; the transformation for the persons with disabilities, the benefit reform in ESIA. Any cuts that I make to organizations that aren't doing the work that are priorities - all of that has been reinvested into the department.

 

            I mentioned earlier, sometimes it's not how much money you have - it's how you spend it. As somebody who was on the outside looking in for many, many years in the community, I often had many different questions: Jesus, why do they do it that way? Or how does that happen and why does it happen? I have mentioned before that when I became minister, I got to ask those questions and I often got the answer: Because that's the way it has always been done. In the past year we've had an extraordinary ability through a perfect storm of senior management change to be able to effect change in a meaningful way that will set the system up on the right path so that it will be sustainable, it will work better for the people who use the system, and the costs will not keep going up and the outcomes keep going down, because that's what we're seeing. It will be just the opposite. That takes time. We're committed to doing that, and it's well underway and long overdue.

 

            MR. HARRISON: The cut-off, I guess, for money for people to go on community services, has that been increased or is there any thought of increasing that?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Everything is on the table. We're looking at benefit reform; we're looking at everything from cut-offs right now to when people leave our system, how long we might support them; and we're looking at administrative streamlining. The benefit reform that is happening within DCS has never happened to this extent. Everything is on the table, everything is being looked at. The goal is - and I often say this - this system has not changed any since I was a single mother in the 1990s on this system. So we're looking at 30 years of everything around us changing, but the system that helps the most vulnerable people in the province is not keeping pace. It was time for change and I'm glad to be at the helm when that's happening, and it will happen.

 

When I look at the caseload for income assistance, I always do it in thirds: a third for people who were like me, who were job ready and could walk off the system at any time; a third for people who need some professional and personal development, perhaps to help with literacy or anything like that; and then a third for folks that for whatever reason will never be able to live self-sufficiently. The focus is to really help the folks in the first two groups to reach the potential that they set for themselves. We have not been doing that.

 

We've been doing it with a little bit of success but I think the benefit reform is really going to help people become self-sufficient, because quite frankly, coming onto social assistance - and I talk to many young people in my office and many moms - it's not a career choice. It should never be a career choice and it should never be a career path, and we talk about that quite a bit in my riding. We often see the generational aspects of income assistance and so we really need to start working with children and ensuring that they are set up and supported for the goals that they eventually want to reach in their adult lives. It's exciting to see the structural and the benefit reform changes that will eventually come over the next couple of years.

 

The third group that I talked about, mostly persons with disabilities that rely on our services, they have to be more included in the community and person directed. That has been the focus because the programs that we may have now, particularly in our large residential areas, we know that for many people those aren't working. The outcomes are poor, the cost is great, people aren't in their communities - they're not in the communities with their families - and we have been told quite clearly that that needs to change.

 

MR. HARRISON: I think you're right, it has been that way for a very long time, and maybe that's part of the difficulty with some of the bureaucracy: it hasn't changed in so long, even they're getting tired of doing the same thing, so if we can elevate them somehow into doing some things differently, they too may get a renewed sense of helping people. This is the very reason I decided to go into this in the first place, was to try to help people in a different way. Some ways are still the same, but at the same time it's a different venue and I know people get very, very frustrated with the bureaucracy, with trying to fit into a certain slot or whatever.

 

I guess I'm encouraged to hear that some changes are going to be made and I think in that, hopefully, the bureaucracy will behave differently as well. There are a lot of good people in there, no question, but there are some that are probably just plain tired, just tired and burnt out.

 

            MS. BERNARD: I agree. I think one of the things that keeps my head in the game and nose to the grindstone is during the campaign I met a young woman who had severe disability and was in a wheelchair and said to me, Joanne, I just want you to always to remember that every year I have to go to my doctor and get a receipt to tell my income assistance worker that I'm not going to get out of this chair. That's dehumanizing for her, it's dehumanizing for the worker who has to ask for that receipt, and that hasn't changed in many, many, many, many years.

 

            MR. HARRISON: I guess it's the rural that I had been concerned about and to find ways in which we can meet the needs of the people that are way back on these dirt roads that oftentimes they won't even come to you, and when you see them you really just want to help them. You say, why don't we try to do something here? Oh no, no, no we're fine, we're fine. Then of course you get the other group that are using the system and it's hard to strike that balance, I know it is, and I really do appreciate that.

 

            The sexual violence strategy, that is certainly one of your primary concerns - it's a big concern, let's put it that way. When is the strategy going to be completed and come into effect?

 

            MS. BERNARD: I'm looking at most likely the month of May, it's just being completed now. I want to go over every word of it. I made a commitment that I wasn't going to release it until I was ready to because it's far too important not to do it right the first time. I'm very excited about the direction and the feedback that we've gotten from community, and I'm extraordinarily thrilled that there will be two new sexual assault nurse examiner programs that came through this budget. They will be part and parcel - they're not part of the strategy but they certainly will lend to increased supports for victims. It's something that will be released in May.

 

            MR. HARRISON: Part of the pilot project that I named earlier, the Fire in the Rose project, it really did zero in on that - not the sexual violence per se but just the perceptions, the attitudes that are present in our society, and it's not getting better - it should. I mean with the way in which women have been valued more and more in the workplace and in other areas, there are certainly areas where it has gotten worse rather than better. Just how men look at women, it's not respectful, I guess. I don't know how you get the education out there because I think that's the only way you're going to eliminate it is to get society thinking and feeling in a different direction than what it is now - how you do that, maybe you just do it one on one, I don't know, but I find it frustrating too.

 

            MS. BERNARD: It takes a long time to change a culture shift. In the next year, especially when I meet with my counterparts next month, I will be talking about the conversations that we can start having with our men and boys. We're always focused on our girls, which is great, but we have to focus on the conversations we're having with our sons because that will change the boys that grow up and how they view women and how they interrelate with women.

 

One of the successes, I guess, that I've seen coming from the domestic violence field over the last number of years has been the strategy, which was the recommendations that came out in 2010 with the Domestic Violence Court in Sydney. That is now continuing on with support through the budget last week, which is so important because that really assists women through the court process, but more than that it also provides integrated support for men who wish to change behaviours.

 

            I've had the opportunity to sit in a men's intervention program just outside of Stellarton. They knew who I was and I told them why I was there: I had a keen interest in what issues men who abused faced. I was so surprised when I walked out of there because there were many issues - women I had been working with all had the same fears and the same insecurities, the lack of self-confidence, and their insecurities came out through violence. It was very eye-opening for me.

 

            I am pleased to say the only program in Nova Scotia, Healing the Bruises - which I developed - is now fully funded, and over the years that has helped hundreds of children not only within the confines of Alice Housing, but in public relations and in public education within the school system. We know that boys who witness violence in the home are five times more likely to grow up to be abusers, so if you can intervene very early, you can have young boys realizing that family violence, sexual violence, doesn't have to be their legacy and it doesn't have to define their future.

 

            We've been very supportive of organizations that really look at the core reasons for violence against women in Nova Scotia but it will change, it has to change, but more education - I've had conversations with my counterpart in the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development about curriculum introduction within the younger ages about healthy relationships, and that's the area that we really need to focus on.

 

            MR. HARRISON: And that's a good place to start, too, is in the education system. It's huge for a lot of kids because they don't have any good home life in order to fall back on.

 

            Now are these programs and initiatives in every part of the province?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Healing the Bruises, unfortunately, is only available in Dartmouth; eventually we'd love to see it roll out throughout the province. Transition houses do a lot of public education, as do women's centres within the schools. They do tremendous work within their communities but talking to young boys, you know I always found that whenever we did a consultation or a public education piece through Alice Housing we would talk to kids, usually about Grades 5, 6, and 7, and there was never a time in all the classrooms that we went to that we did not have a child at the end of it disclose.

 

            What that meant was that a complete stranger who was in their classroom talking about domestic violence for 60 minutes gained more trust than what was happening with teachers. It had nothing to do with the ability of the teachers, it had everything to do with children not being able to trust adults, to disclose what's going on in the home, because we don't always talk about domestic violence in the classroom. So kids who were living domestic violence at home were telling their 10-year-old best friend, and that's where it would go.

 

            When I looked at the statistics when I was at Alice Housing, out of the 301 children who had interviewed with their mothers over the previous five years, only two had disclosed to a teacher and that was a fundamental red flag for us, so discussing it in the classroom is paramount.

 

            MR. HARRISON: Would that be a one-shot deal for this person to come in and present themselves? I'm just wondering if it's possible to gather those competent folks together who are able to do that and maybe just send them out to other areas.

 

            MS. BERNARD: Well, there's one child and youth counsellor at Alice Housing and there's one outreach counsellor, and I would suspect that if the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development were to call Alice Housing at 466-8459, they would love to go. The Minister of Education has also been extraordinarily supportive because we did a book - she was very supportive in having that in the schools throughout the province - which talked about a 10-year-old's journey through domestic violence.

 

            There are all kinds of opportunities, and the women's centres do extraordinary work with a couple of their programs in talking to youth about healthy relationships; Lori Morgan is a force unto her own but she's one person. I think in the future, probably a train the trainer, in co-operation with my department and the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, would be the way to go in terms of discussing that issue in the classroom.

 

            MR. HARRISON: There probably could be a lot of things done with the Department of Justice, the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, and certainly your department, to get the word out there and offer help when people do hit the system rather than fall through.

 

            How much time do I have?

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: You have six minutes.

 

            MR. HARRISON: I see the question here - the intent to determine community- based approaches which better support victims and families - potentially, how many different approaches could we see maybe this year as we unfold?

 

            MS. BERNARD: For sexual violence?

 

            MR. HARRISON: Yes.

 

            MS. BERNARD: I haven't seen the strategy yet but I know what I would like to say. There are tremendous community-based organizations doing a lot of great work now. The problem is they're not coordinated together so a lot of victims are not seeking help, or they don't know where to go for help, or they don't feel it's accessible.

 

            For instance, if you're a man in Port Hawkesbury who has been sexually violated, there is no place to go until you hit Truro. So there has really been a patchwork of community resources that sort of work in silos in some areas but certainly don't meet the needs of everyone. That is part of the direction in which we'll be heading.

 

            One of the things that we also found is that there are extraordinarily different levels of support, depending on where you live, and we had a media call on that a couple of weeks ago, a very high-profile place. One of the areas that we will be looking at is community- specific programming, because not every community is the same and not every community has supports within it to be able to provide those services. Government can't do it alone, but we need to be able to provide the framework so that victims can be supported.

 

            MR. HARRISON: When I was working with the palliative care team at the Truro hospital, we started a group for men whose wives had passed and we did it for about a year, but then it kind of petered out - and that's a good thing, in a sense, because they obviously felt better than when they came into the program.

 

            Sometimes it's just a matter of trying these in communities - you know, get one or two people just to put it out there, to have people gather and talk about their life experiences. It may not work, like you say, in some areas; in other areas it might just take right off and then it might have an effect on other communities that are nearby. So do you foresee any of that changing?

 

            MS. BERNARD: It's certainly our hope that community supports will be tailored to the area that they're in - that they will be more accessible to all people. That certainly is the direction that we're moving in.

 

            MR. HARRISON: I have another hour, right?

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes.

 

            MR. HARRISON: That's good because I have a whole list more, but I think for the time being - Eddie, do you want to ask anything?

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: There's about 42 seconds left. (Laughter)

 

            MR. HARRISON: Thank you very much.

 

MADAM CHAIRMAN: We'll move the questioning on to the NDP caucus.

 

            The honourable member for Truro-Bible Hill-Millbrook-Salmon River.

 

            MS. LENORE ZANN: Thank you. Can you just tell me, we only have five minutes, right?

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: No, we will be going until 9:04 p.m.

 

            MS. ZANN: I thought we were finishing at 8:30 p.m. Is that not correct?

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Four hours of the Subcommittee on Supply would be 9:04 p.m.

 

            MS. ZANN: That makes a big difference. First of all, I want to thank you so much for your presentation. Just to be clear, I tried to jot down some things while you were speaking, but is it possible to get a copy of your presentation - your speech?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Absolutely.

 

            MS. ZANN: That would be great because there's a lot of good information in there. As you probably know, I'm the new critic for this portfolio so please bear with me, I'm just learning the ropes here.

 

            MS. BERNARD: You've got a pro next to you.

 

            MS. ZANN: Yes, she was kind enough to offer to sit with me to help me through this one, because obviously it's so fresh. Did you say that the department provides services to more than 44,000 people in Nova Scotia?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes. That's for income assistance.

 

            MS. ZANN: I really enjoyed what you had to say in the speech because I think that for many years people have been struggling here in Nova Scotia and I don't know if it has really necessarily been a priority of some of the governments. I do know that when we came into power we tried to make it a priority to change things. As you know now, it's easy to say things when you're on the outside - why don't they do this, why don't they do that? Everybody's an armchair politician, and people seem to think you can just change things like that, but it really is like sailing a big, huge ocean liner and if you make a sudden turn - as many people have found out - the ship may just go down. You don't know what the consequences are going to be so I understand that it takes time.

 

I know that the way governments work now - I've learned over the last six years that a lot of the seeds for various things are planted and it came from former governments, which some things a new government will continue on with and other things they'll just scrap, depending on what their priorities are and what their mandate is and what their vision is for the province.

 

            There are many things in here that I really was glad to see, like the 16 to 19 year old gap. As an MLA that definitely I heard a lot about that, people worried about those particular young people falling off the map, and also a lot of the disability work that you're going to be doing and the money that's going to be put into that, I think it's very timely.

 

            There are also thing that, of course, concern me and I also have to say that I understand how hard it is when you've been also given a financial budget. How, you know where do you cut, where do you save, what do you do, it's not easy and we're dealing with people who really, really need help, and we're dealing with poverty, and we're dealing with poverty that goes on generationally and living in communities such as my colleague to the left of me, there's so much poverty out there.

 

            My sister is a teacher and guidance counsellor in South Colchester Academy and she has to deal with this every day, and it's very very sad and it's difficult. The same in Truro, many people who can't afford their rent, once they've paid their rent they basically live on $85 a month. Many of them have disabilities and many of them have learning issues. They weren't all given a golden playing-card deck when they were born, and they are therefore dealing with the hand that they've been given, and it's not all equal and it's not all fair.

 

            So how do you deal with that situation and how do you try to create a better, more even playing field for the people of a particular province?

 

            MS. BERNARD: I think what you have to look at is really the root causes of poverty because I know in your government you made great strides with the Affordable Living Tax Credit and the child tax credit and increases to income assistance, but you talk to any of your constituents, as I do with mine, they don't feel any better off today than they did four years ago when the increases happened.

 

            There has to be a real look at why there is generational poverty, what the barriers are for people who want to be attached to the labour market, and I think that takes time. I think there are some folks who don't see beyond income assistance because they don't understand or have any sense of what could be, and there is a learned helplessness that they have embraced. Breaking through that - and I've seen it so many times over my career, people who don't think they deserve any better than I'm not going to try. Getting to the root causes of poverty in this province is, in my personal opinion - I'm not sitting here as minister but in my personal opinion - that really is what will break down a lot of the barriers for folks.

 

            MS. ZANN: Yes, I have to agree with you, and I think along that line of thinking, it's interesting that we have the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development here at the tables with us, because early childhood development is such a big part of that. As you know, our government did start that whole program going, as well, putting money into early childhood development and going down that route, which to be honest, my dad taught at the Teachers College in Truro for many years and he taught that 40 years ago, the importance of early childhood intervention and education. The students that he taught, they got out there into the system and they made such low wages - and they still really do - and here they are looking after our children and educating our children.

 

It has been very interesting to hear from my dad over the years, about the importance of those early years in trying to create an even playing field for kids. Whether a little child hears 14,000 words by the time they start school, whether by age 6 or 7 they've heard thousands of words, or that they hear words like "shut up" or "sit down" - this can make a huge difference in a child's life. So I think it's very important for us to invest in those early years and to try to get all the kids to have as much of a chance as possible and to be given encouragement and support and kindness and caring. That's part of the situation that I think needs to be changed.

 

            The other thing is, how do we create a society where people feel valued and they feel that they have something special to offer society? Because so many of them do seem to feel just - it gets beaten out of them by an early age where they just feel like it doesn't matter, they're worthless, they're not important, nothing they say matters, nothing they do really matters. These are the kids who are going to have mental health issues, they're going to turn to drugs and alcohol.

 

Of course, alcoholism is a huge problem as well. I believe it's genetic and I know that many of us have people in our families that we might be aware of, or also friends. I think we've only just touched the tip of the iceberg when it comes to that problem. That also has an effect on families and poverty. If you've got young parents who get pregnant and then they have children and they're drinking and they're doing drugs and they're not paying attention, and they're spending the money on booze, drugs, and cigarettes, then that child is going to suffer.

 

            There are so many prongs to the problem that I think we really do need to look holistically. I have been talking about holistic results and trying to deal with things holistically for 30 or 40 years myself and people just seem to be now picking up on holistic that they're using it so much, but I think it really does work.

 

            Also the justice system - when kids get into the justice system, they've done something wrong - even children with mental health issues, as you have experienced and my colleague to the right has experience. Once they get into the justice system and they've been flagged as a problem, how do you deal with that? How do you get them off that path? They get thrown in jail or children's institutions and they might sometimes pick up bad habits there. I think we have our work cut out for us to try to change the status quo here in Nova Scotia when it comes to these particular issues.

 

With those few words, I'm going to start to ask you a few questions about the budget in particular. Based on looking at the budget and getting some research workers helping me to understand it, it seems like your Community Services budget is actually only increasing spending by $12 million.

 

            MS. BERNARD: I'm sorry, could you repeat that?

 

            MS. ZANN: It seems like Community Services is only increasing spending by about $12 million. Is that correct?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes, $11.9 million.

 

            MS. ZANN: This indicates that to meet the 2015-16 Budget Estimates, the department will spend about $1 million less than it did last year in 2014-15.

 

            MS. BERNARD: No, I'm not following that. I don't follow your math, I'm looking at what I'm . . .

 

            MS. ZANN: Okay, so the budget has increased by $12 million - $11.9 million, right?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: But in order to meet the 2015-16 Budget Estimates it seems the department will spend about $1 million less than it did in 2014-15. There doesn't seem to be any allowance in the budget for spending increases associated with inflationary costs and inflation is supposed to be about 3 per cent.

 

            MS. BERNARD: The forecast for last year was $920.092 million; our budget for this year is $915.410 million, and last year it was $903.496 million. Now the forecast is for - what I have found in this department is that every year you cannot plan for things that might happen so the difference in what was actually forecasted in estimates last year and what we actually spent are for extraordinary circumstances that arise when you're dealing with people who need your services and they are not part of your budgeted expenses, they are not a budget line anywhere. They are cases that are dropped off at emergency rooms that need to go somewhere until a placement is found, they're extraordinary circumstances that are planned for because, quite simply, there are no mechanisms within accounting practices to plan for that.

 

            In my estimation, not because I'm the minister but any minister will always have, very rarely - when you're dealing with people's lives, you can't budget for that. You cannot budget for the extraordinary things that may or may not happen and that is why the forecast is probably always, historically, going to be different than the estimate.

 

            MS. ZANN: For instance, in 2014-15 the estimate was $903.496 million.

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: So the department actually spent $17 million more last year than was budgeted.

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes, and I can give you a breakdown of that if you'd like.

 

            MS. ZANN: That's okay right now. Then for 2015-16 it's estimated that you're going to be spending $915.410 million.

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: So taking into consideration the inflationary costs, which usually are around 3 per cent, there doesn't appear to be any allowance in the budget for these spend increases associated with inflation.

 

            MS. BERNARD: All departments have to absorb the inflationary costs.

 

            MS. ZANN: Okay, so the department is absorbing that.

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: I would imagine it's probably going to be hard to stick to that estimate there.

 

            MS. BERNARD: Well, we have specifics in terms of what the extra $11.9 million increase is, but when you're dealing with people's lives - and we are an eligibility program, and if people are eligible, they're eligible. There will always be - you know, we have a responsibility in this province to always make sure that people that need us, we're there. I'm $17 million over budget but we took care of that $17 million worth of needs.

 

            MS. ZANN: I totally agree, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think the estimate for this year is taking into consideration the inflationary costs that are going to be happening, you're going to be sucking that up into the department, but you're probably going to have to go over budget anyway because it went over $17 million last year. That's what I was asking.

 

            Going further along, can you please explain, especially to assistance recipients, why the budget has functionally been frozen for the department?

 

            MS. BERNARD: So specifically you're asking why income assistance rates have been frozen.

 

            MS. ZANN: Income assistance rates, yes - two years in a row.

 

            MS. BERNARD: Two years in a row, not an easy decision, not something that I'm particularly proud of.

 

MS. ZANN: Right.

 

MS. BERNARD: I'm encouraged with the work that has been going on with benefit reform. I mentioned that the previous government, much to its credit, had increased social assistance rates and pumped about $18 million into that area. I can tell you right now that from the people I know, they're no better off than they were four years ago.

 

Looking at the way the benefit system is in Nova Scotia, it has to change. Income assistance rates, for every dollar of an income assistance rate it costs $400,000, so you would have to invest anywhere between $5 million and $10 million to truly make it anywhere meaningful in the lives of people. Clearly we're not in that fiscal reality at this point in time, and quite frankly, I'm not sure it would make much of a difference at the end of the day.

 

MS. ZANN: So you're saying if you had $10 million more you don't think it would make any difference at the end of the day?

 

MS. BERNARD: That would result in maybe about a $10 a month allowance, and people who are on income assistance would tell you that that would not bring them out of poverty.

 

MS. ZANN: Well, I do know that in the four years that we were in government we added the Poverty Reduction Credit, we added the Affordable Living Tax Credit, and we found that in those four years poverty actually dropped 18 per cent in Nova Scotia and 11,000 families were lifted out of poverty. I think that is actually somewhat substantial.

 

I understand that you're under a budget crunch, I get that, but I don't buy the argument that, well, if we had more money it wouldn't help anyway.

 

MS. BERNARD: I don't think $10 a month is going to lift anybody out of poverty but the programs that the previous government instituted are still there. In fact, we increased one of them last year and were able to bring 1,300 more children under that auspice. In Nova Scotia we've hit sort of a welfare wall and we need to put benefits outside of income assistance. We need to build on what we have. When 80 per cent of the people who come back onto income assistance every month are returning back to that system, it shows us that throwing money at the system is not working. If 80 per cent of the people who come back onto income assistance each month in this province have previously been on income assistance, what we're doing is not working.

 

MS. ZANN: Following along on that argument then, what's your opinion about guaranteed income living wage, a guaranteed living wage?

 

MS. BERNARD: We're looking at that as part of benefit reform - guaranteed income supplements, absolutely.

 

MS. ZANN: For instance, in my many travels, I lived in Sweden for a year. They have a guaranteed income living wage, and it means that there's no income assistance, nobody is living on welfare; people aren't looked at as welfare bums because everybody gets the same supplement. Obviously people are encouraged to get work and to get jobs and to get wealthy, and that whole system seems to work a lot better than the one that we have. People aren't living in poverty, they have less stress, less anxiety, they're healthier, they have less trips to the hospitals, and there are less sick days. I mean how serious do you really think that your government would be at doing something like that?

 

MS. BERNARD: All I can say is that it is part of the benefit reform that we're looking at over the next couple of years and looking at the indicators of everything that you talked about, because clearly what we're doing now isn't working - what any of our governments are doing in terms of income assistance.

 

One of the areas that I really tried to focus on was rent supplements, because you know as well as I do that a lot of people spend their personal allowance money on their rent, so by investing over the next 10 years a significant multi-millions of dollars, we're able to provide on average about a $375 supplement for up to 500 people. To me that was a faster way to move people from a wait-list and to help them with their average monthly income by providing that supplement so that they weren't taking their personal care money and using it on their rent.

 

Rent control is not under my responsibility but I can tell you in the 1990s, when rent control was brought in, I was on income assistance and no sooner had the words "rent control" been spoken that my landlord jacked the rent as high as he could and I had to find somewhere else to live, and that's my fear with rent control in this area.

 

I remember two years ago being in the House when the former minister talked about rent control, and she was right when she said that because that's exactly what happened in the 1990s - landlords, as soon as they heard that it was being a consideration, they jacked it up and everybody suffered for it.

 

When I worked at Alice Housing I kept the rents low based on income assistance rates because that was an artificial rent control. I knew if I went much beyond that then people weren't going to be able to afford it, it was as simple as that. Not every landlord sees that in this area so my focus over the last year was really investing in rent supplements, which in my opinion was a win-win in terms of finding people safe, affordable housing, while releasing some of the budget pressures in their monthly budget.

 

MS. ZANN: It's funny, you must have been reading my mind because I didn't mention rent control and yet I was thinking about rent control before you even mentioned it. When I lived in New York, actually, they have rent control there and it definitely saved our buns there because rents are extremely high in New York, and even under rent control, the landlords were allowed to raise the rent but it was only 2 per cent every two years; if you signed a lease for two years they could raise it by 2 per cent at the end of those two years.

 

Most of us found that it helped because otherwise they just kept jacking them up anyway. I do find that even here I'm paying for my apartment here in Halifax, and I've only been in my apartment for a year and they're already rising the rent by 5 per cent. I don't know how people can afford to live here.

 

Can you please let me know what caused the budget for the Community Residential Services to increase in 2014 by $65,000, in the forecast over the estimate?

 

MS. BERNARD: What page are you on there?

 

MS. ZANN: I'm not sure where it is but I have that it was.

 

MS. BERNARD: Could you ask the question again?

 

MS. ZANN: What caused the budget for Community Residential Services to increase in 2014 by $65,000, in the forecast over the estimate?

 

MS. BERNARD: It reflects the time and the cost required to close Empire House. I closed Empire House last July down in Bridgewater. It was a four-bed facility, I believe, the only one actually run by the province for youth. It now has since morphed into Freeman House which I had the pleasure of visiting in February.

 

There are not many times that I leave something in my heart - that was a very difficult decision for me to close a shelter and I really took a chance on it. The hub model that is now in place in Freeman House, under the Family Service Association and Art Fisher, is something I would extraordinarily love to replicate throughout the province because he has brought in corporate, he has brought in community - he has Laing House, which provides services here, doing a program once a week for the youth of that area. It is an extraordinary investment in families and I can't say enough about it, I can't say enough about the commitment of the board and the staff there. That would have been, for lack of a better word, the blip.

 

            MS. ZANN: You don't foresee that happening again this year, it was a one-time only?

 

            MS. BERNARD: It was a one-time.

 

            MS. ZANN: I also noticed that there are going to be changes in the service delivery model in rural Nova Scotia. Starting in June the department is making changes to the service delivery model and eliminating regional administrator-level management?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: Those positions, you're also reducing the four regions to three by merging northern and eastern regions, right?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: Could you explain why that decision was made to merge the northern and eastern regions and what this may mean for residents in Guysborough and Antigonish Counties, and Amherst and Tatamagouche as well?

 

            MS. BERNARD: When looking at caseloads throughout the province, the northern region actually had the smallest amount of caseloads so it made perfect sense to collapse them together. The service delivery will not change for clients, it will just be coming from different areas. There are no office closures in those areas.

 

            One of the things that I had consistently heard from my colleagues on all sides of the House is the lack of consistency in policy interpretation and service delivery. What you get in Amherst is different than what you get in Yarmouth and is different than what you get in Port Hawkesbury. What the regions had done over the genesis of many years has developed silos - I called them fiefdoms, but silos for lack of a better word. It made sense for me to do a - when you're doing the internal shift of benefit reform it made sense to marry a new service delivery model within what we were doing, which really has been extraordinarily long overdue.

 

            Those regional administrator positions, the four of them, no longer exist. We will have three directors, but more importantly - and what I'm very happy about - is that we will actually have an executive director of service delivery so we can ensure that service delivery from one end of the province to the other is the same, is transparent, is accountable, and is streamlined. We will also be developing a new director of community service provider relations which we've needed for so long, because oftentimes the work of service providers may be done on the corner of someone's desk - we need a designated person that actually deals with the multi-level agreements and the service providers. As a former service provider, we've been calling for this for many, many years.

 

            District managers will go from 26 to 15. I found, and I don't think many people would argue, like most bureaucracies we were a little top-heavy and so this was part of the streamlining system as well.

 

            MS. ZANN: So how many staff have actually received their notice then?

 

            MS. BERNARD: The 26 will go down to 15; the 26 will apply for those 15. We've had some retire and the four regional administrators will compete for whatever position, whether it's the executive director - most people have found other positions within the civil service. We've had five specialists that I can honestly say have truly received layoff notices. There is no place for them to land.

 

            MS. ZANN: How many actual employees will be leaving the department?

 

            MS. BERNARD: We don't know until the competitions are completed, but nine were given layoff notices.

 

            MS. ZANN: I heard that there were 42.

 

            MS. BERNARD: There were 42 vacant positions that were eliminated.

 

            MS. ZANN: So 42 vacant positions?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes, they had been vacant for a while - they were eliminated.

 

            MS. ZANN: Is that on top of the other 26 down to 15?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: One thing I noticed was that last year $6 million was spent for social workers to travel around the province, and now with the merger, have you budgeted for an increased travel cost? Those social workers will now have to travel farther and stay overnight - have you actually budgeted for that?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: So even though you're merging it, you're aware of how much money it's going to cost to do the travel allowances for the social workers that you have remaining?

 

            MS. BERNARD: The changes in staffing are above the social worker level so they're in the upper management positions. It will not affect the social workers who are on the ground now.

 

            MS. ZANN: The other thing I wanted to ask - I know my time is getting short. So now that there's a decrease in upper management, will casework supervisors be asked to take on extra responsibilities?

 

            MS. BERNARD: No.

 

            MS. ZANN: And you feel that there will be enough of the other management there to take care of it?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Yes.

 

            MS. ZANN: We know that some of the regional offices are at capacity with social workers' caseloads - well, higher than they should be - so can you really guarantee that the staffing cuts won't affect the caseloads?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Vacancies are monitored, and particularly with social workers, every social worker vacancy that is vacant is filled. So that caseload may be up for a couple of weeks until a vacancy is filled, but there is absolutely nobody who is working above the standard that's set.

 

            MS. ZANN: The other thing I wanted to ask was about the ESIA - the bus pass, transportation changes. For years the department has provided travel subsidies to recipients under the ESIA Act. The policy states that recipients with special needs can receive up to $150 a month for special needs transportation, but recently I've heard that individuals who had received the subsidy are having their funding cut and are being told they need at least 12 medical appointments a month to be eligible for such things as a bus pass. So my question is, can you tell me why someone who needs 12 medical appointments a month isn't in a hospital?

 

            MS. BERNARD: Well, I know plenty of people in my work who have had 12 medical appointments a month, and that could be a psychologist, a massage therapist, a physiotherapist three times a week, and that would make 12, so the need for a hospital wouldn't be there.

 

            MADAM CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The time allotted for the consideration of estimates by the Subcommittee on Supply today has elapsed.

 

            We are adjourned.

 

            [The subcommittee adjourned at 9:04 p.m.]