HALIFAX, THURSDAY, APRIL 11, 2019

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY

2:56 P.M.

CHAIR

Brendan Maguire

THE CHAIR: Order. I call the Subcommittee of the Whole on Supply to order. We are here to hear Resolution E17.

E17 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $213,222,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Municipal Affairs, pursuant to the Estimate, and the business plan of the Nova Scotia Municipal Finance Corporation be approved.

THE CHAIR: I will ask the minister for opening remarks and to make introductions of staff that you have here. You have 60 minutes. The floor is yours.

HON. CHUCK PORTER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am pleased to introduce the Estimates of the Department of Municipal Affairs for the 2019-20 fiscal year. Joining me today are Deputy Minister Kelliann Dean, who I am sure everyone knows; and Darlene O’Neill, who is our Director of Finance for the department. I have a few opening comments, and then we’ll be happy to get into some back and forth in the questions.

Our mandate at Municipal Affairs is to promote responsible local government that supports healthy, vibrant, and safe communities. It is generally not to intervene, but rather to provide advice, support, and guidance to municipalities as they strive to operate efficiently and effectively.

Municipalities are governed by the Municipal Government Act, or the MGA as we all know it, and the Halifax Regional Municipality Charter. This legislative framework provides structure for municipal government in Nova Scotia. This legislation gives municipalities authority to raise revenue, to manage planning and development, and to deliver services such as water, waste water, and solid waste management; police, fire, and emergency services; and public transit. It gives them these powers as individual, locally-elected governments that are accountable to their citizens. This gives them a fair degree of independence, and we respect that. They are an order of government accountable to their electorate.

The successful achievement of our mandate is dependent on these strong partnerships. Our primary partners are the province’s 50 municipalities and 21 villages and the organizations that represent them - the Nova Scotia Federation of Municipalities, the Association of Municipal Administrators, and the Association of Nova Scotia Villages. Working together, we implement sound legislation and programs that support good governance, accountability, and effective planning.

The Department of Municipal Affairs also works with municipalities and the federal government to build strong, healthy, vibrant, and sustainable communities. On behalf of the Province of Nova Scotia, we administer numerous federal and provincial funding programs that benefit Nova Scotians and help to build strong and resilient communities.

Within our department, the Emergency Management Office works to enhance the safety and well-being of Nova Scotians by taking a leadership role in emergency management planning and response.

The Office of the Fire Marshal has a mandate to promote, coordinate, and facilitate fire safety in Nova Scotia. The Office of the Fire Marshal also oversees building safety, ensuring that the Nova Scotia Building Code Act and the regulations reflect national standards.

Mr. Chair, I have had the opportunity over the last several month to meet with many municipal councils to hear from them first-hand about their priorities and challenges and how we can continue to support them. I look forward to more of these meetings in the Spring. In the meantime, I’m confident that this fiscal year’s budget continues to support municipal priorities.

The overall department budget for Municipal Affairs for 2019 is $213,222,000. You’ll notice that our department budget has remained about the same, with a slight net increase of about $600,000. This is mainly related to a new program called Community Works Program and changes in the federal-provincial allocations for infrastructure programs. Our budget also includes a new municipal modernization program.

Before I provide details on the two new programs, I should note that four community transportation programs, with a budget of approximately $4.8 million and one FTE, have moved from our department to the Department of Communities, Culture and Heritage. They are the Community Transportation Assistance program, the Accessible Transportation Assistance program, the Public Transit Assistance program, and the Nova Scotia Transit Research Incentive program. There’s no reduction in the funding to these programs, and they’ll continue to be available to municipalities, but through CCH. CCH is the government lead in implementing the Nova Scotia Community Transportation Action Plan, so it makes sense to have all the community transportation programs and work in one department.

[3:00 p.m.]

Now I would like to elaborate on the new programs we will be launching this fiscal year.

The Community Works program makes $500,000 available to municipalities this year to help create new opportunities for jobs in our communities. Through this program, municipalities will be able to hire youth and others to work on community-focused projects such as landscaping and beautification, municipal accessibility plans, and tourism. In the coming weeks, we will share more details with municipalities, including the guidelines and timelines for projects to be approved.

Municipalities across Nova Scotia are facing new challenges and new opportunities every day. Many are exploring new, more innovative ways to work together to better leverage these opportunities and build stronger communities.

One recurring theme I have been hearing since becoming minister is that there is a need for change, and increased regional co-operation is necessary. We often refer to this as municipal modernization. By collaborating and modernizing, municipalities can leverage their collective resources to respond to opportunities that are in the citizens’ best interests. I’m pleased that we are allocating $577,000 this year for the new Municipal Innovation Program. This funding will support projects that advance municipal modernization and increase collaboration between our municipalities.

The federal government is a valued partner in our work to ensure that communities have modern, reliable infrastructure. As mentioned, we have a mandate to support our municipalities to ensure we have healthy, safe, and vibrant communities in our province. There’s no question that reliable infrastructure is the foundation for building strong communities. Enhanced public infrastructure is also critical to growing our provincial economy. All three levels of government - the Government of Canada, the province, and municipalities - recognize this and know that solid infrastructure contributes to economic growth, job creation, and productivity in Nova Scotia. The key part of our mandate is to partner with the federal government to deliver infrastructure programs.

In July 2017, the Government of Canada announced an Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program. Under this program, Infrastructure Canada will invest $180 billion over 10 years, including new programs and areas of public transit, green and social projects, and rural and northern communities. The Nova Scotia allocation is $828 million over 10 years. In 2019-20, the province and the federal governments will invest over $30 million in new infrastructure for our communities.

The Department of Municipal Affairs allocation this year for new projects is $18.9 million and will include the following: just over $8 million in projects under the social stream, eligible projects may include community, culture, and recreation infrastructure; $7.25 million for projects under the environmental quality sub-stream of the green stream, which will help municipalities carry out projects related to their waste water, drinking water, and solid waste infrastructure; and $3.5 million for projects under the rural and northern communities stream which will help municipalities support water, waste water, and solid waste projects in their communities.

We accepted applications for the environmental quality stream last December and are reviewing the submissions now. We will continue to work with our municipal, provincial, and federal partners to ensure our province receives the maximum benefit of this program. Together, we will ensure that municipalities can build new or upgrade existing infrastructure, the infrastructure that our citizens depend on every day.

The 2019-20 budget also includes funding for previously announced federal infrastructure programs. These programs are fully committed, and municipalities are focused on completing approved projects. For example, under the new Building Canada Fund, the national and regional projects portion is scheduled to finish in March 2020, with 12 projects approved.

The Small Communities Fund is also fully committed, with varying start and finish dates for different projects. The Clean Water and Wastewater Fund has 73 approved projects to be completed by March 2020. The department’s budget continues to reflect projected spending in all these programs for committed projects.

Before wrapping up my comments on programs that leverage federal dollars, I did want to speak briefly about federal gas tax funding. This is money that is transferred from the Government of Canada to Nova Scotia municipalities through my department. It can also be spent on municipal infrastructure priorities. As announced in the recent federal budget, the gas tax for municipalities has doubled from the $57.7-million gas tax allocation they received in 2018-19. We are waiting for further information from the federal government before the funding is reflected in the department’s 2019-20 budget. Eligible funding categories include: water and waste water, active transportation, public transit, and community energy systems, to name a few.

Many significant projects have been completed across the province with gas tax funding. For example, three municipalities in Yarmouth County collaborated on a regional wind energy project to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and create more energy security, using local, renewable energy. The Cape Breton Regional Municipality used gas tax funds to complete 2.3 kilometres of the Grand Lake Multi Use Path. This multi-use trail is an active transportation corridor that connects users with communities between Sydney and Glace Bay. In Halifax, the municipality used gas tax funds to support the design of the Lacewood transit terminal. The terminal design included several features to make it environmentally friendly and accessible for users, while enhancing the customer service experience.

The Department of Municipal Affairs also offers programs to municipalities that support their infrastructure needs. Through the Provincial Capital Assistance Program, we support municipal water supplies, sewage disposal and solid waste infrastructure. In 2018-19, the Village of New Minas collaborated with the Municipality of the County of Kings in the development of an asset management plan for the village’s municipal infrastructure assets. This year, we will invest $690,000. Applications for this fiscal year will be accepted until May 6^th.

The Flood Risk Infrastructure Investment Program also allows us to make investments that help reduce flood risk and community vulnerability. In fiscal 2019-20, CBRM will install a flow control structure at Mud Lake as part of the Wash Brook flood mitigation initiative. This year, we will invest $500,000 in that. Over the next year, we will continue to provided support to these programs and help other municipalities build solid, reliable infrastructure across Nova Scotia.

Infrastructure planning is a key responsibility of municipal governments. To help them better identify their infrastructure needs, DMA is working on a municipal asset management program. The asset management program, developed in collaboration with the Nova Scotia Asset Management Working Group, aims to provide tools and resources that help lay a foundation for making informed, evidence-based decisions to manage municipal assets.

In Spring 2017, the Province launched the first Nova Scotia asset management pilot project, which supported five municipalities - Mahone Bay, Port Hawkesbury, District of Argyle, Town of Shelburne, and Lockeport - in collecting, assessing and maintaining relevant infrastructure information for municipal assets. This project resulted in the development of data collection tools and resources intended to support Nova Scotia’s municipalities with infrastructure planning.

Working with the Municipality of the County of Antigonish and the Town of Antigonish, the department has launched a second pilot project relating to asset management. This second phase provides the opportunity to test the existing data collection tools and resources with a larger rural municipality, as well as further explore potential regional collaboration benefits. The Province has also allocated funding to support the development of an infrastructure registry for asset management, based on the tools and resources developed from the first pilot project.

My department and the Nova Scotia Federation of Municipalities are working together to assist municipalities with understanding the benefits and the tools and resources available to assist municipal councils in their asset management processes. In the coming year, we will be rolling out the first phase of our registry application province-wide and will continue our focus on working with our municipal and project partners to further refine our existing tools and resources. We will continue to support these programs and help our municipalities build solid, reliable infrastructure across the province.

Mr. Chair, our department also provides a number of annual grant programs to support municipal service delivery. One example is the grant we provide to municipalities. I will note that there is considerable confusion between the Government of Canada’s equalization program and the annual grant our department administers, which was called Equalization. These programs are completely unrelated to one another, despite having the same name. I want to be very clear: the grant we provide to municipalities is distinct and separate from the federal equalization funds that flow from Ottawa to Nova Scotia.

To provide clarity, we changed the name of this program to the Municipal Financial Capacity Grant. As you are aware, the amount of funding for municipalities in this program has been frozen at $30.5 million dollars since 2014. We know that this program needs to be updated and that we need clarity regarding its purpose. We are committed to working with the Nova Scotia Federation of Municipalities, the Association of Municipal Administrators of Nova Scotia, and the municipalities to review this program.

The department also administers other legislated grant programs, including grants in lieu of property tax, where the province pays municipalities grants instead of property taxes for provincially-owned properties. We paid approximately $19.8 million in the 2018-19 fiscal year to 49 municipalities and one village.

The Farm Land Grant compensates municipalities for active farmland lost to them as property tax income. Active farmland is assessed as exempt property by the Property Valuation Services Corporation. In the 2018-19 fiscal year, we paid 42 municipalities approximately $1.83 million.

The Fire Protection Grant is paid to municipalities for properties that are not eligible for grants in lieu of property tax payments. Examples include public hospitals, schools, and museums. In 2018-19, approximately $1 million was paid to 35 municipalities and two villages. These grants and others are legislated under the Municipal Grants Act. In 2019-20, we will provide municipalities with a total of $62.4 million.

The department also operates a number of programs that municipalities can apply to, for various projects, to participate in to enhance economic growth. The Beautification and Streetscaping program supports local development, tourism, and economic development in communities throughout the province. This year, we will invest $500,000 to help local governments make their towns and municipalities look more welcoming and to attract more tourists. The program contributes up to 50 per cent of the cost of municipal projects for landscaping, installing interpretive entrance signs, enhancing lighting, and building public restrooms. Key investments like this can rejuvenate areas, foster local pride, encourage economic development, and enhance the character of municipalities.

We also help municipalities create innovative approaches to regional economic development through the regional economic development network program. Regional enterprise networks - which I’ll further refer to as RENs - municipalities, private business, and others work hard to spur economic growth in our province. According to the 2014 One NS report, economic growth is about changing attitudes and generating greater co-operation. It is also about innovation. To survive, compete, and prosper in today’s global economy, Nova Scotian companies need to be competitive, and so do the regions in which they operate. It makes sense, therefore, that building our provincial economy depends very much on the financial success of municipalities and their success in working with each other.

RENs are set up to intentionally encourage more collaborative ways of approaching economic development. They also link the activities of municipal planning and economic development. Most of Nova Scotia’s municipalities are part of a REN. They are doing great work throughout the province and are instrumental in helping to implement various government programs.

For example, the Department of Labour and Advanced Education has launched the Connector Program through the RENs with four connectors across the province: Western, Eastern, the Valley, and the CB RENs. The Connector Program is a globally renowned, award-winning networking program focused on helping newcomers and international and local students build a professional network, connect with career opportunities, and stay in their community.

The Cape Breton REN and the Western REN have been conducting an immigration pilot program through the Atlantic Immigration Pilot. This is a creative approach to addressing our labour market challenges. Employers in Nova Scotia can use the pilot to hire foreign workers. The Western REN recently completed a productivity pilot program for local businesses with funding from ACOA.

This year, we will continue to provide $1.8 million in funding to the RENs. We recognize that the RENs are in various stages of development. However, recognizing the important role they play, we will continue to work with them and with municipalities and local business communities to focus on RENs’ mandates and to expand their successes. I want to thank our RENs, our First Nations communities, municipalities, business community, and other organizations working together to grow our regional economies.

[3:15 p.m.]

Mr. Chair, planning is another critical element in creating vibrant communities and business certainty. Our role is to ensure municipalities have the tools they need to carry out their responsibility for planning and regulating the use and development of land, buildings, and structures within their jurisdiction. Having authority at the local level recognizes communities differ and it’s important for municipalities, as the order of government closest to the people, to have tools to develop a vision for control over the nature and form of development within their boundaries. Municipal planning strategies and land-use bylaws have the status of law in a municipality. They outline a municipality’s vision for the future and its strategy for managing challenges, such as social and economic issues.

The MGA and the HRM Charter authorize municipalities to develop and adopt planning strategies and bylaws and require some form of public participation in the process. We offer a number of guidance materials, model bylaws, and other resources to help elected officials, planning advisory committees, municipal planners, and the public. These include information in the Local Government Resource Handbook and the Municipal Government Act resource binder.

Municipal Affairs is also responsible for statements of provincial interest, which outline the province’s vision for protecting Nova Scotia’s land and water resources and which are fundamental to our physical, social, and economic well-being. They help the provincial government and municipalities make land-use provisions that support the principles of sustainable development. These statements are adopted as regulations under the Municipal Government Act.

Development by the Province and municipalities through their municipal planning strategies must be reasonably consistent with these statements. Five statements deal with the following: preserving high-quality farmland, preventing development on known flood plains, protecting municipal drinking water supply areas, providing for affordable housing, and making the best use of existing infrastructure. The statements are general in nature, providing guidance rather than rigid standards. They reflect the diversity found in the province and are not designed to take all local situations into account. They must be applied with common sense, thoughtfulness, innovation, and creativity.

In the coming year, as part of our municipal planning work, we will complete the development of regulations, guidance documents, and support programs associated with minimum planning requirements, and assist municipalities with implementation. We will work with our partner departments to better align municipal and provincial management of our land and other resources, and we’ll continue to support municipalities in addressing impacts of climate change through the development of a municipal planning flood line mapping standard for the province.

I would like to turn our attention to the work done by the Office of the Fire Marshal. The Office of the Fire Marshal oversees building and fire safety for the province, advising the various levels of government on fire-related matters. The office also oversees building safety, ensuring that the Nova Scotia Building Code Act and Regulations reflect the latest national standards.

This past year, the Province worked with the Nova Scotia Federation of Municipalities, the Association of Municipal Administrators, and the Fire Service Association to respond to a study on fire services in our province. This study noted that volunteer fire departments are finding it challenging to recruit and retain volunteers. They also identified governance, organizational structure, and funding issues. The Office of the Fire Marshal will continue to work with the Fire Service and municipalities to strengthen these important services. This work is a priority for the upcoming year.

Another priority will be continuing to respond to recommendations of the Auditor General. I am pleased with the progress we have made, with three-quarters of the recommendations completed. Of the outstanding seven, three will be complete within the next two months. Four of the outstanding recommendations relate to fire inspection oversight. We’re actively working on this, and we’ll be collaborating with municipalities to help them meet their accountabilities. This work includes reviewing the regulations to provide greater clarity to municipalities and developing tools for municipalities to help them meet their accountabilities. In the meantime, my expectation is that municipalities are inspecting all buildings that are required to be inspected.

I want to ensure Nova Scotians that the Office of the Fire Marshal takes its governance and accountability role seriously. We recognize the critical role we have in public safety and know that Nova Scotians count on us in this regard. They can be assured that we understand the gravity of this role and are fully committed to the safety of Nova Scotians. We continue to work with municipalities that have the responsibility to provide fire services in their areas.

The province supports fire services through the Emergency Services Provider Fund, which provides funding to hazardous materials teams, ground search and rescue organizations, and fire departments for equipment. Organizations can apply for grants up to $20,000 for a variety of firefighting, ice rescue, personal protective gear, and communications equipment. In 2018-19, we provided almost $1 million to 61 organizations and communities throughout the province to help their first responders stay safe.

The Office of the Fire Marshal will continue its important public education work this year. During Fire Prevention Week in October, we will share messages around fire safety, but we will also share information with Nova Scotians on fire prevention and what to do if a fire occurs. The Office of the Fire Marshal also provides information, advice, and recommendations regarding numerous aspects of building and fire safety as well as fire service delivery. This includes support for municipal building and fire inspectors, architects, engineers, and other consultants as well as private citizens.

This office also collaborates regularly with provincial departments, conducts inspections for provincial licensing, and provides advice and recommendations relating to fire and building safety for over 3,000 provincially owned properties. The office continues to foster and develop relationships with fire services in Nova Scotia.

We support local fire chiefs in determining the cause and origin of fires. Our deputy fire marshals are available to respond across the province around the clock when requested to conduct fire investigations. During the investigation process, the Office of the Fire Marshal collaborates closely with fire services, provincial police services, the Nova Scotia Medical Examiner Service, and the insurance industry.

I also want to acknowledge and thank the Fire Services Advisory Committee, which provides service and advice to me as minister regarding legislation, policies, and practices for the delivery of fire services to promote efficient administration and operation of emergency fire services in the province. This body also advises the Fire Safety Advisory Council regarding services.

I would also like to acknowledge and thank the many organizations that partner with the Office of the Fire Marshal to keep Nova Scotians safe. They include the Nova Scotia Building Advisory Committee, the Nova Scotia Building Officials Association, the Fire Service Association of Nova Scotia, the Fire Inspectors Association of Nova Scotia, and many others.

While we’re on the subject of public safety, I would like to turn our attention now to the Emergency Management Office. The mandate of EMO is to enhance the safety and well-being of Nova Scotians, their property, and the environment through innovative, collaborative, and integrated emergency planning response. In times of emergency, municipalities lead the response. The Emergency Management Act requires every municipality in the province to have an emergency management coordinator and have an emergency plan. EMO support municipalities in developing and reviewing the plan, carrying out exercises to test the plan, and training key staff in emergency response. This year, we will continue our work to support municipalities in reviewing and updating their emergency management plans.

Mr. Chair, as you are aware, last summer southwestern Nova Scotia experience a significantly dry year that resulted in many property owners experiencing a shortage of water, both drinking and non-potable. EMO worked with the municipal emergency coordinators to identify short-term solutions. The province provided non-potable water in two tanker trucks from TIR as well as bottled drinking water and access to provincial parks for drinking water and showers.

Following a similar situation in 2016, the Department of Municipal Affairs made legislative changes that allow municipalities to finance the cost for property owners who drill or expand their well through their tax bill. To date, the Municipalities of Annapolis, Argyle, Barrington, and Yarmouth County offer this program to their residents. We encourage all municipalities to take part in this program.

We are also working with municipalities on long-term solutions to water shortages. I met last Fall with elected officials from the impacted communities and asked them to send me ideas or options on how to address these recurring water shortages. I welcome all input and look forward to future discussions on how residents can access reliable sources of drinking water.

In times of emergency, EMO opens the Provincial Coordination Centre to bring together any number of government and private organizations that may be needed to support the local response and recovery. EMO coordinates identifying the needs and risks and finding and using the necessary resources to resolve issues and help Nova Scotians stay safe.

The October 2016 flood in Cape Breton Regional Municipality was a significant event impacting communities and its citizens. In these situations, the federal disaster assistance programs provide critical support for the recovery from a significant disaster event. The programs cover damages to primary residences, non-profits, and businesses when there is no insurance coverage available. To date, the province has spent about $29.5 million in response to this flood event. In the 2019-20 budget, we have identified an additional $2.5 million to support mitigation work in the CBRM.

We just don’t know when or where the next disaster could strike, so the Emergency Management Office will continue its focus on helping Nova Scotians prepare for emergencies. In addition to governments and communities planning for emergencies, it is important for each of us to take personal responsibility to be prepared. Everyone needs to know the risks and have an emergency plan and an emergency kit with enough food and water and essential supplies for 72 hours. The Emergency Management Office has resources in English, French, Mi’kmaw, and Arabic on how to prepare for emergencies and what items to put into your emergency kit.

I would also like to take this opportunity to make everyone aware that May 5^th to 11^th is Emergency Preparedness Week in Nova Scotia. While this week provides an opportunity to make Nova Scotians aware of how they should plan for emergencies, our work in this area is ongoing 52 weeks of each year. Another test of the Alert Ready system is scheduled for Wednesday, May 8 at 1:55 p.m. These scheduled tests of the Emergency Alert System help us ensure we can reach Nova Scotians in times of emergencies as necessary.

To ensure Nova Scotia and our citizens are prepared for emergencies, we will begin implementing our strategic emergency management plan this year. This plan provides a comprehensive and coordinated whole-of-government approach to emergency management activities within the province. It will guide our actions and decisions during a provincial-level emergency response. We will also continue to implement our Critical Infrastructure Resiliency plan to improve the ability of owners and operators of critical infrastructure to prevent, prepare for, and respond to emergencies and service disruptions.

We are participating in the development of a next-generation 911 system which will provide Nova Scotians with access to new and innovative emergency services and capabilities to improve public safety. I’m proud of the legislation we introduced a few weeks ago which will help strengthen our provincial 911 system and make our services available to Nova Scotians during emergencies and severe weather events. This may include providing comfort centers with satellite phones or helping provide enhanced cell phone coverage and charging services for citizens during prolonged weather events or emergencies.

I want to stress the primary purpose of the E911 Cost Recovery Fee, and the monthly fee will continue to support our 911 system. To this end, EMO will work with its partners and stakeholders to identify opportunities and priorities. We will also undertake work to help us better understand cell service gaps in Nova Scotia so we can work with our partner at Develop Nova Scotia to make informed decisions on next steps.

I would like to acknowledge and thank our municipal emergency coordinators; our provincial and federal partners; non-government organizations, such as the Canadian Red Cross; and the private sector for their efforts around emergency planning. As well, I want to acknowledge the important role of the 911 call-takers as they ensure emergency calls are directed to the appropriate first responder agency.

As I said earlier in my comments, the success of our mandate is dependent on strong partnerships. We simply cannot do our work without our partners. Together, we are working to ensure a sustainable future for Nova Scotia’s communities. We work through a collaborative approach with our municipalities and the organizations that represent them, including the Nova Scotia Federation of Municipalities and the Association of Municipal Administrators.

For example, we will work closely with these partners to make adjustments as necessary to the legal framework. We work together to standardize municipal expense practices and require that expenses be posted online. In 2016, we signed a partnership framework to focus our collective efforts on nine priorities: consultation, accountability and transparency, legislative reviews, municipal governance, the financial condition indicators, regional planning, asset management, regional enterprise networks, and the fire services review. This framework focuses our collective attention on our shared top priorities and holds us all accountable for getting them done. To date, we have completed work on a number of these priorities.

For example, after consulting with municipalities, we introduced legislation a few weeks ago which means municipalities will no longer require legislative change to approve spending for a new purpose. Currently municipalities can only spend on items that are included on a list in the MGA and the HRM Charter. If they wish to spend on goods and services that are not on the list, they required legislative amendment. This can restrict the services municipalities can offer or activities they can be involved in and prevent them from making decisions in a timely manner.

This change will remove the list from the legislation so that municipalities can more readily respond to priorities. It will also give municipalities more autonomy and the flexibility to better meet the needs of their citizens. These legislative amendments are another step forward in our work to modernize the legislation governing municipalities.

[1:30 p.m.]

Modernizing the MGA and the HRM Charter are shared priorities. In the coming year, we will continue to identify further opportunities to modernize our legislation. We also amended legislation last Fall to require municipalities to plan for efficient use of land within their boundaries. The changes mean that municipalities are now required to create land use plans to meet specific requirements. These requirements will reflect the minimum threshold for land use planning. Department staff are currently reviewing the statements of provincial interest as they relate to these requirements. These amendments will also ensure that all land use plans adhere to the statements of provincial interest, which I spoke of earlier.

Mandatory planning supports are a consistent approach to land use and development across the province. I want to stress that our partnership approach reflects the fact that municipalities are individual, democratically elected governments that are accountable to their citizens for the decisions that they make and the actions that they take. That is why our partnership approach is vital to the success of our municipalities. We are an important source of funding for municipalities, but we also have an equally important role to provide them with advice, support, and tools that help them operate as independent levels of government.

Municipal Affairs reviews municipal finance information to ensure municipalities are meeting reporting requirements. We analyze the financial health of municipalities and offer recommendations for improvements. Our municipal advisers are in regular contact with municipalities across the province. They answer questions, provide guidance and advice, and encourage municipalities to act on the recommendations.

The MGA requires that municipalities submit their audited financial statements by September 30^th of each year. Reporting is outlined in our Financial Reporting and Accountability Manual, or FRAM, which municipalities must follow. They are required to provide a financial information return, statement of estimates, and capital investment plan.

The department uses information from these documents to populate the financial condition indicators which the department and individual municipalities use to monitor trends in their financial health. This information is available online and updated each year. Municipalities use the FCIs to better understand their own financial position. Nova Scotians can use it to learn about the financial health of the municipalities. The department uses it to assess how well municipalities are operating.

The department’s analysis through the FCIs helps identify strengths and improvements. We monitor the financial indicators and follow up with municipalities to provide guidance and advice. The FCI is also one of the tools our advisers use to evaluate a municipality’s ability when borrowing for capital projects. Often municipalities use the services of the Municipal Finance Corporation. The corporation’s mission is to provide capital and infrastructure financing to clients at the lowest available cost, within acceptable risk parameters. They also provide financial management advice and assistance. Ultimately, our staff are working with municipal officials to better manage the long-term financial health of municipalities. To make this process faster and more efficient, we’re launching a new municipal reporting system this Spring.

We are in regular contact with all of our municipalities, providing guidance on various topics, including advice on financial planning and other matters and doing our best to help them be strong and sustainable. In the coming months, I will be having further conversations with our municipal partners as to how we will advance our shared priorities.

As the Department of Municipal Affairs enters the 2019-20 fiscal year, we remain committed to supporting and working with municipalities and partners to ensure Nova Scotia has strong, safe, successful, and vibrant communities. We have made progress over the past year in our work to facilitate municipal modernization and increased collaboration with our partners. Our mandate and work focus on investing in the municipalities and people of Nova Scotia through our various funding programs.

Looking ahead, we will continue to work with municipalities to identify areas for collaboration and innovative, new approaches to better leverage opportunities. Our legislation will continue to be modernized and updated to better meet the needs of our clients and partners. We will ensure Nova Scotians continue to have strong and robust programs and services around emergency preparedness, and fire and building safety.

Through our various funding programs, we will invest in Nova Scotia communities to help ensure they have modern and robust infrastructure, can reduce or mitigate the effect of floods, have clean water, and can deliver important services to Nova Scotians.

In the coming year, the Department of Municipal Affairs will continue to play a key leadership role in ensuring Nova Scotians have strong, sustainable local government and municipalities that are empowered and ready to seize social and economic opportunities. We look forward to continuing to work with municipalities, our emergency management and fire service partners, the Nova Scotia Federation of Municipalities, the Association of Municipal Administrators, the RENs, and other partners. Together, we’re building a stronger province.

Ensuring that we can deliver our mandate requires an innovative, nimble and dedicated team that delivers the best each day. I want to acknowledge and thank every member of the Municipal Affairs team for their ongoing work to serve the citizens of Nova Scotia. I look forward to working with our dedicated staff in the coming year as we continue to advance our municipal modernization mandate to create a legislative environment that fosters business growth and a strong economy and help keep Nova Scotians safe and undertake the responsible and efficient management of financial resources.

With the deputy and Darlene’s assistance, I will now be pleased to answer any questions you may have about the department’s estimates.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Smith-McCrossin, you have an hour.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Thank you, minister, for your opening remarks. I have really enjoyed getting to understand your department and studying the Department of Municipal Affairs. I look forward to learning more today.

I have a few varied questions. Does the department actually look at how much money is brought in collectively through all of the municipal governments from the taxpayers of Nova Scotia?

CHUCK PORTER: We have been looking at a number of things with regard to the programs and the money that goes out, the naming of the program that was once called Equalization. We’re looking at the grants that we put out and all of these different aspects of what does go out right now. We are reviewing what all of that looks like - what’s coming and going - and we’ll continue to do that in the months ahead.

That work is just really getting under way. We have just taken that on recently. It’s a big project. Don’t be fooled - there’s a lot to it. There’s a lot of programs that are available to municipalities, and there is a lot of work that goes on within them

We’ve got a good relationship with the NSFM, the AMA, and others in our communities out there. We’re looking forward to that.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: My question was more around the municipalities themselves collecting money through deed transfer tax and through property taxes. Does the department look at how much money is raised collectively through all 50 municipalities? What would the gross amount of tax be collected province-wide from the taxpayers for the municipal level of government?

CHUCK PORTER: No, we don’t look at the overall amount. We look at it in the context of their budget. The tax base would be their general revenue stream. We don’t look at that overall number. As I suggested earlier, we’re looking at our back and forth, but not the overall number. We don’t look at that.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I always like to play with numbers, so I tried to figure it out myself, and I was curious if my numbers matched yours. That’s why I asked the question.

I was curious, with your most recent amendments to the MGA - I know that many people from CBRM have been asking for their own charter for a number of years. Do you see a need to work with CBRM to establish their own charter?

CHUCK PORTER: Since I took this job last July 5^th, we have had no discussion around the charter for CBRM. I have had different discussions with them. That has not come forward in my time there. I know there was some discussion some time back - I don’t know when, but that has not been a priority, at least in recent months, with them. We’re open to having discussions and collaboration with all of our municipalities as we travel around.

I’ll tell you what I have done in the past. We had a great trip down around southwestern Nova Scotia and other places. I go with no agenda, the agenda is theirs. The discussions are wide open; whatever they want to talk about. When we go to Cape Breton, sometime in May I think or thereabout, I’m sure this may come up. We’ll certainly be willing and open to having a discussion if they raise it. To date, we have not had that discussion, not since I have been minister.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: There’s a few specific questions that I’ll ask. One is with regard to municipal governments. I couldn’t find this in the MGA - under what conditions can councils go in camera? Is there a limit to how many times they can do so?

CHUCK PORTER: I’m going to just make sure. I want to say there are five reasons, but we’re going to ask staff if you want to give us a couple of minutes. I do know there’s some contractual and legal issues there. I want to be sure that we have the right answer to give you. I can get that if you want to move on, in the essence of time, and we’ll come back to that.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: In your opening remarks, you mentioned that you are going to be looking at a new municipal reporting system. Are you able to share any details about that? Will it replace the financial indicators you’re currently using for measurement?

On that same topic, I’m from Cumberland North, and they have gone through some pretty significant changes over the last number of years with the dissolution of Springhill and Parrsboro. I’m wondering if you could comment on the financial indicators of Cumberland, specifically in relation to them taking on those municipal governments that were in financial distress.

CHUCK PORTER: Unfortunately, I cannot give you the specific FCIs; we don’t have them with us today. I can supply them to you later, if that would be appropriate. We do not have the FCIs for each individual municipality with us. I think a lot of them are available online. Part of our plan moving forward is about making it easier for them to upload their information.

Some municipalities are already doing it. We’re coming into that - I want to say the end of August, September? September 30^th is our deadline for the first quarter so that will run behind. Some municipalities are already doing that now. If you were to pop onto Cumberland’s site, you might find it they are uploading now (Interruption). They are online, but I don’t specifically have each indicator for those areas with me.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I have looked at those. I was looking more for a comment on your opinion on the status of those financial indicators, I guess, whether they’re positive or negative. Specifically, in relation to the fact that the Municipality of the County of Cumberland took on two other municipalities that were in financial distress and how that has impacted their financial indicators after that.

The reason I’m asking this question is because - and I don’t know if you know this or not - the council made a decision to increase the taxes. Many citizens throughout Cumberland blamed it on the fact that they took on two other municipalities that were in financial distress, and they are not happy about that.

CHUCK PORTER: We have asked for the FCIs for a number of municipalities, so we can have a look at it. Actually I think there are seven of them in total across the province, the Municipality of Cumberland County being one of those. They are relatively new with all of this, so we are happy to work with them and identify what risk factors may be there or may resolve as time goes on.

I don’t have them directly in front of me, but I do know we’ll take the time to look at them and see what risks may be identified or not. We’re more than happy to be working with them. Our advisers who are out there are there to help them as well and us at the department.

[3:45 p.m.]

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I appreciate that, and I think other municipalities in the province will also appreciate that because it is a large responsibility to take on another municipal government that has either gone bankrupt or is on the way. You hate to see the taxpayers of the municipalities that have been financially robust - whether it’s through good practice or for whatever the reason - to see those citizens be penalized by having to increase their taxes to cover the floundering municipality. I think it may provide some insight through future amalgamation or just dissolution.

On that note, I wanted to ask a couple of questions about the amalgamation of West Hants and Windsor. I’m pretty sure your municipal department has been promoting shared service agreements with municipalities. Can you share with us why you would be promoting the amalgamation of these two municipalities versus just encouraging them to continue or use a shared service agreement?

CHUCK PORTER: Let me take a few minutes on this one because I’m very familiar with this one. I have been a member there for 13 years, and this is my 13^th Estimates.

Windsor and West Hants have worked together over the years on a number of projects. They have also, many would maybe argue, had some issues on other things. Three or four years ago, I remember being interviewed by Paul Withers. He came down when there was some discussion around all the fire services things that were going on. I was very clear that there was no doubt about how I felt at that time and my statement.

I’ll paraphrase it, but this is close. At that time, it was that it doesn’t matter to me if it’s collaborating shared services, amalgamation, or something yet to be named. It did not matter, as long as there was a partnership working together in the best interest of all the people that we together represent in the best way. That was my comment at that time, and that remains my comment today for any municipality across this province.

I was appointed July 5^th last year, and I think on July 10^th or 11^th, I received notice about this letter from the Municipality of West Hants as well as the Town of Windsor wanting to consolidate, asking us to assist them in a consolidation. I had no knowledge of that, quite frankly. There was nobody more surprised than me, so it wasn’t like I went out and said, you guys need to amalgamate, or I want you to amalgamate. It was automatic, as it has always been, that if there’s something that I can do in my role as the MLA previously - coming to meetings, providing information, whatever you need me to do - I’m happy to do, and we continued that.

They actually came to us. We had a meeting with them and said okay, what does this look like to you? They actually brought the idea of consolidation. They brought the idea of what their legislation might potentially look like and asked us for that assistance. We have great staff. They provided that, and we have been working forward ever since. The transition team is in place. That is going very well.

It’s not about a desire to amalgamate everybody. That’s not at all my desire or my opinion. If there are units out there that feel that there are service agreements or shared services that can work together, or if they are actually looking - there’s a number of them now, I know because I have been contacted. There’s a number of municipalities right across this province that are watching this particular Windsor-West Hants model because it’s something new. It’s a little different than Queens. It’s certainly different than others. There may be more newer ideas that come together by way of consolidations.

One of the things couldn’t have taken place in the past because it’s new this time. Generally, what you have when you have an amalgamation of municipalities is that everyone in the county is required. Hantsport three years ago now, I think, dissolved into the Municipality of West Hants because of their situation. That’s still ongoing, but that has worked out very well.

We had discussed in the legislation how if that’s the case, everybody in the county would have included East Hants, the other side. At the time, they were obviously not desirous of coming in. The legislative change was around that rule that said you don’t need to have everybody in. You’re welcome, if you want to come to the table. This also opens it up later. If East Hants says they want to have a discussion about this? We welcome that. That’s great if they’re okay over there. Or maybe East Hants someday decides they want to go another way.

We like to think we’re very open around the idea of looking at legislation and promoting and putting forward changes that reflect good governance for these areas. Windsor-West Hants makes sense. We’re all together in West Hants, quite frankly; the greater West Hants district. Windsor’s the town in the centre of that, and it’s a place that many people come to and use for a variety of things and always has been, but many things have changed over the years.

The town has existed just fine. It has done well in the last number of years since Mayor Anna Allen has come back on, at least. Former mayor Paul Beazley was there really driving the idea of amalgamation and working together. During his tenure there, it didn’t happen obviously - he wasn’t able to get there. We had a council change in the last municipal election. There were seven brand new councillors that came onboard for the municipality of West Hants. Three of them are only in their second term.

It really reflected an idea of change. I think that was part of the idea of sitting down and talking and making motions and discussions around consolidation. They came up with that. In that interview I did, there was something yet to be named. Lo and behold, the yet to be named turned out to be consolidation. Maybe there’s another name out there too somewhere that’ll come forward someday. I don’t know.

Our department and this minister will be wide open to any of those discussions in any format that anyone wants to bring that will include some combination of collaboration and working together. All of that together is municipal modernization as far as we’re concerned. Times are different. Needs are different.

There’s the bill last Fall that we put in, a mandatory planning bill. We didn’t say that every single municipal unit that does not have a planner has to go hire one. We said you can partner if you like. If your neighbour or two or three neighbours together want to partner, that’s fine with us too. That’s another example of great shared services that we think there’s a lot of value in. We’ll continue to promote that and be more than willing, with an open door, to have these discussions. It’s very positive.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Can you clarify - I’m asking because I don’t know this answer - I have always heard of dissolution versus amalgamation, but you speak about consolidation. What’s the difference there? Is there one?

CHUCK PORTER: In the end, none. We’re all part of the same unit. It’s how you get there. There’s just different steps. Consolidation was something new. In consolidation into a new region - I’ll start with this one - what happens is those two units are no longer known as the Town of Windsor or the Municipality of West Hants. They’re going to come together and, in the end, form a new region and have a new name.

I’ll take you back to an example: Halifax-Dartmouth-Bedford-Sackville is now the Halifax Regional Municipality. Many, many communities outside of that make that up. That is the consolidation efforts that we have just put forward through in that legislation. That is a very simple process. Amalgamation is those two units coming together. I’ll go back - that consolidation was done through special legislation. The URB has got one piece in this and one only, where that’s not quite typical, and I’ll get to that in a minute.

In this particular case of consolidation, the URB’s only task and only ask was to provide boundaries. There are currently a mayor and four councillors in the Town of Windsor and 10 councillors, including the warden, in the Municipality of West Hants, for a total of 15. They will decide what that number will be when we come together next year on April 1^st with a new council, how many boundaries districts we will have. Is it seven, nine, 12? I don’t know what that looks like. That’s the one task that was asked of the URB.

That’s the difference in consolidation versus the others - in an amalgamation or a dissolution, URB plays a bigger role. They’ll come in, and they’ll do the studies. It’s a bit of a different scenario. They have a much bigger involvement in that. That’s time consuming, obviously, for them, and they’re pretty busy. The cost could potentially be more to do that because it’s not done in legislation. In the legislation, it’s just done. They decide what they want, an agreement is finally reached, and we put the legislation through. They were all favourable to that.

The URB is a bit of a different scenario. They would have to go out and do studies. There will still be studies done in the consolidation. I don’t want to make it sound like there won’t be - there are, but it’s done a little bit differently. It’s done by the transition team. In an amalgamation, you may not have that transition team; that’s not the setup.

In the Municipality of West Hants and the Town of Windsor, the transition team is Kevin Latimer, who is the chair. Then we have the mayor and the warden, and the deputy warden and the deputy mayor, who are basically running the priorities and putting this together, ensuring that all these things are in place, and reporting back to their respective councils. It’s significantly different than amalgamation. In the end, the one thing that remains constant is they’re one unit. How you get there is basically the difference in those steps. That’s really all.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: When I read about this, I’ll often read that the consolidation of West Hants and Windsor will possibly be used as a model for future consolidations of other municipalities. Is that why, because you’re using consolidation versus amalgamation or dissolution? Along that same line, I have been told the province is providing around $500,000 to aid in this. What would that $500,000 be used for, if that is the right number?

CHUCK PORTER: On a number, we have actually allocated $1.5 million, which includes all of the transition coordinator salaries, studies, and support. There may be organizations that are coming forward with ideas to offer and support and to bring communities together. There’s a number of factors there. The $1.5 million is what is set aside to bring the two communities together, basically. The HR and the organizational restructuring, things like that obviously take time and money to do.

This started from a backwards date of April 1, 2020, when we’ll see a new council step in. There’s an election period there that has to take place. That will be early. Just to be clear, municipal elections in 2020 in Windsor-West Hants will happen about six months ahead of everybody else. The date is set in October - they will happen in February, March, somewhere in that area. I forget the date, but it’s as we lead up.

They will take over April 1, 2020, and they will actually sit for four years and six months as opposed to having another election in the Fall. It’s costly every time you do that, and obviously, it doesn’t make sense. That’s about the cost. We have $1.5 million set aside. We don’t know if it will take all of that, but that’s what we have associated with that part of it. That’s all of those administrative tasks, studies, et cetera, that would be done for that.

Just on an earlier question you asked about in camera meetings, I have some information I want to pass on to you if you are okay with that. There’s no limit on the number of times they can go in camera. Acquisitions and sales of municipal property, setting a minimum price accepted by a municipality for tax sale, is done in camera as well as personnel matters, contract negotiations, and labour relations. Litigation or potential litigation is an in camera discussion, and solicitor/client privilege and public security. Those are the reasons to go in camera. Again, there’s no limit on the number of times.

A lot of times there’s questions around some of that, why municipalities go in and whether they should be in there for certain things. Those are the rules within the MGA to allow that to happen.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Are there ever any red flags to the Municipal Affairs Department, if they see a municipality going in camera over a certain number of times? Are there any red flags as to why that might happen or cause that?

CHUCK PORTER: I wouldn’t say that there are any red flags. We would like to say that this is a democratically-elected body of folks, who are close to the people, who are dealing with very local issues, and who know the MGA - we hope they know the MGA. The administration would certainly have a good handle on the MGA, and they would know the reasons to go in. Their legal teams would obviously know the reasons to go in.

Some areas may have more times. There may be certain events taking place - or issues may be a better word - taking place that put them into in camera, whether it’s an HR matter or whether it’s a legal issue. Especially with legal matters, HR matters, and personnel matters, there may be a number of times when you have to go in camera before you get through to a resolution at the council table. There has been nothing that has come to us at this point, as far as I know - not in my time, anyway - to indicate that’s a problem right now anywhere.

[4:00 p.m.]

The public probably might not know the details, though - I just explained to you all the allowable reasons to go in - or be aware of certain matters because they’re not going to be discussed in a public forum. The council’s going to move a motion to go in camera, and they’re going to have those kinds of discussions. There may be some motions made coming back out, but the detail of that discussion remains in camera.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: This question came to me to ask because Annapolis County had gone in camera 15 times or something since December. Maybe not within your department but within the community, there were some red flags as to what was causing that increase.

Would the Department of Municipal Affairs - I guess it would probably fall under the financial corporation there - would it fall under that mandate to provide security for a private development such as a private school in the County of Annapolis?

CHUCK PORTER: Municipalities can apply to the Municipal Finance Corporation for borrowing. There are a number of requirements they need to meet: obviously the financial health and stability of their municipality, the debt ratios. There are a number of factors to consider. Those FCIs are considered.

When I look at a temporary borrowing resolution, I look at that and see what number they’re asking for and what they’re going to use it for. Part of those requirements are around their financial health and well-being and future and how much it is and how long it’s for. I look at all of that. I generally ask a lot of questions around that. You can ask either of these ladies here, especially my deputy. I think that’s the right thing to do.

We also have great staff at the Municipal Finance Corporation and on our floor who put this together and review all of these factors. I can safely say that they don’t bring me anything to sign that isn’t a possibility and recommended. We look at these very closely. The financial health of municipalities varies. We hear a lot about small towns struggling and other municipalities struggling. It doesn’t have to be a town, I guess. We look at all of those.

The Municipal Finance Corporation is a great organization offering a good rate where they can. In fiscal 2019-20, I think we have asked for around $128 million as a ballpark figure of loans that will go out to municipalities across the province. We’re a middleman, if you will - or middlewoman - managing this process for them. It is a good thing. From what I can see, it works very well.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: This was more in line with a private development. Would it be appropriate for a municipality to try to obtain security for a private investment or a private development such as a school?

CHUCK PORTER: Municipalities can borrow for assets that they’re going to own. In that circumstance, if they were going to own it, there’s considerations that obviously would be looked at, again, around their financial health and all the FCIs and the indicators I just spoke of a minute ago. They have the ability to look at everything that is in front of them, but it has to be a facility that they own, traditionally speaking.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: That’s what I would have assumed as well, so I was just clarifying that. If a municipality was looking for security for funding for a private ownership, then that wouldn’t fall under their mandate, based on what you have just said.

CHUCK PORTER: I’m not exactly sure what you’re asking me, but I’ll just say this again: a municipal structure or unit can borrow. If you’re asking me if there’s a private entity that’s coming to us to borrow, no they can’t - unless they’re tied to a municipality, I suppose, in a partnership of ownership with the municipality having ownership in it. I have not seen that.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: On to another topic that’s similar - just questions around financing. As I mentioned earlier, I really enjoyed getting to understand all the different grants and opportunities for funding for municipal governments through your department. I’m wondering if you could share with me, through which municipal funding grant did West Hants go to receive the funding for the West Hants Arena and Soccer Field?

CHUCK PORTER: That is under the ICIP program.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Can you tell me what ICIP stands for again?

CHUCK PORTER: This is an Infrastructure Canada program, and my apologies. There are many acronyms in this department. I don’t think I have ever seen anywhere with so many acronyms. Forgive me - I’ll go to the shortcut a lot of the time, not thinking. The Infrastructure Canada program is $820 million over the next 10 years for a variety of streams. That is where a lot of these projects will come from over the years as we look ahead.

There will be examples and application opportunities and so on. There’s a lot of money in this, and that is our provincial share.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Under this funding through ICIP, do the province and municipality have to provide matching amounts for a project, or can the province provide a higher portion?

CHUCK PORTER: Depending on the stream, there are some variations in the percentages. Some of them are a third, a third, and a third, again, depending on the stream. They don’t have to be that.

We’ll use the case of West Hants and the arena complex. This was set out as a $12-million plus project initially, I think, plus maybe HST. We put $3.6 million in that project, basically around a third, and the feds put in $4.4 million. This was the municipality’s priority. They have to put all of the rest of the money into that project. If this thing goes over budget, for example, then it’s the responsibility of the municipality.

Again, you would look at their fiscal capacity, and they may be in very good stead from a financial health perspective, to carry that. This is a great example of one to talk about because the Town of Windsor is contributing $1 million to that project, so that’s $1 million less in the balance. They also have a fundraising component which could bring in $1 million or $2 million.

Hockey’s a big thing where I come from, and I’m sure all over. We claimed the game, as you may be aware, and we have been claiming the game for a long time. There are a lot of hockey enthusiasts from all over actually, not just in Nova Scotia. Others who have been born in Windsor and maybe lived there, played the game, and moved elsewhere are great supporters. There is a fundraising component that I know they are working on as well.

What that end number really looks like is the municipality’s responsibility, and they will need to provide for that and, as part of the agreement, assure us and the government of Canada that they can actually make that happen.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Earlier on when you talked about the ICIP federal funding, you had said that there were several areas that you could apply for, and then the funding structure is based on which program it is. Can you share under which specific program the ICIP funding is for, for this arena?

CHUCK PORTER: This will come from the social stream. There was a green stream and a rural and northern stream. This will come out of the social stream. Remember, this isn’t money that flowed in the past. This is money that will flow into the future under that stream.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Along the same vein of questions with the specific program, it may be a similar answer. Can you describe the program that Annapolis County went through to receive funding for the Bridgetown artificial track complex?

CHUCK PORTER: The Department of Municipal Affairs’ part of that was the Small Communities Fund, which was another program whereby there were a number of applications that were put through. That program is fully committed.

Like all these programs, even though they are committed - and this one is committed, so the application period is closed, and all money is accounted for committed, it doesn’t mean the projects are done yet. They will overlap over the course of years, some of them. Through the Small Communities Fund, $1.1 million was put through the Department of Municipal Affairs and the Government of Canada was the same.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I apologize, I should know this probably: Is that also through the federal ICIP?

CHUCK PORTER: No, that was a different fund, which was called the Small Communities Fund. That had been put in place in 2016, I think, and had a four-year window. It’s actually closed. ICIP has a 10-year window, and some of them had different life spans. Actually it was a 10-year program from 2014 to 2024. The reason I said that although some of these programs have been allocated for - let me talk a little bit about the process here. A list of projects would come in, they would be assessed and then go to the federal Government of Canada for their input and granting of funds that they supported. Then they would come back. We really just administer, to some degree, all of these different programs.

That program spanned from 2014 to 2024 for all kinds of different things - highways, roads, drinking water, waste water, recreation, culture, public transit, and infrastructure, to name a few. It’s fully committed. That means we are no longer accepting applications. Again, I want to stress that that doesn’t mean that the projects are done under that fund. I think the project has to be done by 2024. That end date does mean something, and a project has to be complete by then.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I think I heard you say that the federal government gave $1.1 million. Can you clarify how much the municipality gave, how much the provincial government gave, and how much the federal government gave for the completion of the Bridgetown artificial track complex?

CHUCK PORTER: All I can clarify for you is that the Department of Municipal Affairs put in $1.1 million.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: You don’t have the information here. I know you said for some funds, it’s a third, a third, and a third, and some it’s 50-50. Are you able to gather or find that information? I’m just curious about how much the Municipality of Annapolis contributed and how much the federal contribution was.

CHUCK PORTER: I know that Communities, Culture and Heritage made a contribution to this project as well. As for the municipality, we’ll have to get back to you on what their figure was because I don’t know.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: It’s pretty exciting for these communities to get this funding. I would love to get some of that money up in Cumberland. On that note, I’m curious - I’m asking a question from sort of a selfish standpoint, representing my constituents. We have a real issue. Our hospital was built outside of the town limits of Amherst. When the decision was made on that physical location, the citizens of the area were told they would be provided with a walking trail or some sort of a safe sidewalk. That was about 15 years ago, and it has never been provided.

[4:15 p.m.]

As our population ages, every day people are driving by our seniors in these mobile scooters, and it’s just an accident waiting to happen. Someone is going to be killed. Plus, several of our citizens financially can’t afford a car or can’t afford to pay for a taxi, so we have a lot of citizens walking.

I have had several meetings with TIR as well as with Cumberland County and the Town of Amherst, and nobody wants to pay for it, basically. Everyone thinks it’s a great idea. I’m just wondering, would there be any grant money through the programs that the Department of Municipal Affairs provides that have a mandate a project like this would fit in under?

CHUCK PORTER: We did have some different transit grants at one time. The accessibility grants, which I think I mentioned in my remarks, have all been transferred to the Department of Communities, Culture and Heritage. There were four of them there. The amount of funding that was available, I do remember, was quite substantial, so you could certainly make application through that. That’s where I would advise you to go for trails funding.

I would have to confirm this, or you can confirm with the Minister of Energy. There were programs on some trails through the Minister of Energy that others have taken advantage of as well, I think. I see the Chair shaking his head in agreement, so he must know about that.

CCH does have a program over there for trails accessibility. I know your area there well around the hospital and such, so I understand what you’re talking about there. I would certainly recommend that you write them or contact them or get your municipality to do it if they’re looking for a grant application to be put forward. There’s probably a partnership opportunity there.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I appreciate that, and we certainly will. The challenge that we face is that most of the people who need the accessibility live in the Town of Amherst, so it’s hard for the councillors in the Municipality of Cumberland to be motivated to spend that kind of money because it’s not their taxpayers who are asking for it. It has been a bit of a challenge.

I went to visit my son in Alberta before Christmas. When I was driving up to the mountains, there were these bridges over the main highway so that animals could get across. I thought that if they can do that for the moose, we should be able to provide walking access to our hospital here in Nova Scotia.

On that note, I will move to a question about the Fire Marshal’s office. Has your department implemented the performance standards for the Deputy Fire Marshal’s office as outlined by the Auditor General in one of his last reports?

CHUCK PORTER: I think you asked me this question in QP perhaps one day. We have certainly been working on some of these issues around the Fire Marshal’s office and other things that have come forward.

I can tell you that we work every day very closely on performance standards in this office with all staff. I think part of my answer that day was that I would expect that there are regular performance appraisals, just like every other public servant, being done annually for all of these folks.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I would assume so too. I just know that in one of the last Auditor General’s Reports, that was a deficiency that they found, that there weren’t performance standards being done at the Fire Marshal’s office, so I’m just wondering if that did get started.

I’ll move on to another question about the Emergency Management Office. This question comes from feedback from some municipalities. They have found it difficult sometimes to have scheduled access for Incident Command System training. I’m wondering if the Emergency Management Office has looked at improving accessibility of this training for our municipalities.

CHUCK PORTER: I’m told that there will be a training schedule that will be available to us all very shortly, within the next few weeks, which will outline those sessions that you’re looking for. They can work with their regional coordinators to help set that up.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I have another topic that was brought up by different municipalities, and I’m sure you have had discussions about this too. Policing costs are one of the costs that seem to have really escalated over the last number of years for municipalities. There was some rumour that they may lose some provincial funding for the Boots on the Street program or AOP. I’m wondering if you could just provide us with an update on provincial funding for the Boots on the Street program. Will it continue? If it’s being modified, what will it look like?

CHUCK PORTER: The Boots on the Street program is something that has been in place for some years, but it is not something that’s managed by us. The Department of Justice, I believe, actually is the appropriate place for that question. The minister may be able to answer for you.

We don’t manage that part. As far as I know, it’s not anything that we have anything to do with. I’m familiar with the program, but I don’t believe that we have any management of that whatsoever.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I know it is a concern that municipal governments have because it will affect their municipal budgets.

Going back to fire dispatch, I know I asked you this question in Question Period, but I’ll just bring it up again. Could you provide an update on any work towards the possible centralization of fire dispatch services here in the province?

CHUCK PORTER: This is an interesting one for me. I come from a different world, as some of you may know, the EMS world. I worked in communications for a very long time as well as on the street for a very long time and also as a volunteer firefighter some years ago. I know we have a few others who have been part of fire services in this House, as well.

When we travelled around to some of the municipalities, as I spoke of earlier, doing some tours, I was surprised when a couple of them actually slid their notice across the table indicating the issue of fire dispatch. We know, in this current circumstance, some of the issues that took place in parts of the province and the concerns that some of them have raised.

This is something that I am quite passionate about. I’ll be honest with you, there’s no decision. I want to be clear on this. We’re just beginning this process in the last couple of months, really looking at these four, five, or six letters that we now have from different parts of the province saying that they support the idea of centralized dispatch. That’s great, but it’s not easy. There are a number of steps to how we get there.

I’m not going to sit here today and tell you there’s going to be one. There might be four, might be five, or it might be just adding on to what we’re doing now, enhancing it and making sure all is going well there. There are a number of different ways this is done, which I’m sure you’re aware of. There’s not a consistent application to how dispatch is done in certain areas of the province. There are a number of different ways organizations are different and those dispatch centres are different. Some folks are doing it from home because that’s how it’s set up. They have an office or however they do it.

It has come a long way from where it was when I was a kid. I remember when my father was a firefighter, from 1968 onward. The old Plectron on top of the fridge would go off, and off he would go. Technology has certainly advanced. Now it’s on our cell phones that these things are going off and pagers. The fire horns don’t even blow anymore. That has gone by the wayside in a lot of communities. There are areas where they don’t do that anymore because of the noise and the work around and all that.

Technology has taken us a long, long way. We’re just scratching the surface, I think. One of the things I have always said about technology and where I come from in the world of EMS dispatch and ambulance dispatch is that you never want to be on the bleeding edge. You want to be on the leading edge, but not the bleeding edge as you continue. You set up, and you go maybe four or five years. Then you go again, you re-evaluate, and you upgrade. You do all the necessary things.

As we continue to go forward here around the fire dispatch issue, there’s a lot of conversations yet to be had. I haven’t gone out and had this conversation yet with stakeholders that I want to have it with, but that will happen. Those that have written us, municipal units and others - we want them to be part of that discussion, and we want to get their thoughts on it. I have thoughts on it, but that doesn’t mean that’s where it’s going.

We need to ensure that we have good dispatch services in place that support our fire services, that support all of the great folks here in Nova Scotia, keeping their lives and property protected. That is the number one priority for me. As I said, I’m very passionate about it, and there’s a lot of discussion yet to be had on it, but it will be had.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I think I have shared this with you. The people up in our area are not necessarily in favour of a central dispatch service, but I know there’s other areas of the province that are.

Another topic that shows my bias, being from Cumberland County, is an issue around farmland assessment. I have been part of a lot of conversations around how we can get unused farmland back into production. I had someone say to me once: Elizabeth, it’s easy. I said oh, tell me. They said, start taxing it if it’s not being used.

I started talking in more depth to some other farmers. If there’s farmland that’s not being farmed for a certain period of time, and it’s growing up into alders and alder bushes, is someone in the Property Valuation Services Corporation looking at that land and changing the assessment to forestry at any point? If so, is it in a certain number of years? Is that ever looked at?

CHUCK PORTER: I want to touch on a couple of things here, and we’ll get to that. You mentioned some not being in favour. I just want to stress to you that that’s all the more reason why it’s so important to have the discussions around the province to decide where we are on that particular piece. Take some comfort that it will happen before decisions are made. This isn’t a quick thing. These are things that take time.

On the farmland one, I want to touch on a couple of points. Municipal units have planning strategies. I do know this much from my own area. I’ll use a recent example of one that I worked on in the Town of Windsor. There was land that was zoned farmland, agricultural land. Some years ago when the municipal planning strategy came into place, the town said, we’re going to make some changes and designate that particular area as residential. That was in 2005-06, I’m going to say, but that has not yet happened from a PVSC point of view because the land was not actually developed.

I stand to be corrected if we have the right people here to clarify this for me, but in talking to one of our planners in the department, and we went back to check it, it was made very clear that until that development actually happens, there wouldn’t be a change. In the example that you have asked about, I’m not sure. Part of the farmland rationale is to keep this as potential farmland. There’s a municipal farmland grant that goes out. I’ll use the Town of Windsor again as an example. I don’t have a bias, but I might sound like I do. It’s easy for me to think about it that way, but it doesn’t matter where it is. If it’s designated farmland and it’s taxed as such, that means that the municipal unit is losing that revenue. That’s where our grant comes in. It takes care of the other side of it. It basically helps support the loss in that tax revenue, so we do that.

We certainly are encouraging and promoting and are desirous of farmland. I do know that in the municipal planning strategies - which I think I can safety say not every municipal unit has in place, although we put that bill in place last year. We’re working toward these phases. This is part of why we put that legislation in place, to bring consistency across the board in the application of planning on many fronts, farmland, building, and others. That development that I refer to has not yet happened. That is actually still being taxed and designated as farmland because nothing has yet happened.

There is some talk about that. Why do I know that now? Because there’s some talk now about the lack of land left in the Town of Windsor proper. The owner is thinking, maybe I’ll develop that. That’s when it’s going to change to residential or something else, depending on what is built there. The actual tax change will come into place once that development happens. That engages, for lack of a better word, the municipal structuring and the taxes that will be charged to that landowner. That will change at that point. I think I have that right.

[4:30 p.m.]

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Nobody wants to pay more taxes. It’s just that what we’re seeing up in Cumberland is if a farmer owns the land, they either farm it or they find a farmer to farm it and don’t charge any money. What we’re seeing is land that’s maybe being passed down when a farmer passes away, and sometimes the property owner is someone who doesn’t live in the area or doesn’t have any attachment to farming, so they’re not farming, and it’s growing up.

The point that this person had is, if you start taxing it differently, if someone had to start paying a tax, they would soon make sure it went back into farming production. That’s where I’m coming from, but I will switch on to another topic.

I wanted to talk just for a couple of minutes about the RENs. As a former businesswoman, I was always surprised that this was under the Department of Municipal Affairs and not the Department of Business. I’m curious to know if there’s any key performance indicators, any measurement, that are being used to understand if the money that’s being given to the RENs throughout the province - if there’s any measurement of their performance. If yes, does that determine if they receive future funding, a decrease or an increase based on their performance?

CHUCK PORTER: The RENs’ funding remains the same, and it’s a year-to-year agreement. There are some discussions we have had with others who would like to see that agreement be longer than a year. A lot of these are still in the phase of getting up and running. Some of them have made decisions early about how they’re run.

I would argue that they’re a little different depending on which part of the province you’re in. You have the organization, the people who are making up the REN. Again, how big is that region that they’re working within? What is the council’s desire to be in, and how active do they want to be?

Measurable outcomes are certainly important. We’re putting $1.8 million again in the coming year into all of these RENs. I have been on that path of what the measurable outcomes are. We can talk to municipal units which will tell us there are success stories. There’s no question. Others are getting up and running, and we look for more success stories. Others may make the decision that it’s not for them, but that will be a priority of council, whether or not they support the RENs and so on going forward.

So far, although we may have seen a few bumps along the way, a lot of these have been quite positive. We have heard stories from areas and councils. Port Hawkesbury, I remember, was in to see me, and that local area had done a great thing. It’s always hard when you implement something new to get buy-in. If it doesn’t affect my area, and it doesn’t benefit me, sometimes it’s hard to understand the greater picture, the entire region. If it’s good for here, it’s probably helping me over here too.

We’re early on in this. We are measuring it ourselves, and we look forward to outcomes over the next little while to see whether the progress is there.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Are you able to share with us what some of the measurements would be for that $1.8 million?

CHUCK PORTER: I can’t provide you with that at the moment, no.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Can you tell me, if a REN does not use their government funding within one fiscal year, will they still be allowed to receive it in a future year? Or will they be penalized and not receive the funding?

CHUCK PORTER: That has not happened. They use what they have been allotted. Quite frankly, if we were to give them more, they would probably use that, too.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: There’s one that didn’t use it. That’s why I’m asking. That’s okay. I don’t want to get anyone in trouble.

Is the Halifax Partnership a REN?

CHUCK PORTER: For some activities, they fall into a REN, but no. Let me clarify. They are funded for some REN work, but the partnership is the partnership. They may work on some REN-type projects within the business community within the HRM, which would fall under REN funding.

I just wanted to add to that that they are getting some funding through business for innovation type projects.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Are you able to tell us if the funding for the Halifax Partnership work has been increasing each year? Again, I’m curious about measurement and performance measurement.

THE CHAIR: Order, time has elapsed for the Progressive Conservative Party. We’ll now move on to the NDP and Ms. Martin.

TAMMY MARTIN: I appreciate the minister and his staff being here to answer some questions. I just have a few, and of course, they are about Cape Breton, which I am sure surprises no one.

Cape Breton is in crisis, as I have said many times. We have seen decades of stagnant growth and declining population. Tax rates are higher in CBRM than in HRM. I’m wondering if the minister can talk a bit about what he is doing to address the fiscal imbalance between the two largest municipalities in the province.

CHUCK PORTER: There’s a viability study that is under way in the CBRM which is soon to come to a close, as I understand it. We are very interested in looking at that, assessing it once done, and seeing the actual state of affairs in the CBRM. I think that will give us a fairly good picture of the state of industrial Cape Breton.

TAMMY MARTIN: So is the department prepared to react financially when it sees the deplorable fiscal imbalance that we’re seeing right now?

CHUCK PORTER: I would say that there are a number of programs that we have that I have talked about certainly in my opening remarks - things like ICIP and other programs that are out there. We’re working with the CBRM through their application process on different projects. We’ll continue to do that once we have a look at the viability study, as I said, and maybe have a better understanding. I can’t tell you that there’s a certain chunk of money that is just going to be allocated. I don’t know what that is at this point, so I can’t tell you that there’s something there.

Would we be looking at that? Would we be taking this seriously? I will tell you yes, absolutely, we will. That’s part of our interest in this, and we want to know what the situation looks like there. We will work with the CBRM, just like we will work with every other municipal unit across the province in every other region, through various programs. We’ll look at what kind of assistance they may need.

TAMMY MARTIN: Council has said publicly that we receive $15 million from the province and that we send back $19 million. How is any municipality expected to survive when you’re starting out minus $4 million? Can you talk about Equalization and how the municipality is supposed to survive or thrive with these concerns when we’re starting off already in the hole?

CHUCK PORTER: We have what was formerly called Equalization. We have just changed the name for clarity. There is $15 million of $30.5 million that we have that goes out, with Cape Breton getting half of that at this point in time. The rest is made up of the rest of the province, with some areas getting none of that.

That has been frozen at that rate. We’re in the fifth year of that five-year state of being frozen. I can’t tell you today where that is going to go, but we are looking at that, as I think I have said in Question Period probably a couple of times. We are reviewing that. We know we’re coming to the end of the fifth year. We’ll have some options to look at. I think it’s safe to say that we have to take all things into consideration.

What you raised, Ms. Martin, is a good point. I think all those kinds of things have to be taken into consideration about what we’re doing. This is one grant that we’re offering up, the $15 million. There are other grants that we are also doing, of course, and that we’ll continue to do.

I think this goes back maybe to Ms. Smith-McCrossin’s question around the greater look at everything, overhauling it and saying what is actually going where. I haven’t got a good sense of that. We know that there’s this grant, there’s that grant, and there’s this grant. What does that all actually equate to when we are putting these out the door? What does it really mean? We need to have a really serious look at how this works.

We’re going through a number of these processes to say how we are going to refine this. We know that this is coming to the end of the five years. We know there’s a viability study. This is one of many. There are 50 municipal units in this province. Every one of them would like to have more. I’m sure you know that as well. They would all ask for more. That’s not easy, but we’re trying to manage that. We’ll continue to look at that and review how much money is going where.

We understand the challenges. As a former councillor I can tell you, I understand the challenges municipal units are having every day. We deal with municipal units on many different fronts and many different issues and challenges that they have. I appreciate very much the challenges that exist in industrial Cape Breton and in other municipalities across this province.

TAMMY MARTIN: I appreciate your response, but knowing that you’re negative $4 million before you even start, the minister must agree that you’re already a leg down.

I’m wondering if you could tell us, after the viability study is done, and when this five-year term is up, when can we expect some real investigation and answers on how CBRM moves forward?

CHUCK PORTER: I appreciate that and your comments on the difference of $4 million. There are also other grants that we provide. I’m not sure that the number is $4 million when you take all that into consideration.

Again, the question around timing is always an important one. Some would say that I’m not a very patient man. I think I’m very patient from what I used to be. When I want some things done, I like to get them done. I don’t want things to drag on and on and on and continuously say, we’re reviewing, we’re reviewing. I do not like that. If we’re reviewing it, good. Let’s review it, and let’s make a decision. There are many pieces to this puzzle, everything from the cap onward that we have talked about since I arrived here, and mostly in recent months, about how some of these things affect municipal units across the province. We have to look at all of that. We are looking at all of that. I don’t want this to go on forever and a day. There need to be some resolutions here.

I can’t tell you it’s next month, but I can tell you it’s not five years away. I’ll tell you that. I’m interested in doing as much as we can to support and help the long-term sustainability of industrial Cape Breton and every other municipal unit that exists in this province. I don’t want to be forever doing that. We have lots on the go, so we need to get to these things, whether it’s fire dispatch conversations and resolutions or whether it’s cap conversations and resolutions or whatever the topic might be. My goal is to get to them sooner rather than later.

TAMMY MARTIN: We’re at the lowest population we have been at in CBRM since 1931. We need 1,000 people coming to Cape Breton per year in order to stabilize our growth and economy. Has the department put any thought or effort into supporting CBRM in doing that or any plans on how we can do that, attract newcomers to CBRM, not just HRM?

CHUCK PORTER: I think there are a number of things. We look at the immigration strategy and what brings people to us. That’s a big question. Cape Breton’s beautiful, no matter where you go there. It’s a wonderful place. I look forward to getting there. I don’t get there near as often as I would like to visit.

[4:45 p.m.]

People need to have a reason to come. I think we both know that. We all know that people need to have a reason to come and live in industrial Cape Breton or in any other part of Cape Breton, for that matter. There has to be a reason to be there - that’s jobs and the economy. That’s what it equates to. We’re looking at announcements that have been made down there. I know there are differences of opinion - and I’ll just leave it at that - around hospitals and the improvements and the expansions there. We know growth in the economy and in jobs is absolutely what brings people to our communities. There has to be a reason to come.

It’s interesting how the decline has happened. We have to look at that and ask, what has created the decline? Why do people leave? I’m a pretty simple guy. I think simply, and for me, it’s that simple. Why do people leave? How do you turn that back the other way? What brings people back?

You do have some coal mining there, but not like you used to have. Perhaps when you were younger, there may have been more. Cape Breton was booming at times. What made it boom? We have the potential cruise ship industry’s growing. That brings tourists, and they leave money. Those are all good things. The actual population growth that you’re talking about is reflective of so many more things. Quite simply, the question is, how do we either bring people back home or welcome them to a new home in this part of the province?

There’s investments in students and infrastructure. The second berth is an example. The hospital, which I talked about, and the future of health care - all of these things matter. They’re very important. We need to continue to do that. We have conversations all the time about bringing people to Nova Scotia. We’re at the highest population we have ever had in the province, but not necessarily in every region, industrial Cape Breton being one of those examples. It’s simple for me. What takes people away? Usually, that’s jobs, the economy, and the ability to live, grow, and raise families.

The other thing is what the viability study will have to say about that. I think that there might be something in that. I’m hopeful that it speaks to that. I would be disappointed if it didn’t speak to that, the potential growth for all of Cape Breton and industrial Cape Breton. I would be surprised if it doesn’t talk about that, but it’s not a simple answer. You know that. It’s not a simple answer at all. There are options that we need to look at and consider. Where do we go from here? How long does that take? It won’t happen overnight, we know that. What brings people to us? That’s a great question. It’s not easily answered, though.

There’s a lot of pieces to this puzzle that can be talked about, that can be looked at, that can be reviewed and discussed. Are there investments that help bring them to industrial Cape Breton? I think that there’s opportunity there. We need to look that and just be simple about it. Don’t overcomplicate it because it’s not complicated.

It wasn’t complicated for them to leave. People made decisions to leave. It may have been difficult, but I’m sure that it wasn’t complicated. It’s hard on families, I know. Many went west in the early days to work - I was one of them people, as a kid. I thought it was the land of milk and honey for a year and a half or so. Then I came back to Nova Scotia because I love Nova Scotia. It’s not the same, and a lot of people that I talk to who travel back and forth would love to be living here at home all the time and working.

We have to look at what those options are that we need to invest in that will take us there. I think that they’re there. They are things we can talk about, but you also need to have the will. You need to have a desire to create new things and the will to make some of that happen. I’m not saying we don’t have it. I’m just saying that there’s a lot of discussion yet to be had on it. I look forward to that viability study, hopefully, touching on it.

TAMMY MARTIN: Let me tell you, we have the will in Cape Breton. We just need the government to have the same will. We will continue to have these questions and discussions. I appreciate your time.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Roberts.

LISA ROBERTS: I’m going to start with some questions that our caucus members are asking of all departments and then get into some specifics around municipal affairs.

Would the minister be able to provide an organizational chart for the department with job vacancies clearly identified?

CHUCK PORTER: We can tell you the number of staff. I don’t have an organizational chart. I can give you a number if you would like. I can break it down for you a little bit. Senior management would be four FTEs. Grants and programs would be 28.6, as it’s broken down. Policy, planning, and advisory services is 27.9. Emergency Management Office is 21.6. The total of all of that is 82.1 FTEs, and will take in EMO and the Fire Marshal’s Office, and everyone in DMA.

LISA ROBERTS: I think those numbers that you talked about are actually reflected in the Budget Estimates book. I’ll understand if you don’t have the answers to some of these questions. For any of them, if you’re able to provide the information afterwards, we would certainly be grateful.

Another question is, how much did the department spend on services provided by a temp agency last year? How much, if any, is the department budgeting for those services in this budget?

CHUCK PORTER: Just give me one second here. I’ll see if Darlene might have that broken down.

The actual spent on a temp agency is zero, zero, and zero.

LISA ROBERTS: I’m going to guess that you’re not the sort of department that spends a lot on overtime. Am I correct?

CHUCK PORTER: Overtime does exist, believe it or not, because EMO will be in after hours and such based on the incidents. Just looking at this, it’s $117,033 in 2018-19, and we have a projected line item of $134,900 for the coming year, but that is always up in the air. We won’t know the actual until it’s over, solely based on how and why that happens.

LISA ROBERTS: How much did the department spend on external consultants last year?

CHUCK PORTER: That one I don’t have. We can get it for you, though. We’ll get back to you on it, for sure.

LISA ROBERTS: If it’s possible to have a list of what the contracts were, what type of services were provided, and the name of the vendor, that would also be great. I expect some of that might be available in that third volume.

CHUCK PORTER: What we don’t have, I will tell you don’t have, but we will do our best to supply it for you.

LISA ROBERTS: Another standard question we have been asking is, by what percentage is the compensation for senior management in the department increasing?

CHUCK PORTER: I’ll go back to that document again and see if I can break it down by percentages. I may be doing it roughly.

When we talk about the percentages, they’re right here, yes. Emergency Management Office is 26 per cent. That’s with 21.6 FTEs. Senior management was your question - it’s 5 per cent. I can break down the others if you would like them in percentages while I have it here.

LISA ROBERTS: Sure, and if you’re also able to break down into percentages the compensation increases for the lowest-paid position in the department.

CHUCK PORTER: I’ll finish with the FTEs. Policy and planning is 34 per cent, which equated to the 27.9 FTEs. In Grants and Programs, there were 28.6 FTEs, which equates to 35 per cent. Again, senior management was 5 per cent, with four senior management folks.

LISA ROBERTS: I think we might not be talking about the same thing, sorry. The question was the percentage by which the compensation for the lowest-paid position is increasing and the percentage by which the compensation for the senior management is increasing.

CHUCK PORTER: Yes, I realize that. I was just giving you the balance of the earlier numbers that I gave you and what they equated to in percentages of FTEs. We’re just getting a breakdown here. Bear with me one second, and I’ll give you that answer, I think.

LISA ROBERTS: Maybe while somebody’s doing math, which I appreciate - like I said, our caucus has been asking these numbers of departments in general. Looking at the Budget Estimates Book, the numbers for management in the Department of Municipal Affairs actually do show a lot of variance.

CHUCK PORTER: Could you ask me that again, please? I was distracted, and I want to be able to hear what you’re saying.

LISA ROBERTS: I totally appreciate that. The figures in the Budget Estimates Book for senior management in the Department of Municipal Affairs shows a lot of variance between the estimate and the forecast and then the estimate for next year. That is true in senior management; in the Executive Director of Grants and Programs; in the Executive Director of Policy, Planning, and Advisory Services; and also in administration of the Emergency Management Office. In each of them, there’s a significant variance between what was budgeted last year versus what was actually spent and then change again to what is budgeted for this year. I wonder if you could just quickly explain why.

CHUCK PORTER: Is there one specific that you wanted me to talk about? I can give you an example - the deputy, for example.

LISA ROBERTS: The Office of the Minster and Deputy Minister was budgeted last year for $477,000. The forecast is actually for $392,000. Then the estimate for this year is $482,000. Maybe somebody was seconded or something?

CHUCK PORTER: The specific issue with the deputy is that she is split 50-50 with IGA. That’s what changes there. Unfortunately she’s shared with Intergovernmental Affairs, as the deputy there as well as with us. That’s why there’s a difference there.

LISA ROBERTS: Another one that I noticed was the Executive Director under Grants, Programs, and Operations was budgeted for $270,000. The actual was $341,000. Then the estimate for this coming year is $373,000.

CHUCK PORTER: If I have this right, this was the additional cost for legal services that were added to the department to look at a number of ongoing files. That equates to around $100,000 for legal support.

LISA ROBERTS: I was just curious because of the number of FTEs. There’s an additional $100,000, but the actual number of FTEs is going down by four. The numbers are going in two opposite directions.

CHUCK PORTER: Yes, and I asked a similar question. It was always a question, actually, when I sat in your seat, that I often asked around different departments as well. It’s the ongoing movement of staff. There’s always a vacancy - or quite often, there’s a vacancy, and that’s what we see in there. They’re not static all the time. If there’s a vacancy for three, four, or six months - whatever it might be - that’s why you have the differences there. It’s the up and down. It’s solely a prediction at this point.

LISA ROBERTS: On Page 19.2, there’s a significant budget increase to the Emergency Management Office; also on Page 19.5, actually. We can see that there’s a significant increase to the budget in EMO disaster assistance. The FTEs are not going up, so is that an emergency fund?

[5:00 p.m.]

CHUCK PORTER: That is the $2.5 million that was associated with the disaster mitigation. I spoke to that in the opening comments. You have probably heard lots about that over the last year or so anyway. That’s that addition. It’s just added in there. It doesn’t reflect in the FTEs.

LISA ROBERTS: On to some more substantive questions, quickly, why was the funding for community transportation moved to the Department of Communities, Culture and Heritage?

CHUCK PORTER: They actually were the best department to manage that because they were also managing other portions of that - trails and transportation grants. We manage an awful lot of stuff, but it made sense to bring it into there.

I do want to remind you and just be clear, there was no decrease in the amount of funds that were available in those grants. They were shifted over to CCH solely for the ease of management and to bring it all together, knowing what was coming and going by way of grant applications. We were getting some, and they were getting some. It just made sense to bring it all together. That’s all we did with it.

LISA ROBERTS: Across Nova Scotia, women make up 104 of the 379 municipal elected officials, so about 27 per cent - I think the percentage in Halifax is actually considerably below that now - and 13 of 33 Nova Scotian mayors are women. The mayors are actually doing pretty well.

Is the department engaged in any effort to increase gender equity and representation of community diversity among elected municipal officials?

CHUCK PORTER: While we’re getting the information for you, can we take a short break?

THE CHAIR: We’ll take a short recess.

[5:02 p.m. The committee recessed.]

[5:05 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

THE CHAIR: Order. Minister Porter.

CHUCK PORTER: We invest $20,000 in the campaign schools for those women who wish to participate, every four years through the Status of Women. We do grants to Status of Women as well, outside of that.

As a guy with four daughters, this has always been of interest to me. They have all grown up. My kids are not very young anymore. My youngest is 19. They have grown up with me in this business, and they have paid close attention to how governments work and what elections are like. They have all worked them, quite frankly. A couple of them have often talked about how someday they might be interested in running for a council seat or something like that. I know that there are others who wish to do that, and that’s a great thing.

If I’m not mistaken, and I don’t know who asked, there was a question in the House around whether we should have legislation that dictates - dictate is not a very good word - that would indicate maybe that there should be 50 per cent or something like that or a number of available seats. The Premier took the question, if I recall, and it was the same thought I had. I think about that because I have four daughters. Why would we ever indicate that there was a limitation? It would be like saying two of you - I’m sorry you can’t run. Well, two of you could.

I favour as many as who want to run. I don’t think about gender. I don’t think about colour. I don’t think about any of those things - minorities or whatever the status. It doesn’t matter to me as an individual. I would like to think that many people feel that way around who can run and why we should run and the passion it takes to run - not only to run, but to stay and want to do it again and again and again. Some of us have been fortunate to come back here a few times. I think that democracy is a wonderful thing. I’m very passionate about that, quite frankly, for a multitude of reasons. I have always, and I will always, encourage as many people who want to run.

One of the most favourite things I have enjoyed doing over all my years, and a lot of times it only seems to happen as elections are looming - not always - is getting invited to schools to talk to the Grade 11 and 12 would-be voters. A lot of time, it’s a law class or whatever it might be. I have had the great pleasure of going in outside of those times as well. It’s about this very thing - questions from these young folks about how I run and why I should run. I talk a lot about all of that. There’s no limitation on who can run. We encourage as many people not only to pay attention, but to put their name on the ballot and to become involved to make these important decisions because the future is theirs.

I’m on the other end of things, but people like my own children - perhaps yours and others - may one day also find a love for this place and a love for the democracy that we all share in here. We may have differences of opinions politically on things, but I believe solely that whether we’re man or woman in this place, we all believe in this place. We all believe in this province and in moving it forward in the right direction. I’ll always be a supporter of that.

LISA ROBERTS: I’m going to go to some really specific things. You talked about the drought that we experienced in southwestern Nova Scotia and about the funding that’s now available for drilling deeper wells. We have heard concerns and tried to address concerns about the increased risk of heavy water pollution. It’s not biological contamination, but more heavy metal and possibly cancer-causing elements in the water, particularly as you drill down further into rock.

We tried to address that with a bill that we tabled this session, but I am wondering if there’s an alive conversation in the department about the risks that we may be running by encouraging people to drill deeper and also, whether there are some alternatives. Given that we know that climate change will be coming not just with droughts but also with heavy rainfalls - possibly investing or encouraging investment in cisterns, for example, which is another whole way of going.

CHUCK PORTER: This has been an interesting issue. We have seen it specifically in southwestern Nova Scotia, and that drove this. In 2016, they had drought there and then saw it again last year. Twice in three years is very concerning.

I had the opportunity last Fall, during the NSFM’s annual gathering here in Halifax, to meet with all the mayors and wardens from Chester to Yarmouth on this issue to talk about ideas and some of the struggles that they have had. That was a very good couple of hours of conversation. We learned a lot about certain issues and how they’re all different. They are all different. Chester and Yarmouth and all those places in between are different. They all have different needs. Geographically, the way they’re set up is different.

We are going to come back together. One of the things we did there around that particular piece was start the conversation. I felt there must be something we can do here to improve the situation. If it has come twice in three years, that means probably in a couple years, there’s a chance that it’s going to come around again. Are we going to be in a good position?

We responded very well. I don’t want to take anything away from the response. I had conversations, in the days when this started, with wardens on the phone, conference calls, to see where they were at farther down through southwestern Nova Scotia, the first to experience the issue, and what we could do for them.

Our team at EMO and our regional coordinators worked very well together along with those municipalities. They have a great relationship. They went through it in 2016. It continued on into 2018 to re-evaluate again and put things in place. TIR stepped in with their big tankers, and that’s all great. That’s the interim solution while this is happening, but in the longer term, my question was, how do we make this not happen? How do we resolve this or prevent it?

We can put preventative measures in place. You were talking about cisterns a minute ago. This is an available water solution in certain communities, whether there are a number of drilled wells or whatever they might be, and a location where people can go and shower and load up their water jugs and whatever that is, for all normal everyday purposes.

There’s a whole array of opportunity here and ideas where we need to come back together. This is on our agenda in the coming months, to come back together with that same group again. What I had asked them to do is send me their ideas and thoughts specifically on the municipal units that matter to them. What I’m looking for when I analyze these is, are there some comparables here? Do Chester and Lunenburg look similar? Do Liverpool and Argyle look similar? Is there something here? Is there a consistent message that says all right, here’s a great starting point? We know at a minimum we need to do this, but they’re a little different over here. There’s lots of options there.

We put the legislation in for municipalities in 2016. We have four that are doing it across the province, and we continue to talk about this. Annapolis, Argyle, Barrington, and Yarmouth County are doing it. They were affected areas.

Where I come from, as an example, there are rural areas that don’t have the luxury of good water. They’re still living with hard water. They will argue that devalues their properties. Nobody wants to live there. Their house goes for sale, and they’ll get a lower price for it than if it was elsewhere - in Falmouth or in town or somewhere on services.

We’re working with all our municipalities on emergency management plans and how we’ll respond. We need to look at how we encourage others to offer this up. Not every municipality does it. I know it seems like it’s a little slow to catch on, but it is a good program where municipalities are able to put this in place.

You talked about drilling and the depth and the issues around the water. One of the things we needed to ensure when we’re doing this, anybody who’s drilling a well today or digging a well wants to ensure that the water is safe. I’m not a specialist in this, but there are mechanisms whereby you can put ultraviolet light or other things that you use to help cure and soften your water. That has come a long way from the 1980s, when I drilled my first well at my first home. The water was hard. You put a softener and these great big cannisters in your house. That has very much changed today, these processes.

As we all know, you have to have water, or you don’t have much of anything by way of your property. We have to be able to ensure that it is available at all times in all situations, regardless of drought seasons. There is the fire protection, the EMO responses, and so on. Those are other risks outside of the everyday living risk that you have and the basic necessities of life, having drinking water and water to cook with and all your other necessities.

[5:15 p.m.]

Water testing was part of this discussion. We did have some early talk about that, and it was great. We said we’ll create a place somewhere within the municipal unit. Somebody has to be measuring and monitoring the water, testing the safety and so on. These are all pieces of that greater puzzle that have to come together so we’re able to build something here and look after parts of the province like that that are having issues. There’s a lot to it - it’s not simple - and the safety of it has to be number one.

I appreciate the comments around what might be in the water, or the further you drill, the metals and things - lead or the hardness of the water and minerals. All of these things are tested as they’re being done. We would have to ensure that. If you have a mortgage, as an example, and you’re drilling a well and building a home, they want to know how many gallons a minute you’re getting and how your water tests. There’s a lot of process to it. We would need to ensure all those things were there, and we wouldn’t want to be drilling to a depth where we’re hitting metal of some kind or other chemicals or anything. That takes away from what we’re trying to do, quite frankly.

LISA ROBERTS: You referenced the minimum planning standards that your department will be mandating from municipal units. I wonder if that means that provincial buildings that go into municipal areas will actually be in compliance with those standards. My colleague for Cumberland North referenced the hospital in Amherst. I think about the Bayers Lake outpatient clinic, which the province is investing in, which is not in alignment with the current priorities of Halifax Regional Council in terms of trying to concentrate development around transit-accessible places.

Will the province follow the municipalities’ lead in terms of trying to work toward walkable, accessible services when they’re building schools, hospitals, or what have you?

CHUCK PORTER: I think those are all important pieces. The municipal planning strategy that we put in last year around the minimum planning standards is about ensuring that municipalities have planning in their municipal units. Some don’t. I think there were a dozen that did not have any.

We have seen how that can be negative in a municipal unit, just on simple building in flood-prone areas. There are places today that were developed long ago that you likely wouldn’t get a permit for today. Climate change is an example. We know rising waters, rivers, even brooks - how they become quite overwhelmed in big storms. I have seen it in my own area.

The minimum planning standard is broad. We’re not here to drive a hammer at anyone, if you will, and say you must, you must, you must. We’re there to help them and guide them and advise and work with them to get to a place where we need to be.

Those are great points that you raise. They make all the sense in the world. Why wouldn’t we, in an urban area like Halifax, as we develop and plan, be looking at all those factors? You have the benefits of sidewalks and streetlights and bus shelters and transit and hospitals and walking areas. In other areas, they don’t have any of those.

We have to be open to how those municipalities differ. The more urbanized ones certainly are different than rural planning, but the fact is that plans have to be in place that take in those kinds of things, EMO, planning, all of these things. We have to have plans to respond.

All of that is exactly what it’s called - minimum planning standards. We’re there to work with those municipalities. I know that not everybody was in favour of that. Again, we believe this is a good direction for the province to be going in because it’s a positive direction. We weren’t looking to burden anybody with extra costs or any of that. That’s why we’re not opposed to - if the neighbouring municipality had a planner, and you didn’t, you could obviously bring that planner over and cost share it. It would save you tremendous amounts of money and benefit you at the same time. Two, three, or four - it doesn’t matter to me how many. It’s the fact that we need new planning, and there’s a benefit to having a plan. I think we could all agree there’s a benefit to having a plan, and that is our greater concern in the areas where there’s no planning going on.

I’m not a planner by trade. I’m organized, and I like to be in control of certain things - some might argue. Those in the planning business, I have to tell you, are passionate about these things. They are well informed, and they are great at giving advice. I’ve learned an awful lot in my short time in DMA from the planning folks and have the greatest respect for what they have to offer and support by way of our municipal units. I think that again that’s a wonderful thing and a wonderful option that we have.

LISA ROBERTS: I would just point out that I think that there’s a role for Municipal Affairs to maybe bolster the municipal voice - be it at the Cabinet table or from deputy minister to deputy minister - because the situation that the MLA for Cumberland North talked about is exactly what happens when there’s poor planning. You put a hospital that people then are on a scooter on the side of a road to get to because it has been built outside of town, possibly because it’s a little bit less money to buy the land initially for TIR. But then you end up with nobody able to take a bike, nobody able to scooter - you have people going to the hospital who are no longer able to drive.

The consequences that fall out from that are really significant, particularly in an era of climate change, knowing that there’s going to be so much to be gained from having walkable communities. There are health benefits, there’s climate benefits, there’s mental health benefits, and there’s economic benefits. When you place a hospital outside of town, then no local businesses get the spinoff effects of people popping out for lunch because you can’t pop out for lunch when you’re off a highway. We have seen that across Nova Scotia again and again and again.

Because I have probably more questions than we’ll get to in my time, I’m going to move to the federal gas tax projects and just ask two things. Is that money only available for projects, or is it also available for the in-house planning and human resources that would be required to put together a good proposal? That’s sort of the rationale behind another one of our proposals, which is to add some support to the Nova Scotia Federation of Municipalities so they are able to assist individual municipal units in applying for federal government funding related to climate change. That’s my question around the federal gas-tax-funded projects.

CHUCK PORTER: The gas tax is available for a number of categories of projects. There’s 18 eligible project categories. I’ll list a few of them for you: water, waste water, solid waste, local roads, transit, recreation, tourism, and culture. Disaster mitigation and broadband are already part of that as well.

One of the benefits of this gas tax - depending on where you are, how big your municipality is, and how many dollars you get - is that you can use that on any number of these projects. It’s actually a very good program because it creates great leverage for municipal units to have their share of the funds on certain projects. If they are in a 50-50 cost share, for example, on a grant project that may be with us, they can use that gas tax money for those kinds of projects that I just listed.

There is some issue around what they call stacking. If you’re getting federal dollars from a program for a project, and you also want to use your gas tax, that’s questionable. There may be some things that fit that over the years, but there are some of these kinds of projects that they don’t allow that stacking to happen. The federal government just announced doubling the amount, which is great. We don’t know some of the details around that, though. I think it’s safe to say we don’t know where that fits into that stacking rule.

One of my questions was, if you can’t stack the first original portion, with the duplication, are you now able to stack that with a government program to assist us with these projects in those categories? I don’t know the answer to that yet because we haven’t got it. Until the feds are done doing what they’re doing with it, and the money actually flows with the details around it, I can’t answer that portion. I can only talk about what we currently have.

I can’t even tell you when. I would expect it won’t be too long before municipalities will have an idea, as will we, how that money will work. All those kinds of projects that are out there, they can use that on recreation like the arena in town or whatever else. They may be able to use that, but it depends on the project and the funding program.

LISA ROBERTS: That sounds like it might be a pre-election flowing of money, but I don’t know; I haven’t been following it. My question is, what do you see as the value of providing some more resources to the Nova Scotia Federation of Municipalities so that there’s some expertise that can be shared across many municipalities in terms of the design of projects?

Obviously, for a small municipal unit, it’s great if all of a sudden there are federal dollars available, but you can’t ramp up your expertise over a one-year period, even, to go after those funds in a way that is really going to pay dividends for citizens.

CHUCK PORTER: The NSFM plays a key role in this already with the gas tax they’re administering. They work with all our municipalities. They set their priorities. We, obviously, are there to provide assistance and advice. We have municipal advisors if there’s questions around clarity on what they can spend, can’t spend on, et cetera. We’re happy to help with that. We do a lot of those kinds of things.

The NSFM meets twice annually. I meet with them in between that. We have round tables in between that. Also, they create and have been creating their list of priorities that they bring to us - one through five. They usually come with their three to five priorities that matter to them, and we work on these things.

One of the examples, most recently, that we worked on with them was the bill we just passed in the House to give them powers to expand. That was on their lists of priorities. There are a few others. We’ll continue working with them on those priorities, but they’re a well-organized great group of people who continue to do great work on behalf of their municipalities right across the province, and they’re a good partner of ours. We have good relationships with all of our partners, as far as I’m concerned anyway.

LISA ROBERTS: Related to that, the Federation of Municipalities has passed resolutions the last two years asking for the province to work with it to pilot some ways of moving beyond the current municipal property tax cap.

I found the response from the Department of Municipal Affairs to the resolution passed not this past Fall, but the Fall before. It said that the department acknowledges the request to move to a working committee on the cap rather than an all-Party committee and will take the request under advisement as we set our priorities for the coming fiscal year. Then it says a formal review of and possible changes to the cap program requires extensive research and policy work and extensive public education to ensure taxpayers are aware of potential impacts.

I didn’t see a clear commitment there, and I haven’t seen a response to the resolution that passed in this past Fall. I’m wondering what the department is doing, recognizing the issues that municipalities are having with the cap. The issues play out differently in different constituencies, but certainly I’m hearing from young families with mortgage payments, day care payments, and student loan payments, and then they discover that their property tax bill is so much more than their neighbour’s.

[5:30 p.m.]

CHUCK PORTER: I’ll talk a bit about this, and then maybe I’ll ask you a question.

This has been an interesting piece for some years. I remember when it came in. I was in this House. I know how it came in, why it came in, the issue of rates in certain areas, but it was put on across the province and has had changes over the years.

We had what I would call a really good presentation. The folks from industrial Cape Breton and East Hants municipalities partnered came in early January - the 3^rd or 4^th, whatever it was - put on a good presentation, brought their staff, and put forward some good ideas for us to consider.

We are seriously looking at this because we have heard from lots of people. I have seen multiple presentations. We know how this affects our residents. Some would argue, don’t touch it, while others would argue it’s unfair. There are examples of how it is unfair that can be put out there.

This is a complicated, convoluted equation, quite frankly, that is difficult for some to understand. When you put up that picture on the wall, it talks about the example you just gave, somebody living in a semi or whatever you call it - a duplex or whatever we call them today. Depending on how long you have lived there and all those circumstances that you have just described, they can be paying two very different tax rates. You have to ask yourself, how is that fair? Many of us would argue that it’s probably not fair - for one side. The other side loves it. I have lived here all these years. I’m capped. I like it. I have stayed. I have lived in this municipality, and this is part of the benefit of me living here all this time and supporting this community. You can just imagine the two sides of this story.

What we need to ensure that we do here is consult. We have had a lot of discussion with our municipalities. Everywhere I have gone, I have heard about the cap from municipalities. I met in Truro with the NSFM, I think for the first time, last Fall after becoming minister. What was number one on their agenda? The cap was. That’s how we actually made a decision that day. I enjoyed that discussion very much because it allowed us to say, great, why don’t you put something together? We agreed - the warden there, and then the folks from CBRM were present - that we would come to the department with a presentation. We were quite happy to get that. They made a great presentation, as I said, lots of good points to look at.

We need to take the time to get this right. There’s no halfway here. You can’t be half right and half wrong. If we’re going to do something with this, we need to ensure that we have every single piece of this covered.

There are some people who will argue forever that you should just leave it, that you shouldn’t do anything with it. They are happy with it. There are many more, I think, who would argue we need to make a change somehow. The question is, what does the change look like? Who is affected by the change? It has to be gradual. You can’t just go tomorrow, we’re cutting it off. This is a phase-out if we’re going to do anything. Those decisions are not final. They have not been made. This is a decision that will be not taken lightly.

The other side of this, and I’ve said this before, is this also cannot go on forever. We have been reviewing and reviewing. We have some good information. I have asked for a couple more things to be done around the presentation we received. Our staff, who are well versed in this, are preparing some things for me to look at and our government to look at. We will have a plan from there. Again, I want to stress that, if we are going to make a change here, I will take the time to ensure that we are getting this right.

When I started this piece, I said that maybe I would ask you a question. You live in town, in the city, in urban Nova Scotia. Keep it or remove it?

LISA ROBERTS: I would agree that it needs to be phased out, but I do think that it should be phased out.

I think there are other opportunities with property taxes. My colleague from Cumberland North - I don’t know, I feel I can never use people’s names - mentioned the tax on farmland. I think it would be worth looking at the property tax regime in P.E.I. where there are additional taxes paid by owners who are non-resident in the province. I think that there could be sources of revenue available through property taxes that we’re currently not going after.

For example, I was up in Cape Breton recently, and in Inverness they raised issues around farmland because a lot of farmland is actually now owned by non-residents, and there’s no incentive in the property tax regime to even lease the land to be cultivated. Literally there’s a growing farming community. There has been some really great work led by municipalities or supported by municipalities, both, to increase local food production, but they’re running up against not being able to access any more land.

I think a phased approach or possibly a pilot approach, but yes, I do think it’s just fundamentally unfair, especially when we know that the poorer people in Nova Scotia in general are renters. This feels like sort of a subsidy in many cases to some of the higher-income people in the province. It’s very un-transparent.

I definitely hear from homeowners who have saved up, and this is their first big home. It really does hit you at a time in your life when life is really expensive. I don’t think there’s a time in your life when that is more expensive than when you have just bought a home and you having paid off your student loans yet and you have kids in daycare. You’re like, what? Phased out and multi-party - not one person kind of wearing it.

CHUCK PORTER: I appreciate those comments, Ms. Roberts. I really do. Like I said, there’s a lot to it. That’s an interesting approach as well, a phase-out and so on.

You mentioned a pilot. I’ll be honest with you. I’m not a fan of pilots, I’ll say that. I think I maybe said it to the group that presented. If you’re going to do it, you’re going to do it across the board. I wouldn’t want to pilot it for five, six, or seven years, as an example, on a phase-out to see how it worked at municipal area A and leave the rest for another number of years. If you’re going to do it, I think you would just move to do something whatever that something is.

I’m anxious to get to a place where we can have a decision and further discuss this and move on because there’s lots of people who have been talking about it. Certainly, in municipalities, it has been an ongoing priority on that list for municipal partners and the NSFM when we meet with them, and I can appreciate that.

I’m never excited to just keep standing up and saying I’m reviewing it, I’m reviewing it, I’m reviewing it. I’ll review it, but I also like to work toward a conclusion and then, hopefully, what will be a good resolution for at least the majority as we move forward. I appreciate your comments on that.

LISA ROBERTS: I have a question about the Richmond council. I got a copy of the letter today that was sent to you by a number of former municipal politicians raising concerns about the council. They feel it is showing signs of dysfunction. What possible avenues do you have at your disposal? If you would share, which of those avenues do you think you might go down?

CHUCK PORTER: I just received today, as well, one letter with 18 signatures on it from former wardens - I think they were all former wardens, and they’re councillors, obviously - expressing their concern around the issues that are ongoing in Richmond as of late in the media.

One of the things that I work hard at, and it’s hard when you come from a municipal unit like I do, and you do, and we all do - when something is close to home, you sometimes think more with emotion than maybe you should. I am continually stepping back to ask, what would I do anywhere else in the province? What would I do when there’s a problem at home?

I know the optics of things in Richmond. It isn’t the only municipality to have a concern around one thing or another. What we do know about Richmond is that there are still some facts that are not clear. I believe those will probably be made clear in due time - at least I hope, if there’s more to come. I know decisions have been made. I know that the warden resigned, but he stayed on as a councillor. That’s great - he’ll represent his people.

We have been there with our advisers. We’re prepared to go back. I reached out in writing to the five - the warden and the four councillors of Richmond County - to offer them any assistance that we could to help resolve some of the differences that they may be having. From what you read in the papers, some pretty harsh things maybe around it have been said. I received seven other pieces of correspondence and two phone calls. I would think there’s probably a lot more discussion going on closer to home around this whole event. We don’t know yet.

There was some discussion around why the CAO was released. It is within their purview as council to do that. The one employee that they actually have is the CAO. They have the authority under the MGA to hire and terminate as they see fit, but basically as per the contract that they would have written. We are assuming that they have done so under the contract and the terms within the contract. If that’s not the case, I’m sure they’ll hear about that.

I think there’s probably more that will come out here, but as far as our ability to just step in and say, you’re all this or that, there’s nothing that gives us authority under the MGA currently to go in and do that.

If there were some substantial financial issues that were obviously out front and blatant, yes, we would be there. There would perhaps be a ministerial order, but that ministerial order provides just that - an order that they have to comply with. It doesn’t say, you’re all done today, and thank you for your service. That is a worst-case scenario at this point in time. That could happen, but I have nothing right now that says to me that I have the authority to do that, unless there is something more that comes forward, other than perhaps a disagreement around the table that they’re currently having. They have gone out and appointed an interim CAO. I’m assuming they’ll go through the application and hiring process yet again, as per normal. They’ll go through those steps.

There was an audit committee there that meets twice a year. I believe they’re meeting sometime in the future. They were scheduled to meet. I don’t believe they have. We would certainly recommend, if there are any issues around those questions, that they do meet and allow that to come out. That’s a public meeting. If there are discrepancies on something, that should come out.

Maybe it’s all very clear. If they are having some issues, need some advice on how that all happens, we’re there, and we’re able. We have great advisers who have been working with them and will continue to work with them. We’ll offer them the support that they need. Outside of that, there is nothing currently in the MGA that allows me to do anything more than that. That’s one piece.

The other is that I have to step back and look at this and ask, what would I do? These folks are all democratically elected by the people. They need to come together and make decisions on behalf of the people who elected them, every day, in all circumstances, whether there are agreements or disagreements, which there always are. They have to work through that. These are five adults sitting around the table who won’t always agree. They’re no different from other councils or provincial Parties. We all have things.

The only other thing that really stands out for me is if the entire council resigned. That would leave us in a position where we would have to step in and appoint somebody until there was another election held, and that will be in 2020. I think there were some comments around an early election. We don’t have the authority to instate that. That can’t happen, not under my authority anyway at this time. That’s not possible.

We’re encouraging the good folks down there to work together, and we’re there to assist them. We’ll do whatever to help them out and get on track and make good decisions on behalf of the good people of Richmond County.

LISA ROBERTS: Thank you. I think that actually concludes my questions.

[5:45 p.m.]

THE CHAIR: Ms. Smith-McCrossin.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I was curious when I was studying your department and I was looking at the different grants and payments. Can you tell me why we have the grants in lieu of taxes for Nova Scotia Power and why Nova Scotia Power wouldn’t just pay directly like every other property or building owner to the municipalities? Why does it have to go through the department and then get paid out?

CHUCK PORTER: We’ll get some clarity on that. We do have grants like that. It’s no different than the farmland one I talked about a few minutes ago. Nova Scotia Power owns certain properties within the province.

Nova Scotia Power is an example. They have lines and transmission, et cetera, which are not all located in one taxable area. This deal in lieu is set up, so it’s collected and paid. That’s why it’s done that way. That’s why it’s set up. I think $40 million is the total that’s collected and paid out from Nova Scotia Power; $41.3 million is actually what I have on the chart.

The program, which we formally called equalization, of that $30.5 million, $20.4 million of that comes from that $41 million. The province tops that up with another $10 million. That’s how it gets to the $30.5 million. There’s same amount of money as last year for this year in the budget line item of $14.7 million. That’s why it’s collected that way.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: I was just curious because there seems to be a lot of confusion around equalization and different payment structures. As a business person, I was just thinking if you were able to remove that and Nova Scotia Power went through property valuation services like everyone else, it might just remove confusion for people. That’s the only reason I ask that question.

Has there ever been any concern shared with you from municipal governments around the Atlantic procurement and the procedures around that? I’m just curious.

CHUCK PORTER: Not to my knowledge, no. I have never had a conversation around that. I’m not exactly sure I understand the question totally, but no.

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: Maybe just because of the time, I’ll put something in writing. There has been some concern shared with me that the Atlantic procurement is not keeping up with the rate of inflation, and it puts barriers in place for municipalities. We’ll talk about that offline.

My last question is: Has there ever been any discussion around the municipalities’ role, possibly in collaboration with the Department of Health and Wellness, around prevention of dental cavities and fluorination of water and working with municipalities to put fluoride in water systems?

CHUCK PORTER: We have not had those conversations. You could go to the good Minister of Health and Wellness, who I’m sure could probably enlighten us all more on those discussions around dental issues. We have not had any in my time. I’ll speak for my time, and the deputy, who has been in the department for about three years - we have not had any of those conversations. That’s where we’re at now.

THE CHAIR: Would you like to question the Minister of Health and Wellness?

CHUCK PORTER: Next question. (Laughter)

ELIZABETH SMITH-MCCROSSIN: The reason I ask is because Pugwash had recently gotten federal funding and put in a new water system. Our community health boards were trying to convince them it’s cheaper to put in fluorination of water when you actually install the system. You can still do it later, but the capital cost is quite a bit more. We were trying to convince them, and their point was there are no funding opportunities. What’s the incentive for us - even though there’s absolutely proof that it definitely reduces dental caries.

That’s the end of my questioning. I just wanted to ask.

CHUCK PORTER: Just on that topic, if they did that in a project, and they were under a grant, we would certainly be willing to look at that option as part of that project. It could be fit in there perhaps, somehow. It wouldn’t necessarily have to be specific health care-related funding. I think if it’s part of a project, you may be able to set it up as part of that project. There are different phases to almost every project. It’s something we certainly take into consideration going forward if they were doing it at the time of the project.

THE CHAIR: Shall Resolution E17 stand?

Resolution E17 stands.

[5:52 p.m. The committee recessed.]

[5:58 p.m. The committee reconvened]

THE CHAIR: I’ll call the Subcommittee of the Whole on Supply to order, and welcome the Department of Community Services.

Resolution E4 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $1,018,081,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Community Services, pursuant to the Estimate, and the business plan of Housing Nova Scotia be approved.

THE CHAIR: I’ll invite the minister to begin with her opening statement and introduce any of her staff that she might have with her. She has one hour.

HON. KELLY REGAN: It has been a while since I have done this. I’m honoured to be here to present the 2019-20 budget for the Department of Community Services, Housing Nova Scotia, and the Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women.

Seated with me on my right is Lynn Hartwell, who is our Deputy Minister of Community Services. On my left is Peter Newbery. He is Director of Budget and Results for Community Services.

I want to share with you that this is Mr. Newbery’s last Budget Estimates before he retires. He joined the Province of Nova Scotia in 1996 and he has held a number of finance roles. Since 2013, Pete has served DCS as the Director of Budget and Results. He has led and supported the development of over 30 departmental budgets to date, and look how young he looks. I just want to thank him for his work. He’s a very thoughtful, calm, nice guy, and we’re going to miss him tremendously. That’s all I’m going to say about that.

Mr. Chair, to add context to the work I’m about to outline, I’m going to first provide a bit of background. The Department of Community Services is committed to a sustainable social service system that promotes the independence, self-reliance, and security of the people we serve. The goal of Housing Nova Scotia is to ensure that all Nova Scotians can find a home that’s right for them at a price they can afford in a vibrant community that offers the services, supports, and opportunities they need. The Advisory Council on the Status of Women serves to educate the public and advise government on issues of interest and concern to women.

Mr. Chair, we believe all Nova Scotians want to provide for themselves and their families, contribute to their communities, and lead fulfilling lives. At times, however, the challenges to doing so can be overwhelming. Sometimes these challenges are economic, like a lack of access to food, shelter, and transportation. Other times, it can be a need for services to help manage or overcome physical or mental health issues, or finding supports to become a better parent so children don’t have to be taken into care. Or it can be a need for services to help heal after fleeing domestic violence.

Helping people overcome challenges like these is why we have been making changes to our system - changes that are transforming the way we work. This work, which we began in 2015, represents the biggest wholesale change to Nova Scotia’s social services system in half a century.

Of course, this work is not just about transforming a system. At its core, it’s about transforming lives. We have not carried out this work in isolation. Over the last four years, we have sought the input of clients, advocates, stakeholders, communities, and staff, and we continue to so that the changes we make better respond to the needs of Nova Scotians.

A key component of our work is to help people receiving income supports build income security so they can meet their basic needs. We doubled allowable asset levels for both single individuals and families. We doubled the poverty reduction credit for individuals and couples, and introduced a new personal items allowance to support people temporarily staying in homeless shelters and transition houses.

We also implemented a more generous wage exemption for people receiving income assistance. Now clients can keep more of the money they earn through paid employment. This is helping people better address their basic needs and makes it easier for them to pursue and sustain employment. The exemption applies to regular wages as well as wages from supported employment for people whose physical, mental, or cognitive abilities prevent them from working on their own without continuous support.

Mr. Chair, to ensure money earmarked for children actually benefits children, we exempted child maintenance payments from income assistance calculations. This resulted in an average increase of $275 per month per household. In this fiscal year, we will extend the child maintenance exemption to people receiving disability supports and/or housing supports.

Over the last few years, the department has held engagement sessions on the province’s Employment Support and Income Assistance program with more than 100 organizations. These included advocacy groups, poverty networks, women’s centres, transition houses, and others. We also met with many more individually about our transformation work and held information sessions with more than 300 ESIA staff.

Most importantly, Mr. Chair, we sought the input of our clients. Through 19 focus groups across the province, 180 people participated. Nova Scotians also completed more than 1,700 surveys. The feedback we received informed our transformation work and helped to shape the changes we have made to help people receiving income assistance build income security. After receiving this feedback and analyzing the work of other jurisdictions, we determined that a standard household rate for people receiving income assistance is the best and most sustainable option for Nova Scotia.

The standard household rate will provide all clients with the maximum amount they are eligible for, as well as rate increases. Clients who are single with no children and who have a disability, who are fleeing domestic violence, who are 55 years of age or older, or our youth age 16 to 18 will receive a 5-per cent increase. For context, people who meet these criteria represent 51 per cent of Nova Scotians receiving income assistance. All other clients will see a 2 per cent increase. Again, this in addition to moving all clients to the maximum allowable benefit for their household type.

Here’s an example. Under the standard household rate alone, a single person with no children who has a disability will receive $40 more a month at a minimum. When you factor in other increases such as the personal allowance increase, doubling the poverty reduction credit, and federal and provincial tax credit amounts, it’s an increase of $83 a month, or $996 more per year than he or she would have received in 2015-16.

Here’s another example. Under the standard household rate alone, a couple with two children will receive $23 more a month. That’s at a minimum because we also implemented a more generous wage exemption last year, and Income Assistance clients can now keep more of the money they earn. If one of those parents earns $764, which is the average of what our clients earn, in net monthly income, they will see another increase of $232 more a month. When you factor in other increases such as the personal allowance increase and federal and provincial tax credit amounts, the family will see an overall increase of $443 more per month, or $5,316 more a year than they did in 2015-16.

These increases are not something that would have been achievable through rate increases alone. The cost to taxpayers would be prohibitive. However, with each change we have made - whether it’s the introduction of a child maintenance exemption, introducing a new wage exemption, or doubling both the poverty reduction credit and allowable assets - we are helping people build income security that would not have been possible otherwise.

Mr. Chair, I want to stress this next point. In 2016, we increased the personal allowance by $20 a month for people receiving income assistance. It was the largest increase ever to income assistance, and it came as a total investment of $7.1 million annually. Our investment in the standard household rate, once it’s in place for a full year, will be more than three times that amount.

We didn’t stop there. Last year, we implemented a pilot program with Halifax Regional Municipality to provide free bus passes to people receiving income assistance, as well as their spouses and dependants. Of course, bus passes provide safe, reliable transportation to people in need. Because of this pilot, thousands more Nova Scotians now have access to transportation. Those folks who can’t take the bus because of a disability or short-term illness can continue to receive an allowance for other types of transportation, such as taxis. I should note that this is a one-year bus pass. It’s not something where they have to go in and show how many doctor’s appointments they have or anything like that. It just comes to you if you’re on income assistance in HRM.

Improvements like the bus pass are not reflected in economic data and statistical reports like the market basket measure because they’re not income based. However, these changes provide the kind of support vital to helping Nova Scotians meet their basic needs and move forward with their lives. Through government’s $20-million multi-year poverty reduction blueprint, we’re partnering with communities, non-profits, multiple sectors, and other government departments to improve access to the basic necessities of life and provide supports for Nova Scotians who are living in poverty.

The blueprint consists of three funding streams: the Building Vibrant Communities Grant, the Poverty Reduction Government Innovation Program, and the Social Innovation Labs. Through the Building Vibrant Communities Grant, funding is available to community organizations, First Nations bands, municipalities, community groups, and social enterprises that have identified projects to help tackle poverty. To date, more than $2 million has been invested in a total of 107 projects since 2017. Grant recipients include community organizations such as the East Hants Family Resource Centre, which is receiving funding to bring Mi’kmaw culture to children. The focus is on children, families, and activities that promote strong mental health and increase self-confidence, self-awareness and pride.

Helping women who are missing work or school because of the cost of feminine hygiene products was the aim of a Sheet Harbour project. With a Building Vibrant Communities Grant, products were handed out to anyone who expressed an interest regardless of income. This helped to reduce the stigma often associated with poverty. Included with the products were pamphlets and literature outlining organizations and resources available to provide support. The project helped 77 women, thereby exceeding project expectations.

A second component of the blueprint initiative is the Poverty Reduction Government Innovation Program. Government departments apply for funding to work with communities across Nova Scotia to tackle complex poverty-related issues. With these projects, more Nova Scotians will be able to access the basic supports they need to help them improve their day-to-day lives. Last year, 12 new projects received a total investment of $710,000 through the program.

In addition to these new projects, four projects from the previous year received funding to further advance their work. This includes the expansion to the mobile food market. This travelling food market program brings healthy, high-quality, and affordable food, including fresh fruits and vegetables, to communities that have challenges accessing fresh food. I can tell you, having visited the food market, it’s well used.

In a separate project, Community Services is working alongside Independent Living Nova Scotia and the Society of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Nova Scotians to support individuals with disabilities to open a registered disability savings plan. RDSPs improve financial security.

The third funding component of the blueprint initiative is for Social Innovation Labs. The labs are designed to bring communities together to address local poverty issues. One of the labs, based in Amherst, centres on food security. Lab participants are focused on identifying solutions that will improve regular and sustainable access to food in the area. They’re testing a food-inclusive housing pilot aimed at providing groceries and recipe food boxes directly to households. Cost of the food is discounted due to economies of scale achieved as a result of the number of participating households. This reduces the risk that area residents will need to reduce their food consumption to pay for expenses incurred during the month. We’re now entering year three of the blueprint initiative.

Community Services is changing how Nova Scotians with disabilities are supported. Many Nova Scotians with disabilities often struggle to secure the supports needed to achieve independence. We’re expanding the services and programming available for persons with disabilities so they can pursue paid employment if they’re able. Recent enhancements to the Workplace Support Program have expanded the region’s supports available to help Nova Scotians with disabilities find and maintain employment or complete their post-secondary education. Our Ability Works and Renewed Work Activity programs both support clients with disabilities on income assistance by helping them participate in activities that foster community inclusion and employment.

We have also augmented support for day programs for youth with disabilities. A few months back, we invited established service providers to apply for funding to develop new day programs and services for youth aged 16 to 24 who have disabilities. We want young people with disabilities to have more opportunities to meet their goals within their communities, whether their goals are volunteering, recreational, or skill-building for future employment. We encourage service providers to engage with youth and their families to help realize these goals. The first successful applicants will be announced very soon.

[6:15 p.m.]

Our move towards smaller community-based homes will enable individuals to live inclusively as part of the community. As you know, our government committed to developing eight small option homes. I am pleased to report that two of these homes are now open, and two more will open this calendar year. The four remaining homes are in the design and site selection phases, and residents and their families are involved in this work. The process to move all residents into community-based homes will take several more years.

Our focus remains on listening to the people we serve and doing what’s right for each person. Ultimately, we will only move people when (1) it’s what they want, (2) it can be done safely, and (3) they have all the supports they need to thrive in a community environment. We want to set people up for success. I will say that it has been instructional when we have been able to reach out to other provinces across the country to hear more about their experience in shutting down these larger facilities. We have learned a lot from the examples across the country.

Mr. Chair, this year we will begin work on creating community placements for children and youth with disabilities who have complex needs and require out-of-home community-based care. In addition, we will be testing new and expanded support services to families with children who have disabilities to strengthen and build capacity at home.

Helping young people avoid the need for income assistance is fundamental to breaking the cycle of poverty, which manifests generation after generation. That’s why we continue to invest in supports for youth at risk, young adults who are receiving income assistance and youth who are dependants of people receiving income assistance.

This past year, we introduced Edge, a job-search and readiness pilot program for young adults age 18 to 26 who receive employment supports and income assistance. The program, which is a first for Nova Scotia, was designed in part by young adults. It helps them develop skills and gain access to the resources they need in a peer environment designed to meet their needs. I have to tell you that the Premier and the member for Kings South and I attended the announcement of the program, and we met with some of the participants. I have to say that they were thrilled to have jobs, and they spoke very eloquently about that experience and about being able to hang out with people who had similar interests and who had similar experiences. It was quite a delight that day.

Students looking to gain work experience and explore careers within their community also have more opportunities through the Career Rising program. Career Rising assists the dependants of our clients receiving income assistance and youth who are in care. Following a successful pilot project last year and in partnership with the Nova Scotia Co-operative Council, we made it a permanent program and added incentives for students.

The program features a two-week skills development camp, paid work experience with a local employer, resumé development, ongoing connection to the community and supports throughout the year, and a post-secondary grant funded in part by the department and the Community Credit Union of Cumberland-Colchester. I think the Minister of Environment and I were at the announcement of that program, which was actually after we had piloted it over the Summer. I have to say, the response we had from the young people who were involved in it was quite terrific. They were very articulate; they stood up and talked about it.

Also, hearing from the employers in that sector - and I spoke about this in the House today during Question Period - many of whom were in the agricultural sector, said that they actually got to take time off during the Summer because the young people that they employed were so impressive and took to the work like ducks to water, and they were actually able to take some time off and have the young people run their operations. I thought that was quite an endorsement of their experience.

I will say that recently this program received international recognition from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, which most of us know as the OECD, as a best practice for youth programming and supports.

We introduced the Educate to Work for dependants program that provides financial support to dependants of people receiving income assistance so they can study at the Nova Scotia Community College. Our government is also taking a leadership role as an employer by providing clients of the Department of Community Services and youth with summer work experience in their fields of study or in support of their career goals. This summer, 15 departments and agencies will give our clients and youth a leg up on their path to independence. These programs are helping to reduce and eliminate barriers so our youth and our clients can get the life skills, education, and work experience they need to succeed. We’re committed to helping young people build connections to communities, build self-confidence, develop a career path, and free themselves from the need for income assistance.

Safe and healthy children, youth, and families are key to building a stronger Nova Scotia. They are why we are transforming our child welfare system. We need to ensure that children and youth are protected and that families can be supported before they’re in crisis. Sometimes staying in parental care is not an option because of child safety issues. We know children do better if they can stay in a loving home with people they already know, such as grandparents, aunts and uncles, or family friends. Often though, the cost of taking over the care of the children can be prohibitive for families.

This past year, we introduced a new program called Alternative Family Care so that children can be cared for by trusted family members or others known to the children. The program provides financial assistance and other supports to caregivers to cover expenses like food, clothing, and other costs of having children stay with them. In addition to the financial supports, other social work supports are provided - all with the goal of keeping a familiar connection for children until they can be reunited with their parents.

Every child deserves a loving home where they can thrive. That’s why the Department of Community Services is changing how we support foster families. In addition to introducing auto-payments and improving per diem rates and babysitting rates, the department is about to test a new funding model with some foster families. The aim of this work is to reduce paperwork for both foster parents and staff and to eliminate the need for foster families to pay out of pocket for the expenses of children in care. This new funding model will be tested with foster parents who receive special training to deliver an advanced level of care to support the augmented needs of our most vulnerable youth in care. These foster parents provide dedicated supports within a highly competent foster home environment. They receive a higher rate of compensation and sign a contract to deliver these specialized services.

As well, last year the department created a youth round table, facilitated by Heartwood. We created a foster parent reference group and developed programming and supports for youth who have specific vulnerabilities, including youth who have been sexually exploited or are at risk of being sexually exploited.

This year, the department will also undertake a comprehensive analysis of the foster care program to inform how the program can be improved. The analysis will include a review of best practices and models regarding the provision of foster care for all children and youth.

We aim to determine how the program can better meet the needs of a range of children and youth in care and how foster parents can be better supported through and by streamlining processes. We also want to ensure financial supports reflect both the expenses of children in care and the competencies of the caregivers.

The staff of the Department of Community Services continues to work closely with the 13 First Nations communities and Mi’kmaw Family and Children’s Services to better address the needs of Mi’kmaw children and their families. We’re also increasing our focus on helping African Nova Scotian children find a permanent placement with adoptive parents within the African Nova Scotian community.

Everyone deserves to live in a safe, affordable home. The Department of Community Services, Housing Nova Scotia, and community agencies are working together to help reduce and prevent homelessness. This past year, through rent supplements, we were able to help Nova Scotians move out of temporary shelters and into safe, affordable units. Currently, there are more than 70 units allocated for this purpose.

As part of our three-year plan to reduce the public housing wait-list by 30 per cent by 2021, we allocated more than 500 rent supplements last year. These, together with the approximately 1,700 rent supplements already in the marketplace, account for more than 2,000 rent supplements assigned to date. Staff have worked very hard and very closely with clients to implement these new rent supplements. In fact, while our goal was 500 new rent supplements last year, and we announced that in North End Halifax during the Summer - I think it was July - we were actually able to roll out 552 new rent supplements.

Last year, we also piloted a program with the Salvation Army to help men at a temporary shelter in Halifax move to more stable housing. As of April 1^st, 51 men secured housing as a result of this rapid rehousing work. We will also provide additional funding to the Cape Breton Community Housing Association to build and operate a new 24/7, 16-bed emergency shelter in Sydney for men and women. This shelter is the first of its kind for the area.

Our Down Payment Assistance Program is helping Nova Scotians with modest incomes purchase their first homes. Since the start of the program in 2017, about 300 families have realized their dream of owning a home. I’m very pleased to say this pilot will now become a permanent initiative.

As part of the Capital Asset Management Program, Housing Nova Scotia will continue to compile reliable data on the building condition of our public housing to identify required renewal projects and target funding to where it is most needed.

We have leveraged federal monies to increase access to affordable housing for Nova Scotians in need. A total of $75 million federal and provincial dollars have been invested under the Social Infrastructure Fund over the last three years. Through our rental housing portfolio, the province continues to be the largest landlord offering affordable housing in the province.

There are more than 11,000 public housing units across the province managed by five regional housing authorities. Close to 18,000 families and seniors rely on these units. In addition, more than 2,000 low-income households live in private market rental accommodations supported by rent supplements.

In the last two years, we have also supported the preservation and construction of more than 350 affordable rental units across Nova Scotia. We continue to negotiate with the federal government on a new nine-year funding agreement for housing that would allow us to advance the objectives of the National Housing Strategy. The new federal funding will be available for Nova Scotia to claim in this fiscal year, pending the signing of that agreement.

[6:30 p.m.]

We’re also developing a provincial housing strategy - an action plan to advance long-range housing priorities for Nova Scotia while leveraging federal National Housing Strategy funds. This important work will help us to reduce the public housing wait-list; advance our government’s goal of ensuring our communities are safe and connected and providing affordable housing; and ensure the sustainability of housing over the longer term - this includes government, co-op, and not-for-profit housing. It will also help us to ensure the most vulnerable populations are served and that we increase the supply of affordable housing. It will help us to achieve operational efficiency and effectiveness, and it will help us to leverage external funding, such as federal investments.

Domestic violence affects many Nova Scotians and can happen in any relationship. We are working with community organizations and groups to build a provincial plan to break the harmful cycles of domestic violence. The plan, called Standing Together, is a $9-million multi-year investment that will enable community groups and government to test new, innovative ideas and explore best practices. What we learn from these projects will be an important part of the work to develop the plan. The recipients of the first round of grants will be announced soon.

Victims of domestic violence can now take leave from work without fear of losing their jobs. People who have been in their jobs for at least three months are entitled to protected leave if they or their child experience domestic violence. The leave allows them time away from work so they can seek medical attention, obtain victim services or counselling, relocate, and seek legal or law enforcement help. Employees can access up to 16 continuous weeks and/or 10 continuous or intermittent days of domestic violence leave. Up to three days of this protected leave will be paid by the employer.

Nova Scotia supports the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. We will continue to work with the national inquiry; federal, provincial, and territorial partners; and Mi’kmaw organizations as the inquiry looks at the underlying cause of violence against Indigenous women and girls and makes recommendations to end the high rates of violence.

Despite efforts to the contrary, sexual violence remains a serious health, social, and public safety issue that affects many Nova Scotians. The department continues to work with communities to help victims and survivors of sexual violence get the support they need and promote education and awareness of the issue. The training course supporting survivors of sexual violence is available online, and two new modules are actually being developed: one focusing on African Nova Scotian perspectives and the other on sexual exploitation and trafficking.

Work also continues as part of our ongoing funding commitment to help prevent and respond to sexual abuse and exploitation of youth and children, including human trafficking. Work includes outreach to young people, marginalized, and underserved communities, and community mobilization lead by and for marginalized communities.

As a government, we have made changes to support parents. The eligibility period in the Labour Standards Code to qualify for protected pregnancy and parental leave was eliminated as of January 1^st. This now means that parents can access pregnancy and parental leave from the moment they are hired. Under the code, both biological and adoptive parents are eligible for up to 77 weeks of leave.

Nova Scotians who need our programs and services are now seeing the benefits of this transformational work. We know there is a lot more to do, but by continuing to listen to our clients, advocates, partners, and staff, we will ensure that the changes we make will be effective ones for the people we serve.

In closing, I want to extend my personal thanks to the staff of the Department of Community Services, Housing Nova Scotia, and the Advisory Council on the Status of Women for their continued support and ongoing commitment to our collective work and to give 100 per cent each day so Nova Scotians in need can have the opportunity to live their best lives. I can’t say enough. It’s difficult to say how much I appreciate their commitment. I’m very proud to be their minister.

Mr. Chair, I’m ready for your questions. I would ask that any questions for the Department of Community Services be asked first. My understanding is that tomorrow, we will move to Housing Nova Scotia, and then later Status of Women. This avoids staff in the respective areas having to run back and forth. Actually, some of them aren’t here this evening.

Thank you, and now on to your questions.

THE CHAIR: We’ll begin with the Progressive Conservative Party for 60 minutes. Ms. Adams.

BARBARA ADAMS: Just to clarify before we get started, would questions about small options homes be housing questions? No, that’s all right.

First of all, I would also like to echo the minister’s comments. I think everybody who works at the Department of Community Services has a very challenging task. They are working with the most vulnerable people in the most dire circumstances. I also want to echo a comment I made to the Minister of Seniors that when I got elected and was appointed Critic for the Department of Community Services, the minister brought us in and did an orientation. I understand that’s not necessarily something that happens across all ministries, but I did appreciate that very much, to give us an overview of all of the programs.

I’m going to start off with some budgetary questions and then move into more program-specific things. I just want to get a sense of some of the funding changes that have happened from last year to this year. I’m looking at Page 6.2 of the Estimates and Supplementary Detail. The first thing I want to go to is the Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women. The forecast for 2018-19 was $11.587 million. I know that was an increase from the year. Now it is up to $12.268 million.

I know from the Community Services Committee meetings that there had been a $6-million amount, $2 million each year, for programs to help with sexual violence. I know that was ended after the three-year term, if I’m correct. I’m just wondering, with the increase for the Advisory Council on the Status of Women, what does that increase look like practically in terms of what else is going to be done in that department?

KELLY REGAN: The 2018-19 forecast increase of $410,000 is due to increased spending related to campaign school and community grants. These expenses are partially offset by recoveries from the federal Department of Justice and Status of Women Canada. Then additional unbudgeted funding - that was $350,000 - was also authorized for enhanced funding to women’s centres. That would be the Strait Area Women’s Centre and the Nova Scotia Native Women’s Association.

For whatever reason, in the past when Strait Area set up their transition house, they did not receive the same funding as all the other ones, so we improved that funding to them. We also began funding the Nova Scotia Native Women’s Association because they had not been receiving that, and we felt they were doing important work.

The 2019-20 estimate increase of just over $1 million is the result of salary increases. That would be approved cost-of-living increases for staff, cost-of-living increases for transition house staff, and an additional $1 million in funding received for year two of Standing Together, which is the provincial action plan to prevent domestic violence.

BARBARA ADAMS: I do want to congratulate the minister on the Campaign School for Women. I went to the one four and a half years ago, and then I went to this one. It knocked your socks off, so well done.

I do want to raise a point. We, collectively - the NDP and the PC Party - have about four hours of time with the Department of Community Services, but we only have 30 minutes today. The NDP are not going to be able to ask any questions tomorrow on non-housing issues if the staff who are here today don’t come back tomorrow.

KELLY REGAN: They’re coming back.

BARBARA ADAMS: So we can still ask non-housing questions tomorrow? Okay, good.

The same thing down at the bottom of Page 6.2 - when we look at total funding staff for the Department of Community Services, it’s a large department with 1,661 people, but it has gone down by about 26. We’re hearing about social workers who are overworked and wanting more supports. I’m just wondering, who is losing staff? It’s down at the bottom of Page 6.2, total funded staff, FTEs.

Just for clarification, on Page 6.4, under Programs and Services, they’re dropping staff by 50. That’s almost half the loss of staffing if that helps. On the bottom of Page 6.4, Funded Staff goes from 1,161 to 1,110. That particular programs and services area is losing - it’s under Corporate Services Unit.

[6:45 p.m.]

KELLY REGAN: The difference there is that we were actually over-forecast in 2018-19, and that’s due to the additional staff needed for transport of children in care. There’s a decrease of staff from estimate to estimate because we transferred some staff to the Department of Justice. At Employment Support and Income Assistance, we ask people to pursue all possible forms of income, and that would include child maintenance. Once the inclusion of that in income was removed, those staff were transferred over to the Department of Justice to help augment their efforts to collect more child maintenance. There are some additional transformational savings planned, but they have not been achieved as of yet.

What I will say about the issue of social workers is that whenever we have openings available, and we know that there is an office that needs another social worker, we’re able to shift resources around. We have done that with 15 so far. We’re able to move folks in there to help out.

I just would say around the issue of caseload that we continue to have caseloads below the national average. I do want to say that some cases are more challenging than others. We know someone could have a very small caseload, but they could be cases that require a lot of work. We recognize that, and we are working very hard to make sure that we take that into account when social workers are being assigned cases.

BARBARA ADAMS: I appreciate that effort, especially in my constituency. I see it happening. On that note, one of the things that I’m aware of is that the caseload for social workers requires a lot of time to document what was said between the client and the social workers. I know it makes up a substantial portion of the time.

In an awful lot of government departments, when you call in - and an awful lot of the communication between the two go on over the phone - even if I call Koodo, it’ll say, this telephone call will be recorded for quality assurance and training purposes. We often get calls saying, the social worker never called me back, or she was rude to me, or the social worker says the client was not very pleasant on the phone.

Where there’s a challenge with communication at times, and there’s a challenge to document what was actually said, has the department considered taping the conversations? Obviously, they’re not going to get released for security and privacy issues, but they could just be transcribed straight into the notes so that the social workers - who don’t have to take the time to transcribe what they believe was said - could actually just have accurate documentation of what was said, like we literally do here in the Legislature every day.

KELLY REGAN: What we have been doing is focusing on giving our social workers the tools to be able to take better notes, to have the opportunity to take notes at the time, things like tablets, et cetera. I would like to thank the member for the vote of faith that those recordings would remain private, because we have taken a fair amount of abuse recently for that. But no, that is not something we have considered. We want our social workers to have relationships with their clients, and I don’t know that the knowledge that you’re being taped would necessarily make that a more likely thing.

Could social workers afterwards tape their own notes or something like that? That’s different. I don’t think that’s considered a best practice. I don’t know of any other jurisdiction that does it. I don’t know a lot of people who would be particularly comfortable with the knowledge that you’re being taped when you’re having a conversation about what can be some very sensitive topics.

BARBARA ADAMS: I’m going to suggest perhaps that, for those who would be comfortable with it and who would actually appreciate it, maybe it’s an option to consider. There are those - at least the ones who call us - who will tell us that one thing was said, and then we call, and we go back and forth between what was actually said and what was in notes. I’m just thinking, perhaps there’s an option there to consider.

I’m going to turn the remaining time over to my colleague.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Paon.

ALANA PAON: I’m going to focus my questions on some childhood poverty-related questions. It was mentioned in the business plan that the Department of Community Services is four years into your transformational work. People are stated to be seeing the subsequent improvements but more importantly realizing the benefits of the changes that are being implemented. I’m curious - what are the subsequent changes and transformations you mentioned when it comes to combatting childhood poverty in particular?

We all know, with the recent results coming out, our province is standing within the nation as extremely poor - the worst, in fact. The worst is in Cape Breton, and of course, my constituency is on Cape Breton Island. I would love to know what changes and transformation you mention when it comes to combatting childhood poverty.

KELLY REGAN: What I will say about the recent Statistics Canada numbers is that they are from 2017, and a lot of the changes that we began rolling out actually happened in the subsequent year. Those wouldn’t be reflected in those 2017 numbers. Nova Scotia has always had difficulty with child poverty. There is no doubt about that. I remember going to a movie in the early 1990s with my now-husband, then-fiancé. It was about poverty in Nova Scotia. The numbers for us were concerning, particularly because they didn’t match up with unemployment numbers and the fact that our caseload has been declining. We were delighted to see continuing reduction in the rate of poverty for families led by single parents and a continuing decline in the rate of poverty for seniors.

I would say that a lot of what we do in Nova Scotia would not always fit within the market basket. The market basket measure is a different measure than had been used in the past, which was LICO or low-income cut-off. The market basket measure looks at your ability to buy a basket full of the things that you need to live - things like food, lodging, transportation, and that kind of thing.

This is the tough part of doing something like the bus pass. We don’t give you the money to buy the bus pass. We give you the bus pass. That’s not going to be reflected in what Statistics Canada is seeing once they actually get to the 2018 numbers. That’s not going to be reflected in that. You’re not going to see that there, even though a whole family will now have transportation. There will be nothing on their tax return that will reflect that.

The measures are complex. If you look simply at income, if we are providing things like a rent supplement, that will not be reflected in that because until we roll out our portable rent supplement program, the money isn’t coming directly as income. Even then, it probably won’t show up as income there. It’ll just be treated a different way. Right now, rent supplement does not show up as income. Things that we do like that reduce poverty don’t show up. The fact of the matter is, it’s an easy sound bite to say that we’re going in the wrong direction, but a lot of what we’re doing won’t ever show up in those measures. It’s disappointing and all that. There are a number of things that we are doing.

I should say that we have asked Statistics Canada for more information about this. They could not easily identify why this happened in Nova Scotia - why we were the outlier there. What we do know, for example, is that in 2017-18, the Canada Child Benefit alone brought just shy of $600 million from the federal government to Nova Scotian families. For example, I believe the member’s federal riding is Cape Breton-Canso. So, 6,520 families received the Canada Child Benefit that year, and that represented 11,370 children. The average annual payment to those families was $7,070. It was a significant boost to a lot of incomes.

Certainly, Cape Breton-Canso is not outlier on that particular level of income, although I believe Sydney-Victoria is actually a little bit higher. It’s the second-highest level of income coming in across the province from the federal government. All of those things, taken together, are a bit puzzling. The federal government can’t explain it yet, but they are doing more work, and our economists are doing more work. What we do know is that the indications are that it was two-parent or parent and child families where this was happening. We actually don’t have a lot of them on our ESIA rolls as a percentage of our caseload. Again, we’re looking to other things as well to better understand that.

Just to remind folks, there are a number of things that we are doing - and this would be in 2018, so again, they would not be reflected in those 2017 numbers. These changes that would not be reflected are exempting child maintenance payments from calculation of income assistance payments. That represents an average of $275 per month per family. That change alone is a big change. Introducing the new wage exemption helps people receiving income assistance keep more of the money they earn.

Working with communities across Nova Scotia through our blueprint initiative improves access for the basic necessities of life and provides supports for youth at risk so they can develop job skills. We have more than 100 projects already receiving funding through the Building Vibrant Communities Grant component alone to test community-developed approaches for effectively reducing poverty.

Today earlier in the House, I spoke briefly about transportation. We actually had nine projects that were under way, either first or second year, mostly first year, on transportation. In a lot of areas, transportation is a huge difficulty, particularly in rural areas.

[7:00 p.m.]

I remember once, when we were in Opposition, going to the Town of Pictou and hearing that people were moving there because accommodations were cheaper. Then they found they couldn’t get anywhere from there because there was no public transit. For a lot of folks, transportation is a huge issue.

We’re also in the process of creating up to 1,500 new, affordable housing units through rent supplements. In the first year we did the 552, which was exceeding our goal. We expanded child care spaces by up to 1,000. We introduced free universal pre-Primary program for four-year-olds. As we heard, another 83 classes are being rolled out for this Fall. We capped increases to parent fees for child care. We’re investing in healthy eating programs. We’re now up to 93 per cent of schools having free breakfast programs. We introduced income tax changes that mean that about 63,000 more Nova Scotians don’t have to pay any provincial income tax.

As I said, a lot of the changes that we’re making won’t ever show up. When 2018 rolls around, that won’t show up because they’re not income based.

ALANA PAON: With regard to the Child, Youth and Family Supports program, I noticed it only has a minor increase this year, and last year it had a larger increase. I know you have just mentioned several different programs - kind of a reallocation of where monies are going - but could you explain it to me? One would think, with so much child poverty - and child poverty usually is an indication, obviously, that family is impoverished - that there would have been more of a rigorous response within the Child, Youth and Family Supports program. Can you explain why there wasn’t more of an increase in that this year?

KELLY REGAN: Just to be clear, the Child, Youth and Family Supports is not the program that provides extra money to children. This is about children who are in care or at risk of coming into care. While there may be a correlation with poverty, there’s not a causation for poverty. This is about the money that is set aside for looking after children who are in our care or may come into care.

ALANA PAON: Are there any studies being done as to why Cape Breton Island has the highest child poverty nationwide? Is there any kind of study that can be commissioned to look into that since we don’t know what the causes are?

KELLY REGAN: It’s interesting - I was doing an interview earlier tonight with Jean Laroche. We were talking about a program that we have that actually transports workers to work in Cape Breton. This was an initiative that was actually conceived of - the Common Good group brought folks together, our clients and also businesses, and they actually worked on solutions for this. What was interesting is that there a thousand jobs going (Interruptions)

THE CHAIR: Time has elapsed, as you can tell by the 16 alarms that just went off. Time has elapsed for Subcommittee of the Whole on Supply today. We will see you back tomorrow.

[The subcommittee adjourned at 7:05 p.m.]