June 17, 2019
Pursuant to Standing Order 68,
Helen Conway Ottenheimer,
MHA for Harbour Main,
substitutes for Barry Petten, MHA for Conception Bay South.
Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Siobhan Coady, MHA for St. John's West,
substitutes for Elvis Loveless, MHA for Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune, for a
portion of the meeting
Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Ches Crosbie, MHA for Windsor Lake, substitutes
for Loyola O'Driscoll, MHA for Ferryland.
Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Brian Warr, MHA for Baie Verte - Green Bay,
substitutes for Derrick Bragg, MHA for Fogo Island - Cape Freels.
The Committee met at 9 a.m. in the Assembly Chamber.
CHAIR (Bennett):
Good morning, everyone.
We are
going to get started shortly, so I'd like to welcome everyone this morning. I
guess everybody is fairly familiar with the process. We are going to start off
by introducing Members of the Committee and staff members, followed by members
of the Executive Council introductions. Then minister has 15 munities to speak,
followed by the person in the Opposition with 15 minutes. And then we will
follow with 10 minutes after.
Before
we get started, I would like to ask for motion to accept the minutes of the
Government Services Committee meeting of June 12 for the Department of
Transportation and Works.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
So moved.
CHAIR:
So moved by Ms. Conway
Ottenheimer.
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Opposed?
Carried.
On
motion, minutes adopted as circulated.
CHAIR:
Under normal process,
independent Members are also given opportunity to ask questions, with the
approval of the Committee. Rather than asking after each line, is everyone in
favour to give the independent Members some time to ask questions after each
line item?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Opposed?
Okay.
So
we'll start off now with introductions.
Ms.
Coffin, do you mind going first?
Ms. Coffin:
Thank
you.
It's
Alison Coffin. I am the MHA for St. John's East - Quidi Vidi.
MR. MORGAN:
Ivan Morgan, Researcher, NDP
caucus.
MR. LANE:
Paul Lane, MHA, Mount Pearl - Southlands.
MS. DRODGE:
Megan Drodge, Researcher
with the Official Opposition caucus.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Helen Conway
Ottenheimer for Harbour Main District.
MS. EVANS:
Lela Evans, Torngat
Mountains District.
MR. CROSBIE:
Ches Crosbie, Windsor Lake, Leader of the Opposition.
MS. TUBRETT:
Denise Tubrett, Deputy Chief of Staff with the Official Opposition Office.
MS. STOODLEY:
Sarah Stoodley, MHA for Mount Scio.
MR. WARR:
Brian Warr, MHA, Baie Verte - Green Bay.
MS. COADY:
Siobhan Coady, MHA, St. John's West.
MS. ROSS:
Linda Ross, Deputy Minister, Office for the Status of Women.
MS. HALEY:
Carol Anne Haley, Minister for the Status of Women and MHA for Burin - Grand
Bank.
MS. TRICKETT:
Wanda Trickett, Departmental Controller.
MS. HOLLETT:
Nancy Hollett, Director of Communications for the Office for the Status of
Women.
MS. LANE:
Leanne Lane, Senior Program and Policy Development Specialist with the Office
for the Status of Women.
MR. GEORGE:
Eric George, Executive Assistant to Minister Haley.
MS. ELLIOTT:
Susan Elliott, Executive Assistant to Minister Osborne.
CHAIR:
Just for the purpose of Hansard, we
ask that when you go to speak, make sure your light is on and then first say
your name.
CLERK (Murphy):
Subhead 2.7.01.
CHAIR:
Minister, we will let you
open up with opening remarks.
MS. HALEY:
Good morning, everyone and thank you all for being here to participate in the
Estimates for the Office of the Status of Women. You'll have to excuse my voice;
I'm nursing a very bad cold. This is new for me on this side, doing it myself as
minister. I've been over there and I've sat in the Chair there, so this morning
this is a little different for me, and I guess the majority of people are new
here as well.
I'll
start by saying that I'm very proud of the work my office has undertaken in the
last 12 months to advance the social, economic, cultural and legal status of the
women in Newfoundland and Labrador. On November 9, 2018, the Premier announced
Newfoundland and Labrador's first stand-alone Minister Responsible for the
Status of Women, and on February 27, 2019, a deepened mandate for my office was
created. Priorities include implementation of an all-of-government approach to
Gender-based Analysis Plus, a strengthened focus on the prevention of
gender-based violence and focus promotion of women in leadership roles.
I'll
take a few minutes to highlight some of the great work that the office has
undertaken this past year in each of these areas. Although our government has
been utilizing gender-based analysis for a number of years, implementation of an
all-of-government approach ensures policies, programs, services, legislation and
budgets will be responsive to the needs of women in our province from the very
beginning of the policy development process.
The
office is working diligently with Cabinet, executive members, directors, policy
analysts and communications to support the application of Gender-Based Analysis
Plus throughout the government decision-making process. I am pleased to report
that the office is currently designing Newfoundland and Labrador-specific
Gender-based Analysis Plus training tools to be used in concert with the federal
government Gender-based Analysis Plus online training tool.
In
addition, the office has commenced targeted and customized Gender-based Analysis
Plus training with various departments across government. We look forward to
continuing our work in this area to ensure women in our province are not
negatively impacted by government decisions.
In
March, I had the privilege of representing the province at the 63rd session of
the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women in New York, reconfirming
the provincial government's investment and commitment to gender equality and the
health, rights and well-being of women and girls in our province. One such
initiative of the Office for the Status of Women that helps us move closer to
the realization of this commitment is the ongoing work of the Violence
Prevention Initiative. Working collaboratively with provincial government
departments and the community stakeholders to find long-term, systemic solutions
to violence against those most at risk in our society is essential to the growth
and progress of our province.
This
past year marked the final year of our violence prevention action plan,
Working Together for Violence-Free
Communities. The office is currently exploring ways to enhance future
provincial violence prevention efforts to ensure that diverse perspectives,
needs and concerns are heard and incorporated into provincial violence
prevention efforts moving forward. Collaboration amongst government, community,
academia, business, unions and persons with lived experience is essential to
advance violence prevention work in our province.
Despite
the many advances we have collectively made over the past year, many barriers
still exist to women's equal participation in both the private and public
spheres. The harsh reality is that women remain under-represented in leadership
roles in Newfoundland and Labrador, which means that the province is losing out
on valuable insights, talents, expertise and experience. Women deserve to live
in a society where barriers to advancement are eliminated and women have equal
opportunity to succeed. Encouraging and supporting women to pursue leadership
opportunities in politics, business, community service and in any other field in
which they are interested is a high priority of the provincial government.
In
February, our provincial government hosted a women's leadership conference to
facilitate knowledge sharing and mentorship opportunities with women leaders.
The conference was attended by 350 people and served as a springboard to launch
future women's leadership initiatives across the province.
If
passed, Budget 2019 allows for the
continuation of women's leadership initiatives and activities across the
province. The Office for the Status of Women will be working collaboratively
with community partners and women's equality-seeking organizations to identify
regionally and culturally specific needs to ensure women and girls have
available opportunities, tools and resources to help achieve their goals and
reach their full potential.
Our
government continues to recognize the importance of investing in community
organizations that work hard to create a safer and equitable province for our
residents. If passed, Budget 2019
will support continued funding for the Status of Women Councils and Violence
Prevention Newfoundland and Labrador organizations across the province, the
Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women, the Newfoundland Aboriginal
Women's Network, the Multicultural Women's Organization of Newfoundland and
Labrador, the Newfoundland and Labrador Sexual Assault Crisis and Prevention
Centre, the Safe Harbour Outreach program, and the Intimate Partner Violence
Prevention Units with the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police.
I am
pleased to inform you that if passed
Budget 2019 will provide first-time funding to the Coalition Against the
Sexual Exploitation of Youth to employ a full-time support worker and core
operational funding for the establishment of the province's ninth Status of
Women Council on the Northern Peninsula. Through balancing priorities and
implementing gender-based policies, programs, services, legislation and budgets,
our government demonstrates its commitment to the social, economic, cultural and
legal advancement of all women and girls in this province.
As I
stated earlier, I am proud of the work accomplished by the Office for the Status
of Women over the past fiscal year and look very much forward to continue
collaboration and partnerships with key community and governmental stakeholders
to achieve our collective goal: Advancing the social, economic, cultural and
legal status of all women in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Minister.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Before I address the specific 2.7.01 heading, I would like to ask a few general
questions first.
Minister, how many or what percentage of the recommendations from the 2015
Violence Prevention Initiative Action Plan have been implemented?
MS. HALEY:
It's about 96 per cent.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
You referenced the Women's Leadership conference which occurred last year. What
was the final cost of that, Minister?
MS. HALEY:
It was $49,700, somewhere around there, give or take a few dollars.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay. Thank you.
MS. HALEY:
That included consultations prior to the conference.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
You indicated that there are plans to have that Women's Leadership conference,
but are there any specific plans to host another conference this year?
MS. HALEY:
Not here in the city of St. John's. We're planning to take it around the
province and to Labrador, of course.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Will you be incorporating some of the lessons learned from last year's
conference?
MS. HALEY:
Absolutely.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Specifically, what lessons would you think that would be?
MS. HALEY:
I think participation and inclusion is very important, that we take a closer
look at it next time.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay. Thank you.
MS. HALEY:
Of course, the feedback that we got from the last time, we'll take that into
consideration as well.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Will all female MHAs be invited to this conference?
MS. HALEY:
Yes.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, great. I look forward to that.
The Way Forward,
Minister, talks about multi-year grant commitments. Can you please outline which
multi-year grants commitments are in place in your department?
MS. HALEY:
The women's centres get multi-year grants, isn't it – just one moment please.
Sorry. Leanne will take this question.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay. Thank you.
MS. LANE:
The St. John's Status of Women Council and Mokami Status of Women Council are
participating in the pilot multi-year funding.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Getting back to the Violence Prevention Initiative Action Plan, I note from last
year that you had successfully implemented 96 per cent of the action plan. What
has been done this year? You've indicated just a few moments ago that the
number, the percentage was 96 as well.
MS. ROSS:
Yes, as you know, we're looking at developing a new Violence Prevention
Initiative. One of the key pieces that are a priority is to have collaboration
between key government departments and community stakeholders, because the one
thing that we do realize is that no one department or office is responsible for
ending violence.
What
happened is there has been a meeting convened of those stakeholders, from both
government and community, and the feedback from them was we need to look at the
consultations that have already happened, research that has already taken place
and to get a really close look at the statistics and some of the best practices
federally, but where we sit statistically within the province. To that end, that
piece of work is in progress right now.
The
committee will reconvene again in the not-too-distant future to then look at
that and look at where do we go from here in terms of the consultations, to look
at what the priorities should be in terms of the work that we do in the next
plan.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Can you please
give an update, Minister, on the Intimate Partner Violence prevention program?
Have all positions been filled, for example?
MS. ROSS:
Yes, they have. Both the RNC
and RCMP and the unit is very active.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay. Thank you.
Last
year in Estimates, the deputy minister, Linda, talked about partnering with the
St. John's Native Friendship Centre on a conference which would take about three
years to plan. Can you please give an update this year?
MS. ROSS:
I'd like to defer to Leanne
Lane, who leads on a lot of our work with the Indigenous –
MS. LANE:
The Office for the Status of
Women has historically provided monies for an Indigenous women's provincial
gathering. Last year and the year before, we transferred that money to the St.
John's Native Friendship Centre – currently now First Light – as they will now
be the organizing partner with us for the Provincial Indigenous Women's
Conference on a go-forward basis.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
I have an
understanding that there is a committee of ministers who meet to tackle issues
of violence in the province. Can you please give an update on that, Minister?
MS. HALEY:
Yes, it is a committee that
I chair, and of course it's a number of ministers across various departments
across government. I know the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social
Development, the Minister of Justice and Public Safety, the Minister of Service
NL and the Minister of Health and Community Services sit on that board.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay.
How
often do you meet and where?
MS. ROSS:
My understanding from that committee is it is convened by various mechanisms,
not always necessarily by having all of the ministers come together, but working
on a one-on-one basis from what I understand. That will be happening with
Minister Haley as well.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thank you.
Just a
few more general questions: Can you give an update on the work which has been
taking place to support pay equity legislation in the province, Minister?
MS. HALEY:
Yes, sure.
Actually, my deputy minister, Linda Ross, who's sitting next to me, actually
chairs the committee on pay equity. I think the last meeting was on Thursday of
last week? Tuesday?
MS. ROSS:
Wednesday.
MS. HALEY:
Wednesday.
So, if
I could just defer this to Ms. Ross and she could provide an update from the
meeting.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Yes, thank you.
MS. ROSS:
Since I've come to the position – I haven't been here all that long, since the
middle of January – certainly this has been an issue we've been working on and
there have been a few meetings. We had one most recently on Wednesday.
We have
been looking and doing a jurisdictional scan of what was going on across the
country, and also looking closely at how it's being implemented on a
province-by-province basis. But one of the things that we realized is right now
we're at a point where we need to bring in more expertise. So we now have
reached out to others in government who can come to the table with us because we
want to really look at what it's going to mean for our own province and how to
move forward.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Yes, I
understand. Thank you.
Can you
give an update on the Indigenous Women in Mining project, Minister?
MS. LANE:
The Indigenous Women in Mining project is not a project that sits with the
Office for the Status of Women. Rather, it is a project that's actually run by
Temiskaming Native Women's Association in Northern Ontario. We have, over the
past couple of years, engaged on a committee with Temiskaming, and most recently
with NunatuKavut Community Council as well, as there is a project currently
funded by the former Status of Women Canada, now the Department for Women and
Gender Equality with the federal government.
We sit
on that steering committee with both NunatuKavut Community Council and
Temiskaming Native Women's Association. It was never a project that belonged to
the Office for the Status of Women. Rather, we've been a supporting department
in the development of projects that both have undertaken to apply for federal
monies to support that project being brought into Labrador.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
So your role is
more of a supportive role.
MS. LANE:
Absolutely.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thank you.
In your
opening statement, Minister, you did reference the gender-based analysis. Can
you please describe the gender-based tool specifically, which is used to analyze
government policy, including this budget? So, in practical terms, how does this
tool really work?
MS. HALEY:
I don't have the specific
tool here with me. I know my colleague, the Minister of Natural Resources,
tabled this in the House, I believe, some time ago, but I can certainly get it
for you.
Right
now, the office is currently carrying out a training program right across
government. I think, to date, we have some 84 employees trained toward
Gender-based Analysis Plus.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thank you.
Minister, are you planning to host any women's economic round tables this year?
If so, where, and who will be on the invite list?
MS. LANE:
In the past, we've held economic round tables in St. John's and around the
province. We are currently in the process of hiring a new manager of economic
policy with the Office for the Status of Women. When that individual comes on
board, that individual will determine if round tables is, indeed, the way
forward for us, or if there is another mechanism of which is it that we can put
in place.
I
presume that that will be done through consultations with our partners, as it
has in the past, such as the Office to Advance Women Apprentices.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thank you.
And my
final general question is: Can the minister, please, give an overview of the
women's shelters in the province, and how does the demand of them match the
capacity they have, for example?
MS. ROSS:
Within your binder, you should have the information that actually gives you the
location or the name of each of the particular women's shelters.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
I don't believe
we have the binder.
MS. ROSS:
Once you get your binder, sorry. This is very new to me, so I'm not sure what
you have in advance.
The
women's shelters, as you know, existed in a number of communities across the
province, including in St. John's, and they do a lot of front-line work and they
do advocacy work. Some of our women shelters also have attached to them
accommodation facilities where women stay on a somewhat temporary basis. They
are women who have a number of challenges.
The
kinds of supports that they provide differ from women's centre to women's
centre. Some of them are able to offer much more in the way of supports and
programming because they access other funding through, for example, the federal
government or other initiatives; but the kind of program they do varies,
everything from doing educational work in the schools on violence against women
and girls, about consent, doing front-line work with women who have difficultly
navigating systems, for example, around housing or social supports that they
require. So it does vary, but there are a lot of things they do have in common
but there are differences in them.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thank you.
What
happens, actually, when the women's shelters are full, when there is no
capacity?
MS. ROSS:
There are two types of women's shelters. The women's centres, which have some
housing with them, are for women who, as I said, have different challenges. The
other types of shelter that we have within the province are our transition
houses for women who are fleeing situations of violence.
There
are also additional types of shelters that are there, so with Stella's Circle,
for example – and these are not necessarily getting funding through our office
but from government. So there are particular shelters that women can go to
depending on, for example, their age, depending on whether or not they're
fleeing violence or other kinds of challenges that they have.
I hope
that answered your question.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Yes, thank you
very much.
Okay,
going to section 2.7.01 under Minister's Office. The Minister's Office is new.
Minister, can you please give an explanation of how these budget numbers were
calculated?
MS. HALEY:
Linda.
MS. ROSS:
As you know, the minister was appointed, as she indicated in her speech, at the
beginning of November. So if you look in the column projected revised budget,
this is for a portion of the fiscal year since the minister came on and then of
course what you see is the budget projection for – it reflects the increase due
to the creation of the office. The notes are on the side. What you see in
2018-19 is only a portion of the fiscal year because the office was only in
existence with the minister for that short period of time.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Your time has expired.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thanks.
CHAIR:
Ms. Coffin.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you very much.
I would
like to thank everyone for taking the time to be here this morning and all the
hard work that I know goes into the preparation of these Estimates. So thank
you, everyone, for your participation in this process.
Let's
start with numbers first. I'm going to move on to Office for the Status of
Women, Salaries, I notice there's almost an extra $250,000 in Salaries in this
current Estimate compared to last years and there was a little bit of
underspending last year.
Is
there an intention to have even more positions at the Office for the Status of
Women? If so, what are the nature and type of them?
MS. ROSS:
Well, the figure that you're
referring to reflects an increase from '18-'19 due to annualization, as the
notes indicate. We have a new communications director which we didn't have
before. There were some changes in terms of staffing within the office over the
past year, but we are in the process, right now, of hiring two new positions. As
my colleague indicated, we are looking for a manager for economic policy and
we're also looking for an additional position of policy analyst for our office.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Professional Services, I notice there's an extra $50,000 added in that. Is that
the RCMP Intimate Partner Violence prevention unit?
MS. ROSS:
As indicated, you'll see in
the notes that you received, that is an additional $50,000 for the gender-based
analysis work for our leadership initiatives and for violence prevention work.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. So, the RCMP Intimate Partner Violence prevention unit – we are funding
this, yes?
MS. ROSS:
Yes, we are.
MS. COFFIN:
Where would we find that?
MS. ROSS:
Yeah, it's in that same one.
MS. COFFIN:
Yeah. It's under Professional Services, yes?
MS. ROSS:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, lovely. Thank you very much.
Can we
have an update on their activities?
MS. LANE:
We don't have that information here with us today but we can most definitely get
it for you this afternoon.
MS. COFFIN:
That'd be wonderful. Thank you very much.
The
additional funding that we're seeing in that line is for – I'm sorry, again?
MS. ROSS:
That is for the gender-based
analysis training –
MS. COFFIN:
Right, the gender-based analysis. Yes, thank you.
MS. ROSS:
– and some of the more
leadership work as well as violence prevention.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent. Thank you.
Grants
and Subsidies, 2.7.02.10, I notice we're down by about $210,000. Was something
cut or an initiative cut?
MS. ROSS:
No. In point of fact, as you
recall, I spoke to the fact that some of the women's centres have a shelter
component to them. They were moved over to Newfoundland and Labrador Housing
with money. Plus, one of the other pieces in there is the establishment of –
should the budget pass – a new women's centre on the Northern Peninsula is
incorporated in there.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
MS. LANE:
So, no it wasn't, in fact, cut.
MS. COFFIN:
So there was a big chunk
that came out but then you added a little bit back in for the Northern
Peninsula?
MS. LANE:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
Revenue, I noticed that revised from '18-'19 we got $2,200 in. Where does
revenue come from in the Office for the Status of Women?
MS. LANE:
The revenue that you're
seeing there is we provide grants to our Violence Prevention NL organizations.
One of the organizations was not staffed for a portion of the year so they had
revenue. They are allowed to keep 10 per cent of the funding which we provide.
The $2,200 there that was returned to us was over and above that 10 per cent of
their funding.
MS. COFFIN:
Lovely. Thank you.
Can we
have a list of all the organizations and amounts of grants in 2018-19 and
anticipated '19-'20, please?
MS. LANE:
Sure, I'll get that to you
today, Ms. Coffin.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent.
Can you
also tell me which organizations now receive multi-year core funding?
MS. LANE:
We have two women's centres
that receive multi-year core funding: the St. John's Status of Women Council and
Mokami Status of Women Council.
MS. COFFIN:
Lovely. Thank you.
Let's
go to some general questions now. The violence prevention action plan, we had a
little bit of an overview but maybe you can get into a bit more detail on the
activities of the ministerial committee against addressing violence against
women and girls. Was that just meetings at this point or has anything been
established along the way?
MS. ROSS:
The ministerial committee,
as was indicated by Minister Haley, is made up of many ministers, and when I
spoke earlier about having an advisory committee that's made up of key
government departments, it basically is very similar. As we know, when you're
talking about violence it impacts all of these different departments.
When we
have had consultations with community partners, community stakeholders, one of
the things that always comes forward is if we're going to address violence we
must look at this department, that department and what within those departments
can be done or what is within their mandate that they're working on that is
going to help eradicate violence. This committee is basically to look at the
progress on that work. That's my understanding.
MS. COFFIN:
Can you give me an updated prevalence statistic? Do you have such a thing with
you; prevalence of violence, in particular, violence against women?
MS. ROSS:
Actually, I'm hoping that we can do that for you very shortly with the research
that I referenced earlier.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent.
This is
related, I was just wondering how effective has the plan been, and what data is
being used to analyze that? Because we often have swings in violence and violent
incidents when we see recessions or we see depressed economic conditions,
especially people without jobs. So, as our economy has been slowing down and
we're seeing higher rates of insolvency, we're seeing higher rates of
unemployment, we're seeing just a general depressed economy, I'm just wondering
how effective this plan has been, and what data is being used to calculate that?
MS. ROSS:
I think one of the things that is challenging is to do a direct link between the
actual initiatives of the Violence Prevention Initiative and the statistical
data, because the statistical data that we work with is often what is reported
through a lot of our federal and some of our provincial statisticians.
As I
said, we are now looking at where the prevalence is, within which populations,
because one of the things that frequently happens is once something gets said,
it gets reiterated and we really need to ensure that when that happens that
we're working on evidence based, and we are actually working with the
statistics. So, as referenced, that piece of research is well under way right
now.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. So you're saying you're hoping for data soon?
MS. ROSS:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
This is wonderful.
The
Aboriginal women's network and conference, can we have an update on their
activities, please?
MS. LANE:
The Office for the Status of Women funds has provided core funding to the
Newfoundland Aboriginal Women's Network for a number of years now. The violence
prevention Indigenous women's gathering was held in November of last year. There
is a great deal of work that's taking place right now and looking at violence
against women in Indigenous communities as well as mental health.
As I
said earlier, we provide a grant to First Light to help organize that conference
on the office's behalf, and we are currently working with the steering committee
that we have in place to organize this year's gathering. We're anticipating that
this year's gathering will either be held the end of October or the first week
of November this year.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
What
gender-based analysis training was done in 2018 and what is planned for 2019?
MS. LANE:
Gender-based analysis training; we have done several sessions and we can
certainly get the departments and agencies that we've worked with in government
that we've trained in 2018-'19. We've really focused our attention on rolling
out that plan in this fiscal year. With additional monies that we've been
provided in Budget 2019, should it be
passed, it will help us roll out those training sessions and certainly help us
develop those tools that we have in place right now, and further develop those
tools to develop Newfoundland and Labrador-specific training components.
We can
certainly get you a list of all of the departments and agencies trained to date
this past fiscal year and, currently, in the new part of this fiscal year.
MS. COFFIN:
Appreciate that. Thank you.
CHAIR:
Ms. Coffin, your time has expired. We'll get back to you shortly.
Any
other questions?
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Yes, I have just three or four more final questions.
First
of all, this is under section 2.7.02 under Salaries. In '18-'19 there was a
Salaries savings of $122,300. Can the minister please outline why that is the
case.
MS. HALEY:
That reflects savings from 2018-2019 budget as a result of some vacancies
throughout the year.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thank you.
Under
Purchased Services, what purchased services does this department use, Minister?
MS. TRICKETT:
Purchased Services for the office include some basic charges such as printing
charges, shredding and record storage. If there was a consultation held that
required meeting space, those type charges would be charged to Purchased
Services.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thank you.
I note
that there's a savings of $22,900 in the '19-'20 fiscal year. How are you
planning to save that money?
MS. TRICKETT:
There was money allocated in the budget associated with the Intimate Partner
Violence Initiative and that wasn't really representative of where the costs
were anticipated to be spent for '19-'20. All we've done is actually reprofiled
that money to other line objects across the office to better reflect where we
expect those expenditures to come in.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay. Thank you.
Finally, under Grants and Subsidies, I note that, Minister, you've indicated
that there will be a list provided – when my colleague asked – with respect to
the funding. Is this list the same year over year?
MS. ROSS:
There are core partners who are funded on an annual basis. As I indicated
previously, should the budget pass there will be a new one; there was also
mention in the minister's speech about should the budget pass, the Coalition
Against the Sexual Exploitation of Youth. We also have grants to Indigenous
women's anti-violence work. Indigenous women apply for those grants and use them
for particular programs. It varies, but it is often the same groups and the same
partners.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thank you.
What
are the criteria for determining who gets a grant?
MS. LANE:
In terms of our violence prevention NL organizations, they were part of the
Violence Prevention Initiative core funding plans when that plan first rolled
out back in the early 2000s. In terms of the eight women's centres, those have
historically also been funded by the Office for the Status of Women.
In
terms of any specific criteria that are looked at for additional organizations
that we fund, we basically have done – as Ms. Ross has indicated earlier, we're
working with all of our community organizations to determine where needs lie in
terms of violence prevention, economic security and leadership initiatives.
Based on the need that our province, our community organizations have identified
at a point in time that's needed for the women in our province in order to
advance status, that is what we have used to determine whether or not funding
has been provided.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Okay, thank you.
My
final question: What accountability mechanisms are in place to follow up on how
these funds are spent?
MS. LANE:
Each of the organizations that are provided core funding by the Office for the
Status of Women are required to submit annual reports prior to funding being
released. After the interim funding is provided, organizations are required in
February to submit a work plan for the following year, and, as I said, annual
reports are submitted to us by April 30 of that fiscal year.
MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Those are all my questions.
First
of all, I should have stated this at the outset that I am substituting for Barry
Petten, who's the MHA for Conception Bay South. I would like to, as well, thank
the minister and her officials for the obvious dedicated efforts that you put
into the positions that you hold and for the answers to these questions today.
It's been a very useful exercise and I thank you.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Helen.
Any
further questions, Ms. Coffin?
MS. COFFIN:
Yes. There's my light. Excellent.
Your
office was developing an equity profile on the status of women in this province
as part of developing gender-inclusive policies, legislation, programs and
services. Is this profile available?
MS. LANE:
That equity profile has indeed been completed. If you would like a copy, you are
more than welcome.
MS. COFFIN:
Lovely. Would appreciate that, please.
Can we
have an update on the leadership initiatives begun in 2018, please?
MS. LANE:
The core leadership initiatives that we held in past fiscal year was, indeed,
our women's leadership conference. Consultations held with a number of women's
organizations and public consultations – and I'll use the word consultation very
loosely, but it was engagement sessions with all our of women's equality-seeking
organizations and the public to determine what is needed in order to help
eliminate barriers for women in leadership and how we best move forward in order
to do so.
MS. COFFIN:
That's excellent. So what is needed?
MS. LANE:
We're still looking at that and our consultations with those organizations are
still ongoing. There have been no conclusive measures determined at this point
in time. We have a fair idea but we are still in that engagement process.
MS. COFFIN:
When might we expect to have that?
MS. LANE:
The engagement process completed?
MS. COFFIN:
Yes.
MS. LANE:
Likely by the fall.
MS. COFFIN:
Wonderful. Thank you very much.
Let's
go to gender analysis now. I'm assuming that there has been a gender analysis of
the 2019-2020 budget, in particular, on new spending. How did majorish
initiatives, like Grieg and Canopy Growth, fare in their gender analysis? Were
there any particular issues identified in either one of those?
MS. ROSS:
As you're aware, one of the things that we look at is women's employment plans
and gender-equity plans. One of the things that we do in our office is we review
all of those and look at where the opportunities are for the employment for the
impacts that are on women, and they're treated as are all of the plans that come
to us.
MS. COFFIN:
So, in particular, with Grieg, did we find anything that was anomalous? Were
they gender equitable in their employment? Was there any negative effects for
the women that are left in the community? Like, for example, if both mom and dad
got a job at the plant or at the aquaculture facility, was that leaving Nan at
home taking care of small children?
MS. ROSS:
We don't have that specific information.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. Good enough.
Let's
move on to women in poverty, in particular, minimum wage. Is there any move to
increase minimum wage beyond the annual CPI increase? In doing such a thing, we
find that CPI going up by whatever amount as well as every other salary going up
by proportional amounts, it's actually going to keep women in the same level of
poverty proportionally.
So we
actually need higher increases in the minimum wage rate if we want to move
people out of poverty. We know that more women than men tend to be earning
minimum wage. Has there been any movement on that?
MS. ROSS:
The responsibility for minimum wage doesn't fall within the Office for the
Status of Women, it falls within another department.
MS. COFFIN:
Is there an initiative in the Status of Women to certainly move that forward as
a thing that would improve women's lives?
MS. ROSS:
We work on a number of initiatives that looks at how do we have women raised up
from poverty in terms of the kinds of occupations they get into, what kinds of
supports they need, looking at them getting into higher wage positions. As
indicated, employment plans are another piece of it, but, as indicated, when it
comes to minimum wage, that falls totally within another department.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. Let's talk about equal pay and pay equity.
There
is a distinction between equal pay for work of equal value versus equal pay for
people doing the same job. The much more predominant and much more effective one
would be moving towards equal pay for work of equal value. Is there any appetite
for moving to that type of model in this office?
MS. ROSS:
As I mentioned earlier, the pay equity committee is very active looking at all
of the different options that are out there, really looking at what the
implications are, how they would apply in our province and what other provinces
have done as well. That work is ongoing right now.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Let's
have a chat now about large projects. Certainly, we have seen the negative
effects that large scale projects have had on our communities and our province.
When we have done a lot of analysis on the effectiveness of bringing in large
scale investment, quite often we forget to look at some of the economic bads, or
some of the negative things that come as a result of that.
Some of
the things that we have seen in our society that has come as a result of that
have been the increase in the number of gangs, an increase in opioid use, an
increase in sex work. Certainly along these lines, has there been a move to
incorporate a more detailed and comprehensible analysis of these types of things
into some of our megaprojects? Of course, many of these things would, of course,
disproportionately effect women as well.
MS. ROSS:
Certainly in terms of some of what you referenced, given that we are
specifically looking at finances in this session, as you'll note, we do support
the Safe Harbour Outreach Program, which does work with individuals who are
involved in the sex trade. SHOP – as the acronym is – are partners of ours and
we receive consultation. They provide an update on what they're seeing in terms
of the clientele that they're working with in terms of the impacts of various
issues and what's going on in community.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent.
Spring
boarding off of that, given the prevalence of sex work, which again is
predominantly female dominated, has there been a consideration in the office to
move or co-operate with whatever authorities need to be co-operated with for the
legalization, taxation and health improvement of anyone working in that
particular industry?
MS. ROSS:
This is an issue that is of concern to the office and we are, as I indicated
earlier, in consultation with those who work with individuals involved in the
sex trade. So, SHOP, as well as another community partner, Thrive, which
oversees the coalition against the sexual exploitation of youth and the Blue
Door Project, both of which work with individuals who are in the sex trade or
being sexually exploited and have expressed a desire to leave that.
We are
also involved with other stakeholders, because one of the major concerns that we
all share is ensuring the safety of those who are involved. What can be done to
ensure that they are safe, that their health is being looked after, et cetera,
so those conversations happen on a frequent basis and there are meetings in that
regard.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Can we
have an update on the Gender Equity and Diversity Plans and Women's Employment
Plans for major projects? For example, what employers have you been working
with?
MS. LANE:
We don't have that information here with us on hand, we can have it for you this
afternoon.
MS. COFFIN:
Wonderful; appreciate that.
I do
believe one of my final questions, I had a grand chat to some people at Advanced
Education, Skills and Labour, one of the programs they administer is the Mother
Baby Nutrition Supplement. They were underspent last year because they had some
difficulty reaching out to women who were eligible for the project.
Are you
coordinating efforts with them?
MS. ROSS:
We do on a number of different issues; however, I have to say, I hadn't heard
that, but certainly we'll follow up. Thank you.
MS. COFFIN:
I would recommend that because that's a very important one.
Thank
you very much.
CHAIR:
Any further questions before I give Mr. Lane an opportunity to speak, or ask
questions? None.
Mr.
Lane.
MR. LANE
Yes, thank you.
I just
got a couple of questions, because pretty much everything has been covered off
pretty good.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
MR. LANE:
You're welcome.
One
question I do have relates to, I guess, your efforts as it relates to violence,
violence against women, in particular, obviously. We do know that there can be
violence the other way around too, but, predominantly, it's men against women.
I'm
just wondering, in the work that you're doing in targeting violence against
women, and I know you work with a number of women's organizations and so on, but
what efforts have been made to try to reach out to men on this issue? Because if
they're the ones that are generally the perpetrators, then I think that, you
know, there's a lot of value, and I've been to a number of sessions in the past,
and it's been talked about, that there absolutely is a need for men who are not
violent to step up, if you will, and get involved and support the cause. So, I'm
just wondering what efforts or initiatives is made by your office to reach out
to men to be part of the solution?
MS. ROSS:
I think that's an excellent point, and it's one that we are very aware of. Some
of us have been saying that for a very long time.
One of
the things – and I will ask my colleague, Leanne, to confirm this, but through
our grants program, we have funded Indigenous men to allow them the funding to
be able to do workshops on this particular issue. I know that did happen in the
past, so I'll ask her in a moment to speak to that. Certainly, that's one of the
issues that's coming out in this consultation that we've had where we've got the
advisory committee of community and government.
The
partners that we have at First Light are big proponents also of engaging men in
ending violence. As people may know, our Indigenous partners across the country
have led the way in things like the Moose Hide Campaign and I am a Good Man, et
cetera, and I know there is an interest in ensuring that that continues. We will
be working to engage men, by all means.
Now
I'll turn it to Leanne.
MS. LANE:
As Ms. Ross has said, we've
done a great deal of work with our Indigenous partners in terms of Violence
Prevention Grants that have been awarded specifically for the engagement of men
and boys in finding long-term solutions to violence within Indigenous
communities to ensure that the solutions are, indeed, culturally appropriate.
Aside
from that and building on that, this past year I'm sure that you have all seen
the MerB'ys Calendar. The MerB'ys Calendar, for those who don't know, it's an
organization ran by Hasan Hai who is the president of Newfoundland and Labrador
Beard and Moustache Club. The calendar actually this year – the Violence
Prevention NL organization was chosen as the recipient of the profits and
proceeds of the sales of the calendar.
Our
Office for the Status of Women assisted very heavily in the development of the
proposal which was selected, and the core topic and the project that's unveiling
around the province right now is about indeed deconstructing toxic masculinity
and engaging men and boys in long-term solutions to violence.
So,
aside from and in addition to and complementary to the work that's ongoing
within our Indigenous communities, we also have our Violence Prevention NL
organizations who were awarded over $200,000 from the sales of the MerB'ys
Calendar that are specifically targeting initiatives and activities across the
province to engage men and boys of violence prevention efforts.
MR. LANE:
Yeah, thank you for that.
That's a good initiative and I do believe I did hear of Mr. Hai before
somewhere.
I'm
wondering now about pay equity. It's already been sort of referenced, but it
seems to me that I've been hearing about pay equity forever. Maybe I dreamt it,
but it seems like, for a long time, I've been hearing about pay equity, pay
equity. Now we're hearing that you have a committee, you had your meeting – I
believe, you indicated, Ms. Ross, that you were looking at bringing in some more
expertise or something because you had determined that needed to happen.
It's
great that we're working on it. I'm not knocking that. I realize, perhaps,
you're new to the process and the minister is new, but the process of pay equity
and the talking about pay equity has been happening, like I said, forever. At
what point in time do we think that we might see some actual movement beyond
talking about pay equity?
MS. ROSS:
Thank you.
Yes, it
has been going on and it does take a great deal of time. I think the one thing
that has become increasingly clear in the process of doing this is that this is
far from simple. It is very complex in terms of setting pay equity up. This is
not solely my opinion, but it's what we have seen from the research that we've
done and looking and talking with colleagues across the country in terms of what
needs to be taken into consideration, how you go about doing that, the questions
that need to be answered in terms of what it's going to look like. Specifically,
what it is we intend to do?
It's
not something that can happen quickly. Our hope is that by adding this expertise
that we will be considerably further along because we've now reached a point
where we know what some of the challenging questions are and that we need to
present that and to bring that forward.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
I don't
mean this to sound wrong, but it sounds like we're going to be talking about it
for quite some time to come before we see any actual implementation. That's what
it sounds like to me, and you can correct me if I'm wrong.
MS. ROSS:
Well, as I said, we're
hoping to really have something to bring forward for consideration by
government. We're looking to be much further along in terms of the presentation
and the work we're going to do over the summer, for example. But, even after
that point, implementation of it is not something that happens quickly. If you
look at what's happening in other jurisdictions, for example, where
implementation of it is, some of them are taking three years to get it in place,
once they've kind of decided that they're going to do it. So it is a lengthy
process by all means.
MR. LANE:
Indeed. Thank you.
I am
wondering about the whole concept of applying gender lenses to policies and so
on that the minister referenced. And I know somebody asked about the tool and it
was indicated that you didn't have the tool itself available right now, but you
could probably get it.
Can you
just walk me through the mechanics of what that means? Like, when I hear someone
say, we applied a gender lens to policies, what specifically – just the
mechanics of how does that work with a piece of legislation, for argument's
sake.
MS. ROSS:
Certainly. I didn't speak to it earlier because, as I indicated, I only came in
the middle of January, so I can speak to what's happened since that time.
MR. LANE:
Sure.
MS. ROSS:
People talk about it, you're quite right, and really don't necessarily know what
it means or how it actually applies to the work that they do. We have done a lot
of work to try to change that.
As I
think the minister indicated when she gave her opening remarks, what it's really
taken is taking specific groups within government – for example, people in
communications, what does that mean for the work that we do? Each session is
tailor-made and it consists of something as simple as going through, at the very
outset, things that are true or false. A lot of what we actually espouse as
being true, people find out it's false in terms of just assumptions.
Then
the person who's doing the training takes the mandate letter of the minister and
looks at what's within that. I'll take, for example, any particular department;
it's difficult to imagine how to apply a gender lens. Well, our staff are
actually working with them on a step-by-step, using examples of this is what it
means, this is how you do it so that when you're developing this, when you're
developing a program, when you're developing a policy, whatever you're doing,
this is what you need to think about. This is how you have to view it because
you cannot assume that everybody is impacted in the same way.
It's by
doing these – and also, the other piece that we have been doing, the staff are
to be credited because what they do is they actually are receiving calls, they
offer the support and help people in departments who are calling and saying,
okay, I'm doing this, am I on the right track? What do I need to do? What
questions do I need to ask here? It really is having a significant impact.
MR. LANE:
That's good. Glad to hear
that.
My
final question around the same thing, I suppose, to some degree, is in terms of
the filling of positions on agencies, boards, commissions and so on. I know
we've heard that the gender lens has been applied but I know my colleagues with
the NDP – or my former colleagues with the NDP – there were times when bills
would come up around that, people being appointed to certain roles. They would
always bring up and ask the question about the gender lens and nobody could
concretely say for sure exactly, yeah, that was necessarily done to ensure
equity in the hiring of people for the filling of positions.
Is it
safe to say that whenever there are positions appointed now in all agencies,
boards, commissions that is indeed happening, as opposed to, yeah, I think it's
happening, I'm sure it's happening. Is there a policy? Is it absolutely
happening?
MS. ROSS:
I don't sit at the Independent Appointments Commission table and it is, by its
very nature, separate and independent. We always say that we need more women at
the decision-making tables; we're always very clear about that. I think that's a
consistent message that many people reiterate.
One of
the things that we need – and it will be part of the work that we do on
leadership – is to encourage more women to put their names forward. One of the
challenges that we face is, many times, women don't put their names forward for
it because they somehow don't think they're qualified, or they perhaps only feel
90 per cent of what they're looking for, so they self-select out.
It
certainly has been brought to our attention that one of the critical issues is
to really help women to see how the skills they have are transferable, to being
able to put their name forward for the various agencies, boards and commissions
that have openings. That is one of the pieces that we're intending to do as part
of our leadership work.
MR. LANE:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Your time has expired.
Are
there any other questions to 2.7.01 to 2.7.03?
CLERK:
2.7.01 to 2.7.03 inclusive.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.7.01 to 2.7.03 inclusive carry?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
On
motion, subheads 2.7.01 through 2.7.03 carried.
CLERK:
3.1.01.
CHAIR:
Okay, we're going to discuss 3.1.01 to 3.1.02.
CLERK:
They'll have to switch out.
CHAIR:
Okay, switching over.
While
we're switching over we'll take a five-minute break, if anybody needs to. In the
interest of time we will start again at 10:18.
Recess
CHAIR:
Can we get a microphone for
Mr. Crosbie, please?
MR. CROSBIE:
As I was saying, Mr. Chairman, I'm substituting for Loyola O'Driscoll, the
Member for Ferryland District. Shall I continue or –
CHAIR:
No.
MR. CROSBIE:
– do you need someone else on the –?
CHAIR:
I will ask the Member to your right.
MS. TUBRETT:
My name is Denise Tubrett. I'm the Deputy Chief of Staff with the Official
Opposition.
MR. LANE:
Paul Lane, MHA, Mount Pearl - Southlands.
MS. COFFIN:
Alison Coffin, MHA, St. John's East - Quidi Vidi.
MR. MORGAN:
Ivan Morgan, Researcher, NDP Caucus.
MR. LOVELESS:
Elvis Loveless, MHA, Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune.
MR. WARR:
Brian Warr, MHA, Baie Verte - Green Bay.
MS. STOODLEY:
Sarah Stoodley, MHA, Mount Scio.
MR. WAKEHAM:
Tony Wakeham, MHA, Stephenville - Port au Port.
MS. EVANS:
Lela Evans, MHA, Torngat Mountains.
CHAIR:
We're going to use the same process. The minister will be given the opportunity
to introduce his Executive Council and then we'll give you 15 minutes to speak,
followed by the Member for the Opposition to also have 15 minutes. Then each
Member will have 10 minutes after that.
Mr.
Osborne.
MR. OSBORNE:
Tom Osborne, Minister of Finance, President of the Treasury Board. I will ask
staff now to introduce themselves as well.
MS. DAY:
Elizabeth Day, Clerk of the Executive Council.
MS. TRICKETT:
Wanda Trickett, Departmental Controller.
MS. HUSSEY:
Cindy Hussey, Assistant Deputy Clerk.
MS. NORMAN:
Katie Norman, Assistant Deputy Minister, Public Engagement.
MR. BROWN:
David Brown, Private Secretary to the Lieutenant Governor.
MR. BRUCE:
Glenn Bruce, Associate Secretary to Cabinet, Communications.
MS. ELLIOTT:
Susan Elliott, Executive Assistant to the minister.
MR. BARFOOT:
Scott Barfoot, Director of Communications, Communications and Consultation
Branch.
CLERK:
1.1.01.
CHAIR:
1.1.01.
Mr.
Osborne.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you.
Before
we begin I'd like to take a few moments to make some high-level remarks about
Executive Council as a whole. The Office of Executive Council of the Government
of Newfoundland and Labrador is the Premier's department and plays a critical
role in supporting the effective operation of government.
The
Executive Council's three key roles are: Leadership, coordination and the
provision of advice and support. Many of the activities focus on ensuring
informed, effective decision-making and public sector management. These
activities support the strategic priorities of government and ultimately
contribute to the development and delivery of public services to the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
The
mandate of the OEC is to support the Premier's office and the work of Cabinet
and its committees; to facilitate, coordinate and support the Cabinet
decision-making process; formulate orders and communicate decisions of Cabinet;
to facilitate and coordinate advice and initiatives on matters related to
economic policy, social policy and government operations; to facilitate and
coordinate performance-based planning and reporting throughout government and
its public bodies; to facilitate and coordinate the Regulatory Reform Initiative
and the policy on evaluation; to support the role of the Lieutenant Governor; to
advise on protocol matters; to provide strategic communications counsel and
support to the Premier and Cabinet and coordinate government-wide communication
activities; and to provide leadership of the provincial public service to ensure
that the government has the policy, human resource and management capacity it
needs to develop and deliver effective policies and programs.
While
the Executive Council is the Premier's department, there are some portions of it
that report to me in my role as the Minister of Finance. These are the Human
Resources Secretariat and the OCIO. When we get to these departments, I'll make
a few remarks around those departments as well.
We'll
open it up for questions.
CHAIR:
Mr. Crosbie.
MR. CROSBIE:
Okay, thank you, and thank you to the minister.
I'm
looking at – as you read out, Mr. Chairman – 1.1.01, Government House,
Lieutenant Governor's Establishment, as we tend to say, I guess. The first one
that jumps out is the salary item. The obvious question is: Can you explain why
Salaries went over budget by $126,000 in fiscal '18-'19?
MS. TRICKETT:
The overrun from '18-'19 represents severance and related benefits for two
management employees, as well as there were a few vacancies throughout the year.
MR. CROSBIE:
Sorry, I didn't hear the last few words.
MS. TRICKETT:
There were some vacancies throughout the year as well. That offset the payment
of severance and related benefits for the two employees.
MR. CROSBIE:
Sorry, I'm not sure of the connection between the vacancies and the severance.
What's that?
MS. TRICKETT:
There was a small amount of vacancies through the year that did reduce down the
overrun associated with the severance and related benefits.
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes, well, still, it's $126,000.
MS. TRICKETT:
The majority of that relates to severance and related benefits for two
employees.
MR. CROSBIE:
What's the net number?
MS. TRICKETT:
It was $148,500 related to severance and related benefits, which was slightly
reduced by $22,500 for vacancies, to net down to the $126,000.
MR. CROSBIE:
In a similar vein, the budget for Transportation and Communications has
increased. Could an explanation be given as to why that is?
MS. TRICKETT:
The majority of that over increase from budget to budget relates to the carrying
costs and the ongoing costs associated with Wi-Fi costs for the Government
House.
MR. CROSBIE:
So the whole place is ‘Wi-Fied' out, is it?
MS. TRICKETT:
Yes. During the fiscal year '18-'19, Wi-Fi was installed at Government House.
There is an installation cost that you will notice as an increase in a line item
under Purchased Services; I'm sure that may be a question as we go further.
The
budget increase in Transportation and Communications relates to the ongoing
monthly related costs associated with that Wi-Fi.
MR. CROSBIE:
That fits under Communications that bit.
MS. TRICKETT:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
And the Purchased Services, the Wi-Fi installation, shows up in there as well,
that increase?
MS. TRICKETT:
Correct.
MR. CROSBIE:
Anything else? What accounts for the extra, what is it, $21,300? Wi-Fi and what
else?
MS. TRICKETT:
The Purchased Services line itself will include such costs as printing charges,
shredding costs, those basic operational amounts, but the overrun from '18-'19
is associated mainly due to the installation of the Wi-Fi.
MR. CROSBIE:
Boy, an expensive service.
MS. TRICKETT:
Yes and I can probably refer a little bit to the Office of the Chief Information
Officer on that. My understanding is considering the nature of the house, the
age and the structure, I do believe that installation in that facility is much
more onerous than it would be in a more modern office building.
MR. CROSBIE:
I can understand if it's challenging.
Where
does liquor purchasing fit in – liquor, wine and beer? I am not meaning to be
critical; we know that one of the purposes of the place is entertainment. Where
does it fit?
MS. Trickett: I
am going to defer that to Dave Brown.
MR. BROWN:
Yes, Sir, thank you.
Liquor
purchasing is not a provincial responsibility, it's a federal responsibility.
MR. CROSBIE:
I never knew that.
Can you
provide a list of purchasers, please?
MS. Trickett: You
mean the list of actually spent for '18-'19?
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes.
MS. Trickett: I
don't have that specific detail with me, but I can certainly provide it to you.
MR. CROSBIE:
Yeah, that would be fine.
MS. Trickett:
Okay.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you.
The
Lieutenant-Governors attend a yearly conference and so does the Governor
General. Does the federal government pay for that?
MS. Trickett:
Again, I'll defer that to Dave Brown, please.
MR. CROSBIE:
Mr. Brown?
MR. BROWN:
Yes, Sir, it does.
MR. CROSBIE:
Very well.
As we
know, the salary of the Lieutenant-Governor is paid by the federal government as
well.
MR. BROWN:
That's correct.
MR. CROSBIE:
I'd ask the overall budget for the Government House?
MR. BROWN:
From the federal –?
MR. CROSBIE:
Well, no, what we are
looking at here that you are responsible for.
MR. BROWN:
Wanda?
MS. Trickett: I'm
sorry. Could you repeat your
question?
MR. CROSBIE:
Who drafts it, the budget?
MS. Trickett:
That is done in consultation with the Lieutenant-Governor, the clerk of the
Executive Council and the premier.
MR. CROSBIE:
But who initiates and is
really doing this piece of paper here with the numbers?
MS. Trickett: I
am the Departmental Controller for that area.
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes – you?
MS. Trickett:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
Okay.
Where
does the maintenance budget for the property fit in here?
MS. Trickett: I
am going to defer that to Dave Brown as well.
MR. BROWN:
Yes, Sir, it fits within the
Transportation and Works budget somewhere. I couldn't be specific on it.
MR. CROSBIE:
Okay.
So it's
not in these numbers we are seeing here?
MR. BROWN:
No, that's correct.
MR. CROSBIE:
I see. It'd be of some substance given the age of the property, the size of it
and so on and so forth, but it's not in front of us now.
MR. BROWN:
That's correct.
MR. CROSBIE:
Given the province's fiscal situation – I will not bother reciting that – was
consideration given to reducing the budget at Government House?
MR. BROWN:
Yes, Sir, the budget has been reduced over the past three, four, even five
years.
MR. CROSBIE:
I'm sorry; you said the
budget was reduced?
MR. BROWN:
That is correct.
MR. CROSBIE:
Okay, very good.
I'm
finished on this 1.1.01.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Ms. Coffin.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you very much.
I was
going to ask about the capital cost but I can find that in Transportation and
Works. You're not exactly sure where that is in Trans and Works? Yes?
MR. BROWN:
Yes, that's correct.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. I can try and dig that
out.
Can I
have a breakdown of the number of staff and their positions at Government House,
please?
MR. BROWN:
We have my position, we have
an events manager, we have a clerk typist III and we have three domestic
workers: a gardener, a chef and two contractual workers.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent. Thank you very
much.
I've
done a couple of these now and I've noticed several different departments have
approached the attrition model in different ways. Has there been any attrition
in the Government House?
MS. DAY:
With respect to attrition, I can say that we are addressing that across all of
the offices. I know that HRS is going to speak specifically to attrition and the
general policy and how we are moving forward with attrition.
With
respect to Government House, yes there has been. They have had savings as a
result of attrition.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, thank you very much.
So that
answer now goes across all your department in terms of how they have approached
attrition? Because I'm glancing at some of this now and I don't see a whole lot
of attrition happening, just glancing at some of these pieces.
MS. DAY:
Right, we are approaching it, generally, across the offices within Executive
Council and we have had savings at Cabinet Secretariat, the Communications
Branch, as well as Government House.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, do you know how many
positions you've attrited?
MS. DAY:
Not positions particularly, we have salary-dollar savings. Within Cabinet
Secretariat there has been $40,000 this year and last, within the Communications
Branch there has been a total $80,000 this year and last and about $15,000 at
Government House.
MS. COFFIN:
You say there are salary
decreases but not position decreases, so does this mean that someone was laid
off at a more senior position and a junior person was hired in their place?
MS. DAY:
No, there have been no individuals affected or positions. It's basically
vacancies that are being held to account for the savings.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, so those positions are
not being written down even though they're not filled.
MS. DAY:
That's correct.
MS. COFFIN:
If we haven't had them
filled in a year, perhaps they are unnecessary?
MS. DAY:
That is certainly under review as well and we take that into account when we are
looking at filling positions.
MS. COFFIN:
Good enough.
Thank
you very much. That's all my questions.
CHAIR:
Any other questions?
Mr.
Crosbie?
MR. CROSBIE:
Not on that item, no.
CHAIR:
Mr. Lane, have you got any
questions?
MR. LANE:
Yeah, I've got a couple of
quick ones.
I am
just wondering, Operating Accounts is basically $100,000 a year. So what is
that? What's covered in that?
MS. TRICKETT:
I'm sorry; could you repeat your question?
MR. LANE:
The Operating Accounts,
$100,000.
OFFICIAL:
That's the total of everything above that.
MR. LANE:
Oh, that's the total of
everything above it. Okay, never mind.
When
the Lieutenant-Governor travels around the province or out of the province for
that matter, $36,500, that's the total cost for travel, or are there other
sources of funding federally or something that covers that? Because that seems
fairly low to me.
MS. TRICKETT:
Her travel would be reflected under the federal budget.
MR. LANE:
Under the federal, okay.
Right
now there's $742,000 provincially. That's not including what would be under
Transportation and Works for maintenance and upkeep and whatever other services
would be provided there. So, likely that takes us to a million or thereabouts
provincially. How much do we get from the feds on top of that to pay for
Government House in general?
MS. TRICKETT:
I'll defer to Dave Brown on that.
MR. BROWN:
The Office of the Lieutenant-Governor receives an annual grant from the federal
government of approximately $77,000. That covers the Lieutenant-Governor's
travel around the province and outside when it's required, as well as other
ceremonial functions that are required to be supported.
MR. LANE:
Okay, $77,000.
MR. BROWN:
That's correct.
MR. LANE:
So what else does the
federal government pay for? They pay her salary and what else?
MR. BROWN:
Yes, the federal government pays the Lieutenant-Governor a salary.
MR. LANE:
Yeah.
MR. BROWN:
She also contributes to a pension plan and she gets regular medical coverage as
well. She is essentially an employee of the federal government. To further
explain, Sir, the grant has specific uses that we have to very carefully expend.
MR. LANE:
Sure. So what's the total funding from the federal government? For everything,
what's –?
MR. BROWN:
I can't speak to her salary, I guess that's available publicly, but I don't know
exactly what it is. I can tell you about the $77,000 that's there to support
official functions and travel.
MR. LANE:
Okay, that's it, that's all the questions I have.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
No further questions?
CLERK:
1.1.01.
CHAIR:
Shall 1.1.01 carry?
All
those in favour, ‘aye.'
AN HON. MEMBER:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against, ‘nay.'
On
motion, subhead 1.1.01 carried.
CHAIR:
Shall the total carry?
All
those in favour, ‘aye.'
AN HON. MEMBER:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against, ‘nay.'
Carried.
On
motion, Government House, total head, carried.
CHAIR:
Next item is going be the
Premier's Office, 2.1.01.
CLERK:
2.1.01.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.1.01 carry?
All
those in favour, ‘aye.'
Sorry.
MR. CROSBIE:
I think I get a chance to ask questions.
CHAIR:
You do, that's correct. We're jumping ahead.
MR. CROSBIE:
Good.
CHAIR:
Go ahead, Sir.
MR. CROSBIE:
I was a little worried there for a moment.
Could
we be provided with a list of all the staff in the Premier's Office, please?
MS. DAY:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
The answer is a yes. Thank you.
As to
Salaries, the details document lists 14 positions in the office in 2018 and 16
in 2019. Curiously enough, the budgeted salary is the same. Can you explain
this?
MS. TRICKETT:
Just to clarify, you're referring to the salary report that was published on
budget day?
MR. CROSBIE:
Well, it's – the answer is yes.
MS. TRICKETT:
Thank you.
That
report is, in essence, a snapshot in time that's taken by the Human Resource
Secretariat and it would display all active, filled positions within a
particular area. So, if there were any vacancies at that moment in time, they
would not display in that report. So, that would explain, I guess, the
difference between the number of positions from two years.
In
terms of the salary envelope, that is the budget at the time of budget
preparation that was anticipated to be required for the staff complement that
would be necessary for '19-'20.
MR. CROSBIE:
So if I understand you, the 14 positions given in 2018, is that as of the end of
that year?
MS. TRICKETT:
Once again, that report that was published in the former Estimates would also be
a snapshot in time. I don't know the specific date that those reports were
generated. I'm sure the deputy minister and officials with Human Resource
Secretariat who will be speaking later this morning may have some more detail on
the generation of that report.
MR. CROSBIE:
Well, again, so I understand, are you saying that the snapshot, as you put it,
could be taken at really any time during the year?
MS. TRICKETT:
I don't believe it's taken at any time of the year. My understanding – and,
again, I stand to be corrected from those officials – is that it's taken at the
point in time that the Estimates, that the budget itself is getting ready to be
published and/or released. So, it would be somewhere towards the end of the
fiscal year, depending upon when budget had been slated to be delivered.
MR. CROSBIE:
Okay, so the actual date could vary, then, from one fiscal year to another,
could it, somewhat?
MS. TRICKETT:
That is my understanding, yes. I don't believe it's taken on a particular day,
no.
MR. CROSBIE:
So it's not necessarily consistent in terms of being a snapshot taken on the
same day each fiscal year.
MS. TRICKETT:
That would be my understanding.
MR. CROSBIE:
It's based on workflow and when people get around to actually doing the work
that is provided to Estimates.
MS. TRICKETT:
I would imagine that it is done as close to budget day to allow for publication
as possible to –
MR. CROSBIE:
Yeah.
MS. TRICKETT:
– give the best picture of who we have, as an organization, on payroll at that
moment in time.
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes.
What
all this is getting to is the explanation of the variation, somewhat, and the
number of positions. It just depends on whether those positions happen to be
filled at the time the snapshot is taken, is it?
MS. TRICKETT:
For that particular report, yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes.
Could
you also provide a list of Purchased Services, please?
I hear
a yes, Sir?
MS. TRICKET:
Yes.
OFFICIAL:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
I'm just used to working on
transcripts and you like to hear an audible answer, so it gets captured by
Hansard. Thank you.
Could
an explanation be given, please, for why Salaries have gone over budget by
$203,500 in '18-'19?
I'm on
2.2.01, Executive Support.
MS. TRICKETT:
This overrun from'18-'19 reflects an increase related to positions associated
with the Muskrat Falls Oversight Committee, other major projects for which
funding was budgeted under the Department of Finance and, subsequently,
transferred in per direction of Treasury Board.
MR. CROSBIE:
Got it.
MS. TRICKETT:
It also reflects severance and related benefits for two management employees.
CHAIR:
Mr. Crosbie, we're going to
complete 2.1.01 first, so if you've got any questions related to this one –
MR. CROSBIE:
I see.
CHAIR:
– we'll address the 2.2.01
after.
MR. CROSBIE:
Very good. So, in other
words, you want to rotate to other people?
CHAIR:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
Very good.
CHAIR:
Ms. Coffin?
MS. COFFIN:
So, we're at 2.1.01, yes?
CHAIR:
Correct.
MS. COFFIN:
Allowances and Assistance,
there is $20,000 there. What's that used for?
MS. TRICKETT:
That reflects the housing allowance for the Premier.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
Yes,
that's my only question on this.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Mr. Lane, you got a
question?
MR. LANE:
No questions.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.1.01 carry?
All
those in favour, ‘aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
On
motion, subhead 2.1.01 carried.
CHAIR:
Shall the total carry?
All
those in favour, ‘aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Carried.
On
motion, Premier's Office, total head, carried.
CLERK:
2.2.01.
CHAIR:
2.2.01.
Mr.
Crosbie.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you.
So, I
was about to ask what are the other major projects referred to that go into the
over budget amount of $203,500?
MS. DAY:
Some of those projects included work that was done on the federal loan guarantee
2 and work that was done on the ExxonMobil file.
MR. CROSBIE:
Sorry, the federal loan guarantee …?
MS. DAY:
The federal loan guarantee 2.
MR. CROSBIE:
Two –
MS. DAY:
The second.
MR. CROSBIE:
Muskrat?
MS. DAY:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
Okay.
MS. DAY:
As well as work that was done on the ExxonMobil file that was worked on through
the person who was hired with Cabinet Secretariat, and the provision of policy
advice to the Premier's office on an ongoing basis.
MR. CROSBIE:
Could I have the list of such expenditures, please?
MS. DAY:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
Very good. Thank you.
There's
a planned salary decrease for ‘19-'20. How is it planned to achieve this?
MS. TRICKETT:
That is, as the clerk had
referenced previously, an exercise in vacancies. There would be natural delayed
recruitment processes and savings that would result from the filling of those
vacancies.
MR. CROSBIE:
Sorry, say that again? Savings …
MS. TRICKETT:
Savings that would relate from delayed recruitment, just the natural recruitment
process and the timing that it takes.
MR. CROSBIE:
I see. Can you give an overview of the line item for Transportation and
Communications? Last year we had $56,600 budgeted and $38,000 spent, with a
savings of $18,600. This year, the budget is set at $45,300.
MS. TRICKETT:
There were savings last year related to lower travel than anticipated and –
MR. CROSBIE:
To lower – I'm sorry.
MS. TRICKETT:
Lower travel requirements than anticipated. For this year we have reflected the
budget to a reduction of $11,300 to reflect those lesser anticipated
requirements, again, for '19-'20.
MR. CROSBIE:
Would you provide a list of the Professional Services provided, please? That's
affirmative?
MS. TRICKETT:
Confirmed, yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
In Purchased Services, we went over budget by $17,000 in '18-'19. Can you say
why?
MS. TRICKETT:
The overrun in Purchased Services reflects relocation costs associated with the
former clerk of Executive Council.
MR. CROSBIE:
So we've already heard that the budget for the Muskrat Falls Oversight Committee
is contained in these numbers here. Is that right?
MS. TRICKETT:
No, the budget for the Muskrat Falls Oversight is actually – for the portion
that relates to the Cabinet Secretariat work – budgeted under the Department of
Finance. As those expenditures are incurred – and, as necessary, the office will
absorb those costs to the best of their ability. As necessary, the office will
request from the Treasury Board authority to move some of those budgetary
amounts that are allocated under the Department of Finance into Executive
Council to address those costs.
MR. CROSBIE:
Where do we go to piece together the entire budget for the Oversight Committee?
MS. TRICKETT:
I can't speak, I suppose, to the entirety across government, only what I have
responsibility for. As stated, the office will absorb general office operating
costs. Paper requirements, supplies: those types of basic costs are absorbed
within these budgeted allocations.
In
terms of specific costs associated with the project, there is an allocation
under the Department of Finance in a vote there that has specific amounts
allocated. I can't speak to other departments and if they would have anything
specifically budgeted for in their Estimates or not.
MR. CROSBIE:
Can you tell us what amount was transferred in to Executive Council, please?
MS. TRICKETT:
Yes, for '18-'19 we transferred $151,800 into Salaries to address – I'm sorry,
for Muskrat Falls Oversight, specifically?
MR. CROSBIE:
This Oversight Committee, yes.
MS. TRICKETT:
I'm sorry, I misspoke there. For Salaries we absorbed the salary requirements to
the best of our ability and we didn't actually transfer anything else. There was
nothing transferred for '18-'19 for Muskrat Falls.
MR. CROSBIE:
There was nothing? Say that again?
MS. TRICKETT:
There was nothing transferred from Finance to Executive Council for Muskrat
Falls in '18-'19.
MR. CROSBIE:
Okay.
I think
you were trying to explain what got transferred in to Executive Council. What
was it? What was it for?
MS. TRICKETT:
My initial statement?
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes.
MS. TRICKETT:
That would be related to the salaries for the individual the clerk spoke to that
was in charge of major projects in the office. So that salary component was
recovered through an allocation in the Department of Finance as well.
MR. CROSBIE:
Is it in order to ask if we
could be provided for the total budget? It may be fragmented in various places,
but is it possible to get that, Madam Clerk?
MS. DAY:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Ms. Coffin.
MS. COFFIN:
Yes, please. Thank you.
I am
remiss; I should have thanked you for coming and being very well prepared. I
forgot that we had switched out people, so thank you and thank you for what I
imagine are excellent notes. One question now that fits here just as well as it
does everywhere else – I guess maybe two – what is the departmental attrition
target?
MS. DAY:
There is no specific target. We have been allocated a percentage of the savings
of the budget and we are, across the entire Executive Council, focused on
meeting the overall government target. We're all contributing to the overall
target throughout the entire government.
MS. COFFIN:
Wait, what is the overall target for the whole department? This is for the whole
department, not for each section. This is just where I thought it might fit,
just as well as anywhere else.
MS. DAY:
I think I'll defer that question to when HRS is here doing their Estimates just
after us. They'll speak to the government (inaudible).
MS. COFFIN:
I've got the question written down there. Okay, perfect. That's where I had
hidden the question, but I thought it might be an appropriate one here.
I do
believe that's all I have to say on this section.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Mr. Lane, did you have any
questions for 2.2.01 to 2.2.02?
MR. LANE:
Yeah, the only thing I have
is any time that Mr. Crosbie or Ms. Coffin should ask for reports or whatever
the case might be, numbers on different things, I would ask that we could all
have copies of that.
MS. DAY:
Yes, we will do that.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
I have
nothing else.
CLERK:
2.2.01 to 2.2.02.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.2.01 to 2.2.02
inclusive carry?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
On
motion, subheads 2.2.01 through 2.2.02 carried.
CLERK:
2.3.01.
CHAIR:
2.3.01.
Mr.
Crosbie.
MR. CROSBIE:
2.3 –
CHAIR:
Yeah. 2.3.01 to 2.3.03,
Communications Branch.
MR. CROSBIE:
So last year Salaries went
over budget by $49,500. Could the minister or other official please outline why?
MS. TRICKETT:
This overrun again reflects
severance and related benefits for an employee.
MR. CROSBIE:
I'm sorry; I didn't quite
catch that.
MS. TRICKETT:
I'm sorry. The increase over
budget reflects the severance and related benefits for an employee.
MR. CROSBIE:
I see.
There's
a salary savings, comparing '18-'19 to '19-'20, of $37,300. Could an explanation
be given how this is going to be achieved?
MS. TRICKETT:
The similar answer I guess
as I gave in the prior activity. This will be achieved through natural delays in
the recruitment process, and any vacancies that are currently vacant, are how
those savings will be achieved.
MR. CROSBIE:
In respect of Supplies,
could you explain what caused this item to go over budget by $8,400?
MS. TRICKETT:
The reason for the overrun
in Supplies is just the result of additional requirements for general office
supplies that were needed in the office, replenishment of resources.
MR. CROSBIE:
When I look at the
description of the Communications Branch, 2.3.01, in my understanding two
different disciplines are being discussed there or described. For example, it
starts out talking about communications counsel and then it goes on, then we see
reference being made to government's marketing services and brand strategy and,
toward the end, marketing and brand services.
Can you
say whether these are separate functions or regarded by this establishment as
separate functions?
MS. TRICKETT:
I'm going to defer that
question to Glenn Bruce.
MR. BRUCE:
Yes, we do have 10 people in
the Marketing division and we have 10 people in the Communications division.
MR. CROSBIE:
So, what I said earlier, in
my understanding they're separate disciplines. Would you agree with that
statement?
MR. BRUCE:
Yes, but we work together
with all the departments as well so the communications staff in departments
would work with marketing staff to develop messaging for the departments and
then develop the products that we would use to deliver those messages.
MR. CROSBIE:
There would be overlap and, of course, communication between these two – what do
we call them, branches or …?
MR. BRUCE:
Divisions.
MR. CROSBIE:
Pardon me?
MR. BRUCE:
That would be division. The Communications division within the branch and the
Marketing division.
MR. CROSBIE:
Obviously, they don't work in totally separate silos; they communicate with each
other?
MR. BRUCE:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
But what I'm getting from the organization of this is that they are regarded
separate disciplines.
MR. BRUCE:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you.
In
terms of Professional Services, can you please outline what expenses or projects
were included in the $242,200 expenditure?
MS. TRICKETT:
I don't have a list of the specific items for '18-'19, but I can certainly
provide that to you.
MR. CROSBIE:
What's planned for this year?
MS. TRICKETT:
I'll defer to Glenn Bruce for that.
MR. BRUCE:
Our budget for this year for Professional Services is the $350,400. That
reflects a decrease from 2018 budget as identified under zero-based budgeting.
MR. CROSBIE:
A decrease from the budget that was allocated this year but underspent, you
mean.
MR. BRUCE:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
I'm sorry; you said you were going to provide a list, Ms. Trickett?
MS. TRICKETT:
Yes. You were looking for the list for '18-'19?
MR. CROSBIE:
Well, the answer would be yes.
MS. TRICKETT:
Yes, I will provide that.
MR. CROSBIE:
Where does branding strategy fit into Purchased Services, if at all?
MR. BRUCE:
Under Purchased Services, one of the things that we do is media advertising
buys, so they would fit in there.
MR. CROSBIE:
We're getting a list for this last year, then, are we? The list of expenditures?
MS. TRICKETT:
A list of expenditures for the Professional Services line?
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes.
MS. TRICKETT:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you.
Total
budgeted for Operating Accounts is $225,100 more than the revised for '18-'19.
Can you explain why the increase?
MS. TRICKETT:
There were allocations in
'18-'19, the majority of which were late under the Professional Services and the
Purchased Services lines, for which were not fully expended during the fiscal
year. That would relate to the majority of the savings across the Operating
category.
MR. CROSBIE:
So, why is the same budget
needed this year?
MS. TRICKETT:
I will defer to Glenn Bruce
if necessary, but my understanding is with this office the needs are revisited
on an annual basis and the intention for that budget for the coming '19-'20 year
is currently being determined. But I will let Glenn speak to that if he feels –
MR. BRUCE:
That is right. The planning
is still underway for a lot of the public awareness campaigns and those types of
things. They arise from year to year and after that planning is done we will
have a better idea what departments need.
MR. CROSBIE:
Can you explain what outside
contracts have been used over the last 12 months?
MS. TRICKETT:
We do not have a list of
that here, but the list that we have promised for the Professional Services for
'18-'19 will certainly outline any external consultants that were utilized.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you for that.
MS. TRICKETT:
You're welcome.
MR. CROSBIE:
What media marketing
campaigns have taken place over the last 12 months?
MR. BRUCE:
I do not have those details
with me, but we can get them for you.
MR. CROSBIE:
I look forward to that.
Thank
you.
MR. BRUCE:
Okay.
MR. CROSBIE:
What publications or reports
has the branch published over the last 12 years, and what was the production
cost for each?
MR. BRUCE:
I would have to get that for
you, as well.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you.
I look
forward to that.
Mr.
Chair.
CHAIR:
Further questions, Ms.
Coffin?
MS. COFFIN:
Yes, please. Thank you.
So, I
get anything under 2.3, right?
CHAIR:
2.3, correct.
MS. COFFIN:
Lovely. Thank you.
Let us
start with Communications. How many comm staff are there across government?
MR. BRUCE:
I will get it for you to
give you the exact, but we have 10 in the Communications division, and then
there is a director for each of the departments, and a media manager for all but
Office of the Status of Women. So, I think we are around 39.
MS. COFFIN:
That is pretty good.
Did you
know there is only one legislative drafter?
MR. BRUCE:
I did not.
MS. COFFIN:
No. Just as a comparison.
Supplies – I noticed that the replenishment of Supplies under 2.3.01 was pretty
significant. We see Supplies over in 2.3.02 as being a fairly big chunk we
expect to spend in 2019-2020, and another fairly large chunk again in Policy,
Planning and Coordination. What's under Supplies there?
MS. TRICKETT:
I'm going to ask Katie Norman to speak to the Supplies under the 2.3.02 and the
2.3.03.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
MS. TRICKETT:
In regard to the Supplies under 2.3.01, the categories under Supplies are paper,
pens and those types of things. With the communications and marketing branch,
any materials that they would produce in-house for any work associated with that
would come under that line object. As I referenced, Katie Norman will be able to
speak to the specifics for those other two activities.
MS. COFFIN:
I was having some trouble getting my head around how many stickies and paper
clips would $20,000 buy, right?
MS. NORMAN:
I can provide more detail, Ms. Coffin, on that.
MS. COFFIN:
Lovely.
MS. NORMAN:
Under Supplies for Public Engagement 2.3.02, that includes $15,000 which is our
annual licensing fee for the online engagement portal, Engage NL. Then, under
Policy, Planning and Coordination the large bulk of the spend there is for
licensing fees for a program called NVivo, which is our engagement data analysis
software. So that's some specialized tools that only our office uses across
government, so we absorb those costs.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, lovely. Thank you very much.
Okay,
let's go back to the attrition model. I know that you said you've cut a number
of vacant positions that haven't been filled. Has any of the work that would've
fallen under the vacant positions that have been left unfilled and are falling
into this attrition model, are they being captured at all in Professional
Services?
MS. DAY:
I would say, no, not to my knowledge.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. Thank you.
Let's
move to 2.3.02, Salaries. We're seeing a substantial decrease in Salaries under
Public Engagement to the tune of $226,000 plus or minus a couple of hundred. Is
there attrition there and, if so, what were the positions that were cut?
MS. TRICKETT:
No, there were no positions cut in that office. That's simply – sorry.
OFFICIAL:
(Inaudible.)
MS. TRICKETT:
I can keep going?
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
MS. TRICKETT:
Sorry.
MS. COFFIN:
That's okay.
MS. TRICKETT:
The reduction from budget to budget in that salary line does not reflect any
reduction in positions. It is just a reflection of positions that are
anticipated to be vacant for the coming fiscal year.
MS. COFFIN:
How many positions? That's $226,000, that's a fair chunk of change.
MS. NORMAN:
Wanda, if you'd like, I can speak to that.
If you
actually sum Public Engagement and the Policy, Planning and Coordination office,
those both fall under my responsibilities. The total has been maintained at
$1.67 million in overall spending. That's been looking strategically at the
positions that we have in light of government's efficiency mandate and attrition
over time because there have been a number of reductions, particularly on the
policy side, over the last number of years.
There
are no positions that have been eliminated, as Wanda has stated; however, we are
working together across those two divisions to deploy government's public
engagement activities.
MS. COFFIN:
That's why we see the increase in 2.3.03 under the Policy, Planning.
MS. NORMAN:
Exactly.
MS. COFFIN:
You see it go up there.
MS. NORMAN:
The amount is the same, we just sort of rightsize both to reflect the staff
complement.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, so more money is now being spent on Public Engagement and less on Policy,
Planning and Coordination, yes?
MS. NORMAN:
Actually the converse.
MS. COFFIN:
All right. That's reassuring, actually.
Let's
see what else here. There's an extra almost $20,000 spent on Purchased Services.
What was that all about?
MS. NORMAN:
That's in part related to government's commitment to increase the accessibility
of public engagement. Last year, there was a new policy put in place related to
accessible public engagement. When I looked at my budget this year, I felt it
was important to put in an allocation that would allow us to be able to provide
some of those services for major public engagement activities. It's been
reprofiled from other areas.
MS. COFFIN:
That would be things like sign language interpretation –
MS. NORMAN:
Correct.
MS. COFFIN:
– or alternate language interpretation and those types of things.
MS. NORMAN:
Correct.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, good job on that then.
Let's
see, Professional Services, Policy, Planning and Coordination; they have an
extra almost $391,000. What was the planning chunk that was almost $400,000
there?
MS. TRICKETT:
That reflects cost associated with shared services. As I spoke to you previously
under the Executive Support activity, that money is budgeted under the
Department of Finance and transferred in if and when required.
MS. COFFIN:
So the shared services, again, are what?
MS. NORMAN:
I can speak to that.
Part of
the responsibility of the Policy, Planning and Coordination office is to support
horizontal efficiency initiatives. One of the things that we have been
responsible for is serving as the project management office for government's
public commitments related to sharing back-office functions across the broader
public sector. As part of that, we had a contract this year with an external
consultant to measure a baseline of back-office functions and identify
opportunities for efficiency in a manner consistent with government's attrition
and broader public sector commitments through collective bargaining. As part of
that, we're preparing a report to the Cabinet on opportunities.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent. Who was awarded that contract? That was a rather lucrative contract.
MS. NORMAN:
That was awarded as part of a broader master service agreement going back to
2015 under the transformational change initiative with Ernst & Young.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Do you
have any preliminary results on what they thought would be reasonable shared
services and what those back-room efficiencies were?
MS. NORMAN:
Sure.
I can't
speak to that at this time in that the report is being finalized for Cabinet
consideration, but government has been publicly updating
The Way Forward website with progress
on shared services, as those have been identified over time. Certainly, it would
be my expectation that there would be a public release of information when it is
appropriate to do so.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, I look forward to seeing that.
Grants
and Subsidies; as we move along here there is exactly $3,219,900, consistent
from budget to revised to Estimate. Who's getting these Grants and Subsidies and
what are they for?
MS. NORMAN:
That funding falls into three categories. The first is just about $2.5 million
that goes to the 34 Community Youth Networks throughout the province. That's
their core operational funding, supporting at-risk youth throughout our
province.
It also
includes $206,000 in core operating funding for the Community Sector Council.
That's part of a multi-year funding agreement with that organization. It also
includes just over $400,000 in project-based grants for what's called the Grants
to Youth Organizations program. That's year-over-year funding on a one-time
basis to organizations providing supports to youth throughout our province.
MS. COFFIN:
I'm a little confused as to why these youth initiatives – and that's big, big
chunks of money – are falling under Planning, Policy and Coordination of
Executive Council, as opposed to a department that's more directly involved in
servicing youth. Does anyone have the rationale for why it sits there and not
in, early childhood education or another department that's perhaps a little more
targeted towards youth?
MS. DAY:
I think over the past number of years – it is the office that Katie is the ADM
for that has been responsible for the provision of these grants to youth.
The
work that is done and the decisions that are made on the funding is done in
consultation with all those other departments that would be supporting youth,
but it's coordinated and centralized within one division within government.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. Thank you. I do believe that's –
CHAIR:
Your time is expired.
MS. COFFIN:
Yeah.
CHAIR:
Mr. Crosbie, do you have any
other questions on 2.3.01 to 2.3.03?
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes, thank you.
Did I
understand from Ms. Norman that there is a report to go to Cabinet on – did you
use the word opportunities?
MS. NORMAN:
Yes, Mr. Crosbie, I did use the term opportunities.
MR. CROSBIE:
What kind of opportunities?
MS. NORMAN:
Well, the shared services project, government's public commitment is to look at
opportunities for shared services across back office functions focused on
finance, human resources, information technology and supply chain.
An
example of opportunities that are currently being pursued and are publicly noted
would be consolidation of payroll functions, collections, the recent
consolidation of civil engineering services within core government and –
MR. CROSBIE:
Sure, I get the general idea.
So the
object of all this is to find efficiencies and save money. Is that right?
MS. NORMAN:
Yes, that's correct, and better services.
MR. CROSBIE:
Improve service.
MS. NORMAN:
Improve service.
MR. CROSBIE:
And do it more efficiently.
MS. NORMAN:
Yes, that's correct.
MR. CROSBIE:
Okay. Has this project implemented and identified any budgetary savings yet?
MS. NORMAN:
It would be premature to comment on this at the time, as we're just finalizing
the initial baseline information for Cabinet consideration.
MR. CROSBIE:
Well, I think you said that there are regular updates on the website, but they
seem to be somewhat vague about progress. There's no actual quantification or
measurement of progress, is there?
MS. NORMAN:
The intention is to provide real-time updates as they're available. I would
defer – obviously, that's a Cabinet decision on how much information they wish
to release.
MR. CROSBIE:
Well, just an observation. It seems vague updates to me.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Ms. Coffin, do you have any
further questions?
MS. COFFIN:
No, thank you.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.3.01 to 2.3.03
inclusive carry?
All
those in favour.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
On
motion, subheads 2.3.01 through 2.3.03 carried.
CLERK:
2.4.01.
CHAIR:
2.4.01.
Mr.
Crosbie.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you.
Could
we get a list of all the positions whose salaries are included herein and also
an explanation of the variance across the line item, please?
MS. TRICKETT:
Yes, I can provide you that listing, and you wanted to know …
MR. CROSBIE:
The reasons for the variance across the item.
MS. TRICKETT:
Across Salaries.
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes.
MS. TRICKETT:
The savings that are reflected there from last year is a result of several
vacancies in that office during the year.
MR. CROSBIE:
The result of –?
MS. TRICKETT:
Vacancies of several positions.
MR. CROSBIE:
Vacancies. I'm sorry.
That
seems to be a theme, if I'm not mistaken.
MS. TRICKETT:
The vacancies were timing. It was delayed recruitment, trying to get those
positions staffed up. There was also a portion of time where the departmental
controller had left the division and was replaced with another departmental
controller at a lower salary, so you would see differences in salary grade
associated with that.
MR. CROSBIE:
Yes, and I'm sure these things happen in an operation as large as government.
Revenue
- Provincial, where did the $3,300 in revenue come from, please?
MS. TRICKETT:
The revenue that's reflected here is a grouping of miscellaneous revenues. So,
it would result in, for example – I'm not sure how familiar you are with the
P-Card initiative in government, but, effectively, that has replaced a lot of
our petty cash allocations across our department.
When an
employee is granted petty cash they are set up with a receivable, as they are
owing of that money to government. When they turn that money back in, that money
is receipted as miscellaneous revenue. This activity is sort of the general,
operational catch-all for the Cabinet Secretariat, the Office of the Executive
Council, and that reflects that return of funding.
It also
would reflect, for example, if somebody had an overpayment in salaries that
cannot be written against the expenditure in the fiscal year for which it
incurred, so it was salaries that were overpaid in a prior fiscal year and it
was recovered in this fiscal year. It's just an accounting treatment of how you
have to record the revenue and when it relates.
MR. CROSBIE:
Am I understanding it
correctly this is kind of like petty cash advances?
MS. TRICKETT:
Correct. It would relate to money that had been given to a government employee
to house and control petty cash for a division that has now been turned in
because they have been given a Purchasing Card instead, so there's no need to
have cash on hand, if you will, in that area. So, when that money is returned,
it is paid back to government coffers.
MR. CROSBIE:
All right, or is could be as
well salary overpayments which got repaid.
MS. TRICKETT:
Correct.
MR. CROSBIE:
Since it's $3,300 in the big
picture, I'm not going to agonize over it.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Any other question, Mr.
Crosbie, on 2.4.01?
MR. CROSBIE:
No.
CHAIR:
Ms. Coffin?
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Let's
go along the theme of horizontal efficiencies.
I note
that this seems to be the only department with financial administration as a
subsection, and it's almost a million dollars; it's three-quarter of a million
dollars.
Any
reason why this has not been manifested as a horizontal efficiency somewhere?
MS. TRICKETT:
The Financial Administration division here reflects – actually it's my division
and it reflects all of the financial components that provide the general
operational and financial services to multiple departments. So, we're referred
to as a cluster controller group.
In
other departments, you will notice that the controller unit reports directly in
through that department; Department of Health, for example, Department of
Transportation and Works.
For
mine, I'm responsible, and my employees are responsible, for providing these
services to the entirety of Executive Council, the Department of Finance, the
Public Service Commission and the Consolidated Funds Services.
So, I
report directly in through the clerk of the Executive Council, as well as the
Premier, and this is where my activity is housed to provide services for those
four departments.
MS. COFFIN:
So where are the other
services? Where do the other departments – where do we see their financial
administration services manifest?
MS. TRICKETT:
I can't speak specifically, but oftentimes you'll see a corporate services
activity or something like that in that department. It may contain some of their
policy people. I guess it depends on that particular department.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. Good to know.
Thank
you.
MS. TRICKETT:
You're welcome.
CHAIR:
No further questions?
MR. CROSBIE:
No, Sir.
CLERK:
2.4.01.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.4.01 carry?
All
those in favour, ‘aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
On
motion, subhead 2.4.01 carried.
CLERK:
2.5.01.
CHAIR:
2.5.01.
Changeover?
CLERK:
We need to change over.
CHAIR:
Intergovernmental and
Indigenous Affairs.
We'll
take a short break as we have to change some staff over.
Recess
CLERK:
2.5.01 to 2.5.02.
CHAIR:
Okay we're going to do items
2.5.01 and 2.5.02.
Minister Osborne, if you want to introduce your staff first.
MR. OSBORNE:
Yes, I'll ask my staff to
introduce themselves.
MS. HEARN:
Good morning.
My name
is Patricia Hearn; I'm the Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.
MS. TRICKETT:
Wanda Trickett, Departmental
Controller.
MS. HUSSEY:
Cindy Hussey, Assistant
Deputy Clerk.
MR. BRUCE:
Glenn Bruce, Associate
Secretary to Cabinet, Communications.
MS. ELLIOTT:
Susan Elliott, Executive
Assistant to the Minister.
CHAIR:
I think everybody else has
been introduced.
Ms.
Coffin, I don't know if you want opening questions this time on items 2.5.01 and
2.5.02.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, let's see here. Sure, I can do that.
Let's
go with some of the technical questions first. I notice Salaries are all over
the place. The budgeted and revised came in almost twice as much as budgeted and
the current Estimate is somewhere in the middle of both of those. What's going
on there?
MS. HEARN:
The revised budget for
2018-'19 includes the $195,000 that was severance and related benefits for one
employee. There was a new ADM position that was created and that added the
$87,800 to that number, offset by some vacancies.
That's
the increase in the revised budget for '18-'19. For '19-'20, obviously, we don't
have the severance and related benefits included in that and it does reflect an
additional portion to reflect the assistant deputy minister position.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
I
noticed Grants and Subsidies haven't changed at all. What's included in that?
MS. HEARN:
That Grants and Subsidies is
the contribution that we make on behalf of the government to what's called the
Canadian secretariat for intergovernmental services, I believe. They provide all
the administrative support to all federal-provincial meetings, whether it's the
Premier, the ministers or deputy ministers.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Transportation, $56,000 of revised over budget and then an increase of almost
double in this year's Estimates. Are we communicating more or transporting more?
MS. HEARN:
I think we're transporting
more. Two reasons for the increase in terms of '18-'19; first, it was offset by
some reductions in travel in non-executives. We had more executive travel offset
by the reduction, to some extent, by non-executive.
The
other reason for the increase was the fact that we did have some extraordinary
travel related to NAFTA renegotiations. That happened during the year. We did
have a NAFTA challenge through Kruger and Corner Brook Pulp and Paper that was
launched in the US. That required extraordinary travel in that particular year.
This year, it's to reflect the increase in the travel at the executive level,
offset by travel in the non-executive level.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, thank you.
Go back
to that new ADM. How does the new ADM square with the attrition model?
MS. HEARN:
As I think has been said
previously, it's been set in terms of dollar amounts. We're working towards that
and managed – and I will let Wanda speak to it – more holistically within, what
I'll call the department but the broader office.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Let us
go to Indigenous Affairs. Grants and Subsidies; there's an extra $90,000 which
is a very wonderful thing.
CHAIR:
Excuse me, Ms. Coffin, we're
going to keep that for next. We're just dealing strictly with 2.5.01 and 2.5.02.
MS. COFFIN:
Oh, I'm sorry. I got
excited. 2.5 …?
CHAIR:
2.5.01 and 2.5.02, keeping
2.5.03 –
MS. COFFIN:
And 2.5.03?
CHAIR:
No, not 2.5.03 right now.
MS. COFFIN:
Oh, okay then.
Then,
let's go over here. Is government now making the effort to ensure Indigenous
groups are at the table when decisions regarding them are being made? As an
example, they were not properly consulted in the early days of Muskrat Falls or
when cuts to Black Tickle were made.
Indigenous people have the right to be part of decision-making that affects
them. Has government developed any kind of policy on ensuring this happens?
MR. OSBORNE:
I think that would be the
next section as well.
CHAIR:
That would be Indigenous
Affairs.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, yeah, that's the
secretariat. Sorry, I'm new.
CHAIR:
That's okay. We have to
change some staff over.
Mr.
Crosbie.
MR. CROSBIE:
Now that they have a chance
to consider the question, that will increase the quality of the answer, I'm
sure.
If you
have a surge requirement, such as a negotiation like what the government likes
to describe as the Atlantic Accord negotiations, where would that fit in?
MS. HEARN:
I can only speak for my own
case, coming out of Intergovernmental Affairs – and we participated in those, as
you are aware – we did it, really, through a reallocation of resources and
people in terms of directing them to that and in terms of the travel to support
that. They wouldn't be reflected in these numbers, per se.
MR. CROSBIE:
What are you saying? You're
more of a coordinating body within government when a negotiation with the
central government occurs?
MS. HEARN:
It would depend. We are certainly a coordinating piece, being Intergovernmental
Affairs and if the discussions are with the federal government. We would also
work, obviously, closely and as part of the team with the other line
departments, be it Finance, Natural Resources or whomever it might be.
MR. CROSBIE:
I'm on to 2.5.02. That's in
order, Mr. Chair?
CHAIR:
That's correct.
MR. CROSBIE:
The Salaries went over
budget by $75,100. Can you explain, please, why that happened?
MS. HEARN:
Yes. There was $101,000 severance and related benefit for two employees, and
then offset through a $26,000 reduction that was attained throughout the year to
give us the net difference.
MR. CROSBIE:
In Transportation and
Communications it seems that savings were found and more savings may be found in
'19-'20. Can you give an explanation for that?
MS. HEARN:
I think I had previously mentioned that we had more of the increase in the
travel reflected in the executive level, and so with a reduction in the
non-executive level and a concerted effort to reduce the travel – more
conference calls, that sort of approach.
MR. CROSBIE:
In the revised for 2018-'19,
Professional Services, we have a round number there, $100,000. Is that because
the full cost, at the time this was prepared, was not then known and that was
the best estimate?
MS. HEARN:
That cost reflects access to services not otherwise available to us, specialized
services, to support trade negotiations, trade analysis. In this particular
case, that would have been the amount available to us, I believe is the correct
answer, and so we used what was available to us.
Wanda,
I don't know if –
MR. CROSBIE:
I'm not quite sure I follow
that, because what was budgeted was $119,000.
MS. HEARN:
That's right. We had $119,000 budgeted, we were reducing our costs. What was
available to us was the $100,000 and that's what we used, because we used –
MR. CROSBIE:
I'm not sure I understand the meaning of available then.
MS. HEARN:
In order to balance our budgets or to reach the targets that we needed, we were
able to take $19,000 of that and move it into the other categories.
MR. CROSBIE:
I see. Are we to understand that $100,000 has actually been expended?
MS. HEARN:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
That's the exact amount then?
MS. HEARN:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
How will $118,900 be spent this coming year, or this year?
MS. HEARN:
The options available to us, and for what we've used them in my term in the last
couple of years, have been through, as I said, getting expert trade analysis to
support either ongoing discussions or negotiations, or to do that analysis of
ongoing projects. This would be funding that we would disburse through
Department of Justice, if I'm correct, in terms of we're getting that
specialized expertise from legal firms as an example.
MR. CROSBIE:
Do I understand then, that Justice sources the expertise and you pay for it?
MS. HEARN:
We have an allocation for it for trade-specific activities.
MR. CROSBIE:
You're saying all of that $118,900 is going to be trade related?
MS. HEARN:
That's the intent. In the past, when we haven't required it for those purposes,
we've done some other activities, some trade analysis in specific sectors, but
in my term, in my time, it's been supporting the trade legal analysis.
MR. CROSBIE:
I'm still perplexed by how you can be so specific and accurate as to budget, or
spend $100,000 this year, but then apparently be so accurate as to forecast an
expenditure of $118,900 next year or this present year.
MS. HEARN:
This amount was the amount that's been traditionally within the trade
secretariat that was moved over to Intergovernmental Affairs a couple of years
ago and that was the amount, the $119,000. We used this to, as I say, contribute
towards any legal costs, as an example, that may need to be done to support the
detailed trade analysis.
So, we
would have made that contribution available to support the Department of Justice
as they contract out – if I'm using the terminology correctly – with legal firms
and that would've been our capacity to support the activity that they would have
undertaken.
MR. CROSBIE:
Could you provide a list of the expenditures under that $100,000 item?
MS. HEARN:
Yes.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you for that.
The
Grants and Subsidies, we had $4,400 last year having been spent out of an
envelope of $5,900. What's the item for and why not all funds distributed?
MS. HEARN:
So that funding supports, in the same vein as I discussed earlier, the
secretariat that used to be referred to as the Agreement on Internal Trade, now
called the Canada Free Trade Agreement. So that's a secretariat that supports
all the provinces, and our bill last year was $4,400 as opposed to the $5,900.
MR. CROSBIE:
So, in a sense, you don't control the expenditure. You estimate it and you pay
the bill they send you.
MS. HEARN:
We have a role on the Management Committee to oversee all of this. So, I can't
tell you specifically why the amount was less than it was originally indicated
to be last year, but that is the order of magnitude and that's the amount that
it's traditionally been.
MR. CROSBIE:
Were any of these monies we're looking at here spent on what the government
refers to as the Atlantic Accord negotiations?
MS. HEARN:
There would have been some travel. None of the Grants and Subsidies, but there
would have been employee travel in terms of the meetings with the Government of
Canada.
MR. CROSBIE:
That's the only character of expenditure with respect to the Atlantic Accord, is
that right?
MS. HEARN:
We may have used some of the Professional Services money for some legal advice
in terms of that. I'm just trying to think in terms of timing, so that would
have been right before the end of March.
MR. CROSBIE:
Can you state whether any
money has been spent to study the legal implications on section 92A of the
Constitution as it relates to our ability to tax hydro power export?
MS. HEARN:
Not in my budget there
hasn't been.
MR. CROSBIE:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Your time has expired, Mr.
Crosbie.
Ms.
Coffin, do you have any further questions on …
MS. COFFIN:
I'm good.
CHAIR:
You have questions on 2.5.01
and 2.5.02?
No
other questions?
Mr.
Lane.
MR. LANE:
Thank you.
A
couple of quick ones. The first one under 2.5.01, Transportation and
Communications, I know it's been asked, but I just want to get some
clarification.
So, we
budgeted $32,100, spent $88,200, and that had to do with the federal loan
guarantee 2, I think, the second loan guarantee, I believe you said is what
drove that number up in the travel. Was that correct?
MS. HEARN:
Actually, no.
MR. LANE:
No?
MS. HEARN:
It was the NAFTA renegotiations.
MR. LANE:
The NAFTA, okay, yes.
So that
drove that up. That was sort of a one-off, a special circumstance, but yet we're
doubling what was budgeted for last year. So, I'm just wondering what the
rationale is, given that that's now taken care of. Is there something else
extraordinary that's come up this year, or why the doubling?
MS. HEARN:
I would say two things. First of all, it's been offset by a reduction in the
non-executive level –
MR. LANE:
Yeah.
MS. HEARN:
– because now we have the ADM as opposed to someone in the non-executive level
travelling. So, that's one of the contributions.
The
other has been that there has been a lot of demand in terms of
federal-provincial meetings, and we've seen an increase in that. As well I would
say in terms of the trade negotiations that go broader than even NAFTA; we've
seen some of the discussions with respect to the Trans-Pacific Partnership one,
there's a China – all of these things can vary –
MR. LANE:
Okay.
MS. HEARN:
– depending on what's happening in the world, but we've seen a number of those
that have taken on a greater prominence, I guess, on the intergovernmental
world.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
Somewhat relating to that, when I look at 2.5.02, in the description it talks
about: “Appropriations provide for review and analysis of intergovernmental
issues relating to social, fiscal, resource, economic, constitutional and trade
policy …” and “intergovernmental negotiations in those areas.”
So,
just focusing on the resource piece and intergovernmental negotiations, granted
I represent an urban district, but I'm sure like a lot of Members and the
parties, I hear from people from all around the province. I've heard from a
number of people who have serious concerns around our fishery and so on and
policies that I think a lot of people believe need to be changed as it relates
to our fishery, including some form of joint management and so on.
If
there was anything happening in that regard, I assume that it would fall under
sort of that category under this area. I'm sure, obviously, the Department of
Fisheries would be involved as well, but, nonetheless, it should fall under here
because it is a resource.
I'm
just wondering, has there been any initiatives taken or are there any
initiatives planned from the prospective of Intergovernmental Affairs to meet
with the federal government to talk about the challenges around our fishery and
the potential to change some arrangements in the future?
MS. HEARN:
I'll have to, I guess, refer to the Minister of Fisheries for the specifics of
that. What I can say is that this group and this section of our department
oversee, depending on the year, approximately 60 intergovernmental agreements
across a whole realm of the government, obviously. Predominantly, they're with
the Government of Canada, but not all, so the bulk of our activity reflected
here is supporting those agreements.
I am
aware, but, as I say, perhaps better addressed by the Minister of Fisheries.
There are ongoing discussions with the Government of Canada across the whole
breadth of the government and, of course, all the sectors, and we support the
department in those discussions.
MR. LANE:
Am I to understand, then, that such an initiative, as it relates to our fishery,
would have to be something that would be driven by the Department of Fisheries,
by the Minister of Fisheries, to say that we want to engage in discussions and
so on around this, and then your division would support those efforts? Is that
how it would work? Or would you lead those efforts?
MS. HEARN:
Our leadership, it's decided on a case-by-case basis in some respects. The
Premier is the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, so I should start with
that. In our department, we look across the whole breadth of issues that we are
discussing with the Government of Canada and determine – and I am giving you a
very honest answer in terms of how it would work.
MR. LANE:
Yeah, that's what I am looking for.
MS. HEARN:
We would look at what are the priorities, what is the timing, how we position
ourselves, who we put together in the teams and how we approach it. The Premier,
as the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, would lead it but, obviously, in
consultation and in a team way with line departments.
MR. LANE:
Is it fair to say that, to your knowledge, at least for this budget year and
this upcoming year, there are no plans to engage in any such activities as it
relates to the fishery? Is that fair statement?
MS. HEARN:
No, I would say that there is always ongoing discussions with the Government of
Canada with respect to fisheries.
MR. LANE:
Okay, thank you.
That's
all I have.
CHAIR:
No further questions?
CLERK:
2.5.01 to 2.5.02.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.5.01 to 2.5.02
inclusive carry?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Carried.
On
motion, subheads 2.5.01 through 2.5.02 carried.
CLERK:
2.5.03.
CHAIR:
2.5.03, Indigenous Affairs.
I think
we have some staff change again. While staff is changing over – obviously, we
are getting close to noon, our three hours will soon be expired, but is it the
wish of the Committee to continue on?
We will
try to conclude by 12:30. Is that good with everyone? Is that fair? We will look
at it again at 12:30?
Is that
good with you, Ms. Coffin?
Ms. Coffin: Yes.
CHAIR:
Good with everybody else?
Thank
you.
As
there has only been one change on government's side there, Ms. Evans, I'll let
you introduce yourself when your mic comes on. Can we have Ms. Evan's mic on in
the seat Mr. Crosbie just occupied, please?
MS. EVANS:
Lela Evans, Torngat Mountains.
CHAIR:
And now we're discussing Indigenous Affairs. So again, we'll introduce the staff
members.
MR. GOVER:
Aubrey Gover, Deputy Minister of Indigenous Affairs. With me is Assistant Deputy
Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Judy White.
MS. TRICKETT:
Wanda Trickett, Departmental Controller.
CHAIR:
I think everybody else have not changed, so we'll move on. We'll discuss 2.5.03.
Ms.
Evans, would you like to start?
MS. EVANS:
Yes. 2.5.03, Indigenous Affairs, looking at Salaries there. Salaries went over
budget by $15,500 in '18-'19. Would you be able to tell us why?
MR. GOVER:
Yes, we had one long-term employee retire and, as a result, that employee was
entitled to certain benefits, termination benefits, and offsetting those payouts
were some vacancies we had during the course of the year, so it all netted out
to an increase of, as you say, $15,500.
MS. EVANS:
Thank you.
Looking
at Transportation and Communications, last year there was a savings of $25,200.
I'm just looking at why. Given that there were savings last year, why is this
year's budget still near last year's $110,000?
MR. GOVER:
It's often difficult to predict the amount of travel that Indigenous Affairs
does with a high degree of accuracy. This budget has been reduced, over the
years, a very significant amount. But some of the factors that drive the amount
of travel that's needed are the location and the number of negotiation sessions
for land claims. For example, on the Innu land claim, there's a framework
agreement which prescribes the negotiations are supposed to take place in
Natuashish, Sheshatshiu, Happy Valley-Goose Bay – I'm sorry, St. John's and
Ottawa on a rotating basis.
Oftentimes, in a run of a year, you might see, depending on what is being
discussed, more sessions in St. John's which reduces the travel budget.
Sometimes the sessions are of such a nature or the issues are of such a nature,
you see more sessions in Sheshatshiu and Natuashish and Ottawa, because that
involves travel from St. John's for the Indigenous Affairs staff, the budget
would increase. Also the number of sessions in any given year, of course,
affects the budget.
Also,
initiatives that the federal government establishes have a big effect on the
budget. As we see with the current federal administration, we have Bill C-92 on
Indigenous child welfare and Bill C-91 on Indigenous languages. Earlier on we
had federal principles on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples and a proposed recognition – rights framework by the federal
government. These are all initiatives that we had to travel for and be involved
in.
Last
year, because we may have had more sessions in St. John's, we didn't use up the
entire budget. This year, we could come close to using it all up. It fluctuates
up and down on any given year.
MS. EVANS:
Thank you.
Okay,
moving on to Grants and Subsidies. Can the minister please outline what this
grant money is used for and provide a list of the groups who received the
funding in '18-'19?
MR. GOVER:
The $399,800 that was budgeted in 2018-19, that is entirely to fund boards under
the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement. So the boards under the Land Claims
Agreement, that particular land claim agreement, are funded one-third by the
Nunatsiavut Government, one-third by the federal government and one-third by the
provincial government.
The
almost $400,000 that was budgeted in '18-'19 represents the provincial one-third
share for the boards that are established under the LILCA. The bulk of that
money is for the Torngat Wildlife and Plants Co-Management Board and the Torngat
Joint Fisheries Board and their common secretariat of public service, the
Torngat Secretariat. The bulk of that $400,000 would be for that.
MS. EVANS:
Thank you.
Yes,
just continue on with Grants and Subsidies now. You mentioned $399,800. That's
usually pretty standard throughout the years, I've noticed, because of what it's
used for, as you just outlined. Looking at the Estimates now, under Grants and
Subsidies, the line item there being increased now to $489,800, that's almost an
extra $100,000?
MR. GOVER:
That's correct.
MS. EVANS:
Would you be able to just
tell us where this extra funding will be going?
MR. GOVER:
Yes.
Should
the House approve this budget and these appropriations that $90,000 is
earmarked, for the first time ever – that the House will have approved
appropriations for Native Friendship Centres in Newfoundland and Labrador. The
$90,000 is to be divided: $30,000 for the St. John's First Light Friendship
Centre, $30,000 for the Labrador Friendship Centre and $30,000 for the People of
the Dawn Friendship Centre on the West Coast.
Like I
said, there has been never an appropriation from the provincial government for
friendship centres until this particular appropriation. The $90,000 is for the
three friendship centres in those amounts.
MS. EVANS:
Okay, thank you.
Moving
on now to revenue, we did see that there was $6,500 there in revenue. We were
just wondering where did this come from and why?
MR. GOVER:
This is a residual of many years ago. As you may recall, I believe it was under
former Premier Dunderdale and former Minister Patty Pottle, there were issues
about the certification of home heating oil tanks in Nunatsiavut.
MS. EVANS:
Yes.
MR. GOVER:
It was extraordinarily expensive for the residents of Nunatsiavut to comply with
the regulations, so the government of the day put in place a program to allow
people to have their oil tanks either replaced or brought up to the regulated
standard at a significant subsidized cost. Some people did have to make some
contribution towards that program and over the years the money keeps trickling
in.
This
$6,500 would represent some payments that people made that they had agreed to
make under this program, because we did take payments over a period of time.
MS. EVANS:
Thank you.
Just
another question now: Could you please give an overview of how Indigenous
Affairs interacts with various government departments on policy analysis and in
program delivery.
MR. GOVER:
Indigenous Affairs, I would say, is like a few entities in the government. It's
a central agency. By that I mean it's like all departments come to us for advice
or views on Indigenous affairs. It's just like all departments come to Justice
for advice on justice matters, or all departments go to Finance for advice on
financial matters or to Intergovernmental Affairs for advice on
intergovernmental affairs or Labrador Affairs or Women's Policy, as the case may
be. We basically have three main lines of business, which are outlined in our
annual report, where we interact with all the departments of the provincial
government, all the Indigenous governments and organizations in Newfoundland and
Labrador, and, of course, the federal government, which is, of course, a large
factor in Indigenous relations.
Our
first line of business would be when it comes to the negotiation of land claims
and self-government agreements, and any other Indigenous agreement between the
province and an Indigenous government and organization. We would generally lead
those negotiations. During the course of those negotiations, of course, we need
positions or views on how does Natural Resources feel about this particular
position that, say, the Innu are putting forward. Or how does Fisheries feel
about a particular position, or Health. As a result of that, in the negotiations
we interact with all other departments. That would be one aspect.
Also,
not only negotiation of land claims and self-government agreements, but we're
heavily involved in the implementation of such agreements. As you may well be
aware, with respect to the Labrador Inuit Claims Agreement there's an
implementation committee comprised of the federal government, the Nunatsiavut
Government and the provincial government. Again, the issues that can arise at
those tables, the implementation tables, can affect a multiplicity of
departments in the provincial government. We have many interactions along with
those issues.
Our
second major line of business is consultation and accommodation. The Supreme
Court of Canada, I believe, in 2004 – it might have been earlier, it might have
been 1994 – in the case of Haidi Taku, laid down the law that whenever a
government is contemplating taking a decision, which potentially may adversely
affect the asserted rights of Indigenous people, consultation is required.
Generally, we facilitate all such consultations with the provincial government
departments and Indigenous governments and organizations.
Our
third line of business is to interact with Indigenous governments and
organizations so that we can reflect their views, interests and values to other
departments of the government in the delivery of programs and services, because
Indigenous people have unique experiences due to history, geography, culture,
linguistics, traditions. To the extent that these are not reflected in the
delivery of programs and services, they will not effectively meet the needs of
Indigenous people. We provide a lens on that to the other provincial government
departments.
Those
would be the three lines of businesses which brings Indigenous Affairs into
frequent contact with the provincial departments, the federal government and
Indigenous governments and organizations. In addition to that, there is an
annual round table where the Premier meets with all the Indigenous leaders in
the province to have a view to common priorities and common initiatives that
could be worked on.
CHAIR:
Ms. Evans, your time has expired.
Ms.
Coffin.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Let's
start with Salaries. I note that you
said you had a senior position that retired. That position was refilled, yes?
MR. GOVER:
No.
MS. COFFIN:
No. Okay.
MR. GOVER:
This person that retired –not to get into the details of it – was on secondment
to another department for a long period of time, but was still listed on the
books as an Indigenous Affairs employee. We used to have five senior analysts.
That person's duty was assumed by the rest of the staff. That person has not
worked for Indigenous Affairs for five years, so when that person made their
decision to retire, there was really no need to fill the position because all
those duties had been taken care of.
MS. COFFIN:
Their salary doesn't show up here, it shows up in the department to which they
had been seconded? Because it seems that your severances –
MR. GOVER:
I'll have to review that. All I know is that when the person retired, their
termination benefits and their salary continuance and things like that, we had
to pay for it in part, which caused the cost overrun.
MS. COFFIN:
I guess the larger issue that I'm trying to get at here is that if there was
attrition, or we lost that one position, I was wondering about if that position
had been refilled. But it's a bit anomalous that the salary budget for last year
and Estimates for this year is exactly the same, so that tells me that there's
no step increases included in this, nor was there any attrition in that. So I'm
a little confused as to how the department expects to be able to meet its salary
targets without including that type of escalation.
MR. GOVER:
I can't really speak to how the steps are taken care of. I will say this, with
the money that is being asked for in these Estimates for '19-'20, the current
staff complement will not be affected.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, all right.
MR. GOVER:
I would note that part of that is we currently have two vacancies, so this
allows us some flexibility. But we do intend to fill those vacancies.
MS. COFFIN:
I'd be very curious to see how that all pans out. So if the vacancies exist,
that means that we're not paying out that salary right now. Somewhere in here
along the way, people would've gotten their normal salary escalations and I know
that there are no anniversary increases because we're pegged at zero for the
last four years, but it'd be interesting to see how that all pans out there.
I'll mark it for next year, perhaps.
MR. GOVER:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
Let's ask, perhaps, some policy questions now. We know that Indigenous groups
were not at the table in the early days of Muskrat Falls, or when the decision
was made to cut services in Black Tickle. Has government now made any effort to
ensure that Indigenous groups are at the table when decisions regarding them are
being made?
MR. GOVER:
Definitely. There is an Aboriginal Consultation Policy, which is online at the
Indigenous Affairs website. It deals with consultation on lands and resource
decisions that the government is making. We certainly have encouraged our
colleagues in all the other departments too, on social policy, to consult with
all Indigenous organizations, far and wide, in depth, as soon as possible.
Because as I said, the experiences of Indigenous people are different than
non-Indigenous people.
MS. COFFIN:
Absolutely.
MR. GOVER:
And without those experiences being reflected in programs and services, they
will not be affected. So we've encouraged all our departments, consult early,
consult often, social policy in particular. Thirdly, as I said, we have the
Indigenous round table. When I'm ever in doubt about consultations sometimes,
which can happen, I have the former CEO of the Assembly of First Nations to
provide me with some guidance on that matter.
MS. COFFIN:
Wonderful, that's very reassuring.
Okay, I
have follow-up questions. We are wondering if there is a provincial action plan
with Indigenous people at the table to address violence against Indigenous
women, girls and 2SLGBTQQIA individuals.
MR. GOVER:
The Final Report of the National Inquiry
into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls just came out. We
honour all those people, survivors and families that came forward and provided
the testimony in difficult circumstances. We have had a preliminary look at the
231 calls to justice and we're assessing the actions the province can take on
those 231 calls.
But we
must bring this national tragedy to an end. We appreciate the wisdom of the
commission in their first call to justice saying that there must be a national
action plan by the federal government, the provinces, the territories,
Indigenous governments, in consultation with Indigenous people, to bring this to
an end. The prime minister has promised that and we look forward to
participating in that with everyone else to bring this genocide to an end.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
We do
have a provincial action plan that includes that, so I'm assuming that's not
formalized, given your response there, but we're waiting for the national action
plan to –?
MR. GOVER:
No, I didn't say that.
MS. COFFIN:
No? Okay.
MR. GOVER:
I said we're looking at it now, but it's impossible to say – the report came out
just a while ago – to have a provincial action plan in a few days.
MS. COFFIN:
I'm just asking if there was a plan to have the plan.
Jordan's Principle – is there any intention to implement Jordan's Principle?
MR. GOVER:
My understanding from speaking to my colleagues in the Social Department is
Jordan's Principle is fully implemented in Newfoundland and Labrador. No child
in Newfoundland and Labrador fails to receive a service due to a jurisdictional
dispute with the federal government. We will deliver the service immediately and
then if we feel we must pursue the federal government for reimbursement, we will
do that after the service is delivered.
MS. COFFIN:
So it is fully implemented? That is very reassuring, Sir, thank you.
We're
looking at the Office of the Newfoundland and Labrador Child and Youth Advocate
did a review of experiences of Innu children in protective care. Can government
provide an update on whether this review and associated legislative changes have
helped address the over representation of Indigenous children in protective
care?
MR. GOVER:
This would be a question that would be better directed towards the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development. But we are definitely encouraged by
the revisions that were made in consultation with Indigenous governments and
organizations in Newfoundland and Labrador to the new provincial act on child
welfare.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
The
inquiry report calls up provincial and territorial governments to ensure
students are educated about gender and sexual identity. Has there been any
movement on that recommendation? Again, I realize that this has only happened in
the last couple of days.
MR. GOVER:
Again, that would probably be a question better directed towards Education. One
thing I would say is that the staff of Indigenous Affairs, its full complement,
is 11 people, with two support staff. Apart from the programs and services I
just talked about, in particular land claims, self-government negotiations, we
don't deliver educational services, we don't deliver health services and we
don't deliver child protection services. We try to provide Indigenous insights
into those that do. So the mandate for the delivery of the services rests with
others.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. I will ask them. That will be wonderful.
In
terms of recommendations now, we're looking at guaranteed access to legal
services to defend and assert human rights and Indigenous rights. Is that
recommendation also on the books? And I assume you'd be working with the
Department of Justice under that one?
MR. GOVER:
On all 231 Calls to Action, when I went down through them, I believe 175 Calls
to Action implicated the province in some way. So we will be working on all of
those. There were probably 30 that were directed solely to the federal
government and maybe another 30 that might've been directed towards third
parties.
But all
the 231 Calls to Action that implicate the province in any way, we'll be working
with our colleagues on them, yes.
MS. COFFIN:
I am glad you brought that up. Because of the Calls to Action, I'm just
wondering how many recommendations have been implemented to date. What are the
timelines on the other recommendations? And that's the 2015 Calls to Action.
MR. GOVER:
The TRC?
MS. COFFIN:
Yes.
MR. GOVER:
We have engaged with the Indigenous governments and organizations of the
province on the TRC Calls to Action. They provided us with some feedback. Work
has been done on many of the calls that are directed towards the province. There
are 30 of the 94 that are directed towards the province. And we're hoping to
advance that work this year with those organizations in light of the comments
they've given us.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you very much, I appreciate it. That's all my questions for now.
CHAIR:
Any other questions, Ms. Evans?
MS. EVANS:
Deputy Minister, you were saying Indigenous Affairs has a role for leadership
facilitation and also has the ability to help with implementation of services
when it comes to Aboriginal peoples.
Just
going through the last year, government announced the intention for an inquiry
into the Innu children in care. I see no monies allotted, not much progress on
this. So I was wondering, in terms of the role that you specifically outlined,
because of the seriousness – without our children we're nothing, without our
children's knowledge and growing up in our Indigenous communities, we don't have
culture, we won't have language. So this inquiry is very, very important to us
because we have to find a solution.
So, I'm
asking you now, Deputy Minister, would Indigenous Affairs have the ability to
advocate for advancing the inquiry and putting forward monies, because, like I
said, without the inquiry, without the ability to bring our children home,
without the ability to keep our children in our communities, there's not going
to be any culture, there's not going to be any language, our history will die.
In
actual fact, if you want to look at cultural genocide, Deputy Minister, failure
to act can result in cultural genocide.
MR. GOVER:
I agree that's a crucial
issue that all children grow and thrive in their language and culture.
On the
Innu inquiry, we did work out a joint terms of reference with the Innu and sent
if off to the federal government and asked the federal government to fully
participate in the inquiry. There was a point in time that the Innu weren't
satisfied with the level of participation in the inquiry.
In
Indigenous matters, the federal government has jurisdiction over Indians and
land reserved for Indians, which we know includes all Indigenous people in
Canada, and there's no solutions unless there's community solutions. So when we
deal with Indigenous Affairs it's a tripod: federal government, provincial
government, Indigenous community, Indigenous government.
We've
maintained close liaison with the federal government and with the Innu on this
matter. I believe we're coming closer to a resolution, but there are still some
issues outstanding with the federal government on this inquiry.
MS. EVANS:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Any other questions?
Mr.
Lane.
MR. LANE:
Yeah, just a couple of quick
ones.
Deputy
Minister, when I attended the Estimates for the Department of Justice one of the
questions that was asked was related to inquiries. The Minister of Justice, for
example, had indicated pretty much – it sounded like they were going to be
dropping the idea of the Humber Valley Paving inquiry, as an example. It was no
longer a priority, and so much time has passed.
I'm
just wondering, as it relates to the other inquiry, Burton Winters and that
tragedy, I know the federal government is doing some work on its own as it
relates to the air service and rescue and so on, but is that something that's
still on the radar of your department, to ensure that gets done?
MR. GOVER:
Unfortunately, Sir, I wish I had an answer to your question, but we're not the
lead agency on that particular inquiry or that particular matter.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
MR. GOVER:
I know the individual was Indigenous, but other folks have the lead on it, so,
unfortunately, I have no knowledge to answer your question.
MR. LANE:
Okay. All right. I thought I would ask.
I guess
the only other question I had relates to, of course, the Muskrat Falls Project
and the issue about methylmercury and so on. I've heard from people, as I'm sure
all Members have, from Labrador about their concern around that. Would you have
any involvement in any of the discussions that are occurring around that issue?
MR. GOVER:
Well, I believe that there has been recent publicity on that. The Premier
recently had a meeting with the Indigenous leadership, and that movement is
expected on that to go forward.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
MR. GOVER:
We've asked for the views of the Indigenous governments to move forward on the
consensus-based approach.
MR. LANE:
Is there any idea as to at what point in time there would be a decision made one
way or the other, or that wouldn't have anything to do with you?
MR. GOVER:
That would be –
MR. LANE:
I'm sure you're involved to some degree.
MR. GOVER:
That's a decision that will be made when it's made. That's all I can say.
MR. LANE:
Yeah, okay.
That's
all the questions I had. Thank you.
CHAIR:
Okay, no other questions?
CLERK:
2.5.03.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.5.03 carry?
All
those in favour, ‘aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Carried.
On
motion, subhead 2.5.03 carried.
CLERK:
2.6.01 to 2.6.02.
CHAIR:
We're going to move into
2.6.01 to 2.6.02.
MR. OSBORNE:
We've had a couple of
additions, so I'll ask our staff to introduce themselves.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
MR. BOWLES:
Good afternoon everyone.
My name
is Ron Bowles, Deputy Minister of Labrador Affairs Secretariat.
CHAIR:
We'll start the questions,
Ms. Evans, on 2.6.01 and 2.6.02.
MS. EVANS:
Okay.
Under
2.6.01 under Executive Support, just looking at the Salaries. In '18-'19,
Salaries went over budget by $30,100. This year the budget for Salaries is
increasing to $473,200. This is a $4,900 increase.
Can the
minister please give an overview of this?
MR. BOWLES:
Yes, thank you.
The
reason for the $30,100 overage is a result of a retro Labrador allowance that
had to be paid out to one of our employees. As for the $4,900, that's an
increase from our 2018-19 budget as identified under the zero-based budget
salary plan.
MS. EVANS:
Okay, thank you.
2.6.02,
Labrador Affairs, just looking at the Salaries now. In '18-'19, Salaries went
over budget by $43,000. Can the minister please outline why?
MR. BOWLES:
Yes, thank you.
The
reason for the salary overage there is a $57,200 severance and related benefits
for one employee that departed from us, so that was the primary, and we had some
vacancies that offset that as well, but that would be main reason for the salary
overrun there.
MS. EVANS:
Okay, thank you.
Moving
down to Grants and Subsidies, can you minister please outline what the $569,000
was for? Grants and Subsidies; the budget.
MR. BOWLES:
Thank you for the question.
So, our
Grants and Subsidies would be for the Labrador Transportation Grooming Subsidy
that provides access for winter road access, particularly on the North Coast of
Labrador for all communities that are not connected to a road to the nearest
service centre which is North West River.
MS. EVANS:
Right.
MR. BOWLES:
We also do it on the South Coast from Cartwright to Black Tickle, and to Norman
Bay as well.
The
other grants are the Labrador Aboriginal Nutritional assistance program, under
that as well. We provide $50,000 there: $20,000 to the Nunatsiavut Government,
$20,000 to NunatuKavut and $10,000 to the Innu Nation. We also have the Combined
Councils of Labrador, which is $100,000 a year, and we also have recently taken
over the Labrador Travel Subsidy, which is $730,000.
MS. EVANS:
Okay.
Continuing on with Grants and Subsidies now, can the minister please outline
what the $1.8 million is for? Can you look at the difference between 2018-'19
and the Estimates for 2019-'20?
MR. BOWLES:
The reason for that increase is we have a one-time budget allotment of $449,000
and that's to buy a groomer. Also, the groomers for Cartwright, that's to update
the modern fleet. The other reason is for two snowmobiles and the drags that
will be used on the North Coast of Labrador from Hopedale to Nain to try
essentially a pilot project on ice conditions, try to do the ice trails. It's
the first time we've done that.
The
other additions are $52,000 for just general operating increases for the
Labrador trail Grooming Subsidy. The other difference for the $1.8 million is
the $730,000 in the Labrador Travel Subsidy that's been transferred from
Children, Seniors and Social Development to Labrador Affairs Secretariat.
MS. EVANS:
Which community did you say the groomer was for?
MR. BOWLES:
That would be from Hopedale to Nain. They're looking at putting two snowmobiles
and two drags to look at trying to see if we can – this year we marked the ice
between the communities and it was a very big success. Now we're looking at
seeing with the snowmobiles if we can do something on the ice to make the trails
more manageable for the travelling public.
MS. EVANS:
Okay, thank you.
Looking
at Labrador Affairs staff now, how many of them are located in Labrador?
MR. BOWLES:
We have 10 permanent employees, one seasonal. All 11 employees are located in
Labrador. We have nine based in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, one based in Labrador
West and our seasonal employee is based out of North West River.
MS. EVANS:
Okay, thank you.
Just
looking at the trails now in Labrador, I believe last year you talked about
extending the trails. Can you give us an update on that?
MR. BOWLES:
I most certainly can. For the first time last year we extended our trails.
Traditionally, we just went from Happy Valley-Goose Bay to North West River,
North West River to Postville, Makkovik and Rigolet. For the first time this
year we tried to go up from Makkovik to Hopedale to Nain and we did a marking of
the trails. It's been a very successful year. We're also in the process now of
getting additional shelters and we're working with local stakeholders to see if
we can get shelters along the trails for safety reasons.
Our
initial preliminary reports are it was a very successful year. For the people
that are using those trails on the ice conditions, we weren't sure that was
going to work. It went over very well and we're planning to continue to keep
marking those trails on a go-forward basis.
MS. EVANS:
Yes. Thank you.
I
personally use the trails and I noticed a big improvement, especially out on the
frozen ocean. It's actually really, really good, very successful.
Just
looking now at the Labrador food subsidy program, you said there's a Labrador
Aboriginal nutrition assistance program.
MR. BOWLES:
Yes.
MS. EVANS:
Can you just basically give
an overview of that?
MR. BOWLES:
A very quick overview of
that is that is a $50,000 grant that's provided to – as I said before, $10,000
to Innu Nation, $20,000 to Nunatsiavut Government and $20,000 to NunatuKavut.
That funding is available for programs such as the community freezer program; it
can be used for artistic endeavours that may be for the Indigenous communities
there. For instance, where the caribou have been in decline, we've also used it
to transfer moose from the Island to Nunatsiavut Government, as an example.
Those
are things that – the money that we provide, we work closely with those
organizations to see how they want to spend that money.
MS. EVANS:
In the past, was there an
air subsidy for trying to get nutritional food to the isolated communities?
MR. BOWLES:
There was, and that program
was discontinued and replaced with the Labrador Aboriginal Nutritional
assistance program. Our program was $50,000 and the federal program was a
multi-million dollar program, and the analysis on it was that it just wasn't
making the difference that we were trying to achieve. We went with this – in
consultation with Indigenous groups – the Labrador Aboriginal Nutritional
Assistance Program.
MS. EVANS:
The reason why the one that
subsidized the actual cost of getting the nutritional food into the communities
was cancelled was because it wasn't …?
MR. BOWLES:
It's a federal program, the
Nutritional North program, so we were doing $50,000 trying to subsidize the
program, but the cost of administering the program was more than the actual
benefits that were coming from the – there's no real benefits from that $50,000
program on a multi-million dollar federal program. It was decided at the time it
was better used to give the money directly to the Indigenous governments and
organizations so they could use that themselves. I use the examples of
transferring moose from the Island to Labrador and using community freezers.
MS. EVANS:
Okay, thank you.
CHAIR:
Ms. Coffin.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you very much.
The
first thing that I note here is in Transportation and Communications, both in
Executive Support and Labrador Affairs, it is bang on. The only thing I see
different is that you took $100 out of Labrador Affairs and put it up into
Executive Support.
Congratulations because every other section that I have sat through – and I feel
like I've sat through most of them –had increases in Transportation and
Communications because they were bringing people to Labrador. You guys got that
one down. Well done on that. I'm very impressed.
That
leads me to my next question, which is: Is government looking at a way to curb
travel costs across departments for travel to Labrador and for Labradorians to
travel as well?
MR. BOWLES:
Absolutely. We do a lot of travel to the Labrador communities. It's a very
diverse region as we all know, and so you're looking at 300,000 square
kilometres with 32 communities. We're trying our best to get around, but we
certainly take advantage of the technology.
Our
staff, where possible, will do teleconferences. We monitor all those
teleconferences and we record them. It's a balance of being in the region and
also being in St. John's and trying to make that a very effective balance.
As an
example for myself, personally, once a week the deputy ministers meet. I would
say 90 per cent of the time I will attend those by teleconference. When I'm in
town on business I will join those conferences, but we are very cognizant of our
travel dollars. It's very expensive to travel to the North Coast, to the South
Coast and to St. John's, and we've been able to manage that in our travel
envelope very well. But we do continue to use teleconferences a fair bit and
linked-in systems where we can.
MS. COFFIN:
That's excellent; I'm going to recommend that you be in charge of travel to
Labrador for all government.
MR. BOWLES:
I'm just looking at the Minister of Finance, to see if he's nodding.
MS. COFFIN:
That's all my questions in this section.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Any other questions, Ms. Evans?
MR. LANE:
I have one on –
CHAIR:
On 2.6.01 nothing, Ms.
Evans?
MR. LANE:
I didn't have one until you were talking about the moose. I'm just curious if
I'm mishearing you. You're transporting moose to Labrador? Is that what you
said? Did I hear you say that?
MR. BOWLES:
We have been.
MR. LANE:
Is that dead moose or – is that moose meat or is that live moose?
MR. BOWLES:
We're not transporting live moose. We have worked closely, particularly with the
Nunatsiavut government, in the past with my previous colleague, the deputy
minister of Indigenous Affairs. With the decline in caribou as a stable food
product for the Inuit particularly, we've worked in collaboration to work with
getting a certain allotment of moose to the Nunatsiavut Government in the past.
MR. LANE:
What do you mean by getting a – forgive me, I'm not really overly familiar with
Labrador and how it works. Somebody is shooting moose in one part of Labrador,
or they're shooting them here in Newfoundland and you're sending the moose meat
up? Is that what you're saying?
MR. BOWLES:
We certainly would work with Fisheries and Lands Resources. It's a controlled
hunt and there would be a certain allotment and those are transferred to the
Nunatsiavut Government. If you need, we could certainly try to provide further
details on that for you as to how that works.
MR. LANE:
No, no, it's more curiosity than anything, I'm just really surprised that –
MR. BOWLES:
Actually, it was very, very successful. To be clear here, the caribou is the
preference but with the declining stock – that was just something that was tried
and if the Nunatsiavut Government continues to request that, we will, where
possible, try to assist them.
MR. LANE:
Very good.
That's
all I have.
CHAIR:
Okay, no further questions?
CLERK:
2.6.01 to 2.6.02 inclusive.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.6.01 to 2.6.02 inclusive carry?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Opposed?
On
motion, 2.6.01 to 2.6.02 inclusive carried.
CHAIR:
We're at 12:33 and we still
have Human Resources Secretariat and OCIO left to cover. Shall we …?
MS. COFFIN:
I'd like to make a recommendation that we adjourn and find another time to go
back. These are two fairly large sections and we have less than an hour before
many of us are expected back in the House again.
CHAIR:
Everybody in favour of that, to reconvene to discuss those two items?
Anybody
objecting to it?
If it's
the wish of the Committee, we'll adjourn for now and then reconvene at a time
that the Clerk is able to arrange. I apologize to those that are waiting
anxiously to jump in the hot seat, but people have to prepare for the House.
I'll
ask for a motion to adjourn.
MR. WARR:
So moved.
CHAIR:
So moved by Mr. Warr.
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Carried.
Thank
you very much.
On
motion, the Committee adjourned.