June 17, 2019
GOVERNMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE
Pursuant to Standing Order 68, John Haggie,
MHA for Gander, substitutes for Derek Bennett, MHA for Lewisporte - Twillingate.
Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Carol Anne
Haley, MHA for Burin - Grand Bank, substitutes for Elvis Loveless, MHA for
Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune.
Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Kevin
Parsons, MHA for Cape
St. Francis, substitutes for Barry Petten, MHA for Conception Bay
South.
The Committee met at 6:02 p.m. in the
Assembly Chamber.
CHAIR (Parsons):
Good evening, everyone, and welcome.
I think
we are ready to start now; we're pretty much right on time. We'll start, of
course, with the department introducing themselves on this side and then we'll
go around the room.
So we
will start over here, please.
MR.
Dutton: Sean
Dutton, I'm the Deputy Minister of Service NL.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Minister Sherry Gambin-Walsh.
MS. TIZZARD:
Heather Tizzard, Chief Procurement Officer, Public Procurement Agency.
MS. HICKEY:
Marlene Hickey, Chief Review Commissioner with the Workplace Health, Safety and
Compensation Review Division.
MR. DELANEY:
Michael Delaney, Assistant
Deputy Minister of Regulatory Affairs.
MR. DOODY:
Alan Doody, Assistant Deputy
Minister, Government Services Branch.
MS. HAYES:
Robyn Hayes, Departmental
Controller, Service NL.
MS. HOWE:
Deanne Howe, Manager of
Operations with the Review Division.
MS. O'NEILL:
Melony O'Neill, Director of
Communications with Service NL.
MS. WHITE:
Kelly White, Executive Assistant to Minister Gambin-Walsh.
MR.
O'Driscoll: Loyola
O'Driscoll, Ferryland District.
MS. BONIA:
Laurie Bonia, Researcher,
Official Opposition Office.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Kevin Parsons, Member for the
beautiful District of Cape St. Francis.
MR. LANE:
Paul Lane, Member for
District of Mount Pearl-Southlands.
MS. COFFIN:
Alison Coffin, St. John's
East - Quidi Vidi.
MS. WILLIAMS:
Susan Williams, Researcher
for the Third Party.
MS. HALEY:
Carol Anne Haley, Burin -
Grand Bank
MR. BRAGG:
Derrick Bragg, Fogo Island -
Cape Freels.
MR. HAGGIE:
John Haggie, MHA for the
District of Gander.
MS. P. PARSONS:
Pam Parsons, MHA for the
strong District of Harbour Grace - Port de Grave and I'll be chairing the
session this evening.
The
minister has 15 minutes to introduce her Estimates. The Member speaking
immediately in reply to the minister has 15 minutes and all other Committee
Members have 10 minutes to speak. Also, we can refer to each other by name
rather than department or district or portfolio in this matter.
Tonight,
we'll be starting with the Public Procurement Agency.
Minister.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Good evening.
As
Minister of Service NL, the Minister Responsible for the Public Procurement
Agency and WorkplaceNL, I'm pleased to be here this evening to discuss the
Estimate figures for these entities.
I want
to take this opportunity to thank the Members opposite and their staff for
joining us this evening. I also want to thank staff from Service NL, the Public
Procurement Agency and the WorkplaceNL Review Division for their participation
in today's session.
Before
we get started, I want to highlight a few points regarding our Estimates. You
will see that Service NL, including the WorkplaceNL Review Division, has a net
budget of over $23 million. You won't see our $139 million in revenue reflected
in the department's Estimates. In 2019-2020, Service NL will generate this
revenue through such functions as the issuer fees, the Registry of Deeds and
especially the transactions at Motor Registration Division. This review is
included in the general revenue of government.
Additionally, Service NL also encompasses the Occupational Health and Safety
Division or OHS Division, which is responsible for health and safety inspection
and enforcement programs. The OHS Division establishes through legislation the
codes, standards and practices for safe and healthy working conditions. The
costs associated with OHS are recovered from WorkplaceNL so there is offsetting
revenue for all related expenditures.
Service
NL is responsible for the majority of licensing, inspection, public record
keeping and regulatory functions within government and is the primary access
point for people who need these services. These range from electrical
inspections to restaurant inspections to the production of vital statistics
records and the registration of deeds.
Within
the Motor Registration Division, Service NL completes more than a million
transactions a year. As of April 30, 2018, Motor Registration Division no longer
issues renewal notices through regular mail. The use of email to contact clients
saves over $400,000 annually in printing and mail costs. The savings allowed us
to address other cost pressures in the department.
For
example, there were upfront costs with implementation of the print-on-demand
stickers. There was a restatement of $80,000 in funding from the Department of
Transportation and Works mailroom to the Motor Registration Division for the new
print-on-demand vehicle stickers, which are now done from our Mount Pearl
location.
Some of
these savings were reallocated to our French Services and Commercial
Registration Division. All in all, this resulted in $28,400 as the amount of a
year over year operational savings. We also had an attrition target of $550,600
for 2019-20 which was achieved.
I
believe all Members here tonight will have witnessed first-hand at some point
the hard work of at least one of the divisions of Service NL, and I'm sure we
can all appreciate the commitment of staff to the serving of the people of our
province.
The
Office of French Services provides French language training and translations
services to government. This office also provides support to the Minister
Responsible for Francophone Affairs. In addition, through the Office of the
Queen's Printer, the department provides printing services for the provincial
government and the general public.
I'm also
the Minister Responsible for the Public Procurement Agency, the central
procurement unit of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. It is
responsible for the oversight of the procurement process for goods and services
on behalf of all public bodies. The agency also establishes policies for
procurement as part of the public procurement framework and provides
information, training and oversight of procurement activities of all public
bodies. The mandate of the agency is provided within the
Public Procurement Act which was proclaimed in March of 2018. It has
an annual budget of over $1.9 million.
The
WorkplaceNL Review Division reviews decisions of WorkplaceNL to ensure
compliance with the act as well as regulations and policies. The division
provides vital appeal services to employers and workers and pursues continuous
improvement in the area of client service. The costs are recovered 100 per cent
from WorkplaceNL.
This is
just a quick introduction to the portfolio as well as a brief explanation of
some of the significant aspects of our Estimates.
I would
like to start with the Public Procurement Agency, then go to Workplace Health,
Safety and Compensation Review and then onto Service NL, if everyone is okay
with that.
CHAIR:
Okay. We'll have our first speaker, but I'll remind everybody to please identify
yourself prior to your questions.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Can we provided with a copy of the minister's briefing binder?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Are
there any errors in the published Estimates book?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
No.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Are you
still applying zero-based budgeting?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
What
were the attrition savings last year in terms of dollars and positions?
MS. TIZZARD:
Our target was $7,300 and we
achieved that through a vacancy rate within the agency. So we didn't use a
position to attain those savings.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
What is
the attrition target savings for this year?
MS. TIZZARD:
It is $7,300. We were able to
attain that last year, yes.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
How many
people are currently employed in the department?
MS. TIZZARD:
In the agency?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Yes.
MS. TIZZARD:
We have 31 positions; six are
vacant right now.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
I'm just going to move on
here to section 1.1.01, Public Procurement Agency. The Salary Details for the
Public Procurement Agency state the department total is $1,709,853 but the
numbers stated under Salaries in the Estimates is $1,954,000. There's a
difference of $244,147. Is there an explanation why these numbers would be
different?
MS. TIZZARD:
Sorry, which numbers were
those?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Subhead 1.1.01 under
Salaries.
MS. TIZZARD:
Are you talking about the
difference, sorry, between the budget of last year and this year, or between the
revised?
Are you
talking about the decrease in the budget in the revised number?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Yes, $117,300 less was spent
than budgeted last year. This year's budget includes $110,000 over the revised.
MS. TIZZARD:
Yeah, that was the result of
some vacancies within the agency.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
How many positions are
included in this amount?
MS. TIZZARD:
Right now we have vacant two
managers of strategic sourcing positions, two buyer II positions and an admin
officer position, but they were vacant at different times throughout the year,
so sometimes a couple were filled and sometimes they were vacant.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Transportation and Communications, last year $19,500 less was spent than was
budgeted. This year it's $51,000. How do you explain the revised numbers and
this year's budgeted amount?
MS. TIZZARD:
There were fewer training
sessions than anticipated on the legislation. We also had fewer audits in that
year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Professional Services, last year $45,000 more was spent than budgeted; I'm just
wondering why that would be.
MS. TIZZARD:
We had an extra requirement
for auctioneering services. The Public Procurement Agency, in addition to
purchasing, oversees the disposal of surplus goods from government. So we had
more than anticipated increase of a requirement for auctioneering services for
that need last year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Purchased Services, why was $49,500 less spent than was budgeted last year, and
why is the $57,800 being budgeted this year?
MS. TIZZARD:
In our Purchased Services budget, in case we were going to acquire an electronic
notification system for the Procurement Agency, we had budgeted an amount in
case we needed to do some training for that service, and possibly purchase some
training modules for that service. We just awarded the RFP. It was just a delay
in the implementation of that system, then a delay subsequently for the
training.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
In under
Revenue - Provincial, what is included?
MS. TIZZARD:
The main component of the revenue is revenue from the auctions, as I mentioned
earlier, and it's also revenue from the purchase cards. We get a rebate from
using purchase cards through government.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
And under the auctions, is that equipment that we're selling off at auctions and
stuff like that?
MS. TIZZARD:
Yeah, so equipment that government wouldn't necessarily use any more – vehicles,
for example, ATVs, snowmobiles, furniture, that sort of thing.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
And what
explains $122,000 increase in this revised?
MS. TIZZARD:
That was greater than anticipated auctions. So we don't exactly know from year
to year what's going to be required to auction off. So we just estimate and
sometimes we have a greater amount.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Sometimes it would be more, sometimes it would be less.
MS. TIZZARD:
Sometimes it's less, absolutely.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Can you
tell us how you are doing things differently at the Public Procurement Agency
than when it was the Government Purchasing Agency? Is there any difference?
MS. TIZZARD:
There is. Right now, since new legislation, we have four divisions. Our
corporate services division is operating as usual; it's just the policy and
financial arm of our agency. And our Procurement division, same thing, it's
procuring as we usually did as an operational basis as required. Our Audit,
Information and Training division now, which largely had been focused on
training and getting the legislation and regulations ready in the last year or
so, and then focused in the last year in training for that legislation is now
really focused on the audit side, with this new legislation in place now. We
also have a Strategic Sourcing division which is just starting to ramp up.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Initially, there was a lot of talk about strategic sourcing and strategic
purchasing. Can you give examples where this is happening now?
MS. TIZZARD:
We just recently hired a director for that position. That director, now, is
working with different agencies, some previous strategic procurement that we had
done to renew those, but also working with some different stakeholders on
opportunities that we may have to do things more efficiently and try to identify
additional savings.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
There
was also a reference to joint partnerships. Have you done any across government
with ABCs to do that?
MS. TIZZARD:
Not yet, no.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
All right.
With the
new act, local suppliers are supposed to have more opportunities to bid on
government services. Has this been occurring?
MS. TIZZARD:
We can't track for all public bodies the number of procurements that local
suppliers take on, but with the new procurement legislation, the thresholds were
increased, so it does provide greater opportunities for local suppliers or for
public bodies to procure for goods under those thresholds for local suppliers.
Anything above those thresholds have to go to an open call, but anything below
that, any public body can access a local supplier for that.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Can we
have an update on the electronic notification system?
MS. TIZZARD:
Yes, as I mentioned, we just recently awarded that so we're in the process, now,
of developing a plan to implement that system.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
That's
it for me.
CHAIR:
That's it for you, okay.
We will
move on now to the next speaker, please.
MS. COFFIN:
Great, thank you.
I'm not
going to ask anything about the numbers here. They seem to be reasonably well in
line. I would like to know what the status of the training and information
sessions, the new Public Procurement Act,
is?
MS. TIZZARD:
We did a number of training sessions last year. I can't give you a number off
the top of my head, but we did a Web-based training. Any request that we had for
municipalities, larger organizations where we were able to cover a lot of public
bodies at once. So Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador, provincial
municipal administrators, we always made sure that we could go out to those any
time they had any session, that we were part of that.
We also
did, like I said, a Web-based system, so we made sure and requested that every
public body took that training.
MS. COFFIN:
If someone finds that they have a need to do the training, they can go on the
Web-based system and do they need –?
MS. TIZZARD:
Absolutely. They can call us.
MS. COFFIN:
Wonderful.
MS. TIZZARD:
We can accommodate any of that.
MS. COFFIN:
You can facilitate it.
MS. TIZZARD:
Absolutely.
MS. COFFIN:
Wonderful. That's great.
Okay,
let's talk about social buying, which brings environment, gender, diversity,
social enterprise and other policy goals into the procurement. Once upon a time,
I heard a rumour about green procurement protocols. Does such a thing exist and,
if so, is it being implemented?
MS. TIZZARD:
Sorry, what buying?
MS. COFFIN:
Green procurement guidelines.
MS. TIZZARD:
If you go into our website
there is a lens that you can look at, for example, for environmental or green
procurement in there. I don't know if that's –
MS. COFFIN:
It might very well be. It's
just something that I'd heard about a while ago. Say, for example, we want to
buy lots and lots of paper, reams of paper, is there any regulations or any
guidelines that say we have to have 30 per cent recycled paper or it has to be
bleach-free or anything like that?
MS. TIZZARD:
No, but that's the type of
thing that's in that lens.
MS. COFFIN:
The lens is there.
MS. TIZZARD:
The things that you may want
to consider if you want to go down that road.
MS. COFFIN:
Does anything get filtered
out with the lens?
MS. TIZZARD:
I'm not sure …
MS. COFFIN:
If something came in – for
example, we're going to buy another set of vehicles and those vehicles were not
hybrid vehicles or they're not electric vehicles – do we not purchase them
because of that?
MS. TIZZARD:
I can't speak to the
purchasing policy for vehicles for another department.
MS. COFFIN:
Right.
MS. TIZZARD:
But, generally, for that lens
or those guidelines that we have on our website, it's not mandatory, they're
just if you want to go down that road. Any public body could implement its own
requirements.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, so it's just a guide.
It's not a regulation or mandated.
MS. TIZZARD:
That's right.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
Last
year we were told that under the new act, public bodies would have greater
flexibility to use RFPs instead of tenders and thus be able to evaluate other
factors besides lowest price. How is that working? Has it been used very much?
MS. TIZZARD:
It's my understanding public
bodies, just based on the phone calls that we receive, are starting to use RFPs
more. I can't tell you how much they use them versus how much they used them
before, because public bodies are responsible for their own procurement.
MS. COFFIN:
Right.
MS. TIZZARD:
I don't know how much they're
using them but, as I said, just based on the phone calls that we're receiving it
indicates that people are using them more.
MS. COFFIN:
Is there a threshold by which
they can use the RFPs? It has to be for anything under $100,000, or can an RFP
be for actually anything?
MS. TIZZARD:
No, they can use an RFP for
anything, there's no threshold. It's just a tool that they can use, depending on
the nature of what they're looking for.
MS. COFFIN:
Are there guidelines in those
RFPs for setting out such an RFP?
MS. TIZZARD:
We have templates on our
websites. We have an RFP template right now on our website for anybody to
access.
MS. COFFIN:
Right.
And each
individual public body comes up with their own filters or their own criteria.
MS. TIZZARD:
That's right.
MS. COFFIN:
Do they have to justify that
anywhere?
MS. TIZZARD:
For using an RFP?
MS. COFFIN:
No, for what criteria they're
using for choosing something that's not lowest price.
MS. TIZZARD:
No. I mean an RFP, if you're going down that road, is best value. No, they don't
have justify it, they just set up whatever criteria they're looking for within
that RFP document and how they're going to evaluate that and proceed from there.
MS. COFFIN:
They have to have the
evaluation in there as well.
MS. TIZZARD:
Absolutely.
MS. COFFIN:
That's an upfront thing.
MS. TIZZARD:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, so the follow-up
question is: What controls are put in place to prevent misuse of such a thing?
MS. TIZZARD:
Well, the evaluation
component within the RFP, they would
have to follow that.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. That would be
interested to look at.
Last
year, we heard the department were looking at other jurisdictions and doing more
consultation about how to incorporate social buying into government procurement.
Can we have an update on what was found and what government is planning to do?
MS. TIZZARD:
That's something that we're
still looking into. It's still a new policy piece so we're trying to figure out
how best to do something with that, that maintains equity for all of our
suppliers. I sit on a FPT committee, federal-provincial-territorial meeting, and
it's one of the things that are on the agenda. Other jurisdictions are still
looking at that piece as well and figuring out how to implement it.
MS. COFFIN:
How they incorporate the
social buying – one of the other filters you're using there is equity for
current suppliers?
MS. TIZZARD:
The other piece, too, is that
with the RFPs, of course, if you're evaluating that then you have the
opportunity, through the RFP, to incorporate other components, besides price, in
your evaluation. If a public body wanted to incorporate anything in their RFP in
that regard, they do have that flexibility under the RFP process and also within
the thresholds too. The thresholds are lower than any public body seeking three
quotes, for example; below that threshold has some flexibility there as well.
MS. COFFIN:
Right. What's the threshold?
MS. TIZZARD:
The threshold for when they
have to do an open call, so anything below the threshold. For example, if you
need to procure goods, if your procurement is less than $10,000 for goods, then
you can get three quotes from organizations and you can direct those three
quotes.
MS. COFFIN:
That can go through RFP,
right?
MS. TIZZARD:
Absolutely.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, so the social buying
filter is a subjective initiative of each of the public bodies if they choose to
incorporate it into their RFP process.
MS. TIZZARD:
They do have that option.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay but it's not an overall
government procurement direction.
MS. TIZZARD:
No.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. Thank you.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Any
further speakers to this particular section?
Mr.
Lane.
MR.
Lane: I'm
wondering about the new Procurement Act that we passed in the House – I think it
was last year, was it? I should say Opposition Members had significant concern
at the time because it was so broad. All the details were going to be in the
regulations and, of course, there were no regulations. We didn't know what would
be in the regulations.
You're
kind of saying, yeah, we want a new Procurement Act, but to some degree didn't
even know what we were voting for. You had to sort of take it on faith that
there would be regulations and they would be good regulations and so on.
The
first question: Do we have new regulations?
MS. TIZZARD:
Yes, we do.
MR. LANE:
They have all been put in
place?
MS. TIZZARD:
Yes, we do. They came in shortly after the legislation. It was March 2018.
MR. LANE:
Okay, so there are new –
MS. TIZZARD:
Yeah, they're available on our website as well.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
In those
regulations then, it was already asked about local preference. What I think you
indicated was that if it was an amount that you could just do three quotes, like
under $10,000 or whatever, then you said you could go local.
Again,
though, I guess my question is – and it kind of ties into the social buying,
same idea. There's a difference between you could go local, you have the option
to go local versus you will go local. I just wanted to clarify that we're not
saying you will go local.
There's
nothing to stop me – if I was procuring some goods and there are local
businesses that can provide that, then personally I think that's where we should
be going, as long as they are competitive, of course. But let's take the option
off, going with some Mainland outfit or whatever and our local people are not
seeing the benefit. There are three local suppliers, get three quotes from three
locals. From what I'm hearing, someone could choose to say, no, I'm going to go
with the national company or something if I wanted to. Is that right?
MS. TIZZARD:
That's right. Yes.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
Can I
ask – and maybe that's more of a policy decision for the minister – is there any
thought around revising that to make it mandatory that if there are local
suppliers that you will go to the local suppliers. Not that you may go to the
local suppliers but you will.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
That's an option to put in
the RFP. As she indicated there is no discussion yet to put it in place that you
have to, but it's certainly something we can bring forward. I believe the trade
agreements –
MS. TIZZARD:
For anything over the thresholds, the trade agreements prevent us from doing
that.
MR. LANE:
I understand that, but I
guess the point I'm making is that where the trade agreements do not kick in and
we're not forced to go with the tender, the standard tender, and the option is
there to buy local, then I can't understand why we would not have as a public
policy in this province that we will use all local companies and keep the money
here in our own province as opposed to some of these big national or
international companies to get the business. I guess that's the point I'm trying
to make.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yeah, that's definitely something to consider, but if there are no local
suppliers, of course, you have to go outside, right? I hear what you're saying,
you're if there are local suppliers –
MR. LANE:
If there are –
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
– then why are we not putting it in policy that you have to go below the
threshold?
MR. LANE:
Correct.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Okay.
MR. LANE:
That's the point I'm trying to make –
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yeah.
MR. LANE:
– I'm trying to get at.
I
suppose, arguably, and I understand it's a different issue altogether, but,
arguably, what Ms. Coffin was saying even about some of these green initiatives.
I'll just use an example, if you're going to buy straws, you can get paper
straws, right?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Not necessarily.
MR. LANE:
I think that's what she means by green; not that we necessarily buy straws, I
don't know. Probably we do at the hospitals, but –
MS. COFFIN:
(Inaudible.)
MR. LANE:
Yeah, instead of plastic
forks, buy biodegradable forks or whatever.
So, I
suppose, theoretically, the same thing applies right now that it's not a policy,
it's a case of if you want to do it, you choose to do it, fill you boots, but if
you don't bother to do it, well no one's telling or even encouraging you that
really we should be doing it. Is that how it stands?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yeah, I totally understand what you are saying. It's also value for dollar; you
have to consider value for dollar, right?
MR. LANE:
Sure, I understand.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
So there are a number of components that you would have to consider in making
the decision rather than saying every vehicle you buy is a hybrid or what have
you. You have to do the value-for-dollar component also.
MR. LANE:
Sure.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
An electric vehicle may work fine in the city of St. John's but it's certainly
wouldn't work well in parts of rural Newfoundland, right now.
MR. LANE:
Sure, I understand.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
But there is discussion.
MR. LANE:
I guess the point would be, there could be something saying if prices are
relatively comparable and there are green options –
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
MR. LANE:
– then there could a policy suggesting that you should be going with the green
options, if they're available and if they are comparable in cost. That would be
my thought anyways.
The
other thing I want to raise is, and I'll give an example, I had a situation,
someone who came to me about a year or two ago now, and in this case they had
put out, I guess, a request for proposal, or actually it would have been a
tender, for supplies, it was office supplies at the time; one of the agencies I
think.
They're
saying we can't get a price on every single item, there are so many different
office supplies, so they came up with a list of bid on 50 items or 100 items and
whoever had the lowest price on those 100 items got the contract to supply for
two years or whatever.
Of
course, then, the little game that you get into is we lowball on the prices of
the ones that you bid on, on certain items, but then you charge $100 for a
stapler or something – I know this is a stretch, but you get my point. Let's
charge three times as much for the stuff that is not on the list.
Of
course, the other thing being, if someone were to bid on Post-it Notes, for
argument's sake, and it's some brand of Post-it Notes, and every time you call
looking for them, we're out of those, we'll give you these here replacement
ones, but the replacement ones were three times as much as the ones that they
bid on and that type of thing happening.
So is
there any training or anything in place or any policies in place when it comes
to those situations and staff in different offices reordering stuff that we make
sure that they're getting the low-cost stuff and that they're not being dinged
with all the high-cost stuff, that they don't even probably realize that they're
doing?
MS. TIZZARD:
We have training that we are implementing right now for low-dollar-value
purchases that we intend to roll out across departments and agencies, just
talking about that exact issue. Of course, each time that we go out with a new
procurement for something like office supplies, that's the type of thing that we
review. So we'll look at what was spent, what was purchased on the list, what
was purchased off the list. Are they things now that we need to include on those
this time around? So they're the things that we look at.
MR. LANE:
Okay. Thank you.
The
final question I have relates to ABCs and so on. I'm just wondering, what you
guys do, is it primarily for core government or – I'll just use an example, what
happened with the English School District and buddy who was renting the
wheelbarrow for thousands of dollars or whatever he was doing, and that kind of
stuff.
Is that
something that would fall under your jurisdiction, or they just kind of do their
own thing? Do you audit them regularly, or how does that work?
MS. TIZZARD:
We procure for core government, but we provide oversight with respect to this
legislation to all public bodies. So the School District would be one of them.
With
respect to those incidents that happened with the School District, a lot of
those went beyond the procurement legislation. So if we're auditing on
procurement, we're auditing in accordance with how they follow the legislation.
Some of the things that you're talking about that happened with the School
District had to do with lack of proper controls, the lack of financial
processes, that sort of thing. Some of that went beyond the procurement
legislation itself, but we do have an audit function in our agency, and it is to
audit public bodies under the legislation.
MR. LANE:
So when this came about, was that something that came about – that never came
about through your audits though, was it? That was the Auditor General, was it?
MS. TIZZARD:
Yes, it was.
MR. LANE:
Okay. So you're not necessarily going around constantly auditing all these
different agencies, or are you?
MS. TIZZARD:
We are. Since the training has wrapped up, we've started our audit function
again.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
MS. TIZZARD:
Yes.
CHAIR:
Okay?
MR. LANE:
All right, thank you.
CHAIR:
All right. Any further
speakers?
Okay, we
got Mr. Parsons.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Paul just went to my question because I was wondering if you guys had a process
in place to audit the different the ABCs, and if there's a time frame on stuff
like that. How often is it done?
I know
that the new procurement agency and the act we brought in, brought in a lot of
new regulations. How familiar are these ABCs with all these regulations and
stuff like that?
MS. TIZZARD:
Well, some of them are still ramping up with respect to their familiarity, but
we're auditing as we can with the staff we have. So as soon as we finish an
audit, we'll start another one immediately. It depends on how long it takes to
do the audit.
We're
also, right now, in addition to doing, what I call a broad-scope audit, we're
also looking at, for example, doing some audit on some of the smaller
dollar-value items to look at compliance with those contracts. So we might do a
number of those, that will happen more quickly because we're only looking at a
small scope in those cases. So it depends on the nature of the audit that we're
undertaking.
MR. K. PARSONS:
How the regional health boards and stuff like that, are they being audited on a
regular basis?
MS. TIZZARD:
Well, we will start auditing those, they will be part of our audit. We just
started again since the training wrapped up. That division was responsible for
training, getting the regulations and the legislation in order, but we've just
started our audit function again this year.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay, thank you.
CHAIR:
All good?
Okay, I
think we're ready to vote on this subsection.
CLERK (Hawley George):
1.1.01, Public Procurement Agency.
CHAIR:
Shall 1.1.01, Public
Procurement Agency, carry?
All
those in favour, ‘aye.'
AN HON. MEMBER:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against, ‘nay.'
Carried.
On
motion, subhead 1.1.01 carried.
On
motion, Public Procurement Agency, total head, carried.
CHAIR:
Now, we're moving on to page
61, that's the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review.
CLERK:
4.1.01.
CHAIR:
4.1.01.
Minister? Okay.
First
speaker over here.
Just
give a wave there to Broadcast. There you go.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Thank you.
Last
year, $115,200 less was spent than was budgeted, and this year, an additional
$350,600 is budgeted. Can you explain this?
CHAIR:
Just give a wave.
MS. HICKEY:
Okay, thank you.
Variances this year from the budget versus what was spent included some changes
with respect to the payment of remuneration to review commissioners. Review
commissioners within the Review Division had been part-time, and this past year,
we were fortunate enough to have three full-time positions created. So, we moved
around some money that we had last year and acquired an additional $235,000 for
extra salary this year. The variance that you are seeing in last year's amount
consists of those changes to the review commissioner positions.
Also, we
had some changes with respect to some renovations that we made for offices to
accommodate new review commissioners. We also had some changes with respect to
some new furniture that we bought, all relating to the appointment of new review
commissioners.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
That would all be under
Salaries, you are saying?
MS. HICKEY:
Pardon me?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
All that would be considered
under Salaries? Like, with the equipment and stuff?
MS. HICKEY:
Well, it affected both
Salaries and Professional Services.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
An
additional $27,400 is included in this year's budget. I am just wondering why
that is – under Transportation and Communications.
MS. HICKEY:
The Review Division regularly
goes into the regions – into Gander, Grand Falls, Corner Brook and Labrador – to
have hearings for workers and employers. As part of the appointment of new
review commissioners, we hope to be able to have more hearings in the regions,
and that is going to result in additional travel costs for us, so the additional
$27,000 is to allow us to move with our new review commissioners into the
regions to get the hearings done.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Professional Services, $139,800 was budgeted last year but only $50,000 was
spent, yet $75,000 is budgeted for this year. Why is that? What is included?
MS. HICKEY:
The $139,000 was a projection that we had based on the review commissioners we
had hoped to retain. Part of that explanation is really what I've just
explained. We didn't retain all of the review commissioners, and the ones that
we did get were much later in the year. So we had a certain savings there, and
that's some of the savings that we use, then, moved around here.
The
$75,000 this year is to reflect the remuneration for part-time review
commissioners, so there's a distinction between the pay for a full-time review
commissioner and part-time review commissioners.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Purchased Services, last year $27,000 more was spent than budgeted; yet $12,900
less is budgeted this year. Can you explain this?
MS. HICKEY:
Yes. So the change there was the renovations for the new review commissioner
offices that we had created.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Revenue - Provincial, can you explain this line?
MS. HICKEY:
The Review Division is 100 per cent funded by way of the injury fund
administered by WorkplaceNL. So the cost of the operation of the Review Division
is charged back to WorkplaceNL, and that's where that dollar value comes from.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
That's
all good for me.
CHAIR:
Okay, good.
Thank
you.
Next.
MS. COFFIN:
I'm sorry, I should've said
this long before now, but thank you very much for everyone for taking your
evenings and doing all of this work and listening to a barrage of questions and
deflecting them, so thank you very much for doing that. We do appreciate this.
My
questions: How many review commissioners did you have in 2018, and how many at
present?
MS. HICKEY:
So the number of review commissioners is always a shifting figure. For most of
2018, we had about five review commissioners; however, by July, we were down to
two review commissioners, and into the fall, we just had one review commissioner
that was actively involved in hearings.
In
December of 2018, we had new appointments, which were the full-time appointments
I just mentioned. In February, then, we had another full-time appointment. Right
now, we're operating with five review commissioners; four full-time and one is
part-time.
MS. COFFIN:
That's great, and you did all
of that without looking at your notes, well done.
There is
no shortage at this point?
MS. HICKEY:
We still have two vacancies.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
MS. HICKEY:
So, with the appointment of the new full-time positions, we're certainly open to
bringing recommendations to the minister for additional appointments on
part-time. We're very much mindful of the productivity of the new model and how
that's going to work, but I can tell you that we're positioned very well moving
into the summer and into the fall in comparison to what we were last year. I
think the first six months last year we completed 50 cases; the first six months
of this year, we expect to complete over 100.
MS. COFFIN:
That's not bad. Five people – wow, that's impressive.
Are
these appeals being decided within 60 days of application as the law requires?
MS. HICKEY:
Not all of them. At this point, our numbers on that have also improved. There
has been a considerable increase or improvement in the amount of time it takes a
full-time review commissioner to have a decision provided versus what it was
taking a part-time review commissioner. So our new full-time review
commissioners now are taking anywhere from 45 to 60 days. Our part-time
commissioners were taking considerably longer than that.
MS. COFFIN:
Of course, because they're part-time. That totally makes sense.
How big
is your caseload?
MS. HICKEY:
Last year we had 208 applications, and last year I believe we did 155 hearings.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, not bad.
I guess
to follow up; do we have any recent caseload statistics? The latest on the
website are 2014-2015.
MS. HICKEY:
So the website should be updated. The new statistics, really, what we're seeing
is we do have about 200 cases waiting to be heard, which we hope to be able to
dispose of them as we move forward. The number of cases that we can do a month
will be about 24 to 30 cases. If you file an application today, it would take
approximately one year to have that application completed from the time you file
the application to the time you received a decision.
MS. COFFIN:
Wow.
MS. HICKEY:
Which is slightly less than it was last year because I think we were at 14
months last year.
MS. COFFIN:
Right.
And you
have a lot of new people, so they of course are learning the system.
MS. HICKEY:
We have a lot of new people, yes. And even though those people were appointed in
December, they didn't assume their roles until January and then, in January, we
started the training program. The training program runs about six to eight weeks
and it's very intense because it has to be provided slowly, believe it or not,
because it's just so technical.
MS. COFFIN:
I imagine.
MS. HICKEY:
So it takes a little while. These review commissioners starting hearing in March
and we ease them into it.
MS. COFFIN:
That's very nice of you.
MS. HICKEY:
Right now, it is a little bit more challenging trying to get the schedule done
in the summer but in the fall we're targeting 25 to 30 cases a month.
MS. COFFIN:
That's great. I guess the speed with which you get them done depends on the
complexity of the case.
MS. HICKEY:
Exactly. Some people who may have a fairly recent claim with a very less than
complex issue may get their decision within 30 days. Other claims that have a
number of injuries, a number of different issues, a long history, they're
probably going to take in excess of the 60 days.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you very much.
MS. HICKEY:
You're welcome.
CHAIR:
Before we go ahead with your question, could we get leave, please, for Mr. Lane
where he's an independent Member? Do we have leave from all Members?
Okay, go
ahead.
MR. LANE:
Thank you to my colleagues.
First of
all, let me say I'm glad to see that we have some more full-time commissioners.
That's certainly something that I've raised in Estimates for the last number of
years, and glad to see we're making progress there.
Minister, one of the questions I have – I'm going to ask it here because there's
nowhere else to ask it, really – about workers' comp, even though it may not
necessarily be the Review Division, per se, but it's all related to the process.
I saw a news article recently that the injury fund is in really good shape, even
after the increase in benefits that was given to injured workers from 80 to 85
per cent. Of course, there have been two or three reductions in rates given to
employers over the last couple of years as well. It speaks well to health and
safety, I think, in general and the fact that we're not having as many injuries,
which is a great thing.
One of
the problems that we have with injured workers, in a lot of cases, is that they
don't have anybody to advocate for them. A lot of them don't understand the
system and the policies. I know there is this Workers' Advisor that may give
some advice at the beginning. Certainly, I know that I've done a number of
appeals on behalf of my constituents, but there are a lot of people that don't
necessarily – I'm not sure if every Member is going out there and doing workers'
comp appeals, to be honest with you.
Is there
any thought to having more Workers' Advisors or to set up something so that
workers understand their rights and what they are entitled to? I know when
someone goes up on workers' comp, they give them the booklet. That's the
standard process at workers' comp – I gave them the booklet. I think about PFIs
as an example.
There
have been many cases I've come across where the case worker at workers' comp
never did tell that person: Do you know that there's such a thing as a PFI? In
addition to your workplace injury and your coverage, your temporary earnings
loss and so on, this PFI exists to deal with the fact that you've lost a
function in your hand, your leg, your arm, whatever, and they don't even know
about it. When I've gone to workers' comp and brought that to the attention of
people, they'll say: Oh, well, they were given the workers' handbook; they're
supposed to read it. I've dealt with some people that sign their name with an X,
so giving them a book wasn't going to do them any good.
I'm just
wondering has there been any thought to putting some additional resources – I
don't know if it would be through the Review Division, probably not, probably
workers' comp itself or something else – for injured workers, of someone that
they can actually go to, to help guide them through the system.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Of course, every case is
individual and everyone's reaction to the cases is individual.
MR. LANE:
Sure, I understand that.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Each individual, once they're
injured, are assigned a case worker at WorkplaceNL. Also at the Newfoundland and
Labrador Federation of Labour and the Newfoundland and Labrador Employer's
Council we do have staffed positions there to assist injured workers, so there
are people within the system. It may in fact be a communications issue or
concern where they don't know where to access those particular resources.
MR. LANE:
Yeah.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
For individuals who can
access the website, of course we're putting more information constantly on the
website so they can have constant access to it, but any questions an individual
injured worker faces, they really need to discuss it with their caseworker to
get that type of assistance. Of course, when you come to appeals, that's when
you don't agree with a decision that's been made by WorkplaceNL and, of course
you have a democratic right to appeal the case.
MR. LANE:
I guess my point is that I
think there is a lack of communication that's happening sometimes at the case
manager level on some of this stuff. I think a lot of people don't even realize
there's even such a thing as a Workers' Advisor or whatever. I'm not sure how
well known that is. I think if you're someone who may be a public service
employee or something like that, like a NAPE member, they might direct you, but
if you're someone working in private industry, I'm not so sure they are
necessarily aware of that.
I also
believe it's somewhat limited as to what they will do. Would the workers' rep
that you're referring to at the Federation of Labour, I mean I don't think that
they're going to do 200 appeals this year. I'm sure Ms. Hickey can probably
comment on that. I would be very surprised, if she does 150 cases this year,
that the workers' rep from the Federation of Labour is going to be there
presenting 150 times on behalf of those people to help them represent them. I
doubt that's happening.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
I understand what you're
saying. Individuals have to find the proper supports themselves to help them
through an appeals process. The staff, the employee is with the Federation of
Labour and the Employers' Council. There's one at each.
MR. LANE:
Yes.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
But an individual themselves
would need to reach out to the Employers' Council – no, the Federation of
Labour, sorry, to get that assistance there, but they're not going to help them.
They're not going to represent them for an appeal. You have to find that support
yourself.
MR. LANE:
No, they're not. I guess that's my point. Is there any thought in making some
changes and additional resources of having something in place to help injured
workers with their appeals. If a constituent comes to me and I'm aware of it, I
represent them, but there's a lot of people go unrepresented, a lot of them
wouldn't even think about going to their MHA.
Again,
seeing as how there is a very healthy injury fund there, I'm just wondering
would there be any thought or desire to even entertain the idea of additional
resources for injured workers to help them with their appeals?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Two things: Equal representation to the injured worker, equal representation to
the employer, so it's an equal system; and the second thing being is that the
2019 stat review is coming up.
MR. LANE:
Yeah.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
It's certainly an opportunity
to bring that type of situation forward for review to see if there is an
appetite, once the analysis is done, to add additional supports for injured
workers.
MR. LANE:
Okay, well, I thank you for that. I'll probably go to that stat review and
recommend that.
I would
disagree with you on the whole employer and employee being equal, because
they're far from equal when you've got an employer who probably has a disability
manager working within their company or they have contracted out to one of those
companies. It's definitely not equal, that I can assure you, but anyway.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
It's a no-fault system, too,
right?
MR. LANE:
No, I understand that. Thank you, Minister, for that.
The only
other question I had was around the appeal process. I just want to make sure I
understand. It was a 14-month wait. Now it's taking, you're saying, like 12
months or thereabouts, which is obviously way beyond 60 days; it's not even in
the same ball field.
Have you
ever looked at triaging? I don't know if you do that or not. Is it just based on
the date that it comes in or is there any – I'm using the term triaging to say,
look, here are a few easy ones that we can deal with fairly quickly and dispose
of, rather than having this person wait a full year for something that we can do
quickly, waiting in line so to speak, or is it simply on the date that you
receive it?
I guess
for Ms. Hickey.
MS. HICKEY:
Yes, we do that already.
MR. LANE:
Do you?
MS. HICKEY:
So all of the new review commissioners that just came on, obviously, we're not
going to give them a lot of complex cases.
MR. LANE:
Sure.
MS. HICKEY:
So that was one of the things that our staff worked through with Ms. Howe,
behind me here, to identify some of the cases that were a little bit more
straight forward. They were assigned those cases and we do them, not on the date
they come in, but as the time allows us to do them and get them into hearings
slot.
With
respect to people who may have, for example, a wage loss issue, we will try to
get them scheduled as quickly as we can, if we can get all the parties together.
So there's a fair amount of work that goes into managing the case load and
prepping it for hearing.
Often
times there are other issues that surface that don't allow us to schedule a
hearing, but, for the most part, we're always aware of the nature of the
applications that we have. We do engage in the triage. We also try to screen the
applications before we actually assign them to hearing to make sure that they're
ready for a hearing. So, if we feel that WorkplaceNL has not done something that
it ought to have done, we will refer the application back to WorkplaceNL for
that kind of follow-up.
MR. LANE:
Okay. Thank you. That's good to know.
I was
going to ask about the wage loss issue because, obviously, someone whose
livelihood is depending on it versus someone who's looking for a PFI and a few
extra dollars, then I would put someone's livelihood prioritized ahead of that.
MS. HICKEY:
But that is subject to the availabilities that the parties.
MR. LANE:
I understand, yes.
MS. HICKEY:
If you have an employer representative, for example, it may be more difficult –
MR. LANE:
Sure.
MS. HICKEY:
– and WorkplaceNL participates from time to time as well.
MR. LANE:
Sure. Thank you for the answer. I appreciate it.
MS. HICKEY:
You're welcome.
CHAIR:
Okay. Mr. Parsons.
MR. K. PARSONS:
I'm just wondering, Ms. Hickey, about the number of appeals, 60 days, she says
it's an average, by law. What time frame are we in now?
MS. HICKEY:
It's probably taking a full year from the time –
MR. K. PARSONS:
A full year?
MS. HICKEY:
– of an application being submitted to the time you have your decision.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay.
Are you,
hopefully, going to be hiring some more full-time to handle this load? When do
you see us getting up to snuff on this and make sure that we're within our 60
days according to the legislation?
MS. HICKEY:
By our projections, we're looking at approximately a year and a half to 20
months, by the time we get within the range that we need to be in.
So, at
this point with the current number of review commissioners, we're projecting
about 250 to 300 applications being processed annually. Within those, right now,
we're receiving about 200 to 210 applications a year. That's like a 90-number
jump –
MR. K. PARSONS:
Yeah.
MS. HICKEY:
– on where we have capacity versus what we have for application.
That's
subject to a lot of change and so on, but the normal operating caseload for the
Review Division is about 70 applications within normal range. We're at about 200
right now, so we're hoping that within the next year, certainly, we'll be able
to take a big chunk out of that number.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Are you hoping to hire any
more full-time commissioners?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
As you know in the past, of course, this system was on part-time commissioners –
MR. K. PARSONS:
Yeah.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
– and that didn't work, so we
did an extensive review and arrived at the changes to the full-time
commissioners.
I am now
evaluating, from the time that they were hired and trained to how this system is
actually working with the full-time positions and when we would need or possibly
need to hire more to address it. You have to take into consideration, of course,
the training and the fact they're new and the cases.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Yeah.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
There's a realization, too,
that there are some cases that are over at the appeals board that are not moving
simply because there might be court involved or they're waiting on other
documentation that's not there. So, the number of cases doesn't necessarily mean
that that's the full number that's lined up to be heard right now, that's ready
to be heard, so that's the other thing you have to take into consideration.
As Ms.
Hickey alluded to, we're also receiving, I think, it's 25 to 30 a month. Is that
correct? Yeah. So there are 25 to 30 a month, from January. So, the system, with
the full-time commissioners, appears to be working well.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
But we really need to do a
clear analysis and to ensure that they're each – it's the complexities of the
cases, too, and when are we going to need to hire more, if we actually do need
to hire more?
MR. K. PARSONS:
When are the new ones in the
process of hearing appeals? Right now, are they in the training stages or are
they in the stage of hearing appeals, because obviously we must be hearing a lot
more appeals every month, are we?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Marlene, you can answer to
the stage of each one.
MS. HICKEY:
All the new review commissioners are currently fully trained and taking on a
full caseload as the summer schedule permits.
The two
that were appointed in December, they were finished their training by the end of
February. We had another appointment in February and she began hearings, I
think, late March because we were able to do one on one with her, so everyone
right now is in training, but a review commissioner training really goes on for
years. It's not something that ends after –
MR. K. PARSONS:
Yeah, every case is
different.
MS. HICKEY:
Yeah, well, it's not that every case is different. The legislation is very
technical.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Yeah, I can understand that
too.
Minister, I have a question for you.
Since we
brought in coverage for PTSD –
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
MR. K. PARSONS:
– can you give us an update
of how that's going?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Well, that'll come into
effect on July 1.
MR. K. PARSONS:
It comes into effect July 1?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yeah.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay.
I'm
good.
CHAIR:
Okay?
MR. K. PARSONS:
Yeah.
CHAIR:
We're good. One more?
Okay,
Mr. O'Driscoll.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
I know there are 200 or 225 waiting to be heard. How many are ready to be heard?
MS. HICKEY:
About 180.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Ready to be heard? Okay.
All
right.
CHAIR:
Okay, we're good?
I think
we're about ready to vote on this subsection.
CLERK:
4.1.01.
CHAIR:
Shall 4.1.01 carry?
All
those in favour, ‘aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against, ‘nay.'
Carried.
On
motion, subhead 4.1.01 carried.
On
motion, Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review, total head, carried.
CHAIR:
Now we're moving to page 51.
CLERK:
1.1.01.
CHAIR:
Shall 1.1.01 carry?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
I just got some general questions again.
Are you
still applying zero-based budgeting?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes, we are.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
What was the attrition savings last year in terms of dollars and positions in
this as well?
MR. DUTTON:
I think the minister noted in her opening remarks, we had a target of $550,600
that was eliminated from the salary plan for this year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
How many positions?
MR. DUTTON:
We currently have 451 positions funded in the salary plan. You'll note from the
Departmental Salary details, we had 434 positions reflected there. It was 446
the year before. That includes the positions in the Review Division itself.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
How many of those are contractual or short-term employees?
MR. DUTTON:
I don't know if I have that figure. What we do have in terms of the salary
information is the number of short-term hires was 59 during the course of the
2018-19 fiscal year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
How many retirements have occurred in that department this year?
MR. DUTTON:
Fifteen for last year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Fifteen.
How many
layoffs have occurred in the department in the last year?
MR. DUTTON:
We haven't done any layoffs.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Any new
hires in the past year, do you know?
MR. DUTTON:
Yes, 23.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Twenty-three?
How many
vacancies have not been filled in this department?
MR. DUTTON:
At this point, again, we have 451 total positions and 434 of them were filled as
of the time that the Departmental Salary details report was published. It's a
difference of 17 and of course that number goes up and down throughout the year
as people retire or resign or move on.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Thank you.
All
right, go to section 1.1.01 under Salaries, $36,100 more was spend under the
revised, yet $34,800 less is budgeted this year. What explains that difference
there, the variance?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
That is payment of severance and leave balances.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Severance and, what was …?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Leave balances.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Leave? Okay.
Down to
General Administration, 1.2.01, under Salaries, $259,600 more was spent in 2018
than was budgeted and $205,300 less is budgeted this year. Can you explain that
variance?
MR. DUTTON:
I'm sorry, which line are you on?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Sorry, 1.2.01.
CHAIR:
It's the whole subhead.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Oh just –
CHAIR:
Yeah, that's fine. That's the whole subhead that we're discussing now. You said
1.2.01?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Yeah.
MS. P. PARSONS:
Yeah, that's fine. Go ahead.
MR. DUTTON:
Okay, and which …?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
The Salaries.
MR. DUTTON:
In the Salaries?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Yeah.
MR. DUTTON:
Okay so in the budget last
year we had an attrition target assigned over and above the target from the 2015
budget. Given the lateness in the year when that was assigned, it was all booked
in the Executive Support area for the purpose of capturing the savings. That
spread out throughout the department for this year's salary plan to where our
plan works out.
In terms
of the increased spend last year, that also reflects the severance and annual
leave payout for two executive positions; we had two assistant deputy ministers
retired during the fiscal year. That was partly offset, again, by the attrition
target that was assigned to that item for the whole of the department. In terms
of the salaries for the year ahead then, there's been no change in the number of
executive positions and both of those assistant deputy ministers have been
replaced and are sitting by me here.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
That was going to be my next question. Under Employee Benefits, the amount
stated in last year's Estimate under this category was $2,900, yet there's an
amount listed as $75,300 for last year. Can you explain that?
MR. DUTTON:
Okay, on Employee Benefits in Executive Support, the workers' compensation
charges for the entire department, with the exception of the Occupational Health
and Safety Division, were paid out from this line item. That, obviously, is a
number that fluctuates from year to year, depending on the number of injuries
and time missed. That was the reason for the higher than budgeted spend in
2018-'19.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under Revenue - Provincial, what is included in that?
MR. DUTTON:
The revenue is essentially the costs in Executive Support related to the
occupational health and safety work. Part of the time of the executive that's
devoted to occupational health and safety is charged back to WorkplaceNL. I
think that may be the only item for this area. There are other
federal-provincial revenues in other parts of the department.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Go to
1.2.02. In the description of the department, the training component of French
Language Services is no longer referenced, only the translation is mentioned. Is
French training still being provided?
MR. DUTTON:
French language training is carried out by the Centre for Learning and
Development at the Human Resources Secretariat. Some of the funding to help
cover that cost is recovered through the federal-provincial Agreement on French
Language Services. All of the revenue is booked in French Language Services, but
all of the spend related to training is in the Human Resources Secretariat.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under Salaries there's a considerable variance of $111,400. More was spent last
year and another $45,600 budgeted for this year. Can you explain that?
MR. DUTTON:
Sure. This also had come up at last year's meeting. We were at a point during
the negotiations of the new five-year agreement last year where we were lobbying
for an increase in the federal funding share. When the program was transferred
from the Human Resources Secretariat to Service NL, it didn't have funding in
the forecast for all four of the long-term positions that are attached to the
program. The Estimates showed up last year with funding for two of the four
positions at that point in time.
The
negotiations went on; we subsequently confirmed that there would be no increase,
the funding was frozen for the five-year period and that was the same outcome
for all provinces and territories. We made a determination through the budget
process that, again, following the principles of attrition, that we weren't to
displace any employees who didn't want to go.
Over the
course of the year we transferred some funding from savings in Motor
Registration to cover some of the salary costs. We have a slightly lesser spend
than what we're budgeting last year because one of the four employees was
recruited to a temporary position at Justice and Public Safety. She returned
before the end of the fiscal year so what we have reflected in 2019-'20 is the
historic regular cost of the four positions reflected there, as well as the
anticipated revenue offsetting from the federal government.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under Professional Services what was included in this?
MR. DUTTON:
The Professional Services line item includes part-time for translation services.
We do some of our translation with an in-house translator. Some of the more
complicated jobs we have to deal with the Translation Bureau in Ottawa and we
have another federal-provincial agreement for how that work is carried out.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under Grants and Subsidies, what's included in that?
MR. DUTTON:
That is for the province's membership in the Ministerial Conference on the
Canadian Francophonie. While it's called Grants and Subsidies, it's really a
membership.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Revenue - Federal, I understand that there's federal funding for the program and
the agreement expired. I think you answered that already.
MR. DUTTON:
Right.
Again,
that was renewed on the same basis, so it's a 50/50 agreement. Our 50 per cent
partly comes from our expenditures in this area, as well as the Centre for
Learning and Development. Other funding that the government expends in other
departments for projects to support the Francophone and Acadian population can
be counted towards meeting our matching target.
That's
it there for me.
CHAIR:
Okay. Thank you.
The next
speaker.
MS. COFFIN:
I was wondering, is there a new Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Agreement on
French-Language Services with a funding increase?
MR. DUTTON:
No. There is a new agreement, there was no increase. The press release was dated
April 1. It was signed in February. The funding has been at the same level for a
number of years. There was a decision from the federal government not to
increase the federal share for any province or territory, other than I think an
announcement the year prior that there's been an increase for the territories,
but all the provinces have the same level of funding in the new five-year
agreements that they had in the previous.
MS. COFFIN:
No adjustment for inflation at all?
MR. DUTTON:
None.
MS. COFFIN:
Good. Thanks guys.
MR. DUTTON:
It's not that we didn't ask.
MS. COFFIN:
I'm saying that on your behalf. I'm with you on this one.
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah.
MS. COFFIN:
I do want to commend you on being able to keep Transportation and Communications
in check where many other departments have totally (inaudible) that one. I'm not
sure what your postage is, but everybody else seems to think that postage has
caused Transportation and Communications to go through the roof.
What
were your activities in 2018 related to translation and cultural programming of
the service navigator pilot project at Motor Vehicle?
MR. DOODY:
The service navigator was that we had staff volunteer to either assist clients,
whether that would be to help them directly get in touch with an individual to
help do direct translation or just work with them through using things like
Google Translate to help provide services. So at least they had someone who was
there to help interact with them. There's –
MS. COFFIN:
You used Google Translate?
MR. DOODY:
Yeah. And it works.
MS. COFFIN:
And it works?
MR. DOODY:
Yeah.
MS. COFFIN:
Have you done that? Like, you know, put a sentence in, translate it to a
different language and then try to translate it back and get something totally
different?
MR. DUTTON:
I just want to say that our translator would probably have a fit if we said that
we relied on it exclusively. Certainly it gives you the gist.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Linguists all over the world.
MR. DUTTON:
And we certainly rely on professional translation, especially for formal
communication. I think you earlier also asked about the translation activity.
Last year, I think, it was the first year that we went over 1,000,000 words
translated through the French Services group. So there has been a lot of content
that's been added to the government website in French, as well as a number of
press releases, particularly things that would be of particular interest to the
Francophone community.
So
you'll see that a lot of the education releases will also be done in French, and
that's an area that is very important to the community and it's been a priority
for government.
MS. COFFIN:
That's good. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
You
don't offer any other languages, just the two officials and ASL? You just do
English, French –?
MR. DUTTON:
It's the French Language Services. It's purely again to advance the bilingual
nature of Canada.
MS. COFFIN:
Yeah, of course, this was kind of a sidebar question of, do you translate into
other languages that are outside of the French secretariat? I'm just curious.
MR. DUTTON:
Sure.
MS. COFFIN:
All right. Thank you.
I think
we've answered the other questions, just a second.
Okay.
We're good.
Thank
you very much.
CHAIR:
Okay.
Moving
on, you're good?
MR. LANE:
I'm good.
CHAIR:
Everybody good? Okay.
MR. K. PARSONS:
I've got a couple.
CHAIR:
Okay.
MR. K. PARSONS:
You said that through attrition there was a savings of $544,000?
MR. DUTTON:
$550,600.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay. How many positions was that?
MR. DUTTON:
Well again, I guess going back to the numbers to compare year over year in
salary details there was a reduction of 12 positions overall across the
department. But when you consider that the Review Division had an increase of
four due to the matters that were discussed earlier, the impact for the Service
NL itself would have been 16.
MR. K. PARSONS:
How many were eliminated last year in the department – any?
MR. DUTTON:
Well, I think there were a couple of positions that were reported for the
purpose of the new attrition target for 2019 – three? Sorry, yes.
But as
far as doing the salary plan, the approach we have taken has been to look at,
following the principle, the first review is to make sure that we have enough
funding to pay for all the positions that our people are in today, and then we
look at, with what is remaining, what are the highest priority positions to fill
going forward. We've had a particular focus there on maintaining public
inspection and safety services as a priority.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay.
The
number of positions that were in the budget last year versus the number of
positions in the budget this year, what is the variance – is there much
difference in how many people are in the department?
MR. DUTTON:
Well, that would be the difference, the 16.
So if
you look at the Departmental Salary Report that accompanies the budget –
MR. K. PARSONS:
Yeah.
MR. DUTTON:
– the difference between those two reports would be 16 for Service NL, is a
decrease, but an increase of four for the Review Division.
MR. K. PARSONS:
But you just said that you
had 60 through attrition.
MR. DUTTON:
No, 16 – 1-6.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay, 16, I'm sorry.
MR. DUTTON:
But three PCN numbers, we'll call them, that were formally abolished.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay, all right.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Okay, good.
Seeing
no further speakers, shall we vote on the subhead?
CLERK:
1.1.01 to 1.2.02 inclusive.
CHAIR:
Shall 1.1.01 to 1.2.02 inclusive carry?
All those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against?
Carried.
On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 1.2.02
carried.
CLERK:
2.1.01.
CHAIR:
Okay, we'll have our first
speaker, please, on Regulatory Affairs.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
All right.
Under
2.1.01 under Salaries, this year's budget includes an additional $29,000 over
last year. Can you explain that one?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
That's the additional two
positions that are being filled from the previous 2018-19 salary details. The
salary plan fully funds the existing positions. They were filled during '18-'19
fiscal year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Revenue - Provincial, what is included in that?
MR. DUTTON:
The revenue is the application fees that are paid by applicants seeking to have
a complaint adjudicated. That would relate, I think, to the residential
tenancies part of the division.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
How are
the caseloads in the residential tenancies?
MR. DELANEY:
So, in terms of the
caseloads, there are approximately 1,100 applications they receive per year over
the last couple of years, but the new legislation came into force January 1 of
this year, and the division has noted an uptick, probably, the start of this
year, and they are on track for about 1,250 applications this year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Has the new act impacted the
caseload and the number of complaints?
MR. DELANEY:
Well, I think in terms of the
number of applications, it is certainly up. Whether it is that the process has
been more simplified and there are more people coming forward, but certainly
they have noticed an increase in the number of applications they are receiving.
MR. DUTTON:
(Inaudible) increased that
boarding houses were covered for the first time.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
In late
March, it was announced that the legislative changes to the Real Estate Act were
planned for this spring. I understand it was selected for review to a committee.
Can you provide an update on the status of that?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
As you know, when the House
closed prior to the election that was on the Order Paper, and the objective is
to bring it back in and to put it through committee as soon as possible, we can
hopefully bring it into the Legislature in the fall.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
In both 2015 and 2017 mandate
letters, the minister of Service NL was directed to establish an online,
searchable database to alert customers of bad business practice. What is the
status of that database now?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
The internal review was
completed of the existing disclosure methods at Service NL, including consumer
alerts and advisories related to illegal investment activity, mortgage
brokering, real estate licences and occupational health and safety. The Office
of the Chief Information Officer initiated the development of the consumer
notification webpage for Consumer Advisories and Alerts, charges and convictions
and the new Consumer Advisories and Alerts webpage was launched on November 1,
2018.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Well, that is it for me.
CHAIR:
Good for you? Okay.
Moving
on to our next speaker, please.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
Consumer
Affairs – the Salaries, you have spoken to that, yes?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
Yes? Okay.
Can we
have your work with OCIO on a consumer notification webpage for consumer alerts,
charges and convictions?
MR. DUTTON:
Yes. So that is a website
that the Member for Ferryland was just speaking about.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
MR. DUTTON:
There was a press release on
November 1 where you can find the link to the information. Also, if you go to
our main Service NL webpage then there's a hotlink to the consumer alerts part
there.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
Payday
loans legislation came into effect April 1. Does any part apply to people who
borrowed before April 1?
MR. DELANEY:
The legislation is effective
in terms of the licensing, but in terms of consumer protection legislation there
still could be issues related to payday lenders. For example, I do believe there
were a small number – I think two or three complaints – that were outstanding
regarding payday lenders, and I think in particular it related to collection
agencies of payday lenders.
To
answer your question, yes, if there's a pre-existing condition there might be
other pieces of legislation where the protection would apply.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent.
MR. DUTTON:
In terms of what was deemed
the Criminal Code rates for excessive
interest, the government had decided in the previous administration to pursue
prosecution on that and made a conclusion that it wasn't something that they
could enforce. That was one of the considerations in the government deciding to
proceed with payday loan legislation similar to what's in place in other
provinces.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, thank you.
How is
the department providing information to the public on the new legislation and
the public's rights under that?
MR. DELANEY:
Under payday lending you
mean?
MS. COFFIN:
Yes.
MR. DELANEY:
Certainly, I mean, the
website is updated. I know the director of the division has been out to meet
with industry in particular. There are a lot of the requirements around
disclosure at the time that someone takes out a payday loan and then there are
disclosure requirements so, basically, the public is informed at the time of
making application.
MS. COFFIN:
So it's at point. Okay.
Financial services regulation; we've heard complaints that insurance companies
are increasing their rates to condominiums and some have pulled out altogether.
Has your department received any such complaints?
MR. DELANEY:
There has been an issue, I
guess very recently, raised in regard to condominiums, but I think it had to do
with condominiums where there were detached dwellings, townhouses associated
with the condominiums. I think the issue there is in terms of the insurance. The
insurance provider is looking for some sort of history of insurability, so a
history of the property, and that's not always easy to come by.
You can
imagine if you have a condo development and there are 200 separate town houses
all effectively with separate owners who have maintained their properties over
the years, while there's knowledge of the external condition of each premises,
there is no consistent – trying to gather 200 historical references on all the
different properties.
I think
there is an issue there, but certainly it has been brought to our attention, but
very recently. It's certainly something we'll be looking into in terms of trying
to allow them to make sure that they can be insured.
MS. COFFIN:
That will be the follow-up.
Would government play a role if condominium owners can't get insurance and what
might that role be?
MR. DELANEY:
I think at this stage it's
very early in terms – the issue that's been brought forward is just simply that
they're still looking at what options are available with regard to insurance
but, certainly, if there are issues, I'm sure we'd do a policy, do an analysis
on it.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent. Thank you.
Back to
Commercial Registrations, 2.1.04, I noticed that Transportation and
Communications go up there. What was the jump there or what is the anticipated
jump?
MR. DUTTON:
The increase was the higher postage costs and out-of-province travel for
conferences.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, because I don't see
postage cost increased anywhere else, so it must be travel, hey?
MR. DUTTON:
No, postage is a part of T and C throughout the department.
MS. COFFIN:
Pardon?
MR. DUTTON:
Transportation and Communications, sorry.
MS. COFFIN:
No, that's not what I mean. I
didn't see the jump in several of the other sections.
MR. DUTTON:
They do a lot of mailing and in Motor Registration we've cut out a lot of
mailing.
MS. COFFIN:
Of course, because you had
the emails and stuff kind of got your costs under control there.
All
right then, let's talk about Vital Stats. I noticed the number has gone up and
gone up again. Did we get more people in Vital Stats?
MR. DUTTON:
The staff complement is the same, but all of the positions weren't fully funded
last year as part of the salary plan. We have all of those positions fully
funded in this year's plan.
MS. COFFIN:
Man, the work you must be
getting done now, hey, with everybody in there.
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah, well, some of the
positions throughout the department were temporary, but they were long-term
temporaries. In order to balance the plan last year, the temporary positions we
had to fund for six months and then see where the savings would accrue, knowing
that there were going to be retirements and turnover. We've addressed that on a
go-forward basis.
MS. COFFIN:
That's excellent. Good.
Let's
look at the federal revenue. What are the feds paying us for in Vital Stats?
MR. DUTTON:
We have a number of information-sharing agreements, and they require some data
to manage some of their own programs. The federal revenue would be for –
particularly Statistics Canada and Elections Canada would need to access the
vital statistics information to ensure –
MS. COFFIN:
Oh, they pay you for that?
MR. DUTTON:
– the validity of their information. We get a small fee for doing so, of our
cost.
MS. COFFIN:
That's great. Have you ever tried to get data from Stats Can? They charge you
three times as much. Unless you're an educational institution, then there are a
couple of back doors around that.
Provincial revenue there; is that revenue coming into the province for – it
costs you $20 to get a birth certificate now, or is that something different?
MR. DUTTON:
It's a recovery of cost for secure shipment of certificates.
MS. COFFIN:
Right.
MR. DUTTON:
Where that has to be done. Then there's a fee and then the cost is recovered. It
shows up in the expenditure and then on the revenue side.
MS. COFFIN:
All right, I'm looking at Queen's Printer, the revenue there. Gee, didn't quite
see as much as we had hoped under revised, but there's a big jump now next year.
What are we selling?
MR. DUTTON:
The Newfoundland and Labrador Gazette
and copies of the legislation. In Budget
2015 there was an increase in the subscription fees. It was, I think, 10 per
cent that year and then another 5 per cent thereafter. This is the last year of
that increase, so that's what accounts for the increased revenue.
MS. COFFIN:
There's a decrease of almost $40,000 budget over revised. Even with the fee
increases, are we expecting readership to go through the roof? There's some
really interesting stuff coming out in the Gazette?
MR. DUTTON:
Not particularly. We do our best.
MS. COFFIN:
It's riveting reading.
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah.
MS. COFFIN:
I'm just wondering why the rates – it says revised. It only came in at $56,000;
we're expecting almost twice that this year. Is someone selling these in the
school, like, check off the magazines and you get a free Gazette?
MR. DUTTON:
I guess at that point there were fewer subscriptions than anticipated. I don't
know whether that projection will hold true or not for 2019-'20, and then we'll
have to re-evaluate that for next year.
MS. COFFIN:
Of course. Thank you.
Let's
flip over to Printing and Micrographic Services. Let's see, the Salaries look to
be a little bit of attrition and possibly a little bit of severance payout
there, right?
MR. DUTTON:
In terms of 2018-'19, there were some vacancies during the year, so that
accounted for the lower expenditure. In terms of the year ahead, there's one
fewer position in the salary details compared to the year previous.
MS. COFFIN:
Right. How much toner do they
go through?
MR. DUTTON:
A lot of toner. Most of the expense in the area is on ink and paper.
MS. COFFIN:
Right, of course. This is
what I expected.
So we're
not printing; we didn't print quite as much as we had anticipated. We're down by
about a third from budget to revised last year?
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah, that's right.
MS. COFFIN:
The Budget Speech was really
long, I don't know why?
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah. That was printed in
2019-20.
MS. COFFIN:
Right, yeah. Well, the one
last year was pretty substantial too, right?
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah.
MS. COFFIN:
So, a little less printing
happening last year?
MR. DUTTON:
I guess in terms of the total expenses, I don't have a figure on the number of
print jobs, but we've actually reached out to other agencies, boards and
commissions during the year to make them more aware of the printing services.
Core government uses it fairly regularly, but sometimes agencies, boards and
commissions, they may not realize that they could have their print job perhaps
done more cheaply through the in-house service than if they went out to market.
There
are some jobs that are unusual sizes or that are on particular deadlines that
maybe they can't accommodate, but mainly, the equipment is already there and the
staff are there, so unless there was excessive overtime for a rush job or
something like that, it often can be done more cheaply.
MS. COFFIN:
Yes.
MR. DUTTON:
So we've tried to bring in more of that work for other entities wherever
possible.
MS. COFFIN:
Good, that's reassuring.
CHAIR:
Okay, thank you.
The
Member's time has expired.
We can
come back to you, but we will move on now to the next speaker.
Mr.
O'Driscoll.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
My error there; when I
started at first, I just stopped at the first page, so my fault there.
Back to
2.1.02.
MR. DUTTON:
Yes.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Salaries are $139,800, less
was spent last year and an additional $147,500 is included this year over the
revised. Can you explain the variance here, please?
MR. DUTTON:
Sure.
There
were a number of vacancies during the course of the year; we've had a plan to
fill all of those positions. So, overall, if you look at the salary details,
there's a reduction in one position compared to the year before, but that was a
position that was temporarily vacant that we intended to fill. So we do
anticipate to maintain the full staff complement for this year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
When can
we expect to see some action based on the automobile insurance review?
MR. DUTTON:
Well, the legislation has passed into law; some of the reforms take effect on
August 1, those that don't require regulations to support them. January 1 would
be the effective date for the remainder of the reforms, with the exception of
the adoption of the treatment protocols, that part of the legislation is on a
date to be determined because we have to carry out consultations with the health
professionals who will be providing those services. That's something a little
more out of our control, so we just want to make sure that we have those
consultations completed.
So, if
someone has a more common injury, then they'll be approved right away for
treatments based on an existing schedule and payment plan that will reflect what
would be the normal costs associated. It'll work more like when someone's on
workers' comp, they will go to get their treatment and it'll be billed directly
and then they won't have to come up with the money up front.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
All right.
2.1.03,
under Salaries, $64,800 less was spent than budgeted in 2018, and that amount is
back in the budget again this year. Can you explain that?
MR. DUTTON
Yes, so this is the Pension Benefits Standards Division, we have three
positions. One of the positions is temporarily vacant, and there's recruitment
ongoing. I think it recently closed and interviews are being scheduled. The
other is for the director of the division. That was the current assistant deputy
minister of Regulatory Affairs. So he's acting as the superintendent of pensions
to fulfill the legislative obligations until someone can be recruited. So, we
did run a competition, didn't result in a qualified candidate, so we'll be
reposting that again during the year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay, thank you.
Under
2.1.04, under Commercial Registrations, Salaries, $73,200 less was spent under
the revised last year, an additional $49,800 in this year's budget over the
revised amount. Can you explain that?
MR. DUTTON:
Yes, so the decrease reflected mainly vacancies that occurred throughout the
year. Then in terms of the year ahead, the salary details would reflect a
decrease of five positions from the previous year. Now, in fact, those five
weren't funded in last year's budget. It was related to a project, we call it
the verification team, but, basically, we were digitizing records from the
Registry of Deeds and turning them into searchable texts. Some of them are
handwritten and have to be, not just scanned, but also turned into a searchable
text.
We have
all of that done back to 1982. It's a multi-year project that had finite funding
that was provided, so the funding expired in March 31, 2018, and that accounts
for the change.
We still
maintained two positions, although that wasn't funded, we found money in the
salary plan to retain two. We are going to continue to digitize the older
records, at least to be able to preserve them for posterity, because we don't
want to lose those records in the event of a flood or a fire at our office.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
That pretty much up-to-date or it is long (inaudible) to catch it up or catch up
(inaudible)?
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah. Well, it will take
longer, obviously, with a lesser number of staff –
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Yes.
MR. DUTTON:
– but they are focused on just digitizing the records as fast as they can. Then
some of this conversion will have to occur later, so at least they will be
backed up and preserved.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
How far back would that go?
MR. DUTTON:
Pardon?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
How far back would that go?
MR. DUTTON:
1820, I think.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
MR. DUTTON:
It goes back before
responsible government.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Is that right?
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
What's
the status of the Registry of Deeds digitization?
MR. DUTTON:
Well, again, up to 1982, we
have all of the records digitized, and they're continuing to work backwards. So
there sort of regular plans to go through the documents. I couldn't say how many
years back they've gone from there; that was our progress as of last year.
Again, that's ongoing as a priority to preserve the records.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Employee Benefits, 2.1.04, the amount stated in last year's Estimate under this
category was $1,800, yet it states $1,600 here for last year's budget. Can you
explain that number? They just do not match.
MR. DUTTON:
Go ahead, Robyn.
MS. HAYES:
During the fiscal year, we
restated our workers' comp to be all under the executive support division, so
that's why you would see the difference in the number there. It was the worker's
comp for this division.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under Purchased Services,
what is included?
MR. DUTTON:
Purchased Services
(inaudible) was the contract fees with the Unisys. We have personal property
security registry that we have with them, and there is a contract that involves
all of the Atlantic provinces and the three territories that was renewed last
year.
It also
is the area where we pay our Moneris fees. People that pay their fees to the
registry online, then we have a fee from Moneris for using credit card or debit
card information, and other general Purchased Services, which would be a very
small amount.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
In Other
Services, in the 2018 budget, the Vital Statistics Registry, the Queen's Printer
and Printing and Micrographic Services were under Government Services.
MR. DUTTON:
Yes.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Why have they been moved into
the Regulatory Affairs in this budget?
MR. DUTTON:
So, I mentioned earlier that
we had two retirements this year, and it was another opportunity to look at our
organizational structure. We made a determination with Occupational Health and
Safety, initially when the three branches were collapsed into two, we had
Occupational Health and Safety and what was formerly Consumer and Commercial
Affairs put together.
With the
departure of the two ADMs, we had a chance to look at what was the right mix and
skillset to match with those areas. We felt that Occupational Health and Safety
was more of an inspection service, so that was more similar to the sorts of work
that goes on in Government Services Branch, particularly around health
inspections, Engineering and Inspections Services, and things of that nature, so
that aligned better. To retain a relative balance in the number of direct
reports, Vital Statistics and Printing and Micrographic Services were probably
more on their own within that division. There's still a relative balance of I
think six or seven directors per ADM, so the organizational structure was more
balanced in that respect.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under 2.2.01, under
Transportation and Communications, $14,000 less was spent than budgeted last
year, but $13,900 of this is back in this year's budget. Can you explain that?
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah, they were just for Vital Stats, lower travel, postage and courier costs
than anticipated, and it's just a zero-based adjustment in the year ahead. So it
was just a minor adjustment, that might have been an anomaly and some of those
travel costs may go up and down depending on where the meetings occur.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under 2.2.02, under Queen's
Printer, Salaries, why aren't the salaries listed for the Queen's Printer? And
$44,800 was there last year.
MR. DUTTON:
The person who was the Queen's Printer retired, and as part of the attrition
plan we've combined the roles of the Queen's Printer and the director of
Printing and Micrographic Services. So that individual fulfills both functions,
but the cost of operating the Office of the Queen's Printer, which has sort of a
separate office here in the basement of the East Block, those costs are
reflected as still in a separate line item.
So the
phone line is forwarded to that individual's desk, and this is where we have to
book the expenditure and revenue related to, like I said, as a discrete item.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under Purchased Services,
what is included in Purchased Services? There was $12,100 less spent than last
year than was budgeted, yet additional $12,000 is included in this.
MR. DUTTON:
In terms of what's the money for, it's for the various bills and accounts and
equipment lease, copying charges and other documents associated with the work
for the House of Assembly. In terms of the variance throughout the year, the –
sorry, the reduction during the course of the year was just a reduction in the
requirement for printed publications. Again, we had a zero-based adjustment but,
as we discussed earlier, we'll be monitoring this during the course of the year
to see whether, you know, there is a real year-over-year decrease in the amount
of subscriptions and use of that material, and may have to make some adjustments
into the next year.
CHAIR:
Okay, thank you.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Time is up? Yes?
CHAIR:
Yes, you have expired.
So, no
further questions here on this particular subhead, we can call the vote?
MR. K. PARSONS:
I just got one.
CHAIR:
Okay.
MR. K. PARSONS:
When it comes to the Queen's
Printer, is there any stuff outsourced outside the Confederation Building? Do
they do any printing for different boards and agencies?
MR. DUTTON:
Well, I guess the way it works now, all of the former budgets for printing in
core government were all reallocated into Printing and Micrographic Services a
number of years ago, so there's no direct cost to a line department to have a
print job done that they're capable of doing. So they just send in the order and
then it's covered there. Service NL covers the cost. I wouldn't call it a kitty
– somebody described it as that to me – but, basically, that was for efficiency
sake.
For the
agencies, boards and commissions, they may choose to do their own printing
somewhere, but we've, again, reached out to them to try and encourage them to do
more of that work with Printing and Micrographic Services for a lesser expense
than maybe they would have incurred previously.
There
are some unusual print jobs like large maps or different things that maybe don't
fit with the types of equipment that we have in the basement. It can't do every
single type of print job, but anything that their equipment is able to handle,
they have.
One of
the things we had purchased for last year was a new saddle stitch binder to
enable us to be able to do the public exams. So they used to be outsourced by
the Department of Education. Now, they're doing it in Printing and Micrographic
Services, and it saved Education, I think, $33,000 or $36,000, which came out of
their budget, but there was no offsetting increase because we just absorb it
within our paper and ink, and it was a cost-neutral initiative for us that saved
another department money.
MR. K. PARSONS:
But, years ago, the Queen's
Printer used to do a lot of printing for Department of Education, like public
exams and different boards.
MR. DUTTON:
Yes.
MR. K. PARSONS:
I think the NLC and stuff
like that, so they did a lot.
Is the
capacity down there not what it was 10 years ago compared to what it is today?
MR. DUTTON:
I don't know about that. I mean, I guess they've been a real strong adaptor of
lean approaches to try to make sure that their operation is as efficient as
possible, and even just in terms of ergonomics and that sort of thing, what
level on the shelves they put the paper and all that kind of thing, and how the
office is organized, and looking at how people do their work every day, that
they've made a lot of great strides. That was a big part of the department's
strategic plan to focus in that area, and those were the sorts of things that
we've highlighted in our annual reports as good examples for others to follow.
Certainly, there is less stuff probably printed overall than before because more
and more things are being pushed to online services.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Do they have all the up-to-date equipment that they need to do at printing
services?
MR. DUTTON:
Yes. They have existing service agreements. Xerox would be one of their main
suppliers with the equipment, and those sorts of arrangements are regularly
reviewed and updated.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay. It's just out of curiosity. I used to be there on a daily basis because I
was the one that would repair their equipment at one time. I'm not saying that I
was a bad repair person, but I was there on a daily basis.
MR. DUTTON:
Well, we'll keep that in mind the next time we have a job after 5 o'clock.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay. No sweat. Give me a call. I'll take care of it. I take care of everything
on the fifth floor right now.
Under
Supplies, there's $109,000 less spent on Supplies than the budget, but almost a
full amount back this year. Can you explain that?
MR. DUTTON:
Are we in Printing and Micrographic?
MR. K. PARSONS:
I'm doing the Printing and Micrographic Services.
MR. DUTTON:
Okay.
In terms
of the Supplies, the reduced amount was just lower office supply requirements.
They tend to vary from year to year depending on the requirements and they use
some of the savings in this area to offset overages in Professional Services,
Purchased Services and Property, Furnishings and Equipment.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay.
Under
Professional Services, can you explain the $41,000 under the revised?
MR. DUTTON:
Yes. That was a one-time expense and there was some outsourced project
management services through the Office of the Chief Information Officer to
install an information management system and online ordering system for printing
services. They are trying to digitize their orders, so rather than having
departments do them by paper, they can do that through an online service and
it'll help to improve efficiency.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay.
Under
Purchased Services, an additional $74,100 was spent under the revised last year.
Can you explain what's included and what occurred?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
So that was the budget material in 2018 that was sent out to the households for
the Department of Finance.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay. And that is covered under there?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Under Purchased Services, yes, that increase of $74,100.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay.
MR. DUTTON:
It was the first time I think that the printing was done differently in past
years and so it wasn't something that was an anticipated expense for Printing
and Micrographics Services Division and then the Department of Finance covered
the postage on the mail out.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay.
Is that
something you plan on doing in the future?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Well, I think what it was, was that in the past it had been done, and then one
year we decided not to do it and then we realized there was a need to do it to
get the information out, so we changed it and did it in the following year.
MR. DUTTON:
It occurred in April. The budget submission had been already put in and then we
found out about the expense. So that's been factored into the budget on a
go-forward basis as part of the zero-based exercise.
MR. K. PARSONS:
So it's been factored in on a go-forward basis, okay.
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah. So we'll make the assumption that may be required again.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay.
Property, Furnishings and Equipment, an additional $15,000 spent over the
revised from last year. Can you explain that?
MR. DUTTON:
There was the purchase of a digital printer.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Okay. That's it for me.
CHAIR:
Okay.
MR. LANE:
A couple of quick questions. I'm waiting for the light.
CHAIR:
Just give it a wave. You have to do the YMCA every now and then.
MR. LANE:
There we go.
I'm just
wondering, prepaid funerals; I can remember there was a significant issue that
happened a number of years ago. As a result of that, of course, there are
supposed to be prepaid funeral audits and I know that the funeral home operators
are supposed to send in documentation, I think, every year to the division and
then there are audits.
I seem
to recall over the last couple of years there were issues where information
wasn't being received on a timely basis from all the funeral home operators, and
then there wasn't necessarily audits being done in a timely fashion. I can
remember asking and I was told the same guy that the does the funeral audits is
also the same guy that has a number of other things: insurance and real estate
or whatever. It's like multi-tasking, so he doesn't necessarily get time to do
everything in a timely fashion, per se.
I'm just
wondering, where are we now in terms of prepaid funeral audits?
MR. DELANEY:
Certainly that is a very top-of-mind issue. There are a number of reviews
ongoing. I apologize, I don't have the number in front of me, but there are a
few of the funeral homes that have had their licence suspended for the selling
of prepaid funerals.
Not to
repeat probably the response of the past but certainly it falls under the same
division as the auto insurance review, the real estate legislation, so in terms
of keeping up with some of the priorities, it's – and we did have a change in
director in that position during the last fiscal year as well.
It is
very much an issue that I can comment. The director does get regular
calls from a few of the key funeral homes, especially those that are awaiting
the final audit of their trust funds. It's something that we will certainly be
putting a push on to get done over the course of the next few months, in terms
of getting some of these reviews up to date and also in terms
of finalizing some of the
audits. Some audits are still ongoing for some of these trust funds as well.
There is
a bit of difficulty – you're correct – in terms of getting some of the
information from the funeral homes. But at the end of the day, in order to allow
them to continue to operate, to be able to sell prepaid funerals, we need to get
these audits of the trust funds up to date.
MR. LANE:
Okay. It sounds like we're still sort of floating out there with a lot of this
not being done.
MR. DELANEY:
No, I guess I –
MR. LANE:
Or at least delays in it getting done.
MR. DELANEY:
I would say the difference being that I can say with certainty that the director
has been working on a couple, actually, over the past week. There are a couple
currently in progress, as opposed to on the agenda, to be addressed.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
MR. DUTTON:
I think you should add, too, that if anybody becomes aware or has a concern,
that they should bring their complaints forward to the registrar of prepaid
funerals and it'll be investigated. We have investigative staff there who do the
follow-up.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
I just want to add, too, that
when they are brought to our attention – the particular funeral homes, if there
is one brought to our attention, because often the board can come together and
put forward a complaint – that is addressed immediately and we look at it
immediately.
MR. LANE:
Sure. Obviously, the concern is what led to all this being put in place to begin
with. We wouldn't want to see any citizens prepaying and their money is –
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
That's right.
MR. LANE:
That's why that trust fund was set up to begin with –
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
That's right.
MR. LANE:
– because it did happen.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes, that's right.
MR. LANE:
You want to make sure it doesn't happen again.
The only
other question I have, overall in the department, or certainly in the areas
we're covering here, you're dealing with a lot of documentation and we're
talking printing services as well. I'm just wondering what efforts – I'm sure
there have been some made. Are there any ongoing efforts to eliminate paper
altogether in terms of more opportunities to use technology and do things
electronically, as opposed to paper and reports and stuff like this.
Theoretically, this could be on an iPad and we wouldn't be here flipping through
pages on a book. I'm just wondering, ongoing efforts in that regard?
MR. DUTTON:
Yes, just on that part, one of the things the minister referenced in her opening
remarks was the email notification project with Motor Registration. That
diverted a lot of paper away from the landfill. We've had well over 100,000
people signed up for the email reminders. As you mentioned, that's saved
$400,000 in printing and postage costs that we're able to use to address some of
our other financial pressures in the department and put a bit of money towards
the deficit at the same time.
Also,
the minister had an announcement in March with the Minister of Finance on the
MyGovNL portal. Motor Registration is one of the first programs to be put on
there. The idea is that people will have their own digital identity where
they'll be able to log in to that website and get their information about their
Motor Registration renewals and driver's licence renewals. More and more
programs across multiple departments will be added so you'll be able to get to
the tell-us-once place and be able to access all of that information in the long
run through your computer, through signing in once, to access your own personal
information.
That
will also provide some enhancements over the type of information that was
provided. With the email, as an example, one of the issues some people raised
was that they had multiple vehicles, but we designed the email not to have any
personal information in it so as to not have an inadvertent breach in the event
there was a keying error on the email address. Then they said I have more than
one vehicle and I don't know which one it is that's up for renewal. When they
log in on the MyGovNL they'll be able to see, if they own two, three or 10
vehicles, which ones are due for renewal at which time. Those are some of the
obvious things.
Just in
terms of our own use, we remind our own staff that printing in colour costs
three times as much and to select monochrome or grey-scale when they're printing
drafts at the office and using double-sided paper and all of that sort of thing.
The more information we can put out through our website the better. That's one
of the key ways that we are reaching out to people is through social media,
through the government's website and news releases and so on.
MR. LANE:
Thank you.
That's
all I have for this area.
CHAIR:
Okay, Broadcast?
For the
Clerk, please. I tell you, YMCA.
CLERK:
2.1.01 to 2.2.03 inclusive.
CHAIR:
Shall 2.1.01 to 2.2.03
inclusive carry?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against?
Carried.
On
motion, subheads 2.1.01 to 2.2.03 carried.
CHAIR:
On that note, we will take a
short restroom break and, say, meet back, Minister, in how long, five, 10
minutes?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
CHAIR:
Five, 10 minutes?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Five is good.
CHAIR:
Five is good?
Five
minutes folks.
Recess
CHAIR:
Are we all ready? Thank you.
Okay,
Minister, so we're ready to get started again. We'll go to Motor Vehicle
Registration. It's 3.1.01, and, again, we'll just remind all speakers to please
identify yourself prior to speaking.
Good?
Okay.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under Motor Vehicle Registration, in 2018, Motor Vehicle was broken down into
three sections: Administration, Service - License and Registration and
Enforcement. Why merge all them together in this year's budget?
MS. HAYES:
So part of the budget guidelines from the Department of Finance asked the
departments to look at their various activities and anywhere there were
activities that could be consolidated to do so. So we took the opportunity with
the Motor Registration Division; they all relate to motor registration. If we
ever wanted the information that was separate before, we do have that separated
in the financial system should we ever need to get that reporting information,
but from an Estimates perspective, it was only required to be in one activity so
we consolidated it.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Salaries, 3.1.01, there's a significant difference of $549,000 in salaries since
last year.
Can you
explain what occurred there?
MR. DUTTON:
Looking at the projected
revised, the decrease was reflecting vacancies throughout the year, including
highway enforcement officers and front-counter staff.
For the
year ahead, it reflects the decrease of four positions from the previous year,
as far as the comparison in the salary details, and the budgeted amount reflects
the actual expenditure that we anticipate for this area. Total staffing
complement in terms of funded positions is 111.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
All right.
How many
highway enforcement officers do you have currently?
MR. DOODY:
There are 41 positions and currently 36 of them are filled.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Do you plan to fill the other
– go back to 41 once you get –?
MR. DOODY:
Yes.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Yeah? Okay.
All
right, under Employee Benefits, I'm just wondering is that, again, the
reinstatement of workers' comp in the number there for $2,400? It said 572 last
year and now it's $2,400.
MR. DUTTON:
Yes, that's correct.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay, all right. I'm just checking because that's the way it's been going
forward in most of this here.
Transportation and Communications, there's a significant variance in the amounts
here with $196,000 less than budgeted being spent last year, but an additional
$164,600 more being budgeted this year.
Can you
just explain that variance for us?
MR. DUTTON:
Sure.
In terms
of 2018-19, the decrease was from lower travel cost and postage savings from the
discontinuation of the mail outs for the vehicle and driver's licence renewals;
$115,500 was transferred during the year to French Services to cover their
salaries; sort of based on the discussion we had earlier today. So it didn't
show up here, but was in the spend in French Services, that amount, and $73,000
was transferred to Purchased Services to cover the cost for vehicle
registrations.
In terms
of the new fiscal year, the decrease relative to the previous year's budget was
the net change in postage from the savings of the year before and additional
costs for 2019-20. We do expedited service delivery for driver's licence cards,
so if an individual applies for a new driver's licence now, it comes in the
mail, but you can get expedited delivery. There's a cost associated with that of
about $20,000 with related revenue. A person can ask to get an expedited card;
otherwise, they will get a receipt that they can use with their old licence,
which would be accepted by law enforcement.
There's
also an anticipated increase in postage due to the centralized printing and
mailing of vehicle registrations, and that's $144,600. Previously, we were
maintaining an inventory of registration stickers at each of our Motor
Registration offices. There was also a risk with that in terms of having to
maintain the security of those items, so now we're doing all centralized
printing and mail outs of the registrations from our Mount Pearl office, so
there are some upfront costs associated with that activity.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Many people are still unaware that the licence and the registration renewals
reminders are no longer being mailed out and they're getting tickets. One report
said there was over 25 per cent increase in the number of people convicted of
driving with expired vehicle registrations after government stopped the mail
outs.
I'm just
wondering, can you tell me how much government has collected over this period of
time?
MR. DUTTON:
In terms of the collection of fines, that is done through the Department of
Justice and Public Safety, so we don't really have direct visibility on that.
As far
as the public awareness is concerned, certainly, we had announced the change up
front; we were very active on social media. All employees in the public service
were sent email notices to sign up and to have their friends and family sign up,
and we are encouraging people that visit the Motor Registration offices to sign
up. Anyone that goes online to do their renewal, there's a prompt when they go
to the website to sign up for email reminders.
We've
had some other activity, including a pilot at our AESL offices, where they have
computer banks. So people can go to the AESL office, if there's no Motor
Registration office in their town, to be able to do their renewal if they don't
have access to a computer at home.
There
also was a fair amount of media coverage, including the article you referenced,
which, in itself, also raises public awareness of the program, and each time
those things have happened I think there's probably been a bump in the number of
people who have signed up for email reminders.
We've
been regularly trying to remind people and, again, more and more people have
signed up for the email reminders each and every month. We also accept that if
someone doesn't have email, they can have a trusted family member or friend
receive the notice. Through the MyGovNL pilot, we're also providing more fulsome
information to members of the public who signed up for that service so that
they'll get the reminder specific to each individual vehicle.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Just in regard to – I know you did mention it earlier – if you have five
vehicles in the household and you went in to look for registration or to go
renew, people are saying they're getting them in the mail but not sure which
vehicle it is. You can identify each one?
MR. DUTTON:
Yes, we can. The issue with the email notice was that if we had in the email
notification more personal information about their vehicle and it was
inadvertently sent to the wrong account then there would be a privacy breach. We
do like a million customer contact points a year in Motor Registration. As a
result of the magnitude, if we have a lot of those smaller scale privacy
breaches that are inadvertent through access, so we're taking some of these
steps to also try to reduce that issue.
The fix
for the people with multiple vehicles is through the MyGovNL pilot, but there's
another thing. We also allow people to change their renewal from the date of the
purchase of the vehicle to their birth month. That makes it easier for people to
remember. That will likely be made a mandatory change in the future, but at this
point it is a voluntary option that people can change it so that my birthday
comes up in June or July, or whatever the month may be, that you'll have your
renewal then rather than at some unusual month during the year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Will the cost be offset then? If you changed it to six months earlier, would you
be charged a six-month registration or – to get it back to the date, like your
birthday.
MR. DUTTON:
I think they prorate it, wouldn't they, Alan?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Prorate?
MR. DOODY:
Yes, the intent is to give the choice to the client.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Yeah, okay.
The
other question on that is let's say a company – and I've dealt with cars so I'm
a little bit more aware of it – had 40 vehicles and that is out there that they
have 40 vehicles that are due for registration, you can't just go out and look
at the licence plate to see which one it is, it's not as easy for those
companies. Or have you run into any of that which caused that issue?
MR. DUTTON:
I guess I would say we also had feedback from some people who said that when
they had a larger fleet of vehicles, they also had the office set up in such a
way to do more record-keeping on the management of their overall fleet, and not
just their registration and renewals, but also around repairs and gas and all
that sort of thing. I think more of that issue is people, more in that smaller
business cohort, that maybe had five or 10 vehicles would probably fall more
into that, that don't necessarily have the back-office capacity to have been
managing that.
The date
of renewal is on the sticker of the vehicle, so the information is available to
the consumer. We listened to that feedback and that's one of the reasons why the
MyGovNL pilot was designed the way it was, to help to respond to those types of
complaints. We're always listening to the public about service quality and how
we can improve.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
One other question in regard
to registration. Somebody that doesn't have the availability to – say an older
person, I'm going to say over 65 or 70 that don't have the internet, don't have
somebody to help them do this and it's not in their area, is there anything
there to take care of that?
MR. DUTTON:
We do have a toll-free number
for Motor Registration and if people want to call in and get assistance by
phone, they can certainly do that.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Will you then send that out
if they request that, by any chance? Or is that not –
MR. DUTTON:
I guess the challenge with
the design of the initiative, of whether to do it voluntary or mandatory was
that if you made it voluntary, that people would default to the lowest common
denominator, what they were accustomed to. The only way to achieve the savings
was to be able to make it a mandatory notification.
There
are other tips that we've given to people about things they can do to help
remind themselves; writing it on your calendar or what have you when you receive
your sticker in the first instance. We now have gone through over 12 months of
this initiative so there's been a year for people to become accustomed. The
issue you raised about the tickets, anyone who got a ticket last year, I don't
think they're going to get a ticket this year because if they are, they wouldn't
have learned from the previous years' experience.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
No, I –
CHAIR:
Thank you.
The
Member's time has expired. You can certainly come back.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
We'll move forward now to the
next speaker.
Is that
Ms. Coffin?
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you very much.
Let's
have a chat about Motor Vehicle Registration still. Can you update us on what
measures you are considering to address the high number of uninsured,
unregistered vehicles on the road?
MR. DUTTON:
Sure.
As part
of the insurance reform announcement, that was certainly something that the
Public Utilities Board heard a lot about, and that we also heard about through
our department-led consultations. One of the important measures that was taken
in amendments to the Insurance Companies
Act, there is an uninsured fund. That is where people access for benefits
when they are not insured.
While
that is certainly reasonably intended for passengers, cyclists, pedestrians and
other people who wouldn't be expected to have insurance, people that are
choosing not to buy insurance are currently able to access that fund if they're
in an accident. As of August 1 they will not be able to access the uninsured
fund for any heads of damage. It gives us the principle that all motorists are
expected to share in the costs of the insurance system. If they expect to be
able to benefit, then they need to be a full participant.
Also,
the government had announced a plan to move to plate to owner. We currently have
a plate-to-vehicle system and that's what our mainframe computer is designed to
manage. The feedback we had from a lot of people in the public was that if we
had a plate-to-owner system and then the plate was assigned to the owner of the
vehicle – so when you sold your vehicle you took the plate off and that remained
with you to assign to your new vehicle – that would help to reduce the amount of
uninsured drivers and unregistered drivers.
It's not
foolproof from what we've heard from jurisdictions that have that system in
place, but it's another means by which to help to close the net on the
uninsured. That may end up being a multi-year exercise, but one of the things we
are looking at is whether there is an option either to procure a pay-as-you-go
system. Rather than to trying to budget an upfront cost to buy a new system, we
may be able to do it on per-transaction basis with a willing vendor.
We may
be also able to access a system from another province or territory and be able
to make an intergovernmental arrangement or a joint procurement. We're looking
at all of those options and that's certainly a high priority that the minister
and her colleagues are very bullish about. We're also taking some steps to
address the notification of Motor Registration when someone cancels insurance.
Under the existing legislation, operators of ambulances, school buses, buses,
commercial vehicles and other school transportation, if they cancel their
insurance there is an obligation for the insurer to notify the Registrar of
Motor Vehicles 10 days in advance of the expiry of the policy, but we don't
collect that information on any kind of regular basis for private passenger
vehicles.
That's
also included in the legislative amendments, that there will be a requirement
for insurers to report when there's a cancellation of insurance to the
registrar. We'd have to provide some more prescription in the regulations
that'll be drafted and published between now and January 1 on the frequency.
In the
past there had been various piecemeal initiatives where various reports have
been sent to the Insurance Bureau or their members to sort of do a spot check.
Those sorts of enforcement blitz-type of measures can still be taken today, but
we'd like to find a more regular – electronic means which would be the optimal
outcome because certainly we've heard from the insurance industry that a
paper-based process, given the volume of vehicles, was going to be very
difficult to administer.
So, all
of those measures and one that had been done earlier, the minister signed, the
Canadian Driver's Licence Agreement and that was an updated agreement with the
other provinces and territories of Canada. So we've all agreed that when a
driver moves from one jurisdiction to another, that now they are going to check
their record in the other province for any outstanding fines or fees. That was a
measure that we weren't all doing before.
All of
those things, cumulatively, are intended to try to reduce the number of
uninsured drivers and unregistered, unlicensed drivers as well.
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you very much. That's
very thorough.
Have the
changes to the Highway Traffic Act
concerning excessive speeding, stunting and street racing made a difference?
MR. DUTTON:
It would be hard to say at this early stage, but certainly there have been a
significant number of amendments undertaken over the last four years to address
impaired driving, drug-impaired driving, excessive speeding and street racing.
Certainly, there is a lot of public attention when those sorts of charges are
laid. It's typically headline news every morning when we come in about the level
of efforts and certainly the policing services are active out in the field to
try to address that issue.
One of
the things that was also announced during the insurance review was the adoption
of traffic cameras. That's one of the things that government wants to do to try
to extend that reach because police can't be everywhere. Even if you doubled the
number of police there are still going to be places where people won't be able
to cover. Traffic cameras would be a way to help to strengthen enforcement, so
we will have to do some additional Highway
Traffic Act amendments to give effect to that.
Transportation and Works had done a pilot project last year; they released the
results last spring. The Department of Education and Early Childhood Development
is also interested in putting them on the exterior of school buses to capture
where people are passing a school bus when the stop sign is out. So those sorts
of things are all part of a continued effort to try to improve highway safety.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent, thank you.
Are
drivers still ignoring the requirement to slow down and change lanes when
approaching first responders at the roadside? I know I am very cognizant of
this.
MR. DUTTON:
Well, the legislation was strengthen to provide more specific rules around how
much they have to slow down, and there are penalties for that. So, again, that's
an area of enforcement. Certainly, the pilot showed that there were a
significant number of people that were speeding through posted traffic
construction areas, so it's a very significant concern when people's lives are
being put at risk; passing school buses the same thing.
We're
certainly doing what we can there and also through driver education to ensure
that those sorts of things are covered in the driver licensing program.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent, thank you.
Let's
stay with the driving theme. Is the department looking at the regulations around
heavy trucks and other heavy equipment that more modern equipment can be used in
the province? I say this because I think the standards in Quebec are slightly
different then they are in Labrador or here in Newfoundland and Labrador and
that means that vehicles coming over from Quebec into Labrador, transporting
back and forth, may not be able to be used on the roads. Are you familiar with
that at all?
MR. DOODY:
There are several MOUs.
There's a national MOU and there's actually an Atlantic MOU for vehicle weight
and dimensions, and that also covers vehicle configurations under our vehicle
regulations. Those standards are adopted across all jurisdictions. The only
consideration would be for new technology and weight would be through our
consultation with Transportation and Works, with the department, on the ability
of our infrastructure to support heavier weights, excessive weights, but I'm not
aware of any type of technology that's being used anywhere in Canada that we
would not permit.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, but you are aware of
the infrastructure, I guess, constraints associated with it, because if you have
a heavier vehicle or you have a wider vehicle on a road that is already pitted
by ruts because of maybe studded tires or whatever else is going on, and I know
that's a Transportation and Works question, but in terms of taking those
regulations coming out of your department and then considering what the
alternatives might be or what the implications might be.
MR. DOODY:
Yes, there's a process in
place for anything that's excessive, whether that's load or dimension, and it
actually isn't a decision made just within Service NL, it's also made in
conjunction with the bridge office from the Department of Transportation and
Works before any of those special permits are issued to allow those vehicles to
move over our highways.
MS. COFFIN:
Excellent. That is very good
to know.
Maybe I
can fit a question in here. Did we finish everything in Motor Registration
Division? I think we did.
Support
Services, 3.2.01, I noticed we're down a little in Salaries there. Is that due
to attrition as well or –?
Your
severance was quite low. Normally, I see the severance in the revised but you
seem to be a little bit lower there in that section.
MR. DUTTON:
The decreases in projected
revised was associated with just vacancies throughout the year and for 2019-20,
the salary details comparison, year over year, reflects two fewer filled
positions. So, that's the decrease of $86,100.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. Good.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
The Member's time has
expired. We can certainly come back.
Are
there any other speakers for this section? Any questions?
Okay.
Who is going next?
Loyola.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
We are back under Motor
Vehicle Registration, right?
CHAIR:
The whole subhead there in
the –
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under Supplies, that's under
3.1.01, an additional $22,500 is budgeted compared to the budget of 2018. I'm
just wondering why that is and what's included.
MR. DUTTON:
Sure.
So, on
the Supplies, the increase reflected the cost of paper and toner and the
addition of eight new printers for the centralized vehicle registration
printing. So, again, that's the print-on-demand stickers that are being printed
from our Mount Pearl office.
For the
year ahead on Supplies, the increase over the previous budgeted amount was,
again, the toner and eight new printers for the centralized printing, and also
an annual renewal increase for licence plate costs, as reflected in the standing
offer agreement.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
I understand that the
government is continuing to have licences printed in Ontario and that people
have to wait for them to be mailed back. Is this a permanent practice now or
just something that is temporary?
MR. DUTTON:
Well, I don't know if I would
use the term permanent. We have a contract that was arrived at through a joint
procurement with the Maritime provinces, and part of the review that all of us
had done came to the conclusion that the only way to achieve some long-term
savings was to have centralized printing. So, we joined together on that
initiative. I think the contract length is five years.
Of
course, then there would be a renewal clause, and then we would have to go back
to market at that point, but it would be unlikely to go backwards because the
industry standard is centralized printing, which everywhere in North America has
a centralized printing location. There was no local bidder in the Atlantic
provinces and no printing plant that could handle that sort of job outside of
that.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Purchased Services, an additional $24,100 is budgeted compared to 2018. Why and
what is included in that in Purchased Services?
MR. DUTTON:
So, in terms of the projected revised, there was $75,000 for printing of new
vehicle registration permits for the print on demand. That was offset somewhat
by a lower than anticipated cost for shredding services, which was $14,700.
Secure cash pickups were down $8,000. The calibration of the portable and fixed
weigh scales was down $15,000; we had bought new portable weigh scales last
year. So, that probably helps explain why our maintenance costs are less,
because there is newer equipment.
Security
and lock services were down $4,500 and Moneris fees, $10,000, and there was some
funding transferred to Grants and Subsidies to cover some other costs during the
year.
For the
new year, we have an annualization of the printing costs for the print-on-demand
stickers; $80,000 that the minister mentioned in her opening remarks was
transferred from Transportation and Works to help cover this increase. They had
savings in their mailroom from not having to do the mail outs. So we have booked
that money here so there's no net impact of that $80,000 on government. There
was also $55,900 in savings, again, due to lower rates for secure cash pickup
costs and for the driver licence cards.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Property, Furnishings and Equipment, an additional $20,500 was spent under the
revised last year. Can you explain that?
MR. DUTTON:
Sure.
So we
had an Occupational Health and Safety order to acquire portable eyewash stations
for the fixed weigh scales. That was an $8,000 expense. We also had eight new
printers for the print-on-demand stickers, so that was another $9,000. A new
customer flow system for our Corner Brook office was $2,500.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Were these eight new printers the same as in Supplies up above?
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah, I think the cost for the equipment is in the PFE. The toners are in the
Supplies.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Grants and Subsidies, what's included in that?
MR. DUTTON:
Grants and Subsidies, again, some of this is memberships, so it's a bit of a
misnomer, but there is a $10,000 grant in this line item for SafetyNL, and
that's for the Lids for Kids program, bicycle helmets. Our memberships in the
Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, the Canadian Council of Motor Transport
Administrators and the International Registration Plan are all charged to this
item, so that accounts for the other $31,100.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
The
Revenue - Federal, what is included and why the decrease as revised?
MR. DUTTON:
The federal revenue is offsetting costs as part of a National Safety Code
program. In terms of the changes, the decrease relative to the budget in
projected revised was just the actual cost of the National Safety Code project.
The increase in the new year will reflect the increase in Canadian Council of
Motor Transport association annual fees.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
All right.
Under
Revenue - Provincial, what is included in that one?
MR. DUTTON:
The provincial revenue here are funds collected from customers to offset the
costs of expedited delivery. So similar to what we're doing in Vital Statistics
that we discussed earlier, people choose the option of having something
delivered sooner, than they can pay for that cost, and so there's offsetting
revenue for that.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Just a
different question. What role will Service NL have now that the pilot project on
the highway cameras has concluded?
MR. DUTTON:
The Highway Traffic Act is legislation
the minister administers. So it would be expected that if we bring legislation
to the House that our minister will be the lead on those legislative amendments
and any regulations that would support that. We'd obviously be working very
closely with the Department of Justice and Public Safety because one of the
objectives would be to ensure that it's written in such a way that it will be
easier to secure convictions in court.
So, how
it's designed around, for example, how often would a traffic camera have to be
calibrated for it to be deemed to be providing an accurate reflection of the
speed recorded? Those sorts of things would be considerations, and the realities
of what equipment is procured is where Transportation and education will give us
some useful feedback as well.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
I guess other provinces would be using that as well, would they? I know they use
it in the States for tickets. Would they use it in Canada in that kinds of
things? Is that something that –?
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah. It is used in other provinces and some municipalities across the country
use it as well.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Will
Motor Registration, Service NL have a role in the pilot project that has been
planned to deal with the outstanding fines from unlicensed, unregistered and
uninsured drivers? Will it be entirely the Department of Justice?
MR. DUTTON:
That would be with the Department of Justice and Public Safety. Once the fine
has been administered, it's that departments responsibility to collect it and
they will pursue whatever other means they can to have the debt repaid whether
in cash or otherwise.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Is the government still paying to have faulty licence plates replaced?
MR. DUTTON:
Pardon me?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Is the government still paying to have the faulty licence plates replaced?
MR. DUTTON:
We allow for people to bring their pealing plates back free of charge, and that
continues to be the case. We have waved that fee. If a plate is otherwise
damaged, there is a replacement fee, but for peeling plates, they can be
replaced free of charge.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
MR. DUTTON:
The taxpayer is basically
paying for it.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Yeah.
Under
3.2.01, Transportation and Communications, $21,000 less was spent last year than
was budgeted, but $20,900 is back in the budget.
Just
wondering if you can explain that?
MR. DUTTON:
Are we on 3.2.01?
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
3.2.01, yes.
MR. DUTTON:
Okay.
In terms
of last fiscal year, the decrease was just a result of reduced travel due to
vacancies in this division. For the year ahead, again, there's just a zero-based
adjustment that we weren't getting back the same amount of money as we had the
year before. That's another area that we'll continue to monitor for potential
future savings.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
All right.
Under
that same section, the Revenue - Provincial, what is included in that?
MR. DUTTON:
The provincial revenue are
fees required for building accessibility plan reviews; fire and life safety plan
reviews; design review; registration and inspection of boiler and pressure
vessel systems; pressure fittings and repair procedures; licensing of mechanical
contractors; propane gas and medical gas installer certificates; testing of
pressure welders and brazers and procedures; the review and approval of sewage
treatment systems over 4,546 litres per day and unserviced subdivisions; permits
to alter or install pressure systems; and design, review, registration and
inspection of elevator and amusement ride installations.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay, thank you.
CHAIR:
Your time has expired.
Are we
ready to vote on this subhead, or do we have any further questions?
MS. COFFIN:
We're doing all get three,
right?
CHAIR:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
Yes.
CHAIR:
Okay,
Ms. Coffin?
MS. COFFIN:
Thank you.
Support
Services, the Mobility Impaired Parking Regulations were amended last year to
raise the fine. Has this made a difference? I think this is parking in the blue
zone; thou shalt not park in the blue zone?
MR. DUTTON:
Well, I guess it's a
relatively new fine, but what we had found, which was what formed its adoption,
was where places like St. John's and Mount Pearl had adopted the higher $400 to
$700 fine, that they got an increase in compliance, so actually revenue was
impacted as a result of that.
We don't
collect the fines so I don't have any data on how that's worked province-wide –
MS. COFFIN:
Right.
MR. DUTTON:
– but we basically adopted
that same regime throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.
MS. COFFIN:
That's excellent.
Now we
only have to get people not idling in front of the parking spaces out here.
MR. DUTTON:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
The
Building Accessibility Regulations
were also changed to require power doors, more accessible parking, accessible
apartments and accessible washrooms. Have you seen improvements?
MR. DUTTON:
Well, it's a requirement, so whenever a developer wants to undertake some work
on a building or put up a new building, then they are required to apply either
to have their plan reviewed or to seek an exemption.
Anything
that was built before 1981 is exempted, unless the total cumulative renovations
add up to more than 50 per cent of the current value of the property. So there
are some buildings that are exempted.
We
certainly encourage people, even if they're exempted from the regulations, to
look at making investments to help make their buildings more accessible, which
will hopefully increase their customer base and would be more inclusive for
everyone.
Certainly, that's how we are enforcing it, is that when their plans come in then
they're reviewed to ensure that there is compliance on any new builds or any
renovations. They're just given that feedback. If it's not a part of the plan,
they're told to adjust their plans to incorporate the compliance with the
regulation.
MS. COFFIN:
Does the regulation include all doors that can be accessible to the public do
have wheelchair accessibility associated with it?
I say
this because quite often I take my nephew around, and he's in a wheelchair, and
it's very, very difficult to get a wheelchair and a person through a door when
doors aren't accessible. I find that in some buildings that we've gone in, some
doors are wheelchair accessible, but not all of the doors in that particular
building are. So you have to go to a particular entrance and you have to get …
MR. DUTTON:
So for buildings that, again, are subject to the act that don't have an
exemption, then they are supposed to be accessible throughout. That was one of
the changes in the regulations –
MS. COFFIN:
Right.
MR. DUTTON:
– that the minister had announced that came into effect St. George's Day last
year.
So,
again, unless they have an exemption from being an older building, then they're
obliged to come into compliance. I think that was a problem that sometimes the
first door had a door opener, but then the next door did not –
MS. COFFIN:
Yes.
MR. DUTTON:
– and so that wasn't really truly accessible.
MS. COFFIN:
You get trapped in that and you can't get out, right.
MR. DUTTON:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, good, thank you. That's going to be great.
Regional
Services, where in the province are Government Service Centres co-located with
Service Canada offices, and are there future plans for co-location?
MR. DUTTON:
We're not co-located with Service Canada. We did look at a possible co-location
in St. Anthony. Based on the cost evaluation, we would've had to pay a certain
amount of money to do renovations to their leased space, and their lease was
expiring within a year anyway. So we had no certainty that they would still be
in there.
I think
the current plan is to look at alternate space in the College of the North
Atlantic, but, in general, no, we're not co-located with Service Canada.
What we
have done in terms of co-location is to combine with other government offices.
Our new space in Labrador City, they're not actually changing location, but
other government departments are locating in the same building and they're going
to have some shared space, so we reduce the overall footprint of the location.
Same
thing in Gander. They're in the mall, they're going to stay in the same place,
but some of their space will be shaved off for other departments. Transportation
and Works manages all that so you won't find the spend on the leased space in
our budget. It's all been moved into Transportation and Works.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. Good to know. I look
forward to that, too.
Let's go
on to OH&S, Occupation Health and Safety Inspections, what was done in 2018 to
address the relatively higher injury rates in municipal government, health care,
fishing and construction industries?
MR. DUTTON:
I'm sorry, I'm not sure I'm following the question.
MS. COFFIN:
We noticed that there was
relatively higher injury rates with municipal government, health care, fishing
and construction workers. We're just wondering if anything had been done to
address those.
MR. DUTTON:
Well, the division develops an inspection plan each year. They focus on the
areas that are high risk and where they have receive complaints and those sorts
of things. So, whether it's enforcement blitzes or doing things on a regional or
central basis, that's the sorts of information that informs their inspections
yearly.
One of
the areas like the fish processing sector was something that's had some public
attention recently, and they've been out to inspect at least 22 of the 60 plants
up to a month ago.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
This also would be with
WorkplaceNL and the safety sector councils.
MS. COFFIN:
Yes.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
So, that's the area that
you're discussing right there.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
OHS and WorkplaceNL, of
course, work collaboratively together. As my deputy minister just alluded to,
the fish processing and harvesting, we are, in fact – with the safety sector
councils and the fish processing that you've heard in the media recently,
there's difficulty in forming that safety sector council because the employer
and the employee – the worker – they have to come together to do it.
So,
right now, we're presently working on additional options to try to move forward,
and WorkplaceNL, with OHS, are continuing on with educational component to
ensure that it's covered in the plants for the employees while we're waiting to
develop the safety sector council, which developed in the fish harvesting but
didn't develop in the processing.
I had a
meeting this morning, I'll have another meeting on Friday, and we've come to the
conclusion that if the employer and employee will not come together, we will
continue to put resources in from WorkplaceNL to address the concerns.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay. Excellent.
Thank
you.
Are
there any plans for a webpage, like the consumer information webpage, that will
publish workplace health and safety violations?
MR. DUTTON:
I think we're aggregating the announcements on Occupational Health and Safety
charges through the Consumer Protection website. Certainly, anytime that a
charge is laid, there's a public announcement made to make people aware of that.
MS. COFFIN:
Great, thank you.
When was
the last statutory review of the Workplace
Health, Safety and Compensation Act?
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
I mentioned earlier, we are in the process now of getting ready to announce the
next review in, hopefully, 2019. We are overdue because the legislation states
that it's supposed to be five years from the last one, so we're overdue,
technically, from August 2016. A significant amount of the recommendations from
the previous review have been put in place over the last three years,
specifically. Right now, we are trying to work through – it was prior to the
election, so I just picked that up again to try to get it done.
MS. COFFIN:
Good to hear.
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
So we can announce (inaudible).
MS. COFFIN:
What is WorkplaceNL's current assessment rate for employers?
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
It's $1.69 per 100 right now but that's temporary for this year. It is $1.90 per
hundred.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, thank you.
You say
it's temporary, it's $1.69?
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
Yeah, because in order to balance the injury fund, because there's an excess
amount of money, WorkplaceNL announced back in December that there would be a
one-year reduction (inaudible).
MS. COFFIN:
Right.
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
It will be reassessed again in the fall. It may have to come up again, not
necessarily to $1.90, it could be $1.80; it could be $1.85. This assessment will
be done in the fall.
MS. COFFIN:
Is that fund – I guess it's in a trust – but is earning any interest?
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
Yes.
MS. COFFIN:
How safe is the investment? I would assume very, very safe.
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
Yeah, very, very safe. That is how the funding actually grows is through
investment and employer contribution.
MS. COFFIN:
Right. What's the funded ratio? Is it 110?
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
Yes, 110 is what we maintain and we're at 119 right now.
MS. COFFIN:
Right, so you're just bringing it back down.
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
Yeah, we were up to 134.
MS. COFFIN:
Okay, great, thank you.
MS. GAMBIN WALSH:
But we've also introduced PTSD coverage, so we have to wait to assess to see the
cost of that on the system.
MS. COFFIN:
Right, of course, that makes sense.
Quick
question: Can we have a list of the organizations and amounts of grants for
2018? This is Assistance to Outside Agencies that I'm looking at there. Why was
that grant money not fully spent? You didn't spend $4,000 out of $9,000.
MR. DUTTON:
The total grants was a smaller amount. Funding was provided to the Newfoundland
and Labrador Occupational Safety & Health Association, Canadian Society of
Safety Engineering, SafetyNL, Canadian Standards Association, Newfoundland and
Labrador Employers' Council, North American Occupational Safety and Health Week,
Newfoundland and Labrador Construction Safety Association, Newfoundland and
Labrador Federation of Labour, SafetyNet and the rest was, as you referenced,
unallocated.
It's
pretty standard that they do every year.
MS. COFFIN:
I'm just impressed how far
the $5,000 went.
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah, it's based on the
requests that come in.
MS. COFFIN:
Yeah, okay, of course, but
still you listed off about five or six agencies there, probably more, and it was
only $5,000 so someone is making good –
MR. DUTTON:
They have other sources of
funding and some of the safety sector councils, I think, receive funding through
WorkplaceNL.
MS. COFFIN:
I'm just impressed that this
much money went that far.
Okay,
that's all my questions.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Anyone else have questions
for this particular subhead?
Mr.
Lane.
MR. LANE:
Thank you.
I guess
it falls under Support Services, 3.2.01, although it's not a line item question,
it relates to accessibility, persons with disabilities and so on.
I'm well
aware of the 1981 rule. Has there been any thought though – I understand the
rationale for – I suppose it was a random date that was chosen, but I understand
if you have an old building, which was the thought, I suppose, and it was just
going to be unrealistic to make it accessible, like an old courthouse or
something like that or whatever, but if you have an old building that's just a
square box, for lack of a better term, no different than a building that was
built in 2010, other than the fact that it was built before then, it's just as
easy to put in an accessible door in that building as it is to put in a brand
new modern building. Why would you not adjust the rules to say, instead of 1981,
it should be where it can be demonstrated by the owner of the building that it
would cause financial hardship or something like that?
Absolute
financial hardship for an old building, sure, but a building just because it's
old but that can be made accessible just as easy as a new one, no additional
cost, no additional work or effort, then I don't know why they get of the hook
at 1981.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Very important point; a very
valid point.
Right
now, the Building Accessibility Advisory Board will be meeting again on July 30
and 31. We're consulting with the business community, because we've done
significant consultations with the disability community, so we're consulting
with the business community now to arrive at, as you indicated, so that expense
is not exorbitant –
MR. LANE:
Hardship.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
– the hardship – to try to define and determine.
As we
move forward with the act, hopefully, in the fall of this year or in the spring
of 2020, we will be debating those type of issues here on the floor.
MR. LANE:
Awesome. Excellent. Just what
I wanted to hear.
I guess
another question under this category is, right now, to my knowledge, there's
only one person in St. John's – one inspector, if you will – that you call. I
know I've heard it from ministers in the past, you can call the RCMP and stuff
like that in other parts of the province. I'm not sure how engaged they are in
any of this stuff. I don't suspect they are too engaged, that's my thought.
Is there
any thought to, if not expending staff – at one point in time, there had been a
thought of working with, like, CODNL or something, and giving them some
abilities to go out and inspect. Are there any thoughts of doing something to
increase inspectors or inspection services? Again, it may be farmed out to
somebody but – to increase inspections?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
This is definitely an
important topic on my agenda, I can assure you, so as I work through this piece
of legislation, that is one of the concerns that I have identified.
MR. LANE:
Yeah.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
We are on a complaints-driven
basis right now.
MR. LANE:
Absolutely.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
We have had significant
complaints that we have addressed. So, as we are working through this
legislation, it is getting more awareness out in the general public and people
are complaining. We've had a number of complaints about some buildings regarding
their blue zones –
MR. LANE:
Yeah.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
– where they are, the accessibility. As you know, we changed the blue zones over
here at the Confederation Building.
MR. LANE:
Yes.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
So, I just think as the
awareness component gets out there, the complaints will go up, and as we move
through this act and make these changes, in actual fact, we may have to hire
more staff, or reallocate more staff within the division to this area.
MR. LANE:
Yes. Okay. Good.
On that
issue, as well, I know there was a pilot project that happened a couple of years
ago, an acquaintance of mine and yours was involved with the schools.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
MR. LANE:
I believe, as a result, all of the schools on the Avalon Peninsula are now
accessible because there was some sort of a pilot initiative to go out, inspect
them –
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
MR. LANE:
– and bring them all up to
scratch. That is wonderful. Is there any intention of applying that now to other
parts of the province or to other government facilities besides schools on a
province-wide – because it's one thing for private employers to not be up to
scratch –
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
MR. LANE:
– but it is absolutely
reprehensible, to my mind, for public buildings not to be up to scratch.
Granted, I know there are a lot of them and you cannot do it all overnight, but
it's something that needs to be – as I'm sure you would agree.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes.
MR. LANE:
I'm just wondering what is
going to be done to try to bring other public buildings, outside the St. John's
area, up to scratch.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
So, with the Department of
Transportation and Works, because they're responsible for infrastructure –
MR. LANE:
Yeah.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
– if you just look around you
right here, this room is not accessible.
MR. LANE:
Yeah.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
I can't get to where you are
if I'm using a chair, right?
MR. LANE:
Yeah.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
So as we move forward, as the
40 MHAs in this House of Assembly, I think we all hold a degree of advocacy
towards making the act so that Newfoundland and Labrador is more accessible.
So, yes,
this government, in fact, does – and we are working towards trying to make
things more accessible. Like I said, as we bring the act to the House of
Assembly here to debate it, hopefully, that will be an outcome.
MR. LANE:
Excellent. Good.
I want
to move on to OHS now, a couple of questions there.
I know
there was an issue, I'm wondering is it still an issue with Occupational Health
and Safety inspectors in Labrador. There was supposed to be one or two positions
at one time, it used to be in Labrador, and I know then we had issues with – we
had nobody in Labrador and they were flying them in and flying them out and so
on.
Are we
still doing that or do we have somebody now in Labrador?
MR. DUTTON:
The office in Labrador City is fully staffed, or in Wabush, pardon me.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
MR. DUTTON:
Yes, and it has been for at least a year and half, two years.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
MR. DUTTON:
Yeah.
MR. LANE:
Okay, I know it definitely
was an issue because I can remember asking about it.
You
touched on the fish processors council, or sector council, whatever, that was
another one that's been on the go for a long time. I know that the fish
harvesters came on board pretty quickly through the FFAW, but it was the
processors that didn't want to get involved. At one point in time, they were
even offered some money to get it started and so on and they never even took
government up on that offer.
So, I
guess, as a comment, I'm glad to see that you're taking action to at least get
out into the plants, and if you have to do it yourself, they're not willing to
come to the table to make it happen – I hope they will come to the table, but if
not, I'm glad to see it because, of course, a lot repetitive strain and soft
tissue injury, opportunities for that in those processing plants, because you're
doing so many repetitive tasks and so on. It's damp conditions and everything
else. So, just as a point, I guess, just to say that I'm glad to see you're
doing that and I hope you're going to continue.
The
final question I have in OHS relates to workers' compensation and occupational
disease.
If you
look at Ontario, I know with their workers' comp system they have a lot more
in-house expertise for dealing with issues around occupational disease. I
believe there were even outside expertise that had to be brought in on a couple
of occasions relating to the Marystown Shipyard, which I'm sure you're familiar
with the issues there.
I know
there will be a statutory review and I will bring it up there too, but I'm just
wondering, is there any thought around looking at having more appropriate
resources at the commission to deal with claims for occupational diseases which
is very specialized.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Yes, very.
You just
mentioned the Marystown Shipyard so I certainly will address that one. In actual
fact, mesothelioma, silicosis and asbestosis are covered. Under the act right
now, WorkplaceNL can in fact form a medical committee, which would include three
oncologists, to address that particular situation. They want an intake clinic,
which is people coming together just to talk about your problems and discuss
your problems, but in actual fact the act covers the medical clinic. We have
offered the medical clinic and have not received a response back.
As it
comes to occupational disease and death specifically, the number of deaths is up
right now. Of course, it's back to the '70s and the '60s and we're seeing the
impact of it right now. We do have access to resources to deal with occupational
disease.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
But,
right now, in terms of the resources that you have, is that in-house resources,
or that's just bringing in expertise from the Mainland?
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
No, we do have some in-house resources but, also, as I indicated, if we were to
do a medical clinic specifically for Marystown, we would need to consult; we
would need to get three oncologists. We may need to bring them in from out of
the province, or there may be someone within the province that specializes, but
we would seek them out to form that particular committee.
MR. LANE:
Okay.
Yes,
it's happening in Marystown, but as you said, these things are something that
builds up and it takes time before it manifests itself with a lot of these
industries. Back in the day, when personal protective equipment wasn't being
used, or not used properly, and there weren't proper mechanical controls in
terms of ventilation and air handling and all that stuff, a lot of it comes home
to roost many years later.
With a
lot of these industries, as you say, in the '60s and '70s, now it's all starting
to come to the surface. Obviously, it's something that there is going to be a
little more, perhaps, attention, more focus on that area.
CHAIR:
Okay, the Member's time has
expired.
MR. LANE:
Thank you.
That's
it. I'm done.
CHAIR:
Okay, good. He's done.
Are
there any further speakers to this subhead?
Mr.
O'Driscoll.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Thanks.
Under
section 3.2.02, under Regional Services, under Salaries, $22,000 less was spent
last year than budgeted, and an additional $14,300 is included in this year's
budget over the revised amount. Can you explain that variance for us, please?
MR. DUTTON:
Yes, the projected revised
number was lower due to some vacancies that occurred throughout the year.
The
budget for 2019-'20 just reflects planned savings to balance the department's
overall salary plan. If you look at the salary details one year to the next
you'll see three fewer filled positions than the previous year, but it is
anticipated that they would all be filled over the course of the year.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay.
Under
Employee Benefits, we went through this already but where are the workers' comp
benefits restated?
MR. DUTTON:
That's under Executive
Support.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Just a couple of more there
now.
Under
3.3.01, under Salaries, $259,800 less was spent than budgeted last year. Can you
explain that decrease?
MR. DUTTON:
The revised number reflects –
we had vacancies during the year and we had a couple of retirements, so not all
of the positions were filled.
Comparing the salary details, we had 46 positions filled in this year's salary
details; it was the same number the year prior. We have a budget here to fund 51
positions, so it's still intended that we're going to continue to proceed on
with recruitment.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Under Supplies, what explains
a $19,000 decrease in revised last year and an additional $19,700 in this year's
budget?
MR. DUTTON:
The decrease in the revised
was lower than anticipated subscription costs for the Canadian Centre for
Occupational Health and Safety inquiry services. For the year ahead, the
increase just reflects the zero-based budget adjustment based on the expected
costs.
The
Supplies would include office supplies, uniforms and protective clothing,
inspection and testing supplies, promotional materials, materials and supplies
for training and food items for meetings.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
One last one there. Under
Professional Services, what explains the $13,500 decrease in the revised last
year? What is included?
MR. DUTTON:
That is lower than anticipated Professional Services requirements due to the new
definition of professional services under the
Public Procurement Act, which is just
limited to legal services and certain banking services. Also, there were fewer
court proceedings than anticipated.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
One more. Under Revenue - Provincial, what is included?
MR. DUTTON:
The provincial revenue is the recouping of costs from the WorkplaceNL fund. One
hundred per cent of the cost of occupational health and safety work of the
department is charged back to WorkplaceNL.
MR. O'DRISCOLL:
Okay, that's good for me.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Are
there any further speakers to this? Okay, good to go?
I'll
call the Clerk for the subheads, please.
CLERK:
3.1.01 to 3.4.02 inclusive.
CHAIR:
3.1.01 to 3.4.02 inclusive.
Shall
they carry?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against?
Carried.
On
motion, subheads 3.1.01 through 3.4.02 carried.
CLERK:
The total.
CHAIR:
Shall the total carry?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against?
Carried.
On
motion, Department of Service NL, total heads, carried.
CHAIR:
Shall I report the Estimates?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against?
Carried.
On
motion, Estimates of the Department of Service NL and Public Procurement Agency
carried without amendment.
CHAIR:
A reminder, the next
Government Services Committee is tomorrow morning here in the Chamber.
Can I
get a motion to adjourn, please?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Those against?
Carried.
Thank
you everyone.
On
motion, the Committee adjourned.