The Committee met at 6:00 p.m. in the Assembly Chamber.

CHAIR (Forsey): Good evening, everyone.

What we will do first before the minister gets into his overview I guess, and it will probably take a while according to the numbers, we will start on this side and introduce the Committee and their staff. You can start up here.

MR. LANE: Paul Lane, MHA for the District of Mount Pearl South.

MR. PEACH: Calvin Peach, MHA for the District of Bellevue.

MR. FLEMING: Mark Fleming, staff of the Official Opposition Office.

MR. EDMUNDS: Randy Edmunds, MHA for Torngat Mountains.

MS PLOUGHMAN: Kim Ploughman, Researcher, Official Opposition Office.

MR. DINN: John Dinn, MHA for Kilbride.

MR. MURPHY: George Murphy, MHA for St. John's East, NDP.

CHAIR: We have one more.

MR. BURRY: Jeremy Burry, Research Assistant, NDP.

CHAIR: Before we get to your side there, Minister, the minutes of the last Estimates of the Department of Finance and the Public Service Commission, can I have a motion?

MR. DINN: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by John Dinn.

Minister, you can introduce your staff or they can introduce themselves. Before we get into the review we will call for the subheads. So, if you want to get into the introductions first.

MR. DAVIS: Whichever way you want me to do it, and if you want them to introduce themselves to make sure that their microphones are functioning and all that good stuff.

CHAIR: Yes, sure.

MR. DAVIS: I will start with Mr. Norman on my left.

MR. NORMAN: David Norman, Deputy Minister, Service NL.

MR. JONES: Scott Jones, Departmental Comptroller, Service NL.

MS PAYNE: Sonya Payne, Director of Planning, Government Purchasing Agency.

MS MACDONALD: Ellen MacDonald, Chief Information Officer, OCIO.

MS TILLEY: Jean Tilley, Executive Director, OCIO.

MS BRAGG: Jennifer Bragg, Manager of Financial Operations, OCIO.

MS TRICKETT: Wanda Trickett, Departmental Comptroller, Executive Council.

MR. MAHONEY: Tom Mahoney, Executive Director at the Workplace, Health Safety and Compensation Commission.

MS GALWAY: Leslie Galway, CEO of Workplace, Health Safety and Compensation Commission.

MS DUNPHY: Kim Dunphy, Assistant Deputy Minister, Occupational Health and Safety Branch.

MS KELLAND: Donna Kelland, Assistant Deputy Minister, Government Services Branch, Service NL.

MR. BURKE: Gerry Burke, Director of Consumer Affairs.

MS COCHRANE: Rachelle Cochrane, CEO, Labour Relations Agency.

MS DAY: Elizabeth Day, Director of Policy and Strategic Planning, Service NL.

MS BRENTON: Barbara Brenton, Director of Strategic and Human Resource Management, Service NL.

MR. DONOVAN: Hugh Donovan, Director of Communications, Service NL.

CHAIR: I asked for a motion on the minutes but I did not ask for a vote on it.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: The last minutes.

Okay, thank you.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: What we will do is call for – we are going to start with OCIO first. Only the committee members will ask the questions, Minister, and you can answer or one of your staff can answer. We will call for the subheads of OCIO. Start with the subhead.

CLERK (Ms Murphy): What page is that?

CHAIR: Page 2.17.

CLERK: Subhead 4.1.01.

CHAIR: Subhead 4.1.01.

Minister.

MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Committee.

I would like to open tonight by just an overview of the department and some of the operations that exist within the five different entities that are represented here this evening.

Service NL delivers citizen protection services to the public in areas of public health and safety, environmental protection, occupational health and safety, consumer and financial interests, and in the provision and preservation of vital events and documents.

In addition, through the Office of the Queen's Printer, the department provides printing, micrographic and digital document services for government and for the general public, including copies of provincial legislation, the Newfoundland and Labrador Gazette, and select documents and books. The department also is responsible for the leadership and ongoing co-ordination of government's regulatory reform mandate.

The Department of Service NL was created with the aim of consolidating where possible the licensing, permitting, inspection and regulatory functions within government, and providing a single window point of access to the public for those services. The authority to carry out the department's mandate is derived from over 175 statutes and regulations, as well as standards and codes of practice. Do not ask me to name them, because I am not going to do that.

The operating budget for Service NL, including GPA and also the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division, this year is $47,089,000. Service NL employs 551 employees; 489 are permanent and sixty are temporary across the Province. It is comprised of three branches: the Government Services Branch, the Consumer and Commercial Affairs Branch, and the Occupational Health and Safety Branch.

The minister is responsible for eleven public entities in addition to Service NL. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission is a category 1 entity, as defined by the Transparency and Accountability Act, and prepares an independent strategic plan and annual report to the House of Assembly upon approval of the Minister of Service NL. The Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation, the Government Purchasing Agency, and the Office of the Chief Information Officer are category 2 entities and provide independent business plans and annual reports.

The remaining seven entities are considered category 3 entities and prepare activity plans and annual reports. These seven include: the Public Safety Appeal Board, the Advisory Council on Occupational Health and Safety, Buildings Accessibility Advisory Board, Buildings Accessibility Appeals Tribunal, the Financial Services Appeal Board, Radiation Health and Safety Advisory Committee, and the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division.

In addition, I have the responsibility for oversight of the Public Utilities Board mandate with respect to auto insurance and the Petroleum Products Pricing Office, the Government Purchasing Agency, the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation, the Office of the Chief Information Officer, and the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission report, independently to the minister. As such, each of these entities prepares independent three-year plans and annual reports.

The Government Service Branch provides a variety of services internally to government and externally to the people of the Province. This is accomplished through the branch's six divisions, which are: Government Service Centres, Program and Support Services, Motor Registration, Engineering and Inspections Services, Vital Statistics, and the Office of the Queen's Printer, printing of micrographic services.

The Consumer and Commercial Affairs Branch regulates consumer protection and provincial financial services, facilitates commerce in the Province, regulates private employer pension plans and public sector pension plans, and maintains nine legal registries for the Province. The branch is comprised of four divisions, being: Financial Services Regulation, Commercial Registrations, Consumer Affairs, and the Pension Benefits Standards.

The Occupational Health and Safety Branch, or OHS Branch as we know it, protects the health and safety of the Province's workforce through the development and enforcement of occupational health and safety legislation, the inspection of workplaces, the investigation of workplace complaints, incidents and serious injuries and fatalities. Occupational health and safety enforcement is a compliance-based program where severe penalties can and have been filed for failure to meet statutory and regulatory obligations, regardless of whether the non-compliance resulted in an injury for the purpose of insurance considerations by the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission.

The OHS Branch is comprised of four operational units: Inspections, Occupational Health, Compliance and Regulatory Affairs, and the Standards and Regulatory Development.

As Minister of Service NL, I am responsible for the Government Purchasing Agency. The Government Purchasing Agency is an independent branch of the public service under the management and control of the Chief Operating Officer. The agency operates under the authority of the Government Purchasing Agency Act and the Public Tender Act.

The Government Purchasing Agency Act outlines the mandate of the agency and provides for its operation. The Public Tender Act is the primary legislation that governs procurement within the public sector.

As Minister of Service NL, I am also the Minister Responsible for the Office of the Chief Information Officer, or most of us know them as OCIO. The Office of the Chief Information Officer has approximately 379 positions and 301 permanent positions and seventy-eight temporary positions. The majority of the employees are located in offices throughout St. John's; however, there are employees distributed amongst regional offices in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Corner Brook, Stephenville, Grand Falls-Windsor, Gander, Marystown, and Clarenville. The operating budget for OCIO this year is $121,352,900.

The Office of the Chief Information Officer operates as an entity within the Executive Council, and is governed by the Executive Council Act. The Office of the Chief Information Officer is responsible for information technology and information management co-ordination, planning, budgeting, and policy development; for developing and operating computer systems and infrastructure for government departments, agencies, boards, and commissions that are directly supported by the administrative support services of the departments; and expenditures and procurement of information technologies, goods and services; administering the Management of Information Act; and managing information technology related agreements, contracts.

They are also responsible for providing consultative services, particularly in the area of information management; working collaboratively with the private information technology sector to maximize business opportunities, while meeting the information technology and information management needs of government.

In addition, as minister, I am also responsible for the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, or WHSCC, or sometimes called the Commission. Serving approximately 12,000 injured workers and over 17,000 employers, the Commission is the Province's no-fault workplace insurance system which was established in 1951 as part of a historic compromise between workers and employers.

The compromise was to provide workplace injury compensation and health care benefits to injured workers through employer-generated assessments or premiums. Since that time, the Commission has expanded significantly to provide a number of additional services including return-to-work programs, labour market re-entry programs, prevention services, and coverage for occupational disease initiatives, among many other programs. The Commission has 403 employment positions, among these, 363 are permanent, and forty-one are considered to be temporary.

Finally, as minister, I am also responsible for the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division. The Review Division was established in 1994 by legislative amendment to the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Act, and it is the final level of review within the workers' compensation system in this Province.

The Review Division is an independent quasi-judicial body consisting of a panel of review commissioners which includes the chief review commissioner. The Review Division is responsible for reviewing decisions of the Commission to ensure that those decisions were made in accordance with the act, regulations, and the policies as approved by the Commission board of directors. The Review Division has twelve employment positions, among them eight are permanent, and four are considered to be temporary.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening remarks and I look forward to any questions or comments from the Committee. We will do our best to provide what information we can to you.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister.

The Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission – is that what we call Occupational Health and Safety now, or what we used to?

MR. DAVIS: No, sir.

Mr. Chair, if you are looking for Estimates for the Commission, you will not find them in our Estimates book. The Commission is funded by premiums or by assessments by employers in Newfoundland and Labrador. So the Commission is funded by the employers of Newfoundland and Labrador. The goal is to provide benefits to workers in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is not funded by government.

CHAIR: For the sake of the Committee as well, Randy and George – there is a little bit of a lapse there – we were planning on doing the smaller ones, if you would call them smaller or not, with OCIO first. Then when they are finished, they can leave and we will just continue on like that.

What we will do is start with Randy, usually fifteen minutes if you need it. If we need any more than that we will go to George for fifteen, then come back again and alternate as such. That is if we need that much time. When we are finished, of course, we can continue with the next subhead.

Randy, you can start.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As the minister stated, there is nothing in the Budget which mentions OCIO. A lot of my questions are going to come on the overall Budget as presented, and a few questions on different departments throughout. With the lack of information in the Estimates on OCIO, there are not a whole lot of questions we can ask.

I had assumed the minster had his entire staff here by the number of people across the way there.

CHAIR: If I may, Randy, as we get into the different ones, like Government Purchasing and so on, you can ask those questions then. If you have a couple of questions on OCIO, that is fine. You can do your line item if you want. Then you can also ask a question in general, if you wish.

MR. EDMUNDS: The first question – and we have seen it in other Estimates – is a list of staff and salaries, with the immediate staff for OCIO.

CHAIR: Yes, on page 2.17 in the Estimates book.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: If you want, Randy, maybe we can ask George. If you have any questions on OCIO – because usually it is not a big lot of questions asked on OCIO. If you want, we can go to George. Do you have any questions on OCIO, George?

MR. MURPHY: There are a couple of questions I guess, but first of all, just some general comments.

I want to thank your staff, Mr. Minister, for showing up here today to answer any questions that we do have. First off, and foremost, I know it takes sometimes a pretty huge sacrifice to get your work done, and I know that your staff are fairly dedicated. I hope they are meeting the everyday challenges.

I want to thank them for their time to come in here and do this. I know there are times when your staff have probably been called to answer to any number of concerns on the part of the people of the Province and I want to thank you for your conviction to your Province in carrying out your duties everyday. So, I figured I would open up with that.

Yes, Mr. Minister, when we are talking about line items, Office of the Chief Information Officer, the first thing that comes to mind, section 4.1.01 Corporate Operations and Client Services. There is a difference there in Salaries between this year and the actual that was attained, by about $200,000 difference here in that particular line item. Again, with that same line item, the Estimates for 2012-2013 are going to be down from the actual this year. I wonder if you can explain that line for us.

MR. DAVIS: I certainly can. There is about a $200,000 deficit there. That was mainly due to temporary staff hires for administrative functions, and as well as some overtime that occurred during the year.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

As well in that section 06 Purchased Services, $128,600 budgeted against $85,300 in actual that was spent but the budget for that particular line item for 2012-2013 is going to be the same, $128,600.

MR. DAVIS: I am sorry, which line is that?

MR. MURPHY: Purchased Services, line 06 in that same section, 4.1.01 Corporate Operations and Client Services.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, there is about a $43,000 difference. Is that the one you are referring to?

MR. MURPHY: Yes, that is the one, sir.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, about a $43,000 difference, and that was pertaining to lease-to-own contracts expired on two photocopiers. There was also lower than anticipated training expenses, and there was more printing that had been done in-house. That was primarily the differences in that line.

MR. MURPHY: Okay. I am just wondering, you may have a figure around it but when it comes to lease to own, that one kind of surprises me that government did not purchase outright for that.

Do you have any other numbers in your department as regards to how many of these machines are out there that would be lease to own in a situation like that?

MR. DAVIS: I do not have a number offhand. Quite often when those contracts are done – and I would think that quite often lease to own would be a normal process when it comes to types of equipment, such as photocopiers. You may find it both ways. Quite often they are done through the usual processes of tenders or RFPs, as the case may be.

MR. MURPHY: Right, okay.

So, we do not have a solid inventory number or anything like that we can go by as regards to the equipment?

MR. DAVIS: No.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, alright.

Further up in Transportation and Communications on line 03 as well, $174,000 budgeted, $195,000 actual that was spent, and $174,000 again for this year.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, the $21,000 increase was due to staff on off-site projects. There were some additional costs there which were essentially because of the transportation and communications that occurred because of off-site projects that occurred there. The change for this year reflects anticipated expenditures for this area. It basically comes down to what the needs are anticipated for next year.

MR. MURPHY: The needs are going to be less than the actual this time?

MR. DAVIS: They are, yes.

MR. MURPHY: Because I noticed the budgeted amount is the same for last year.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, those extra amounts were because of the off-site needs that occurred.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

Section 4.1.02 Information Management, under Salaries as well; there is a bit of a drop when it comes to Salaries in that section, $1,557,900 was the actual budgeted and the revised figure is $1,274,800. Again, for that particular line figure the Salaries are projected to be up for this year. I wonder if you could give us an overview.

MR. DAVIS: I can. On the first part, the $283,000 savings is primarily due to delayed recruitment in filling vacant positions. It also is a result of employee turnover that has happened. It is generally vacancies throughout the year.

In the $57,400 increase for this year, it is a combination of two repatriated positions, which I will explain to you now momentarily, and a salary funding reallocation to the Corporate Operations and Client Services.

Repatriated positions, I should point out to you that there are a large number of positions at OCIO that are contract positions. They are actual employees who work in OCIO that are contracted from private companies. We are in the process of repatriating those positions, to make those positions become government employees once again.

MR. MURPHY: Permanent government, okay.

MR. DAVIS: Yes. We anticipate it would make an impact overall of this year –

OFFICIAL: This year the savings is $2.9 million.

MR. MURPHY: I cannot hear you, I am sorry.

OFFICIAL: It is $2.9 million in savings.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, $2.9 million.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, that will be this year, Mr. Murphy.

MR. MURPHY: Yes. So, I take it for line 05 in this same section it might have all to do with that as well.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir.

MR. MURPHY: For the recruitment and everything, the $500,000 difference there?

MR. DAVIS: That is exactly what it is, yes.

MR. MURPHY: Okay. We can pick the bones out of this one quick enough. That is not bad.

Solution Delivery, 4.1.03.01, you were not far off the budgeted, I guess, $34,000 it looks like. It looks like a huge increase in the budget there, I wonder if you can give me an explanation on that one?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, the same thing again. That is basically a combination of seven repatriated positions and salary funding reallocations from the Operations Branch. So, that is seven more repatriated positions.

MR. MURPHY: I thought government was cutting back on a lot of positions, though you seem to be hiring.

MR. DAVIS: Well, we are. What is happening, these positions currently exist but we are essentially paying private companies to fill that position.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, but these are going to become, again, government positions. So we are not going to have to worry too much about paying out for that.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, they will become government employees. The same if you go to Professional Services; you will see the opposite occur there again.

MR. MURPHY: All right, that is what I sort of figured out for that line, too.

As regards to Transportation and Communications in that section, line 03, gone from $184,600 was the actual. I noticed there was a huge drop there in those numbers from what was budgeted and projected for 2012-2013 down to $101,000. I wonder if you can make that one a little bit more clear for everybody.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, I certainly can. On the revised from budget for last year there is a $36,400 difference, that is due to a lower than anticipated cost on a project, for travel on a specific project.

MR. MURPHY: Can you give us any detail on what that project was?

MR. DAVIS: Certainly, yes. It is a CYFS project – Child, Youth and Family Services project.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: In this year's budget, the decrease of $120,000 relates to projects requiring less travel funds in 2012-2013 such as vital statistics and vessel management.

MR. MURPHY: Okay. Just a little bit more clarification on that CYFS project – any further detail on what that project was?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, that is a case management project that is currently underway.

MR. MURPHY: So we cannot get into any other detail other than that?

MR. DAVIS: Child, Youth and Family Services require case management capabilities.

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: This is a project, especially with the new department being set up.

MR. MURPHY: I was thinking for a second that it might have been a particular case, so just in case there were any names that might have come up. Okay, that is good.

MR. DAVIS: No, it is just case management for caseworkers or for social workers.

MR. MURPHY: Right, that is great.

Farther down as well Property, Furnishings and Equipment, $86,500 was budgeted, $298,400 spent. This year $29,300 projected to be spent this year in the budget – 4.1.03, Solution Delivery, line 07.

MR. DAVIS: There was just under $212,000 due to higher than budgeted hardware requirements, again for CYFS departmental IT set up. You know that there are changes happening, new offices being established.

MR. MURPHY: Right.

MR. DAVIS: That amount was higher than what was initially budgeted.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: The decrease of $57,000 is related to decreased requirements for project hardware purchases.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

CHAIR: George, do you have many more?

MR. MURPHY: No, just one more section right here in Application Services, 4.1.04.

CHAIR: That is okay.

MR. MURPHY: Unless my time is (inaudible) –

CHAIR: No, if you had a few we would go back to Randy –

MR. MURPHY: I will just finish up this section then.

CHAIR: You can do that if you wish, sure.

MR. MURPHY: Then we will pass it back to Randy and Randy should be ready to go then.

CHAIR: Yes.

MR. MURPHY: Mr. Minister, 4.1.04. Application Services, in line 01 as regards to Salaries, I noticed that you did not spend that much. Well I should not say you did not spend that much. There is about $7 million gone there the year, but there was $8 million approximately that was budgeted there. That amount is projected to be higher than what was budgeted for last year. I am wondering if you can explain that.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, there is a difference there of just over $1,011,000. That was due to delayed recruitment, employee turnover and then also some vacancies throughout the year. There are also savings resulted from the temporary internal resource assigned to solution delivery projects, and the budget to eventually support these systems was also implemented.

MR. MURPHY: The increase in Salaries this year would be…

MR. DAVIS: The increase in Salaries this year of $135,000 from last year is a combination of nine repatriated positions.

MR. MURPHY: They are working cheap – nine salaries, $135,000?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, but you also have to balance it off from what happened last year. That is what that mostly is, if you balance off what was taken down from last year.

MR. MURPHY: Perfect, okay.

The only other thing that stands out readily or apparent here is Transportation and Communications. You did not spend so much as what it was last year, but you have the same amount budgeted – line 03 in 4.1.04.

MR. DAVIS: This is a result of some of the salary reductions that we just talked about there in employee turnover and delayed recruitment. Because of that then, they did not travel. That would result in a $31,000 savings lower than anticipated. We do anticipate it will be at the same level as last year for this year.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, that is good.

Just one more thing now in this particular section line 05, Professional Services, $5,953,500 spent, approximately $3.8 million budgeted for Professional Services. I am just wondering if you can give me a breakdown on those professional services that Application Services would be using.

MR. DAVIS: It is $539,100 and it is resulting from costs associated with acquiring additional contract resources to support applications, the backfill for employees assigned to solution delivery projects such as the Human Resource Management System, which is a project underway, and also budget systems. There were people assigned to work on projects and this was backfilling in some of those staff.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, because I did notice the number was down quite a bit actually, $2.1 million. Are you using less in the way of those services?

MR. DAVIS: Pardon me?

MR. MURPHY: Are you using less in the way of those professional services?

MR. DAVIS: For this year?

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, nine repatriated positions again.

MR. MURPHY: So it is just a transfer from one line to the other?

MR. DAVIS: Yes.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

That clarifies that particular section for me right now. Randy, I guess I will digress and pass it back to you, if you have any questions.

MR. EDMUNDS: George, I think the only question you asked (inaudible) is the reduction in Professional Services and the apparent increase, almost in all of the departments, in Purchased Services. That was the line of questioning.

MR. DAVIS: You will see for this year a decrease in Professional Services and an increase in the Salaries, and that is the repatriated positions. What we are doing is we have a number of people who actually work in OCIO who are not government employees. They work for private business. We are repatriating those positions, bringing them back to become government employees. Instead of hiring a private company to provide an employee, we are bringing those positions back to government. That is why you will see the decrease in Professional Services and the increase in Salaries.

MR. EDMUNDS: Having asked that, you almost look at there is a consistency across the board on Employee Benefits. This kind of contradicts some of the salary adjustments.

MR. DAVIS: Employee Benefits will come with the staff as well because Employee Benefits, quite often, are registration fees, training opportunities, or maybe members of professional associations, that type of thing.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

Would we be able to get a breakdown of the positions within the department, salaries attached?

MR. DAVIS: For each individual – we do not have it, but we can try to put that together for you.

MR. EDMUNDS: It kind of just gives you an edge as to how many positions have been lost or how many new positions have been created.

MR. DAVIS: Like I mentioned, there are a number of repatriated positions, but we will try and put together an assessment of that for you if you like.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

CHAIR: Do you have anything else under OCIO, George?

MR. MURPHY: That is it for you, is it, Randy?

CHAIR: That is Randy's questions, yes.

MR. MURPHY: I just wanted to carry on, I guess, for a couple of more line items besides asking just some general questions of the Office of the Chief Information Officer.

In Salaries, just on first appearance – and I should not be making up answers here. I will let you answer the question; that is your job. Just under Salaries, 4.1.05, Information Technology Operations.

MR. DAVIS: Subhead 4.1.05?

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

Information Technology Operations, line 01, Salaries. There is a difference in Salaries. Salaries are up against what was budgeted last year and what the revised was.

MR. DAVIS: The Salaries are up by $137,000 as a result of cost overruns in temporary salaries required for supporting various projects.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

No breakdown on exactly what those projects were?

MR. DAVIS: I can defer to Ellen or Jean on that to see if –

MS MACDONALD: We are running approximately eighty projects right now. That would be like HRMS type projects. We have a new system that we are running. There is a long list of projects.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

There is no chance of getting a breakdown of exactly what those projects are, though, I guess. With eighty projects, I suppose it is –

MS MACDONALD: Related to this specific line item?

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MS MACDONALD: It would be hard for us, but we could do that.

MR. MURPHY: Well, the more significant dollar amounts would be okay, just to give us an idea of exactly where the money is going, that sort of thing.

MS MACDONALD: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: One of the things that sometimes occur in an operation – OCIO has 379 positions, is the last count I have, and you may have someone who works on or who has input on more than one project.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: So you may be working on –

MS MACDONALD: (Inaudible) break it down.

MR. MURPHY: I can understand the difficulty then, okay.

MR. DAVIS: So there are eighty current projects under this section.

MR. MURPHY: Yes, okay.

Well, maybe if you can just give us a brief overview, for example, of one project, what one project would entail there in that particular line item and that would probably be sufficient, just to get a flavour of that particular department.

MR. DAVIS: So, did you want those details, or did you want some comments on it now?

MR. MURPHY: Well, if she has details on one particular project, just to give us a sense…

MR. DAVIS: If there is an example that maybe you could provide.

MR. MURPHY: Any example that stands out?

MS MACDONALD: So, for example, we could talk about the Child, Youth and Family Services departmental IT setup.

MR. MURPHY: Sure.

MS MACDONALD: When that department was formed, we took a bunch of employees who used to be part of Eastern Health and they moved into the department, and we had to supply them all with new equipment. So, we have a lot of people, as you can see in this branch, which are supporting the 8,000 employees of government. In order to be able to support that extra work, we had to bring in temporary people. Really what would happen is some of our full-time staff who knew government well went off to support the new department setup, and then we had temporary people to augment that service.

MR. MURPHY: Got you, perfect, just what we were looking for. Thank you very much for that, by the way.

Mr. Minister, just an explanation as regards to why the Salaries in this particular department would be up this year (inaudible) –

MR. DAVIS: That accounts primarily for seven repatriated positions.

MR. MURPHY: So these would be contract positions again, and of course, coming from Purchased Services further down?

MR. DAVIS: Professional Services.

MR. MURPHY: Sorry, Professional Services, I meant to say.

That is good for me in that section. I guess we will run down Solution Delivery, 4.1.06. Salaries were up considerably over what was budgeted last year and well up over what the actual was spent for this year – in line 01.

MR. DAVIS: Well, there was $149,000 savings on Salaries –

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: – and that was due to delays in resources starting on the CYFS case management project.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: On the increased Salaries for next year, there is a $674,000 difference, and that is to support capital salary costs for projects such as the FMS system, the CYFS system as well, and the HRMS system. That is the Financial Management System; the Child, Youth and Family Services case management system; and the Human Resource Management System. They are all projects underway.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, sounds good to me.

Nothing else stands out there other than Professional Services are well up, $20 million forecast for this year against $15.9 million that was spent last year. Professional Services, line 05.

MR. DAVIS: There is an increase of this year over last year. That is just over $2 million, about $2,142,000. That relates to projects such as again the HRMS, the Financial Management System, and the CYFS project. There are some other systems that are affecting that as well, some smaller projects that are affecting that as well.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, all right.

Back down to line 06, in Purchased Services there is a big disparity in monies there: $62,100 spent against $475,000.

MR. DAVIS: There is savings there of $413,000 due to deferral of projects and projects just not being where they were when it was anticipated. They are not at the stage where they thought they would have been. One of those is like the CYFS system.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

Are there any other projects here that we should be concerned about as regards to the money that is gone into that budget? Of course, it looks like the money has just been rolled over to be carried on. So it is an ongoing thing, is it? My understanding would be from that.

MR. DAVIS: I am sorry, try again?

MR. MURPHY: Yes, it looks like a rollover of money from one year to the next that is building up obviously for something to proceed here.

MR. DAVIS: Under Purchased Services you mean?

MR. MURPHY: Right.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, there is $295,000 increase in budget there this year. That is related to an office lease for the Human Resource Management System, HRMS, and also the FMS, Financial Management System.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: That is for training as well. I think there is a training component to that.

OFFICIAL: That is for a physical location (inaudible).

MR. DAVIS: Yes.

MR. MURPHY: You say an office lease. Where is that office or those offices leased?

MR. DAVIS: Pippy Place.

MR. MURPHY: Up on Pippy Place.

OFFICIAL: Where Child, Youth and Family Services used to be on Pippy Place.

MR. MURPHY: I am just trying to remember now where they were.

OFFICIAL: They just moved in there recently.

MR. MURPHY: North Atlantic Building?

OFFICIAL: I do not know the name of the building.

OFFICIAL: Seventeen Pippy Place.

MR. MURPHY: Seventeen Pippy Place, okay. I will find it – former taxi driver by trade.

As regards to the leases then, Mr. Minister – well this particular case might be a case in point. I know Child, Youth and Family Services are going to be moving in down on Elizabeth Avenue if they have not done it already with the retrofits and that sort of thing.

Are we talking about any savings of money or anything? Are these offices going to moving any time in the future?

MR. DAVIS: Any savings for leases in relation to…

MR. MURPHY: Particularly for Child, Youth and Family Services.

MR. DAVIS: I would not have that information for you. The space that is leased here is directly for OCIO staff and implementation projects.

MR. MURPHY: So they would be kept separate, over and above, from CYFS?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, any leasing or office space for CYFS would probably go to that department.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

That does it for me as regards the line items with this particular department. We will pass it back to Randy in case he has any other questions before we go on.

CHAIR: Do you have anything else on OCIO before we clue up, Randy?

MR. EDMUNDS: No.

CHAIR: You are finished with it, George?

MR. MURPHY: For the time being. I am just trying to see now if I have anything else here as to questions.

CHAIR: What we are going to do is call for the subheads and we will be able to let that particular staff group leave. Just remember we have three hours for Government Services, so all of these committees are under the one, if you want to use more time on OCIO.

MR. MURPHY: I am pretty sure they will be up all night for us. I do not know if there is a hockey game on tonight you might be worried about.

I have no other questions here for OCIO, so OCIO is dismissed for the evening.

CHAIR: We will call for the subheads for the Office of the Chief Information Officer.

CLERK: Subhead 4.1.01 to 4.1.07 inclusive.

CHAIR: Subhead 4.1.01 to 4.1.07 inclusive.

Shall the subheads carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, subheads 4.1.01 through 4.1.07 carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, OCIO, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister.

MR. DAVIS: Thank you.

Of course, I cannot leave with them, hey?

CHAIR: Absolutely not.

We had a little technical problem there at the beginning, just for the sake of the information of everybody, because the Office of the Chief Information Officer was not really under Service NL. It was in another subhead and was not in with the rest of the Government Services.

MR. DAVIS: It is under Executive Branch, yes. Sorry.

CHAIR: That is why we have a little difficulty getting some questions from that particular department.

We will continue on, according to sticking with the Service Newfoundland and Labrador and the Estimates book, to Occupational Health and Safety.

MR. DAVIS: We can, or if it is okay with you, Mr. Chair, we could probably go to the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division.

CHAIR: Okay. We can go to the Review Division, and I will call for the subheads for the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review Division.

CLERK: Subhead 5.1.01.

CHAIR: Okay, 5.1.01.

Randy?

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes, I have a few questions on the workers' compensation headline. I could go through so many and then I guess I will hand it over to George to go through a few more.

The first question on the line by line would be, the allocation in last year's budget was $715,700 and the actual was $444,000. I am just looking for some clarification on the just under $300,000 difference.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, certainly. There was a reorganization carried out in the review division, and part of that reorganization resulted in the identification and the desire to fill and create three new positions. Those three positions being: a solicitor for the review division, which previously did not exist; a manager of operations; and also an appeals officer. It was anticipated early that those positions would have been filled during the 2011-2012 Budget year; however, they were not.

The solicitor's position was filled in October, 2011, and the manager of operations and appeals officer positions has just recently been filled. So, that would allow those three positions, not included in the salaries, to account for the variance in the salaries.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay. I think everyone else under the estimates, there looks to be no big fluctuations.

On our Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, I do have a number of questions. In January you announced a review of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, which is mandatory I think every five years. Are there any updates on this review and when there could be a report coming forward?

MR. DAVIS: The Statutory Review Committee was established in January of this year. There are three committee members. One was a nominee by the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour, one was a nominee by Newfoundland and Labrador Employers' Council, and the third one was a nominee representative from the Commission.

They are taking a two-phased approach. The first phase is to conduct a comprehensive review of current legislation that is in place. They are doing some work on jurisdictional scans across the country as well to see what is taking place in some of the other provinces.

Once that is completed, their intention is to file a discussion document which will then be made available prior to moving into a round of public consultations. I would anticipate that the public consultations should get underway in the next few months, two or three months I am thinking, hoping.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

During this evaluation, I am assuming the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission will look at what it has achieved over the last five years and what it is supposed to be doing.

MR. DAVIS: It is a fairly comprehensive overview that is taking place at this point in time. Then once they complete that phase and complete the document, then they will also go to public consultations. Once they go to public consultations, of course, the door would be open for anybody who has an interest or a desire to present to the committee, will have the opportunity to do that.

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes, okay. Thanks.

I am just going through some of the information that has been coming out. Last year I know in the forest industry the number of injury rates went from, percentage-wise, 2.4 per cent to 3.3 per cent. In the meantime, the forestry industry is taking drastic reduction in forest harvesting. I am wondering why a higher rate on a reduced amount of operations in the forestry sector?

MR. DAVIS: Accident rates are done on incidence per 100 workers is the number that is quite often used. For example, the overall rate right now for 2011 has been determined to be 1.8 injuries or incidences per 100 employees.

As for that particular sector, I am going to ask Ms Galway or Mr. Mahoney if they want to comment on that.

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes, and just in the interest of saving time here, is there a specific sector in which these injuries did take place?

MS GALWAY: We do track the injury rates over each of our identified industries. They include: health care; wholesale, retail and trade; transportation and warehousing services; finance, insurance, and real estate; and we have agriculture, manufacturing, fish processing, forestry, construction, fish harvesting, and mining.

You mentioned forestry in particular. In 2009, the lost-time incidence rate for that industry was 2.8, and in 2010 it went down to 2.4. In 2011 it increased again, as you pointed out, to 3.3. Part of what you have to consider when you look at each of these industries is the number of people who are working from year to year.

There has been a significant change in the working population within the forestry industry. That may have its own impact on the calculation over time. The people who remain in the industry now would no longer have the pulp and paper industry as prominent as it was in the past. So, the mix of the companies that are in that industry can have an impact.

CHAIR: I am just going to butt in for a second.

The minister has been doing such a great job answering all of the questions that we are getting to some of the staff. It would be a good idea for the staff to introduce themselves when responding to a question for Hansard.

MR. EDMUNDS: I am glad you pointed that out, Mr. Chair, because I could not remember the names.

CHAIR: Randy.

MR. EDMUNDS: In going through the reports again, there were also some increases in the health and social services sector.

Can you shed some light on where these injuries occurred, and in what manner? I am sure it is a wide open question, and there could be any number of possibilities for the injuries that take place in the health and social services sector.

MR. DAVIS: Which sector is that, sorry?

MR. EDMUNDS: Health care and social services.

MS GALWAY: You are correct. There was an increase in the number of lost-time incidence rates in the health industry between 2010 and 2011. It increased from 2.4 to 2.8.

We have available on our Web site information on each of these industry categories. What you will find on these industry fact sheets is a breakdown of the types of injuries, the body parts that are most impacted, as well as a breakdown between lost-time incidence rates there, health care only, and any fatalities in that industry. That may be useful. If you like, we could provide that information for you.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, thanks.

Just a couple of questions on Review Division, I am assuming it is under the same headline.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, go ahead.

I look at it as the same but different in that the Review Division is independent from the Commission. While they service the same or similar clients, their roles are different but the Review Division is an independent organization that can review the decisions made by the Commission. They are independent from the Commission from that regard.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

The question is along the number of cases that have come forward and the number of cases that are under review and being carried forward. With the number of new cases coming forward, there is still a large increase in the numbers up for appeal. I use the last 2010-2011 for example, where there were 186 appeals that were carried forward the past year and in 2010 it was 137, yet the new numbers of applications have gone down.

Is there a strain on the Review Division to process some of the appeals that are coming through that shows this significant difference?

MR. DAVIS: There has been, and I think myself that there are a couple of different reasons for that, Mr. Edmunds. One is I think that cases are more complex than they have been in the past. There was a considerable amount of diligence done in hearing cases and reviewing cases as well. As well, last year we recruited three new commissioners and we also had two who resigned in the last year.

We still have vacancies in commissioners which we are in the process of filling. Those two resignations have created that challenge as well in the caseload. We are working on that, and we are looking forward to filling those positions with an effort to clear up that backlog that appears to be there right now.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay. So I can assume that you are doing what you can to address these issues and to reduce the number of appeals that are carried forward.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, we are. Our goal is to have these appeals dealt with in a manner that is as expeditious as possible. We have to have the commissioners to hear those appeals. With the three new commissioners who came in last year, they went through an extensive training program prior to actually taking files and starting to hear reviews. It is only early this year that they are starting to actually hear cases. There was a fair bit of time and a fair bit of work to get those commissioners trained, prepared, have the information and knowledge and abilities to actually start hearing cases.

As I said, we are in the process of recruiting three new commissioners now to add to that complement, and that will bring us up, if we are successful in recruiting three, to the maximum amount of commissioners allowed, which is seven.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, thanks.

I have a couple of more questions here, but I would like to jump ahead to the situation at Marystown Shipyard where the workers are looking for compensation, where the workers have gone to see a specialist, Dr. Noel Kerin, regarding the claims and workplace effects it had on these workers.

What is the status on the applications coming forward a result of injuries in Marystown Shipyard?

MR. DAVIS: Maybe by way of an overview on that, if I may, and then if I do not provide you with anything that you want, then we can pursue that as well. There have been fifty-nine claims made from Marystown Shipyard workers. Twenty-two of those have had claims that had been approved.

The approach with the Marystown Shipyard workers is the same as it is for any other industry or any other employee in any workplace in the Province in that if you have a claim to file, then you file that claim with the Commission. Each and every claim has to be assessed on its own merits, so there has to be an assessment process that we go through. They can be very complex and I can tell you they can be very difficult matters.

What happened with Marystown and the Marystown Shipyard workers has had a significant impact on a large number of workers and their families. It is a very important matter for me, as minister, and I know that these cases are considered very seriously by the Commission as well.

As a result of the last statutory review that took place there was a formation of what we call ODAP, which is the Occupational Disease Advisory Panel. One of the first pieces of business that the Occupational Disease Advisory Panel was to engage IRSST, as you are probably familiar with, which is an institute out of Montreal, very well recognized, highly regarded organization in Montreal, Quebec, that was asked to look at these circumstances of shipyard workers. They actually looked at over 300 reports of shipyard workers and compiled a report for the Commission that, to my understanding, is unequalled anywhere in the world. It was a fairly significant piece of study of reports.

That particular piece of work is now being used by the Commission to assist them in adjudicating cases from Marystown Shipyard workers. The position of the Commission and myself has been that if there is a shipyard worker from Marystown who feels that they have new information, new scientific or medical information, or that this IRSST report may have a bearing on a previous adjudication or denial of their claim, then we ask them to contact the Commission and talk to the Commission about any new information or new considerations that may have taken place.

As for Dr. Kerin, he has had significant discussions with some of the family members in Marystown and if Dr. Kerin or anyone else, not only him but if anybody has any further medical or scientific evidence that could be made available to the Commission to assist them in adjudication of those claims, I know I can speak for the Commission that we are quite accepting of any new information that may be made available to them, medical or scientific information.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

In the IRSST there was really no specific reference made to the Marystown Shipyard, but the reason I bring this up is because for some of those workers who are affected it has been a long time and it has been an uphill struggle. Just one more question on Marystown: Is there any system in place for monitoring the health of those impacted while they are waiting for additional information, like you said, to come forward?

MR. DAVIS: If any person, any resident of the Province, who has their own family physician or their own health care available to them –and many of us have done that, have tracked our own health through our own family doctors or other doctors that we may have who are caring for us. They have that available to them.

I think it is important, if I may, just for a moment, to put in perspective what the Commission actually is because sometimes there is a misunderstanding and confusion created. The Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission is, in the first place, a no-fault insurance program for workers in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is sometimes confused as a social program or a government-funded health care program, and it is not that. They are funded completely by the employers in Newfoundland and Labrador for the benefit of workers in Newfoundland and Labrador.

It is an insurance program, and very similar to our insurance program that we would have or a person may have in their workplace, it has limitations. It has benefits that can be provided to the plan member in the case of a private insurance program. In order to take to advantage of those benefits, there is a process that you have to go through.

Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission is much the same as that. It is a no-fault insurance program. If you feel you have a claim against the services they provide, then you can file a claim and the claim becomes adjudicated. The same as you would with a private insurance company.

If you have a car accident today and you call your insurance company and say, I want to file a claim. Then there is a claim process and an adjudication process you go through in that regard. The Commission works in a very similar way. The difference is, of course, the Commission is there for workers in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is probably one of – if not one of, the broadest coverage for workers in any province.

In this Province now we are at about 97 per cent. About 97 per cent of workers in Newfoundland and Labrador are covered under the Commission. I think that is the highest percentage of any province in Canada. So, I think it is important to back up for us to understand what the Commission is. Each case that comes to the Commission is adjudicated on its own merits.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, thanks.

If my colleague would permit me just one more question on the review division, there is a clause in the regulations that states that the division may seek legal advice from an independent advisor. What we are starting to see now is there is a government lawyer showing up to a lot of these hearings. Is this a new process? Is this the standard operating procedure now?

When you talk about independence, to me – and I am hoping you can answer the question – it is somewhat compromising to independence.

MR. DAVIS: I will defer to Ms Galway again, but the Commission has its own staff counsel who assists them and provides them with legal advice and direction. I do not know of a case when a government lawyer would have been involved in the adjudication.

MS GALWAY: With the appeal process, there will be some cases where we will have our legal counsel present and other cases where we will have review specialists from our internal review group attend. The purpose of which is to provide information that is useful to the Commissioner that is hearing the case, as well as provide some background information. We cannot possibly provide legal counsel for each case, and it would not be appropriate to do so.

It is only in special circumstances where the case itself is quite complicated that we would have someone present. I know we have had legal counsel attend some of the employer claims where there are questions with respect to our prime program. In certain cases where there is a request for cost recovery by the employer we have sent our legal council, but generally speaking, we would not have legal counsel present. It is not a trend to send them more often.

MR. DAVIS: Was your question in regard to the appeals division or claims?

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: I am sorry, my mistake. I thought you were asking about when claims were being adjudicated, but it was actually about appeals.

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes, just to the hearings.

MR. DAVIS: Yes.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

I think I have gone fifteen minutes, Mr. Chair, and I will sit down.

CHAIR: Yes, a little bit over, but that is fine because George went over a little bit on the previous one.

MR. MURPHY: I will forgive him.

CHAIR: Back to you, George.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you very much.

Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission I think is probably one division of government, albeit at arm's-length, that probably gets more beaten than any other department that I can think of with government. I do not know whether that is rightly or wrongly.

I do not think anybody's character or anything like that should be attacked whenever it comes to that but, personally speaking, with some of the cases and everything that I deal with, I do not know. I have not really seen the word fairness in there sometimes. I know I am only early into my own mandate here but there is any one of a number of examples that we have all been taken up with, I think, over the last couple of years.

Do you think the Workplace, Health and Safety Compensation Commission, Ms Galway, would be given a bad rap? Let me start off by saying that, or asking that, Minister.

MR. DAVIS: I think I will jump in on that one, if you do not mind.

The first thing I would have to say to that, Mr. Murphy, is there can be nothing more difficult for a family than a provider of that family becoming injured and losing their ability to provide for their family. I can understand how people are very emotional about that, how it is important to them, and so they should be.

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: I can tell you, it is important to us as well. The operations of the Commission are important to us as well. This is about people, their lives and their ability to look after themselves and their families. When injuries occur – you know people who have experienced it, and I know people who have experienced it. It can change their lives forever. I know how it is important to people and it is a very emotional, it is a very personal issue for people as well.

What the Commission has to do is a very difficult task. I know when they are adjudicating claims – and I know the 400 employees who work at the Commission have a really tough task in the different branches within the Commission that they operate. They do come under a lot of public scrutiny.

One of the things we are doing, as we talked about, is a statutory review. A statutory review is an opportunity for the Commission to take a step back and say: How are we doing business? How are things taking place? What is it we can do to tweak the processes, the policies, and the way the Commission does its work to do a better job of it?

There does have to be a balance in how you adjudicate claims. There absolutely has to be fairness, there has to be policies, and there has to be a process which when followed sometimes can be really difficult. It can be difficult for the people who are impacted by it and difficult for the people who have to adjudicate those claims.

The other significant stakeholder in this is the employers, because the employers are the ones that pay the bills at the Commission. There has to be balance. We have to give consideration to the employers as well. We cannot drive the cost of premiums high. We pay very high premiums. Employers pay very high premiums in this Province for the benefits that are received, amongst the highest in the country right now.

As I mentioned earlier, there are also some really good things happening for injured workers as well at the Commission, but it is a steady battle. It is a hard job that they do. The statutory review we are going through right now is a good opportunity to have a look at that and to hear from people who have an interest in the Commission and want to have a say, or make suggestions, or propose changes and so on.

MR. MURPHY: As regards to the statutory review, you mentioned it was going to be getting underway officially, I think, in about two months. Some people have been named in the process, I think probably about two months ago.

MR. DAVIS: It has been underway for a long time. There are two phases.

MR. MURPHY: Yes, but they have not done any actual interviewing as regards to –

MR. DAVIS: Regarding public consultation.

MR. MURPHY: Public consultation is what I am trying to get at, yes.

MR. DAVIS: In the next few months that should take place.

It is a fairly comprehensive review. When you do a statutory review such as this, it is a significant piece of work to be done. I think it is important while they are doing it, that they take the time to do it to the best of their abilities and do a good job of it.

The goal is, when they complete the paper review that is taking place right now, a discussion document will be prepared and made available to the public to review. We need to give them some time then to have a look at it before they carry out the consultations. It is no good to release it on Friday and start the consultations on Monday.

MR. MURPHY: No. Hopefully you will do both on the Monday.

MR. DAVIS: What is that?

MR. MURPHY: Hopefully we will start both of them on a Monday.

MR. DAVIS: Well, you want some time for people to have a chance to review it as well.

MR. MURPHY: Yes, exactly.

I just want to come over to something you said about employer compliance. Is there much of a problem now as regards to WHSCC and employer compliance? As regards to getting employers to pay their bills, are you finding any difficulties to have employers owe up to their end of the bargain, so to speak?

Once an employee is injured, he is injured probably in some cases for life, any reluctance to compliance amongst employers to have to pay their bills?

MR. DAVIS: That is probably more of an administrative question. I will let Ms Galway or Mr. Mahoney respond.

MS GALWAY: With respect to our process, it does work exactly the same way as an insurance program that most of us have works. We will provide insurance in the form of an assessment premium to the employers. That will cover the cost as calculated by our actuaries that is necessary overall to pay for the injuries of that year. Once that assessment is paid, we would take from that fund of money the cost we would need to pay out for those injuries for a lifetime of an injury.

If you are concerned about the payment by employers, we have a group of individuals within the Commission who also pay attention to collection to ensure that our accounts are up to date. We have a very low, bad debt expense that is associated with that over time. Businesses sometimes do get into difficultly and they are not able to continue. We have mechanisms in place where we try to recover as much of the outstanding assessment bills as possible.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, all right. I was wondering about that.

Mr. Minister, just to come back to one line that was – a question, I guess, in the line items. Page 5.15, 5.1.01 Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review, line 06 Purchased Services. The only question I really have is in regard to this section: $175,000 was the actual revised figure for 2011-2012, against $120,500 for the 2012-2013 Estimates.

MR. DAVIS: The change there, Mr. Murphy, was in relation to renovations that were required to accommodate the three new positions that I talked about earlier, the solicitor, the manager of operations, and the appeals officer.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: There were renovations required in the office in order to accommodate those three new positions.

MR. MURPHY: All right.

Those offices are where, again?

MR. DAVIS: Those offices are in Mount Pearl, on Mount Carson Avenue in Mount Pearl.

MR. MURPHY: On Mount Carson Avenue. It is more rental space, is it?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, it is rental space, but the offices they are currently contained in had to undergo renovations to make allowance for the three new employees, the three new positions that were created.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, perfect. That is great.

That is all I have as regards to the line items that were there, but I just wanted to come back to have a look here to see if I had any more questions on WHSCC.

You had $200,000 budgeted, I guess, for that office. Is that sufficient for those three, for the review?

MR. DAVIS: I am sorry, which line are you in?

MR. MURPHY: Well, it is just a general question, really. I think there was a $200,000 amount that was budgeted for the three people who were going to be undertaking the review. Is that right?

MR. DAVIS: On the Purchased Services? Or are you talking about the Professional Services?

MR. MURPHY: Professional Services.

MR. DAVIS: The Professional Services were $200,000 and the revised was $150,000.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: That corresponds to the new commissioners. We had hoped to have them trained and prepared to start taking new files earlier than they had; then they actually did start taking files. They were not up to speed, if you like, and taking files as early as hoped. So that made the difference in the $50,000 reduction there.

MR. MURPHY: Perfect. Okay.

Just one other question on WHSCC in general, some inspection orders – I just have a quick little note wrote down here: Orders not always complied with and about one-third of the time no follow-up was carried out to ensure compliance. That was from the Auditor General's Report.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, and that is actually for the Occupational Health and Safety Branch of Service NL, so if you want to hold on to that one for a minutes.

MR. MURPHY: Save it for then.

MR. DAVIS: We will save it.

MR. MURPHY: Perfect.

MR. DAVIS: We will try to remember to make sure to remind you when we get to that branch that we will –

MR. MURPHY: Oh, do not worry; I have a page full of stuff here.

Okay, that is all that I have, sir, under WHSCC.

CHAIR: Okay.

Randy, do you have anything else under that one?

MR. EDMUNDS: Just a couple of a quick questions, I kind of skipped a few.

According to the act, the commissioner has up to sixty days to communicate a decision. Going back to the three positions that you are trying to fill, I imagine that is what is creating the backlog and going above and beyond the sixty days – I think in some cases five months. Can I assume that once you get those commissioner positions filled, that you will be able to climb back up to the sixty-day deadline?

MR. DAVIS: Well, I would not assume anything, but that is certainly the goal, is to provide a faster service, faster turnaround on reviews. That is certainly the goal.

We have to ensure that the review division, that commissioners carry out their work in an appropriate and a thorough, and a comprehensive manner. In order to do that, we need to make sure we have the right people tasked with the roles in the first place, and that they have the skills and the tools and the training and ability to do that. So, we want to make sure that is done properly first.

The goal is to turn cases around faster, but having said that, that does not mean I want – I do not want to see anything being rushed, but we want to make they are able to turn these around in a much faster manner than what we have here now. The commissioners that are there now, they are doing good work. It is just that we need more of them to keep up with the caseloads.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, thanks.

Just one quick question; I have never had to go through a hearing process, and I hope I never have to, but sometimes as critic you get information from individuals who have. Some of the concerns that have been brought at least to my attention is they were under the impression that the hearings are supposed to be informal. What they are starting to see is a trend that is becoming more like a courtroom process and a little more serious. So, I am not sure what the process is. Is the division now taking a more formal approach to these hearings, would be my question?

MR. DAVIS: Well, I am glad you have asked it, because I meant to mention this earlier.

One of the new positions is an appeals officer, which has just recently been filled. Part of the role of the appeals officer would be to work with clients who are filing an appeal, to help review their files. The appeals officer may provide suggestions to the person filing an appeal that they may want to include more information or obtain other information to assist them in their appeal.

The Commission itself and the commissioners, how they conduct themselves is a quasi-judicial process. I really cannot speak to how one commissioner may carry out a hearing versus another commissioner.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: It is a quasi-judicial process that is subject to appeal. It is the highest level from the Commission as far as appeal to the Commission. We expect them to do a good job, to be thorough, to be fair and consider all the information. The same as when the Commission adjudicates a case in the first instance, they have to base their decisions based on the laws that are in place and the rules that are in place in regard to the Commission.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, thanks.

Mr. Chair, I think that is all I have on the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review.

CHAIR: Okay, that is it? George?

MR. MURPHY: That is it, sir, for me.

CHAIR: Okay, we will call for the subhead on Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review.

CLERK: Subhead 5.1.01 and 6.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall 5.1.01 and 6.1.01 inclusive carry?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, subhead 5.1.01 and 6.1.01 carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the total carried?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, total carried.

CHAIR: Okay, thank you, Minister, for that portion.

MR. DAVIS: Thank you.

We have three that will leave now at this point in time. If you want to go next to the –

CHAIR: Some of the more lucky ones. All smiles they are.

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Chair, we can go through Service NL if you would like or we can jump over to the Government Purchasing Agency which would be the next – whichever way.

CHAIR: That is the next one on there. If it is okay with George and Randy, we can finish with Government Purchasing. We are very close to the 6.1.01 – we just called that one, didn't we?

MR. MURPHY: I was just going to ask you a question about that actually.

CHAIR: Yes, we can go back. Actually when we called in the subhead, we called in 6.1.01.

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

CHAIR: We can go back to it and that would be Government Purchasing Agency. Did you want to start off on that one, Randy?

MR. EDMUNDS: I have had the floor long; I think I will throw it over to –

CHAIR: It is okay with George. George, you can start off that one for us.

MR. MURPHY: Sure.

Subhead 6.1.01, Government Purchasing Agency, the first line in Salaries is $173,300 less than what was budgeted. We will start off there.

MR. DAVIS: The $173,000 variance is a result of the delays in filling positions. It is vacancies in positions and a delay in recruiting positions.

MR. MURPHY: I notice that Salaries as well is a little bit lower than what was budgeted in 2011-2012.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, there is a $93,500 variance and that is a result of forecasted adjustments for the removal of funding for implementation of procurement reform positions. That is a forecasted change, an adjustment that is coming for the future for this year.

MR. MURPHY: Cutbacks?

MR. DAVIS: No, but I meant to mention earlier, because some of those adjustments earlier were small ones that were made. I will try to do a better job of pointing those out to you as we go through here.

MR. MURPHY: We would appreciate that. Especially if we do not ask, it would be nice to hear about it.

There is really only one more that stands out here. As regards to Purchased Services, $90,000 was the actual against $183,900, and budgeted for $116,000 this year.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir.

The revised for last year was a $93,000 variance and that is a lower than anticipated advertising costs. Advertising costs are entirely dependent on the overall government's advertising and that is borne by Government Purchasing Agency for all departments for all government advertising.

The $116,000 variance for this year, which is a decrease of $67,900, just under $68,000, is part of the 3 per cent Budget reduction. The other part, $57,900 is additional reallocation of funding of –

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. DAVIS: Property, Furnishings and Equipment is $10,000.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, I think we are good there.

The only question I have as regard to this particular section, Government Purchasing, was in general on policy when it comes around government purchasing. Are you dealing with untendered items as well?

MR. DAVIS: You are referring to the exception report that you see?

MR. MURPHY: Yes, that we see every month. There are times when I have to question some of the things that are purchased because there is, say, for example, nothing else in the area, that sort of thing. One of the items that stood out – I am just trying to recall now. I should have brought the book down with me. I think it was in June month, or may have been July, having to do with a golf tournament in Terra Nova Park. I wish I had more detail on it.

I keep thinking to myself if it was the only golf course in the area and something occurs to me that there is one right across the bay from Terra Nova Park, but it escapes me now. You mentioned advertising as well, I would like to get a little bit of an explanation as to how do they arrive at the conclusion, for example, radio advertising, television advertising, how they come to the conclusion that there would be nobody else competing in that particular field in any particular area?

MR. DAVIS: Again, it would depend on which one you are looking at. I think it is important to point out that the exception report that is tabled in the House of Assembly, when the House is in session, sometimes it is misunderstood as procurement that occurs contrary to the act. That is not the case. The act lays out the rules and procedures that must be followed when purchasing goods and services. Quite often, that is done by tender, depending on the nature of what is being purchased. If it is a good or a service, then there are boundaries where you must follow tender processes.

There are exceptions to when tenders have to be called and tenders are required. When that exception occurs, when tenders are not being called for one of the outlined reasons which are outlined in the act, then that shows up in the exception report.

Sometimes there is a misconception there – I am not saying you have it, but sometimes there is a misconception or belief that what is in the exception report are goods and services that have been obtained by government or a government funded body, when they did not follow what was required in the act. That is not the case.

MR. MURPHY: All right.

MR. DAVIS: As for the one you are saying for Terra Nova, I am not familiar with it all. Do you know off-hand, Sonya, what it might be?

We can look that up and we can get that information to you. We can find out what that is for you and get that information to you.

MR. MURPHY: I know it is in the book and I should have brought the book down with me. I said no, that is one of the things I will leave behind, but I will take it next year.

There is nothing else I can think of right now in government purchasing. On my end of things, I am just taking a quick look over the notes here. I think that is about the only thing that we might have had on it.

CHAIR: Randy.

MR. EDMUNDS: The only question I had was a long the same lines as George. I did not go through the whole list of purchases outside of the tendering process because there were too many, but I did go through a major portion of it and I could only highlight things that were sort of relevant to my area in terms of location, say, Goose Bay and Lab City.

The one thing that jumped out at me is the number of occasions where snowmobiles were bought for whatever government department. The reason for the purchase outside of the tendering process is that no one else was available with the sale of these snowmobiles.

In Goose Bay alone there are four dealerships. There are two on the South Coast. There are three in Lab City. So that was one of the questions: How, on top of the spending outside of the tendering process – it is pretty much insignificant but it jumped out at me enough that I said that I would bring it up under the Purchasing Agency.

I think it is more of an information bit for you as opposed to a question from me, because I think you have already answered the question.

MR. DAVIS: In a process like that they are followed fairly well by staff in the Government Purchasing Agency. There are actually forty-six positions at the Government Purchasing Agency who follow the trail of a lot of the procurement, the purchase of goods and services.

Whatever is contained in that exception report has been reviewed by staff of the Government Purchasing Agency. We would be able to provide you with information as to why that occurred or what was the explanation for it, for anything that is contained within the exception report. If there is any time that there is something that comes up like that, you can feel free to contact us. We will be sure to look it up for you and give you the information.

You will see there quite often – I cannot speak for the one that you just mentioned, by the way, not offhand. I do not know – Sonya, do you know that one offhand?

MS PAYNE: (Inaudible) there could be various reasons why, as well. It depends; maybe they were not available at the particular time that they were required. It could have been that they did not meet the particular specifications.

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes, being from Labrador, you have to be careful which snowmobile you are buying. You could get caught up in the snowmobile wars.

MR. DAVIS: There are sometimes - you will see there, for example, a purchase of school textbooks and there is only one producer of that textbook. So you would see exceptions in the exception report in cases like that, when there are sole sourced emergency purchases – what are the more common ones?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes, I have noticed that there are emergency situations. There have been expenditures on some of the vessels. You do not have time to go through a tendering process.

MR. DAVIS: Right.

MR. EDMUNDS: Or heavy equipment that needs to be fixed right there and then. Other than that, it is just a few that jumped out at me that I just mentioned.

MR. DAVIS: Absolutely, and that is a really good example on ferries. When a ferry needs a repair, it needs a repair and you need to do it as quickly as you can to get the ferry back in operation.

MR. EDMUNDS: Or a replacement.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, or a replacement.

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Chair, that is all I have.

CHAIR: Great.

What we have to remember is that we did call for subheads 5.1.01 and 6.1.01, which did include Government Purchasing.

Thank you, Minister, for another portion.

MR. DAVIS: Thank you.

There is one more departing.

CHAIR: Yes.

MR. EDMUNDS: It is getting smaller over there.

CHAIR: Now we will call the subhead for Service Newfoundland and Labrador, Executive and Support Services.

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Subhead 1.1.01.

Randy, do you want to start it off?

MR. EDMUNDS: I am assuming this is Executive and Support Services.

CHAIR: Yes.

MR. EDMUNDS: I did not bother picking at the numbers that were just minor differences, but there were some that did stand out and are worth mentioning. Line 06 of 1.1.01, in 2011-2012 it was budgeted for $18,800 and was revised to $1,500. It is a noticeable difference and one to look at. Why the decrease in Purchased Services?

MR. DAVIS: On that line item there is a tendency that could change radically depending on the activities taking place in the department at the time. The $17,300 variance is a reduction in expenditures for advertising and primarily advertising for the department at that time. We realize that, depending on the activities of the department, we anticipate we could most likely be more in line with what is budgeted there for this year.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

Line 07, Property, Furnishings and Equipment seems to be almost consistent throughout the different sub-departments under Executive and Support Services. In 2011-2012 the budget was for $500 and the revised was actually $3,900. I am assuming you are not anticipating a bigger budget.

MR. DAVIS: No, we are not. There was some new furniture and equipment purchased for the office in the last year. There were new Blackberrys that were obtained as well. There was a new shredder bought as well. There were some items that were bought – it is a very small line item; it does not take much of a purchase to knock that out. We do not anticipate that there will be any significant requirements this year.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

Just moving down to section 1.2.01, under Executive Support, line 05, there is a major increase in revision. In 2011-2012 it was budgeted $35,000 and was revised to $5,000. Now 2013, you are projecting $135,000. It is a $100,000 jump from your budgeted amount for last year.

MR. DAVIS: The department, as you know, we have had a name change and we are changing focus. We are moving towards a new brand of Service NL. That $100,000 in Professional Services is to develop the plan and the strategies on how we move from where we were with Government Services to Service NL.

Instead of being in a government-focused service, we are moving to a client, resident or citizen-based service is where we want to go. We want to focus our services on the citizen, not on the government.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

Below that, there are differences but nothing major. Section 1.2.03, Regulatory Reform, there is a big difference in Salaries there, from $306,100 to $262,200 in line 01.

MR. DAVIS: The variance reflects less planned savings due to filling of positions, in addition to a transfer in of a new position as well. There is a new Clerk Typist III under Regulatory Reform.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: I am sorry, was I on the right one? I think I gave you the wrong information there.

MR. EDMUNDS: The $306,100 to $262,200.

MR. DAVIS: I am sorry; yes, I am looking at the wrong notes.

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: The $43,900 –

MR. EDMUNDS: A good salary for a clerk typist.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, really.

That is part of the one just above there on Strategic Human Resources. Under Regulatory Reform, the revised variance of $43,900 reflects savings from vacant positions and delayed recruitment.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: When you will see a reduction in Salaries, that most often is the reason for that.

MR. EDMUNDS: Consumer and Commercial Affairs – before I hand it over to George – 03, 2011-2012 was $65,400 budgeted, the revised was $30,500, and now it is back up again. This is on Transportation and Communications.

MR. DAVIS: There was a larger use this past year in teleconferencing services, therefore it required less travel. Also, the result of some vacancies in positions also had less of an impact, or reduced the need for transportation and communications. That is also one of these line items that have a tendency to fluctuate from year to year, depending on the activities that are occurring in the department at the time.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

I will let George carry on if he wishes.

CHAIR: Yes, sure.

MR. DAVIS: Did you say, George? I think he said for Mr. Murphy to carry on.

CHAIR: I am sorry Randy, did you say you were going to carry on or do you want to pass it on?

MR. EDMUNDS: No, I will let George –

CHAIR: Okay. All right, fine.

MR. MURPHY: Perfect. Thank you, sir.

Section 2.1.03 Commercial Registrations line 01, we have $107,900 less than the budgeted. I was wondering if we can get some clarification here. The revised number that is, and then at the same time, while you are talking about the Salaries, talk about the 2012-2013 estimate because that number is higher than the actual was for last year.

MR. DAVIS: The increase in Salaries for this year, $35,400, reflects a reallocation of salary budget within the department. The variance on last year's is $107,900, and that reflects savings from vacant positions and delayed recruitment. There was some offset there by some overtime costs as well, but essentially the $107,900 reflects savings from vacant positions.

MR. MURPHY: Those positions are not going to be filled, are they? I would be wondering that, of course, knowing government's 3 per cent austerity program that they are into.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, there is intention to fill those positions.

MR. MURPHY: There is intention to fill those positions?

MR. DAVIS: Yes.

MR. MURPHY: Okay. That is the reason why the 2012-2013 number is up.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, that is right. It is back to where – more in line with what it is this year. Sometimes when you have vacancies created or employees leave a department or move to another department, then there is a process that takes place and sometimes there is a delay in refilling those positions.

MR. MURPHY: Okay. These are obviously what government would deem a necessity then. How many positions were they, again?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, we deem it necessary. How many positions?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. DAVIS: It is not necessarily one or two positions, it could be multiple positions.

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: The entire department has 561 positions, so there is fairly regular movement. Everyday there is somebody coming or going. There is a fair movement of staff throughout the department. When you see those positions change or move, there could be a number of those positions that were vacant for short periods of time, as an example.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

That same section, 2.1.03 Commercial Registrations, further down in line 06 there is about a $23,000 variance between what was budgeted last year, what the actual was for this year, but the same amount is budgeted for this year, as well as in 2011-2012.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, we pay a fee to Moneris, which is for debit and credit card transactions.

MR. MURPHY: What was the name of the company again?

MR. DAVIS: Moneris.

MR. MURPHY: Moneris?

MR. DAVIS: M-O-N-E-R-I-S.

When there is an increase in the usage, there is an increase in the fee. What we had here was $22,300; it reflects the increase in the cost for Moneris fees.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

Does Moneris belong to any particular bank or anything, or is it a separate company, separate entity all together?

MR. DAVIS: They are an independent company separate from banks. Financial institutions would subscribe to their service.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: Most do, and they provide the service then to government. So, government uses Moneris for on-line transactions and banking transactions.

MR. MURPHY: They are not the only company out there, though, are they?

MR. DAVIS: I do not think. I think there are some others, but I think they are one of the main companies that are used. They are obtained through a tender process.

MR. MURPHY: They are obtained through a tender process, that is what I was wondering. Okay.

Just below that in line 07 Property, Furnishings and Equipment, $34,900 budgeted, $10,500 was the actual spent, and budgeted again for $31,400. I would take it that might be – well, I guess I will let you explain.

MR. DAVIS: Well, the variance of the $24,400 on the revised budget for last year reflects less of a requirement for furniture and equipment for that particular year. Again, that is one of these expenditures that have a tendency to vary from year to year.

MR. MURPHY: Right, but it remains fairly steady –

MR. DAVIS: This year's budget is based on what is anticipated.

MR. MURPHY: Perfect. Okay.

I think that is all I have on Consumer and Commercial Affairs when it comes to line items. I think I might have a couple of questions here as regards to government policies, for example.

As regards to the CADO system; I know there were some problems as regards to the CADO system for a little while. I think a story on the radio a number of weeks ago referred to the Internet Explorer type system that they were using. Is there any update on that, or has the government made changes?

MR. DAVIS: I think the circumstances that you are referring to there, is a consumer attempted to obtain or to use a Mac product to access CADO, and then the CADO system would not interact with the Mac system. We probably should have had this discussion a little bit earlier when OCIO was here.

One of the challenges in government – and you got a flavour and grasp, or somewhat of an understanding earlier when OCIO was here, on the magnitude of work that goes on within OCIO. OCIO, their clients are government departments and government agencies. It is constantly a challenge to keep up with technology. There are 8,000 desktop and laptop computers in government. It is a significant number to maintain and keep operating on systems.

If I am referring to the right reference that you are referring to, part of the issue was about older systems that government is using, and that is true. Government does use some older systems that work within government, that operate, interact with each other, and through those 8,000 laptops and desktops they will work and operate with each other. It is a continuous task to try and keep up with the technology that evolves. It evolves so fast and so quickly, you are installing one system and one program when something new comes along. It is a constant challenge. That is essentially what happened there.

The CADO system will interact with most systems. I do not know, since I have been in this position I have not heard of another circumstance or another complaint where CADO did not operate. I am only aware of that particular one.

MR. MURPHY: No, that was the first time I have ever heard of one, but I know the way operating systems change these days you cannot keep up with them anyway. You can go out and buy a computer tomorrow and the day after that it is out of date.

MR. DAVIS: Yes.

MR. MURPHY: Anyway, that is pretty much everything I had as regards to that particular section and those line items.

I would like to thank you for that.

CHAIR: Thank you, George.

Randy.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

Are we moving on to Motor Vehicle Registration, section 3?

CHAIR: Sure. You can start out and go right on through there now.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

I have a few questions there on the lines, and I will have at least one question on Motor Vehicle Registration itself.

Section 3.1.01, line 03 shows a fair discrepancy in the budget from $669,700 to 689,700.

MR. DAVIS: I am sorry, Mr. Edmunds, which line is that?

MR. EDMUNDS: It would be line 03, Transportation and Communications.

MR. DAVIS: Okay.

MR. EDMUNDS: Am I under the right category here, under Administration? It would be under Motor Vehicle Registration.

CHAIR: You said 3.1.01, Randy, number 03?

MR. DAVIS: Line 03, Transportation and Communications.

CHAIR: Transportation and Communications?

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay. I am focusing on Administration here, sorry.

Well, I will start off with my question because it is relevant to rural areas and it is relevant to my district. The way the system is set up now is that you can go on-line and do registrations and it is not a problem. There are also cases where the government has made exceptions to rural areas. I will use my district as an example, where you can register on-line for seven months, which is about the time that you would use your vehicle.

There is no problem to go on-line to register for twelve months. The problem is you cannot go on-line to register for seven months. I am sure exceptions were made for rural areas in terms of the seven month registration, but I would have thought that on-line registration would be applicable to rural areas as well. The reason for creating the shorter registration would be the same reasoning used for on-line registration, to target rural areas.

I am wondering why you cannot go on-line to register your vehicle for seven months; you have to go through the normal process?

MR. DAVIS: I guess the simplest answer for that is the system does not have the capacity to do that. The system is designed for twelve-month registrations.

The Motor Registration system that is in operation is one of the older systems that have been in existence in government. It has been around for probably about thirty years now. It works quite well but it really restricts and limitations on when you want to – to making changes to the program and making changes to how it operates, but it does what it was meant to do. It does it very well, but it does have limitations on how we can make changes to that. That is one of the problems, just as you are talking about.

MR. EDMUNDS: Is there any plan to upgrade that system so it can accommodate rural areas?

MR. DAVIS: It is something that has been talked about and considered. We know that some time in the future we are going to have to have a good, hard look at it.

It is a system that carries out approximately 1.5 million transactions a year. It is probably one of the more widely used systems in government. It has served government well. It has served the people of Newfoundland and Labrador well but, again, it has its limitations. We know the time is going to come where an updated or a new system is going to have to be put in place.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: It would be a major project. It would be a significant project for government.

MR. EDMUNDS: To change the system?

MR. DAVIS: To update. To bring in a new Motor Registration computer system, you would be talking tens and tens of millions of dollars.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

All right, I will turn it over to George now.

CHAIR: Okay, that is fine.

George.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Subhead 3.1.01 – to knock off a couple of more line items here – line 06 Purchased Services, $2.6 million budgeted for 2011-2012, down to $568,900 actually spent. That budget is up to $2,560,900 now for 2012-2013.

MR. DAVIS: Under Purchased Services?

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: In Purchased Services, $2,146,000 of that is in reference to renovations to the MRD building. Part of what we are doing at Motor Registration is the Government Services that currently exist on Mews Place is moving over to the Motor Registration building in Mount Pearl.

The allotment there of $2,146,000 is part of that project, to move Government Services over to MRD. The project has not occurred as quickly as we had hoped it to occur. That is why the funds were not expended last year and is included back in the budget again for this year.

MR. MURPHY: Okay. They were just rolled over to this year forward.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir.

MR. MURPHY: Perfect.

Supplies, line 04, $217,600 was budgeted for 2011-2012, $342,000 actually spent.

MR. DAVIS: That $125,000 variance is made up primarily of increase in costs for fuel, some uniform expenses. There was also some other office expenses during 2011-2012.

Again, this is one of these line items that can have a tendency to have a variance from year to year but it is anticipated to be in the $248,600 range this year is what is budgeted.

MR. MURPHY: When you say fuel costs, you are talking about fuel costs for which particular branch, obviously not for RNC vehicles, for example? Are you talking about highway safety vehicles?

MR. DAVIS: It would be highway safety vehicles.

MR. MURPHY: Highway enforcement.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, and the driving examiner vehicles, highway enforcement vehicles.

MR. MURPHY: All right.

The costs are gone up that much?

MR. DAVIS: Yes.

MR. MURPHY: Do they have any hybrid vehicles in that particular department, do you know?

MR. DAVIS: Then again, fuel is only part of that. There were office expenses, as well as uniforms, because most of these frontline employees are uniformed employees. So there was an extra cost there in uniforms.

MR. MURPHY: Are we going to be losing – just to come back up to line 01 here in 3.1.01 Administration, in Salaries, I do not know if the highway safety officers, the enforcement officers are actually in with that section.

MR. DAVIS: If the highway enforcement officers are included in –

MR. MURPHY: If their salaries are actually included in these numbers? Would I be looking at the right section for their salaries?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, they are.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

I was just wondering as regards to the difference then in last year's Salaries versus the revised number for 2011-2012. I noticed there is a significant climb there, but at the same time Salaries for 2012-2013.

MR. DAVIS: The variance there is just shy of $138,000. It is the result of the creation of temporary positions for a Program Policy Development Specialist, and that was about $57,000 of it. There was a payout for some reclassifications, and that made up about $23,000 of that. There was some payout to severance and paid leave to retiring employees, and that made up about $77,000. There was also some additional cost for some new contract. There is also a doctor in contract to Motor Registration who reviews any medical related applications. There was a new contract but in place there as well.

MR. MURPHY: Right.

I just wonder if I might – now might be a good time to do it as regards to asking questions about highway enforcement officers and the workload that they are tending with right now in the safety, for example, of vehicles out there obviously that they are dealing with on a day-to-day basis. I know they carry out regular inspections of buses, tractor trailers, and that sort of thing.

I was just wondering: Is their workload going to be increasing in the future, for example, as regards to the number of cars I am seeing out there? I do not know if it is just me. Maybe everybody else here may have noticed it. There seem to be an awful lot of vehicles pulled in on the side of the road with tie rod ends gone. I do not know if that is just me or not, but it seems like there are an awful lot of cars breaking down.

Do you find any of the highway enforcement officers out there are dealing with more vehicles being pulled in lately?

MR. DAVIS: They have a variety of roles in their capacity. If you are asking me if I know of an increase in any significant issue they are facing on the highway, I do not know offhand myself. I could ask our assistant deputy minister if she may have any knowledge in that regard.

MS KELLAND: Highway enforcement officers are primarily responsible for commercial vehicles. They would not be normally involved with anything to do with private-passenger vehicles. I am not sure if that is what you are referring to.

MR. MURPHY: That is probably more of an issue that is Constabulary related when it comes to private vehicles.

I am just wondering: Are you getting any feedback from your highway enforcement officials as regards to what they are seeing out there on the roads, not only on a commercial basis in this case because they are also seeing the private vehicles out there? Are they giving you any recommendations to where they would be going with, I will call it, problem vehicles out there? Are they calling for, for example, the possible need for more emergency inspections, side-of-the-road inspections, for example, to happen from time to time?

MS KELLAND: We do a regular type of blitzes on certain types of vehicles. At any given time, we might do a brake-check day. We might do special blitzes in addition to our regular inspection process. I am not aware of any particular increase in problems. Our stats are not showing any particular increase in problems in the commercial fleet.

We do keep a fairly close eye on what we call out-of-service rates, which is vehicles being taken out of service for particular reasons. I am not aware of any particular increase we are seeing in that direction. We also do audits of companies with larger fleets of vehicles to make sure their maintenance programs are kept up-to-date and things like that.

MR. MURPHY: Perfect.

That is about all I had for that section, 3.1.01. I guess I will go ahead and move on a bit. How is the time going, all right?

CHAIR: You can probably give Randy a bit of time now, if you like.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, that is what I was wondering about. Randy, do you want to go ahead?

CHAIR: He might even ask some questions that you were going to ask – that would save some more.

MR. EDMUNDS: Before I go there, there is one question I would like to go back to – I think it was around the Moneris question. I have had dealings with Moneris as part of my company, but that would not eat up the whole $665,000. It is just the difference that we are looking at here?

MR. DAVIS: (Inaudible).

MR. EDMUNDS: It is under Consumer and Commercial Affairs, Purchased Services, line 06.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, the variance there is what I am referring to, Moneris, the $22,300 variance reflects increased cost of Moneris, but it is not the entire Purchased Services.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, the only question I have on 3.1.01, Administration, is again in Purchased Services. Last year's budget was for $2.7 million approximately, and the actual was just over $500,000, almost 600,000, line 06, and it has again gone up to $2,560,900 – a very noticeable jump.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, $2.146 million of that is in reference to the Motor Registration Division Building renovations as a reference. We are moving a government service branch from Mews Place to Motor Registration Building in Mount Pearl, and $2.146 million of that is carried forward to 2012-2013.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: That is why it has returned again this year.

MR. EDMUNDS: I think that was the only question to add on Administration.

On driver examinations, weigh scale operations, the Salaries are pretty much consistent, and there is a disappearance of benefits there. Supplies, line 04 under 3.1.02, the budget was $36,500, and you spent $5,500, so you budgeted for $5,500 this year. There is almost a $30,000 difference there.

MR. DAVIS: That is on Supplies?

MR. EDMUNDS: That would be Supplies, line 04.

MR. DAVIS: Okay, there is a $31,000 variance, as you pointed out, and that reflects a reallocation of funds to Motor Registration Administration where the fuel costs were being charged.

MR. EDMUNDS: I never got that?

MR. DAVIS: You never got that?

MR. EDMUNDS: No.

MR. DAVIS: There is $31,000 and there was a reallocation of funds from that line item to MRD administration where fuel costs are being charged. If you go to Administration – just a second now, I will find it for you. Under Supplies, that is a reallocation to line 04 under Administration.

MR. EDMUNDS: Motor Vehicle Registration, carrying on, Licence and Registration Processing, section 3.1.03, Employee Benefits, line 02 – you budgeted $9,000 last year and your actual was $94,500, a big difference.

MR. DAVIS: There is. That one is $85,000 related to injury on duty billings to the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission. That can fluctuate, again, from year to year.

MR. EDMUNDS: There is one there that is not overly large but it does – actually, there are a couple there. One is Purchased Services, line 06, where you had a $300,000 difference there from what you budgeted last year to what you actually spent to the budget and the increase again this year of $1,873,800. That would be line 06.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, that is a $275,000 variance. In this case, it is a result of lower than anticipated Moneris fees.

MR. EDMUNDS: The other section there, again, is on Property, Furnishings and Equipment. The prediction for last year was $7,000 and the actual expenditure was $39,500.

Is it the same thing?

MR. DAVIS: That is a $32,500 variance that was the purchase of a new electronic client management numbering system. That is a new system for when people go to Motor Registration in Corner Brook. That is for the Corner Brook office, which was recently moved and renovated. That is for the numbering system so when you go in you get your ticket of where you are in the line.

MR. EDMUNDS: It cost $32,000?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, sir.

MR. EDMUNDS: Pick a number.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, there is a bit more to it because it depends on which lineup you are going to go to and what service you are going to require. It is really based on service. The system then would move you to the wicket, depending on what service you need. When one person walks in to line up, the person behind them may be there for a different service so it may move you to a different line.

The other thing it does too, it also gives us an opportunity to have a look at queue lines, demand for service. The system allows us to see where the demand for service is, where people are waiting longer for one service versus another service, so we can reallocate human resources to make it more efficient for customers.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

Just one question before I will turn it back over to George. There is reference made there to Moneris a couple of times. Through the department, what is the total amount paid out to Moneris in fees?

MR. DAVIS: Just give me a second now. Mr. Edmunds, we can get that for you. We do not have the total amount here with us now, but we can definitely get that. In the next couple of days we should be able to that for you.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, I think that is all I have on Licence and Registration. I will turn it over to George.

CHAIR: Okay.

MR. DAVIS: If I just can on Moneris – Moneris really and quite often is reflective on users using registration on-line. We have seen continuous growth in numbers. We just recently hit a higher number than we had before for on-line registration. Of course it is most cost effective for the customers, for citizens. It is much more convenient for them. We are seeing a higher number, but we never reached where we thought we were going to be last year. That is where that variance came from, that $275,000 variance.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

CHAIR: Okay, George.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We will move on down to National Safety Code, 3.1.04. Starting things off, line 01, Salaries, gone from $1,418,200 last year and the actual that was spent in that department $1,429,400.

MR. DAVIS: It is an $11,000 difference there. That was primarily the result of a payout in severance to four employees.

MR. MURPHY: Okay. Then I noticed in that department, as regards to that line, Salaries dropped down to $1,345,000.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, that is a $73,000 variance. Basically, Mr. Murphy, that is just reflective of salary requirements for this coming year. Salary funds have been reallocated to other divisions to address salary pressures in other divisions. There is a small reallocation of salaries there.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, you mention the $11,000 was paid out to severance for a couple of employees who are gone. Do we have any job losses here as regards to National Safety Code, highway inspections, that sort of thing?

MR. DAVIS: There was some retirements, but they are positions that –

MR. MURPHY: So basically through attrition, but nobody lost –

MR. DAVIS: No positions lost, no.

MR. MURPHY: Okay. That was a concern.

Line 05, Professional Services, $40,000 unspent in 2011-2012, and in 2012-2013 it is the same amount of money.

MR. DAVIS: That is correct. The revised zero there is a $40,000 variance, lower than anticipated costs for contractual services. It is much lower; there are none at all actually. This year, though, there is anticipation that there could very well be those contractual services.

I do not know if you wanted to comment on what those types of services may be. Maybe Ms Kelland can give you that information.

MR. MURPHY: Sure.

MS KELLAND: From time to time we might use consultants to help us on policy issues. For example, the year before last we looked at how our weigh scale operations were distributed and they did some extra-curricular work for us on those types of things. That need varies from time to time. This past year we did not have a need for any of those types of services, but we are thinking we may do some additional work on various policy issues coming up in this year.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, that is great.

Seeing you mentioned weigh scales, in one of the notes that I had here – 3.1.02, if we can backtrack a little bit, Driver Examinations and Weigh Scale Operations. I wanted to come over to the Salaries component again, 2011-2012, the variance there, if you could explain that, as well as the 2012-2013 Estimate for a little over $2.4 million.

MR. DAVIS: The revised variance there of $148,000 is a result of the delays in filling a driver examiner and weigh scale positions. That is offset by a payment of severance to retiring employees. There were retiring employees which there was, of course, severance paid out. The $148,000 is a result of delays in filing it and it is offset by that $70,000. For this year the variance of $65,000 reflects anticipated salary requirements for this coming year.

MR. MURPHY: Is there going to be any extra hiring by the looks of that, or is that just going to be a job increase? We have not seen any job losses here either though, did we?

MR. DAVIS: No, we have not. We have a new scale house just opening in Labrador West, so there are new positions to operate those scales.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, so that would be in Lab West.

I am just wondering, too, at the same time while we are on this particular section as regards to the policies with weigh scales. I know from time to time, passing by on the highway, particularly late at night, the weigh scales are not in operation, obviously, late at night; however, there is a massive amount of tractor trailer traffic that uses that highway, particularly after government working hours.

I am just wondering if government is taking into consideration that particular note. I am just wondering if government might be making a change as regards to weigh scale operations considering extra shifts, that sort of thing, to see if we cannot catch any overloaded tractor trailers, for example, that might be on the highways. They do an immense amount of damage whenever you are talking about being overweight.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, a good question.

The scale houses, while you do drive by, are the fixed scale locations in which they work on a variety of schedules, but we also have portable scales that are used throughout the Province from time to time. In cases like that, there are times when the portable scales would be utilized.

Again, they work on different shifts, different schedules, and conduct different patrols at different times, and the scales operate under schedules as well.

MR. MURPHY: Are they doing this emergency scale use, we will call it, after-hour scale use, or portable scale-use?

MR. DAVIS: Portable scales.

MR. MURPHY: Are they used, for example, 12:00 or 1:00 at night when these tractor trailers are all on the highway?

MR. DAVIS: The issue with operating scales at 12:00 and 1:00 in the nighttime is a safety issue for lighting, traffic and so on. So, normally they would not be operated like that.

Having said that, I can tell you there are times under circumstances when they may be called and be required in a response under certain circumstances.

MR. MURPHY: Basically, what I am wondering then if that is the case, if it is unsafe to be using portable scales and that sort of thing, I am wondering about the possibility of government looking at keeping up some of the other fixed scale positions, if you will, Goobies and wherever else they are, open at some particular times to see if we cannot find some of these offenders out there that are basically hauling around too much weight.

MR. DAVIS: It is a matter that we have discussions about it from time to time. We keep an eye on the operations, on the demand. We have discussions about traffic and needs, also then to balance that with budgets and funding allocations. They are discussions we have from time to time and that we continue to look at. As times change and as we progress, then there are times we make adjustments to those operations.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

I just bring that up as a matter of fact because some people may argue that studded tires are doing some damage to the highways but whenever I am looking at a tractor-trailer whose tires are almost flat, not because of safety-code violations when it comes to the air amount that is in the tires but because of the cargo they have on board. Sometimes you get trailers out there that are taking a little bit too much weight and travelling late at night for obvious reasons. Less traffic may be one, but at the same time trying to beat the scales is also a habitual thing for some violators out there. I am not pointing the finger at anybody out there in particular but I think it may be worthwhile if government considers some of these operations to catch some of these offenders too at the same time.

MR. DAVIS: Yes. I think along the same lines of what you are referring to there, it would be important to point out as well that our highway enforcement officers quite often will work in co-operation with the RCMP and the RNC in working together for highway safety. Primarily their role is to ensure highways are safe and that vehicles are fit to be on the road and within their weight limitations as well. They quite often will work together on those projects, and some of the efforts that Ms Kelland referred to earlier, when they will do a blitz or go out and target a particular area, a particular problem, or a particular concern.

MR. MURPHY: Yes. I guess, Ms Kelland, you are working with the highway enforcement officers?

I would just like to pass on my compliments to the guys out there. I had dealings with them in the past, years ago, and I have to say the utmost co-operation and knowledge that I learned off these guys at the same time. Shawn – I cannot remember Shawn's last name, but I think he will know who I am talking about.

It is just an exceptional bunch you have there. These guys will get on their backs in the middle of winter with the wettest kind of ground and coldest kind of ground dealing with some of these vehicles and everything that are out there. I can speak from personal experience in the past that she has a great crew working under her, and my hats go off to them.

That is all the questions, by the way, that I had on this particular department.

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Murphy, I can tell you that everyone over here certainly appreciates your comments, and I appreciate your comments as well.

I can tell you, since I became minister in October – I worked in public service my entire life, but somewhat of a different public service from what people see as public service. We are kind of separate from the general government service, if you like. Since coming into this position, I can tell you I have a renewed respect. I always did respect them, but I can tell you I have a higher respect now for government employees than I did before.

I can speak for my department, specifically. The people who were here tonight represent almost 1,400 employees in government. There are really dedicated, hard-working, talented people in government who want to make a difference. They want to do good work, and they want to have a positive impact on their Province.

It is not unusual for me to come to work at 7:00 o'clock in the morning, and I can tell you, many times I come here at 7:00 o'clock in the morning I am not the first person in the office. There are lots of people here ahead of me. When I leave at 6:30 or 7:00 o'clock at night, it is not unusual to find people who are still in the office here late at night as well. They are there because they want to do a good job. They want to get the work done and they want to do it well.

Right through my department in many different branches, different parts of the Province and in different areas, I can tell you I am quiet pleased and quite proud of the work of the public service in this Province.

MR. MURPHY: Yes, and you should be. Like I said, I can certainly speak for the Highway Enforcement Officers and staff; they are all a great bunch.

I will say this much too, when I was at the wicket the other day renewing my driver's licence, you have some good, friendly staff in there behind the wickets, too.

MR. DAVIS: Good. It is always a welcome comment.

MR. MURPHY: Yes. I will say that, now I do not know if it is because of the leadership or not.

[Laughter]

MR. DAVIS: Having said that, we are open to thoughts and ideas as to how we can tweak something to make it even better.

Motor Registration – you were out to, I assume, the Mount Pearl office?

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: That is an office out there that is working really well. We get a lot of positive feedback from the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador who have interaction with the people in that office and have to visit that office to carry out their regulatory obligations.

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

That is all I had on that particular line of questioning. How am I doing for time? Do I have a few more minutes?

CHAIR: Well, we can go back to Randy or you.

What is that?

MR. EDMUNDS: By leave.

CHAIR: By leave.

MR. MURPHY: By leave, okay; now that I have Randy's attention, too.

Just a couple of more questions as regards to Motor Vehicle Registration itself when it comes to the policy items there and a couple of issues that arise. There are a lot of people getting affected with this lately, licence plate theft. There has been an abnormal amount, I suppose, maybe it is normal because you were a police office in your previous career. The costs associated with the theft of licence plates, for example, the little sticker on the corner of that place draws a few bucks for somebody on the black market, no doubt.

I would like to get your comments on it, and if Motor Vehicle Registration may be considering a change in the way vehicles are licensed or if there are any mechanisms they are considering to try to get around this, because I know that not only is it an inconvenience and not only is it a pain in the butt, it is also coming at a cost to the person who is trying to do right. In actual fact, I think it costs an extra $20 to get the licence plate changed over to a new set of plates. Through no fault of their own, they are after having this sticker literally snipped off.

MR. DAVIS: No, I have seen it cut off.

MR. MURPHY: Yes, literally snipped off a licence plate. So, I was just wondering if the department might be considering probably waiving that $20 replacement fee, just as a simple act of kindness toward the user of the car out there who has been victimized, basically.

I know the first thing that I felt like, I felt like I was being victimized by Motor Vehicle Registration because I was victimized by somebody who wanted that sticker. I would like to get a couple of comments from you as regards to that, and if Motor Vehicle Registration or your department are probably considering any changes there to the way that is done.

MR. DAVIS: Sure. There is nothing that can be more frustrating than being the victim of a crime, or when someone takes advantage or preys on those who have put themselves in a situation where they are being preyed upon. I have seen it so many times during my lifetime. It sometimes can have a pretty significant impact on innocent people.

Having said that, the theft of plates and fraudulent use of stickers and plates exists, I would say, in virtually every jurisdiction. Even though systems may be different, in some provinces you have a plate that is registered to an individual instead of a vehicle. In some provinces they register a vehicle, which is what we do, and still the thefts would occur.

So, it is a really difficult one. It is a really hard one to do. We rely a lot on police, the RNC and the RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador, to use their observations. Sometimes you can see an older vehicle with a brand new plate, and you go huh. The plate does not match the car, so let's have a look at it.

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: Those types of things happen on a regular basis; or you will see a plate with a June sticker and an August sticker, and you think, well that does not normally happen. What happened there? So you look into it or you can – most police officers, the RNC now, they can run it right in the car. They can check right in the car.

We do not have any plans to make any significant changes to address those matters. If you had any thoughts or ideas on it, we are always open to hear suggestions but we do not have any plans at this point in time. I think whatever system we have, we are going to have thefts.

MR. MURPHY: Yes. I would certainly like government to waive that $20 fee to the victims of such a crime. I know it may be a case where government may have to take a small loss on that, but $20 is not a significant amount for government to lose when it comes to somebody keeping their sanity when it comes to keeping their motor vehicle properly registered.

To see somebody after being victimized by a crime have to pay that extra fee just does not make any sense to me, not at that particular juncture. It is an exercise in frustration sometimes for some having to go into Motor Vehicle Registration to get the new plates done and having to get the transfer and everything done. I would just like to see that fee lifted.

MR. DAVIS: There is a cost to government, which means there is a cost to the taxpayers so someone has to bear that burden on the cost. On the other side of it, while many people are victims of such crime and at no fault of their own – most often it is at no fault of their own. I have encountered circumstances myself when you see a vehicle with no plate, in my former career. Then you approach the driver and say: How come you do not have a plate on your car? Well, I do, it is right on the back of my vehicle. They did not even know the plate was gone because they have been a victim.

I have also seen a circumstance where a person goes in, buys a sticker, walks out the door, sells it someone, and walks in the next day and says: I lost my sticker and I want another one. I have seen those circumstances occur: I lost it or someone stole it so I want to obtain another one. I have seen those circumstances exist as well.

It is a really difficult circumstance for Motor Registration when those things occur as well. For those people who have their stickers stolen from them, we do not have any plans at this point in time to change it. There is a cost to be borne by it. There is a cost to taxpayers on replacement of plates and stickers.

As well, we also have circumstances where someone loses their driver's licence or accidentally washes their wallet and needs a replacement, or breaks it or cuts it. It is the same with the registration document. It is not unusual to have a need for replacement of those types of documents as well and there are fees associated to all of those.

MR. MURPHY: I guess we will leave that one for now. It will be a private member's motion one of these days.

MR. DAVIS: There you go.

MR. MURPHY: I have just one more question when it comes to Motor Vehicle Registration and the problems associated with a lot of drivers going out there with – we have touched on it – false registration and vehicles with no insurance.

I am just wondering if government is considering co-ordinating the activities of insurance companies, for example, the consumers who do not pay their bills at insurance companies.

There is a concern out there, to sum it all up, as regards to uninsured drivers out there. It seems like it is picking up in pace in the number of offenders out there. I do not know if it is just me or not. Surely there must be a way for Motor Vehicle Registration to co-ordinate something with the insurance providers when they find, for example, there is somebody who is not paying their bill and they have to be cut off from their insurance.

Is there anything like that under consideration between companies and the department?

MR. DAVIS: The Motor Registration system captures some of that information. When you renew your renewal now, you are required to provide your insurance information. Similar to a comment I made earlier, the Motor Registration system we are working with does have its limitations, and that is one of the limitations that exist on the system, the ability to effectively follow and have that interact with insurance systems, and to have them effectively active with each other. Right now, the system does not have the ability to do that.

CHAIR: We will go back to Randy.

Do you have a few more questions?

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes, just a couple of questions.

One is probably more of a comment: I was glad to see the efforts made by the department on the reduction of fees for seniors. I think it was a good move.

Just a couple of quick questions in the interest of time, or lack of it, and one is on the use of studded tires. I know it has been the topic of some controversy. The City of St. John's is actually looking at banning studded tires.

Does the department have a comment or a position on winter tires?

MR. DAVIS: Well, winter tires and studded tires are two different issues, similar, but they are a little bit different. The rules in this Province on studded tires, as you know, is that there is a period of time when they are permitted to be used and there is a period of time when they are not. May 1 this year is when the studded tires had to be removed.

I know the City of St. John's has talked about banning them in the city. They have not made a formal request to my department. We have not had any formal discussions or formal presentation from them on that yet, so I really do not know what their plans are in regard to that.

Winter tires are a little bit of a different circumstance. We do not require the use of winter tires in the Province at this point in time. I do recommend them. We do recommend that if people are going to be travelling throughout the winter and using their vehicle especially in inclement weather and less-than-ideal road conditions, we encourage them to use them. We have not required them to be used.

MR. DINN: (Inaudible) talking about studded tires seven or eight years ago.

MR. DAVIS: Pardon me?

MR. DINN: When I was on city council seven or eight years ago, they were always talking about studded tires. It never went anywhere because, at the time, we were told that it would require an amendment to the Highway Traffic Act and the implications were greater then for the residents of St. John's.

MR. DAVIS: I do not know what authority their intentions were, so I would not think it would be appropriate for me to speculate on it.

On snow tires, again we encourage people to use them in adverse conditions and less-than-ideal driving conditions, but we do not require them at this point in time.

MR. EDMUNDS: The next question – and this is probably all I would have on Motor Vehicle Registration – it was not that long ago when there were many, many, many deficiencies highlighted in school bus inspections and I am just wondering: Is there a new regulation in place now to stop the deficiencies that were coming forward?

MR. DAVIS: School buses in Newfoundland and Labrador are, I think, the most inspected vehicles on our roads today – I do not think, I know. From a regulatory perspective, they are the most inspected vehicles on the road today. They are inspected three times a year. One of those times they are inspected by our highway enforcement officers who carry out fairly comprehensive inspections on the buses and then the other two times they have to be inspected by an official inspection station, which is certified to inspect that class of vehicle.

There is actually three times a year that buses now have to be certified. As well, the busing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador, we have been moving towards the requirement of what is known as a D250 standard, which is a CSA standard. That is a higher standard of design, safety design for the buses.

We have been moving in that direction, so that is where you see now everything from reflective tape on buses, which you did not see years ago, to the crossing arm that comes out on the front of the bus, roof hatches, and even a requirement now that the outside mirrors on the buses be heated. You do not know that unless you look close enough. They are all increases in standards. Like I said, it is referred to as the D250 standard. In Newfoundland and Labrador we have been moving toward that standard. We are essentially there at this point in time.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, that is good to know.

Mr. Chairman, I think that is all I have on Motor Vehicle Registration.

CHAIR: George, do you have a couple of more questions?

MR. MURPHY: Yes, I guess I will finish up with just one more question about winter tires and rental vehicles.

Mr. Minister, I know that one has been bantered about, for example, like in the Province of Quebec. I am just wondering if there was any consideration the government might have been giving with regard to some of the rental agencies that are out there that go around with all-seasons and, in some cases, summer tires still on the vehicles, even during the winter. As well as that, just a note on trailers, some U-Haul trailers, for example, do not have winter tires on them. I am wondering if government might have been looking at that over the last little while.

MR. DAVIS: I do not recall any specific discussions that we had with trailers. As far as snow tires go, there were some assessments done on the usage of snow tires. We found that there is a very high compliance rate in Newfoundland and Labrador. When I say compliance, I mean usage of winter-specific tires. The Northeast Avalon, I think, was the highest level –

OFFICIAL: High eighties.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, it was in the high eighties – high 80 per cent range that are using them. We found that in some instances the people who are not using winter tires are circumstances where a person has a second vehicle, sometimes where they will have one vehicle that is outfitted for the winter driving, where they will not outfit the second vehicle.

We also see circumstances where people do not use their vehicle in inclement weather or in adverse driving conditions. Quite often, you will see a retiree who will use their vehicle for running their errands, doing the business they have to do, but when they know that the forecast is bad or the road conditions are less than ideal they do not operate their vehicle.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

That is all I have for that particular section, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Do you have any more questions for Government Services? Do you, Randy?

We have twenty-five or thirty minutes left. There is three hours put aside for each department.

MR. MURPHY: I guess in that regard then what I was wondering about was if Randy might have had anything else with regard to the Motor Vehicle section of it, if not then I guess we will just move on.

CHAIR: Okay. We are finished with that section.

Do you want to start again, Randy, on another section?

MR. EDMUNDS: Sure.

CHAIR: Okay.

You pick it up and we will take it from your next section that you are going to start with.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

I am thinking Occupational Health and Safety, section 4.

CHAIR: Yes.

MR. EDMUNDS: I just have a couple of questions and some line by line, so I will start off with inspections, section 01, Salaries. In 2011-2012 budgeted was $4,227,500, revised to $3,290,800, and there is a major difference again in budgeting this year for close to $4 million. It is a $936,700 decrease last year. Did this affect any positions and what would cause the increase now for this year?

MR. DAVIS: The $936,700 revised number is a result of a turnover in staff and vacancies that were created in staff. There were some delays in recruitment primarily related to some of the hard-to-fill positions we have. Some of the positions in our Occupational Health and Safety Branch sometimes have unique skill sets or hard-to-find skill sets and sometimes can be difficult to fill.

Also, overtime was less than had been budgeted, than had been expected. As well, the budget included funding for positions that were not necessary for the operation of the division such as – I will let Ms Dunphy comment on that one.

MS DUNPHY: Some of these positions would have been entry-level positions that they would have been successful in getting more senior officer positions. The entry-level position that was created on a temporary basis would have been no longer required because they were successful in getting more senior positions.

Some of the other positions, there may have been some just duplication of budgeting one position – salary dollars were budgeted twice because one position was temporary and one position was permanent. There was some clean up of that through this exercise.

MR. DAVIS: There used to be what was referred to as Officer I positions and Officer II positions. The Officer I position was essentially an entry-level position. They would then move into Officer II positions to fill vacancies. That is where those positions are primarily filled at this point in time is in the Officer II positions.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, thank you.

The only other question I have on section 4.1.01 is line 07, Property, Furnishings and Equipment. In 2011-2012 you budgeted approximately $82,000, it was revised to $38,900, and you are again estimating $81,900. What was the decrease last year?

MR. DAVIS: The $43,000 decrease that is reflected there was less purchase of furnishings and equipment than had been anticipated. This is one of these line items, again, Mr. Edmunds, that sometimes fluctuates from year to year. The requirement for the purchase of that equipment and furnishings did not exist in the last fiscal year, but we believe could exist this year, and that is why the line item in the budget is maintained the same for this year.

MR. EDMUNDS: Before I turn it over to George, I do have a number of questions outside of line by lines.

MR. DAVIS: Yes.

MR. EDMUNDS: I guess there are few concerns that came out of the Auditor General's report with respect to the Occupational Health and Safety Branch. One makes reference to nursing homes. Over seven years the inspector carried out fourteen (inaudible) investigations with no action being taken. The Auditor General was concerned that the branch had no documented procedure to enforce the orders, such as these ones that I just mentioned.

Is there any update in this particular case, what was outlined in the auditor's report, in terms of inspections being done and to make these elders and employees safer than what was outlined in the report?

MR. DAVIS: If you are referring to the circumstance, which I believe you are – I think we are talking about the same matter – going by my recollection here is that there was an issue that was identified by an occupational health and safety officer. There was temporary corrective action taken by the operator so as to correct, on a temporary basis, that safety issue that had existed there. Some time had passed before the permanent corrective action had been taken, but the operators did take steps to correct the safety concern.

I am told I am talking about the right one. I believe that is the one you are talking about?

MR. EDMUNDS: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: So the permanent repair, which was a fairly significant piece of work, did not take place for some time later, but the safety issue was corrected in a temporary way.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

It still needs to be addressed in terms of permanent repair?

MR. DAVIS: It would have to be or has been, or is in the process of being, I believe.

MS DUNPHY: Yes, this is a matter that was significant capital expenditure and the work needed to be done in a phased-in way so that the facility could continue to operate. It was done over time, but in the meantime there were still temporary measures put in place to ensure the safety of the workers that were there.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

The other one is the safety of fishery workers. Since 1980 or 1979, there have been 193 fatalities in the fishing sector. I think it was 2010, late in the fall, that both government and the Workers' Compensation Committee announced, I think it was $1 million toward the establishment of a Fish Harvesting Safety Association and a Fish Processing Sector Safety Council.

This initiative was intended to become self-sustaining in three years. We have not heard much on it lately and it is about a year and a half now. I am just wondering if this is going to be another fee for fishermen to pay after the rest of the funding runs out. Are there any updates on this program?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, you are correct in what you are saying. It was, I believe, in late 2010 when the announcement was made. There was a $500,000 commitment by government to the establishment of a Fish Harvesting Safety Association, as well as a fish processor safety association. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission also committed $500,000, so a total of $1 million to be expended on that project.

The work has gotten underway. It started last summer in August, September. Work has begun. There has been a fair bit of progress undertaken in the fish harvesters and work to informing the ship harvesters association. Unfortunately, there has been less success in moving forward the fish processing sector, but we are still trying to move both of those projects forward.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay, just one more.

I am supposing this falls under Occupational Health and Safety, the plant in Englee where there was a ministerial order issued to clean up the site. There seems to be some discrepancy. I am just wondering what the plan is? Do you plan to enforce this order, or is there a deal being worked out with the company? I am not sure what the name of the company is.

MR. DAVIS: Sea Treat.

MR. EDMUNDS: Sea Treat Limited, yes; I am just wondering what the status is on the plant in Englee.

MR. DAVIS: The plant in Englee, I can assure you, is a very complex matter. It involves several departments in government, including Service NL. There has been, yes, a ministerial order issued to the owner of Sea Treat to correct the issues that exist in Englee. They have sixty days in order to take action.

There are a number of orders with some specific actions to be taken, but essentially they have sixty days in order to take action on that. We are following the file. We are watching the progress as it takes place. I can tell you our goal is to correct this and have it – that is our goal, is to have this matter rectified, but I can assure you it is a very complex matter. It is a very complex legal matter. It is a very complex matter for government to deal with but we are continuing to work through it and we will continue to do so.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

One question before I turn it over to George. The asbestos conditions that are in place in many of the buildings and the abatement program, are there still schools in the Province, or have you tested schools within the Province to find out if there is still asbestos present? I know in 2009 the Auditor General's report found that 186 schools were identified for testing in 2004 and have not been tested, is there any update on the testing? Is it continuing or –

MR. DAVIS: I cannot speak for schools, Mr. Edmunds, because that I think would come under Transportation and Works, or the Department of Education. I can speak for asbestos from a very generally perspective to tell you that there are numerous buildings in Newfoundland and Labrador that when constructed there was a use of asbestos in the construction of those buildings, and that exists throughout the Province.

There are very strict rules on asbestos abatement, or construction, or renovations that take place in buildings where asbestos exists. I can tell you that the Occupational Health and Safety branches are always very focused on ensuring that property owners follow the proper procedures and ensure the safety of the workers when there is asbestos present in any of those buildings and there are renovations or work taking place.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

Thank you for that, Mr. Chairman.

I will turn it over to Mr. Murphy.

CHAIR: Okay. Thank you, Randy.

George, do you have a couple of more questions there?

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just a couple of questions, I guess, while we are on the subject of asbestos and abatement. I want to ask a question about the Janeway property down there because my understanding from that particular contract when it came to the dismantling of the old Janeway hospital was that the contract was supposed to involve asbestos abatement as well, but asbestos is now in the ground. So it would be my understanding that the contract was not agreed to on the part of the construction company that was sent in there to do the work.

I was just wondering if I can get some clarification on that, and if government is going to be taking any kind of action against the company for not living up to their end of the contract. I do not know if any of your people, Mr. Minister, might know anything more about that, but we have, essentially, a great need for a school down in the Virginia Park area and we have a piece of land that – it is my understanding, I think from one of the news reports some time ago – will probably need a $3 million investment to get the land back into shape for any kind of future use.

MR. DAVIS: The issues regarding the Janeway site are really questions that should be put to the Department of Transportation and Works.

MR. MURPHY: Through Transportation and Works, okay.

MR. DAVIS: Yes. Transportation and Works has oversight on government properties, including the Janeway. I do not have the information, and it would be an appropriate answer by that department.

MR. MURPHY: All right. Thank you for that.

I figured while we were on the topic I would get that one out of the way, to find out if it was your department or not. Well, that's great.

MR. DAVIS: Sure.

MR. MURPHY: As regards to Occupational Health and Safety and the Auditor General's report, there were a number of issues that the Auditor General addressed in his report. The number of workplaces included in the branch essential information system is incomplete and inaccurate, for example, would be one. I wonder if we can –

MR. DAVIS: Sure. Do you want me to comment on that one?

MR. MURPHY: Sure. We will take them one at a time. I have a rafter of them here.

MR. DAVIS: There are 17,000 or 18,000 employers in Newfoundland and Labrador. I do not have it in front of me, but I think there is estimated to be about 30,000 worksites roughly, thereabouts in the Province. A worksite is defined as any place where work takes place. If a contractor goes in on a private lot to clear snow, that becomes a worksite. If a paving company goes out to lay down asphalt in five different locations in a single day, there are five different worksites but there is only one employer, and that is where that issue comes up.

MR. MURPHY: That is where the problem lies.

MR. DAVIS: That is where the problem lies are that there are numerous worksites. A particular company, depending on the business they are in, could have numerous worksites.

MR. MURPHY: That would also deal with the problem then with Occupational Health and Safety Branch not being able to adequately plan and schedule workplace inspections. That falls right in line with that.

MR. DAVIS: They respond quite frequently to complaints or when information comes to their attention that there is or may be an issue or something that needs to be looked at. They respond quite frequently to those types of responses as well. You are right if a worksite, place of work, is considered to be a certain street where there is 100 metres of asphalt being laid it is difficult to inspect a site at a particular time when that company may be moving to any number of sites in a given day.

MR. MURPHY: Leading up to that one, I guess, with branch managers not being able to meet their responsibilities for monitoring inspections, that would be falling in pretty much with the criteria there –

MR. DAVIS: I think so. Maybe I can ask Ms Dunphy – it is her area of expertise, and maybe ask her to give her viewpoint on this as well.

MS DUNPHY: Our officers perform a lot of activity in the run of the year and our managers are expected to make sure that they performance manage staff, so there is always opportunities to improve that. That is what it is referenced to.

MR. MURPHY: Okay, thank you for that.

I guess further, another point that the Auditor General brought forward: The Occupational Health and Safety Branch has no system in place to identify, access and document health and safety risk – or risk assessment, I think, in general is what he was referring to.

MR. DAVIS: Risk assessment is an interesting process in itself and there are many, many factors that are considered when looking at inspections. Sometimes it is believed that if someone has a high accident rate then those are the ones who should be inspected most often, but there is so much more to consider when you are looking at the frequency of inspections, where most inspections should take place. It is not only a history, but you also have to look at sometimes Occupational Health and Safety programs that the employer has, the operations of our Occupational Health and Safety committee and how active they may be in the workplace. So, there are a number of factors that are considered when determining priorities in occupations health and safety inspections.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

Another one: The branch is failing to carry out regular inspections of the employers – she just touched on this one actually – with the highest WHSCC assessment rates. As well as that, the branch is failing to carry out regular inspections of the employers with the highest WHSCC injury claims.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, and the same thing. There are a number of factors that are considered when carrying out and determining where most inspections need to be carried out.

It is probably fitting – we announced today, NAOSH week: North American Occupational Safety and Health week. The Occupational Health and Safety inspector and the Occupational Health and Safety Branch, they go a long ways in ensuring safety in the workplace and carry out inspections on a regular basis. I can tell you they are another hard-working, very diligent group and team that work towards that goal of safety in the workplace for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

MR. MURPHY: With regard to employers' compliance with orders: not always carried out within the required time frame; orders not always complied with; and about one-third of the time no follow-up is carried out to ensure compliance on the part of OHS.

MR. DAVIS: If you look back on compliance of orders, if you go back around ten years, if you look at the numbers from ten years ago, I think the rate of compliance of orders you would find was below 35 per cent and today it is over 90 per cent.

OFFICIAL: It is 90.6 per cent.

MR. DAVIS: It is 90.6 per cent, which is a significantly high number and I think is a very successful number. Some of the 9.4 per cent include businesses that will take, for example, a piece of equipment out of service. So, if a piece of equipment is deemed to be a safety risk and an order is issued, quite often there would be a stop-work order. It could be a stop-work order issued on a piece of equipment that you are not going to use until you fix it. Sometimes the employer will not fix it. They will just take it out of service; they will stop using it. Therefore, they did not comply with the order to repair the item.

So you will see those types of things that will take place. As well, sometimes you will see businesses that cease to operate because they are under stop-work orders or orders to comply, and instead of compiling with those orders or resume the work, they just go out of business.

MR. MURPHY: Understood, okay.

That is all I had right here with regards to OHS, I think. I have 100-odd questions, but I think the time is running short on this. Is there some way that maybe we can have a possibility of scheduling a further meeting, is that a possibility, or will I just forward questions on –

CHAIR: Generally, no. If you only have a couple of questions we still have, I guess, seven or eight minutes left from when we started.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

MR. EDMUNDS: (Inaudible) questions left.

MR. DAVIS: We did not start till after 6:00 p.m.

CHAIR: Do you have a couple of questions?

MR. EDMUNDS: I have quite a few.

CHAIR: Oh, did you? It is only three hours allotted.

MR. EDMUNDS: There are a lot of sub-departments within that we have not touched on yet.

CHAIR: I will have to go back to you, sir. You are after giving up some of your time so if you have a couple of questions we have about – my time – seven minutes, from when we started.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay. I will certainly see what I can do.

I guess a couple of questions on the lottery licensing division and the Auditor General outlined some discrepancies. I guess the first thing is the lottery-licensing officer being hired to oversee the licensing.

MR. DAVIS: I am sorry.

MR. EDMUNDS: The first question is with the lottery licensing division. For the longest time there was no official in place to monitor the licensing of lotteries. Has this person been put in place now?

These are concerns that were outlined in the Auditor General's report.

MR. DAVIS: In lottery licensing and permitting and inspection services there is very much of a team effort that takes place over there. I say over there because they are across town. Overall, they do good work over there as well.

The position that you were referring to was an Opening Doors position and the person who was in that position moved up to a more senior position. That position has been difficult to fill, but we still have a desire to fill it. If we are able to do so, we certainly will.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

I am going to jump right to Consumer Protection and this is a question I think, Minister, you are not unfamiliar with. It is one that I brought up earlier. I guess it is more of a request or if there is a procedure that one would follow with respect to high pricing on the North Coast of Labrador. I am talking a 500 per cent increase, 500 per cent higher than some other of the retailers in the nearest regions.

The reason I bring it up is because there is accountability when it comes to a case of beer. In Nain, a case of beer costs exactly the same as it does in St. John's. The reason I question it is because baby formula is 150 per cent to 200 per cent higher. Basic foods are 300 per cent higher. Produce and fresh vegetables are 300 per cent higher.

I am thinking if there can be regulations in place in terms of alcohol, surely goodness there must be some form of regulation or, I look right at the category, consumer protection. Could it be put in place for areas north? We live north and we do expect a higher cost, but we do not live in the High Arctic. I have pointed that out many, many times.

Is there a policy in place whereby the Province can expand upon the governing of alcohol sales on a unit price across the Province and include other food items that are more essential?

MR. DAVIS: The Newfoundland Liquor Agency, as you know, is an agency of government and being so have the ability then to regulate liquor. As for consumable goods, privately utilized consumable goods, there is no regulation in Newfoundland and Labrador. We do not regulate the price of goods in that regard.

It is a really difficult one, and I understand the concerns and the issues that you are referring to. The short answer is right now we do not have any regulation to regulate prices that people can charge for general goods and services.

MR. EDMUNDS: Okay.

There are a few more questions but they are not really significant. I am ready to clue up. I will just turn it over to George, if there is five minutes left.

CHAIR: Thanks, Randy.

We will give George a couple of questions. We have a couple of minutes that we can push into.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In the time that is left I will ask you a couple of general questions on the overall policy in Service NL. The first thing I would like to ask about is payday loan companies, and the regulating of payday loan companies.

Presently, right now in the Province, we have no regulations governing payday loan companies. I would like to know if government has a position on that, if they are considering legislation to govern payday loan companies. I know I am dealing with a client or two out there who have experienced quite – I will say borderline travesty when it comes to the treatment, the interest they are being charged and the fees and everything.

I wonder if government is considering taking out any legislation as regards to payday loan companies, or if they have had other problems from other people that they are addressing?

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Murphy, there are no provincial regulations that regulate payday loan companies, per se. However, the Criminal Code of Canada does have legislation – I believe it is section 137 of the Criminal Code – which sets out the maximum charge and maximum fee allowable in lending at 60 per cent. Now, 60 per cent sounds like a really high level. If you were to add that up, if you took a $100 payday loan, as you refer to it, and over a period of two weeks at 60 per cent annual rate, the calculation of interest on that $100 loan is a few dollars. If memory serves me correctly, it is probably a $3, $4, or $5 interest to be charged against it.

What that means is that if a payday loan company is charging an individual a higher rate than that, it could be a violation of the Criminal Code of Canada. The Criminal Code is investigated by the police in Newfoundland and Labrador. I would suggest if you have someone who is being charged higher fees than that, that they consider filing a complaint with the police.

MR. MURPHY: Yes, and certainly the problems are not inane to anybody. I think we have all been hearing lately on the problems with payday loans. Is government considering any legislation as regards to payday loan companies?

MR. DAVIS: Not at this point in time.

MR. MURPHY: Not at this point in time. There is nobody looking at the background as regards to what is happening?

MR. DAVIS: No, not at this point in time.

MR. MURPHY: Has government been getting a lot of people with problems with payday loan companies?

MR. DAVIS: I would not say it is a lot. We do hear it from time to time. You hear it from time to time through the media.

Our Consumer and Commercial Affairs Branch do receive complaints from consumers about one item or another from time to time, but that is one, to the best of my knowledge, is not one that we frequently get inquiries or complaints on.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

I will limit it to one or two other questions, and then I will clue up. I just wish we had more time for some more line items.

As regards to the strategic plan for Service NL, you mentioned there would be a framework for the creation of a culture of service excellence. I am just wondering if you can you explain what you mean by that?

MR. DAVIS: Yes, certainly.

Service NL was previously known as Government Services. What we want to do is create the best possible service we can to the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador. We want to focus on the service that is provided to the citizens and how they interact with government. If you consider how citizens are most likely going to have an interaction with government, if it is not through education or if it is not through health care, there is a good likelihood it is going to be through one of the services that are provided to people through Service NL.

So, we want to focus on a citizen-centred focus; we want to provide them the best convenience with the best service that we can. That is the direction that we are going in. That is about the best way I can probably sum it up in a short period of time, is that is a focus on citizens to provide them the best service that we can.

MR. MURPHY: All right.

The only other thing that I have, then, is a line item in section 3.3.01. We can go through this one nice and quick like and get an explanation from you on 3.3.01, Vital Statistics Registry.

MR. DAVIS: Three point –

MR. MURPHY: Just down, 3.3.01, Vital Statistics.

MR. DAVIS: Oh, three point three.

MR. MURPHY: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: Yes, okay.

MR. MURPHY: Just down below the amount to be voted, Revenue – Federal. Last year budgeted was $209,200, the actual that the federal government gave was $225,000, and this year is $9,200 from the federal government, if I have that right?

MR. DAVIS: You do, yes.

MR. MURPHY: Any explanation as regards to how come the federal government is not putting in some money here for this particular application, or what the money was initially for?

MR. DAVIS: That was project-based.

MR. MURPHY: Was it?

MR. DAVIS: That was project-based, and it was a vital statistics project. The variance on this year, the change to $15,800, is an increase in revenue from Stats Canada for microfilming imaging of birth certificates. The change for next year – the $200,000 – reflects the removal of revenue from the federal government for that vital statistics project.

MR. MURPHY: Is that because the project has been completed, or because the feds no longer want to participate?

MR. DAVIS: The project has been completed.

MR. MURPHY: It has been completed.

I do not think I had anything else here. Are we all done? I think we had everything. I think we are good with what we have right now. There is nothing I can see in the last couple of minutes that I have here.

I will just fire one out here, I guess, Other Services, 3.3.03, Printing and Micrographic Services, and I think you just might have answered that question as regards to Supplies in line 04. Perhaps I can get an explainer on the on just to be sure.

MR. DAVIS: On the variance from $379,400 to $300,000, that was a result of anticipated savings in Supplies. It is reflective partially because of more use of on-line services and there was the reallocation with the division to cover ongoing expenditures. There are a number of items there that caused that change there.

As for this year's budget of the amount of $479,400 it is a $100,000 variance and it reflects the return of one-time funding allocated to capital account for the purchase of machinery, offset by a reallocation of funding.

I think that piece of machinery – was that the folder?

OFFICIAL: Yes.

MR. DAVIS: That was a new folder and that was purchased for printing services.

MR. MURPHY: Okay.

I think we are good.

CHAIR: Okay.

Thank you, George.

Thank you, Minister.

MR. DAVIS: Thank you, sir.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you.

CHAIR: We will call for the subheads.

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01 to 4.2.02.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01 to 4.2.02 carry?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 4.2.02 carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, Department of Service Newfoundland and Labrador, total heads carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of Service NL, which includes Government Purchasing Agency, Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Review, Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, and OCIO carried without amendment?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Carried.

On motion, Estimates of the Department of Service Newfoundland and Labrador carried without amendment.

CHAIR: Two things – our next meeting of Government Services, according to the new schedule I have, is Wednesday, May 16, in the p.m. here in the House. It is Transportation and Works. I would like to thank the minister and your staff, sir, for being so kind.

With that, I will ask for a motion for adjournment.

MR. LANE: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Paul Lane.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Carried.

Thank you.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.