Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Eddie Joyce, MHA for Bay of Islands, replaces Mary Hodder, MHA for Burin-Placentia West.

The Committee met at 9:00 a.m. in the House of Assembly.

CHAIR (Mr. Walsh): Welcome to the Resource Estimates Committee for Tourism, Culture and Recreation. Before we begin I would like to deal with the minutes from our previous meeting. (Inaudible) our Committee was together. Also present was John Ottenheimer. Mr. Williams attended as well. It was Mines and Energy that we were dealing with on that particular day. The minister was here with her staff. On a motion, seconded by Mr. Taylor, the minutes of the previous meeting were adopted as circulated. The Committee began to review the Estimates of the expenditures of the Department of Mines and Energy at 9:00 a.m. At noon, a motion was put forward and accepted to return and have followup meetings with the Department of Mines and Energy. In that, we had agreed to adjourn and meet again today at 9:00 a.m.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

Some housekeeping duties; we will ask each of the Committee members to introduce themselves so that Kevin, downstairs, can adjust the mikes. We will do the same thing for the minister and her guests this morning, ask you to introduce yourselves. In particular, for our guests this morning, if you could remember to identify yourself for Hansard purposes. The MHAs voices tend to be recognized by the Hansard workers, but for everybody else and probably for all of us, if we could remind ourselves to identify ourselves, that might help as well. Also, for those of you who are new to the House, there is a little red light next to your microphone, when that is on, you are on. With that in mind, we will do our introductions and then we will go to the minister for opening statements.

Tom, we will start with you for introductions.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Tom Osborne, MHA, St. John's South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Roger Fitzgerald, MHA, Bonavista South.

MR. TAYLOR: Trevor Taylor, MHA, The Straits and White Bay North.

MS M. HODDER: Mary Hodder, MHA, Burin-Placentia West.

MR. SWEENEY: George Sweeney, MHA, Carbonear-Harbour Grace District.

MR. BUTLER: Roland Butler, MHA, Port de Grave District.

CHAIR: Minister.

MS BETTNEY: Perhaps we can start with our officials.

MR. GRANTER: Clyde Granter, Deputy Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

MR. CROCKER: Gerry Crocker, Director of Finance.

MR. HEALEY: Keith Healey, Assistant Deputy Minister of Natural Heritage and Recreation.

MR. JANES: Vic Janes, Assistant Deputy Minister of Tourism.

MS MACLELLAN: Heather Maclellan, Assistant Deputy Minister of Culture and Heritage.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Minister, an opening statement if you would.

MS BETTNEY: I will keep my opening statement brief. To start with, I would say that what I have learned in the last three weeks or so, since I have been in the portfolio, is that the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation has a very, very broad mandate. When you look across its responsibilities, it focuses in general on improving and trying to achieve the best possible quality of life for people in this Province by strengthening our economic growth and employment in the area of tourism. In addition to that, it certainly focuses on fostering creativity through the contemporary arts people in the Province. In addition to that, when you look at some of the other areas that we have responsibility for, it is also preserving and interpreting our Province's natural and cultural heritage and promoting active living through recreation and sports. That is quite a large mandate for the department.

In the year 2001 the size of the department, in terms of its operating units and lines of business, actually doubled when the inland fish and wildlife division and the science division were created. As well, transferred to the department was the Newfoundland and Labrador Film Development Corporation and Marble Mountain. That brought in a fairly large number of new units to the department.

Perhaps what I will do, very briefly, is just focus on what we see as some of the key issues for the department. Then I will conclude and leave it to questions to address any other issues.

Certainly, one of the greatest issues that we face as a department is trying to overcome the relatively low level of awareness that exists of Newfoundland and Labrador as a travel destination and, of course, trying to do that in the context of what are limited funds for marketing.

Secondly, we have undoubtedly a very, very rich culture. It is a real issue for us in terms of preserving; being able to have the resources to preserve that culture, to develop all of the arts from a sector perspective and to be able to export it as well as preserve it for future generations. This is something that I think we have made great strides in, but there is still quite a lot more work to do.

On the side of the wildlife and inland fish resources, we recognize that this is an area that is integral to our economy and our culture. It is a way of life for people. It is also a very important part of economic development. Again, conserving, protecting and managing this aspect of our Province's resources is a challenge for us.

The final one, of course, is in the area of physical activity. We recognize that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, according to the latest stats, are becoming more and more inactive. It is a real issue, particularly for our young people. This aspect of our department, promoting active living, recreation and sport in order to improve the health of our children, families and people throughout the Province, is one that we take very seriously and one that we think will contribute to healthier lifestyles and improving the healthy outcomes for people of our Province.

We are currently revamping and bringing up-to-date out strategic plan, our multi-year strategic plan, which we will publish later this year. We are confident that - even recognizing that the financial resources that we have to work with are constrained - we are doing the best that we can to focus those in the areas that will achieve good outcomes for the people of the Province and help further our economic growth as a Province.

With that, Mr. Chair, I will turn it back to the Committee for questions.

CHAIR: Thank you.

We will begin questioning of the minister and her department. Before we begin though, I will attempt this morning to follow through with a pattern that has worked for the Committee, I guess, up until yesterday, when we seemed to get bogged down. We are going to, with permission of all members - the critic is here this morning. I guess Roger that is your role. When Roger is awake, Roger is the critic.

We will begin, I guess if everyone agrees, to allow the critic to have some freewheeling discussion. Yesterday it all went well. We had an hour and a half of discussion back and forth. Then we started to re-go over all the same ground that we had allowed the critic to do. I will try it again this morning to see if it works. If not, we will probably begin the next session with the Committee members and have the critic wait. In reverse, maybe most of the questions would have been answered for the critic; whereas I would have thought, with the critic doing the questions, most of them would have been answered for the Committee. It did not work yesterday. We will try it again this morning. But, for the sake of members knowing, I just want to serve notice that we will go that attempt again this morning. In our next meeting we may have to go in reverse and have the critic wait and let the members do their work.

Roger, if you would like to begin. If all members agree, we will allow - you are here as a guest and you are quite free to ask questions, and by all means do so.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I guess the first thing - and we are allowed to ramble here. We do not have to stick to the headings. I always find those committee meetings, when you sit with the minister and staff, is a good time to ask some questions and find out information; not only on funding that is showing here in the Estimates but how the department runs, what the projections are to do work, and how things are proceeding as well.

CHAIR: Roger, just a clarity. What you are saying is exactly what we have been doing. In particular, when the critic attends we are allowed to move through the estimates, but we have been allowing the critic for the department - at least in my committees - to pretty well have freewheel discussion. You may receive an answer that may twig something else in your mind in allowing you to move forward. But, my caution to the other members is: If the ground is covered once, do we need to cover it three more times? That is the way I have seen the critic's role, by being the lead person, in particular for the Opposition, and by all means, committee members following up. I have no problem with that. As I said yesterday, I found that the critic did a very good job of detailed questions and in a freewheeling atmosphere, but then we were dealing with the same question three and four times again afterwards.

MR. FITZGERALD: I am certain, Mr. Chairman, that will not happen. You should know from your experience that all questions are answered here in this House, and have been answered clearly over the years. I am sure it will not be any different this morning. We always get clear, concise answers with every question we ask. So, that should not be a problem.

MR. TAYLOR: That was the problem yesterday, we did not get those clear, concise answers.

MR. FITZGERALD: I ask the minister if she might give me an update of what is happening with the Cape Bonavista lighthouse. I understand, as people here would know, that was damaged by a lightening storm late last year. My understanding is that the projection would be to have that facility ready for a reopening some time in early June of this year before the tourist season starts. Can she give me an update of what is happening there? I have not been inside the facility but I have been by it many times. If the exterior is any indication to what is happening on the interior, then I think that maybe the opening date of June might be a little bit optimistic.

MS BETTNEY: I am not certain that the opening date is in June. I will ask Heather MacLellan to speak to the specifics of this after my response. I do know that it is scheduled for reopening this summer, and I did anticipate that it was early in the summer. There has been some excellent work that has been done on the facility so far. We consider this to be one of the major tourist icons, of course, for the Province. It sounds like - from the briefings I have had - there is some very high quality, really good work that is taking place in restoration in that. Everything is going well, but I would ask Heather, who knows the actual details of how far the work has progressed, to comment for you.

MR. FITZGERALD: Okay, thank you.

MS MACLELLAN: We are anticipating it will be open by the end of June. The exterior work, from the damage that was done by the fire, is all completed. That included a replacement of the northern part of the entire roof and some of the structural components in the frame of the building. We have just let a contract to R & D Construction from Bonavista to do the interior work which will mean replacement of some of the partitions on the second floor and replacement of the steps. We also have our staff at the historic sites working on finding the reproduction wallpapers. We are looking at England and the United States, and some of those purchases have taken place. There has been an onsite meeting with out contractor Beaton Sheppard and with R & D contracting, and so far everything is still on schedule.

MR. FITZGERALD: There is still the projection to have the facility open in June?

MS BETTNEY: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: Moving from that, I guess the other one, which is topical of today, is the situation as it exists in New Bonaventure with White Point, where the Cape Random Trust is looking at allowing access to the Random Passage movie site there, to turn it into a tourist attraction and to have it open this coming season. As everybody knows, there has been a problem there with a gentleman from another area claiming a parcel of land. I have been in conversation with a Mr. Fisher and Mr. O'Dea there, who are members of this Cape Random Trust, looking at allowing Mr. King's land - I guess, that he claims - to be separated from the rest of the site there.

Heather, you know this situation very well because I think you have been the person who has been in contact with those people, according to my conversations. What is happening with that? Are we going to be able to allow that site to be accessible to the public this year? Are we into a legal wrangling that now we have turned our backs on the whole thing and probably will see it disappear? It is a big issue.

The Bonavista Peninsula has been identified as one of the major tourist sites on the Peninsula. It has always been a situation where people complain about not having enough there to keep people in the area longer. This is certainly a drawing card. I do not know how long it will be popular. I mean when the movie is done it is going to be popular for at least five years. The projection was that there were over 6,000 people who wanted to see that site last year. They are expecting in excess of 15,000 people this year. I do not know how many people watched the Juno Awards, but I am sure the numbers were high. What was the projection? One point -

MS BETTNEY: One point five million.

MR. FITZGERALD: One point five million. It is my understanding that there were four times as many who watched the series Random Passage. So, it certainly did get great exposure and it would be shameful if we seen it disappear. Question?

MS BETTNEY: Yes, you are right on the projections for how long the site would likely remain an attraction, based on what happens elsewhere. It is that five-year period or so after a production like that, that has peaked people's interest.

In terms of whether people will be able to have access to the site this summer, regardless of the outcome of the issue that is on the go there right now there would still be access to the site, obviously. Part of the issue is that a fence has been erected which would prevent access to one portion of the site, but obviously the remainder of the site could still be accessed. But, that is not an ideal situation. There are discussions and negotiations now taking place between Heather, in our department, the Cape Random Trust and the King family, generally, with respect to the land that is being contested. As I indicated recently, it is private land. There just isn't all of the quitting of claims and deeds which support that, but we know that it is private land.

What we are trying to do is come to an amicable solution and an agreement between the owners of the land and the Trust so that, ideally, the fence could come down and full access could be granted for the Trust to use that as a tourism site to help take advantage of this opportunity that exists. I think we are on a track to have this resolved, but I cannot say definitely that it will happen at this point. Indications today are encouraging. I do not know if I could say much further than that. There are discussions taking place between lawyers for the family, ourselves, and all the people involved. As I say, we are hopeful that we will be able to get the matter resolved. I think some form of agreement which would provide the trust with access over the next five years or so would be the ideal solution.

Again, I will ask Heather if she has any further update or detail that she could provide to your question.

MS MACLELLAN: I spoke with John O'Dea yesterday and we have invited him in this afternoon to meet with the deputy and myself to talk about a further negotiating position with Reginald King. We will have an update on that by late day or tomorrow.

MR. FITZGERALD: What happens if there is not an agreement reached? My understanding is that the Cape Random Trust have said if Mr. King owns this section of land then so be it, allow that to happen and go through the courts or whatever to reach some settlement on that. But, they are saying to me - correct me if I am wrong or if they are wrong - there is still a great potential leaving that land where it is. All they want is access to the site and the remainder of the site. If they could receive a permit from your department, or from Crown Lands, and permission to use the site and promote it, then right now it would be certainly something that would satisfy them.

MS BETTNEY: We would not be able to, at least in my opinion, give permit to the private land that is currently being contested, but the remainder of the property - as I understand from my conversations with Heather - could still be accessed by the public under the auspices of the trust. That would be the alternate plan, I guess.

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, it would be the ideal solution. I think that would satisfy them. That is my understanding. In my conversation back and forth to them, right now it seems to be at a roadblock as to your department not saying: Okay, this land is under question. You can still have access to this land, and here is your permit to occupy.

MS BETTNEY: Heather, could you comment please on the specifics?

MR. FITZGERALD: Because that has not been done, to my understanding.

MS MACLELLAN: What John O'Dea was asking for was a grant under the Crown Lands Act for vacant land. Crown Lands cannot issue that under that act because the land is not vacant. We would only use that act if it was actually Crown land. That land has never been registered as Crown land, therefore that act does not apply. What John is actually asking for legally cannot be done. We had a discussion with him yesterday on that so he understands it.

We have spoken to Justice and Justice feels very confident with the nature of the claims there. What we have heard from the members of the family who have come forward so far is that they would have no problem giving them permission to continue to be on that land, and that it could be done on a five-year agreement. It also would not take away any long-term ownership of the family of that land, for them occupying it for five years. So, it seems like that is the best route to go. I think John got a further understanding yesterday afternoon on that issue.

MR. FITZGERALD: It sounds like there is going to be some settlement brought to it.

MS MACLELLAN: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: That would satisfy them. In fact, I think all they are looking for is just a permit to occupy, to have access to the land. That is probably no different than what you had given Random Passage in the beginning in order for them to go and use the site. That never went through Quieting of Titles or expropriation or anything. It was just a permit issued for the film set to go and use the land, occupy the land, and revert it to government. So, they are not looking for anything different.

MS BETTNEY: That's right (inaudible) at the time because there was no direct claim on the land by a private owner. While it was not Crown lands, that is, I guess, the remedy that was provided in that circumstance. But, when an individual actually came forward claiming the land, then that remedy is not open to us at this point.

As Heather as indicated, one part of the family is quite agreeable to entering into an arrangement with the Trust to allow access and have some kind of a lease arrangement. We are really hopeful that we will get the whole matter resolved as well.

MR. FITZGERALD: Good.

Another issue, just moving away from that, grave pit camping. What is your department's stand on gravel pit camping?

MS BETTNEY: What is our department's stand on gravel pit camping, Clyde?

MR. FITZGERALD: Tell me. You really want me to try - don't sing a song to me.

MR. GRANTER: I suppose it is not something that we would like to see continued, but we understand that it is a very sensitive issue. Many Newfoundland campers take it as a right to occupy these gravel pits. At this point we have not discussed any action to address it.

MR. FITZGERALD: It is something, I think, that your government has been trying to discourage and to get people into recognized sites. The reason I asked what your stand was on gravel pit camping is because a lot of people are really interested in seeing some of our parks continue to operate in a longer tourist season. They tie it in with the schedule of the ferry from North Sydney to Argentia. A lot of times you get people travelling in what we would call the shoulder season of tourism. When they come here, at least for the last two weeks, they find our parks are closed. They have no other choice but go and take part in gravel pit camping some of the time. A lot of our tourists are rubber tire tourists who come here to visit the Province. I think we expect to see greater numbers of them this year. Are we looking at extending the season for at least two weeks of some parks that we identify as being popular and wanting to keep open for an extended period rather than closing on September 15?

MS BETTNEY: Well, just let me answer generally first. This is one of the issues that the Tourism branch has been looking at; the issue of how to extend those shoulder seasons. We recognize that the tourism season is very valuable in terms of the employment and the money that it brings to the Province, but it is very, very short as it exists right now.

In many cases there are almost too many things that are happening in a very short space of time in the month of July and in the month of August. They are making a lot of effort right now to try and find different ways to extend, both into this time of year, into May and June, and later into the fall, which we all know is one of the most beautiful times of the year in the Province anyway. So, this is something that could be considered. There are two aspects to it of course. There are our own parks, which we operate ourselves, which we could look at in that regard. It would be a financial decision that we would have to make as to whether we could afford the cost of operations for the time involved. Then there are also the privately operated parks which, again, if there was good business to access at that time, I am sure it would be a good business decision on their part to try and remain open. But, I do not believe that at this time we have plans to extend the season. It is something we would want to analyze more before going down that road.

Again, if Vic would like to comment on that.

MR. JANES: Well, Keith will deal with the parks. But, from a tourism perspective, let me just - while the mike is on - say that with respect to shoulder seasons, both spring and fall, it is an issue that we always focus on in an attempt to expand the traditional time. In fact, we are looking at one project this particular fall that will help us within the shoulder season.

If I might also make a comment in terms of gravel pit camping, generally. The Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador industry association for tourism has a committee within its structure for campgrounds and attractions. They have made some representation to us over the last year about the issue of putting gravel pit camping back on the table, because within the last couple of years it really has not been a high profile discussion item. It has over time, but has not been necessarily in the last year or year-and-a-half. I expect that possibly this year when they come to meet with us they may reintroduce that particular topic and ask us to revisit and discuss it. At that point in time, I suppose, it will go back on the table and become a -

MR. FITZGERALD: It seems kind of strange that we would put a link to the Province in place to accommodate the tourist season and we would close our parks two weeks prior to that link being taken away. That, to me, does not make sense. Even if we opened some parks or left them open for a couple of weeks on a trial period. I think of Butter Pot Park, it is strategically located where people could go. We do not need to open them all for a trial basis. It is something that is not new to the department, it is something that has been brought up many times. I hear it all the time because there appears to be a need there. I think the number of people travelling in September and October now seems to be far greater than what it was just a few short years ago. A lot of people enjoy that time of the year to travel. They come here and a lot of our facilities are closed up or they expect people to go there in some of the sites on a volunteer basis to open them up. I am not so certain that is the way to promote tourism.

MR. HEALEY: I will make a couple of comments to reiterate what the Minister said; that we do, indeed, have a number of very good, private sector parks that can help with the shoulder season. My understanding is a couple of years ago we did look at and keep a couple of parks open during that season, but the take up on it was not very good.

I will reiterate again what the minister said, and that is: certainly if the need is identified there, and if our tourism folks tell us that the people who are coming in during that shoulder season are looking for camping facilities and not able to find it - subject to, of course, having to find the financial resources to extend the dates on some of the parks - we would certainly consider that; no question.

MR. FITZGERALD: It was just yesterday - in fact, I accepted a call from one of our own local tourists. I suppose a tourist is considered somebody who travels a certain number of miles and stays for a certain period of time, but this was a fellow here in St. John's. He goes out to Butter Pot Park and pays $1,000-plus a year for a campsite there. His argument was come the fifteenth of September I am driven out of there. I would be willing to pay more money. I would be willing to have it tacked on for an extra two weeks if I was allowed to go there and use the park. We are not only talking about tourists coming to visit the Province but our own people as well.

MS BETTNEY: Good point. It's something we can look at.

MR. FITZGERALD: How have the private parks, the parks that have been privatized, have those parks been working out well? I know now that they are privatized the department doesn't keep a hands-on approach or do regular visits or anything like that.

One of the complaints I have heard from a lot of people, or some people I should say, who are using private parks is that it appears some people are going into those parks and putting their trailers there, building on bridges, and almost making it like a cottage area. They are finding that when you see the number of sites advertised - the number of sites are still advertised and the amenities which that particular park has to offer, but when people go there they find a lot of the sites are taken up by almost permanent residents. Has that been a problem, or has it been raised with your department before?

MS BETTNEY: That is not a problem that I am aware of. I do not know that the issue has been brought to our attention within the department, but as someone who kind of travels the parks a lot too, it is not something that I have encountered. I would be interested, if there was a specific park which that comment was made about, in knowing what it is. I think, generally speaking, the experience with the private parks has been positive in terms of just creating another kind of experience that is working well for both the entrepreneur involved and in keeping access for that kind of outdoor facility in various parts of our Province. It varies from park to park. Some are obviously doing better than others, but I think in general, the experience has been relatively successful.

MR. FITZGERALD: I can get the name of the park for you. I do not have it off the top of my head either, but it was a complaint that came to in me. A fellow had raised it. In fact, I should have the name of the park upstairs. I will find out and get it for you.

MS BETTNEY: Please.

MR. FITZGERALD: The other thing as well - and it was the same complainant who made the observation. I don't even know if this is true but I will ask. In other provinces, like Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, in competing for tourists, when they put out their tourism brochures they advertise their parks and they rate much the same as we do with our accommodation establishments.

MS BETTNEY: Yes, Canada Select.

MR. FITZGERALD: That is right, Canada Select. I do not think it is done through Canada Select but there is a rating guide. He thought that would be something that we should look at for our parks because in many of our parks, while it gives the number of campsites and gives the amenities that are offered there, his experience was - and I know nothing about parks, I do not go near them, when the flies come out I stay home. His comments were that when he went there he found that a lot of those lots were permanently occupied. If there was a star rating for parks then at least that should be a gauge as to what was there and how popular they would be.

MS BETTNEY: It sounds like a good idea. I do not think it is something that we have looked at to date. I do know that when it comes to parks, from other provinces where I have camped and visited, I would say our park facilities are beyond compare. I think we have some fabulous parks in this Province. I know that even going through the rest of the Atlantic provinces that we excel in this area, and the tourists who come here will acknowledge that. We have some very good park facilities, but I think that you are right, that any further detailed information we can give our tourists in advance so that they will know exactly what a park has to offer and the kind of amenities, because people who like to camp and visit our parks have different attitudes towards the kind of experience they want. Some bring a tent and want complete wilderness type experiences. Others want to have hot showers and the ability to socialize and all the rest of it. I would be quite willing to look at some kind of rating system. I think it is something we can probably talk with the hospitality industry about as well to get their cooperation.

MR. FITZGERALD: It sounded like a reasonable request.

Minister, have we issued or is there a freeze on outfitters licence in the Province, in Newfoundland and Labrador?

MS BETTNEY: There is a moratorium - is there Clyde? - at this point, while we look at the whole situation and bring forward a paper to Cabinet to look at the whole issue of outfitters licence as well as the issue of resource management.

I will ask Clyde to comment more specifically on that, or one of our ADMs.

MR. GRANTER: There is, essentially, a freeze on new outfitting operations on the Island part of the Province right now pending some further direction from Cabinet. With respect to the - and I assume you are talking about the big game licences. They are the subject of a five year plan. The first year of the next five years, so to speak, was this year; and because of the big game populations, there were no additional moose licences issued to outfitters. They essentially were left with what they had, and I think in a few cases they received less than what they had. We tried to issue caribou licences in an attempt to make up the difference. That five year plan is subject to review on the third year and would sort of take us forward to the next five years.

MR. FITZGERALD: So, there has been no new big game outfitters licences issued within the past - how long? No new big game outfitters licences issued in the past year, in the past two years?

WITNESS: No, the freeze came in in 1998; 1998 was the last time there were any new entrants into the outfitting business.

MR. FITZGERALD: Okay, and there have been no new additions to existing outfitters licences for moose? Were there any new licences issued last year?

MR. GRANTER: If there were, there were very, very few. I could check on that for you.

MR. FITZGERALD: The only way somebody can get an outfitters licence now - I guess would be a correct statement to say - is to buy another outfitter and take over that licence and operate on. Would that quota go with that licence if that were to happen?

MR. GRANTER: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: Travel for sports teams, minister, that is always an item of concern and interest. Many times we see it done in ways that upset other places and other teams. What is the criteria that your department uses in providing financial assistance to sports teams to represent the Province outside the Province?

MS BETTNEY: Are you talking about at -

MR. FITZGERALD: School teams.

MS BETTNEY: School teams? Not the Canada Games or anything of that nature?

MR. FITZGERALD: No, school teams.

MS BETTNEY: That is something that is done on a variable basis. I do not believe we have a program, as such, that has set criteria to sponsor school teams. So, it tends to be something that is very individual from area to area. I know sometimes it is something that MHAs themselves will find a way to contribute to. In the past I believe that - I do not know if it is within this department - there has sometimes been support given when there was a team travelling a distance and there was a great expense involved, but there is no program, as such, within this department to help fund school teams for travel or other teams, community type teams, for interprovincial travel. It is an area where, if you had the funding, you would like to be able to have a structured program there because it is certainly recognized that whenever a team wins the right to represent the Province in interprovincial games or national games that they are ambassadors for the Province. There is considerable expense involved, especially if you get soccer teams or hockey teams with fifteen, twenty players and then their chaperones and coaches and everything else. But, given the constraints that we have on our funding in this area, it is not something that we are able to have a structured program for.

MR. FITZGERALD: But, you will admit, in the past there has been funding provided. It seems a little unfair that we take the political system down to the high school level where some people can access funding for their sports teams to travel and other members cannot. That is not the right message, and it is certainly not the right way to treat athletes who have earned the right to travel and represent the Province. It is terrible!

MS BETTNEY: I think at some point - sometimes it is simply a question of when there are funds or if there are funds that happen to be available. Sometimes it is a question of the time of year, in terms of the fiscal year, as to whether these funds are made available. As I say, it is an area where I would like to be able to do something structured but we simply do not have the resources to apply to it. Individual members, I am sure, will continue to try and do their best to be able to provide support to teams in their districts when they get this honour of being able to represent our Province in interprovincial sports.

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, there should be some kind of a policy because it is unfair. I know because I have experienced it myself. I have experienced trying to access funding for a local school team to represent the Province. Then all of a sudden, to pick up the local paper in two weeks time and find our that another school's team has been fortunate enough to receive funding from government to travel outside the Province. That is not the way we should be spending government money or taxpayers dollars. Everybody should have equal access to it.

MS BETTNEY: I believe there is also a difference between voluntary travel for interprovincial purposes and teams which have won, by virtue of within the Province competition, the right to represent the Province. There are many of our schools and even sports clubs who choose that it would be a good thing to go to Prince Edward Island, or to go to Ontario, for the purposes of a specific competition. It is not something that they have competed and proven themselves to be the best in the Province, it is something that the club wants to do or the school wants to do. I think that is a slightly different circumstance. It is going to be a great experience for them. It is going to be something that I am sure they will remember all of their lives and will be very positive but it is in a different category, at least in the way I look at it, from teams which compete within this Province - are seen to be and proven to be the best and then move on to another level of interprovincial competition. I think you need to look at the circumstances associated with it when there is support given.

MR. FITZGERALD: No, I am speaking exactly about the group of people that you referred to, a team that has gone out and competed provincially and earned the right to move on and have passage to represent the Province outside of the Province. Some teams are funded and some are not.

I wonder if the minister can provide a list of the teams or the money that has been funded, and where it went to help sponsor sports teams travelling outside the Province this last year?

MS BETTNEY: I can provide that. I am not sure that there were any funded through this department, but I will check and provide that to you.

MR. FITZGERALD: There certainly were the year before. I am aware of that.

Mount Pearl - or Marble Mountain condominiums. There are no condominiums in Mount Pearl. There are no elevators there, are there? Yes, there is. There is one somebody said. I heard the other day as I was driving - not the other day, quite some time ago. I am going to make this comment -

CHAIR: You had better be careful, you are really on thin ice here, okay.

MR. FITZGERALD: I have to make this comment. I probably mentioned this to you before. There was a phone in show on what a community should have before it would be considered a city.

MS BETTNEY: You are on dangerous territory here.

CHAIR: Some people are catching up with my comment. I told him that is very thin ice.

MR. FITZGERALD: Some people were calling in and they were saying that you should have this, you should have a men's clothing store and you should have something else. One fellow called in and said: Well, you should have to have at least one restaurant with no gas tank outside.

Marble Mountain Condominiums; that has been an issue of where government owned facilities, taxpayers' dollars, is in competition with local people. What are your thoughts on that? Is the department getting any complaints?

MS BETTNEY: We are working closely with the local industry on this issue. I know that there has been, from time to time, concerns expressed in this area. It usually depends on the nature of the tourist season, the winter tourist season, and the volume of tourists that are requiring accommodations. Of course when the market is soft, having any extra capacity at all causes concerns for the local business people. But, it is something that my officials are working closely with the industry people in the Corner Brook and Steady Brook areas to ensure that there is good cooperation and that one complements the other. Again, there are different types of facilities involved here. We all know that you can attract certain tourists with certain amenities and not others. So, we try and ensure that in advertising and promoting, as well as operating this facility, that we complement the amenities and the facilities that are available through the private sector in that area. We do have a member of our staff who is on the board of directors

I would ask Clyde or Vic, if you have anything more specific that you could add to my comments?

MR. GRANTER: With respect to the relationship between Marble Mountain and the hoteliers in the Corner Brook area, I think it is fair to say that in past years the relationship has not been good. There have been considerable complaints that Marble Mountain, a government funded - particularly, the accommodations - operation was directly competing and was not being helpful to them. But, in the past year I think we have seen a considerable turnaround in that attitude. The management at the Marble Mountain facility have spent considerable time liaising with the Corner Brook business people. We have witnessed a very cooperative arrangement this year where I think they have concluded that having a very active ski facility, with accommodations that draw certain kinds of skiers, in the end is good for them as well.

MR. FITZGERALD: I just want to ask a couple of questions on the T'Railway. A lot of people have concern that the Newfoundland and Labrador Snowmobile Federation seems to have control over the T'Railway. In many of the reports that have been written and many of the submissions that have been brought forward to government, people with all-terrain vehicles, trikes and those kinds of things, have expressed concern that somewhere down the road the T'Railway may not be accessible for their use. Has that been something that government is looking at, or have there been recommendations made to ban ATVs from the T'Railway?

MS BETTNEY: I think that there has been some misinformation on this particular subject. I know in recent weeks there has been some discussion and concern about the snowmobile trail on the Northern Peninsula. People were making an assumption that was part of the T'Railway. Of course, it is not. The Northern Peninsula route is a snowmobile trail. That is primarily what it has been constructed for. It was with the intent, yes, if you are going to have this kind of infrastructure that there will have to be some way to maintain it and operate it. The snowmobile association for that area is involved in that particular case.

With respect to the T'Railway as it runs from St. John's to Port aux Basques, I believe it has been our intent and will continue to be, that it will be multi-use and will be accessible. That brings with it, of course, all kinds of issues. There are many conflicting uses for the T'Railway across this Province. We have to find a resolution to some of these issues so that we can balance, as best as possible, the use for individual recreational types who want to hike and cycle. We know that the T'Railway ideally would provide that kind of experience for people, but looking across our Province and the vast expanses in wilderness that we have, which that trail runs through, it is also reasonable that there would be motorized vehicles on it. We have to find a way to be able to blend the two and still ensure safety for (inaudible) users and also ensure that the trail does not sustain significant damage that would cause it to be lost to us as a resource. I think in particular - when you look at all-terrain vehicles, they do chew up trails. There is no question about that. Snowmobiles do not have the same kind of impact on our trail system. There are even places across the Province, of course, where they are used by vehicles to access cabins because we have cabin use on it.

There are many uses that conflict and post problems for the management of the T'Railway. I think in essence, to answer your question about how we see it, I would like to see us work in partnership with groups to find a way to be able to maintain and upgrade and keep the trail in good condition; for people to take ownership of that because the cost, from a provincial government point of view, to even upgrade what we have right now, let alone maintain it on an annual basis, is really considerable, and it is beyond our means at this point. I am concerned that if we do not do something in partnership with people who really do have a passion for this and are willing to volunteer to ensure that it is taken care of and fixed up when it gets run down, that we will lose it. That it will deteriorate to the point where it will not be safe and then we will not be able to have access to it. So, this is a real priority for us.

MR. FITZGERALD: It might be the right way to go because when you get people assuming ownership and responsibility of things - not assuming ownership but responsibility about them, that it seems to work much better. It is an issue. I do not know how many ATVs are in the Province but there has to be many. As you know, in the past we have already restricted this group to not using wetlands and other areas. I suppose the only area now that they can use their ATVs on is the railway bed, where people are fortune enough to have a railway bed to use. It is a big concern with them and I think they would feel a great degree of comfort knowing that your department would certainly acknowledge the use of that particular roadbed for ATVs.

MS BETTNEY: I think too, that one of the benefits - although probably, originally, people would not have been too enthusiastic about having all-terrain vehicles on the railway bed, but along with the efforts that you spoke about to restrict ATV use on our bogs and elsewhere, having the T'Railway there for them to use has seen an improvement in the damage to our natural landscape. I think looking back ten years to the condition of some of our natural areas and the trails that you were seeing which were getting eroded by all-terrain use, that has diminished.

My, I guess, unprofessional observation as somebody who is outdoors a lot is that there seems to be less damage now than there was when this became an issue about ten years ago. So, that is positive. Now we have to find a way to ensure the use that is taking place on the T'Railway can be sustained; and engaging ATV users in a responsible way so that they can help contribute as well to keeping that infrastructure there is probably the only way that we will be able to sustain it.

MR. FITZGERALD: Well, it is certainly not acceptable any more. When people assume ownership and responsibility then they not only don't do it themselves, they are quick to react when they see somebody else doing it. That is certainly a good sign and I think it is something that has worked here.

How many trail groomers do we have in the Province? Eight, ten, four?

MS BETTNEY: We don't know.

MR. FITZGERALD: Okay. The reason I ask that is because I know that there has been some. There is one in Gander and there are probably one or two on the Northern Peninsula.

I met with a group of people the other day who were very frustrated in that they could not borrow a groomer to groom their skidoo trail for them and they talked about Gander. Apparently Gander has a groomer and it is only used - I do not know how often it is used, but it certainly must have a time when it is not being used. That particular groomer was paid for by ACOA, I think. I think they received ACOA funding. There seems to be a group of people there now who have assumed ownership of it and very selfishly have said: This is our groomer and no, you don't get it. Is there something that we can do or that your department can get involved in to allowing those groomers to be accessible for other people or to be used, I suppose, for what it was intended to be?

MR. HEALEY: My understanding is that the groomer was bought for a specific trail, but we would certainly commit to talking to them and seeing what the conditions were under which they received it, and certainly talk to them about the possibility of making it available to others who need it in the area. I do not know the rights of what they have it for or if there are any restrictions on that but we would certainly be willing to talk to them and suggest that they look at sharing it as much as they can with their neighbours, if you will.

MR. FITZGERALD: I talked with the representative of ACOA in Gander and I know that she is going to meet with the group that has met with me, and that is the group down in Valleyfield, Badgers Quay. While they do not have a railway, they have some cut trails. They had the groomer down there before and it has not been a problem, but then all of a sudden: no more, that's it, you are cut off. We want the groomer and it is ours. We are not going to lease it out to you. I think they paid $50 an hour while they had it. So, they did pay for the costs and it did provide the service but now it is not an option for them anymore. If it is something that we can help with, I think we should.

Minister, who is responsible for the branch lines of the old CNR? I am thinking of the Bonavista Peninsula in particular, the old railway track.

MS BETTNEY: It would be Crown land, I presume.

MR. FITZGERALD: Would that have gone back to Crown land?

MS BETTNEY: I presume so.

MR. HEALEY: Yes, that is correct. Some years ago, after CN had abandoned it, they were returned to Crown.

MR. FITZGERALD: In order for somebody to upgrade that trail or to access it then they would have to go to Crown Land to get permission to do that?

MR. HEALEY: That is my understanding.

MR. FITZGERALD: You certainly would not be able to get ownership. I doubt if they would provide ownership of it. They would probably provide access to it.

MR. HEALEY: That is my understanding, yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: Would you be kind enough to give us an update on the Rooms, the $40 million project that is happening not far from here, the only crane I see in St. John's? Is that project on schedule? Is it not only for time for (inaudible) but monetary reasons as well?

MS BETTNEY: Yes, it is on schedule. Work is progressing very well there. I believe it is also on budget. It is within budget schedule as well.

If you would like to have some details of how far along we are with the construction, again, I would ask Heather if she can speak to the specifics of the construction schedule. Heather?

MS MACLELLAN: We are about 17 per cent at completion right now, which means that the first floor has been put in place and the second floor is being worked on. The construction crew was increased up to 100 people over the last week. They are going to be moving full speed. We are on budget and we are on schedule.

With respect to the interior work that needs to be done by the three institutions, we have the exhibit design company working with us, Lord Cultural Resources from Toronto with Dugal Dunbar as their local company. We have our exhibit planning underway. We also have the conservation and preparation of the artifacts for the move and for the exhibits. We have an advisory committee established for looking at the work we need to do on archives and for client services that we need to improve, as we will be going from forty to an eighty person reference resource room with the archives.

As well, with our art gallery, work is underway to inventory the collection and to prepare them as they move into the Rooms.

MR. FITZGERALD: The requirements for non-resident salmon fishermen; it is my understanding that any non-resident, whether you are a property owner or not, requires a licence and must have a guide in order to go salmon fishing on our rivers and waterways. Have we looked at the possibility of people who are landowners in the Province being allowed to fish without guides?

I think of a piece of correspondence - minister, I do not know if you have been made aware of it but probably the deputy minister has - from a gentleman, Myron Becker from Wendell, Massachusetts, who has been a landowner here in this Province for eighteen years. He brings a fair number of people up to use his private facility out on the West Coast. He has been a landowner here for eighteen years and that individual still must hire a guide in order to take part in a salmon fishing exercise. He has chatted with me about it. He has written your department, minister, several times. While he is not objecting to the people that he allows to come here to have a guide - he fully agrees with that. He has no problem with his licence as well; the cost of his licence. In fact, he would be willing to pay more if government deemed that he should pay more because he should not use a guide. He has no problem with that. But, the problem is, and I kind of agree with him, that somebody who has been a landowner here in this Province for the last eighteen to twenty years, should we look at saying that those people must have a guide with them when they go salmon fishing?

MS BETTNEY: The issue would probably be one of: Where do you draw the line? The reason for having a guide in that requirement is twofold. One, it is for conservation purposes, obviously. It also is something that promotes the employment of guides. So, it is part of the economic benefit of this piece of the industry when guides have to be employed when people come to the Province in order to fish. The challenge then would be in saying: Well, if you own property, if you own the land, how long? Is it somebody who comes in from away and buys a site, buys a piece of land - yes, a non-resident but they have property here so they can fish without a guide.

I had another version of this presented, I know in a letter just a couple of weeks ago, where this is a person who now lives away. They are no longer resident in the Province, but they used to be. So when they come back they are a non-resident. He said: I grew up here, I should not have to be required to have a guide. Those are the grey areas which make it very difficult to define and have some degree of consistency from a policy point of view. The fairest way to draw the line here is to say: non-resident requires guide, resident does not require guide. I am not sure if it is possible to vary from that, even recognizing the exceptions of these two cases. I am sure there may be many, many more who could make the same kind of valid claim without being charged that this is not fair, it is inconsistent, and you are not treating people the same. That would be the challenge we have with this particular policy.

MR. FITZGERALD: It seems to be a bit unfair, and I agree with the other person as well. I mean, if somebody leaves this Province and god knows we have enough of them left who has lived here for the last forty-five or fifty years, and fished here for the last forty-five or fifty years. Is it right, because they live in Alberta for economic reasons and have maintained their property here in the Province, to come back and have to hire a guide in order to go salmon fishing? That does not make sense.

Sometimes we bring in blanket policies to cover everything because that is the easy way to do it, but in doing that I am not so sure we bring in the right policies. Maybe it is time to look at changing some of those kinds of things. If somebody is a landowner here, a property owner, and spends x number of months a year here and pays taxes on their property, contributes to the economy, then why should we drive them away? Maybe we can put a five year or a ten year landowner limit on it.

I understand your concern, just because somebody comes here and buys a piece of property. But, we control our Crown lands, and it is not a problem, where they are issued a permit and within two years they must do something with it; and with another certain term they must do something else or it reverts to the Crown. Maybe it is time for us to look at getting away from blanket policies and bring in something sensible that would not drive those people away. This fellow puts forward a real good argument. Are you aware of the case that I am talking about here, minister?

MS BETTNEY: I am aware of the case.

MR. FITZGERALD: Because I can provide you with a copy of the correspondence if you are not. I know the deputy minister must have it because it was an ongoing thing with the former minister. Is it something you are willing to look at and entertain?

MS BETTNEY: Certainly! I would not see any reason not to examine it to see if we could develop some kind of addition to the policy that would still protect our conservation efforts and still maximize our economic benefit, but also accommodate what is seen to be a reasonable request here. It is something I would tread carefully on because I know the whole issue of licences, when it comes to our outdoors, whether it is fishing or hunting or anything else, is scrutinized very closely. People have very strong feelings about that particular aspect. So, I would want to do careful study before making any change.

Keith, did you have anything specific you could add?

MR. HEALEY: I guess there is no question that there are as many exceptions and special cases that people will put forward. To that end, I know as late as two years ago the division did look at and speak to all the stakeholders involved in the management of that resource, the fish resource in the Province, and looked at specific requests, such as the one that you raised. It was determined, again at that time - because that was not the first time it was reviewed - that there wasn't sufficient justification for making the change. Maybe it is time to have a look at it, but as I say, as recent as less than two years ago all the stakeholders were consulted on that. They confirmed the policy that we have in place from their perspective.

MR. FITZGERALD: Nobody is asking you to sacrifice conservation. Conservation and protection will still be provided by the system that we have in place now. All we are asking for people is, after a certain period of time or commitment or residence here in the Province, then they should be allowed to go fishing like other people who are residents here. It is not a big request.

Signage, minister; what is your government's policy or what are you planning on doing with - I hear signing policy being talked about. I hear that it is going to be changed, and we are going to do this and we are going to do that. I do not know. I do not see much difference happening in signage policy in this Province today when it comes to providing information as to how somebody gets to where they want to go and what services are provided. I brought it up with the last minister as well because it is frustrating. Even though we are used to travelling the Burin Peninsula and the Bonavista Peninsula, there are other people who are not. It certainly must be confusing when they go and try to find their way around. I know we put out maps with Route 230 and Route 235, and when we go to another province we follow them. I do not see many Newfoundlanders with maps in their cars following them around the Province. I guess they get lost as well as people from away.

One of the former ministers talked about putting in little rest places along certain parts of major trunk roads where people would be able to pull off the road and there would be signage provided in a little kiosk or whatever. It would show them where the communities are and what the amenities are, that sort of thing. None of that has happened. When are we going to see a change in signage policy? If it is, what is it going to be?

MS BETTNEY: The signage policy that we have right now is one that has evolved over at least the last half dozen years that I have been here. I know there has been extensive consultation with the hospitality industry and with communities to try and come up with something that would be acceptable and reasonable for promoting communities and promoting various commercial sites, as well as other attractions, and balance that with the aesthetics of the environment and making sure that we do not end up with just a proliferation of signs that really spoil the vistas and make what is the unique attraction of our Province something less than it could be.

In the past year, in 2001, we brought in, I believe, changes to the policy at that time which were agreed upon by the hospitality industry. That seems to be working relatively smoothly. That has allowed for certain advertising within certain distances from the main road, main intersections and so on. Again, this one has been as troublesome and problematic as some of the other areas we have talked about in terms of trying to satisfy everyone's particular viewpoints around what is reasonable.

Signage from the provincial point of view of course is an issue with the Department of Works, Services and Transportation, in terms of advertising our own highways and our own routes. That would be something that is taken up by that department. Usually they respond when there is a particular problem that gets noticed, that people do not seem to have adequate information. That would be something we would advise them of, if we are made aware that there is an issue in a particular area.

Generally speaking, my experience in travelling the Province is that the signage for our highway routes and direction finding is relatively good. There are a few areas where, I think, it perhaps can be improved. I recently received some correspondence which suggested that the directional signs to lead you through the Northern Peninsula from Deer Lake needs to be improved. Some people had some difficulty with that. So, we would pass that information on to Works, Services and encourage them to have a look at it and see if they need to put in more signs.

I noticed, just in recent days, that there are more and more of our businesses who are going towards using the standard Works, Services and Transportation signage policy, where you have one sign with standard design, that they pay for through Works, Services and Transportation, and it will advertise a particular site. For example, the Butler Gallery in Mount Pearl - I noticed just yesterday on the highway coming into the city - has one of the government signs that advertises it, as well as the Glacier and others. I think that is the ideal. There are still private signs which advertise things. That will vary. But, as long as we do not get to the point where it is messy and it is just not aesthetically pleasing, I think we will be able to balance it.

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, we certainly need something done. There had to be a change. I think of the one between Clarenville and Goobies there; there was a fair amount of signage. It was the ideal place to put up a sign. A lot of them were advertising places where you could go and buy a brew mix, for instance, in the local stores or you could get film developing done; something that did not make sense at all. But, it was also a little bit frustrating for businesses that had to advertise a fair distance, in some cases, from where the turnoff and the exit to their business was. I especially think of the people in the Port Blandford and Charlottetown areas because of the park there. Some of their signage had to be a great distance from where the exit would be and where their residence was. So, they had great frustration with that.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I will pass it to another member of the committee.

Thank you, very much.

CHAIR: Thank you, Roger.

You had pretty well, I guess, a free-wheeling discussion between the critic and the department minister. Perhaps now we will move to the actual numbers of the estimates. Trevor, Vice-Chair, we will go to you first.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to thank the minister and her officials for coming in this morning to answer our questions. If I could, with a little bit of latitude, Mr. Chairman, I have two questions that are not directly related to the estimates but, if you do not mind, I would like to have the latitude to ask them. Then I will go directly into the estimates.

I wrote a letter - I am not sure when it was now, November or December - to the former minister on some concerns that were relayed to me on moose populations in area one, two and forty-five, I think it was. I should not have had to follow up, but anyway, I did not check back on it and I have not received a response. I wonder if somebody could check into it? Maybe the concerns that I relayed, which were relayed to me, where unfounded but I would really like to have a written answer to the questions that I raised at that time or the concerns that I relayed on. If the minister could please see about that I would appreciate it.

MS BETTNEY: No problem.

MR. TAYLOR: That is one, and I do not expect you to answer today because I know you have not been there very long and what have you.

The other thing is a question on the increased tourist traffic numbers, the number crunching, the statistics that we point to. The comments about people coming back who had moved away sort of sparked this question. How do we, or do we, differentiate between the 80,000 people who have hauled out of here in the past number of years, in the past four or five years? How do we differentiate between those types of people who come back here to visit family and the actual, what I would consider to be, real tourists who have no real connection to this place other than something pulls at their heartstrings and brings them here?

The reason I ask that, I guess, is because we see the numbers increasing. I know there is probably no immediate correlation or direct correlation between the number of people who have left the Province and the increased tourist traffic that we see coming back. I wonder if sometimes the unfortunate people who have had to leave this place, that once they get moved out we count them as tourists when they come back. I sincerely hope that is not the case.

MS BETTNEY: I do expect that they get counted as tourists to start with. I do believe that we can differentiate between the two but it would not be a very exact science. It would be something that if we were doing a particular count, as we do from time to time, to estimate the number of people coming from other places where you actually use your tally sheet type of thing to count up people coming either through the airports, ferries, or whatever, then in direct contact that question would get pursued. But, as I say, it is not very exact.

The other way that you would get a picture of it would be when you look at the increase, for example, in hotel use, in airlines, and so on. Oftentimes when people have moved from here and come back, are coming back to stay with family. They often do not go into a hotel type space. So, the increase in the use of hotel rooms would be one of the indicators that would signal, for the most part, that these are people who do not have that link to the Province of family here.

I would ask Vic if he has any other specifics he can add to this.

MR. JANES: Thank you, minister.

We do, periodically, exit surveys from the Province. That is where we derive the prime source of stats that drills down into the types of tourists that they are. The general numbers in between survey points - and survey points are fairly wide apart. We are planning to do one this year. The most recent beyond that would have been back in 1997. Of course, we work off those stats from 1997 until we generate new ones.

We also derive information from people who hold tourism establishment licences. Hotels, motels, B&Bs report to us annually and you get a sense of what their occupancy rates are. The occupancy rates have been strong. As our non-resident tourists have grown over the last five years, so has that industry grown. So, we are getting good representation there.

The group that you are referring to we refer to as VFR market, visiting friends and relations. People who come home basically to visit, but still an important part of the overall market. In fact, some of our marketing efforts are directed to those folks to bring them back to the Province, particularly in areas where we know there are large pockets, such as northern Alberta for example. It is still an important part of the overall mix of tourists.

When we get this survey done this year - it will be actually this year and next that we will be executing a whole new exit survey - we will get much more detailed information about the nature of the actual tourists; who they are and where they are from. The kind of things that we do not get on the annual reporting from the industry people in hotels and so on.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you.

As I promised, I will move into some questions specifically about the estimates. I will start with the Minister's Office. I guess it is probably more related to last year than the estimates for this year. Although if we follow the same trend this year as we did last year, I am sure the estimate is going to be off by a ways.

I just wonder why we would see a $140,000 difference between the Budget and the Revised in the Minister's Office, 1.1.01.? Again, in Executive Support, 1.2.01., there is a difference of approximately $150,000 there.

MS BETTNEY: I will take the two separately. On the Minister's Office there were some extra positions that were funded under the minister's salary component for some period of time during the last fiscal year. I believe there were a couple of students who were employed under the Minister's Office and also a couple to other positions that received funding for some part of the fiscal year.

On the Executive Support category; primarily, the increase that you are seeing there is the addition of the extra ADM position, which I referred to in my opening comments, when we had moved to this department, Inland Fish and Wildlife. Of course, we have the new ADM position. We said to Keith, when we were preparing for the Estimates, that this is his fault.

MR. TAYLOR: Would we - and I have not looked - see a corresponding reduction in - I do not know if this is a fair question - but a corresponding reduction in wherever he came from?

MS BETTNEY: I am almost certain. I do not know if it is absolutely corresponding, but I presume that the salary block for - your position, was that filled?

MR. HEALEY: (Inaudible).

MS BETTNEY: Okay, so there would not be a reduction. I think it would be better if you pursued that, obviously, with the other department. But, the increase in cost in the Executive Support, as I say, primarily is due to the addition of a third ADM.

MR. TAYLOR: Just back to - you said the reason for the difference in the Minister's Office was primarily on the salary front. Why would there have been a couple of other people? I did not get that in your answer.

MS BETTNEY: I believe there were some special projects that were assigned to the people who were required under the Minister's Office. As I say, I do not believe that they were for the full year, but they were for varied portions.

MR. TAYLOR: Okay.

I see on the next page, on page 152, in Administrative Support, 1.2.02.12., Information Technology. The Budget last year was for $268,400 and Revised to $480,000. A substantial, needless to say, increase of $212,000. This year a similar number, $476,400. Why such a large jump from the budget of last year to what was actually spent, and to what is projected this year?

MS BETTNEY: There are two separate reasons. The increase last year was due to purchasing some IT hardware, new computers and upgrading. That was primarily the reason that you see that go to $480,000. This year, however, it is not in the area of hardware, but we are doing work on the tourist destination management system. There is $300,000 that has been allocated in the IT budget in order to improve and upgrade that IT system.

MR. TAYLOR: Why, in March, would we not know that we would need to spend $212,000 on hardware for the IT section of the department and come to that conclusion, I presume, not a great deal later?

MR. GRANTER: It is essentially a case of while we know what we need, early in the year the conclusion was that we did not know whether we would have the budgetary flexibility to address the need. As the year progresses and we see how the budget expenditures are going then we sort of make a decision to transfer funds into that particular allocation to take care of the hardware needs, in this particular case. It is a matter of sort of letting the year progress partway through and having a better sense of what we can and cannot afford to do.

MR. TAYLOR: Moving right along because I know of two other members want to ask some questions I am sure.

On page 153, under 2.1.01., Tourism. Appropriations provide for the establishment and implementation of programs that will develop tourism products, encourage residents of other provinces and countries to visit the Province as well as encourage Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to vacation within. I assume that this is our advertising budget, primarily in section 06., Purchased Services?

MS BETTNEY: Yes, this would be the contract with the agency of record. It would be a big piece of this particular line item.

MR. TAYLOR: Number 10., in the same section, Grants and Subsidies. What is it, and how do I get some for my district?

MS BETTNEY: In the Grants and Subsidies, are you looking at the expenditure for last year or this year?

MR. TAYLOR: I guess there are a number of questions there. What are they? Why such a huge difference in the budgeted and the revised? Why are we back down this year? There are a number of questions that are begged there.

MS BETTNEY: A couple of items that contributed to the increase, as you say the substantial increase in expenditure, there for the year past have been the Juno funding is included in that, the $550,000. Also, there was $185,000 provided for the Norstead operation. In the year coming, as you will notice, the amount goes back down roughly to the same; a little bit more than it had been previously budgeted. Included in that is the amount for the operation of Marble Mountain, which my department provides. I believe that $400,000 goes to Marble Mountain. In addition to that there is some money for the Grand Concourse and some money for the visitor information centres. So, that is the bulk of what you see in the $559,000 that is estimated for this coming year.

MR. TAYLOR: Primarily, you said the visitor's centres, the Grand Concourse and Marble Mountain.

MS BETTNEY: Yes.

MR. TAYLOR: The large difference from last year would have been that you did not know for sure you were going to get the Junos. So, that was added on afterwards. Then in April or May, whenever the decision was made - in late April or early May I guess the decision was made to advance funds to Norstead.

MS BETTNEY: That is right.

MR. TAYLOR: Okay.

WITNESS: So you did get some.

MR. TAYLOR: Oh, I knew we got it. It took awhile but we got it. They are not looking for it this year, I do not think. They are still looking for money, but not to the provincial.

WITNESS: (Inaudible).

MR. TAYLOR: (Inaudible) to get some more.

CHAIR: (Inaudible).

MR. TAYLOR: Pardon?

CHAIR: I said get Trevor's help to get some.

MR. TAYLOR: Under 3.1.01, page 154, I will start with 05., Professional Services. The Budget was for $56,500 last year and Revised to $114,500 and back to $56,500 this year. What Professional Services are we talking about there? Why the jump?

MS BETTNEY: Is this in relation to the transition with The Rooms?

WITNESS: (Inaudible).

MS BETTNEY: This is an area, if you look at the Salary component as well as Professional Services - and I believe there is one other, Gerry.

MR. CROCKER: Purchased Services.

MS BETTNEY: - and Purchased Services, you will see considerable variance in what was estimated last year and what was actually spent. This is because of the way that we transition the funds from another part of the Budget to the way that we actually disperse them to pay for the work that we are doing in The Rooms. I believe when you go to the section on the Art Gallery -

WITNESS: Archives.

MS BETTNEY: - on the Archives, you will see that there would have been underspending in that area. It corresponds to the over expenditure in this section where it is dispersed. There was approximately $1 million last year that was flowed through for the work on The Rooms. It came in its disbursements through this section. So you see the increase in the Salary component and the increase in Professional Services. These would have been contracts that we engaged in for some of the work - that Heather spoke to - that is being done to develop the displays and to start to prepare to get ready for the new operation.

MR. TAYLOR: Just so I understand, the money would have come from Provincial Archives, 3.2.01., Purchased Services? No?

MS BETTNEY: Yes.

MR. TAYLOR: Well, I am missing you then.

MS BETTNEY: For example, if you go to 3.2.01. you will see that we budgeted for $1.1 million in expenditure there, and the revised in July was $757,000.

MR. TAYLOR: In Salaries, yes.

MS BETTNEY: In Salaries. By the same token, back in 3.1.01. we budgeted for $1.3 million but we spent $1.7 million. So, we increased in this area and there was a corresponding decrease in Salaries under the Provincial Archives. Likewise, under Supplies for example, or take Purchased Services, we budgeted $232,200 and we revised it in July to be $20,000, and correspondingly - though in this case, in Purchased Services, we actually -

WITNESS: (Inaudible) Grants.

MS BETTNEY: It is in the Grants, was it?

We actually went down there but we moved it up into the Grants under Professional Services. According to my Director of Finance, this was to make it administratively more simple, from their point of view, to pay for the kinds of contracts and work that we need doing as we proceed with the construction on The Rooms. It does make it difficult for people like ourselves to track, but that is the explanation.

MR. TAYLOR: I could follow the Salaries move, once you pointed it out, but I could not see the move until you mentioned it. It did not go from number five to number five, or number six to number six. It went from number six to number ten.

MS BETTNEY: Right.

MR. TAYLOR: That's fine.

I was going to ask a question on Grants and Subsidies, 10., under Culture and Heritage. What are the Grants and Subsidies used for? Who would they have went to, or what?

MS BETTNEY: I can give you a few examples. We provided a grant to the Stephenville Festival for $16,000; the Signal Hill Tattoo for $36,000. You come down through things like the Resource Centre for the Arts, the Newfoundland Quarterly, TickleAce magazine. The big component of these Grants and Subsidies, I believe the largest component, is the grant to local community museums and heritage foundations. These are provided to a host of small community museums and heritage groups annually. It is based on an application. There are criterias set and so on. It is a combination of provincial type operations that require some assistance, some financial assistance, and they would say that it is not nearly enough. We provide it through this particular heading.

MR. TAYLOR: We are in the section where I intended to ask the question, and I will probably get away with it now that the Chairman is not here. I noticed the other day a press release that came in. It was probably about two or three weeks ago, and I forget the name of the fund that it was announcing funding for, but it was something related to Fisheries Heritage structural -

MS BETTNEY: Fisheries Heritage, yes.

MR. TAYLOR: Would you mind giving me a little bit of information on that, please?

MS BETTNEY: This is a fund that the federal government has agreed to set up to assist the Province in trying to preserve some of our fishing architecture. It has recognized that as things have changed in rural areas and some communities are not as involved in the fishery as they have been in the past, that you will find abandoned stages, wharves, fishing huts and things of that nature that are really part of our culture and our heritage, and that we would not want to disappear from the landscape completely.

This fund has been something that we have been looking for to be able to provide some assistance to community groups, I would think in particular, who would want to take on restoring and preserving, as part of their local culture, some fishing related structures. I would have to ask my officials for the actual specifics of the amount and if they know when the fund will be available, but that is the purpose of it.

MR. TAYLOR: I seem to recall $800,000-odd.

MS BETTNEY: That sounds right.

MS MACLELLAN: The fund is $50,000, and it is being administered by the Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and Labrador. It was put in place to establish the program. The Heritage Foundation have proceeded with the guidelines and criteria. It is an application process, which has been announced.

MR. TAYLOR: A $50,000 fund.

WITNESS: Annually?

MS MACLELLAN: No, it is get the fund started. It is to get the program started.

MR. TAYLOR: Okay. There will be more details to follow, I assume.

Again, since we are on Culture and Heritage, I have to ask the same question I asked the minister last year. I was at the Convention Centre back in February, I guess it was, when Persona was launched. Regional Cable relaunched as Persona, I suppose, for lack of a better way of putting it. At the time the Minister of Tourism was there and Persona made an announcement and a commitment, presented a cheque or whatever, to Folk of the Sea for $100,000 - I will say we because I have been involved with Folk of the Sea ever since it started - to establish a monument to the fishermen/fisherwomen who have been lost over the years in the industry. I brought this up actually the first day we came back after Easter, I believe.

The minister made a commitment at that time to see this through. Now, there wasn't any financial commitment. This has been toyed around for eight years now. I know it because I raised it eight years ago. I wonder if the department has any intention, or if it is poked away in these estimates somewhere, for any kind of a financial contribution towards establishing what I think is long, long overdue in this Province, some kind of a monument to the only reason that we came here in the first place?

MS BETTNEY: If it is poked away I do not know where it is. I have not stumbled across it as a particular initiative that the department has planned for in this year's budget.

MR. TAYLOR: Okay, I was just wondering. The reason I asked it, as I said, back in, I believe it was February, the minister - and I am not suggesting that he made a financial commitment or anything like that, but certainly -

MS BETTNEY: One of those good ideas.

MR. TAYLOR: Yes, it is one of those good ideas.

Some of those monuments that we see around, who pays for them, the actual construction of them? When I say some that is a pretty general question I know, but the Merchant Mariners monument up in front of Memorial, in front of the Fisheries College, comes immediately to mind. Memorials like that, are they funded by some department of government or are they privately constructed or what?

MS BETTNEY: I would think it is a bit of both in the case of some government buildings. Then the monuments and the general landscaping and all of that often get incorporated into the cost of building the facility. I know for other monuments that have been done recently there has been private fundraising to secure the funds to do it. I am thinking something like the Shanawdithit monument in Boyd's Cove. That was done through almost a trust group who got together and decided that they would spearhead the fundraising to pay for that particular monument. So, it is a combination of both. I am sure that from time to time the provincial government has also contributed to monuments of this sort, but I do not have the particulars.

MR. TAYLOR: It looks like Heather is trying to say something back there.

MS BETTNEY: Okay.

MS MACLELLAN: We are also providing a little bit more support to the Folk of the Sea. I am co-chairing with Ged, the committee that has been established to bring forward the site selection, terms of reference and strategy around fundraising. We have been meeting weekly over the last eight weeks.

MR. TAYLOR: Since it is being recorded I would be remiss - since I mentioned the $100,000 that Persona provided I should mention the $50,000 that the shrimp fleet donated.

One final question, because I have been half an hour now and I know that there are others who have questions. It is related to a request, actually, that I received just recently. I forwarded the letter on to the minister just last week, I believe it was, in the absence of a formal proposal from the community yet. The community of Englee have just recently started down the road towards trying to get a youth centre for the community. There is very little in the way of recreational, or any kind of structure of that nature there for the young people. The RCMP have committed to helping, both from an organizational perspective and from a financial perspective. Now how much that financial contribution will be remains to be seen. Where in this would the people of Englee be able to find some assistance to help in that? I wonder if the minister might be able to -

MS BETTNEY: What I would do is ask Keith to comment on our recreational capital supports that we provide through that program and see if there is capacity within that for this type of application.

MR. HEALEY: The minister is right. It would come through to the Capital Grant Program in our Recreation Division. From the sounds of it - and I think I have seen it actually, if memory serves me correctly. The nature of what will be looked at is probably not something that we could fund under that program; both from a perspective of what it is, but more importantly I think, from the size of it. It is the type of thing that we would refer the request to another department, to Municipal and Provincial Affairs, for their larger capital program. The nature of the capital that we look at under our program is much smaller - in the $2,000, $3,000 to $4,000 range - which we can contribute to that.

MS BETTNEY: I might suggest, as well, that you might want to look at the youth networks that have been established. I am thinking back to my other portfolio and the funding that was allocated for the establishment of youth networks. Now, it was not intended to be bricks and mortar. I am thinking Municipal and Provincial Affairs, as Keith has as indicated, is probably the better source for that sort of support. But, in terms of the operation and the kind of linkages that they would benefit from having, it would probably be a good idea to put them in contact with the youth network in the area. I believe that now comes under Minister Kelly, because of the nature of her department. They could probably be very helpful in advising them around setup.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, minister.

I am going to pass it over to some of my colleagues now.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Chair, could I suggest we have a five minute stretch?

CHAIR: We can take it, sure.

MS BETTNEY: Thank you. I will keep it to five.

CHAIR: Tom or Ray, who is up?

MR. T. OSBORNE: Just a couple of questions, minister.

Under 1.2.02., Administrative Support, appropriations are made for financial, administrative support and human resource activities for the Departments of Tourism, Culture and Recreation and Environment and Labour. I was just wondering what the breakdown would be there? Have you any idea what is spent on Tourism and what is spent on Environment?

MS BETTNEY: Certainly, I will ask my Director of Finance to respond to that, please.

MR. CROCKER: The allocation does cover Tourism, Culture and Recreation, and Environment and Labour, but the operating costs are budgeted under their own operating costs. The Environment is budgeted under Environment, the Labour is budgeted under Labour. It is only the salary allocation there that would cover the costs of the three departments. It is not a mix of the three departments, except for the salaries only. You would not get a breakdown because it is not certain staff working on certain departments. Everyone is involved in the three departments.

MR. T. OSBORNE: So, it is only under Salaries that there would be a shared cost?

MR. CROCKER: That is right.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Okay.

MR. CROCKER: So, the operating costs that are budgeted there - for example, under Employee Benefits, Transportation and Communication, Supplies, and what have you - that is all administrative support for Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Under 2.1.01., appropriations are to provide for the establishment and implementation of programs that will develop tourism products, encourage residents of other provinces and countries to visit the Province as well as keep residents of the Province vacationing within the Province.

Other than the Tourism manual and some posters and so on that we see, what other tourism products are provided for their -

MS BETTNEY: That would include a lot of our advertising. For example, the issue that got brought up here a couple of weeks ago with the inserts in Time and Maclean's magazines that you would have seen; very attractive inserts. That kind of advertising and purchase of advertising space would be part of this as well.

The product development aspect of Tourism is also working with community groups and with zonal boards and others to develop the kind of tourist attractions that we have here. So, some of it is support. It is that human resource of trying to develop the caliber and the maturity of the tourist attractions that we have here. I think everyone would agree that we have improved considerably and brought some very fine attractions to various parts of the Province. In addition to that, there are a number of other materials that our officials use in promoting Newfoundland and Labrador that are very specific to different sectors. There are different approaches to the convention industry. There are different approaches to ecotourism groups. There are different approaches from a cultural point of view around the historic features of our heritage. So, all of that would be part of this particular appropriation.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Under Marketing Agreement, 2.1.02, that is cost-shared between the four Atlantic provinces. What type of marketing is done there? I have seen marketing for Newfoundland and P.E.I, for example, and Nova Scotia, but I have not seen any marketing saying: Come to the Atlantic provinces, as a joint marketing type of initiative. What type of marketing is done under that appropriation?

MS BETTNEY: This particular initiative, as is indicated there in the text, is one that was provided by the federal government through this Atlantic Canada Tourism Partnership with the intent of giving the four Atlantic provinces a little more financial capacity to develop some new markets, not particularly new markets, but to develop markets where we think that there is opportunity.

We have, for example, limited exposure in the northeast United States. This is an area we know that could be a good market for us and the money would have gotten used to do some promotional work in the United States. The other two areas are in Japan and in Europe. Particularly, on the adventure tourism and the ecotourism side there is a very high end, but a relatively select market in Europe that would respond really well, we believe, to this Province. It was funding that we have used primarily in those markets to bring people, and it was available to each of the Atlantic provinces. It was not so much for the Atlantic provinces to work together to attract people throughout the Atlantic provinces. That would be something that we would do anyway because the Atlantic provinces are a good market for us because of the proximity. So, through our normal advertising and marketing we target the Atlantic provinces, as well as Ontario and Alberta.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you.

Under Culture and Heritage, you mentioned there the Grants and Subsidies. You mentioned a number of different agencies, such as the Signal Hill Tattoo, for example, that received grant money under Grants and Subsidies there. Two or three years in a row now I have applied for - what I think is a very small amount - a grant for the Signal Hill Tattoo to put off performances at Fort Amherst and have two students hired all summer long to provide two extra jobs, dressed in period costume to act as tourism interpreters because of the historical significance over in that area with Ring noon, Fort Frederick and so on, British and French fortifications dating back to the 1600s. It has significant potential over there, and all they were looking for was $5,000. To be honest with you, I am mystified that government does not see that as a good investment to have them put off performances between Signal Hill and Fort Amherst, and in Fort Amherst itself, in addition to hiring two additional students for the entire summer. I wonder, is there any room in the budget this year to make allowances for that?

MS BETTNEY: The grant that we provide to the Signal Hill Tattoo is $36,500. That is what is allocated for this coming fiscal year. The difficulty we have is with all of the ones that are established and that we fund from year to year. The amount gets spent, is the bottom line here. There are far more requests for supports through grants and assistance like this than we have the capacity to be able to respond to. We take the major ones like this and really provide as much as we can. Thirty-six thousand is one of the larger grants that we do provide, by contrast to the resource centre for the arts. We give - that is the LSPU Hall - $11,500 to try and assist their operation year round. In the context of all of the other grants we give, it is fairly large. I do not see a lot of flexibility in that particular heading because most of it seems to be allocated already to established groups and operations. They have a tradition of relying on the amount of money that government provides. I cannot argue with you that it would not be a good addition to the Signal Hill Tattoo to be able to do this, but I do not see a great deal of flexibility here right now.

MR. T. OSBORNE: I wonder, is there anywhere else in the budget? I mean, for $5,000 to have a provincial presence in the Fort Amherst area, which in my opinion is a missed opportunity by the Province because of the significance of the area. You have tourists going out there on a regular basis and absolutely no definition of the significance of the area. In addition, I know that your department has been involved in meetings with the Rotary Club of St. John's East and the Grand Concourse and so on, trying to refurbish the old gun shelters out in that area. Is there any funding available before those are completely lost? I know right now that there was some testing of the soundness of the concrete and so on in those structures. They have deteriorated significantly over the past eight or ten years. If there in not some work done on those very soon to preserve them they are going to be lost.

MS BETTNEY: It is something I can take a look at. I cannot tell you right now that there is funding available. I do not believe there is anything planned within the current year expenditures, unless Heather has something that she can add to my comments around some of the discussions that are taking place which you have referred to.

MS MACLELLAN: As you know, the structures are owned by the city. We have been participating on that committee to assist them by providing the professional knowledge, expertise and support where we can to help complete the studies that need to be done on the development of the site. We do own the archaeological resources and they are all permitted and managed under an archaeological program. We have no provincial program here to assist in conservation of those sorts of buildings that are not Crown owned.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Under 3.1.07., the Art Procurement Program. I know that there is $200,000 spent every year to purchase art by local artists. We see a fair number of those pieces around the building but they never seem to grow in size. Sometimes they change -

WITNESS: They disappear.

MR. T. OSBORNE: They disappear.

MS BETTNEY: And they get found.

MR. T. OSBORNE: I am just wondering where all of those pieces of art - the past several years under this program, if all of those pieces of art are now accounted for? Where are they? Like I say, we see pieces of art around the building but we do not see additional pieces. We see pieces changed from year to year but not additional pieces added.

MS BETTNEY: To answer the main question there; to the best of my knowledge they are accounted for. I think there was a process that the department went through last year to ensure that the pieces, which in the first overview could not be accounted for, were actually located and the disposition of them was noted. All of the pieces of artwork that we have purchased now have been made note of and their location noted. So we can provide that kind of detailed information, subsequent to this, if you wish.

As to why you would not see every square inch of space in these buildings and others full of our artwork, as you say, because you would expect that it would grow from year to year when we have been doing this program for a significant period of time. I will ask Heather to explain that for us.

MS MACLELLAN: There are over 200 government-owned buildings throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. We go through a process of providing art to all of the government-owned facilities. So, after you complete a process - some facilities are new, some facilities have not had art in the past - there is still a demand for us to keep purchasing.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Has all of the art been accounted for then?

MS MACLELLAN: Yes.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Just one final question that I have. Under 5.1.05., the Science Division: Appropriations provide for scientific research required to support the management of our wildlife and natural heritage. Under 5.1.09., we also have: Appropriations provide for scientific research, inventories and investigations required to manage wildlife and inland fish resources. Aren't they essentially the same thing?

MS BETTNEY: The Science Division itself provides the scientific resources, the biologists and ecologists and whatever other professional names are required, to be able to actually do the research on our wildlife in order to support better management of our resources there.

The Natural Heritage Stewardship Secretariat is intended to be a funding support in the sense that its mandate is to actually track down sources of funding that can be used for the scientific research that the Sciences Division and others would be doing. So, that is the relationship between the two. In the Natural Heritage Stewardship Secretariat they are, literally, exploring and trying to bring in grants and other sources of funds that can extend our capacity for good research. We think we can be a real centre for this kind of research if we are able to build on the capacity that we have here.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Ray.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will try to keep it as brief as possible. I will just make a few comments as I ask the questions, if that is okay.

Minister, under 4.1.01.06. Could you tell me what type of services that were purchased to come up with that estimate in the budget there?

MS BETTNEY: That is 06., Purchased Services?

MR. HUNTER: Yes.

MS BETTNEY: The main expenditure in this caption would be lease costs for the new accommodations for the provincial parks staff. There will be other costs associated with printing, supplies, and things of that nature, but the main expenditure is for lease.

MR. HUNTER: Are there any monies in the estimate for the T'Railways, such as the purchase of signs for T'Railways?

MS BETTNEY: No. Gerry?

MR. CROCKER: There is also funding for the T'Railways under Purchased Services for $250,000.

MR. HUNTER: Minister, are there any plans to do any restructuring of the T'Railways this year?

I will give you a case, that way you can make a comment based on that specific case. Grand Falls-Windsor, for instance, part of the T'Railway goes on the opposite side of a housing area going up Main Street west. We get a lot of complaints from residents about the dust in the summertime. For about a kilometre of road residents of that area cannot open their windows during the summer because of the dust problem.

Also, in the same area there is not enough signage telling, especially out-of-towners, where the trail crosses the roads. You have to cross a couple of different access roads going through town there and going into Beothuk Park. This morning I got a call at 7:30 from a retired gentleman threatening to sue the government because of lack of signage going up in that area. If he happens to get struck he is definitely demanding compensation. In the summertime, last summer in particular, I got a lot of calls from people in that area who met with the department, met through the Grand Falls-Windsor Council, and want that part of the T'Railway relocated away from the houses there. Now they are saying that the only course they are going to have this year, if something is not done, is to take legal action against the department for damages. I guess they are talking dust damages and stuff.

Can the minister check into this and see if there is anything that can be done before this problem gets any worse? It has been going on for a while. I was wondering if there was any funding in Purchased Services to put up more signage on the T'Railways? Not only there, but Badger is another area, up in the Gaff Topsails area, where there are T'Railways being used for forest access and stuff like that. Signage seems to be a big problem. If there is any money in the budget for signage, could you look into that problem?

MS BETTNEY: I will look into it, certainly. I do know that where the T'Railway goes through communities is a particular issue that we have to deal with. There is an issue of governance and who should have control over the T'Railway. That is something that we are studying now at the department and hope to be able to bring forward something to Cabinet in the near future; but, I know that there are other communities as well who have unique problems associated with the T'Railway running through their communities. In many cases they would like to have control of the T'Railway so that they could regulate the use. It is an issue that we are trying to come to terms with, because on the one hand we would not want to break up the T'Railway and see parts of it that would destroy the continuity of the link across the Province; but, on the other hand, we recognize the unique issues associated with it when it is in urban areas. So, I will look at the particulars.

I would ask my Director of Finance or the ADM on the question you asked specifically about whether there is any money in the budget for something like signs.

MR. HEALEY: There is money there. Some of that is already allocated to specific projects. I am not aware that there is any of it currently allocated to signage, but I will take it upon myself to talk to our parks folks and just mention the two specific areas that you mentioned, and have a look at the need for improved signage there and see if we can get something done.

MR. HUNTER: Down the page there, minister, 4.1.02., Park Development. I noticed in subhead 01. there was no money budgeted for Salaries, but in the Revised there was $105,000. Can you tell me what made that come about when it was not budgeted?

MS BETTNEY: You are referring to 4.1.02.01.?

MR. HUNTER: Yes.

MS BETTNEY: We hired people last year to do repairs in the parks. In previous years, and at the time of the Budget, I think we were anticipating purchasing those services; actually doing it through contracts with private individuals. I guess for certain reasons the department decided in the summer season last year to hire those people directly. So, consequently, the cost of it got allocated to Salaries.

MR. HUNTER: So that it why it is estimated this year under Professional Services and Purchased Services, $250,000.

MS BETTNEY: Yes.

MR. HUNTER: Okay.

I will get into the wildlife, minister, because I do get a lot of phone calls about wildlife. The public do not understand that forestry resources handles just the enforcement of wildlife and your department handles all of the other aspects of wildlife. I do get a lot of questions concerning wildlife. I would like to ask a few questions on the estimates here and probably from your answer, make a comment on it.

On 5.1.01.06., Purchased Services, could you tell me what type of services would be purchased in your estimates there?

MS BETTNEY: This would be mostly lease costs again. This was at the time of moving the staff out to the Corner Brook area. A lot of this would be office costs associated with regionalization.

MR. HUNTER: So, you are not finished that yet, because your budget again this year is for $483,300. So there is still more -

MS BETTNEY: Well again, they will still be in the rental accommodations this year, so the lease would run.

MR. HUNTER: Okay.

Minister, 5.1.04., Wildlife Ecosystem Management Planning. Subhead 01., the difference in the salaries that was budgeted and then revised was a lot less, and then budgeted again for more. Is that because some people would not relocate and there was a reduction in staff on that?

MS BETTNEY: Those were vacant positions after the division was moved and those positions were not filled. We do anticipate that they will be filled this year.

MR. HUNTER: So, they are not all filled yet?

MS BETTNEY: No.

MR. HUNTER: You will go back to the same amount of regular employees this year as you did in the Budget of 2001/02?

MS BETTNEY: Yes.

MR. HUNTER: Minister, 5.1.05., could you tell me why the big increase from the budgeted last year and the revised, and the actual estimated this year on Salaries?

MS BETTNEY: In Salaries?

MR. HUNTER: Yes.

MS BETTNEY: That is the addition of the eight new positions in the Science Division that was announced last week. Likewise, you will see an increase in Transportation and Communications and that is to provide helicopter time, primarily, for those scientists to be able to go out and do their surveys and so on.

MR. HUNTER: Okay, that was my next question.

Professional Services, I guess, would be what you are talking about?

MS BETTNEY: That is lab support. That is lab analysis that cannot be done here in the Province that we contract with other provinces. So, they are going to be working more.

MR. HUNTER: Subhead 5.1.04., the Wildlife Ecosystem Management Planning, Science Division, and also the Wildlife Ecosystem monitoring, seems to be basically doing the same thing. Now, I don't know if it will be done by the same people because there is a difference in salaries there.

If I could ask the minister this question. In that scientific research, is there going to be provision made there to study the affect of coyotes to our small game population? Is that part of your scientific cost under the Science Division? Will that be done?

MS BETTNEY: I would expect that is one of the issues that we will be studying. We know there is a major increase that has taken place in the coyote population here in the Province. To date, we certainly have been shorthanded in terms of our ability to be able to look at the science of what the impact has been. That, along with other areas, particularly in the big game area, the big game side of things, we have to look at more closely.

Keith, I don't know if there is anything that you can add to that?

MR. HEALEY: I will just add that it is part of the normal process throughout. Each year we develop a work plan. Thanks to the increase in the money that we now have for science we will expand that work plan in terms of the research priorities that we will do. We will gather together the senior people in all the divisions that have a relationship to our natural heritage. Based on their recommendations we will come up with a recommended list of priority research projects and start to knock them off. Certainly, the area of the coyotes would be one of those areas I suspect that some of our people will put forward as a suggested project for this year or next, if we do not get it done this year.

MR. HUNTER: Having said that, minister, Inland Fish, 5.1.06.01., Salaries. I know there was a program over the last number of years dealing with counting the fish population and evaluating fish habitat. Do those figures reflect any decrease in that program? I know it is down. It was revised last year from $146,000 to $75,000, and then $51,000 budgeted again this year. Does that mean there are going to be layoffs with that program, and if it is going to continue?

MS BETTNEY: The reason that we see the decrease in the revised estimate is that as part of the reorganization with the creation of the Science Division we moved two positions from this division into the Science Division. So, there is no decrease in the resources we are applying to this area. We have just reorganized them in terms of their function and the budget here.

MR. HUNTER: Will there still be scientific research done on inland fish?

MS BETTNEY: Oh, yes.

MR. HUNTER: Counting and things, that will not be decreased?

MS BETTNEY: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: Okay.

Minister, this is another question I am going to ask you because of a phone call I received this morning and also because of a visit I had from the Mayor of Pilley's Island this week.

Under 6.1.02., Community Sports Facilities. Could the minister tell me if grants and subsidies would be made available to communities who are trying to enhance recreation facilities during the tourist season and trying to keep tourist in their communities? Will there be grants made available to communities such as Pilley's Island who want to do some work on an outdoor swimming pool which a lot of tourists use? They stop over and picnic there and swim at this particular site. If something is not done with that facility then they are going to miss out on keeping a lot of people in that area. I am sure it is happening all over the Island and Labrador. It seems like a small amount of money, with the infrastructure that we have by communities in the Province and Labrador, that $227,000 is not very much to spread out for these communities. It is something we need to look at seriously. Can the minister tell me if there will be grants available to communities such as that?

MS BETTNEY: I believe that this particular item deals with the - at least in part - grants that are available to each district, to each MHA, for the amount of approximately $2,000 to apply to priorities that they see in their area. There is also some other funding that is available for some small scale projects but, as you say, it is very limited; $227,000 is not a lot of money and you end up being able to give far less than what is requested. We do have these two aspects that are available and it is only subject to demand, really, whether there is an ability to respond to every request that comes in.

MR. HUNTER: That recreation grant will be available to MHAs again this summer?

MS BETTNEY: Yes, that is included in -

MR. HUNTER: When will this be announced to be available?

MS BETTNEY: We will have that letter out within this week.

MR. HUNTER: That is it for me, Mr. Chairman.

I had more questions but our critic asked basically the same questions.

CHAIR: Roger has a question.

MR. FITZGERALD: I just have a couple of quick questions. One is referring to 5.1.05., Wildlife, Science Division. Was there a committee appointed to look at the affect of coyotes - the population and the affect that they are having with wildlife in this Province?

MS BETTNEY: I am not sure whether there was a committee put in place. The ADM suggests, that no, there has not been a committee put in place. I do know that there has been some work done on the issue but it would have been internal to our staff.

MR. FITZGERALD: There has not been a committee put in place?

Was there a recent committee appointed to work with your department to look at something other than the coyote population and to do with wildlife? I think Ron Dawe was a member of that committee. Which one am I referring to?

MS BETTNEY: That is the Natural Heritage Stewardship Secretariat, and that is a funding body. I explained to one of the other member's questions on the difference between that and the Science Division. That secretariat is intended to track down funds for scientific research in the natural heritage area to do with our wildlife management and outdoor resources.

MR. FITZGERALD: How many people are on the committee?

MS BETTNEY: It is not a committee. It is a quasi-organization. It reports to the deputy minister. Including the secretarial and administrative support, there are eight people there. Shane Mahoney serves as an advisor to that committee and makes the link with the Science Division.

MR. FITZGERALD: Could I get a list of the people's names that are on that particular - I will call it a committee?

MS BETTNEY: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: Is that possible? With the salary scales too, could that be made?

MS BETTNEY: I presume.

MR. FITZGERALD: I do not see why not. My salary is public knowledge so everybody else's should be as well. Can I get that, deputy minister?

MR. GRANTER: Yes.

MR. FITZGERALD: The other one is Inland Fish. Recently the topic that has been on top of everybody's lips is the fear that you may see some major changes brought about in trouting and this kind of thing here in the Province. They talked about size limits. They talked about licences, species and what have you, causing great concern. A lot of people - and I am not going to get into the enjoyment, everybody is well aware of all that. Do your department be consulted or make recommendations to the federal department before those recommendations are brought forward?

MS BETTNEY: There is a Trout Advisory Committee. Officials from my department at the technical level take part in that process. The issue that has surfaced over the last couple of weeks is one that developed out of concern that people, anglers, and others who are involved in this area, have expressed around the management side of preserving and conserving our resource with trout.

The concern was that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans did not have an ability to be able to regulate the catch of trout by watershed and by species if they wanted to. If there was a concern that arose about trout and the amount of trout, the size of trout, and all the rest of it, the department had to respond in a blanket kind of fashion that would put restrictions on all trout throughout the Province. It did not have the ability to go by area-to-area from the watershed. In bringing forward this change to the trouting regulations it was with the intent of giving them the capacity should the need arise. Only in that case, should the need arise, that a particular trout was in danger in a particular area. Then they could zero in on that and put a size restriction on that particular trout for this area.

The table that was used to illustrate it got misconstrued as being a blanket policy which would put a minimum size on all trout, and that is not what is intended. This chart, if these amendments are approved by DFO, will change on a yearly basis. It could state that there is no need to change any size restrictions in any location and it could remain the same if that is what is best for conservation, but if a certain species becomes endangered in a certain area, with this amendment DFO would have the capacity to say: In this site, with this trout, you should only catch it if it is five, ten, fifteen, whatever the case may be, in terms of centimeters. So, yes, we are involved with it. It is a very consultative process. They work with the Salmonid groups, and with others who are anglers, to try and improve their regulatory approach to management.

MR. FITZGERALD: Are they seriously looking at requiring trouters to have a licence?

MS BETTNEY: No.

MR. FITZGERALD: Are they seriously looking at having species of trout - well, if you do not need a licence then you are not going to be looking at the species either.

MS BETTNEY: No. Like I say, the species is really only to be able to zero in for protection purposes. You would not look at different licences. There will still be just -

MR. FITZGERALD: Trouters will not have any fear of losing their right to be able to go out and fish, as they have always been. There are already bag limits or catch limits, so that should be suffice anyway.

MS BETTNEY: That is right.

MR. FITZGERALD: It has come a long way from what it was.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Thank you, Roger.

The Chair is prepared for the question, if the question wishes to be called.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01. through 8.1.02. carried.

On motion, Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: Thank you folks, I really appreciate it. Thank you, minister, and your staff. I would like to thank the Committee and indeed, thank the critic for coming and enlightening us on his knowledge of the department as well.

On motion, Committee adjourned until Monday, May 6, at 5:30 p.m.