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

CHAIR (Harding): Okay, I think we are ready to begin.

First of all, I would like to welcome you all as we debate the Estimates of the Department of Natural Resources, as well as the Status of Women and Women's Policy Office. We will begin as usual by the Committee members identifying themselves.

MR. DALLEY: Derrick Dalley, MHA, The Isles of Notre Dame.

MR. VERGE: Wade Verge, MHA, Lewisporte District.

MR. HUNTER: Ray Hunter, MHA, District of Grand Falls-Windsor-Green Bay South.

MR. BAKER: Jim Baker, MHA, Labrador West.

MS JONES: Yvonne Jones, MHA, Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS MICHAEL: Lorraine Michael, MHA, Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

CHAIR: Okay. We ask the observers also to identify themselves, please.

MR. LONO: Good morning, Simon Lono from the Opposition office.

MS PLOUGHMAN: Good morning, Kim Ploughman, Researcher in the office.

CHAIR: Thank you very much.

We will begin with the – I will have the Clerk call the first subhead. After that I will recognize the minister, who may take up to fifteen minutes to review her Estimates, and then at that time as well she can identify her officials. It is important that you say your name any time you are asked to answer a question or want to clarify something.

I will ask the Clerk now to call – before we do, we have the minutes of the last meeting that we had. So I ask for a motion to adopt these minutes.

Moved by Mr. Verge, seconded by Mr. Baker, that the minutes of May 10, Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, be adopted as circulated.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: Okay, I will ask the Clerk now to call the first subhead.

CLERK: 1.1.01.

CHAIR: 1.1.01., shall that carry?

Minister Dunderdale.

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning.

Thank you very much for being here today to discuss the budget priorities for the Department of Natural Resources this year.

Mr. Chair, where we are beginning with the Estimates of the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency, I will introduce these officials first, and once we have gone through the Estimates for that part of the department we will then move them out and Mines and Energy will come in. We have a lot of people here, as you see, and I am trying to limit confusion about who has responsibility for what.

CHAIR: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: So let me begin by introducing the CEO for the agency, Mr. Len Moores. Len, you can introduce (inaudible).

MR. MOORES: (Inaudible) here is Keith Deering, and he is the ADM for Forestry.

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Chair, I will start the same way that I have in previous years and provide a general overview of the main budget items for the four branches: Forestry, Agrifoods, Mines and Energy. After that, my officials and I would be happy to take any questions you may have on any of those items.

I will begin with Forestry. As we are all aware, our forest industry has been going through a transformation in recent years due to changing markets, particularly the decline in the pulp and paper and lumber industries globally. We have been proactive in response to this, starting with our comprehensive review of the forest sector and the establishment in 2008 of the Forest Industry Diversification Fund to assist in the diversification of the industry, particularly to the sawmill sector. This year we are putting an additional $7.5 million into this fund to continue to modernize the sector and identify new products and markets.

On the West Coast, Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Limited, a major employer in that region, is facing significant challenges as it attempts to weather the global downturn and over capacity issues in the sector. It is working with the employees to achieve increased efficiencies and competitiveness to improve its position in the marketplace. Just as the unions are doing, government has committed to working with the company to improve its competitiveness by entering into arrangements that will take some of the financial pressure off the operation.

As we announced on Budget Day, we are spending $15.4 million this year, $30 million over two years, to provide assistance to the mill in a number of areas. This includes increasing our share of the annual silviculture forest insect control and forest inventory programs, as well as foregoing the companies managed land tax. We are also spending $12 million to purchase timber cutting rights on roughly 447,000 hectares of land currently held by the company. As a result, we anticipate an additional 144,400 cubic metres of fibre this year to reallocate to support (inaudible).

Our investments in agriculture this year are targeted at increasing our local food production and value-added processing opportunities and leveraging additional funding from the federal government. We are budgeting $2 million over the next four years for a federal-provincial large scale land development initiative. The industry has identified a need for additional land and a reduction in land clearing capital costs. Through this investment, we will be able to reduce production costs and improve sustainability for the sector. This will also assist our industry in moving towards increased food production.

We have also earmarked funding for two other cost-shared initiatives with the federal government to support research and development in the sector and to advance research and surveillance of important animal diseases for the protection of the industry and public health. We are waiting for final approval from the federal government to move forward with these initiatives, so more details will follow when that happens.

We are also continuing our annual contributions to the Provincial Agriculture Assistance Program, the Agriculture and Agrifoods Development Fund, the Land Consolidation Program, and the Cranberry Industry Development Program, as well as our portion of the federal-provincial Growing Forward Agreement.

In Mines and Energy: first moving into the Mines branch, I am pleased to be able to say that the mining industry is starting to come around after a challenging year last year. It now appears that the worse is behind us, when it comes to the decline in the commodity markets that hit worldwide in the fall of 2008 and continued through 2009.

The recent announcement of the resumption of the Iron Ore Company of Canada's $435 million Phase I iron ore expansion project in Labrador West will provide significant economic and employment opportunities for many Labradorians. This project will contribute to the continued recovery of mining operations in Labrador and help ensure the regions future growth and development. Our budget focus in the Mine sector continues to be on bringing increased mineral exploration and investment to the Province.

As I announced prior to Budget Day, we are spending $235,000 to assist with the development of our provincial mineral strategy. The strategy will assist with the long-term economic growth and continued success of the mining industry. With our significant resource potential, it is important for us to ensure that future investment decisions and program development encourage opportunities for exploration, production and employment within the industry.

The strategy will focus on all aspects of the mineral sector, including the issues of sustainability, competitiveness, benefits to the Province and infrastructure. The strategy will also provide a comprehensive and timely review of existing mineral legislation. The first step in the development of the strategy will be the completion and release of a discussion paper later this year that will lay the basis of subsequent public and industry consultations. We hope to have the final strategy issued by mid-2011.

We are also spending $2.1 million this year to improve our geological understanding of the Julienne Lake iron ore deposit in Western Labrador as well as its potential market value to the Province. The Julienne Lake deposit has the potential to provide economic development, employment and opportunities for the residents of Labrador West, and it has the potential to help us meet the increased global demand for high-quality iron ore.

The department will issue a Request for Proposals for the drilling, mineral testing and geotechnical work which will be completed by the end of this year. This assessment will provide an estimate of the size and quality of the mineral resources and enable government to properly plan for its future potential use and development.

We are also spending $5 million for the emergency repair and construction of the Buchans tailings dam and for the covering of the exposed tailings that present a dust hazard for the town. I made that announcement at a news conference with Minister Johnson prior to the Budget, outlining the details of the work at that time. Approximately $2.2 million of that amount is already available in surplus pre-committed funds leftover from the remediation project on the former Baie Verte and Rambler Mine sites.

The Baie Verte Rambler project is in its third and final year and is starting to wind down. The amount leftover from this will now be transferred to assist with the Buchans remediation. We are confident that our investments are encouraging in attracting investment and exploration to our Province, as well as making a difference in the environmental legacy that remains from former mining operations.

Finally, the Energy branch: We are continuing our long-term strategic approach to the development of our energy resources as outlined in the Energy Plan. This year we are providing $164 million to Nalcor Energy to facilitate its participation in oil and gas activities and other energy projects. You will notice in the Budget documents that we did not spend the $228 million that we had budgeted last year to assist Nalcor in this regard. Our revised expenditure was $40 million as a result of lower than expected acquisition costs and expenditures.

We are also spending $12.2 million this year to assist in the continued implementation of our Energy Plan initiatives, in the areas of geoscience, data acquisition, energy efficiency, conservation, and innovation. This is part of our $35 million multi-year commitment to the implementation of the Energy Plan.

We are recognizing the importance of dedicated funding for marketing and promotion of the Energy sector by increasing our budget for participation in international oil and gas trade shows and exhibitions by $160,000. Additional funding will allow us to further build international market awareness of our Province's resources, our immense resource potential, and our service and supply capabilities and expertise.

The Budget document also reflects our funding to the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board to cover the costs associated with the Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry, the Core and Storage Research Centre and the data management centre. Funding of $550,000 will go toward the cost of the Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry, and $400,000 will complete the Core and Storage Research Centre. The centre stores and curates well cores, cuttings and oil samples collected from wells drilled in the Province's offshore area. After twenty years of operation, the centre is at over 90 per cent of its capacity.

We will also spend $225,000 for the data management centre administered by the board. It is important for the board to have rapid access to the petroleum data available in-house to ensure timely decision making in regard to our resources. The data centre helps to make it possible for the board to better manage the industry and facilitate further exploration and production.

An increase of $670,000 is going to the board's base budget, largely to cover the cost of computer hardware and software required by the board's reservoir engineers and geologists, as well as to cover increased office lease costs. These expenditures are matched 50-50 by the federal government and are 75 per cent recoverable from the industry.

These are just some of the main items included in Budget 2010 for the Department of Natural Resources, and we are now pleased to take any questions you might have.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister.

We will begin with Ms Jones. So I guess we will try to – I do not know how you have your questions arranged. Executive and Support Services – can we do the forestry and agrifoods division first, and then just move through the mineral and energy part after, if that is okay?

MS JONES: Yes.

CHAIR: Ms Jones.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, Minister - thanks for that update - and good morning to your officials. I am going to start on page 152, section 1.2.02. I am going to start with the Salaries, which is 01. Last year, it was budgeted at $1,335,000 and there was around $1,066,000 spent. So, you did not spend the total amount, and I ask if it was because of vacancies in the department or some other reason?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, the revised variance is due to vacancies in the division as well as several retirements we had during the year, which facilitated salary savings for various lengths of time while we were refilling the positions.

MS JONES: Okay. Again, there under Purchased Services, you spent over $60,000 more than you had budgeted, and I am wondering what that was spent on - 1.2.02.06.

MS DUNDERDALE: Higher than anticipated expenditures were associated with Purchased Services, such as paper shredding, file storage and retrieval, as well as facility and room rentals associated with training and workshops for departmental staff.

MS JONES: Was some of that unexpected because it is strange that you would only budget $22,000 and spend $88,000 and this year you are only budgeting $12,800. So, was it unexpected, something that you will not do every year?

MR. IVIMEY: Philip Ivimey, Director of Financial Operations.

Yes, some of that was unexpected. We had some higher expenditure costs associated with file storage and retrieval in our registry operations this year. That was primarily due to the cleaning out of some old files and the storage of those files that were located in our building to Iron Mountain storage facility. That was kind of a one-time thing that was done during the year to clean up the registry operations. So no, that would not be expected for next year.

MS JONES: So they are not in storage any more, you have destroyed the files?

MR. IVIMEY: Yes, some files were destroyed and some files were sent to storage, but it was an overall process that was incurred during this year to clean up some of the files that were located in our building.

MS JONES: Under 1.2.03., Property, Furnishings and Equipment, you have increased your budget by a million dollars this year over what you had budgeted last year, can you tell me what that money is going to be used for?

MS DUNDERDALE: It is for a foreign animal disease laboratory to bring the current post-mortem building up to code and replace the existing biomedical waste incinerator. The budget also reflects $1.1 million reduction related to the end of a three-year plan to replace aging vehicles within the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency. It also now includes a base, ongoing funding of $500,000 a year to maintain forestry and agrifoods fleet of vehicles.

MS JONES: Under Forest Management, 2.1.01., again the salaries that you had budgeted for, you spent a lot less this year. Can you tell me which positions were vacant in the department and if they have been filled since?

MS DUNDERDALE: You are asking about the increase?

MS JONES: No, you budgeted $4.7 million and spent $4.259 million. I am wondering why you spent nearly half a million dollars less than what you had budgeted for and what positions were they that were not filled, or what happened there.

MS DUNDERDALE: It was late recruitments and vacancies in forestry.

MR. DEERING: Keith Deering from the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency.

We had four positions that were pretty much vacant for the full year. It was a resource protection specialist out of our Legislation and Compliance Division, which is now filled. We had a provincial ecologist position, which was not filled until late in the fiscal year. We had a supervisor of insect control position, which was filled only about two weeks ago, as well as a roads engineer, which was filled fairly late in the fiscal year last year as well.

MS JONES: Why were all of those positions vacant? Did people retire, or did they quit, or did they leave, or move into new jobs within the department or what?

MR. DEERING: They were all retirements, with the exception of one which is the provincial ecologist position, which is a new division that was set up last year under the Budget.

MS JONES: Okay.

I guess that is why the employee benefits were up as well - because of the retirements, was it? It went from $61,800 to $163,100.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, and that was due to higher than anticipated worker health and occupational safety compensation payments.

MS JONES: The Professional Services under that heading – what professional services do you use there? You spent $377,200 last year. What would that have been spent on?

MS DUNDERDALE: Those fees are associated with forest management planning and specifically aerial photography interpretation work.

MS JONES: Are you redoing all new maps and charts or whatever?

MS DUNDERDALE: We do that on a regular basis.

MS JONES: Okay. So are there any particular areas that you are doing?

MS DUNDERDALE: Keith.

MR. DEERING: We are aiming to put our inventory on a ten-year cycle right across the Province. What that means is that every ten years the photography will be updated everywhere.

Last year we had interpretation work on the Northern Peninsula, and this year our program is going to be focused in Central Newfoundland.

MS JONES: Okay.

The Purchased Services, last year you budgeted $2.8 million, you spent a lot less than that, $1,599,000. Can you tell me what you were budgeting for that did not happen last year, and then I will get into what you are going to spend the money on this year.

MS DUNDERDALE: It is not that it did not happen, it came in under budget.

MS JONES: Okay. Do you want to tell me what it was?

MS DUNDERDALE: It is not always a negative thing.

A number of tenders for various required services came in under budget, as well there were some delays in obtaining aerial photography of forest sites, which in turn delayed the calling of tenders for interpretation contracts during the year. So, it kind of has a domino effect. If you do not get your aerial photography done, then you do not move ahead with your interpretation.

MS JONES: So all the Purchased Services money was spent on aerial photography last year?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, there were other pieces of that, but that is the explanation for the variance why it was less than –

MS JONES: Okay, could you tell me –

MS DUNDERDALE: Are you asking why it was less than we budgeted?

MS JONES: Yes, I asked why it was less and what it was used for.

MS DUNDERDALE: It was because tenders came in - if you are asking what it was used for, we are happy enough to tell you that, but if your are asking why it was less than we had budgeted, it was less because tenders came in lower than expected and we were delayed in starting our aerial photography. Therefore, if you do not have the photography, you do not need the interpretation. So, that gets pushed out as well.

MS JONES: Okay.

Could you tell me what it was used for besides aerial photography?

MR. DEERING: Keith Deering.

Aerial photography is the big piece here. We also have the mapping work associated with that, that goes out to tender as well. That is the bulk of it.

MS JONES: Who does the aerial photography work for you? What company did that work?

MR. DEERING: There are several companies that –

[Disturbance - alarms sound]

CHAIR: I guess we can carry on?

MS JONES: (Inaudible) minutes, Mr. Chairman, if that is okay with you.

[Alarms stop]

MS JONES: Good. All right, Keith, go ahead.

MR. DEERING: All of our aerial photography work goes out to a public tender process. There are several local companies that have bid on this work in the past as well there are some companies from outside the Province that have bid on it as well. Most of the work in the past few years, in my memory, has gone to local companies within the Province.

MS JONES: This year you have budgeted $8.7 million, can you tell me what that money will be used for under Purchased Services?

MS DUNDERDALE: The bulk of that money or a significant part of that money will be used for the buyback of fibre from Corner Brook Pulp and Paper.

MS JONES: How much are you paying for that, Minister?

MS DUNDERDALE: Twelve million over two years.

MS JONES: The rest of it, I guess, will be used to continue with the programs you were doing in previous years.

MS DUNDERDALE: We had a number of cost-shared programs with the pulp and paper companies. What we have done to offer assistance to them and make sure that we are keeping on the right side of international agreements and so on, is we are taking on a lot of the forest management responsibilities entirely.

MS JONES: Do you want to explain to me how that contract works with Corner Brook Pulp and Paper in terms of the purchase agreement and so on?

MS DUNDERDALE: What, the overall –

MS JONES: Yes, what the overall deal was.

MS DUNDERDALE: The overall deal is $15.4 million a year for two years. It means, as I said in the overview in my opening remarks, that we will take over full responsibility for areas such as silviculture, insect control, inventory programs and so on. These were programs that we shared on a 50-50 basis with Corner Brook Pulp and Paper previous to this. We bought back the lands from Corner Brook Pulp and Paper under your Administration some years ago but leased the fibre to them until 2037. So what we have done now is bought that fibre back. Some of that fibre will not be used in the industry. It will go to help resolve some conflicts we have in our natural areas systems plans.

There are some parks and so on that has conflicted - there has been a conflict between departments on how we deal with the forestry resource and at the same time is protecting values around park lands and so on. Some of that fibre will be used to resolve those conflicts and those issues, but the bulk of the fibre will be used in the sawmilling industry, where we have some pressures and people are looking for more fibre and so on. So, not only does this help Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, but it helps the sawmilling industry around the Province generally as well. So part of the funding will go to them from that.

As well, in the Rate Stabilization Plan, there is now a surplus due to $10 million that we put in there when Abitibi left Stephenville. There was a deficit in the Rate Stabilization Plan at that point in time that all of our industrial customers, that are part of that plan, would have had to pick up. As a government, we felt that we ought to do something to relieve that pressure. So we put $10 million in there to protect the rest of our industrial customers. We now have a surplus in the plan, and that $10 million is available to us again. We will remove that over the next two-year period and use it to continue to support the pulp and paper industry here in the Province. They are the three main areas that constitute that $30 million over two years.

MS JONES: The $10 million that you put into the Rate Stabilization Plan, that was a one-time $10 million. You did not put that in every year did you?

MS DUNDERDALE: No. It is $10 million that we earmarked to help the industry when the Stephenville pulp and paper mill closed.

MS JONES: Now, of the $15 million that you are putting in this year, is some of that money coming from the community trust fund?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, $4 million of that will come from the community trust program and you will see that – I will point that out in our Estimates as we move through them here, where that money is.

MS JONES: Okay. Well, I will wait until we get there then.

This injection of money right now for programs like you just outlined, will that provide the stabilization that they need with Corner Brook Pulp and Paper?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes. We put a lot of effort into this. The union came forward first in terms of working with the company and finding savings. We made a commitment to the union and to the company that we would be there as well. If they stepped up to the plate, the provincial government would be there with them. So they came forward with savings to the company.

Corner Brook Pulp and Paper has opened their books to the government and have been completely transparent in terms of their financial situation. They, themselves, continue to make significant investments here in the Province and a huge commitment. This is not a shareholder corporation. This company is held, owned completely by Joseph Kruger. So when there are losses, and there have been significant losses, in the face of that Kruger continues to make investments in Corner Brook and seems to have a very solid commitment to that region of the Province and to the people who work there. Even though it is a high-risk investment in these troubled times in the industry, in our view, given everything we have seen and the level of commitment by Kruger, it is still a worthwhile commitment.

MS JONES: How many jobs were protected through this investment? How many people are employed there?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, we have about – does that include harvesters?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MS DUNDERDALE: With the mill and the woodlands, we have about 700 jobs directly, and of course significant indirect employment.

MS JONES: Were any of the local contractors affected or any of the local contracts cancelled?

I only ask that because I had a phone call back some time ago but I did not have a lot of details on it and I did not get anything to follow up, so I am not sure if that became any significant problem whatsoever at that time.

MS DUNDERDALE: Suppliers are impacted from time to time as they reconfigure. We have had two machines shut down and the company is always looking for innovative ways to cut their energy costs or to find a more efficient way to get biomass to work with integrated sawmillers and so on. So they are starting to take as much fibre and as much chips as they can from integrated sawmillers, for example, rather than having to chip at the mill and so on. From time to time that has had an impact but it tends to be in the normal ebb and flow of business. It is something that we monitor very carefully.

We had an occasion last year - two operators were impacted as they tried to reconfigure to get more efficiency in the mill. They have to do that because they have to try and manage their losses and cut their losses, and the mill has been operating at a loss for some time.

MS JONES: Okay. You talked about resolving some of the fibre conflicts and you said that some of this fibre would go for use in the sawmilling industry. In the Economy 2010 report it also stated that the mill was spending $500,000, I think it was, to do a study of the fibre in that particular area, what was available and so on. I am just wondering if there was any concern about the supply of fibre at that time or if was like a normal research and development practice for the company or –

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, well Corner Brook Pulp and Paper –

MS JONES: What the purpose of it was, I guess.

MS DUNDERDALE: No, if they had concerns about - for them it is about efficiency and how do you provide biomass, particularly for the mill. I am sure that they constantly look to a time when perhaps they will not have to use their wood (inaudible) any more. We watch all of that carefully because that impacts employment, but certainly in terms of - they have sufficient fibre to do what they need to do and that is why they are in a position to be able to allow us to do this buyback of fibre here in the Province. So, it is not an issue. They get a lot of their fibre – they have agreements with integrated sawmillers, which works very well for us, where an integrated sawmiller will go on either Abitibi's directly - well, lease lands. They will take the sawlogs for their own operations but harvest the pulp logs and deliver them to Corner Brook Pulp and Paper. That is how the industry has worked here for years. So it is a symbiotic relationship. Now some of the mills are actually into chipping, and that is more efficient for Corner Brook Pulp and Paper as well.

MS JONES: Yes, I am just wondering because the government is buying back fibre from the company and then the company is looking to do a study on fibre supply. So it is just -

MS DUNDERDALE: It is just good management and good planning, and that will be part of their whole management piece. That is what we do as a Province on a regular basis. As Len just spoke, we are trying to get into a ten-year rotation so that we clearly understand what is happening in our forest here in the Province and what we need to be doing in silviculture, pest control, all of those kinds of things.

Abitibi has leased significant fibre here in the Province and it needs to have a plan around how it is going to use it, how it is going to manage its fibre supply on a go-forward basis. We are certainly not aware of any – they have huge tracks of fibre that they are not using, especially on the Northern Peninsula.

MS JONES: How many sawmills are operational in the Province right now?

MR. MOORES: Three right now and when the Northern Peninsula sawmill is up and ready –

MS DUNDERDALE: Integrated sawmills, three large integrated sawmillers.

MR. MOORES: Integrated sawmills. When the Northern Peninsula is operating, that will be four large sawmills operating.

MS DUNDERDALE: And a large number of sawmill operations but not integrated.

MS JONES: Yes. Can you tell me the three integrated ones? I think I know but I will just ask.

MR. MOORES: Sexton Lumber, Cottles Island Lumber, and Burton's Cove Logging.

MS JONES: What was the last one?

MR. MOORES: Burton's Cove Logging.

MS DUNDERDALE: And will soon be in production on the Northern Peninsula, wholesome products. That will be our four large integrated sawmillers, and there are a number of many small operations throughout the Province.

MS JONES: So, you are saying there is a demand for more fibre by those sawmill operators, is there?

MS DUNDERDALE: They are always looking for fibre because they are able to boost their production, but there are other sawmilling operations, as you know from Terra Nova last year, that sawmillers are looking for fibre and we now have an opportunity to be able to relieve their pressures that they are under as well.

MS JONES: What are the indicators like in the sawmill industry now? Is our sales up within the Province? Are our export sales increasing? I know we went through a difficult period a few years ago but I am just wondering where it is now.

MR. MOORES: For this year we are forecasting a bit better. The price is stronger; it has gone up. In fact, the last figures I saw it doubled from this time last year. So we are expecting this year to have a bit better industry and probably increase our sales, but as you know, for the previous two years they were below our average.

MS DUNDERDALE: Some of the pieces have come about as a result of lack of investment in the industry, and that is what we were trying to address in our diversification strategy and we believe that it is starting to work and take hold. We have been able to go into these operations and work with the owners to make sure, first of all, that they are operating properly, that they have the equipment they need to be efficient in terms of their operations.

There is an ongoing piece of work around market developments. That expertise really does not exist within the industry. We are working with them to develop that expertise within the department and to share that with all of them and to build that capacity within their own companies. The Department of Natural Resources, working with the Department of INTRD and with the industry, are trying to work with them so that they have the capacity to identify markets, access that market, get contracts and fill them. That whole export supplier development piece is ongoing.

MS JONES: Just before I move onto the last line under that estimate, I am just wondering if you could give to us the sales and export values of the sawmilling industry for the past five years, if you could get that for us.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: Yes, okay.

I guess a couple of things there. Under Property, Furnishings and Equipment, you spent $330,000 last year. I am just wondering what that was for?

MS DUNDERDALE: Additional equipment for program delivery, GPS units, plotters, printers and Tablet PCs as well as the purchase of new and replacement ATVs and snowmobiles for field inventory work.

MS JONES: Okay.

Can you tell me what the Grants and Subsidies section is used for here?

MS DUNDERDALE: Grants and Subsidies - our pellet rebate program would be under that heading.

MS JONES: Pellet, you said?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, if you buy a pellet stove, you get a 25 per cent rebate of $4,000 – $4,000 is the maximum. So a maximum of $1,000 rebate on the purchase of a pellet stove.

MS JONES: That is all that is under that Grants and Subsidies, is it?

MS DUNDERDALE: That is Grants and Subsidies. We had a lower take-up in that when we started the program, but we have continued it because people are becoming more aware of it. Also, the variance there has to do with grant payments to the Métis and the Innu with regard to our forest management agreements.

MS JONES: So you did not pay it out last year or what?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, we did not have new agreements negotiated, so we are in the process of doing that now.

MS JONES: So they did not get any funding last year?

MS DUNDERDALE: The Innu did and the Metis did not because we were not involved in the process and now we are starting to do a new management plan. So, once we start to do the new management plan – this is real work that has to get done. Now that we have started the new management process, we are engaged with them now talking about a new agreement and what that will look like.

The big piece of it is that to have Aboriginal people engaged in the development of a management plan right through from A to Z so that when we get to the approval phase – and we are prepared to put it forward to Environment and Conservation for approval – that there has been engagement the whole way through.

We have had some difficulties with that in the past and we pay a lot of money for that advice, that direction and so on. We have gotten to the end of the process and we have still found ourselves at loggerheads with one another. So, we are trying to clarify all of that so that both parties understand what it is we are doing here, what the expectations are, what the goals are, and so on. We are in the process of having that discussion now with the Metis.

MS JONES: How much do they get in the grant?

MR. MOORES: Len Moores.

The Innu agreement is up to $340,000 a year.

MS JONES: I am sorry, I did not hear you.

MR. MOORES: The Innu agreement is up to $340,000 a year. With the Metis, there is funding available up to $200,000 for an agreement.

MS JONES: The only other question on that section before I move on and Lorraine takes over is: Under the Administration and Program Planning section, the Temporary & Other Employees, you spent $582,500 last year, can you tell me what that was? What were the temporary positions, what the other employees were and why they were other or temporary (inaudible) -

MS DUNDERDALE: Where is it? Sorry?

MS JONES: It is in the salary funding. It is a separate book from the Estimates and it is on page 113 of the salary Estimates.

MS DUNDERDALE: I am sorry, I do not have it. We do not have it.

So, it is Salaries under Administration and Program Planning, 2.1.01.01.; the question relates to that -

MS JONES: Yes.

In the Administration and Program Planning it breaks down the Permanent Employees, Temporary & Other Employees, Overtime, and Permanent & Other Adjustments. I am asking what the nearly $600,000, what positions they employ on a temporary basis in that section of the department.

MS DUNDERDALE: We will have to get more detail on that for you, but we expect that it has to do with the cross over between inland fish and conservation officers, but we will get more detail and provide that to you. Conservation officers are with our program, and some of our conservation officers do inland fish, but they go over to the Department of Justice in the spring and come back in the fall, so-

MS JONES: In your whole department, Minister, there is over $10 million paid out to temporary and other employees and we are going to be asking a question on every section. So, if you are going to get the information, we may as well ask for it all now.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS JONES: In the Forest Management section alone, not including Agrifoods, there is $6.6 million paid out.

MS DUNDERDALE: By its very nature, in forestry and agrifoods we have temporary workers. For example, the silviculture program is done by temporary workers. You would not have a permanent – or the bulk of your employees would not be permanent around that piece, and the spray program and so on. Off the top of my head, I think I know the answer to your question, but I have to go back and check it, because I cannot give you a definitive answer where all that is coming from.

MS JONES: Yes, well we are looking for the breakdown on the Temporary & Other Employees. I understand other employees could be people that are called back every season and so on.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS JONES: I understand that. The temporary employees, we want to know how many of them and for how long they would be in the department and what positions they would hold, because it is a lot when there is one department that is paying out $10 million in salaries for temporary and other employees. It is a significant amount of money.

MS DUNDERDALE: I will have to check that for you, but like I said, in terms of forestry, in terms of conservation, silviculture, all of those kinds of things, spray program, all of that work by its very nature is seasonal, and therefore you would only have temporary employees to do it.

MS JONES: Yes, and it does give me the breakdown, actually, for silviculture and the amount that is permanent and the amount that is temporary and the amount that is overtime, but it is only a fraction of what the total budget is.

MS DUNDERDALE: We have to do an investigation with regard to that. We did not come prepared with that kind of detail this morning.

MS JONES: Lorraine?

CHAIR: Thank you, Ms Jones.

Any additional information that is provided, if you could channel it through me, as Chair –

MS DUNDERDALE: Absolutely.

CHAIR: – and I will pass it to the other members of the Committee then.

Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I do not have a lot of questions because a lot has been covered in the discussion. I will not repeat any questions that I had, because they have been asked and I do not think I need clarification on much that has been said.

On line items, though, 2.1.01., continuing on there, under the Revenue, could I have an explanation of the federal revenue? That was the $4.8 million that is showing there.

MS DUNDERDALE: That is the community trusts.

MS MICHAEL: Pardon?

MS DUNDERDALE: That is the Community Trust funds –

MS MICHAEL: That is a Community Trust fund, okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: – that we talked about earlier with the Leader of the Opposition.

MS MICHAEL: Right, you said you would let us know where it was.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, that is great.

Then, coming down to 2.1.02. Operations and Implementation, 04. Supplies, there was an over expenditure of $427,900.

MS DUNDERDALE: That variance is due to increased expenditures associated with the cost of fuel for vehicles, as well as additional costs of outfitting new and replacement vehicles purchased during the year with tires, winches, light bars, racks, et cetera, required for operations, so all to do with vehicle operation.

MS MICHAEL: Which was unexpected, I take it? Well, the cost of fuel, of course, you cannot bank on that one.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, and even when we buy new vehicles or used vehicles there are still pieces of work that have to be done.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Thank you.

Under Purchased Services, line 06., again an over expenditure of $364,600.

MS DUNDERDALE: Due to higher than anticipated expenditures associated with vehicle repairs and maintenance, as well as office rental and storage facilities.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

Heading 2.1.03., Silviculture Development, 03. Transportation and Communications, quite a large over expenditure there, almost double the budgeted amount.

MS DUNDERDALE: The revised variance is due to internal reallocation of funds during the year. Allocation of the silviculture budget is done early in the fiscal year. At that time a number of projects have been certified to proceed, so some projects proceeded as planned and others do not. Some tendered projects come in beneath the estimated cost, therefore funds are reallocated from Purchased Services within the activity, where public tender contracts for silviculture projects are budgeted, to Transportation and Communications and Supplies during the year to allow the department to proceed with other silviculture work that can be performed internally by the department. It is not having a clear enough picture. By its very nature, you are just not able to get it all clear, straight, on how you are going to do it, so you reallocate internally.

MS MICHAEL: That is how you do deal with that on a regular basis every year?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, because you do not know what your tenders are going to be and you still want to spend your budgeted amount of money on the silviculture.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

Minister, could you just give us an idea of how the silviculture program is going in terms of the planting of seedlings and what percentage, on a regular basis, is being renewed.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

I will let Len or Keith speak to that piece, but we are very lucky in this Province in that an awful lot of our land has natural reforestation -

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MS DUNDERDALE: - properties, really high quality of reforestation ability, so we do not have the same requirement to do silviculture as in other areas of the country and the world. I will let Keith speak to it.

MR. DEERING: Annually, we have the production of about 13 million seedlings at our Wooddale facility in Grand Falls. Over the past couple of years, leading up to last year I should say, we have had a fairly healthy appetite for programs. We had a correction last year with the Abitibi piece in that we had to take a year to review the land base, the former Abitibi land base, to determine what needed to be planted. As a result, we did not have as many silviculture projects last year.

This year we are anticipating having a full program again. In fact, a lot of tenders have already been advertised for.

MS MICHAEL: Great.

I am thinking that with the buyback of fibre and these sawmillers who are going to be looking for that that is going to be a new element for the reforestation as well, increasing the need.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

Still under 2.1.03., line 04. Supplies, an over expenditure of $404,700.

MS DUNDERDALE: We spent – I am sorry.

MS MICHAEL: Line 04. Supplies.

MS DUNDERDALE: It is the same explanation as the last one. It is just that reallocation internally to maximize our silviculture program.

MS MICHAEL: Right, I thought it might be.

Thank you.

Under line 06. Purchased Services, it is actually an under expenditure last year a fair bit, $3.4 million.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, that was the silviculture program that we had earmarked for Abitibi that we did not do last year.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, Abitibi, of course.

That is all of my questions on that section.

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Ms Michael.

Ms Jones.

MS JONES: Do you want to move on, Lorraine, or do you want me to -

MS MICHAEL: If we are finished with Forestry, the minister may want to make a change -

MS DUNDERDALE: We are going to make changes here, so it is just –

MS JONES: Oh, no. I have Forestry questions though, I guess.

MS MICHAEL: You go ahead, Yvonne.

MS JONES: I have a couple of questions with regard to the mill in Grand Falls-Windsor. I am just wondering if there are any plans for that mill at this stage or what government intends to do with it?

MS DUNDERDALE: Not at this point in time.

MS JONES: Okay. What is the cost right now of maintaining that property and providing the security, doing all those things that need to be done?

MS DUNDERDALE: I can get you that estimate because we just had it done. It is the cost of security and some maintenance. I want to say $100,000 a year but I am not going to go there. I will get you the number.

MS JONES: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: We have costed it, but that is basically what it is costing in security.

MS JONES: Yes. Have you contracted that out for someone to take care of it or are you just doing it directly?

MS DUNDERDALE: It is being done through the Department of Transportation and Works.

MS JONES: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: What we have tried to do in Grand Falls and anything in that region, anything associated with the mill – we have spent out a significant amount of money in that area since the mill closed to lessen the impact of the closure, to do everything we can to diversify the economy and create employment there.

It certainly makes sense to us when there are employment opportunities associated around the mill, even with work that we are doing, that we use those opportunities to help relieve some pressure on the people who are most directly affected, which were the workers in the mill. Doing it through the Department of Transportation and Works allows us to do that and we work in co-operation with the union.

MS JONES: Section 2.1.05., the Forest Industry Diversification program. Obviously, the amount of money budgeted last year was not spent. This year government has allocated another $6.5 million. How many sawmill operators took advantage of this funding in the Province?

MS DUNDERDALE: Two last year; Holson and Sexton Lumber. Significant investments; they are two very large integrated sawmilling operations here in the Province. They employ significant numbers of people. In fact, Holson is now the pivotal point for the whole forestry industry on the Northern Peninsula.

MS JONES: Yes. Is all that money interest-free loans or is some of it grant money? How does that work?

MS DUNDERDALE: Some are grants and some are interest-free loans.

MS JONES: So, it is two components. You are considered for the two components?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS JONES: Were there many proposals at all or was that the only proposals or what?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, we still have proposals. There are a number of proposals that are under consideration at the moment, ready for sign-off. There is a healthy interest in the program. You have to have some strength about you as a company in this industry at the moment if you are going to sustain yourself and be able to develop a good, strong business plan, but we have had enough of those applications that we are drawing down – this year we will draw down the whole fund that we have available.

MS JONES: The proposal that came forward from Deer Lake, I think that was probably a year ago, maybe even two years ago now, and they were talking about the super mill concept. Did that ever get funded, or is it off the table?

MS DUNDERDALE: She withdrew -

MS JONES: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: - but that proposal has been on and off the table for a significant amount of time, much longer than a year.

MS JONES: What is happening with the proposal submission for Labrador, the one that the Innu were involved in? Has that been approved, finalized? I know that there was another call for proposals, so I am not sure where it went.

MS DUNDERDALE: We went out two years ago, or three years ago on an expression of interest for development of forestry in Labrador. We had three proposals back under the expression of interest. We looked at them all. We took one of the proposals that seemed to be the most solid of the three from a number of different perspectives, and we asked which one was the Innu proposal. We asked the Innu who had submitted that proposal then to go back and develop a business plan because until you get the business plan you would not make a final decision.

The business plan that came back in did not in any way reflect what had been proposed under the EOI. Just on the basis of fairness, you would not be able to accept that proposal. It would not be fair to the other proponents. So, given that, we went back to an expression of interest call again, that closed a month or more ago and we have two proposals coming in under that EOI. The committee is reviewing it and a recommendation will be made to me in due course.

MS JONES: Okay.

In January of last year, you announced that you were retaining a market consultant to develop a market strategy for the sawmilling industry. Was that ever completed? Where is it, or was it released? I have no idea; I just have not seen it myself.

MR. DEERING: Keith Deering. We had retained a consultant, Laue Guay, out of Quebec to craft a piece of work for us and the second step to that process now is that the department is crafting a strategy around the consultant's report and I guess at this point we are in the very final stages of completing our strategy, at which point both documents will be released.

MS JONES: Any idea when that is going to be?

MR. DEERING: I would have liked to have thought that we would have been ready to do that right now. I am thinking that within the next couple of weeks we will be finished our piece, at which point we will undertake a review of the executive level of that. That is the internal strategy.

MS JONES: Okay. It is interesting you are taking advice from consultants in Quebec on the forest industry, but anyway.

On the forest management plan, I think you guys talked about having it implemented by 2011. I am just wondering where that is right now, what has been happening with that, and have you finished all the consultations and so on?

MR. DEERING: I am just looking for clarification, for which plan was that?

MS JONES: I am not sure; I do not have it here. How many were you doing?

MR. DEERING: We are currently undertaking a process for -

MS JONES: This was a five-year forestry plan.

MR. DEERING: Yes, we are currently undertaking a process for districts ten, eleven and twelve.

MS DUNDERDALE: Just for a point of clarification, we do a five-year plan for every forestry district in the Province.

MS JONES: Yes. I guess that is -

MS DUNDERDALE: So, a number of them, they all do not come due at the same time. There is a forestry management plan always in the works, you could say, for somewhere in the Province at any given time.

MR. DEERING: Last year we would have completed plans for districts fifteen and sixteen on the Province's West Coast. We would have submitted a plan for district twenty, which is Cartwright. That plan was released a couple of weeks ago from environmental assessment. We are currently undertaking a process right now for districts ten, eleven and twelve in Central Newfoundland and we expect to have a plan implemented for those districts on January 1, 2011.

MS JONES: When you do these plans, do you do consultation with commercial permit holders and others that are actively involved in the industry or do you just consult with certain specific groups? How does that work?

MS DUNDERDALE: Anybody who wants to participate in our consultation process has the opportunity to do so. There are various notices sent out to the municipality, they are published in the paper. We welcome public comment and involvement in every stage of the process.

MS JONES: Okay.

Minister, you opened up a number of new areas to harvest fuel wood on lands that were formally licensed by Abitibi Bowater. What was the take up on that?

MS DUNDERDALE: As far as I know, very good. These people traditionally harvested domestic wood off there in any case. So, this was not new. Abitibi traditionally allowed this kind of harvesting on their lands. We have tried to keep everything whole and not see any of our own people, or other operations outside of the pulp and paper industry negatively impacted in any kind of a way. So, we have allowed that tradition to continue.

MS JONES: Okay.

I am finished with the forestry sector.

CHAIR: Okay.

Ms Michael, do you have any further questions on the forestry sector?

MS MICHAEL: No.

CHAIR: Okay.

We will move into the Agrifoods sector now.

Ms Jones.

MS JONES: Do you want to go, Lorraine?

CHAIR: Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

First of all, line items, under 3.2.01., Salaries was overspent last year by $206,000 and I notice that the estimate for this year is back down to more or less last years. What happened last year that required that increase?

MS DUNDERDALE: Is it 3.1.01.?

MS MICHAEL: 3.2.01., and then 01. Salaries.

MS DUNDERDALE: Okay, sorry.

3.2.01., okay. In terms of the variance in 2009-2010, it was higher than anticipated salary expenditures associated with temporary and seasonal positions required for the operation of the seed potato farm. We have the variance coming forward for the new budget for the 4 per cent increase for next year in Salaries, as well as removal of the twenty-seventh pay period, as was required in 2009-2010.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, that one I understand because it is actually just about the same as this year. It is only $7,000 variance.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: So the $206,000 then was all towards temporary and seasonal positions with regard to –

MS DUNDERDALE: Seasonal employees all associated with the seed potato farm.

MS MICHAEL: Could you tell me about the seed potato farm, please?

MR. WHALEN: Jeff Whalen. It is the research that we have in Glenwood, where we basically try different varieties of potatoes for Atlantic Canada, particularly for Newfoundland. Those potatoes then, once we do the research, go out to seed producers in the Province to produce seed.

MS MICHAEL: Very good. I think this is the first time I have heard about it, actually. This is owned by the government and run by the department.

MR. WHALEN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Very good. How does it work? Do farmers apply to get the seed potatoes or do you seek them out? I am just curious.

MR. WHALEN: What we do, basically, we try different varieties and we give certain varieties out to seed producers to try. So we do the research on the farms as well, plus we have the producers do research.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. I am just wondering why you had such an unexpected increase last year if this is an ongoing program.

MR. WHALEN: The reason for the potato seed farm variance, basically, is in previous years the potato seed farm was funded underneath a cost-shared agreement which could not come forward this past year. So there lies the variance with the potato seed farm.

MS MICHAEL: You hope for next year that the cost sharing will happen.

MR. WHALEN: We hope to put the potato seed farm underneath our Research and Development program.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. That sounds like a logical place to have it actually.

Thank you very much.

Line 10., Grants and Subsidies, there was quite an under expenditure last year and the Budget is also down quite a bit this year from last year's estimate as well. Could I have some explanation of what is happening there?

MS DUNDERDALE: All of that had to do with the Aleutian Disease response in the mink industry. We did not have the expected draw down on funds and the disease seems to be better managed now. We have other funding available and so on, so it is not required to bring forward under this heading.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, and that is all related to the Aleutian Disease?

MS DUNDERDALE: All of it.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, great.

Thank you very much, Minister.

Under the Marketing Board, just one line item, not a major one, 3.2.02., line 05., underspent by $50,000. It looks like you just keep $70,000 on that line for Professional Services?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, and that is per diem expenditures – underspending of per diem by marketing board members.

MS MICHAEL: That is a nice one to hear.

MS DUNDERDALE: It is.

MS MICHAEL: 3.3.01, Agricultural Business Development – Administration. It is not a major one, but since it is marked, I will ask. Line 07. Property, Furnishings and Equipment, you had a small over expenditure there.

MS DUNDERDALE: The over expenditure was due to the purchase of a display booth for the division, as well as the upgrading of a fax machine and photocopier.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Thank you very much.

3.3.02., agribusiness - none of these are major, actually. I am not even going to ask about them, they are pretty minor in terms of expenditures.

Let us come to 3.3.04., please, which is the Agriculture and Agrifoods Development Fund. It is only one line, of course, the Grants and Subsidies. Budgeted last year at $4 million, with a big under expenditure, and this year the budget is down by just over a million.

MS DUNDERDALE: That is our very large project development fund. So, your project has to be $1 million or less to qualify for this program. It is the same program we use for the expansions to Central Dairies, Brookfield Ice Cream, and the egg grading facility out in Roaches Line, for the making of cheese, specialty ice creams and so on. So these are very, very large projects. They require a great deal of analysis and so on before you do approval.

We find that fund has pretty much hit its mark, and we are making some changes now. Instead of $1 million - the value of the project - we are moving it now to $500,000, so we are able to go out to the next layer in the industry and help them grow and expand and really try to get into some secondary development of their products here in the Province.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

Who would you anticipate would do the take-up on that? You have $3 million, so let's say if you had $500,000 projects come in or proposals come in, where would you see it coming from?

MS DUNDERDALE: Jeff can speak to it more fully than I, but we have opportunity here in the Province. Most people do not realize we have some of the largest dairy farms in the country here in Newfoundland and Labrador. What we want to be able to do in those areas, as well as others, in agriculture, again, is maximize opportunities on secondary processing.

MR. WHALEN: Basically, all the small to medium companies – the medium companies would be companies such as mink producers; you would get the poultry industry. These types of companies would basically avail of the $500,000 or less.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

I am just going back and forth between questions I have over here, along with the line, to make sure I am covering everything. Under 3.3.05., the Growing Forward Framework, line 01. Salaries, you must have had some unfilled positions last year, did you?

MS DUNDERDALE: Late recruitments and vacancies.

MS MICHAEL: Late recruitments, yes.

Under Grants and Subsidies, the spending was down by $1.97 million last year, and the budget is going up this year, so if I could have an explanation on both sides.

MS DUNDERDALE: That is the negotiation of the Growing Forward agreement. It was late getting approved last year, so on a go-forward basis there will be a bigger drawdown on those funds.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, because of the late approval last year.

Last year you talked about the frustration of negotiating it, so this year – I am just noticing the notes. So you are not as frustrated this year, I take it?

MS DUNDERDALE: Well, I am not in the midst of negotiating an agreement.

MS MICHAEL: That is right.

MS DUNDERDALE: It is a very frustrating process, because as you well know, when you look at Ontario, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, B.C., and the size of the agriculture industry in those provinces, that most of the federal government response in the Growing Forward Program is targeted towards them. We have a very small industry here. It is very important to us and very important in terms of food security for us, where we are paying a whole lot more attention, but it is worth a Farm Gate Sales of around $500 million a year.

Given the design of the federal program, because our industry is so small, we miss all of the criteria. Trying to develop an appreciation and an understanding for that at the federal government level to say to be fair to everybody and to be fair to us, you have to treat us differently; that is an argument that we are very familiar with.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MS DUNDERDALE: Trying to maintain some success in doing that - and the most frustrating part of last year was using all our energy in trying to fight for what we had and keep what we had. It would have been really good if we had been able to use some of that energy to try to get more.

I am putting a sustained effort with our Atlantic counterparts, whose industries are also much bigger than ours, to develop an appreciation for that point of view so that we have some kind of support when we go forward. That is one of the challenges of doing this kind of business in the country. You are all together at breakfast, by 11:00 o'clock in the morning everybody is looking out their own best interest, and it can be a very frustrating process.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Minister.

Two things, one is just an update on the cranberry industry, how is that going?

MS DUNDERDALE: It is going very well, and I will ask Jeff to give you a full report. We did not have the take-up that we expected last year, but there is a very keen interest and everything about this industry bodes very well for us.

MR. WHALEN: The cranberry industry, as the minister said, is going really well. We did not have the up-take in our program because the federal government came out with a cranberry program as well for Central Newfoundland and the cost-sharing ratio was much better than what ours was. It was late in the year starting, so this year we are expecting ours to really take off. There are several producers; I think it is ten in Central Newfoundland plus the five we have outside of Central Newfoundland, of the East and West Coast. It is going really well. Production is really high.

MS MICHAEL: Has the Province changed its cost-sharing ratio -

MR. WHALEN: No.

MS MICHAEL: - to be competitive with the federal?

MS DUNDERDALE: Not at this point in time. We also bring other things to the table in terms of preparation of the land. It takes approximately $30,000 to prepare an acre of bog for production, and the provincial government absorbs all of the cost of that.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

Another general question under Research and Development - it is not a line item just a general question. Is the department involved at all with any groups with regard to research with regard to organic farming in the Province?

MS DUNDERDALE: Jeff.

MR. WHALEN: None to this date. We are looking at basically using that program to cost-share with the federal government as well to make a much larger program and invite interested parties to come forward. So, organic farming would be a part of that process.

MS MICHAEL: If somebody comes forward?

MR. WHALEN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: It is all based on that, somebody coming forward?

MR. WHALEN: In the new process it will be, yes.

MS MICHAEL: It will be?

MR. WHALEN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

What was it in the old process?

MR. WHALEN: The old process, basically staff met with producers, different industry groups and they would suggest research ideas, the priorities that they would want. The organic industry in this Province is very, very small.

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

Even though you need the request to come from the other side, will you be doing some advertising around that and getting that word out? I know the industry is very small, so maybe the word is out already.

MS DUNDERDALE: We work very closely with the industry, with the Federation of Agriculture.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MS DUNDERDALE: There is almost a daily interaction with our department. I meet with the association on a regular basis, so we have very good communication between the organization and government.

MS MICHAEL: That is good to hear.

Thank you. I do not think I have any more questions in agrifoods and agribusiness.

CHAIR: Thank you, Ms Michael.

Ms Jones.

MS JONES: Just to pick up on the organic piece, didn't you guys give a grant or something to a local company - ACORN or someone like that, ACORN-Newfoundland and Labrador or something - to do some training or something in the organic farming piece? I thought I saw that in a press release or somewhere.

MR. WHALEN: Jeff Whalen.

I cannot recall. ACORN is a company in Atlantic Canada and in Ontario as well. We may have gotten them in to do some training for organic producers, but I cannot recall.

MS JONES: Okay, that is what it was then. They were just training producers in this Province.

To section 3.1.02., Limestone Sales, is limestone being bought in the Province now or are you buying it outside and bringing it in, or what is the story on that?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, it only did for a very short period when one company went down. We had to, as a stock measure for farmers, bring in some limestone. There is another company up and operational on the West Coast, that is where our limestone is obtained.

MS JONES: Okay.

The subsidy was down last year. I guess that was because the take-up by the farmers was down, was it?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS JONES: Okay.

In section 3.2.01., to deal with the Aleutian Disease, I guess, with the mink farmers and so on. I know you said the amount of money that you budgeted was down because you did not have to do as much cleanup or there was not as much take-up or whatever, but have all the farms now that were infected, have they all been cleaned up? Is that piece finished or not?

MR. WHALEN: Jeff Whalen.

All of the large producers that availed of the program, yes, are cleaned up.

MS JONES: Are all of those farms still in operation? Did any of them have to close up or anything like that?

MR. WHALEN: I cannot recall any farm – any mink producer – that closed up.

MS JONES: Due to the Aleutian Disease?

MR. WHALEN: Due to Aleutian Disease.

MS JONES: Is there a different process in place now in the Province for checking for that disease before the transfer of animals or anything of that nature?

MS DUNDERDALE: To the best of our tests - and the testing is pretty good - animals are Aleutian-free when they come into the Province, unless it came on the cage.

Anecdotally, the information we have received is that there were mink industries here back in the 1950s and people described a disease that sounds very much like Aleutian Disease that took hold of animals in those farms at the time. A lot of those animals were released into the wild. While very limited testing was done on mink in the Province prior to the industry being established here, in the animals they found, they did not find any kind of Aleutian Disease.

We suspect that the disease has been here and here since the 1950s. That is confirmed, to some degree, by the fact that the type of Aleutian Disease that we had to deal with here several years ago has not been found anywhere else in the world, it is particular to Newfoundland and Labrador. It would substantiate or give a lot of credence to the anecdotal information we have about we thought we were Aleutian-free, but that was not quite the circumstance.

MS JONES: Okay. Are there any court cases against the Province as a result of the Aleutian Disease?

MS DUNDERDALE: Not that I am aware of.

MS JONES: Okay. Just to go back as well to section 3.1.04., with regard to the acquisition of land, how much farmland under the Agricultural Land Consolidation Program has been acquired by the government right now and how much of that has been leased out?

MR. WHALEN: Jeff Whalen. Do you want to know what was purchased last year or over the life of the program?

MS JONES: I would like to have it over the life of the program.

MR. WHALEN: Over the life of the program it is roughly between 1,400 and 1,500 acres. All that land usually is reallocated to producers. We are in the final stages now basically of reallocating the last land that we purchased last year back to producers. The committee met, and I guess it will be in the next few weeks, it will be reallocated to producers. Last year, it would have been somewhere in the range of about 100 to 150 acres.

MS JONES: There is no shortage of demand I would think, is there, for land?

MR. WHALEN: For land? No, absolutely not. We cannot purchase enough land for what is required.

MS JONES: Yes. Okay.

Under 3.3.04., I think this is where this falls, the Agriculture Development Fund. I am just wondering, what large-scale initiative would have taken place under that fund last year? That is the money that is used to stimulate and attract large-scale investments in agriculture and agrifoods.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, the large project last year was the one we announced with regard to the dairy farms and dairy farmers and the production of pasture land here in the Province. The number one priority for them and very well-received, I must say. They were absolutely delighted because it is a big pressure on them to find proper pasture for their animals. As I said earlier, we have a big dairy industry in this Province. We have some of the largest dairy farms in the country, in fact, here in the Province.

MS JONES: How many dairy farms do we have in Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. WHALEN: Jeff Whalen. There are thirty-eight quotas and approximately thirty-six farms, because you can have quotas on different farms but there are thirty-six farms.

MS JONES: Wow. Were there many people who made application, many farmers, under this program last year?

MR. WHALEN: This program basically - we went through the Dairy Farmers of Newfoundland and Labrador, that is who we basically ran this program through, and then the individual farmers would go through their association to clear land. So it is pretty well - most of the producers would have gone through their association.

MS JONES: Okay.

MR. WHALEN: The contract was between government and the Dairy Farmers of Newfoundland and Labrador Association.

MS JONES: Yes. Do you have any stats, Jeff, on the number of new entrants in the agriculture industry over the last number of years? There have been a lot of incentive programs, both federally and provincially. I do not know if there are a lot of new people going in or if there are lot of people expanding or developing different scopes of industry.

MR. WHALEN: Two years ago there were two new entrants brought into the industry. The Dairy Farmers of Newfoundland and Labrador Association, they advertised for new entrants. There were two, two years ago; there were two this past year – this current year, actually. So, it is four over this past two years.

MS JONES: That is overall or just the dairy?

MR. WHALEN: That is just the dairy, new.

MS JONES: Okay. What about overall in the agriculture sector?

MR. WHALEN: Of producers in the Province?

MS JONES: Yes.

MR. WHALEN: New entrants? I would expect that it is pretty well stable, or actually a little declined. It seems all across Canada the agricultural producers, age-wise, are getting older all across Canada. The average age being fifty-seven, and we are trying to basically put in new entrance programs to get new entrants back into the – as in other provinces – into the industry.

MS JONES: Okay.

What are the egg production levels like in the Province now? I know back years ago there were something like thirty or forty different quotas of egg producers and I think today we have what? I don't know, four, six, or something in the Province? I am just wondering, has that affected the production levels and the overall quotas in the Province?

MR. WHALEN: You are asking: Has the quota level changed in the Province, in eggs?

MS JONES: Yes, for egg production.

MR. WHALEN: No. What has happened, basically, is the number of producers in eggs has gone down, but one large producer, basically, purchased that quota. So, the quota stays the same.

MS JONES: Okay, that is what I was wondering.

There are a lot of grants and subsidies in the agriculture estimates for the department. Can we get a breakdown of all the grants and subsidies that are given out on an annual basis?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS JONES: Yes, okay.

The only other question that I have is on – you guys were doing something with the forestry building. I am not sure if it was a new building - and I am trying to remember because I forgot when I was doing the Forestry section - in Lewisporte and Winterland.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS JONES: Did that get completed?

MS DUNDERDALE: They are done.

MS JONES: Okay. Were you doing something as well in Port Hope Simpson and Roddickton?

MS DUNDERDALE: We are doing something in Roddickton. I do not know about Port Hope Simpson.

MR. DEERING: We had crafted a proposal to add on to the building in Port Hope Simpson, but again, it fell short of the priority in Roddickton.

MS JONES: Yes, okay.

Is it going to be done any time soon, because there is not enough room in the building for the people who are there? I think they sit in the truck and take turns using the office. I am serious, it is really filled up. It is just a small place.

MR. DEERING: Yes, it is a small place and a lot of people there, no question. I do no think the priority list has been completed for this years work yet. Transportation and Works will usually have some influence over the final list.

MS JONES: Okay. Would there be money in the Budget to do that? Wouldn't those priorities be decided for this year? It is just an overall budget, or what?

MS DUNDERDALE: There has been no money allocated this year that I am aware of, for work in Port Hope Simpson.

MS JONES: Okay, just Roddickton.

MS DUNDERDALE: Roddickton.

MS JONES: Was there any other places where there is work committed for this year?

MS DUNDERDALE: No. I think Roddickton is the only place that is in the Budget for this year.

MS JONES: Okay. I do have one more question.

In the overall Estimates for Agrifoods, this year there is $23,487,400. In 2008-2009 this Budget was $33 million. It is down $10 million in two years. I would like to know why that is overall, where the big shift in estimates and expenditure came from.

MS DUNDERDALE: The Aleutian Disease program would have been a significant piece of that.

Can you show us were you are seeing that?

MS JONES: Yes. If you look on page 163 of the Estimates book it gives you the Total for Agrifoods Development, and the total money that you are voting to spend this year is a little over $23 million, but if you go back to 2008-2009 Budget, in 2008-2009 you had budgeted $33 million in that year as the overall estimate for Agrifoods. You did not spend all of that but that is what you budgeted. I am just wondering where the shift in the budget for that sector would have been over the last two years? If you do not have it now, you can get it for me.

MS DUNDERDALE: We will have to go back and check the numbers because - in fact, money has been increased to the department, not lessened. So we have to see where it is allocated and so on.

The only thing I can tell you that would have been in the program that is not in the program now is the Aleutian Disease Program. It is not in this year's Budget, and that was $5.4 million over two years. I will have to go back and check the rest of it because there have been no cuts to the department.

MS JONES: Yes, and that is not what you spent. It is what was budgeted, right?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS JONES: Expenditure was different. Yes, okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, and the expenditure will be different from year over year because, as I said throughout the whole piece, there are different draw downs. You make money available, but it depends on where businesses are, in terms of their own planning and whether or not they feel they have the capacity or want to at this point draw down those funds from those programs. So, you have no control over those pieces, but in terms of the Agrifoods branch, there has been no trimming of their budget whatsoever, none. It would have to be associated with one-time funding or that it is not required at this point in time because our base budgets have not been touched. In fact, we put more money into agriculture in this Province than the federal government does, and we are the sole Province who finds ourselves in that position.

MS JONES: Yes, I am finished that section now.

CHAIR: Okay. Before we move into the Mineral Resource section, I guess you need to -

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, we will do a change up.

CHAIR: – change some of the officials around now.

MS DUNDERDALE: We are ready again, Mr. Chair, and I will introduce the people who have joined me in the front row here.

CHAIR: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: My Deputy Minister of Mines and Energy, Robert Thompson, and I will ask Robert to introduce the ADM.

MR. THOMPSON: Thank you.

To my left is Pierre Tobin, Associate Deputy Minister for Energy, and to his left is Dick Wardle, Assistant Deputy Minister for Mines.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

We will start with some line items; 4.1.01. Geological Survey, and line 03. Transportation and Communications. I know particularly the increase this year of $235,000 more or less. What are you anticipating this year?

MS DUNDERDALE: I am going to ask Richard Wardle to take us through both pieces.

MR. WARDLE: That increase was due to higher than anticipated expenditures associated with travel and transportation, mainly chartered aircraft and helicopter time to support field operations.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, that was the revision from this year. I actually did not ask about the revision, but thank you. I am looking particularly at the $235,000 more that is estimated for this year's budget over last year's budget.

MR. WARDLE: Okay. A reallocation of funds from Purchased Services to meet higher operational needs anticipated for this year.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. I guess there is going to be more activity this year in the industry. Is that why you are anticipating higher needs there?

MR. WARDLE: Primarily, it will be a location of field programs. If we have more programs in Labrador there is a higher fixed wing aircraft component and higher costs.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Thank you very much.

I think the reallocation then that you have just mentioned probably explains lines 06., Purchased Services, which is going to be down by $238,000. I presume that is the reallocation?

MR. WARDLE: (Inaudible) to meet different operational needs this coming summer.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Okay, thank you.

Under Mineral Lands, line 01. Salaries, last year the revision was $189,600 over the budget. It looks like that amount of money is not expected this year. I am just wondering what the overexpenditure was about?

MS DUNDERDALE: Overtime (inaudible) employee expenses associated with quarry inspections, field work for core collections, field operations of the core storage program and field inspections of mineral exploration sites and mining lease boundaries. Increased expenditures also were incurred during the year related to the reclassifications for several quarry inspectors.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Thank you, Minister.

Line item 05. Professional Services, the expenditure was $45,000 over what was expected. It looks like you do not usually expect much in professional services there - 05.

MS DUNDERDALE: That higher than anticipated expenditure is related to the Mineral Adjudication Board. That is associated with several hearings related to grievances under the Mineral Act that are being heard.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

I will just keep going; I have some more line items. 4.1.03.01., Salaries, once again the Budget this year is – no I am sorry, I had my columns mixed up. The revised budget last year was $185,000 less than the estimated budget. What happened there?

MS DUNDERDALE: We had two vacant mineral development engineer positions within the division during the year.

MS MICHAEL: Are they filled now?

MS DUNDERDALE: Are they filled?

OFFICIAL: Yes, one of the positions was filled (inaudible).

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

MS DUNDERDALE: It is difficult to keep our positions. We have a mines division within the department that is really top drawer, so we receive high praise for the work in that part of the department. Of course, when you do your work really well, people are well aware of it and there are opportunities outside of government. It is a constant challenge.

MS MICHAEL: Competition with industry which pays higher.

MS DUNDERDALE: Pay higher wages, so it is a constant challenge trying to keep these positions filled.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Thank you.

Under line 05. in the same section, Professional Services, I am looking particularly at the variance between last year's budget and the projected budget for this year, and the variance is $1.7 million. What are you expecting in Professional Services that would bring it up that much more this year?

MS DUNDERDALE: This is the whole piece of scoping work we are going to do in Labrador around Julienne Lake, which is a very large deposit.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: Before we put those lands up for exploration we would like to have a better idea of what is contained within, how large a deposit this is, what the quality of the ore is and so on. It goes hand in hand with what we are doing in terms of the development of the mineral strategy. It just makes the work of ensuring that we are being good stewards of the natural resources of the Province for the people. We are doing that work properly. So, when people come to bid and we go to negotiate the kind of industrial benefits that go with developments, that we have a really good understanding ourselves of what it is we are talking about and dealing with.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. That makes sense.

Under Purchased Services - this might be related - which is the next line, 06., once again the variance between last year's Budget and this year's Estimate is $1.8 million.

MS DUNDERDALE: The variance between last year and this year or the projected?

MS MICHAEL: No, last year's budget and this year's estimate.

MS DUNDERDALE: And the variance?

MS MICHAEL: Yes, the variance.

MS DUNDERDALE: That had to do with less than anticipated expenditures with the Baie Verte and Rambler Mine rehab program. We had planned to do a piece of work in one year but found that if we moved it on to the second year and bundled it with other work that we were doing that we could really lower the cost. So, we did that. We had the same amount of work done and fulfilled our obligations there but were able to do it at savings by delaying it and bundling it.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

Obviously, with that one out of the way you are estimating less money this year than you had budgeted last year.

MS DUNDERDALE: That one is for the Buchans tailings dam - $5 million there.

MS MICHAEL: Is that all of it?

MS DUNDERDALE: All of that is going to Buchans.

MS MICHAEL: To Buchans. Okay, thank you.

I have some general questions. With regard to the Mineral Incentive Program, you are into the third year of funding this year, I think, for the Mineral Incentive Program. Things certainly were not great last year, but what are you projections for this year, especially with some of the projects you have in mind yourself, like the Julienne Lake? What are your future hopes?

MS DUNDERDALE: Well, the activity is starting to pick up again, and we are happy about that, as prices rebound worldwide. In terms of the Mineral Incentive Program, this is a program that is drawn down by junior explorers –

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MS DUNDERDALE: – and so on, who go out in the field and do that kind of work. Exploration is critical to development in that industry. So, we do everything we can to encourage that kind of work to continue, which is the reason why we increased the program. It is a little less than that this year, but expectations are good.

MS MICHAEL: How does exploration on the Island compare with exploration in Labrador?

MS DUNDERDALE: We have pretty robust exploration right throughout the Island and on the mainland, but the bulk of the work, I understand is – Dick, you can speak to it.

MR. WARDLE: Over the past two years the bulk of the exploration work has been in Labrador. A lot of it was targeted at uranium, but with the onset of the recession, interest has switched very much to gold. So, we are seeing a relative increase in exploration on the Island because the Island has the greater gold potential perhaps of the two areas.

MS MICHAEL: Right. I think the cost of gold just went up again.

MR. WARDLE: I am sorry?

MS MICHAEL: I think the cost of gold just went up again, too.

MR. WARDLE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: I think I heard that this morning on the radio.

This is more of an internal question, Minister: How is the work with OCIO going to develop and launch the on-line approval of mineral exploration, or is that fully in place now?

MS DUNDERDALE: We have done quite a bit of work in terms of technology and innovation in technology, and have received awards for it, in fact. You can now stake a claim in this Province from anywhere in the world, I guess, if you have access to a computer. We are putting all of our geoscience – we are moving to put all of that on-line, our staking system is on-line. So, we are trying to do everything we can to make information available, and to make access as easily available as the information. So, we are having a great deal of success with that and doing groundbreaking things here in the Province, which is always good.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

I think that is all the questions I have, Mr. Chair, on that section.

CHAIR: Thank you, Ms Michael.

Ms Jones.

MS JONES: Thank you.

I have some questions under section 4.1.03. Just to pick up on the Julienne Lake project, the mineral assessment that government is doing there, is this something new for government or is it something that has been done in the past?

MS DUNDERDALE: This is something completely new for government.

MS JONES: Is there any reason why the Province would be doing this as opposed to the mineral claimholders in that deposit area?

MS DUNDERDALE: Well, normally, in the past, that work has always been left to explorers and developers, and we always have not had a good idea of what it is that we are dealing with. In the energy sector, we developed the Energy Plan and everybody understood why that was a really good thing to do. There were calls for it for quite some time. and it had been worked on by your former Administration and then ours. It took some time to complete, so it was to have a really good understanding of what was involved in terms of the resources available to us around energy and what the principles were going to be in terms of development of those resources.

We are doing the same thing now with the mineral piece and that has been really well received. Some of this piece is we have an opportunity here to understand more fully what it is – we know about Julienne Lake and we know that it is a very large resource within Labrador. We would like to know more about it before we actually put it out for permitting or development. To do that in context with the development of a mineral strategy for us makes good sense – that we develop both things at the same time. We will see where we are at the end of our mineral strategy in terms of how we approach the development of large scale projects like Julienne Lake.

MS JONES: Is this going to be a normal practice now for the department? Are there any other assessments going on or is this the only one?

MS DUNDERDALE: This is the only one ongoing at the time, and this is a pilot project for us. In what we do in the future, it will be very much driven by what we find out in the Julienne Lake piece as well as the development of the mineral strategy.

MS JONES: Are there any mineral claims held in that area?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, not on Julienne Lake.

MR. WARDLE: Dick Wardle.

The Julienne Lake property belongs to the Crown, but there are areas around it that are privately held. They have been staked in the same way that you would stake any other area of the Province.

MS JONES: How are they affected by this or are they not affected at all?

MR. WARDLE: I am sorry who –

MS JONES: The work you are doing is not in any of the areas that they would have had mineral claims right?

MR. WARDLE: No.

MS JONES: Okay.

On Vale Inco, I am just wondering if you can give us an update on Long Harbour. In the last few weeks I have had a couple of calls about contracts going outside the Province that was bid on by in-province companies that had the expertise to do the work. They are obviously not pleased by the fact that they are not getting it, that it is going outside. I am wondering if you are aware of that, I am sure you are and if there is anything that can be done about it.

MS DUNDERDALE: Very aware of the issues around – and we have been very aware from the beginning in terms of the initial debate around the development of the project here in the Province and what kind of benefits we are going to accrue to the Province.

Under the original contract, the only proviso around contracting to companies and to the labour force here in the Province was full and fair opportunity; that is all. When we were able to amend the agreement last year as a result of Vale Inco failing to have their development plan ready for submission on time, we were able to negotiate 8.9 million hours of labour that had to be performed here in the Province. Out of that over 400,000 of those hours had to be in engineering. We were able to negotiate that last year. That was the first time in that agreement that you had firm commitment to employment here in the Province.

We have put in place a number of mechanisms to ensure that we monitor them very carefully. We have an engineer who goes in and does regular checks. That is done on a scheduled timetable. We also monitor the full and fair opportunity with regard to companies bidding for the work.

Having access and adjacency are important components in the full and fair opportunity, but at the same time the lowest bid also has an important role, or the lowest bid that meets all of the benchmarks that they have set out also plays an important role. Every time that a complaint has been registered with our government we have gone directly back to Vale, sat with them, questioned their rationale. We have sat with the companies ourselves. We have arranged meetings between Vale and the companies and we have also acted as a facilitator in terms of the exchange of information.

Complaints have been raised about the capacity to do the work. There have been issues around bundling. We have addressed those because they are important from our perspective to ensure that the work is not bundled in such a way that shuts out our people, but at the same time some bundling is required because it has to make economic sense for the company as well. So, we are working hard to make sure that that balance is maintained, but do we have a mechanism within the agreement other than the 8.9 million hours to say to Vale Inco you must do this work here in Newfoundland and Labrador? No, it was never negotiated, ever.

We have found so far in all of our investigations, which we spend a fair amount of time on, that there is no indication at all that we could find that Vale Inco is not operating within the terms of the agreement and the spirit of the agreement. When contracts have been lost there have been significant differences between the bidders, huge differences in fact.

MS JONES: Can you tell me what is happening with the mining operation in Voisey's Bay, if they are preparing to go underground with the operation and what the time frame is around that?

MS DUNDERDALE: It is an issue that we continue to press with them on a regular basis. We very much want to see underground mining in Voisey's Bay and the maximization of the resource that is there. In terms of their commitments under, again, their agreement on Voisey's Bay, they have met all of their requirements, over expended the amount of money that they committed in the agreement to spend on the development of underground mining. They continue to do pieces of work, and they have an engineering study that is due – when is it, next year?

OFFICIAL: 2011.

MS DUNDERDALE: – in 2011, that might give us some indication where they are headed. We continue to apply a great deal of pressure around this issue with the company because it is very important to us.

MS JONES: On the new mines in Labrador, the Thompson mine and the Labrador Iron Mines, I know the finds are on the Labrador side of the Schefferville-Labrador border, what, if any, production is going to be done in Labrador around those mining operations?

MS DUNDERDALE: This is a long negotiation that went on around these projects. Under the environmental assessment, we negotiated a number of benefits to the people of the Province. So I will let Dick take you through it.

MR. WARDLE: Labrador Iron Mines will be a completely Labrador-based production. It will start off with about a million tons and build to somewhere in the region of three to four million tons over the next few years.

I believe you referred to Consolidated Thompson? Their mine is actually in Quebec. It is the Bloom Lake Mine. The only development in Labrador has been the construction of the Bloom Lake Railway, which transports that ore to the Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway for transport status to Sept-Isles.

MS JONES: Thompson does not do any mining on the Labrador side of the border?

MR. WARDLE: No.

MS JONES: Okay. It is all on the Quebec side?

MR. WARDLE: Yes.

MS JONES: So, it is just the railway access, and that is the upgrade that is going on right now, right?

MR. WARDLE: Yes. Under the terms of their benefits agreement with us they have to provide largely provincial operating personnel for that railway, and they are training those at the moment.

MS JONES: Yes. So, Labrador Iron Mines is –

MS DUNDERDALE: In terms of the employment within Labrador, we have carved off the maximum amount of employment that can be had, leaving them the ability to honour their Aboriginal IBAs. So they –

MS JONES: Is that with Thompson you are talking about?

MS DUNDERDALE: Labrador Iron Mines.

MS JONES: Oh, Labrador Iron Mines.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, because there is no secondary processing that goes on with that ore, because it is so pure.

MS JONES: Yes.

MS DUNDERDALE: So the benefits are around getting the ore out. In terms of transporting that through our lands, they have to hire our people to do it. It is the same as Consolidated, and I think the amount of employment is –

MR. WARDLE: Well, I think on Consolidated it comes to 100 per cent of railway employment.

MS DUNDERDALE: One hundred percent of the railway employment with Consolidated, Thompson has to be people of this Province, and 75 per cent on the other one has to be people of the Province - and only 75 per cent because we had to leave them enough room to honour their Aboriginal IBAs.

MS JONES: Okay. I guess all of that information is public through their environmental assessments?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, it is.

MS JONES: Okay.

New Millennium is still going through EIS is it? So there is nothing happening there yet.

MS DUNDERDALE: I am not sure. Are they in EIS yet?

MR. WARDLE: Yes, it is still in the (inaudible) process.

MS JONES: Yes, okay.

Just another question here because it is somewhat connected to the mines bordering Quebec and Labrador, but also it has to do with the Lower Churchill and the Innu involvement, and that is the panel or the discussion or the group that the federal government has set up through Chuck Strahl's office. I think it involves the Quebec and the Labrador Innu and its purpose is to try and resolve any conflicts or issues that arise with regard to overlapping claims in those areas. Is the Province a part of that process?

MS DUNDERDALE: No. We have negotiated our Land Claims Agreement with the Innu. Those were the two parties, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Innu Nation. The Innu Nation's next piece now is to negotiate with the federal government their fuller land claims piece, which will include the New Dawn Agreement. The federal government in their process has a function of negotiating overlaps. So the overlap in their area will be between the Quebec Innu and the Labrador Innu. That is a function for the federal government.

MS JONES: Yes, but I understood from the Innu – maybe I am wrong – that this particular committee was set up as a result of - of course, the Quebec Innu making claims on the Lower Churchill and also because of impeding, I think in particular, the Labrador Iron Mines development or whatever in terms of benefits and all of that.

MS DUNDERDALE: No. The process has to do with the negotiation of a lands claim. So the government has a piece that it needs to do with the Aboriginal groups (inaudible).

MS JONES: No, I understand that. I thought this was a different committee.

MS DUNDERDALE: No. Well, it does not have anything to do with us. We have concluded our negotiations with the Innu on land claims. They now have to negotiate with the federal government on the larger piece, which will include ours. The federal government, in the negotiation of that land claim with the Labrador Innu, has a mechanism to deal with complaints where there is an overlapping claim. That is the process that you are referring to.

MS JONES: Yes, I am well aware of all that but I just want to know: Was the Province invited to participate in this process?

MS DUNDERDALE: There is no role for the Province.

MS JONES: Because I understood the Province was invited and the Quebec provincial government was invited, along with the two Aboriginal groups.

MS DUNDERDALE: No, there is no place in that process for governments. That is a process between the federal government and the Innu.

MS JONES: You were not invited to participate?

MS DUNDERDALE: We did not expect an invitation to participate. This process is not special. It is part of the normal land claim negotiation that happens with the federal government when they are negotiating Aboriginal land claims. There will be overlapping claims from time to time.

MS JONES: That is all my questions on the mining section.

CHAIR: Okay.

Ms Michael do you have any –

MS MICHAEL: No, more on mining.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Okay.

I guess we can move into the Energy Resources sector now.

MS DUNDERDALE: Sure.

MS JONES: Did you want to go ahead, Lorraine?

MS MICHAEL: No, you can start.

MS JONES: Okay.

MS MICHAEL: I do have questions but you go ahead and start.

MS JONES: Okay.

Under section 5.1.01., Professional Services, last year you budgeted $373,500, you spent over $8 million. Can you tell me what that was spent on?

MS DUNDERDALE: That was spent on environmental assessments, legal work and advice associated with the NAFTA challenge. That is the $8 million you have been asking some questions about and have a freedom of information request in on.

MS JONES: Okay.

The Purchased Services under that section as well, can you tell me what that was for?

MS DUNDERDALE: The variance from $321,000 down to $220,000?

The variance was due to lower than anticipated purchased service expenditures, such as rental and lease of office equipment, like photocopiers, rental of meeting room facilities, printing services, advertising, on-site recycling and shredding services.

MS JONES: Okay.

Again, in the Salaries section – I just skipped over it in there - but 01. of course, was down by $300,000. Were there some vacancies there somewhere?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, and slower than anticipated recruitment.

MS JONES: What positions –

MS DUNDERDALE: And we have ongoing restructuring in the Electricity Division. So we are including the establishment of a climate change office and the hiring of a director of energy efficiency.

MS JONES: Okay.

Then to move on to section 5.1.02.; again, the Professional Services under this section, can you tell me what was done with that estimate? What that used for?

MS DUNDERDALE: Professional Services, again, that is Abitibi.

MS JONES: Under 5.1.02. Petroleum Development?

MS DUNDERDALE: Oh, sorry. Pierre, can you speak to that, please?

MR. TOBIN: Specialized engineering advice in the sector.

MS JONES: Specialized engineering advice?

MR. TOBIN: Advice, that would be correct, and geoscience advice.

MS JONES: Under the oil and gas section you put some money into the West Coast oil development. Where is that in the Estimates?

MS DUNDERDALE: That is within Nalcor.

MS JONES: It is done through Nalcor, okay. Did they complete that exploratory drilling work or anything at this stage?

MS DUNDERDALE: It is ongoing as we speak.

MS JONES: That is in Parson's Pond, I am referring to.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS JONES: Okay. So we do not know what the results are at this stage, I guess?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, and there are two objectives there. If we hit oil, which will be marvellous, but the geoscience is just as valuable to us at this point, that they will find as they bore.

MS JONES: Okay.

Last week when you announced the consultant to do the review of the offshore oil spill, what resources are going to be provided to do that, besides the independent individual that you appointed?

MS DUNDERDALE: We are working through those issues now as we develop the work plan. The work plan should be completed, hopefully, by the end of this week. Once we get through that - because what it is we are reviewing is the prevention of oil spills, oil spill response and liability associated with it and all of the policies and legislation that refer to all of that. So, when we get the work plan done, then that will show to us, very clearly, what kind of resources that he is going to require to get this work done within ninety days. All of that will be provided to him.

MS JONES: Is he also going to be examining what our liabilities are as an equity holder?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes. It is liabilities, so the liabilities will be inclusive of our own responsibilities.

MS JONES: Okay.

I guess the ninety days will be after those things are settled and ironed out?

MS DUNDERDALE: I would imagine.

MS JONES: Okay.

So, you do not know how much money you are going to need to commit to that at this stage?

MS DUNDERDALE: Not at this point in time. The Premier promised a comprehensive review, so that is what we are going to provide. We will have a better sense of that as we get through this work plan piece.

MS JONES: Yes.

MS DUNDERDALE: It is not like we have to reinvent the wheel here. This information is out there. What he is doing is reviewing what exists. We do not expect the cost to be exorbitant.

MS JONES: As well, under that section, under the salary component, there was savings again last year. Were there some vacancies there or people retiring, what was the situation?

MS DUNDERDALE: On what heading?

MS JONES: Heading 5.1.02.

MS DUNDERDALE: Okay.

Again, it is recruitment issues. We have the same issue in the energy branch as we do in mining. These are highly specialized jobs and skills that are required. The industry is looking for them as well and you can make a whole lot more money outside of government than you can within, so it is a constant challenge trying to hold onto people.

MS JONES: Can you tell me what is happening with the natural gas development off Labrador? Was there anything done there this year?

MS DUNDERDALE: No (inaudible). There is no drilling program that I am aware of. There is seismic work that has been committed to this year, and I know that companies are working to contract people to come in and do that piece of work off Labrador.

MR. THOMPSON: Robert Thompson.

Just to expand a little bit on that, there is a work commitment off Labrador that companies have made to the offshore board. They have started the community consultations in Labrador and started all their planning work for the seismic and other kinds of evaluation that they will do, but that is about the limit of it right now.

Pierre, do you have anything to add to that?

MR. TOBIN: No, that covers it, Rob.

MS JONES: What companies are those that have those options? Those parcels -

MR. THOMPSON: It is led by Chevron, isn't it?

MR. TOBIN: Pierre Tobin.

Chevron would be the most recent successful bidder in Labrador, yes. There are others.

MS DUNDERDALE: There are a number of (inaudible) in offshore Labrador and some of them are numbered companies and some are smaller companies, some recognizable and some not, but Chevron certainly would be the biggest player that is there to date.

MS JONES: Okay.

In the 2007-2008 Auditor General's report he raised an issue with regard to the royalty collection on the audits from the three oil projects at that time: Hibernia, White Rose and Terra Nova - I think. Where is that to now?

MS DUNDERDALE: Well, we have a work plan in place. You have a number of years to complete a royalty. Certainly, when I came to the department, four years ago in July, none of those audits were up-to-date, although work had been done on a number of them. We developed a work plan two years ago and we continue to implement that plan. We have not lost a dollar yet because an audit has not been completed, nor do we intend to.

MS JONES: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: It is a massive piece of work to have undertaken.

MS JONES: Moving on the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board, I guess lately there have been a lot of calls out there, I do not know about a lot but there certainly have been opinions expressed that the dual role of the board is not sufficient in terms of the environmental protection and safety aspect of it. Is this something that government has reviewed in terms of the operations of the C-NLOPB and whether it is serving our purpose at this stage or if there is more that could be done?

MS DUNDERDALE: Well, first of all we have spent a great deal of time trying to understand the argument that has been put forward about the dual nature of the board. In terms of some of the activities that have been attributed to the board, it has been argued that these activities are what give the board the conflict of interest.

The arguments that have been put forward to date are not correct. First of all, in terms of the board, they do not set or collect royalties. They do not negotiate industrial benefits when we have a project. When we developed Hibernia South, White Rose extension, Hebron and so on, the government does that negotiation. We negotiate the royalties, we negotiate the industrial benefits and it is the Department of Natural Resources who monitors all of those things. The royalties come directly to the government. It does not have anything at all to do with the board.

In terms of promotion of the offshore, the board does not do that either. That is an activity that is undertaken by my department. It is what we do in publications, it is what we do in advertising, it is what we do at oil and gas shows all around the world; we promote the offshore.

While the board is responsible for land sales, there is a difference between our land sales and the way they are conducted than the way they are conducted elsewhere. In Newfoundland and Labrador there is a sole criterion for land sale, and that is: How much money are you going to spend?

When we put a piece of land up for sale here in the Province, it goes to the highest bidder. Again, there is no negotiation required, there is no interaction with oil companies, and there are no other benefits that get negotiated around that piece. It does not require the board to be engaged at any kind of a deep level with companies.

When we have seen boards split elsewhere in the world, what they have done and what they are currently doing in the United States is structuring their boards exactly as our board is structured. They are carving out the economic and the fiscal pieces from the regulatory and legislative responsibilities of the board.

That is exactly what President Obama announced this week. He is taking responsibility for royalties away. He is taking responsibility for any kind of negotiation of economic benefits and so on. All of that is now falling away and going into a separate agency.

In terms of that piece, trying to get that established in the public debate has been a task that we have had to undertake in the last weeks, because it is important if you are going to have a debate that we are all working from the same understanding of the role of the board.

So, the role of the board is for safety, for regulation of the offshore and so on; that is the responsibility that they charged with. In terms of the review now, we are going to have a look at oil spill prevention, response and liability. We are certainly going to have all of that reviewed.

There has also been a call in the Province, especially around the Wells inquiry, for discussion around the board's role with Occupational Health and Safety. We will see in terms of what the recommendations are coming out of the Wells inquiry with regard to those pieces. We are more than prepared to engage in the discussion. We are certainly interested in what the Wells inquiry will say, and we are interested in what labour has to say around these issues. I have had some preliminary discussion. It is important to understand what their point of view is and why they feel that way. We need to have a look at it and see what we can do with regard to it.

The other piece that we also have to remember is that this is a shared jurisdiction, so the Province does not have the authority. I have to work with the federal minister on every decision that is made with regard to the board. We are open to hearing what it is that people have to say, but any changes have to based in fact and they have to have good, strong arguments for change. You do not likely go in and open up Accord Acts, you have to do it with very good reason and there are all kinds of risks associated with that.

MS JONES: The C-NLOPB also put in guidelines for petroleum companies in the Province in terms of the Research and Development Fund. It was contested in the Supreme Court and they were denied an appeal. That money that the companies are spending now in R&D, who monitors that, and does government have a process by which you ensure that they spend the money and what they spend it on and so on?

MS DUNDERDALE: The C-NLOPB would certainly be engaged in terms of what the companies are doing around R&D. They have a responsibility in terms of monitoring that piece, but the government is also very engaged in that piece, in terms of how do we direct that money. The companies have a lot of ability to control where that money goes, so it is extremely important for us that the money be directed here in building capacity, not only for the companies in the offshore to do their work better and to have innovative technologies and safeguards available to them in doing this work, but that we are also building a legacy in this Province that there are benefits.

So, there is a strong engagement from the government in terms of these pieces, but the C-NLOPB also has a role in ensuring that those monies are spent on R&D.

MS JONES: Okay.

Under heading 5.1.04., the Royalties and Benefits, the government budgeted over $2 million last year for Grants and Subsidies, this year it is down to a little over $1 million. What is the grant and subsidy money used for here, and why is it reduced this year?

MS DUNDERDALE: Bull Arm transferred to Nalcor.

MS JONES: The transfer of Bull Arm?

MS DUNDERDALE: Of the Bull Arm facility to Nalcor.

MS JONES: Okay.

So, they get the expense of it now, we do not, under this budget? The other $1 million there, what would that be used for in Grants and Subsidies?

MS DUNDERDALE: Can you speak to that, please?

MR. TOBIN: Pierre Tobin.

There is $1 million left there for Bull Arm to take through the transition period. Nalcor would pick up the balance through revenues associated with the site, but there is $1 million there in case there is a requirement for that for the upcoming year.

MS JONES: Okay. So, all of that grant and subsidy in 10. was relative to Bull Arm?

MR. TOBIN: For all intents and purposes. There is also a small grant that was there for PRAC, Petroleum Research Atlantic Canada, which is no longer required as well.

MS JONES: Okay.

When you announced that Nalcor was going to take over Bull Arm you guys announced also - or at least back in June, I think, last year you announced a refit program, a major refit for Bull Arm. Was that work ever completed, or what is the status of it?

MS DUNDERDALE: Ongoing pieces of work are happening within Bull Arm. Some of the money we made available – we need to go in and ensure that that yard is ready for Hebron. There has been significant work going on in that yard over the last two years. About 500 people were employed during the last year on a refit out there. So, we are reinvesting that money back into the plant.

It just came to my attention this week, that there are some remediation pieces that need to be addressed out there in terms of the building on the highway. There is some mould found there that needs to be dealt with and there are some other issues that need to be dealt with, but the site has been generating revenue because of the work that is ongoing.

MS JONES: The money that would be in the budget here would be the operating costs, I am assuming, of the site, right? What was the cost of the refit, the dollar amount rounded?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, it is a grant given to Nalcor for the operation of the site. So they could use it in a variety of ways. The site also generates its own funds from having work ongoing at the site. The site is leased now and has been leased and has had hundreds of people out there working for months and months and months on the refit of a rig.

MS JONES: Yes. How much money is government or Nalcor putting into the refit? What is the cost of that?

MR. TOBIN: Pierre Tobin. It is an ongoing piece. It was much smaller than what we initially thought a couple of years ago. As the minister indicated, the revenue that is being generated through lease of the site is covering off a substantial portion of the cost in any event. There has not been any significant capital investments required out there of late. It is largely taking down some old buildings, those sorts of things. The figure is not as large as was contemplated a couple of years ago.

MS JONES: Can you tell me or provide to me what the total cost of the refit was and what portion of that was paid by the Province and by Nalcor?

MS DUNDERDALE: (Inaudible) what we can do is give you the repairs and maintenance since Nalcor took over the site and how much money that – well, it is quite clear how much money we were putting into it.

MS JONES: You announced a refit program. You must know how much it was going to cost and how much you had to put in.

MS DUNDERDALE: No, we did not announce a refit program per se. What we announced was that Nalcor would get the site ready. I do not –

MS JONES: Someone must know how much it cost.

MS DUNDERDALE: We will get you whatever – but we did not announce a major refit program. What we did announce was that we would get the site ready for Hebron development and that Nalcor would take on that responsibility. We certainly did not announce any particular program to do that, not that I recall.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible) enough money for ongoing maintenance and repairs, not a major capital program.

MS DUNDERDALE: (Inaudible) reflected in any of our budgets that we made, because that is out of the monies that we have made available for Bull Arm in the budget. There is not any other allocation that we have made to Nalcor anywhere else for the refurbishment of Bull Arm. It is all under that heading.

MS JONES: Yes. I will just wait until I get the information.

MS DUNDERDALE: Sure.

MS JONES: I have no other questions on the oil and gas portion, so I will turn it over to Lorraine.

CHAIR: Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

Just a couple of line questions first, nothing big. In 5.1.03., the C-NLOPB, the Grants and Subsidies, I am just curious as to why the amount of money they get is not a fixed sum. There is a variance between last year's budget and the revision of $520,000, and then this year the budget is going down by $205,000. Is that the same for the federal government as well, that it varies from year to year?

MS DUNDERDALE: Well, no, the variance this year is due to the Wells Inquiry.

MS JONES: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: And the $1.6 million that is required to do the inquiry. The additional requirement was partially offset by savings due to delays in the data management project, $175,000, and savings due to the delays in the construction of the cold storage and research centre expansion, $900,000.

Delays in the data management project are a result of significant manual efforts required to effectively load and quality check the technical data in order to populate the system, and delays in the cold storage and research centre expansion are as a result of adverse weather, timing and delivery of raw materials, such as structural steel and unforeseen circumstances encountered with bedrock at the site. So the savings from those two things, and the variance, is what makes up the $1.6 million for the helicopter inquiry.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. So, per se, that money is not going to the C-NLOPB, the inquiry money.

MS DUNDERDALE: No, it is –

MS MICHAEL: It is, and they are paying it.

MS DUNDERDALE: – because the C-NLOPB has called the inquiry.

MS MICHAEL: Oh, right, that is true, right.

Does the federal government, are they putting money into that inquiry as well?

OFFICIAL: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, they are. Would it be an equal amount?

MS DUNDERDALE: It is 50-50. Everything we do with the board is 50-50.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: And a portion is also paid by the industry.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

With regard to capital expenditures, in particular, capital costs, is there a fixed amount for that or can C-NLOPB apply to the governments for extra money as needed, just like you are now covering the Wells Inquiry?

MS DUNDERDALE: Their core management extension and so on, they apply and that goes through. The whole budgetary process comes here in our Estimates and so on.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Thank you.

Under 5.1.05. Energy Initiatives; I think I know the answer but I will ask just to have it on the record. Under Grants and Subsidies, line 10., there is a $6 million increase. Is that mainly the heating allowance increase, the $6 million increase in this year's Budget Estimates over last year's Budget?

MS DUNDERDALE: Which one is it again?

MS MICHAEL: Line 10. of 5.1.05.

MS DUNDERDALE: Line 10. Grants and Subsidies.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, the Grants and Subsidies. There is a $6 million increase this year over last year's Budget.

MS DUNDERDALE: Okay. Estimates variance due to – no, Robert -

MR. THOMPSON: Sorry. Is this the increase from $4 million to $13 million?

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MR. THOMPSON: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: Okay. It is an internal reallocation of $470,000 within the activity from Purchased Services to Grants and Subsidies and an additional $1.55 million for the EnerGuide for houses program, and $4.075 million for the energy plan initiatives as per the fiscal forecast and planned expenditures outlined in the Provincial Energy Plan.

MS MICHAEL: Right, okay. Thank you.

So, it is a number of things there in that.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Thanks a lot.

Then 5.1.06., Energy Initiatives; you just have the one line, of course, Loans, Advances and Investments. There is quite a drop. There was quite a drop, first of all, between the budget and the revision last year.

MS DUNDERDALE: That is due to Hibernia South and the Lower Churchill development. We did a great negotiation on Hibernia South and spent much less money than we had anticipated for our equity pieces, and the other pieces, we did not spend as much money in terms of the Lower Churchill as we expected that we would.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Then between last year's Budget of $228 million, and this year's estimate of $164 million, we have a $64 million difference. Could you just give an explanation of why you have brought it down that much?

MS DUNDERDALE: Basically, all to do with the Lower Churchill. Requirements change from year to year, depending on what gated activity we are engaged in.

MS MICHAEL: Under that line item, then I am assuming that that expenditure would be an investment expenditure. It is not loans and advances, it would be the investment.

MS DUNDERDALE: That is right.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, just getting that clear, because there is a big difference between a loan and an investment, although they can be related.

I am just curious about the C-NLOPB, in the past the refusal of the board to have the Auditor General audit their books. Where are we with that situation?

MS DUNDERDALE: We have said quite clearly that we do not have an issue with it, with the Auditor General auditing their books.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Do know if it has started, or do you know if they have taken their position yet?

MR. THOMPSON: Yes, the audit started. It was being conducted throughout the course of last year, because from time to time we would just hear about it, but I do not believe I have seen any report yet.

Pierre, is their any update on that?

MR. TOBIN: No, that is right, the board was providing with the information that they required to conduct the audit. They were back and forth on some confidentiality issues, which the board has tried to resolve with the Auditor General, but they have been more than open to having the AG's office in to complete that audit.

MS MICHAEL: That is good, I am glad to hear that.

With regard to the Abitibi power plants that were expropriated, could we just have an update with regard to that power, what is going on with that power? I know it was being used to offset Holyrood. Is there storing going on, because there are issues with the reservoirs and the storing of the water? Could we just have an update on that whole situation?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, and I have to correct you, it was not used to offset Holyrood at all.

MS MICHAEL: Not at all?

MS DUNDERDALE: Not at all.

MS MICHAEL: We were given information that there was an offsetting going on.

MS DUNDERDALE: No, it is not. What in fact it has – the industrial demand in the Province over the last year has been very low. We have had two mills go out of operation. For some reason consumer consumption has been down. Because there is not a reservoir system connected with the Exploits River that energy has to come into the system right away and be used, otherwise it is lost. So, what that has caused us to do is store water in the reservoir in Bay d'Espoir. In fact, because demand has been so low it has caused us to spill water, which is never a situation that you want to find yourself in. It is like putting money in a barrel and setting it afire. So, we have had to spill water in Bay d'Espoir because we took on those generating facilities and have that extra power.

We are not able to bring power past Sunnyside into the Avalon Peninsula. We do not have the infrastructure, the transmission capacity to bring power past that point. So any idea that power that is generated outside the Avalon Peninsula is being used in this area is not based on fact. We do not have the capacity to do it. On top of that, we are required to run Seal Cove at a minimum level. Year round that has to be done so that if there is a call for greater power we do not have to wait two or three days to get the plant up to the proper generating facilities. The PUB requires us to run that at a minimum level. I have not checked in the last couple of months but certainly up to the time that we took those generating facilities, expropriated those generating facilities up to the last couple of months, Holyrood had been running at that minimum level.

In terms of power coming out of the Exploits, it has not generated a copper for us at this point in time. However, it is important for us to have control of that asset. It is a required expenditure of money because those facilities needed work when we went in there and it was important to do that. We will use that power for economic generation here in the Province. We are glad to have them, but advertising and articles and so on which claim that the government is making tens of millions of dollars off the generating facilities that we expropriated from Abitibi is not correct.

MS MICHAEL: Is any kind of a plan, actual plan, being put in place or are you just waiting?

MS DUNDERDALE: Well, I wish I had a plan that would guarantee that you would have industrial customers coming into the Province to use up this power.

In terms of the promotion of the Province, the EOI processes that we have undergoing for the use of the fibre in the area to try and bring in industrial development and so on, all of those processes go - the pressure is always there, not only in terms of the Department of Natural Resources but the Department of Business, INTRD, an example, to draw investment into the Province. That is an attractive piece of it; the fact that even before we had Abitibi that you would have access to cheap industrial power here in the Province. That has always been so.

In terms of Seal Cove and Holyrood, until we make the final decision with regard to the Lower Churchill and see where we are going there, that will determine the infrastructure upgrades that we will do on the Avalon Peninsula to bring power from beyond Sunnyside into this part of the Province.

MS MICHAEL: You are saying that this could be years down the road.

MS DUNDERDALE: No, that is not what I am saying at all. If an industrial customer decided to come into Central Newfoundland tomorrow and -

MS MICHAEL: No, I mean with regard to the Avalon Peninsula, if you are -

MS DUNDERDALE: No, we have set out parameters in terms of which we will make a decision as to whether or not we will proceed with the Lower Churchill and that decision is within a foreseeable length of time. Because once we shelve this project now and if we shelve this project - if we ever get to a place where we shelve the project - it is my view that it will be some time before it comes on the table again.

We have made commitments to the people, particularly in the region of Holyrood, that we will deal with the whole emissions piece. We have taken a number of initiatives to reduce the effect of the plant on the land and people in that area of the Province and we have made a commitment to deal with that finally, one way or the other, within the next two to three years, and planning is ongoing for that piece. Not only are we planning for the Lower Churchill but we are also planning in terms of Holyrood, what happens and what can we do and what engineering and so on is required to be immediately able to move on what is required in Seal Cove to reduce emissions should the Lower Churchill not go in terms of scrubbers, replacement and so on. So the two pieces of work are ongoing simultaneously.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Are there any further questions from the Committee?

Ms Jones.

MS JONES: Yes, I have some questions on the Energy sector. On the Exploits - just to pick up where Lorraine was leaving off. What is the problem with accessing the Avalon? Is it because there are no capacities on the line or is it because there is no interconnection?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, the infrastructure is not there. The infrastructure cannot carry the power. It needs very expensive upgrades to be able to bring power.

MS JONES: It is the line capacity, is it?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, it is not there.

MS JONES: Okay. At this stage, if you were even talking about bringing Lower Churchill power, you still do not have the capacity?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, we build the capacity. That is all included in the planning for the development of the Lower Churchill when we do the Labrador-Island link.

MS JONES: Yes.

What is the amount of power that can be generated on the Exploits River power project?

MS DUNDERDALE: Charles, do you know how many megawatts we have? Fifty to sixty, from my recall –

MS JONES: Megawatts.

MR. BOWN: It would be fifty-four at the mill and I think there is an additional thirty that is available at the other sites.

MS JONES: So you are looking at about eighty-four or eight-five?

MR. BOWN: Yes.

MS DUNDERDALE: Eighty, eighty-five megawatts of power.

MS JONES: Is any of that being utilized now?

MS DUNDERDALE: Well, all of that power comes directly into the grid because there is no reservoir. You cannot store electricity. All you can do is store water, which is potential electricity. Because there are no reservoirs on the Exploits system, once that power is generated it has to come directly into the grid. It is much the same as wind. When you generate the electricity from wind, there is no reservoir; it has to come directly into the grid. What is happening, because we have this extra power that is available to us now, some of it we were already using because we have power purchase agreements with Abitibi to buy their excess power back -

MS JONES: Yes.

MS DUNDERDALE: - but there is a substantial amount of power. All the power they use for the operation of the mill is now coming directly into the grid. Because it is, and we do not have a call for that power, we have had two big pulp and paper mills shut down in Stephenville and Grand Falls-Windsor. So, the industrial call on power is substantially less here in the Province. What that means is we have to store power in Bay d'Espoir where we originally took a substantial amount of that power from. That water now in Bay d'Espoir is being pushed back into the reservoir but the reservoir in Bay d'Espoir has a finite capacity. What is happening because of the extra power coming in, we have to spill water, let water out of the reservoir. So, we are losing money in one way.

MS JONES: Where does Long Harbour fit into this now, are you able to transmit power to Long Harbour?

MS DUNDERDALE: No. The planning for - Newfoundland Hydro in terms of its planning for the industrial development in Long Harbour had a plan to provide that power from existing supplies with the Grand Falls mill operational to provide, and so that plan is being followed through. It is, again, one of these urban myths that have come out of Central that Abitibi - the power generated from the expropriated hydro assets was going to be used. It was even suggested that there was a plan to make that happen. That is not so, that is not true. We cannot bring the power in past Seal Cove, or Sunnyside.

MS JONES: On Long Harbour - I am trying to recall and I am sure someone there knows - wasn't there two or three different power developments that they were going to use to supply Long Harbour? Can someone tell me what it was now?

MR. BOWN: No, they were threatening to take that from existing sources. You may have been referring to the previous iterations of the project when there were plans for a smelter there. They were looking at significant amounts of electricity that they would have to put dedicated generation in.

MS JONES: Yes. Okay, as the site is right now, all of the capacity for power will come from where?

MR. BOWN: That will come from existing sources on the grid.

MS DUNDERDALE: Vale Inco would not come in and spend well over $2 billion on the development of a project in Long Harbour on the off chance that Abitibi might go down and they might have access to power. Newfoundland Hydro had to be able to clearly demonstrate to the company that it had the power supply that it required to operate that plant, which they did and which they drew from existing generation that they have in a number of places around the Province. It came from existing supply, with Abitibi fully functioning. Nobody had a crystal ball to know that Abitibi was going down. Now, the exact configuration of where they draw so many megawatts from, I do not have that level of detail but it is certainly not dependent on Exploits.

MS JONES: How much power do you need in Long Harbour? How much power do they require?

MR. BOWN: It is approximately sixty to seventy megawatts.

MS JONES: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: Also remember that we have brought on fifty megawatts of wind power as well, in the last two years, in Ferryland and in St. Lawrence. The primary purpose of that piece is so that we can better understand the integration of wind into the grid now. It was not because we were power hungry. We have quite a bit of power available to us here in the Province, and we would be delighted to see an industrial customer come in to the Central part of the Province looking for some of that power.

MS JONES: On the Lower Churchill piece, because it seems kind of ironic that you have water spilling in Bay d'Espoir right now and you have no demand for power, that you are still out proposing to build a transmission line to the Island to generate more power, which you have surplus today and no use for. I guess I am trying to get a handle on where government is projecting the demand for more power to come from in the next four to five years, because if you did not have an idea, why would you be spending money today on doing environmental assessments and proposing to build transmission lines?

MS DUNDERDALE: We will build transmission lines from Labrador to the Island, and then to the mainland. We would need about – I mean the plan has always been, in terms of hydro generation out of the Lower Churchill, that we would take about 700 megawatts here for the Island. The rest of the energy would be for export.

MS JONES: Yes.

MS DUNDERDALE: That is the whole piece, it is the Maritime route – or the Atlantic route, I suppose is a more accurate description of it. It would be to take power from the development of the Lower Churchill, bring it down to the Island, down the West Coast, take a line off to completely do away with Holyrood, which generates around 490 megawatts of power, which is pretty substantial. To do away with that completely, and then do our submarine route into the Maritimes, and either right up into the mainland or left, down into the New England states. There are possibilities, that given potential customers, we might not even have to come out of the Maritimes.

MS JONES: You said there is a minimum requirement by the PUB for the operations at Holyrood, and I was aware of that. What is the minimum requirement?

MR. BOWN: I do not have the correct percentage right on the top of my mind, but it is based on the cost of fuel and the cost of service calculation for electricity rates that requires the boilers to be run - when a boiler is up and running, that it be run at a certain capacity factor to ensure that it is running at its most efficient operating level.

MS JONES: The 490 megawatts you just referenced at Holyrood that is the capacity there is it? That is not what you are producing today is it?

MR. BOWN: No, it is actually 640.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes. The capacity is higher than the generation that normally takes place there. The capacity is over 600 megawatts, the 490 is generally what we generate out of that. Yes, 640 is the capacity.

MR. BOWN: Okay, I was wrong; 490 is it.

MS DUNDERDALE: Oh, 490 is it. Is that the maximum it can generate? Okay, so 490 – I am sorry, that is our total generating capacity.

MS JONES: Charles, do you know how much of the 490 is being used at Holyrood now? How much they are generating?

MR. BOWN: I am not sure how many units are up and running right now. The way that a normal configuration goes is that during the summer the units are down. Generally in the fall you will pick up one. You will probably pick up the next two during the peak and then they drop off again. So I could not actually tell you today how many units are running.

MS JONES: Okay.

How much money is being spent this year on the environmental and preparatory work for the Lower Churchill project?

MS DUNDERDALE: I do not have the budget here; we can provide that to you.

MS JONES: Okay. Can you also provide to me a list of the contractors that are doing the work across Labrador on that project?

MS DUNDERDALE: Sure.

MS JONES: I just have one more question on the Estimates. That is, back in 2008 the federal government announced that they were going to put an energy office in Newfoundland and Labrador. Did that ever materialize? How is it staffed, or is there any joint relationship with the Province on the operations of it or anything?

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes they have, and yes there is.

MR. THOMPSON: Robert Thompson.

Yes, they have established the office with a headquarters in St. John's. It has perhaps less than ten staff in total. They are jointly appointed from ACOA and NRCan.

I believe they may have one staff person in each of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. It is also the main liaison that we have for the proposed Atlantic Energy Gateway studies that were announced last year by the federal government.

MS JONES: Okay.

Those are all the questions I have.

CHAIR: Ms Michael, do you have any further questions for the Committee?

MS MICHAEL: No that is fine, thank you.

CHAIR: Before we move into the Estimates for Status of Women and Women's Policy Office, I will ask the Clerk to call the subheads for the Department of Natural Resources.

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: 1.1.01, shall that carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, subhead 1.1.01 carried.

CLERK: Subheads 1.2.01 to 5.1.06 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall 1.2.01 to 5.1.06 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, subheads 1.2.01 through 5.1.06 carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, Department of Natural Resources, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of the Department of Natural Resources carried without amendment?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, Estimates of the Department of Natural Resources carried without amendment.

CHAIR: Now your Department of Natural Resources staff will probably leave. Before they do, I just want to thank them for their attendance and participation. We move in now to the Women's Policy Office Estimates and the Status of Women.

If we are ready, maybe the minister, if she wanted to make a few brief opening remarks and introduce her staff.

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you.

Mr. Chair, to my left is my Assistant Deputy Minister, Heather MacLellan. Heather, if you could be so kind as to introduce the rest of our personnel.

MS MACLELLAN: Linda Vaughan is joining us today, the Director of Finance for the Women's Policy Office and Executive Council.

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Chair, for being here to discuss the budget Estimates for the Women's Policy Office.

Total budget assigned to this office is approximately $4.7 million. More than half of this funding goes to many of the Province's women's organizations to assist with enhanced delivery and improved access to community services, as well as to increase awareness of key issues facing women in this Province. We believe these investments have raised the profile of important issues that specifically impact women.

We do this work with the support and assistance of community partners and women's groups and organizations throughout the Province who are also dedicated to advancing the social and economic status of women. To continue being effective in identifying and meeting the needs of women in this Province, we must continue strengthening the services available to women provided by these community groups and organizations.

In Budget 2010, we are delivering on our Blue Book commitment of an annual 5 per cent funding increase for the eight Status of Women councils across the Province. This will result in a grant of just over $115,700 provided to each of the councils. This increase enables the women's centres to address daily operating needs and concerns of women within their communities, as well as provide support to women. The Provincial Transition House Association is receiving an additional $30,000 to bring their annual grant up to $105,000.

I am proud to say that this year, for the first time, the Newfoundland Aboriginal Women's Network will be getting $100,000 operating grant to support their ongoing work to advance the economic and social well-being of women in the communities that they represent. We are investing $350,000 this year for the operation of a shelter in Rigolet and expanding the capacity of the Nain shelter.

The Multicultural Women's Organization of Newfoundland and Labrador and the provincial sexual assault and crisis centre will also each receive their annual grants of $100,000. The ten regional violence prevention co-ordinating committees will be receiving $70,000 each. We will also invest $125,000 in Inuit communities in Labrador to increase the capacity of Inuit women to advance their issues.

Since 2003, we have increased the budget of the Provincial Advisory Council by 72 per cent, for a total contribution this year of $451,000. This is an important council in advising me, as minister, and the government, on ways policies and programs need to be changed or improved to advance the status of women here. We are also continuing to fund an annual meeting with women's councils, an Aboriginal women's conference, and a provincial violence prevention stakeholder's conference.

Last year we launched a very successful violence prevention campaign called respectwomen.ca. The campaign aired on television for twenty-three weeks. An evaluation completed after just ten weeks demonstrated that the campaign reached over half of the adult population over age eighteen. As well, 56,000 people became more aware that society is responsible for eliminating male violence toward women, and 48,000 more residents became aware of the relationships where violence against women happens and the types of violence against women.

There has also been an increase in the percentage of people who now believe that men are responsible for combating and eliminating male violence against women, not just women.

Added to this, more than 10,000 more individuals no longer believe that the victim is responsible for combating and eliminating male violence against women. These are significant results for a ten-week campaign.

This year we will continue to build on our success with this campaign. We are starting to make violence against women a societal responsibility much like drinking and driving has become more unacceptable to society as a whole.

I am pleased with the work of the Women's Policy Office, the Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women, our Violence Prevention Initiative, the women's councils, the ten regional violence prevention co-ordinating committees, the Aboriginal women's organizations, as well as our other provincial partners, in their work to advance the status of women and prevent violence in the Province. We look forward to our work continuing in 2010.

Mr. Chair, I am more than happy to take any questions next.

CHAIR: Thank you very much, Minister.

We will begin.

Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, and welcome to your staff. It is nice to see Heather again, and welcome to Ms Vaughan, is it?

MS VAUGHAN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

Just the line items first. Of course, there is a small number of lines, so not too much to ask there.

Under Salaries, you were under spent last year. Could we just have an explanation of that?

MS MACLELLAN: Heather MacLellan.

We were under spent due to some delayed recruitment and vacant positions.

MS MICHAEL: What would the recruitment areas be? Did you have new positions become available?

MS MACLELLAN: Yes, we had some administrative support we were looking at filling. We are also currently undergoing an organizational review with Treasury Board, so where we had some vacancies we delayed until we had finished our organizational review.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

I note that about half of the salary budget goes to temporary positions. Are they mainly with the Violence Prevention Initiative?

MS MACLELLAN: Yes, they are. We have five temporary positions in the office and we have one position that is a project that we do with health and that is a four-year project. The other temporary positions are associated with the six-year Violence Prevention program.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Thank you very much.

Under line 03. Transportation and Communications, you were down significantly in that area this year. Could we just have an explanation?

MS MACLELLAN: That reflects the fact that we have a joint project with the Department of Health and Community Services on preparing training to address violence against older persons in the Province. We also have a steering committee in place.

Our development of our curriculum for that has taken us now to having a fifteen-chapter project. We actually have fifteen components developed so that has taken us a little longer, but it is result of what is felt is actually necessary. We are going to start the travel, the training on that in this fiscal year. We have mainly had a delay in that.

MS MICHAEL: Very good. How soon do you hope that will start?

MS MACLELLAN: We are anticipating it will start within the next eight weeks.

MS MICHAEL: Good. Thank you.

Under line 05., again an under expenditure of almost $93,000, could we have an explanation of that?

MS MACLELLAN: That reflects the fact that there were two Requests for Proposals that went out where we did not receive bidders. In one case we will do the work this year; in another case we found an alternate way to do the work.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

Still under that line, I notice that the budget for this year is up by almost $70,000 over last year's estimated budget. It was $326,900 last year and it is $391,800 this year. What are you anticipating more than what you have done in the past?

MS MACLELLAN: Under 10?

MS MICHAEL: Line 05.

MS MACLELLAN: The Estimates reflect the fact that there is $125,000 going to support the capacity building for Inuit women. Then there is a reduction of $60,000 as a result of a project that came to completion under the Poverty Reduction program.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

That is the answer for Professional Services?

MS MACLELLAN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: What about 06., the Purchased Services, because there was quite an over expenditure from the budget to the revision of $111,000, but in this year it is down by $100,000?

MS MACLELLAN: Well, this year it was up because we had some planned internal reallocation. What we did not spend in our transportation budget, we moved into that line object, and that was planned to help us expand our Respect Women Campaign. Then also this year we had carried forward $100,000 from the previous year to give us more capacity in our Violence Prevention program. So that was a one-time carry forward, so that is now gone out of the budget.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, so that is why you are down to the $280,000.

I think that is all of the questions I have with regard to the lines. I think the Grants and Subsidies explains itself, because the budget has put the different increases in and I am aware of that. I just have a few questions before I turn it over to my colleague.

I think the minister did mention some of the results with regard to the work on the Violence Prevention Initiative. Could you give us a more detailed report on the kind of research that is going on as part of the initiative? I am assuming research is an essential part of what is happening, not just tracking how the initiative is going, but actual research with regard to violence itself in the Province.

MS MACLELLAN: Well, this year our researcher – we have a research plan that outlines where our priorities are going to be. This year their efforts were working with the stats agency, doing the pre and post-evaluation of the Respect Women Campaign. Of course, that was very, very important because we are able to look at exactly, in terms of the adult population, what their attitudes are with respect to the Respect Women program.

Their other second major project was working with the stats agency in designing an attitudinal survey for all of Newfoundland, but it is going to be on the issues of violence in our society and it is going to be broken down by each of the ten regions of the Province. So, we are going to have a new baseline of understanding the attitudes across the Province on the issues of the various vulnerable populations that we have identified in that program of where each of the regions sit. We will be then able to track not just our own work but then the work of our ten regional co-ordinating committees, because this year alone these committees did over 1,500 awareness and educational programs in their communities. Some were based on children, some on adults and some on women. We are starting to see some of the results from that work. We have both the attitudinal survey and then we have the evaluations of this work that is actually happening.

MS MICHAEL: Do you have any sense of how long it would take before we could actually see and quantify a reduction in violence, in actual violence?

MS DUNDERDALE: No, the statistics still are alarming.

MS MICHAEL: They are, yes, that is why I am asking.

MS DUNDERDALE: The degree of violence against women, we see - over half the criminal offences that take place in this Province are assaults against women. We have a big piece of work that we need to do as a society. That was one of the fundamental pieces we tried to address in the Respect Women Campaign, to have society as a whole engaged rather than women trying to combat – and it has been largely women, as you well know, who have taken hold of this issue and are trying to deal with it and all of the fallout from it.

Part of the Respect Women Campaign is to – in a way that is effective – talk to men about this issue and underline how important it is for them to become engaged and to take responsibility. We worked with a broad range of stakeholders in the design of that campaign. We worked with women's groups; we worked with a broad section of society in terms of what needed to be in that campaign. Our post audit shows that the campaign is even more effective than we had hoped it would be. So now we have to continue to build on that piece, but violence is very much a reality for far too many women in this Province.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, definitely.

With regard to rural Newfoundland and Labrador, we do know that it is very difficult for women in terms of getting out of a violent situation because shelters are not in the majority of communities. Is there anything happening at all with regard to offering more assistance to women in the rural parts of the Province where they are trying to get out of the violent situations?

MS DUNDERDALE: We are trying to take a multifaceted approach to this whole issue. So a big piece of our Poverty Reduction Strategy is around the reduction of violence and building the capacity and the ability of women themselves to remove themselves from situations that are harmful.

MS MICHAEL: But they need a place to go to.

MS DUNDERDALE: You do need a place to go to, and we have our VPI committees in those areas. We have our transition houses; we have a number of them around the Province. We are trying to enhance the resources and tools that they have available to them. We are working with the Provincial Advisory Council in terms of creating awareness. We are working with the seniors' organizations within this Province to deal with violence against elders. There are regular enhancements that happened. Last year in our Budget we had a new transition house in Carbonear. This year we are trying to do something in Rigolet and Nain.

In terms of even the capacity building for Inuit women, which was something that we identified in our work in Labrador because of the restrictions on their ability to travel and therefore their ability to network, not only with government agencies but other women in the Province and so on, their knowledge of what is available to them or even how you access funding through different programs and so on is really impacted in a negative way by that marginalization that takes place because of the isolation, and part of what we are doing here is trying to break that down to give them the capacity to understand more about what is available to them, their ability to network and so on. So we are a long ways away from a place where you would have five transition houses, for example, or four transition houses on the Burin Peninsula. What we are trying to do is make sure that within a region we have a transition house that is reasonably accessible by women in that region, and we continue to build on that.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

MS DUNDERDALE: The other piece is, under the Poverty Reduction Strategy as well, there is work that is going on in HRLE to try to break the back of the economic situation that in a lot of circumstances keep women in these violent situations because they do not have the education, the training, the skills, the capacity to earn a decent living for themselves.

It is part of the work that you did in Women in Resource Development and so on to make sure that they have access to the economic engines that run this place and that they have access to good paying jobs so they do not need to rely on anybody else to support them or their children, that they can stand on their own two feet economically and do that. Until you break that back, in my view, until we get around that piece, we are going to have trouble dealing with the other.

MS MICHAEL: I think we need a child care program before that is really going to have that back broken. I do not know where the Women's Policy Office is with regard to promoting the whole notion of a child care program, but we need a full child care program because that is one of the biggest things that stops women from even going on and doing training and trying to get a better economic situation for themselves.

MS JONES: Mr. Chair, can I interrupt for a moment, because it is nearly 12:30 and I have been here since 9:00 o'clock, as you all have. I really need to get ready for the House of Assembly and I do not feel comfortable pushing through this in ten minutes so that it is done. I would ask the minister if she is prepared to set another time or if I can submit my questions and have them responded to within a significant period of time. I have at least ten questions right now that I have under this section.

MS DUNDERDALE: I am happy to come back and do it. We will just have the time for doing that.

MS JONES: Yes, and we can do it this week. Whenever you are available, any morning this week we will do it.

CHAIR: I have just been informed by the Clerk that we have to do it today. This is the last day.

CLERK: This is the last of the fifteen days in the Standing Order to do it.

MS JONES: Okay. Well, I guess I would have to ask the minister for some co-operation. If I was to submit my questions in writing, could I get a response within seven days or ten days or something?

MS DUNDERDALE: This compromise I will make with you: I am happy to come back today. If your questions are with regard to the Estimates themselves then I am more than prepared to do that.

MS JONES: Yes.

Bill, do we have to have it done by 1:30?

CLERK: No, midnight I suppose, but once you start the Estimates you have to do them within a fifteen-day period.

MS JONES: Okay. Well, maybe at 5:30 would be -

MS DUNDERDALE: I am happy to sit for 5:30.

MS MICHAEL: I am probably going to be at an emergency meeting in one of the schools in my district but I will be satisfied for it to go ahead and get a report on what was asked.

MS DUNDERDALE: I am happy to come back at 5:30.

CLERK: I am just looking at the Standing Order, "Each committee shall, at the conclusion of 15 sitting days of the House of Assembly following the reference of estimates to it, put all questions, without debate, needed to carry every subhead…" at the conclusion of fifteen days. I guess today would be okay and then tomorrow would be the report, yes; Standing Order 75.

MS JONES: Okay. I mean, it will not take long.

MS DUNDERDALE: No, I am happy to come back.

MS JONES: I am sure half an hour is fine, but I really need to use that half an hour right now to do some other things.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes, I do not mind coming back. I do not mind coming back on the Estimates and I would not mind answering your written questions on the Estimates, but once you get into the policy piece, if you want to explore some of that, it is better for us to come back because I cannot commit to putting all of that in writing.

MS JONES: Well, I can tell what my questions are about if you want to make a decision. They are around the Violence Prevention Initiative. They are around affordable housing. They are around the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, and what involvement the Women's Policy Office have had in that. So that is a policy question, no doubt.

MS DUNDERDALE: Yes.

MS JONES: The other stuff is around some of the issues that came to us with regard to women providing home care to family members with disabilities, children. Our other questions are around the strategy for the Women's Policy Office, what your strategy is for the next year, what issues you are dealing with and so on.

MS DUNDERDALE: Let's come back.

MS JONES: Okay.

MS DUNDERDALE: If you want all of that answered you are going to come back.

CHAIR: Okay. That is as far as we will go now.

I ask for a motion to adjourn for now and we will reconvene at 6:00 o'clock.

MS DUNDERDALE: Six o'clock is fine (inaudible).

CHAIR: A motion to adjourn now?

Mr. Dalley.

This meeting stands adjourned until 6:00 p.m.