April
21, 2016
RESOURCE
COMMITTEE
Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Steve Kent, MHA for Mount Pearl North,
substitutes for David Brazil, MHA for Conception Bay East – Bell Island.
Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Gerry Rogers, MHA for St. John's Centre,
substitutes for Lorraine Michael, MHA for St. John's East – Quidi Vidi.
The
Committee met at 9:05 a.m. in the Assembly Chamber.
CHAIR (Warr):
I'll start by saying good
morning again. We'll ask Mr. Kent if he can start the introductions, please.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, good morning.
Steve
Kent, MHA for Mount Pearl North.
MS. HAYDEN:
Veronica Hayden, Executive
Assistant to Paul Davis.
MS. ROGERS:
Good morning, I'm Gerry
Rogers and I work for the good people of St. John's Centre. Thank you very much
for your hard work. I know what a busy time this is with both the budget and
Estimates and everything else that's happening. Thank you so very, very much for
making the time for doing this this morning.
MR. MORGAN:
Ivan Morgan, Researcher, NDP
caucus.
MR. DEAN:
Good morning.
Jerry
Dean, MHA, District of Exploits.
MR. BRAGG:
Good morning.
Derrick
Bragg, MHA, Fogo Island – Cape Freels.
MR. FINN:
Good morning.
John
Finn, MHA, Stephenville – Port au Port.
MS. P. PARSONS:
Pam Parsons, MHA, Harbour
Grace – Port de Grave.
CHAIR:
Minister.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Christopher Mitchelmore,
Minister of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development, also responsible
for Forestry and Agrifoods and the Research & Development Corporation.
MR. EVANS:
Jim Evans, CEO, Forestry and
Agrifoods Agency.
MR. DEERING:
Good morning, I'm Keith
Deering and I'm the Assistant Deputy Minister of Agrifoods Development Branch,
Forestry and Agrifoods Agency.
MR. BALSOM:
Steve Balsom, Assistant
Deputy Minister, Forestry Services Branch, Forestry and Agrifoods Agency.
MR. IVIMEY:
Philip Ivimey, Departmental
Controller.
MR. HOLLOWAY:
Colin Holloway,
Parliamentary Secretary to the minister.
MR. GEORGE:
Bradley George, Executive
Assistant to Minister Mitchelmore.
MS. MUNDON:
Tansy Mundon, Director of
Communications.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
My name
is Brian Warr and I'm the MHA for Baie Verte – Green Bay and I'll be your
Chairperson this morning.
We're
starting off with Forestry and Agrifoods. I'll ask the Clerk to call the first
head.
CLERK (Ms. Proudfoot):
1.1.01.
CHAIR:
Shall 1.1.01 carry?
Minister, if you would start with some opening remarks.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I understand that we have a
lot of entities to go through here today and to give the Opposition the most
opportune time to question the Estimates – I understand that we have three
hours, but I'm certainly willing to extend that beyond the 12 o'clock timeline
today if we don't get through all of the matters, as long as the Opposition is
in agreement to that.
I'll
let them start with Mr. Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good
morning. I want to join my colleague for St. John's Centre in thanking everybody
for being here and participating in this wonderful process. I should advise
upfront if I have to leave suddenly it's because I'm being appointed as the CEO
of Nalcor. So If I have to leave abruptly, I apologize.
I'll
jump right into it, in the interest of time. I have some knowledge of the great
work that's going on within the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency. I was there very
briefly as a parliamentary secretary; it feels like a lifetime ago. So I have
great respect for the work that's being done in the agency. I have some
questions for you as I get up to speed on the budget for the agency going into
this fiscal year.
Under
1.1.01, I was just wondering if the minister could explain two quick things: the
obvious one, the growth in Salaries; and secondly, there appears to be a spike
in Purchased Services and also Property, Furnishings and Equipment. I was just
wondering if the minister could comment on both of those items.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The variance from 2015-2016
to $478,900 was a filling of a secretary to an ADM position that wasn't
originally anticipated in 2015-2016. What we have now is the re-profiling of
salary funds to the department of $69,000 for the salary to the ADM and the
higher salary for the ADM for the Forestry position compared to when the
position was vacant.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you, Minister.
Last
year there was an increased expenditure in Property, Furnishings and Equipment,
not a big amount, but I'm just curious what that represents.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We had budgeted $300 and
$5,600 was expended. That was for the purchase of a desk, drawer, hutch and
other office equipment.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
That's
it for me on 1.1.01.
CHAIR:
Ms. Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
Oh, we're not going 10
minutes by 10 minutes?
Okay, I
have no questions on that particular item.
CHAIR:
We'll do 1.1.01 and 1.1.02.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Okay, great. Thank you.
I
notice there's a cut under 1.1.02, again in Property, Furnishings and Equipment.
I only ask because it is a noticeable amount. I'm just curious what that means.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The variance is the reversal
of a one-time re-profiling of funds from silviculture to admin support capital
for the purchase of a seeding truck, which accounted for $86,000 and the
addition of $23,000 as previous budget decisions and the fiscal forecast.
MR. KENT:
Thank you. That's it for me.
CHAIR:
Ms. Rogers, anything on
1.1.02?
MS. ROGERS:
No, I'm fine with that.
Thank
you very much.
CHAIR:
Will the Clerk please call
the next subhead?
CLERK:
1.1.02.
CHAIR:
Which we've done.
Would
you please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
2.1.01.
CHAIR:
2.1.01.
Ms.
Rogers, would you like to start?
MS. ROGERS:
Salaries, we see an increase
of over $500,000. Can the minister explain that, please?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The original budget was
$5.385 million. Last year, there was $5 million. This was a result of various
vacancies that existed within the division; $5.5 million is the rate
re-profiling of salaries within the department to meet salary plans; adjustments
for the job evaluation survey is $135,000 of that. It primarily is to fill
vacant positions and to deal with the JES.
MS. ROGERS:
Minister, again, just for
point of clarification, so from $5.385 million and then $380,000 wasn't spent,
why was that not spent?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The $385,000?
MS. ROGERS:
Yes.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The variance was due to a
result of vacancies within various divisions during the year.
MS. ROGERS:
Are those vacancies now
filled?
MR. EVANS:
We anticipate filling some of them. This whole program encompasses five
divisions: ecosystem management; silviculture; policy division; forest
engineering and industry services; and legislation and compliance. Throughout
those, we do anticipate filling of some vacancies and the re-profiling of money
– we did move some salaries in there from the regional operations; regional
ecologist positions are in that budget right now. That's the difference.
MS. ROGERS:
Could we have a list of the
vacancies, the ones that were vacant, the ones that will be filled and the ones
that won't be filled?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The department itself has a
number of positions that are filled, and given the seasonal nature of some of
our divisions, depending on if we need firefighting services, some of them will
be called back. If firefighting services escalate, you would need to hire more
employees to deal with the situation or more call-backs.
The
same thing with silviculture, depending on what's in the plan; so at any given
time, there may be a variance in what's planned to hire, depending on what is in
the upcoming budget. It is somewhat difficult, in your request, to provide to
that detail because it would change, given on today versus summertime activity
versus the fall. I'm not really clear as to how we would be able to provide that
information to you in a list form.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay. So for the firefighter
positions, for instance, does that mean someone may be called back just for a
period of a few weeks?
MR. EVANS:
That's quite possible. If you look at the situation we had in Labrador two to
three years ago, we did have to call in some additional firefighters just to
deal with the issues there. It's possible but it's only in circumstances such as
that.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay. Thank you very much.
Then
for Purchased Services, in the revised budget for '15-'16, we see a bit of a
significant drop there.
Can you
tell me what was anticipated and then what was cut?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Purchased Services last
year, the budget had increased from $284,000 to $333,100. That is primarily due
to higher-than-anticipated professional services because we had a data
interpretation contract related towards inventory program during the year. This
is basically looking at the photography and aerial view of the forest, the GIS.
We had
quite a bit of work that was backlogged that would normally be done by the
division. We anticipate the division can do the work, and based on our work
plans for our five-year forest management we can contain our costs to $256,400.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay, and for the Purchased
Services underneath?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Purchased Services, we
had originally budgeted $1.5 million; $945,000 was expended.
We
didn't purchase new aerial photography in 2015-16. We have anticipated lower
Purchased Services with our forest inventory work. We anticipate the budget line
of $928,400 is in line with what we will be purchasing and we can contain that
cost. It will have no impact on our forest inventory planning.
MS. ROGERS:
So the big variance in the
budget from '15-'16 to the revised was mostly around the not purchasing of
aerial photography?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes, that's correct.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay, thank you.
Also,
will we be getting some of the other Estimates? Departments have provided us
with the briefing books. Will we be receiving those?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes, you'll get these
briefing books.
MS. ROGERS:
Great, that's wonderful.
Thank you very much.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Ms. Rogers.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Along
those lines, I trust that any information either of us ask for will be provided
to both parties. I know that kind of goes without saying, but I would appreciate
that of course.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We'll provide you with
copies of these binders after the Estimates.
MR. KENT:
Great. Thanks.
Also,
if we request any additional information that would not be contained within the
Estimates binder, I just ask that it be provided to both parties.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Sure.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
I only
have one additional question on 2.1.01, Mr. Chair. I notice a slight reduction
in Grants and Subsidies. Two questions really: What do those Grants and
Subsidies represent? If you could just give us an overview of what's contained
in those Grants and Subsidies. Secondly, the reduction of approximately $42,000
or $43,000, if you could let us know what that means that would be appreciated.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Grants and Subsidies
that reflected $844,200 last year was basically money that was put into resource
information systems, Junior Forest Wardens and the Newfoundland and Labrador
Lumber Producers' Association would receive $75,000. This is to maintain the
grade stamp; else we would have to go out of the province to maintain that.
The
Labrador Innu, Metis, Nunatsiavut forest management agreements get $100,000 and
the forest research, Centre for Forest Science and Innovation, last year
received $623,800.
They
will receive a reduction. We will provide that list. It will be $595,000 this
year. It does reflect a small variance of $43,200 in terms of Grants and
Subsidies and we do not anticipate that will impact. We had a number of projects
and contracts with the centre and we'll continue to do work with them.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Minister.
Just a
follow-up question: How much funding is provided annually to the Junior Forest
Wardens Program? Which is a great program by the way, just curious what the
annual budget would be for that.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Junior Forest Wardens
received $8,000 last year. It's anticipated they'll receive $3,000 this year.
MR. KENT:
Eight thousand last year to
$3,000 this year?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes.
MR. KENT:
I'm just curious; I don't
believe the membership is really large these days which would probably explain
the relatively small budget.
Do you
know how many young people are involved in that program?
MR. EVANS:
I can't give you a definite
number but I know there are reduced numbers in that program. I don't know the
number.
MR. KENT:
I appreciate that Mr. Evans
wouldn't be able to provide an exact number but could you give me an idea?
I think
it may be dozens of young people versus hundreds of young people. I'm just
curious if you can give me some sense of – and you can provide it later if you
can't guess. I think it's a relatively small program. Given my interest in youth
programs, I'm just curious.
MR. EVANS:
I think you're right. I think it's less than 100, for sure, but we can get you
the number.
MR. KENT:
Okay, that would be great
because I do think it's a valuable program. I sensed it had been shrinking,
through no fault of governments, of course, but they would face similar
challenges to many youth organizations.
Mr.
Chair, is it appropriate to ask about 2.1.02 at this point as well or do you
wish to –
CHAIR:
It hasn't been called but as
soon as you're ready we can call that subhead.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Well, I'm finished on
2.1.01.
CHAIR:
Okay.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
2.1.02.
CHAIR:
2.1.02.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Just a quick question, why
the increased spending last year, both on Professional Services and more
importantly, Purchased Services, given the sizable number?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The increase in Purchased
Services – you asked for Purchased Services?
MR. KENT:
Professional and Purchased,
but the seven grand is of less interest than the larger number under Purchased
Services, I guess.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Professional Services
originally budgeted $5,300, went to $1,200. That variance was due to a
remediation contract that was required for the Black Duck Camp, the former
Abitibi property. So that work is done. We don't anticipate we will be over
budget, that there would be a variance this year.
Then
the Purchased Services, that variance is to due higher-than-anticipated vehicle
repairs, additional expenditures associated with the movement of wood from the
Muskrat Falls Project and to clean up the site, as a result of the agreement
with the LAO and additional expenditures relating to grading and repairing of
roads that was required in Labrador.
Given
that work is done, we anticipate that we can contain our costs at $499,000 this
year; a significant reduction from last year.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
That's
it for me, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
Just out of curiosity, I
know this was in the public for a while, so the removal of the wood due to the
Muskrat Falls Project, where did that go? We paid someone to take it away?
MR. EVANS:
Yes.
This
project was a smaller project. The department or the agency provided fuelwood to
three communities in Labrador, primarily targeted towards the elderly and
underprivileged who couldn't access it themselves.
MS. ROGERS:
Great.
Thank
you very much – great use.
CHAIR:
I'd just like to remind the
staff, if you're being asked to answer a question, if you would state your name
for the Broadcast Centre downstairs.
Thank
you.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Ms. Rogers, on 2.1.02,
you're okay?
MS. ROGERS:
Yes.
CHAIR:
Okay.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 2.1.03.
CHAIR:
2.1.03.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes. In Salaries, the
original budget was $3.464 million and the revised was $3.116 million. Can you
just identify what the significant drop was?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
This was a result based on
vacancies throughout the year. This year we see re-profiling of salaries to meet
the salary plans of $214,000 and an adjustment for JES of $141,900 based on the
job evaluation survey.
MS. ROGERS:
What kinds of positions were
vacant?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I would think these would be
positions that are related to the silviculture, replanting of trees and maybe
some positions at our Wooddale tree nursery, but I would hand it over to our ADM
of Forestry, Steve Balsom, to provide a –
MR. BALSOM:
That's correct. We had vacancies in both our silviculture, which is the planting
program primarily, in a conservation operator II category and also in the
Wooddale Provincial Tree Nursery, and they would have been silviculture worker
I. It's a combination of two of those groups. There were approximately nine
vacancies there.
MS. ROGERS:
The vacancies were because
of budgetary considerations or there was no work? Why were there so many
vacancies?
MR. BALSOM:
I guess it's a combination of the current forest industry and the reduction in
the amount of harvesting that's been going on over the past few years. So both
those programs have caught up. We're not planting as much as we have in the
past. We don't need to grow as many trees. So vacancies were held because we
didn't need to recall people due to the amount of work that was required.
MS. ROGERS:
How come we're not planting
as many trees as we were?
MR. BALSOM:
Simply a reflection that we're not harvesting as much land as we have when we
had our three pulp and paper mills and all of our capacity. We're currently at
about half capacity.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay, thank you very much.
In
Purchased Services we see a discrepancy here from the original budget to the
revised budget of approximately $700,000.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The reduction of about
$700,000 was due to cancelled contracts due to – inclement weather resulted in
two prescribed burns, lower-than-anticipated bid prices on contracted
silviculture work and a reduced silviculture program related to Corner Brook
Pulp and Paper Limited. So because of those measures we were able to save costs,
and we anticipate – as we continue to go out and seek contracts – that they
would be in line with previous years so we can contain our costs at $3,015,400.
So that's what accounts for the reduction and savings there.
MS. ROGERS:
What kinds of contracts were cancelled?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The contracts that were
cancelled were two prescribed burns.
MS. ROGERS:
So those are burns that
would have been planned, and then cancelled. Why would they have been –?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes, the weather was a
result of why they were cancelled.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay.
Would
those be rescheduled again or would there be no need for those burns again?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Steve.
MR. BALSOM:
The prescribed burn program has been something we've been attempting over the
past number of years as a silviculture treatment, primarily on the West Coast,
and we've been having a lot of difficulty due to our weather to have success in
that program. So we've decided we are not going to pursue that means any further
and look at other options.
We're
going to remove that from our program this year, and potentially going forward
we'll look at different means of preparing sites because it's very expensive to
set up and mobilize, and weather can shut you down. It just costs too much.
There's too much risk involved.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes. What would be some of
the other options?
MR. BALSOM:
Some of the other options we have are – we can do mechanical raking of sites to
remove the slash. We're also looking at planting different species, putting a
mix of spruce in with some on the West Coast that doesn't get impacted by the
insect that's causing the problems out there, that we're trying to remove fir
for, that type of thing.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay.
Good
luck with that.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
I guess
more of a general question for the minister; a few general questions for the
minister about this area of silviculture development. I was just wondering,
first of all, if the minister or his officials could identify, at which sites is
silviculture now done?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
You're asking which
particular sites in our forest management plans that we would have programs?
MR. KENT:
Yes.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Okay.
Jim.
MR. EVANS:
Generally, the areas are assessed throughout the province after a disturbance.
It could be fire or harvesting, and they're assessed for natural regeneration.
Generally, on the West Coast you have a lot of natural regeneration of balsam
fir, but there are some insect issues that Steve mentioned.
In
Central, you have most of the tree planting – and Central being east of
Springdale, I would say.
MR. KENT:
Okay, thank you.
Actually, my second question Ms. Rogers has already posed and we've gotten an
answer.
Are we
in line with our targets in the sustainable forest management plan? Are we
following that plan, I guess is what I'm trying to ask? Is the work we're doing
in this area fully aligned with the forest management plan and with the targets
that are set?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We plan to follow the forest
management plan. That's been clear, and it's listed in the mandate letter given
to me by the Premier. We also receive the ISO standardization for forest
management.
Let's
not have a DarkNL here, as the lights just flickered.
MR. KENT:
You shouldn't have gotten
rid of Ed Martin, I guess.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
But in terms of the plan, we
will be following the forest management plan and we have clear targets in place.
MR. KENT:
If the lights go out that
will be my signal to leave abruptly.
Thank
you, Minister, for that answer.
I have
no further questions on 2.1.03.
CHAIR:
Would the Clerk please call
the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 2.1.04.
CHAIR:
Subhead 2.1.04.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm
just curious if the minister could comment briefly on how this resource roads
construction unit functions and how is the roadwork determined annually? I
assume some of it would be based on emergency requirements, but I'm just curious
how the unit works and how the roadwork is determined form year to year.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes. We look at where
harvesting activity is taking place and look at those plans to work with our
harvesters that are out there delivering timber to our sawmills to make sure
that we have adequate resource roads and that they are maintained. We have a
responsibility toward them.
They
have a clear plan. There are some areas where bridgework needs to be replaced or
culverts, grading that would happen and, as you said, if there were emergency
matters that need to be taken care of, then this would be handled under this
particular budget.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
I
noticed there was a jump in the Salaries line the last fiscal year from $143,700
to $236,000. I'm just curious if that could be explained, please.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We had
higher-than-anticipated expenditures associated with a conservation officer III
and grader operators required throughout the year. So because of those
activities, we had to have additional staff complete the work.
We
have, in this year's budget, $165,700 which includes adjustments for the JES of
$22,000 from the original $143,700.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
My
final question is Grants and Subsidies, it's a relatively small number, I'm just
curious what's contained in that $18,000.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The $18,000 is grant
expenditures related to memberships in forest research institute of Canada and
the Canadian Woodlands Forum, which was a little slightly lower than
anticipated.
MR. KENT:
Okay, thank you.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much.
In
Supplies $648,000 budgeted, revised to $86,000, can you just tell me what
happened there?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Supplies and the
Purchased Services, if we look at what we're actually purchasing here, it's
either looking at roads or looking at bridges, culverts, timber and other
things. What had happened in budget 2015-2016, there was a reduced requirement
for bridge components and that was transferred into the Purchased Services to
actually deal with more roadwork activity that would happen.
I
think, in future years, we should look to consolidate these lines because
they're all one in the same in terms of the activities that are purchased,
whether it's a bridge or whether it's gravel for the roads, but that's the
budgetary line and how the variances for the Supplies and the Purchased Services
are being presented today.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay.
What a
beautiful, glorious Newfoundland and Labrador we have, but ever so complex, huh?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Uh-huh.
MS. ROGERS:
I have nothing further for
that section.
Thank
you, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 2.2.01.
CHAIR:
2.2.01.
If you
can start, Ms. Rogers, please.
MS. ROGERS:
Insect Control, we see a
significant difference in the Salaries from the budget of 2015-16 to the revised
budget.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
In 2015-2016 there was
lower-than anticipated-salary cost with the insect control program delivery
during the year. There was a one-time $1 million additive to the budget to deal
with a particular spray program and there were higher-than-anticipated salary
allocations when the assessment was done.
Actually, the amount should have been placed in other areas, as you see the
variances in the budget there for Transportation and Communications, around
things like spray aircraft which would have accounted for that variance.
This
year, we have government reduction measures of $203,800, the removal of the
one-time funding for the increased spray programming of $150,000, adjustments to
the JES of $67,200 and attrition management adjustments of $3,500.
MS. ROGERS:
How many jobs would we have
lost then here? Was this reflecting job losses?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
In our budget there were no
layoffs in the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency. Jobs were dealt with through the
attrition management program that was clearly identified previously.
MS. ROGERS:
How many positions are those
in attrition?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Positions for the entire
department, like the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency that were dealt with through
attrition?
MS. ROGERS:
Specifically in the area of
Insect Control.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
It was $3,500 for attrition
management adjustment.
MS. ROGERS:
Three thousand. Okay, thank
you.
How are
we doing with our insect control program?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Which budgetary line are you
referring to, Ms. Rogers?
MS. ROGERS:
I'm asking just a general
question.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
In terms of insect control,
when there were situations of the looper or the other insects that came, we did
have issues in the past around that. There were higher allocations given to do
spray programs and to deal with insect control. We're monitoring the forest
quite regularly and we're seeing where we don't have to allocate as much funding
to insect control programs in this budget because of the condition of our
forests.
MS. ROGERS:
Well, that's a good news
story.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Ms. Rogers.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Just a very quick follow-up
question to Ms. Rogers's last question. Any predictions about the kind of year
we'll see in 2016 in terms of insect control? I assume from the minister's
comments that there's no major crisis on the horizon that we anticipate in 2016,
but any general commentary on predictions for 2016 when it comes to insect
control?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Our forestry conservation
officers and our team have been doing research. We continue to monitor through
our forest management plans to make sure that we have environmentally
sustainable forests in our practices. We monitor quite regularly.
We
cannot control, however, if disease or insect happens, but we will monitor
closely that if anything does arrive throughout the fiscal year that we will
deal with the matter very responsibly. And if we have to conduct spray programs
or contain any insect, we will use our insect control program. This is why we
have a budgetary line to deal with this matter.
MR. KENT:
That's it for me on 2.2.01.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 2.2.02.
CHAIR:
Subhead 2.2.02.
Mr.
Kent, you can start.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Does
this area of the budget, under Fire Suppression and Communications, include
water bomber operations?
MR. EVANS:
It does, yes. We share the water bombers with Air Services under Transportation
and Works. So we work with Transportation and Works, the Air Services division,
and we give direction, I guess is the right word, to the water bombers. We place
them and we utilize them on fires, as needed.
MR. KENT:
Okay, thank you.
There
was a noticeable increase in Property, Furnishings and Equipment. I'm just
curious what that relates to.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We had
higher-than-anticipated Property, Furnishings and Equipment expenditures in
order to replenish equipment in preparation for the 2016-2017 fire season. So
this would have been outfitting a fire truck in Paddy's Pond and some equipment
for the Wooddale Provincial Tree Nursery.
MR. KENT:
That's it for me, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Mr. Kent.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
Under Supplies, we see a
drop from the 2015 budget and revised.
Can you
just explain that for me?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yeah, we had
lower-than-anticipated supplies required for fire suppression during the year,
such as portable radios, antennas, GPSs, burn kits, uniforms, et cetera. We
anticipate we can keep our cost, given our current inventory, to $320,700. We
will ensure all of our firefighters properly have the equipment they need.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay. Thank you very much.
I'm not
sure; did we already look at that issue of Purchased Services? There's a slight
increase there.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We had
higher-than-anticipated vehicle repairs and maintenance in 2015-2016. What we've
done in the budget at $168,000 is basically rightsizing the budget. Because of
our fleet and because of the historical context, this is a budgetary line that's
always been revised because of the activities that one would deal with when
you're looking at forest fires and whatnot and the cost of being able to contain
repairs. So we've budgeted $168,000. It's a rightsizing of the budget there.
MS. ROGERS:
How many forest fires did we
have last year? Are we seeing any kind of variance in forest fires in the
province over the past while?
MR. BALSOM:
We had 128 fires last year. It wasn't a lot. We had just under 4,000 hectares
were burned. They were all small fires that didn't last any more than two days.
We're
kind of seeing that trend in a bit of a lower – kind of opposite to the other
end of the country due to the weather we've been getting in July.
MS. ROGERS:
Nothing would burn in July.
MR. BALSOM:
We're predicting lower-than-anticipated fire years, but it seems like every few
years Labrador can have a large fire. It's hard to predict.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay. So we're not seeing an
increase?
MR. BALSOM:
Not if last year is any kind of indication.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay. Thank you.
I'm
fine, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead.
CLERK:
3.1.01.
CHAIR:
3.1.01.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much.
I just
would like to look at 02, the Revenue, the provincial revenue. It was
anticipated $33,000 in Revenue. We had $11,000. Then for this year the
anticipation is lower.
Can you
just tell me a little bit what that's about?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Sure.
We had
less revenue due to lower-than-anticipated laboratory requests for Soil, Plant
and Feed Laboratory during the year last year. We reduced the budget by $25,000
because we believe that – and there has been minimal revenue received over the
last number of years.
So we
don't anticipate that – through our labs because of other private laboratories
that exist, whether it be petroforma or AGAT or whatnot – we will not be able to
achieve $33,000 in revenues.
MS. ROGERS:
So who would those requests
come from? What kinds of requests? Would they be companies or individual
landowners or –
MR. DEERING:
We routinely get requests
for analysis from commercial farmers to have their soils tested to see if they
need to add limestone or fertilizers and things like that.
Similarly, we also get requests from homeowners to have analysis done on their
landscape for landscape issues on their own properties to see if they need to
add limestone to their turf on their front lawn.
MS. ROGERS:
Why would they not be coming
to the provincial labs then? Why would we see such a significant drop?
MR. DEERING:
Last year and the last
couple of years, we actually had a piece of work done by an external consultant
for the commercial farms. As a result of the work they did, they actually sent a
lot of their samples outside of the province to be analyzed. That was just part
of the network they had already established.
So a
lot of the reason for last year was that fact that many of our commercial
farming entities, particularly on the East Coast, were participating in that
other program.
MS. ROGERS:
But these commercial farmers
would have previously sent to provincial labs?
MR. DEERING:
Yes.
MS. ROGERS:
So why would they not be
doing that?
MR. DEERING:
A lot of the groundwork has
been laid by the consultant's piece that was done over the last couple of years.
I think the baseline information has been collected.
They
will still, no doubt, come from time to time to our labs to get work done but
the expectation is that it will be reduced.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay.
Thank
you. I'm fine.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Ms. Rogers.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
No further questions, Mr.
Chair, on 3.1.01.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead.
CLERK:
Subhead 3.1.02.
CHAIR:
3.1.02.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Just one question really,
the Supplies and Revenue for agricultural limestone were down a little last
fiscal. I'm just curious why that is and is it demand driven? I assume it is,
but if the minister could comment that would be great.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes, it is demand driven.
Primarily, this program has always been subscribed to the maximum. We had
slightly less-than-anticipated purchase of limestone last year. This is
primarily from East Coast farmers purchasing because the limestone is on the
West Coast of the province.
So this
is a program that helps primarily those that are on the Avalon Peninsula and
other East Coast farmers to make sure their soils have the appropriate level of
limestone so they can have maximum growth.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you.
MS. ROGERS:
I'm fine.
Thank
you, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Okay. Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead.
CLERK:
Subhead 3.1.03.
CHAIR:
3.1.03.
Ms.
Rogers, please.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes, under Professional
Services and Purchased Services, what kinds of services would be purchased
there?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Professional Services
are primarily due to legal fees, survey costs and appraisals associated with
land purchases we would have under this particular program.
The
Purchased Services is costs associated with off-farm access road construction
and maintenance on Crown land. So we have administrative costs, associated
survey – I have quite a list here and you'll get a copy of that at the end, if
that's okay.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay, perfect.
So we
don't use our in-house legal services for the purchase of lands and any of those
legal services required around that?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Well, that was a decision
previously, but, as minister, I've drafted a letter to the Department of Justice
seeking to see if we could secure in-house justice solicitation, recently. It
can be a way to save additional money.
Even
though we've budgeted right now this amount, it may come in lower if we're able
to get Justice to do the legal work associated with that.
So that
is a measure I've taken as minister to help contain costs.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay. I just have a few
quick questions here.
In
Budget 2016, government committed to
follow through on its commitment to develop a new food security and agriculture
growth strategy. Can we get an update on what this will entail?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Well, right now we've
already had consultation with the Federation of Agriculture. I believe we had 22
stakeholder groups. That had taken place a number of weeks ago and we're
continuing to have that dialogue.
We're
very committed to an agricultural growth strategy and looking at food security
in Newfoundland and Labrador. I understand that we have a lot of lines to get
through here in the Estimates. If you have some specific questions about
programs or things that I'm mandated to do, I'd be more than happy to have that
conversation with you, Ms. Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay.
We
learned last year that the province has approximately 26,000 acres under
cultivation in the province and a thousand of which was added in 2014-15 fiscal
year. How much more land was added this past year?
MR. DEERING:
I guess I may have to get
back to you with specific numbers, but we had a program with the dairy farmers
for $750,000. That was, I guess, compensated through that program at about
$3,500 an acre. That program was fully subscribed.
We also
had a Cranberry Industry Development Program. That program was also fully
subscribed. We've increased our cranberry footprint from about 250 acres on up
to 390. We have about two years left on that program.
I guess
some of the numbers I would have to get back to you on; there are some fairly
small developments in horticulture. I'd have to go back and reflect on some of
the numbers in our other programs to figure out exactly how much land base, but
it's relatively small compared to those two.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay, so when we see the
uptake it's a good news story. Is there a plan to increase that program and
those grants at this point?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
With respect to looking at
land development and land acquisition, my mandate letter has been very clear,
and that's been around looking at the assets that we have in terms of Crown
land. We would be working on that matter.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay, great.
How far
are we? We know that we need a hundred-thousand acres under cultivation to
achieve food security. How close are we to that?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Right now, you clearly
outlined where we are in terms of the amount of acreage that we have in use.
We're always looking at reaching out to new farmers and when we look at food
security, it's a very broad topic. It depends on if we look at vertical farming
– there are a variety of things – if you want to look at hydroponics to deal
with food security.
So I
think that this would be a very complex matter for us to get into acreage and
determining how much we need. We can have 100,000 acres and plant solely
potatoes and that's not going to solve our food security problem, Ms. Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
That's right.
Okay,
thank you.
CHAIR:
Are you finished, Ms.
Rogers?
MS. ROGERS:
I want to ask about
agriculture and agrifoods, the development fund. That was eliminated due to poor
uptake.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I believe that's a line
item.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Which line item are you
talking about now?
MS. ROGERS:
Well, we can wait till we
get there. I'm fine with this one.
Thank
you, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Ms. Rogers.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
I'm fine, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
3.2.01.
CHAIR:
3.2.01.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I note
that Grants and Subsidies will increase by about a half-million dollars. I'm
just wondering why that would be.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
A half-million dollars is
for the Cranberry Industry Development Program as per our commitments to the
program.
MR. KENT:
Okay, great.
And can
you make some comment on the variances with the provincial revenue?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
There was no revenue
received for the sale of cranberry plugs. This was a decision based on
government. Under the new Cranberry Industry Development Program there's no
requirement for us to sell cranberry plugs; therefore, revenues have been
adjusted accordingly.
So
we've taken out $44,700. Despite having more acreage we see that we'll get more
revenue, up to $10,000 this year, but we're not selling the plugs.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
That's
it for me, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Mr. Kent.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
I'm fine, thank you.
Just a
second, I'm a little bit lost here now.
Someone
would like to know if we gave the plugs or did we just not sell them?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We gave the plugs to the
Cranberry Association, the farmers.
MS. ROGERS:
Great.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 3.2.02.
CHAIR:
Thank you, 3.2.02.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
I'm fine.
Thank
you very much. I have no specific
questions for that section.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Ms. Rogers.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
I'm just wondering if there
are any changes contemplated in this area; and secondly, Minister, if there's
anything changing because of international trade agreements. I suspect not but
I'm asking anyway.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
In terms of the structure of
the marketing board or how they're operating?
MR. KENT:
Yeah, and will any new or
upcoming international trade agreements have any impact on any of the work
that's going on with the marketing board?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Our agency is always willing
to engage, discuss and talk to farmers about the opportunities that exist,
whether it be with TPP or CETA or some other international trade agreement. We
do see some opportunity for our famers there.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead.
CLERK:
Subhead 3.3.01.
CHAIR:
3.3.01.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
In this area, just a broad
question really. I'm guessing that this agriculture business development area is
responsible for promoting farm growth. I think there may be a tie-in to your
mandate letter as well, Minister. I was just wondering if you could comment on
that.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes. In particular, if you
look at the Grants and Subsidies, the additional $60,000 is the funding
proportion based on the mandate letter and a commitment to give $60,000 to the
Federation of Agriculture to look at new development that would take place
there.
This
particular program looks at farm management, counselling and training programs,
the agri-insurance, livestock insurance, Growing Forward 2 and other development
assistance.
MR. KENT:
That's fine. Thank you.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Mr. Kent.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
I have no specific questions
for this section, only that I have been speaking with some new farmers and it's
very exciting, the possibilities that face our province. We know the challenge
of food security and just thank you very much for your work.
I know
the potential for innovation is great. There are some great people out there
willing to work closely with you to do this innovative work.
Thank
you.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead.
CLERK:
Subhead 3.3.02.
CHAIR:
3.3.02.
Ms.
Rogers, if you could start, please.
MS. ROGERS:
I am fine. I have no particular question
on this.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Mr.
Kent, 3.3.02.
MR. KENT:
Nothing for me, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Would the Clerk please call
the next subhead.
CLERK:
3.3.03.
CHAIR:
3.3.03.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
I'm fine.
CHAIR:
Ms. Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes, could we have a list of
the recipients for the Grants and Subsidies for this, or would that be in the
briefing book that would be provided?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I don't think this would be in the briefing book because a number of the
programs – whether it be through the provincial agriculture assistance programs
– are attached to individual names. I guess if you're requesting that
information, we would have to make sure it's not breaching any privacy matters.
If you do want that information, we certainly can endeavour to get you the
details.
MS. ROGERS:
That would be great.
Thank
you.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Okay.
MS. ROGERS:
I'm fine.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 3.3.04.
CHAIR:
3.3.04.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes. Again here, the list of
recipients, if possible.
Also,
my question is, why was the Development Fund cancelled?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Development Fund is not
cancelled.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
It will be reduced over a
four-year period. Previously, we had $2.55 million in the budgeted. We had
expended only $1.25 million.
We have
a commitment, as the ADM Keith Deering had mentioned, to the dairy farmers when
it comes to looking at land development there for $750,000; however, we have
$1.5 million and we anticipate that would be all that would be used under this
particular program. We are planning to utilize and make accessible Crown land as
per my mandate letter.
MS. ROGERS:
It's not entirely clear to
me why the uptake wasn't as much as expected. Again, it's an area that we really
need development in, where we need the innovation. Can you explain? Is this –
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I don't disagree that we
shouldn't be looking to develop more farmland, and I would like to have seen
this particular program fully subscribed every single year. The case is it
wasn't. It may have been because of guidelines or various restrictions that
exist or the ability to secure private lands and costs associated with it, but
we are recognizing that we have other avenues to make land available to farmers
and those who would like to do agricultural development in the province and
we're committed to working with them.
MS. ROGERS:
I guess my question is, is this specifically money to buy land or is it to look
at the whole area of diversification, which is one area that is just ripe for
diversification for the province.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
This fund is intended to
encourage development, diversification and expansion of larger-scale
agricultural products in primary, secondary and value-added in the industry.
Based on where we have been and the uptake, we have a variety of other programs
that can help assist and attract and stimulate this type of large-scale
investment and activity.
When it
comes to, particularly, land, we have – which has been primarily what this
program has been used for – the ability to utilize Crown land.
MS. ROGERS:
So then if we have a drop of
$1 million, are we going to see that reallocated anywhere else then if you have
a number of other programs that will help in increasing diversification,
exploring diversification? Is that allocated somewhere else? Are there any other
programs that are bumped up to help make that happen?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Not in this budget, no.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay. So we're seeing a $1
million drop in this area.
Thank
you.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
In fact, if we look at the
revised and what was expended last year, we're actually seeing $250,000 more
that we have in our budget from previous years as to what as actually spent.
MS. ROGERS:
That's true, but I guess my
question, again, would be, if it's an area that is so vital and with the
potential of diversification, why is it we weren't able to spend that $1
million? There may be a number of factors. Is it –
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Of course, and we have a
plan as we're developing our programming and we will see changes, I anticipate,
that will benefit farmers and benefit the industry and attract investment as we
move forward.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Anything further?
MS. ROGERS:
I'm fine, Mr. Chair.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Mr. Kent, anything on
3.3.04?
MR. KENT:
No, Ms. Rogers stole my
questions.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 3.3.05.
CHAIR:
3.3.05.
Mr.
Kent, please.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Why the
smaller budget for Grants and Subsidies? It's probably due to the federal
agreement that's in place, but I'm just wondering if you could provide some
detail on why the drop from $3.7 million-and-something to $6.7
million-and-something.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Growing Forward program
is a five-year framework which can be allocated over the five-year period which
is split 60-40. We're in our fourth of the fifth year, and currently we're
renegotiating a new agreement. So all funds over the five-year period would be
what is available based on federal-provincial agreements.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Ms.
Rogers.
MS. ROGERS:
I think I am fine. I have no
particular question there.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Okay, thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 3.4.01.
CHAIR:
3.4.01.
Ms.
Rogers, would you like to start?
MS. ROGERS:
Yes, thank you.
The
line item I would be interested in is the Revenue – Provincial. We see a nice
bump in the Revenue and then a reduction for '16-'17.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Revenue is increased based
on the – associated with burns done in the division's incinerator. We've added
additional revenue this year from what was previously budgeted, from $680,000 to
$830,000, based on the burns that were done in the division's incinerator by
about $150,000. So we anticipate we can maintain that additional revenue.
MS. ROGERS:
Why was there such a
significant bump in the burns?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
It was increased demand.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes, I realize that.
MR. DEERING:
We had a new incinerator installed, I guess completed last year, and has a much
larger capacity than the previous one we were using. We have the ability to be
able to burn larger volumes, which I guess permits the folks who use that
service to burn more things.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay.
MR. DEERING:
So we have seen a lot more
activity in the incinerator. Also, this particular item can fluctuate, depending
on the amount of vet services that we provide to our farmers as well. In fact,
it was up quite significantly last year due to the fact that one of our dairy
farmers, who was previously using private vet services, came back and started
using provincial government vets again.
MS. ROGERS:
Are we seeing a growth in
dairy farmers in that area in terms of the output in dairy farming?
MR. DEERING:
Not so much in dairy. We are self-sufficient in dairy in this province, and the
growth in dairy is basically prescribed by a national formula. So we don't see a
lot of growth in dairy. The quotas we have, with the exception of some small
increases, have been largely the same for quite some time.
MS. ROGERS:
Are we going to see a growth
at all in the area of livestock for food?
MR. DEERING:
Yes, in the non-supply managed commodities I suspect we will. In dairy, chicken
and eggs, again we are largely self-sufficient, but in beef and sheep and some
of these other livestock commodities I would think we will see unprecedented
growth in the next little while.
MS. ROGERS:
Unprecedented?
MR. DEERING:
I think so.
MS. ROGERS:
And would this be existing farms or new farms, and what has sparking that
growth?
MR. DEERING:
Good question; I guess one of the things that we've been doing over the last few
years – I'll back up a little bit, actually. One of the biggest constraints in
livestock development up to this point has been the cost of production and,
namely, bringing into the province the feed that's required to grow that
livestock.
So we
have been taking steps over the last few years to do a lot of research in grain
development and we're seeing much more land base put into production. And our
thinking is that as the cost of production comes down with the production of
these grain requirements locally, that will foster the growth in the livestock
sector.
MS. ROGERS:
So that we can grow the feed here ourselves –
MR. DEERING:
Yes.
MS. ROGERS:
– rather than bringing it in?
MR. DEERING:
That's correct.
MS. ROGERS:
Great.
And
I've met farmers who are raising sheep and who really want to be able to expand.
So it's great; that's good to hear.
MR. DEERING:
Our winter wheat program has been very successful and we're doing that
throughout the province. We've been growing a lot of barley on the West Coast.
Just yesterday, we were clearing fields in Pasadena to try canola.
MS. ROGERS:
Wonderful, great. Thank you, that's good to hear.
(Inaudible.) Is there a plan for any other growth areas besides that? Under
farming, under agriculture?
MR. DEERING:
Yes, I would think outside of the supply-managed commodities, particularly in
the commodities that we can grow, like, we refer to them as the Jiggs'
dinner-type commodities – carrots, turnips, potatoes, cabbages – we would
expect that we're going to see significant growth in those areas as well.
We can't grow everything in Newfoundland, but in those
commodities we would expect to see significant growth. We are also doing
research in grape varieties and various other fruits as well, which I guess,
much to our surprise, is working out very well.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes.
MR. DEERING: So
we would expect to see growth in fruit as well.
MS. ROGERS: I
think we're on the same latitude as Northern France, so I know some of the grape
growers.
The whole area of harvesting kelp, does that come under
agriculture or does that come under fishery?
MR. DEERING:
Fisheries.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay, thank you very much.
CHAIR: Thank
you, Ms. Rogers.
Mr. Kent, anything on 3.4.01?
MR. KENT: No,
other than to express my excitement about increased barley growing, as a beer
drinker. So keep up the good
work, I say to the officials opposite.
No
further questions, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 3.5.01.
CHAIR:
3.5.01.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Sorry, Mr. Chair; I'm just
quickly reviewing my notes. I'll pass at the moment on 3.5.01.
CHAIR:
Ms. Rogers, anything on
3.5.01?
MS. ROGERS:
No, I'm fine with that as
well. Again, I would like to thank everyone for their wonderful work. It is an
exciting time. I know we're on the cusp on some kind of qualitative leap in our
production of food. I do hope that the monies that are needed to be able to
foster diversification, to support some new possibilities, and push beyond our
borders in terms of what we have been doing, I do hope that the resources are
there to be able to do that.
Thank
you very, very much for your wonderful work.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please recall the subheads?
CLERK:
Subhead 1.1.01 to 3.5.01 inclusive.
CHAIR:
Would the Clerk please call
the total?
MR. KENT:
Sorry, Mr. Chair, could I
just ask a question? Maybe I missed it, but I thought we did 3.4.01, but I
wasn't sure that we'd actually done 3.5.01.
CHAIR:
I came back to you in the
beginning and you passed it.
MR. KENT:
Oh.
CHAIR:
Is there something that you
need to ask, Mr. Kent?
MR. KENT:
No, sorry, Mr. Chair. I
missed it and I wasn't listening to my colleague next to me. I apologize.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible.)
MR. KENT:
No, I was listening to you.
I wasn't listening to the colleague immediately to my right.
Just a
general comment to say that I think all parties share some passion around
developing both our forestry and our agrifoods sector. While I'm sure we'll get
into lots of fun debate in Question Period, I think there's an opportunity for
us here to collaborate. I say that sincerely because I know the minister shares
my passion around food security, in particular. So if there are opportunities
for us to work together in a spirit of all-party co-operation to advance these
sectors, then there's definitely willingness on my part and I don't doubt that
that would be similar for my other colleagues.
I look
forward to working with you and appreciate your participation this morning.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
MR. KENT:
Sorry for missing 3.5.01.
CHAIR:
That's fine.
Would
the Clerk please recall the subheads?
CLERK:
Subhead 1.1.01 to subhead 3.5.01.
CHAIR:
1.1.01 to 3.5.01.
Shall
the total carry?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Carried.
On
motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 3.5.01 carried.
On
motion, Forestry and Agrifoods Agency, total heads, carried.
CHAIR:
Shall I report the Estimates
of the department of Forestry and Agrifoods carried without amendment?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Carried.
On
motion, Estimates of the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency carried without
amendment.
CHAIR:
We'll just have a very short
break. Do you need to switch out?
AN HON. MEMBER:
Yes.
CHAIR:
Okay.
Recess
CHAIR:
Okay, we'll get started.
Again,
welcome back. I'd ask the minister to have staff introduce themselves, those who
have not.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Christopher Mitchelmore,
Minister Responsible for the Research & Development Corporation.
MR. PLOUGHMAN:
Mark Ploughman, Acting Chief Executive Officer for the Research & Development
Corporation.
MR. MAY:
Levi May, Chief Financial Officer for the Research & Development Corporation.
MR. HOLLOWAY:
Colin Holloway, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister Mitchelmore.
MR. GEORGE:
Bradley George, Executive Assistant to Minister Mitchelmore.
MS. MUNDON:
Tansy Mundon, Director of Communications, BTCRD.
CHAIR:
Will the Clerk please call
the first subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 9.1.01.
CHAIR:
9.1.01.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank
you for being with us. I just want to take the opportunity to congratulate Mr.
Ploughman on his appointment as the acting head of the Research & Development
Corporation. This is an area where there's great potential, and while RDC has
been on the go for a number of years, there's still a lot of untapped potential
and a lot of work to be done.
I don't
have a lot of detailed questions. I guess my only specific question related to
the Estimates is related to the Grants and Subsidies line. There is a
significant reduction of several million dollars, so I was just wondering if the
minister can give us some information on what the intentions are and what impact
we anticipate on RDC's efforts.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Research & Development
Corporation has seen their Grants and Subsidies, operating grant, reduced by
$3.2 million I believe, or close to $3.2 million. Some of the reductions account
for a $1.2 million deferral in tangible capital asset, as well as changes – not
filling vacant positions and the layoff of two employees at the Research &
Development Corporation. As well as finding other efficiencies through line by
line, they were able to reduce their operating expenditures by $1 million, and
there will be some changes to the non-commercial component of the Research &
Development Corporation through some of their programming that was geared
towards more academic, that will see some changes.
The
goal of RDC is to leverage and to work primarily with commercial clients to have
greatest economic impact on the overall economy when it comes from a
pre-commercial to commercial, but it will be up to the board of directors and
the Research & Development Corporation to utilize this grant to its full
potential and capitalize on all the opportunities. We see significant
opportunity in research and development in the community. RDC is an asset to the
province and they've proven themselves through various projects that they've
done.
MR. KENT:
I think I agree with
everything you just said, so I appreciate your comments. This is another area
where I think we can offer each other some support because there is great
potential here to stimulate economic growth and to attract R & D activity to the
province.
I have
no further questions, Mr. Chair.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you.
It's
Gerry Rogers. I work for the great people of St. John's Centre. I want to thank
you very, very much for your work and for your commitment to the people of the
province.
As you
know, in our particular fiscal situation, current, past and going forward, how
important research and development is, particularly in the area of
diversification and how vital the work you are able to do, the work you are able
to shepherd, the work you are able to ignite is so very, very important for our
province going forward.
I have
no specific questions, except for: What do you see, in this current situation,
as some of your priority target areas for research and development?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Research & Development
Corporation primarily has three strategic areas they focus on. It would be the
oil and gas sector. It would be mining and the exploration activity around it.
That would comprise two-thirds of typical expenditures at the Research &
Development Corporation. The remaining one-third would be for other
opportunities that would exist, whether it be in life sciences or whether it
would be in forestry or other activity in manufacturing, or working in academia
on various other projects.
There
have been some exciting developments that have taken place with the Research &
Development Corporation. If we look at, for example, an announcement with
Rambler mines where using a piece of equipment that would have been used in
diamond mining into this cooper and gold mining to be able to extend mining life
and enhance productivity.
These
are the types of things that the Research & Development Corporation are very
proud that they're engaged in. They have a number of files they work through the
board. They have a very business-like way of operations that's performance
managed and really good indicators as to how we can look at enhancing the
overall economy.
I guess
I can get the CEO to point out, for the dollars that have been invested in RDC,
how much has been levered in the overall economy.
MR. PLOUGHMAN:
In terms of leverage, we typically get a leverage of about three to one. So
every dollar that's invested by RDC, we'll see another $3 come in. That's a
combination of funds that we'll get from other funding agencies, but mostly it's
from business, which is core to what our mission is, to drive business-led
research and development in the province.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay.
Again,
is there any particular area – I know the three different areas that are sort of
the primary ones – is there anything particular that we can get excited about
right now in terms of the near future, what's on the horizon?
MR. PLOUGHMAN:
We are seeing some very interesting growth taking place in the geosciences
sector. Our programs are a combination of directed research but there's also
academic research and other commercial-type programs.
In the
directed-research programs, we generally pick themes that are significant, like
with respect to current trends and opportunities. So we're doing a lot of work
around ocean technology and sensor technologies. We'll be hearing a little bit
more about that in the coming months, about some of the exciting work that's
taking place there.
As I
indicated, there's also been some growth in the geosciences which is important
to Newfoundland and Labrador because a lot of that activity takes places in
rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes.
MR. PLOUGHMAN:
We will also see, I think, a
lot of growth in the start-up community. There's growth of entrepreneurship. All
entrepreneurship that's successful is coupled in innovation. Innovation
generally means research and development. So with respect to our Proof of
Concept program, we're expecting to see some uptake on that.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Ms. Rogers, part of my
mandate is around the development of an innovation strategy and Research &
Development Corporation will play a very critical role in that, as we roll out
that strategy over the next little while.
I'd be
more than happy to have a further conversation with you. I thank you for your
interest in this.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay.
Also,
would the exploration and development of alternative forms of energy come under
the Research & Development Corporation, at all? I know we have Nalcor, but in
terms of research and development, looking at those areas.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Research & Development
Corporation will engage with any business or entity to see if any of their
research and development activities are something that they can deliver on any
of their programming.
So if
somebody has an idea they should certainly engage with the business advisors or
account managers at RDC, have dialogue with them, work through the Research &
Development Corporation and the board of directors there.
MS. ROGERS:
Great.
Thank
you very much and, again, thank you for your work.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Ms. Rogers.
That
would be it under Research and Development. We're going to move to The Rooms, if
the Clerk could call the next subhead.
CLERK:
Do we have anyone to move
for The Rooms?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Did we vote on that or are
we –
CLERK:
(Inaudible.)
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Okay. Thank you.
We'll
get Dean and Donna Marie in. It's just two people.
CHAIR:
(Inaudible) The Rooms
Corporation.
I just
ask our newcomers to please introduce themselves.
MR. BRINTON:
Good morning. I'm Dean Brinton. I'm the CEO of The Rooms.
MS. HUMPHRIES:
Good morning, Donna Marie Humphries, Director of Finance at The Rooms.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
CLERK:
Subhead 8.1.04.
CHAIR:
8.1.04.
Ms.
Rogers, would you like to start, please?
MS. ROGERS:
Again, thank you very much.
Thank you for your incredible stewardship of one of the jewels in our cultural
crown in Newfoundland and Labrador. I know that it's been a very difficult time
in the past few years having to fulfill the mandate in spite of some of the
fiscal restraints.
I know
that, as a province, we are so very proud of The Rooms. We are proud of what it
has done and also we live in anticipation, as well, in what it can do, not only
for tourists but for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I know that it's a
very, very busy time, particularly with the 100th anniversary coming up.
I want
to thank you for the work you have done with such skill in partnerships with
philanthropists, with people in the arts and the culture and the heritage
section. So I want to thank you very much for that work, at times under such
very, very difficult situations.
As you
can imagine, I'm somewhat disappointed in the fact that access has been somewhat
diminished in terms of having to close some days. So I'm wondering why the
budget announced a cut of $200,000 to close The Rooms two days instead of one.
Here the cut says only $93,500.
Can you
explain a little bit about some of the cuts and the decisions made in view of
the cuts to The Rooms?
I also
have to explain, I have to leave here in eight minutes. It's beyond my control.
This morning I am a woman without choice. This is where my heart is but I'm
afraid I'm going to have to leave. I trust my colleague will be as thorough, as
well. I'm sorry that I won't be here for the Tourism and Culture part. Again,
this is so much where my heart is but my body will have to take me somewhere
else.
Thank
you again for the incredible work you are all doing with such success.
Thank
you.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Ms. Rogers, the change to
The Rooms Corporation, we do anticipate $200,000 in savings by reducing the
hours on Tuesday in the off-season only. We will remain open during the summer
on Tuesdays, as well as we've reduced the number of free days a month that would
have been available.
But the
changes to what was budgeted of $6,717,100 last year and what's budgeted this
year of $6,623,600, you're correct that there's only a small variance, and
that's primarily due to the JES to account for increases due to the new job
evaluation that is accounted for by government and the particular grant to The
Rooms so it's able to pay the employees the wages that are part of the
contracts.
MS. ROGERS:
Will we experience any job
losses due to the diminishing of the hours that it's open?
MR. BRINTON:
May I, first of all, just
thank you for your very kind words. It's been a remarkable privilege to be part
of The Rooms for the past decade. We have really wonderful things ahead of us.
We
don't expect that there will be any job loss as a result of this. We're going to
reduce our cleaning and security coverage; that's how we're going to save about
$200,000 a year. But in terms of our government employees, there shouldn't be
any impact there.
MS. ROGERS:
Okay, thank you very much.
On that
note, I may have to just slip out.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Ms. Rogers.
I would
just like to remind the staff if they're called upon to answer a question, if
they wouldn't mind just introducing yourself before you speak.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good
morning, I missed the introductions but I see lots of familiar faces, so that's
good to see. Maybe we didn't do those introductions yet, did we?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Not yet.
MR. KENT:
Oh, then I didn't miss
anything.
Good
morning and thank you for being with us. I simply want to echo Ms. Roger's
comments. I have great respect for the work that's being done by The Rooms and
the facility, and the programs that it provides to the province are exceptional.
Based on the commentary provided so far, I don't have any further questions.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Mr. Kent.
MS. ROGERS:
Can I just ask one more
quick question?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Sure.
MS. ROGERS:
Can you tell us a little bit
about what you see on the horizon for The Rooms, any particular new direction or
any news programs or anything that's coming?
MR. BRINTON:
Well, our next major project, of course, is the First World War-related projects
that include the opening of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment Gallery on July 1,
the completion of the site of the former Fort Townsend which is the grounds of
The Rooms, as you know – and the connection, by the way, between the two is that
the very first Royal Newfoundland Regiment was formed at Fort Townsend in 1795.
So we're bringing that part of our history full circle.
We also
have quite a remarkable ceremony, I believe, planned for July 1. It's going to
be broadcasted nationally by the CBC. It's going to be on the large screens on
Parliament Hill as part of Canada Day. The parade from the War Memorial is
coming to The Rooms. Princess Anne, Princess Royal, will be here to be involved
in the dedication and so on.
All of
our effort right now is being directed at that. I'm very pleased also – I know
this is well known – that we've been successful in securing over $11 million to
date for our First World War projects, which I believe really speaks volumes
about how Newfoundlanders and Labradorians feel about Beaumont-Hamel and the
First World War.
MS. ROGERS:
Yes. The $11 million you've
secured from where?
MR. BRINTON:
Well, this has been a major gift campaign for two reasons. We haven't had a
large staff to approach hundreds of potential donors. Secondly, we didn't want
to do anything that would impact smaller charities.
If you're trying to raise $25,000 and so on from a lot of
different sources, those are the funds, locally, that are often used for a lot
of smaller charities. So our great supporter, Elinor Gill Ratcliffe, contributed
$3.25 million. That was matched by Fortis, another $3.25 million.
MS. ROGERS:
Wow.
MR. BRINTON:
The five large Canadian chartered banks have together contributed $2 million and
so on. These have been all major gifts. There's also going to be an announcement
from the federal government very shortly.
MS. ROGERS:
Great.
Also, is there anything in the plan to help increase
visitations by local people?
MR. BRINTON:
Yes, we believe that the Royal Newfoundland Regiment Gallery is going to bring
thousands of people to The
Rooms that would have otherwise probably never visited, both residents and
tourists. We're making plans now to capture that market and make sure that we
can eventually try to encourage them to become members and become interested in
the other things that we're doing on an annual basis.
MS. ROGERS:
My membership has lapsed;
I've got to do something about that. But yes, that's been a concern that we
haven't had as much uptake in terms of people using The Rooms as much as
probably they could be.
MR. BRINTON:
Yes. And, as I'm sure you well know, the key there is to constantly be changing
the pallet of programs and events that you're offering the public so that people
have a reason to come back time and again. And with this core budget, we think
that we're going to be able to continue doing that.
MS. ROGERS:
Great, thank you very much.
I must fly.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
MR. BRINTON:
Thank you very much.
CHAIR:
We'll just take a minute to
switch out the staff and bring in the staff of BTCRD.
Welcome, and continuing on with the Estimates on Business, Tourism, Culture and
Rural Development.
I'd
certainly like to welcome everybody here again this morning. I'd kindly ask the
staff only to introduce themselves. Again, just a reminder for the Broadcast
Centre downstairs, if you're called upon to answer a question, if you would
kindly say your name, wait for your tally light, and continue to speak.
So if
you'd introduce yourself, please.
MR. GENGE:
Daryl Genge, Acting Deputy Minister.
MS. MURPHY:
Carmela Murphy, Assistant Deputy Minister of Tourism and Culture.
MR. BURKE:
Brian Burke, ADM for Ocean Technology and Arctic Opportunities.
MS. HAYES:
Robyn Hayes, Departmental Controller.
MR. JOHNSTONE:
Terry Johnstone, Director of Policy and Strategic Planning.
MR. LODER:
Jeff Loder, Director of Trade Policy.
MS. SKINNER:
Gillian Skinner, Director of Regional Economic Planning and Development.
MR. HOLLOWAY:
Colin Holloway, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister Mitchelmore.
MR. GEORGE:
Bradley George, Executive Assistant to Minister Mitchelmore.
MS. MUNDON:
Tansy Mundon, Director of Communications.
CHAIR:
Okay.
Would
the Clerk please call the first subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 1.1.01.
CHAIR:
1.1.01.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good
morning to everyone. It's great to see many of you again. I'm familiar with the
great work you do on behalf of the province, so thank you for that.
With
regard to 1.1.01; are there or were there any vacancies, any positions being
eliminated? I was just wondering if the minister could comment on that.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Sure.
The
Salaries line that was revised up to $311,900 last year reflected a retirement
and leave payouts for political staff. That was the executive assistant that
would have previously been in the minister's office due to the election and the
changes.
The
decrease right now in the current budget of $207,100, the current amount – the
decrease is $80,300. It reflects the transfer of political staff from the
department to the House of Assembly and a step increase for the executive
assistant.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
No
further questions, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next set of subheads, please?
CLERK:
Subhead 1.2.01 to subhead 1.2.04 inclusive.
CHAIR:
Subhead 1.2.01 to 1.2.04
inclusive.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Under
1.2.02, Administrative Support, Professional Services funding was unspent. I was
just wondering if there's any particular reason for that. I was just wondering
if we could get an overview of what would be contained within the Purchased
Services line, beyond the office admin stuff, copier contracts and that stuff.
Is there anything else in there that's worth noting?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Okay, under Professional
Services there were no funds spent last year because of a deferral of a
retention schedule which was part of a process to consolidate records and which
looked at saving money by doing a consolidation of records. We did a decrease of
$10,000 when we did the line-by-line review.
In
terms of Purchased Services, this is primarily made up of our lease, and record
storage cost would be there.
MR. KENT:
Thank you for that,
Minister.
My next
question pertains to 1.2.03. It relates to the Grants and Subsidies line item
which has been eliminated in this fiscal year. I'm just wondering what that
$25,000 amount in Grants and Subsidies was previously used for?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We had posted that in terms
of the posting that went online. The $25,000 was a decrease to CARE. This would
have been the team funded through Dr. Wade Locke.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
Similarly, under 1.2.04, $1.8 million in Grants and Subsidies was unspent last
year. It's not budgeted this year. I'm just wondering what that relates to.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The $1.815 million is a
decrease that reflects the Colonial Building interpretation, the internal aspect
of the Colonial Building that was announced in the budget as deferred
indefinitely during the 2016-2017 budget and GRI process.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
No
further questions, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next set of subheads?
CLERK:
Subheads 2.1.01 to 2.1.03 inclusive.
CHAIR:
2.1.01 to 2.1.03 inclusive.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My
questions are under International Business Development, Marketing and Enterprise
Outreach, and Investment Attraction Fund. I have a few broad questions on Trade
and Investment. I recognize there's a lot of good work that's been done, and
we're lucky to have the calibre of staff that we have in this area, and in other
areas as well, but I'd certainly highlight this one in particular.
I'm
just wondering if the minister can make any comment on the current status of
CETA negotiations as it relates to Newfoundland and Labrador.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Well, CETA negotiations are
ongoing, as you may have read in the media as well, about the English text
passing its legal scrub. Right now it has to go through the French text version,
and then has to go through the EU in terms of acceptance.
Federally, we are engaged with our federal counterparts, and the federal
minister has been in Europe on a matter. We're working to prepare our business
community to be able to amply do business and capitalize on benefits that are in
the CETA agreement, which we anticipate to come into effect in the spring of
next year.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you.
Could
you comment specifically on the status of the fisheries fund, the infamous
fisheries fund?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The matter of the Fisheries
Investment Fund is something that my department has been tasked in leading, but
this would be – in terms of the actual fund itself, would fall under Fisheries
and Aquaculture, but I continue to have discussions with my counterparts in
international trade with the federal government and look forward to securing
investment into our fishery based on CETA negotiations.
MR. KENT:
Minister, I sense you're
optimistic. Would that be a fair categorization of how things are progressing?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Well, we're continuing to
have those negotiations. So I don't have any further comment to make, Steve, on
that particular topic.
MR. KENT:
Oh, well, I can only try.
Any
trade missions affected by the discretionary travel freeze in this fiscal year?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I'll defer that to –
OFFICIAL:
Would you like to answer
that?
MR. LODER:
The freeze in discretionary
spending is not anticipated to impact a number of trade missions. We focused our
energy in trying to streamline activity. The regular course of business is
planned.
MR. KENT:
That's good news. Thank you.
I know
we have an MOU with a province in China that, as the critic, I should learn to
pronounce but I believe it begins with Z. I was just wondering if you could give
me an update on the status of that MOU.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We do have an MOU. I've had
discussions with representatives who are looking at doing business in China,
looking at how we could secure having a delegation and look at the opportunities
to enhance and increase business within China. Those types of discussions have
happened within the last number of days. We are active in that particular matter
of looking at the Chinese market.
MR. KENT:
That also is good news.
So just
to be clear, there is a trade mission being contemplated, either in partnership
perhaps with the federal government or with COF or on our own? It is being
contemplated?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We're certainly open to
having inward delegation when it comes to having Chinese investors and those who
would like to look at the opportunity here. We're always looking at bringing in
investors in Newfoundland and Labrador to attract foreign direct investment and
create new opportunities.
So I'm
very encouraged to see there's been some interest, but we don't have anything
currently planned. If it progresses to that point, we will certainly be willing
to have inward delegations from China or other countries come to Newfoundland
and Labrador.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Minister.
I
appreciate those questions aren't specific to line items, so I appreciate the
opportunity to have a good conversation that Question Period doesn't allow.
Thank you for that.
Under
2.1.03, the Investment Attraction Fund, I acknowledge there was Capital
allocated that wasn't spent last fiscal. I also notice the budget is lower in
2016-2017.
So I
would like to ask the minister to just provide some explanation on the plans. Is
government planning to do less through loans and advances in investments to
attract investment? Just wondering if you can give me an idea of what the plans
are.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Sure.
Historically, this Investment Attraction Fund has typically been higher in
dollar allocations, even in previous budgets. There's been a significant amount
of dropped balances that have carried over the years and it's made media
presence, but in the last year we did see $7.35 million of the $13.5 million
allocated for attraction of business investment and that infrastructure.
This
year we have an $8 million budget allocation which includes money for venture
capital and anticipated investments that we have for loans and advances with
companies. We still have money available to attract and invest new companies, as
well as we have the Business Investment Corporation to be able to do lending and
secure business opportunities.
The
decrease of $5,500 really reflects a reduction of $3 million in a line by line
and $2.5 million being re-profiled to the regional diversification fund within
Comprehensive Economic Development to ensure that we have sufficient resources
for our economic development initiatives throughout the province and to secure
proper leverage when it comes to looking at our federal colleagues, such as ACOA
and others, with those particular funds. So it's a movement of dollars that
still will attract significant investment in our province.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
Thank
you.
Mr.
Chair, I believe we've only called as far as that, correct?
CHAIR:
2.1.03.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
No
further questions.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Would the Clerk please call
the next set of subheads.
CLERK:
Subheads 3.1.01 to 3.1.03 inclusive.
CHAIR:
3.1.01 to 3.1.03 inclusive.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Under
3.1.01, I'm just wondering what's included in the Grants and Subsidies in line
10.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Grants and Subsidies are
basically the EDGE contracts that we would have.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
Thank
you.
I'm
sure you can appreciate some of this is an education process because these
Estimates are somewhat new to me. While I've read them before, I haven't been a
part of this process with BTCRD.
Under
the Grants and Subsidies line under 3.1.02, Minister, I was just wondering if
you could tell us how that works and what's included in that amount.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
That's our Business
Development Support Program we have in which we can help companies look at being
more efficient, utilization of technology and other matters which we provide so
that companies can be more innovative. There is a benefit to entering into that
marketplace.
So
that's what the particular program is. There's also some interest under the
Fisheries Loan Guarantee Program.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you.
Are
there any changes contemplated in how the Strategic Enterprise Development Fund
financing is provided? Any changes being considered or anticipated?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Strategic Enterprise
Development Fund which, historically, had a higher value for a particular
project that got budgeted. Particularly, it was for the Canada Fluorspar
project. We see some exciting news this week about plans for Canada Fluorspar
where they've selected, in Marystown, the Cow Head project as a site for their
depot and looking at new jobs and opportunities. This particular investment was
budgeted for particular wharfing that would not particularly be needed for that
project.
In
terms of Strategic Enterprise Development, we see opportunities to do business
deals with entities. We have a variety of programs within BTCRD, but we also
have the ability to reach out to the Department of Finance or Treasury Board to
look at securing. We will not let opportunities that exist that can create
long-term economic employment pass by.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
Mr.
Chair, we have called as far as 3.1.03, correct?
CHAIR:
That is correct.
MR. KENT:
My next question is related
to 3.1.03. I note there's nothing budgeted this year but there was also nothing
spent last year. So, just wondering, are these funds moving elsewhere?
I don't
think this is where venture capital would show up, but I'm just curious where
that fits in the department's budget as well?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Actually, in terms of my
response to Canada Fluorspar and that agreement, as to what I talked about, was
the capital –
MR. KENT:
Oh, okay.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
– that was allocated under
the Strategic Enterprise Development.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
There are funds. We do have
a contingency fund should economic opportunities come into play within the
Department of Finance.
In
particular, the venture capital fund that you had talked about previously falls
under the investment attraction program. That's where the appropriations for
venture capital fall.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you. That's
helpful.
No
further questions, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call the next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 4.1.01 to 4.2.01.
CHAIR:
4.1.01 to 4.2.01 inclusive.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think
we'd both agree this is potentially a huge growth area. I note the reference in
the minister's mandate letter as well.
I would
like to hear the minister's perspective on what's going to be happening this
year to develop a new innovation strategy. I'm also curious what that means for
the current innovation strategy. So I'd welcome the minister's comments on that.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We're very excited about
developing an innovation strategy for the people of the province. It's quite
exciting to look at the ecosystem and the opportunities that we have when it
comes from entrepreneurship. We certainly see a real business-focused
opportunity when it comes to innovation.
We will
be developing through BTCRD and RDC, as mentioned earlier, an ability and a
working group to develop the innovation strategy. We will be engaging our
stakeholders as well to be part of that particular process. That work will
become underway very soon. I'm very excited as well about other opportunities
that exist within the Arctic and ocean technology sectors.
MR. KENT:
Thank you. I appreciate
those comments and share your excitement about the potential in those areas.
Under
Purchased Services, Minister, there was perhaps an unanticipated expenditure; I
was just wondering if you could comment on that.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The expenditure, the
$238,000 was basically repairs that were needed to the Atlantic Cable Facility,
the ACF, which is the fibre link that we have and we have an agreement that we
pay one-twelfth of the cost if there's a fibre break. We can't anticipate when
breaks may or may not happen, so the budgetary line is $9,500 but we have
appropriated plans for contingency in case of these unique matters.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
Under
4.2.01, anything happening that you're able to talk about at this point;
anything different happening this year to drive sector development that you'd be
willing to share at this stage?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We have strategic sectors
and we have six specific sectors. A lot of activities and initiatives will take
place in a variety of these sectors. If we look at our agricultural sector, as
we talked about Forestry and Agrifoods, we see the ability for partnerships and
synergies between our programming at BTCRD and also the Forestry and Agrifoods
Agency as we work towards food security and agricultural growth strategy, as
well as looking at ICT and looking at the innovation strategy that is being
planned.
Also
looking at life sciences, we've seen growth in that sector, when we look at
genetics and genome – and I know that's an area as well, Steve, of particular
interest for you.
MR. KENT:
Yes.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We had announced a
partnership and funding towards the hearing project for hearing loss in Grand
Falls-Windsor recently where Dr. Terry-Lynn Young is looking at genetics around
hearing loss in families. That was partnered with the EXCITE Corporation and
ACOA in the Town of Grand Falls-Windsor.
We look
forward to doing more of these types of initiatives to look at life science
because we have a unique genetic pool in Newfoundland and Labrador – so that
potential lot of untapped potential.
MR. KENT:
Great to hear you talk about
that, Minister. It's another area where I think you and I are very much aligned.
And if I can help support the government's initiatives in that area – I see
great potential, not just from an economic perspective but from a population
health perspective, there's just incredible opportunity there.
I thank
you for your comments on that. I have no further questions, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Mr. Kent.
I ask
the Clerk to please call the next set of subheads.
CLERK:
Subhead 5.1.01 to 5.3.01 inclusive.
CHAIR:
5.1.01 to 5.3.01 inclusive.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Will
things be functioning the same or differently this year when it comes to
regional development planning?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Our regional economic
development planning, we have a variety of different programs but there are
changes when it comes to regional economic development in terms of we are
relocating a physical office, the Avalon office. We have plans to close down, to
save on leasing costs of $123,000 and move these employees into our office space
at BTCRD. We have the appropriate space.
So
that, in particular, may create opportunities to work with our employees and
have better synergy across departments to look at and capitalize on how we look
at regions and look at the opportunities that exist. So that is one measure of
which we are implementing some change.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
Under
5.2.01, there is a notable reduction under Purchased Services; I am just
wondering if the minister could briefly comment on that.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Purchased Services is a
decrease of $86,200 as a result of a lease cost this fiscal, and some leases
have not yet renewed and are being paid at the existing rate.
The
Purchased Services for this year, a decrease of $200,300, reflects a
line-by-line review, the reduction of $80,300 and the GRI process for the
$120,000 basically for the relocation of the Avalon regional office to the
Confederation Building.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
No
further questions.
CHAIR:
Okay, thank you.
Would
the Clerk please call them next subhead?
CLERK:
Subhead 6.1.01.
CHAIR:
6.1.01.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
This is
another huge growth area with amazing potential. I'd like to begin by asking the
minister: Will the goals of the ongoing ocean technology strategy continue to be
advanced? Does the department remain committed to that strategy?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We're very much committed to
ocean technology and opportunity sector. We've done a number of things since
I've become minister around ocean technology and Arctic opportunities. We've
been at the Northern Lights Conference. We've had implementation meetings with
the delegation of Nunavut. I've hosted workshops at that particular session with
a team of our collaborative group, whether they be with the Marine Institute or
NRC. We've been advocating for new infrastructure investments around this
particular area.
We see
tremendous potential for a pathway to the Arctic, Newfoundland and Labrador
being that strategic location. We'll continue to implement the MOU with Nunavut.
We were so happy to have that delegation here just a few weeks ago. They've had
positive opportunities to look at all areas of the MOU agreement, whether it be
infrastructure or health care or skills in training or culture. As well, we look
at other opportunities in the North and we'll continue to make that a priority
area because that does present a significant aspect for growth.
MR. KENT:
I think the work that's been
done in this area and is being done in this area is excellent, and happy to lend
our support in any way we can.
No
further questions on 6.1.01.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Mr. Kent.
Would
the Clerk please call the next set of subheads?
CLERK:
Subhead 7.1.01 to 7.1.04
inclusive.
CHAIR:
7.1.01 to 7.1.04 inclusive.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm
very pleased and relieved to see the budget pretty well intact for Tourism
Marketing. We've reaped the benefits of investments in this area for the last
number of years, and I am glad the new government has chosen to continue that
commitment. We've had some brief public exchanges, but hopefully we can have a
slightly more productive discussion this morning.
I just
would like to hear the minister's quick comments on what's being done
specifically to target markets to capitalize on exchange rates and gas prices
and so on. I'm sure that's under active consideration, I have no doubt. I was
just wondering if the minister can give me a little more insight into what's
being done this year to capitalize on some of those potential opportunities.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Well, we're very excited
about the upcoming tourism season, and with the new launch of our tourism ad
we've seen tremendous uptake. We've received a lot of positive response.
Our
YouTube view of that ad, once it went up in January, is now in 10th place, and
some of these ads on the channel have been there for up to six years. This one's
only been for a very short period of time with more than 100,000 views. So it's
quite exciting. We're purchasing ads across Canada. We have to be cognizant of
exchange rates.
There's
tremendous opportunity in the US market because of population, especially the
New England states, but the exchange rate being – in the US dollar – beneficial
to them, it also makes going to the US more expensive for the Canadian consumer.
So we also have to be cognizant of that.
A
number of our markets are still the Canadian marketplace. We're still in those
markets as well, but we do have an Atlantic Canadian Tourism Partnership, and we
are partnering with Destination Canada. Destination Canada does have a targeted,
I believe it's a $20 million – a $30 million strategy, and we're part of that
strategy, to be able to target specific markets that would be of interest to us,
like many in the New England states, because of the connection.
MR. KENT:
Right.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Whether it be the Boston
market or New York. So we're being strategic on where we want to invest. As well
as in Europe as well, that's not a market that's lost on us. We are there when
it comes to the UK, German marketplace.
Newfoundland and Labrador is a unique place to visit, and much of our consumers
have more disposable income. They're usually well educated. This is a trip
they're planning. Fluctuations and things like that in gas prices typically
would not impact or hinder their ability to come to the province. This is a
decision that they make. We don't get accidental tourists. They come here for a
reason, because of our product and our experience; the authentic experience they
get when they come here.
As
well, we're working with our airport authorities to enhance tourism and visitor
access, because beyond marketing you need access. We're very pleased to see
those three direct flights to Europe that exist, to Dublin, as well as a couple
to London. We'll continue to work with the airport authorities to get enhanced
links and work towards seeing another link to the US marketplace as well.
So it's
not lost on us. Our department and our division in Tourism and Culture, as well
as business investment, we're looking at trying to secure enhancements to
tourism so that we can grow the industry, because there is a goal set to grow
revenues to $1.6 billion by 2020. What we've done recently through our
destination development plans is we've set the way to increase our product
offering to help grow revenue.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Minister.
My next
question pertains to 7.1.02. I'd welcome the minister's general comments on
what's happening in this area to capitalize on the opportunities; although in
his previous comments he may have very well covered that already.
Minister, I don't know if there's anything else you'd like to add at this point
of a general nature around opportunities we're trying to capitalize on this
year.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I think one of the things –
as I mentioned earlier, we have the destination management organizations on the
ground that have been working very hard to do destination development planning
and they're going to be advancing their initiatives, which they have prioritized
recently. So those are our opportunities. We will continue to work with our
partners through Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador and the tourism board.
We're very engaged when it comes to what we want to do to grow tourism.
If you
have questions about the Grants and Subsidies seeing a significant drop, this is
for the completion of the St. John's Convention Centre project. That was the
amount of $12,200,000.
MR. KENT:
You read my mind.
No
further questions, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Okay.
Just
prior to going into the next set of subheads, I'd like to take a five-minute
break, please.
MR. KENT:
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair.
I do
have a question about 7.1.04. I apologize, I thought that was the next one but
it's still this one.
CHAIR:
Continue on, Mr. Kent.
MR. KENT:
Just very quickly. Can you
confirm that the $1.3 million was for the Marble Mountain ski lift replacement?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I can. That's what that
expenditure was. That's the last payment to complete the purchase of the ski
lift. That was over $4 million.
MR. KENT:
Is the work complete at this
point in time?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes, and they actually did a
one-year launch of the ski lift to celebrate the anniversary of the
implementation.
The ski
lift is operating. Certainly, snow conditions and everything sometimes makes it
challenging with the weather conditions that we have, but we did not have any
breakdowns or any major issues with this new ski lift, and I'm told it is fully
insured.
MR. KENT:
I think skiing would be
possible in my backyard today. It's rather unfortunate.
So
there were no major savings or overruns, the project was pretty well on time, on
budget. Would that be fair to say?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes.
MR. KENT:
Okay, great.
Any
plans to sell Marble Mountain or any part of it? Is that under any kind of
active consideration?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
With respect to Marble
Mountain, we see opportunity with Marble Mountain. Marble Mountain itself needs
to focus on its core operations, which is the ski lift. Skiing and snowboarding
gives it its greatest potential.
We're
going to work with Marble Mountain and the board to look at finding ways in
which there can be investment made that can reduce operational cost and focus on
that core product offering to bring up the numbers so that it actually
encourages people who haven't been skiing in a while or snowboarding in a while
to get there. The more people who are utilizing this pristine facility that we
have on the West Coast, helps generate other revenues, whether it would be at
the Marble Villa which we own, as well as the food services and beverage
services that exist, as well as rentals and accommodations. So increasing
revenue is an important focus for us right now at the Marble Mountain
Development Corporation.
We do
have a plan to move forward when it comes to looking at the base development at
Marble Mountain because there are significant assets. If we could generate new
inward investment from new businesses at the base of Marble Mountain, like other
ski hills, like in Banff and other areas, that's how they generate revenue. So
if you could do a lease sale on particular property, that could be a rent that
is basically paid, or a lease paid to the Marble Mountain Development
Corporation, but these types of matters need to be dealt with through the board
of directors.
We're
certainly working on engaging a project management team to work with them so
that we can make the viability of Marble Mountain much more successful as we
move forward. It's not something that can happen overnight, Mr. Kent. It's been
a long-standing matter, I think by a number of other ministers that would have
been responsible for the Marble Mountain Development Corporation, but it is
something that, I can tell you, I've had a number of conversations with my
staff. I met with the board of directors and I've been to Marble Mountain. I see
opportunity with the Marble Mountain Development Corporation, and I want to see
it be around for the long term.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you.
I'm
afraid of heights; otherwise I would go with you and go up the lifts, but I'm
afraid that won't be possible. I can hang out in the chalet if that's helpful at
any point in time.
I don't
have any further questions on this section, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Mr. Kent.
I'm
suggesting that we take a four- or five-minute break and we'll be back at 11:25.
Thank
you.
Recess
CHAIR:
Okay. Thank you very much.
I'll
ask the Clerk to call the next set of subheads.
CLERK:
Subheads 8.1.01 to 8.1.03.
CHAIR:
8.1.01 to 8.1.03 inclusive.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is
an area where I also have some real passion and concern in light of the budget.
I know it's an area that the Member for St. John's Centre is quite passionate
about, as well. So I probably will delve a little deeper than we have been doing
so far this morning, just to try and gain some more insight into what's planned
and what the potential impact of this budget is on our culture and heritage
sectors. So I'll apologize in advance for all the questions.
Just
wondering, under 8.1.01, why was the Salaries area under budget last year?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Salaries was a decrease
of $45,600 reflecting severance and leave payouts of $139,200, offset by delayed
recruitment of $185,000.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
I know
some of this might feel a little nitpicky, but given it's such an important area
and, in some cases, they're small amounts of money, any reduction could
potentially have impact. So I just want to frame my questions in that regard.
Under
Transportation and Communications, we were somewhat under budget last year and
there's a slight budget reduction, probably to reflect reality. I'm just
wondering if the minister could comment on the Transportation and Communications
line as well.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Last year the budget was
$75,200. What was expended was $60,900. That was primarily due to a freeze on
discretionary travel that was in place. This year the budget reflects $70,000
after a line-by-line review. Given that costs could be contained at $60,900, we
anticipated that we'd continue to do the work at $70,000.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you.
Under
Professional Services and Purchased Services, I would appreciate if we could get
a breakdown of those budgets and what's contained in them. I was also wondering
if the minister could comment on if there's anything specific being cut.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Professional Services
under Culture and Heritage – we have a list that we will provide you but I can
certainly read them out as well.
This
would include the provincial archeology. Much of it is archeology. We had Black
Spruce Heritage Services, $5,277.20; Burnside Heritage Foundation, $21,614.15;
Gerald Penney Associates Limited, $18,836.96; Memorial University of
Newfoundland and Labrador, $2,451.33.
There's
also money for Provincial Historic Sites.
MR. KENT:
So are these one-time
grants?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
These depend on the activity
that's taking place, based on what kind of particular finds may happen in terms
of archeology.
With
Nalcor, for example, doing major work in Labrador and other areas, if they have
a specific find we may have to engage our Provincial Archeology Office, given
that we have an act protecting these measures. We may have to engage in that
process.
It's
difficult to gauge where Professional Services will be in this particular matter
but we have budgeted $87,000.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
What
would be included in the Purchased Services line? If you're going to provide the
list, that's fine. We don't need to get into detail now.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Purchased Services,
these are related to visitors, the increase of visitors to exhibits offset by
increased revenue. This would be for Provincial Historic Sites.
MS. MURPHY:
Yes. It would cover the cost
of our participation in federal-provincial initiatives, exhibit development,
programming, uniforms; all the Purchased Services for the entire branch.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
So in
either of those lines is there anything particular – some of it is based on what
comes up during the run of a year, but is there anything particular being cut
out of those budget areas? I sense there's not but I'll ask the question
nonetheless.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
These lines have remained,
basically, in line where they were revised last year. So in terms of cost, there
was $180,600 in Purchased Services last year. This year we anticipate spending
$180,000.
We
certainly think that we can retain our costs for those amounts, such as uniforms
and things like that, in the $180,000.
MR. KENT:
Okay, thank you.
A
couple of questions related to the Grants and Subsidies; I believe the $37,000
cut is a transfer of the Provincial Historic Commemorations Program to the
Heritage Foundation. I'm just wondering where they will find the money for that
program.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
There's a particular
advisory board that deals with the Provincial Historic Commemorations Program
and there was an allocation, a small grant, associated with each particular
project. The provincial Hertiage Foundation has accepted that this fits in line
with their mandate and they will take over the program and this can be absorbed
within their normal operations. It doesn't have to reflect the $37,000
expenditure.
MR. KENT:
Okay, thank you.
Would
we be able to have a list of the recipients and the amounts, including the
sector organizations for both heritage and culture for last year and this year?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The CEDP?
MR. KENT:
Yes, whatever grants and
subsidies would be covered here.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We have all of our lists of
grants for the Cultural Economic Development Program for arts and heritage. They
are available on our website.
MR. KENT:
Okay, great.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We can make them available,
if you need them.
MR. KENT:
No, that's fine. If they are
on the website, we should be able to manage that. Thank you.
I'll
move on to 8.1.02. Could the minister provide some explanation on the Salaries
line? Why was it under budgeted last year? Is there a new position this year?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The $106,300 last year in
the revision reflects delayed recruitment. This year the increase of $100,200
reflects the JES implementation; $61,800 pay scale step increases of $17,100;
overtime and shift differential payments of $21,300.
MR. KENT:
Okay, thank you.
And
there was a minor overrun last year in Transportation and Communications. Is
there anything you wish to comment related to that?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes, the increase of $6,300
reflects more third-party travel due to the increase in the number of
large-scale productions in the fourth quarter. We've certainly seen where our
Arts and Culture Centres, especially last year, saw an increase in revenue
because of the level of activity that's taken place, which is good to see.
We've
budgeted back to our $126,000 for Transportation and Communications because
we're certainly looking at trying to find ways to do things a little more
efficiently when it comes to how we travel or the utilization of communications.
MR. KENT:
A more significant variance
last year was under Purchased Services. There was about a $450,000 additional
expenditure. Could the minister comment on that?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes, that primarily reflects
I guess, as I just mentioned, the increase in revenue. We have an increase of
$442,000 in Purchased Services that reflects the increased third-party shows and
the expenditures related to these shows. So it's payments to performers. As we
have more shows, we'll have more costs but we're also generating more revenue.
So that's a positive.
MR. KENT:
Yes, that is definitely a
positive.
I trust
it's government's intention to retain all of our Arts and Culture Centres and
continue to operate them.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
In terms of budget
2016-2017, there have been no changes made to our operations at the Arts and
Culture Centres.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
8.1.03,
the Grants and Subsidies for the Arts Council, let's start there. They've been
cut substantially. I'm curious what the implications of that will be and if
there are any details you can provide at this point.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Arts Council maintains
all of their core funding they had previously retained. The differential
reflects $197,100; $197,000 is the closure of the Labrador Cultural Outreach
Office and the Labrador Cultural Travel Fund that was associated with that,
which was announced by the Arts Council and listed when the budget was released.
MR. KENT:
Right.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
In terms of this particular
program, though, Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs recently announced as well a
travel fund for artists. In terms of looking at what is available to artists,
any artist served in Labrador would be available as well to utilize the core
programming of the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council. So there is no cut to
the particular programming. This is a cost savings of having administration and
a secondary office.
MR. KENT:
Would you mind commenting a
little further on the rationale for eliminating the Labrador Cultural Outreach
Centre. I appreciate that, based on what you just said, those programs and
services will be provided in a different way, but I'm just wondering how the
conclusion was reached to eliminate that centre.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Well, government had reached
out to all of its entities to engage in a line by line or a Government Renewal
Initiative, and this was a matter that was put forward as an option for savings
by the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council.
In
terms of looking at the overall offering, the Department of Business, Tourism,
Culture and Rural Development has a regional office in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.
There is a Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs office in Happy Valley-Goose Bay that
we're looking at utilizing those staff to deliver programs to support and
deliver on the mandate, as well as the Arts Council will focus on its core
mandate.
The
Labrador Cultural Outreach Office was something that was created based on the
Northern Strategic Plan of 2007.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
I have
no further questions up to 8.1.03, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Okay.
Will
the Clerk please call the next set of subheads?
CLERK:
Subhead 8.1.05 to subhead 8.1.09 inclusive.
CHAIR:
8.1.05 to 8.1.09 inclusive.
Mr.
Kent.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Could
the minister explain what constitutes the reduction of almost $60,000 to the
operating funds here?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The $59,900 was a part of
the GRI process for funding and this would be savings that the Newfoundland and
Labrador Film Development Corporation will save in operations, whether it be
reductions in travel, or money spent in marketing or other office administrative
work. They anticipate that they can make those savings without having impact on
their overall offering.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
I see
this as a line item that could have significant impact in the community in terms
of leveraged funds, for instance, and I think there could be a multiplier effect
in terms of jobs, benefits generated and so forth. Would you be able to provide
updated stats on this?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
On the Grants and Subsidies
to operate the Newfoundland and Labrador Film Development Corporation or are you
talking about the equity program which would be the next line item? There would
be no leverage from the Grants and Subsidies to operate the Film Development
Corporation under 8.1.05. This is strictly for their operations.
They
have a number of staff that are doing good work to promote film and artistic
means in the community. We anticipate they can have some cost savings based on
reduction in the marketing budget they have or within the travel they do. In
terms of the financial statements, a significant portion of their budget goes in
those two fields.
MR. KENT:
Okay, thank you.
We'll
move on to 8.1.06, if that's okay. The unbudgeted amount under Professional
Services under Historic Sites Development, what was that used for last year?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
It was services for the
landscape development plan.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
Under
the Purchased Services area, would that be for repairs to various sites?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Purchased Services are for
repairs for the Provincial Historic Sites. Current costs include roof
replacement in 2015-2016, and the total available for 2016-2017 is $405,000.
MR. KENT:
Would you be able to tell us
a little bit more about what repairs were done to what sites last year? Just
give us sort of a quick overview, if you wouldn't mind.
MS. MURPHY:
This money constitutes a
development plan, a four-year plan. Last year in 2015-16, we spent $420,000 on
sites in Trinity, Bonavista Lighthouse, Heart's Content and Point Amour. That
could include repair work; it could include exhibit upgrades or development for
new programming and exhibits.
This
year, the plan is – Heart's Content is a big focus of our investment, last year
and this year, for the 150th anniversary. We're also going to be doing work at
Point Amour, finishing that, and the Mockbeggar Plantation in Bonavista.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
We'll
move on to 8.1.07, if we're okay.
Are
there any special celebrations and events scheduled for this fiscal that should
be noted in this section?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
This whole section is
focused on the Honour 100 initiatives that are taking place. We have a number of
activities that will take place on July 1 and other special dates throughout the
year. We have exhibits that are ongoing and activities through various grants
that have been dispersed, whether it would be plays that would be taking place
or digitization of World War I records. That's solely what this allocation is
geared towards. It's a four-year program for the reflection of 100 years since
World War I.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
Is
there a salary being eliminated here? There is a reduction of almost $70,000 for
2016-2017.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
There is no salary being
reduced here. There are two people working on the project. There is a project
lead and another individual working, but their salary is accounted for in the
cultural division.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
Is
there a reason there was $30,000 under Transportation and Communications that
was not spent last year? Was there some kind of – is it related to a freeze on
travel, and was travel stopped to the memorial sites or –?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Well, the decrease in
$30,000 reflects less-than-anticipated travel to reduction in planned travel
last year. As well as the First World War commemorations to the Gallipoli
Memorial, as well as the freeze in discretionary travel, certainly impacted the
ability this year. Given that it is 100 years since the Battle of
Beaumont-Hamel, the Battle of the Somme, we've allocated $25,000 for
transportation.
MR. KENT:
Okay, thank you.
There
was $100,000 in Professional Services unspent last year – actually, more than
that; no, $100,000, yes. So was there something anticipated or planned that was
not done, or that a decision was made to discontinue?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The $100,000 reflects less
Professional Services required for the planning of the First World War
commemorations, primarily the Gallipoli Memorial.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
Could
you comment on the Grants and Subsidies? There is a significant increase. I
trust it relates to Honour 100, but could you give me some idea of what's
included in that $450,000?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes, sure.
The
increase of $200,000 from what was budgeted – last year $350,000 was
appropriated. So there's an increase of about $100,000 from last year, and
that's rightsizing the account to accommodate for celebrations and
commemorations that are unfolding this year, including the Royal Visit, the
First World War commemorations, the Royal Canadian Legion initiatives, including
the annual Trail of the Caribou pilgrimage to Beaumont-Hamel. Last year the
$100,000 increase was to support the Royal Canadian Legion and the
istoric Sites ambassador
program that would take place.
MR. KENT:
During my years in
government, I never got to Beaumont-Hamel. Do you think you might be able to
take me with you if you go this year, given it's a significant year? It would be
a show of solidarity or something maybe.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
We certainly are looking to
contain all of our costs when it comes to travel.
MR. KENT:
Thank you for that
anticipated answer.
Just
one more specific question in 8.1.07; can you comment on the reduction to
Purchased Services and any potential impact that might have?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Purchased Services?
MR. KENT:
Yes.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Purchased Services are
savings of $65,000. They were done, basically, by rightsizing of the accounts,
and given what's being planned, what has already taken place and what is planned
for the upcoming fiscal.
We have
seen that with July 1 being a major event, there has been a lot appropriated to
get to that point for all the planning and activity and organization. We
anticipate that will be reduced and we can contain that at $65,000.
MR. KENT:
Thank you.
Mr.
Chair, I'd like to move on to 8.1.08. I'd like to ask the minister to explain
what the cut to the Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and Labrador, Grants and
Subsidies, will mean. What impact will that have?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I'll defer that to –
MS. MURPHY:
The reduction for this year represents a reduction of $23,000 in the operational
budget of the Heritage Foundation, and $29,000 in their grant program for the
preservation of buildings.
The
Heritage Foundation submitted their proposal under GRI. They felt they could
make these operational savings for use of video conferencing for board meetings
and less travel.
Based
on historic numbers they have for the past five or six years, they felt that
grant reduction could be contained and it wouldn't mean that anyone who applied
could not receive assistance.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you for that.
The
budget also cited a $15,000 grant to the Heritage Foundation being reduced to, I
believe, $2,400. I don't believe that's here. So I'm just wondering: Is that an
element of those numbers you just described or is that something different
somewhere else? The numbers, I believe, were – it was a $15,000 grant. Maybe
it's a different grant. I'm not sure what it relates to. It was being reduced to
$2,400. Do you happen to know what that would relate to?
MS. MURPHY:
No, that's a direct
operational grant that we provide for the operations of the Heritage Foundation.
It has been reduced from $515,500 to $463,300. So I'm not aware –
MR. KENT:
There isn't other funding
elsewhere?
MS. MURPHY:
Except for what we already
discussed around the Commemorations Board. They're going to assist with helping
us implement the designations, but the actual grant funding for that was
reduced, which we'd already discussed.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you.
Mr.
Chair, I'd like to move on to 8.1.09.
Perhaps
the minister could start by explaining why there is a reduction of $2.455
million in the capital grant to the Newfoundland and Labrador Film Development
Corporation.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you for that question.
I'd be more than happy to answer that particular question because I believe
there have been articles put out there in the media talking about cuts to the
Film Development Corporation.
I want
to be clear that the Film Development Corporation will be receiving their normal
equity program that they have to do investments into film in this fiscal year
2016-2017.
The
reduction of basically $2.5 million is for the removal of
The Republic of Doyle season five and
season six that would have been allocated under previous budgetary means of 1.25
per cent. So that's $2.5 million, but there is a reinstatement of $15,000 for
the development program and the Equity Investment Program related to producers
to allow us to be at the figure of $2.5 million.
MR. KENT:
So, effectively, all of that
$2.5 million is already allocated and accounted for. Is that correct?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
This would have been money
that would have not been needed, is my understanding because –
MR. KENT:
No, I mean the remaining
amount would all be already –
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The $2.5 million is
available as an equity program. That would be up to the Film Development
Corporation to decide how they want to invest that into various producers or
film documentary, start-up, amateur film.
MR. KENT:
Right.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
That is their prerogative as
the board and the film corp.
MR. KENT:
I guess what I'm wondering,
Minister, is has the Film Development Corporation made those decisions for this
upcoming year? Is the $2.5 million committed, I guess, is what I'm asking?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
I'd like to say, too, that
in this allocation of $2.5 million, there is a half million for the completion
of season 1 in Frontier.
MR. KENT:
Okay.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
So that has been
appropriated.
I don't
have the details of how much particularly is available from the Film Development
Corporation in terms of their budget. On a day to day they manage their program
that they have available in equity and they may carry that over a number of
years in terms of how some of the other programs were administered.
MR. KENT:
Okay. Thank you for that.
Just a
related follow-up question; you mentioned
Frontier which is good to hear. Are there other film projects that are worth
highlighting at this point that are on the horizon or that are actively being
worked upon that are worth noting?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
The Film Development
Corporation has a number of proposals that they're evaluating and reviewing in
terms of their equity program. We will work with the Film Development
Corporation on matters that they put forward. They have the ability to invest,
through their equity program, into film in the province.
If
there are investments that we can make that can have return on equity and return
to the Treasury, then those are the types of things that we'll certainly
consider.
MR. KENT:
Thank you very much for your
willingness to answer all my questions, all of our questions. It's been a
productive discussion this morning.
I thank
the officials for their great work on behalf of the province, once again.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you, Mr. Kent.
I
really appreciate your direct questions and your interest in the department and
clarification of some of the Estimates and expenditures we have within the
department. As well for Ms. Rogers, during her time that she was here, to ask
the questions. I understand you've asked a number of questions as well on her
behalf but if there are other questions that you have, feel free to reach out to
my department at any particular time.
I thank
my officials for the afternoon and other Committee members that are here and the
Chair.
I will
hand it back to you, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Thank you, Minister.
MR. KENT:
Mr. Chair, just one more
thing. I believe we covered this earlier, but the minister did confirm that we
will receive a copy of the briefing book for Estimates. Is that correct?
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Yes, we'll deliver them now
if you'd like.
MR. KENT:
Excellent, thank you.
That's
all for me, Mr. Chair.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
Okay, thank you.
Would
the Clerk please recall the subheads?
CLERK:
Subhead 1.1.01 to 9.1.01 inclusive.
CHAIR:
1.1.01 to 9.1.01.
Shall
the total carry?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Carried.
On
motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 9.1.01 carried.
On
motion, Department of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development, total
heads, carried.
CHAIR:
Shall I report the Estimates
of the Department of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development carried
without amendment?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Carried.
On
motion, the Estimates of the Department of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural
Development carried without amendment.
CHAIR:
Just some housekeeping
duties; I need a motion to approve the minutes of the Resource Committee which
was held on April 19 at 6:04 p.m.
Moved
by Pam.
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Carried.
On
motion, minutes adopted as circulated.
CHAIR:
I'd like to remind Members
of the Resource Committee that our next sitting will be on Wednesday, April 27
at 9 a.m.
Before
we accept a motion to adjourn, I, too, would like to thank the minister and his
departments this morning for their co-operation and certainly to our Members
opposite, the Official Opposition and Third Party, thank you very much. To the
Committee members and to our Clerk, thank you very much again for your
assistance.
I'd
accept a mover for the adjournment
MR. KENT:
So moved, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Moved by Mr. Kent.
MR. KENT:
(Inaudible.)
CHAIR:
Thank you.
Again,
thank you very much.
On
motion, the Committee adjourned.