Pursuant to Standing Order 87, Mr. Oliver Langdon, M.H.A. (Fortune-Hermitage) substitutes for Mr. Walter Noel, M.H.A. (Pleasantville); Mr. Danny Dumaresque, M.H.A. (Eagle River) substitutes for Mr. William Ramsay, M.H.A. (LaPoile); and Mr. Harold Small, M.H.A. (Baie Verte-White Bay) substitutes for Mr. John Efford, M.H.A. (Port de Grave).

The Committee met at 7:00 p.m. in the Legislative Chamber of the Colonial Building.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

Before we have the continuance of the estimates for the Department of Health, the minutes should be adopted and approved, Social Services Estimates Committee, May 20, 1992. May I have a proposer and seconder?

On motion, Minutes adopted as circulated.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I want to welcome the Minister of Health and his officials to the Colonial Building to conclude the estimates of his department. First of all, for the people from the department I would like to introduce the people who are on the committee.

Ms. Verge, who is the Vice-Chair and myself, Oliver Langdon in the Chair. We have Harold Small from Baie Verte-White Bay; Jim Walsh from Mount Scio - Bell Island and Danny Dumaresque from Eagle River; and for the benefit of the committee members, Mr. Minister, would you introduce your officials please?

MR. DECKER: Mrs. Joan Dawe, the Assistant Deputy Minister; Dr. Williams is the Deputy; Gerry White, Assistant Deputy; Roy Manual is Acting Director of Hospital Services and Cec Templeman is Director of Administrative Services.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, what we have been doing is letting each person have ten minutes, so we will have the Vice-Chair, if she would.

MS. VERGE: I would like to start with mental health services for young people. It is a topic I have raised each year since I have been in Opposition and have had an opportunity to question this Minister of Health. There is a desperate need for mental health services for children and adolescents in our Province that has come about with a dramatic rise in the number of reports of child abuse, reports to the Department of Social Services with the number of prosecutions for child abuse, with the increase in the number of people on social assistance; there are now about 75,000 people in our Province on social assistance.

In 1988, the previous administration established the Thomas Anderson Centre in St. John's, as a pilot project for providing mental health services to young people. In the winter of 1989, shortly before the government changed, the Department of Health came to Treasury Board, as they were requested to do, with their budget submission,; they indicated that one of their priorities for improvement in the health care system was an expansion of children's mental health services, saying that the Anderson Centre had proven to be extremely successful and that a similar unit should be established in Central Newfoundland -

MR. DECKER: Which year was that Ms. Verge?

MS. VERGE: That was February of 1989. The government changed on March 5th of 1989 and that June, when I questioned you, this minister, about the Anderson Centre and the need for expanded mental health services for young people, you and your officials, the deputy in particular, Dr. Williams - I have a transcript here - acknowledged the need for the Anderson Centre to continue to function, for the Anderson Centre to have additional staff and for comparable programs to be put in place in other parts of the Province.

Last year, when I asked about it, there was an extensive reply by the minister and by Debbie Sue Martin, speaking for the Department of Health. All along, based not only on what this minister told this committee, what this deputy minister told this committee, what Debbie Sue Martin told this committee last year, but what I have heard from a variety of other sources, what I heard when I was Minister of Justice, all indicated that the Anderson Centre was an extremely good program, badly needed, providing a vitally needed service; the only difficulty is that there was not enough of it. There were not enough counsellors at the Anderson Centre and there was virtually nothing in other parts of the Province, so I along with everyone else within hearing range, was shocked to hear the minister say in the House of Assembly yesterday, in answer to questions posed by the Member for St. John's East, that there is some problem with the Anderson Centre and the government is apparently thinking about changing it or abolishing it. I would like to ask the minister: What is going on?

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, the Anderson Centre started out as a pilot project, and rightly as the member says, by the previous administration. At the time there were high expectations for this way of dealing with mental health problems in children. I think it goes up to nineteen years old, does it not? I think that is the age group generally, and in some cases older than that.

It was an initiative that was started by the previous administration, and I on many times have given them full marks for it because logically it should be an excellent way to deal with this problem; however, we have never formally adopted the decision of the previous administration to build four more throughout Newfoundland and Labrador; nor have we said we would not build them.

For the first couple of years while I was minister we certainly did give it every opportunity to succeed; however I do not believe they have ever had a full complement of employees, of counsellors.

AN HON. MEMBER: Not as yet.

MR. DECKER: Not as yet. They have thirteen or fourteen positions funded, and at the moment I think there are only five or six filled. I do not know - what is the most that have ever been filled, Dr. Williams?

DR. R. WILLIAMS: (Inaudible).

MR. DECKER: There have never been more than five or six people -

MS. VERGE: Could I interject here just for clarification because last year, and I have a transcript, there were -

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, can you ask her to just restrain herself a little bit, because it is extremely difficult to carry on with an answer when you are interrupted all the time. Could you ask her to restrain herself?

MS. VERGE: I think it is important, while we have the chance, to clarify the numbers.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Well the question has been asked. Let us have the minister give the answer first.

MS. VERGE: Okay.

MR. DECKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Anderson Centre has never gotten up to its full capacity. Now to work there we require at least a Masters Degree in various disciplines. So last year the department said maybe if we could bring this under the Janeway board, where they have their own mental health services and where they are sort of more on the front line than the department is, maybe then we might be able to get it up to its full potential. So it was handed over to the Janeway hospital -

AN HON. MEMBER: January.

MR. DECKER: - In January of this year. Now to date the Janeway has not filled the positions either, but there is one problem which we see there. The problem is with the two union bargaining groups where there is going to be I think the allied health services or the (inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DECKER: Yes.

The groups themselves and the hospital board have not been able to resolve that, so I understand it is either gone or is going to The Labour Relations Board to make a decision on. We still cannot say it is a failure or it is a success. All we can say is that to date it has not been a success. We are waiting until The Labour Relations Board deals with the issue so the labour thing is out of the way. Then we are going to give the Janeway ample opportunity to see if this experiment is going to work or not going to work.

If it works then we will consider going with other such facilities around the Province - when the Province can afford it. You are talking about three or four million dollars just to put a building in place, but no doubt we would adopt it.

If, however, the Janeway cannot recruit any better than the Department of Health could directly, then we are going to have to consider whether or not we are going to go on with it. It is foolishness if we are going to build those buildings and cannot get people to work in them. It would not make sense, so we have to review it.

Now I heard the media story which said we are going to close up, which is a pack of utter tripe. It is just sensationalism, which the media does sometimes with their stories. There is no intention to close it, but if the thing does not work then we certainly will have to consider closing it. Then, in keeping with that of course, we have those community health care boards. We are hoping to do more mental health services on the community basis, which Mrs. Dawe is putting a lot of her time into.

MS. VERGE: Chairperson, that is absolutely appalling. The Anderson Centre was working well and providing a critically needed service. Now this minister apparently has set back progress by making an administrative change. This is not a matter of unions or administrations or buildings. It is a matter of thousands of children needing counselling services. Now for the last three years I have been asking about this, and never was there any suggestion that there was any problem.

AN HON. MEMBER: A point of order, Mr. Chairman.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Mr. Chairman, obviously the member is not satisfied with the answer she received but I thought she got a very thorough answer. Now, if you are not satisfied with the answer it does not legitimate making another speech. Obviously you started off and made your opinions known, but we are not going to sit here all night and listen to the hon. member give speeches just for the sake of doing so. The minister is answering the questions very thoroughly and we have to give him that opportunity, Mr. Chairman.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, it has never been fully staffed.

MS. VERGE: Is this a point of order?

MR. CHAIRMAN: A point of order.

MR. DECKER: If the hon. member knows when it was an outstanding success I think she owes it to the group to tell us. It has never been fully staffed.

MS. VERGE: Is the Chair going to deal with the point of order first?

MR. CHAIRMAN: I think it is a matter of clarification so I think there is no point of order.

MS. VERGE: Obviously, there is no point of order. It is a case of the Member for Eagle River trying to run interference for the minister again.

Let us talk about the need for mental health services for young people. I have asked this now for the last three years, 1989, 1990, and 1991, but would the minister tell the committee what is his assessment of the need on the part of the young people of this Province for mental health services?

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, there is no doubt that there is a need, of course there is, but the Anderson Centre is not the only attempt to meet that need. It is one which there was high hopes for being an excellent experiment but not the only one. Every region in the Province has mental health services. There are independent psychiatrists, there are psychologists attached to the school boards. There is mental health being delivered but like everything else we cannot say we are doing an excellent, absolutely perfect job, but we are dealing with it. Maybe, doctor you could give us some more examples of what we are doing in mental health for children in the Province. I do not want to give the impression that there is only one attempt to deal with mental health problems in children and that is the Anderson Centre, and that the Anderson Centre has not been a success. That would be misleading.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Williams.

DR. WILLIAMS: The Anderson Centre is one part of the program in place for services for children and adolescents. As the minister says it has not been as successful as we would have liked it to be. There are a number of positions that are vacant.

MS. VERGE: Can I ask why? In what respect has the Anderson Centre failed to meet the hopes or expectations of the department?

DR. WILLIAMS: We have never got the staffing up to the full complement and offered the full range of services that we had hoped for initially.

MS. VERGE: How have the staff who have been there performed in the view of the department?

DR. WILLIAMS: The staff who are there now have performed well in our view. We have no problem with the staff that are there. It is just that we do not have the staffing up to full complement. There is a component to deal with early childhood mental health problems, a component to deal with adolescent problems, a provincial court team which we would like to get in place, and a day care program plan for the Anderson Centre. We have never been able to get those in place as we would have liked. We are looking for very well qualified people obviously if we are dealing with mental health problems.

MS. VERGE: Is there any reason to think that an administrative change will improve the recruitment problem?

DR. WILLIAMS: Well, I think the Janeway are involved in the day to day delivery of health services to children across the spectrum of need. A number of years ago the department as a pilot project, and again we do not get into the direct delivery of services on a long-term basis, we started up the Adolescent Health Counselling Centre on LeMarchant Road as a pilot project at the department. That was up and running and we moved that to the Janeway Child Health Centre as it fitted in nicely with other components that they had at the Janeway. In the communications area they have a Psychology Department and a Psychiatric Department.

MS. VERGE: I would like to zero in on the recruitment problem because this seems to be at the crux of the problem. What significance does the salary scale have to the recruitment problem?

DR. WILLIAMS: I think the salary component is one that we have had reclassification done on which has improved it somewhat. Again that is tied in somewhat to the bargaining unit issue which is a complicated issue. We are now GS and the Janeway is bargaining under HS but there is also an AAHP group and most of the psychologists and social workers are in that bargaining unit so these issues need to be dealt with at well. Salary was one and we have made some improvements in the salary.

MS. VERGE: What is the salary scale now?

DR. WILLIAMS: I would have to look that up. That was a couple of years ago. I cannot give you the exact figure so I do not want to quote any figure unless I have the exact one.

MS. VERGE: Okay. Could you provide that to me or other members of the Committee later?

DR. WILLIAMS: I can look back and get that information on salaries, sure. That's no problem. I will get the old classification and the current classification.

MS. VERGE: What recruitment efforts have been made in the past year? Now I noticed last year Debbie Sue Martin talked about special recruitment efforts. She said there had been advertising outside the Province as well as within the Province. The year before the same thing was said, and in 1989 the same thing was said. What has been done in the past year?

DR. WILLIAMS: In the last number of months where we were transferring to the Janeway there hasn't been any active recruitment and there is not at the current time. The Janeway is currently assessing the programs there to see how they fit in with the other four or five programs in mental health that the Janeway operates. Then by the end of June I understand they will be making another approach to get additional staff.

MS. VERGE: What's the waiting list in the meantime?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, Ms. Verge. We had agreed I think at the beginning to have ten minutes for each person. I've allowed you fifteen. So we will go to Mr. Harris, and afterwards we will come back again.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have with me a document called Child Sexual Abuse: A Guide to Services and Resources in Newfoundland and Labrador. Produced by the working group on child sexual abuse through the Community Services Council. In that it lists a series of victims' services for victims of sexual abuse. In that is listed the Thomas Anderson Centre.

Now it describes the agency as follows: that the Dr. T. Anderson Centre provides a comprehensive package of services related to the assessment and treatment of all types of childhood mental health or psychiatric problems. This includes children and adolescents affected by sexual abuse, and adolescent sex offenders. Counselling is done on an individual and family basis and specialized programs are developed for groups of individuals or families with similar needs. Is that an accurate description of the Thomas Anderson Centre?

MR. DECKER: That is a description of what the Anderson Centre is supposed to be.

MR. HARRIS: In what respects is it a failure?

MR. DECKER: The hon. member came in a bit late, and I explained earlier that when it was begun there were high expectations for it. But it has never been fully staffed, it has never been able to work at full capacity. Therefore it is extremely difficult to use it as an example when we don't know - we've never had that one up to scratch.

MR. HARRIS: Is the counselling that is being provided by the inadequate staff itself improper? Is there something wrong with it?

MR. DECKER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: No, the counselling that is being provided, is it deficient, is it poor quality? Is it lacking in quality and professional standards?

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, I don't know what reason he would have to ask that unless he knows something I don't know. I have nothing but glowing praise for the people who work there. I don't know where the hon. member is coming from.

MR. HARRIS: My difficulty is this. That you are describing the operations of a centre. You haven't used the word 'failure' to me. You've said that they are not a success. Are the services being provided improper services? Are they poor quality? Or is there just not enough of them?

MR. DECKER: All the services that were supposed to go there, they are not enough. All the services that they intended were never offered like, I just gave some examples before you came in, I think. The program has never been complete. It was set up for twelve or thirteen or fourteen counsellors. The most we've ever had was five or six. Now, surely God, unless you're totally dense, you are going to have to question whether or not you are going to build four more if you can't staff one.

MR. HARRIS: If I may ask about staffing, when was the last recruitment done? Can I ask when the last recruitment was done?

MR. WALSH: Mr. Chairman, just a point of order.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island.

MR. WALSH: All I want to say -

MS. VERGE: Running interference.

MR. WALSH: It's not interference, Mr. Chairman, but we're not in a court of law. The minister should at least be allowed to answer the question before the bantering starts back and forth. When you can't pause to catch your breath or to wet your whistle with a glass of water and someone is coming at you again, I mean, we are not in a court of law here. We are here to try to deal with the estimates, get the answers that you are looking for. The minister I'm sure and his staff are more than willing to give it to you, and we are more than willing to let you have all the time you want.

But please, allow someone to catch their breath or to put a glass to their mouth before you jump back down their throats again. That's all I want to say. I don't know what we had for supper. Ours was obviously not with as many spikes and razor blades as the hon. members who are joining us. At least allow an answer, that's all I'm asking.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. DECKER: The last recruitment, Mr. Chairman, I could refer the hon. member to Hansard. He came in late. But as we just pointed out the last recruiting effort was made last winter in January some time. Since it has gone over to the Janeway they are reviewing the program before they start recruiting. As I also pointed out, there is a problem there with the bargaining units.

MR. HARRIS: I'm not certain where in Hansard that refers to a recruitment in January, but I know last May when the Social Services Estimates Committee met we were told that there was a formal recruitment program done a year before that. So there would have been an attempt in May or June of 1990 and not another attempt until December of 1991. Would that be correct?

DR. WILLIAMS: I will have to get the information for exactly when the last recruiting effort was made.

MR. DECKER: That is a detailed question that we are on.

MR. WILLIAMS: There was some discussion going on with the Janeway for a considerable part of the 1991 year. We hoped to have the service transferred to the Janeway before January but there was a delay there. So during that phase there was no recruitment efforts at the time of the transfer.

MR. DECKER: Before we say we are going to cancel the experiment, we want to get the thing up and running under the Janeway Hospital Board. If it is outstanding and it succeeds then we will continue on and decide whether or not we will build more. But we just can't keep the thing going if we can only recruit half the number of people we require. I think I would be remiss if I did not do that. It is totally illogical to go and build four or five more if you can't get one fully staffed.

MR. HARRIS: Can we get the specifics on the recruitment efforts that were made? Was effort made in January this year or December of last year, and what kind of positions were they trying to fill? Which positions were trying to be filled that were impossible to fill?

DR. WILLIAMS: The positions at the Anderson Centre are a sort of generic type of position for mental health workers. Some are supervisory but some are direct workers. The people we are looking for are people who have a background in social work, a background in nursing, a background in psychology. These are the three main levels of disciplines with a masters level of training and preferably some experience in children's mental health. That is the type of people we are looking for.

MR. HARRIS: But they would not have to be all three of those. You wouldn't have to have -

DR. WILLIAMS: No.

MR. HARRIS: - a social worker, nurse and psychologist degrees.

DR. WILLIAMS: As long as you are from one of those disciplines, that is the three key discipline, it is a multi-disciplinary team. They will work hand in hand with the psychiatrist at the General Hospital. From time to time the psychiatrist has been a consultant to the service, so if one of these workers feels that a psychiatric opinion is necessary then they will consult a child psychiatrist who works at the Janeway. These are the front line workers.

MR. HARRIS: Is it the conclusion then of the Department of Health that there are no social workers, nurses or psychologists available with this type of training or ability?

MR. DECKER: What conclusion would you arrive at if you were trying to recruit people and you just couldn't get them. You can't force it. We don't have the authority to go out and take people and say you must - you know what I mean?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DECKER: We can't force people to work and manage this if they don't want to.

MR. HARRIS: Yes, we are just looking for the details. So I guess then that there was a recruiting effort made in December which was unsuccessful.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, (inaudible) -

MR. HARRIS: I am not certain who did the recruiting and what the results were. Last year we were told that in May or June of 1990 there was some recruiting done. That was like last May. Is it December of last year there was a recruitment effort?

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, I have undertaken to get that information for the hon. member.

MR. HARRIS: Okay.

MR. DECKER: If he can't get through another ten minutes without the information, let's rise the Committee and we will go and get the information and bring it back. Does the hon. member want to do that?

MR. HARRIS: No. That is quite satisfactory.

MR. DECKER: We are dealing with eight hundred and eighty-something million dollars in the Department of Health.

MR. HARRIS: I didn't understand that could be the answer.

MR. DECKER: Now, whether or not recruiting was done December 12 or December 31, I honestly don't know. But I do know there was an ongoing effort made to recruit. Anyone in this Province, who knows anything about mental health, knows there are openings at the Anderson Center. Now, if that is not satisfactory for the hon. member, let's rise the Committee, we will get the information and then we will come back again. That is exactly what we should do, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: You had already consented to get the information, so there was no need for the member to continue to prod for that. The information would be forthcoming.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In addition, there is a description in this publication of a child and adolescent guidance service at the Western Memorial Hospital which describes it as a multi-disciplinary unit providing mental health services to children and adolescents and their families in the Western Region of the Province. The clinical team includes the Director, a social worker, a psychiatric nurse, a psychologist and a special education teacher. Can you tell us whether that agency is fully staffed?

MR. DECKER: Mrs. Dawe.

MRS. DAWE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

To my knowledge, yes, that service is in place in Western Memorial, to my knowledge.

MR. HARRIS: And are all the positions filled?

MRS. DAWE: I am sorry but I can't answer that.

MR. HARRIS: You are not sure?

MRS. DAWE: I would be happy to get the correct information for you.

MR. HARRIS: Okay. While you are getting that, my information and some other members of the Committee may have greater information, is that not all those positions are filled. If that is the case, could we find out the reason for that as well?

MRS. DAWE: Yes.

If I could: As the minister indicated earlier, we recognize that mental health - and I think we indicated that at the last session -is a concern to the department and we are focusing a considerable amount of attention on trying to develop community mental health services, as I had expressed the last time, through the establishment of the community health boards. So we are not saying that all areas in the Province which currently have mental health services are satisfactorily and fully staffed, but I would be happy to get the details for you with respect to Western.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you. Just one final question. Can someone tell us, if the real difficulty is lack of trained people, how that would change because you establish a community mental health board as opposed to the Anderson Center or the Janeway Hospital directly hiring, a community health board trying to fill positions? If that is the problem, then do we have any programs to solve that problem?

MRS. DAWE: Again, with respect to mental health services generally, including children's' mental health, I think one of the initiatives that is underway in the St. John's area, to answer your question, is to review and establish a longer term plan for mental health services for the St. John's metro area. That initiative has been underway since last June and we have determined that about eighty-five different organizations, many of them voluntary and some funded, are providing some components of mental health services in the St. John's area. Many of these groups themselves have indicated that part of the problem in the delivery of this service is that it is fragmented and that some groups are really not aware of the existence of some of the voluntary groups.

Part of our initiative, with respect to community services, is to better co-ordinate the existing services so that we can offer a range and build on these. So it is a co-ordination of existing services, both funded and voluntary, first, so we can make better use of the existing resources.

MR. HARRIS: Is there any program to provide an incentive, as you have in medical practitioners serving in rural areas, or any program to ensure that people in the fields of psychology, social work or nursing are made aware of a program or a need in this area to provide special courses or to ensure that the university is offering that type of program? Are there any efforts being made there?

MRS. DAWE: There are some discussions, particularly with the medical school, with respect to psychiatrists and we have offered for additional funding this year for bursaries to recruit and retain psychiatrists in the Province, as well as the bursary program for other professionals. There are discussions currently under way with respect to psychologists in that area, particularly for child services. So there are discussions, yes, to look at bursary programs and so on.

MR. HARRIS: Perhaps the minister, when he has obtained the information regarding the recruiting efforts, could identify whether it is psychiatrist positions or these positions for social worker, nursing or psychologist positions that are, in fact, going wanting. We know there is a shortage of psychiatrists, but I would suspect that it is easier to either recruit or give existing social workers, nurses or psychiatrists the required training to be involved in this program. So if we could get that information it might be helpful.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Walsh.

MR. WALSH: Mr. Chairman, I guess, for the sake of Hansard, Jim Walsh, Mount Scio - Bell Island.

I am not as much concerned about the line of questioning because I have had an opportunity to experience that over the last number of weeks, but I am very concerned about the impression that may be left by the questioners so far tonight. The thing I am most concerned and most disturbed about is that I almost sense that there are dispersions being cast upon the Janeway.

Now, the Janeway is probably one of the finest facilities for children in Atlantic Canada, if not in Canada. I am really concerned that the kinds of comments being made here tonight are as if to say the Janeway is either 1) no good, or 2) is not doing an adequate job.

I want to ask the minister and his officials, under the circumstances, where obviously you are trying to find people and you can't get above that five or six mark, while you are looking for thirteen or fourteen, how is the Janeway, which I believe to be, as I said, one of the finest hospitals in Canada for children -I don't want any impressions left that the Janeway is no good, and listening to the previous speakers that is what I am sensing. How is the Janeway coping under the circumstances?

MR. DECKER: Well, as we pointed out, one of the biggest problems they have with this specific program is the union issue. They tried to resolve it with the different bargaining groups and they were unable to do it. Whether it was the Janeway's fault or the union's fault is not for me to judge. So they have not really been able to give the Anderson Centre the attention they would normally give to their other programs.

So, basically, they have to come to grips with the labour problem that has been passed over to the Labour Relations Board. They are also evaluating the program, what has been done to date, to see what they have. They are also evaluating what kind of program they should deliver. So, hopefully, once the labour thing is out of the way - I would think that should be out of the way when, Ms. Dawe - in another month or so?

MS. DAWE: Within a month.

MR. DECKER: Within a month the labour thing should be resolved. Then the Janeway will be able to give it full attention and see if it can get up and running.

MS. DAWE: (Inaudible).

MR. DECKER: Yes. The Labour Relations Board might be later meeting and that could be complication, but anyway, once the labour thing is dealt with, then the Janeway can give it its full attention.

If the Janeway - which, as you rightfully point out, is one of the top children's facilities hospitals in Canada and possibly in the world - if the Janeway cannot make this experiment work, then I would challenge anyone else in North America to try to make it work. I think if they can't make it work we are going to have to come to the conclusion that the experiment is going to have to be changed.

MR. WALSH: Following through with that, for me, I suppose having been in the free enterprise side of things, recruitment works both ways. One, when there is a need for people, you carry on your advertising campaigns in as many areas as you can when you are looking for specific kinds of people, but it works the other way, too. People with experience and knowledge in a certain field tend to come looking for employment. I am sensing that if three or four people who were qualified were to come through the door tomorrow whether there was an ad in the paper last week or not, that they would be welcomed and you would say, 'Please, come in. You are hired.'

MR. DECKER: Absolutely. They would be welcomed with open arms.

Now, there is a shortage of psychiatrists in the Province. I am not aware of any major shortage of psychologists or the masters in sociology; nevertheless, for whatever reason - maybe it is the fault of the Department of Health, I don't know, but I don't think it is. I think we gave it a good shot. We could have pulled the plug on the thing six months ago and said we just couldn't seem to get it fully staffed. But rather than do that we wanted to give it to an expert group. They have it now, and let's hope they can make it work.

MR. WALSH: Just one final question. Is that the reason also for the reclassification, that you were trying to move more money into that system? Or was the reclassification done for other reasons?

MR. DECKER: Yes. A year-and-a-half or so ago, I met with some people from the Anderson Centre. Among other things, they told me that they thought there was a problem with the salary scale. So I went back to Treasury Board and we got some reclassifications done. But it seems to be more than money. I suppose, if you paid them half a million dollars each, you might have a better shot, I don't know. But, in my opinion, the salaries now are adequate in comparison to the same qualification in other fields.

MR. WALSH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Verge.

MS. VERGE: Let's get back to the Anderson Centre. It really bothers me to hear the minister say that the government might cancel the program because of a difficulty in recruiting staff. There is an identified need for mental health services for young people. To make a comparison, you don't stop offering cancer treatment because there is a shortage of cancer doctors or cancer nurses. Surely, if the incidence of cancer outstrips the medical and nursing personnel to treat the cancer patients, then the answer is not to cut out what you are doing, it is to use innovative approaches to get more personnel. Doesn't the minister recognise the critical need for mental health services for young people? Given the rise in the reports of child abuse, given the number of prosecutions, given what we all know now about child abuse and neglect?

MR. DECKER: Two issues, Mr. Chairman. The first is her opinion, for which I thank her. The second I have already answered and explained that I'm concerned with the issue.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: Mr. Chairman?

MS. VERGE: I'm not finished my ten minutes.

AN HON. MEMBER: Have you finished?

MS. VERGE: No, I have not. There are other topics I would like to move to now. Three or four -

AN HON. MEMBER: Well, I would just like to say something on this very same topic, too, that we are discussing.

MR. CHAIRMAN: She hasn't finished her ten minutes (inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: Okay.

MS. VERGE: Thanks. I think it was three or four years ago the Department of Health did a review or study - I'm not sure what word would be appropriate - of pap smears. Now, I am not sure of the correct terminology, but I have heard it referred to as a cytology study or review. I wonder if the minister or one of the officials would let us know the results of that study, and also let us know what is happening throughout the Province in terms of the provision of pap tests and the lab analysis of pap smears. Three or four years ago there was a fairly serious backlog of samples. The lab capability couldn't seem to keep up with the need. What is happening now?

MR. DECKER: I'll ask Dr. Williams, here.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Williams.

DR. WILLIAMS: Yes, that was about - I'm not sure of the exact date but it was two or three years ago. Wait now, I think probably in 1988?

MS. VERGE: Yes, that sounds right.

DR. WILLIAMS: That's the date that rings a bell. There was a problem with a backlog of pap smears. Some arrangements were made, with the assistance of the British Columbia Cancer Foundation and Control Agency, to do some of the pap smears where the backlog occurred. Most of the backlog occurred in St. John's. We had some help from places like Clarenville in clearing up the backlog, as well.

I am not aware at this point in time that a backlog exists. I have not heard that there is any problem in having a reasonable turnaround time for routine pap smears at this point in time. We have done a study of the issue of pap smears in the Province. We are linking that study with a federal-provincial study that was done on the issue of pap smears in Canada, and the approach to cervical cancer control in Canada. We are hoping to have some discussions with the Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation and other agencies in the Province to look at how we might approach the whole pap smear issue.

One issue relates to quality. Quality is a big issue in the pap smear area. There have been some studies and stories in the media recently about the failure rate, the false negative rate in the area of pap smears. We want to make sure that, first of all, pap smears are taken appropriately. It is a simple test, but I think, in order to increase its accuracy, it has to be taken properly. That is an education issue we will be looking at on that front. The whole issue of quality, efficiency and effectiveness of the program, we will be looking at that, as well, in terms of the number of organizations now providing Pap smear services in the Province.

Different provinces have different approaches. If you look at the Province of British Columbia, they have a totally centralized system for Pap smears. All the Pap smears are done centrally at the Cancer Control Agency in B.C. They operate the only service in the Province. Other provinces have different setups.

In Newfoundland, we have cytology services at Western Memorial, Central Newfoundland, Gander and Clarenville, as well as the large adult hospitals in St. John's. So this is another issue we are going to look at, the issue of centralization versus decentralization in terms of quality.

MS. VERGE: Will the department release the study report?

DR. WILLIAMS: We haven't finalized our review of the study report as yet but, sure, when we finish doing that. Plus the national report is available as a public document right now.

MS. VERGE: How long has the provincial study report been completed?

DR. WILLIAMS: I would have to check the exact date for you.

MS. VERGE: Okay, but you will make it public?

DR. WILLIAMS: Yes. It is done but we haven't had a final meeting with the committee yet that has done the report, and we haven't taken a position in the department on which way we want to go. We have been waiting for some developments to occur at the Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation because we would like to get that agency involved in the program a little more than they have been in the past. They have been on the periphery, whereas, if you look at their mandate and role, I think they should be more intimately involved in the organization and management of the program.

So, I guess, on a philosophical basis, I can only say that at this point because there is no policy at this point. We are looking at the program in British Columbia as a fairly good model and it may be a model that we might want to adopt in the Province, but that will require some policy changes and some discussions with the organizations that are going to be affected, because there are a variety of organizations providing the service around the Province?

MS. VERGE: So the B.C. model would be one central lab for -

DR. WILLIAMS: The B.C. model is one that we would like to look at carefully -

MS. VERGE: Okay, thanks.

DR. WILLIAMS: - because of the quality issue. Again, if you are doing a high volume and a lot of expertise, there is that issue of quality in Pap smears. If you want to make the program work, you have to be sure that the false positive rate is very low.

MS. VERGE: Is our false positive rate very high now?

DR. WILLIAMS: I am not aware. I think you would probably have to do some studies on that and look at the data and statistics. I am not sure that has been done, to be honest with you.

MS. VERGE: Okay. I would like to ask about nurse practitioners. It is a topic I brought up at our last session. There is a pilot project that has been underway, co-sponsored by the Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland, involving nurses operating what I think is called a primary care service or a primary care clinic on the Southern Shore. How is that going, and is the Department of Health monitoring it and looking at it as a possible model to be copied elsewhere in the Province?

MR. DECKER: It is in the third year now, isn't it, doctor? I think we have funded it for the third year. You are on top of that one, are you, Joan? By the way, at a recent Health Ministers' Conference that I attended, there was a doctor representing the Canadian Nursing Association who gave us credit for it. She said it was one of the most outstanding programs in Canada. Maybe Mrs. Dawe can respond.

MRS. DAWE: That is correct, Minister, and there is an article in the Canadian Nurses, The National Journal, this month, with respect to the primary care project. It is being looked at very carefully by the rest of Canada. The program will be evaluated during this next year, because it is a pilot project, and then it will obviously be determined where we go from there. But thus far the results are very positive, particularly in promoting primary care and putting more emphasis on health promotion and prevention with the community very much involved. Again, I would have to go back. We are looking at that very closely because it is the same concept as we are talking about through the community health structures where you get the public involved and put more -

MR. DECKER: Community health orientation.

MRS. DAWE: Yes, community health structures. But thus far the results are very positive.

MS. VERGE: Is there any consideration being given to setting up another nursing primary care service in any other part of the Province now?

MR. DECKER: Well, by its very nature, it is a pilot project and before we start setting them up all over the Province we would certainly have to evaluate what we are doing there and see how it is doing. We have had a lot of primary care delivered by nurses in Northern Labrador and the Northern Peninsula for years. There are some similarities, but there are other things which are unique to this one, as well, plus the fact that we have the World Health Organization involved in this, so it is not totally our own program. We are funding it, but we have a lot of input from them. We would like to have the pilot project over and done, evaluated, and then determine whether or not they are going to go on with it.

DR. WILLIAMS: The federal government is involved in providing some funding for a thorough evaluation of it, so that is part of the whole package.

MS. VERGE: I see - okay.

The last question has to do with drugs. From what I have read in popular literature, it seems to be a fact of life in many part of the western world that too many drugs are being prescribed and taken, more than patients need and, in some cases, the excess either causes new problems or complicates the problems that the patients went to the doctor to see about in the first place.

What is the view of our Department of Health about the extent of the prescription of drugs and the use of prescription drugs, if there is a feeling that there are too many prescription drugs being taken? Is there any strategy to cut down on the prescription of drugs?

DR. WILLIAMS: Well, maybe I can just make some comments.

MR. DECKER: Go ahead. I wouldn't touch that one.

DR. WILLIAMS: The whole issue of the utilization of drugs is a concern and, in particular, the utilization of drugs in some of our elderly population is a concern, as well, the number of drugs some people are on and this type of thing. People in that age group obviously have more chronic disease and problems than people in the younger age group, so you would expect probably higher drug utilization, but it is an area of concern. Mrs. Dawe, here, chairs The Provincial Quality Assurance Committee, which is a committee made up of representatives from the ARN, The Medical Association, The Medical Board and The Hospital Nursing Home Association. I don't know if I have left anybody out - have I Joan?

MS. DAWE: The Department of Health.

DR. WILLIAMS: The Department of Health.

Joan can probably tell you about a project that we have under way now with the Clinical Research Unit at Memorial University to do a study in the Province about utilization of drugs. We thought we would start at nursing homes where we have traditionally probably a high consumption of drugs and people with chronic diseases, and see what findings are there. So we started the project in co-operation with the medical school to review the utilization of drugs in the nursing homes in the Province. Maybe Joan could give you a little more detail.

MS. VERGE: I would like to interject one related question. It is a question I have asked before. Does the Department of Health agree with, or is the Department of Health inclined to take a position in opposition to physicians who prescribe drugs owning or having a financial interest in drug dispensaries or pharmacies?

It seems to me, where a physician has a financial interest in a drugstore or a pharmacy or a dispensary then, obviously, the more drugs prescribed, the more business there is for the dispensary and the more income from that source. So it seems to me there is a conflict of interest, or a potential conflict of interest.

MR. DECKER: There is really no process from the Department of Health.

DR. WILLIAMS: The medical board monitors that.

MR. DECKER: The Newfoundland Medical Board would have to monitor that. If the hon. member wants to see the Minister of Health pushed over the wharf or shot, let me start telling physicians how to prescribe drugs. That would be the end of it. The only process is the medical board.

DR. WILLIAMS: The medical board has some regulations. It is a conflict of interest for a physician to participate in a drugstore, as I understand it, and they monitor that.

MS. VERGE: Well, that's news to me, because other years when I have asked that question, I have gotten a different answer. But it is a very common practice, you know, doctors typically locate their offices in the same building as a dispensary.

MR. WALSH: I have no problem with the question (inaudible) but if we are going to refer to directly, 'I have asked this question in other years and I have gotten a different answer', then I would like to see the answer tabled. I mean, that is a wild statement. I think I was here last year and I don't know if the question was asked or not.

All I am saying is, if we are going to say that, we should at least be willing to - but let's quote the page and the paragraph. It is a wild statement to say, 'I have asked it before', but not be willing to table where it was asked. It is unfair.

MR. DUMARESQUE: It is only (inaudible). We should move to the headings, I think.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I think that is a point well taken. Do you have any other questions?

MS. VERGE: No, I would like to have Ms. Dawe's -

DR. WILLIAMS: I understand there is no problem in having a physician located in the same building as a pharmacy, as long as there is no financial gain relationship.

MS. VERGE: Yes.

DR. WILLIAMS: That is, I guess, within the medical board's prerogative. They set the ethical standards for medical practice. They tell us that is part of their standard, and that where they have a reason to believe there is a problem, they look into it. That is my understanding of it.

MS. VERGE: Oh, I see. Is that a recent change, do you know?

DR. WILLIAMS: Maybe in the last few years. They have been doing a lot of work on their by-laws and upgrading their Act.

MS. VERGE: Okay.

MR. DECKER: Thank you, but. Mr. Chairman, I know the member would probably answer the question, but I was aware for the last five or six years that a doctor couldn't own a drugstore, for example. I believe there was a time when a doctor could own a drugstore.

DR. WILLIAMS: There was a time when a doctor could own a drug store but in the last few years there has been a lot of work with the Medical Act. Gerry?

MR. WHITE: I don't remember the date, but I think there are some new conflict of interest regulations brought in, some amendments to the current Medical Act regulations -

MR. CHAIRMAN: In the past two or three years?

MR. WHITE: - which delineated, if I remember correctly, the various situations which were prohibited in terms of ownership or relationships between physicians and drugstores.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. White and Dr. Williams.

AN HON. MEMBER: We should get the specific regulations.

MR. WALSH: Mr. Chairman, I want to relinquish my right to ask questions and hope that my colleagues will join, but I would like to serve notice that at about 8:00 p.m., we are going to be looking to deal with the headings themselves, so we will let it be wide-ranging until then.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Walsh. I understood from Mr. Harris, that was the last of the questions he had just now.

MR. WALSH: What is that?

MR. CHAIRMAN: I understood, when you gave up your right just now that was the end of the questions you had?

MR. WALSH: No, I assumed that was an appropriate period of time and I was going to pass to someone else.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, alright. Ms. Verge, have you finished?

MS. VERGE: Yes, but I don't think Miss Dawe had finished her explanation to my question about curbing the prescription of drugs.

MS. DAWE: I think the question was the activity that is underway through the Provincial Quality Assurance Committee, which is, we have surveyed - and it is a current activity, so I could tell you the status right now - we have surveyed all the nursing homes in the Province and gathered information on the number of prescription drugs for each of the residents in the nursing homes. We have just received that information now and the data is being collated and analysed. We have a preliminary report which is under review by the Provincial Quality Assurance Committee and then we will be proceeding. There are two more phases, so we are in the midst of the process.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Mr. Harris.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you. I have a few questions. One follow-up question on the area of adolescent health counselling. The Adolescent Health Counselling Service on LeMarchant Road in St. John's also advertises a multidisciplinary psychology, medicine, nursing, social work service with psychiatric consultation. It is listed as a satellite service to the Janeway. Has this been a successful program, to use the minister's words? Has that been fully staffed and operating?

MR. DECKER: Yes, that is correct.

MR. HARRIS: That is operating and up to staff. How many staff work out of there? Does anyone know offhand?

AN HON. MEMBER: We would have to look and get the figures.

MR. HARRIS: You don't really know, but as far as - so that is a satisfactory operation - it stands alone, operation on LeMarchant Road for referrals for various groups.

DR. WILLIAMS: That was set up by the department as a pilot project with the intention of seeing how it would work and it was subsequently transferred to the Janeway as part of a plan. We are trying to do the same with the (inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: So, from that, can we assume, as a model for adolescent counselling, that, in fact, does work and the department is satisfied it is an appropriate way of delivering that type of service?

DR. WILLIAMS: That model is working and is part of a broad spectrum that the Janeway is operating on all fronts with this issue, yes.

MR. HARRIS: Is there any reason why that cannot be duplicated in places like Gander, Grand Falls, Labrador City, Goose Bay and other areas where this service is needed?

DR. WILLIAMS: I guess we will have to work that particular issue in with the plans that were ongoing at the regional bases or the regional community health boards. No, but we have good experience with that particular service; it was a little broader than just the Mental Health Service, as well; it might be listed with the Mental Health Service but it was set up -

MR. HARRIS: Well, lifestyle, growth and development, mental health.

DR. WILLIAMS: Yes, that's right, it is looking at the whole lifestyle and this type of thing and not just concentrating on mental health.

MR. HARRIS: No, no. It is not specific. So I am assuming that this can be expanded under the community health service program that you are talking about? I confess to not knowing whether I have a chance to ask this last time, but I had it marked in my copy of the Estimates. Under sub-head 2.3.01, Mental Health, there is a decrease in budget of approximately $240,000, or $225,000, I guess, from the revised estimates for last year for salaries in the Mental Health division. As I say, I don't know that I got to that last time. What is the explanation for that?

DR. WILLIAMS: It represents the transfer of the Anderson Centre.

MR. HARRIS: That is the transfer of the Anderson Centre.

DR. WILLIAMS: That's right, and additional funding will be provided as new staff are hired.

MR. HARRIS: Okay.

Another matter I would like to raise - it is topical, but it is also structural, presumably under the Department of Health - is the issue of community health concerns in the Placentia area, suggestions that there are possible problems as a result of air quality, or air emissions, or various other, what the minister has referred to as scaremongering, but what people have a genuine concern about, which has been raised publicly of late.

My question is not on the specifics of that event that is being looked at. What I am interested in is, is that kind of issue something that is dealt with outside of the normal operations of the department, or is there a particular division or responsibility within the department for what might be called environmental health or environmental health issues? I know, the minister, in the House the other day, said that we were consulting with people at Memorial University, and well you might, if there were experts available for that. Is that something that is handled at a political ministerial level, or are there people already in place who are ready to respond to these kinds of concerns as they are raised?

MR. DECKER: Dr. Williams, just explain what we are doing there. You're on top of that more than I am.

DR. WILLIAMS: You don't want to deal with the specifics of Placentia, you just want to deal with the general issue of how you deal with issues such as that.

MR. HARRIS: If you want to use that as an example, feel free. But I am asking, is there a responsibility, or is it something that because it is raised then the wheels start turning to see what we can do about it to figure it out?

DR. WILLIAMS: There are five health units in the Province, four operated directly by the Department of Health, and one under the Grenfell Board. Grenfell has responsibility for public health, as well as the institutional side in the North. At the department we have four health units where each is a responsibility of a medical officer of health, a physician who is trained in public health issues. So those physicians and the staff are dealing with population health issues, community health issues, on a regular basis. As well, the Department of Environment and Lands has a role to play in monitoring the environment, the quality of the air and the quality of water.

We have a public health, I guess, environmental health, or public health inspection division which deals with bacteriological quality of water, which deals with restaurants and proper food handling techniques, and inspection, this type of thing. The overall mandate for monitoring the health status of the people in the Province rests with the Community Health branch. So they are looking at population health issues, issues that can affect the population's health, and specific health hazards as they come up.

The responsibility for monitoring the environment in terms of air quality and overall water quality is with the Department of Environment. We link in with them from time to time on various issues where they have responsibility and we have responsibility, such as certain community water supplies, certain disposal systems, and this type of thing.

MR. HARRIS: It is treated, I take it then, as a public health issue, although it is a very specialized branch of that and you don't have any experts on staff in that area.

DR. WILLIAMS: I guess our public health physicians are trained in public health matters and public health practice. I would say, a lot of these issues fall within the purview of their background and training. They would have a knowledge, and we have other people in the department with public health training who have a knowledge of some of these issues - since the Placentia issue, and the issue of radiation biology and this type of thing - to a degree necessary to, I guess, deal with it in a general sense. For instance, in Placentia, we need some specific epidemiological and some research people with a special interest in that area. So we are getting, in terms of that, that particular expertise from the medical school. They have a health research unit which has people trained in public health, who are specialized in epidemiology and certain other aspects of the public health spectrum. So we consult a lot with them.

In certain areas, of course, if we had a specific issue - such as the issue in Placentia, where we have arranged with the health research unit to do a review of the health issue that has been brought forward recently - they would do a thorough review of that and present a report to the department outlining what the issue is, how they view it as a health issue, what potential it has to be a health issue, or has not, I guess, in that sense, and make recommendations to the department on what course of action we should follow. We have asked them to do that specifically on that issue.

MR. HARRIS: Although I didn't intend to home in on the issue, since you mentioned it, that report is in progress now, it is?

DR. WILLIAMS: They are in progress. We had a recent update yesterday from them and their target date is, I guess, late June when they will have a full report in to the department on that specific issue.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you.

I want to ask a question about drugs. The last time we met with the minister we talked about the increase in the cost of drugs and I think Dr. Williams indicated that we have been looking at, for the last number of years, at least, about a 12 per cent, or thereabouts, increase in the cost of drugs. Since then, in the last week, there has been some national publicity on it. The federal government is looking at that issue and there is some controversy about what the actual increase in costs were. Green Shield, I believe, is the name of the insurance organization that came up with a figure very similar to ours, in that the actual cost of providing the drugs was about a 12 or 13 per cent increase.

My question is about the prescribing of drugs. It is not so much health-oriented, although there may be implications, given side effects and things, but in terms of cost. One of the criticisms of health care costs is that we are dealing with a lot of new drugs that the public, individuals and the governments are expected to pay for. Sometimes they are referred to as designer drugs. The drug company will take a drug and change a few molecules here and there and put it out at a price that is ten times higher. I am not a scientist, but there is sometimes marginal increase in results in certain populations, etc., but the end result is that the cost of drugs continues to skyrocket. These are drugs that, although you couldn't tell a physician not to prescribe them, from a public policy point of view you could probably say they are not necessary. I am wondering whether government has any method of dealing with that? Do these drugs have to go through some procedure before the government decides they are going to put them on the list to pay for them, and what methods are being used to control these costs?

DR. WILLIAMS: That is a very timely question because it is an issue that is on the national agenda now between health ministers and, I guess, health deputies and, in turn, the advisory committee that advises the conference of health ministers and deputies on the whole issue of drugs. It is a statement about just changing a radical here or a radical there and coming up with a new version of a drug that has a different name but probably is just the same thing as the previous drug. It is a good marketing strategy, I guess, if you own a drug company or have shares in it, of marketing your product. There are a lot of new entities coming on the market but in a lot of cases they do represent just a different version of the same old drug. At a national level, all provinces are trying to come to grips with that issue and the cost of drugs runs anywhere from 10, 16, to 17 per cent across Canada in terms of various drug plans.

One issue we are looking at with the federal government and with Health and Welfare Canada, the licensing authority for new drugs coming on the market - we are looking to them in co-operation with the provinces in developing a cost analysis of the new drug to give, I guess, a cost base, as well as doing an assessment: if the drug works, is it safe and all these other things they do in the regulatory process, asking if they would consider another regulatory process and the cost benefit analysis of the drug in terms of the drugs that are already on the market, and including that in the specs when the drugs are licensed. As well, in Atlantic Canada we have a committee of senior officials looking at perhaps developing an Atlantic approach to a drug formulary. It may be very difficult at the national level to develop a drug formulary where we say, we are sorry, we are going to pay for these drugs but because this is a new drug it doesn't offer anything in terms of cost benefit over the drug that is already on the market. We are not going to approve it for our drug plans. That is one approach to it.

It may be difficult to do at the national level, given the diversity of the country, but we are looking at it very seriously, as well as what we are trying to do at the national level, at the Atlantic level, with the other Atlantic Provinces in terms of trying to look at maybe developing an Atlantic formulary. We think we might be able to manage that, and together we can use our collective expertise to do an assessment of drugs when they come on the market and say, 'Well, sorry, although this drug costs twice as much, the drugs that are now on the market offer the same therapeutic value at half the cost, therefore it is not going to be covered under our drug program,' and probably try to provide that information to the practitioners who are ordering the drugs, and to the general public, more importantly, who are buying the drugs, to help them be better consumers of drugs.

MR. DECKER: We haven't done that. That is what we are looking at.

MR. HARRIS: Yes, that is part of the plan.

MR. DECKER: Because right now we have the formulary, as the hon. member knows, where if a particular drug is prescribed and there is a generic drug available of the same quality then the pharmacist would have to give the cheaper drug. But what the deputy is talking about would be a brand new initiative where we have to make a value judgement on whether drug A which costs $26,000 a year is better than drug B which costs 50 cents a week. That is not a simple matter but it is one of the things that all Health ministers and deputies are looking at across the country.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I understood that Ms. Verge was finished, but she said she has two short questions.

MR. HARRIS: I am not finished either, Mr. Chairman, but if my time is up I will welcome going back again another time.

MR. WALSH: (Inaudible).

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, two short questions and then we will go back to -

MR. WALSH: (Inaudible) all over the place and I would like to deal with the numbers.

MS. VERGE: Chairperson, we are here to deal with the numbers (inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: You can make a motion if you want. You can't give notice (inaudible) the Committee.

MR. WALSH: (Inaudible). We're all over the place.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Chair will entertain one or two more questions and then we will call the subheads.

Ms. Verge.

MS. VERGE: I would like to ask the minister about MCP coverage for abortions. Why isn't the government extending MCP coverage to abortion procedures done in the private Morgentaler clinic in St. John's, since the Morgentaler clinic does abortion procedures at a lower cost than the hospitals are doing them?

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, we have a policy - which we haven't changed, by the way, the previous administration had the same policy - whereby government will not pay for significant medical procedures that are carried on outside of an accredited hospital. I don't know what reason you people had for having that policy when you were in power, but one of the reasons we have it is we want to discourage a proliferation of clinics. If you have an abortion clinic, the more you could have someone doing heart surgery in clinics, you could have someone doing gallbladders in clinics, you could have someone doing any procedure in clinics which are outside of government, outside of hospitals.

Now, if this were to happen, in my opinion, it would have a terrible impact on the cost of our health care system. I believe one of the reasons Ontario is paying in excess of 30 per cent of their budget for health care is because they do have a proliferation of clinics, and my good friend, the Minister of Health, Frances Lankin, is disgusted with me. I remember just a little while ago there was one, I think, to do with a dialysis clinic or something, from which she was trying to pull back the funding. In the States you will find clinics all over the place, one of the reasons, I believe, why they have one of the most expensive health care systems in the world.

We could well be challenging the courts, and we could well be made pay for the abortions. I suppose, if that comes, we will have to deal with it.

MS. VERGE: Well, that was going to be my next question.

MR. DECKER: The worst thing that could happen, Mr. Chairman, in this Province, would be to have LeMarchant Road full of clinics. I think it would drive the cost of health care through the roof, and I believe it would ultimately see the demise of a university-funded health care system.

Medicare in Canada, health care in Canada, I suppose it is just as well to call it like it is - it is controlled. It is rationed to a certain extent. Once you lose control of it the other alternative might well be the destruction of the universal health care system that we have. That is why we have the policy. Now, I don't know, you probably understand why you fellows had the policy when you were in government.

MS. VERGE: Does the minister have a legal opinion on the current policy of discriminating against the private abortion clinic? - on the one hand, extending MCP coverage to hospitals -

MR. DECKER: There have been several cases. We did not summon a lawyer in and say, give us a legal opinion. All we can do is look at what happened in the other provinces.

Bob, would you want to give a rundown through them, the ones which have been challenged? Most of them have lost in the courts and they ended up having to pay. Nova Scotia, I believe, is still in the courts?

DR. WILLIAMS: I am not sure. Nova Scotia may have appealed the decision. I believe they lost in the courts. Manitoba, I think, has the same policy as Newfoundland. Is that correct, Gerry?

MR. GERALD WHITE: Pretty well the same, yes.

DR. WILLIAMS: Ontario does pay -

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

DR. WILLIAMS: That's my understanding - Quebec, probably, as well.

MR. DECKER: Wasn't British Columbia challenged, and lost?

DR. WILLIAMS: I am not sure.

MR. DECKER: Most of the provinces had a similar policy as we have. As I said, we might end up - we probably will be challenged, we will probably lose it. Then we have to deal with it.

MS. VERGE: If you are challenged, do you intend to pay out taxpayers' money to contest the challenge? What's the likelihood that you are going to end up losing?

MR. DECKER: That's hypothetical, Mr. Chairman.

MS. VERGE: Pardon?

MR. DECKER: We will deal with that if and when the issue arises.

MS. VERGE: Okay. How many abortion procedures outside the Province has MCP paid for in the last year or two?

MR. DECKER: We could give an approximate, but we would have to get the exact numbers from Medicare.

DR. WILLIAMS: We'll get the figures. You want the exact figures (inaudible).

MS. VERGE: Isn't it true that MCP has been paying for women to go from the St. John's area outside the Province for procedures that could have been done at much lower cost here at the Morgentaler clinic?

MR. DECKER: You see, assuming that it is just a doctor's fee, at the Morgentaler clinic, I think it's $85 or $90 for an abortion but, in addition to that, the clinic asks for a facility fee, which drives the cost up pretty close to what we are doing it for in our hospitals.

MS. VERGE: It would be a lot less than what it would cost to pay somebody to go to Montreal, though, wouldn't it?

MR. DECKER: Those who are going outside the Province, if I am not mistaken, Mr. Chairman, are in excess of fourteen weeks, I think, are they not?

DR. WILLIAMS: Yes. The General Hospital provides a service for up to twelve or thirteen weeks.

MR. DECKER: In excess of that we send them outside the Province.

MS. VERGE: But the procedure is done here at the Morgentaler clinic for women who are more than twelve or fourteen weeks, while MCP is paying the cost of these women going to Montreal or some other mainland centre, which would be astronomically more than the cost of having the procedure done here at the private clinic.

MR. DECKER: I'll try to explain. In the short term, if we were to pay the Morgentaler clinic for abortions we might end up - I don't know; the hon. member is suggesting it would - we might save some money. A few nickels and dimes. But if we were to see a proliferation of clinics - not just abortion clinics - in this Province it would drive the cost of health care probably in excess of 30 per cent of our Budget, in which case, it would threaten universal Medicare. That is why I believe our policy is a good one; that is why, if we are ever forced to abandon that policy, I think it will be a nail in the coffin of the health care system, universal health care, in this Province. That would be devastating.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister. Is that it?

MS. VERGE: One other question, a totally different tack now. One of the odd responsibilities of the Department of Health is the Solemnization of Marriages Act.

MR. DECKER: Yes.

MS. VERGE: Right now, we, under legislation, have authorized to perform marriage ceremonies, in addition to clergy, only provincial court judges and the mayors of the cities. This government is centralizing provincial court services. There is no longer a provincial court judge resident in Wabush or Labrador City, Port aux Basques, St. George's, Bonne Bay, the Northern Peninsula, Springdale, or Holyrood. So, in all these areas of the Province where there used to be provincial court judges who could perform marriage ceremonies, now there is no civil authority with that power.

I am wondering if the minister would consider authorizing more civilians or more non-clergy, be they justices of the peace or mayors or members of the House of Assembly, or some civil authority to perform marriage ceremonies for people in every part of the Province who, for their own reasons, would prefer not to have to go to the clergy to be married.

MR. DECKER: Yes.

MS. VERGE: When?

MR. DECKER: As a matter of fact, I just appointed one yesterday in Labrador West, the Mayor of Wabush has been appointed a marriage performer under the legislation of 1974, I believe it was. The Minister of Health can authorize anyone to perform a wedding, so I shall take advantage of that.

MS. VERGE: But will you do that in a consistent way across the Province? The Mayor of Wabush may be a political colleague and friend, but what about -

MR. DECKER: The reason we did it in Wabush, Mr. Chairman, as the hon. member points out, where the judges are being centralized, there is no judge going to be in Labrador West for the next little while. A couple up there want to get married and for their own reasons they want a civil ceremony. We could have sent a judge in at a cost of $1,200, or whatever it costs to send one into Labrador West, and maybe, next week have to do the same thing all over again, so we said, here is one case where it makes a lot of sense to appoint someone.

Now, if we find a similar case in Conche or in Nain, or if the need arises, the leeway is there and I suggest we will consider it. I am not saying we are going to make marriage performers, commissioners - what is it? -

MS. VERGE: Marriage licence issuers.

MR. DECKER: - of every single citizen over eighteen years of age, but where the need is found, I certainly will be only too happy to appoint -

MS. VERGE: But why would you wait for people to come to you? I mean, most people who want to get married ask around and -

MR. DECKER: Well, you know, I could appoint everyone over eighteen, Mr. Chairman, but somewhere between the extreme of that and appointing where the need is, I will make the appointment.

MS. VERGE: Sure.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I think the question has been well answered, and we have been on this long enough.

MR. WALSH: I move the numbers 1.1.01 through 4.5.02.

MR. DUMARESQUE: I second that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: It has been moved and seconded that subheads 1.1.01 through 4.5.02 be submitted.

MR. HARRIS: Just this one set of numbers?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Which number are you speaking to now?

MR. DUMARESQUE: First to last.

MR. WALSH: I am moving the Estimates.

MR. HARRIS: We'll do them all. I (inaudible) specific one, Mr. Chairman, if the question is going to be allowed or whether the Liberals don't want to have any further questions asked.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, I think you have had a fair amount of time; we have had four hours and twenty minutes and lots of leeway where you could have asked particular questions, you digressed and that is the thing about it. If the Committee chooses to give you leeway to ask a particular question, sobeit. If they want it to be passed inclusive from 1.1.01 through 4.5.02 and they have the majority, then it would be done.

MR. HARRIS: If there's a final vote on all the issues at once instead of discussing the particular subheads and they want to run the Committee that way as a majority, then they have the power of the majority, but -

MR. SMALL: Mr. Chairman, I think we spent more than half-an-hour on the Anderson Centre and there was lots of time then that we could have had.

MR. CHAIRMAN: What is the wish of the Committee?

MS. VERGE: I would like to speak to this. I have been participating in these committees for thirteen years, ten as a Minister, and we have always taken as much time as all members of each committee wanted. I can remember, as Minister of Education, coming before the Committee for ten or twelve hours of questioning. This department has the largest budget of all the government departments, over $800 million, and I think we should allow Mr. Harris as much time as he needs to finish his questioning.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, you said we would go to 8:30, so that is ten minutes, and you have it both ways, you know.

MS. VERGE: It is not 8:30 now.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I said there are ten more minutes to 8:30.

MS. VERGE: Well, instead of wrangling over time and procedure, let us let the Member for St. John's East ask his questions.

MR. HARRIS: I have a lot of questions.

MR. WALSH: Do I have an understanding I was not aware of, that the Chair and Vice-Chair said, at 8:30 we are going to be doing that anyway? If that is the case, that is fine because we have another group with whom we are going to be meeting tonight and that will be good for an hour-and-a-half or maybe two hours. So, if, unbeknownst to me, the Chair and the Vice-Chair have talked about an 8:30 time limit, if Mr. Harris has a couple of questions that he can get in by 8:30, I will leave my motion on the floor, but will allow him to ask those couple of questions and at 8:30 we will then move the numbers.

MR. HARRIS: I am not aware of any understanding and I don't know what your understanding is. As it happens, my own questions are very few; I just have a couple of questions to clue up something that I was asking, but I do resent, as the Vice-Chair says, the idea that we are able to ask questions at the leave of the majority of this Committee.

MR. WALSH: Well, to that, I will take that -

MS. VERGE: Let him ask his questions and get it over with and then we will get out of here.

MR. WALSH: I will accept that as a point of order, with one understanding; and speaking to his point of order, for four hours, which, if we were to take equal time, would have turned into about nine or ten hours, this side of the Committee have agreed to allow free-flow questioning from the Opposition members. I don't know if Hansard will show us with much more than one or two questions, most times for clarification. So, in actual fact, if we had taken our own equal time we would be here for ten hours or more. We have relinquished our time and given it to the hon. members on the other side of the House. Even though it has been four hours, if you were to compute that through we have probably punched in ten hours.

I say, by all means, ask your few questions, and then we are moving the numbers.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Harris.

MR. HARRIS: Thanks very much. I recognize that the hon. members opposite have been -

MR. DUMARESQUE: Ask your questions now, unless you want to get into partisan debate.

MR. HARRIS: Does the member have a point of order, Mr. Chairman? I was recognizing the generosity of members opposite in leaving all the time to the Opposition members, and I wanted to thank them for it. But if the hon. the Member for Eagle River wants to interrupt, sobeit.

My follow-up question on the cost of drugs relates again to the issue of marketing. I haven't seen any recent estimates, but I know, a couple of years ago, when Bill C-22 was being debated - the federal government seems to have slipped another act by most people recently to extend the generic drug option or to foreclose a generic drug option for another six years - a statistic was released that the drug companies spend approximately $20,000 per doctor to market their drugs through that individual. It seems to me that that cost is obviously passed on to the public through the cost of drugs to individuals or the cost of drugs to government.

I wonder: Has the department ever looked at somehow or other trying to control that type of expenditure? We do know that the drug companies spend an awful lot of money in that area of marketing, quite often sponsoring conferences, and not only conferences but social gatherings or other types of affairs, to bring doctors, at no cost to them but at great expense to the drug companies, together to promote their drugs. Has the department ever looked at ways of influencing that or does it see that as something beyond its control altogether and left entirely to the medical associations to control?

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, that is not under provincial jurisdiction, but there is a national drug board of which Mr. White is a member. If you would like to talk about that, Mr. White.

MR. WHITE: Well, the whole issue of, I suppose, the marketing development and promotion of drugs is an international issue and a national issue. I think on the provincial level it would be pretty difficult to regulate how drug companies promote and market their products. I think it would have to be done on a national basis.

MR. DECKER: Canada, I think, is 2 -

MR. WHITE: I understand that Canada is about 2 per cent of the world market, that is for drugs.

MR. DECKER: That is Canada?

MR. WHITE: And Newfoundland is probably around the same proportion of Canadian consumption of drugs.

MR. DECKER: Two per cent of that, too.

MR. WHITE: I don't know what levers a province could take that would be able to effectively come to grips with the concern you are raising here.

MR. DECKER: We don't have a lot of levers.

MR. HARRIS: Then there is the relationship between the drug companies and the doctors, that kind of money, the marketing, that angle, not international advertising.

MR. DECKER: I am not sure.

MR. HARRIS: No province regulates that? Is this what you are saying?

MR. DECKER: I am not sure I can substantiate that $20,000 figure. I know there is some promotion, I know there are some free samples, but I am not sure of the $20,000 figure per doctor. Are you, Dr. Williams, familiar with that?

DR. WILLIAMS: I guess what you are probably saying is that you are looking at the drug companies' major expenditure, which, instead of in research, is in advertising and promotion. That is their major expenditure, if you look at any multi-national drug company, I guess, if you look at their books.

MR. HARRIS: No, I am talking about at the physician level. I know that they -

MR. DECKER: You are not saying a physician receives $20,000, are you?

MR. HARRIS: No, I am saying that per physician in terms of the effort that is spent in promoting to that individual's physician, not by advertising in a magazine, but promoting -

MR. DECKER: Sure. It is related to the number of physicians or you could relate to the number of Newfoundland dogs. You could say it is $50,000 per Newfoundland dog or you could say it is ten cents per Chinese. You know, there are different ways to equate -

MR. HARRIS: So what the minister is saying is that you don't intend to have anything to do with trying to regulate that.

MR. DECKER: But you have equated it with doctors, and you gave the impression that every doctor gets $20,000 for a drug. That is just playing around with words.

MR. HARRIS: It is not my statistic, Mr. Minister.

MR. DECKER: It is just a matter of what you equate it to, but I would not want to give the impression that every doctor in this Province is receiving $20,000 for every new drug that a drug company puts on the market. That is just playing with words.

MR. HARRIS: So the Province, then, has no interest in attempting in any way to regulate the relationship between the doctors and the drug companies?

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, as Mr. White pointed out, Canada represents 2 per cent of the international drug market. Newfoundland represents 2 per cent of the Canadian drug market. I suppose we could stop buying drugs from the manufacturers.

MR. HARRIS: So is the minister saying that he is not at all concerned about the amount of money spent by the drug companies in promoting directly to individual physicians in this Province these new and expensive drugs?

MR. DECKER: No, Mr. Chairman.

MR. HARRIS: No. Thank you.

Last year, Mr. Minister, I asked questions about The Midwifery Act, and was asking whether the minister was looking at forms of health care delivery involving licensed midwives as an option available to people. At the time, the minister, by his response, indicated that we were trying to get away from that; that was not something he wanted to see promoted.

I noticed last September in a series of articles in The Evening Telegram that the minister's views may have changed in that respect, and I welcome that. May I ask the minister what steps the government may be taking to consider perhaps using The Midwifery Act to licence midwife practitioners and to encourage the continuation of a midwifery program that had been offered at The School of Nursing, but because of, I suppose, lack of response by the government in licensing midwife practitioners, interest has waned in it. Can the minister tell us what changes are taking place in this?

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, I have to address the first part of the accusation. I am being quoted as having no interest in midwifery and wanting to get away from it. I am not sure if that quote is taken out of context or not. I think I might have talked about when I grew up and nurses did all the deliveries, and that was not ideal.

I also said, I think, to the media that we would look at a pilot project of midwifery in the Province. We obviously didn't fund it.

I should point out that on the Northern Peninsula and in Labrador, the role of the midwife is very important. However, it has been accepted as a policy of the Department of Health, and with advice from The Association of Registered Nurses, that generally, where the midwife or GPs practice deliveries, we would like to have the obstetrician within shouting distance sort of thing, and I think that has to do with the quality of the care.

Now, these are some general terms, and maybe Mrs. Dawe would want to add to that. That comes under her jurisdiction.

MS. DAWE: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

We have already referred that matter to The Provincial Perinatal Committee, to develop terms of reference to look at a study which would consider the potential and implications of introducing midwifery into the program, and that is currently under discussion.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.

It is now 8:30 p.m. We had agreed with the Vice-Chair that we would have equal time for Justice. Could we, then, have the subheadings?

On motion, 1.1.01 through 4.5.02, carried.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I want to thank the minister and his officials for coming back and doing a thorough analysis of the questions that were being asked. Minister, you have been very diligent and we appreciate the effort of you and your officials. On behalf of Committee members, I would like to thank you.

MR. DECKER: I want to thank you, Sir, for the way in which your Committee treated the people from the department. I want to say, after spending four years in Opposition, that I am really amazed at the scope the Opposition was given. I sat in this very building and was shut up by - in Opposition, one night they were inebriated, and I have had to say in the House that they were inebriated with their zeal because I couldn't say liquor. And it is a credit to this Committee, the way it allows the Opposition to carry on its affairs. It is too bad they cannot be a little bit relevant to the subheads, but we have to live with that, of course.

MS. VERGE: What a nasty individual!

AN HON. MEMBER: You are just getting your (inaudible) back.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CHAIRMAN: We now welcome the acting minister and his officials, and we will begin the questioning. I understand there have already been what - three hours?

AN HON. MEMBER: Well, about that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. We will, as we did before, give the Vice-Chair ten or fifteen minutes and then we will go on from there.

MR. HARRIS: (Inaudible) three hours?

MR. CHAIRMAN: No, no.

MR. HARRIS: (Inaudible) these committees and we are only entitled to a certain amount of time?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, we were of the understanding, and the Vice-Chair informally said to me -

MS. VERGE: I'm only one member. I wasn't speaking for any other member.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I know that, but it is the consensus of the group that we should be out of here within the 10:00 range, an hour-and-a-half on each one. That was, I think, informally suggested between us. I was hoping that we could get out before that, probably within the next ten or fifteen minutes. We will see as time goes.

Anyway, we will allow the Vice-Chair to begin.

MS. VERGE: Thank you. I would like to welcome the acting minister. Some time in our first meeting was taken up discussing the inappropriateness of the unelected minister -

AN HON. MEMBER: Let's hope we go through this rather quickly this time.

MS. VERGE: - being before the Committee (inaudible) an elected minister.

Anyway, I have half-a-dozen topics here I would like to ask about. I will start with law reform because the acting minister, as the Government House Leader, would be in charge of the government's legislative program. The Law Reform Commission, which the government is disbanding, did a considerable amount of extremely high-quality work, making detailed recommendations for law reform. Their reports on limitations of actions and mechanics liens haven't yet been implemented. I know those reports were completed just before the government changed and I am wondering what happened to those recommendations. Is the government intending to act on them and bring before us bills with revised limitations of actions and mechanics lien laws?

MR. BAKER: Yes, I don't know the exact position that is in now. Perhaps Ms. Spracklin could respond.

MS. SPRACKLIN: The Limitations Act is in pretty close to final form, I think, for some final decision-making. The mechanics lien legislation, I think it was felt, should be part of a more complete regime, and I'm not aware that is as far advanced at this point. However, I would point out that Chris Curran, who was with the Law Reform Commission, has been brought into the department to stay on as a policy initiatives person, if I can put it that way.

MS. VERGE: Good.

MS. SPRACKLIN: It would be directed and preserved for that role, and we hope to carry on with most of their projects and see them to completion, including, I might say, the health care initiative that they were involved in.

MS. VERGE: Good. What about a new personal property security act? It has been recognized as a need for quite a while. Is there any effort being put into that?

MS. SPRACKLIN: Not at the moment, in all honesty, but it is something that, again, Mr. Curran will be directed to fairly shortly, I would anticipate.

MS. VERGE: What was the rationale in disbanding the Law Reform Commission? The commission itself was made up of volunteers, lawyers and judges who served without - I am going to say without any remuneration. I think there was a per diem available although, from what I recall, for an extensive period of time the commissioners didn't claim per diems. At any rate, it was a group of very knowledgeable, able people who provided a valuable advisory service to the government at minimal cost. What was the rationale in disbanding the Law Reform Commission?

MR. BAKER: I guess the rationale comes from the overall approach that was taken. We were in the situation where we were forced to look for all kinds of ways to save $20,000 here, $100,000 there and so on, and there were a number of these things that were done throughout government. As a part of the whole approach, The Law Reform Commission was one of the things we decided to abolish. The savings are minimal. There is not a lot of money in the greater scheme of things in terms of the $3 billion Budget, but it was one of the many small things that were cut. That is not to say that at some time in the future you can't have a law reform commission again. That is not to say that you can't still use the volunteers that are still there to give advice in terms of the reform of the law of the Province, because you can still go ahead and do that. We do have one individual who is dedicated to carrying on that kind of work within the department. There are very minimal savings, you are right, and it was part of the larger scheme of things.

MS. VERGE: Well, I would urge the government to reconstitute the Law Reform Commission. I am glad to hear that Chris Curran, who has been the Executive Director of The Law Reform Commission, will be employed by the government. He has done just excellent work that has been praised by people involved in the law, literally all over the world.

Now, I will switch to asking about the crimes compensation program. It was a great disappointment for me to see the government cancel the whole crimes compensation program. I appreciate the problem created for the provincial government with the federal government withdrawing funding, and I condemn the federal government for that; but, from the beginning it was a cost-shared program, meaning the Province did fund part of the cost all along. Why couldn't the Province, or why didn't the Province at least continue to fund some kind of program?

The Province of Nova Scotia, which would have similar financial pressures to our government, opted, instead of cancelling the works, to continue a program which would provide awards for counselling and for reimbursement of people's out-of-pocket expenses. They have discontinued providing awards for pain and suffering, but they are continuing to provide awards to repay people for out-of-pocket expenses for ambulances, for prescription drugs, for counselling, for transportation to counselling or medical services, or for loss of income from time missed from work due to criminal injuries. Why didn't our government continue at least some kind of program?

MR. BAKER: Well, that is a rather involved answer, I suppose. First of all, I could start off by saying that it is a matter of money. I don't deny that a need exists in our society to help people who need help. I don't deny that, but I would point out to you that there is no way government can provide every need for every individual in our society. That would be impossible. So there is a need that exists. We don't have unlimited funds; as a matter of fact, the squeeze comes on every year more and more and more. In this particular instance, like we had budgeted last year for federal revenue of $300,000 or something at the beginning of the year. Of course, then, that disappeared and all of a sudden the Province had to pick up the extra cost last year. So there was no federal revenue. It was just an instance where costs seemingly were mushrooming. We are in the mode, at this point in time, and I hope it doesn't last too long, where we cannot allow that to happen. So I guess some hard decisions were taken, and the decisions basically were that what money we had available we would put into assisting people through the process, and I don't know if we have enough money in there for that, even; but there's an amount of money in there to assist people through the process.

As we agreed to carry on with the requests that were in, therefore a large chunk of that million dollars you see in there this year is for cases already in progress.

MS. VERGE: Applications that were in the system before the Budget?

MR. BAKER: Yes. Now what happens next year, we decided to cut off at a certain point, and then the question becomes: What happens next year? How much money will be available? I hope there will be more available under Victims Services then to do a little more (inaudible).

MS. VERGE: I hope the minister appreciates that the Victims Services Program - that's head 4.2.06 - which the government is pointing to as the substitute or the replacement for Crimes Compensation -

MR. BAKER: It's only a part of it.

MS. VERGE: - that exists only in four urban centres: St. John's, Gander, Corner Brook and Happy Valley - Goose Bay - in each of those four urban locations there is one worker, and in St. John's there is a provincial supervisor. Each of the workers is attempting to cover only a small radius. For example, the worker in Corner Brook is attempting to cover only the Corner Brook - Bay of Islands - Humber Valley - Deer Lake area, that small part of Western Newfoundland.

In the meantime, there are literally hundreds of victims of personal injury crimes - child sexual assault, for example - on the Port au Port Peninsula, in Stephenville, Stephenville Crossing. We have heard about some recent cases through the news media. They don't have access to the victim court worker in Corner Brook.

MR. BAKER: Yes. The answer is that, of course, we will try to expand the court services, or the services through that court trial period, to as much of the Province as we possibly can. But again, I will go back to the first part of the answer, when I indicated that a need is there. There are a lot of needs there, and at a certain point in time, I guess, if you don't have the money, you have to make decisions. One of the decisions was that we couldn't carry on the Crimes Compensation. I regret that, as I know you do. I guess you could argue that perhaps there is money spent in other ways that is better spent here and so on, and we could get into that kind of argument.

MS. VERGE: Speaking of which, have you looked at closing the adult correction centre in Bishop's Falls or Clarenville in terms of cutting costs? The minister was talking about the difficulty of making the right choices, and with the pressure that is on the government, trying to make the best choices to meet the gravest needs. I am asking, in terms of an option for cost reduction, if the government has looked at closing the adult correction centre in Bishop's Falls or in Clarenville?

MR. BAKER: Yes, this is one of the things you could look at. However, the courts keep sentencing people. There is a pressure on us now to try to somehow make more space available like that, you know. We are overcrowded in the prison system.

MS. VERGE: Could we have statistics?

MR. BAKER: You know, there are these pressures. I don't know what the answer is, to be honest with you. Some people would say better preventative programs and all this kind of thing. I don't know if that is the answer or not, and what do you do in the meantime? It is one heck of a problem, no doubt about it. Should we be responsible for compensating for crimes? If we had the money (inaudible) the money. But we have a real problem with the prisons, too.

MS. VERGE: Could you tell us about the problems with prisons? At our last meeting, I think it was the Member for St. John's East who asked questions about current prison populations. We have in the Province something like - what is it - five or six correctional centres? They are in St. John's, Clarenville, Bishop's Falls, two in Stephenville and Happy Valley, six correctional centres. What is the occupancy rate for each of them?

MR. BAKER: I think we are probably 10 per cent overcrowded.

MR. EDWARD KENT: We have 350 authorized cells or places, and we have averaged 400 people occupying those for the last six months. We are using mattresses on the floors, in some cases, to accommodate people.

MS. VERGE: Are all the spaces in the men's centre in Stephenville currently in use?

MR. KENT: Currently, you have a capacity in Stephenville for fifty and we have seventy occupancy.

MS. VERGE: Okay. What about Bishop's Falls and Clarenville?

MR. KENT: Both of those are at thirty-three and their occupancy is over forty - forty-three, forty-four.

MS. VERGE: So there has been a dramatic increase in prison population, hasn't there? Why is that? Can you give us a profile of that population? What are they in for?

MR. KENT: The sentence length has increased by about a week and there is a greater level of activity with more cases in the court system. Perhaps we are also catching up a bit on the backlog of cases in the system so a lot of them are going through. Whether that is a short-term thing is debatable but we feel we are going to have a 10 or 15 per cent under capacity for the foreseeable future.

MS. VERGE: Could you give us a profile of what they are in for? How many are in for inability to pay fines or debts, how many are in for crimes against a person, and how many for crimes against property?

MR. KENT: For fine defaults, 17 per cent are in, on average. There were 447 people admitted during the year for fine defaults which represents 17 per cent of the total people admitted. I don't have the information in front of me with respect to crimes against property or people, but we can get that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Harris.

MR. HARRIS: Just for accuracy, Mr. Kent. The 447 who are 17 per cent of the total population, you call them admissions, the total people incarcerated, in which year would that be?

MR. KENT: That would be for 1991-1992 - 447.

MR. HARRIS: That is the 1991-1992 fiscal year?

MR. KENT: That is the fiscal year. Yes, 17 per cent.

MR. HARRIS: Can you tell us the average length of stay of those 447?

MR. KENT: I think the average length of stay for all inmates is thirty to forty days.

MR. HARRIS: It strikes me that that may not be consistent for overall. If that is the overall average then that may not be consistent for the fine defaults.

MR. KENT: No, it is probably lower.

MR. HARRIS: I would think it would be lower. Is that statistic available or can someone get it at some point?

MR. KENT: Yes.

MS. SPRACKLIN: So you want the average length of stay?

MR. HARRIS: The average length of stay for the fine defaulters.

I am going to ask one question. I think I should, just as a comment, echo the Vice-Chair's concern about the Law Reform Commission. I, too, am delighted that the full-time researcher has been retained to the service of government. As the minister said, it can be re-activated as a law reform commission and I think it is particularly of concern in this Province where there is no law school. There are no academic lawyers who are contributing to the body of knowledge or critique of our provincial laws and, of course, as a provincial jurisdiction we have a responsibility to give some thought and comparison to other jurisdictions and innovate for ourselves; that is just as a comment. I would like to see it back and although the individual who is full-time -

MR. KENT: I guess it would take a lawyer to fully appreciate that.

MR. HARRIS: It may be.

MR. KENT: It is not something that is generally appreciated in the Province - it would take a lawyer to appreciate it.

MR. HARRIS: I think that is correct which is why I am making the statement - because, as a lawyer, you are aware of that. If you are in a province which has a law school there are all sorts of papers being written and presented, presentations are being made, people are speaking at gatherings, people are writing briefs for governments and to governments on changes in the law that might be needed or desirable, and rationales for things such as - crimes compensation, I suppose, is a good example. In that area again the rationale for crimes compensation, for example, is not just another need in the community. The rationale for the promotion of crimes compensation is that there is a public responsibility. Just as the public takes responsibility to arrest, incarcerate, and pay the cost of rehabilitation of a criminal, the public takes a certain responsibility to assist the victims. Once again, I think the legislation is still in place for crimes compensation, and I take it that even thought no applications are being accepted now, there is a possibility for a modified program to be re-instituted as an alternative to the full - well, the full program is there now, with the payment suffering awards. Is that under consideration or could it be under consideration by the department as a way of delivering the ability of the individuals to pursue or buy services perhaps, with a more limited budget?

MS. SPRACKLIN: Mr. Harris, no, that is not under active consideration per se in the form of which you speak. I don't think, though, that there is any reluctance to admit in the department, that there is a need to deliver counselling, the question is how; and it was not being effectively delivered to people by paying them money in their hand two or three years after - well, actually, many years after their offence, but two or three years, sometimes, after the conviction.

We tried a couple of projects, one of which you may have been familiar with this year, which was to deliver services - to purchase services for group counselling, individual and group, actually, and to actually sort of contract with service providers, that is one model. Other models will be looked at. Funding community groups and training them is another model that is being looked at. There is no intention to withdraw, I don't think, from providing counselling, although there is some lag time; had the federal government I think hung in a bit longer, we would not have had this hiatus. But, you know, we had hoped to get the Victims Services program up an running before discontinuing, or moving away from crimes compensation.

So, to answer your question, we are looking at various models, but I think that compensation, trying to deliver counselling monies through a board, trying to hear claims all over the Island is not an effective way. I was looking at the statistics from a crimes compensation board and they showed, for example, in blended awards, that would mean awards that had a component of periodic payment, only $4,180 in 1991-1992. You can see that there wasn't as much being done - it was very important that people had got it, but it wasn't effectively getting counselling services to the people who need it, and I think there are more effective ways of doing that.

MR. HARRIS: I think it is fair to say, and I can say from my own minimal experience, that individuals who have received awards - I mean, there is difficulty finding someone to deliver the counselling even if the money is available to them, or if the Crimes Compensation Board has agreed to pay for counselling; at least, in this Province it is difficult to find them. But my sense was that that was a growing thing and that individuals, knowing there are people who can afford to pay for that process, that kind of service becomes more available. And I think we have, in the St. John's area at least, the beginnings of a counselling community that could deliver some services.

MS. SPRACKLIN: Well, that may continue if there is funding. It doesn't have to be delivered through giving it to individuals to purchase it. These groups may well contract. The other thing is that when you have very scattered population as we have, and that sort of thing, you might create enough demand in a place like St. John's but it is not going to work in the rural areas, for sure, and it's a very expensive delivery mode and not timely enough.

Now, having said that, you know, nobody took any pleasure in discontinuing crimes compensation, least of all me, but when there are choices to be made and you have to choose which way you are going to deliver services to victims, you have to start looking at how you can buy the most for your dollars, I guess.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you. The Hughes Commission, Mr. Baker, recommended that there was an inadequate number of Crown prosecutors and I see in the Budget - I am just trying to find the subhead, I had it a moment ago - under subhead 2.2.01 on page 217, the minimal increase in salaries under line 01, but a significant increase under professional service, line 05 from what was budgeted last year, a slight decrease in what was spent last year. I take it that is the Crown agency work out of the department?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. HARRIS: Is it expected to continue, the same level of expenditures for two years in a row rather than hire Crown prosecutors in other areas?

MR. BAKER: Yes. Obviously, if you have the proper number of Crown prosecutors, then that cost goes way down because you are not contracting out to lawyers.

MR. HARRIS: You are not paying hourly fees.

MR. BAKER: Actually you should be able to provide more service, I guess, more cheaply, if you have enough Crown prosecutors.

MR. HARRIS: So the question is: Why are we continuing, then? In 1991-92 we spent $1 million in professional services and we are spending $900,000; is there -

MR. BAKER: That had to be put in there. The plan was, if I remember, during the budget process, and the explanation given to us was that they wanted to increase the number of Crown prosecutors, but an amount had to be put in there in case they couldn't get the people to do the job. So there is an amount of $900,000 in there which, again, is fairly close to what we spent last year. Hopefully, with the increase in the number of Crown prosecutors, then that money can be shifted to regular salary money to provide more service with it than we did last year.

MR. HARRIS: So there may, in fact, be less than $2.9 million spent on prosecutions, if that goes through. How many new prosecutors are you hiring?

MR. BAKER: We have hired what? Seven? Five? Seven now?

MS. SPRACKLIN: We have two vacancies left. We have managed to hire and fill all but two of the old vacancies. We have created five new positions and we are recruiting presently for those. Recruitment is not always easy, particularly when you get away from major centres.

MR. HARRIS: Those five new positions, are they in St. John's or are they -

MS. SPRACKLIN: They are in St. John's.

MR. HARRIS: So there are five new positions in St. John's?

MS. SPRACKLIN: I shouldn't be so quick on that.

AN HON. MEMBER: The new ones are allocated in other centres.

MS. SPRACKLIN: Jack, I am not sure about that right off the top of my head. I am going to have to try to find that in here, and I don't know if it's in here.

There are some for St. John's, I think. We have, I think, Goose Bay and Gander. My problem is, I am not sure which are the new ones and which were old positions. Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: Stephenville.

MS. SPRACKLIN: Stephenville?

MR. HARRIS: I know there is a Crown agent very active in Stephenville.

AN HON. MEMBER: Dave Mills.

MR. HARRIS: Dave Mills.

MS. SPRACKLIN: Yes, Dave Mills.

MR. HARRIS: Dave Mills is doing a lot of agency work.

MS. SPRACKLIN: Well, we have been trying to recruit for there for a long time, and obviously, there is no incentive for him to apply.

MR. HARRIS: No.

MS. SPRACKLIN: But we have been unsuccessful up until now.

I can provide you with the information as to where those positions are. To be honest with you, I cannot recall off the top of my head exactly for which centres they were.

MR. HARRIS: Okay.

Line 6, Mr. Baker, Purchased Services there is almost as high as Professional Services. I have no idea what that is. Perhaps an explanation can be provided as to what is included in that subhead.

MR. BAKER: There must have been $780,000 or $781,000 budgeted and over a million was spent.

MR. HARRIS: A million was spent and they are going to spend another $895,000.

MR. BAKER: These are witness expenses I quoted in there. They were just higher than expected and assuming that we can stay within budget this year.

MR. HARRIS: So that is like travel for witnesses and expert witnesses, perhaps, as well?

AN HON. MEMBER: Both.

MR. BAKER: Would experts be in that, too?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. HARRIS: The government is spending $475,000 on forensic pathology services - it is a slight increase from last year - of which there is $97,000 for Professional Services.

It has been suggested from time to time, and a number of times, in fact, over the years, that the Province ought to institute a medical examiner position. It is often explained by the individual who seems to know more about it than anybody else that this would provide two services: one, there would be an office that could establish procedures to be followed in the case of sudden death, and also have some forensic value, in that there are established procedures as to what police or other actions should take place, whereby perhaps the procedure for whether or not there ought to be a judicial inquiry, for example, that discretion will be in the hands of a forensic officer as opposed to a decision being made by the minister or by the director of public prosecutions, sometimes taking months to decide.

What consideration has the government given to that, and why would they not adopt that type of approach, rather than as it is now with our kind of antiquated system, leaving it as a decision for the discretion of a legal officer, as opposed to a properly trained forensic pathologist operating from a medical examiner's office?

MR. BAKER: I think, if I remember the legislation, it is not really at the discretion of a legal officer, is it? For instance, if there is a death that is - and the conditions are laid out in the legislation, then an inquiry follows. It seems to me, that is pretty specifically laid out, isn't it? It's not the Department of Justice that makes that kind of decision, is it?

AN HON. MEMBER: Colin Flynn.

MR. BAKER: In the first instance.

MS. SPRACKLIN: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: The DPP, I believe, makes that decision.

MS. SPRACKLIN: In practice, the DPP makes the decision.

AN HON. MEMBER: Based on the police report.

MR. HARRIS: I think the practice - Ms. Verge just reminded me of it, but I recall in a recent incident, in fact, that the DPP, in practise, makes the decision or the recommendation to the minister, which is almost invariably followed, but not until after the police report comes in - after an autopsy, after a police report, after an investigation. It seems to me that an awful lot of time is wasted.

I've had, over the years, a number of families quite concerned about that. In fact, I recall one family who wanted to have a judicial inquiry, insisted on a judicial inquiry. I wrote a number of letters on the family's behalf to ask for a judicial inquiry. Lo and behold, six months later I found out that they held a judicial inquiry, didn't advise me, didn't advise the family, didn't advise anybody, and the judicial inquiry was over. The family wasn't participating in it, didn't get a chance to ensure that the death had been properly investigated. This is an unusual occurrence, I should think - we would hope. This happened three or four years ago.

AN HON. MEMBER: It was four years ago.

MR. HARRIS: It was four years ago? More than three years ago, perhaps.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: I will take it up with the former minister after the hearing. In fact, the judge who held the judicial inquiry recently attempted to get himself elected in Mount Pearl.

MR. BAKER: Yes, but that would be the problem with the judge, wouldn't it?

MR. HARRIS: I don't know if it's a problem with the judge.

MR. BAKER: The judge doing the inquiry would decide who to contact, who to call, who to talk to.

MS. SPRACKLIN: There is consideration being given to a medical examiner system. We are reviewing that and I don't think it has been rejected, by any means. It just has not been fully considered at this point.

MR. HARRIS: So it's not being actively considered at the moment but it is something the department is looking at?

MS. SPRACKLIN: Yes, actively.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Verge.

MS. VERGE: I would like to come back to the penitentiary/adult correctional centre problem. There were problems before, but with the increase in occupancy, I would think the problems are greater. When I say 'problems' I am thinking about suicide attempts, about violence, which occasionally erupts, about the over-prescription of drugs, about the lack of programming, the lack of meaningful activity for the inmates while they are incarcerated.

I understand, an inmate at the penitentiary in St. John's attempted suicide the other night. I just happened to hear about that today. I wonder if the minister or the officials could elaborate on the incidence of suicide attempts in our adult correctional centres, the incidence of violence, and talk about whether there are greater difficulties and what strategies there are to deal with this sort of thing.

MR. BAKER: Yes, they can deal with the specifics in a moment. I would just like to comment on the problem. It is a problem. As a matter of fact, very recently I had a discussion with the real Minister of Justice -

MS. VERGE: You mean this is not the real minister?

MR. BAKER: - and we agreed that we would have further discussions on it in terms of what to do next year. We are going to go down and see for ourselves what the situation is. Obviously, as there is more overcrowding, there is more difficulty in giving programs, no doubt about that. And I guess the conditions change - I mean, the security conditions change within the institution. It is something that the real minister is concerned about, and that we have had discussions on. But I will let the officials attempt to answer about the suicides and the incidence of violence, and so on. Obviously, there is going to be some.

MS. SPRACKLIN: I don't have statistics with me, and I don't have the kind of memory, frankly, for that, but I can say that we have one of the best if not the best record in Canada with respect to suicides. I think there was one successful suicide at the penitentiary ever, and that is a remarkable record in the context of Canadian penal institutions. Having said that doesn't minimize the fact that there are incidence of attempts, some of them more serious than others. I don't have the statistics. I don't know if Mr. Kent has them with him, but we can provide them. My understanding of the majority of them is that they are not - and again, I am not trying to minimize this, there is never a suicide attempt that is not serious, but most of them result in fairly minor injury that is attended to on the premises as physical injuries do not require hospitalization or very much in the way of treatment. Psychiatric treatment is required, but I think we have a very good record in that respect.

MS. VERGE: Okay. I have read - perhaps you can tell me what you know - I have read that the incidence of HIV infection and AIDS is higher among prison populations than it is among the population at large. AIDS advocates say that universal precaution should be taken in health care institutions. In other words, hospital workers should assume that every patient may be HIV positive because, obviously, there is no way of knowing who is and who isn't. I am wondering if there are universal precautions or any precautions being taken at the adult correctional centres to prevent the spread of HIV infection?

MS. SPRACKLIN: No is the short answer to that if you are referring to provision of condoms or anything like that. The answer is no. The reason that decision was taken, and it was taken with the concurrence of the Department of Health and in consultation with them, is that our incarceration periods are generally short. They have much more profound concerns about that sort of thing in federal institutions where people are serving long sentences, and where behaviour, perhaps, is altered because of the period of incarceration. But they are not provided at the penitentiary for that reason, that it is a shorter period and it wasn't felt necessary. The provision of condoms introduces all sorts of problems with security. It is one of the problems that you have to cope with as soon as you introduce them.

MS. VERGE: Presumably, federal institutions have figured out a way to dispense condoms without greatly adding to the security risk, haven't they?

MS. SPRACKLIN: I don't know if the federal institutions dispense condoms, to be honest with you.

MR. KENT: There are several jurisdictions.

MS. VERGE: They just called tenders for mega condoms.

MR. KENT: Two or three provinces and the federal government, I believe, use them. But we have looked at it with the Department of Health and it is concurrent with the department that we not do it at this point. As well, all our guards have been trained in dealing with known cases of AIDS, and there are several there that we know of.

MS. VERGE: But, of course, you never know who is infected.

MR. KENT: No.

MS. VERGE: Okay, what else do I have here? The Unified Family Court: Is there any thinking about expanding beyond the St. John's area, the Unified Family Court model, meaning combining under one roof or combining under the jurisdiction of one judge, all family matters, and providing through the court, counselling and social services?

MR. BAKER: As far as I know, no, but they can correct me if I'm wrong.

MS. SPRACKLIN: I don't think it is under active consideration at this point in time. That is not to say it might not be in a month's time or six months' time. At the moment, it is not under active consideration. It is always in the background and I would say, as well, that we are constantly looking at - how can I put it? - at ways of providing some of the services that are available at Unified Family Court in other areas of the Province without necessarily going to that exact same model, where you have a building that houses social workers.

MS. VERGE: Yes.

MS. SPRACKLIN: It is never far from our minds, but it is not under active consideration right now.

MS. VERGE: In my opinion, the priority is the service and not the building.

MS. SPRACKLIN: Yes.

MS. VERGE: But speaking of buildings, I see there is a beautiful law courts building going up in Gander. I can remember when the tables were turned and the Member for Gander was getting after me because of the inadequate court facilities in Gander. Now, I am going to ask about court facilities in Corner Brook. Is there any plan, once the law courts are open in Gander with a beautiful bronze plaque marking the responsible minister, to have a similar new complex constructed in Corner Brook?

MR. BAKER: Yes, well, I will remind the former minister that she informed me that this was a very high priority, and I believe there was a freeze in construction at the time, but once the freeze was lifted that that would be under active consideration.

MS. VERGE: Yes, I said the priority was Gander. I said Gander had a greater need than Corner Brook.

MR. BAKER: Yes, the Corner Brook situation is and has been, for the last year or so, under active consideration. However, I should point out to you that, I guess, a number of months ago, I can't pinpoint a time - and we did have plans for renewing the court system, plans for changes in the medical system in the Province, and so on, and we had capital plans that we were actively considering. We have had to slow these down. All of the capital plans we have had to slow down. We are now actively looking at the next five years to see what capital building can be done reasonably within the limits that have been placed upon us by the rating agencies.

Every year, under capital for the next five years, there is anywhere from $150 million to $180 million that is committed. That is the committed amount. The problem is, it has been indicated to us that we can't plan on spending, in terms of capital, unless we can come up with the money ourselves. We can't plan on going to the market for any more than - well, we can't do $250 million a year. The amount we can do has to be considerably less than that. So that has forced us to rethink.

The Corner Brook courthouse was a consideration. We were at the stage of even looking at possible sites and so on and going to do some planning. Also, Clarenville was another thing that we were looking at, and St. John's, something with the facilities down here. Something has to be done here in St. John's. I think there is a very definite need to do something with the law library, and also some of the court facilities. So these were under consideration.

Now, the Corner Brook and the Clarenville were ahead of the St. John's situation. That's the way we looked at it eight months or a year ago.

All I can say now is that when we have a serious look at the five- year capital construction that we can do - and I think we are going to have to wait a month before we can complete that, because there are no rating agencies doing work right now. We are going to have to wait about a month before we can complete that capital plan. But that is the Corner Brook and Clarenville courthouse situation we would like to take care of. These are the two things we are looking at there first. Then, in the health field, of course, there are several things we want to do, but again, we have to slow all that down.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Harris.

MR. HARRIS: Recently, the Law Society has informed its members, at least, that they have entered into a lease at Atlantic Place for five years to move the law library there from the mainstream courthouse now. I don't know what effect that has on government's plans. It may be that other plans might not come to fruition for five years, in any event.

MR. BAKER: That's right. Also, two years ago was when we started seriously looking at the law library. We were told by the Law Society so there is a tremendous need. Now, I know that they have since made other arrangements, but that still doesn't mean that there is not a need in terms of doing something with the courthouse base in St. John's.

MR. HARRIS: There is, in the Budget, $2 million, and it says, voted from other departments for court facilities and development of new facilities $2.378 million. What is that -

MR. BAKER: The transfer for the Gander courthouse.

MR. HARRIS: That is for Gander for 1992-1993, to finish it?

MR. BAKER: Yes.

MR. HARRIS: The Winston Baker Law Courts, is that what they call it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARRIS: What is the total cost of that facility?

MR. KENT: Three point three million dollars.

MR. BAKER: Three point three million when it is finished. The estimates at the beginning were $2.8 million, or something like that, and it ended up at $3.3 million.

MR. KENT: Yes, it was (inaudible) planning.

MR. BAKER: Yes, the planning one included and everything else.

MR. HARRIS: Well, I know the facilities there. Both the Provincial and Supreme Courts in Gander seem to be very inadequate, in my contact with them.

Under Consumer and Related Services, the office of the Consumer Advocate is an amount voted at $119,600 in which it included $38,000 for Professional Services. Now, my understanding is that the Professional Services to be purchased by the Consumer Advocate would be in the area of expert witnesses for interventions and Public Utilities applications. I have had some experience before the Public Utilities Board on these matters, and I do know that the professionals one uses in these things, and the professionals the Utilities use and that anybody operating against them use, usually are brought in from outside the Province and often from outside the country, and don't come cheap. In fact, the figure of $38,000 is a very small figure, and I am concerned that this might be acting as a cap or a control on the freedom of the Consumer Advocate to take appropriate action in challenging rate increases or whatever other activities the Consumer Advocate would be involved in. I just wonder how the minister would respond to the suggestion that this limits his freedom of action.

MR. BAKER: I agree, it is a small number in terms of the expert witnesses, and so on, that are called, and the member is quite right. Often these people are from some part of the States or whatever, and they are experts in particular parts of the Public Utility control regulation. That is a small amount; however, the Consumer Advocate would put in requests in terms of what he needs for extra witnesses. I believe there is only one hearing scheduled for this year. Is that correct, one hearing before the CRTC?

MS. SPRACKLIN: At the moment.

MR. KENT: One at the moment, yes.

MR. BAKER: That is really the only one we know of at the moment. If the Consumer Advocate puts in a request and has to have an expert witness come in, then it is possible to move some money around if it has to be. My point is that there is not a lot of scheduled activity this year, and that is why.

MR. HARRIS: So, obviously, you can't guarantee that if he asks for money he is going to get it and my concern is that his independence is at risk.

MR. BAKER: It really has nothing to do with his independence. You stated it differently the first time. It might impede his ability to get the best experts possible and so on, but it wouldn't really affect his independence. He still operates as an independent person. The only thing is, you can't simply leave it open and you can't put an unlimited amount in it. You may be right, he may like to have more money, but his independence is not in question. Whether he can get the best expert advice in the world possible, I would probably say no.

MR. HARRIS: The independence is only in the sense that if he decides he needs this expert and the government says there is no money for it, then he is obviously depending on how interested the government is in pursuing this particular avenue. He could be limited that way. That is a matter of opinion. I will leave that.

MR. BAKER: But no matter what you have, there are limits, no matter how that is done. The sky is never the limit, you know.

MR. HARRIS: No, I appreciate that.

One of the other ways of having control over that is to indicate that the Public Utilities Board in our own jurisdiction would pay the regional expenses of intervenors. They have done that in the past. In this case here, is the Public Utilities Board called upon to pay some of the expenses of expert witnesses, even if provided by the Consumer Advocate?

MR. BAKER: There is Revenue Provincial in there and that is where that would come from, if you are looking at Officer of the Consumer Advocate.

MR. HARRIS: Yes.

MR. BAKER: The amount can be voted. Then there is Revenue Provincial. That is what we would get back.

MR. HARRIS: From the Public Utilities Board when they charge the utility?

MR. BAKER: Yes.

MR. HARRIS: But that is what you would get back of the above amount?

MR. BAKER: Yes. So the net cost to government is the other amount.

MR. HARRIS: Speaking of getting things back, the Sheriff's Office shows an expenditure here of a rather large amount but I don't see any revenue. I know that the government, last year, used a whole series of increases in revenues, and it was based on some sort of user-pay notion or whatever, but I don't see any revenues there. Now, perhaps it is in Consolidated Revenue Fund. Can you give us the amounts that are achieved through fees from the Sheriff's Office?

MR. BAKER: Well, I will tell you that the situation in the Sheriff's Office over the last year or so has been improved considerably in the sense that there has been an attempt to streamline and so on. I am sure the former Minister of Justice would appreciate that that was probably a big job. Anyway, there have been some changes, and last year there was $521,879 that came in, and we are projecting $400,000 for this year.

MR. HARRIS: Last year there was $521,000 collected?

MR. BAKER: Yes, $521,879.

MR. HARRIS: And we are projecting only $400,000?

MR. BAKER: Yes, $400,000.

MR. HARRIS: This is as a result of the improvements?

MR. BAKER: Yes. In previous years, for instance, it was much less than that.

MR. HARRIS: Why would there be a decrease next year?

MR. BAKER: I have no idea.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is a one time thing. In last year's revenue certain things came in, a one time thing. The $400,000 is an annual better estimate on a recurring basis.

MR. HARRIS: I see.

The Registration of Deeds, Companies and Securities is another area where there were a great deal of increases in fees last year. These are registration fees. Other provinces have a land transfer tax or a sales tax on land. So I think there are substantial amounts of money collected there.

Can you tell us what is collected for Registration of Deeds, Companies and Securities under the activities listed in 2.1.03?

MR. BAKER: Registration of Deeds, $7 million; Securities, $1 million; And Companies, $1.5 million.

MR. HARRIS: That area of the government has been going through some efforts of streamlining, computerization, improvements in information delivery. How far has that gone? Are we getting to the stage where - and I'm not familiar with that area of practice now - but it was, at one time, thought that could be computerized with access to other parts of the Province, and that sort of thing. How far along is that process of 'computerization', I guess, is the full word, that all that stuff is going to be able to have access to?

MR. BAKER: I would like to say to you that I look forward to the answer as much as you do.

MR. HARRIS: I wouldn't expect -

MR. BAKER: There was a tremendous need there, a really tremendous need. My understanding was, it is a very difficult task to accomplish. Now, that was a couple of years ago. Somebody let me know how we are getting on here.

MS. SPRACKLIN: Mr. Harris, to be honest with you, I can't give you a really good answer on that one. We are still trying to get the deeds onto the system. I am not aware that there is any expansion to the other areas of the Province imminent at this point in time. It is an expensive and time-consuming -

MR. HARRIS: You're still trying to get the deeds going back in time.

MS. SPRACKLIN: We are still trying to get the stuff flowing onto the system. It's certainly not imminent.

MR. BAKER: My understanding is the whole court process is extremely archaic. Now, I don't know if I'm wrong here or not, but extremely archaic. There are things that should be done in terms of computerization that will make the whole system function better. I am talking not just about the registration and so on but the whole court system. It is probably back a hundred years.

MR. HARRIS: Is there a subhead under 2.1.03 which deals with the amount of money to be allocated to this continuing process? We see obviously the salaries and employee benefits are there.

AN HON. MEMBER: EDP funding?

MR. KENT: Our Professional Service budget is $189,600, which would be the area covered by computers. But I have to say that the government has approved a three-year strategic plan for computer development with major increased funding throughout our department for computer development. The priority has been the courts area and we are attempting to put in major new accounting systems and so on and so forth in that area. We are very hopeful that in the next twelve to eighteen months we will have major progress made. But our computer budget has been increased substantially in the development area by government.

MR. HARRIS: Actually, this is not necessarily an area of computerization. It is actually putting microfilm copies of things and it is implementation of a system. Is the Professional Services in there related to that? It's almost dogged work of, deed by deed, putting it on the system and having it accessed through microfiche.

MR. KENT: The money, Mr. Harris - I will just read briefly - $150,000 of that is for payments with respect to equipment they have, lease purchasing and hardware and software, maintenance agreements on their car system. But the remainder of the funds will be used to purchase additional reader-printers and terminals, and to cover cost of any required enhancements. So there is no major new initiative in there. It is basically paying for the equipment we have and so on and so forth.

MS. SPRACKLIN: I don't think any access throughout the Province would be by microfiche, though. I would think what is contemplated in the long-term is that one would have access to the terminals so you could do a search.

MR. HARRIS: Or to the index.

MS. SPRACKLIN: You wouldn't be duplicating microfiche, I don't think, for across the Province. That's obsolete at this point.

MR. HARRIS: But conceivably, without too much difficulty you could have a terminal in Corner Brook, say, and access by telephone line to the index as it gets -

MS. SPRACKLIN: To the index would not probably be all that difficult - to the actual document is where you start getting into the difficulties.

MR. BAKER: There was a complete analysis done about a year or so ago, was there not, in terms of the needs in the system?

MS. SPRACKLIN: No, that was of the entire department. Our major focus, I have to say at this point, on EDP, has been in the courts, as Mr. Kent says. We had terrific fines management problems, if you consider that there are fines being collected all over this Island, in every little nook and cranny and courthouse and whatnot. We felt that we had to give some priority to that. That is what we are doing. So there is no major initiative going ahead with the registry right now as far as expanding access throughout the Province is concerned.

MR. HARRIS: In the area of modernization, I suppose, and technology, one of the things that has been done in the last year or so has been in the court reporter system where I understand the government is no longer using or hiring court reporters and are relying instead on tape recordings. We had an incident in a recent trial, a very lengthy six or seven month trial, where there was a failure of the system and were it not for the consent of counsel to rely on the judge's notes, there could have been a very difficult situation and that whole trial could have been forfeited. What can you say about that? Are you satisfied, in other words, that this system is going to work and that it is not going to result in mistrials or problems? Has it been too hastily introduced, in other words?

MR. BAKER: You can never guarantee anything, of course. When you get into any system, it can go wrong at some point in time, even the court reporter system. I would suggest that the courts, to move ahead, have to rely on technology, and that surely in this day and age there is technology available in terms of recording and so on that is as foolproof as it can be. No matter what you have, you are going to run into some problems, and I don't suppose there could ever be a guarantee that there would not, at some point in time, be a mistrial because of the failure of some system.

MR. HARRIS: This is the only one that I am aware of. Have there been other problems in reporting?

MR. BAKER: I do not know if there have been any more.

MS. SPRACKLIN: It is the only problem. We have had remarkably few start-up problems and, I mean, anecdotally, you can cite one instance like that. Anecdotally, I can also cite the same sorts of instances when we had both tape and shorthand. You can have a court reporter who quits and goes to Victoria, B.C., or whatever; her notes may not be useful to other people, and you have books lost. We had a fire at the Unified Family Court where both tapes and notes were burnt so, anecdotally, you can have problems with anything. We have had remarkably few problems with this and we are satisfied. The day is gone where you have a girl sitting in the courtroom scratching out shorthand and another sitting there monitoring a tape. The reality is that they all type their transcripts from the tape, not from their shorthand notes. That is the reality.

MS. VERGE: Okay, getting back to the Electoral Office, 2.1.04: Last year there was $308,000 spent and there is over $1 million budgeted for the new year, with a big increase being for salaries. Last year there was only $90,000 spent on salaries and for the new year over $600,000 is budgeted. What is planned for the electoral office this year?

MS. SPRACKLIN: The enumeration.

MS. VERGE: Probably a voter's list.

MR. BAKER: Is that supposed to happen this year - the enumeration?

MS. SPRACKLIN: Yes.

MR. BAKER: The enumeration is supposed to be done this year. Obviously, there is a problem in the Electoral Office. We don't have a chief Electoral Officer at this point in time, so one has to be obtained soon. Of course, there is always the possibility when you get past the third year there might be an election at some point in time.

MS. VERGE: Okay. When will the election be?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS. VERGE: For the enumeration, we used to do two enumerations, one for the voter's list for general elections or by-elections and another for jury lists. There was a move afoot, at least on my part, to consolidate the effort so there would only have to be one enumeration and the one list could be used for both purposes. What is the situation now? Is there provision for one enumeration to serve both purposes?

MR. BAKER: Combining them both, yes.

MS. VERGE: Good.

MR. BAKER: That is what should happen this year.

MS. VERGE: Good. When will the enumeration be done?

MS. SPRACKLIN: I think we're scheduled to start in the fall, aren't we?

AN HON. MEMBER: That's the plan.

MS. VERGE: How will the enumeration -

MR. BAKER: The next question is: How quickly can it be done?

MS. VERGE: What are the mechanics that you anticipate for doing the enumeration? Do you plan to have a Chief Electoral Officer in place by then?

MS. SPRACKLIN: Yes.

MR. BAKER: Yes. A Chief Electoral Officer will have to be in place before then. We have a new Elections Act and it is kind of important, because we are fairly far along with it and we now pretty well know what is going to be in it. There are about twenty-some changes going to be made because of the Committee input, and we pretty well know what it is going to be. I think it is kind of important that the Chief Electoral Officer be put in place fairly soon to get things ready.

MS. VERGE: Yes. Now, I'm not conversant with the details of the draft Act, but presumably there are provisions in the Act for the Chief Electoral Officer. Is there anything in the new legislation about how the Chief Electoral Officer is recruited and appointed? And, regardless of what's in the draft Act, how does the minister propose filling the position? Will there be a public competition? Will it be done through the Public Service Commission?

MR. BAKER: I believe it used to be just simply by appointment, wasn't it?

MS. VERGE: Yes, I think it used to be done by Cabinet appointment.

MR. BAKER: What I would like to do - I could let you know exactly, some time next week, what the process is going to be, because I am not quite familiar with it.

MS. VERGE: Okay. Generally, all I am interested in is whether there will be a public competition and whether the Public Service Commission will evaluate and rank the applicants, or whether it will be a Cabinet appointment without competition.

MR. BAKER: The reason I'm hesitating is that I seem to remember something about that and I prefer now to go back and check and see that we have had that discussion. I can't recall now what it was. I can let you know as soon as I find out.

MS. VERGE: Okay. So you are expecting to have the Chief Electoral Officer in place before the fall. Beyond that, what will be the mechanics of getting the enumeration done?

MR. BAKER: Do you know?

MS. SPRACKLIN: I guess, the same as they always were. You have to hire people and send them out to do it.

MR. BAKER: It is the Chief Electoral Officer who does that, doesn't he?

MS. SPRACKLIN: Yes.

MS. VERGE: Or she.

MR. BAKER: Right. Or she, yes - sorry.

MS. SPRACKLIN: Now it will go on to a computer. From my understanding, at least, and I don't pretend to an intimate one of it, I do believe that now you will not have to enumerate each time.

MS. VERGE: Good.

MS. SPRACKLIN: People who are sworn in, I believe -

MR. BAKER: They're automatically added.

MS. SPRACKLIN: - will stay on the list, so that it becomes a much more continuous process.

MS. VERGE: A continuous process, that's good.

MS. SPRACKLIN: The original compilation of the list has to be done the same old way it always was, as far as I know. I am not aware of any change in that. It is looking like (inaudible).

MR. KENT: I know it is going to be a bit easier because there is a new computer system. These funds, $25,000 allocated, will be used to complete development work on an automated voter and jury list. So it is going to be computer-assisted, which will make it more efficient and probably more accurate.

MS. VERGE: What will be the procedure for updating the list and adding oneself to the list on moving to a new district?

MR. KENT: I have to take that under advisement and report back.

MS. VERGE: Okay. What else do I want to ask? Oh, yes, 2.3.04, Commissions of Inquiry. Can you give us a breakdown of what was spent last year and what you expect to spend this year? Which inquiries were funded at the amounts indicated?

MR. BAKER: Which heading?

MS. VERGE: It is 2.3.04, on page 218.

MR. BAKER: 2.3.04. Okay. Now, what was the question?

MS. VERGE: Would you give us a breakdown of what was spent last year, the $1.4 million, indicating which inquiries that total was spent on? - then a breakdown for what is projected for next year, which inquiries? Do you have specific inquiries in mind for the new Budget year?

AN HON. MEMBER: That's cumulative over since they started. This is next year's. We do not have 1991-1992 broken down. But the commissions that went on last year, we have the cumulative cost of that.

MR. BAKER: I could, I suppose, get some different numbers for you but the commissions that were ongoing last year, the cumulative cost was about $4.6 million. I have those numbers for you if you want them. The Hughes Commission was $2.5 million; The Sprung Commission, about $1 million; The Public Service Commission, $105,000; The Education Commission, slightly under $1 million; and the general inquiry, $21,000.

What is approved for next year: $150,000 to finish off The Education Commission - I think that is the printing and all kinds of stuff like that, that is now ongoing; $25,000 for The Public Service Commission; $73,000 to finish off The Sprung Commission; and $140,000 in there for general inquiries?

MS. VERGE: What is left with Sprung? The final report was submitted in January.

MR. BAKER: I should imagine it was put in there in case there had to be printing done or in case something else had to be done. I am not sure there was a specific thing in mind for that, unless there was a bill that came in after the year's end. I will have to check into that.

MS. VERGE: Okay.

MR. BAKER: It looks suspiciously like -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BAKER: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BAKER: For?

AN HON. MEMBER: The Efford Inquiry.

MS. VERGE: The PSC (inaudible).

MR. BAKER: That would be under general inquiries, would it not? -The Public Service Commission.

MS. VERGE: One hundred and five thousand last year, and twenty-five thousand this year.

MR. BAKER: Twenty-five for next year.

MS. VERGE: That is $150,000.

MR. KENT: One hundred and five would include the twenty-five.

The figures that we given initially were cumulative up to May.

MS. VERGE: Okay, so $105,000 is the total for the Efford -

MR. KENT: Yes.

MS. VERGE: Now, the judge hasn't finished that report, has he?

MS. SPRACKLIN: My information is that it is due on our doorstep momentarily. It has not yet been delivered, but I believe it is -

MR. BAKER: I believe the direction was it should have been done by the end of January or something but it has taken some time.

MS. VERGE: Okay.

The Public Utilities Board: now, somebody might have asked this the last time, but there is quite a large increase in the budget for The Public Utilities Board.

AN HON. MEMBER: It was answered the last time.

AN HON. MEMBER: I asked that (inaudible).

MS. VERGE: Okay. I can't remember the answer, but I will find out later. I won't repeat the question.

I asked for statistics the last time about women in the two police forces, and about violent crime against women and against children. Have you had a chance to compile those statistics?

MR. BAKER: In the RCMP, 12 per cent are female. There are fifty-five officers. In the RNC, it is 6.6 per cent; there are twenty-three female officers. The problem with the RNC is there have been no new members recruited for two years, so the change has not happened as rapidly as it otherwise would have, because of the lack of recruitment due to our financial problems.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is another issue.

MR. BAKER: The other question was on the sexual assault statistics? I don't have numbers for the RCMP. The note says that -

AN HON. MEMBER: The RNC.

MR. BAKER: What?

AN HON. MEMBER: The RNC figures.

MR. BAKER: Oh, I am sorry - the RNC.

The RNC: Sexual assault charges against adults and children in 1990 were 358 and in 1991 there were 404. Over the past nine months, up to May of 1992, 144 charges have been laid for sexual assault against children. That's the nine-month period leading up to May. They didn't keep the detailed information up to that point, so we have nine months of information. There were 144 charges laid for sexual assault against children, that is fifteen a month, on the average.

The RCMP: Sexual assault charges against adults and children rose from 709 in 1989 to 776 in 1990 and dropped a little in 1991 to 753. Charges against individuals for sexual assault on children rose from 362 in 1989 to 574 in 1990 and went down to 511 in 1991; they are averaging over forty charges per month, as the numbers indicate. Is that in proportion to the population served?

AN HON. MEMBER: I think it is a bit high.

MR. BAKER: The figures would be comparable, I guess, in terms of operations served, probably. The RNC is now keeping the detailed information like the RCMP used to, or it has been doing.

MR. HARRIS: This information that was obtained for the Committee, may we have copies of that?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, I will give you copies.

MS. SPRACKLIN: (Inaudible) copies (inaudible) us here tonight, actually.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS. SPRACKLIN: Yes, definitely.

MS. VERGE: The police forces only started opening their positions to women a relatively short time ago. In the case of the RCMP nationally, I think it was around the end of the 70s -

MR. BAKER: That is right.

MS. VERGE: - and in the case of the Constabulary, it was about 1980, not a very long time in the history of either force. Progress has been pathetic for a variety of reasons, bias being at the top of the list, but the caseload is such that it seems the services of women officers are more and more in demand, and in the case of the Constabulary, the very few women members seem to be front and center in talking to the public in dealing with child sexual assault, sexual assaults against women, family violence matters. Is the government at the point of recognizing that nature will not take its course and there has to be affirmative action?

MR. BAKER: Yes. I think, for instance, the RCMP are taking now only women and, I believe, some native recruits. So the RCMP have now started an active campaign in that regard. We have not, in the RNC, done any recruitment for two years; it is simply a matter of numbers, and I guess the question you are asking is, once we start recruiting, I don't know if you could sort of lay off some and replace them and so on. In terms of future recruitment, I suppose I will check with the minister.

MR. WALSH: The minister, when the question was asked here previously, made a very strong commitment to doing just that.

MR. HARRIS: He didn't even baulk at the words 'affirmative action' when I presented them to him.

MR. WALSH: He was very firm, in fact, that he wants to see that done and he intends to see it done.

MS. VERGE: I didn't hear it that way, although I would be very glad if that is what he meant.

MR. WALSH: I am sorry, that is what I sensed he said - and I might be wrong, but I felt that is what he was saying.

MR. BAKER: I think there is recognition that there is a need there, and then the question is, How do you do it? We are in a situation where there has been no expansion, in fact, there has been some contraction and once expansion starts, I guess there has to be a commitment at that point. But, as I said, the RCMP, of course, because they are continuing, they are trying to take an active role and I guess we should, too.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) the Member for St. John's East, (inaudible), as well?

MR. HARRIS: Well, actually, he did not say he was committed to it, we didn't nail him down as to specifics, but I would expect to see a positive, affirmative action program once positions are available to be filled.

MR. BAKER: The other side of it is that I guess the Police Chief and the assistant recognize the need and they would feel that need first.

MS. VERGE: I think it is the public who would feel it first. The institutions always lag behind; I mean, I know, I talked to them about this eight years ago. Is there any consideration being given to an early retirement program for the Constabulary, for people who are senior and who have been there for quite a long time but who, under the present arrangement -

MR. BAKER: Are you talking about management now or -

MS. VERGE: For the whole Constabulary.

MR. BAKER: The way their scheme is, after twenty-five years they are gone anyway. I don't know how we can afford to have any richer type of pension where they go after twenty years.

MS. VERGE: Are many due to retire in the next couple of years?

MR. KENT: We've had an extraordinary number who have retired in recent times, I guess, about thirty. Some of them are accelerated by choice, etc. I think the records indicate that there are only four, five or six, that kind of range, for the next several years. So I guess we have a decision to make in 1993 as to whether we are going to have another recruit class. If that were to be a class, it would be ten to fifteen, perhaps.

MS. VERGE: Okay.

MR. BAKER: Those decisions were made one year at a time. We made the decision that for this year we didn't need a recruit class, that we could do without one now. That wasn't the decision made for the year after, so we are going to have to look at it again.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Harris, do you have a question?

MR. HARRIS: Yes. There is an area that a constituent of mine has brought to my attention. Having given consideration to it, it is something that should be explored. I'm looking at the ticket management operations here on page 222, which reminded me of it. This is only the cost, obviously, and the revenues that are generated there, I think, are quite considerable.

His complaint, one that strikes me as being important, is that if you get a ticket, let's say, a parking ticket, and you receive a notice of the ticket in the mail, you are fined five dollars, and if you don't pay it pretty quickly, it's doubled to ten dollars. His most vociferous complaint, which I repeat, is that that was a 100 per cent penalty for a non-payment of a fine, which he considered to be exorbitant, and out of line with any other kinds of penalties for these things.

It is a very quick turnaround, I understand, and I see some of them in my mail from time to time myself, not being particularly vigilant with putting money in parking meters. Is that considered to be fair, that there be a doubling of a fine for a minor matter?

MR. BAKER: I don't believe the turnaround is really that quick, not in my experience. I've had some experience with them, too. It seems as if there is a reasonable time allowed. And, in percentage terms, I suppose you may have a case, but in other terms, to increase it five dollars if it is not paid over a certain time, I think, is quite reasonable. The notifications and so on would almost take up the five dollars. You'd almost be just simply recovering costs of somebody delaying to pay. So the amount is not very much.

MR. HARRIS: Is the five dollars a minimum fee?

MR. BAKER: Yes.

MR. KENT: Or 10 per cent, I believe.

MR. HARRIS: Or 10 per cent. So if it were a ten-dollar fine, it wouldn't go to twenty dollars?

MR. KENT: It would be just five, (inaudible).

On motion, Department of Justice, total head, carried.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I want to thank the minister and his officials for coming. I would also like to thank the Committee members, and especially the two questioners, for the way that the questions were asked, and the answers coming forthwith. I want to thank the Page, Elizabeth and the recorder.

The Committee adjourned.