May 27, 1996                                                      SOCIAL SERVICES ESTIMATES COMMITTEE


The Committee met at 9:00 a.m.

[The beginning of the committee meeting was not recorded.]

CHAIR (Bob Mercer): (Inaudible) the people around the table, and he needs to record that for the purposes of Hansard. So if I could ask you to do that, even those who have been around for some time. Jack understood and recognized most of the voices from the House, but I think Randy is a bit new at it.

The first order of business is to adopt the minutes of the previous meeting. Elizabeth have those been circulated?

MADAM CLERK: Yes, just now.

CHAIR: If they are in order can I get a motion from one of the committee members to adopt.

MR. H. HODDER: So moved, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Moved by Harvey Hodder.

MR. ANDERSEN: I second it.

CHAIR: Seconded by Wally Andersen.

On motion, Minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: Just by way of introduction, we are here this morning to review the Estimates of the Department of Social Services. Before doing that, I will just outline briefly the procedure that we will follow. To most of you I am sure it is old hat. First I will go around and ask the members of the committee to identify themselves, following which I will ask the Clerk to introduce the first head, on which we will start debate and discussions. After that I will ask the Minister to introduce her officials and to make an introductory statement on her budget. Normally that lasts about fifteen minutes, Joan Marie, or less as the case might be. Following that I will ask the Vice-Chair, Mr. Ottenheimer, to respond and to ask questions. After that we will ask each member in turn to ask questions until the questions have run out or we reach twelve o'clock; whichever comes first, I guess.

So with that having been said, and with a reminder to everyone to identify themselves before they speak, I would ask then each of the members of the committee to identify themselves starting with the gentlemen at my far left.

MR. ANDERSEN: Wally Andersen, M.H.A., Torngat Mountains.

MR. G. REID: Gerry Reid, M.H.A., Twillingate and Fogo.

MR. H. HODDER: Harvey Hodder, M.H.A., Waterford Valley.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: John Ottenheimer, M.H.A., St. John's East.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Now to you, Joan Marie, for your introductory comments and introduction of your officials.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you very much. Good morning. Joan Marie Aylward speaking, Minister of Social Services.

I would like to start by introducing my officials. To my immediate right, Deputy Minister Joan Dawe. Sitting next to Joan is Dave Roberts, Assistant Deputy Minister. Next to Dave is Dave Lewis, Director of Income Support. To my left, Director of Finance, Jim Strong, and to my far left, Assistant Deputy Minister, George Skinner.

I would just like to take a few minutes to give a brief overview of the budgetary impact of our department. Certainly there will be an opportunity for lots of questions as we proceed this morning. I would also like to say that my intentions were to invite my committee to lunch today, but I would like to defer that request because I have a Treasury Board meeting at twelve o'clock which I have just been made aware of. So if it is okay, I would like to take my committee to lunch, all of you, and maybe we can agree on a time outside of the setting here this morning.

CHAIR: I am sure that will have no influence whatsoever on the questioning this morning.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Okay. It is not meant to, believe me.

The first point I would like to make is that when we started our budgetary process, it was brought to our attention, the large number of temporary employees that were working in the Department of Social Services; certainly in all parts of government, but from our perspective in the Department of Social Services. Immediately we were very concerned, as had been my predecessors and other government officials in the department, about what this would do to our front-line staff. So we made a very clear effort from the very beginning to try to stabilize our front line, and in so doing, we brought a proposal forward to Treasury Board in an individual way as well as through the budgetary process. We value all of our workers and employees, but we recognize the value of a stabilized front-line workforce. We are very pleased that we were successful in identifying that need and the fact that these employees have been made permanent, those that have met the two-year threshold requirements. For us that made a big difference in how we would look at the overall budget process.

We recognized, with the type of financial restrictions we had, that there would be positions that would also be eliminated through redundancy, and I think I would like to reinforce that stabilizing the front-line force was crucial to us making those decisions. When we looked at the number of people who actually left through redundancy and lay off, the larger percentage, two-thirds in fact, were from management, and one-third was at the bargaining unit level. I would like to make it clear that we did not eliminate any front-line positions from our workforce.

At the end of the day what we have seen, at least what we feel we are confident in seeing, is that we have stabilized mostly our social workers, our financial assistance officers, and our administrative staff at the front line. In addition, we were successful in lifting the hiring freeze so that we were able to put in place approximately twenty front-line supervisors. So this also added to the support in the front lines by giving our workers some support for decision making, and will allow us to decentralize the decision making to the front line, but in the meantime giving them the support they need.

As was read in the Budget, we hired five social workers to assist single parents, who are mostly women, to retrieve court ordered child support payments. Of course, this process was done in consultation with the Women's Policy Office which is very supportive of this process, because it is a voluntary process. For a lot of women, in particular, it allows them to receive their income support from social assistance without an interruption in the money they need to work through their requirements as family members.

Other issues, of course, were that we modified our regions from nine regions to six, and we did restructure our district manager responsibilities. For the record, I think it is very important to state that we did not close any district offices, and for us that was very important. We know that that may, in the short run, produce some extra support as well because of the situation we are facing over the next year. We also are in the process of program review, and we will be looking at the needs of our offices and the types of services that we deliver. In areas where we can create efficiencies over the coming months we will be looking at doing that.

As also mentioned, we reduced our operating budget by 20 per cent. You must keep in mind that 70 per cent of the total budget in social assistance goes to income support. So we are also, I guess, somewhat pleased in that direction, that we are able to cut our operating expenses by 20 per cent and focus on providing the services that we are able to provide.

I would like now to open up this session to questions, and I will speak to whatever questions you will have, or defer appropriately to my officials. So if you are ready, I'm ready.

CHAIR: John.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: In terms of procedure, I guess it is fair to say that it is relatively informal, and if we just go back and forth in terms of any particular issues which may arise.

Subhead 1.1.01, concerning the Minister's Office: I think it is clear from the estimates which have been tabled that we have an increase, if I'm reading this correctly, of some $51,000 in Salaries, and the Transportation and Communications double, when there is a comparison made of the 1995/96 figures, in comparing with this year's estimates. Perhaps just for clarification, and for the purposes of beginning on this issue, I guess my question is simply: I'm looking for some explanation as to why there is an increase on the face of the documentation when you compare last year and this year.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you.

With respect to the Salaries, I think the answer is clear. We had a number of positions that received redundancy. We had a severance package for a previous administrative executive assistant and we also had a previous minister who received some partial monies that were coming. We also had some increased travel because the previous minister was in an out-of-town portfolio which required a lot more travel, I suspect, back and forth. We also had one more staff than we currently have so all those coupled together would allocate the increase in funds which you refer to. We had the severance package of a long time member so that would be fairly significant.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: How does the Chair wish to proceed? Are we going to proceed item by item or just generally?

CHAIR: Anyway you wish, John.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Okay, the next heading there, 1.2.01, under Executive Support, again on the issue of Salaries: When a comparison is done we see an increase of some $133,000 again, so my question is similar to the last one I guess.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I would say that the answer is similar to the previous one, in that we had a very senior deputy minister's severance package in accumulated leave included in here and that's it.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: When you say accumulated leave, you talk in terms of, as part of - are these for individuals who have left their jobs or had been terminated or is this leave for ongoing officials in your department whose jobs remain intact?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: No, this is for one person who left, a very senior person with approximately thirty-seven years of service, who left, I guess, in early March of this year and had annual leave and other accumulated leave that was owing to him because he left before he was able to use it. So it was a combination of that accumulated leave for that person plus a severance package.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: This might be an appropriate time to get the department's officials to respond in terms of the grants and expenditures by way of the federal government and, of course, the federal government input, particularly in this department. We see, for example, throughout the Estimates, a reference to federal government granting and so on. I think this department can distinguish itself because of the input it receives from federal government resources. This question is certainly by way of just general information and clarification. Maybe somebody within the department can give me some overview of the involvement directly by the federal government and its injection of funds into the provincial Department of Social Services, as it distinguishes itself from other departments in terms of cost-sharing and revenues that this department receives. I wonder if somebody on the committee, Madame Minister, could respond to that, just to put it in some context for us because, I think, of the special relationship that this department has vis-à-vis the federal government involvement?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Okay. Jim, would you like to respond to that?

MR. STRONG: Sure. Currently there are three federal programs which the Province receives funding for that relate to the Department of Social Services. One is the Young Offenders Agreement which is a cost-shared program with the Department of Justice for eligible expenditures relating to young offenders.

WITNESS: (Inaudible).

MR. STRONG: I think there is around $2 million forecast for the 1996-1997 year relating to that program.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Can I ask you a question on that?

MR. STRONG: Sure.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Specifically where you said the Young Offenders Agreement: Can you give a bit more detail in terms of precisely what that $2 million is for with reference to the Young Offenders Act?

MR. STRONG: Well, in terms of the federal Young Offenders Act, the agreement would cover a number of, what would be called, eligible expenses. Those would be custodial costs and non-custodial costs. Custodial costs relative to our department would be costs associated with running young offenders' group homes where the young offenders would be placed by the court system. Non-custodial costs would be things like the cost of our social workers working in the young offenders' area in our district office and that. That would be an example of a non-custodial cost.

We aren't the only department now that receives federal revenue. With the transfer of the Youth Centre to the Department of Justice, some of the revenue goes there.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Is it fair to say, then, that the bulk of the money coming from the young offenders' agreement would go to the provincial Department of Justice as opposed to the provincial Department of Social Services?

MR. STRONG: Yes. In total it is about $4.9 million in revenues receivable.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: So about 40 per cent of the funds available under that agreement come to this department?

MR. STRONG: Yes. That agreement was capped in 1988-1989 by the federal government.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: We still allocate it from this department to Justice. Because of the recent shift from Social Services to Justice, it is still all delegated from this department.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: You mean administratively, all the funding arrangements?

MR. STRONG: Yes. We administer the agreement, but that was similar to when we administered the CAP agreement. We would do the claiming on behalf of Health and Finance and other government departments.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Of course, that made the news there several months ago when there was a shift in jurisdiction, with respect to closed custody in Whitbourne and Pleasantville, from one department to another. From a funding point of view, even though the administration is from this department, what was the effective date in terms of transition from one department to another?

MR. STRONG: From a funding perspective?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Yes.

MR. STRONG: April 1.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: April 1. Okay, that is the young offenders agreement, then.

MR. STRONG: Another agreement we have currently is the vocational rehabilitation of disabled persons agreement. The revenues anticipated from that are about $3.2 million.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Three point two million dollars?

MR. STRONG: For this department.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I guess the name of the agreement largely speaks for itself, but perhaps again, could you just give me some indication as to specifically what the purpose of this agreement and funding is.

MR. STRONG: It applies mostly to individuals who have physical or mental impairment and provides funding to enable them to gain employment or an occupation. It provides things like counselling, assessment training, employment services, things along those lines.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Does it also provide people, for example, who live in group homes, or is this specifically for employment purposes.

MR. STRONG: It is employment oriented, yes.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Okay.

MR. STRONG: The third area that we would receive some cost-sharing in would be under The Right Future agreement, which was a special agreement with the federal government. That is estimated at about $1.3 million.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: What is the amount again?

MR. STRONG: About $1.3 million.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Again, an overview on this agreement.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: If I just might add here. With respect to The Right Future agreement, this is a four-year pilot project which, I guess, was developed with four partners. It was the provincial government, namely the Department of Social Services, the federal government, then the provincial Association of Community Living and the federal Association of Community Living. So it is a four partner project. We are into the final year of that project, but we have not really, at this point in time, gotten a clear direction on where we will be going with it because we are still waiting for confirmation from the federal government. We, in fact, have a meeting set for Wednesday of this week to outline the course of action for the following year.

There was a four-year agreement, but because of the change in CAP and EPF and the switch to CHST we are still not clear on the type of commitment that we are going to have, and certainly we are concerned as well as the other partners. So we will be meeting with them on Wednesday.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Just in terms of regular benefits for social assistance recipients - I am thinking, for example, a number of years ago when we had a significant influx of refugees that came to this Province. I know, for example, legal services were provided on a cost-shared arrangement, but obviously it was at an incredible cost to the provincial government in terms of maintenance and day to day expenses. I understand, as well, there is a cost-sharing arrangement with respect to federal government input as well. Is that under a particular plan? What is it precisely? What arrangement is in place that would allow the federal government to make contribution to the provincial government for those kinds of expenses that the Province may find itself in, at relatively short notice?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Are you referring specifically to the legal aid question?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: No, no. I am thinking, for example, of just room and board and lodging and expenses and transportation. In addition too, I realize the legal aspect is a separate issue and there was a cost-shared arrangement in place. I am just thinking, for example, many were living in apartments throughout the city. Of course, there were many individuals in that situation here in the province for several years. What arrangement is in place between both federal and provincial governments to meet that sort of, you know, sudden situation that the Province finds itself in?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, I will just say with respect to that immigrant issue - I know that was an example, but you know that issue has pretty much dried up. I think we had one immigrant who came from Gander this year, if I remember correctly. In terms of the actual funding, I think that the block funding related to Canada Health and Social transfer is how we have gotten the monies, and the monies are given in a block fund. We have put in an estimate of what we need to the provincial government, and we were given an allocation of our money. We have special needs and we have special areas where we can deal with needs as they arise. There are no specific funds any more that are earmarked for this or for children's issues because of the way the system now has changed. So it is based on an allocation of the needs that we put forward.

I think it is fair to say at this time, because of the change in the federal government system we are taking it upon ourselves to review the whole income support program, as are the rest of our colleagues across the country, in how they deliver social programs because of the change in the relationship between the federal and provincial governments.

CHAIR: Are there any questions? Wally?

MR. ANDERSEN: Not at this time.

CHAIR: Gerry?

MR. G. REID: This pertains to my district. I think we lost a regional manager. Where was that, on Fogo Island maybe?

AN HON. MEMBER: District manager?

MR. G. REID: District manager. Was that position filled before or was it vacant at the time?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: That position was vacant.

MR. G. REID: Vacant.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes.

MR. G. REID: So it will not be filled. So that will give Gerri Poirier - she is the regional director, I take it, in Twillingate - more responsibility?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: It will not be filled. I think the choices we made were difficult choices. We were looking at how we could either restructure the delivery of services or how we could restructure the management of the delivery of those services, and we chose to restructure the management perspective leaving the district offices in place. So it is important to note that the district office remains open but the district manager is not in place.

We have looked at is a number of things. We have looked at the ratio of management to employees; we have looked at the geographical areas; and we have tried to find a combination whereby we will meet the needs of the catchment area through demographics, through employee needs and through the caseloads; that is how we have done it. We have reduced the number of district managers. We are left with forty-nine district offices and we will be combining duties.

MR. G. REID: So, there is one body less on Fogo Island, I take it?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, there was one not filled and that will not be filled.

MR. G. REID: That's right. So the social workers there on the island now report directly to the regional director in Twillingate?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes. There are still district managers but -

MR. G. REID: Okay. It is Gerri Poirier, I am talking about, in Twillingate. She is a district manager, not a director. So they report to her, I guess.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes. As I said, there will be a management structure in place but it will probably have broader responsibilities, so those social workers in Fogo will report to Twillingate.

MR. G. REID: Good.

The other thing is Education and Training: Do you still have a program under which the clients, social services recipients, can obtain training from district vocational schools or anything and be paid?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: We have the Employee Opportunities Program which is a federally funded program, or was federally funded I should say. We are now still providing this service and in fact, what we are doing is, it is a three-part process. We do assessment and training, we give some education and then we also assist people in the workforce, through either partnerships or by trying to assist them in going out into the workplace. We have approximately $7 million in that area. While it is less than what was budgeted, it is more than what we actually spent last year.

While we have the three-part process, the assessment and training, the education and then the workplace, this year we are hoping to focus more on the partnerships in the workplace versus the assessment and training, because we have a significant number of people already gone through the program, approximately 2,000 people, who have gone through for an assessment process and training. This year we are going to try to devote most of our attention to the third part of the program which is getting people back to work either through partnerships or other arrangements. So, yes, there is money in the budget.

MR. G. REID: I don't know if I am understanding you correctly, but if there is a social service recipient and he needs to take - I had one particular person who wanted to do a mining course and who went to social services there just before the end of the fiscal year looking to have his tuition and what not, cost of living, paid for while he was going there, and there were no funds available at that time. Do you have something direct like that?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, the reason there probably weren't funds available at the time is because -

MR. G. REID: It was the end of the budget, the end and fiscal year.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, it was close to the end of the budget year and we had direction previously to freeze and to limit the spending so that we wouldn't be over-budget. We do have programs with which we are able to assist people. We are trying to do two things. We are trying to bridge more people into areas like Department of Education for student loans and that kind of process. When people do get student loans we still provide the services they need with respect to basic living allowances, and we will try to set them up, yes, with partnerships if that is what they need in the community once they have gone through the program.

You know, we try to be more responsible on how we are doing it. We are looking at the needs of the community, the needs of the person, the assessment that would go into it. So if someone comes up and says: I want to do a course in something or other, if it is totally irrelevant to the workforce and the needs, we try to match people up with the likelihood of finding employment afterwards. There are possibilities there for people.

MR. G. REID: Thanks.

CHAIR: Harvey?

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you very much.

We were talking about the temporary employees and we totally agree with initiatives that you took there. I think in some cases it was long overdue, the fact that we had people in all parts of the government services with, in some cases, ten and twelve years and they were still classified as part-timers. In their downsizing mode, the collective agreement, sometimes they don't necessarily even protect those who are included in the collective agreement. We all know examples of that throughout, not just the collective agreements that you work with, but with the NLTA and all the rest of it.

In that, how many of your social workers now have their Bachelors of Social Work as a minimum criterion? What percentage?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I would have to defer the numbers to George to get the actual numbers. I know, before I turn it over to George, that that is an area in which we are trying to provide support and encouragement, because we recognize that a lot of our front-line social workers have not met the requirements and are working towards them. A lot of social workers are in fact working towards their bachelor's and having their registration. Of course, it isn't by choice, it is because of direction we have been given to improve the accountability on the front lines, which we are very happy to do because it is a very important place to work with respect to children and other areas.

In terms of the actual numbers, I will turn it over to George.

MR. SKINNER: I don't have the actual numbers in total but we can get that for you and provide it to you later. Certainly since 1985 we have required, for a permanent social worker appointment, to be a B.S.W. I believe it was since 1991, 1992, we have required the B.S.W for all temporary workers. The vast majority of our social workers would have the B.S.W except for those who were grandfathered in.

In terms of the breakdown, I would have to get that for you later.

MR. H. HODDER: Would it be fair, George, to say that at the moment there are fifty to sixty social workers in the Province who are on the front lines day after day but they do not have a minimum of a Bachelor in Social Work?

MR. SKINNER: I can't confirm that specific figure, like I said. In terms of the registration of social workers act that came in in 1994, I believe it was, those who were with us, long-standing permanent positions, had a grandfather provision in terms of their registration. Of course, they have had long practice with the department over their career. Certainly, as I said, the earlier appointments would have taken in the B.S.W. requirement ever since 1985.

MR. H. HODDER: What provisions are you making? Let's state the number at being fifty, fifty-one, fifty-two. I think the actual number is forty-nine. Let's assume there are fifty out there. What provisions are you making to make sure - you are now into the second year of a five- or seven-year program that, sat, by a certain time all social workers will have to have a minimum of a bachelor's. How far along are you in that particular program now?

MR. SKINNER: I believe the provision you are talking about is the seven-year provision under the registration act for social work. These social workers are given every opportunity to avail of the social work requirements through the School of Social Work. They are aware they have to complete their social work degree for registration. The department, through its educational policy, is quite supportive, district by district, in helping people get their B.S.W. within the seven-year requirement.

In terms of the grandfathered social workers, of course, there is no legal requirement for them to complete the B.S.W.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: If I might just add to that, Harvey. I think this most recent move from temporary to permanent has really kind of put the focus on the qualifications issue for front-line workers. Through a communications system that we have started, people now will contact me directly in many cases with issues. On my e-mail I have a lot of notes, I guess, from very concerned social workers who have not met the requirements. I think it is really coming now to the forefront in the sense that these people will not be given permanent positions. While we are able to recognize and value a combination of years of experience with some qualifications, it is beyond our control to go beyond that. We have to say: In order to become permanent you have to meet the minimum requirements. For some people, as you can imagine, who are facing the twilight years of their professional career, they have to make some serious decisions on whether in fact it is even sensible to go and take on that type of educational arrangement to meet the requirements.

In terms of new hirings, we are obviously not able to hire anybody without the requirements. I know it is an issue that has come to the forefront because these people now have actually missed an opportunity, and in some cases may actually be bumped out of the system; although I find it difficult to believe that would happen because we are always trying to recruit social workers.

MR. H. HODDER: Well in terms of what is happening out there - and you are right, I agree with the provision of changing the collective agreement and what you have done. However, you can have people, for example, who have eight years of experience on the front lines, but they do not have their degree, and, I mean, they looked for permanency. You have people who have two years who have been retained and then somebody with seven years or eight years find themselves moved to a new office at a lesser position.

My question would be: Knowing that there are people out there who have eight or nine years, or whatever the years are, what provisions are you making to give these people an opportunity to upgrade their qualifications? More specifically: When these people have gone to university in the nights, and whatever time they can get from their schedules and they have completed the course requirements, one of the things that happens is they have to have a placement and during the placement period this, of course, means that they have to have (inaudible). They have worked eight or ten years into the social work and now when they finish their course work they have to go and work in some office, probably with somebody much junior to them, for a three or a four month period in order that they can meet the placement. During that period of time they are essentially unemployed, in the sense that they are out of the system. Is there any provision to give some fairness to these people who want to upgrade their qualifications in order to better themselves and the department so that these people can be encouraged by some kind of a program of educational leave or something like that, so that they can more easily bridge the gap between, shall we say, not having a bachelor of social work and having it?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think you raised a couple of points there. I think the first point I would like to make is that education is a lifelong process. While we recognize the importance of experience, because it is very valuable, we also have to work within the requirements, and that is that the qualifications are set down. It is incumbent, I guess, upon the people who are working on the front lines to meet the requirements, not only for the sake of their own professional liability but for the sake of the safety and care of children, in particular, and other services that we provide.

Many of the issues that you are referring to are clearly collective agreement issues, and are issues that are, I think, best dealt with at the bargaining table. For example, educational leave funds or other sorts of arrangements. We have made, I guess, some provisions available for people where they are able to go on leave, to try to get their degrees. We are supportive of them in a sense that these positions are being blocked or held for them. If they meet the grandfather clause, they will not be terminated, but they have a window where they have to go and try to meet the requirements.

There are lots of creative ways for people to get their education and I would like to refer to one of the leading agreements which was put in place by the nurses where we were able to provide a two-thirds pay arrangement for people to go back and get their degree. As I said, it was a lead agreement in all of the country. I still think that is best left at the collective bargaining table, because that is, in fact, where that was negotiated. I think you can provide the support, but there are a number of people in areas that would like to upgrade, and to have some sort of pay provisions.

With respect to the other comment you made about people coming out with say eight or nine years experience, and then perhaps working with somebody with one year to get their placement. I mean, that is also part of the process, and it is beyond our control. We always say in those areas that both people will learn from each other. I think the person with the more experience will certainly add to the new person's ability to take on that experience and, you know, the person who has gone back with their degree will meet the requirements. We have tried to keep positions blocked for those people and we have tried to provide the leave. As you know it is always ultimately up to the individual to take on that kind of a responsibility.

MR. H. HODDER: Madam Minister, we all recognize that you have to have the best qualified group of professionals out there, and we know that historically there has been some difficulty. It is just not in social workers, it is with nurses and teachers. Just a few weeks ago Chief Justice R.S. Furlong died, and he was the last chief justice who never went to law school. He was from that old school where you learn on the job.

In terms of incentives - and in the nursing profession I am aware of what you people were able to negotiate there and it was a good agreement. I just wanted to make sure that that kind of initiative is brought forward in your department to recognize that there are people out there who really, really want to complete their program so they can be guaranteed a two-thirds salary while they are doing this thing. What happens is these people do not qualify for student loans because they are not available for work, they are going to university. So, some way in which we can be fair to these people. What you are saying to these people is that after eight or nine years working on the job now they are going to take four months off, be placed, no salary and no educational leave. It is a matter of putting the incentives there to get these people to move on with their education. They want to but a lot of these people just cannot take four months off and they cannot get a loan either.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I hear what you are saying with respect to incentives but I still think that is an issue that is best negotiated at the bargaining table. I think if you are looking for special arrangements, that is something that is done at the bargaining table. I feel that the fact we were very successful in moving the temporary issue to permanent is a very lead issue with respect to our department and one that we are very proud of, because I think we have helped stabilize the front lines and minimized the amount of disruption from any redundancies or lay-offs that might occur in the system. I still think the union must play a very large role in representing their membership, and I think in so doing, they need to bring forward those types of proposals to the bargaining table. Because while this is very specific of social workers we also have other areas out there with FAOs wanting to upgrade, where we have new requirements where people want to advance and would like to go on and complete their masters and do those sorts of things.

I think it is a combination of incentive, personal incentive, and the need to hold a job. If the requirements are such that they do not meet those requirements there will come a point in time when they will not have a job and that is beyond our control.

MR. H. HODDER: On the issue of training for social workers, the amount of time spent in child protection, as a part of the curriculum at Memorial University's Department of Social Work, was so minimal that it certainly was not very adequate. In fact, child protection just happened to have been one of those things that just got put in there. Yet, the entry level for most social workers into the system is at the child protection level. It seems to be that many of the people who enter into the department's workforce are not always as accurately trained for the entry level as they might otherwise be if the curriculum at MUN were different.

Have you made any initiatives to change the training program at MUN to more adequately reflect the entry level into the Department of Social Work which is at the child protection level?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, before I would answer that I would have to do a detailed analysis of the total curriculum of the social worker program. My understanding of any baccalaureate program is that it provides an entry level degree and like any other degree there would have to be a period of orientation to that area. Now orientation varies from on the job orientation to other programs but I would be very interested in looking into the basic requirements. We do have meetings set up with representatives from the Social Workers Association and with the School of Social Work as well, and that would be something that we would certainly raise with them, to get their views on it; because I would suppose that would also be an area of concern for them as they try to represent what is required at the front lines. If there has to be more training or education of delivery of child care services then that is something that we would raise and we would look into, but I wouldn't comment on the curriculum without having an opportunity to study it.

I think there have always been concerns about front-line deliverers of care, especially in the social programs. There has always been an expectation that you produce a graduate who is ready to go to work immediately. I think that has been a fair assessment of all sorts of professionals, whether it is an engineer, a nurse or a social worker. I think the trend in the education system is that you provide a generic basic student, and then anything that becomes specialized requires added training or expertise. Again, I wouldn't speak on behalf of Social Work because I don't know their curriculum that well.

MR. H. HODDER: We all recognize that at the bachelor level it is a basic program.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: An entry level.

MR. H. HODDER: That is true of all bachelor programs. When you look to the Master of Social Work you get to be more specialized, which brings me to the point of: What proportion of your social workers now are at the master's level? I think you are finding that there are a lot of people now doing their master's. My other question would be: How many of these people who have their master's level are actually practising within their level of specialty?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: That is a question that I would also defer to George, as Assistant Deputy Minister, for those types of specifics. I would say, in the preamble, that we have a number of social workers at the policy level who are working with the department and in an advisory capacity to the front lines.

In terms of working within their specialty, I guess I would have to know what their specialty is, because like any other program there are a number of specialties, and at the graduate level there is a fair bit of flexibility, in that people have an opportunity to pick what specialty it is, whether it is in the legal aspects of social work, whether it is in child protection, whether it is in rehabilitation or whatever.

So I turn that over to George for the specifics with respect to numbers.

MR. SKINNER: Again, in terms of the actual specifics I will have to get the numbers from Human Resources. Dave, I don't know if you have that.

WITNESS: Not off hand.

MR. SKINNER: Generally, I can certainly say that the School of Social Work has expanded the graduate level program by teleconference and other methods in the last couple of years. A large percentage of our management staff, I know, have pursued correspondence courses, and these on-site teleconference courses. So a greater number are receiving training at the graduate level.

It has been my experience that the specialty they focus on is usually related to their job function within Social Services. You may be aware that there are two main areas of specialty, one in social administration and the other in clinical practice. Many of our St. John's social workers have pursued courses for a long time, since the graduate program has been in existence. Certainly with the advance across the Province, a greater number of our managers are also taking part, as well as our social workers, as far as Labrador and in the western region in particular. In terms of the exact numbers, we can get that breakdown for you.

MR. H. HODDER: A further question - and again I'm focusing on the training and this kind of thing. If you haven't got the right emphasis there, you can have all the front-line workers you want, if they aren't properly trained then it won't work.

On the issue of the turnover in child protection workers, we have had about a 65 to 70 per cent turnover of child protection workers in the past twenty-four months. What initiatives are we taking to analyze why that occurs, to make sure that the proper supports are in place so that doesn't occur? This turnover is detrimental to the system, it is detrimental to the clients, and it has been identified for a long time. What is happening to address the issue?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I agree with you, the turnover is an issue that we are all very concerned about. I think one of the significant components of the turnover was the fact that we had so many temporary employees. The turnover was out of their control, because a lot of people were bumped at the front-line protection area and that would be community service workers, in many cases, who are providing the care and the advice; and also with our social workers. So that was one area, the temporary.

We are looking at other areas and I think that by the very nature of the job it is a very stressful job; there is no doubt about it. We certainly value and recognize the type of work that our front-line people are doing, social workers as well as some of our other front-line workers, because you cannot minimize the type and value of the work that our financial assistance officers are also doing. They provide a lot of support because they are the first person that often meets with the client and makes a referral to the social worker. So it is a very stressful area.

I guess in our short time here, just a little over two months, we have identified the need to provide more supports to the front line. That was one of the reasons why we lifted the hiring freeze, to put supervisors in place to give that type of support and direction.

Another area I think that we are looking at is trying to work towards some sort of centralization so that we are not looking at practitioners out on their own. For example, in the area of Harbour Grace and Carbonear, we tried to move those services together so that these front-line people will have support systems themselves and that they can bounce things off one another for professional support and guidance. So there are a number of things, but it is a concern. I think by the very nature and intensity of the job, that will always be a challenge and we will continue to look at it.

I think as we go through program review over the next year, and in particular look at child prevention and protection, as well as income support, we are going to try to put in place more tangible ways of dealing with it, whether it is regular meetings. Those sorts of initiatives need to come from the people who are most affected. I cannot say: This is what you need. What we have tried to do, right at the outset, is identify and establish a communication system where they can communicate with their immediate supervisors, who are now in place in most cases, and then on up the line. So we are very aware of it and we are concerned. We are going to try to come up with some solutions other than the ones I have mentioned.

MR. H. HODDER: What kind of programs do you have by way of Employee Assistance Programs for social workers who do get burned out and who do have very high stress levels? What proportion of your social workers will avail of that kind of program? You are familiar with the program, I am sure?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes. Well I think, as you know, that sort of program is highly confidential and we would not have access -

MR. H. HODDER: Yes, but I am only looking at it in terms of, not numbers but percentages.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I would not have the percentages because also they do not do the breakdown on departmental statistics for Employee Assistance Programs. As you know, the way the system is developed is based on a highly confidential process whereby a number of an employee would go into the system and you would not have access to the actual specifics of the case or the need.

WITNESS: And nor should you.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: And nor should you, and I think that is very important.

I think, in terms of the services, in addition to the Employee Assistance Program with their group insurance program, they also have access to professional counselling services. Out of fairness, I would not be able to say that these people avail of the services because as in any amount of stress that is involved there is usually more than one factor. Like any professional group who are providing front-line services, there are a number of supports within the system. Employee assistance is one; the type of relationship you have with your supervisor and your colleagues; your own family life; financial situations: They are all a part of the whole determinant of stress and types of healthy needs. So I would not be able to answer that and I am not sure that I would want to in terms of the breach of confidentiality.

MR. H. HODDER: I don't think anybody would ever want you to get into particulars. However, I did want to assure that there is adequate funding put in place, if we are going to address the high stress levels, particularly with child protection workers, although not exclusively to them. When you have traumatic events that happen in a community, then you obviously know there are going to be traumatic events happening in the lives of the professionals who have to serve that particular community. While sometimes we hear tell of all kinds of interventions when you have things that happen, you know, a tragic events response team - I wrote part of a manual for that some years ago for a school system.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Are you talking about the Critical Stress Debriefing?

MR. H. HODDER: Yes, and all of these issues that are there that effect the lives of social workers, as they do teachers, doctors or whoever; that there is adequate funding put there to make sure that proper counselling and debriefings and all of these things do occur, and in the time of fiscal restraint that we make sure we look after the people who are providing the service to the clients.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes, I recognize that. I think there are many avenues in addition to the employee system. There is the physician that you would go to who would make the necessary referrals to psychologists and whatever through your own group insurance plan. I agree it is very important and it isn't an area that we would be interested in reducing. I think we recognize the value of providing the supports, as we have outlined, to the front lines and all the way up through the system.

MR. H. HODDER: Let's get on to something more mundane for a while.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: My pleasure.

MR. H. HODDER: Not that it isn't important, but way over on page 290, you have $2.9 million for Information Technology. That always interests me, particularly in the Auditor General's Report, where you people have spent, in that department, millions of dollars to bring us along by way of having an integrated network of technology. What is the status of the efforts to computerize the department? Are we proceeding or are we spinning tires?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Of course, we are not spinning tires.

MR. H. HODDER: Well they have for the last number of years. If you have snow grips on right now, then tell us about it.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: We have the chains and the studs on.

Actually, I think that is a very good area to outline, the whole issue of computerization. There a number of very positive things happening, as far as we are concerned at least. We are in the process of working very closely with Health to try to link with their computerized system to bring the needs and issues of Social Services with the needs and issues of Health. I think that we are recognizing from our, I guess, preventive backgrounds and our related social programs, that we are, in fact, in many cases, dealing with the same clients. So rather than trying to reinvent any wheel, and I use the reference to `wheel' not `tire', we are trying to bring our resources together. That is one of the directions we are taking with respect to administration, to try to eliminate duplication of services and trying to work more closely with other departments. We are starting off with Health, but we are also hoping that we will bridge that to Education and Justice as well.

That number is one that we think will provide a very useful service to us and to all of government. You will also note, from your Estimates, that the number is down significantly. The reason is because we are trying to work more closely with Health, we are trying to develop a program that will benefit departments in a horizontal way versus a vertical way. You can see that it has decreased from $4.7 million to $2.9 million. I think that is pretty -

AN HON. MEMBER: Responsible.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes, it is responsible and also it shows a direction in which we are going.

MR. H. HODDER: Last year there was an incident of a difficulty with the security of data, when information that was private to a young offender at Whitbourne was being faxed to a construction camp in Labrador. What provisions have you made to ensure that that kind of incident never occurs again?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: When there is a breach of security it is always a concern, whether it is a breach of MCP files or whether it is breach of a social assistance recipient or a young offender. I think that we have, I guess, done what we considered is appropriate by stressing the need for confidentiality and verification of fax numbers and lines. I think that happens from time to time. It isn't something that we would like to see happen. We are very concerned about it, but we did try to provide an updated list of the numbers, and we tried to verify those numbers so that wouldn't happen. We would like to avoid using the fax machines if we could in cases of clear confidentiality issues, but that doesn't always happen because of the time frames and the necessity of it.

I think in terms of anything specific, I would say we have just tried to verify numbers and we have certainly put out a communiqué to all our staff of the importance of that. It often just takes a phone call to verify the number if it is something that you aren't clear about.

MR. H. HODDER: What was interesting about that particular incident was that (inaudible) to have been called back from the construction camp on a number of occasions, and yet someone at the other end never did make the call to the department and say: Look fellows, there is something wrong here. It was a case where I don't know whether somebody felt that they shouldn't do it or couldn't do it or whatever, but it certainly went on for some time, and it was kind of a sad story. It does go to show us that information technology is only as good as the people who are using it, and your willingness to say, this isn't working, and to make the appropriate changes. I would like to think that kind of thing is, shall we say, totally isolated and was an absolute abberation, and I do believe it was.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think when you have 1,000 employees working for you, as you have pointed out, working under a lot of stress and a lot of challenges, I would like to think it is an abberation. Again, there is always an element of human error, and as long as we maintain our human status I suspect that is the way it is going to be. We always try to minimize that as much as possible. I'm not trying to minimize the impact, because a breach of confidentiality is always serious, but I think we have done as much as possible. As soon as it comes to our attention we have no other choice but to follow up on it. It was in fact followed up on, to the best of my knowledge, although it did take some time for it to actually be acted upon. I would finish by saying, I suspect it is an abberation.

MR. H. HODDER: I think what disturbed us was how long it took to make a simple change? The error was one thing. How long it took the bureaucracy to respond to it was a sad commentary.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: It is something we can always strive to improve upon.

MR. H. HODDER: Yes, sure.

Mr. Chairman, if you would like to break for a few minutes now.

CHAIR: If you would like.

MR. H. HODDER: Well, I think that the minister (inaudible).

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I am fine, if you want to continue on.

CHAIR: The Clerk has been very efficient passing around the coffee. If it is the wish of the Committee to take a short break, by all means.

MR. H. HODDER: I can go on.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Me too.

CHAIR: Okay, continue?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: We might want to see if Gerry and Wally have any further questions.

MR. ANDERSEN: Not at this time, no.

CHAIR: No.

MR. G. REID: On page 291, under 2.1.01, Salaries dropped by about $1 million. Is that the district managers we talked about earlier? At the top of page 291.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes. I'm just getting my proper area here, Gerry. Just give me a second.

MR. G. REID: Regional Operations, Client Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I can give you a breakdown on the decrease. We had a total of 34.5 funded positions which have been eliminated over the course of the year. That included lay offs that were imposed in November and also some of the more recent ones. So that is the bulk of the $1.4 million.

MR. G. REID: So that is under Regional Operations?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, it was more than regional. It included regional managers, managers of support services, district managers, program supervisors, employment opportunity field workers, word processing equipment operator, .5, a service quality manager, a service quality support staff and a director of community agencies. So it was just the regions, it was a whole provincial perspective.

MR. G. REID: The number that were let go are not filled? You said 40-something?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: That was the total number throughout the year.

MR. ANDERSEN: I have a question and it is not particularly on the budget, but, Minister, I would prefer at a later date if I could sit down with one of your - probably the Deputy Minister Dawe. It is mostly for information purposes pertaining, for example, to vocational training, support services and so on. I have a few questions I would like to ask, probably later on.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: At any time, yes.

CHAIR: Perhaps in the interest of our circulation, maybe we could take a five-minute break just to stretch. We can refresh our coffee and then come back to the table.

 

Recess

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

Mr. Ottenheimer.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I just have a few questions. The first one is general in nature and has to do with an issue which again came to the fore a number of months ago, and we touched on it briefly this morning.

I would like to ask the minister, in the hopes of getting a clearer response, because in the House I asked a similar question of the Minister of Justice and did not get, what I feel to be, a satisfactory response. So I am going to try it again now with respect to the Minister of Social Services. That is, the rationale for the change in jurisdiction in terms of closed custody, specifically Whitbourne and Pleasantville, from this department to Justice. I am wondering Madam Minister if I could have your explanation as to why that change was made. Obviously, you know the rationale behind such a change?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you.

Well, while I was not a direct part of that decision to transfer services, I can give you some information which might help answer your question.

With your background in law, I am sure you are very much aware that the jurisdiction of closed custody is not one that is consistently kept within the boundaries of social services right across the country, and in fact, in many jurisdictions, is a part of the Justice portfolio as opposed to Social Services. So it is not something that is totally out of line with the trends across the country, and there are many different styles of portfolios that deal with social issues. Some are specific to Departments of Social Services, some have specific breakdowns, families and community services, and they deal with those portfolios. Some deal specifically through Justice.

I guess I can add to my colleague's answer by saying that it was a decision that was made perhaps for other reasons than I am aware of, but one that I am familiar with, that is in keeping with many of the other jurisdictions across the country. It is not out of line with how the services are delivered because we still very much keep a close liaison with the Department of Justice. As you know, our director moved with the program so we see it as a way to enhance the relationship between Social Services and Justice. At this point in time, it will stay within the boundaries of Justice, unless we are given direction of it moving back.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Isn't it in some way though, a shifting in response? Is the purpose of this move, if only in part, away from rehabilitation to one of incarceration, if you know what I mean, in terms of the emphasis, you know, in dealing with a young offender who has been convicted of a criminal offence? Is that, if only in part, you know, some of the rationale as to why there was a shift?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well in response to your question, the incarceration is evident with respect to whichever portfolio these two particular sites belong, because, in fact, it is a closed custody environment. With respect to the philosophy of the shift, whether it will mean a direction moving away from rehabilitation, I think that would be something that would be best dealt with now through the auspices of Justice. My understanding is, there was a balance of both rehabilitation and incarceration under the closed custody system.

I think my colleague in Justice would perhaps best speak to the plans with respect to the actual programming with these two areas, Pleasantville and Whitbourne. From my perspective, I know we will be working very closely with the director of the program, as she moved to Justice, because in many cases we do see the continuity and we are trying to refocus our energies to put more emphasis on early intervention and prevention. I guess our goal would be that they would not end up in those facilities if we had our way. Our intention is to work very closely, as we mentioned earlier, to improve collaboration with the four departments, Justice being one. Anything more specific than that I think would be best answered by my colleague from Justice.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: On the issue of open custody, I believe I am correct in saying that the whole area of open custody, custody with respect to young offenders, continues to be within the jurisdiction of this department.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: That is correct.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I understand that in recent weeks there have been a number of young people who have absconded and they have been on the missing lists. Obviously that has been an area of concern, I would think, for those homes or institutions where open custody is permitted. I am just wondering what steps has the department taken to, I guess, tighten security, as it were, although it is an open -I appreciate the fact that it is an open custody setting, but it must be of some concern to the department if, in fact, young people are not reporting back at a particular time and, in fact, are missing for hours. These matters have not become public to my understanding, but they have been of concern to those individuals within the Social Services Department, and who have responsibility for supervision in these institutions.

Because of this problem which has occurred in recent past, what steps have been taken, or can be taken, to ensure that young people do not find themselves in serious distress as a result of having not reported to these homes for open custody? Obviously the accountability of the department, it would seem to me, would be a major concern, and the department would have to speak to it if an incident did occur.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: In order to answer your question: Is there a specific area or home? You mentioned absconding persons? Is there a specific incident to which you are referring so that I might best try to answer the question?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Sure. Approximately six weeks ago - and it coincided with the time when there was an attempted suicide incident out in Whitbourne - I am aware of a home in town where there was at least one, maybe two young offenders, who were in open custody who had been missing for, I think, a six or eight hour period. Are you familiar with that?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Okay. So that particular incident, obviously that can happen again. So my question is: What steps had been taken by the department, or what does the department see as the best way to address that? Clearly, you know, there is other than the accountability issue. We have to look at what is in the best interests of these people who are in these institutions?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think, as you said in your preamble to your question, that it is open custody, and when you deal with open custody versus closed custody there is always the element of risk related to people leaving a premises, because they are not under lock and key twenty-four hours a day, and while they have supervision, it is not one on one supervision. As you are also aware, with your background I am sure, the whole purpose of these arrangements is to allow a certain element of programming and a certain element of restriction. The whole idea of the programming, speaking generally - because I mean there are individual programs set down - is to try and encourage independence and responsibility for one's actions.

While we are very much aware of it, I think the most important role that we play is monitoring and making sure that we have adequate staffing levels, that we have an adequate reporting mechanism, and that we have the necessary resources to find the people if, in fact, they do leave. To say that I can assure you there will never be a breach of safety with respect to people leaving these residences is unrealistic and something that I could not maintain; so I certainly would not promise it.

All I can say is that we are aware of the risk. The courts are aware of the risk, because when a court orders these young people into those homes they are aware that that possibility exists. If they feel the situation is such that they need closed custody, then they would have been ordered in a different environment. So while we have a responsibility for the risk, I think the courts also recognize that these young people are not suitable for closed custody, are suitable for open custody, and these things may happen by virtue of the environment they are living in. They are not living under lock and key.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: There is a desperate need out there, it seems to me, for professional help, obviously, for a lot of young people today. We see in the Education budget, for example, a reducing of program coordinators and so-called specialists within the educational system. I am wondering, has the recent budget recognized the need in your department for increased professional services for misguided young people or young people who obviously are crying out for help regardless of the reason? Is there attention being given to this particular problem by the department, and what allowances, if any, have been made for, perhaps increased professional services and psychiatrists or psychologists to help young people in need?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: To answer your many questions. With respect to the program coordinators begin removed from the school, I think you are probably more familiar with that part of the education system. In fact, many of these program coordinators were not in roles of providing counselling. So I think that that particular statement does not reflect the withdrawal of services that you referred to with respect to counselling. I think that is clearly a separate issue.

As I mentioned in the beginning, one of our directives, more recently since my assumption of the role of minister, is to try to improve collaborative efforts between the departments. Education and Health are two that come to mind, as well as Justice. You can see there are very clear linkages. While right now we are faced with dealing with a lot of young adolescents with a lot of problems, we all recognize from the determinants of Health that early intervention is the way to go, and an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Another way of saying that is, you either pay now or you pay later.

We are very much involved in trying to bring together the four major portfolios to try to provide and create more solid linkages, for example, having more early intervention in the schools. I am not sure if you are aware of it, but the Classrooms Issues Report that was released last year, there are a number of initiatives in that which I feel are very important to our department in social services as it relates to early intervention. From a health perspective we also know that rather than trying to help children when they reach adolescence, if we can prevent the problems in early years we would be much better off.

These are the sorts of things that we are doing. We are very aware of the problems, and I think I have stated time and time again that I would like to focus more on prevention than on treatment. It does take some time. We are actually going to be engaging in working more closely at how we deliver child welfare services and trying to shift the emphasis more to prevention. That is clearly going to involve more linkages with education and with health.

So that is where we are moving and I am very committed to that from my background in health, from my background in the community and from my other experiences with community development. I am very interested in trying to provide preventative services as much as possible.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Okay. That's good to hear because obviously we share the same concerns and obviously the department is making strides in this area.

One further question, before I hand it over to my colleague or indeed another member of the committee. The department plays a role in the social arm of the Unified Family Court, in the providing of social workers, for example. It is my understanding that social workers play an active role in home studies, for example, and in the preparation of home assessments in dealing with often very difficult issues concerning custody and access of children, involving parents and spouses who are in the midst of matrimonial strife. The social arm is an important arm of this court and, in fact, the judge down in Unified Family Court, Madame Justice Mary Noonan, herself is very much in favour of having the social arm play an active role in dealing with issues that come before the court.

My question is really one of funding. I am familiar with a particular incidence, not that long ago, when it was deemed necessary by the court that a home assessment be done to deal with the issue of custody and access to children involved in the middle of a matrimonial dispute involving their parents. There was a home study ordered, however there was simply no funding. In fact, it was made known to these individuals that if they wanted a home study the cost was anywhere between $1,200 and $1,800 to have a professional home study prepared. It was necessary for the parties themselves, both the mother and the father, to pay for it and to, in fact, divide the cost equally. This is something new because obviously the social arm of the court would, in the past, have covered that cost and a social worker would have been provided to do an in-depth analysis of the problems. There would then be a completed home assessment filed with the court that would assist the judge in determining what the outcome of the case should be.

However, as I say, recently there appears to have been a problem with funding in this area. So my question is: Is this an isolated incident? Has in fact funding then either been reduced or discontinued to assist social workers, or was it because of the time of year, in the sense that the budget had been met and there was a specific period of time when social workers could not be engaged at the cost of the department?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Is there a specific time of the year that you are referring to?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: No, well this happened in March or April. I am not sure whether, because of the time of year, that there had not been new funds allocated for the social arm of the Unified Family Court, or is this again a shift, perhaps a further reduction?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think the best way to respond to that question - I will turn it over to George if he has any additional information. I can say, that particular case has not been brought to my attention, and it may have been before I came to the department that you are actually making reference to this case. I do know that we do have meetings planned with Justice over this very same issue that has been raised to us in terms of supports - and in this particular case was brought forward on behalf of women - supports to women in that particular situation, between social services and justice and where, sort of, the twain shall meet with respect to funding. I am familiar with that process being underway and I will ask George to speak to anything more specific other than that.

MR. SKINNER: I am not aware of the specific case either, however, when you mentioned Unified Family Court - and the minister has mentioned our need to talk to Justice and our intention to talk to Justice - Unified Family Court has counsellors and social workers involved in the issues around family law. That is not to be confused with our social workers. We would only be involved on a protection matter. The actual home study that you are talking about, if there was a case I would have to check into it, but certainly the home studies that I am aware of from family court would probably be done within the jurisdiction of the family court which is Justice and not our issue.

As the minister has said, we are concerned about the interface and this is why we have to have discussions. But if a home study was necessary as a result of custody, that would not necessarily bring us in, in terms of a protection matter.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: If I could add to that, we have also had contact with Madam Justice Noonan identifying this issue as well as other issues, and we do have a meeting set for September to sit and discuss that whole issue of, as George referred to, the interface between Social Services and Justice, when, in fact, it does not deal specifically with the child welfare issue. I think the ability to pay is one that comes into play here and in many cases, I think - I am learning at least as time goes on - whenever there is a grey area and somebody does not know exactly where it fits, there is automatically an assumption made that Social Services owns the issue. What we are trying very clearly to do, is to identify what services we provide, how we provide them and that we in fact are not a catch-all for all.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I guess though, it is fair to say because of the direction that government is taking in the various departments, in our committee for example, there is going to be much more involvement and sharing of resources. As you just said, maybe one day it would be Social Services, the next day it would be Justice and the next day it would be Education or Health, which is perhaps not a bad idea, because, obviously, to work in isolation of one another, I don't see it.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: You can't do it.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: It can't be done, no.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think the days of working in isolation are gone. I think we are trying to develop, through our program review, not only a more efficient way of delivering services but a more horizontal approach to the delivery of services based on the old vertical, this is your department and this is your department, when in fact we very often deal with the same people.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Okay, thank you.

MR. H. HODDER: I am pleased to hear you make the last comment because one of the things that I am familiar with is a case where there were thirty-six different professionals interacting with one fourteen-year-old victim of cerebral palsy; and, sad to say, after two years of interaction, the young man's condition had not really improved. Nobody saw the total child. These kinds of initiatives not only are they welcome, they are indeed to be encouraged and promoted. The challenge for you is to make it a government priority and to make sure that the bureaucracy sees it happening.

In my work, which is across country as you know, it certainly is a big challenge and I am delighted to see that you are heading in that direction. It really is a monumental problem. It is not just Newfoundland's problem, it is a national problem.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: If I could say, though, if the governments and the bureaucracy were to look more closely at the nursing model, they would see that the nursing model looks at the total person and maybe that is a perspective that we are trying to move through government - who knows - but it is not a piecemeal approach to it. It is looking at the total issue, the total problem or, in this particular case, it is the total person. We are looking forward to doing that. We probably have lofty hopes but somebody has to get in there and try to bridge the gap between departments. I think some of it has begun but more of it needs to happen.

MR. H. HODDER: Talking about interfacing and all that kind of thing, back to my computer work again. In terms of claw-backs -

MS J.M. AYLWARD: (Inaudible).

MR. H. HODDER: Yes, if we get to a computer question. In terms of claw-backs and how they are processed: While members of the government and others might disagree, in particular, on claw-backs, when it comes to things like the Canada Pension Plan benefits, TAGS, workers' compensation and these things, where there are obviously overpayments or payments whereby the individual has been the recipient of social services benefits in the waiting periods, very often the person gets the benefit, whether it is Canada Pension lump sum payments or whatever, and after that money has been expended, then they find themselves in the position where someone says: Oh, oh, there is a share of that that has to come back to Social Services. In terms of front-line interacting with these various agencies, so that the person who is on social services don't find themselves victimized by lack of information or whatever, is there any provision there whereby your new computerization program will again look at the total person in terms of all of the programs and we do not end up having claw-backs where it really wasn't necessary? Very often when it comes to these claw-backs people find themselves with payments going over years and years and years when really with simple cooperation between different agencies, it would not have been necessary at all.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well in response, the challenge to improve communications is always there, and we recognize that. One of the areas that we will be forging ahead with is trying to improve the computerization process to identify people who are receiving social assistance and old age assistance or CPP or other forms of funding. It is our intention to do our best to notify people in advance, you know, that this is the direction we are going to be taking.

I will come back by saying, I will leave it to Dave, our Director of Income Support, if he wants to add anything. When people find themselves on social assistance, there is a contract that they sign where they have to identify any other sources of income. While on the face of it, it seems quite unfair that people have to give back money they have received, I think we will standby our statement that we are living in a shrinking financial environment where we are trying to provide a growing number of services to people. I think, perhaps our biggest mistake is being as non-vigilant as we have been in the past. We just cannot afford now to be non-vigilant, we have to be more vigilant in the types of funding and the amounts.

I also have to say that it is not only an issue for us, but it is also an issue for many people who are forced to live on social assistance, who are living next door to people who are getting other sources of income. So we have as many concerns and issues raised by people in the same communities, as we do from our own financial resources. It is very difficult for a family who is receiving x amount of dollars to be living next door to a family who should be getting the same amount, and perhaps is receiving funding from two other sources. It creates an imbalance.

I guess that is an area that we are trying to address. I would also like to say that I wish we had more money to give, because I know it is very difficult for people to live on their basic allowance that they have. It was a choice that we made to become more vigilant rather than going back and looking at rolling back basis social assistance services; and that is exactly where we are coming from. We came out of this budget feeling very relieved, on the one hand, while we have an increase in overall funding, and we had some very difficult choices to make to get that.

I do not know if you have anything that you would like to add to that, Dave.

MR. D. LEWIS: Just specifically to the planned Canada Pension Plan interface with the social assistance program. A number of other jurisdictions have implemented similar interfaces over the past couple of years. Basically there are two main functions of the interface. One is to identify persons who are receiving both Canada Pension and social assistance to ensure that that income is being taken into account in the social assistance program. The other thing that jurisdictions have found is that there are significant numbers of clients who are eligible for Canada Pension benefits but are not aware of it, and those clients are then assisted to apply for benefits which they were not aware that they were eligible, which has had the effect of reducing their requirements for social assistance and of having them access benefits to which they are entitled under the Canada Pension program.

MR. H. HODDER: My intention is not to get into a dialogue as to the fairness of it, but to address the issue of co-ordination and to make sure that we don't make people's situations that much worse, to find them in situations where they have indeed expended the money and then find that they do now have a claw-back, you might say, coming. I am not talking about claw-backs, that is not my point at all, but to be up front about it, to be pro-active on it. It does not eliminate their right to appeal if they feel that they have been wrongly assessed or whatever, but to make sure that we don't further compound people's difficulties by letting them access the money, then only to have it clawed back after it has been expended.

I think the aim is to have it better co-ordinated within the department and within the government itself, both federally and provincially, although in some cases you find the federal government is not as co-operative. There isn't any reason at all why departments of the provincial government cannot have a sound interaction with each other. I mean, there is again one client, and again it is your horizontal model that you are talking about.

I have a section there in the budget, Partnerships At Work, page 298, since we are here to talk about estimates, Grants and Subsidies, $2,972,000: Is it possible to have a listing of the organizations and groups that have been supplied with these grants and subsidies?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Are you talking about the Partnerships At Work in particular?

MR. H. HODDER: Yes, Partnerships At Work. It says Grants and Subsidies. This would be employment projects, looking here at organizations, or is that possible, in looking, for example, at Family Resource Centres and that kind of thing; how it breaks down by category even?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think the best response to that question is to say that they have yet to be developed in specificity because you are trying to identify matched jobs with particular workplaces and there are no specific, larger groups, although we are trying to work more closely with the regional economic development boards in trying to establish those. I can't say to you that we are going to Mr. Jones' workplace to try to get a partnership for one of our recipients to go to work, because until we know who we are going to put in with Mr. Jones, we don't have that partnership made. I don't know -

MR. H. HODDER: So your figure here is really a guesstimate?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, I guess you could say any budget is a guesstimate perspective, when you are trying to identify the number of people that you actually put in specific partnerships.

MR. H. HODDER: But not the minister's salary though.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Pardon me?

MR. H. HODDER: Not the minister's salary.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, if you are working out the hourly rate, it is, I guarantee it.

What I would say to you is that it will be distributed provincially; it will be allocated regionally by these boards and then they will have an ability to establish partnerships in every region throughout the Province. It is not going to be specific to one area or another but it will be allocated. As I said at the beginning, this is a three-part process. We have the skills assessment part, we have the training and we have the Partnerships At Work. We have, this year, tried to focus more of our energies towards the Partnerships At Work. One of those will be actually partnering in a workplace and another will assisting people to try to get student loans to move on into other areas.

We haven't actually identified the allocations yet but that is where our focus will be, on putting people to work this time, because we have a significant number of people already assessed and into training.

MR. G. REID: May I ask a question on that, Harvey?

MR. H. HODDER: Sure.

MR. G. REID: What happened to it last year? It started off with over $4 million and was revised at $2,280,000, and that is just about half. Did you cut it or was it just not taken up?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, it was both. We were asked not to spend it as part of the restraint measure, so we did not. What we have budgeted this year is what we spent last year, but not as much as was budgeted last year, if you are following me.

MR. G. REID: What you spent last year would have been the revised, wouldn't it?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, that is what I am saying. Originally there was a budget of $10 million, we spent $7.3 million, and that is what we have budgeted again this year, $7.3 million, or $7.9 million actually in total. That includes the Partnerships at Work and the Strategic Initiative.

Okay? So, what we are planning to do is spending what we had allocated last year for spending.

MR. H. HODDER: (Inaudible) with your support for things like, for example, family resource centres and other similar initiatives, which have proven to be very, very successful - and some of these are located here in St. John's and some of them are in various other parts of the Province, the Port au Port Peninsula, for example. What is the department's position on support for family resource centres as a preventative measure.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: We have not established any new family support centres in this budget. What we have been able to do, and we are very pleased, is that we were able to stabilize our contributions to various agencies, some of which provide those services in sort of an arm's length approach. For example, Big Brothers/Big Sisters provide that kind of support, and there are other groups listed. I have most of the list here, I think, in front of me. As I said we are looking at the types of services we are providing for children and families in a preventative way. I would not say at this point in time that there will be new allocations, but I would like to think next year that we might want to put more emphasis on that preventative part of it.

This year, as you know, after coming into the portfolio we are very much directed to try to organize our budget based on what was given to us in November. We have revamped a lot of that, and we try to sustain the front line, sustain our supports in the community. I guess, that has been the main focus. We have no identified sources of funding for new family resource centres right now.

MR. H. HODDER: In terms of social workers in the school system, in the classrooms, I was of the opinion, and still am, that this was a very positive initiative, and was very well received. It was certainly in line with the thinking on preventative programs and recognizing when a guidance counsellor has a ratio of 1,000 students to one guidance counsellor. Also guidance counsellors are not particularly trained to deal with the multitude of social issues that are found in the school system. I do not see that program being encouraged within the school system by your department in terms of expanding the program. In fact, I sense that it may be discontinued almost.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well that was a pilot project which you are referring to, where the social workers were in the schools, as you are aware. As I mentioned in the House, I guess earlier today, we are in the process of looking at our whole Department of Child Welfare and protection and we would like to focus more on prevention. As I have mentioned in the past, we are very interested in the final report of the Committee on Children's Issues.

We also have some research now being done into the Classrooms Issues Report which is where that whole concept of social workers was established on a pilot project. We are looking at that. As I said, you have to take into consideration that you are talking about a two month period since we have been in this new portfolio and we do have some ideas in terms of what we would like to do with prevention. I am very committed to not putting a band-aid here and a band-aid there. I would like to think we would have an opportunity to look at the whole program and that is something we are very much interested in doing, and we will be starting in clear detail by the end of June. We will be looking at how we deliver services to children.

I will also say that if we were to put twenty social workers in the schools, it perhaps would not deal with all of the issues. So we have to look within the realistic format of the type of sub-services we will provide. While counsellors do not have the role in the schools of providing those types of services, they do have the role of referring children that are in need of those services, and I hope they will continue to do that.

In terms of whether or not social workers will go into the schools on a regular basis, I can't say that right now. I think that will depend on our ability to collaborate with Health and with Education because I think it is not just our issue, as I have said over again, it is a horizontal model and it will involve a number of different areas.

No, you have not seen it in the budget but that is not to say we are not going to be working on putting a system in place, but it won't be a social worker here and a social worker there. I would like to think we would have more of a planned process for putting those types of measures in place.

MR. H. HODDER: Just to correct one thing, these social workers were there before the children's issues report was even -

MS J.M. AYLWARD: But it is also coming out in the children's issues.

MR. H. HODDER: It has been reflected, yes.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: It was done on a pilot project. Many of these social workers were student social workers who were doing part of their placement. So, with all due respect, it was not a formalized program that was in place. I have no doubt that it did reap many benefits, because whenever you put a professional in that type of environment you will obviously get clear benefits. I think I would like to reiterate that we are not opposed to that type of service, we just want to do it in a proper way, in a planned way.

MR. H. HODDER: Will that be included in your social policy review? You obviously have the document now, you know, your complete review that you are doing for the Province in terms of social policy and that document has not been released.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: That is right.

MR. H. HODDER: I assume that when that document is released there will be some time for the various parts and agencies of the government to respond to it. When do you anticipate a) the document being released and b) how long a period of time are we going to assign for its review?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, the details of that will be coming out I think, when we release the document and the document will be released over the next, I would hope, a week to ten days.

In terms of would the review be done? The answer is, no, the review would not be done, because the purpose of the consultation is to seek input from the various groups, and for us to come out with a planned review to give to people would be in total opposition to the concept of consultation. So we will be putting out a document that sets out a process for consultation and it will look at a horizontal approach to all the departments. We are hoping, through the process of consultation, the issues to which you refer will be raised, and from that a plan will be put in place; but this is not a plan that will be released, it is a consultation document.

MR. H. HODDER: My point is: Is there a time frame in which the consultations will take place?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes, there is a time frame.

MR. H. HODDER: You know, that we don't end up with something that is going to go on and on. The first time that this social policy was talked about was in March of 1993, I think it was, when the statement was made in the House. So that has been going on since then, and every election we have a kind of: We are going to do this and we are going to do this. I always say: Well, how many elections does it take to get a document prepared? Not less than two, and that is part of my many years of being in public office that makes me think all these things.

I would say that my question is: Are we going to allow six months or a year or are we going to just flimsy along for longer than that?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Well, we won't be flimsying along. What we will be doing is providing a process through the establishment of a council which will conduct the arm's-length consultation process. I will say at the beginning, there are many ways of consulting and while they may not meet the requirements and definitions of all involved, I think we have to work in a timely manner. We are committed to have something in place before the next budget in terms of a document and a plan. So in order to meet those requirements, with your experience you would know, that we have to complete that within a relatively short period of time.

I think many people are very much waiting for this process to begin and have their own issues and concerns, and I would expect that people would address the issues that are relevant to their areas of concern. So the process will begin as soon as we have the council in place. We have to meet the requirements that will allow us to bring forward a plan for the next budget. The actual time frames will be identified when we release the document in the coming days.

MR. H. HODDER: So basically autumn consultations?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Not necessarily autumn consultations. They might be sooner than that.

MR. H. HODDER: I was looking at the fact of the way that things happen in this Province. I think we all recognize that summer time is not the greatest time for things, but it is time to have the document and for people to be able to prepare their commentaries. Basically, I would say, before the end of this year we should have the consultations completed.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I would say that I don't necessarily agree that summer is not a good time to consult. I know from my past experience I have done a number of research projects over the summer, and last year, in particular, did a very detailed research project of consultation with a 78 per cent response rate. I think it depends on how you do the consultation and I think there are very many creative ways of doing that. It will not be a single way of doing it, it will involve many ways of consultations. I think the issue is such that people will make a point of getting their views across.

MR. H. HODDER: I am getting towards the end of my questions now and I want to talk about school textbooks for a second. Many people who appeared before the Children's Interest Committee talked about the way in which the department pays for school textbooks. In particular, they spoke about the fact that nobody wants to deny a child, whose family is in receipt of social services benefits, access to adequate learning materials. However, many of the people who appeared, particularly the recipients, said that instead of giving their child all new textbooks every year - in some cases they get new ones so that they don't transfer them within the families and often end up selling them. The people who are working, their children in some cases buy the textbooks from the other students and they just get new ones to replace them.

Is there some recognition that the same dollars can be spent but they can be spent more wisely? For example, instead of giving Johnny all new textbooks - we recognize that to get a child ready for school, a child needs sneakers, new clothing or other things to be ready for school - a kind of a block funding, you might say, per child, per family, and then let the parents themselves decide as to whether or not they buy new textbooks or second-hand books, plus having some funds available to further help the child.

I just throw it as an issue, I don't have a resolution for it. Since we give families the money to pay their own rents, from a very practical position, in a school system, having a child come up to get his or her textbooks and just walk on out and that kind of thing, if we sometimes say to the parents: Well we will let you have your money instead of having vouchers or whatever, because it is also embarrassing at the cash register and the supermarket if you have to pass in a voucher. In the school system, we do that to children all the time because they get their books and, essentially, everybody knows that the child is not paying for them. You try to arrange convenient times but it does not work out, so we take away children's dignity by doing that. Is there any way in which we can: (a) do a better job with the same money; and (b) can we be as attentive to the social and psychological needs of the child?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you.

In response to your question concerning the textbooks: We are very much aware of the issues that you have raised in terms of social assistance recipients every year getting new books and the child next to that child, who is receiving social assistance, gets the used books. It is very obvious that the person with the new books is the person on social assistance, and that does become somewhat stigmatizing. Of course, there is also the financial perspective. We are very much aware of it, and we have begun discussions with the Department of Education. We are actually hoping this year to put something in place to begin the process. We recognize that the time is limited right now. The school year end is fast approaching, and we may not be as successful as we will be next year. We will be putting something in place, and whether it will be having the books returned to our own offices of Social Assistance or if they will be returned to the actual school, we do not know how that is going to work yet logistically. It is something that we would like to do, retrieve the books so we can recycle and reuse them in a way that would be fair to all students.

Again I do not know much of a success rate we will have, but even if we are able to save 10 per cent of the books, it is a good start for this late point in the year. Next year we will be making a more concerted effort in trying to recycle all of the books, so that they are available to the students who need them. So that is our plan for this year.

We have set down some meetings, I guess. With everything that is going on in education, I think it is going to be a sort of very short window to try to implement such a huge project, but we are going to do our best to try to implement it in some way, to at least get some benefit.

MR. H. HODDER: Just to follow up on a supplementary to that. Very often in the school system, as you know, a fair amount of the learning material is not covered by the Department of Social Services. The textbooks that are recommended by the department are paid for, but then if you are in, for example, the primary program, a large part of the learning materials is not textbooks, it is school board generated or school generated materials. Then the schools would charge assessments or fees or whatever to pay for that. The children who are coming from social services families either have great difficulty or their parents have to take money out of their food allowance or whatever to be able to pay that. Is there any attempt to try and address that, again taking the total picture of all the issues, not just whether it is, you know, interfacing with the Department of Education. It is a broader issue.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think, for this year, I will say that our efforts are on trying to retrieve the books. I will be very upfront. We are very interested in doing that. We think out of fairness to all students, to the working poor as well as to social assistance recipients; it is fairer to be able to recycle books.

In terms of the whole picture, in looking at every program and specific materials that are offered, to be very honest, we would not have the time this year to look into this, you know, before the end of the school year. I do not know where we will be with it by September, because it is quite a huge issue, and, of course, with the summer being what it is with respect to the schools, I do not know how much specifics we would get from every department. It is something that we will look at as we try to look at how we deliver services. For this year, in particular, I would say we will specifically look at retrieving books and recycling them in September as best as we can.

MR. H. HODDER: It is an area where we can do better with the same dollars. We do not need any new dollars. We just need to use the ones that we are now spending better, really.

On the issue of day care. I have forgotten the exact part - 4.1.01. You have a modest increase there, not very much. I guess the $200 that you got last year from the Federal Government never came across this year. On day care policies, particularly day care for the people who are trying to get themselves into work programs, who are on social assistance programs. There always seem to be a lot more people who want to take advantage of the program, but they sometimes can't get access. Is there some way in which we can better coordinate or make sure there is equal opportunity for all those people, particularly single moms, who want to get into an educational program but seem to be, I suppose, locked in by the day care funding structures.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I am sure the need is always greater than the ability to pay in most of these programs. This program has been very restricted over the last couple of years in allowing new people to avail of it. I guess, as people move out of the program we do allow other people to come in to try to get the services. There is also some provision under the Employment Opportunities Section to allow single mothers to go back to work and provide them with the supports to get the education and training they need under those programs.

You can see the budget as it is. There isn't any intention to increase it this year. If we are able to find some creative ways under the Employment Assistance, I am sure we will be able to look at that. We are very cognizant of the fact that if you have, in particular, a single mother who has gone through some assessment training and had some education and needs some child care support to complete a process of education, then we will find the dollars through Employment Opportunities to provide it. In terms of an expanded day care service, you know, that is not there as you can see.

MR. H. HODDER: Even the program that you have, one of the complaints you get in rural Newfoundland, of course, is the fact that you do not have any day care centres. One of the issues that came up: If you are living in some of the smaller communities the complaint is made that the day care programs you have available, say in St. John's or Corner Brook or Grand Falls, might not be as readily available in, shall we say, Winterton or Forteau, Labrador. Is there any attempt to try to make opportunities for single parents more equal across the Province?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think the statement you made would be true of any services provided by any government. It is very difficult to have equal services in every rural community in the Province, and I think you have to look at them all individually. For example, in Nain we have a very progressive day care environment for children, whereas we may not have one in Winterton. The ones that we -

MR. H. HODDER: I am not sure whether we do or don't.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Where?

MR. H. HODDER: In Winterton. I just used Winterton as an example.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Okay. I am just using your example. I do know there is a very progressive one in Nain because I have been there to visit and I have seen the type of programming they have.

I think to say that we are on a directive to equalize all services that we provide equally to every rural community is unrealistic and it is certainly not a direction that I would be able to take because it is not realistic. There will always be better services in the urban centres than there are in rural centres whether it is in day care or in health care services. You have more choices if you are living in an urban centre. That is the reality, I guess, of the geography of our Province.

I guess that is much as I can say in terms of - the provision of day care services, we feel, would be a venture that would be left up in many places to the private sector, and with incentives to the private sector they may want to establish day care centres, as they have in other areas. There is no provision for government to try to establish these centres within this year's budget.

MR. H. HODDER: Day care for children under two, the policy of the department: We do not have a licensed day care program for children under two. We are the only province of Canada that does not have a licencing program for children under two. Are we going to address that?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think the recent changes to the legislation which extended the hours to eight o'clock at night was the most recent revision. It is something that has been raised consistently to the department, the licensed regulated care of children under the age of two. It is something that our department, I guess, would look at in terms of policy but there is no direct move right now to implement new legislation to cover that. We are looking at the whole issue of day care services and the provision of care, but I can't tell you that legislation is waiting to be brought to the House for this because it isn't.

MR. H. HODDER: That is all I have, Mr. Vice-Chair.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Just a couple of points, Madam Minister.

On The Right Future which is found on page 295 of the Estimates, we heard this morning that I believe we have some $1.3 million from federal revenues in this program and we can also see from the estimates that this is a significant reduction from funds that were retrieved last year from federal revenues, down to $1.3 million from $2.9 million. That is a significant amount of money.

If we look up slightly, under Allowances and Assistance, we can see that the estimates this year is $6.9 million and the revised figure for 1995/96 was $5.5 million, again a difference of some $1.4 million. So I have two questions really: One, I believe it was indicated that we are coming towards the end of a four-year project or pilot project on The Right Future. Is that correct?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: That is right.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Okay. This figure of $1.3, was it expected that this is what we would receive, was this a part of the four-year plan, or was this an abrupt sort of announcement by the federal government that we would only be getting $1.3, and was there in fact another figure that the Province was expecting?

Secondly, under Allowances and Assistance: Is this a result of, again, maybe residents of the hospital now going out into the community, and many more residents going out, you know, resulting in the fact that we have $1.5 million in increased expenses?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: First, I would like to say that the $1.3 million, as I mentioned in the beginning, we have no commitment right now from the federal government about the fourth year of this program. So this budget estimate is outlined here but it is very much pending the federal government resources. We should know, we hope, by Wednesday, the exact extent of their commitment. We have gone ahead and done, I guess, the provincial budget to match what we would need because it is a four-partnership process with funding coming from two sources, the federal government and the Department of Social Services. I guess I will be able to say with more certainty on Wednesday what our actual funding arrangements will be from the federal government, because we don't know that just yet.

We are committed to deinstitutionalizing but I think what we would say at the outset is that how we do that may be different from how we have done it in the past, depending on the funding and depending on the ability to keep these people in an environment which would be stable. I would not want to put them in an environment now and in nine months time say, we have run out of money and we can't sustain them. I think out of fairness we need to be up front right at the beginning.

In terms of the Allowances and Assistance to which you referred, that is in fact what has been approved to offset the cost of the shift to the community. I think, as we look more into this program, the cost of this is only really a part of the total cost because we are also providing other services in addition to these. This is the actual shift into the community and the support, but in addition to that we will be providing other support services through, maybe occupational health or occupational assistance, other social work supports. So there is another amount of money that is also incorporated into this which is, I guess, buried.

It is quite a costly program. It has been a move in the right direction, to take people out of institutions.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: How many people, Madam Minister, are involved directly in this program?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I think the total is 113. Is that right?

WITNESS: One hundred and eighteen.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: One hundred and eighteen people, in total. We are at the fourth phase of that. I think we have around, -

MS DAWE: About eighty out in the community.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes, that is right. So we have about another thirty left to go approximately.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Am I misunderstanding, though? This figure here, this $6.9 million, is that to deal with these individuals that are out?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: That is right.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: For 118 people, that is the cost to the Province?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: That is only part of the cost. I am saying, that is only part of the cost.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: It is quite significant.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes, it is very significant. I think from a perspective that this project was one that was entered into as a pilot project, it is one that is unique in the country. No other province offers it. As I said, the government is committed to deinstitutionalizing, but perhaps we would look at a different continuum of how we deinstitutionalize. Many of these residents are now living in individualized living arrangements in the community with two and three staff around the clock. So we will look at deinstitutionalizing, but perhaps into a much different environment.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: You mentioned that on Wednesday you will probably have some idea as to what the Federal contribution may be. Is that just for this specific program or will the department -

MS J.M. AYLWARD: No, just for this program. This is a unique project, the only one in Canada as I have just alluded to. This is the fourth and final year of the program after which these people will be in the community with various levels of supports.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I wonder would the Minister be in a position to table whatever the response is from the federal government during the week when you have received notification of what, in fact, funding is available?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I would not have any problem tabling the information provided it is completed. We are hoping, at least we are being very optimistic, that we will know on Wednesday when our federal counterparts come here to tell us. I will have no problem tabling it as soon as we are made aware of it. I do not know if it will be Wednesday, but it will be as soon as possible.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Obviously, when you are in a position to.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Certainly.

CHAIR: Do you have anything else?

MR. H. HODDER: The only other thing that I would have is a question addressing child hunger. I know we all recognize that it is a huge problem out there. While your departmental stats and the ones from Education agree that there is a very high number, there is a breakdown to these. Whether they come from single parent families, particularly if there are two children and a single mom, the probability of living under the national poverty line is about 80 per cent. You know that there is funding that goes indirectly to the school system, in some cases to support some of the school lunch programs. We know that there are initiatives across the Province, in many parts of the Province now, for breakfast and all that kind of thing. I recognize that not all children who go to school hungry is because of their lack of food at home. There is a higher probability that females will skip breakfast rather than males because of certain sociological factors, particularly for teenagers.

Are there some proactive programs that your department is looking at in terms of trying to address the issue of child hunger?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: In so much as we are reviewing our delivery of child protection and prevention, I do not think you can ever eliminate the determinants of health, and one of those determinants of health, of course, is income status and social status.

You did mention there are programs. We do have a school lunch program, and there are various other programs throughout the Province, some by our department and others by outside departments. The IODE, the International Order of Daughters of The Empire, support many communities with cheese and crackers and peanut butter and crackers for recess time.

You are also right that many families who have more than adequate funding to provide food still see a number of their own children going to school hungry. So it is a much bigger issue than income, it is an issue of peer pressure, of social status. I guess, inasmuch as we are able to recognize those problems we will be addressing those issues.

In terms of a specific project on child hunger and poverty, we have not taken that on, but it will be a part of our whole review of children's issues and determinants of health that we are trying to incorporate into our preventative mode.

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Chair, I would suggest you call the heads.

CHAIR: Are they all finished on your side?

Mr. Andersen.

MR. ANDERSEN: A couple of points, Minister, because if I did not raise in committee and the committee (inaudible) I would be in serious trouble.

The first one is the part about income tax where people do get back so much income tax. People in my area have a very difficult time at present, since the collapse of the fishery, to get enough stamps, but they do work from time to time. When they do receive a refund from Revenue Canada that is deducted from their welfare. There are cases, and it can be proven, that their method of getting to and from work is either by an outboard motor or a snowmobile. A lot of these people up there do have a chance, especially with some new projects on the go - the $800 or $1,000 that they get to do repairs to a snowmobile or an outboard motor could mean a difference of them not having to go back to welfare, probably for the next four or five years. As I said, there are new programs on the go now, some new fisheries that we are starting on the coast, but when you have no money - when you go to the bank no one is going to give you money unless you have a steady income. There are situations where that $800 or $1,000 could take people off welfare. They would have an opportunity to go and get their stamps and they would not have to come back for probably eight or ten years, depending on the type of job they get, such as the caribou hunting season in the wintertime, transporting materials for mining companies from one bay to the other, or fishing. That part concerns my district quite deeply.

There are situations where it could mean the difference. For example, a power pack for an outboard motor, the size of this, costs over $400, and they go through at least one a year. There are situations where I know that if people had enough money to repair an outboard motor or to buy a new motor for a snowmobile, it would mean a difference between getting their stamps and drawing UI or going on welfare.

The second question I want to raise is - I know we discussed it before, about hungry children. I just want to mention part two of the program where you administer funds to recipients. We did a cost of living, and a young fellow downstairs in our office took what the ordinary people on welfare would buy. If you have a man and a woman and two children living in St. John's and you give them $200 for a two-week period, you give the same amount to people everywhere across the Island. Right now the cost of the same goods in Nain is 53.8 cents higher than what it costs in St. John's. Although they are giving x amount of dollars for four people, again because of the geographical location, the cost of living - basically the money you are giving to feed four people in St. John's or surrounding areas, for people who, through no fault of their own, are living in a part of this Province where the cost of living is almost double, that $200 that can feed four in St. John's ends up basically taking care of the needs of two people in coastal Labrador. I hope these problems can be looked into and addressed.

A lot of times, too, the part about the people repairing their snowmobiles or outboard motors, when they cannot do that in these remote areas that, at times, creates a lot of social problems. So I trust that these could be taken into consideration.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I will speak to each one separately. I think the issue on the income tax is one that has been raised a number of times. As I have said previously, the policy is not new. We do have a $100 reduction that we allow families to keep. I guess for a lot of families that is $100 more than people who don't have any income coming in, over and above their regular assistance.

I agree there are some very difficult situations out there. Until we look at a review of our income support program in totality, I can say that policy is in place. While we are able to look at very individual difficult situations, for the most part, the policy is clear. Unfortunately I know sometimes it seems that it is a bit regressive, but until we are able to look at it - I think, as I have said in the House, we have one of the more generous policies across the country with respect to income tax recuperation. A number of provinces have no rebate, it is totally deducted 100 per cent from their social assistance. People know upfront when they come on social assistance that any other sources of income must be reported. Then it is measured off dollar for dollar after that $100 deduction, against your social assistance.

With respect to the food and the cost of the food in coastal Labrador. As you know, I have recently been to the Torngat Mountains, in the northern district, and am very much aware of the added difficulty and challenges trying to meet the basic needs through purchase of food. I am aware of that and I have given direction to our officials to look at that very specifically.

When we look at how we deliver services regionally, which we will be, that is something that we will be looking at more closely, but even now our officials are very aware of my concerns related to the cost of food in coastal Labrador. I think, from my experience, that people rely very heavily on shipping from Lewisporte and other areas. Unfortunately not everybody has that option, to buy it in bulk. So I recognize the problems. I am aware of it and I am not planning on doing anything to make the situation any more difficult.

CHAIR: Any further questions?

MR. G. REID: That $100 rebate, is that right across the board or do they have to apply for it?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: It is a family rebate. I think it is $75 single and $100 family. Is that the way it is Dave?

MR. D. LEWIS: It is an earnings exemption and there is a formula which is applied depending on whether it applies to an individual or families and depending on the reason for assistance, whether they are disabled or whether there reason for assistance is unemployment. So the amount that the minister mentioned there is a maximum per family whose reason for assistance is unemployment.

MR. G. REID: What I want to know is, do they have to apply to get the rebate or do you just automatically not deduct?

MR. LEWIS: No. The worker would automatically apply that in dealing with the income tax report.

CHAIR: Well, thank you kindly. Before I call for a motion to accept the Estimates of the Department of Social Services, I would just like to say thank you to the Minister and her officials for being here this morning. Especially to thank you all for the very forthright way in which you answered all of the queries that have been placed to you and to the members of the committee for allowing the session to be conducted in the cordial atmosphere that it was, to allow you to answer in that way. Thank you very much for being with us this morning.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you.

CHAIR: So if I would now call upon the Clerk to call the headings.

MADAM CLERK: Subheads 1.1.01 through 5.1.02.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 5.1.02, carried.

On motion, Department of Social Services, total heads, carried.

MR. G. REID: May I say a word before we leave?

When I was teaching I always said that the only people who have a more stressful or a difficult job to do are the front-line social workers. I still believe that today. For the past seven years I have been dealing, as an executive assistant to a couple of ministers, with the social workers and managers on the East Coast and the West Coast and I have always found that they have co-operated fully and are doing a good job, but often times they do not get credit for it. I know that a number of them have caseloads that are quite heavy. So if there is anything that you could do to alleviate it in any way or even just a letter or commendation sometimes to these people would be appreciated.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I recognize what you are saying. I think I agree with you 100 per cent; I think there is no more stressful place to work than at the front lines. I guess, since I have been in the department I have made an effort of communicating on a regular basis with the front-line staff through our computer system and memos, and have offered encouragement and appreciation for the work they do. I think the most obvious appreciation is by making their positions permanent and reducing the amount of stress with bumping and layoff. There is always room for improvement, but we certainly do recognize and value our front-line social workers. I think over the years we have moved towards decreasing the workload. It will depend on the area, the intensity and the stress associated with it, but we are very aware of the work they do.

CHAIR: Thank you kindly.

A motion for adjournment is in order now.

On motion, Committee adjourned.