The Committee met at 6:00 p.m. in the House of Assembly.

CHAIR (Hutchings): Good evening, everybody.

I would like to welcome everybody to the Budget Estimates. This evening the Social Services Committee will be hearing the Estimates of Municipal Affairs.

First of all, if I could, I would like for the Committee members to introduce themselves. First off, Keith Hutchings, MHA for the District of Ferryland. I am Chair of this Estimates Committee.

MR. YOUNG: Wallace Young, St. Barbe.

MR. RIDGLEY: Bob Ridgley, St. John's North.

MR. CORNECT: Tony Cornect, Port au Port.

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Kevin Parsons, Cape St. Francis.

MR. DEAN: Marshall Dean, The Straits & White Bay North.

MS PLOUGHMAN: Kim Ploughman, no district.

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

MR. MORGAN: Ivan Morgan, Researcher, NDP.

CHAIR: Thank you very much.

As well, just a housekeeping note, for those with the department, before you speak each time, if you do speak, I would ask that you identify yourself for the benefit of Hansard - we have a seating arrangement here – so they can identify each time who is speaking.

Minister, we will ask you, or your staff can certainly identify themselves first for the benefit of everybody here.

MS WHALEN: All right.

Is the floor mine now?

CHAIR: No, just go ahead and introduce your department or they can.

MS WHALEN: I was going to just open with my remarks -

CHAIR: Yes, we will do that in a few minutes, if we could just get everybody to identify themselves.

MS WHALEN: You want everybody introduced right now?

CHAIR: Yes, everybody introduce themselves.

MS WHALEN: Okay.

Let me introduce to my left is our Deputy Minister, Sandra Barnes; Mike Samson, our Chief Executive Office of Fire and Emergency Services; Cluney Mercer, Assistant Deputy Minister of Municipal Engineering and Planning.

Directly behind me is Lori Anne Companion, Assistant Deputy Minister of Municipal Policy and Support; Bill Duggan, Assistant Deputy Minister of Employment Support; Marilyn McCormack, Assistant Deputy Minister of Fire and Emergency Services; Scott Jones, Director of Financial and General Operations; Heather MacLean, Director of Communications; Jim Gladney, Executive Assistant; and Mac Blundon, the Manager for Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangement for Fire and Emergency Services.

CHAIR: Thanks, Minister.

What we will do, we will call the first heading, and then I can go to you and you can make any opening comments and then we will go to the Committee for questions.

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01 carry?

With that, Minister, I will go to you.

MS WHALEN: I would like to say, first of all, it is indeed a pleasure to be here tonight to discuss the Estimates for Municipal Affairs. I would like to highlight some of our initiatives and activities ongoing with Municipal Affairs, prior to opening the floor to questions.

We have had a busy and a very productive year and continue our work and focus on ensuring healthy, safe and sustainable communities led by strong, local governments throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

We are committed to investing in our communities and ensuring that our residents have access to reliable and efficient services, and working with our communities, our municipalities, to make our community stronger and enhance the lives of residents throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

Infrastructure investment remains a priority for our government. In 2010, government has provided significant funding for municipalities in two areas: capital infrastructure and solid waste management. In Budget 2008, the provincial government made an unprecedented multi-year commitment of $252.9 million, an increase of 69 per cent in municipal capital works funding for the fiscal year 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011.

Infrastructure commitments were accelerated in 2009-2010 by an additional $64 million in order to access much needed infrastructure funding from the federal government in the form of top up and stimulus funding. It was a one-time opportunity and the government believed it was important to step up to the plate and advance infrastructure commitments in order to secure this funding.

In excess of 200 Municipal Capital Works projects worth more than $200 million went to tender in 2009-2010. The provincial contribution of this amount is $103.2 million. Provincial spending in support of municipal infrastructure projects in 2010 will be $135.5 million.

The Province will leverage an additional $53.4 million in federal funding provided under various federal-provincial cost-shared agreements for a total municipal infrastructure program budget of $188.9 million, an increase of approximately $34 million over Budget 2009.

With municipal contributions factored in, the total investment in municipal infrastructure in the Province in 2010-2011 is anticipated to be the largest in history at approximately $225 million. This funding will enable the department to maintain the current enhanced cost-shared ratio, enable projects scheduled to be tendered this year to proceed, and enable the department to offer a Municipal Capital Works infrastructure program continuing with the enhanced cost-shared ratio.

An investment to strengthen administrative support and engineering resources will focus on improving administrative functions related to building Canada and MRIF programs and the department's multi-year Capital Works and its Municipal Capital Works programs.

Targeted investments are underway to improve water quality issues province-wide. The Province has committed to provide a minimum of $6 million annually for water quality and another $4 million committed annually to waste water treatment.

In the last budget cycle the Department of Municipal Affairs, through the Fire and Emergency Services - Newfoundland and Labrador, allocated more than $2.2 million for fire equipment in the Province. Government assisted a total of eleven communities in attaining new firefighting vehicles with final delivery expected in the fall of this year. Funding has been accessed through the Municipal Capital Works Program and with municipal funding through the different cost-shared ratio. A combined total of over $2.5 million was infused into the fire service to help to upgrade the fleet.

In 2009-2010 Fire and Emergency Services - Newfoundland and Labrador received $500,000 to assist communities in replacing a number of pieces of fire protection equipment. This funding focused on personal protective equipment for our volunteer service including bunker suits, breathing apparatus and portable pumpers. Budget 2010 saw an increase in capital funding by $800,000 for fire equipment to help address the high demand for new vehicles.

Fire and Emergency Services - Newfoundland and Labrador has also seen an increase in the investment in fire protection equipment effectively doubling the funding from $500,000 to $1 million to further enable and protect our volunteer fire service.

In December, 2009 federal and provincial governments announced an extension of the gas tax program providing $124 million from the federal gas tax fund between 2010-2014. The extension provides additional funding to continue investments in water quality, waste water, community energy systems and transportation infrastructure.

Municipalities have stepped up and made great efforts to complete work on their Integrated Community Sustainability Plan. The ICSPs will help municipalities access their long-term strategy goals and examine their viability and sustainability. Since the spring of 2009 Municipal Affairs have held thirty-six training sessions with 765 attendees on ICSPs, with approximately 70 per cent of municipalities completing their ICSPs within the deadline; the remainder are in the final stages of development. Ninety-seven municipalities chose to partner with towns to complete their plans.

The department has completed its training sessions to assess the Province's 276 municipalities and five Inuit community governments to implement the new Public Sector Accounting Board - PSAB accounting standards. Since the spring of 2009 the department has delivered thirty-one training session which were attended by approximately 82 per cent of the municipalities. The department continues to provide training and technical advice to the municipalities in their conversion to PSAB through its Web site which offers copies of all training materials, reference manuals and templates related to all three phases of the departments PSAB Implementation Action Plan.

Since 2007 when this government announced an implementation plan for the Provincial Solid Waste Management Strategy, there has been significant progress across the Province and we are happily engaged with over fifteen regional and sub-regional waste management committees throughout the Province.

In partnership with the municipalities, government is supporting the capital costs through provincial funds and through the federal gas tax program. This is a financial benefit that few other jurisdictions enjoy and a direct savings to the municipalities and their residents.

Since we announced implementation of the strategy in 2007, we have spent $61 million. In 2010 we have budgeted $26 million in support of initiatives associated with this strategy.

Each year the Community Enhancement Employment Program provides financial support to projects that are run by voluntary sector organizations in rural communities. These projects create employment for individuals and also create some benefit for the wide community in addition to community-based organizations. One hundred and twenty-one municipalities and twenty-three local service districts availed of this program in 2009-2010. This past year, the CEE Program funded 298 projects with approximately 2,850 workers availing of the program.

In 2009, the total expenditures of grants and subsidies for employment creation projects were $10.4 million. Of that total, approximately $5.1 million was invested in employing fish harvesters and processing workers, and approximately $5.3 million was invested in employing other persons in rural communities.

A few other departmental items to note - we continue to provide support to communities who require assistance. This past year we have provided support following the Abitibi closure of $1.4 million of grants in lieu of taxes to the municipalities of Stephenville, Grand Falls-Windsor, Botwood, Buchans and Terra Nova.

In addition, we supported the isolated municipality of Grand Bruit with relocation assistance. We responded to residents following a landslide incident in Daniel's Harbour and Trout River, and funded a million dollar provincial donation to the relief efforts in Haiti.

To encourage municipalities to explore opportunities for sharing of services and achieving economics of scale, Municipal Affairs will continue to support regional co-operation efforts. Councils and residents are considering sharing services, delivery and resources to secure and strengthen municipal services to improve the overall well-being of their communities.

Significant progress has been made in discussions with Fogo, Trinity Bay and Little Catalina. Work will continue with other communities interested in entering into discussions to determine the benefits of regional co-operation. Government remains committed to reviewing the fiscal framework for municipalities and exploring all options in the context of municipal needs including operations, infrastructure and waste management.

Regional land use plans are currently underway in three areas: Humber Valley Regional Plan, the Northeast Avalon Regional Plan and the Labrador Inuit Settlement Area regional land use plan. These plans will guide development for the betterment of regions in a responsible manner to protect our environment and resources while supporting a sensible use of land.

In addition, we hosted the annual meeting of the Provincial and Territorial Ministers Responsible for Local Government in July with meetings focused on issues of provincial and territory importance, including municipal infrastructure, strengthening the rural municipal sector, climate change and municipal-Aboriginal engagement.

I would be remiss if I did not mention the MakeYourMark campaign which was well-received and focused on attracting candidates to consider a run for municipal council. It initiated much discussion about the valuable contributions that we can make to secure a bright future for all of our communities.

The campaign sparked a renewed interest in municipal government and resulted in improvements to a number of incumbents seeking another term in elected office and growth among women interested in participating in municipal council. The campaign will serve as a great stepping stone in our efforts to attract individuals to serve on future municipal councils and we will continue our work to saying this important message.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide a brief overview of some of the work we are doing. I now open the floor to address any questions that you may have.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Okay, thank you, Minister.

We will now go to our Committee.

Mr. Dean.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Minister.

I acknowledge the efforts that you have put into this important department, the challenges that are there, you and your staff. It is a pleasure for me to be able to come here this evening and spend a little time discussing some of the issues. It is my third committee, one more to go tomorrow. This is one that is, I guess they are all important, but this one is probably particularly important to me perhaps in some ways. So, to have a dialogue and some exchange back and forth certainly is a good opportunity. I will probably speak or ask for about ten minutes or so and then I will give Ms Michael an opportunity and we will go back and forth so that you do not get bored looking at one or the other or listening to one or the other, or whatever.

MS WHALEN: I never get bored.

MR. DEAN: To look at some line items - and there are a lot of things that I have notes on and some questions that I want to ask you and a lot of it you just kind of touched on really, but we will go back to it just for the sake of a little more dialogue and so on about it. If we could look at section 1.2.02., Administrative Support, page 254 –

MS WHALEN: Where is this one, Administrative Support?

MR. DEAN: Yes, 1.2.02. I would just like for you to give some clarification, I guess, on line 06. Purchased Services. Our Budget was $83,000 and our Revised estimate was $130,000. Then as we look forward to this year our Estimates is $58,000, so some variances there. Probably you could, or your deputy minister or whatever, someone speak to that for us.

MS WHALEN: Okay. Well, I will speak to that.

MR. DEAN: Thank you.

MS WHALEN: That increase reflects higher than anticipated costs for the 2009 Provincial-Territorial Ministers Conference, plus higher equipment rental costs and other unanticipated purchase costs, like works by Transportation and Works for the first floor Municipal Affairs entrance. So that is what covered under that 2009-2010.

MR. DEAN: Okay. I am just flipping the page into Policy and Strategic Planning, and I guess we have a similar variance on 2.2.01. There are two line items there basically, Professional Services and Purchased Services, lines 05. and 06. on page 256. You budgeted $20,000 for line 05. and the actual was $91,800, and you are carrying forward the same estimate for the coming year.

MS WHALEN: Okay. That was for Professional Services you are looking at?

MR. DEAN: Yes.

MS WHALEN: The increase reflects the consultants cost for the municipal election advertising campaign.

MR. DEAN: Okay. That would not have been a budgeted kind of thing, or we just kind of missed that or something along the way I suppose, that would be correct?

MS BARNES: No, there was no specific funding allocated for Mark Your Mark Campaign. The department financed it within existing allocations.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

Then the very next line, again, Purchased Services, the Budget was $3,500 and the actual was $64,500.

MS WHALEN: That reflects the higher equipment costs as well, for room rental and other purchase services caused by the municipal election advertising campaign. That is reflected in there, the advertising campaign for Make Your Mark.

MR. DEAN: Okay. So both of those lines kind of reflect on the same thing there?

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

A couple of questions then in municipal operating grants in general. The MOGs are issued twice a year now, I guess instead of four times a year, as was the pattern or the norm, whatever.

MS WHALEN: Yes, that is right.

MR. DEAN: I am just wondering how that is working out for municipalities, if there are any issues there or they are finding it a better system or any concerns?

MS WHALEN: (Inaudible) any feedback on that, that I am aware of.

MS BARNES: I am Deputy Minister four months today and I have only had one inquiry from a municipality asking for the rationale behind it. Overall, it seems like it has been accepted fine. There was a municipal symposium in Gander last weekend, very well attended, best attendance ever, and it was not raised at all as an issue.

MR. DEAN: Okay, yes.

MS WHALEN: I think it was something that they lobbied for to try to get that done through the federation. We complied with it and they were quite happy about it, and there was also one time, for whatever way the pay scale changed, they got like a 13 per cent increase over and above. So they were quite happy with that.

MR. DEAN: Yes, and no news is usually good news or no complaints is usually good news, I guess. I think there was just one municipality that I heard mentioned in my district. It was one of the smaller ones, so I do not know, perhaps they might find it a little more difficult to handle. I am not really sure.

MS BARNES: Generally speaking, it gives them a larger amount to help manage their cash flows.

MR. DEAN: Yes, okay.

I guess municipalities have – everybody wants more money, more increases in their MOGs and so on, but basically we are flat again this year from last year and you did acknowledge that there were increases a couple of years ago - I believe you said, right, in 2008 if that is correct? I guess around the principle of the funding that they have and so on, are we seeing or do we have an idea of what percentage of municipalities have been identified as sustainable and how many are not or whatever? I know, again, some of the smaller ones in my district really seem to be struggling to make ends meet.

MS WHALEN: Yes, there are municipalities that are struggling to meet ends but we are encouraging them to talk to the other municipalities surrounding them and look at the regional approach, because there are savings there if they would look at that. Government is very supportive. They are not forcing anyone to go into it but I think leaders of the municipalities will see that that is the way of the future to sustain effective and efficient services for their citizens and that they need to look at that picture.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

Just another line item. In 2.3.02., Industrial Water Services, page 257. Again, we are looking at the Purchased Services, or my question would be on line 06. Our Revised is less than what we used and we are carrying the same budget forward. Can you give us some idea of what did not take place there in the past fiscal year?

MS WHALEN: That decrease reflects lower than anticipated electricity repairs and water treatment chemicals for the five remaining water treatment plants.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

MS WHALEN: So that was a decrease.

MR. DEAN: So, the fact that we are carrying the same figure forward, would that mean we expect it to go back up again this year, or what –

MS WHALEN: We buy our chemicals in bulk for the, especially treatments, the water treatment plants and that. So we would have to budget for that.

MR. DEAN: Okay. So it is just a matter of having inventory from one year to the next; that you might not get into that purchasing mode or whatever. Okay.

Ms Michael, do you want to -

MS MICHAEL: Okay, sure. You can take longer, but I have a couple that you had not done prior to this.

Just go back one section to 2.3.01. Engineering Services, line 05. Professional Services. I am interested in the fact that this has been a high item. It was $418,000 and revised at $400,000, but now it is way down to $78,000. So what is happening there?

MS WHALEN: Well, the decrease there reflects the reallocation of funding, the $400,000 to grants for the early design initiatives; costs on the infrastructure projects, plus additional funds, $56,000 for waste management consultant costs.

MS MICHAEL: So where has that money been reallocated too?

MS WHALEN: It has been put into Grants and Subsidies.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, great. In the same major head?

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, great.

MS WHALEN: It is reinstated.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, and I can see a difference there. I can see the $400,000. Thank you very much. That takes care of that question.

In 2.3.02., under the provincial revenue, 02. Revenue, there was quite a bit of extra revenue that went into the revision, $414,800. Where would that have come from? It is all with the collection of the associated fees?

MS WHALEN: Increase reflected in the –

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible) reflects usage.

MS WHALEN: Yes, that is right.

The increase reflects higher than anticipated revenue from the water treatment plants as well as a collection of outstanding receivables. That is where the provincial revenue would come from.

MS MICHAEL: You got more than expected but you are back down to $707,000 for this year. That is more like your standard, the $707,000?

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

The next one is 2.3.03.

MS WHALEN: What is it, 2.3 -

MS MICHAEL: 2.3.03. and it is, again, Professional Services line 05. Here the Budget was pretty low. Last year the estimate was $17,000; it went up to $23,700 and now it is up to $77,000. Yes, an explanation for why it is going up each year.

MS WHALEN: Okay. Well that increase reflects a higher than anticipated consultant cost for our protected road zoning plans, and a higher anticipated board members cost as well.

MS MICHAEL: Okay; and you are expecting that to stay up, obviously.

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: May I ask why you think it is going to go up to $77,000?

MS BARNES: Sandra Barnes. Yes, we have a number of requests for rezoning under the protected road zoning plan provisions of the act. In order to do that, the act requires that a commissioner be engaged to hear the rezoning plan. The department never had the funds to move forward on that. In this budget process we did get that allocation so we could go out and clear up the backlog.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you very much. It is clear.

Next, under 3.1.01., Municipal Debt Servicing. I notice that it has gone down. This year it is going to be over $3 million less. I am glad to see that. What is happening that it is going down that much this year? Is it that less money is being owed, less interest being paid?

MS WHALEN: Well, the decrease reflects lower projected debt servicing expense due to declining debt balances, and our better projections and debt reducing, in addition to our new debt. So that is what is happening there, that is why it is going down.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Do you have a list of the breakdown by municipalities, of the assistance that goes out in the municipal debt servicing?

AN OFFICIAL: We do not have it with us.

MS WHALEN: No, but we will have to get it for you.

MS MICHAEL: If you could.

MS WHALEN: Yes. Make a note, Sandra.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much. Of course, a request that it come to all members of the Committee.

MS WHALEN: Sure.

CHAIR: Sure, yes. Distribute it to all Committee members, yes.

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

Section 3.1.03 – actually, I think you have given a fairly good explanation of the Special Assistance in your opening comments, minister -

MS WHALEN: Yes, I did.

MS MICHAEL: - and I think I took good notes. I do not know if Mr. Dean would like to ask more under that.

MR. DEAN: No, that is okay.

MS MICHAEL: That is okay, all right.

The next one is 3.1.04., Community Enhancement, under Grants and Subsidies. There was quite a bit more spent than had been budgeted. There is a variance of $5.8 million. Could we have an explanation of that?

MS WHALEN: That increase reflects higher than anticipated program costs as a result of government's decision to provide employment programming for fish harvesters and processing workers.

MS MICHAEL: Could you give us some idea of what that was, the money that went to the fish harvesters?

MR. DUGGAN: Do you need the breakout?

MS MICHAEL: Yes, please.

MS WHALEN: Bill Duggan.

MR. DUGGAN: The breakout was about $5.1 million was invested in employment of harvesters and processing workers and about $5.3 million was invested in the regular CEEP program.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. That hiring of the harvesters and processors, I take it was to help out with employment and gain EI?

MS WHALEN: Yes. (Inaudible).

MS MICHAEL: Yes, I saw some of that work being done.

I will go back to you, Marshall.

MR. DEAN: Thank you.

There are some questions that come to my mind there as well. That was one of the lines that I had highlighted to get an explanation on. The fact that you have given the explanation, and it is fish harvesters and plant worker program related, I would like for us to just have a little discussion around that if you could. I guess due to the overall downturn in the economy and the fact that our fishery from 2008-2009 was down 20 per cent, and we are anticipating it to be flat this year versus last year, which means we are going to - at best, I guess, we are going to do the same. That is kind of where our thoughts would be and I know that is kind of a moving target, too. The pricing that was set today for the shrimp industry certainly did not win a lot of accolades out in the processing sector and so on.

I wonder is our $10 million perhaps going to be more realistic or perhaps even a little short this coming year, and not the dollar figure as much, minister, as I would be concerned about - last fall much of this fish harvesters and plant worker money was being spent in my district during the by-election. We had the unfortunate experience of talking to people under tarps out on the roadside, the snow coming down, this kind of thing, and really not much dignity in the whole process at the end of the day, to be quite honest. This year, we are going to go down that same path in terms of, I would think, income support programs or whatever. Can we prepare for that much quicker, or what is the plan? How do we – I do not know what the question is exactly but it is –

MS WHALEN: No, and I am trying to figure where you are going with that.

MR. DEAN: Well, where I am going is that given where the fishery is today then I think we can prepare for another fish harvesters/plant workers program this year, and I do not know that our budget is a realistic budget. Also, can we try and do that in a more timely fashion, I guess, is -

MS WHALEN: I am sure that we will have discussions with the Minister of Fisheries on this issue that you are talking about there, but right now I cannot give you anything of where we are going with this right now.

MR. DEAN: Yes.

MS WHALEN: I know that every time it comes up - every year we are looking at helping these people out. I do not see it as being any different than that, but it will have to take some discussion with the Minister of Fisheries and my fellow Cabinet. So I really cannot give you an answer on what we are going to be doing right now.

MR. DEAN: Yes. It is just more to probably create an awareness there, minister, of the lateness of last year and if we are going to do –

MS WHALEN: I think as a government though, we are really aware of what is happening in the fisheries. We are aware of the people on the ground and the people who are suffering through this fishery crisis.

MR. DEAN: Sure, yes.

MS WHALEN: As a government we will do, I guess, whatever is in the best interest of our people at the end of the day.

MR. DEAN: Good, good.

If I could go back to one section that Ms Michael spoke to, section 2.3.01. There was a line there that I would like to have a question on as well, on page 256 in the Engineering Services.

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MR. DEAN: You gave explanation to line 05. but also line 01., I guess our Salaries, we did not spend the budget this year but we have a 20-odd per cent increase going into this year. So I am just wondering if you could speak to that.

MS WHALEN: What happened there is that the increase reflects the salaries for additional waste management staff, $92,000, plus filling positions that were previously held vacant in the department. So we filled those positions.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

Under our line items again, 3.2.02. Federal/Provincial Infrastructure Programs, page 260.

MS WHALEN: What was it, 3.2.02?

MR. DEAN: 3.2.02.

MS WHALEN: Page 260, okay.

MR. DEAN: Again, line item 10. Grants and Subsidies. We were pretty much on the mark I guess for last year, $79 million projected; $73 million Revised. This year we are estimating $142 million. This is almost double.

MS WHALEN: Okay. That increase reflects the anticipated cash flows for the various federal and provincial infrastructure programs like CNIP, CRIF, CSIF and the Building Canada Funds Project and the inclusion of the provincial portion from 3.2.01. together with the federal portion. That is what it – Grants and Subsidies are there.

MR. DEAN: Okay. Just further down the page in the next section, 3.2.03. Grants and Subsidies again for the gas tax program, a significant decrease in that. How does that reflect or how does that – on line 10.

MS WHALEN: Okay. That decrease reflects removal funding allocated for the Waste Management Strategy to address accelerated delivery. In previous years the department had included provincial funds associated with waste management and gas tax. These funds are now in municipal infrastructure.

MR. DEAN: Okay. So we will find them in another place, basically?

MS WHALEN: Yes, you will.

MR. DEAN: Okay. In the next section, 3.2.04., page 261, Municipal Transit Infrastructure; we did our budget and spent our budget more or less. There is nothing there for this coming year is it?

MS WHALEN: Yes, that program is fully funded by the federal government. It is finished now. It is completed.

MR. DEAN: Okay. It is a done program.

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MR. DEAN: Okay. You mentioned at the beginning Daniel's Harbour and Trout River - not Trout River as much, although I was out there last summer one time. Daniel's Harbour I used to travel through fairly frequently, now I bypass it and that is great in terms of travelling and a good job done there and so on. Can you give us an update in terms of the resettlements that were ongoing there? Are they all finalized, any idea?

MS BARNES: The Department of Justice is working with the individuals in Daniel's Harbour who are affected by this relocation. Their legal counsel to clear title, that has been a time consuming process. I know that we have three definitely cleared away and the others are in various stages of completion. We are also working with the municipality now to develop land in the community so that those people who are being relocated can build new homes in Daniel's Harbour, those who choose to stay.

MR. DEAN: Okay. How many were there in total? There is three done, do you know the number?

MS COMPANION: Lori Anne Companion. It is twenty-six properties and fifteen homeowners.

MR. DEAN: So there is three of the twenty-six done, is that correct?

MS BARNES: Yes, three - now there were two lots wasn't there?

MS COMPANION: There are twenty-six landowners. Fifteen are homeowners. They are working to get those done first so that the people can get their new homes started. Three of them have been completed and the remainder are, as Sandra said, in various stages. The department has funded legal counsel for the town. We provided the town with some funding so that they could have their own legal counsel to deal with the Department of Justice, and their legal counsel is doing all of the work for them to get their title straightened up.

MR. DEAN: Okay. That number seems - I am surprised that we would not be further ahead with that in terms of the number. Now, I do not know -

MS WHALEN: (Inaudible) to search titles and you have to get clear titles before you can actually access properties. I think that is where a lot of the hang up is, is getting the clear titles to the property out there and as you know, Newfoundland does not have a registry of deeds. Sometimes your grandfather owns it or your great-grandfather owns it or someone else up the road owns it. So in order for us as a government, we have to make sure they have clear titles before you can move forward with this. The process sometimes is long drawn out but let me assure you, the government is doing what they can to get those people in their new homes.

MR. DEAN: It takes forever, I know. I bought a property in St. Anthony and I eventually had to get insurance or something on it, title insurance or something because we never could bring it all together.

Trout River then, what is the situation there?

MS BARNES: They are completed.

MR. DEAN: They are all done?

MS BARNES: Yes.

MR. DEAN: Okay, good.

On the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements, can you give us an update on how much the Province has been able to recover from the feds on that?

MS WHALEN: I would like to turn that one over to Mike.

Mike, would you answer that one, please?

MR. SAMSON: This year we had budgeted for $14.75 million in revenues from Disaster Financial Assistance. That would be in recoveries from the Government of Canada on various events that have happened over the years since 2000. We actually booked approximately $11 million in revenue against the $14 million. The reason for the variance relates to some scheduling problems in final audit on the claim from the Badger flood of 2003. We requested the audit around mid-year. Audit Services Canada, federal auditors were not available to come to the Province to do the audit on that event until April of 2010. That audit is now complete and that $3 million will ultimately be reflected in the $17 million of revenue that is budgeted for next year.

MR. DEAN: Okay. Was it $47 million, I think is the amount that was owed from the 2003 disaster? Is that correct?

MR. SAMSON: Yes. I think the number, Mac, would be –

MR. BLUNDON: (Inaudible).

MR. SAMSON: The amount of money owing overall on the events.

MR. BLUNDON: Overall? The total anticipated revenue from the feds would have been roughly $63 million and we have received $20.7 million to date with $42 million outstanding, and we are anticipating $17 million of that in this fiscal year. So, we will find that we will finally be in a stage whereby we have recovered more than is actually outstanding, in this fiscal year.

MR. DEAN: What did we get in the past fiscal year? What did we get back in the past fiscal year?

MR. BLUNDON: In the past fiscal year, this fiscal year, just over $11 million.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

MR. BLUNDON: But, in total, we have received $20.7 million over the past number of years.

MR. DEAN: Yes, that would be five or six years or whatever, right?

MR. BLUNDON: Since 2001.

MR. DEAN: Oh, since 2001. Okay.

I want to talk about regional governance for a few moments, just a question or two that I could ask on that. I know that government stated it will not force regional governance on people, obviously. Again, when I think of the Northern Peninsula it is one of the places probably that needs to go there in a lot of ways, when you consider all of the communities that are kind of close to it, if you will. How many communities have amalgamated in the past year, or how is that process going, or is it something that we are trying to champion more?

MS WHALEN: We did one with Roddickton and Bide Arm, which is working out quite well.

MR. DEAN: Yes.

MS WHALEN: They are moving forward and they have come together very successfully, and the communities themselves, both communities seem to jell very well together. From the indications that I have, it is working out quite well.

MR. DEAN: Yes, and I echo that. All indications that I see, it is doing very well, as well. There is still a lot more there, and again, we kind of have to encourage them to do it because it is a new thought process, a new way of managing their municipalities and so on for people. Do we see more of that in the next year or so?

MS WHALEN: I think we will. There have been municipalities that have approached the department and want to enter into discussions, and we are really receptive to that. We will do everything that we can to assist them once they approach us.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

Now, there was an assessment report of that, I think, that was expected to be available in March of this year, I believe. Is that correct?

MS BARNES: I do not know if you are referring to - there is a paper, well it is a set of three papers, actually, that was released by Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador at its symposium. That is not government's paper that is Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador's. Our understanding is it intended to start a dialogue amongst their constituency, in terms of where they wish to go with respect to regionalization.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

My understand was there was an assessment report – and I do not know if Ms Michael might know of what I am referring to or where it is coming from – for regional governance. Maybe –

MS WHALEN: I am not aware of a report, other than the one that Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador gave out on the symposium. Like I said, that is the one that I think - what they are trying to do is to get the municipal leaders to actually look at regionalization to start it off, because we as a government have said we are not forcing.

MR. DEAN: That's right.

MS WHALEN: They feel, as well - they are very supportive of regionalization and I think they see that as the way of the future as well.

MR. DEAN: Yes.

MS WHALEN: I guess they are just helping their membership along. They have said they are going to have some public consultations with them. So we will leave it to the federation there, but we are very supportive of regionalization as a government.

MR. DEAN: Yes. I guess being kind of driven from there would be a better place than being driven from the government level, anyway. They would buy into it a little easier I guess, at the municipal level?

MS WHALEN: Personally, my own feeling, and being a municipal leader for eighteen years, we have to start looking at big pictures, particularly in rural Newfoundland where you are getting a population decrease. There are only so many citizens who can sustain that service. There is not a lot of taxation, and some of them are seniors who cannot afford a high boost in taxation. So we have to do whatever is possible, as municipal leaders, to look at where we can deliver that service to our citizens at a reasonable, affordable and sustainable cost, in my mind.

MR. DEAN: Yes.

Section 4.1.02. Fire Commissioner's Office, page 262, line 07; again, a huge discrepancy there I guess between what we thought we do. Obviously, something came along that we had not anticipated; if you could speak to that, please.

MS WHALEN: Yes. That Property, Furnishings and Equipment increase reflects costs to purchase consumable equipment for ten of our mobile trailers. That is the hazmat, where we had to re-equip the ten trailers. If you want more detail - I guess, Mike, you can explain how the municipalities are responsible for that trailer.

MR. DEAN: Okay, yes.

MR SAMSON: A number of years ago the government entered into contractual arrangements with nine communities around Newfoundland and Labrador whereby local volunteer fire departments within those nine communities host these hazardous materials response units. They are essentially equipped trailers. They provide those fire departments the ability to respond properly equipped and trained to hazardous materials incidents of one sort or the other. So whether that is a refrigerant leak in a fish plant, an oil spill on the highway, and those sorts of things.

The contract we have with the host municipalities obligates the government to replace the consumables and to regularly renew. A lot of the equipment that is aboard these trailers is time dated. So you have a suit, whether it is used or not, the date is up. It has to go, got to have a new one. The time was up this year so we went out and we invested approximately $250,000 in re-equipping and ensuring that everything was up to date, and in fact, in some instances adding new and additional technology and required equipment to these units. So that is where the variances reflect it.

MR. DEAN: Okay. In the same section, line10.Grants and Subsidies, you are pretty much right on the dollar for the budget for the past year and this year we are going to increase that significantly. Can you tell us what is in there?

MS WHALEN: Yes. Well, that increase reflects the higher budget of $500,000 for special assistance grants for the supply and firefighting costs covered by the municipalities.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

You can jump in Ms Michael whenever you want.

CHAIR: Okay, Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much.

Before I go to line items, with regard to the amalgamation work - which I agree with you, I think it is work that needs to be done. I am just curious, where the funding - I imagine you must help financially as well with the amalgamation. Are there any financial costs?

MS WHALEN: With regionalization?

MS MICHAEL: Yes, right.

MS WHALEN: Yes, we have some money allotted for that to help municipalities when they want to come together.

MS MICHAEL: Where is that found in the Budget?

MS WHALEN: In the Regional Support which is 2.1.01.

MS MICHAEL: 2.1.01. Okay, thank you.

Minister, in your opening statement I think you talked about some regional plans that were happening with regard to land use, regional land use plans.

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: One of the things that we have been asking for is a provincial land use plan. Are you taking a regional approach to that or is that separate from - would another department be in charge of coming up with a complete provincial land use plan, because there is a dire need for it?

MS WHALEN: Yes. That would come under the Department of Environment.

MS MICHAEL: That is what I thought, yes.

In doing these regional land use plans, what is involved in that?

MS WHALEN: I do not know if I have someone here tonight who can run down on this.

MR. MERCER: The three land use plans that are being developed, the biggest one would be on the Northeast Avalon, consisting of fifteen municipalities for the most part, the geographic area. It is looking at, for the next twenty-five years or so, in terms of setting aside land use for water supplies, transportation networks and various types of land use development. So it is being done, I guess dropping municipal boundaries but looking at the region as a global region and developing a land use plan. Falling out of the land use plan then will be the municipal plans.

MS MICHAEL: Would the Department of Environment be involved in that as well with the municipalities?

MR. MERCER: They are involved but the project is actually led by a leadership committee consisting of elected officials from each of the municipalities that are involved and supported by a technical committee then that would have Environment and Conservation officials, Government Services, Municipal Affairs and others.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, very good.

I think the minister - you said there were three of these regional plans that were being worked on right now?

MR. MERCER: That is correct.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, it sounds good. I will have to keep pushing for a provincial plan, though, I think.

MS WHALEN: Okay.

MS MICHAEL: Coming back also to the Municipal Transit Infrastructure, where that program has now ended. Is the department looking at all at the issue of public transit in the Province? It is a big issue and I know it is very complicated because of our sparse population.

MS BARNES: Sandra Barnes. I will have to check that for you. We were just the flow through department because the funds from that federal program were provided to the cities of St. John's and Corner Brook.

MS MICHAEL: I remember that from last year.

MS BARNES: Okay. So we were just an administrative body to move the funding through. I will have to ask if anybody else is looking at that.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you. I am more concerned about the smaller communities. I remember now that that was where that money went and we did talk about this last year as well in Estimates.

I am continually hearing from people out in the Holyrood area, for example, who are used to having a small bus service; it was private, it ended. I get phone calls from people on fixed incomes, senior citizens, who really feel they just cannot afford to leave Holyrood. They cannot afford to take taxis to go to St. John's or even to go further in CBS to do shopping and stuff. It is a serious issue, especially for people on fixed incomes. I do not know, I mean if this is the department that should look at that –

MS WHALEN: I think that would come under Transportation and Works.

MS MICHAEL: That would be under Transportation and Works?

MS WHALEN: Yes, Transportation and Works would look at that, or HRLE would look at it, but not Municipal Affairs, because the municipalities would - some municipalities are looking at it. I know Paradise is one of them that were looking at getting public transit. That is something that municipalities can look at as well.

MS MICHAEL: Right, well I will take that up in another forum.

MS WHALEN: Sure.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, thank you. I have some more line items.

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: I have a couple of more other specific questions but they will come up under the line items; I will do it at that time.

3.2.01., which is the Municipal Infrastructure; it is: appropriations provide for the payment of provincial contributions towards principal owing on projects.

I am just interested in the fact – under Grants and Subsidies, line 10., the money is going down regularly. The Revised was $22.5 million less than the estimate budget, and now this year we are down to $88.7 million.

MS WHALEN: Okay. Sandra, you can speak to that.

MS BARNES: Sandra Barnes. What you are seeing there is an accounting restatement. Previously, the department used to put all the provincial funding under Municipal Infrastructure. In the following vote, the federal-provincial infrastructure program, it did not match up appropriately with the federal contribution. So this year we restated it appropriately so that it is all provincial funding under Municipal Infrastructure and then it is provincial and the federal portion under the federal-provincial infrastructure program. It just gives you a better view of how those two programs are structured.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Okay, and I can see that being reflected there; $63 million more under the 3.2.02. So that is the reallocation of the restatement.

Okay. Thank you very much.

In 4.1.03., it is not a big one but I may as well ask it, I guess. Line 03., under Transportation and Communications, you seem to have a consistent budget line there of $161,000 for Transportation and Communications and this year you were $66,000 less. Was there anything that you did not normally cover that you had to cover or it was just something that -

MS WHALEN: Yes. Actually, these reflect lower than anticipated emergency air services, lower helicopter usage as there were fewer missing persons, accidents, and natural or manmade emergencies, and also lower than anticipated staff travel due to a vacant director's position.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. Well, that is a good news line, isn't it?

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

I would like to ask a question, since we are under emergencies here, and I know that Mr. Samson will be really surprised if I do not ask the question. Could we have an update on 911?

MR. SAMSON: I was waiting for that.

MS WHALEN: Well, I am actually - 911 right now, I am working on it. I am almost in the final stages of going to my colleagues with it.

MS MICHAEL: Final stages of?

MS WHALEN: Yes, bringing it to my colleagues for a decision. Basically, we have looked at our expressions of interest and right now I am looking at going up to my colleagues, and I really cannot announce it here this evening of what I will or will not do.

MS MICHAEL: I am not clear, though. You are at the point of - you have not done the final tender call yet, have you?

MS WHALEN: No. It is not gone to tender.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

MS WHALEN: That is what I am in the decision making right now, about going to tender.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, right.

MS WHALEN: I should have something within the very near future released on that.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, and tender will take what, about three months, the tender call, or longer? How long do you expect the tender call period to be?

MR. SAMSON: We anticipate – well, once we get a final decision we will issue a Request for Proposals immediately.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MR. SAMSON: Our plan would be to conclude that process and make a recommendation to the government on the contract award within a couple of months –

MS MICHAEL: Oh, that is not too bad.

MR. SAMSON: - with a view to concluding this initial phase of the work at least some time in late 2010.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

I am waiting, but that is good. I am glad to hear that.

OFFICIAL: You are working when we are (inaudible).

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

I am just curious, under 4.1.05.03, there is no budget here. Is it that you just spend as needed, because I note there is no budget under Transportation and Communications? No budget at all, actually, budgeted but you have expenditures. Is it that you spend as needed here?

MS WHALEN: Mike, do you want to take that one?

MR. SAMSON: Essentially, what happens is, those are costs which are associated with the Revenue Recovery initiative we have ongoing with the feds. The joy of this initiative is that the costs we incur are by and large recoverable from the federal government as part of the claims.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Yes.

MR. SAMSON: We move money in and out during the process as necessary, as we incur the expenditures during the year.

MS MICHAEL: Oh, okay.

MR. SAMSON: We do not budget for it. We think it is bad luck to budget for emergencies.

MS MICHAEL: It is probably not a bad thought, actually.

Okay, that is fine. So that is just sort of a flow through line where the money comes in and out.

MR. SAMSON: Yes, that is correct.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. They are all the line ones I have and I think all of my big picture questions have been asked.

That is it for me for the moment, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Thank you.

MR. DEAN: Seeing we are there in Disaster Assistance, there was one other line that I would like to ask a question about and that is line 10. again in 4.1.05. Our budget last year for the Grants and Subsidies was $7,451,000 and we came in at $3,650,900 and we kind of estimated a consistent number with that for the coming year. What would have been thought we would do in 2009-2010 that we did not do?

MS WHALEN: I guess the Grants and Subsidies increase reflects ongoing projects not progressing to the extent projected, and that Stephenville has gotten $400,000, 100 per cent completed; Chantal is $1.5 million, 99 per cent completed; the storm surge 2007, $1.25 million and is 50 per cent completed; the Northeast Coast 2008, $325,000, 100 per cent completed; and Daniel's Harbour, $36,000, 100 per cent completed. That is $3.511 million.

MR. DEAN: Okay. Our budget was $7.4 million, right? We had a few bad years or something probably, did we?

MS WHALEN: Mike will add to it.

MR. SAMSON: Essentially, if you look across what you will see is that the numbers sort of add up across the line. Where we ended up was we are dependent upon consulting engineers and municipalities and discussions with the federal government to bring things along to tender phase. Sometimes that bogs down.

The biggest issue at the moment, for example, over in your area of the Province would be the breakwater repairs at Rocky Harbour. So, there has been an ongoing discussion amongst duelling engineers over how you go about doing it and the size of the armour stone and where it should come from, given that it is in the middle of the national park. Things get delayed, so really what it is happening is we are just rolling that work out into the next year. It is just a carryover.

MR. DEAN: Okay, that makes sense.

Two or three issues that I wanted to ask a couple of questions on. Ms Michael mentioned the land use strategy, I guess, whatever. There is one question, in last year's annual report it was stated that the Northeast Avalon would be completed by March 2011, is that correct? I am just wondering if you can give us an update on that, whether we think it is achievable -

MS WHALEN: (Inaudible). Cluney, do you want to take that?

MR. MERCER: Yes, that was the original schedule. We have had some delays. Associated with the first round of consultations there was a scoping document that was produced by the consultant, CBCL Limited. That scoping document has been provided to municipalities and the feedback coming back through the leadership committee has been slow. So, it has slowed the process for several months now.

MR. DEAN: So our target date, is that still achievable do you think?

MR. SAMSON: March 31, 2011, not likely, but probably within four to six months, I would think.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

I have a question on the pesticide ban. Any plans to update the Municipalities Act so municipalities can impose measures such as pesticide bans and so on?

MS WHALEN: That would have to come from the Department of Environment, a policy from the Department of Environment. They would be the ones responsible for that.

MR. DEAN: Okay. Is there anything in the makings do you know?

MS WHALEN: I cannot speak for Minister Johnson. I do not know what is going on in her department, but I am sure that if she is at that, she will certainly inform us in due time.

MR. DEAN: Yes.

We touched just on a couple of line items on the gas tax, but some general questions around that. Can you give us an update on the gas tax refund, like how much the Province receives and this is where the money is spent and that kind of thing?

MS COMPANION: Lori Anne Companion. The gas tax fund, we renewed the agreement this year, an extension. The first four years it was an $83 million program. It is all federal money. The money is distributed. A portion of it goes to waste management. The other portion is distributed to municipalities on an allocation formula which is base plus a per capita. That allocation formula was decided by the Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador on behalf of their municipalities.

The extension to the agreement was signed and it was effective April 1, 2010. It provides for $124 million over the coming four years. That allocation formula from the previous four-year agreement was carried forward to the coming four-year agreement. The money will be advanced from the federal government in July – in April actually it was advanced and we will be issuing it to municipalities in July.

The money is used for green friendly infrastructure. There is an outcomes report that is done based on what has been accomplished with the gas tax funds. That report is available on our Web site and we are required to do it under the agreement with the federal government to show what kind of benefit Newfoundland and Labrador and municipalities are receiving because of gas tax funds for road infrastructure, for waste water, for drinking water and benefits.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

You mentioned the Waste Management Strategy. Do you know the percentage of it that goes to waste management?

MS COMPANION: It is approximately 30 per cent. It is 27 per cent, 28 per cent.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

The AG identified some problems with the gas tax agreement and so on and the administration of it. Are those issues being addressed, concerns being addressed?

MS COMPANION: I can speak to that Sandra.

The administration issues that were identified by the AG were mostly a reporting issue. A big part of our reporting issue is that the same day that our report is due to the federal government, the report was due from municipalities. If municipalities did not get the information in to us, we could not report to the federal government.

This time, in our local government agreement, we are going to make sure we change that so that we have a lead time for the municipalities to be able to get us the information. In many cases municipalities are slower getting the information, so we will provide a window of opportunity where we have an ability to assimilate the information and then provide an update to the federal government. That is where most of the administration issues were.

MR. DEAN: Okay. I would not dare ask you another question that would be unfair to you.

MS COMPANION: That would clearly be.

MR. DEAN: Unless water quality comes - that you have to speak to that as well, but I am hoping, for your sake, that it does not.

MS COMPANION: No.

MR. DEAN: There are a couple of questions that I would like to ask on water quality. I know one town for sure in my district that has had a boil order on for – well, the mayor would exaggerate and say as long as the town has been there, but it probably has not been that long. Can you tell us how many boil order advisories are in effect in the Province now?

MR. MERCER: Cluney Mercer.

The boil water advisories are done as a result of testing that is done by Environment and Conservation. They keep a log of that on their Web site pretty well in real time. There are about 200 of them right now. They are all not long-term boil water advisories. Some are as a result of a break in a line that requires some repair, so it is a short-term advisory. I think there are about fifty-five or so of those generally on an ongoing basis.

There were about 140 or so municipalities that had long-term boil water advisories and they were ranked as relatively medium to high risk by the Department of Environment and Conservation. Municipal Affairs, last year, we wrote those municipalities and asked them if they were interested to seek funding under the drinking water initiative. As a result of that, there were thirty-five municipalities that applied initially.

We hired a consultant and they went out and they looked at those specific water supplies to see what potential solutions were. As a result of that, we are in a process now, and we just issued an RFP, to have twenty-six portable water drinking units installed in very small communities. Most of these communities are less than 500 in population.

Since the initial application process we have had another fourteen or so communities make a request. They are in the stage of being evaluated now and they may, if PWDU is the only affordable option, then they may be installing PWDUs as well.

We are looking at purchasing technology that will be similar for every single community. Right now we are looking at twenty-six units that would be identical in twenty-six communities. Of course that provides an economy as a scale in terms of buying the infrastructure, maintaining it for the municipalities and servicing it. We expect to spend about $4 million just on that initiative alone for those twenty-six this year.

MR. DEAN: What about testing of the water? I guess from a staff perspective, you have to have one level above – is it one level of training about the level of your – how do I say it – water quality or whatever?

MR. MERCER: I cannot speak to that too much. The training aspect and the water monitoring are within Environment and Conservation and it is not something that we get involved in too much.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

MR. MERCER: I know that they have a training program in place now, a mobile training unit actually, that they will go out to municipalities around the Province and deliver training. They have a series of classifications depending on the complexity of the water treatment facility that they are looking after. Although despite that program being available, I think at the symposium a week or so ago, it was reported that only about 10 per cent of municipalities have actually taken advantage of that training at this point in time. The training is provided free.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

I think about this one community of Raleigh. I do not know if you are familiar with that or not, but they have been on boil order, like I said, for a long time. I am just paraphrasing the mayor or whatever. I am not really sure if they know what to do with it. It just may be a little bit above where they are kind of thing in terms of knowing how to handle it or how to go about fixing it, I guess.

Do we target some of those - when we see a community that has been there kind of there forever, do we try and –

MR. MERCER: That is what we were trying to target in terms of having municipalities come forward under the drinking water initiative. What we did, when we hired the consultant to look at the initial thirty or thirty-two or so, they went out and met with the municipality, looked at their system, they looked at potential solutions. Of course, if there is a viable solution in terms of the capital cost and the long-term operating cost of having good potable water coming to everyone's tap that is the ideal solution.

MR. DEAN: Yes.

MR. MERCER: That was an opportunity for municipalities to have someone with expertise come in and look at their system and diagnose it. It is only a very small percentage of municipalities jumping on board at this point in time. So, we are still trying to encourage more to come forward.

Within Municipal Affairs, we are looking at identifying drinking water as one of the highest priority capital infrastructure investments that you can make. In fact, last year we said no to provide funding to municipalities for paving roads when they, in fact, had drinking water issues.

MR. DEAN: Okay.

I have just one last thing I want to ask about in case someone has been sitting there with it on their plate and burning to get it out, and that is our teepees. How many do we have left, and when do we expect to see them gone – the incinerators?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. DEAN: That is Environment as well?

MR. MERCER: Cluney Mercer.

A couple of years ago we had about forty-seven teepee incinerators left. Right now we have fifteen only left on the Island. We expect a significant number of those will be shut down in 2010.

MR. DEAN: Okay, that is good.

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

MS MICHAEL: No, thanks.

CHAIR: Okay.

I ask the Clerk to call the headings.

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01 carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

On motion, subhead 1.1.01 carried.

CLERK: Subheads 1.2.01 to 4.1.06 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall 1.2.01 to 4.1.06 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

On motion, subheads 1.2.01 through 4.1.06 carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

On motion, Department of Municipal Affairs, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of the Department of Municipal Affairs carried without amendment?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, Estimates of the Department of Municipal Affairs carried without amendment.

CHAIR: Before we adjourn, the Committee members should have a copy of the Social Services Committee minutes of May 5, Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

I just make note in the minutes, line 6: On motion of Mr. Butler the Committee adjourned at 10:34 a.m. to Wednesday - that should have been May 11 at 9:00 a.m.

AN HON. MEMBER: At 6:00 p.m.

CHAIR: Oh, I am sorry. Yes, this evening at 6:00.

With that amendment, I will ask for the motion to adopt.

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: So moved.

CHAIR: Mr. Parsons.

On motion, minutes, as amended, adopted.

CHAIR: Thank you to the Committee for this evening. Minister, I thank you, as well as your staff, for partaking in this Estimates Committee.

I think that is it. I will ask for a motion to adjourn.

MR. RIDGLEY: So moved.

CHAIR: Mr. Ridgley.

Thank you very much. We are adjourned.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.