May 8,

RESOURCE COMMITTEE

Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Dale Kirby, MHA for St. John's North,

substitutes for Lorraine Michael, MHA for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi.

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

CHAIR (Brazil): I would like to welcome everybody as we review the

Estimates of the Department of Advanced Education and Skills.

I would first like to start by asking the Committee if they would introduce

themselves, then I will ask the minister to have her staff introduce themselves

and then we will start the process.

Members of the Committee.

MS PERRY: Tracey Perry, MHA, Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MR. CROSS: Eli Cross, MHA, Bonavista North, and my good friend Keith

Russell from Lake Melville.

CHAIR: (Inaudible) you can introduce your support staff that you have

with you, please.

La Poile.

MR. KIRBY: I am Dale Kirby. I am a Member of the House of Assembly for

the District of St. John's North, and this is Daniel Smith; he is a Researcher.

CHAIR: Thank you Committee members.

Minister.

MS BURKE: Joan Burke, Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

CHAIR: Okay. Can you have your staff introduced, please?

MS FIELD: Marilyn Field, Deputy Minister Acting.

MR. LEWIS: David Lewis, ADM for Corporate Services.

MR. CURTIS: Ken Curtis, Manager of Finance.

MR. TOMPKINS: John Tompkins, Director of Communications.

MS ENNIS-WILLIAMS: Candice Ennis-Williams, Director of Institutional

Services.

MS TOOPE: Pam Toope, Director of Labour Market Development Division.

MS WHEATON: Roxie Wheaton, Assistant Deputy Minister for Regional

Operations.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister and staff of Advanced Education and Skills.

The process, just to clarify for everybody what we will do, we will go back

and forth. I will give the minister an intro of up to fifteen minutes to talk

about the process of the department and where it would move particularly around

the Estimates. Then we can start back, go right to Mr. Parsons to start the

process of asking questions.

I do ask that you do due diligence of sticking to the intent of the Estimates

Committee review, the particular line areas and the dollar figures related to

them. Then any related processes around the programs that are being offered so

that we can get as close as possible to completing in the prescribed time. If we

need additional time we will reconvene if necessary.

Now minister, to you.

MS BURKE: I have no opening comments; we can start right in.

CHAIR: Okay, even better.

I do ask the Committee to direct all questions to the minister. Then if the

minister needs one of her staff to assist in an answer, I do ask that particular

individual to identify themselves because it is being recorded under Hansard.

Mr. Parsons, right to you.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you.

Firstly, I would like to thank the minister and staff for all taking the time

to be with us this morning. Bear with me; it is my first Estimates session so I

am going to try my best to not ask redundant questions.

I am going to start right away under Executive and Support Services, 1.1.01

Minister's Office. We look at 01 Salaries, last year $79,300 was spent that was

not budgeted. What did this cover?

MS BURKE: That was a retirement payout, and at the retirement payout we

also had the person who was coming in behind at that point hired.

MR. A. PARSONS: As it stands, Minister, how many employees are currently

within your department?

MS BURKE: What is the total number?

OFFICIAL: Approximately 850 employees.

MS BURKE: Eight hundred and fifty.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am going to put my earphone in my ear.

CHAIR: Yes, the echo here sometimes it is hard I do encourage members,

if you need to, put your headsets on.

MR. A. PARSONS: Of those employees, how many are permanent, temporary,

and/or contractual?

MS BURKE: I do not have that information on me this morning.

MR. A. PARSONS: Are you able to undertake to provide that information?

MS BURKE: Yes, we can get that.

MR. A. PARSONS: The next part of my question follows up to that. Do you

have the information there for how many full-time employees or part-time?

MS BURKE: Out of the 850, that would be full-time employees.

MR. A. PARSONS: Are there additional part-time employees who are not

included in that figure?

MS BURKE: That is departmental employees. Then there are obviously MUN

employees, college employees, but I do not count them. I just thought you meant

departmental employees, and I would not have the information on MUN and the

college. They could have people delivering a course versus full-time employment.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

We know there were four to five temporary positions referred to in the Budget

that were going to be made redundant. How many of these are within your

department?

MS BURKE: In that Budget exercise, none of those would have been

identified from my department.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am going to move forward to 1.2.01 Executive Support.

We have heard of the business transformation project. Under this heading, is

that where that project is located?

MS BURKE: Under 4.1.03.

MR. A. PARSONS: This project, this is the

section that it is located

under?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: To undertake this project, was there an amount of funding

put forward to pay for this or cover it off? How much is this project going to

cost?

MS BURKE: It would be covered off within this budget here under

section

MR. A. PARSONS: I will come back to that after. I am going to try to

stick to the order I was in so I do not lose everything here.

Back to Executive Support 1.2.01, under Purchased Services line 06. Can you

give me an example of what kind of purchased services or what the purchased

services were for this department under this heading?

MS BURKE: Purchased Services, that would be general services like room

rentals for meetings, printing. General services like that.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

We all know that Mr. Noseworthy was hired this year under the department.

There is a contract that was executed for Mr. Noseworthy. Is he under Executive

Support?

MS BURKE: No.

MR. A. PARSONS: No? What

section would his contract be under?

MS BURKE: Yes, that would be 4.1.03.

MR. A. PARSONS: That is back to 4.1.03?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

I do have some questions on that section. I think what I will do is I will

skip ahead to 4.1.03. What is the total budget for the business transformation

project?

MS BURKE: I think it was around $140,000.

MR. A. PARSONS: That is basically his contract?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Is there a timeline attached to this? Is he expected to provide a report

within a certain period of time?

MS BURKE: It will not be a report, but there are a number of projects he

will work on over a twelve-month period.

MR. A. PARSONS: Will any of these reports be provided for review once

they are done? Is the purpose of this to look at this new department and

streamline it?

MS BURKE: The new department is new in a sense, but it is reconstituted

in another sense because it is sections from two former departments.

Basically, both departments that were put together are of components both

had a social-policy perspective. The new department has an economic policy. It

is trying to work with the policies, the new mandate, and the strategic plan to

ensure we are not just two separate entities doing our own thing as we did, but

how we come together to address the needs of the labour market in the Province.

MR. A. PARSONS: In the contract it says: The consultant shall provide

employees who are competent in their field of specialization.

Are these employees outside government or are they within government?

MS BURKE: Within the department.

MR. A. PARSONS: Their pay is already budgeted in under Salaries, I

presume.

MS BURKE: This is working with the existing department heads.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Is his mandate just to cover

section 4.1.03, the Labour Market Agreement

aspect, or is it the entire department?

MS BURKE: It is not necessarily as segregated because all components of

the department should work for the same reason. Whether we work with clients and

individuals to attach them to the labour market because funding is under the

LMDA or because it is within the department is somewhat irrelevant because we

want to get the business processes set up so we work to help people attach to

the labour market.

Some of the staff and some of the programs he may be providing assistance on

may fall under the LMDA or not, but he would still work to help us understand

that when we work with a client we have to make sure we have the best business

processes set up and within the department the most efficient process, as well.

MR. A. PARSONS: While I am here I will cover off the rest of this

section. I have some other questions.

Can you explain to me: Why is 4.1.03 separated from 4.1.02? One is Labour

Market Development Agreement and one is Labour Market Agreement. I am just

trying to figure that part out.

MS BURKE: The 4.1.02 is the Labour Market Development Agreement, and that

is services and programs for EI eligible, and the 4.1.03 is the Labour Market

Agreement for the clients who are not EI eligible.

MR. A. PARSONS: I noticed last year under the Salaries heading $570,000

less was spent than was budgeted. This is under 4.1.03, Labour Market Agreement,

under Salaries,

section 01, we budgeted $3.759 million, but we spent $3.189

million. So why was less than the budgeted amount spent? Were there positions

not needed?

MS BURKE: No, it was delays in staffing.

MR. A. PARSONS: Now, I noticed that there is still a smaller amount

budgeted for this year. Are there positions that are not being filled or

MS BURKE: No, based on our positions, and based on the staffing that the

budget should cover, that is not with any cutbacks or new staff; that is status

quo for us.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Under

section 05, Professional Services, can you give me an example of the

professional services that the department utilized last year?

MS BURKE: Under Professional Services, that would be evaluations that we

would do under the LMA. It would also look at some literacy supports and

services. There would be some auditing, client outcome tracking, there would be

some money spent there under our CEYS youth-related programming, the Office of

Immigration and Multiculturalism. We would also do the Workplace Skills

Enhancement Program through IBRD as well, under that area.

MR. A. PARSONS: Last year just under 30 per cent, under what was

budgeted, was spent. Were there services that you anticipated that you did not

have to pay for?

MS BURKE: Yes, the LMA evaluation was not included last year and it will

be this year.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay, thank you.

Under Purchased Services, line 06, there was $600,000 budgeted, but we only

spent $200,000. What made up the significant decrease in what was actually

spent? What was not purchased that you anticipated having to purchase?

MS BURKE: The launch of the Strategic Literacy Plan. It was budgeted for

and it was not launch.

MR. A. PARSONS: Now, I notice the budget this year is higher than what

was spent last year but still a fair bit lower than budgeted last year. Would

that Literacy Plan be launched this year?

MS BURKE: It will.

MR. A. PARSONS: Even if that is launched, we still have over $200,000

less than what was budgeted last year. What else was budgeted for last year that

you do not anticipate having to spend this year?

MS BURKE: It is the Literacy Plan. The reduction is part of our 3 per

cent exercise. The delay in launching the Literacy Plan for later in this year

gives us the savings.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just a question on the Literacy Plan again. Where it is

getting launched this year, because of the delay will that affect the

effectiveness in the plan in any way, or the reduction in funds?

MS BURKE: No.

MR. A. PARSONS: Being new at this, can you explain to me line 09,

Allowances and Assistance. It is the same section, 4.1.03. You will see that

last year it was $2.183 million budgeted, we spent $1.328 million, and this year

we are back up to $2.129 million. What is the purpose of this part? What does

that cover specifically?

MS BURKE: That would cover expenses under job skills, under the

Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy. The Literacy Plan would have some funding there,

supports for apprenticeship, the LMD, transition supports. That would come under

that.

MR. A. PARSONS: What did we not have to pay for last year that was

budgeted for?

MS BURKE: There were portions out of all I just said that we would not

have spent a full amount in last year. The money is there.

MR. A. PARSONS: If I might ask: Why wasn't it spent or done last year?

Was there any reason? Was it just delayed?

MS BURKE: Not necessarily was it planned and delayed, but that is ongoing

funding throughout the year and it is drawn down on. If the need is there, it is

there, and sometimes the need varies. We would not count on saying it will not

be there year over year so it stays in the budget.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

In the same

section 4.1.03, under Grants and Subsidies, 10, what does Grants

and Subsidies for this

section cover?

MS BURKE: Grants and Subsidies, that would be supports to community

agencies or employers who apply for the different programs that we would have

under the LMA.

MR. A. PARSONS: Half of their budget was not spent last year. What

happened here?

MS BURKE: Eight hundred thousand dollars would have been specifically for

the Strategic Literacy Plan that did not go ahead last year.

MR. A. PARSONS: Eight hundred thousand dollars, but we budgeted $7.9

million and we spent $3.5 million.

MS BURKE: There would be some, as well, for the Apprenticeship Wage

Subsidy that would have been not drawn down, carried over because their work

term is probably not as clean as the fiscal year. There might be like Wage

Subsidy Programs that are ongoing. It would be money targeted in one budget but

not drawn down because of the start date of the program. So it is not

necessarily finished at March 31.

MR. A. PARSONS: You take out the $800,000, what you just explained there

with the apprenticeship, would that cover off the rest or is there anything else

that was not

MS BURKE: That would be the significant, the rest would be drawn down of

something like $35,000 on one program, and there is the reserve and the

unallocated which is $1.6 million. So that would not be for any specific

program.

MR. A. PARSONS: The same section, we look at Revenue Federal. I am

presuming this is part of the devolution is you receive money from the federal

government. It looked like we were budgeted to receive $9.2 million but actually

got $10.8 million in revenue from the federal government. Why was there an

increase? Was it planned? I guess it was not planned. What happened there for us

to get extra money?

MR. LEWIS: The increase in the revenues last year was because there was a

delay in collection of federal revenues in the previous year. Some 2010-2011

revenues were actually receded in 2011-2012.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Going to the next part there, what we had budgeted for this year $7.4

million, which is really $3 million less than what we collected last year. Is

that going to result in decreased services?

MS BURKE: The actual decrease is $1.794 million and that is the federal

funding. That should not decrease the services.

CHAIR: Mr. Parsons, are you completed with that section? Only because of

due diligence, I want to move on to Mr. Kirby. We will switch back and forth

equal time.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am good for now.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Before we move to Mr. Kirby, I just want to note for the minutes

that we have started with budget line 1.1.01, to have it recorded.

Mr. Kirby.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you.

Just for my own curiosity, at the outset it was mentioned by the minister

that there are 850 staff falling under the bailiwick of this department.

How many of those staff would have been as a result of the federal-provincial

devolution under the LMDA several years ago? How many of those folks, ballpark

figure, would have previously been federal government employees?

MS TOOPE: Right now, there are about 120 positions that would have been

associated with the federal delivery system.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you.

You just spoke about the fact that the Strategic Adult Literacy Plan was not

launched this year. It was not launched last year; it will be launched this

year. Do we know anything about the timing of that, or this is one of these

ministerial secrets, as it were? Let the cat out of the bag.

MS BURKE: No, there is no date at this point.

MR. KIRBY: There is no estimated time of arrival for that.

Reading through the brief that was written by Literacy Newfoundland and

Labrador that they submitted under the consultations, that were held for the

Strategic Adult Literacy Plan, they point out that the last time there was any

research conducted, at least that they were aware of, was the International

Adult Literacy Skills Survey which was conducted in 2003.

Has the department made any expenditure on getting more updated data to

ascertain what the level of adult illiteracy is in Newfoundland and Labrador

right now, or are we still working with the 2003 figure?

MS BURKE: When we released our strategy, one of the things we needed to

ensure was that we have an effective way to evaluate. Based on the results from

2003 and the methodology, it was felt that probably was not the best way to

evaluate the Province. That is why we wanted to make sure that we have a more

appropriate way in this new strategy.

MR. KIRBY: So you have new numbers now?

MS BURKE: We will be evaluating. We are going to implement the strategy

and there will be a process to evaluate.

MR. KIRBY: Do we know what the level of adult illiteracy is right now in

the Province?

MS BURKE: We can go back and pull out the IALSS or whatever, but it would

not be a test or an evaluation of our particular strategies.

MR. KIRBY: So, really the figure we are still working with is the 2003

figure, then?

MS BURKE: Well, we have not implemented our own evaluation yet.

MR. KIRBY: There is no new data beyond that?

MS BURKE: We are going to evaluate our strategy.

MR. KIRBY: You are going to look into it?

MS BURKE: When we launch our strategy and we rollout the funding attached

to our strategy, we are going to evaluate how we are doing.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

So you will not say at that time the level of adult illiteracy in

Newfoundland and Labrador is X per cent as per the 2003 (inaudible)?

MS BURKE: Whatever information is available from whatever source, we can

use it. It is not our numbers, so we can use it or anyone can use it.

MR. KIRBY: Yes. I am trying to establish whether or not that is the most

recent data that is available or if the department has done any research

recently on what the level of illiteracy is in the Province.

MS BURKE: We have not done our own research, but if there is research

available we can use it.

MR. KIRBY: Okay. Good, good.

It was also mentioned when you were talking about the Labour Market Agreement

under one of those Allowances and Assistance. That is the where wage subsidy is?

MS BURKE: What line are we at?

MR. KIRBY: Line 4.1.03.09. Is that where the wage subsidy is? Do they

fall under there, the wage subsidy program?

MS BURKE: No. You are referring, I think, to 4.1.02.

MR. KIRBY: Is that where the Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy is to employers?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. KIRBY: Do we know how many employers participated in that program in

the most recent year, last year?

MS BURKE: Yes, we do have that number.

MS TOOPE: For the Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy program it is about 293.

MR. KIRBY: Two hundred and ninety-three employers participated.

MS TOOPE: In the Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy.

On the LMDA wage subsidy it is about 960.

MR. KIRBY: Okay. Just to clarify, what is the difference between those

two numbers?

MS BURKE: One is the Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy that we advance from

provincial funds.

MR. KIRBY: That is the 200 figure?

MS BURKE: Well, we had 344 apprentices.

Under the Labour Market Development Agreement, 4.1.02 that we are discussing

here, under the Grants and Subsidies there is a wage subsidy program tied to the

LMDA that is not the Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy program.

MR. KIRBY: So there are two different programs. What were the numbers

again?

MS BURKE: There were about 960 under the LMDA employers in the Province.

Under our Wage Subsidy Program, which would not fall under these numbers, we

were able to place 344 apprentices last year. There are other apprentices placed

from other programs, but that is just purely that line.

MR. KIRBY: So 344 apprentices now, how many employers would we be talking

about? Because, I guess, it is possible that there would be more than one

apprentice, perhaps, placed with IOC.

MS BURKE: It is less than that. I think it is 297, probably.

MR. KIRBY: How many employers would we, or apprentices the employer

applies for the wage subsidy under the Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy Program, or

is the other way around, is it the apprentice who applies?

MS BURKE: It would depend.

MR. KIRBY: It could be either?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. KIRBY: What sort of number of applications do we see on an annual

basis for last year? How many employers and/or apprentices? How many

applications would we have seen for that? Would it have been higher than the 344

or the 297?

MS BURKE: We did not meet the full demand and that was why we expanded

and had more money put in this year's budget. We think that with the numbers

going through the skilled trades, the numbers coming out and doing

apprenticeship, and the labour market, that we increased the money thinking that

we could find more.

MR. KIRBY: What would the target number of subsidies have been previously

then, 500?

MS BURKE: As we introduced it, we were only seeing if there is a demand.

The target for this year is to have at least 500.

MR. KIRBY: Five hundred for this year.

MS BURKE: At least.

MR. KIRBY: Is that the same target we had last year?

MS BURKE: We did not have a target last year because we brought in the

funding last year to start the program, to make it happen. Depending on the

uptake and the need would determine if we were going to expand it. If we had to

put the money in and could only get 200, we would not have introduced it this

year.

MR. KIRBY: Just sort of continuing on the subject of apprentices because

it is a significant area of expenditure here. There are sixty apprentice trades

right now that have plans of training and fifty of those are Red Seal. Is that

correct?

MS BURKE: I guess so. I do not know the exact number.

MR. KIRBY: How many of those trades are compulsory or are they all

voluntary?

MS BURKE: I think electrical may be compulsory but the rest are

voluntary.

MR. KIRBY: There is only one compulsory trade out of the sixty?

MS BURKE: There might be more than one but, by far, 90 per cent more of

ours are not compulsory.

MR. KIRBY: One of the areas that was talked about and has been talked

about by you, Minister, is the issue of completion. I know there is a federal

grant for completion, but it is really one of those vex questions when it comes

to apprenticeship.

What is our completion rate now here in Newfoundland and Labrador? What is

the percentage of apprentices who initially register and end up getting their

journey persons certificate in the end? Do we know what the completion rate is

right now?

MS BURKE: We do not have the data on that. We do have that information

within the department; we do not have it here with us today.

MR. KIRBY: Sorry?

MS BURKE: We do have that information, but we just do not have it with us

here today.

MR. KIRBY: You do not have it? When might we be able to get that

information?

MS BURKE: It depends well, we will break it down. Do you want every

program?

MR. KIRBY: Sure.

MS BURKE: Okay, so it will take some time.

MR. KIRBY: What is the definition that the department is using right now

for apprenticeship completion then?

MS BURKE: Journey person.

MR. KIRBY: Pardon me?

MS BURKE: To become a journey person.

MR. KIRBY: Over what period of time?

MS BURKE: Well, there is no defined period of time, if they are through

the apprenticeship program.

MR. KIRBY: It is not like a college diploma where, say, if you are doing

a technology diploma it is a three-year diploma. If you do not do it in three

years, then you could say well the definition is you compete in three years,

alternatively you could say well a definition is you complete in four to five

years.

MS BURKE: We would not have a definition because some people may do the

pre-apprentice training but have had previous work experience. Just think some

people come out of the armed forces, so then through their block training they

get credit for so many hours that they have completed. Others may take a year

off maybe on maternity leave. Others may not be available to go back and do the

block training at a certain time. There is no real if they are progressing

through the program as a registered apprentice and getting their booked signed

and coming back for their block training, they are not cut off after, say, three

years or four years and say you cannot continue.

MR. KIRBY: I am not sure how you could calculate a completion rate if you

did not have the definition of completion.

MS BURKE: The completion is how many become a journey person.

MR. KIRBY: Sure, and so out of what number then?

MS BURKE: We will get that based on the different trades for you.

MR. KIRBY: Okay, so the definition of completion will be provided then

with the figures, so we will get a breakdown of the completion.

MS BURKE: The definition is if they complete their program, which means

they become a journey person.

MR. KIRBY: I am not sure how I explain it any differently. Of the trades

that we have then, we will get a breakdown of the completion rate or at least

the numbers when can that information be provided?

MS BURKE: We will go through each of the different trades and put it

together. So once that is done, we will provide it. We could give you a general

overall rate, but if you want to dig down and go through all the different

trades, we can get the staff to start doing that.

MR. KIRBY: Are we talking a couple of weeks or tomorrow?

MS BURKE: It will not be tomorrow.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

Where does the apprenticeship I am not going over my time here, am I?

MS BURKE: Is there anywhere in the book we are talking about here? Are we

on any particular Estimates section?

MR. KIRBY: I was going to ask: Where does the Apprenticeship Incentive

Grant fall under in this? Does that fall under the LMDA or the LMA? This is the

grant that is provided to apprentices after their first year and after their

second year.

MS BURKE: That would be under 7.1.01.10 Grants and Subsidies, but it is

not as clear as that. Some of it would also come under the LMDA.

MR. KIRBY: So it is spread across the two lines, 7.1.01?

MS BURKE: Yes, but the provincial portion would be found under 7.1.01,

line 10.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

As with the Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy program, I am interested to know what

the uptake is in the numbers of applications the department gets for that. It

would seem to me that would make it difficult to track, would it not, if it were

spread over two lines in here? Is it more straightforward than that?

How many apprentices are we seeing getting awarded that grant after their

second year, and how many after their first year?

MS BURKE: Yes, we can get those numbers. That number itself would not be

difficult to get.

MR. KIRBY: Why would that be, because they are spread over two different

lines?

MS BURKE: No. The number of apprentices who get that, it is tracked in

our apprenticeship shop. That is not a difficult number to get.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

The number of apprentices who get it would not be difficult?

MS BURKE: No. The difficulty would be if you wanted the breakdown as to

who came under this line and who came under another line. The apprentices

themselves probably would not even realize what line of funding they came under.

MR. KIRBY: Sure, that is fine.

You can provide a breakdown then of how many apprentices received this grant

after their first year and after their second year, divided between those two?

MS BURKE: Yes, we can do that.

MR. KIRBY: That is the same as the other one, where we are not sure when

you will be able to provide it but you will be able to provide it.

MS BURKE: You want to know how many people are enrolled in the

apprenticeship program for each of the different trades and the rate they are

going through to become a journeyperson?

MR. KIRBY: Yes.

MS BURKE: Just because somebody is in the pre-apprentice and they become

a journeyperson does not mean it was four years. It could have taken them six;

it could have taken them three, and you want to know how many people got the

grants?

MR. KIRBY: Yes.

MS BURKE: Okay.

MR. KIRBY: Just out of curiosity, is there something I can do to follow

up with you? Is there some protocol I should use to follow up with you to get

that information? Do I need to write to you?

MS BURKE: You could write, but that is entirely up to you. You do not

have to phone but you can write me if you like.

MR. KIRBY: I will leave you a message.

MS BURKE: Yes, okay. I will give you my constituency office number and

then you can leave a message there. People seem to like to do that.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

I will hand it back over to Mr. Parsons.

CHAIR: Okay.

Before we do that, before I turn to Mr. Parsons, I would like to adopt a

couple of the headings there that we have moved beyond. Particularly 1.1.01, the

Minister's Office, we have discussed it. Can I have a motion to accept that?

MR. RUSSELL: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by the Member for Lake Melville.

All those in favour, aye'.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: We are adopting subhead 1.1.01. I have asked that the intent

(inaudible) to the subheads to move them forward. That is the one that we

started with, and that has been reviewed by both.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

On motion, subhead 1.1.01 carried.

CHAIR: Subhead 1.2.01, Executive Support, a motion to accept?

So made by the Member for Lake Melville.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Opposed?

Section 3.1.01, Income Assistance; I am going to move to that now if you want

to discuss it. The other two we have had a general discussion on. I am going to

move to that

section now before we adopt.

I can move it to Mr. Parsons.

MR. A. PARSONS: Actually, am I allowed to go back to 1.2.02?

CHAIR: Not now that it has been adopted.

It is not adopted? Okay, you can go back to

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Okay, you can revert to that for discussion.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you.

I am looking at 1.2.02 Administrative Support. I noticed we have added on to

the Salaries from last year's budget to this year's budget. Are there new

positions created?

MS BURKE: Not created in this budget, but there were six new positions in

that area. They are now there and annualized, and then there are some general

increases that would be normal over the year. So, there are six positions there,

but they are not new positions that we are creating this year.

MR. A. PARSONS: What are those positions?

MR. LEWIS: Those are IM tech positions in their information management

section.

MR. A. PARSONS: Is that based here in St. John's?

MR. LEWIS: Yes, it is.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just moving forward, the same section, line 03

Transportation and Communications. That is a fairly large travel budget for

Administrative Support. Can you advise as to what this

part covers for this

specific

section of the department?

MS BURKE: The biggest component of that budget is $161,000, which is for

postage. Then our actual travel for staff there is about $16,000. So, it is

$16,000 for travel for the staff, $160,000 would be postage or freight, and then

the appeal boards accommodations or travel comes out of that as well, and that

would be about $30,000.

MR. A. PARSONS: Postage is not covered under Supplies?

MS BURKE: Postage is under Transportation and Communications.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay. That is a lot of postage.

MS BURKE: That is not all.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just moving down under Professional Services, line 05.

What professional services did we purchase last year?

MS BURKE: Professional Services here would be program audits. It would be

the payments to the board members for appeals and whatever. It would also be

money we use to set up video conferencing capacity within the department; that

cost us $65,000. It also paid for workplace safety assessments that were done.

There was also money there to do training in service excellence.

MR. A. PARSONS: The biggest portion of the unbudgeted increase would go

towards something like video conferencing, $65,000?

MS BURKE: Yes. We had budgeted $50,000. We thought we could do it for

$50,000, it cost $65,000. So we went over on that one.

MR. A. PARSONS: We have the same amount budgeted this year. Is there any

fear that we are going to have those same unanticipated overages?

MS BURKE: No. We expect now having the video conferencing network

available to us it may actually help, at some point, reduce some of the cost.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Under Purchased Services, could you provide me with a general explanation on

what this covers for this specific section?

MS BURKE: Purchased Services here would include some of our service

excellence training; our leasing costs; advertising; bank fees; shredding, which

is quite expensive; leased accommodations, which is about $3 million; then there

are copier rentals, advertising, and bank fees.

MR. A. PARSONS: When you say leased places, what are some examples? What

would be some of the places that were leased? I am just trying to get a general

idea.

MS BURKE: Say an office in

MR. A. PARSONS: We are talking like the government offices.

MS BURKE: Yes, say the office in Stephenville is not in a provincial

building, it is leased space in the community.

MR. A. PARSONS: What

section would go towards leases, or how much?

MS BURKE: It would be $2,954,700.

MR. A. PARSONS: Has there been any thought put into a way to reduce this

amount somehow? It is a big chunk of money for paying out in leases. Are there

any talks of finding a way to reduce this, maybe ownership of some sort?

MS BURKE: It is always the age old we can own buildings and then we

have the deterioration, the maintenance, the upkeep, and the liabilities that go

along with it, or we can lease. Anytime we lease, it is done in accordance with

the Public Tender Act.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am moving forward to 1.2.03, Program Development and

Planning. Perhaps starting off here because a lot of these headings are very

similar and it is easy to have confusion within this department can you

explain what this

section covers?

MS BURKE: This would cover the division that looks at the policy and the

planning. That would cover the policy and planning for areas such as our CEYS

which is the Employment Youth Services, the Labour Market Development, the

Income Support, Poverty Reduction Strategy, and the Disability Policy Office.

Those areas are falling under this.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Under the Salaries line, last year we spent an extra just under $415,000 than

was budgeted. Where did that go?

MS BURKE: That would have been the retirement cost for three staff who

retired and then the double up in their salaries because they were replaced.

That would have accounted for that part.

MR. A. PARSONS: I noticed in the Transportation and Communications line

that we have essentially doubled the budget. What is planned for this upcoming

year to account for that?

MS BURKE: There is a $192,100 increase: $60,000 is for the Workforce

Development Secretariat, which is under our Labour Market Development Division.

We also put in $30,000 that was reallocated for the Labour Market Division and

that is a combination of the actual expenses in recent years and our projected

operational requirements for this year. There is also $120,000 put in there,

additional funding, for the Disability Policy Office. That would indicate why we

increased it by the $192,100.

MR. A. PARSONS: Take something like the Workforce Secretariat, which is a

new creation, when you say $60,000, is that for the whole thing or just for

their transportation and communications?

MS BURKE: That would be for the transportation and communications for the

Workforce Secretariat. The Workforce Secretariat, in looking at this overall

page, that salary increase when you go from the budget in line 01, we talked

about why it went up last year more than what it was, but then if you look at

this year it is higher than what it was last year, and the increase is

reflective of the Workforce Development Secretariat, which is a $140,000

increase.

MR. A. PARSONS: How many positions is that?

MS BURKE: It is an ADM position and there will be positions there, but

they will be re-profiled from within. We have people who do that work. It is

just we want to set up the secretariat with that focus. It is not a lot of new

jobs as much as it is a way of organizing under the secretariat.

MR. A. PARSONS: Has this person been hired?

MS BURKE: Yes, he was in the department before we did the change. He came

in this role in August, not necessarily under that name but came in to do the

work that needed to be done on the labour market within the department.

MR. A. PARSONS: When we look at the Workforce Secretariat, I guess they

have a mandate. Would this budget for travel will they be going throughout the

Province?

MS BURKE: They may be going throughout the Province or we may be having

meetings, symposiums, or conferences where we need to bring some of our

stakeholders together as well. It would be either-or.

MR. A. PARSONS: I notice a $50,000 increase in Supplies for this budget

year. What are you anticipating there?

MS BURKE: There is $48,000 approved for the Disability Policy Office for

the Inclusion Strategy, so that basically takes in the $50,000 increase.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

For Professional Services, we see a significant jump in what was budgeted and

spent last year. What is the increase going to cover?

MS BURKE: The $295,000 increase is actual additional funding, which is

$120,000 for the Disability Policy Office and then there is $180,000 that has

been reallocated from within the budget for the Labour Market Division and that

is to reflect the actual expenditures in recent years and try to look at the

operations. So that was re-profiled, but the $120,000 was for the Disability

Policy Office.

MR. A. PARSONS: So when you say professional services for the Disability

Policy Office, is this a consultant?

MS BURKE: Yes, and that is consulting services for their campaign.

MR. A. PARSONS: They have gone out and hired this consulting company or

firm or person?

MS BURKE: They will.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Looking at the Purchased Services, there is a slight decrease and I guess

when you are looking at numbers as big as this you can call $100,000 slight.

What was budgeted for last year that was not spent?

MS BURKE: It is a $90,000 decrease and actually what it is, is $215,000

was moved from here Professional Services, $95,000; Supplies, $2,100;

Transportation and Communications, $117,900. Then we added in $125,000 for the

Disability Policy Office related to the Inclusion Strategy. So there is some out

and spread around, but some in so the actual decrease is $90,700.

MR. A. PARSONS: I guess my last subset of questions on this is just under

Grants and Subsidies. How do the grants and subsidies work in relation to

Program Development and Planning?

MS BURKE: What is the question again?

MR. A. PARSONS: In Grants and Subsidies, line 10, last year there was

$526,000 budgeted and this year there is $1.176 million. What do grants and

subsidies cover, in general?

MS BURKE: The increase there is $1,144,500. That is with the Disability

Policy Office. We have launched some strategies there that they will have for

vehicle retrofit or the access to community agencies to improve their

MR. A. PARSONS: There has been a fair amount of increases under this

section to cover the Disability Policy. What is the overall plan? This goes

toward the Inclusion Strategy, does it?

MS BURKE: It is, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: When you say community agencies, is it just offices under

this department?

MS BURKE: It could be non-profit. With infrastructure that has

their community organization, their building, accessible or events accessible to

people who have disabilities.

MR. A. PARSONS: This is money that groups can apply for?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Has this been put out there yet?

MS BURKE: We announced it, but we have not put out the actual program

parameters. That will happen shortly.

MR. A. PARSONS: Have you calculated the amount of these subsidies that

will go to groups? Is there a baseline or top amount? Is it based on what they

submit to you? Do you have a number anticipated?

MS FIELD: At this point in time, it is an estimate. The vehicle retrofit

is done on a sliding scale similar to what the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing

uses for needs-based. The vehicle retrofits can be as simple as seat adjustments

or as big as putting in a wheelchair lift. There are some estimates done on that

and the Disability Policy Office has taken a look at how much we would expect

this year.

There are also community access grants that will be available to communities

who actually have things like community events that they need to have

interpreters to come to. There is some information on that that people can apply

to as well for grants. Usually we are expecting about $2,500 to $5,000 for the

community access grants.

MR. A. PARSONS: This would cover things like ramps for buildings or other

rails and whatnot

MS FIELD: Those types of things can be considered, but they will probably

be at a higher cost than the $5,000 access.

MR. A. PARSONS: Is this something that still might be covered.

MS FIELD: Yes. That is currently being looked at now.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

CHAIR: Mr. Parsons, are you almost complete with that section?

MR. A. PARSONS: I have covered that section.

CHAIR: Okay. I will go to Mr. Kirby. We are on the Administrative Support

heading, are there any questions on that?

MR. KIRBY: Subhead 1.2.02?

CHAIR: Yes, 1.2.02.

MR. KIRBY: I do not have any further questions on that.

CHAIR: Okay.

Can I have a motion to accept 1.2.02 and 1.2.03?

MR. RUSSELL: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by the Member for Lake Melville.

All in favour signify by saying, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Opposed?

On motion, subheads 1.2.02 through 1.2.03 carried.

CHAIR: Now those headings are covered. Mr. Kirby, we go to 2.1.01, Client

Services.

MR. KIRBY: Client Services, would this be covering the salaries and

expenses for folks who are on the phone when you are calling up trying to get

information from the department?

MS BURKE: I did not get what you

MR. KIRBY: Would this include salaries and expenses and office space and

so on for your staff who are answering inquires from the public over the phone,

when they are calling the department?

MS BURKE: This would cover our four regions, so the twenty-eight offices

we have in our regions.

MR. KIRBY: Can you explain a little bit more about what they do then?

MS BURKE: They do the Income Support Program and the employment programs.

MR. KIRBY: Okay. So when folks are looking for information about the

employment program or Income Support they are calling these offices, speaking to

people in those offices.

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. KIRBY: I believe last year that there was some mention of hiring new

staff or ten new staff, I think, was referenced to cover peak times, because

constituents have been reporting that they are having difficulty getting through

sometimes. Have more staff been hired during peak times to deal with that sort

of a crush of calls that

MS BURKE: Roxie, you can answer that.

MS WHEATON: Yes, we did hire eight additional staff about four months

ago.

MR. KIRBY: Do you think that is having a suitable impact then?

MS WHEATON: Yes, actually we can see because we have strategically hired

them for times when we knew that we were not where we wanted to be. They were

hired for peak days of the week and peak hours of the day.

MR. KIRBY: Good, good. Thanks, that is great.

Looking at this line then, 2.1.01, we go to 01, Salaries. There was an

increase in expenditure under that line. Is that attributable to those eight

hirings then?

MS BURKE: No, that is attributed to fourteen staff who retired.

MR. KIRBY: That is for pensions and severance.

MS BURKE: For severance.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

Then we are budgeting less for Transportation and Communications there this

year than was budgeted last year?

MS BURKE: Yes, we have a $54,400 decrease.

MR. KIRBY: Is that attributable to something in particular?

MS BURKE: We think we can save that amount of money. As I said earlier,

we are also hoping now with the capacity for video conferencing that we may be

able to have meetings that otherwise would have incurred travel costs.

MR. KIRBY: This is using the facilities around the Province that have it,

the college

MS BURKE: This would be our own sites at this point.

MR. KIRBY: Okay, you do have that capacity?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. KIRBY: Then there is an increase in expenditure on Supplies over and

above what was budgeted last year, some $57,000, but we are budgeting less for

the upcoming year. Was there some reason why the supply costs were higher than

projected last year?

MS BURKE: It says that the additional cost was just for the various

office supplies for both the Client Services and the LMDA programming. The

decrease this year is we just anticipate it will be lower. The fact is that

sometimes the supplies vary from year to year depending on what you need and

what you purchase. It may not be a purchase year over year or as much.

MR. KIRBY: Did not use as much toner perhaps.

MS BURKE: Probably.

MR. KIRBY: Under Professional Services there is a $25,000 reduction. What

sorts of professional services are we talking about under this line?

MS BURKE: The decrease here is due to the fact that we have had workplace

safety assessments and related training done because we have a number of sites

completed, we have some to continue to complete. We anticipate that because we

have so many sites done, that is the decrease.

MR. KIRBY: What are some examples of purchased services that Client

Services make expenditures on?

MS BURKE: The purchased services would include: shredding, printing,

meeting room rentals, training and some office alterations that would have been

in relation to some of the workplace safety assessments that we had done.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

I do not have any further questions under this line. I will move to the next

one, Income Support, 3.1.01. There was an extra $1 million spent above what was

budgeted last year. Was there a particular reason for that, 3.1.01.09?

MS BURKE: We do an estimate of the caseload, and the anticipated caseload

and the cost per case per month. Our projections, to get us to the number that

was in the budget, indicated that we would have a monthly caseload of 25,000.

The actual caseload was a bit lower, it was 24,839.

We had budgeted thinking that the average cost per case would be $760, but

the average cost was $761.82. The number is based on our estimates. I guess when

you look at it, you can say it is $1 million over but when you look at the $1

million in context of the full budget and the fact that it was based on

estimates, we were fairly close in estimating what our payout would be.

MR. KIRBY: The figure for the current year, is that supposed to reflect

inflation, the increase in the consumer price index? The amount of $233 million,

is that supposed to reflect CPI?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. KIRBY: The Newfoundland Statistics Agency is projecting a 3.4 per

cent increase and that does not seem to fully account for that.

MS BURKE: It does. The base is adjusted by the 3.4 per cent, which is

$5.1 million.

Where it does not necessarily add up in the numbers is when you look at the

budget for the average number of cases and what we anticipate would be the cost

per year or the cost per month. That formula is built in, and then the increase

is put in there as well.

There is $5.1 million put in for the increase, but there is also some money

taken out that was re-profiled into Health for the dental plan. Some money came

out and went over there for that because they will be covering that cost which

was under our budget.

Based on our projections, based on the money coming out of the dental and the

3.4 per cent increase, there was actually $5.1 million added into that to cover

that cost.

MR. KIRBY: Okay. I think I follow.

There appears to be there was less revenue. That line there, 02 Revenue -

Provincial, does what you just explain account for that?

MS BURKE: Yes. That is money that comes into the provincial coffers from

the collections or set-off: the EI assignment of benefits; the Workers'

Compensation assignment of benefits; the

CPP, OAS assignment of benefits; the Support

Enforcement; and CPP assignments for burials. That is money that would come back

into the program.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

Sometimes you will have people who are seeking Income Support who have no

fixed address. They are couch-surfing or what have you. How does the department

deal with those incidences when you are trying to provide an Income Support

allowance to somebody who does not have a postal address or a telephone number

even?

MS BURKE: They could pick up their cheque or they could have it through

Direct Deposit.

MR. KIRBY: So, are they

MS BURKE: Or they could provide a mailing address. It may not be where

they are living, but it could be a relative they could trust who would get the

cheque to them or whatever.

MR. KIRBY: They could potentially pick up their cheque at any of these

Client Services sites?

MS BURKE: Well, or the one that they are dealing with, yes.

MR. KIRBY: Yes.

I know this was asked previously, and I fully do not understand the

department's current policy with respect to Income Support clients who went off

CPP at age sixty. I am just wondering, is that policy fully enforced now that

Income Support clients do not have to apply for Canada Pension?

MS BURKE: That will be on July 1.

MR. KIRBY: That will happen on July 1.

Let's say that I turn sixty and I will not on May 19 of this year, which

is my birthday, would there be any recourse for me? Because the current policy

would say that I have to go to CPP, but is there something I could do to avoid

getting dinged there, to be grandfathered under the new policy?

MS FIELD: I gave the minister the employment transitions date. The CPP

people can apply to wait from age sixty. Instead of getting Canada Pension at

age sixty, which we require, they can now wait for that. We have actually

eliminated the recipients to apply for this.

Some individuals may have already applied, and we have been in contact with

the federal government to look at how we are going to approach some of that.

They can opt to return the payments that they have already received. As far as

we can tell from contact with the federal government, there is actually no

penalty associated with after applying and then going back and saying we are not

going to, we are going to take that back. Is that what your question was?

MR. KIRBY: Sort of. Just if I could probe a little bit further. If I went

on CPP last year, is there a way that I could turn back time and go under the

new policy for July 1 now, or after

MS FIELD: The July 1 is not that date, sorry.

MR. KIRBY: Oh sorry.

MS FIELD: As far as I know there is no way in which you can do that, if

you apply.

MR. KIRBY: You cannot go back?

MS FIELD: No, I do not think so. It is a go forward.

MR. KIRBY: I think that would make sense. It would be more difficult I

think otherwise.

Under 3.1.03, Mother/Baby Nutrition Supplement, the actual program would be

the Allowances and Assistance, under 09. That would be where you are spending

funds on the actual program. That was down considerably. It was budgeted for

$420,000 and there was $282,600. Is that because there was a fairly significant

lack of uptake as was projected? Subhead 3.1.03.09, Allowances and Assistance.

MS BURKE: That is down basically because it is demand driven. The benefit

is on the demand. That may vary from year to year, but it is down just because

there just were not as many applications for it.

MR. KIRBY: Do you have numbers to compare, say, the previous year's

uptake to that year's uptake to what you are projecting for the upcoming year?

MS BURKE: We would have the number of people who drew down on it. We did

not adjust the budget because we would want to keep the budget so that if there

was an increased demand, that we would cover the cost for it.

MR. KIRBY: How many individuals will we be able to help with $420,000?

MS BURKE: The threshold for people who apply for it are people who have

an income of less than $24,183. Then what they would collect would be $60 a

month while they were pregnant and $90 for the month that the child was born.

When you add up that, it would be eleven times $60, if you apply and know you

are pregnant in the first month that you are pregnant, then $90 for the twelfth

month. Those numbers divided into the $420,000 if everyone maxed it out from

month one to month nine, would give you the total number that could draw down on

that.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MS BURKE: Yes, we are not going to run out of money. If there is more

demand, we would reallocate money from it. It is just that we think that would

be it. If you took $60 times eight and you had $480 plus $90 is $570. So $570

divided into $420,000 would give you the number if everyone applied who had an

income threshold of less than $24,183 in any given year.

MR. KIRBY: Because there are fewer individuals who applied than was

budgeted for, is there a way or is the department looking at ways to encourage

additional applications to this to see if there is an unmet need out there that

MS BURKE: We can always look at our policies and review and see that if

there may be a better way to meet the needs. It could be just that there was

less people in that income bracket who were pregnant last year.

MR. KIRBY: How is it marketed now? How is the information made available

to people now, expectant moms?

MS WHEATON: We work very closely with physicians across the Province,

prenatal clinics, anywhere really that we know that parents, expectant moms,

hang out. We also do regular mail out. It is very well promoted, particularly

over the past few years.

MR. KIRBY: Would women who are Income Support clients receive that in a

mailing or anything like that?

MS WHEATON: Individuals in receipt of Income Support but where this

program is not directly marketed to Income Support recipients, we would use

other ways of getting information to individuals whose income threshold meets

the target group.

MR. KIRBY: It would just seem to me that it would be a particularly

useful program for women who are receiving Income Support.

MS WHEATON: Yes, our staff on the Income Support Program, once they

become aware that a recipient is expecting, they would in fact notify them

immediately and have our staff contact the individual.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

CHAIR: Mr. Kirby, are you good on that section?

I am going to go back to Mr. Parsons and I am going to let you go back to

2.1.01, any questions you may have on the Client Services, where you did not

complete that if you are good on that, we can move forward.

MR. A. PARSONS: I am good on that one.

CHAIR: Okay. I am going to ask for a motion to accept 2.1.01.

MR. RUSSELL: So moved.

CHAIR: So moved by the Member for Lake Melville.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Opposed?

Motion carried.

On motion, subhead 2.1.01 carried.

CHAIR: We will go right to Mr. Parsons, under Income Support.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you.

Just a couple of questions there: Under the Income Assistance, last year how

many people in this Province received income assistance?

MS BURKE: The monthly average caseload was 24,839.

MR. A. PARSONS: Do you have any projections in the department whether you

think this number will increase or decrease?

MS BURKE: A very slight decrease.

MR. A. PARSONS: We have heard about some poverty reduction monies under

the Department of Advanced Education and Skills, would that be under this

section, or what

section would that be under?

MS BURKE: The poverty reduction initiatives would be reflected under

Allowances and Assistance, so it would be under line 09.

MR. A. PARSONS: So this year, part of this increase, we are going from

$228 million budgeted last year to $233 million so this accounts for the 5 per

cent increase?

MS BURKE: That takes in the 3.4 per cent increase for 5.1; it also takes

out of the budget $740,000 which goes into Health for the dental program. It

increases $500,000 for the people who no longer have to apply for CPP at age

sixty, and it also includes $195,000, which allows us to extend the earned

income supplement for some clients.

MR. A. PARSONS: Just moving on to 3.1.03 again, the Nutrition Supplement.

It sounds like you budgeted $420,000, it is there if you need it, and last year

we used $282,600. Do you have the numbers there for what was used the year

before? Was it higher or lower?

MS BURKE: It was down $50,000 or $60,000 the year before.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Just a question on the program itself; if an expectant mother found out later

about this program, are they able to backdate or apply retroactively?

MS WHEATON: No, it is from the date that we receive notification. That is

my understanding. I can confirm that for you.

MR. A. PARSONS: If I am an expectant mother and I am not aware of the

program for whatever reasons, and I find out about it halfway through the

pregnancy, I cannot apply and you backdate me? Again, I am a low-income family.

I cannot get that money?

MS WHEATON: It is more complicated, because the benefit is administered

through an arrangement with the federal government. So, there is an application

process there. I will confirm for you as to how far we can go back because it is

based on your income level in the previous year, your taxation income. There are

a couple of variables that have to be factored in, in the application process. I

can confirm that for you, if you like.

MR. A. PARSONS: If that is indeed the case, is this something the

department can consider? It might be a way of making sure people get this I

guess they are entitled to it. It is just a matter if they actually do it on

time. Maybe this is a policy the government can consider to make sure these

expectant mothers get the full benefit they are entitled to.

MS WHEATON: Yes, I would have to confirm it, in terms of some of the

technicalities around the benefit.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Thank you.

I am going to move forward to

CHAIR: If I could just interrupt. I am not going to take any of your time

away, but while we are on that

section I would like to have a motion to accept

section 3.1.01 to 3.1.03.

MR. RUSSELL: So moved.

CHAIR: So moved by the Member for Lake Melville.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

On motion, subheads 3.1.01 through 3.1.03 carried.

CHAIR: We still have seventeen minutes here.

Mr. Parsons.

MR. A. PARSONS: A very good Chairperson. I just had to put that on the

record.

Employment and Labour Market Development, 4.1.01; from reading the

description there, this is monies provided to help Income Assistance clients try

to obtain or keep employment. There are big amounts of money there for Grants

and Subsidies. Who actually receives the grants and subsidies, is it people or

is it groups?

MS BURKE: The grants and subsidies, there are grants to agencies and then

there are wage subsidies, like through NL Works or the Linkages program. It can

go to the agency but directly to the individual.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

The agency is the middleman?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Somewhere there must be a list of agencies from last year

and what they received?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Would we be able to have that information?

MS BURKE: There would be 241 employers and then the Linkages grants.

MR. A. PARSONS: Is it just me or is it my headphone is not working?

CHAIR: Let me check with Hansard there, the Broadcast Centre. Okay, it is

working there now.

Okay, thank you.

MR. A. PARSONS: Could you repeat that, Minister, please?

MS BURKE: Yes. There are 241 employers that received money, say under the

NL Works, to hire. Do you want a list of the 241 employers?

MR. A. PARSONS: If I could.

MS BURKE: Okay.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you.

I noticed last year the budget put aside there was $3.3 million of that

budget that was not spent. What accounted for this?

MS BURKE: Do you want to explain that? That is the supportive living

piece.

MS FIELD: There was a

Supportive Living Community Partnership Program that we have transferred to

the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. That took up the major

decrease in that.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

A major decrease, was there anything else not that was $3.3 million. The

aspect that was transferred, how much of the $3.3 million did that cover?

MS BURKE: All but $50,000; $50,000 was transferred up to Allowances and

Assistance. The rest was for less than anticipated uptake in supportive housing.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

This year's budget is down significantly from both what was budgeted and

spent last year. What is the reasoning behind this?

MS BURKE: We have almost $5 million that is transferred to Newfoundland

and Labrador Housing for the supportive living. That takes the bulk of that

change there.

Also, through our 3 per cent exercise we reduced some of the programs based

on the slippage that we were experiencing in those programs. That would be the

NL Works program, the Linkages program and the business development program,

which is the bulk of that part, $675,000.

We noticed last year they had not spent that money. So what we advanced them

this year was $125,000 and we kept back the $675,000. They had issues with staff

illnesses and they were not able to continue with that program. That program can

continue but we did not need to advance that much money. There was slippage

there.

MR. A. PARSONS: Things like the Employment Assistance Services, does this

fall under this heading, EAS offices?

MS BURKE: No.

MR. A. PARSONS: What

section does that fall under?

MS BURKE: That would fall under the next section.

MR. A. PARSONS: Line 4.1.02?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

I may as well move over to that section, if I might, specifically as it

relates to EAS agencies. We know they have extensions on their contracts in

March. What is budgeted for them for the remainder of the year?

MS BURKE: At this point we extended the contract for the six months,

which is $8.7 million. Then as we move through this year and look at how we need

to allocate the LMDA, we will be making some decisions on how we further

allocate.

We looked at the first six months. We want to make sure, as we do this, that

we keep our focus on how do we get people attached to the labour market? That

will all come into the mix of how we allocate on a go-forward basis.

MR. A. PARSONS: So, we are talking office closures and job cuts?

MS BURKE: What we want to make sure is that the money we have under the

Labour Market Agreement helps individuals attach to the labour market. When we

look at all of the different areas that we have for this level of programming

and we look at what successfully gets somebody attached to the labour market,

that is where we need to focus, just based on the gaps that we are going to

experience in the labour market. So at this point we do not maybe everything

we do and as we do it is perfect and everyone gets to do training and gets back

to school and gets attached to the labour market, but we inherited this program

and we want to look at it and make sure that as we allocate the funds, that it

does help us with the labour market.

MR. A. PARSONS: The six-month extension, what does that bring them up to?

Is it October?

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: When do you anticipate making the decision or figuring

out what the plan is going forward?

MS BURKE: We do not have a date set, but it is an ongoing evaluation that

we are doing within the department to see what are the needs and again, it

goes back to the Workforce Secretariat. It is looking out for the future. It is

being able to make sure that we understand the needs and are people able to

access the training and the skills that they need. It goes beyond that too is

our apprenticeship program user-friendly to people and how can we improve it.

It is all about we are at a time in our history where our labour market has

changed and because something has been done historically for so many years and

factors have changed, so is the way we have always done things the most

efficient way. That is what we are trying to look at.

MR. A. PARSONS: The department has had to have done some looking into

this. I mean, it is something that you said you inherited it; you guys have

looked at it. Do you think there is going to have to be office closures and job

cuts here? Is that what you think is going to happen?

MS BURKE: There are so many different areas under the LMDA that we need

to look at, and that is only one part of it. We have wage subsidies, we have

JCPs, we have the Self-Employment Assistance, and we have the labour market

partnerships. It is not as easy as saying one piece is not the way to go, do

JCPs give us the best results? Those questions have to be answered. If someone

works on a JCP, are they more likely to attach to the labour market on a

permanent basis as opposed to somebody who goes back and studies in skilled

trades? That kind of information we need to look at. That all falls under this.

MR. A. PARSONS: I get a lot of calls from people at the EAS offices and

they are still worried now because they have a six-month extension, so they are

already looking forward to October. There is the possibility that they might be

found redundant or whatnot. Is that the case, in October?

MS BURKE: We are going to look at everything. It may or may not I

cannot say. I would not want to get here and say things that may or may not

happen. As a new department we need to make sure that we do what we can to make

people have the skills and the opportunity to attach to the labour market. Now,

how that falls out at the end of this year and at the end of next year will be

an ongoing piece of work. It will also depend on the labour market and the gaps

and the demands that are there.

It even begs the question: Just because somebody gets funded for training,

what do we do if we have people who pick areas where we know the labour market

demand is not there? Do we continue to spend money and say they have every right

to have that money, and then we look at the labour market shortage and say we

are going to bring in temporary foreign workers because we just spent $10

million, it is just that we trained people in jobs we knew were not going to be

available.

It is a complicated piece of work. It is not as easy as saying: If somebody

comes in, regardless of whatever they want to do, we will fund them to do it

versus how do we position the Province. It is difficult.

MR. A. PARSONS: Would part of this process be that you guys are looking

at reducing costs somehow?

MS BURKE: Not reducing costs because the money is there. What will

benefit the people who are looking to attach to the labour market the most? That

is the question.

The LMDA money is there. There is no benefit for us to say we are not going

to spend $2 million, $3 million, or $10 million out of the LMDA no benefit

whatsoever. The money is there. It is just we want to make sure as we spend it

we are giving people the opportunity that there are real jobs out there that

they can benefit from.

MR. A. PARSONS: Is there a thought process within the department to go to

a more regionalized approach?

MS BURKE: In what way?

MR. A. PARSONS: Make people travel from one area to another to get the

same services.

MS BURKE: Well, the services that primarily shake out of this would be

training services. They would have to go to wherever if you wanted to do

non-destructive testing, you have to go to Port aux Basques. We can do the

application process and we can approve your funding, but we cannot offer the

program everywhere.

MR. A. PARSONS: No, more along the lines of: If I am in Port aux Basques

and I want to go speak to somebody, whether it is at the Career Information

Resource Centre or the Port aux Basques CEC, and these offices were closed, so

these people would have to go to, say, Stephenville or Corner Brook to do this.

That is what I am worried about.

MS BURKE: No, I would think there is a fair amount of work that is

application-process driven and that may include face-to-face, or it may not. The

key component, though, to this would be the fact that if you want to do Adult

Basic Education, or you want to do pipefitting or whatever, some people go to

the College of the North Atlantic, some people go to private colleges, and a lot

of people have to travel, like if you are going to university or whatever you

are doing. There is nobody under any model who should not be able to do their

application conveniently without travel; but, their services, they may have to

travel.

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes, I understand. They might have to travel to go to

school. That is a reality.

MS BURKE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: To take

part in the first aspect of this whole procedure,

going and meeting with someone and talking about this, if I have to travel one

hour-and-a-half to two hours over the highway that is an inconvenience. That is

something to prevent them from possibly going through with it.

MS BURKE: Actually, under the worse possible scenarios, they would have

to see nine staff people in different locations. The way it is set up now, you

have to see at least two people at two different sites. We may have sites set up

in some of the more rural communities, but that is only part of your

application. You will still travel, say, to Corner Brook, if you are in Pollards

Point, for services.

To go through your application process now, you see more than one person in

more than one site. If there are any changes, you will never travel any more

than what you would done for part two of your application process. If you are

doing your training, I do not know where you are going to go. That depends on

what you are interested in and where it is offered and the calendar.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Do I still have time?

CHAIR: No, I am going to ask you to conclude on anything on 4.1.02, not

go to 4.1.03 and we will go back to Mr. Kirby.

MR. A. PARSONS: Can you repeat that?

CHAIR: If there is any other last question, you may have on 4.1.02

MR. A. PARSONS: I have lots of questions left on 4.1.02.

CHAIR: Heading 4.1.02.

MR. A. PARSONS: I can let Mr. Kirby go ahead and come back to it.

CHAIR: Yes.

Mr. Kirby, we are on the Employment and Labour Market Development.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

The minister mentioned that the workforce has changed and there are gaps in

the labour market. I think everybody will remember back around January 1999, for

example, doing an IT program would have seemed to be a great idea back then

because of all the concerns around the Y2K business and all of that.

I remember I had many cohorts at university who, instead of doing this or

that, were planning to go to one college or another to do IT. It turned out in

the end of course the bottom fell out of it, the dot-com crash, et cetera. We

had a real serious problem. We had a lot of people trained for positions for

which there were none.

I am wondering, how is it that the Workforce Secretariat is going to be

establishing what these gaps in the labour market are? How are skill shortages

in Newfoundland and Labrador identified or going to be identified by the

department?

MS BURKE: Pam?

MS TOOPE: We released the Labour Market Outlook in July past, which

actually outlines demands for the next ten years. The Workforce Secretariat will

work with employers in the coming year to make sure that is kept updated. There

are demand projections available now.

MR. KIRBY: That is where the research comes from?

MS TOOPE: Yes.

MR. KIRBY: I know we are sort of talking about apprenticeship trades.

There are sixty recognized trades here in Newfoundland and Labrador, but there

are a number for which there is no training provided.

Is there any discussion of having additional training for trades for which

either the College of the North Atlantic or other providers do not provide any

training right now? If you want to do those trades it is all out of Province. Is

there is going to be any move to providing additional trades training in the

Province?

MS ENNIS-WILLIAMS: The department is continually in conversation with

industry. The Provincial Apprenticeship and Certification Board as part of its

mandate, oversees regular interactions with industry to find out what the need

is for industry. Adjustments and opportunities for new plans of training are

brought into consideration within their agenda as it is required.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

That would include new trade areas then that we do not recognize at all now.

I believe Ontario has over 140 designated trades at the moment, but we have less

than half of that. If our workforce is changing, then one would assume we would

not only provide training for additional trades but to recognize additional

trades.

MS ENNIS-WILLIAMS: Again, the Division of Apprenticeship and Trades

Certification does provide trade certification for trades within the Red Seal

designation. Because a plan of training is not available in the Province does

not necessarily mean an individual cannot receive designation or certification

for that here.

MR. KIRBY: Now, one thing I was interested in, and I do not know if it

comes under here or not so I will ask it. Are programs that relate to a support

co-op education training in Newfoundland and Labrador specifically, I am

thinking about the SECPAP, I believe it is called, and the ANVIL program. Where

do they fall under in the expenditures here? Where are SECPAP and ANVIL?

MS BURKE: What programs specifically were you asking about?

MR. KIRBY: The Small Enterprise Co-op Placement Assistance Program and

the Advancing Non-profit and Voluntary Investments in Learning program. Are they

not provincially-funded programs?

One would support co-op placements for small business and the other one would

be for more the community and voluntary sector. I think ANVIL is relatively new.

MS FIELD: Mr. Kirby is that the program administered by MUN?

MR. KIRBY: I think both of them are at the university, but does the

college not have access to those as well? They would have significant co-op

offerings as well.

MS FIELD: Yes. The co-op programs might be a little bit different than

the ANVIL program. It comes in separately in separate proposals.

MR. KIRBY: Would they be under grants and aids to institutions then, or

would they be funded through separate grants?

MS BURKE: Under 5.1.01, under Grants and Subsidies

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

MS BURKE: there would be a number of employment programs there. There

would be $3.9 million for what we would consider other Student Work And Services

Programs. So under that, money there would go to MUN and the college.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

Under 5.1.01.10 Grants and Subsidies, there is $3.9 million for other Student

MS BURKE: Work And Services Programs.

MR. KIRBY: Other Student Work And Services Programs. Would you be able to

tell us then what the amounts are for those two programs? Are they separate, are

they combined?

MS BURKE: We would not have that number offhand.

MR. KIRBY: You would not have it offhand. Because I am interested in

whether or not it was increased or decreased relative to last year, whether we

have more funding for co-op education programs this year or less.

MS BURKE: There are no changes from last year to this year.

MR. KIRBY: No change.

Would I be able to get some data then showing the number of applications, the

number of businesses or organizations that participated and the number of

students who participated in the most recent year?

MS BURKE: The university would administer that. We would give them the

money, but they would do the administration, collect the applications, and

process.

MR. KIRBY: If you hand the money to the institution, is it assumed that

you are giving it to the institution for a certain number of co-op placements?

If I give you $100,000 and say, well that is for fifty students, or

MS BURKE: Well, they would produce an annual report which would outline

that they did their work. If we gave them the money and they came back there

were no students placed, well, they probably would not get it the next year. We

give it to them on the understanding there is an agreement. Then they process

and administer, and then they produce an annual report.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

If you provided the grant or the subsidy or additional funding to them, there

are a certain number of students based on what their proposal is. If that number

of students was exceeded there would be no additional funding. If that number of

students was significantly or was somewhat less or was less, there would be no

claw back, no adjustment?

MS FIELD: Most of the programs that come in under the youth services I

cannot speak specifically to the ones that you talked about actually identify

a target number that they will try to get to, and staff will actually work with

the organization if they have not expended the money to look at ways in which to

increase the volume.

For instance, some of the programs might have a target of 100, but because of

slippage, somebody may not have finished, they actually can take in extra

students. That will be something that certainly is looked at favourably.

Normally, there is no money left at the end of the day.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

This $3.9 million for other student work and services programs, does any of

that go to College of the North Atlantic then for their co-op program?

MS FIELD: Yes, it does go to the College of the North Atlantic for their

paid placements as well.

MR. KIRBY: Are there any funds provided to the private training

institutions under this? They may have co-op programs.

MS FIELD: No, there is nothing provided to the private training.

MR. KIRBY: If I wanted to know how many participants there were in

programs funded through this envelope, I would have to go directly to the

institutions to get that information.

OFFICIAL: Yes.

MR. KIRBY: I know this year at Memorial there was a bit of a problem with

engineering co-op placements due to a number of different things. I believe

there is a double cohort of engineering students this year seeking co-op

placements. Then also the university has seen fit for various other labour

markets or for the sake of its own foothold in the post-secondary education

market they have increased the number of seats in engineering programs.

Did the department in the end provide additional funding to the university to

help that problem?

MS FIELD: Last year, through some funding we had through the LMDA, there

was extra funding put forward to help the engineering cohort. The budget at this

point in time is similar to last year without that extra money.

MR. KIRBY: So we are not anticipating that problem to arise again next

year, then?

MS FIELD: There is no indication to date.

MR. KIRBY: Good.

Are you aware of other examples, then? Other than the SECPAP and the ANVIL,

are there other programs that are part of that? Can you name other programs that

comprise that $3.9 million?

MS BURKE: Money goes to the Community Youth Networks and to the

non-profit SWASP.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

I am going to let you go back there, Andrew I am going to just skip over to

4.1.05, Employment Assistance Programs For Persons With Disabilities. Under 09,

Allowances and Assistance, I am just wondering what programs are funded under

there. I guess some of this is with the new I will let you explain.

MS BURKE: The decrease was $728,000 and that was lower uptake on some of

the initiatives and lower expenditures for clients under the training services

and the supported employment.

MR. KIRBY: Do you have any concept of how many individuals that are

funded under there? I guess there is a variety of different programs, are there?

MS BURKE: Pardon?

MR. KIRBY: There are a variety of different programs under that

Allowances and Assistance?

MS BURKE: Do you want to assist with that?

MS FIELD: We will have to get the exact number; I do not have that with

me at this point in time about the exact number of clients that were served

underneath this.

MR. KIRBY: I would be interested to see that. We will follow up with you

about that.

Under 10, Grants and Subsidies, I guess I am wondering if these are grants to

community agencies again.

MS BURKE: The increase there would be to the community agencies and the

increase is to adjust for the salary increase for the unionized employment

corporations. It is a twenty-five cent an hour increase for the support workers

that was implemented on July 1. That is the increase.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

Maybe this was already asked, but I do not want to miss it: Are we able to

get a list of the various job creation program subsidies, where those Job

Creation Partnership grants went? By electoral district, I think that was

something we had talked about at some point.

MR. A. PARSONS: That is what I asked for.

MR. KIRBY: Some of us were more fortunate than others.

MS BURKE: Yes, we will give you the list of 115 approvals.

MR. KIRBY: We can get a list broken down that way? It will be interesting

to see.

MS BURKE: I think it has already been requested, has it?

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes.

MR. KIRBY: Oh, has it been requested?

MR. A. PARSONS: I requested it, yes.

MS BURKE: Andrew is getting it.

MR. KIRBY: He does not share with us.

MS BURKE: Write him and ask him. No, you can write us.

MR. KIRBY: I am not sure where this falls. The Poverty Reduction Strategy

we were talking about the Poverty Reduction Strategy. For the new initiatives

under the Poverty Reduction Strategy, that would fall under AES?

MS BURKE: The ones that fell under AES, and we have covered them, was

when we did the Income Support portion and we talked about the increase. It was

a 3.4 per cent increase for the $5 million for the increase in Income Support

rates. It was the $195,000 for the expansion of the Earned Income Supplement.

Then there was money that was taken out that went into health to cover the

dental and the $500,000 for the CPP. The initiatives under AES under poverty

reduction, we covered under the Income Support.

MR. KIRBY: That is all? There is nothing further beyond that?

MS BURKE: That is our department's initiatives under poverty reduction.

MR. KIRBY: Yes.

MS BURKE: They were reflected in that part that we did on the Income

Support, that page, and we outlined them. They were our poverty reduction

initiatives.

MR. KIRBY: If there were any new initiatives for seniors under poverty

reduction, would it come under this department?

MS BURKE: No.

MR. KIRBY: Where would that be?

MS BURKE: It would depend whether it was housing or health. On average,

this department typically does not deal with seniors. Now I am not saying we do

not deal with seniors, but typically when people hit sixty-five they move off

the Income Support Program. Typically, under the LMDA and our employment

services seniors would not necessarily be the cohort that we work with. Not that

we could not provide services to seniors, our department does not have a focus

on seniors.

CHAIR: Mr. Kirby, can I interrupt? I would like to go back to Mr. Parsons

here.

MR. KIRBY: I am sorry.

CHAIR: He had some extra questions on the Employment and Labour Market

section.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you.

I am back to 4.1.02, Labour Market Development Agreement. We have $540,000

less budgeted for Salaries this year than last year. What is this attributed to?

MS BURKE: There is $714,000 that is due to vacant positions or just the

delays that it takes in doing the recruitment.

MR. A. PARSONS: Are there any vacant positions that are not being

refilled or being eliminated?

MS BURKE: No decisions. I know we will go through an exercise and look at

our core mandate, but for the purposes of this Budget we have not eliminated any

positions.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Under Transportation and Communications there was a fairly big jump from what

was budgeted to what was spent last year. What made this up? It went from

$22,000 to $311,000.

MS BURKE: Do you want to speak to that Pam?

MS TOOPE: That would have been from salary savings that were accrued.

Benefits in the Salaries would have been reallocated to provide support to the

regions in delivery, staff, and travel. Any monies that we are able to save do

get redirected to the regions for operational supports.

MR. A. PARSONS: Was there more travel that took place last year than was

planned?

MS TOOPE: In this case there might have been training and/or services

they were providing that were not planned for.

MR. A. PARSONS: Would this be part of the whole devolution process?

MS TOOPE: Yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Professional Services, what were the professional services that were

purchased or obtained last year?

MR. LEWIS: That is the cost of access to the federal computer system that

is used for the delivery of the LMDA at present.

MR. A. PARSONS: It is going to cost less this year?

MR. LEWIS: It is budgeted for less, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Last year, what was the overage for Purchased Services

made up of? I think we were about $350,000 or so over? Again, would that be

extras that came from the devolution process?

MR. LEWIS: Yes. Basically under the LMDA, when we went through the

devolution we were given $8.7 million a year to administer the LMDA. Usually,

the costs are higher than that. So the cost of delivery in the regional services

is really we had no money for it and it is an issue of absorbing the costs.

If there are savings in other areas under the LMDA administration piece,

which is the $8.7 million, it provides us with an opportunity to charge some of

the costs that we are incurring anyway to deliver the LMDA to this particular

area so that we get the full federal revenue.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Under Allowances and Assistance, what is covered here?

MS BURKE: Under Allowances and Assistance we cover the skills

development, the job creation partnerships, and self-employment assistance.

MR. A. PARSONS: There was roughly $5 million less spent last year than

budgeted. How were those savings obtained?

MR. LEWIS: What happened there: there was a shift between the Allowances

and Assistance and Grants. The Grants actually went up by $5 million and

Allowances and Assistance went down. It depended on the types of projects and

where the money needed to be directed.

MR. A. PARSONS: What is the difference there between Allowances and

Assistance, and Grants and Subsidies? Just so I know for myself.

MR. LEWIS: Allowances and Assistance is benefits and financial supports

directly to the clients. Grants and Subsidies is support to community agencies

and to employers. There is a shift, depending on the various projects and so on.

You budget the best you can but you may end up with a higher demand from one

side than the other from year to year.

MR. A. PARSONS: When you break it down, it is not actually more spent. It

is roughly the same; it is just A or B.

MR. LEWIS: Right.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

I am just wondering, the budget this year mentioned $2.1 million which is

made available for investment under Workplace Skills Enhancement Program. It

goes into what it does. It helps address labour market conditions funded through

the Labour Market Agreement. Can you give me more specifics on what the actual

enhancement will be?

MS BURKE: What number?

MR. A. PARSONS: It is not actually in numbers. It is just a question that

I have taken out of the budget per se. Maybe it is under a different section. I

thought it was under this one.

MS FIELD: Can you just repeat your question?

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes, certainly.

Under the budget for this year there was $2.1 million made available for

investment under Workplace Skills Enhancement Program. It says that it was

funded through the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Labour Market Agreement and

the Strategic Training and Transition Fund.

MS TOOPE: Under the Labour Market Agreement, we actually provide funding

to the Department of Innovation, Business and Rural Development to deliver that

program. It is a new program they introduced through LMA funding.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

It is the money from this department but that department will

MS TOOPE: Administer and deliver it.

MR. A. PARSONS: That is just for this budgetary year?

MS TOOPE: No, while the LMA has been in place. It is actually under

section 4.1.03 is where you would find the funding for that.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Under 4.1.03, what part?

MS TOOPE: A combination. They would have mostly grants and subsidies.

Some of it might be supplies; some of it might be operational supports for the

delivery.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Are there extra positions created out of this?

MS TOOPE: IBRD would have to speak to that one specifically, the details

of it

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Just for my own knowledge, what is the Strategic Training and Transition

Fund?

MS TOOPE: That was funding that had been in place up until this past

fiscal year from the federal government, from economic stimulus funding. It was

all categorized and called together in our explanations.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Now, just so I am on the same page here, this is the

section where the Job

Creation Projects fall? JCPs, is this something

MS TOOPE: (Inaudible).

MR. A. PARSONS: That is under 4.1.02. Is there a projected decrease

percentage-wise in the number of JCPs being awarded this year?

MS BURKE: No.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

We have had our discussions on the JCP process, I am just wondering again,

I put it on the record that I have requested a list of the breakdown. You said

there is $6 million allotted for JCPs. Is that for the entire year or is that

for this round of applications?

MS BURKE: This round.

MR. A. PARSONS: This round. Will that entire $6 million be spent?

MS BURKE: I will say no, because there are probably going to be slippages

or it goes to community organizations. They could encounter a problem where they

are unable to process it or something happens and somebody quits near the end

and it is not worth their while to continue with something. There are always

things that happen where they do not necessarily spend their full amount, but it

is all allocated.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

The next round the deadline was last week I believe now what is the pot

of money set aside for that, the summer JCPs really?

MS BURKE: Around $4 million.

MR. A. PARSONS: These ones are the ones primarily associated with

tourism; you have your job sites and stuff. Is there any reason for the lower

amount of money for these ones?

MS BURKE: There are three times a year that we do the application

process. The ones now that we just got in will be for the fall. It goes $6

million, $4 million, and $3 million around that six-point something,

four-point something. Those would be the three allocations throughout the year.

MR. A. PARSONS: This one we just got in, say, Friday, those are not for

the fall per say those are for the summer, aren't they?

MS BURKE: Yes, but that would be

MR. A. PARSONS: June until fall.

MS BURKE: They would go into the fall, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

If you might enlighten me, what is the process that is being followed for

JCPs in terms of application, to decision making, to notification?

MS BURKE: The applications go into the local office and there is a client

services officer who reviews the applications and does a ranking based on their

area. Then it goes to the regional manager. The regional manager then takes the

regional approach. Everyone who reviews the applications has a number one, so

the region has to put in their master list. Then the master list comes into a

provincial list. So you have four number ones, they do the ranking from that

point. The allocation is based on our regions on the EI payout. If the Western

Region has 30 per cent of the EI fund, 30 per cent of the applications based on

the ranking done by staff is allocated.

MR. A. PARSONS: I will use the Western Region, so the office in Port aux

Basques collects all the ones from under their purview. They rank it one through

whatever based on the ones they have taken. Then those are compared to, say, the

ones from Stephenville and Corner Brook.

MS BURKE: The regional staff would do that regional ranking, yes.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

Then the final decision is made in here, though. You guys make your decision

based on what comes into this assessment process.

MS BURKE: The regional rankings come into the provincial staff who then

rank them on a provincial basis. Then the allocation goes based on the

proportion of that region that pays into the EI fund. So we go through the list

and if there is 30 per cent going to go to the Western Region, well when you go

through the list the 30 per cent of that list that was ranked the highest would

go. That is the selection process.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

One of the things that I am hearing from some of the groups I know there is

not enough money to cover off every group; that is obvious. Some of the groups

are telling me that they are not getting guidance on where they might have been

unsuccessful. I have had one group that said they got a JCP for five years in a

row and then all of a sudden they did not get one. They are wondering what

happened, what made me for five years be successful and this year not be

successful, and they are talking about they are not getting enough direction

from the lower end of that process.

MS BURKE: There are two things that could happen for that to happen. One

is that another group may apply and the competition may be different for the

same amount of funding in the Western Region. The other thing is we are going to

offer some workshops to organizations. Because some have become very good at

doing applications, to the detriment of others who probably have very good

projects and provide an excellent work experience, but do not have the capacity

to put in the appropriate application.

We want to try to level the playing field a little bit, so it should help

people who, for some reason and sometimes boards change and staff change and

the quality of the application may change with that, or some organizations may

not understand the process or have the capacity. So, we do want to provide some

workshops to help organizations understand the process and what a quality

application is. Now, in saying that, if we bring the quality of every

application up, we still have to do a selection.

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes.

MS BURKE: So, if the quality increases across the board, there is still

only so many dollars to be distributed. It is always going to be a selection

process, unfortunately.

MR. A. PARSONS: So, would one of the reasons for not getting funded and

I am trying to paraphrase what one group was told: We cannot fund you forever.

So what I am wondering is that seems to have less to do with quality of

application or job, as opposed to well, we have given you money before for X

number of years, we are not going to give it to you any more, just based on that

fact. That is what is being communicated to some of them, which leads to some of

the frustration.

The other

part is that some of these people on the lower end are saying:

Well, how come we did not get it? They are being told: Well, because of the

budget. I guess what I am trying to do is I am trying to work to something that

hopefully benefits everyone, because some of these groups, they are relying on

it, they want to make the best case possible, but they are not getting the

proper guidance on the lower end of what would make them more successful.

MS BURKE: Do you want speak to the matrix that we use for the ranking?

MS TOOPE: In the JCP program, the matrix we use to do the assessments

take into account a wide variety of factors. The dependency or the repeaters is

just one criterion that goes into it. There is a whole list, mostly based upon

demographics and local, regional issues, unemployment rates, and that type of

thing that goes into the matrix.

MR. A. PARSONS: Again, that comes back to the confusion of some of these

groups. You have received correspondence from some of these groups. I will use

the Rose Blanche Lighthouse as one specifically. They have been very successful

in what they have done. They have actually tried to expand but they never got

theirs. That was one of the reasons they were told: We cannot keep funding you

forever; we have to fund other people.

I did not know if that was the main reason or if there were other things

behind it. It is not being communicated to them, which always leads to

frustration.

MS BURKE: There may be other options for employment to help some of these

agencies, but not necessarily through JCP.

MR. A. PARSONS: Maybe that is something, too. Some of these groups, like

you say, are more successful or better at it than others. That comes down to

them being notified: Look, you are not successful here, but why not try this,

which comes down to those workshops and everything else.

The second part to this JCP thing is: Is there any consultation? The ones

that are being looked at now, you just got them in, the majority of them deal

with the tourism industry. Is there any consultation with the Department of

Tourism?

MS BURKE: The application process starts at the local level. They may, in

doing their assessments, look at what is needed in the community or how things

unfold. They do not have to phone the Department of Tourism to assess an

application, but in doing their assessment, if there is merit to something or

they are trying to understand it, they may. There could be consultation done

with a town council. It would depend on the project.

MR. A. PARSONS: I have heard from some Department of Tourism officials

and they said they were a bit frustrated because they would have a very good

idea, just looking at a region, this one might need this and this one might need

that, and they are not being consulted in the process. They would have a better

grasp on it. They are in the department, but they are not being asked by, say,

the first-step person who receives the application.

MS BURKE: Yes. It is a little bit across mandates because JCP is to help

people attach to the labour market and provide the work experience that they

need.

Tourism, I am not saying it would not be a benefit because we do have and

will continue to fund lots, but it is not all about tourism. There has to be a

balance. We also think that for a lot of these tourism industries, whether it is

profit or not-for-profit, there are other avenues there to be able to access

employment programs that might be more applicable than an entitlement to a JCP.

MR. A. PARSONS: Yes. Is this something again, this might be beyond the

scope of what we are doing but I have the opportunity, I hope I can use it. Is

this something maybe where we could work together? We could

schedule meetings

between the department - because it is a new department - and individual

stakeholders in a region to discuss this issue or situation. What we do on it

going forward - because you hear the same thing every year. The same thing came

up last year. You have these groups that are disappointed, and a lot of them are

not privy to what I am hearing right now. It would be nice to it is more of an

information

MS BURKE: We have regional managers and regional directors and employment

counsellors and hundreds of staff out there who can work with any of these

agencies and help. From a communications perspective, we can work with our

regions to ensure that they can open those lines of communication better.

MR. A. PARSONS: Like you say, if JCP is not the appropriate step, what

could we do to maybe ?

MS BURKE: The JCP program is rooted primarily in the EI fund and people

who pay into EI to be able to help them attach to the labour market. That is the

true meaning of what JCP is. We have kind of spun it to: well, our tourism

operations need JCP funding. Well, JCP funding comes from the EI fund.

MR. A. PARSONS: That is the problem, is that these groups we have all

gotten away from this, and if these groups do not know that then, like I say, a

session where we are all put on the same page would help all of us.

MS BURKE: Right, because we do have other employment programs available,

whether it is NL Works, Linkages, or SWASP. There are other things there that

may be a better link than always depending on this application process for job

creation.

MR. A. PARSONS: Okay.

CHAIR: Mr. Parsons, I am going to go back to Mr. Kirby now. We can come

back to this

section for you again. You will get another opportunity before the

MR. A. PARSONS: I am done with 4.1.03, just for your record.

CHAIR: Okay, perfect. I appreciate that.

Mr. Kirby.

MR. KIRBY: Line 4.1.06 Case Management System Development. What is the

status of implementation of this system and how much longer are we going to be

implementing it?

MS BURKE: Do you want to speak to that David?

MR. LEWIS: The project is temporarily on a hiatus. We are evaluating

additional requirements and alternatives. There is no project team at the

moment. The project team completed their work during the past winter.

At this point, there have been software and hardware acquisitions. Most of

the business requirements have been documented. There has been work on trying to

figure out how to integrate with FMS system in the Department of Finance and so

on.

At this stage we are doing further work on our business transformation in the

department and so on. Until that work is done, the project has more or less been

suspended. It is expected it will start up again later on in this fiscal year.

MR. KIRBY: We are still spending $3.5 million on it.

MR. LEWIS: We have $3.5 million budgeted for this year, yes, but at the

moment we are not spending anything. Today, we are spending zero. As the year

proceeds and we get through the business transformation piece and address these

other issues, which OCIO is engaged in at the moment, then the expectation is

the project will restart later on during this fiscal year and then we will

proceed on.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

Was that a recent development, the decision to press pause on that?

MS BURKE: It was going down the road of a different department. Now we

have a new department, and how do we integrate our services? The new system has

to be current for the new department. Until we have the business transformation

of how we do business in an integrated way, we do not want to proceed with this

until we have that piece done first.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

That would explain the under expenditure under Professional Services there,

would it? There was $4,796,000 budgeted but there was only $1,475,000

expenditure.

MS BURKE: Right, yes.

We said okay, let's bring the department together; let's do what we need to

do. Then we budget the money this year and we anticipate that as we go through

the business transformation process we will continue, but we will not spend it

if we are not ready. We are not going to create a new system unless we know what

the expectations are from a departmental perspective.

MR. KIRBY: These professional services, they would be what else beyond IT

consultant fees?

MS BURKE: They would be consultant fees for a new system.

MR. KIRBY: Okay. So we just do not have the capacity to do that

internally?

MS BURKE: No, not at all.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

I am going to jump over to the next page. The first thing here, 5.1.02 Youth

Retention and Attraction Strategy, there are no funds allocated because we are

all done. Maybe I missed something, but was there any statement of the outcome

of this strategy? What was achieved?

MS BURKE: Yes, it was a three-year strategy that has come to an end. What

we did as a department was it helps inform the policies that we develop from a

youth perspective. It goes into where our needs are. That would be employment

programs, like the co-op programs. It would look at how we allocate funding for

student employment. What our priorities would be for youth regarding, say,

preparing youth for the labour market, whether it comes into our tuition freeze

or it looks at the College of the North Atlantic.

We did the strategy. We certainly looked at what we need to do to attract

young people to the Province and how to retain people. A lot of the work that we

have now should be incorporated into our policies, specifically within this

department, but certainly across government as well.

MR. KIRBY: Was there ever a document produced that said: Okay, now we

know the answer, this is how we retrain and attract youth. These are best

practices?

MS TOOPE: We are still compiling final year-end reports from some of our

community agencies that have been involved. We anticipate a full report after we

get all the data in, some time after June and over the summer, for the

two-and-a-half years the strategy was implemented.

MR. KIRBY: Okay.

The Office of Youth Engagement, is that something that came out of this? Was

that an outcome?

MS FIELD: What we are looking at with the Office of Youth Engagement is

actually combining some of the services that were currently being offered by the

CEYS Division Career, Employment and Youth Services with what was YRAS. That

will happen over the next few months.

MR. KIRBY: Where is this represented in here? Is that under 5.1.01?

MS FIELD: Yes.

MR. KIRBY: That is where the budget for the Office of Youth Engagement

is.

Going over to 6.1.01, Office of Immigration and Multiculturalism, under

Grants and Subsidies are we talking about grants for language training or for

the Association for New Canadians? Explain what sorts of grants and subsidies

are provided.

MS BURKE: That money is specifically for projects they would do in

relation to immigration in the Province. I know $48,000 went into food and craft

fairs, for instance. It is project-based funding there.

MR. KIRBY: Well, thank you because there is quite good food at some of

those. It is hard to get good chicken shawarma in this Province.

I am wondering, then: Is there an overall strategy when it comes to

attracting skilled immigrants or for providing settlement services?

MS BURKE: Yes, and we still have the $355,000 there. We also have a

number of staff who work at the Office of Immigration. We have fifteen positions

at that office. We also have under this division the Provincial Nominee Program.

That is where people apply and they are nominated to come into the Province for

different skill sets.

What it does not cover is the Temporary Foreign Workers Program. We do not

administer that program. There is a difference between immigration and the

Temporary Foreign Workers Program.

MR. KIRBY: I know we talked a lot about apprenticeship already, 7.1.01 on

page 8.12. We talk a lot about modernizing systems and approaches in government.

There is a plan to add pre-apprentices to the system, are there plans to further

modernize the department?

MS BURKE: There are. We had a forum here in St. John's in March, and on

Friday we had a combination of three regional forums. We can look at the system

and I will back that up even more. We have had significant internal

discussions as well with the College of the North Atlantic, through this

division and the College of the North Atlantic, identifying some of the issues,

but more importantly, talking to the stakeholders, not just to identify the

issues but to suggest what we could do differently.

We want to make sure that as we move ahead, if there is red tape or if there

are policies or processes that we have in place that may have been there for a

very good reason at one point in time but are outdated or no longer meet the

needs of our apprentices or the system, we want to be able to make some of those

changes.

Two things that we have well, within our Budget announcement, was more wage

subsidies, but the other thing is a tracking system we want to set up to be able

to track people as they move through the apprenticeship program. Right now, they

register, but we do not provide any support. If they come out of school and they

have a lot of difficulty finding that first job, we do not provide any

significant support at that point, and we want to get more involved in a

tracking system to see where we need to intervene and provide supports.

We may have people out there now: women, Aboriginals, people with

disabilities; we have workplace diversity plans set up how are they connected

to that? So, if we can track people who may have barriers, we may provide the

services through government. They just do not know about it. So, it is being

able to provide services to people who are not moving through this process on

their own comfortably.

So that was one, and the other thing is we want to also provide some funding,

not just for the apprentices but we are going to look at providing a mentorship

program for journey persons so that people may be able to find work in

environments where there would not have been a journey person, or the journey

person may be able to supervise a work site where the skills are there but there

was no one to sign off the books. So we want to also implement that side of it

as well.

MR. KIRBY: I am not sure how that is going to really work, though, that

mentorship program. So you are talking is that a wage subsidy program then?

MS BURKE: It would be more of a contract for the journey person than a

wage subsidy.

MR. KIRBY: Then that is journey persons who are already on a work site?

MS BURKE: No. It would be places where apprentices could get the work

experience they need, but there is no journey person to sign their books or to

supervise their work.

Let me give an example.

MR. KIRBY: Yes.

MS BURKE: Right now, we could, based on our ratios, bring in a team to

build a house: carpenters. Based on the ratios right now there is a journey

person carpenter on that team, he or she can only sign off the books of two

people. There may be a team of five or six building that house. Everyone gets

the same experience, everyone is advancing through the same skills, and the

other couple does not get their book signed.

We may be able to add a journey person to that work site who can come in and

who can do some supervision or skill development with some of the people. It may

be the case of where a local garage may hire somebody to do work on a car, doing

mechanical work. They may have staff who have worked there forever, but they are

not journeypersons. They can provide the experience, but no one can sign off the

book.

The person takes the job, they are going through the skill development, but

they have no way to get the credit for their hours and advance through. We may

be able to help out there as well. Places where there would be no journey person

but people are getting the work experience, but they cannot advance through the

system.

MR. KIRBY: The ratios are in place to ensure quality of workmanship,

professionalism in work and to some extent as I understand it, for safety

reasons. Maybe that is ancillary I do not know, but it is certainly to ensure

the quality of the craft and maintenance of the trade and various approaches to

work. Couldn't this be perceived as sort of a back door to circumvent their

requirements for journey person to apprentice ratios?

MS BURKE: We have had in some of our discussions at our forums there is

obviously not a lot of agreement on the ratios. Anything that we implement,

whatever the policies of that day are, would have to be followed.

We would not be able to say if you follow the regular program, an electrician

is 1 to 1, but we are going to do 5 to 1. This is to help people who are getting

the appropriate work experience to advance through their block training from one

point to another, who would not have access to have their books, the

supervision. We are going to do it within the policies; we will not be outside

the policies.

MR. KIRBY: Whom is the department going to be consulting, then, when it

comes to the plan for all of this? Is it just the apprenticeship certification

board, or are stakeholders going to be consulted more broadly than that?

MS BURKE: The stakeholders would be very much a part of it. If we are

doing this, say, in any employment, we cannot send somebody into your workplace

or work without your permission. The apprentice would be part of it; the

employer would be part of it. Then if there are any other stakeholders in

relation to that work site, they would also be part of the process. No employer

is going to have a journeyperson knocking on their door saying I am here to work

because the government hired me. It will be done in consultation partnership.

MR. KIRBY: Sure. I am just thinking about journeypersons themselves

seeing this as somehow undermining the rules and regulations that are in place,

vis--vis the ratios. They have some stake in that as well, right?

MS BURKE: Well, not really, because the ratios are established. People

may like it or not like it, but they are established by the apprenticeship

board.

MR. KIRBY: Sure, but if you have a worksite that has one journeyperson

carpenter and four carpenter apprentices, you can only really have one to two,

and you are talking about bringing in somebody under a separate contract that is

not going to be there full time. Are you saying they will indeed supervise the

work of those additional two apprentices to the same extent and degree that the

person who is there full time would?

MS BURKE: Well, we would work with the employer. There is going to be an

agreement on this. We are not just going to because there is no benefit to put

somebody through without the appropriate level of supervision and skill

development. They have to go do the block training and write a test and keep

going. We cannot set them up for failure either.

There has to be a certain standard that is met or we are doing nothing only

putting people through a system that they are going to go fail because they do

not have the work mastered to pass that level of exam and go to the next level.

MR. KIRBY: Isn't trade qualifier really an avenue for them anyways? Those

people we are talking about who do not

MS BURKE: We do not have a lot of people who challenge the trade

qualifier exams.

MR. KIRBY: Yes. Well, we will see how it all works out.

The other thing I wanted to ask was regarding research. I do not know what

year it was, I did not look at it this morning, whether it was 2007 or perhaps

it was prior to that, the department was under Education at the time, but

wherever apprenticeship was located there was a survey carried out on

apprentices themselves. I ask because I think this sort of research is really

important for informing the sorts of things that you are talking about.

In particular, the one thing that sticks out to me is that women apprentices

reported the primary reason for them not completing their journeyperson

certification was because they were caring for a family member, whether it was a

child or elderly family member. Of course, it always falls to, or quite

frequently falls to women. I am just wondering: Has the department any plan to

continue to do that sort of work, to follow up with individual apprentices to

find out about their own situation? Because I think that is really important.

MS BURKE: Yes. The tracking system should help us be able to track what

happens with apprentices. One of the numbers that led us to wanting to implement

the tracking system was that somebody leaves what we call the pre-apprentice

training at nineteen, then they have to understand the process and they have to

find the jobs. I have no problem with that.

There are some who experience barriers. Then we have programs set up, such as

our Wage Subsidy Program. Right now, they have to approach the employer and

explain the program, and approach the department, apply, and try to bring it

together. A lot of people who were expecting to do that are people who have

barriers.

The tracking system should help us pick up some of those people and provide

the supports they need to make some of these things happen for them. We should

be able to do a better system on a day-to-day basis of tracking individuals.

The average age of people doing training in skills is nineteen and the

average age of an apprentice is thirty-two. There is something happening between

school and apprenticeship that we need to be able to track and be able to

address some of those issues.

CHAIR: Mr. Kirby, I will go back to Mr. Parsons.

Mr. Parsons.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you.

I am going to apologize here. I do have a couple of more questions under

4.1.03.

CHAIR: Sure.

MR. A. PARSONS: That specifically relates to the consultant who was

hired, Mr. Noseworthy. I have just looked through the contract and I want to

clarify some information. I know the amount reported was $140,000 but going by

this contract, the contract could actually be valued at $150,000, correct?

MR. LEWIS: My recollection of the contract, it is $140,000 in this

current fiscal year and $10,000 in the previous fiscal year.

MR. A. PARSONS: This contract was signed on March 14. What work was done

from March 14 to year-end? That is when the $10,000 was?

Either way, I am right in saying that the contract which was reported as

$140,000 is actually $150,000. He is getting $150,000, possibly?

MS BURKE: I would have answered it from the perspective of this fiscal

year.

MR. A. PARSONS: I would look at what was reported in the news as what he

was g