May 13, 2008

Social Services Committee

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

CHAIR (Mr. Hutchings): I would like to welcome everybody to the Estimates

this morning, and welcome the Social Services Committee. This morning we will be

reviewing the Estimates of Municipal Affairs.

Before I get started, there are just a couple of housekeeping issues.

Normally what we do, the minister will have ten or fifteen minutes to make some

opening comments and I will ask him to introduce his staff. As well, I will ask

the Committee to introduce themselves and then we will proceed into questioning

on the Estimates. We can go for approximately fifteen minutes for the Committee

members and I guess you can rotate back and forth, if that will suffice.

Right now I will turn it over to the minister to make some comments, and then

I ask you to introduce your staff.

When witnesses are giving responses to questions, I ask, for the purpose of

Hansard, if you could identify yourself each time before you respond, and you

can refer to Committee members by their actual name.

Minister.

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the Estimates Committee.

I am pleased to be here today to present the Estimates of the Department of

Municipal Affairs. I have some brief opening comments, following which we will

be pleased to respond to any questions that you may have on the department's

Estimates.

Before I go any further, please allow me to introduce the staff members of my

department, and the executive who have joined us here this morning.

To my immediate left is Mr. Baxter Rose, Deputy Minister. Next to Baxter is

Gerry Antle, Assistant Deputy Minister of Engineering Services; Bill Duggan,

Assistant Deputy Minister of Employment Services; Ms Marilyn McCormack,

Assistant Deputy Minister of FES-NL, responsible for the Business Continuity

Plan; Mac Blundon, Manager of Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements; and,

Paul Forristall, Manager of Financial Operations of Municipal Affairs.

OFFICIAL: Denise.

MR. DENINE: And I am waiting to get a hold of my communications

person; they didn't put Denise's name down my Executive Assistant,

Denise Humphries.

Mr. Chair, the Department of Municipal Affairs continues to support our

Province's municipalities through substantial financial support,

infrastructure development, legislative tools for municipalities, and training

for elected and appointed officials to ensure greater professionalism at the

local government level.

We fulfill our department's mandate by working in partnership with several

key stakeholders: groups such as Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador, the

Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Municipal Administrators, the

Association of Fire Services, and the Combined Councils of Labrador.

There are several areas which may come up for discussion this morning.

Capital works commitments: government will increase its capital budget

commitments by $34.4 million annually, for a total provincial commitment to

$84.3 million per year. This results in a provincial investment of municipal

infrastructure of $252.9 million for 2008-2011, an annual increase of 69 per

cent.

New cost-sharing, Mr. Chair: as I recently announced, starting April 1, 2008,

the new cost-sharing ratios apply only to new projects funded in 2008 onwards,

and cannot be applied retroactively. The new cost-sharing ratios will provide

streamlined and simplified approaches to accessing capital works funding on a

go-forward basis. The ratios are as follows: 90-10 for populations less than

3,000, which are 258 municipalities in Newfoundland and Labrador, 31 per cent of

the provincial population; 80-20 for populations between 3,000 and 7,000, and

that is sixteen municipalities and 14 per cent of the provincial population;

70-30 for populations greater than 7,000, and that is nine municipalities, and

the nine municipalities make up 43 per cent of the population of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

Local Service Districts would also qualify for funding supports on approved

projects. Together with federal and municipal investments, the annualized total

investment in municipal infrastructure will be approximately $135 million.

Funding is also targeted to the municipal infrastructure investment strategy,

including: $4 million to begin eliminating untreated sewage outfalls; $7 million

for strategic projects such as the Corner Brook water treatment facility, the

Happy Valley-Goose Bay sewage treatment facility, and we will also have $5.5

million to proceed with the implementation of the Provincial Solid Waste

Management Strategy for our Province of Newfoundland and Labrador; $6 million

for the development of innovative methods for providing potable drinking water -

and that was recently announced last Friday - especially to residents of small

rural communities that may not have the fiscal or human capacity to manage the

large scale water treatment plants, in co-ordination with the Department of

Environment and Conservation; and, $1.7 million for firefighting equipment.

The department continues to pay down capital costs to construction rather

than finance long-term debt. In 2007-2008 MRIF and CSIF programs did not

generate the anticipated cash flows, so you may have noticed lower anticipated

spending last year. This is due in part to projects being approved but not yet

completed, and payments not yet made. These issues will be addressed by the

department in the new fiscal year.

Also, two large scale projects being funded under CSIF, the Corner Brook

water treatment plant and Happy Valley-Goose Bay sewage treatment plant, have

not received final federal approval, which resulted in the delay of construction

schedule and hence no payments towards the cost of these projects.

In 2007-2008, expenditures under the gas tax program were less than

anticipated due to funding allocated to the Waste Management Strategy not yet

utilized. It is expected that all funding will be utilized in the coming fiscal

year because we will be spending more this year than we did in previous years.

Community Enhancement Programs: over the past several years Municipal Affairs

was tasked with administering a number of employment support programs. In

2007-2008, $6.4 million was spent in support of Community Enhancement Programs,

and a further $425,000 was managed by the department but charged against the

Fishing Industry Renewal budget of the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

These expenditures reflect the investment to assist workers in many rural areas

of the Province, as well as special measures to assist workers affected by

restricting the fish processing sector.

Budget 2008-2009 provides approximately $4.6 million in the Community

Enhancement Program, which includes an increase of almost $600,000 to cover a

recent increase in the minimum wage. There was an additional $350,000 carried

over from 2007-2008 to cover final payments of these projects completed in

2007-2008, for which the final project audits could not be completed before the

Province's accounts were closed in 2007-2008. The total of 2008-2009 is $4.9

million, including the $350,000 carry-over.

Fire and emergency services: Mr. Chair, fire and emergency services, FES-NL,

was established in April 2007 and is tasked with the implementation of an

emergency management strategy designed to develop and maintain a modern and

robust emergency management system in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

FES-NL is primarily responsible for both the provision of emergency

preparedness, emergency response, planning, training, and for a leadership role

in co-ordination and delivery of fire protection and fire prevention services

throughout the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

In addition, the agency is leading the development of a provincial Business

Continuity Plan for the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. During the

fiscal year 2007-2008, FES-NL maintained the primary focus on organizational

renewal, the development of improved capacity in areas of policy analysis,

development and information management and regional emergency planning. Budget

2008-2009 provides resources for continuation of these initiatives for increased

levels of activity on both the emergency management and fire protection sides of

the agency mandate.

Mr. Chair, I thank you, and I and my officials will be pleased to respond to

any questions that come forth.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Before we proceed, I will just ask the Committee to introduce themselves,

from my immediate right. Could we start there?

MR. KING: Good morning.

Darin King, MHA for Grand Bank.

MS SULLIVAN: Good morning.

Susan Sullivan, Grand FallsWindsorBuchans.

MR. CORNECT: Good morning, Minister, and everyone else.

Tony Cornect, Port au Port.

MR. COLLINS: Felix Collins, Placentia & St. Mary's

MR. BUTLER: Roland Butler, the District of Port de Grave.

MS MICHAEL: Lorraine Michael, Signal HillQuidi Vidi.

MR. LOVELESS: Elvis Loveless, Opposition staff.

CHAIR: I am Keith Hutchings, MHA for the District of Ferryland. I should

have introduced myself at the beginning, I guess.

I will now ask the Clerk to call the first heading.

CLERK (Ms Murphy) : Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01. carry?

Okay, Committee, questions?

Mr. Butler.

MR. BUTLER: (Inaudible) and have the opportunity to go through a few

liners, I guess, and then a few questions besides that.

To begin with, heading 1.1.01., under the Minister's Office, with regard to

Salaries, I was just wondering how many positions that entails, and probably a

brief rundown of what they may be.

MR. DENINE: In the Minister's Office?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. DENINE: Well, obviously, myself.

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. DENINE: There is a secretary to me. There is my executive assistant

and deputy minister, and a secretary for the deputy minister. That is

all-inclusive in the minister's suite.

MR. BUTLER: Under 06., Purchased Services, I was just wondering if you

could explain what that might be, the Purchased Services there under the

Minister's Office.

MR. DENINE: That reflects basically the printing, photocopying, leasing

and entertainment costs.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

The other one is 07. and, if you don't mind, on the same page, or in our

book it is the same page, under Executive Support - like, for instance, under

07. in each one of them, Property, Furnishings and Equipment -

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. BUTLER: - it shows nothing budgeted, and there is nothing budgeted

again this year. I was just wondering, it must be something just came up on the

MR. DENINE: What happened there, Roland, is that, when we moved to the

fourth floor - we were down on the lower floor - and that is the cost associated

with moving up to the fourth floor.

MR. BUTLER: Very good.

MR. DENINE: That is reflective, I guess, in a lot of the Estimates there.

As you go down through them you will see that, and that is probably the answer

to all of it.

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

You have all my questions taken away from me, look.

MR. DENINE: I have taken half your questions away now. We can go home

now, Mr. Chair.

MR. BUTLER: Under 1.2.02., Administrative Support, under 03.,

Transportation and Communications, last year I am not going to answer,

because I think probably I know what it is, even though I am asking the question

- it was budgeted at $67,000 and it went to $187,000.

MR. DENINE: Wait now, $67,000?

MR. BUTLER: It was $67,800 and it went to $187,200, number 03.,

Transportation and Communications.

MR. DENINE: I thought you were down in the other one. Which one are you

on?

OFFICIAL: The next page.

MR. DENINE: The next page?

MR. BUTLER: Under 1.2.02. I am sorry about that.

MR. DENINE: This increase reflects the payment to the Municipal

Assessment Agency. There was a grievance procedure which was $126,000 for

thirty-six employees, $3,500 each, and also lower communication and travel

costs. That is because of the one-time settlement with the Municipal Assessment

Agency.

If you want an explanation of that, I will pass it over to my deputy minister

and he can

MR. BUTLER: No, I guess I was wrong. I though you were going to tell me

it was due to the storm last year, and the transportation costs which I know

would have been up anyway because everybody was going everywhere at that time.

MR. DENINE: No.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

Going to just a few other general questions now, has there been an

independent environmental assessment done on Robin Hood Bay recently, or within

the not-too-distant past?

MR. DENINE: Yes, there was. There have been two reports. There was a

report done by the City of St. John's and then there was a peer review on that

in terms of whether or not Robin Hood Bay can be retrofitted and lined

comparable to an engineered landfill. Basically, there were two, one that St.

John's did and there was a peer review to support that.

MR. BUTLER: I know we have heard so much about the teepee incinerators

and the timeframe. Has any permission be given to continue operating beyond

December 31? I know there was some confusion over that a little while ago.

MR. DENINE: No. Roland, that is under the Department of Environment and

they control the dates. It is not under Municipal Affairs. Those closure dates

are Environment, so Conservation and Environment would be the ones to ask that

question in terms of that.

MR. BUTLER: With regard to the Avondale Town Council, what is the status

of that town now considering last year the town was shut down for a period of

time?

MR. DENINE: The last number of years - you are right, I just wanted to

get clarification before I moved on - we had an administrator in there to take

over and I think that was for two years, a year and a half.

OFFICIAL: Last summer.

MR. DENINE: Last summer. Right now we are in the process of getting an

election there in that community again. So we are moving forward with that

process.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

I think it was last year in the Estimates meeting, the issue of regional

governments - I do not want to use the word that was used years ago, too bad

amalgamation.

MR. DENINE: What is that word?

MR. BUTLER: We had the amalgamator. I know the minister said last year, I

think, that there were some thirty-some odd communities that were considering

coming together, not all in the one area now, I do not mean it that way. I was

just wondering: has anything developed on that recently? Will we see anything

advancing in the future?

MR. DENINE: Well, I hope so. That has been probably one of the areas I am

looking at in terms of regional services coming together, the number of fire

departments, the number of people looking at water treatment, et cetera, and

snow clearing and garbage collection. We have seconded one of our employees, Mr.

Keith Warren, who will be basically charged with that, to go out and have

dialogue with those people who are looking at coming together, those who want to

share services. He has taken the lead role on that and he has been in it now I

would say three weeks.

Just recently I spoke to the symposium, MNL, in Gander, and one of the things

I mentioned was that we had seconded Mr. Keith Warren to go out and talk to

municipalities, to those who wish to engage in regional services. I talked to

him after the dinner and he said, I wish you did not have to say that. About

four or five people came to him in different parts of the Province: can we talk

to you about some of these?

We are aggressively pursuing it, and again you are right on in terms of

whether or not the amalgamation word is not there, because that is not part of

our mandate.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Chair, I was wondering how I was doing for time, because

the other day they had the clock working and we knew then we were running out.

CHAIR: No, you are doing fine.

MR. BUTLER: I am fine, okay.

CHAIR: You can carry on with another question and after that you can

probably

MR. BUTLER: You can cut me off anyway.

CHAIR: Okay.

MR. DENINE: If I am going on too long, you can cut me off.

MR. BUTLER: No, no.

MR. DENINE: I do not mind that.

MR. BUTLER: So you said we would move now, my time is up?

CHAIR: You can have another question and then we move.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

One of the other questions I had, Minister: we all know the terrible

situation in Daniel's Harbour with the landslide down there.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. BUTLER: I was just wondering if you can give us an update on that.

What was the cost of what did happen there? I know the road had to be changed or

whatever.

MR. DENINE: I am going to make a few general comments on the whole

disaster thing first, and then one of my staff will give you the details on

that.

We have had a number of disasters over the last number of years, and right

now I am very confident in the fact of the system that we have set up and put

in, FES-NL, that on a go-forward basis we are going to be much more efficient in

getting things out and making sure things are done.

In Daniel's Harbour we have progressed very, very fast. Just to give you an

idea how, not only in Newfoundland and Labrador, but how it gets slowed down in

Canada: when I was at the Fire and Emergency Services meetings, FPT meetings, in

Halifax in January, they sent out the last cheque. If you can remember the big

sleet storm in Ontario, ten years after that they had the last cheque. I mean

there are a lot of hoops to get through.

As far as I am concerned, as the minister responsible, God forbid if

something ever happens and I hope I do not even have to call upon anyone

but we are in a good position to make sure things flow a lot better.

Mac, do you want or Marilyn, whichever?

MR. BLUNDON: Currently, in terms of costs, total costs to date that we

anticipate will be $8.5 million. The largest piece of that work will be the $6

million that has been budgeted or allocated for a six-kilometre bypass road that

is going to be put in. All the properties that were in the exclusion zone have

been taken care of now. There are still a few projects to be done up there, but

they should be all finished this year, we are anticipating.

MR. BUTLER: Just along that line, if I have a few seconds.

CHAIR: Yes, go ahead.

MR. BUTLER: You are talking about emergencies and that, and I just want

to make a comment on last August when we had the storm. For the life of me I

could not think about it, and I asked my hon. Colleague.

AN HON. MEMBER: Chantal.

MR. BUTLER: Chantal.

All I could think about was the one they had down in Alabama. That was bad

enough, but seriously, even at that time, through EMO and through the Fire

Commissioner's office, I thought it was excellent the way things unfolded. I

know my area was not hit as hard. It was pretty bad in the meantime, but

probably not as bad as it was in the Placentia area. I know I called in one

time, because a lot of the people who were out there did not know where they

were going or what they were doing. I called in, and I do not know who I spoke

with. I know I spoke with the Fire Commissioner and they graciously came out and

had a public meeting at the Bay Arena, which was excellent, because I would say

half of the people walked out halfway through the meeting, when they knew what

it was all about. Everyone was after something and they did not know where they

were going. I just want to compliment the department and whoever was involved in

that at that time because even though it is not similar to Daniel's Harbour,

an emergency like that and people losing their homes, it was pretty devastating.

MR. DENINE: I think that was the fear of me coming on and being minister,

to make sure it happened properly.

CHAIR: Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Maybe I can follow up on those same points, just to get a little bit more

information. I agree: from what I observed, things really seemed to have gone

well in the last couple of emergencies that we had to deal with.

Has everybody now, who has put in claims, been reimbursed; individual

families in particular and businesses too?

MR. DENINE: No, I do not think that everyone is paid, that the claims are

paid, and I will refer it back to Mac. I appreciate both your comments and your

compliments to the staff and I think they have done a great job. Mac, do you

want to?

MR. BLUNDON: I think at the last count there may have been about

thirty-five claims, personal, individual ones that are still ongoing. There have

been a few quirks in terms of the adjustors getting their work back. We are

hoping to have those clued up within the next month.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much.

MR. DENINE: That is pretty fast.

MS MICHAEL: It is pretty fast, yes. I am impressed.

MR. DENINE: That is why I say, Lorraine, moving forward, that I am very

comfortable in trying I do not even want to talk about disaster, because I

hope it does not happen, but if something unfortunate comes, I think we are well

prepared for it.

MS MICHAEL: Right. How many claims where there all together in the last

one? How many claims were there all together? You said you have thirty-five

left.

MR. BLUNDON: There were approximately 900.

MS MICHAEL: Wow! That is great. That is really good.

If I could, then, come back to the discussion of Robin Hood Bay. I would just

like to get a bit more information on the studies you referred to. Obviously, I

have a very specific interest in Robin Hood Bay.

MR. DENINE: I am sure you do.

MS MICHAEL: I still have constituents with concerns about the decision

that was made around Robin Hood Bay.

You mentioned two studies, Dave. One was done by the city and the other one,

you said, was a peer?

MR. DENINE: The peer review. Gerry, who did the peer review?

MR. ANTLE: The study done through the City of St. John's was done by a

consultant local engineering firm, Kendall Engineering, in association with

Gartner Lee, an environmental engineering firm from Ontario. The peer review was

done through the Department of Environment and the consultant they utilized was

AMEC engineering.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

MR. ANTLE: There were two studies done on determination of the

equivalency of Robin Hood Bay to meet the lined standard of the Department of

Environment.

MS MICHAEL: We have the St. John's one but I do not think we have that

peer review one. So it should be the Department of Environment I should be going

to, to get more information on that, and not your department?

MR. DENINE: They are the ones that take the lead on that part of it. We

also say it is an engineered landfill. Roland, do not forget the engineered

landfill. I am afraid one of these days I am going to say a dump and you are

going to kill me out there.

MR. BUTLER: The one I am talking about is.

MS MICHAEL: What about a waste management site?

Anyhow, I think I have one more question. With regard to the overall analysis

then that was done, Dave, with regard to the final decision, was that located in

Environment as well or did your two departments work together on the final

analysis and decision around Robin Hood Bay?

MR. DENINE: That would be a combination of all three departments, wouldn't'

it?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. DENINE: That would be a combination.

MS MICHAEL: So you worked together.

Was there an actual analysis that was done and put down on paper besides

these reviews?

MR. DENINE: Gerry.

MR. ANTLE: There were two studies performed. There was an internal

analysis done at each department. That is all I know. I do not know the total

details of the analysis.

MR. ROSE: The City of St. John's engaged their consulting firm to make

a determination as to whether or not Robin Hood Bay could be retrofitted to

provide equivalent to lined protection. Their study demonstrated that it could.

The Department of Environment, as being the regulator and setting the standards

for landfill operations, would not accept the city's engineering report simply

at face value. They did not have a problem with it but it would not be a

practical or a prudent method to establish public policy on the basis of one

interest group. The Department of Environment commissioned a second peer review.

AMEC international conducted an independent review and confirmed the findings of

the City of St. John's environmental study.

On the basis that we have two independent engineering firms identifying that

Robin Hood Bay does in fact meet the equivalent to lined standards then the City

of St. John's were given the authority to go ahead with an exhaustive program

of testing to prove the basis on which Robin Hood Bay was equivalent to lined.

There were two independent studies done, and then there was detailed testing

which confirmed the preliminary studies.

MS MICHAEL: That is really helpful.

MR. DENINE: If I might add Lorraine, if you wish the City of St. John's

has a very good presentation that shows you exactly what they have been doing.

If you want that the City of St. John's can get that for you.

MS MICHAEL: I think we have that one in the office. I do not think we

have the peer review, but we will get that from the Department of Environment.

Thanks a lot. That is helpful, especially how Baxter put it together there.

I will do some line by line now, since I have a few here. I will not repeat

anything that my colleague did here. Where did you end?

MR. BUTLER: 1.2.03. I skipped that one because it is furnishings.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, that is straight forward. That is furniture.

If we go to 2.1.01, under subhead 06, Purchased Services, the budget in 2008

was $91,400, then it was revised up to $125,700 and now this year it is up to

$241,400. What are the expected services that you will need to purchase under

that?

MR. DENINE: That reflected the increase in higher office rent, and that

is to our regional offices. Is that the one I am looking at?

MS MICHAEL: 06.

MR. DENINE: 06.

MS MICHAEL: So it is all a reflection of higher office rent?

MR. DENINE: Yes. Is that the one?

MR. ROSE: The increase there from the $91,400 up to $241,400 is a

$150,000 increase.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MR. ROSE: That is additional funds that have been put into our budget.

Roland's question earlier about regionalization initiatives: the department

has put an additional $150,000 in our budget to hire some contractual staff to

assist in regionalization initiatives and to pay for various commissioner

hearings and studies.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

MR. DENINE: The other one was the 06 I was looking at.

MS MICHAEL: No problem. That is why you have a DM.

MR. DENINE: That is why I have him here.

That goes back to Roland's issue about the regionalization.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Thank you very much.

Under 2.2.01., Policy and Planning, appropriations provide for the policy and

planning function of the department, support to municipalities undertaking

regional co-operation initiatives, et cetera.

The Grants and Subsidies, subhead 10., do you sort of maintain $74,000 as

what you would like to have available? Because I notice in 2008 it was $74,000,

you only spent $24,000, and you are budgeting $74,000 again, so it is sort of a

base that you keep there in case needed?

MR. DENINE: Basically, the decrease reflects the non-payment of grants

due to delays in receipt of grant requests.

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MR. DENINE: Several requests have not been received as of April 2008,

thus not paid out in 2007-2008, so that will be carry-over. It includes funding

for the Municipal Training and Development Corporation. Basically, that is to be

carried over into the other years, so we will need that money.

MS MICHAEL: Right, yes, that is what I was assuming. Thank you.

Under 2.2.02., Urban and Rural Planning, which is developing and implementing

policies, providing advice and training to municipalities, investigating

boundary changes, et cetera, I thought I would use that head as a way to get

into some discussion around the provincial land use management plan. What is

going on in the department with regard to the land use plan?

MR. DENINE: Well, we have the St. John's rural-urban planning act; that

is the regional plan that is being done now. That is to all the stakeholders in

the whole area, the Avalon area.

MS MICHAEL: That is the Northeast Avalon?

MR. DENINE: The Northeast Avalon, yes.

Also, too, we are looking at the Humber Valley.

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MR. DENINE: That is one, and we are anticipating having a chairperson

very soon on that and move that strategy forward. That is not to say one is more

important than the other; but, as you know, out on the West Coast there is a lot

of development going on. People want to come because of the beautiful

surroundings that are out there, so we need to basically make sure, because it

is virgin land out there, that it is developed in the proper sequence that

should be done.

We are moving forward with that strategy.

MS MICHAEL: I do know when I first got elected, in doing some travelling

around and meeting with mayors, that certainly is a major concern out there,

that all of the municipalities be involved in the decision-making, because they

felt at that point they really were not involved in decision-making and things

were moving ahead way too quickly.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: How broad will the consultations be?

MR. DENINE: The consultations in those will always incorporate all the

stakeholders, like, for example, the business communities, the residents,

environmentalists who have some concerns, Boards of Trade, Chambers of Commerce,

anyone who has relevancy to what would happen if something was changed zones

and especially, too, I guess, mostly the residents. There should be a lot of

opening sessions where people can go and do a brief.

As you know, Lorraine, a lot of the people especially, you take the West

Coast - there are going to be a lot of environmental people who want to make

sure that everything is going to be protected, and there are buffer zones that

are maintained so that there is no damage to the environment that is out there

now.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MR. DENINE: Similarly so here in the urban areas you have to be careful,

too, in terms of where you are going to put developments, what developments you

are going to put there, what impact does it have on the water systems that flow

through. People do not realize how many water systems you have here on the

Avalon - just go around and look at all the brooks that flow in - so you have to

be careful when you are developing around those areas.

MS MICHAEL: That is right, because both areas are really important -

MR. DENINE: No question.

MS MICHAEL: - but you are saying that Humber Valley is going to move more

quickly than the Northeast Avalon.

MR. DENINE: No, the Avalon they are probably pretty close to each

other, wouldn't it?

MS MICHAEL: Yes, and you do plan. You have indicated public

consultations, open meetings, that kind of thing in both areas.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: That is good to know.

It is a broader discussion, but you are obviously aware of it, and this is

one of the concerns in both cases: people are not aware of the waterways and

people are not aware of what is happening to them. Kelligrews is one example, in

the river in Kelligrews.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: People just take all these waterways for granted. They do not

even notice them sometimes, and I think there needs to be quite a bit of work

done.

Do you see, down the road, legislation coming to help with buffer zones

around water bodies, that kind of thing? I think, in some cases, municipalities

need provincial legislation to deal with some of the issues that they are going

have to deal with, especially when some of the areas are across municipal lines,

where it is not just your municipality that is involved.

MR. DENINE: Right now there are buffer zones. For example, I know when I

was in Mount Pearl, going close to brooks, there has to be a thirty-metre buffer

zone on either side in terms of rivers and that. I anticipate that would be

there because a municipality would have to have some control over that in terms

of that; because, let's face it, they are probably the eyes for government

when they are out there, because they are a little bit closer to the reality of

it and they would need some legislation in terms of that, but I think there is

enough legislation now that we have to protect that.

MS MICHAEL: You think there is.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

All right, I will go back to you, Roland, unless there is somebody else, Mr.

Chair. I am saying Roland, but there could be somebody else.

CHAIR: Anybody from the Committee?

MR. COLLINS: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have a couple of questions.

CHAIR: Okay, you can proceed.

MR. COLLINS: I can wait until everybody else is finished, if you want.

CHAIR: No, you can proceed. Go ahead.

MR. COLLINS: First of all, I would like to join with my colleague Roland

in complimenting the department on their response with respect to the damages

and results of Chantal. I guess my area was probably affected worse than any,

and we have no reason to be anything but positive on the way the department

responded, the Emergency Services, with respect to the individual property

claims of the residents.

I had occasion to visit those people regularly after the damages were done,

and talked with them on an ongoing basis. Certainly, they weren't jumping up

and down over the results, because if they lost three televisions they didn't

get three back. It wasn't an insurance program, it was an assistance program,

but I think on the whole most residents were very happy with the response at the

end of the day and the response on the part of the officials. They were very

co-operative and very helpful, and I have nothing but good things to say.

As you mentioned earlier, the fact that out of the 900 claims these are only

a minimum number outstanding, I think, speaks for itself with respect to other

disasters that have happened around the Province, so I have to compliment the

department on that.

Having said that, to what extent is the department considering a provincial

disaster plan to in any way supplement or complement the federal one, or perhaps

fill in the gaps, the deficiencies that the federal one has? Because the federal

criteria is such, as we all know, so prescriptive and so cut and dried, that it

has to be followed to the letter. That causes problems, as we all know,

especially with regard to municipal infrastructure, these particular parts of

the program; not necessarily the property damage, the person's property

damage, but with respect to municipal infrastructure.

The Town of Placentia, as you well know, has had contracts on the go to

repair roads and streets and whatnot. The system in place is that the Province

decides at this level, because that is the criteria; the Province decides at

this level what the criteria covers as far as the federal money is concerned,

and pays out that amount, and then the rest is cost-shared between the

provinces, and that creates a lot of problems, a lot of delays, as we have

already referenced.

Is there any plan on the part of the government or the department to consider

its own provincial disaster plan so that you are dealing directly with the

Province as opposed to the federal government through the Province, and the

Province (inaudible)? Is there anything on the table with respect to that?

MR. DENINE: First of all, the answer to that is no, right away, in terms

of doing that, but the thing is, we have been working with the federal

government to try to make the requirements a lot easier in terms of getting

claims done. Sometimes the reconstruction of claims, especially if disasters are

older, it is very hard to get them all together.

The thing with that is, Felix, if we do this, we would be the only Province

on our own. There is a certain responsibility to the federal government, and I

am not one to let the federal government off the hook in terms of their

responsibilities. There is a bit of danger in terms of taking that over for us,

because then we become totally responsible for it. Then, if there are any other

cost overruns or whatever the case may be, which we take up anyhow, there is a

significant amount of cost overruns that the Province sometimes has to pay out

because of certain reasons as a disaster takes place. You have been in the

disasters. There are times you do things that sometimes cannot be covered by the

federal disaster plan and we get caught with it.

The thing is that I wouldn't want to go there, to be honest with you,

because I think the responsibility is for all levels of government and I wouldn't

let the federal government off the hook for that.

What I would like to see, though, and we have made some progress - even in

January when we went to the FPT meetings in Halifax - in terms of loosening up

the requirements and how things get done. Minister Day at the time said we will

work with the provinces to make sure that it is streamlined as efficiently and

effectively as possible. Other than that Mac, I don't know if you have

anything to say on that one?

MR. BLUNDON: The plan is in our business plan for this year. We are going

to try to start to get together with a provincial program that will sort of

mirror the federal program because, as the minister said, we are not an

insurance agency. We will develop a provincial program over the next two years.

Our plan is to start it this year and come up with a program that can be quite

effective in administering the disasters.

MR. DENINE: You are talking about two different things now. You are

talking about our own disaster plan. What are you talking about, the disaster

plan in terms of funding and that, or the disaster plan in how we operate?

MR. COLLINS: That is a good point, because I saw in the paper a couple of

days ago - there was an interview, I think, with yourself - that the Province is

considering, or some time down the road was considering, a disaster plan. That

is a different plan altogether than what we are talking about here, I presume.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. COLLINS: In relationship to Mac's last point, when you are talking

about a provincial plan, are you referring to a revised version of the

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. COLLINS: You are talking about a disaster plan? Okay.

What the minister is saying, then, if I understand you correctly, provinces

in general do not have their own plans vis--vis the federal plan?

MR. DENINE: Can you just explain? I think we are getting mixed up in what

a plan is. Can you just explain what you mean by the plan?

MR. COLLINS: The DFA plan - what is it called - the plan that we use for

MR. DENINE: Disaster Financial Assistance.

MR. COLLINS: Okay, that plan; that is a federal program.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. COLLINS: The Province administers it according to the federal

guidelines. That is federal money that the Province administers. It has

deficiencies, bureaucratic problems and whatnot that we have all experienced.

You are still getting cheques five years later down the road.

When you say you are working on a program with the feds, are working to

streamline that program and work on that program to make it more efficient? Is

that what you are saying?

MR. DENINE: Yes, because I think we are getting mixed up in the idea. My

terms of plan was like taking over and funding it.

MR. COLLINS: No, no.

MR. DENINE: No? Okay.

That is what I was addressing.

MR. COLLINS: No.

MR. DENINE: The idea of trying to streamline it, yes, we are working with

the federal-provincial government relationships in order to try to streamline

it. Stockwell Day, the minister for disasters, basically said: Look, whatever we

can do to help streamline it - because there was a constant barrage of concerns

after every disaster that happens in the provinces of Canada, that there is so

much red tape to get through, it is so cumbersome at times, that we need to

streamline it. That is what we are talking about.

MR. COLLINS: That is what we are talking about. Okay.

My next question is with regard to the MRIF program under 3.2.02.,

Federal/Provincial Infrastructure Programs. You have an amount there under 10.,

Grants and Subsidies, $31,376,400. Is that the provincial share of the

federal-provincial infrastructure program? Is that what that is?

MR. DENINE: What is that?

MR. COLLINS: The $31,376,400, number 10., under 3.2.02.,

Federal/Provincial Infrastructure Programs, Grants and Subsidies, page 252.

These are the cost-shared programs you referred to earlier on a 90-10 basis,

right?

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. COLLINS: Or 10 per cent for municipalities.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. COLLINS: Am I right on that?

MR. DENINE: Baxter?

MR. ROSE: Subhead 3.2.02.10?

MR. COLLINS: Yes, page 252.

MR. ROSE: Page 252, $31,376,000?

MR. COLLINS: Yes.

MR. ROSE: That is the share of the federal-provincial cost-shared

programs, it would be the Municipal-Rural Infrastructure Fund Program, the

Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund and the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador

Infrastructure Program. These are our various municipal capital works programs

that are cost-shared with the federal government.

MR. COLLINS: The follow-up question to that then for me is the cost

sharing ratio that you have recently announced, the 10 per cent for $3,000 and

less, applications currently on the table or projects currently in place, is

there any retroactivity to that cost sharing?

MR. DENINE: No, there is no retroactivity. All new applications are as of

April 1.

MR. COLLINS: Anybody who is currently involved in a federal-provincial

cost-shared program now, it is fifty-fifty dollars?

MR. DENINE: Yes, whatever it is.

MR. COLLINS: They are stuck with that?

MR. DENINE: Yes, because if you go retroactive you can go back forever.

MR. COLLINS: There are communities who have applications in that have not

been approved yet. Will they

MR. DENINE: They will move forward on the new cost sharing ratio;

anything that is new. Anything that has been approved the answer is, no. It has

been approved on the basis of the ratios prior to this. Anything on a go-forward

basis is under new cost sharing.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you.

CHAIR: Anybody else from the committee.

MR. BUTLER: Where do I start? I am trying to keep up and scratch out what

everyone else is saying.

Minister, I just want to make a comment. I know mentioned about the word dump

a little while ago. In the particular incident that I was referring to at that

time, whether it is waste management landfill, I cannot change the word dump

around that site.

MR. DENINE: I understand. I know where you are coming from. I am afraid

one of these days if I say in the House a dump, I know you guys would jump

on me.

MS MICHAEL: You are more pleasant here, the two of you, than you are in

the House.

MR. BUTLER: Just a couple of general questions, not a couple, I have a

lot of them here because I do not get on question period very often, only with

one question. They cut me off, so I take advantage today.

I think it is probably called the Jet Program: is that still ongoing. It is

with the firefighting. That is still there, is it? I know last year during the

estimates under the former minister there was - I do not know where it is in the

book and that is not my question, but last year he mentioned there were funds

left over because there was a low amount of applications from councils or fire

departments that made application for money under that program. I was wondering:

has that increased this year? I know I spread the word in my area and different

areas. He was saying there was a lack of applications that came in and the money

was left over.

MR. ROSE: Subhead 4.1.04, Joint Emergency Preparedness Projects. JEPP is

the Joint Emergency Preparedness Project. JEPP is the acronym for the program

title.

MR. BUTLER: There was $282,000 budgeted and then it was revised at

$225,000.

MR. ROSE: The revised was $225,000. The current year's Budget is back

up to $282,000 again.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

I know, Minister, this probably comes under another department partially, but

where you are the Municipal Affairs Minister, I know at the Municipalities

Newfoundland and Labrador Convention this year one of the resolutions, I know,

is tied in with the Department of Environment and Conservation, where they put a

request in for Crown Land within their boundaries if there was a need that came

up. I am sure the municipalities brought it to your attention as well being

municipalities minister and I was wondering: Is there any involvement from your

department to help them to progress with that, with the other department?

MR. DENINE: I can tell you that does rest with the Crown Lands.

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. DENINE: I can also tell you that there have been some consultations

going on with MNL and they are to come back to the minister. I would not want to

speak on behalf of another minister, but I know they are coming back with a

brief to the minister at a later date. They are pursuing it, but what happened

at that meeting, all I can tell you is that there were consultations going on

and they are going to come back and have a subsequent meeting to that.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

The only thing I was wondering is if you were involved to help push it for

them.

MR. DENINE: I was there.

MR. BUTLER: That is fair.

My hon. colleague from Placentia & St. Mary's was into the issue of

whether it is a provincial plan, a disaster plan and so on a little while ago.

The one that you referenced in the paper this week, there was an

article on it,

is that similar to the Emergency Response Program?

MR. DENINE: You are talking about the Business Continuity Plan?

MR. BUTLER: No. The one I will reference I will go right back to

where I started.

MR. DENINE: Okay.

MR. BUTLER: Back when the unfortunate incident happened on September 11

and all the people had to come to our Province at that particular time, my

understanding was the municipalities were to submit an Emergency Response Plan.

I was just wondering: how many of the 282 actually did that from that point on?

MR. DENINE: The municipalities?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. DENINE: There are a significant number moving forward on it and our

FESNL are helping out in that area. I cannot give you the exact number.

MS McCORMACK: The plan, I think, that was referenced in the paper

recently was the Business Continuity Plan. The agency is taking a lead role to

develop a plan for the government of Newfoundland and Labrador first, and then

there are agency staff also working on these operational or emergency response

plans in municipalities. Eventually, we will make sure that every municipality

has an emergency response plan, as well as the Business Continuity Plan for

government.

MR. DENINE: There is more information coming out on 9/11 and the other

one you are talking about, the Business Continuity Plan which our department now

are looking at in terms of getting the continuity between different departments

to make sure that there is a plan for everyone, that they are linked together,

that is what we are doing.

MR. BUTLER: Yes. Now, the one I was referencing is with the

municipalities themselves. I know some of the municipalities in my area are

getting fairly heavy into it and getting a plan in place and talking to everyone

in the community and so on

MR. DENINE: That is right, they are.

MR. BUTLER: I was just wondering if very many across the Province have

done that to this point in time, and if not, is there any timeframe on it when

they should have this done or what have you?

MR. DENINE: You are right, Roland, in terms of out your way people are

becoming more conscious of it in terms of what is happening over the last number

of years. As a matter of fact, I was talking to the mayor of Stephenville and

they started out a plan with some of the neighbouring communities. They had a

plan in Stephenville and now they are branching out and people are starting to

move out. The smaller municipalities said, well, can we be part of your plan? So

the mayor of Stephenville has taken it upon himself to include people in that.

Now it is not going to be the Stephenville plan, they will probably put it under

another name, but they will also go down in small communities on the coast,

around the bay. They can have that plan and put their own name on it.

It makes a lot of sense in terms of that, because when you have a hub area

that would be where a lot of the resources could come from. The smaller

municipalities, if there is a danger or something happens in the smaller

municipalities, then they can piggyback on the resources of the larger

municipality. It was a great initiative, I thought, by the mayor of

Stephenville, to move forward.

MS MICHAEL: If I could? We might as well stay with the topic.

CHAIR: Sure, yes.

MS MICHAEL: To what degree then, Dave, will Municipal Affairs be involved

in co-ordination, so that we are sure that we have, you know, uniform policies

that are going on in the Province around the emergency preparedness?

MR. DENINE: We will always take an active role in that, and that is one

of the things we do. FESNL will take some lead in that. That would be part of

the whole thing. The thing is, Lorraine, when you look at the FESNL, when we

took it all and made it an agency we put a lot of emphasis on that. I think,

rather than hide it away, that will be one of the things we will be actively

pursuing in getting out and helping to co-ordinate with municipalities.

MS MICHAEL: Have there been guidelines that have been done up for them,

or are you leaving it totally to the municipalities to come up with all of that?

MR. DENINE: Marilyn?

MS McCORMACK: There is, in fact, a training program that is offered by

the staff of the agency, so they go out to assist municipalities in how to

design the program. Of course, they come in when they are completed to the Fire

Commissioner's Office so that they can be reviewed and if there is anything

missing they could provide some direction and support. There is some assistance

there available to municipalities who want to begin emergency plans.

MS MICHAEL: Are there any extra resources if they need financial

resources or do they have to come up with that themselves, which would be very

difficult for the smaller communities, obviously?

MR. DENINE: I think what we will do, we will give them the guidance in

terms of doing it and we will also help out with the expertise part of it. We

are not going to leave them on their own.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

MR. BUTLER: I know recently the issue was discussed with regard to fire

safety when it came to personal care homes.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. BUTLER: I understand everything has been resolved there, but I was

just wondering I know there were some previous to that that just closed, and

I was wondering: out of the ones that were listed recently are they all going to

install or build new homes, or will some of those be closing as well?

MR. DENINE: You are talking about the personal care homes?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. DENINE: The number was twenty-two, I believe, and then there were

some that closed. I think there was one in Holyrood that closed permanently and

there is one on Bell Island that closed permanently. The Fire Commissioner's

Office was given ninety days to move forward on that. He wanted a signed

contract and right now they are moving forward on it.

MR. BUTLER: Good.

I know there has been correspondence sent to you by the Joint Mayors'

Association of Trinity-Bay-de-Verde and the CBN Joint Councils. I think they had

their first joint meeting from one shore to the other, the first time they ever

met together, which is good. I know one of the issues that came up at that time

was I will not call it any of the bad words today I will just call it the

site on New Harbour Road. That is main concern with them, which was supposed to

close down and now I think they are trying to get to Winterton as versus coming

to Robin Hood Bay, I guess, for the reasons that they think it is more

financially feasible for them.

My question is: isn't the day coming, regardless of where you live on this

Island - I know it is very difficult for them. I know how difficult the

municipalities in my area find it now having to travel, but they have to do it.

Is there anything finalized? I know there were talks or meetings going on that

all of them can go to Winterton as versus coming to Robin Hood Bay. Has anything

been finalized? I know there was correspondence sent to you. I was copied that.

MR. DENINE: Yes. I will just comment on this. When we moved to the

strategy, moved the strategy forward, our idea is to basically come down to

possibly three host sites, east, west and central. In order to make the

transition a little bit smoother we wanted to see the consolidation come down,

take four or five, consolidate into one and then move on to another. So, you are

cutting it down. You are not jumping off A and going right to Z. There is a

gradual decline in that.

As far as moving it to Winterton, if it is a feasible spot - Gerry, you might

want to comment a little bit more on that - but if it becomes feasible to do

that right now they can do it. The other

part is that if you look at Carbonear

in terms of Carbonear and Harbour Grace - remember when the incinerator was out

there and it was causing problems out there - right now they are all moving

their garbage to Robin Hood Bay, or their waste I should say. I should get into

saying waste not garbage any more. It is garbage right now until we start doing

more recycling on it. Again, terminology! So, (inaudible) consolidation is that

they are now much more comfortable in doing that now. They are bringing it right

to Robin Hood Bay.

You see where they are trying to move down from four or five small ones and

move it on forward. Once you get it on the truck you are only talking a

timeframe that can move it there, so it is not a big issue.

Gerry, on the issue with Winterton.

MR. ANTLE: There are several studies underway now on the Avalon

Peninsula. The Bay de Verde Peninsula is under study. There are no decisions

made. There is not a draft report yet. We have met with a consultant and we are

aware that there are a number of alternatives. There could be any number of

sites consolidated, as the Minister says, before Robin Hood Bay is the regional

site. There are no decisions made yet. It is under study. The communities will

be involved and they are aware. I understand these studies should be concluding

in the next two to three weeks, at least in a draft stage, and they will be

engaged in alternatives and considerations of which is the best option for them

as in interim measure until such time that Robin Hood Bay is finally developed.

MR. BUTLER: I guess I will lead into the other question now. I saw an

article when you mentioned one time before, Minister, that one of the biggest

issues is waste management. No doubt it is. I think the figure that was used was

$38.5 million overall cost for Robin Hood Bay.

I was just wondering: When will that be all unfolded and completed, I

suppose? At what point in time will that be?

MR. DENINE: The target date is 2010, 2011 for Central and we are saying

2016 for Western, but the issue here is, as you go down through so many of these

studies and so many of these consolidation areas and people putting policies in

different parts of the Province, you do not have to reinvent the wheel. The one

on the West Coast could be speeded up. But 2010 would be on the East Coast.

MR. BUTLER: Judging by that and what your Assistant Deputy Minister said,

that is possibly the timeframe when we are going to see everybody having to come

to that point in time.

Robin Hood Bay, does that take in the Burin Peninsula as well?

MR. DENINE: It could. There is a regional services committee down there

in terms of looking at what they can do.

Our policy is that when waste is to be disposed of it has to be done in an

engineered landfill. The infrastructure that is needed to put in a small one and

a large one is significant. The thing is, is that if they could finance one down

on the Burin Peninsula they could, but I know that it is not going to happen.

Eventually what could happen. I do not preclude what they are going to decide,

but I would say a good guesstimate would be the fact that they will be coming to

Robin Hood Bay, yes.

When you deal with that amount of garbage, my deputy minister can give you a

great view of how much would come off the Burin Peninsula because we have talked

about it. People say, well, it is such a large area and there are so many

people, but the amount of tonnage is not as great as you think it is.

MR. BUTLER: Is that right?

MR. DENINE: No.

MR. BUTLER: Along the same vein, I guess - I know I asked you a question

earlier about the teepees, and like you said the timeframes are within another

department and that is understandable. The small rural local service districts

and some isolated communities, and I am thinking about up on the Southwest Coast

and what have you, the only means they have to get to them really is by a ferry.

What type of a system will be put in place for them? Are we saying that they are

going to have to ship it out by the ferry service?

MR. DENINE: That would be something that, for example - the West Coast, I

guess, you would be referring to more than anywhere else.

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. DENINE: That would be something that would come under the West Coast

management committee, and as they move through their consulting with the

stakeholders they will come up with a solution, whatever they think it better. I

am not going to preclude that, because their options could be varied.

MR. BUTLER: Someone mentioned to me the other day I did not have this

here as a question but I will mention it now. There is one community on the

Labrador Coast that, like they said, if they are going to have to move it to one

of the larger sites, it is either going to have to go by komatik or by some

other means, and they were not making fun.

MR. DENINE: No.

MR. BUTLER: That was the only means to get it somewhere else unless they

can take care of it right where they are.

MR. DENINE: You are right, there would have to be something that would

have to be developed for those specific areas.

MR. BUTLER: I do not know what my timeframe is, but I am sure the hon.

gentleman will cut me off.

CHAIR: Yes, we are getting close. Would you want to move on?

MR. BUTLER: One more?

CHAIR: Yes, go right ahead.

MR. BUTLER: Minister, the question I want to ask you now is not to take

away from the wonderful announcement you made the other day about the 90-10,

80-20, 70-30; and I mean that is all wonderful. I know another issue that came

up through the municipalities' convention was the MOGs, and I do not think

there was any announcement made on that. Probably this program is going to help

a lot of municipalities, regardless of whether they have anything under their

MOGs or not. I am thinking about some of the communities that cannot come up

with the 10 per cent or 20 per cent, and they are out there, no doubt about

that. I was just wondering: is there any little program for those? It does not

have to be called an MOG like it was in the past.

MR. DENINE: Well, this was a major initiative that we took on.

MR. BUTLER: I am not arguing with that fact, sir.

MR. DENINE: That is the problem. The thing is, if you go back into the

early 1990s there was $42 million put into MOGs. Now we are down to $17.8

million over thirteen years or something, and there have been clawbacks in terms

of different governments that came in. There were two under the Liberals and

there was one that we had that affected eleven municipalities, not all

municipalities, eleven municipalities, which were the larger ones. Then we, as

other programs did, rather than implement the full three years, they only went

two years and then cut it off there.

You are right, but I talked to a mayor in Gander just this weekend in terms

of doing that. There are a couple of things that happened there that put money

back into pockets. One was the 10 per cent and the other one was the tax on

insurance. That is one thing we tend to forget with municipalities. They all

have buildings, they all have vehicles, they all have insurance policies that

they carry, and they are saving the tax on that. That in itself will generate

some money within those municipalities. I have to tell you, the mayors I spoke

to, and I spoke to a lot of them out there - as you know, I do a lot of talking

they were very, very pleased with what happened. They conceded the fact

that, if they are going to be able to get this done they will be able to save

some money and refocus that money somewhere else.

MR. BUTLER: No doubt about it. I have not heard anyone complain about the

program.

Just to give you an example of where I was coming from, and I am sure there

are other little situations similar in the Province, this community was in the

Port de Grave district prior to the last election and now it is with the hon.

member for CarbonearHarbour Grace, and the community is Bryant's Cove. I am

sure there are officials over there who know the situation. The money that they

used to receive from the MOG they would not get a lot never ever reached

their hands. Maybe I am incorrect in saying this but it used to go automatically

from your department up to Transportation and Works, which would cover the cost

of their snowploughing in the winter there. They used to do some of the other

roads after the main roads were open. I know for a fact that the three or four

years I represented them there was funding which came from your department to

them and from Transportation and Works and they just could not take it. They

could not come up with the financial end on their part.

That is the type of community I was thinking about. Is there some little

thing there, because I am going to tell you they are not going to be able to

come to you on a 90-10; and that is no disrespect to them. Something has to be

done, whether they are going to have to move in with another community next to

them or whatever is going to happen there with their tax base.

MR. DENINE: Again, that could be the option. You probably just hit the

nail on the head in terms of if they cannot afford 90-10. For example, a

community like that probably would only have, I would say, a $100,000 contract

type thing and they would only have to come up with $10,000. I think, in terms

of that, they might have to look at some other options with what they want to

do.

MR. BUTLER: I want to make it very clear now, I am not saying to the hon.

Member for Carbonear what he has to do with that community; far from it. I just

use them as an example, where they were part of the district that I represent

and so on. I will turn it over to my hon. colleague.

CHAIR: I think we are going to go to Mr. King.

MR. BUTLER: Oh, okay, I am sorry.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, a couple of quick comments and a question; if I can echo some of

the comments that have been made. Certainly, in my district the cost-shared

program has been a tremendous announcement. I am not without my challenges, as

the member for Port de Grave just highlighted, around the local service

districts, but having said that, it is a tremendous announcement and I certainly

thank you and the officials who are with you, as well the tax on insurance.

One other point I want to make before my question is to say thanks because a

number of people who are with you today have assisted my municipalities through

meetings and discussions on a number of initiatives that we are moving forward

with, so I want to acknowledge that as well.

One thing that piqued my curiosity a little bit: I am wondering if you or

someone with you might be able to elaborate a bit on the whole issue of shared

services. You talked about, I think, Keith Warren who is going to do some work

there? In my district, I think you are fairly familiar with the geography. It is

probably one where it is fairly conducive to some of that. I have a number of

small communities, particularly if you take Point May, Lamaline, Point au Gaul,

Lord's Cove, that area of the district in particular. I sense it is a good

news thing that might be forthcoming. I wondered if you might be able to take a

few minutes to tell us a bit about the vision for that or how it may work or how

we might be able to become engaged in it?

MR. DENINE: In terms of the Province or just that area?

MR. KING: Well, my area in particular, but I suppose the process would

probably be essentially the same for everybody.

MR. DENINE: Yes, the process and the outcome would probably be the same.

It is the same type of objective no matter what part.

There are a number of things that can happen and a number of things can vary

in terms of what types of services. For example, it could be consolidation of

fire services, it could be consolidation of garbage collection or water

treatment. For example, you do not need a technician, someone who knows in the

small community, that person can do four or five. It could be any type of shared

services that they deem fit. The other part of that could be if they want to

come together. We are taking the approach that it would come from the roots up

rather than from the top down. That is what we want to see. We want to see the

community saying we want to come together on that.

One thing I did not mention that is happening and is in a partnership with

MNL is the CCRC, Community Cooperation Resource Centre. What they are doing is a

town evaluation form, I think for a better word, a municipal self-assessment.

That will give some of those municipalities a chance to go out and go down

through a significant amount of questions. At the end of the day, the answer

becomes clear to you. When you start evaluation of the revenue taken in, the

service you are delivering, the population you have and so on and so on, take

all of that into account and then at the end of the day it basically says how

sustainable your community is. That will help us, as a tool for those

municipalities, to say, well okay, because we are spending this amount of money

or this type of thing and we cannot afford it, if we come together with someone

else or we cost-share something, this is how we do it. That is one tool that we

are looking at.

Darin, to say what will happen, again that will only come under consultation

with the people. We do not go out there unless we are asked to go. If they want

us to go we will go out there. How serious we are is that we put Keith Warren

out there and we are very serious about it. We want to move this policy forward

in terms of getting people to come together. When I spoke at the symposium out

there in Gander, when I spoke to Keith after lunch, he said, if you did not have

to mention that no one would have been talking to me. After I mentioned it he

had a number of people come to him.

To say how it is going to take place, that will unfold in itself and it will

unfold as discussions take place.

I do not know if that answers your question or not. Maybe I just went around

it. I do not know.

MR. KING: I think you gave us some direction there.

I had a meeting last week in my district with all of the mayors from every

single municipality and local service district. Actually there were three

politicians and the town staff were invited in, so there were forty-five or

fifty people. Obviously, most of the discussion focused on the issues in our

district but that one piqued their curiosity, even in communities like Grand

Bank and Fortune which are two of the larger ones in my district. It is

interesting looking at things like fire services and those kinds of things.

I guess the two key questions, Minister, that were raised, and you have

spoken somewhat to both I think, are how would we access that if we wanted to

pursue it and whether or not there is any financial assistance as part of that

program to help us ease into it.

If, for the sake of an argument, Grand Bank and Fortune wanted to merge their

fire departments and come together, I guess in a very simple question, how do we

engage Keith in this? Is there a formal application or do we just call and

invite him down? Secondly, would there be any support financially, or was that

the intent of the program to help us move towards the merger?

MR. DENINE: There are two things. The first thing, the request will come

to the department from your district, from the people who say, can we have some

official come out and talk to us. We will do that. We will help them out. The

issue here is: Can some assistance be done? Yes, but it is not at all costs.

There has to be a certain amount of cutoff. We just cannot give it to a limit

that is beyond. There has to be some consideration given. Debt servicing would

be one. I think there was $1 million put in to help with that servicing cost. We

can help out with other things, but sometimes people's asks are way beyond the

means and it will fall apart. I know your colleague next to you was shaking her

head and she knows exactly what I am talking about. The ask becomes beyond what

is doable.

There is some assistance but I do not want to go into all of the details,

because everyone will be different. Everyone will come forward with certain

plans, everyone will come forward with certain idiosyncrasies that they have and

the things that are prevalent to them and that will all be taken into the

equation.

MR. KING: Sure.

Can I conclude?

CHAIR: Yes.

MR. KING: Just a comment more than a question. I appreciate your answer

on that. I think that is a good approach. From my perspective, I have only been

elected since October, I do not know if I am allowed to say names but I will.

You can correct me if I am out of line. Dan Noseworthy was, I do not know if he

still is, I will call it your point person for my district. We have engaged him,

since I have been elected, on a number of occasions to come down and talk to

municipalities about all kinds of issues. Some of them are very simple but they

just need someone to talk to.

I am envisioning that same kind of approach where Keith or someone can come

in and talk to them about it. In my brief experiences I have to say, from what I

have seen from Dan on behalf of your department, it has been very positive and

municipalities have appreciated even a thirty minute meeting to be able to ask

eight or ten questions. For you guys they are probably simple answers, for the

officials, but for someone in Point May or Grand Bank it is not always that

simple, or they do not perceive it to be.

I compliment you on the process and certainly will share that with my

district.

Thank you.

MR. DENINE: Thanks, Darin.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much.

A lot of what I have had here, you will be glad to know, has been covered in

questions, especially from Roland. That is why I jumped in a couple of times to

make sure we did not have to revisit issues, but I still have a few others.

You mentioned the Municipal Debt Servicing, subhead 3.1.01. I am just curious

as to why each year - not each year - the budget for 2007-2008 was $23,854,000.

MR. DENINE: Which one are we on?

CHAIR: Ms Michael, could you repeat the heading again?

MS MICHAEL: Sorry, subhead 3.1.01., Municipal Debt Servicing. It went

down from the budget to the revision in 2007-2008. and now the grants are down

to $16,550,100 in this budget. Why down so much?

MR. DENINE: Okay, you are talking about subhead 10?

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MR. DENINE: Okay.

The decrease in that - for the $16,550,100 one?

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MR. DENINE: Okay.

The decrease reflects the lower anticipated cost of debt servicing due to

lower overall debt that is in municipalities, a better projection and debt

reducing in addition to new debt. That is part of that, but I am going to defer

this, Lorraine, to the deputy minister and he will explain it in more detail to

you.

MS MICHAEL: Sure.

MR. ROSE: I will give you the detailed technical explanation and try not

to bore you.

MS MICHAEL: I can handle it, I think.

MR. ROSE: Historically, all of the Province's investment in municipal

capital works was on borrowed monies. We went to the bank or the Newfoundland

Municipal Finance Corporation and borrowed the Province's share of capital

works projects. When those projects went on repayment, the interest portion of

that amortization was budgeted in our accounts as well as the capital under

another subhead and $23,854,000 is the interest payments on existing debt.

Over the past few years we have done a couple of things. One is, we no longer

bank finance our capital works infrastructure. We pay cash as we go, so there is

no new debt being added in here. These mortgages I will call them mortgages;

they are loans are being paid out over time, so you have seen a reduction

there from $23,854,000 down to $19,554,000.

Another measure we have implemented last year and it will be fully in effect

this year is when we approve projects for municipalities. Even up until last

year the municipalities used to go out and borrow the provincial share while the

project was under construction, and then at completion the Province would pay it

out in total. As of now, municipalities borrow nothing on behalf of the

Province, so we are seeing a significant reduction caused by two things: one, a

natural maturity of these loans; and, secondly, we are no longer interim

financing our capital works projects.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

That is great. In actual fact, yesterday morning when we were with the

Department of Finance we got a real good explanation around the whole thing of

the difference now that we are paying cash for so much stuff and not having to

borrow in order to take care of needs.

MR. ROSE: It saves a significant amount of money. On the capital works

budget of $60 million or $80 million per year, 6 per cent of that, you are

talking $3 million to $4 million just in interim financing interest.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

Thank you. That is really helpful.

We took care of the MOGs. This is more for my information, under 3.1.03., two

heads down, Special Assistance. What exactly do these grants cover, under

Special Assistance? As I say, this is for my information; I have no idea.

MR. DENINE: Well, the grants there in number 10., $2.7 million, that

covers special assistance for grants to municipalities for different things that

they might come up with, they might have trouble with, and we will give them a

special assistance grant to help offset some costs, and that is sort of a

one-time grant.

Then also, too, there is special assistance - like the closure of the mill in

Stephenville, there was money given for that, so it varies, but the special

assistance has to be done to whatever municipal services they have to deliver,

and that has to be the focus. It cannot be outside of municipal service

(inaudible).

MS MICHAEL: Are there criteria besides that?

MR. DENINE: Baxter, do you want to?

MR. ROSE: The grants that are typically provided would be small amounts

of money. It could be for capital works projects, it could be for firefighting

equipment, it could be for bunker suits, it could be relatively small amounts of

money for other municipal services, the provincial affairs side of things,

support for the Beaumont Hamel Pilgrimage, and those types of things. It is

primarily municipal infrastructure or supports that wouldn't fit under our

capital works program or it wouldn't justify setting up loans (inaudible).

MR. DENINE: It wouldn't be large amounts of money. It would be very

small portions of money.

MS MICHAEL: Does the minister have to approve those grants?

MR. DENINE: Yes, it goes to a committee of my department and then it

comes to me to approve it.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

Under head 3.1.04., Community Enhancement, I think a lot of this is

communities that have been affected by closures in the fishery. Last year, $4.5

million was the budget and it had to be revised up to $6 million. What was the

main reason for that bump up? I know you can't anticipate what is going to

happen in a year.

MR. DENINE: That increase, the amount of enhancement programs that we had

on our list to do, we needed more money to help offset those costs, so basically

there was more additional Community Enhancement Programs approved last year.

Basically, it went from $4.5 million; we needed another $1.5 million to help

because there was a need there.

MS MICHAEL: Yes.

MR. DENINE: So we needed extra money in that.

MS MICHAEL: How many communities were covered under the Community

Enhancement last year? How many received assistance?

MR. DENINE: Bill, do you want to?

MR. DUGGAN: The number of projects overall, I think, was 380, just under

400. Not necessarily 380 communities, 380 projects. Some communities might have

had several projects, particularly if it was larger towns affected by fish

processing and that type of thing.

It employed about 1,800 people through the regular CEP program and about

another 350 under the funds that are voted in fishing industry renewal in

Fisheries and Aquaculture, so a total of about 2,150 people or 2,200 people.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you. That is helpful.

Under 4.1.02., the Fire Commissioner's Office -

MR. DENINE: Under 4.1.02?

MS MICHAEL: The Fire Commissioner's Office.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: No new money basically, it is the same budget - yet we

have raised concerns, concerns have been raised in the House, with regard to

inspection in particular. I don't have to remind you, that issue has come up a

number of times.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: One of the issues that did concern me was the realization of

the degree to which some fire inspection does have to be done by volunteer

firefighters. Knowing that was actually a bit disturbing for me because I don't

think this should be in the hands, actually, of volunteer firefighters. Not

because they can't do it, but because of the nature of the fact that they are

volunteers and they have full-time jobs, a lot of them, besides being volunteer

firefighters.

I don't see any new money here that would say that you are looking at

having fire inspection, having more people hired through the commissioner's

office to do fire inspection, and this is a concern, so I would like for you to

speak to us a bit about that.

MR. DENINE: Again, Lorraine, as I said in the House, in terms of the

inspections, the review that we are going to do, that is going to be put in

place. I don't want to go out and say, here are five or six more people. I

have to find out what way we are going to handle it from now on in. In order to

throw money at it, it is not necessarily what I am looking at right now. I want

to develop a solid policy in how it happens, to make sure that everything is

done. So it is kind of premature for me to say, well, let's throw fifteen more

officers there so we get it all done.

I am going to wait and see, and then come back with the recommendations, but

over the last number of years in FES we had an 87 per cent increase in funding

towards that program. This was an initiative taken on by this government to put

things in the forefront. Normally, the Fire Commissioner's Office was put back

into Municipal Affairs and it was just put away there, but now it is in front,

it is up in FES-NL, the disaster is there, so we have basically taken out major

components and put it into an agency, so the commitment is there.

To say how the inspections will be done in the future, until I get the policy

review I cannot tell you that right now.

MS MICHAEL: Has the policy review started, Dave?

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MS MICHAEL: It has.

Can you give an update of the status of that, and how you are doing the

review?

MR. DENINE: Not to any great detail, to be quite honest with you.

MS MICHAEL: Who will you be involving? In doing that review, who are the

stakeholders who will be involved?

MR. DENINE: For example, when we talked about the health care facilities:

the health care boards, the facility managers, the fire services area, the

volunteer firefighters - anyone who has a stake in safety - the alarm companies,

sprinkler system companies.

Also, too, I forgot to mention, Lorraine, there is a lot of training that

goes on. As a matter of fact, at the end of this month there is a five-day

training session out in Central Newfoundland that goes into a lot of the things.

One of those components in that school is the facility inspections. So there is

a significant amount of training, and when the Fire Commissioner's Office or

the FES-NL sees a need for it, it is put on.

I don't know if anyone else wants to comment on that.

Marilyn?

MS McCORMACK: Yes, there are two fire schools and I do know that other

staff in the agency is involved in the review or an assessment of all of the

fire services. So it is recognized, I think, in the agency that there is some

work to be done in this area and we are hoping that the review will identify the

best approaches to addressing some of those concerns.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, I think that is adequate.

It is not important for me to see the positions in place. It is important for

me to know what is being done to really look at this issue; and, not seeing any

new money at all, obviously what you are doing right now, you are saying can be

done within the budget that you have here.

MR. DENINE: If - and I say if - extra money is decided, then we can come

back and look for it.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MR. DENINE: You can see where I am coming from. I don't want to - here

is $10 million here - not knowing where I am going to spend it.

MS MICHAEL: No, I understand that, but my concern is that, if you

determine in two or three months' time that yes, indeed, we do need more

people in the Fire Commissioner's Office, and that is the route to go, then I

don't want to see us waiting until the Budget of 2009-2010 for that to happen

MR. DENINE: I agree.

MS MICHAEL: - because we are dealing with something that is a serious

issue.

MR. DENINE: I hear what you are saying.

MS MICHAEL: That is where I am coming from.

MR. DENINE: Okay.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

Under 4.1.01., these are just a couple of line things here, not general

questions but just a couple of line issues. Executive Support, under Fire and

Emergency Services Agency, first of all Salaries, you must be planning new

personnel because the Salaries are going up considerably. Are they vacancies

that have not been filled or are they new positions?

MR. DENINE: The increase reflects the Business Continuity Plan

Secretariat for a full year instead of six months, and a senior manager

dedicated to work with the federal claim recovery process and develop a

provincial DFA aid program. That is what that would be for.

MS MICHAEL: What was that second one again, Dave?

MR. DENINE: Did I read too fast?

MS MICHAEL: You read too fast, yes.

MR. DENINE: I am sorry. And a dedicated senior manager to work with the

federal claim recovery process and develop a provincial DFA aid program.

MS MICHAEL: Got it. Okay, thank you.

MR. DENINE: Okay. Sorry about that.

MS MICHAEL: Subhead 03., Transportation and Communications. Budgeted

$170,000, revised down to $34,500 and then up this year to $100,000. What is the

basis of going back up to $100,000 if you only spent $34,500?

MR. DENINE: Basically, from $170,000 down to $34,000, there was less

anticipated travel. Basically, what happened there Lorraine is we are moving

into getting out of the infancy stage at the FES-NL, so there is going to be a

more significant amount of travel that is going to happen and there are going to

be much more things. If we stayed at $34,000, I know we certainly would not be

able to leave it at that; $170,000 was a bit too high, so we shut it off in

terms of that. Given our consultations, there is going to be a lot of travelling

throughout the Province. We are going to be focused on that.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

Then under subhead 05., is that the same reasoning there with regard to the

$250,000 and only spending $20,000 last year? Is it again because you are just

getting into things?

MR. DENINE: Yes, the same thing.

MS MICHAEL: What would the Professional Services be that you would be

enlisting?

MR. DENINE: You are talking about 05., right?

MS MICHAEL: 05., yes.

MR. DENINE: What happened here was delayed recruitment of staff and

resulting in delays of initiation projects, such as the Business Continuity

Plan, the policy development.

MS MICHAEL: Right.

MR. DENINE: There are a lot of things that are going to happen with the

Business Continuity Plan. There is a lot of work to be done and that would

reflect the cost of that.

MS MICHAEL: What would be the nature though of the Professional Services?

MR. DENINE: Marilyn, do you want to -

MS McCORMACK: Basically, it would be things like training of the staff

that are involved in providing the information. We are coordinating the

twenty-one government departments and two agencies now and they require training

in how to establish a Business Continuity Plan.

MS MICHAEL: Right. So you will be hiring people to help with that

training.

MS McCORMACK: Well, we have our staff complement, but we will be working

in rolling this out with all of the departments. They have working groups and we

will be training them and leading them though each step of the Business

Continuity Plan and when all of the departments have their plans done, that will

be rolled up into a provincial plan for government.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

I am sure 06. is the same answer so I will not even ask the question,

although you have come down in Purchased Services, subhead 06. The budget

initially was $275,000 and the estimate for this year is only $150,000. What was

the basis for bringing that down so much from the $275,000?

MR. DENINE: That reflects (inaudible) so it came down from $275,000 to

$150,000.

MS MICHAEL: Of course. Okay, thank you.

There is a question I would like to bring up, if I may do one more, Mr.

Chair.

CHAIR: Sure.

MS MICHAEL: A broader question came out of one of the heads but it is a

broader question. It has to do with municipal transit infrastructure. I know it

is difficult in this Province, we have such small communities, et cetera, but is

there any talking going on inside of the department or with municipalities about

any possibilities on this Province for improving public transportation?

Especially now with the way the cost of gas is going up, we are so dependent on

cars rurally in this Province. I am just wondering, are there any discussions

going on at all around public transportation?

MR. DENINE: Well, there are two areas here Lorraine that comes into mind.

One is the Corner Brook area and one is St. John's. Let's deal with the St.

John's area first, in terms of what is happening. I know for a fact that there

have been talks with Paradise and I know there have been talks with CBS in terms

of extending the Metrobus system out there. Right now, that is the only

transportation that municipalities can avail of and they do it on a per

kilometre basis.

What happens, as the sprawl moves and as - for example, let me give you an

example. Southlands, I hate to mention that name but I will mention it anyhow.

Remember a year ago the Metrobus decided that they wanted to put a bus service

in Southlands because they were isolated from St. John's, which they are, but

what happened was, is that as they move out then it becomes closer to another

place. For example, the bus now comes down Brookfield Road, so that can service

part of Mount Pearl, the Brookfield Road area that it did not service before.

So, you are picking up people there.

Also, too, when you move out to Donovan's, Mount Pearl put the bus services

in Donovan's, now there is only a little small stretch to go to Paradise. So

as you move it out, you will get more people. They are looking at it in terms of

the ridership. Again, I was thinking, last night on TV -and you are right, in

the Toronto area the number of people going by the transit system is a

significant improvement, and the price of gas is probably fuelling that, pardon

the pun. There are discussions going on that I know of, because I talked to the

mayors and they are looking at it, and one of these days when it can happen,

depending on the usage.

For example, I know in Mount Pearl we subsidize it, $3 dollars for every

dollar that is put in. It is not like a cost recovery thing. It is not like:

Okay, we are putting on a bus. It is going to cost you $20,000 and you are

getting $20,000 back. Obviously, you will probably only get a $5,000 return and

you have to put the rest in yourself. So, the cost of providing that service is

a factor which municipalities have to look at. Again, factors will come into

play as we move down the road.

The other

part is in Corner Brook. That bus service is not like St. John's

in terms of the extensive part of it. It is sort of on an hourly - certain hours

it will operate during the day and then it is cut off. St. John's goes a

little bit longer. Then they were provided with money in the gas tax, in terms

of being able to assist their transportation system. It is moving, but how fast

it is going to go I cannot tell you. I know that, especially on the Avalon area,

the urban sprawl is happening, you can see the connect. As you move forward

there will be a connect happening - bring it this close, why not bring it

another 100 feet and be out there? That type of thing will evolve over time. So

that is where it is, but I do know that discussions have been ongoing.

MS MICHAEL: Right. I just encourage more discussion on the provincial

level because I think the municipalities need the support federally and

provincially to make this happen and I think it is more than a municipal

responsibility, that is why I raise it. You talk about what you do not want to

mention - well, this gives my age away, but I can remember when we could hop on

the train and go out to Seal Cove.

MR. DENINE: Yes, I have been on that one.

MS MICHAEL: You think, wow, if we only still had the tracks, because a

train would be a wonderful way to bring commuters into St. John's from CBS,

and we used to do it.

MR. DENINE: They do it in Toronto now, don't they?

MS MICHAEL: That is right, exactly.

MR. DENINE: The same thing, the GO Train.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, that's right. So let's not give up on that thought,

by the way.

I think that is all, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much.

CHAIR: Thank you.

MR. BUTLER: A few one-liners again, Minister.

Under 2.2.01., Policy and Planning, 01. Salaries; I noticed last year the

budget was $372,000 and it went to $504,000, and then it is down again this

year. I was just wondering, was that additional positions? I was wondering if

they are temporary or permanent, and why the decrease again this year?

MR. DENINE: The increase there reflects the inclusion of a permanent

salary for a Director of Policy and Strategic Planning position; that was added

in 2006-2007. Also, in that was retirement and severance package payouts to

people who retired, and there were less than anticipated.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

I guess the same is for 2.2.02. under Urban and Rural Planning, the same

thing, basically?

MR. DENINE: Yes, the same thing.

MR. BUTLER: Very good.

I know my hon. colleague asked questions about the special assistance grants,

and you mentioned about some of that money might have been earmarked for the

closure of a mill. I was just wondering if you could elaborate on that. If they

are going to close, I was wondering why you are going to give them grant money?

MR. DENINE: No, that came under the Grants and Subsidies part of that.

When the Stephenville mill closed down they were given money, because when the

mill was operating they had a grant from - you know the process, in terms of the

mill would pay an operating grant to the community, they lost that. Also, too,

they lost a significant amount of people moving out of the area, and that was

basically for a transition time.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

So, similar to what would have been done through a large community

enhancement program type of thing, or just additional money, or for a different

purpose? Do you know what I am trying to say?

MR. DENINE: Well, basically, when the grant was given from Abitibi, that

was given into the town revenue. This is similar to that. They use it to help -

because what happens is that they were - the grant that they would have received

from the mill was significantly reduced, and this would help pay - basically,

give them a chance to get over the hump.

MR. BUTLER: It says under the heading there, 3.1.03. Special Assistance,

it is for special assistance grants to municipalities and other entities. I was

wondering, I know you listed some earlier - those would go outside the

jurisdiction of municipalities, the other entities as noted there?

MR. DENINE: I am not sure -

MR. BUTLER: Or would all the funding have to go through a municipality to

be a

MR. DENINE: All would have to go through a municipality.

MR. BUTLER: All through municipalities. So that would include recreation

MR. DENINE: Wait now.

MR. ROSE: Some of the special assistance grants would go to organizations

that would be supported by the Province, such as the Legion, the Association of

Fire Chiefs and Firefighters, grants for the Combined Councils of Labrador.

MR. BUTLER: Yes. That is why I was asking that question. Would that be

just through the Newfoundland Command of the Royal Canadian Legion or to

individual Legions out in the districts?

MR. DENINE: No, the grant to Beaumont Hamel, which we give, that goes to

the Royal Command. That is money to help assist people to go every year, a

number of veterans to go to Beaumont Hamel services in France. I was not sure of

what you meant in terms of that. Yes, grants will go out to different places.

MR. BUTLER: Just the local Royal Canadian Legion for something they want

to do around their facilities would not qualify under this? They would have to

be considered under the Community Enhancement Program?

MR. DENINE: It depends. In terms of that -

MR. BUTLER: I know one of the Legions in my area got rejected. So that is

why -

MR. DENINE: Well, we have not done very many, to be honest with you, in

terms of that but, basically, the funding did go to the Command. That is the

most money I gave away, $45,000.

MR. BUTLER: Why I was asking that, I know at different times -

MR. DENINE: Yes, and it is a difficult thing to do.

MR. BUTLER: - people with recreation, Royal Canadian Legions, have

applied and gotten rejected. Probably rightly so, but I am just wondering what

the criteria is or what can a Legion apply for that may be considered? Then,

when you mentioned Beaumont Hamel, I thought it was just through the main chain

of events.

MR. DENINE: No. I am looking at a policy on how we fund those because

they have come across my desk a number of times.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

From that I will go to the Community Enhancement Program. Minister, anything

I ask you here I can tell you is in no way against the program because I think

it is one of better programs that can help any constituency, a lot of the

smaller organizations and groups, even though they only may get $5,000, $6,000,

$7,000, $8,000 or $10,000. I know in my area I can take you out and show you

some facilities that you would not believe it if you saw the picture before and

after. It is almost like the show we see on television, Extreme Makeover, or

whatever you want to call it. Through that program, and I know you said - I

think that is done, a committee in place of different departments who put the

criteria in place, if I am not mistaken, how it is derived at. There are four

classes, I think, of how you grade them for the community enhancement.

MR. DUGGAN: There are four layers of priority outlined in the program

guidelines. The applications come in. They are reviewed by two management staff

from Municipal Affairs, and primarily a management person in the Department of

Innovation, Trade and Rural Development. Those are the three people who largely

try and assess the applications in relation to the four levels of priority. We

also tend to put certain applications out, say, to the Department of Environment

if it looks like there are environmental implications and Tourism, if there is

an application for trails. So, we will solicit input where we need it. We will

get input from the Women's Policy Office sometimes, particularly if it is a

kind of project that we have not seen before and they have not reviewed before.

We will bring all that together and then we will make some recommendations to

the minister in relation to the four levels of priority.

MR. BUTLER: I know there are different districts; it is not divided up by

forty-eight and you balance out your money. I understand that, because it is

based on helping people who have not received their insurable earnings.

Hopefully we will be able to help those people as well as do some good

infrastructure work in the districts. I understand that many of the districts

around the Province receive a lot more money than I would receive and I can

understand that, but it puzzles me when both members and this was prior to

the members changing in the CarbonearHarbour Grace district. My colleagues on

my own side of the House I could see those fellows getting anywhere from

$150,000, $120,000, $130,000. I go on the other side of my district, the same

thing. I think both of those districts are just as well off when it comes to

anything in regards to the economy as what mine was. I was down to $50,000. I

was just wondering how that is determined.

MR. DENINE: I guess the factors of the availability if you go around

the Province, yes, there is a discrepancy in terms of

MR. BUTLER: Oh yes, no doubt.

MR. DENINE: But also there is a discrepancy in the amount of people who

need the hours too, so when you equate both there are some there. My experience

was the availability of work in terms of being able to get your hours. Sometimes

in communities there is just no way to get them. There is just no possibility.

Once a plant goes down, there is no availability for work and so on. That is a

major criterion which we look at.

I do not know, Bill, if you want to answer more to that.

MR. DUGGAN: Over the last two years, Mr. Butler, the Auditor General has

questioned the evidence upon which we based the district allocation decisions,

and the reality is that the district allocation decisions were initially made

about twelve or fifteen years ago and then tweaked a little bit every year in

response to the kind of events Minister Denine referred to. Basically what we do

every year is we take the proportion of the funding last year applied to each

district and roll it forward this year and then tweak it a little more. The

Auditor General basically said he thought probably we should have something a

little more objective.

We made a commitment two years ago to try and develop an evidence-based

allocation system and we confirmed for the AG this year that we would pilot that

this fall. We do not have the formula completed yet but what we are hoping to do

is to take a very small number of the most significant descriptive statistics,

probably local unemployment rates, local employment rates, and use them to come

up with some kind of a tiered allocation formula per capita which would lead to

a more evidence-based and defensible allocation across districts. We will pilot

that this fall and we will see how it works is what I will say.

MR. BUTLER: I mean I totally agree with you, and I do not mean to pick on

any other districts in the Province but I know issues on the Northern Peninsula

and some other areas are far different from what they are in the Port de Grave

district, and I acknowledge that.

I know you people have nothing to do what I am going to say now, but

personally I think the Auditor General is tweaking too much in too many places.

MR. DENINE: Can I quote you on that one?

MR. BUTLER: Not a problem.

MS MICHAEL: It is on the record now.

MR. BUTLER: It is on the record.

MR. DENINE: Oh, you are quoted now is right.

MR. BUTLER: Over a period of time he is going to hear about it too, I

guess.

I mean, when you see such good projects happening and when you look at an

area and say, well, everything is fine in the Port de Grave district, and not

only my district, it could be here in the city, it could be in Mount Pearl, but

there are groups who apply with legitimate - I used to say, I cannot understand

it because they are just as well off in Carbonear and Harbour Main as they are

in our area. That is the

part I used to look at. I accept your explanation.

Back to the Fire Commissioner's Office: it is not under any heading, I was

just wondering how many staff and where are they all located with the Fire

Commissioner's Office? They are still over on Merrymeeting Road, is it? How

many staff are there and are they looking for additional staff?

MR. DENINE: Everyone is always looking for additional staff. The Fire

Emergency Services is up on the fifth floor over in the West Block. That is part

of it and then we have over on-

OFFICIAL: Parade Street.

MR. DENINE: Parade Street. I was born in St. John's and I forgot Parade

Street. I know where the old university was at. They are in that, and

Clarenville, Grand Falls, Deer Lake, there are offices there. We are spread out.

The thing is we are looking at trying to get under one roof.

MR. BUTLER: In the past the Fire Commissioner used to be here to answer

questions and I am sure I am looking forward to seeing the guy from Newfoundland

and Labrador Housing tonight. The Commissioner, there is no reason that he is

not here today, is there?

MR. DENINE: No, (inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: I know in the past when you had-

MR. DENINE: I never knew about the past. I am on a go-forward basis.

MR. BUTLER: I was expecting that answer.

Minister, the other day in conjunction with another department you made an

announcement about changes to water quality in our Province and that.

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. BUTLER: I know that is a good thing, and I think in Question Period I

did bring it up at one time. I understand the situation. This is not with your

department, the inspections are through somebody else. When all that broke about

the water quality last year and the chlorine was not up to a standard, it was

not certified or whatever the terminology would want to be, I checked with

municipalities in my area. I am not saying this comes back to your department

but then again it is a municipality type thing. If something went wrong I am

sure it would be all tied together, like the two of you are coming out with a

policy now on water quality. I checked with some of the municipalities in my

area and, yes, the water was tested - you go for instance up on Merrymeeting

Road and get a sample, and on Water Street there is another one - and the

samples came out pretty good. When I questioned them, do they inspect the actual

facility where this chlorine enters the system, one town manager told me it has

been eight years he was there and nobody ever came for a key - he has the only

key to it - and nobody inspected what was going in the system. If that was

happening, and it has nothing to do with your department-

MR. DENINE: No, that is right.

MR. BUTLER: It all comes back to roost with municipalities and

everything. If that was happening properly before with this uncertified, if they

were inspecting the facilities as well, they probably would have seen the

containers there, that it was not certified and would have detected it before it

went into the main stream. Do you know what I am saying?

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. BUTLER: That bothers me to some degree, I suppose, knowing that

something was in the water, even though it was only at a minor amount. You would

think the inspection would go right to that facility. I mean, you are inspecting

the homes for the fire sprinklers or what have you. You cannot check them out in

the backyard, you have to go into the building to see it. This was the concern I

had with testing the water. I guess I am only bringing it up now, hopefully in

conjunction with the two groups, that maybe your department can bring it forward

because it is municipalities even though the governance and the inspections are

done through another department.

MR. DENINE: Again, that is another reason why we are moving the water

quality thing forward. You are right, that part of the inspection deals with

environment and not municipal affairs. Sometimes when you do interdepartmental

jurisdictional it is so tight you wonder why one has it over another. You know

our goal is to make sure that everyone has potable drinking water and safe

drinking water and that is what the initiative was all about. You know, these

will be smaller communities, less than 500, who cannot go into a $4 million or

$5 million facility or cannot put that much money into ground. They will be able

to go to their communities and fill up their container and bring back good

drinking water. Now, they have water probably going to their house but to put in

a sophisticated system might be just too expensive for them. Basically, it is to

make sure that everyone has good drinking water, and part of that would be

training because they are hiring on more people.

I am going to leave that to Baxter in terms of talking on the training part

of it.

MR. ROSE: On that issue, last year there were actually two events that

occurred with the chlorine. One was: there was a batch of contaminated chlorine

that wound up in the hands of some municipal operators. There was a scent on the

chlorine and it got into some of the water supplies.

The second event was: there is a standard for the handling of this chlorine,

and the company that was manufacturing the chlorine was manufacturing the

chlorine in large containers and the system and the process that they were using

met this national standard. The problem that occurred is that the process for

getting from the large containers down to the small containers had not been

certified. As a consequence, the smaller containers of chlorine didn't meet

the same standard that had been applied to the large container. It didn't mean

that there was anything wrong with the chlorine. Those small containers and that

process are acceptable in a number of provinces in Canada. It is just that

Newfoundland and Labrador has the higher standard. There was nothing wrong with

the chlorine. It is just that the process from getting it from the big

containers to the small ones had not been certified.

I am surprised by the comment that the inspectors have not been in to some of

those water supply systems to do the testing. It may be possible that community

may have been on a boil water advisory for a long term or something. In which

case, if the town is on a long-term boil water advisory, that inspection would

not have been done unless there was something changed to bring the inspectors

back in.

MR. BUTLER: Not that I am aware of, that they were on a boil order.

I just have two or three more items, and hopefully I will have time to clue

those up before you move to I think someone over there might have a

question.

Minister, within your department, do you do much polling or is there much

media training within a twelve month time frame?

MR. DENINE: Why would you ask that?

In what sense? For me or for whom?

MR. BUTLER: Overall, I guess.

I know they wouldn't want to go to the polls about you. Everyone knows what

kind of man you are, right? Just general polling; like, from time to time I know

we ask questions of departments and, yes, we have done a certain amount of

polling about this or that or the other thing.

MR. DENINE: Like, to get opinions?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. DENINE: No.

MR. BUTLER: None?

MR. DENINE: No.

MR. BUTLER: Very good.

MR. DENINE: To be honest with you, the most my button is not on.

Maybe they don't want to record it. I will tell you anyhow. Most of my

information comes from my discussions with municipalities.

When I first got elected, I spent three days down at Municipalities

Newfoundland which I was no stranger to, because I knew most of them anyhow,

having a background in municipal affairs and I spoke to literally hundreds

of communities. When I went out last weekend in Gander, I spoke to a lot of

them. My colleagues here, any time someone wants to speak to me, I am always

available.

If you are looking for polling, there is my polling. I talk to the people.

That is what I do.

MR. BUTLER: I agree with you, Sir, I have seen that first-hand this year,

but I thought you might have done something beyond that.

MR. DENINE: No.

MR. BUTLER: My second-last question goes back to the meetings where you

do get your polling done. One of the resolutions that they brought forward this

year - and I am not saying I agree with it and I am not saying that you are

pushing it or anything like that, but it was brought forward as a resolution

I have to read it word for word, what was in the book: elimination of

unincorporated areas, and establishment of minimum municipal taxes for the

entire Province.

I was just wondering, with that resolution, has anything developed within

your department to go back to them with a response one way or the other?

MR. DENINE: Well, on the unincorporated areas, it is always a challenge,

as you know. The other part of it is that, when I spoke to Municipalities

Newfoundland and Labrador, I committed to looking at the fiscal framework of

municipalities, and how they generate money - where does it come from, what

other mechanisms we can use and do a whole rethinking process in how we

deliver this.

We will have a committee set up between MNL, municipal administrators, our

department, my officials, and we are going to be looking at the whole fiscal

framework of municipalities, and that hopefully to bring forth some time in the

fall. So, for that purpose of funding municipalities, that is where that will

come from.

I don't know if that answered your question or not, but we will be looking

at that, in terms of that; but, as far as the unincorporated areas, no, I have

not moved forward on any of that.

MR. BUTLER: My last question, Sir, and I should have asked it earlier

when I was on the topic: Is there a list available of all special assistance

grants and community enhancement grants that went out last year? Can you

actually get a list

MR. DENINE: I suppose, yes.

MR. BUTLER: - permissible to be passed out, that type of thing?

MR. DENINE: Yes.

MR. BUTLER: Very good.

MS MICHAEL: (Inaudible) committees?

MR. DENINE: Okay.

MR. BUTLER: They would all like that now, look.

OFFICIAL: I will make a note of that list.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

Mr. Chair, I think that is the end of my questioning.

Before it goes to someone else, I want to thank the minister and his staff

for appearing and being so straightforward with your responses.

CHAIR: Okay, thank you.

Are there any further questions?

MS MICHAEL: I would also like to say thank you; it has been a good

morning.

MR. DENINE: Thank you for your questions.

CHAIR: Anybody else from the Committee?

MS SULLIVAN: The hon. Member for Port de Grave asked my questions with

regard to MOGs, and I am happy with those answers. I would thank the minister.

CHAIR: Thank you.

I will ask the Clerk to call the subheads.

CLERK (Ms Murphy): Subheads 1.1.01. to 4.1.05. inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall subheads 1.1.01. to 4.1.05. carry?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, 'nay'.

Carried.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01. through 4.1.05. carried.

CHAIR: Is that the total?

Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, 'nay'.

Carried.

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

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of the Department of Municipal

Affairs carried without amendment?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those contra-minded, 'nay'.

Carried.

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

amendment.

MR. DENINE: Thank you.

CHAIR: Before we conclude, I would just like to thank the minister and

his staff for the Estimates here this morning. As well, thank you to the

Committee for the work they have done here this morning.

Just a reminder that the Social Services Committee will meet this evening at

5:30 here in the House to review Human Resources, Labour and Employment, and

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

I will now call for a motion to adjourn.

MR. BUTLER: So moved.

CHAIR: Seconded?

AN HON. MEMBER: Seconded.

CHAIR: Thank you.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.