April 10, 2006 GOVERNMENT SERVICES

COMMITTEE

Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Percy Barrett, MHA for

Bellevue, replaces Oliver Langdon, MHA for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Kevin O'Brien, MHA for Gander, replaces Paul

Oram, MHA for Terra Nova.

The Committee met at 6:45 p.m. in the Assembly Chamber.

CHAIR (Skinner): Order, please!

Good evening ladies and gentlemen. I would like to welcome you all here to

the Estimates Committee meeting to review the Department of Intergovernmental

Affairs.

Before we start the proceedings, I am going to ask that people introduce

themselves so that the people who are recording will know who we are and where

we are sitting. After we do that, I will read the heads into the record and then

we will start the process.

My name is Shawn Skinner, Chair and Member for St. John's Centre.

I will ask Mr. Sweeney.

MR. SWEENEY: George Sweeney, MHA for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

MR. ANDERSEN: Wally Andersen, MHA for Torngat Mountains.

MR. BARRETT: Percy Barrett, MHA for Bellevue.

MR. FORSEY: Clayton Forsey, MHA for Exploits.

MS E. MARSHALL: Elizabeth Marshall, MHA for Topsail.

MR. O'BRIEN: Kevin O'Brien, MHA for Gander.

MS McCARTHY: Karen McCarthy, Assistant Deputy Minister of

Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: John Ottenheimer, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

and MHA for St. John's East.

MR. SMITH: Doug Smith, Assistant Deputy Minister of Intergovernmental

Affairs.

MR. HICKEY: Billy Hickey, Director of Communications, Intergovernmental

Affairs.

CHAIR: Thank you very much.

The first subhead is 1.1.01. I would ask now that we give the minister some

time for opening remarks and then we will start the questioning.

My apologies. I read in the wrong heading, I'm sorry. The heading is

actually on page 17 of the book. It is heading 2.3.01.

Mr. Minister.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I welcome all Committee members and my colleagues here this evening, and I

thank you for making changes at the last minute to do this somewhat earlier than

was first scheduled. So, I thank everybody for your assistance in that area.

I am pleased to be here this evening to discuss the Intergovernmental Affairs

Secretariat Estimates for the 2006-2007 fiscal year.

The Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat is one of the several Secretariats

which comprise the Executive Council. As you are aware, the Office of the

Executive Council, including Intergovernmental Affairs, primarily serves the

Premier, the Cabinet and Cabinet Committees.

As Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs, I am responsible, with the support

of my staff, for representing and promoting the Province's interests within

Canada, and internationally, to maximize benefits for Newfoundland and Labrador.

While all ministers participate in intergovernmental relations to some

degree, my colleagues and I are responsible for their overall management.

Collectively, Intergovernmental Affairs is responsible for - and I will just

list some of the areas: the formulating and providing policy advice on

intergovernmental matters; the developing of government's intergovernmental

strategy and agenda; leading policy development on constitutional and national

unity issues; developing provincial positions for First Ministers' Meetings

and Premiers' meetings and providing support to the Premier at each of these

meetings; leading the development of provincial policy in intergovernmental

matters that do not fall within the responsibilities of other departments, for

example defense; negotiating or assisting in the negotiation of

intergovernmental agreements; participating in international negotiations, such

as: NAFO and the New England Governors and Eastern Canadians Premiers'

Conference; preparing briefing materials on intergovernmental issues and

coordinating work by departments on intergovernmental issues.

As you are aware, the Intergovernmental Affairs Act stipulates that all

intergovernmental agreements must be approved and signed by myself, as minister,

or by a designate.

The Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat has a staff complement of thirteen

permanent and five temporary positions. The Executive has four permanent

positions; a deputy minister, an assistant deputy minister, and their assistants

or secretaries.

During the development and delivery of the 2006 annual meeting of the Council

of the Federation, we also have additional temporary support of an assistant

deputy minister for special initiatives, and Ms McCarthy, to my right, fills

that position.

The Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat has three core divisions which work

to ensure that the Province's interests are presented and promoted in a

consistent and strategic manner. These divisions are the Economic and Resource

Policy division and the Social and Fiscal Policy division, each of which has a

director and two analysts, and the Intergovernmental Policy division, which has

a director and one analysis.

This year, until August, we also have a temporary division. The Council of

the Federation Organizing Team, with three coordinators and an office manager,

operating under the direction of the deputy minister and the assistant deputy

minister for special initiatives. This division is responsible for the

logistical and program development and execution for the 2006 annual Council of

the Federation Conference, which will be hosted and Chaired by our Premier in

July of 2006.

Mr. Chairman, those are just a few introductory comments with respect to the

Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat, for which I now act as minister.

I thank you for your attendance here this evening, and we would be more than

willing to answer any questions that you may have with respect to the estimates

or any issues that you feel are important.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Mr. Barrett, I will open the floor to you now.

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

I guess what we see here now is a new expenditure of government that was not

included in the Estimates for last year at all. What we saw, I guess, is an

increase in the Cabinet, which meant that it would increase government

expenditures tremendously, which the Premier had indicated when he put the

Cabinet together originally, that he was reducing the number of Cabinet

Ministers to save some money. So, I guess now that we have the money we are

increasing the Cabinet, which means that the Minister's Office in

Intergovernmental Affairs is a new expenditure of $271,000.

I would like for the minister to give me a breakdown of the Salaries within

the Minister's Office, which is $210,000. Can you tell me which positions they

are? I know what your salary is, you do not have to tell me that. But the rest

of them, in terms of Intergovernmental Affairs, what are the salaries within the

Minister's Office?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Barrett.

You are right. There is a new expenditure and it is the result of the

creation of a new ministry, I guess, in that sense because - and you have

alluded to it in your question. Previous to a few weeks ago, the responsibility

for Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat was covered off either by the Premier

or, most recently, by another minister.

The total salary costs for four permanent employees is $177,000 - to be

exact, $177,868 - and that is for four individuals, including myself, as

minister, my executive assistant, my constituency assistant - both of these

individuals, by the way, came with me from the Department of Health and

Community Services - and also we have a ministerial secretary or a ministerial

assistant. The four salaries combined total $177,868.

You are quite correct, these are new expenditures to the Intergovernmental

Affairs Secretariat because a new portfolio, I guess, in that sense, was created

by a new individual or by an individual other than the person who had been

acting in the past.

MR. BARRETT: So, really, as I had indicated earlier, this is a new

expenditure and the government has decided, in terms of its priority, that

Intergovernmental Affairs needs $271,000 to operate.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: One hundred and seventy-seven.

MR. BARRETT: No, $271,000 it says here.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: No. The salary cost for the four permanent employees -

those four that I just mentioned - the total I have here is $177,000.

MR. BARRETT: Well, it is $210,000 in the Estimates. So you must have

overestimated somebody.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: My ADM just pointed out to me, the salary portion is

$177,000 but the whole office expenditure, I guess, and other associated costs,

whether they be travel costs or communication expenditures, the total that has

been budgeted for - you are right - is $271,000. You are correct; $177,000

representing salary component only and the difference representing,

approximately, $94,000.

MR. BARRETT: No, you are wrong. The Estimates that I have here - I guess

I have the right ones - this is Estimates06 , The Right Choices:

Momentum for Growth and Prosperity .

CHAIR: For clarification, if I could -

MR. BARRETT: It says Salaries $210,000, and you just gave me positions

that total up to $177,000.

MS E. MARSHALL: I could probably clarify that for you, Mr. Barrett. It is

publicly disclosed by the government in that document there. It indicates what

comprises the $210,000. So, that would be in your Budget documents.

MR. BARRETT: But, it is not in this here. There is $210,000 for Salaries.

MS E. MARSHALL: Yes, but it is in that Budget document there. You would

have that. Here it is here.

MR. BARRETT: Does it outline the positions?

MS E. MARSHALL: Yes, it is right there. It is on page 7 of the salary

details.

MR. BARRETT: Yes, okay. It says here, temporary employees. What temporary

employees do you have within the department? And, overtime, $8,000?

CHAIR: If I could, Mr. Barrett, for clarification. I just want to be sure

that I am referring to the same figure you are.

In the book that I am looking at, on page 17, subhead 2.3.01.01 Salaries, it

is saying $210,000.

MR. BARRETT: Yes.

CHAIR: That is the amount you are referring to, is it?

MR. BARRETT: Yes.

CHAIR: Okay. So, for the minister's benefit, I just wanted to point out

that subheading 2.3.01.01 is the amount that Mr. Barrett is referring to, which

does not coincide, Mr. Minister, with the amount you just gave of $171,000.

MR. SMITH: Perhaps I can bring some clarity. In addition to the salaries

that are for the four individuals that the minister just detailed for you, there

is provision in there for a step increase; there is provision for salary

increases, which are anticipated for all employees, as I understand it, as a

small rounding adjustment; there is an allowance for temporary and assistants,

and overtime of $19,500. This is a contingency. There is nobody in any temporary

positions right now and we are not necessarily anticipating using that. There

are other earnings which are listed in salary details as a car allowance. That,

together with the salaries previous, comes to the total of $210,000.

MR. BARRETT: Yes, but the other document that the Member for Topsail just

gave me indicates that temporary and other employees is $19,700. You just

indicated that was for overtime, but there is also an $8,000 allocation for

overtime.

MR. SMITH: I cannot speak to the document that the member just gave you,

sir, but in the Budget forecast that I have -

MR. BARRETT: Permanent and other adjustments, I would imagine, is for the

step progressions?

MR. SMITH: Yes, there is a step increase and there is a salary increase

budgeted for.

MR. BARRETT: The thing about it is when you projected your budget for the

year, I mean that would have been included in the salaries, the step

progressions and any salary increases. Normally when you do the budget these are

already included. So, what you have added on now is more money for adjustments

and overtime; $8,000 for overtime and $19,700 for temporary employees.

MR. SMITH: As I understand it, sir - and I do stand to be corrected on

this - the salary details that are included in the Budget give the salaries of

those people who are actually currently employed at the rate at which it is

given.

The step increases, salary adjustments and so on, are a part of the budgeted

figure and they were included in the Budget that was brought down. This is not

an add on at the last minute.

MR. BARRETT: No, no. The document, in terms of the Budget document, it

said $210,000 for salaries. I guess this indicates that you are going to be

hiring more people on a temporary basis and you are allowing for overtime, which

would total up to $210,000. I have no problem with that, but the thing about it,

that breakdown was not in this particular budget here. It is in the salary

estimates, I guess, the salary details for each department. So that gives you

the overtime.

Transportation and Communications, I have no problem with that. The minister

has a responsibility and he has to travel all over the world and travel

throughout the great Dominion of Canada. Three thousand dollars for supplies, to

me is not excessive.

Purchased Services, $8,000, is that for telephones or is that under

Transportation and Communications?

MR. SMITH: Transportation and Communications covers telephones and

associated costs. Purchased Services would cover other costs related to the

minister's office, which would include things like purchasing transcripts or

that sort and manner of things. This allowance is based on previous experience.

It is a contingency again. We do not know that we will necessarily need to spend

all of that.

MR. BARRETT: But you did not have it last year?

MR. SMITH: We did not have it last year. It was covered off either

through the Minister of Justice's office or the Premier's Office, or we

picked it up (inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: So, we can expect a reduction in the - so, the $8,000 that

was budgeted here, that was covered off by the Minister of Justice last year?

So, I guess his budget is reduced, is it?

MR. SMITH: I cannot speak to the Minister of Justice's budget, Sir.

MR. BARRETT: I know, but I guess it is something that we would -

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I think the key word, Mr. Barrett, is that there is a

contingency. As the assistant deputy minister mentioned, and this is based on

past practice, when there was a previous minister dedicated to the

Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat, there were these sorts of contingent

costs that were either experienced at that time and could be anticipated in the

future. I think the key word here is a contingency in the event that it is

required.

MR. BARRETT: I would imagine that Mr. Sullivan has reduced the Department

of Justice's budget, if there is a Purchased Service here (inaudible).

MR. OTTENHEIMER: There may be a correlation based on what you are saying

but, similar to what my colleague to the left has said, I cannot confirm that

because I am not familiar with the estimates of the Department of Justice.

MR. BARRETT: Okay, now we are getting into the next one, 2.3.02. We have

already dealt with the $271,000 which is a new expenditure that did not exist

before, but now we are getting into, I guess, the department as it originally

existed, which was a part of another department, right?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Right, part of Executive Council.

MR. BARRETT: Part of the Executive Council. So, we have Salaries,

$480,300 and last year it was budgeted at $328,500 but it went up in the revised

figure to $401,600, and this year it is $480,000. We are looking at an increase

of $150-odd-thousand from the budgeted of the year 2005-2006. Can you explain

the difference here?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Sure. That is a fair question.

Perhaps singularly what is the greatest difference this year, compared to

last year, is the fact that we are hosting the Council of the Federation

Conference this summer here in our Province.

I will ask Ms McCarthy to speak to it in more detail in a moment, but we are

anticipating approximately 400 people to come to our Province during the last

week of July. We are hosting and sponsoring the event. In fact, our Premier is

the Chair and, for the next twelve months, will act as Chair of the Council of

the Federation which, of course, is made up, as you know, of all First

Ministers.

The event is being held both in the City of Corner Brook and in St. John's,

but we anticipate that these 400 people will be spending close to a week here in

our City. It is a major promotional event and it is a major constitutional

event, because this is a meeting of some prominence and some importance for all

jurisdictions across Canada.

In anticipation - and this relates to your question, and again it is a fair

question because I think this cost differential jumps out at us and here is the

reason why - in preparation for that event, which is coming up this summer, it

was necessary to have adequate staff and adequate individuals who, with some

experience, can act and prepare for this conference of some significance that is

taking place.

In terms of the actual salary detail, because I know you are referring to

that, I will ask the ADM for special initiatives just to speak to that directly,

but in a general sense the reason why you will see that differential is due in

part largely to the preparation work that is required to host and to sponsor a

conference of that size. It is of national importance and, again, when we

include delegates, spouses, support staff and media -

MR. BARRETT: Spouses?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Not in terms of salary but in terms of an event. There

may be an event for spouses and their families that may take place in Corner

Brook for an afternoon, for example. I am just talking very globally now. That

is obviously -

MR. BARRETT: We have a policy of not including spouses in anything.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: No, no, this is not a travel expense.

MR. BARRETT: If they are from away we will pay for it, but if the spouse

is in the Province we will not pay for it, is it?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: There may be an event on some afternoon while families -

if a family of a Premier is travelling Corner Brook, there may be some activity,

whether it is a tour of Bowater Park, for example, for spouses and their

children. There may be some event; there may be some cost associated with that.

MR. BARRETT: To the contrary, parliamentary conferences right now, for

example, those of us who attend as parliamentarians - and I do not see the

Council of Premiers as being any different than the Parliamentary Association of

Canada, but I have attended these over the years, and one time spouses were

sponsored to go. Therefore, the Speaker's office would pay the spousal entry

fee or registration fee or what have you, which would include all those vicious

tours that they took and the dinners and all that sort of stuff. So, we have a

group coming into this Province right now - right now, for example, we have a

policy that we do not include our spouses in those parliamentary conferences.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: In terms of travel costs, that is right.

MR. BARRETT: As a matter of fact, right now if we go to one of these

conferences and we want to take a spouse, we have to pay the registration fee

for spouses.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: That is correct.

MR. BARRETT: But we are bringing people into this Province -

MR. OTTENHEIMER: There may be an event - and the cost is, I would think,

rather minimal. I would think there may be an event, whether it is in St. John's

or in Corner Brook, that may involve spouses who may participate with other

delegates. I think that is the key, I say, Mr. Barrett. I think it is important

that we remember that. There may be an event for the delegates and the spouses

may very well attend that event.

As you know from attending other parliamentary events and functions around

the country, and perhaps internationally, if you attend an event - if you are on

a bus tour, for example, and your spouse who had to pay her way, and has to pay

for her travel costs and other associated costs, but if she happens to get on

the bus with you, that sort of distinction may not be made in terms of costs.

MR. BARRETT: What I am saying right now, for example, there is a

distinction being made. Right? If I were to attend the Public Accounts Committee

meeting - for example, in Timbuktu, somewhere in Canada, or Bumblee Bite - and

if I were to take an accompanying partner or spouse and if there was a

registration fee, I would have to pay that out of my own pocket so that my

better half could accompany me on the bus.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Right. I agree.

MR. BARRETT: We are putting off a Premiers - this is the Council of the

Premiers. This is what this is, right?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Council (Inaudible) federation.

MR. BARRETT: Not 400 people coming in. There are not 400 Premiers in

Canada. There are only twelve or thirteen, or whatever it is. So, what we are

saying right now is that we are going to incur the cost of the spouses going on

the trips. Is there a registration fee for this?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Is there a registration fee for Premiers? That I am not

sure.

Is there a registration fee?

MS MCCARTHY: Yes, there will be a $200 delegate fee.

MR. BARRETT: Will the spouses be paying the delegate fee?

MS MCCARTHY: Whoever checks in at an accommodations unit in here or on

the West Coast will pay a $200 fee towards the cost of provision of food and

that sort of thing for the conference.

MR. BARRETT: When they go to the West Coast, I guess it is at the Humber

Village or somewhere they are staying, is it?

MS MCCARTHY: It is at Humber Valley Resort.

MR. BARRETT: Humber Valley Resort. Are we paying the expenses of these

people over there or they are paying their own?

MS MCCARTHY: All jurisdictions will pay for their accommodations.

MR. BARRETT: They will pay for their own accommodations?

MS MCCARTHY: That is correct.

MR. BARRETT: The only expense that we are putting up is the meals?

MS MCCARTHY: Yes, that is true, and if we provide any entertainment for a

social event on that evening, of course, there would be an associated cost

there.

MR. BARRETT: Which will include the spouses?

MS MCCARTHY: Well, the spouses will be at the meal, I would expect.

MR. BARRETT: Will the spouses be paying the $200 fee?

MS MCCARTHY: It will be a per room charge. So whoever is checking in will

pay a per room fee of $200.

MR. BARRETT: A per room fee?

MS MCCARTHY: Yes.

MR. BARRETT: Which will include the spouses?

MS MCCARTHY: That is correct.

MR. BARRETT: Okay. No, it is important because we do have a policy. This

has been a policy that spouses are not to be included in any travel or any

entertainment or anything else that occurs. I guess what we should make clear

here is that we are providing that service to out-of-town politicians' spouses

but not if they are from Newfoundland and Labrador.

Anyway, I guess the question here now, in terms of the salaries, is who were

the people who were hired? Were they hired from within the public service? Are

they veteran public servants? Because, let's face it, if you are putting on a

thing like that I do not think you go to the outside. I mean, there is a lot of

expertise within the public service. Are the new employees just seconded from

other departments or are they new employees?

MS MCCARTHY: The majority of the individuals are from with inside

government, Mr. Barrett. I would be one of them myself, and I have been around

for fifteen years.

Also, we have temporarily assigned another lady who is a secretary within

Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat, particularly to assist with the agenda

planning side of the conference. So, the actual meeting of Premiers itself, if

you would.

MR. BARRETT: But her salary was already included in this, wasn't it?

MS MCCARTHY: Well, she has been temporarily assigned as an ADM secretary.

She, previously, would have been reporting and doing work for a director before

my coming to the Secretariat. So, she has been temporarily assigned.

We also hired four other individuals to assist with the organizational

planning for this event. It is a very massive event. When you have 300 or 400

people coming to an event like this, which is now in its forty-seventh year, we

wanted to make sure we were going to do things well. We have seconded Jackie

Barry from Cabinet Secretariat, who is a secretary to the Deputy Clerk. We have

seconded Colleen Meaney from, actually inside the House of Assembly, through the

Office of the Child and Youth Advocate, to be a coordinator. We have also

seconded Diane Blagdon, who is an ADM secretary from Fisheries and Aquaculture,

to be an office manager and receptionist person for us in our office. We did

elect to get, on a temporary basis, an individual from outside government. His

name is Greg Gill, and he comes to us from a local communications firm in the

city.

MR. BARRETT: Greg who?

MS MCCARTHY: Greg Gill.

MR. BARRETT: Was that position advertised?

MS MCCARTHY: The position was not advertised because they are less than

six months in duration. What we did was put together a series of - several

names, actually - individuals who we felt would be able to come onboard rather

quickly. We interviewed them, graded them and made recommendations.

MR. BARRETT: Was that position advertised within the public service?

MS MCCARTHY: No.

MR. BARRETT: So, there was no internal competition. You do not know if

there was anybody within the public service who could be seconded at all.

MS MCCARTHY: We did not advertise internally, that is correct.

MR. BARRETT: There was no internal competition so that people within the

public service could have gotten a job or some of the communications officers

within government could have gone into that position. You went outside and hired

somebody.

MS MCCARTHY: Yes, it is true that we did not advertise the positions

internally. By the time I was hired at Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat I

realized the need - personally, at least - to move forward very quickly on this

if we were going to pull it off within a six month time frame. We looked around

- and given my experience within government - pulled in a number of people who

had the capability of doing this, interviewed them and made recommendations to

the steering committee, which then approved the hiring.

MR. BARRETT: Okay.

We get down to Transportation and Communications. I would imagine that - last

year you budgeted $121,000 and this year you have $98,000, now it is $225,200. I

know you are hosting this conference but there are a lot of hidden things here.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Barrett, I do not think it is fair to say they are

hidden. There are a lot of expenses there.

MR. BARRETT: I said the wrong word. There are a lot of expenditures here.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: That is fair enough, but they are certainly far from

hidden. On the contrary, the figures are there and they are there for a reason.

They are there because this is a major event. It is an event of some importance

for us as a Province, for all of us. I mean, it is not a political event. It is

a national event of prominence that we are pleased, as a Province, to be able to

host.

MR. BARRETT: Don't get me wrong. I am not saying it is not important.

What I am trying to outline is that there is a $125,000 increase in

Transportation and Communications, and where is that extra $125,000 going to be

spent?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Well, as Ms McCarthy has mentioned, we have an event

taking place in two venues in the Province, both in St. John's and in Corner

Brook. There will be transportation costs, obviously. To have a group of that

size move from one venue to another, there are some transportation costs and

they are significant.

MR. BARRETT: But the transportation costs are only for our employees,

right? I mean, it is an expenditure in Transportation and Communications in

Executive Support within the department. If we are providing transportation, I

can see that these people here, they are going to have to travel from St. John's

to Corner Brook, and Corner Brook back to St. John's, but that is

$100-and-some-odd thousand dollars. You aren't going to spend that much in

mileage or airfare, so what is the $125,000? Whose expenses are we paying for,

for transportation and communications? Because we are not paying for the

Premiers. They have their own transportation. I hope we are not paying for Ralph

Klein to travel from St. John's to Corner Brook. If (inaudible), we're

cracked.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: We are hosting, the Province, and I think that is the

key issue here. We act as hosts. We are hosting a Council of the Federation

Conference in our Province. The Premier of this Province is assuming the role of

Chair and will be, in fact, Chair for the next twelve months. We are providing

that extra money, and this is an allocation that is there, for ground and air

transportation between the two venues, namely St. John's and Corner Brook. I

imagine there is a charter involved. I am not familiar with that type of detail,

but I am assuming it is a charter. Is that correct?

MS MCCARTHY: Yes.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: That is the allocation for a distance of that amount for

the numbers of people who are at stake. Again, we are the hosts and we do not

say to our guests, when you get on the plane, that it is necessary that you put

a $150 bill or you pay the pilot or you pay the driver, you pay for your ticket.

We are the hosts and, as hosts, we have to extend certain courtesies and that

includes costs that are not cheap. We have acknowledged that. They are quite

significant. This does not happen every year in our Province. When was the last

Council of Federation summer event? Do we know when the last one was in

Newfoundland and Labrador?

MS MCCARTHY: Sure, in 1995.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Hosted then by whom? (Inaudible).

MS MCCARTHY: I am just trying to think of who was the Premier. Premier

Wells at the time.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Premier Wells, I guess, played the same role, Mr.

Barrett, as Premier Williams will do in a few months' time. I can only assume

MR. BARRETT: Not in terms of the expenditure right now, but we are having

St. John's and Corner Brook. Obviously, by having it in Corner Brook, it is

going to cost an extra $100,000 in travel. Why are we having it in two venues?

Why not have it in Corner Brook and then Ralph Klein would be coming in on his

charter to Corner Brook and we would not have to flip-flop him back and forth?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I hate to answer that question with a comment because I

can certainly see the first complaint, or the first observation: Why is it

always in one region of the Province and why are other regions of the Province

excluded?

Again, we have several hundred individuals who are here and it was determined

that, again to be a true host and to be welcoming in a provincial sense, two

venues were selected. As I see it, in fact, the argument may be perhaps other

venues ought to have been considered, maybe Labrador as a region. Your colleague

to your left, perhaps very legitimately, might be able to say: Why isn't a

part of this very important gathering perhaps in Labrador? I guess it was felt

by the planning committee that two regions of the Province ought to be selected,

and I guess that is what was eventually decided upon.

MR. BARRETT: The thing about it is, if you are planning this event, you

could have picked one region whether it was Labrador, Corner Brook or St. John's.

In this case you are picking two regions of the Province. We are faced here all

the time with no money to do this. You can't get roads done, you can't get

this done, you can't get drugs, you can't get - we just increased ambulance

fees, for poor people going on ambulances, from $75 to $125 or whatever. When

you are talking about taxpayers' dollars you are talking about taxpayers'

dollars. On one hand we are saying to people you have to pay $180 for your

registration but we are hosting a national event - I don't disagree with that,

and we need it, but I can tell you, by having it in two locations you are

driving up the cost of that particular event. We are saying to some people - I

have people who have difficulty paying their light bills and everything else in

my district, who are on social assistance and on low incomes, and we are taxing

them at 15 per cent. My role here as an MHA is to ask these questions. Why are

you doing this?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Two comments. That is your role, and I appreciate that,

and your points are relevant. The two points: When First Ministers' gather,

they often select an agenda. The agenda items are obviously priority items for

jurisdictions across the country. One item certainly at the top, and it is

public, is the whole issue of fiscal imbalance and what it means to be a part of

this country, and how Ottawa and all provinces and all territories can relate in

a much better fashion, and hopefully from our Province's point of view, Mr.

Barrett, find some solutions from an economic and fiscal point of view that can

improve the lives of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. I think in some ways,

obviously, a conference of this importance will have that benefit.

The second point, it has been said that because of the nature of the

activities that will be a part of this conference, it is anticipated that there

will be well in excess of $1 million in economic spinoff for local businesses in

the Province. It is not as if money goes into a sink hole and is forgotten and

neglected and there is never any benefit for small businesses or individuals or

entrepreneurs in the Province. Again, we anticipate seeing some benefit from a

business and entrepreneurial point of view, but perhaps going to my first point,

this conference is one that is obviously a serious undertaking by all First

Ministers and it may go very well in some large way to deal with the cost of

ambulances and deal with some of our road conditions and deal with some drugs

that are not presently on the formulary, because if our First Ministers gather

with a view to making some improvements, whether it be nationally or

individually from a province's point of view, this meeting can only be deemed

to be worthwhile. That is why it is taking place.

MR. BARRETT: If you had picked Marystown, Newfoundland, for this First

Ministers' Conference, for example, not St. John's, not Corner Brook, the

economic activity that you are talking about, having it in two locations, is not

increasing; because if it is a week event and it was in Marystown, whether it is

in St. John's or whether it is in Corner Brook, the economic activity is being

generated. The only activity that is being generated, I guess, now is

transporting people from one location to the other, because all the other

expenses are set. I mean, if you had it here in St. John's or Corner Brook or

Marystown it would be the same amount. What I am saying is that, having it in

two locations - you could have flown all these people, I guess, into Labrador.

What I am saying is, why the two locations?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I guess the planning committee -

MR. BARRETT: That is not a decision you made. Okay.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: No, no, it is not a decision I made but it is a decision

that the planning committee made and it is a decision that I support, because

obviously they took all of these issues into account and it was determined that

this, as the hosting Province, would be the most appropriate way to welcome

First Ministers and their support, however many they exactly may be, to

Newfoundland and Labrador. From that point of view, I am confident in saying

that the thought and the preparation that went into this decision is one that I

rest with and, as minister, I will support. I look forward to the conference

because I think, as a Province, we can play a very meaningful role as we welcome

so many of these individuals here, perhaps many of whom are here for the first

time.

MR. BARRETT: I am not disputing it. Don't get me wrong; I am not

disputing the importance of the meeting. I am just looking at this in terms of,

to me, what would have been more cost-effective to do.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I guess, from Newfoundland's point of view, it would

have been most cost-effective to have it in Nova Scotia.

MR. BARRETT: No, it wouldn't, not if you are hosting it in

Newfoundland.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Exactly.

MR. BARRETT: What I am saying is, it would be most cost-effective if we

had it in Marystown, St. John's, Corner Brook, Gander or Grand Falls, and have

it in one location instead of spending all this money of transporting people

around.

I would imagine that all of these expenditures here, in terms of supplies and

professional services, are because of this conference.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: The additional cost, Mr. Barrett, and the distinguishing

feature of the difference in the overall expenditures in the Intergovernmental

Affairs department this year compared to last year are basically two things, and

you have hit the nail on the head in both of them. It is the fact that we are

sponsoring and hosting this Council of the Federation event, and the fact that a

new minister has been appointed separate and apart from another individual

holding that portfolio and sharing that responsibility with another portfolio.

These are singularly the two issues that separate the overall expenditures this

year compared to last year.

MR. BARRETT: Okay.

Based on what you just told me right now, this Council of Premiers, or

whatever they call themselves, the cost to the Province is $1.497 million.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: The original cost, that is correct, and that has been in

the public domain. That was announced, I think, some while ago, that we

anticipate costs to that extent; however, subject to two other conditions. One

is that we receive, I believe, from the Council of the Federation Secretariat,

an amount of some $200,000 as an offset to that expense; and, furthermore, the

planning committee, those individuals who are working quite diligently in

preparation for this July conference, are expecting an amount towards some

$500,000 in - what will we call it?

MS MCCARTHY: Partnerships.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Partnerships, that is the word - in partnerships as they

join with the Province in welcoming and embracing the numbers of individuals to

the extent that we have discussed.

So, $1.4 million quickly is reduced by almost one-half: $200,000 from the

federal Secretariat which this Province will receive - in fact, any Province

would receive that, who hosts it - plus another $500,000 in corporate

partnerships, so that will reduce the half by one-half.

MR. BARRETT: So, $500,000 comes from the federal government?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: No, $200,000 from the Council of the Federation

Secretariat.

MR. BARRETT: Okay, that is the federal one that provides

interpretation

and bilingual services and all that sort of stuff.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: The $200,000.

MS MCCARTHY: If I could clarify, you are probably thinking about the

Canadian Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat. In fact, we are talking about

the Council of the Federation Secretariat which does not have a federal arm to

it whatsoever. It is completely made up of the provinces, and every year each

provincial jurisdiction provides a nominal amount of money into the Secretariat

to keep it running and to help organize such conferences as what we are having

this summer.

MR. BARRETT: So, the Secretariat is $200,000.

MS MCCARTHY: That is right, $203,000 actually,

MR. BARRETT: Two-hundred-and-three thousand dollars. So, the other

$500,000 in revenues is coming from where?

MS MCCARTHY: The other $500,000 are anticipated partnership arrangements

that we would enter into with companies who indicate that they would like to

become a partner with the conference. So the Province actually issued publicly,

and with the assistance of the Government Purchasing Agency, Expressions of

Interest back in February, and those Expressions of Interest from companies,

both locally and across the country, have been coming in, and we are in the

middle of assessing what is coming in there right now. Our hope, really, is to

get $500,000 in partnerships with these companies so that we can reduce the cost

to the public purse.

MR. BARRETT: So, an actual company, some company like Aliant or some

company like that, is going to sponsor a (inaudible) Premiers Conference?

MS MCCARTHY: Certain events, perhaps, at the conference, and this, of

course, is in keeping with many -

MR. BARRETT: Anyway, it doesn't matter where it comes from; the

taxpayers still pay for it.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: No.

MR. BARRETT: The consumer still pays for it, I should say. It doesn't

matter whether it comes from a business or whether it comes from excess dollars.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Yes, somebody has to pay for it, but I think the point,

and I think this is an important point -

MR. BARRETT: If it is a telephone company that is paying for it, they are

writing it off as a business expense and in the end we pay the bill anyway, so

it doesn't matter where it comes from.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: The direct cost to the public, it is anticipated, will

be reduced by approximately 50 per cent from the two sources that we have

mentioned.

MR. BARRETT: From the taxpayers. Minister, you had better clarify - from

the taxpayers. The public will still pay for it.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Human beings, I guess, will pay for it.

MR. BARRETT: It doesn't matter where it comes from; we all pay for it

eventually, right?

Purchased Services, I just want to say here, is going up from $263,000 to

$1,138,600. I guess that is mostly -

MR. OTTENHEIMER: That is the one.

MR. BARRETT: This conference is what is costing that. That is where we

come in with the $1.5 million that this conference is costing the taxpayers or

the people of the Province or somebody.

MS MCCARTHY: A lot of it is there, Mr. Barrett. It is for everything from

the provision of security by members of the RNC to translation,

interpretation,

and technical services of that nature, to food and beverage, to meeting space

rentals, that kind of thing.

MR. BARRETT: When you say security for this is being provided by the RCMP

and the RNC, that is included in the Purchased Services so there should be a

vote within Justice indicating that there is a transfer, I guess, from

Intergovernmental Affairs to Justice to pay for the security for this

conference? Related revenue from some other source?

MS MCCARTHY: Well, I would see it myself as an additional piece of work

that has to be undertaken by the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and, as a

result, we have voted that money within our budget in order to pay the RNC for

the overtime and the work that they would put in on this conference.

MR. BARRETT: So, when this is all said and done we will see a transaction

somewhere, I guess, in that there will be money transferred from this account

centre to the RNC to provide for the security.

MS MCCARTHY: That is correct.

MR. BARRETT: Okay, we will keep a watch out for that.

I am finished with questions for the time being.

CHAIR: Mr. Forsey, do you have any questions or comments?

MR. FORSEY: No, thanks.

CHAIR: Ms Marshall?

MS E. MARSHALL: No questions.

CHAIR: Mr. O'Brien?

MR. O'BRIEN: No questions to this point, other than I was just

wondering why, I guess, did this government bring in the policy in the first

place to exclude spousal costs in regard to conferences and whatnot? I wonder

what prompted that.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: It is a policy that was introduced by the previous

government but it is one that has been acknowledged and maintained by the

present government.

CHAIR: Mr. Sweeney?

MR. SWEENEY: I think it is important that the (inaudible) recognize who

brought the policy in.

Anyway, minister, I have a few questions I would like to ask you about the

Ottawa office. There was $19,900 spent last year on Salaries. What was that

spent on?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: It is my understanding that when the former

representative left the position there was still some clerical and

administrative expenditure. I think someone was there answering the phone, if I

am not mistaken, and there were some administrative and clerical

responsibilities. That continued on, Mr. Sweeney, for awhile after Mr. Rowe, who

was the previous occupant of that position, after he left. If you wish, I can

give you better details on that in terms of whether it is $4,000 for a

receptionist or $5,000 for clerical, but it is my understanding that it is

related to that sort of administrative and clerical responsibility that

continued on after awhile.

MR. SWEENEY: Was there any severance pay allocated to Mr. Rowe?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I do not know. It is something that, I guess, we can

endeavour to find out for you.

This particular area, as you can see, it is recognized there in this year's

Estimates. The Department of Intergovernmental Affairs or the Intergovernmental

Affairs Secretariat, from a financial point of view, covers off the

responsibility in terms of any expenses related to this office.

From a policy point of view or any decisions, I can say to you that this is

clearly a directive from the Premier's Office. Even through there is a

reference here of $206,000 in associated Salaries, I am not aware of any

decision that has been made, as of yet. I think it is fair to say that because

it is there it may well be anticipated, but that sort of information, because it

is largely an initiative from the Premier's Office, that sort of detail I will

endeavour to get for you because we are not privy to it. What the role is this

year, or any details with respect to the Ottawa office, I will endeavour to get

that for you.

MR. SWEENEY: I would certainly appreciate that, minister.

I hate to go back to the Salary headings again, but the Estimates show

Salaries for the Ottawa Office of $206,000 and when we go over to the Salary

Details there is $137,000 reflected. I was just wondering what the difference is

between both? Actually, this whole page here, there is a discrepancy between -

what is in the Salary Details and what is in the Estimates are two totally

different numbers. One of which was under Policy Analysis, in the Estimates it

is $623,500 and in the Salary Details it is $509,000.

Also, when we go to Executive Support, and this is one of the most striking

differences that I find, it is $480,300 and the Salary Details show that it

comes out to $312,475. So, please forgive us for being a little bit concerned

about these discrepancies because they are striking differences, especially when

you are only dealing with four positions in one instance, and $25,000 a person

certainly would not take in the 3 per cent raise that they are going to get this

year.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Okay, fair enough.

MR. SMITH: As I understand it, sir, what is shown in the Salary Details

in the Budget are those salaries that apply to permanent staff and that it is.

What is not included in that information is information related to step

increases, information related to general salary increases, information related

to allowances for temporary assistance and overtime, which all departments of

government do have as a contingency against work that may need to be done over

the course of the year. The discrepancy arises because the Salary Details

provides only the information for people who are currently on staff and what

their current salary is. It does not cover off, as I said, step increases that

are going to occur, general salary increases or the allowance for temporary

assistance and overtime. I can give you more information on that if you wish.

MR. SWEENEY: Yes, I would love to have some more information because the

numbers reflect - we have all been around long enough to understand what step

increases are, and of course what the regular pay increases are, which we have a

3 per cent increase some time this year for the public service. So, it certainly

would not reflect $25,000 per person.

MR. SMITH: No, that is correct.

MR. SWEENEY: If you would -

MR. OTTENHEIMER: We will provide that.

MR. SWEENEY: To me, it shows me that there is some planned hiring, but it

is under each department. I was just wondering why there would be a discrepancy

in each section?

MR. SMITH: I believe that is just the way the Budget is set out, sir.

MR. SWEENEY: It was not set out last year that way.

Our job is to come here and go through this process, and if there is

something compelling there I would certainly like to know the answer rather than

maybe have a reporter who is upstairs listening tonight and say: How come you

didn't ask a question about this? Well, it is kind of obvious that these

numbers are strikingly different.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Fair question. If there is a discrepancy there we will

undertake to provide that so that you are fully satisfied with the explanation.

That is not a problem.

MR. SWEENEY: Has there been any decision made to replace Mr. Rowe yet? I

understand there has been some advertising done for that position.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: To my knowledge, there has not been. I just want to

repeat what I said earlier, this is largely an initiative of the Premier's

Office. Again, I will undertake to bring you up to date on that particular area.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. Unfortunately, the Premier did not show up for his

turn to answer some questions. Like in the Department of Business, we certainly

could have pursued this.

One question that I think begs to be asked here is: How come there was so

much money spent on Purchased Services if the office is not filled?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: You are referring to the Ottawa Office?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes, I am still stuck there.

MR. SMITH: The Purchased Services primarily refers to the rent for the

space that we hold in Ottawa. We have continued the lease, is my understanding,

against reappointment of an Ottawa representative. There are lease costs for

office space.

MR. SWEENEY: How much was that again? What is the dollar value on that?

MR. SMITH: I cannot tell you what the actual lease costs are for the

Ottawa Office. I will undertake to find out for you and get that information to

you.

MR. SWEENEY: I am curious, why was $119,400 spent in the office if nobody

was working there? Was that all rent, or was it...?

MR. SMITH: Again, I do not know the details, sir. I would have to inquire

to the Premier's Office for that.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay, I would appreciate getting it.

I guess the other question I should ask is, what does this office do, if it

was deemed to be left open for a full year with nobody in it? Did it serve any

purpose last year?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: It was certainly felt by the Premier that this is a role

of importance in terms of the relationship between the Province and the federal

government. Now that there is a full-time Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs,

that may in some way qualify and leave that particular position open for a new

defining and a new description.

It was certainly anticipated, as I understand it, that there would be an

individual on the ground in the capital representing the interests of this

Province, being present and dealing in a direct way with, whether it be the

federal government, the federal bureaucracy, our federal representatives in

Ottawa, and from a policy point of view have a real presence in the nation's

capital, and an individual who truly is a representative of this Province. Not

unlike, I might add, Mr. Sweeney, the Province of Quebec, I believe, has a

similar position. I believe the Province of Nova Scotia recently made some

announcement that they, too, would have an individual, I guess, carrying out a

similar role in Ottawa, again on behalf of the residents of that particular

province.

MR. SWEENEY: Also, Minister, it is my understanding that these positions

have been filled, not left open for a year.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: It is true, it is on public record that this position

has been vacant for the last eleven months or twelve months or so; but, again,

as can be seen by the Estimates, I think it is safe to assume that some thought

will be given to having that position filled.

With respect to the kind of detail that you are asking, we will have to

provide you with that because, as you can appreciate, it is a directive of the

Premier's Office and I am simply not privy to it.

MR. BARRETT: If that is the case, why isn't it included in the Premier's

estimates?

CHAIR: Mr. Barrett, if I could, if you would just wait for the light to

go on so they can pick up your - there you go, the light is on now. You can go

ahead.

MR. BARRETT: I just want to -

MR. SWEENEY: (Inaudible) want to wait for a second.

MR. BARRETT: Okay, I will wait.

MR. SWEENEY: I just had another couple of little issues on this one that

I would like to pursue.

Obviously, the fact that the office has been kept open, there has been some

assessment done as to the role of that office and the importance of that office

being there. I was just wondering if we could get some level of comfort with

what that office accomplished while it was being occupied by a deputy minister,

I guess.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: A fair question.

MR. SWEENEY: Is there some record of activity or some log of why we are

keeping the office open? The office has been in existence now, what,

two-and-a-half years, somewhat? I was just wondering if we could find, keeping a

straight face here, what the achievements were that came out of that office in

the period of time there was somebody there in that position?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Again, a fair question and we will have that information

provided for you.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay.

Now, Percy?

CHAIR: Mr. Barrett.

MR. SWEENEY: I wanted to keep my train of thought.

CHAIR: No problem.

MR. BARRETT: What was Bill Rowe being paid, as a salary?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: That question as well, again, I am at a disadvantage

there because the operations of the Ottawa Office are directed by the Premier's

Office and that sort of detail again I will undertake to provide for you. The

Secretariat for Intergovernmental Affairs falls under the heading for

administrative purposes, but that sort of detail we will have to provide.

Again, it is a fair question and we will undertake to provide that for you.

MR. BARRETT: Salaries are $206,000.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: You are wondering what the breakdown is in terms of what

that office is, and any support that may be a part of that. We will undertake to

provide that.

MR. BARRETT: Is that a ranking as a deputy minister's position?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: We will provide the exact figure for you.

MR. BARRETT: Purchased Services, I do not know if Mr. Sweeney asked this

question.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: He did.

MR. BARRETT: That was incurred for what?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: That question was asked and, at the same time, because

of the fact that the information we have is essentially non-existent, we will

undertake to provide that for you on that particular heading.

MR. BARRETT: Minister, this is amazing. These Estimates are included

under your department but you do not have the information, and you are

presenting it to the House for approval.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: With respect to the Ottawa Office, that is correct. It

is information that I will undertake to provide you. We do not have that

particular information.

MR. BARRETT: I guess the question then is: Why is this office under your

Department of Intergovernmental Affairs when all the direction is coming from

the Premier, as the Premier's Office? Why is it not included in the Premier's

Office, the Salary Estimates, which means that we would ask those questions in

the House when Executive Council comes up for questioning within the House?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I have indicated that we will certainly take note of

these questions and we will respond. We will get this information from the

Premier's Office and we will respond accordingly.

MR. ANDERSEN: Minister, the question that Mr. Barrett asked, would that

be answered on page 11 of Executive Council where it says: Ottawa Office,

Provincial Representative, $95,780?

CHAIR: Under the Departmental Salary Details book that we have, Mr.

Andersen is referencing that and he is saying that there are some salaries shown

there for the Ottawa Office and he is wondering if that is the salary of Mr.

Rowe.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: That would be correct.

According to my ADM, that is the amount and that would represent the salary.

Is that correct?

MR. SMITH: That is my understanding.

CHAIR: Did you have anything else, Mr. Andersen?

MR. ANDERSEN: No.

CHAIR: Mr. Barrett?

MR. BARRETT: I don't have any further questions.

CHAIR: I will just go to the other side for a second.

Mr. Forsey? Ms Marshall? Mr. O'Brien?

I will go back, Mr. Sweeney, if you would like to continue.

MR. SWEENEY: Back to the Ottawa Office again, I would sort of like to get

the minister's feeling on having this office as part of your responsibility

but still it appears that it answers to the Premier's Office.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: The administration, I guess, of the office, comes

through - it has to go somewhere, and it obviously comes through the Secretariat

for Intergovernmental Affairs; however, the Ottawa Policy Office and the

directives come from the Premier's Office. There is no question about that,

and that is why the information - you have asked relevant questions and we will

undertake to provide those answers for you.

MR. SWEENEY: I think, myself, my personal view from what I have seen and

in talking to some of the MPs in Ottawa, I think that now that we have a

Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs who is more than capable of continuing

with that file, I am not even sure that it bears merit having it open any more.

Before, when the Premier was on a binge of cutting back on government

departments - and I think that was what he did to eliminate the Department of

Intergovernmental Affairs. Now that we have a Department of Intergovernmental

Affairs, I have complete confidence in your ability to move any file forward

with any of the MPs who are up there or the federal government. I just wanted to

express my views on that.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Well, I appreciate your comments, but, again, the

Premier's Office may well have it within their mandate to move forward on

that, they may not. They did not for the last eleven or twelve months, but that

may or may not be a factor, Mr. Sweeney. That may be taken into account by the

Premier's Office. I cannot speak to that.

CHAIR: Mr. Barrett.

MR. BARRETT: Just in conclusion, Mr. Chairman. I just want to make a

comment.

It is a good point that the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace points out.

With a Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, and you are looking at now extra

expenditures in terms of creating the department. If there was anybody on that

side over there, on the government side, that I would send to Ottawa to

represent us in terms of the views, it would be the present Minister of

Intergovernmental Affairs, I can assure you that. What I am questioning here has

nothing to do with the person who occupies this position. What I am saying is

that as a Minister of the Crown you have an account centre in here that is out

of your control and my advice to you, as the minister, is you had better get

control of it because you are the one who has to answer questions on it, not the

Premier.

In regards to representing this Province, there is nobody over there, not one

person over there who has more ability to represent this Province as an

Intergovernmental Affairs Minister than you do, sir. Therefore, that is not the

point. What we are saying here tonight is that there are a lot of increases in

expenditures and this Ottawa Office may not be necessary.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Your colleague, Mr. Sweeney, has echoed the same point.

CHAIR: I am going to go back to Mr. Sweeney. I think he has a couple of

more points he just wanted to talk about.

MR. SWEENEY: You are not responsible for the Rural Secretariat, are you?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Not at all.

MR. SWEENEY: None of those other things on the Executive Council?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Intergovernmental Affairs only.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. You are not interwoven there in anyway?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Completely separate and apart.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. The Communications and Consultation Branch. What is

the function of that particular branch?

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Sweeney, that is not us either. When you look at the

headings it is a bit confusing, but that is a separate division of Executive

Council and it is not a part of the Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat. You

will notice the very last page, the amount to be voted on - there is a page

number on it, I believe, but anyway -

MR. SWEENEY: Three million, one hundred and eighty-eight thousand.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: That is correct, and anything after that is separate and

apart.

MR. SWEENEY: I see it there now, yes.

CHAIR: The headings are 2.3.01 to 2.3.04.

MR. SWEENEY: And that's it?

CHAIR: Yes.

MR. SWEENEY: Well, I rest my case.

CHAIR: Mr. Andersen or Mr. Barrett?

If I could, I would like to just ask the headings 2.3.01 to 2.3.04, shall

they carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Contrary?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

On motion, subheads 2.3.01 through 2.3.04 carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total heads carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Contrary?

On motion, Department of Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat, total heads,

carried.

MR. BARRETT: For the public record, we are against the Ottawa Office not

against the Minister's Office.

CHAIR: I also have some minutes that I need to bring forward. The

committee meeting on April 10, for the Government Services Committee, I ask that

those minutes be adopted, please. I believe they have been circulated to all

committee members.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Moved by Mr. Forsey, seconded by Ms Marshall.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: I would like to thank you and your staff, Mr. Minister, for

attending this evening. We appreciate the input that you have provided to us.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you.

I would like to thank the Committee as well for their questions. With respect

to the undertakings, we will work on those and have them to the members as soon

as possible.

MR. SWEENEY: I appreciate that.

CHAIR: A motion to adjourn, please?

MR. SWEENEY: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Mr. Sweeney, seconded by Ms Marshall.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Contra-minded?

Motion carried.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.