March 31,

Government Services Committee

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

CHAIR (French): Oh, we have ignition.

Are you ready to go, Minister Pottle?

MS POTTLE: Yes.

CHAIR: First of all, I guess, just a quick brief and welcome everyone

back to Government Services Committees. I know everybody is excited to be back

for a couple of weeks of entertainment and questions and answers, certainly.

I guess before we start I know the Leader of the Official Opposition is

here, but I will ask Minister Pottle first to introduce her staff that she has

with her.

MS POTTLE: Sean Dutton, Acting Deputy Minister it was Ron Bowles, ADM

for Labrador Affairs; David Hughes, ADM for Aboriginal Affairs; John Tompkins,

Communications Director; and Donna Stokes, Executive Assistant to myself.

CHAIR: Thank you very much.

Do you want to introduce yourself, Ms Jones?

MS JONES: Yvonne Jones, I am the MHA for the District of

Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS BUCKLE: Joy Buckle, Researcher.

CHAIR: We will start with Mr. Forsey, and you can go around the loop.

MR. FORSEY: Clayton Forsey, MHA, Exploits.

MS E. MARSHALL: Beth Marshall, MHA, Topsail.

MR. BUCKINGHAM: Ed Buckingham, MHA, St. John's East.

MR. DINN: John Dinn, MHA, Kilbride District.

CHAIR: And I am Terry French, the MHA for Conception Bay South.

So I guess we will start off I do not know if you have anybody else coming

from the committee, Ms Jones?

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Just yourself. So you can start asking questions and continue on

until you are finished, I guess. If you want to stop somewhere in between for a

break, you are more than welcome to.

MS JONES: You did not have any opening comments?

MS POTTLE: I have just a few opening remarks.

CHAIR: Oh, I am sorry! I am jumping ahead.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is a bit rusty.

CHAIR: A bit rusty. Sorry about that.

Minister Pottle, you go right ahead.

MS POTTLE: I just want to welcome you all here this morning, and as

Minister of Aboriginal Affairs I am pleased to appear before you to discuss the

Estimates of Aboriginal Affairs Branch of the Department of Labrador and

Aboriginal Affairs.

I will also speak on behalf of Minister Hickey. Minister Hickey is in Goose

Bay this morning, meeting with the Germans' Ambassador to Canada.

The Department has an annual budget of $5.1 million with a staff complement

of thirty-one people, plus two ministers.

Nearly all of the activities of the department, including land claim

negotiations and implementation of the Northern Strategic Plan for Labrador,

require collaboration with other provincial public bodies, as well as Aboriginal

For the fiscal year 2009-2010, some major departmental initiatives include

the implementation of the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement, providing

operating funds for the Combined Councils of Labrador, delivering and

administering the Air Foodlift Subsidy, the Labrador Transportation Grooming

Subsidy, and the Williams Harbour air transport subsidy.

With that, I am available, Mr. Chairperson, to discuss the details of the

Estimates.

CHAIR: Carry on.

MS JONES: Thank you, Terry, and thank you, Minister, for your own view

and your officials for being available this morning.

I am going to start with the estimate numbers from the book under Executive

and Support Services,

section 1.1.01., and it is the Ministers' Offices

CHAIR: Excuse me, you are right, I am very rusty this year.

I have to start by calling the subheads.

MS JONES: Oh, I am sorry.

You go ahead, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Sorry to break your train of thought.

I call subhead 1.1.01.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will just continue under that heading, under 01., which is Salaries for the

Ministers' Offices. Now I understand from the Estimates that both the Labrador

Affairs and Aboriginal Affairs are still combined as one department, although it

has two ministers. Is that correct?

MS POTTLE: Yes, that is correct.

MS JONES: It also has one ADM?

MS POTTLE: One ADM.

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MS POTTLE: Yes.

MS JONES: Deputy Minister.

MS POTTLE: One Deputy Minister. Well, there is an ADM for Labrador

Affairs and an ADM for Aboriginal Affairs.

MS JONES: Are there other shared staff within those two departments,

those two separate departments?

MS POTTLE: Communications director and the public relations specialist,

Val Oliver in Goose Bay, are pretty much shared staff.

The executive secretary, like if Minister Hickey is in town she will assist

with Cabinet papers, things like that, and if I am up in Goose Bay then the

reverse up there as well. So you have some sharing like that.

The Aboriginal Affairs complement deal with the Aboriginal Affairs files.

Labrador Affairs staff deal with the Labrador Affairs files.

MS JONES: Physically, how are those two departments located in

Confederation Building? Are they in the one office or are they in two different

offices?

MS POTTLE: Labrador Affairs is in Goose Bay and Aboriginal Affairs is

here in St. John's.

MS JONES: Okay. So, where is your department physically located in the

building?

MS POTTLE: Over in the West Block, fourth floor.

MS JONES: So, the Minister of Labrador Affairs has no departmental office

here?

MS POTTLE: He has a suite here that he uses when he is here in town.

Obviously, he is here quite often with Committee meetings, Cabinet and things

like that, and with the House and that. Other than that, he does not normally

have support staff here and that is why we lend our support staff when he is in

town.

MS JONES: Okay.

This year you budgeted $523,700 for the Ministers' Offices, which was an

increase of $50,100. The Estimates show that you plan to spend $41,000 of this

on overtime and other earnings. Why would there be overtime? I thought it might

have been just because of the salary increases and step increases or something.

Why are you projecting to have that overtime? That is according to the salary

estimates book.

MR. DUTTON: The category is overtime and other earnings, but there is no

overtime in this line item. This is a combination of items and I think the

largest is the Labrador allowance for Labrador-based employees. Also, the car

allowances for the two ministers are voted under this item.

MS JONES: Okay.

Is there any reason why those two departments are budgeted together? Like,

why all the expenses for the ministers are under one line item, why all of their

transportation and travel is under one line item as opposed to being broken out

by minister, which is done with every other department.

MR. DUTTON: There is only department. So there is one ministers' office

vote, but it does reflect the spending of both ministers combined.

MS JONES: Okay, because government does outline it as two different

departments.

MR. DUTTON: That is not correct. I am sorry. There are two different

ministers but there is still one department. If you go to the Estimates book it

lists it as the Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs with two ministers

but with one deputy minister. So it is still all under one corporate entity.

MS JONES: Moving on to Executive Support now, under

section 1.2.01. Last

year you budgeted $621,500 for Executive Support Salaries, you spent $534,900,

so there was a difference of over $86,000. Was there a salary budgeted for that

was not paid out? Was someone laid off or let go from the department? What was

the situation?

MR. DUTTON: The previous incumbent deputy minister left the department in

July, and my salary is being charged to Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat.

MS JONES: Mr. Dutton, just so that I am clear, you are currently the

Deputy Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs?

MR. DUTTON: That is correct.

MS JONES: And the Acting Deputy Minister for the Department of Labrador

and Aboriginal Affairs?

MR. DUTTON: Yes.

MS JONES: Okay.

How long have you been acting in that role?

MR. DUTTON: Since July.

MS JONES: Do you get paid two salaries for holding those two positions?

MR. DUTTON: I do not.

CHAIR: Nice thought.

MR. DUTTON: You may feel free to make that suggestion to the Clerk of the

Executive Council.

MS JONES: I will see what I can do for you.

Is there an active recruitment, minister, to fill the deputy minister's

position?

MS POTTLE: Yes. There were interviews, and there was one candidate that

we thought we were going to be able to secure, but that candidate has actually

declined. So, we are searching, and if you know of anyone that is interested and

would like to apply for this position, it is still open.

MS JONES: Yes. Is that position a Labrador-based position?

MS POTTLE: Yes it is.

MS JONES: It is, is it? Yes.

Sometimes it is right before your eyes, minister.

CHAIR: Looking for a job?

MS JONES: Isn't that right, Mr. Bowles?

This year you have budgeted $667,700 for salaries, which is $132,800 higher

than you actually spent last year. So you are obviously anticipating spending

more money.

According to the Salary Estimates, it looks like it is for Temporary and

Other Employees. So, can you give me some explanation of that?

MS POTTLE: Well, we hope to have our DM hired, so we have to allow for

that. There is the salary increase, the 4 per cent. There are actually

twenty-seven pay periods in the coming year. We have a National Aboriginal

Women's Summit coordinator that has to be allotted for there, and there is

supposed to be a temporary Land Claims implementation coordinator for the

2009-2010 season.

MS JONES: I am sorry, I did not get what you said there on the end?

MS POTTLE: Well, we have the salary increase, the 4 per cent; you have

twenty-seven pay periods in 2009-2010; there is the National Aboriginal Women's

coordinator position that is in that and a temporary position for the Land

Claims implementation. So there are a number of things that account for the

increase for the upcoming year.

MS JONES: Are you getting any federal money for the National Aboriginal

Women's coordinator position?

MS POTTLE: That is provincially funded.

MS JONES: It is provincially funded.

What about the other position for the Aboriginal negotiator, you said, I

believe it was, was it?

MS POTTLE: That is provincially as well, right?

MS JONES: Land claims.

MS POTTLE: It is provincial money.

MS JONES: Okay.

Where are those positions going to be based to?

MS POTTLE: The NAWS coordinator, the National Aboriginal Women's

coordinator is here in St. John's. I am not sure on the land claims.

MR. HUGHES: (Inaudible). It might be in Labrador. That is yet to be

decided.

MS JONES: Okay.

Last year, under 07., under the same heading, you budgeted $3,000 for

furniture and equipment, but you spend $62,000. Can you tell me what you spent

all of the money on?

MS POTTLE: A lot of it had to do with setting up the Aboriginal Affairs

office over in the West Block. It is a new suite that we all are housed in now.

We moved in there, I think it was May month. So there were furnishings for the

department, for my office as well. We did go to Public Tender for that, and we

did go with the lowest bid on it for that furniture.

The majority of it is for furnishings, and then we have the suite up in the

Labrador Affairs office as well.

MS JONES: It was used to renovate the departmental office in the West

Block.

MS POTTLE: Furnishings.

MS JONES: And furnish it, okay, and also to set up a suite for you in

Labrador.

MS POTTLE: Yes, there is a suite up there as well for when I am passing

through or have meetings and things like that up in Labrador.

MS JONES: Okay.

We will move to Aboriginal Affairs,

section 2.1.01. You spent $148,900 less

than you budgeted for salaries in 2007-2008. Last year you budgeted $556,600,

which was $221,900 less than what you budgeted.

This year you are planning on spending $894,100, which is well over $300,000

more than you spent even the previous year. I would like to get an explanation

for the increase for the past year, and what your plan is for the $337,000 this

year.

MS POTTLE: We had some vacancies in the department, but now I am pleased

to say that all our positions are filled so we have a full complement there.

Dave, do you have something to add there?

MR. HUGHES: (Inaudible) for half the year, which would cover that off.

The other thing that we had happen over the year was secondment of staff to

other departments, and then the difficulty well, not difficulty but with the

workload that was being carried by the Public Service Commission. Actually

replacing somebody through the public service process can take three to four to

five to six months, and that is where the excess in Salaries is coming from.

MS JONES: Okay, that was the reason why you did not spend the other

$220,000 this year.

MR. HUGHES: Right.

MS JONES: Okay. What positions were they?

MR. HUGHES: I am sorry?

MS JONES: What positions were they that were vacant, that you had to

second people for?

MR. HUGHES: We seconded out a land claims negotiator over to Hydro. We

appointed a new land claims negotiator to fill that position, but the position

was open for a while. We had a senior analyst who was seconded to human

resources. Who else went?

MR. DUTTON: I missed one. We had another individual who took a position

with Municipal Affairs, so we had seconded one person from the Department of

Justice. We ran a competition, and a number of people joined the department as a

result of the internal competition. Several of the positions were vacant between

four and six months. We also had a new temporary position the minister

referenced, of the Aboriginal Women's Policy Analyst, and we had funding for

that for six months of the year as it was a new temporary position. That was

filled, I think, around the end of December.

For the coming year, in terms of the increase, as with all of the salary

items, it reflects a 4 per cent general salary increase, the twenty-seventh pay

period, because of the way the calendar falls this particular year. The

temporary position the minister referenced for a land claims implementation

co-ordinator is $16,300, and the funding of the Aboriginal Women's Policy

Analyst for the entire year rather than the six months, of which we only paid

three last year.

MS JONES: Okay. I am a little bit confused because you guys just told me

that the women's co-ordinator, the Aboriginal women's co-ordinator, was coming

out of the line under Executive Support. Now you are telling me it is coming out

of Aboriginal Affairs.

MR. DUTTON: To be clear, those positions are across the department. For

Executive Support, the increase is entirely related to the 4 per cent increase,

the twenty-seventh pay period, and the assumption, as the minister mentioned, of

having to pay a deputy minister for twelve months of the year. So obviously we

can already anticipate a few dollars of savings for this week anyway.

MS JONES: Okay. So those positions would really be coming out of

Aboriginal Affairs.

MR. DUTTON: That is correct.

MS JONES: Okay.

The positions that were vacant, like the land claims negotiator, the senior

analyst, and you said somebody moved to Municipal Affairs - I do not know what

position that was.

MR. DUTTON: That was also a senior analyst.

MS JONES: Okay. Have those positions been filled now?

MR. DUTTON: Yes.

MS JONES: So all three of those are now filled and you also are hiring

the women's co-ordinator and you are hiring another land claims person or

something, is it?

MR. DUTTON: Well, this was working with the regional planning committee

that is developing a land use plan for the Inuit land claims area, and just a

temporary position for a portion of the year to help co-ordinate the holding of

public meetings to gather public input on the planning process.

MS JONES: Okay.

Under Transportation and Communications, you did overspend last year. Can you

tell me what that was in connection with? Was it anything specific or?

MR. DUTTON: Primarily this relates to sort of an effective restatement

that is going to be reflected in the 2009-2010 year. Last year we had $50,000

budgeted for the support in Grants and Subsidies for implementing the National

Aboriginal Women's Summit recommendations. We have an implementation working

group that involves Aboriginal women from across the Province who live in rural

and remote communities.

As it has ended up, what we have done with the funding is used it to support

their travel costs to bring them together for meetings during the course of the

year. That money has actually been spent under Transportation and

Communications, so it is being restated in this upcoming year's budget to be

reflected in the Transportation and Communications line item. You will find the

corresponding decrease in Grants and Subsidies.

MS JONES: The extra $30,000 under 03. under 2.1.01. would have been used

for the Aboriginal Women's Conference, and you are telling me that this year you

are budgeting an additional $65,000 and that will all be used for this women's

conference?

MR. DUTTON: Well, $50,000 is for the women's summit recommendations, the

implementation working group. The other $15,000 increase is funding for the

travel for the regional planning committee. That is being voted in that item

this year as well, and they expect to have more travel demands for this year

because of the public meetings they will be carrying out on the land use plan.

MS JONES: Under Professional Services, obviously you were intending to do

something large last year that never got done. You budgeted $85,000 and you

spent less than $9,000. Can you tell me what that money was budgeted for, and

why it didn't get used?

MR. DUTTON: There was $50,000 budgeted for surveys related to the

Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement, and we did not have a requirement to do

those surveys. Nor do we anticipate it next year, so that $50,000 is not going

to be reflected in the coming year's budget.

Basically, the demands for spending were much lower than anticipated. The

main expenditures were in support of the regional planning committee I

referenced earlier, and also in translation services related to the Labrador

Inuit Land Claims Agreement.

MS JONES: Why is it again the surveys do not need to be done now?

MR. DUTTON: Maybe Dave could help me out on that one.

MR. HUGHES: Because of the vastness of the area of the claim, some areas,

especially close to communities, are actually physically pegged and lines drawn.

In other areas it is done topographically. So there is a difference, then, and

you do not really know up front how much of each that you are going to need to

do. That is basically the difference. We make an estimate of what we think will

be required, and when it is not required then the money is not re-budgeted.

MS JONES: Under Purchased Services, again you budgeted over $60,000 and

you spent $25,000. What were you budgeting for, and didn't use it for?

MR. DUTTON: This would have been for meeting room rentals and other

related expenses associated with land claims implementation; her photocopier

charges, printing, advertising. Some of the funding for the regional planning

committee would be reflected here. It was just lower than anticipated

requirements.

These are sort of, again, part of the land claims implementation plan. We

would have a five-year forecast of what we would expect to spend on

implementation, and it sort of depends on take-up and requirements. It just did

not require as much funding as we had expected this year.

MS JONES: So you are budgeting more money this year in this estimate?

MR. DUTTON: Yes.

MS JONES: Over $80,000.

MR. DUTTON: Again, a portion of that is related to the regional planning

committee. So, we are anticipating $28,500 for advertising and other purchased

services related to the public meetings process. This is offset by a $5,900

reduction. We are actually transferring funding, as all departments are, to the

Public Service Commission for a centralized employment advertising initiative.

So up to this year, as we have had vacancies in the department and had to

advertise in the newspaper, then those advertising charges have been allocated

to the department. So over the coming year each of the departments have, based

on a formula, had money reallocated from their budgets into the Public Service

Commission. It is cost-neutral, and it is based on past practice of how much

advertising we would have to do in the course of the year.

MS JONES: Okay.

Can you tell me who this regional planning committee is?

MR. HUGHES: It is under the Land Claims Agreement. One of the obligations

of the Province is to prepare a land use plan for the settlement area. That plan

is being developed by a committee, which is composed of representatives of the

Nunatsiavut government and the Province, and they have hired a planner.

What they are doing is they are preparing a plan for the settlement area.

That plan will then go to public hearings, which is what is being anticipated

next year. So it is an obligation we have under the treaty, which we are trying

to fulfill.

Now once that is done, then that expenditure will drop off in future years,

but it is a lot of the issues with the claim and why money is spent or is not

spent, is the length of time it takes to get committees and boards up to steam.

Which is why you see these expenses there being anticipated to be one level, the

money is not spent in one year, may be carried over to the next, and budgets

reduced. So it is a complicated process getting these things up and running.

MS JONES: Under Grants and Subsidies again in Aboriginal Affairs, you

budgeted $634,000, you spent $144,000. So you have $500,000 there that did not

get spent.

MR. DUTTON: Yes, just for this year, we have had some one-time savings

related to two co-management boards under the Inuit Land Claims Agreement, the

fisheries board and the wildlife and plants board. Again, because of a delay in

start up funding that we provided for these boards last year was not used, the

Nunatsiavut government asked that they carry over the funding from the previous

year for this year's expenditure. So we had a one-time savings of $414,500 as a

result of that.

In addition, there is a Dispute Resolution Board established under the Land

Claims Agreement. We have not exactly been overwhelmed with disputes, so they

have not yet become operational. There is sort of a list of arbitrators or

mediators, for want of a better description, which would be available should a

dispute arise to independently resolve differences of

interpretation over the

treaty. So that was another $34,000 in savings for this year.

Also, the Aboriginal Women's Summit implementation working group had a

reduced requirement in grants because these costs were charged to transportation

and communications, as I mentioned earlier. So there had been $50,000 budgeted

here last year and that spending all occurred under transportation and

communications.

MS JONES: What was your budget under that line item for 2007-2008?

MR. DUTTON: I do not have last year's estimates

here with me. I do not know.

MS JONES: It just seems like a lot of money to be holding in reserve and

not being spent. We are not talking about a few thousand dollars, you are

talking about half a million dollars being carried over year over year. I am

just interested to know if this is the first year that this is being carried

over or if that line item is being stacked and the money is not being used.

MR. DUTTON: Well, I guess the way the Budget process works is we have to

provide for the funding in the event it is required because it is a treaty

requirement. If the funding is not required our partners at the Nunatsiavut

government have demonstrated some fiscal prudence to ask that they carry over

money, rather than have us spend it when it is not warranted. So, this is I

guess going towards the debt for this year.

MR. HUGHES: At the beginning of each year (inaudible) provide a grant to

the Nunatsiavut government for these various boards. If the money is not used,

and we do not know upfront whether the money will be used or not depends on the

success and the establishment of the boards. When the board is not established

then that money is not spent. It is not absorbed into the Nunatsiavut government

budget to be spent on other things. It is kept and it reduces our cost for the

next year. We are anticipating now, as these boards really get up to steam, that

this will be an ongoing cost which we will see every year.

MS JONES: The co-management board you said are fisheries, and what was

the other one?

MR. HUGHES: Wildlife.

MS JONES: Wildlife. Okay.

So you anticipate that you are going to spend this money this year, do you?

MR. DUTTON: Yes, the estimates for this year show a slightly lower number

than what we had budgeted last. This, again, reflects the $50,000 we have

re-profiled into transportation and communications for the Aboriginal women's

implementation group. It is also another reduction of $21,500 and that reflects

lower cost for the Dispute Resolution Board, which again, there have not been

any disputes to this point, or any

interpretation of the treaty.

MR. HUGHES: There has to be funding made available in the event that

there is a dispute. If there is no dispute then obviously we do not spend any

money because it is not a carrying cost for that board. It is brought together

as required.

MS JONES: Yes, well that is a small amount. That is $20,000 as opposed to

over half a million dollars that you are floating from year to year.

MR. HUGHES: The problem is if we do not vote it and it is needed then we

would have to go to Special Warrants.

MS JONES: Why is there such a delay in establishing these co-management

boards? There has been an agreement signed now for nearly two years or longer.

MR. HUGHES: I think it is just the nature of the beast. You have three

governments working together. You have to appoint the boards. It is a very

complicated process. I think I said this last year when we were here; you cannot

force one of the parties to do something if they are not ready for it. It is a

process that we are working together to bring about and we want to do it the

right way.

MS JONES: Yes, I am just thinking that it would be in the best interest

of Nunatsiavut to get these things sorted out, especially when you are looking

at things like fishing and hunting which are very much the crust of their rights

and their land claim settlement rights and so on.

MR. HUGHES: Absolutely, but if you look at what the Nunatsiavut

government has been doing, they have been passing legislation which basically

allows them to operate. That process of coming into being has taken quite a

while. What we are seeing now is this tripartite process starting to kick in as

the things get into place.

Having been involved in this, it was a lot more complicated than it seemed

when we write the words in a treaty which gives you three or four lines which

says you are going to do something. Actually putting that into effect is a long

process.

MS JONES: Explain to me how these co-management boards will work. Is it

an interim thing in which the three parties sort out who has jurisdiction, what

the rights are and all of this kind of stuff, and then it ends, or is it

co-management forever and eternity? Because if it is going to cost $250,000

every year or more to have a co-management board, eventually we are going to end

up co-managing every resource sector in the Province with Nunatsiavut. That is

going to run into a very expensive bill for the taxpayers of this Province.

MR. HUGHES: Well, it will not be the Province because the actual scope of

these boards is defined in the treaty. That might be an issue on which you might

want to be briefed separately from this process, because the actual boards, if

you look at the way the land claim is structured and how the land is structured,

then the treaty has rights which are specific to specific areas. There are

jurisdictions which are established on Inuit lands, and there is co-management

which is established over a settlement territory, which is that bigger area that

you see in the maps.

The co-management is a tripartite process, and there are really two sides to

it. There is the bringing up the capacity of the Nunatsiavut government to

manage, but there are obligations in the treaty which say that we share

responsibility for the management of certain resources in this big settlement

area.

MS JONES: You are telling me, really, that these boards are forever.

MR. HUGHES: They are forever, until there is a decision

MS JONES: And they will be paid for by the Province.

MR. HUGHES: I am sorry?

MS JONES: And they will be paid for by the Province.

MR. HUGHES: They will be paid for by the Province, the Nunatsiavut

government and the federal government.

MS JONES: And we can anticipate

MR. DUTTON: What is reflected in the budget is just our share of their

operating funds.

MR. HUGHES: It depends on how these will operate. I think that is

something that we could brief you on separately, because that is a matter of

explaining what is in the treaty in terms of what the three governments'

obligations are, in terms of management of various resources up in the

settlement area. Not Labrador as a whole, just the settlement area.

MS JONES: Yes, I know the area you refer to.

So, I would anticipate that as you get further along in the process, that

there will be co-management boards for mining development, for oil and gas?

MR. HUGHES: No.

MS JONES: It won't? Just fisheries and wildlife?

MR. HUGHES: No. The boards and their powers and authorities and

responsibilities are actually specified in the treaty. Then there are two levels

of consultation that go on. One is through the boards, where there is a process

that we work together to do something. The other kind of consultation that we

will see is government-to-government consultation, the same way that we have

it is the same as the relationship with the federal government. There are

certain boards in which the Province and the federal government operate, like

C-NLOPB. There are other ways in which we consult with the federal government at

a government-to-government level, and we anticipate that with the Nunatsiavut

government.

Certain relationships will be department to department. Other kinds of

relationships are actually specified in the treaty, and there are obligations

that we have to work with them and the federal government to manage something in

the settlement area.

MS JONES: Okay.

Well, I am going to move on to Labrador Affairs. I have some general

questions that are Aboriginal Affairs. Do you want me to do those now, or come

back after all the line items?

CHAIR: Well, I think everybody is fine.

Do you have any preference, Minister Pottle?

MS POTTLE: No, it is up to you.

CHAIR: I think it is whatever you choose.

MS JONES: Okay.

Under

section 2.1.02., Labrador Affairs, again the salaries for that

department have increased this year. Is that the standard step increases, wage

increases and so on?

MR. DUTTON: Yes. In addition, we have funding voted in this line item for

the snowmobile trail inspector that was announced earlier this year. That

funding had been provided elsewhere and it is going to be voted in Salaries this

year as a seasonal position.

MS JONES: How much is budgeted for that position?

MR. DUTTON: That is $22,700.

MS JONES: A seasonal position?

MR. DUTTON: Yes.

MS JONES: What is the travel budget for that position?

MR. DUTTON: The funding in Transportation and Communications, under line

item 03., there is a $14,000 increase year-over-year from the budgeted amount.

That is partly for the snowmobile trail grooming program, but also reflective of

costs for continued monitoring for the Air Foodlift Subsidy. I do not know if we

have a specific breakout between the two, but all of that travel cost would be

charged to that item.

MS JONES: I know it is budgeted at $14,000 more, but it is really less

than $6,000 more than what was actually spent last year.

MR. DUTTON: I think a lot of the costs are going to be related to using

the department-owned snowmobile. One of the things we did this year was to

purchase a snowmobile for the use of the trail inspector. I would not expect

that they would have a lot of costs related to air travel and that sort of

thing, which is what usually drives travel expenses under this item.

MS JONES: If they are going to get all around Labrador, they are going to

need more than a snowmobile or they will take the whole season to do it, to get

from one end to the other a couple of times.

MR. DUTTON: Then the trail inspector will just be doing the

transportation trails, as opposed to all of the recreational trails. They are

responsible for the trails that we provide funding for their operations. That

would be trails between Lake Melville and the North Coast to Williams Harbour,

Norman Bay and Black Tickle.

MS JONES: Okay.

Under Supplies, under that section, you spent over $16,000 last year and you

budgeted $5,000. Do you want to tell me what you spent it on? Was that where you

bought your snowmobile?

MR. DUTTON: This actually reflects safety clothing, an arctic sleeping

bag and gas for the snowmobile. There have been a lot of charges related to ink

toners, and that is showing up in all of our supply items - that has proved to

be a very expensive item - and other miscellaneous office supplies. The

snowmobile purchase is under Property, Furnishings and Equipment.

MS JONES: What kind of snowmobile did you purchase?

MR. BOWLES: We purchased an Expedition, a Bombardier Expedition. We went

with a standing offer that government has, so that would be Notre Dame Agencies.

Government has a standing offer with Notre Dame Agencies, and that is where we

went.

MS JONES: You did not have to go to public tender?

MR. BOWLES: Not with that one, no. We consulted with the Purchasing

Agency on that.

MS JONES: Even though it was over the required amount?

MR. BOWLES: Yes, we followed the proper protocol, and with the standing

offer we were informed that we could go with Notre Dame. We had quotes and

whatnot, and the standing offer, I believe, was one of the cheapest options

available anyway.

MS JONES: I didn't get your last comment.

MR. BOWLES: I am sorry. The machine that we purchased was at a very

competitive price. There were also certain requirements we were looking for

which the standing offer had, that you would be very familiar with: a super wide

track, and the track had to be a certain length and whatnot. All of those met

the requirements under the Standing Offer.

MS JONES: Was that a 600 or an 800 motor?

MR. BOWLES: That is an 800.

MS JONES: How does your standing offer work with Notre Dame Agencies? I

did not realize that government departments could make purchases of this

magnitude under those kinds of agreements. Normally, what would you have the

standing offer with them for?

MR. BOWLES: This is our first time purchasing anything on a standing

offer. We were informed of the process and just followed the regulations that

were in place.

MR. DUTTON: This is a standing offer with government just for the

department.

MS JONES: Yes, but why would government have a Standing Offer Agreement

with them? Normally, what would they be purchasing from them?

MR. BOWLES: They would need that sort of equipment for wildlife

enforcement and other government functions.

MR. DUTTON: The wildlife officers purchase machines for enforcement

regulations and whatnot. There are quite a few actually in the forestry section,

in Northwest River particularly. I am not sure if Transportation and Works

avails of that as well but they may have requirements as well.

MS JONES: Okay, and that would have accounted for all the increased

expenditure under Property, Furnishings and Equipment, I am assuming, the extra

$14,400 this year?

Under 2.1.02 under Property, Furnishings and Equipment you budgeted $10,000,

you spent $24,400. I am assuming that the other $14,400 would have accounted for

the full expenditure of the snow machine?

MR. DUTTON: The snowmobile was about $12,000. There was also a komatik to

carry safety equipment. That was about $1,100. Safety equipment, like a

satellite phone, tent, GPS, stove, that sort of thing, that was roughly about

$5,000. Then other sorts of miscellaneous purchases for the department that

would ordinarily be charged here made up the balance.

MS JONES: Okay. All right.

Under that same heading, I just want to go back to Purchased Services. Last

year you spent nearly $200,000 in Purchased Services. Can you tell me what that

was for?

MR. DUTTON: This reflected the increase in the rent for the building at

21 Broomfield Street in Happy Valley, as well as a one-time cost for renovation

related to the ministerial office in Happy Valley so that - as Minister Pottle

alluded to earlier - she would have a place to work while in Labrador.

MS JONES: Okay. So the money for that did not come out of the other

budget, as was indicated earlier? It came out of this budget?

MR. DUTTON: The other item was for the furnishings related to that office

and the Aboriginal Affairs office in the West Block.

MS JONES: Okay.

Under that section, the Grants and Subsidies, $1.7 million, a little more

than that spent last year, another $1 million budgeted this year. Can you give

me the breakdown of those grants and subsidies?

MR. DUTTON: I am not sure I have all the exact figures at our disposal,

but in terms of how we arrived at this amount for 2008-2009, we had one-time

funding for a groomer's shed for Northwest River, that was $75,000 that was not

required. It ended up that the Town of Northwest River had a separate project

approved for a municipal garage and they were able to house the trail groomer

there.

There was also reduced uptake on the Air Foodlift Subsidy from what we had

projected to have to spend during the course of the year. Some less than

anticipated costs in the winter trail grooming program, and offsetting that in

terms of increased spending, the trail groomer in Postville was more expensive

than we had anticipated, not by a lot but it was about a $5,300 difference in

terms of what we expended. The Inuit Community Government in Postville

contributed funding towards that purchase, and we re-allocated savings towards

the end of the year for the purchase of a new trail groomer for Rigolet, which

Minister Pottle and Minister Hickey had announced on the weekend.

MS JONES: Okay. Can you give me the breakdown of what all that money is

used for? How much of it would normally go into the air food lift subsidy, how

much would go into other programs?

MR. DUTTON: On the Air Foodlift Subsidy, overall for the year we

anticipated a revised expenditure of $426,000.

MS JONES: Okay, before you go on. Can you give me what you budgeted last

year and what you are budgeting this year, because you are obviously reducing

your budget by over $700,000 this year? So I want to know where you are cutting

the money, where the money is being cut.

MR. DUTTON: Sure, okay. In terms of the 2009-2010 allocation, the

previous year we had one-time funding for the purchase of the trail groomer for

Postville, so that was $275,000 budgeted. We also had one-time funding budgeted

for the groomer shed in Northwest River, that was $75,000, and we had one-time

funding for snowmobile trail improvements, that was $200,000. So all of those

items were reflected last year but would not be reflected in the coming year. We

also reprofiled about $39,000 related to the winter trail grooming activity to

salaries and operations for the trail inspector and their travel and operations.

MS JONES: Okay, go back again.

MR. DUTTON: Sorry?

MS JONES: What did you say?

MR. DUTTON: It was $39,000 for the winter trail grooming program that we

have now voted in salaries and in the operating of -

MS JONES: Okay, so that came out of there last year. It came out of the

Grants and Subsidies last year.

MR. DUTTON: Yes, that is right. So it is just being voted in a different

part of the budget. The air food lift subsidy, we are budgeting $500,000 for

this year compared to $600,000 last year. It showed we only had spent $426,000

this year and even with the enhancement to the program being available for the

full twelve months of the year we would not anticipate having to spend that

entire amount. So, we in effect knocked out what would have been a dropped

balance.

MS JONES: Okay. Can you tell me where the money is budgeted for the trail

grooming program? Is it under that heading, under Grants and Subsidies? How much

is it?

MR. DUTTON: Yes, the grooming subsidy program, which is the grants that

we pay out to the communities and to the development associations who carry out

the grooming activity, that is voted in the Grants and Subsidies. For the coming

year we have $351,000 under that item, and then the remainder of the budget, the

other $39,000 is reflected in salaries and operating for the trail inspector.

MS JONES: How much did you pay out in 2008-2009 under that program?

MR. DUTTON: We anticipated $360,000.

MS JONES: So how come you did not vote $360,000 this year?

MR. DUTTON: Because that also reflected the cost of the trail inspector

and the other operating expenses.

MS JONES: Okay.

So there is no money budgeted this year for trail upgrading, for a

maintenance program or for any new groomers?

MR. DUTTON: We have not put forward any funding for purchase of groomers

at this point in time. As far as improvements to trails, one thing we are

looking at is there is a new federal program for trail improvements that is $25

million being administered through the group called the National Trails

Coalition. We are awaiting the details on application criteria for that program

and as that becomes available we will be looking at whether either the

department or the communities and development associations, and of course also

Labrador Winter Trails might be able to avail of that funding in the coming

year. That is all one-time funding that has to be spent by the end of March,

2010. That is a national program across the country.

MS JONES: Was there any new administrative positions created as a result

of the department taking over the trails from Labrador Winter Trails?

MR. DUTTON: No, we have a position that was created a year or two ago of

a program administrator and that person manages our sort of grants programs,

this one, and the Air Foodlift Subsidy would be the two main ones. They are not

as administratively burdensome but the Williams Harbour air subsidy and the

Combined Councils annual operating grant would also be managed through that

position as well.

MS JONES: How much is the air subsidy for Williams Harbour now, what is

the take up on that annually?

MR. DUTTON: It is $30,000, and we anticipate spending the full amount

this year and we budgeted for the same amount for the year ahead.

MS JONES: That is in this Grants and Subsidies line item, too?

MR. DUTTON: Yes, it is.

MS JONES: Okay.

The Combined Councils, what is the grant there now, $100,000?

MR. DUTTON: It is $120,000. It was increased to that amount last year and

we are budgeting the same amount for the year ahead.

MS JONES: Who is the program administrator for the trail grooming?

MR. DUTTON: It is Jeannine Chaulk Moores, in our Happy Valley office.

MS JONES: Just give me a minute there, Mr. Chairman, please.

CHAIR: Sure. Would you like a recess or you just want to get organized?

MS JONES: I just need to get my other notes out.

CHAIR: No problem.

MS JONES: I have a question regarding the Labrador Winter Games. Last

year the games in Labrador were cancelled because they did not have enough money

to run the games, which was unfortunate after over twenty years of running the

games for communities. Obviously, a lot of people were very disappointed that

government was not prepared to match the additional $200,000 or $225,000 that

was required.

I notice in the Budget that there was a vote of $500,000 for the Labrador

Winter Games. That is the amount that has been there for at least the last

decade or longer. I am just wondering, will the games go ahead this year? Have

they been able to raise the extra money, because I did not see it anywhere in

the Budget that government was prepared to pay it?

MR. DUTTON: Yes, the Labrador Winter Games board met last week and are

meeting again this week. The games are on

schedule and plan to be in 2010. The

board has sent out all the sponsorship letters ahead of schedule. The

sponsorship committee has met probably half a dozen times over the last four to

five months. So we are working on that and we are now looking at moving forward

a full time coordinator. That will be a discussion at the board coming up later

this week. We have not been able at this point, where the letters were just sent

out, to see on the sponsorship but we are looking to increase sponsorship,

particularly through some main sponsors, such as the Nunatsiavut government and

the Innu Nation, and going after some of the exploration companies and whatnot.

MS JONES: So, really the money has still not been put together to ensure

that the games will go ahead this year?

MR. DUTTON: The money that is committed by government to the games is

$500,000.

MS JONES: Yes, but the shortfall was over $200,000 wasn't it?

MR. DUTTON: Well the board is now getting together to put together a

detailed budget and they are also reviewing the future of the games as well, in

consultation with Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

MS JONES: Yes, I just think it is absolutely ridiculous. It is the first

time in our history in Labrador and I think we are into what year of the games

now, something like twenty-six years or something of that nature, and it is the

first time ever these games were postponed simply because government was not

prepared to meet the commitment financially to allow it to go ahead. Frankly, I

hope it does not happen again this year. It should have never been postponed in

the previous year but I guess it was done, and without the amount of money to

actually put it off there was nothing anyone could do about it but it has

certainly been a huge setback for people in Labrador communities. It is the one

thing that brings people together every three years and it certainly added a lot

to Labrador's culture over the years to be able to carry this off and it has

been a source of pride for people. So, hopefully it will get off the ground this

time around.

Who is the appointed chair or coordinators for the Winter Games?

MR. DUTTON: The chair right now is Joe Goudie, the vice-chair is Alice

O'Brien. Right now we have a temporary coordinator that has agreed for now -

which was the assistant games director in the last games - which is Bob Quigley.

MS JONES: A couple of questions around the trail grooming because it was

a very contentious issue in Labrador. For the record, I would like to say that I

am not at all pleased with the level of interference that was shown by the

Department of Labrador Affairs, the minister in particular, and government. I

think Labrador Winter Trails has done a fabulous job over the last twelve years

in developing a trail program and network across Labrador in working with

community groups like zonal boards, development associations and municipalities.

They have secured millions of dollars in investment, mostly federal money, that

allow them to build the trail network, to buy equipment, groomers, to put in

safety shelters and signage right along that highway. They were also able to use

some of that money over the years as a marketing strategy to not only develop

trails that were crucial transportation links to communities, but also serve to

be able to promote them as a tourism product.

I really felt that government overacted and overstepped their bounds last

year when this organization ran into some financial problems. I understand that

their problems were more of a maintenance issue and that there was not a proper

maintenance funding allocated to them. When they had a groomer that went through

the ice, I think, minister, in your district, they found that they required a

substantial amount of money to either purchase a new groomer or to repair that

one. They also required some money to repair groomers in communities like

Williams Harbour and Norman Bay where those groomers were sensibly used. They

were smaller and probably could not handle the kind of trail work that was

required and needed maintenance over a longer period of time.

So I was disappointed that when they came to government to look for funding

to be able to do the proper maintenance and repair and get those groomers back

in operation that they were deemed by the minister and the department as being

incapable of doing what needed to be done in overrunning budgets and things of

this nature. I read so many e-mails back and forth in the last year; it

absolutely sickened me, the childishness that went on between the department and

Labrador Winter Trails over this entire issue. I do not think it was handled in

a very professional manner at all, and I guess I am somewhat not sure what to

expect in the future.

As you know, the trail grooming program, right now the subsidies that were

given out and are still being given out through development associations is just

coming directly from the department now as opposed to Labrador Winter Trails.

Those subsidies are also given to areas that do not have the same critical

transportation links, and I look at trails that are being maintained in the

communities like Port Hope Simpson, St. Lewis, Mary's Harbour, between Mary's

Harbour and Red Bay. A lot of the grant money also goes to help those

connections.

I am just curious as to what government's position is going to be on a

go-forward basis, if they will continue to commit to the grants that are

currently being given out to those organizations or if they will be withdrawn?

MR. BOWLES: Thank you.

To answer your question on the department's plan on a go-forward basis with

the winter trails, is our focus remains on the isolated communities on the North

Coast that are not connected to the Trans-Labrador Highway, and, of course, the

three communities on the South Coast: Williams Harbour, Normans Bay and Black

Tickle, that would be our focus on a go-forward basis.

As the access to Labrador opens up, particularly on the Phase III route with

the road improvements, we will be looking at re-evaluating where we are going

there and focusing on those isolated communities.

We have made a number of positive steps on improving the winter trails. The

deputy had talked about some of those as well, the hiring of a trail inspector.

The program administrator now is making sure that all the financial obligations

are made. We have developed a good working relationship with the communities and

the development associations. That is our plan on a go-forward basis.

We flew into communities at the beginning of the year. That went over

extremely well. We will be doing a similar approach at the end of the year to do

a close report of how the year went.

We just purchased a new groomer, as the deputy said, for Rigolet. We just

purchased a new groomer for Postville. We will be looking on a go-forward basis,

on future budget years, at looking at funding requirements for other groomers.

Of course, they will be budget decisions and we will deal with those evaluations

as they come up.

We feel that we had a challenging year but we made significant progress. We

are getting updated reports from the trail inspector. We have also spent

$200,000 on trail improvements this year, all that money is out. We are

replacing some of the damage that was done to some of the sheds. Some places

have stoves that are missing, replacing those, putting signs up along the

trails. The latest report that I received, that went to the minister, is that

some of the dangerous necks out in the water are all marked and whatnot.

Unfortunately, what happens in Labrador is that some of the recreation

component gets mixed up with the transportation component and that causes some

issues but we are trying our best to explain that whenever we can. So that is

essentially our go-forward basis.

MS JONES: So really there is no commitment to the Battle Harbour Regional

Development Association area or some of the areas in the White Bear area which

you are currently paying out grants to right now?

MR. BOWLES: That is quite correct. What would happen in those areas is

they would be no different than any other area of the Province or in Labrador.

They would have to pay for their passes for recreational snowmobiling.

MS JONES: What about communities on the North Coast? Do they have to buy

trail passes to use that trail?

MR. BOWLES: No, because they will not be connected to the Trans-Labrador

Highway; but once they do get down to Northwest River they are then required to

buy a trail pass if they are going to use the trail pass system.

MS JONES: So, really, the people in Black Tickle do not have to buy trail

passes either, even though the people in Cartwright do, and they are all using

the one trail.

MR. BOWLES: That is right, Black Tickle, Williams Harbour, Norman's Bay,

to get to those main trunks, to get to the road, but if they were going to use

any of the trail systems beyond that they would be required to buy a trail pass.

MS JONES: Has that been communicated to those groups? Because I don't

think they are under the impression that they are going to lose those grants.

MR. BOWLES: Yes, we certainly have communicated that to those groups and

we will be further doing that. We have staff that are going down to the zonal

board meetings coming up in Cartwright, and we have an invitation to the

Labrador Trails board meeting. We will certainly give an update on what we have

done this year. Also, we are going out with the Northern Strategic Plan

consultations later and we will give an update on the trails there as well.

Certainly we have had direct communications with all those groups and that has

been communicated and will be reiterated over time.

MS JONES: So this year you are still giving them the grant, I understand.

MR. BOWLES: We did, and what we did this year is a phased-out approach.

Instead of it being a sudden hardship right away, we thought that the road was

not finished. It is the objective to be finished this fall, so we gradually

phased it in.

I have certainly been very clear with the groups that I have met that we will

be phasing that out, and that, starting with the opening of the road in 2009,

government has made a significant contribution there that we would not be doing

both.

MS JONES: How much are you paying Labrador Winter Trails for lease on

their equipment? How many pieces of equipment do you have leased from them?

MR. BOWLES: We are not paying anything for the leasing of those groomers.

What we do with them is we maintain all the groomers. If something happens to

those groomers for those isolated communities we maintain those groomers -

always have and will continue to do so. I would have to go back and look at the

exact number. I believe it was six but I would have to go back and look at the

exact number of groomers. What we have done in the past, too, now we have

entered into legal contracts with Labrador Winter Trails and that is to protect

the interests of Labrador Winter Trails and the government as well and that has

worked very well this year.

MS JONES: How long is your lease with them? Is it a year-to-year lease?

MR. BOWLES: A year-to-year lease, yes. That will change as required.

Like, next year with the road opening we will require fewer machines. Also,

government has made a significant contribution. For instance, on the North Coast

now, Makkovik owns their own groomer, Rigolet owns their own groomer, Postville

owns their own groomer, and North West River now owns their own groomer, so we

have four groomers on the North Coast that we do not need to lease from Labrador

Winter Trails any more.

As we look at our South Coast fleet, in Norman's Bay, Williams Harbour and

Black Tickle, we will look at future budget years and what we are going to do

there. We anticipate leases will probably drop down. As those machines get older

we will replace with newer.

MS JONES: I have a question with regard to the ongoing issue with the

Quebec Innu hunting Caribou in Labrador. This is a problem that has been there

for the last three years. I thought back about a year ago I was informed by

government that ministers had met with the Province of Quebec, that they met

with the Quebec Innu, and that they were sorting this issue out. Obviously, it

is a bigger problem this year than it has been in the past.

I would like to ask what your involvement has been, as the Minister of

Aboriginal Affairs, and if there have been any discussions with the Innu in

Labrador to see if they can have some impact with their sister tribe in Quebec

in terms of understanding the conservation and impact of their actions in our

territory and what is happening there?

MS POTTLE: (Inaudible) briefed by Minister Dunderdale's officials on the

status of what is happening on the Quebec border with the protected herd. We are

very disturbed and concerned about what is happening there. Minister

Dunderdale's office has been dealing with that. We have been consulting them.

They have been told on various occasions that it is a protected herd, so they

are well aware of it. Officials have been in meetings and sit on boards where

that has been discussed.

Right now, though, we have not spoken to the Labrador Innu with regard to

this situation so it is probably something that could be considered.

MR. DUTTON: I think it is important to note also that the Labrador Innu

have withdrawn from the Woodland Caribou strategy. I think that Mark Nui has

expressed publicly his opposition to the protest hunt that is being carried out

right now. Also, Minister Pottle has written to Chiefs Bellefleur and Lalo

in Quebec and advised them that they should respect the conservation rules, and

that while they may be asserting Aboriginal rights which may or not exist in

Labrador, the courts have been very clear that Aboriginal rights assertions do

not take precedence over conservation or safety.

Again, members of these groups have been involved in the Institute for

Environmental Monitoring and Research for over a decade and would have access to

the information provided to board members on the status of the herds in the

flying area, which would include the herds we are talking about, and certainly

there have been a number of meetings taking place with the bands over the past

number of years, to communicate to them the health of the herd and the reason

for the conservation measures that are in place. Furthermore, just the fact that

we have had a number of people from Quebec Innu communities charged in the past

for hunting in closed zones, and have had convictions, should certainly ensure

that people are well aware of the fact that these rules are in place and that

they need to be followed.

MS JONES: I guess I am wondering where it went off the rails. I remember

questioning the minister in the House of Assembly back about a year ago

regarding this same issue, and actually even the year before, and I will go back

and check the transcripts of Hansard, but I understood in the response at that

time that there were agreements being worked out with the Innu in Quebec. I just

do not know where it went from there. I mean, obviously there could not have

been any agreements. There could not have been any results if they are back

doing the same thing again, and obviously more volatile this time than they were

the last time.

MR. DUTTON: Well, I guess we cannot really speak for the Quebec Innu

bands. They will have to explain their own actions. The discussions that have

taken place would have been, I presume, with either the Wildlife Division at

Environment and Conservation or the enforcement officers at the Department of

Natural Resources. It is something that they have management of, the Woodland

Caribou strategy. Our department is not directly involved with that. We are

involved in the environmental institute in Happy Valley that studies the impacts

of military flight training, so we will have to follow up with them on that

question.

MS JONES: So are you able to identify who these hunters are, so that they

can be charged?

MR. DUTTON: My understanding is that the enforcement officers are taking

surveillance and gathering evidence toward the potential for future charges to

be laid. It is just that they have avoided confrontation because of the large

number of people involved in the hunt, and that there have been some

indications, when they have tried to land a helicopter and that sort of thing,

of volatile situations, so they have decided that it would not be appropriate to

put enforcement officers in harm's way and sort of exacerbate the conflict, but

they are still gathering evidence from afar.

MS JONES: Mr. Chairman, I do not have any other questions so that will

conclude my Estimates.

CHAIR: Thank you very much.

I certainly appreciate the minister and her staff taking the time to answer

the questions.

The Clerk is going to call the subheads.

CLERK: Subheads 1.1.01 to 2.1.02 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01 to 2.1.02 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 2.1.02 carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of the Department of Labrador and

Aboriginal Affairs carried without amendment?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, total heads,

carried.

CHAIR: Before I adjourn the meeting, I guess I should remind the

Committee members that our next meeting is Wednesday, April 1, at 5:30 p.m. here

at the House of Assembly for Intergovernmental Affairs and the Volunteer and

Non-Profit Sector. I think I also have to note that I will not be here. Mr.

Harding will Chair, and I will be chairing the Business one in the morning. I

think the paperwork is in place for that.

Without any further questions or submissions, I would ask for adjournment.

Can I have a motion to adjourn, please?

MR. DINN: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Mr. Dinn.

Thank you very much.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.