April 13, 2005 GOVERNMENT SERVICES

COMMITTEE

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

CHAIR (Manning): I call the meeting to order.

I would just like to inform members who may not be aware, we were elected

last year and we stay elected this year, until the duration, until someone else

tells us not to be here. At the present time, I am Chair of the Committee. I

hope you are all pleased with that. Mr. Sweeney is the Vice-Chair, and the rest

of you are members.

I would like to welcome the minister and members of her department here this

morning. Basically, what we are going do, I am going to ask everybody to

introduce themselves. As you realize, wait until your red light comes on before

you speak.

I would ask everybody to introduce themselves and, when it comes time to

start the discussions, if there are any questions that the members have on this

side, or any answers that we receive from the other, before you give your answer

or ask your question, you identify yourself again for the benefit of those who

are down recording this for posterity.

With that, my name is Fabian Manning, Member of the House of Assembly for

Placentia & St. Mary's and Chair of the Government Services Committee.

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

MR. LANGDON: I am Oliver Langdon. If it is not recording, all of you know

who I am.

MR. SWEENEY: The next one to me.

MR. ANDERSEN: They are doing the good people first, I guess. I am glad

they are doing the red people first.

Wally Andersen, MHA for Torngat Mountains.

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

MR. SKINNER: Shawn Skinner, MHA for St. John's Centre.

MR. ORAM: Paul Oran, MHA for Terra Nova.

MR. LANGDON: Oliver Langdon, Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

CHAIR: Minister?

MS WHALEN: Dianne Whalen, Minister of Government Services.

MR. WINSTON MORRIS: Winston Morris, Assistant Deputy Minister of Consumer

and Commercial Affairs.

MS KELLAND : Donna Kelland, Assistant Deputy Minister of Government

Services.

MS WAKEHAM: Barbara Wakeham, Deputy Minister of Government Services.

MS DUNPHY: Kim Dunphy, Assistant Deputy Minister of Occupational Health

and Safety.

MR. CAHILL: Larry Cahill, Chief Operating Officer of Government

Purchasing Agency.

MR. WAYNE MORRIS : Wayne Morris, Manager of Financial Operations.

MS BARRON: Tracy Barron, Director of Communications.

CHAIR: We are going to start now.

The minister may want to make some opening comments. Then we will open the

floor for questions.

Go ahead, Minister.

MS WHALEN: Government Services is made up of five programs: Executive and

Support Services; Consumer and Commercial Affairs; Government Services;

Occupational Health and Safety; and Government Purchasing Agency. These last two

were added . The budget is the same as 2004-2005. It is status quo, with some

exceptions, and I am just going to take you down through the exceptions.

Number one was

section 1.2.01. Executive Support. Funding of $67,700 has been

provided for a full-time Director of Policy and Planning. This position already

existed; however, due to budget restraints it could not be filled. Funding of

$180,000 has been provided to conduct a department's role and mandate review

to see how we could provide our services more efficiently.

Section 1.2.02., Capital, Administrative Support, funding of $395,000 has

been provided to purchase twenty-two new vehicles, four replacement vehicles and

fifteen new vehicles in total to our fleet. These later vehicles will be provide

to existing staff who currently are travelling excessive mileage. It is

anticipated this will result in operational savings.

Funding of $844,200 offset by $645,000 in the current account revenues has

been provided for Information Technology project CADO, phase four, and this

consists of conversion of 3,000 rolls of microfilm 1980-2004 in the Registry of

Deeds; conversion of paper records prior to 1980 to digital in the Registry of

Deeds; building of a new Internet base mechanics lien system; a business case

for development of on-line deed registration; and a business case for replacing

financial service regulation alert licensing system.

Number three,

section 2.1.03. Commercial Registrations, funding of $249,000

of which $139,600 is a one-time funding and has been provided to deal with the

lobbyist legislation registry.

Section 3.1.01., Motor Vehicle Registration, Administration, funding of

$945,000 of which $780,000 is a one-time funding, and this will be offset by

$770,000 in current account revenue and is provided for proposed ATV

legislation. Funding of $81,000 has been provided to cover increased costs

through the year in postage and telephone system costs.

Number five,

section 3.1.04., National Safety Code, funding of $14,400 has

been provided to cover increased mobile radio costs that have increased during

the past year.

Section 2.1.01., Trade Practices, funding reduced by $61,520 due to the

retirement of an adjudicator position which will not be filled due to the

reorganization.

Section 3.1.01., Motor Vehicle Registration, Administration, funding

decreased by $30,000 due to a rental reduction.

These are the new budget decisions that we have made. I have brought my staff

along this morning for any questions that you may have pertaining to the budget.

I guess, Mr. Chair, we are open for questions.

CHAIR: Thank you, Madam Minister.

Any questions?

MR. SWEENEY: I guess I will start off.

Minister, I have to say, you have certainly circumvented some of our

questions, but -

CHAIR: Do you want to introduce yourself?

MR. SWEENEY: George Sweeney.

You went through them kind of quickly, so I may have missed some of the

answers. I do have some questions that I would like to ask, and hopefully we

will not make this a redundant process this morning. In your opening remarks you

certainly answered some of the questions I have.

Executive Support,

section 1.1.01., Salaries have a fairly huge increase

there of $270,000. I wonder, why would we have that increase?

MS WHALEN: Under 1.1.01. or 1.2.01?

MR. SWEENEY: Under 1.2.01., sorry. There is an increase there of

$270,000.

MS WHALEN: Salaries are up due to two or three reasons. A funding of

$67,000 has been provided for an information assistance consultant that was

originally budgeted in the Information Technology projects. Funding of $67,700

has been provided for a full-time Director of Policy and Planning. This position

already existed; however, due to our budget restraints, it could not be filled

last year. Funding of $130,000 has been provided to conduct our department's

role and our mandate review.

MR. SWEENEY: Under Transportation and Communications there is an increase

there of $50,000.

MS WHALEN: Travel has increased due to relocating monies from the

Occupational Health and Safety of $7,400, and the role and the mandate review is

$40,000.

MR. SWEENEY: I missed the first part of that, Minister, I am sorry.

MS WHALEN: Travel has increased due to relocating monies from the

Occupational Health and Safety of $7,400, and the role and the mandate review

was $40,000.

MR. SWEENEY: When you say mandate review, what are we referring to

specifically?

MS WHALEN: I am going to just let Barbara explain to you what we did with

Occupational Health and Safety.

MS WAKEHAM: The $130,000 that has been allocated for review of Government

Services was a result of the program review. As you know, we are about ten years

now since we set up the Department of Government Services and there has not been

an overall review of the mandate and the role. Since that time there have been

major changes in terms of the responsibilities, in terms of delivering services,

and in terms of how those services are delivered in the region. So the

government has provided money this year so that we can do an overall review, go

out and do consultations in the region in terms of the delivery of those

services, find out which services are appropriate, which ones are not, look at

the legislation and see which is a barrier and which one isn't, and what

changes need to be made, and basically go through an overall process of

streamlining and becoming more efficient in terms of delivery of services that

Government Services is responsible for now.

MR. LANGDON: Further with that, the review that you are talking about,

that is being done internally by the department, the staff here, or is it done

externally?

MS WAKEHAM: We will be hiring a co-ordinator, a research assistant, and

some secretarial support to do the review. Obviously, I will take responsibility

for the overall management of it. It will be done internally, not by staff that

we already have; we will be hiring somebody to actually do the work. It will not

be done by a consultant.

MR. LANGDON: I understand that, but you are hiring people other than what

is at the department level to do it?

MS WAKEHAM: Yes, I am.

MR. LANGDON: The thing, I guess -

MS WAKEHAM: I would like to further explain that. The people who are

being hired are being hired for nine months. The report will be completed by the

end of this year, December 31, 2005, so the review is basically for an eight

month period.

MR. LANGDON: Okay.

At the end of the review, is it possible to have fewer people working than

there are now? Is that a possibility? Within the Department of Government

Services overall, is it possible, after the review is done, there will be fewer

people working?

MS WAKEHAM: It is certainly not the intent of the overall exercise. The

overall exercise, if you remember, we have been talking about, in past years,

having more staff because we have more responsibilities.

I have no way of judging at this point in time, but the intent of the program

review is to look at how we are delivering the services right now.

MR. LANGDON: Okay.

MR. SWEENEY: That position, or those positions, would they be advertised

positions through a public competition?

MS WAKEHAM: They are temporary positions. If, in fact, there is someone

in the system I could get on secondment we could probably do it that way;

otherwise, we will have a competition for a temporary position.

MR. SWEENEY: Revenue,

section 1.2.01., provincial revenue was

underestimated by $267,700. What is the source of this revenue, and why is it

only estimated at $589,700 this year? What are we looking at there?

MS WHALEN: Related revenue increased due to more expenditures being

claimable than anticipated from the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation

Commission. If you have not heard what I said, it is a related revenue increase

due to more expenditures being claimable than anticipated from the Workplace

Health, Safety and Compensation Commission.

MR. SWEENEY: I really do not understand that, because I do not see what

role they would have with provincial revenue.

MS WHALEN: Pardon me?

MR. SWEENEY: I really do not understand that answer, because I do not

understand why provincial revenue, why that fluctuation would be there, and why

workplace health and safety revenue would be considered there.

MS DUNPHY: When the OHS Branch, the Occupation Health and Safety Branch

joined the Department of Government Services last year, it would have brought

with it recoverable monies. All of the OHS Branch is recoverable under

legislation. Salaries, operational, our entire budget of approximately $4.3

million is recoverable through

an act clause in the Workplace Health, Safety and

Compensation Act, which says that in any given year up to 5 per cent of the

assessment revenues collected by the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation

Commission is allocated, or can be allocated, for the operation of the

Occupational Health and Safety Branch.

We are self-funded in that we are funded through Workers' Compensation. So,

in that regard, our operating budget gets charged back to the Commission under

that clause. That is where the related revenue comes from.

MR. SWEENEY: Has it always been that way?

MS DUNPHY: Absolutely, yes. It makes us independent of government and

independent of the Commission. It is the way stakeholders have always wanted the

Occupational Health and Safety branch in the Province to be funded. I think this

came about, in about 1978-79, when the Occupational Health and Safety branch was

created. What it does is it allows us to be somewhat independent of both the

Commission, who are a financial institution, and government. So, our income is

recovered, or our salaries, our budget is recovered.

MR. SWEENEY: But the point I am driving at here is that last year it was

estimated to be $582,000 and, obviously, it was an underestimation of almost

$300,000. This year we are anticipating the same amount. So, is this

anticipation for this year an underestimation again? I am trying to find out why

that fluctuation of almost $300,000 of revenue.

MS DUNPHY: You are looking at the $850,000 as in revised, as compared to

what we estimated?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes.

MS DUNPHY: I am not quite sure what the variance is. Perhaps Wayne might

be able to answer that.

MR. WAYNE MORRIS: Based on our projections for 2004-05 in terms of

revised, we had more claimable expenditures than we normally would have,

basically. For the 2005-06 process, when we did our estimate there, we will be

claiming less expenditures for this year.

MR. SWEENEY: Does this revenue include boiler inspections and that sort?

That is another heading somewhere, is it?

MS DUNPHY: No. This is only for the OHS, Occupational Health and Safety

branch, in itself, conclusive; sixty-odd positions, myself, right on down. No

other positions are allowed to be charged off to Workers' Compensation,

strictly Occupational Health and Safety.

MR. SWEENEY: Strictly Workers' Comp?

MS DUNPHY: Absolutely.

MR. SWEENEY: Administrative Support, 1.2.02. We have Property,

Furnishings and Equipment there, an increase of almost $400,000. What accounts

for this increase?

MS WHALEN: The Property, Furnishings and Equipment increase is due to

funding of $395,000 which has been provided to purchase twenty-two vehicles;

seven replacement vehicles and fifteen new vehicles to our fleet. These latter

vehicles will be provided to existing staff who are currently travelling

excessive mileage and it is anticipated this will result in operational savings.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. So that $400,000 is just for vehicles?

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MR. SWEENEY: The $845,000 increase in Information Technology, that was -

MS WHALEN: That is for the new Phase IV of the CADO that we are doing.

That is the conversion of 3,000 rolls of microfilm, from 1980 to 2004, in the

Registry of Deeds. It is the conversion of paper records prior to 1980 to

digital in the Registry of Deeds; the building of a new Internet based mechanics

lien system; a business case for development on online deeds registration, and a

business case for replacing financial services regulations alert licencing

system, and a current account revenue measure has been implemented to recover

most of these costs.

MR. SWEENEY: The next line, Federal Revenue. Last year it was anticipated

that there was going to be - it was budgeted $80,000 income from Federal Revenue

and the Revised Budget show that there is no Federal Revenue. Why would that be?

MS WHALEN: The related revenue - the federal decreased due to the

National Safety Code agreement. It was not signed in 2004-2005. Many claims

could not be filed. It is anticipated that this agreement is going to be signed

in 2005-2006. That is the National Safety Code.

MR. SWEENEY: When we say National Safety Code, what does that apply to?

MS WAKEHAM: The National Safety Code agreement has been on the go for ten

years. It is under MRD. It is the enforcement of the Code of Practice for

commercial drivers. We deliver it on behalf of the standards, and the audits on

behalf of the federal government. They provide us with money to do that. This is

the eleventh time this agreement has been signed. In fact, the agreement was

sent off to Transport Canada to be signed this week. We will be getting the

funding, albeit it will be in Revenue for 2005-2006 for claims against 2004

because it is just being signed now.

MR. SWEENEY: The fact we did not get that revenue last year, that did not

have anything to do with the fact that the inspection stations were closed?

MS WAKEHAM: No. It had nothing to do with the inspection stations per se.

These are the audits that are done on the - the audits are specifically set up

to go into trucking companies. There is a rating system under a National Safety

Code standard that has to be checked for with these commercial operators. It is

done as an audit. It is not an annual inspection. It is an audit of specific

types of commercial operations to see whether or not they are meeting their

rating.

MR. SWEENEY: Where is that audit done? Where does the inspection of those

vehicles take place?

MS WAKEHAM: They are all set up differently. They are done throughout the

year. It is not me phoning up trucking company x and saying: We are now coming

in and doing two trucks. It is not like doing inspections for buses. The audit

system is completely different. It goes through the log set-up for the drivers.

It goes through the hours of service records that they have. It goes through the

mechanicals on the machines themselves, but it is not the same type of

inspection as a rating scale. It is a performance contract rating scale standard

that has been set by the national government that we provide and administer

through facility auditors here.

MR. SWEENEY: What I am getting at is, somewhere along the line these

vehicles had to be checked somewhere.

MS WAKEHAM: These are not done at weigh scale stations. These specific

audits are done on site, either in a designated commercial garage that has been

set up for the commercial operations or a designated time and place set up by

the facility auditor to do the trucks.

MR. SWEENEY: Is there any revenue generated from the weigh scale

inspection stations from the federal government?

MS WAKEHAM: The trucking companies do not pay for these audits. We do

these audits for the federal government.

MR. SWEENEY: It is my understanding that the Province was paid or had an

allocation of funding each year to participate in this National Safety

Inspection of trucks that are travelling from Newfoundland to the mainland, that

sort of thing, coming to our Province that the federal government was also doing

inspections or we were doing inspections for them?

MS WAKEHAM: That is what the National Safety Code program is. They

provide us with funding for two facility auditors which work out of MRD and

those facility auditors have a set program which they deliver on behalf of the

federal government, which is a set of practices and codes which have to be

audited on commercial drivers to make sure that they are operating within that

standard. It is a rating performance system.

MR. SWEENEY: So, it has noting to do whatsoever -

MS WAKEHAM: - with the weigh scale operations, no.

MR. SWEENEY: And the inspections that take place throughout the year?

Nothing whatsoever.

MS WAKEHAM: No.

MR. SWEENEY: Trade Practices. The salaries in that area, 2.1.01.01, have

taken a reduction of $112,000. There was an increase from the Budget to Revised

and then Revised to the Estimates for this year. Actually, it is $300,000 or

$250,000. How many job losses account for this reduction? I guess - okay, answer

that one first.

MS WHALEN: The salary increase is a result of paying severance and

redundancy, plus their vacation pay. The salary decrease is a result of

eliminating a manager of adjudication and delaying filling the vacant positions.

MR. SWEENEY: I guess the next question that has to be asked is: Who is

responsible now, or what happened to the responsibilities of these people now

that they are no longer doing these positions?

MR. WINSTON MORRIS: What we did last year, we consolidated the

Residential Tenancies Division with the Trade Practices Division, which meant

the elimination of one director position. That person had retired. He had over

forty years experience. We had an adjudicator also retire last year, and based

on the volume, it was decided that that position was not needed.

Right now we have two manager positions in Residential Tenancy. One is

retiring and we feel one is adequate. So, a total of three positions are

involved and we streamlined the operations considerably because we were

overstaffed managerially in relation to the number of union positions we had

last year. So we have a much-more efficient structure and the three positions

that were lost are all due to retirements.

MR. SWEENEY: Just to pursue that a little bit further, I noticed that

Transportation and Communications has pretty well remained the status quo here.

When the number of positions have been reduced - there are three positions gone

- shouldn't the budget for Transportation and Communication decrease as well?

MR. WINSTON MORRIS: Not necessarily, because the transportation in this

division is due to a couple of factors. In the Trade Practices side, it is due

to examinations that we do for the various businesses. On the Residential

Tendency side, we travel outside our areas where we have staff, which are St.

John's, Gander and Corner Brook who do hearings on residential tendencies. If

there is a hearing needed outside of those areas, we travel to those areas to do

them. It is an estimate of how many examinations we have to do per year that are

outside those areas and an estimate of how many adjudications we will have

outside those areas. It is pretty hard to know exactly how many we would have.

It is difficult to say from year to year. It could be up or down from year to

year. So, it is our best guess as to what we are going to spend on travel, those

are.

MR. SWEENEY: I worked under the assumption, I guess, that if the number

of salary positions decrease then the travel expenses would also decrease

proportionally. I guess I was being a bit presumptuous on that part, if that is

the case. Oliver, do you want to -

MR. LANGDON: I will do a few.

CHAIR: Yes, I did not clarify in the beginning, excuse me for that, but

what we are going to do now, if anybody wants to ask questions we will give them

a ten minute time frame and then we will just move to the next person and keep

going back and forth (inaudible).

MR. LANGDON: I might not take ten minutes. The few questions - we can go

back and forth.

CHAIR: Yes. We are going to give Mr. Langdon ten minutes now, or whatever

he needs up to ten minutes, and then we will go down the line.

MR. LANGDON: I want to look at the Motor Vehicle Registration, 3.1.01,

first. I see the Salaries have very much increased, by about $100,000-plus

there. Probably you can give us the reason why that has increased on 3.1.01. The

Budget last year was $990,000, it was Revised to $848,000. This year it is

$1,055,900. Has there been a new person hired or is it for steps in the

progression or whatever?

MS WHALEN: Okay. The answer to that is the salary cost has decreased due

to strike savings and delay in filling positions.

MR. LANGDON: Okay. Therefore, really what you have is an estimate of

2005-06 is really 2004-05 with an increased steps in salary really to take care

of the extra amount?

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MR. LANGDON: Is that it?

MS WHALEN: Donna, do you want to answer that one?

MS KELLAND: I could clarify that. We have some proposed changes to

legislation under consideration. There is some provisional salary allocation

there for those changes but, as of yet, none of those changes have been approved

so we cannot really discuss the details of it.

MR. LANGDON: Okay.

Under 3.1.01., line 04., Supplies, last year you had $162,000 budgeted, the

revised was $197,000, and this year it is $616,000, an increase of about

$400,000. What are we buying in extra supplies?

MR. WINSTON MORRIS: Again, there are two elements to that. One is some

provision for legislative changes which again have not been approved. There is a

second provision there, which was increased postage and communication costs. The

postage is about $75,000, and that is a result of historical increases over the

last three to four years where postage costs have increased, as well as the

number of mail-outs have increased for Motor Registration, and there is a small

amount there for an increase due to our telephone answering system.

MR. LANGDON: I know, but that still leaves $300,000.

MR. WINSTON MORRIS: Again, those are provisional allocations related to

proposed legislative changes.

MR. LANGDON: Can you explain it a bit more? What are the legislative

changes that are going to cost $300,000?

MR. WINSTON MORRIS: Again, it is difficult to discuss the details because

they are still under consideration, but it would involve increased supplies,

plates, stickers, and those types of things.

MR. LANGDON: Are you placing a new order for a new licence plate?

MR. WINSTON MORRIS: For vehicles.

MR. LANGDON: For vehicles, you are?

MR. WINSTON MORRIS: Not for drivers' vehicles. We have some proposals

under ATV, motorized snow vehicles legislation, again, which have not been

approved. They are still under consideration.

MS WHALEN: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSTON MORRIS: As the minister said, that bill will be brought

before the House when approved.

MR. LANGDON: Okay.

Under the Driver Examinations and Weigh Scales Operations, I just need to ask

a few questions and then be able to make a few comments accordingly. The weigh

scales that were closed down at Foxtrap, how much did that cost annually for the

government to operate?

MS WHALEN: I would have to get the answer for you for that, Oliver. I do

not know off the top.

MR. LANGDON: Can you get that for me?

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MR. LANGDON: I will tell you the reason why I want to ask the question,

because St. John's is really the port for your container traffic. You go down

on the waterfront and you see container after container, hundreds and thousands

of them, that leave here from St. John's and go across the highway out to

wherever. I want to ask this question: Is the inspection station at Goobies open

twenty-four seven? The truck station at Goobies, is that in operation

twenty-four seven?

MS WHALEN: Yes, it is supposed to be twenty-four seven.

MR. LANGDON: It is supposed to be, but is it twenty-four seven?

MS WHALEN: I would have to get that information for you, Oliver. I do not

know right off the top of my head right now.

MR. LANGDON: Because I will tell you what is happening. The people who

are driving the highway, those of us who are on the Trans-Canada - for example,

you come into St. John's, you are driving in, on a good afternoon you can see

the ruts in the roads about this deep. If you get into them, I mean, your car is

like that. When it is raining, you have all kinds of problems that can cause you

to hydroplane.

My point is this: You have those tractor-trailer trucks now in St. John's,

knowing they do not have to be weighed. They can put on whatever they like, and

they are over the highway. The Trans-Canada Highway is really, in a sense,

taking a real knocking because you can put on what you like. If the operation,

for example, at Goobies is not a twenty-four seven operation, all of the heavy

equipment that was going over the highway, going to Marystown for that FPSO that

was there, all that could be put on a tractor-trailer and not weighed, and what

is the expense of it? The expense of it is a Trans-Canada that is in a mess,

because people are abusing it and will continue to abuse it.

The question I am asking is: Was it penny-wise and pound foolish to have

closed that station at Foxtrap to allow the Trans-Canada Highway to be in such a

deteriorated condition as a result of that particular policy? I know that you

are not going to be able to address it here, but, I am telling you, it is a

point that a lot of people are making. It is not just me. I travel the highway a

lot, and the Trans-Canada Highway, for those of us who travel it, is in a worse

situation now than it has ever been. I think that people are taking advantage of

the fact that there are no inspections.

Why I ask that: In Goobies, by the way, I have come across there time and

time again when tractor-trailers from St. John's are going this way and this

way and they are not coming in, so there cannot be any twenty-four seven

inspection at Goobies.

MS WHALEN: I will get that information for you. I will check on that and

I will get back.

MR. LANGDON: Yes, I would appreciate that.

It is a situation where I am not sure if it is a cost-saving measure. I think

it is going to be a very, very costly item for government to be able to address

that particular item as it relates to the highway depots, and I am only familiar

with that.

The other thing I wanted to say is this: If you bypass Goobies, you can take

your tractor-trailer from St. John's, go through Central Newfoundland traffic

- that has a population of $100,000 people - there are no weigh scales in

Central, and you can go all the way to Pynn's Brook on the West Coast before

you are weighed.

It is a serious situation, and it is a safety situation for people who are

coming to our highways, I am telling you. I am sure the Member for Terra Nova

knows exactly what I am talking about. In the highway itself you see these ruts,

and it is because of the heavy loads that are on the tractor-trailers. It is a

hazard for people who are going to come over it, and it is going to get worse

unless we are able to address it.

I will leave it at that. Wally, if you want to go that route then you can.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you.

Just a point, to be fair to the members on the government side, I know that

the Chair has not referred to these people, to ask them if they want to ask a

question.

The second point I want to make with regard to the Chair is this: I notice

that we humble ourselves in drinking cold water and the Chair had nice warm Tim

Horton's coffee delivered.

When we were the government, as Chair, out of our own pocket, we made sure

that coffee was brought forward to one and all.

CHAIR: As the Chair, I will see how this morning's meeting goes and

maybe buy coffee the next morning.

MR. ANDERSEN: On page 41,

section 2.1.02.01., Salaries, there was an

increase again in Salaries. With the amount of layoffs, I guess, that we have

seen over the last twelve to eighteen months, one would wonder why there would

be an increase again in Salaries.

MS WHALEN: Salaries, 01., is that what you are referring to?

MR. ANDERSEN: Page 41, under 2.1.02.01., Salaries, yes.

MS WHALEN: Salaries have decreased as a result of the vacancies and the

delay in filling the positions, and strike savings. The salary increase is a

result of paying severance and redundance, plus their vacation pay, and also the

result of vacancies, delays in filling the positions.

MR. ANDERSEN: Minister, the majority of people who received their

layoffs, that was well over twelve months ago. Would the redundancy not have

been covered off in your revised budget from 2004-2005?

MS WHALEN: Some of them were bridged. Some of the positions were bridged.

Do you want to explain that, Deputy Minister?

MS WAKEHAM: The situation is that with respect to the age qualification

on some of the positions there was one person whose position was being bridged

from when the integration took place, and that person's salary tied over into

2005-2006.

MR. ANDERSEN: Page 44, 3.1.03.01., there was again a significant increase

in Salaries this year.

MS WHALEN: The salary increase was due to filling the vacant positions

there.

MR. ANDERSEN: Under subhead 3.1.04., again there was a $100,000 increase

in Salaries.

MS WHALEN: The salary decreased due to the strike savings.

MR. ANDERSEN: It is not a decrease, Minister, it is an increase.

MS WHALEN: Which one are we referring to there?

MR. ANDERSEN: Page 44, under 3.1.04.

MS WHALEN: Okay, I thought you said 01.

Yes, the salary increased due to filling the vacant positions we had there.

MR. ANDERSEN: I guess if I asked a question on page 45 for 3.2.02.01.,

Salaries, it would be the same answer?

MS WHALEN: Yes, it would be.

MR. ANDERSEN: Filling positions for Regional Services.

MS WAKEHAM: Subhead 3.2.01.01?

MR. ANDERSEN: Subhead 3.2.02.

MS WAKEHAM: Subhead 3.2.02?

MR. ANDERSEN: Yes, page 45.

MS WHALEN: Regional Services, and you are looking for the increase in the

Salaries? Is that what you are asking?

MR. ANDERSEN: Yes.

MS WHALEN: The salary increase is due to the redistribution of positions

from Support Services to regional operation, to general operating salaries. It

goes back to subhead 3.2.01.

MR. ANDERSEN: Okay.

I will move ahead to page 47. Under heading 3.3.03., the first line,

Salaries, again there is an increase.

MS WHALEN: Salaries increased, you said?

MR. ANDERSEN: Yes.

MS WHALEN: Salaries decreased due to vacant positions -

MR. ANDERSEN: From $532,000 to $652,000.

MS WHALEN: Would you mind repeating that again? I am having trouble with

the -

MR. ANDERSEN: Page 47, subhead 3.3.03.01.

MS WHALEN: Salaries decreased as a result of strike savings, in filling

the vacant positions, and Salaries increased due to the vacant positions being

filled.

MR. ANDERSEN: Minister, if one were to ask the question, with all - no, I

will save that question for a little later on. I will just go on to page 48,

subhead 4.1.01.01., again, an increase in Salaries.

MS WHALEN: Salaries decreased due to the redistribution of salaries from

the OHS inspections. The answer for that one is, salaries increased due to the

redistribution of salaries from the Occupational Health and Safety inspections.

MR. ANDERSEN: The last question on the subheads, for me, would be on page

48, subhead 4.1.02.01., Salaries, from $2.6 million to $2.9 million.

MS WHALEN: The Salaries decrease is a result of the delay in filling the

vacant positions, and we are hoping to get these positions filled.

MR. ANDERSEN: Not a decrease, but an increase I am talking about.

MS WAKEHAM: Under 4.1.02?

MR. ANDERSEN: Under 4.1.02., Salaries.

MS WAKEHAM: It went from $2,994,000 to $2,627,000?

MR. ANDERSEN: Yes.

MS WAKEHAM: Then up to $2,949,000?

MR. ANDERSEN: Yes.

MS WAKEHAM: The decrease on the revised was the result of a delay in

filling positions. We had a number of positions in Occupational Health and

Safety that we did not fill, and now we have the approval to fill them. That is

why the revised estimates for 2005-2006 shows the $2,949,000.

MR. ANDERSEN: Minister, I guess we could ask for a list of - with all the

increases in Salaries, in the majority of subheads we have raised questions on,

you said it was due to the hiring of new staff, filling positions. Most of the

questions I raised here this morning, you said the increase in Salaries was

filling positions. Could we get the number of positions that were filled, and in

what department?

MS WAKEHAM: We can provide you with a list of positions.

The delay in filling the positions is that we have gone to competitions and

we haven't been able to get the qualified candidates. We have had to go back,

so we have been delayed in filling the positions in 2004-2005.

The estimates we have for 2005-2006 is that we have some vacant positions. We

are hoping to fill them, and that is why the salaries have been put there for

2005-2006. These are positions for which we have approval to fill. We just haven't

found the candidates to fill them.

MR. ANDERSEN: Minister, has your department taken a look at people in

small and isolated communities who are required to buy a licence? They have to

pay the full fare, and they live in small communities where they only get a

chance to use their licence for approximately three to four months out of the

year, and the question was raised last year.

Would you look at some way where there could be - probably if they have to

pay the full fare, those who live in these small isolated communities, that

where they only get a chance to use their licence for three or four months out

of the year, would your department look at providing these people with a licence

that is valid for two years as compared to one? Or, if you could buy a licence

now for four years, will you look at extending that to these people for probably

eight years?

MS WHALEN: Okay. Barbara, if you would not mind responding to that

question.

MS WAKEHAM: I understand, Mr. Andersen, that there have been some

concerns, particularly with Nain, in terms of the driver licence and driver

examinations issue and because of the situation with the airstrip operation

there. My understanding right now - and we have talked to the town council of

Nain - is that we are trying to identify a replacement for Rex Howell who was up

there, and we have reinstated Christine Holloway as of April 1, 2005, to do

driver permits, driver tests and driver licences. That was one of the concerns

that was raised by yourself and by the town council.

With respect to the registration, and I know this has been an issue for a

number of people, particularly in Labrador, regarding paying the full cost of

$180 for the vehicle permits. Right now we are allowing for doing the

registration of the vehicles through the banks, online, and mail, but we do not

have - and it has been an issue that has been raised a number of times. We do

not have funds allocated for setting up counter service in Nain or on the Coast

to provide direct one-to-one. I know this has been a concern for, not only your

area, but for other smaller areas of the Province.

With respect to differential fees for Labrador, I think that is something

that the minister can raise, but at this point in time we do not have a

mechanism for differential fees for Labrador.

The issue with respect to multiple year licences has been addressed

previously. The reason that we have a problem with that is due to security

measures and to problems that we have at the national level. We do not have a

mechanism at this point in time for multiple year registration of vehicles. I

know that has been an issue, not only for you, but for a number of - and it has

been raised at the national meetings as well, in terms of remote areas and doing

them, but right now, because driver licences is an instrument that is used for a

lot of fraud, they will not allow us to do multiple years. This is being

investigated by the national group. If at some point there is a possibility for

doing multiple years, then I am certainly sure that it will be looked at.

MR. ANDERSEN: But your driver's licence is done for a multiple year,

isn't it?

MS WAKEHAM: A driver's licence is once every five years with an ID, and

specifically embedded information on the ID.

The vehicle permit; we do not have any jurisdictions in Canada that provide

multiple year for vehicle permits. It is an issue that has been brought up by,

not only yourself, but by members from other Northern areas in terms of that.

They have not found a mechanism yet to deal with that particular area.

MR. ANDERSEN: Okay. I will certainly raise that concern again later on I

guess.

The other question is just a very brief one. Who sets the standard for school

busing? I know it is 1.4 kilometres that is required. Once students travel over

1.4 kilometres, or if they have to travel over 1.4 kilometres to get to school

than busing is provided. Who makes that judgement? Is that -

MS WHALEN: That is the Department of Education.

MR. ANDERSEN: Okay. So it is not Government Services?

MS WHALEN: No. It is the Department of Education that it comes under.

MR. ANDERSEN: Okay, that's it.

By the way, Mr. Chair, I would ask more questions but my ten minutes are up.

MS WHALEN: Thank you, Wally.

CHAIR: I was consulting with your colleagues here. They said you talk too

long.

Mr. Ridgley, do you have any questions?

MR. RIDGLEY: No, thank you.

CHAIR: Mr. Sweeney?

MR. SWEENEY: I will have to try to find out where to pick up here because

my colleague was taking off like a house afire. So, I have to try to figure out

where he was, what he has jumped on and what he missed.

CHAIR: (Inaudible) he tried to take off.

MR. ANDERSEN: Excuse me, Mr. Chair.

To my colleague, I identified every page and every item that I asked

questions on -

MS WHALEN: Yes, you did.

MR. ANDERSEN: - and if he would have ticked them off, he would know the

difference.

CHAIR: Mr. Sweeney.

MR. SWEENEY: Point taken.

Under 3.1.02, Salaries. I do not know, Oliver, if you asked that one or not.

Salaries were over budget last year by almost $200,000. Why were they over? That

is for the Driver Examinations and Weigh Scale Operations.

MS WHALEN: I have answered that previously. I think our deputy answered

that one. 3.1.02, you said, isn't it?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes, 3.1.02.01.

MS WHALEN: We have increased due to the severance, the redundancy, the

vacation pay and the overtime work as a result of the strike. I answered that a

little while ago for Mr. Andersen.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay, I am sorry.

Is it reasonable to assume that will not happen this year then?

MS WHALEN: No. We are not going to have a strike this year, I hope.

MR. SWEENEY: While we are on that heading, I would like to ask a question

about the waiting list for driver exams, driver's testing.

MS WHALEN: What question is it you would like to ask?

MR. SWEENEY: Is there an anticipated reduction in the waiting list for

this year? There have been reports come to me about waiting lists for driver

testing at the various stations.

MS WHALEN: We have not had any, have we?

MS KELLAND: I do not have the exact details on the waiting times in the

various areas. If you have a particular area that you find there is a concern,

certainly we can look into it.

My understanding is that the waiting times that were generated last year, for

various reasons, due to uncontrollable factors, have been significantly reduced.

I know that in some areas, particularly in heavy volume areas like St. John's

and Mount Pearl, there may be some scheduling delays but as far as I know there

are no significant waiting times. If you have particulars, we would certainly be

happy to address them.

MR. SWEENEY: One personal situation with myself, I tried to get a test in

Harbour Grace last fall. Unfortunately, it was later in the year, and I was

informed that they could not do the test with me because the driver examiner had

lost his transportation. They had taken his van away. Actually, what it was, I

wanted to do a motorcycle test. Anyway, I could not get it done unless I gave

proper notice, advanced notice so that he could rent a car from one of the local

suppliers and depending on the availability of the supplier, if they had a car

available, that I could take my motorcycle test. Anyway, unfortunately for me,

the snow came upon us and I could not get my test. I am hoping that this spring

I will have better luck.

That was one of the problems, and there was a waiting list there then for

that particular thing and some of the other things. I know I am still

encountering long lineups at the Harbour Grace division out there. So, that is

one particular case. I have also had calls from Mount Pearl - not from Mount

Pearl but from people who have gone to the Mount Pearl office and they have

encountered long lineups. In fairness, I cannot say that it is everyday, but I

do get a fair number of calls. I guess where I am the critic, I am a magnet for

complaints. That is one of the things.

MS KELLAND: If I could respond. I expect that the problem last fall was

partially related to the hold over from the April labour disruption. Certainly,

I will look into that. That predates me a little bit in this position but I can

certainly look into the issue that you have described.

As far as waiting times at Harbour Grace or Mount Pearl, I would expect that

would the end of the month syndrome where a lot of people wait until the end of

the month that their licence is expiring to actually go and renew. We are trying

to encourage more online registration. People have the convenience, of course,

of doing that at banks. We do staff the Harbour Grace office fairly heavily

because there is a significant amount of volume there. Occasionally, with staff

turnover, there may be blips. As far as I know, in Mount Pearl the waiting times

are very good at this point. Again, there is a bit of an issue with end of the

month, but I will certainly address that with the Registrar and see if there are

any particular issues.

MR. SWEENEY: Yes. One of the things with it, I guess - while I am still

on that topic I may as well get it off my chest. I have had calls from seniors.

I am not sure what service is in place but, minister, it goes to your district

of Bell Island. I have had calls from seniors on Bell Island about the

inconvenience they have, because a lot of seniors do not use - Bell Island does

not have a bank, a lot of seniors do not use the Internet, they are not familiar

with computers. So they have to take the ferry and drive to Mount Pearl to get

their licence renewed, and especially if there is picture taking involved. There

is a time when the picture has to be renewed on their driver's licence.

That is some of the nature of the complaints that I have had. There is an

inconvenience in the service and I am just wondering with the electronic

conveniences that we have today, that maybe something can be established in

places like Bell Island where there is a ferry involved, and a fair amount of

inconvenience to have to leave Bell Island and then go over to the Island part,

the mainland part, or other parts around the Province. Maybe they could go to a

town council office, have a predetermined time or something throughout a month,

where something can be established to offset this inconvenience for some of the

residents. The nature of the complaint is the increase in the cost of fees and

so on, plus add on the gas and the ferry service and their time travelling.

Sometimes if they are tardy, they are left with inclement weather conditions,

especially somebody who is renewing in January, February, March, that type of

scenario. You do not know what the weather is going to be on a particular day.

I am just passing along the concerns that I have gotten because I find myself

rather fortunate. I either avail of the Internet or Mount Pearl or Harbour

Grace. We run back and forth everyday, so it is not a personal problem, but it

is for a large number of people out there who have not taken advantage of the

electronic services.

MS WHALEN: I thank you for your comments.

I am aware of some of the inconveniences that have been called and told. I

know about, as you said, my District of Bell Island, but we have made some

decisions with regard to driver examinations and, right now, there is no

anticipation of changing those decisions.

Thank you very much for bringing it to my attention.

MR. SWEENEY: Yes, it wasn't as much as the examinations. I think it was

the convenience of getting a renewal for seniors. That was the more important

part, because people getting - I know from, Mr. Chair, your District of St.

Bride's. I bumped into somebody and they had to get a bus. They wanted to get

a licence to drive a bus and they had to get a loan of a bus to drive from, I am

not sure if it was St. Bride's or Branch, to do an exam in Harbour Grace, and

the cost of getting down there with the bus and everything else. You know, the

system has changed. I know there are cost savings implemented and everything

else, but that cost is also passed back to the consumer in other forms. Like

this particular fellow from your district, Fabian, was kind of outraged that he

could not go to Placentia and get it done. He had to come all the way to Harbour

Grace. There are valid arguments out there for that stuff, but I understand

where you are in that, as well, minister. But, how much was saved from cutting

all the driver examination sites? What was the real savings?

MS WHALEN: About $100,000.

MR. SWEENEY: That's all? For the whole Province?

MS WHALEN: It is significant when you had the financial picture that we

had when we came here, sir.

MR. SWEENEY: Yes. That varies, too, in opinion, I guess. The person from

St. Bride's, he never thought too much about it, and the people from Bell

Island.

Licence and Registration, 3.1.03. Supplies were overspent by $50,000. What

was the nature of that overspending?

MS WHALEN: The Supply cost has increased due to a higher cost associated

with the plates and the stickers. Also, they had no adequate supply of plates to

meet the demand.

MR. SWEENEY: So the price of plates went up then?

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. That is all those Supplies were, just plates and

stickers?

MS WHALEN: Plates and stickers.

MR. SWEENEY: While we are talking about plates, the veteran's licence

plates, has there been any effort made to integrate those plates in our system

so that when the RCMP or the RNC pulls over somebody who has a veteran's

licence plate -

MS WHALEN: I am still looking at that. I have not made any decision on

it.

MR. SWEENEY: - that they would not have to take their old plate out of

the trunk to show them that plate?

MS WHALEN: No. I do not have any decision made on that yet. We are still

reviewing it.

MR. SWEENEY: Do you think there will be a favourable decision?

MS WHALEN: At this time, I cannot really tell you an answer to that.

MR. SWEENEY: The National Safety Code, let's have a look at that one.

As I understand it, we did not have an agreement with the federal government

last year -

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. SWEENEY: No, that was only $80,000. Why was the Federal Revenue up by

$80,000? - if we look at 3.1.04, down to Revenue on the Federal side. It was

budgeted at $161,000.

MS WAKEHAM: Are you indicating the $161,000 to the $241,100?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes.

MS WAKEHAM: Okay. That was for IT. It varies from year to year. We have a

system that is set up to do the work for the federal government. Sometimes we

have to have increases of pay in terms of software. That is what the increase

is, to give us more money.

MR. SWEENEY: Even without an agreement they still -

MS WAKEHAM: The agreement - the hon. member probably remembers from his

previous occupation, that the agreement gets signed at various times and there

is a delay by the federal government. Sometimes we get money from one year

coming into a next year. So it is not always exactly each fiscal year. Sometimes

we get money overriding from the previous year and there are back payments. So,

this back payment may have come in from 2003-04. It is not a straightforward

thing with the agreement or with the timing that the federal government provides

the money to us.

MR. SWEENEY: 3.2.01, Provincial Revenue. Can I have an explanation of the

variances that are involved right there? It was Budgeted for $1.8 million and

the Revised amount was $2.2 million.

MS WHALEN: Yes. These revenues are received as a result of conducting the

The revenues are also received from the registration of boiler and pressure

vessel systems; the pressure fitting and repair procedures, and the licencing of

mechanical and electrical contractors; the issuance of propane gas installation

certificates; the issuance of permits to alter or install pressure systems; the

design review of elevators and amusement ride installations; the electrical

permits and inspections; the BPV inspections and the elevator inspections. These

revenues vary from year to year. We had a lot of building taking place last

year.

MR. SWEENEY: So we are not anticipating the same amount this year,

obviously.

MS WHALEN: We do not know. I cannot project that.

MR. SWEENEY: Is there a large amount of money there not collected for

inspections?

MS WHALEN: I do not have that information available. I am not aware of it

but I will have to look into it and see.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. I would appreciate it if we could get an answer on

that.

Some of the companies have made contact with me regarding some of their

inspections, that they would like to, possibly, make their inspections cheaper.

The cost involved with getting inspections done, especially to remoter areas or

further areas from outside the city here, of being able to look after some of

the cost themselves, like supplying a ticket for an inspector to fly out to do

something.

MS WHALEN: We have not been made aware of that, hon. member. If you want

to, you can pass it along that they can get in contact with me and I will

certainly look into this.

MR. SWEENEY: Yes, I have told them that they should contact the office

about it. Some of the inspections, I think, are based on a cost recovery basis

and they complain sometimes about the excessive cost of some of the inspections.

MS WHALEN: Okay.

CHAIR: Mr. Sweeney -

MR. SWEENEY: My time is up?

CHAIR: Yes, I gave you a few minutes extra.

Mr. Langdon.

MR. LANGDON: I have a couple of general questions, not a line-by-line

thing.

In the Occupational Health and Safety division - I guess it would be

primarily for Kim to answer that. I would imagine it is probably a bit difficult

attracting very qualified people into the department. It was when I was there

because of the outside forces taking these people away. Is there any program in

government now where, let's say for example, a person who has been a liquor

licence establishment inspector being transferred into the department? Is that

kind of thing happening?

MS DUNPHY: We have had a number of those transitions within government.

We actually have one of our inspectors in the Central region, who is a former

liquor licence inspector, who had enough enforcement experience, just general

enforcement, that we were able to take him under our wing, so to speak, and

provide him with on-the-job training with respect to safety inspections. We also

have a couple of former electrical inspectors that were under the public safety

domain who were declared redundant, and we took them in, as well, because of

their expertise in enforcement and electrical. There are a lot of common issues

that we look at from Occupational Health and Safety.

There has been some of those transitions of staff, but we do require a

certain minimum level of knowledge and experience before we would consider

someone. So it is not in every case, but there are case-by-case, some people

have some particular qualifications that they would bring to the job that is not

necessarily part of their existing job as a liquor inspector or as an electrical

inspector.

MR. LANGDON: Yes, because the reason why I asked, earlier this year when

there was an inspection done of the plant in Harbour Breton -

MS DUNPHY: Yes.

MR. LANGDON: - one of the people who went to the Harbour Breton plant was

a person who was a former liquor inspector. I asked the questions in the House

of the minister at the time, and there was nobody from Occupational Health and

Safety or from a structural engineer point of view that went into the plant. He

went there and, of course, he had to come back because his wife was pregnant, or

was about to have the child - and I would have done the same thing. That report

which was signed off at the end was so much different than what was done by the

independent structural review that the town had done and it was not a good job.

MS DUNPHY: Yes.

MR. LANGDON: It is these types of things that when you have people

transferred into the department from different agencies - like a liquor

inspection, you have certain qualifications and you train the people on the job,

so to speak. Sometimes you will have that type of an experience that you have in

Harbour Breton, when the government people went down there they were looking at

about $6.8 million to do the plant in Harbour Breton. The real cost of that is

$1.8 million. There were a lot of contradictions - I am looking for the word

here that would have happened. These are the types of things that concerns me

some when it does happen because you are dealing with occupational, health and

safety and that type of thing.

The other thing that relates to the Harbour Breton situation. I know it is

not your department but here is a situation - like the company, we have gone

after the company from the town and the workers and so on, and said to the

company: Fishery Products International, you owe the people in Harbour Breton

twelve weeks of severance. I mean, they are a large operation. There are between

300 and 400 people who work at the plant. They have come back and said: Oh, no,

we don't owe that to the people of Harbour Breton. We are off the hook because

Occupational, Health and Safety says that particular plant is not safe for the

people to go to work. But who allowed that to happen in the first place? It had

to be the Harbour Breton operation of FPI, they have held the people to ransom.

I think they received a comment or an opinion from Justice that says they

were legal within their right to say that, but they are taking it before the

Labour Relations Board. These are the types of things that really concerns me,

when you have a large operation like FPI that can allow the thing to

deteriorate. The thing about it is, from the town's point of view, these

people were working in a plant where there were occupational, health and safety

hazards. If they could not open it because of it, they allowed these people to

work there in the plant before it was closed. That type of thing really concerns

me. I will leave that there because there are more things to come on that.

MS DUNPHY: If I could though, I would like to clarify some of the

information because some of it is not, I guess from your perspective - I can

understand where you are coming from, but I think it is to clarify how we do our

work.

First of all, with respect to the Harbour Breton situation. I was not

particularly or personally involved in it because I have a personal conflict of

interest, but I am generally aware of how we did the work down there.

With respect to how we would go out and do an assessment, we do not have

structural engineers on staff. We would not go out and do the thorough

investigation that a consulting company would do. What we do is evaluate how

well they did their job. So, we reviewed the report that was created. We have an

engineer on staff, and the chap who had to go back, he was involved in the

review of that report, as was our director. Then what we looked at was how

comprehensive the report was, sort of how thorough it was. Then we went down and

assessed basically what they looked at from the report perspective and then

looked at the physical facility to see: Well, if they looked at this room, are

there comments on this room? So we looked, basically, to verify that we felt

that the report was comprehensive. We were never intending for us to actually do

the structural assessment.

With respect to the liquor inspector, he really had no involvement in that.

That was his area and he was just along from an informational perspective. It

was not his decision or his call. This was a group effort from a number of staff

that we had in the department. I am a little bit concerned that he gets on the

hook for being the one who made the call when he really never had any role in

that.

MR. LANGDON: I am not saying he is on the hook. All I am saying is that

he was there, I guess as one of the staff, but from a public perception though,

when you have these things happen and people out there - I am not just saying it

for the sake of saying it. I am not that type of person. Being a former minister

I know the responsibilities of it, but when you do have these things happening,

then there are people who will question it.

MS DUNPHY: Yes. Absolutely!

MR. LANGDON: That is all I am -

MS DUNPHY: No, I understand. I certainly understand.

MR. LANGDON: I am raising the flag for you, that is all.

MS DUNPHY: No, I certainly understand that.

With respect to the twelve weeks of severance; again, that would be something

that you would have to deal with through the Labour Relations Board.

MR. LANGDON: Oh, I know that.

I would like to make one more comment again on the insurance industry. I am

just wondering where that is, because, as we speak, there are people who are in

that type of situation. I know of a person - it is not hearsay - who nudged the

bumper of a car; not enough to mark it, not enough to injure it or whatever.

That person got out of the car and said to the driver: Oh, my, I have a

whiplash. The person says: It is impossible. You could not have - there is no

mark on my car. I am not sure if I nudged you, or what have you. That person did

put a claim in. That person is paying an extra couple, or $300 a year for his

insurance, which should never had happened. I tell you, it is an abuse of the

rules of it. By putting in a higher deductible it is just not going to cut it,

because that higher deductible will be just passed on then to the insurance and

my rates will go up.

Now, I have nothing against a person who gets injured in an accident and full

recovery and, God bless them, whatever they can have, they should have, but in

these situations it is still occurring. It is still happening. Personally, I do

not have any faith in the system that it is going to change. I do not think the

new person, I have never met him - Mr. Johnson comes from a lawyer's

background and so on, he might recommend it but I have no faith in that. I think

that the Newfoundland public, the motoring public, have just, in a sense, thrown

up their hands and realize this is the way it is going to be. It is not a very

good situation. I think it has to be addressed. It is being addressed in other

Atlantic provinces and we are the only one that does not have a cap on soft

tissue.

Again, I am not a lawyer and knowing all the intricacies of it, but that is

one case that I know has happened within the last couple of weeks. I can give

you another one, another lady who did the same thing. She went to the police.

She said I have to report it. When she got there she did not have all of her

documentation, so she said to the police: I will be back, but I know there was

no injury involved. I just touched the car. When the person went back the second

time the police looked at her and said that person has already been here and

filed a complaint for whiplash. I mean, give me a break! These are ordinary

people who are just roughing it through and paying the insurance on their

vehicles. They do not need that. It has to be addressed and sooner rather than

later. I will just leave that as a comment.

MS WHALEN: Thank you for your comments.

We are, indeed, looking at everything. The PUB report has just come in and we

will be bringing some new reforms into the House this session. We will have more

to enlighten you on some of our changes in our reforms.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Mr. Langdon.

MR. LANGDON: Again, it might have been asked before here because we are

kind of back and forth.

On the technical question, Support Services, 3.2.01.01, you had budgeted

$1,518,800 and then it was revised to $1,405,300, and now this year you have

$1,267,400. That is really, I guess, about a $250,000 deduction in that budget

head. Is that for people who have been laid off within the department,

inspectors or what have you? Can you explain the decrease there for me?

MS WHALEN: No, it is not, but I will let the DM explain the details of

that.

MS WAKEHAM: If you take 3.2.01, Support Services, and you take 3.2.02,

Regional Services -

MR. LANGDON: I am looking at Salaries.

MS WAKEHAM: Yes, Salaries. What happened is we did a redistribution. Some

of the people were costed up under one division as opposed to another. All we

did was redistribute them. There has been no change in the level of salaries. It

is just a change in where they are being paid out of.

MR. LANGDON: Okay.

Mr. Chair, somebody else.

CHAIR: Mr. Oram, any questions?

Mr. Andersen.

MR. ANDERSEN: Not at the present time. I do have some later on but I will

leave it to my colleague, Mr. Sweeney.

CHAIR: Okay. Mr. Ridgley?

MR. RIDGLEY: No, Sir, not at this time.

CHAIR: Mr. Skinner?

MR. SKINNER: Not yet, Sir.

CHAIR: Not yet, all right. We are back to Mr. Sweeney.

MR. SWEENEY: Regional Services, 3.2.02. I notice there that Purchased

Services was revised by $26,400. What was the nature of that expenditure?

MS WHALEN: The budget provides for the printing services and vehicle

repairs and the maintenance and other miscellaneous purchased services.

Increased costs in the area resulted from the vehicle repair costs and the

equipment maintenance costs and the redistribution of positions from Support

Services to regional operations. Thus the costs varied from year to year.

MR. SWEENEY: So, the cost of vehicles, that wasn't covered off in

Transportation?

MS WHALEN: No.

MR. SWEENEY: Provincial Revenue has a fluctuation there of $350,000,

approximately.

MS WHALEN: Yes. Well, the provincial related revenue relates to the

inspection fees. These fees decrease due to less revenue collected concerning

the food premises licence instituted in 2004-05. Do you need some more

information on that?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes. I was just wondering, does that mean that the

inspections were not done on the food premises?

MS WAKEHAM: No. In 2000-2004, there are approximately 4,000 food

establishments. Up until last year, we go in and do the inspections for free. It

was costing the government a fairly significant amount of money. We instituted a

fee but the fee, itself, did not start to come into effect until November. So we

collected less money when we did the budget back in November, December on the

Revised. In fact, we may have received a bit more money now. We are anticipating

a certain level of funding as a result of getting all that money collected, and

we did get all the money collected. So that is why the decrease is there.

MR. SWEENEY: What I am looking at here is the increase from what was

budgeted to what was collected.

MS WAKEHAM: You are looking at, we had a Budget of $1,630,000, it went to

$1,280,000 and it is now going up to $1,630,000, Provincial related Revenue?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes.

MS WAKEHAM: Okay. The first one, the decrease is because we never

collected all the money on the fees. The increase is that because this is going

to be an annual fee, this is what we should be collecting once we receive all

the money.

MR. SWEENEY: Now, while we are on the topic of fees, are there any fee

increases in this year's budget?

MS WHALEN: No, in my department there are none.

MR. SWEENEY: No fees whatsoever?

MS WHALEN: From my department, I have not increased any fees this year.

MR. SWEENEY: All right.

Vital Statistics, 3.3.01. That takes in revenue from the general public for

the purchase of birth certificates and so on. Where is that outlined in the

Budget?

MS WHALEN: Could you repeat that again (inaudible)?

MR. SWEENEY: Vital Statistics takes in revenue from the general public,

in the line of say birth certificates, death certificates and those sorts of

things. Where is that outlined at in the Budget?

MS WHALEN: Well, it goes into the central cash - any of those fees.

MS WAKEHAM: As you are aware, the department has a fairly significant

revenue stream. Most of it is not reflected in terms of related revenue within

the thing because it is not an exact product. Most of it goes into the central

registry; goes into central revenue cash. That is why it is not reflected there.

You will see that on a whole bunch of things where there is not a direct

one-to-one relationship between the money that is collected by the department

and the revenue that is showing there. If you go to MRD you will see the revenue

MR. SWEENEY: Is not there.

MS WAKEHAM: Yes, it is not there. You will see it all goes to

Consolidated Revenue Fund.

MR. SWEENEY: The Federal Revenue is $9,200. Where does that come from?

OFFICIAL: Federal Revenue?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes, 3.3.01.

MS WAKEHAM: We have two committees that we provide information under

Vital Stats and this is one to the Health Registry of Canada. They provide us

with some money for that purpose. The federal government requires information

regarding vital events to be processed through them and they provide us with

some dollars in order for us to be able to do that.

MR. SWEENEY: Let's move over to 3.3.03. Provincial Revenue there shows

that it is estimated to be $1.3 million. Where does that come from?

MS WAKEHAM: In Printing and Micrographic Services?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes, it is Printing and Micrographic. Revenue-Provincial,

subheading .02.

MS WAKEHAM: Yes, $1,300,000?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes. Where does that come from?

MS WAKEHAM: Every department of government pays for their printing

services, so when they put a requisition in to get certain printing done they

pay for it out of their allocation.

MR. SWEENEY: So that is inside government?

MS WAKEHAM: That is inside government, yes, and the same way for

micrographic services.

MR. SWEENEY: Occupational, Health and Safety, I have a few questions I

would like to ask. Not so much here on this line, but schools. Minister, you

mentioned the other day that schools were being inspected on a regular basis.

How many schools were inspected in the last twelve months?

MS WHALEN: We do not have that information here with us but I can

certainly look it up and see for you.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. I would like to have it if I could.

MS WHALEN: Donna, do you have something there?

MS KELLAND: I do not have an exact number for you, but our frequency of

inspection on public health inspections require schools to be inspected

annually. So there would be at least one inspection of every school by a public

health inspector on an annual basis. I can certainly provide statistics to you

for the last year that we have counted to date.

MR. SWEENEY: I am thinking also in line of the structural safety. These

are public government buildings and I am just trying -

MS KELLAND: We do not do structural inspections, we just do public

health.

MR. SWEENEY: Yes, public health. So, I am just wondering about the other

inspections that the schools are supposed to have from Occupational, Health and

Safety.

MS DUNPHY: We would not, again, do structural inspections; similar to the

fish plant scenario. We do not go in and do a structural assessment of a

facility. What we would do is a routine inspection of any given workplace. A

school would be an example as well.

With respect to schools, we would go in and inspect. If there was a complaint

about a structural issue then we would require the owner of the building,

whoever that might be, if necessary, to have a structural assessment done, but

it is not done as a matter of course. If, for example, workers in the building

or in the school had a concern, then they would bring that to their supervisor,

their safety committee, or the school board. If they were not able to resolve it

internally, then we could intervene to require it if it was necessary.

MR. SWEENEY: When you say a routine inspection, how often do they take

place?

MS DUNPHY: We prioritize our inspections by according to risk. We have X

number of inspectors. We have 15,000 employers in the Province and hundreds of

thousands of different workplaces. We are not into every workplace every year.

There would be no capacity to do that. What we do is, I guess, have an

operational plan where we identify, based on risk, what inspections would be

done in any given year, and in what types of workplaces and what types of

industries. Schools are not on a regular, annual list because public health do

them. They would also, if they had any concerns when they went through and did

their annual inspection on a health and safety matter, then they could make a

referral to us. Then we would go in and address that.

MR. SWEENEY: How many referrals have you had in the past twelve months,

say from public health?

MS DUNPHY: From public health, I would not be able to give you an exact

number but I do know that some information that we did generate just recently

was that last year we did twenty-seven inspection activities in schools either

related to a referral from the public health person, from a complaint from a

teacher, or an employee, or just from a concern that we had heard, a right to

refuse or something like that. There were twenty-seven, I recall, is the number

of inspections for last year with respect to school activity, school buildings,

school facilities.

MR. SWEENEY: And you are not sure where they originated from?

MS DUNPHY: They would have been from a number of places. They would not

have been self-generated, but they would have been generated by clients; either

the employees, the public health folks. There were a number that were referred

to us from public health or from some other activity that we may have been aware

of that was going on at the school; a renovation or construction job, for

example.

MR. SWEENEY: So a school would not get inspected unless it was referred

to by somebody?

MS DUNPHY: As a matter of course, absolutely.

MR. SWEENEY: It would not be done on a -

MS DUNPHY: No. The Department of Education has a responsibility, as do

the school boards, to maintain these buildings in a safe manner. Again, public

health would go in from a public health perspective. The Fire Commissioner's

office may also do inspections of schools from a fire and life safety. Again, if

they had a concern, then they would make that referral to us if they had an

occupational health and safety issue that they wanted us to have a look at for

them.

MR. SWEENEY: If public health, for instance, went in and checked a

washroom, or checked the kitchen in the school cafeteria and there was water

coming down, unless that inspector specifically referred that to Occupational

Health and Safety there would be no inspection done.

MS DUNPHY: Yes. They may deal with it because it also has a public health

issue. They may deal with it with the Principal right there, get the repairs

done or do whatever you have to do because it is also a public health issue. A

lot of issues may have gotten addressed through the public health route and may

not have ever needed an intervention of a health and safety officer.

MR. LANGDON: Can I ask you a question, Kim? Do you have a structural

steel specialist on staff at all?

MS DUNPHY: No, we do not.

MR. LANGDON: Not in government?

MS DUNPHY: Well, maybe in Works, Services, but we do not. We have

professional services monies that are available to us should we require that

expertise.

MR. LANGDON: I am just wondering, is there either one in government at

all?

MS DUNPHY: I cannot answer that, Sir.

MR. LANGDON: Barb, would you know as a former Deputy of Transportation?

MS WAKEHAM: I am not sure of a structural engineer. We have engineering

capability through Dennis Eastman (inaudible) which provides the inspections

with respect to boiler pressure of vessels and things of that nature. Most of

those are mechanical engineers as apposed to structural engineers.

The engineers that we have out at Motor Vehicle Registration, again, I think

they are either mechanical engineers or civil engineers, but I can check and see

whether or not we actually have structural engineers specifically related to

structural engineering in our division.

MR. LANGDON: The reason why I am asking again is the Harbour Breton

situation, because there was somebody - again, government may have contracted

somebody to go down to do that report in Harbour Breton, but there was a person

who went down and structurally looked at that plant from Harbour Breton. So if

there is nobody from within government who is a structural engineer specialist

then how can you comment that the building is either, not or is, structurally

safe unless there was somebody from the outside who was contracted? I want to

follow up on that a bit more. I will check that out.

MS WAKEHAM: I will check it out also, too, with respect to structural

engineers. The only structural engineer that I am aware of would be in

Transportation and Works.

MR. LANGDON: Yes, but there is a structural engineer there?

MS WAKEHAM: Yes, as far as I know, because they do the buildings so they

would have a structural engineer. The other - and I will talk about this from

back in my experience. In both the Department of Health and Education, with

respect to capital projects, all the structural engineers are hired externally

on a project basis.

MR. LANGDON: Okay. Thank you.

CHAIR: If everybody would agree, we are going to take a ten minute break

and resume then and ask some questions; if you want to stretch your legs or walk

around. We will return 10:45 a.m.

Recess

CHAIR: We will call the meeting to order again. Mr. Sweeney was finishing

up his questions there. I do not know if he has any more or is going to pass it

along.

I pass the floor back to Mr. Sweeney.

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

While I was on Occupational Health and Safety another issue came to the

forefront, Voisey's Bay. I received a number of calls from workers at Voisey's

who are saying that the majority of workers down there are suffering from upper

respiratory problems regarding the mould and the mildew and so on. Have there

been any inspections done by Occupational Health and Safety regarding the

accommodations at Voisey's Bay?

MS WHALEN: Yes, there have been inspections done. If you would like some

details, I can turn to my ADM there.

MR. SWEENEY: I certainly would, yes.

MS DUNPHY: Yes, we have done a number of inspections, both of the

accommodations facilities and of the site in general, from a health and safety

perspective. We have had industrial hygienists working with the company to try

to address this ongoing issue. It is a problem that they fix and then they find

other areas. So it has just kind of been an ongoing situation up there.

With respect to the issue of any linkages between the respiratory concerns

that people had and the presence of the mould, my understanding is that an

occupational physician reviewed that matter and determined that he really did

not see a linkage. In that type of environment, as you would in your own home,

if someone gets a flu, everybody gets the flu. It is probably more related to

personal hygiene than it is to the presence of mould or other moisture in those

accommodations.

MR. SWEENEY: Yes. Some of the things that they are telling me is that the

smell of raw sewer coming up through some of the units; vents that have not been

properly vented from the sewage disposal system; dryers being exhausted under

the accommodations, and the steam and exhaust from the dryer vents coming up

into the units creating mould and mildew. The ceilings are black. In areas, the

ceilings are actually falling in; two and three inches of ice on the windows;

the walls rotting under the windows. You know, situations like that.

There is an extraordinary number of illnesses. These are construction

workers. They are not people who are used to heated conditions anyway. Most of

them are experienced with working outdoors and in industrial settings. The cases

of people being sick - fellows have been sick who have not had the flu in their

lifetime, who have upper respiratory problems. They feel - and when you get a

large number of calls, and when I say large number, I have had calls in excess

of 100 right now, of people asking could I raise the issue.

MS DUNPHY: Absolutely.

MR. SWEENEY: So I am raising it this morning. I am just wondering, what

follow up is being taken to make sure that this is being corrected?

MS DUNPHY: We are very aggressively following up on those issues. In

fact, we actually have our hygienists back at the site again. He went up

yesterday, our industrial hygienist. We also received a report from the company

on all the remediation work that has been done to date. I actually received that

yesterday and the hygienist has that as well.

So, any room that has been identified that has the kind of condition that you

have described, my understanding is that those rooms were closed off, cleaned up

or shut down, remediated and then only when they were determined to be fit to be

lived in again that they would be opened up. So, it has been an ongoing problem

of some rooms that have had problems because of leaks and what have you, but

when the problem is identified, you know, I am being told by my staff and the

company that as they are being identified, they are also being repaired and

remedied to make habitable again. But I do understand your comments in terms of

it being an ongoing issue.

MR. LANGDON: Yes, I want to go back to the inspection stations again

because I really think that - and I am not being political. I have spent a lot

of time on the road but I do not spend near as much time on the road as the

people who earn a living in tractor-trailers who are on the road and some of the

sales people and so on, but the road itself is deteriorating. When I talk about

the road, I talk about the Trans-Canada and all the secondary roads as well.

I am wondering if, minister - because I am sure that there have been

complaints made to the department, and I am sure that the MHAs who are on

government side and Opposition have had complaints from their own people. Has

there been any attempt on your part to go back to your Cabinet colleagues and

ask to, in a sense, have any one of these stations redressed, like the one in

St. John's or the one in Port aux Basques or whatever? Because, you know, you

might have saved a few dollars in a sense, but I use the expression - and it is

not to castigate any aspersions on anybody, but sometimes we can be penny-wise

and pound foolish by some of the decisions that we make. I am just wondering if

you have gone back to your colleagues and asked them if they would reconsider

one or other of these particular stations being opened for inspections? Because,

at the end of the day, it is something that is life safety and hazardous and can

protect all of us; yet, at the same time, can save government some money to make

sure that the loads are not overweight and so on.

MS WHALEN: We have not looked at that particular decision. That was a

decision we made for 2004-2005 and we have not had any negative impact from that

decision. As it stands right now, I have not taken that back to my colleagues

because it was a budget decision that we made last year and it is still status

quo. But I understand where you are coming from with your safety issues and

that, but we do have, strategically, three weigh scales on the Trans-Canada.

Plus we have portable weigh scales as well, and inspectors are there and

enforcement is there. I do not have any evidence at the present time to support

that it has been a negative impact on those decisions that we made in 2003-2004.

MR. LANGDON: To follow up on that, portable scales, are there portable

scales used in Foxtrap anytime at all or is there -

MS WHALEN: They are randomly in areas and I guess Donna, my ADM, can

answer the exact locations of them.

MS KELLAND: We have portable scales based at Mount Pearl which checks up

and down the highway between here and the isthmus, more or less, until we get to

Goobies. They operate on a random basis day and night, sort of, to catch people

off guard if you like. There are also portable scales based at Pynn's Brook

and at Grand Falls-Windsor. There are also portable scales at Stephenville. So

between the three sort of nucleus permanent scales, there are portable scales

operating which do random checks.

MR. LANGDON: Can you tell me then how many checks these portable scales

made within the last year?

MS KELLAND: I can certainly get that information for you. I do not have

it with me today.

MR. LANGDON: That would be important because I mean if you have the

portable scales that are there and you have made seventy-five or 200 inspections

here in the Foxtrap one over the year, then obviously, yes, that will account

for the fact that it has been closed, but probably not done as adequate as. On

the other hand, if there have only been a few - fifteen, twenty or twenty-five -

done at random here at Foxtrap, then with all the container traffic that is

going out - because everything is in container - there are no two ways about it,

the Trans-Canada is really getting a wear on it.

If you go up, for example, by Butter Pot Park - if you are driving up Butter

Pot Park and it is a sunny day, the ruts in the road - and I am not kidding -

are that deep and they are that wide. It is really noticeable. Then when it

rains they are all filled with water. I am telling you, I have done it myself, I

am either on the shoulder of the road because I cannot stay in the lane, because

if I do I am going to be hydroplaning and I am going to be off the road. We have

had accidents in the Province over the last number of months where that has

happened, where the cars have gone across the road and people have been killed.

It is in these ruts that it is happening. So, all I am saying is if there are 10

per cent of the trucking population - I am not saying everybody is doing it. If

there are 10 per cent that are overloading on these highways, it is compounding

and exasperating the problem that is already there on the highway and it is

going to make it even worse. At the end of the day then, when this has to be

re-coated and redone, it is going to cost the government a lot more money to do

it; more than, I think, in what it would have by eliminating those two

(inaudible).

It is only personnel. I know the minister made the decision as a part of

government. I am not questioning that decision at all. All I am saying is that

from a public safety point of view, then it probably should be redressed and the

minister can probably talk to her colleagues about it. I am sure if you talk to

- and I will use names like Paul Shelley, the Member for Baie Verte. Paul does a

lot of driving and he would see that happening, and I am sure that if you talked

to Mr. Oram here from Terra Nova, the Glovertown area, they can really verify

the things that I am saying. It is not a pretty sight on the highway with all

the traffic and the roads continuing.

There is no way that government, regardless of who the political stripe might

be, can find enough money to do the Trans-Canada from Port aux Basques to St.

John's every year. I mean, it just cannot be done. It is a long highway. If we

can, in a sense, cut down on the amount of maintenance that needs to be done and

so on, because the trunk highways - like the highway going down to Bay d'Espoir.

Like, for example, the fish coming out of Bay d'Espoir coming to St. John's,

it is possible to get through from Bay d'Espoir to St. John's without being

weighed. It is possible. If you have heavy fog in Goobies you are allowed to go

through, and if you have snow in Goobies you are allowed to through. There is no

other weigh scale from the Bay d'Espoir area and so on. Going down the Bay d'Espoir

highway, it is deteriorating. You have holes there and really, thirty-five or

forty kilometres of it is almost impassable.

These are the types of things that are happening. Probably that is not the

cause of it at all. It might be the road condition, but I just thought I would

bring that point up. Like I said, it is not to criticize. It is a point,

something that I have observed myself by driving the highway.

MS WHALEN: I know that we are aware of the conditions of the road, but

the ruts did not come in there in the last twelve months. The Minister of

Transportation is -

MR. LANGDON: No, no. I understand that.

MS WHALEN: - well aware of it. Last year we spent over $30 million in

infrastructure on our roads. This year is no different. Right now I think we

have about $38 million that we will be spending. So, yes, there are areas of

concern and I thank you for those comments.

MR. LANGDON: Now, I am not saying that it happened in twelve months, but

what I am saying to you is they are getting worse, and $30 million - and I do

not mean to be negative when I say this - is only a drop in the glass if you are

going to pave from Port aux Basques to St. John's and all the trunk highways.

That is what I am saying. We will never get enough money, I guess. We need

hundreds of millions of dollars each year to take care of what we want. I am

just saying, it might be that if those particular stations were doing a bit more

inspection and following the rules that probably in the end result, rather than

spending $30 million you probably might only need $20 million on the

Trans-Canada. That is my point.

MS WHALEN: Okay. I thank you again for your comments and I will pass it

along to my hon. colleague, the Minister of Transportation and Works.

Thank you.

MR. SWEENEY: Minister, just to pursue what Oliver was saying there. One

of the problems we have with the weigh scales, the portable scales, is that when

they go down to, say Torbay or Flatrock or go down to Placentia, with the modern

communication system now that the truckers have, every single person who is

taking a truck out of Donovans going West knows that the scales are not going to

be stopping them on the highway. Their first encounter with a set of scales on a

rainy day or a snowy day would be Grand Falls, and that spreads quickly through

the trucking industry. I know because I spend a lot of time on the highway and I

bump into these fellows, and they do not mind telling you. They will tell you,

right to your face, that the scales were down in Placentia. They will tell you

that they are in Torbay, and they are going right through. You know, their game

is to make profits. Some of the private guys with their own trucks are concerned

about the extra weights that they are being asked to carry on their trucks,

because the trucks are loaded for them. The trailers are loaded - they back

their trailers in and they take them. So the portable scales, one set for the

Avalon Peninsula, from the isthmus of the Avalon to here, is insufficient, for

sure.

Anyway, I have a few more questions. What was the total savings due to the

strike to your department, Minister?

MS WHALEN: I do not have that information available today. I certainly

can look and find out for you.

I would like to go back to your question about the commercial truckers. If

you have any evidence that there is some problem there with the overweights, I

would like for you to pass it along to my department so we can look into it. I

do know that the media have even stated that our commercial truckers, it has

been the safest time that they have ever been on the road is now. There was a

story carried not too long ago about that condition of the commercial truckers.

MR. SWEENEY: There is a reason for it, of course. There are not as many

inspections being done either. You know, Foxtrap is not picking up the defaults

that -

MS WHALEN: Our inspectors are all there and so is our enforcement.

MR. SWEENEY: At Foxtrap?

MS WHALEN: Foxtrap is a scale that you know is closed, but we do have

random checks with our portable, as I stated earlier.

MR. SWEENEY: Again, what I am saying is, if the scales are off the

highway, if they are down in some of the sub-branches they are not getting the

inspections. They are not getting the trucks, and the truckers know.

MS WHALEN: I thank you for your comments but I do not have any evidence

of that right now, hon. colleague.

MR. SWEENEY: Where in the Budget does government have money for

advertising? Does your department have advertising money?

MS WAKEHAM: The only advertising that we have, I think, is around $5,000

in MRD that we use for the Go Slow campaign that we work out with Transportation

and Works. We do a winter campaign and we also do a few radio spots in the

summertime. Most of our stuff is done cheap. We ask the community services group

to provide information on the radio spots with respect to cell phones and

seatbelts. We do stuff through the RNC and through other agencies. So, we have

very little money for advertising.

MR. SWEENEY: Where did the money come from for the automobile insurance

brochure?

MS WAKEHAM: Sorry?

MR. SWEENEY: The brochure that came out regarding the automobile

insurance. Where did that funding come from?

MS WAKEHAM: That one was done internal through Anne Marie Fagan.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. The postage was done as part of the department

postage?

MS WAKEHAM: Yes.

MR. SWEENEY: What overtime was paid out for management during the strike?

Any idea of the dollar value on that?

MS WHALEN: I do not have those figures available today to provide you

with.

MR. SWEENEY: What were the actual savings realized from the closing of

the weigh scales?

MS WAKEHAM: I do not have the exact figure but we can get it for you. I

know that we provided that information last year.

MR. SWEENEY: Any idea of what the number of inspections - reduction in

the number of inspections were?

MS WHALEN: Pardon me?

MR. SWEENEY: Any idea of how many inspections less we did last year than

the year before?

MS WHALEN: I will have to get those stats for you. I do not have them

available here today.

MR. SWEENEY: Minister, can you tell me how many staff are employed by the

department altogether? If you could, I would like to get a breakdown of the

part-time, permanent and contractual.

MS WHALEN: It is approximately 521 staff in the department.

MR. SWEENEY: Can I get a breakdown of what they are, contractual and

seasonal?

MS WAKEHAM: We have, right now, fourteen permanent staff in Executive and

Support Services; we have sixty-three staff in Consumer and Commercial Affairs;

316 staff in Government Services; fifty-seven staff in Occupational Health and

Safety; thirty-five staff in Government Purchasing Agency, for a total 485

permanent positions.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. So, the balance are?

MS WAKEHAM: The balance is temporary positions.

MR. SWEENEY: How many employees were laid off in the department last

year?

MS WAKEHAM: I am just checking on that. I think it was twenty-two

positions. Some were due to attrition through retirement. I think, in total, it

was twenty-two but I would have to look that up. I am not sure if it was

twenty-two or twenty-four.

MR. SWEENEY: The other thing I would like to know with that would be,

what were the termination costs or the severance cost associated with those

twenty-two positions?

MS WAKEHAM: I do not have the figure directly here with me now but,

obviously, we have done up the severance cost. Some of it was paid for by

Treasury Board; some of it paid through the department.

MR. SWEENEY: So, I could get a breakdown? We can get a breakdown?

MS WAKEHAM: You should be able to get a breakdown.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. Was there any money spent on polling last year?

Polling or advertising?

MS WAKEHAM: For Government Services?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes.

MS WAKEHAM: Not to my knowledge. You mean the $500 question, CRA poll

stuff?

MR. SWEENEY: Yes.

MS WAKEHAM: They might have had one. I would have to check.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay. You will provide that?

MS WAKEHAM: Yes.

MR. SWEENEY: I noticed there is no provision for students in this year's

budget. Are there any students anticipated for this summer?

MS WAKEHAM: There has not been - and the member should know this. There

has not been a student allocation for at least ten years in government budgets.

The money for students usually comes from either delays in hiring or changes of

positions or if there is some slack. We will try and see whether or not there is

any capability to hire students this summer.

MR. SWEENEY: How many were hired last year, if that's the case?

MS WAKEHAM: I will have to check on that because, unfortunately, I was

not there last year when they were hired. So I will have to go check and find

out how many there were.

MR. SWEENEY: How much money was spent out of the budget to provide media

training for the minister?

MS WHALEN: I do not have those figures here. I can look for it and -

MR. SWEENEY: There was some. Yes, okay.

Has there been any impact with regard to the securities division being

eliminated?

MS WHALEN: No, we have streamlined our operation and made it much more

effective by what we did. I do not think there has been any negative impact

whatsoever.

MR. SWEENEY: No negative impact? So where did their responsibilities go

to, the people who were there? Tony Patey and -

MS WHALEN: I will ask my ADM, Winston Morris, to explain that to you.

MR. MORRIS: We consolidated the securities division with the former

insurance and pensions division to create a Financial Services Regulation

Division. So all of the regulation of financial services are now under one

director and two managers.

With respect to securities, I would say there has been absolutely no impact

on the regulation in that area. In fact, there is - I would estimate about 80

per cent of the work that has gone on there over the years is sort of

duplication of what has gone on in other provinces. There is a lot of

duplication in that area across Canada. There is currently a process underway to

create what is called a passport system of regulation in Canada, whereby all

this duplication is eliminated. The industry has been clamouring for this for a

number of years so they do not have to deal with thirteen different regulators,

they will only have to deal with one. That system is in process and it is

anticipated phase one will be in place by August of this year. The aim is to

have a common set of security laws in place by the end of 2006. There is, across

the country, a lot of consolidation, streamlining, and elimination of

duplication in securities regulation in particular. That has already occurred in

other sectors like insurance over the years, but in securities it still largely

relies on thirteen different regulators.

MR. SWEENEY : Have there been any layoffs at GPA this year, or last year?

MS WHALEN: I guess the GPA has been restructuring. I will turn this one

over to Larry Cahill, who is the Chief Operating Officer of the Government

Purchasing Agency.

MR. CAHILL: Basically, what we have done is restructured to make the

organization more efficient and a better delivery of programs to the

departments. With the restructuring there were seven union positions affected

and two management positions. Basically, we will operate with the same number of

staff in the new year because new positions will be created. These positions

affected will be given priority to apply in the new jobs that have been created.

MR. SWEENEY: Nine people, effectively?

MR. CAHILL: Affected in the restructuring, yes.

MR. SWEENEY: Lost.

MR. CAHILL: Well, they will be given priority on the other positions that

have been created. We will not be down positions as a result of restructuring.

MR. SWEENEY: Okay, and nine new ones created?

MR. CAHILL: Yes.

MR. SWEENEY: What was the cost of doing this reorganization?

MR. CAHILL: There was no cost, no extra cost.

MR. SWEENEY: No cost at all?

MR. CAHILL: No extra cost, no.

MR. SWEENEY: Any cost involved with bringing the GPA over from Works,

Services and Transportation?

MR. CAHILL: No extra cost at all. We have the same budget. Everything is

the same.

MR. SWEENEY: Administrative changes were just those two managers?

MR. CAHILL: Management, yes. Because the legislation changed so did -

some sections of the GPA reported to the minister directly and it got

streamlined to go under me, all purchasing under one person.

MR. SWEENEY: How many outside consultants were used by the department

over the course of the past budget year? Any consultants hired?

MS WHALEN: We have not used any outside consultants.

MR. SWEENEY: Was there any cost incurred for media monitoring and

transcripts during the past year? How much money was incurred there?

MS WHALEN: Any what?

MR. SWEENEY: Media monitoring and transcripts. What were the costs there?

OFFICIAL: I do not know what the exact cost was. I know that we have done

some, but it is very little. We can find that out for you.

MR. SWEENEY: You can provide that, okay.

How much is paid to the Consumer Advocate for his participation in the

insurance hearings?

MS WHALEN: That comes out of the Public Utilities Board and it is charged

back to industry, that cost for the Advocate.

MR. SWEENEY: So his expenses were charged back to the insurance

companies?

MS WHALEN: Yes, it is charged back to the industry.

MR. SWEENEY: How much was that? Do you have any idea?

MS WHALEN: The hearings are not finally over yet so we do not have the

final bill for that yet.

MR. SWEENEY: Will that be provided? Can I have a cost of that when it is

finished?

MS WHALEN: Yes, we will access it from the PUB.

MR. SWEENEY: So the Public Utilities Board is totally self-sufficient on

charges back to the industry?

MS WHALEN: Yes.

MR. SWEENEY: We notice that, Donna, you referenced some new legislation

coming in. Is there going to be a fee increase or a change in the registration

policy on ATVs?

MS WHALEN: Right now that is just proposed. That is up to my Cabinet

colleagues. Once it is finalized, I will be bringing a bill to this House.

MR. SWEENEY: So it is an anticipation that there will be fee changes?

MS WHALEN: That is not what I said. I said that there is a bill coming

before this House once it has been discussed with my Cabinet colleagues.

MR. SWEENEY: So that will also encompass whether or not an ATV is

registered once when you purchase it or registered on an annual basis?

MS WHALEN: It is a proposal that I am putting through to Cabinet. It has

not gone through Cabinet yet so I am not at liberty to discuss it there today.

MR. SWEENEY: Will that same bill cover trails fees for ATVs?

MS WHALEN: I guess my response again, my hon. colleague, is that this is

a proposal and it has not been discussed. I am not at liberty to discuss it here

at the Estimates today.

MR. SWEENEY: Minister, can you give us a breakdown of your travel costs

inside and outside of the Province for the past year?

MS WHALEN: I have very little travel cost. In fact, I think you will find

that when my former colleague was there, in the prior government - my travel

cost is down considerably low. In fact, some might question why my travel cost

was so low, but I am very conservative. There is a lot less travelling being

done. I am using conference calls, these types of things, where necessary.

MR. SWEENEY: I understand you are very conservative, Minister.

MS WHALEN: Yes, I am. I have to be honest with you, I watch every penny

that I spend. I only spend where necessary, and my cost last year was, I think,

about $27,000 in travel costs, and a lot of it was for federal and provincial

meetings, what I did spend.

Entertainment is down, if you look at my budget. Travel is down.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MS WHALEN: No, I haven't spent any money on shirts either. Thank you,

my hon. colleagues.

MR. SWEENEY: You should, Minister. Give one to Fabian, because he is

always asking about them.

CHAIR: It is more than you did for me.

MR. SWEENEY: I was very liberal with my shirts.

MS WHALEN: Yes, I noticed, 7,500.

Thank you.

MR. SWEENEY: That pretty well wraps up what I had.

MS WHALEN: Thank you very much.

MR. SWEENEY: I do not know if any of my colleagues want to -

CHAIR: Any questions, Mr. Langdon? Mr. Andersen? Mr. Ridgley?

MR. RIDGLEY: No, Mr. Chairman, thank you.

CHAIR: Mr. Skinner?

MR. SKINNER: I have just one quick one that I would like to ask if I

could. I will direct it to the minister and you can pass it off to someone else

if you wish.

A few times this morning, I have heard you refer to some new technology. I

think you called it CADO. I have not heard that before. I am just wondering what

that is, and what its purpose is within your department.

MS WHALEN: CADO is a new system that has come on-line. We have phase four

that we are implementing right now. We are spending $844,000 on this new

technology. It will enable businesses to do business much more quickly with the

on-line system. We are going to be doing some microfilming, putting that on as a

system, so there are some changes there for the betterment of the business

community. It is something that they have lobbied for, and we are moving forward

on that.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible) not completed.

MS WHALEN: The thoughts were there, but now action is there.

MR. SKINNER: Thank you very much.

MS WHALEN: Thank you.

CHAIR: Mr. Oram?

MR. ORAM: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Thank you.

I would ask the Clerk to call the subheads.

CLERK (Noel): Subheads 1.1.01. to and including subheads 5.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall the subheads carry?

OFFICIAL: Carried.

CHAIR: Carried.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01. through 5.1.01. carried.

CLERK: The total of the Estimates for the Department of Government

Services, $23,641,200.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

OFFICIAL: Carried.

MR. SWEENEY: We are being pretty good here this morning because we did

have a majority here a little while ago and we could have - I remember there was

an attempt made years ago to bring the minister's salary down to $1, but we

would not do that to you. We are being nice to you. As bad as the questioning

was, we were being pretty nice.

MS WHALEN: I thank you for your time this morning. I really appreciate

it, and my staff as well.

CHAIR: Certainly, with the experience I have from being here, you were

always co-operative, so we are used to it.

Shall I report the heads carried without amendment?

OFFICIAL: Carried.

CHAIR: Carried.

On motion, Department of Government Services, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: I ask for a motion to adjourn.

Our next meeting for the Government Services Committee is scheduled for

Tuesday night, with the Department of Finance. That should be interesting.

With that, I ask for a motion to adjourn.

MR. SWEENEY: Fabian, before we go, next Thursday night is there another

one?

CHAIR: Thursday night is the Department of Transportation and Works.

MR. SWEENEY: Is there any anticipation of changing that, where people are

travelling?

CHAIR: I do not know. I just got the schedule, like you did, yesterday.

MR. LANGDON: Thursday night is a bad night for us.

CHAIR: I will check on that. We may change that; we will see. I will ask

the Government House Leader about that. As of now, we are meeting here Tuesday

night, April 19.

A motion to adjourn?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Thank you very much.

Thank you, Minister.

MS WHALEN: Thank you for a good job.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.