Social Services Committee — Department of Justice — 5 July 2014

2014-07-05

Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees

May 14, 2007 SOCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE

Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Keith Hutchings, MHA for

Ferryland, replaces Felix Collins, MHA for Placentia & St. Mary's.

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

CHAIR (Mr. Ridgley): Order, please!

Good morning, everybody, and welcome to Monday.

We will start with the introductions, just for the benefit of the people

doing the recording. Can we start with the Committee, please?

MR. PARSONS : Kelvin Parsons, MHA for Burgeo & LaPoile.

MR. BUTLER: Roland Butler, MHA for Port de Grave.

MS MICHAEL: Lorraine Michael, MHA for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. FRENCH: Terry French, MHA for Conception Bay South.

MR. CORNECT: Tony Cornect, MHA for Port au Port.

MR. HUTCHINGS: Keith Hutchings, MHA for Ferryland.

CHAIR: Okay.

MR. ALCOCK: Ralph Alcock, Assistant Deputy Minister, Department of

Justice.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Tom Osborne, Minister of Justice.

MR. BURRAGE: Donald Burrage, Associate Deputy Minister in General

Counsel, Department of Justice.

MS DUNPHY: Debbie Dunphy, Director of Finance.

MR. McNUTT: Marvin McNutt, Director of Corrections and ADM on special

assignment.

MS RYDER-LAHEY: Pamela Ryder-Lahey, Director of Provincial Court

Services.

MR. PETTEN: Newman Petten, Provincial Director of the Legal Aid

Commission.

MR. GALGAY: Jonathan Galgay, Minister Osborne's Executive Assistant.

MS GOULDING: Pamela Goulding, Acting Director of Public Prosecutions.

MS JACOBS: Heather Jacobs, ADM, Justice.

CHAIR: Thanks very much.

Just to remind everybody, if you are a new speaker at any time during the

proceedings, just kind of mention your name for the benefit of the people doing

the recording.

I would ask the Clerk, then, to call the first subhead, please.

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01 carry?

I will turn things over now to the minister. Any introductory comments?

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It is certainly a pleasure to be here this year. I am sure that some of the

contingent from the Department of Justice would enjoy sitting here and some of

them would just as soon not be sitting in the Legislature, but here we are.

In the interest of time, Mr. Chair, I am not going to go through every single

position that has been created this year, or even go through every resource that

we have going forward this year. Instead, I will touch on some of the

highlights.

I will start with the Lamer commitments. This year alone we have had over $2

million committed to begin the implementation of the phased-in approach that

will see all of Judge Lamer's forty-five recommendations addressed. These

commitments include funding for many areas such as: criminal law, the RNC, the

RCMP, the Provincial Court, legal aid services, and other areas. A total of

fifty-nine new positions will be created through this implementation.

In addition to our Lamer investments, we have also put significant resources

into legal aid services over and above the Lamer investments, which include

investments to Child, Youth and Family Services. These initiatives have allowed

us to create a family law team under the Poverty Reduction Strategy and increase

hours for Aboriginal liaison workers under the Northern Strategic Plan.

The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, in addition to Lamer, we have made

investments there. They have a total of thirty-two new positions, they have had

their block funding increased, and have their recruitment program extended for

another three years.

Under Budget 2007, the RCMP have a total of twenty-two new positions and we

have also increased the resources for our Inland Fisheries Enforcement Program

and will be focusing more on apprehending those who poach our salmon stocks. We

have five additional officers, and they will help ensure that our waters are

better protected.

I am also pleased to say that the department has received approval for a

total of 153 new positions, which we will obviously not list here today, but

suffice it to say that the department is quite pleased with the increased

resources and we will use them well.

These new positions range across a number of justice related services from

fines to research analysts, court officers, privacy analysts, legal support

services and more. We hope the addition of these resources will provide the

services that are needed and asked for by our citizens.

We have also been involved in planning around poverty reduction and the

Northern Strategic Plan. We have a family law team that will assist mostly women

and children to have better access to services, while the adult alternative

justice measures resources will also assist those who live in poverty.

The Northern Strategic Plan addresses many of the resources needed to improve

services in Labrador, including: additions to family justice services and court

services resources in coastal communities, more Crown attorneys, increased hours

for liaison workers, and more.

On the capital side, we are quite pleased to announce that construction will

begin soon on the new courthouse in Corner Brook and that we are beginning the

preliminary planning for the new adult correctional facility and doing

renovations to the RNC headquarters and annex. We hope to get our federal

government to partner with us on the new correctional facility.

The Department of Justice is certainly looking forward to the implementation

of the funding that we have been allotted in this fiscal year and moving forward

with the many exciting projects that we have before us, some of which I have

referenced and some that undoubtedly will be highlighted as we move through the

questions and answers.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Minister.

We will go, then, to the Committee. The first person will be fifteen minutes

and then we will do ten minute blocks after that.

Will you be leading, Mr. Butler?

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to welcome the minister and officials from his department.

I am going to begin with just a few questions line by line. The first one is

under the heading 1.2.01., Executive Support, 01., Salaries. I notice that there

was a reduction from what was budgeted to the revised last year and I was

wondering, is this due to a position being eliminated? Then, this year I see it

up to $834,000 again.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Chair, I am going to refer the questions on line by

line to the departmental officials.

MR. ALCOCK: In terms of the variance between the Revised versus Budget,

there was a savings attributed to the delayed recruitment of a senior analysis

position, resulted in that occurrence.

In terms of budget to budget, there is a decrease in funding resulting from

the reassignment of Policy and Strategic Planning Division to another area of

the department. There has been no changes other than those reassignments.

MR. BUTLER: Under the same heading, 06. Purchased Services, I noticed

last year the Budget was $103,000 Revised to $120,000, but under the Estimates

for 2007-2008, it is just listed $2,600. I was wondering if you would elaborate

on that for us?

MR. ALCOCK: That resulted from the removal of a one-time funding that was

allocated for the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Ministers of Justice Conference

which occurred last fall in Corner Brook.

MR. BUTLER: Under 1.2.02., Administrative and Policy Support, last year

it was $566,000, Revised to $530,000, and this year it is $1.1 million in

Salaries. I was wondering if you could give us an explanation on that one, sir?

MR. ALCOCK: There are a number of issues which relate to that one. It was

mentioned a minute ago, it was the transfer of the Policy and Strategic Planning

positions to Executive Support. We are comparing now budget to budget. The

creation of a manager of Public Prosecutions and Support Services position, the

Northern Strategic Plan implementation services, as well as salary increases.

All of these issues make up the variance there between budget to budget.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you.

Under 1.2.03., Strategic Human Resource Management, Purchased Services, last

year the Budget and Revised was in the $600,000 bracket, and this year the

Estimate is for $210,000. I was just wondering why only $210,000 for the

Estimate for this year?

MR. ALCOCK: The reduction there is a result of reorganization of the

Human Resources divisions within government. As you are probably aware, Mr.

Butler, there is a significant change in the organizational management structure

of Human Resources, whereby the Human Resources functions largely have been

taken from - the direct responsibility taken from departments and, as a result,

you will see resulting changes to budgets.

MR. BUTLER: Under 1.2.04., Legal Information Management, under Salaries,

there is an increase over last year, I think, of around $78,800. I am just

wondering, is this a new position or a full-time or part-time positions?

MR. ALCOCK: Again, the budget to budget comparison results from the

creation of a policy and planning analyst position in information services.

MR. BUTLER: Probably most of those could run into the same answer.

Under 1.3.01., Fines Administration, I have a question there on the Salaries

as well. This year's Estimate is $784,000,

whereas last year it was $541,000.

I was just wondering, is that new positions as well?

MR. ALCOCK: Yes, it is, and you are quite correct. What you will see in

many of the salary accounts are adjustments made, incremental funding as a

result of the significant number of positions that have been provided to the

Department of Justice this year. We have been quite successful over the last

several years in terms of additional collections within Fines Administration.

What has been approved this year is the expansion of our collection staff to try

and improve upon what has already been a very successful program we started to

implement about two years ago in that regard. So, yes, it is incremental

positions.

MR. BUTLER: Under the same heading, 06., Purchased Services, I know last

year the figure was $32,000, this year it is $190,000. I was just wondering if

you had a breakdown of what that increase would be?

MR. ALCOCK: As a result of the expansion within that area we are required

to do some renovations, which will be one-time renovations. As well, we have

been quite cramped for space and with the addition of new positions, as well as

space requirements, we will be renting additional space to facilitate our staff

down at Atlantic Place.

MR. BUTLER: Subhead 2.1.01., Civil Law, under the heading Professional

Services, the Budget was $2.7 million, Revised $1.1 million. I was just

wondering why the reduction there? I know it is up to $2.5 million again this

year.

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is under Salaries, Roland?

MR. BUTLER: No, I am sorry, under Professional Services, 05.

MR. BURRAGE: The savings were largely as a result of a decreased demand

for external legal counsel on projects such as Hibernia, the Aboriginal file,

Terra Nova and the health care cost recovery actions. There was a decreased need

for external counsel, that was the reason for the savings. That varies from year

to year and it is hard to predict.

I am sorry, the second question I -

MR. BUTLER: I am forgetting now if I asked a second question.

MR. BURRAGE: Okay, maybe I - have I answered your question?

MR. BUTLER: Yes. Maybe I did ask a second one.

Under 2.1.03., Support Enforcement, under Purchased Services again. I know

last year it was budgeted $228,000 but it was Revised to only $28,000, and this

year it is $437,000. That is 2.1.03.

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is under Purchased Services again?

MR. BUTLER: Yes.

MR. T. OSBORNE: I will answer that. Savings resulted as the funds from

the Contingency Fund were not required during this fiscal year.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

Subhead 2.2.01., going back to Salaries again. The increase there I think is

approximately $1.2 million. I guess this is new positions being created there?

MR. T. OSBORNE: Six new Crown attorney positions, as well as a solicitor

for policy development and several legal secretary positions, as well as some

step progressions.

MR. BUTLER: Subhead 2.3.01., Legal Aid And Related Services, under Grants

and Subsidies. I think there is an increase there of $1.5 million. I was

wondering what this increase consists of?

MR. T. OSBORNE: The articling program, six students as well as three

solicitors, which are commencing in January 2008. The jury trials and appeals;

monitoring and progress of files; intake workers; three legal secretaries;

translation of legal aid pamphlet to French, Innu and Inuit; retention of

outside counsel for expert opinions; training two new solicitors, two paralegals

and a social worker for Child Youth and Family Services; some additional funding

to pay for increased liaison workers, worker hours; funding under the investment

fund for existing projects, such as mental health, Aboriginal, French lawyer;

funding for family justice services, central, which is partially offset by

federal revenue, as well as enhancements to civil legal aid by establishing

specialized family law teams, including one solicitor, a paralegal and

administrative support.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you.

Subhead 2.3.02., Commissions of Inquiry. The Budget last year was $351,000,

the Revised was $715,000 and the Estimates for this year is $151,000. I was just

wondering, is there some inquiry work that has not been completed with regard to

this $151,000?

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is partially attributed to the review of

constituency allowances. I guess on the plus side, the review of the office of

public prosecutions by retired Justice Marshall.

MR. BUTLER: Subhead 2.3.05., and that is the one under Electoral

Districts Boundaries Commission. You budgeted $500,000, Revised to $180,000. I

was wondering, could you explain the decrease of the $320,000 there in that

particular one?

MR. T. OSBORNE: Those savings were primarily as a result of the delay of

the startup of the Commission, as well as decreased travel requirements.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Chair, those are the only ones I have there right now

line on line. If you wish to move to -

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Butler.

For the benefit of the people downstairs, we just had another gentleman join

us in the blank space that is on your chart in the front row.

Mr. Curran, if you would just introduce yourself for the benefit of the -

MR. CURRAN: My name is Chris Curran and I am the Deputy Minister of

Justice.

CHAIR: Thank you, sir.

Ms Michael, would you be going now?

MS MICHAEL: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am trying to decide if I will continue it from there or go back. I will go

back to some gaps that I did not see my colleague cover, gaps from my

perspective. I will not repeat anything that he asked, obviously.

Page 222, 1.2.02. I wonder, could you just explain the Purchased Services,

06., under that section? It is up considerably from last year's Budget and

certainly from the Revised.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Okay, that funding relates to the Northern Strategic Plan

and provides for Aboriginal justice - the justice symposium,

interpretation

services improvements as well.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

Under Property, Furnishings and Equipment, is something big going on the in

Justice department? Maybe what is going on now, the renovations or something

else causing that to go up to $11,900? That is

section 07., right under the

Purchased Services.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Yes, I am not sure what that is.

MR. ALCOCK: Again, we are into a situation whereby the number of staff

that we will be hiring this year has increased. We are talking about an account

that is used significantly throughout the fourth floor of the Confederation

Building. So, it is a modest amount of money, and I suppose the $2,300 or $2,600

would be considered very low for our requirements.

MS MICHAEL: Right. Thank you.

None of these questions are critical. It is just to find out what the money

is going to, so thank you.

MR. ALCOCK: Sure.

MS MICHAEL: Under 1.2.03.07., here it is curious, it has gone down

considerably - oh, no, you have explained that one. You do not have to answer

that one, I have that.

Go back up to 1.2.02.10., Grants and Subsidies, if you could explain. It

started out with a Budget in 2006 at $156,500, then up to the $262,000, which

has been maintained. What was that jump in 2006 that is being maintained?

MR. ALCOCK: The variance between the Revised and the 2006 Budget is

attributable to increased grants related to community tripartite agreements.

Community tripartite agreements are with the federal government, Aboriginal

communities and the government.

In terms of the budget to budget, there is an increased base funding for the

Newfoundland and Labrador Search and Rescue Association as well as a three year

federal commitment, too, under a funding program by the federal government where

they fund initiatives of our search and rescue group, which basically are

offsets between our expenditures and the federal government contributions.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you very much.

Page 225,

section 2.1.01., again, I know you have a lot of increases in

positions and that is why the salaries have gone up, but it would be nice to

hear what the new positions in that

section are, please, under 01.

MR. T. OSBORNE: The increase there is for six additional solicitors, four

relative to the Child, Youth and Family Services, two for client-department

responsibilities, as well as salary increases; also, some incremental increases

which are temporary, and funding provided for the salary of the Director of

Public Prosecutions, who is on secondment with the division while the review of

the Public Prosecutions Division is being conducted. Funding was transferred

from Professional Services to convert temporary positions to permanent under

this category.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Minister.

Then, under 09. in the same section, what was the jump in 2006-2007 about,

the $2 million extra?

MR. T. OSBORNE: That was related to a compensation issue for a wrongfully

convicted individual. Funding was provided here through a special warrant.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

Section 2.1.03., Support Enforcement, it is interesting that here there has

been a drop in the Salaries in 01. under that. Maybe it is not a whole salary,

actually. It is not that much money, is it? It is only about $30,000. Why has it

dropped down?

MR. T. OSBORNE: It has been offset by the reallocation of previous salary

funding to Purchased Services to properly reflect the relative expenditure.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, thank you.

Then, under subhead 2.1.04. on the same page, again, could I have just a

quick explanation of the new positions under 01. there, please? Because I assume

there are new positions.

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is for six privacy analysts.

MS MICHAEL: What is the anticipated increase in Purchased Services under

06?

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is for the funding for the printing of an annual

report, privacy manuals, and the directory of information services.

MS MICHAEL: Does that not happen every year? That is not an annual

report, is it? If it is, why is it gone up by $30,000?

WITNESS: This is the first year that this has occurred. This is a

directory of information services associated with the Access to Information and

Protection of Privacy Office, and this is the first time. It will happen on an

annual basis, an update of the directory henceforth on a go-forward basis.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, so it is related to the new office.

WITNESS: That is correct.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much.

I think I have all of my questions answered on page 227.

In the budget document it points out that $250,000 more has been added for

access to legal services for low-income people. How do you determine the amount

of money that you would earmark as directly being more money for legal services?

The $250,000 is added to how much, I guess, is what I am asking. How do you

determine what is directly the cost of the access to legal services?

MR. T. OSBORNE: I will ask Newman, I think, to respond to that.

MR. PETTEN: Newman Petten, Provincial Director of the Legal Aid

Commission.

One lawyer and paralegal and administrative support person this year for the

Poverty Reduction Strategy is meant to do an analysis of the way we are

delivering legal aid services to family law recipients, to determine if there is

an unmet need and to look at some reallocation of services if we find that there

is a need for new services.

MS MICHAEL: I see. So, the $250,000 is not going to be directly for new

services in this budget; it is to analyze the need.

MR. PETTEN: And perhaps redirect the services to where we feel they may

be needed.

MS MICHAEL: I see. So, next year, maybe, we can be looking for a result

of that evaluation and maybe more monies in that area.

Thank you very much.

I have a question on page 228. It is not exactly a line question but I will

ask it anyway because it is directly related to budget.

There has been basically no change in the budget for Human Rights,

section

2.3.04. I am curious about this, because I have had calls in my office in the

short period of time that I have been MHA. I have had at least three different

groups or individuals come to me about concerns that they have with regard to

Human Rights claims that they have made to the Commission, the length of time it

is taking to get answers to them, all that kind of thing. Yet, there is

absolutely no change under the Human Rights section.

I guess my question is: Has there been any kind of an evaluation done to

determine the work that is going on inside of the Human Rights Commission and

perhaps the need to increase the human resources under the Human Rights

Commission?

MR. OSBORNE: I don't know if there has been an evaluation. I will ask

Chris to -

MR. CURRAN : That is actually a very good question.

We have just gone through the process of hiring, as you probably know, a new

Director of the Human Rights Commission, Jane Fitzpatrick, the previous

executive director having gone to a new office.

One of Jane Fitzpatrick's first duties will be to evaluate the efficiencies

that can be effected in the office in terms of the way the files are handled,

whether or not there are enough investigators and so on. I can also say that she

will have, as one of her first tasks, an across-Province tour to look at

probable changes in processes that will make that office work more effectively

and efficiently.

You are right; there have been some backlogs, and we have had those issues

identified, and the new executive director has that as her first task.

MS MICHAEL: I am really delighted to hear that. That is really good news

to me.

MR. CURRAN: You should also know that one of the proposed actions around

the Human Rights Act for this year will be likely taking a second look at the

act to determine whether or not - and this has been communicated by the minister

to the members of the Commission - to take a look at the act to see whether or

not changes and reforms are necessary to bring it in line with developments

across the country.

Our current act is, in terms of its policies and procedures and processes,

about twenty years old. Although there have been changes, substantive changes,

procedurally it is probably time that there was a look at the act. This is one

of Jane Fitzpatrick's number one tasks as she takes her new office.

MS MICHAEL: That is great. I concur with what you are saying, and I am

really glad to know the minister has given the direction.

I won't do more conversation here except to say that, Minister, I really

would be interested in having a chat with you and maybe your officials just to

look at some of the concerns that have been brought to me, and some of the areas

that maybe Ms Fitzpatrick, when she does her investigation, cross-country tour -

just to be sure that some of the concerns that I have because of constituents

coming to me are going to be covered; because I think some of the things that

have come to me are reflections of the change in our population -

MR. CURRAN: Absolutely.

MS MICHAEL: - here in Newfoundland and Labrador over the last twenty

years. The people who are coming to me, in some case, are people who are from

groups in our Province who maybe were not that prominent twenty years ago, so

that is very good news to me.

CHAIR: Ms Michael, if you are finished on that point we will move to

another member.

MS MICHAEL: Sure. I can come back to other things after.

Thank you very much.

CHAIR: Mr. Parsons, did you want to...?

MR. PARSONS: Good morning, folks.

Just a couple of questions. I am probably all over the place here.

First of all, on fine collection, I am just wondering, Mr. Alcock, where we

started with the amount of outstanding fines, when, and where we are now. You

mentioned it was successful. I am just trying to get an idea of how successful.

MR. ALCOCK: On collections, if you look at the last three year period and

look at total collections for the fiscal year ending in 2005, our total

collections were approximately $6.4 million. That increased over the next two

years to approximately $7.6 million, which is a very substantial increase. The

majority of that increase relates to provincial receipts. Those provincial

receipts over that period increased from approximately $4.9 million to

approximately $6.2 million.

Our collection efforts that we put into this initiative that started a couple

of years ago, I believe, have been quite successful and, as I mentioned earlier,

Mr. Parsons, resulted in positive reaction by Treasury Board or by the

government to add additional resources to that particular area to focus on

collections.

MR. PARSONS: Roughly how much right now would be outstanding and owning

to the Province in terms of outstanding fines?

MR. ALCOCK: I understand from the Director of Finance that it is

approximately $32 million total fines, which includes third party fines as well

as government-owed fines.

MR. PARSONS: That is, say, from - two years ago where was it,

approximately?

MR. ALCOCK: We do not have that information right now, but certainly we

will commit to providing the information, the outstanding fines of each of the

last three years, both, as I say, for third party fines as well as provincial

fines.

MR. PARSONS: Do any of these collection methods tie in, in any way, to

Minister Sullivan's announcements about tying it in with the federal tax

return system?

MR. ALCOCK: Right now, the efforts have been directed at our own internal

collection by transferring any fine that is $500 or greater to the Sheriff's

Office through the Supreme Court for collection activity. The collections to

date have resulted through our own efforts. The federal offset program has just

been triggered, so what you have seen in the past does not reflect the results

of the federal offset. I think what you will find next year is that some measure

of additional success could be attributed to that and we will be able to monitor

that as to exactly how much we get directly through federal offset.

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Burrage, on the health care cost recovery piece, what is

the status of that right now? I understand the Supreme Court of Canada has

upheld the B.C. legislation.

MR. BURRAGE: Yes, they have. That is correct. We have been meeting with

our counterparts across the country - in fact, there is a meeting coming up at

the end of June - to formulate what I refer to as a national strategy.

Other provinces, as you may know, have also passed legislation. Some of them

have actually passed it all the way through; others have it at various stages in

their jurisdiction. New Brunswick has put out a call for proposals to retain an

outside law firm to work for that government in advancing their claim.

Right now, we are at a discussion stage. I cannot really get into the details

of those discussions, other than to say we are at a discussion stage with other

provinces as to how we might collectively advance that file.

MR. PARSONS: Do we still have the arrangement with the Missouri law firm

on a contingency basis?

MR. BURRAGE: Yes, we do.

MR. PARSONS: In the event of litigation they will still be -

MR. ALCOCK: Yes, we do. We still have that arrangement with the American

firm, Humphrey, Farrington & McClain.

MR. PARSONS: Yes.

MR. ALCOCK: I know they have been in discussion with local counsel. I do

not know if they have concluded an arrangement for local counsel or not.

MR. PARSONS: Mr. McNutt, on the HMP situation, I remember a few years ago

there were certainly lots of incidences of overcrowding. Do we have many of

those now?

MR McNUTT: The overcrowding has been quite minimal, Mr. Parsons. The

overcrowding that we have is really confined to the Labrador Correctional Centre

now. It is a thirty-eight bed facility, but we are accommodating approximately

forty-eight to fifty inmates on any given day. That has been historically an

issue for us. At HM Penitentiary the overcrowding is not nearly what it had been

a few years ago even with the closure of the Salmonier institution.

MR. PARSONS: How many federal prisoners do we generally have now on any

given day?

MR. McNUTT: On a given day we would have sixty to sixty-five in our

custody. Most of those would be serving their full term with us.

MR. PARSONS: The Stephenville place, for example, that is pretty well all

federal?

MR McNUTT: Approximately thirty-five of the fifty inmates in Stephenville

would be serving federal terms.

MR. PARSONS: On the new HMP, I notice there is some money in the Budget

this year for preliminary planning and so on. Has there been a commitment from

the federal government to actually construct a new facility?

MR. T. OSBORNE: I will answer that.

We have had discussions with the federal minister regarding that. We have

received a commitment from the federal minister that they will work with us.

That is part of the reason we have the $500,000 in this year's budget, to

determine the cost and scope of the project so that we can go back to the

federal government and determine the level of cost sharing. At this particular

stage, it is impossible to get a commitment from them on a dollar amount when we

do not even know the dollar amount we are going to spend on the new facility.

They have given us very positive feedback on partnering with us, but to the

extent, at this particular point we are not sure until we know the extent of the

funding ourselves, the makeup of the facility and whether or not we are going to

allow for an increase in the number of federal inmates we will be able to house

and so on. Those discussions will continue once we get further into the scope of

the work and the cost of work.

MR. PARSONS: Does your preliminary work include location, scouting a

location or anything? Or is that too premature at this point?

MR. OSBORNE: Yes, it is too premature at this particular point. We have

had some very brief discussions internally on whether we would look at going

outside of the Northeast Avalon or staying within the Northeast Avalon. I think

as part of that we need to do a cost analysis on the cost of transferring

inmates, court appearances and so on. I think we are looking at that piece of it

internally as well to determine the cost of locating it outside. Much of our

focus has been - as was with, I think, the previous Administration, not

everything needs to be in St. John's and not everything needs to be in Corner

Brook. Also with that, you have to balance the cost benefit of locating it

outside of the Northeast Avalon and that is part of what we are doing as well.

MR. PARSONS: I guess there is the reality too in the case of the

Penitentiary of the counseling services, besides the prisoner transfer and so

on. That seems to be a big factor, psychological and psychiatric counseling.

MR OSBORNE: Absolutely. That is part of it. Not only inmate transfer, but

all of the associated legal and professional services that would be associated

with an incarceration facility as well.

MR. PARSONS: Do you have any idea when you would be in the position to

have a decision that there will be a new penitentiary?

MR. OSBORNE: We can almost assure you that there will be. Obviously, we

are not in a position to make that announcement yet, but with the expenditure of

the funds, I think that demonstrates the commitment to a new facility. At this

stage of the game now, we need to determine the cost; what it is going to look

like; what types of services are going to be provided there; and the level of

federal funding that will be associated with that as well. Parts of the existing

facility are over 100 years old. The condition of the existing facility - it is

getting harder and harder to maintain that facility simply because of the age

and the services that can be provided there. It is an outdated facility.

MR. PARSONS: On the issue of compensation - Ms Michael asked a question

there and you said it was for compensation - I am just wondering: Is there is

anything in this year's Budget as possible compensation to Mr. Dalton as a

result of the Lamer Inquiry?

MR. OSBORNE: That is something that is currently before Cabinet. If there

is a compensation claim to be paid, it will probably come from a special warrant

again, I would say. Don.

MR. BURRAGE: The fund for this year, the typical contingency fund, is the

same as it was in previous years so there is no special allotment in that fund

for Mr. Dalton or anybody else. If there was compensation, obviously it would

have to come from that fund first. There is no special allotment this year for a

particular claim.

MR. PARSONS: Okay.

CHAIR: Mr. Parsons, are you done with that point? We need to move on to

another member if you are done with that point?

MR. PARSONS: Yes, sure, I will come back. Go ahead.

CHAIR: Yes, we will come back to you.

Mr. Butler.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you.

Under the heading 4.3.01., Public Protection, Safer Communities and

Neighbourhoods, this is apparently a new program, the way I understand it. I am

just wondering if someone could elaborate on that, how it is being set up and so

on out in the various areas throughout the Province or where would this be done

and what locations, that type of thing?

MR. T. OSBORNE: I think we will ask Marvin to expand on that.

MR. McNUTT: The Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods program is really

one that has been adopted only recently in other jurisdiction in Canada.

Manitoba was the first. The objective, really, is to target properties as

opposed to individuals where, in fact, activities that are deemed to be unsafe

in a given neighbourhood, or in fact are illegal, are targeted, as the result of

complaints we receive from the public. We would then conduct an investigation,

make a determination about whether or not these activities were, in fact, taking

place on that property. The director then would have a number of options

available to actually preclude that type of activity. The letter, for example,

which would be the first stage of the process would go to the landlord or the

owner of the building advising that these activities were being conducted on his

or her property and there would be an order then from the director to cease and

assist.

That would be simply the first stage, but there would be other more intrusive

responses that the director could undertake, including making application to the

court for an order for the residents of that property to vacate.

MR. BUTLER: I know it says residential or commercial. Would that include

properties like - I guess you would classify them as commercial, I do not know

how they are looked at - like school properties and things like that? Would that

be included in the same -

MR. McNUTT: It is more targeting the residential properties rather than a

school property. It would actually be an activity such as drug trafficking or,

in fact, manufacturing of drugs or illegal trafficking in other contraband such

as liquor or gambling. When you are targeting a school property like that you

are really looking at the person on that property who is engaged in the

trafficking process. With this type of program it is the building or the area in

which the activity is taking place where you are focusing your efforts.

MR. BUTLER: Just a couple of general questions, Mr. Chair.

With regard to the Department of Education - and I know we hear more about it

and I hope it does not expand to where it is at - we hear talk about bullying on

school property, teen violence or what have you. I am wondering: Has the

Department of Education ever approached your department for guidance on how this

should be approached? I know for a fact that we have seen it in many cases. I

know I asked the Minister of Education last year, and it is like she said, the

last ones this see this are the teachers. I am just wondering: Has your

department ever been approached on some means that that could be looked at, over

and above the way it is happening today. God forbid, we do not want to see what

is happening away but we hear more about it. There was an incident again this

week. I know there was one in a high school in my area last year. I am just

wondering: Has anything taken place along those lines?

MR. T. OSBORNE: I have not been approached. I have been in the department

now five or six months, whatever it is to date. I have not personally been

approached but I know that both police forces are involved in some awareness at

the community level and so on. Whether there has been any collaboration between

Education and Justice I am not sure. Chris.

MR. CURRAN: The normal collaboration that would occur is collaboration

between both police forces, the RNC and the RCMP, and the schools. Of course,

that is facilitated through the department.

I think, at the present time, that is the primary mechanism that we use to

deliver this message, the anti-bullying message, but there is ongoing

collaboration between the forces and the Department of Education.

MR. BUTLER: My other question goes back - I think the first time I asked

it was during the Estimates in 2005 and then I touched on it again last year. I

did receive the answer, but I just want to come up with another question on it,

and that was with regards to the dismantling of the Salmonier Correctional

Institute. I know I was told in 2005 that was all turned over to Transportation

and Works and so on and then last year when I asked the question, I was told

that, yes, it is still with that department and they have their own lawyer.

Having worked there at one time as an executive assistant, I know that the

lawyers in each department many time confer with your department, I guess, on

legal advice back and forth and take a precedence of what has happened in the

past.

Just one more question on that. I am wondering, has the lawyer at that

Department of Transportation and Works ever consulted your department on any

issue pertaining to the dismantling or anything with the Salmonier Line issue?

MR. BURRAGE: The lawyer actually at Transportation and Works is an

employee of the Department of Justice.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

MR. BURRAGE: So he is considered to be a lawyer of the department.

I will have to check and let you know if there has been a dialogue. There

often is between counsel of course. On this particular matter, I do not recall

this coming to my attention, ever actually, so I will make a commitment to check

and let you know that.

MR. BUTLER: Okay.

My last question is, I guess, with regards to - we hear in the media, not all

that often but we have, I do not know if it was this year or late last year,

from time to time we hear of incidents where there is a lockdown at the

Penitentiary. I guess when you are out on the street people say: Why was it

locked down and so on? We hear different rumors going around that there are

items getting into the Penitentiary, whether it is some form of small weapon - I

do not mean guns or anything like that, and maybe so, I do not know what they

are - or if it is drugs being shifted in some way or other.

I was just wondering - and this is no reflection on the people that work

there. People from my district work there and they are all honourable men and

women. I am just wondering if someone can elaborate. How can something like this

happen and get into the Penitentiary in such a facility as that?

MR. T. OSBORNE: Well, it is an older facility. I mean there is obviously

a security perimeter around the facility but often times things are thrown over

the wall. There are times when inmates at the facility are allowed out on

temporary absences and so on. One of the things that we are not permitted to do

is, for example, body cavity searches and so on. Often times drugs and other

items are brought in through those means. There are a number of ways that items

can be brought into the facility.

Our record at the Penitentiary is better than many of the facilities across

the country in regards to detecting these items prior to them actually getting

into the inmate population, but it is very, very difficult to stop that from

happening. We have a very good record at the Penitentiary of reducing the

instances, but it is almost impossible because of the human rights aspect of

doing cavity searches and so on, and not being permitted to do that.

MR. BUTLER: Why I asked that question, I had a gentleman from my district

who was in the facility, and rightly so. It was nothing major. He was caught a

couple of times, I guess, for driving infractions with not having his licence

and so on. When he came out - it happened one day he was telling me, and rightly

so. What I am going to say now, he was scared as hell when he was in there. He

was relating some of the stories and that is why I asked that question.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Yes. It has raised other concerns as well, such as

Hepatitis C, a transfer from one inmate to another. Again, our records of

disease transfer at our facility are much, much better than they are at many of

the facilities across the country, but, obviously, we consistently try and

identify ways and means in which we can reduce those instances from happening.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Butler.

Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

Just one or two questions left. I would like to come back to the discussion

on the Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods, subhead 4.3.01. First of all, just

a general question to make sure I understand it correctly. Because this is

focusing on property and not on individuals, I assume that the investigation

would be into the owner of the properties. Is that the idea?

MR. T. OSBORNE: Yes, that is correct.

MS MICHAEL: Okay. For example, if a grow operation was happening in a

building and people suspected a grow operation then you are going to the owner

of the building to find out what is growing inside?

MR. T. OSBORNE: Yes. We would go to the owner of the building and it

would be the responsibility of the owner then to address the concerns.

MS MICHAEL: Okay, so it is not necessarily somebody just from outside

that property coming in and doing something on the property, it is actually -

the activity is going on inside the building by somebody who is occupying it?

WITNESS: (Inaudible).

MS MICHAEL: Okay, I just wanted to be clear on that.

With regard to the Salaries, there was mention, I think, of the director.

Does the $120,000 - that does not seem to be a lot for his staff. Is this a

director with an assistant? If so, it still does not seem to be very much money

for salaries, that is why I am asking.

MR. T. OSBORNE: We are allotting for six months, but by the time we get

this process started we will be six months into this particular fiscal year, so

I think next year you will see an increase in that particular line item.

MS MICHAEL: If I had time to read the new proposed legislation I might

have more questions but I have not had time to do that yet. Just one more line

item question and I think that is probably all that I have at the moment.

Section 3.1.01., Supreme Court. The Salaries have gone up by $1 million. Now

I know we have done increases. I think there have been increases to the judges

salaries but I am sure that has not been by $1 million. So if we could just have

an explanation. Maybe it has, maybe I am wrong.

MR. T. OSBORNE: I am sorry, could you -

MS MICHAEL:

Section 3.1.01, under Salaries, 01. The Salaries have gone up

by $1 million over last year's Budget.

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is family justice services. The funding provides for

the transfer of funding from Professional Services for family justice services

positions and for the creation of, again, under family justice services,

administrative positions, a legal information officer, law clerk and positions

to enhance family justice services in Labrador as well.

MS MICHAEL: Good. So we are getting permanent positions rather than - in

one of the pieces (inaudible) permanent positions. That is good. Thank you very

much.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Thank you, Ms Michael.

Mr. Parsons.

MR. PARSONS: (Inaudible) for Mr. Petten on the legal aid side. How many

lawyers do we currently have with legal aid right now, and how many of those

would be in Stephenville and Corner Brook?

MR. PETTEN: At present we have forty-one staff at legal aid.

MR. PARSONS: Excuse me, I did not get that.

MR. PETTEN: I am sorry, forty-one. There are four in Stephenville and

four in Corner Brook.

MR. PARSONS: What is the federal government contribution at the present

time to our legal aid cost?

MR. T. OSBORNE: Actually, that is a bone of contention. It probably was

when you were there as well, it probably was for your predecessor and I am sure

for Minister Marshall.

I think we are currently around 30 per cent, Chris?

MR. CURRAN: If you -

MR. T. OSBORNE: Not including civil law. If you include civil law you are

less than 20 per cent.

MR. CURRAN: It is 19 per cent, but after this year's Budget it will

probably be even a smaller amount for the federal cost share. The Province

funds, currently - if you include everything, criminal and civil - over 81 per

cent.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Including civil, we are less than 20 per cent, but the

feds claim that they are providing us with money for civil under the Health and

Social Transfer, but it does not show up as an identified line item there, per

se. So, they have not been able to identify civil funding but they claim they

are providing civil funding to provinces. I think we are at about 30 per cent

when you do not include civil.

Historically, twenty-five years ago we were closer to 50 per cent. Prior to

that, we were at 80 per cent funding. So, it has consistently been decreasing.

At the Federal-Provincial Territorial Ministers' meeting last year in Corner

Brook that had taken up considerable discussion. I think all parties had agreed

to continue discussions along those lines.

MR. PARSONS: I ask this question every year, I am wondering if someone

could undertake to provide me with a breakdown of the amount of money paid out

to outside counsel and law firms during the last year, and names and amounts?

MR. BURRAGE: I have that list. I can give you the top ten. There were

fifty-one firms that were retained last year for various reasons. I can read

into the record, if you wish, the amounts paid to each firm.

MR. PARSONS: No, that is fine. Provide me with a copy would be fine, or

table it for the record for inclusion, I guess, in the Estimates Committee would

be fine.

MR. BURRAGE: Sure.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

I noticed on page 226 there was reference made to the privacy analyst and six

new ones - under the Access To Information And Protection Of Privacy piece,

Salaries, six privacy analyst persons. Is that just for the Department of

Justice analyst piece, or is that for everybody throughout government?

MR. CURRAN: These analysts are associated with the Access to Information

and Protection of Privacy Office, but they provide services throughout

government to individual government departments. Each analyst will be assigned,

I think it is likely two to three government departments, and they will assist

those government departments in implementing their access piece and their

readiness for proclamation into force of the privacy provisions.

MR. PARSONS: Okay. Thank you.

MR. CURRAN: We have been, I might say, extremely fortunate in the calibre

and the competency of the people that we have been able to maintain and retain

in this office to raise government's readiness in these areas, which, of

course, are crucial to transparency and accountability.

MR. PARSONS: What would be the basic skill sets that such an analyst

would need?

MR. CURRAN: They obviously would need good analytical skills. They would

need good statutory

interpretation skills. We have been very fortune. I think

three of these individuals come with a legal background. Two come from - well,

actually three, the other three. The remaining three come from other

governments, the Nunavut, from Ontario, from the federal government, with

previous backgrounds in Access to Information and Privacy

Interpretation in

government service in the public sector.

MR. PARSONS: One of my West Coast colleagues asked me to ask about

paralegal positions. Are there supposed to be somewhere in the department - in

amongst either the fifty-nine from the Lemar Inquiry or the other 153. Are there

a certain number of paralegal positions being created, particularly in Western

Newfoundland?

MR. CURRAN: Some of those paralegal positions have been created with

legal aid and I could ask Newman Petten, probably, to speak to the particulars

there.

MR. PARSONS: Okay.

MR. PETTEN: In the Budget this year there are three paralegal positions;

two are associated with the Child, Youth and Family Services Project and one is

associated with the Poverty Reduction Strategy. At present, we are looking at

two of those being located in St. John's and one in Labrador.

MR. PARSONS: Are there any particular positions that are designated? The

person is obviously confused, they had positions Corner Brook and paralegal. Are

there any positions that you have created in this year's Budget that have been

specifically designated to be posted in Corner Brook?

MR. BURRAGE: I do not know if this helps, of the four Child, Youth and

Family Services lawyers, it is envisaged that each of those lawyers will operate

from the Office of the Regional Director of Child, Youth and Family Services.

One of those positions is for the Western region. Wherever the director's

office is will be where that lawyer is situated.

MR. PARSONS: Right.

MR. BURRAGE: It is not a paralegal position, it is a legal position.

MR. PARSONS: No, I had not heard, but this person said they heard it

somewhere that there was -

MR. BURRAGE: That is the only thing I can think of on the civil side that

would have a regional focus.

MR. ALCOCK: For clarity, the total number of new positions in the

department is a little in excess of 150, including Lamer.

MR. PARSONS: Okay.

MR. ALCOCK: I could run down through a list I have here which indicates

positions that would be located in Corner Brook, if you wish.

MR. PARSONS: Maybe we can table that. It would be new positions and where

they might be located.

MR. ALCOCK: Absolutely.

MR. PARSONS: That would be great.

MR. ALCOCK: Sure.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

With the thirty-two new hires for the RNC, what will that bring the total

complement now of the RNC once these thirty-two are in the fold?

MR. ALCOCK: It is somewhat of a difficult question because of the number.

What we are trying to anticipate with the RNC is the rate of attrition that will

be experienced. We currently have a class at Memorial University - actually,

they are in the third semester of their training program which deliver primarily

at the RNC. Once those thirty are actually with the force, which will be late

August or early September of this year, the approximate number of positions will

be about 370. With that, we are adding an additional sixteen positions which are

experienced police officers. If you add those together, depending on where we

are with attrition, we are somewhere in the range of 385 positions that will be

on the ground, but that is a moving target, as I am sure you are aware.

As well, we have announced that the program will be extended for an

additional three years. So, we see, again, ramping up the size of the force over

that particular period, but currently there is no doubt that there is work to be

done in putting the appropriate number of resources into the RNC to deliver on

their jurisdictional mandate.

MR. PARSONS: Do you see the training program as a continuing thing? How

many cadets are you training at any given time, and how does that compare with

the attrition? Will there come a time, for example, you will not need a training

program at MUN?

MR. ALCOCK: Well, right now with the RNC, if you look at the demographics

of the individual's length of service and age and so forth over the next five

to seven years, there is a very significant ability for current officers to

either retire or at least be at pensionable service - have contributed to the

level of pensionable service. The question then arises as to how many of those

people will actually stay on with the force and work another five to ten years,

or how many of those will actually retire and move on to something else.

We see the program as continuing for somewhat an extended period. I would

also add that when Memorial University partnered with us in putting the program

in place in the first instance, their objective was to try and develop a program

that might be more universally acceptable and therefore a training program that

might be availed of by other provinces or other policing jurisdictions. That is

still out there as a potential for continuing the program in addition to

providing the services to the RNC.

As I think everybody is aware, there is a very considerable demand currently

for police officers throughout the country.

MR. PARSONS: I am just curious. A few years ago there were significant

problems with the communications equipment, particularly in the Northeast

Avalon, with the RNC and the RCMP. Did we ever get things worked out to

everybody's satisfaction?

MR. ALCOCK: As I am sure you are aware, the financial contribution to

putting in place a new communications radio system for both police forces is

very, very great. The RNC communications component of that system is working, I

think, very well currently. We have expanded the RCMP component of the system to

east of Gander and we have committed to the Central and Western regions of the

Province over the next several years to implement the updated radio system in

these areas.

As again I am sure you are aware, monies for that are actually paid for up

front by the federal government under a ten year amortization schedule. It is

not a direct contribution up front for the Province, but we do pay it off over a

period of ten years which, as again I think you are aware, is provided for in

our Policing Services Agreement with the federal government.

CHAIR: Is that okay on that point, Mr. Parsons?

MR. PARSONS: I have no further questions.

CHAIR: Okay.

Mr. Butler?

MR. BUTLER: No.

CHAIR: Ms Michael?

MS MICHAEL: No further questions.

CHAIR: Members in the back, any further questions?

No.

In that case - we have lost the Clerk.

Ms Michael.

MS MICHAEL: I would just like to ask you a question with regard to what

we have been through over the last two weeks, which has been very good. There

were a number of commitments made with regard to tabling of documents in

response to questions that we have asked. I am wondering if that will be

tracked, because we have not - I haven't, anyway - received any of that yet.

CHAIR: I know there were in terms of tabling of documents and so on like

that, and questions to be answered, and I would assume that each department

would get back to the Chair and then the Chair would pass it on, but I don't

have a list myself of what commitments were made.

If a member is concerned about a particular one, certainly contact me as

Chair and I would go to the department.

MS MICHAEL: I wonder, would the Clerk have kept a list? Because I think

it would be the Clerk's job to do that (inaudible).

CHAIR: She is writing down all the time, so I expect she probably would.

MS MICHAEL: Well, maybe the Clerk would be able to do that. I think it is

difficult for us to go back -

CHAIR: I can probably speak to the Clerk in terms of that, and the

commitments that were made.

MS MICHAEL: Yes, please.

CHAIR: There were a couple this morning.

MS MICHAEL: That is right.

MR. PARSONS: The only difference, Mr. Chairman, is, unlike questions to

which answers are being given in the House of Assembly, which they are usually

not, the undertakings given here are honoured.

CHAIR: Usually.

MR. PARSONS: No, they always are here. Any undertakings given in a

Committee hearing must be honoured.

CHAIR: Yes, indeed.

I guess we will proceed without - we have a matter, before we get into

calling the articles and subheads right here, the minutes of the last meeting of

the Committee, which was the Department of Human Resources, Labour and

Employment, and the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

The minutes were distributed. There will be one slight change there which

would clarify that Mr. Oram sat in the Chair for about a half-hour and then I

came back into the meeting as Chair. It has me listed there -

CLERK: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Okay, we have it changed now.

I would ask for a motion to adopt those minutes, please.

MR. FRENCH: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Mr. French.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Carried.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: I would ask the Clerk, then, to call the subheads for the

Department of Justice.

CLERK: Subheads 1.1.01. to 5.1.01. inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall subheads 1.1.01. to 5.1.01. inclusive carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01. through 5.1.01. carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total for those subheads carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Shall I report the Estimates of the Department of Justice carried

without amendment?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

On motion, Department of Justice, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: Thank you very much.

That concludes our Estimates, God bless us all.

Thank you again for your co-operation, members who did the questioning, and I

thank the minister and his staff.

Minister, did you have any concluding remarks?

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just wanted to thank all members of the Committee and all officials with

the Department of Justice, and the House officials as well, for making the

Committee today flow very smoothly. You were not too critical or too hard on me,

so I thank the members of the Opposition as well.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Motion to adjourn?

MR. FRENCH: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Mr. French.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: We are adjourned.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.

Document details

Collection	Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees
Citation	2014-07-05
Type	committee
Volume / chapter	committees_standingcommittees_socialservices_ga45_just07-05-14.htm
Language	en
Format	html
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	bc5c00e8840f359cee76f0874af8e0587eb87c58

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (html).