Social Services Committee

2021-06-01

Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees

PDF Version

June 1, 2021

Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Andrew Parsons, MHA for Burgeo - La Poile,

substitutes for Lucy Stoyles, MHA for Mount Pearl North.

Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Steve Crocker, MHA for Carbonear - Trinity - Bay

de Verde, substitutes for Scott Reid, MHA for St. George's - Humber.

Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Derrick Bragg, MHA for Fogo Island - Cape Freels,

substitutes for Paul Pike, MHA for Burin - Grand Bank.

Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Helen Conway Ottenheimer, MHA for Harbour Main,

substitutes for Jeff Dwyer, MHA for Placentia West - Bellevue.

The Committee met at 9:07 a.m. in the Assembly Chamber.

CLERK (Hammond):

Good morning, everybody.

This is the first meeting of the Social Services Committee for the 50th General

Assembly, First Session.

My name is Kimberley Hammond and I'll be the Clerk for this Committee meeting

this morning.

The first order of business is the election of the Chair.

Are there any nominations from the floor?

Any nominations from the floor?

D. BRAGG:

I nominate Sherry Gambin-Walsh.

CLERK:

Are there any further nominations from the floor?

Ms. Gambin-Walsh is acclaimed the Chair.

CHAIR (Gambin-Walsh):

All right folks, we are going to start.

I do have a seating plan here so hopefully I can identify everyone correctly.

First, we have to nominate the Vice-Chair.

AN HON. MEMBER:

I nominate Helen Conway Ottenheimer.

CHAIR:

We have a nomination of MHA Helen Conway Ottenheimer.

Unfortunately, Ms. Conway Ottenheimer is a substitution this morning. It has to

be somebody who is on the Committee.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

I'll nominate MHA Joedy Wall.

CHAIR:

We have a nomination for MHA Joedy Wall. Any further?

By acclamation, it is MHA Joedy Wall.

We will move on to announce the substitutes for this morning. For Mount Pearl

North, MHA Stoyles, we have Minister A. Parsons substituting, Burgeo - La Poile;

for Burin - Grand Bank, MHA Pike, we have Minister Bragg, Fogo Island - Cape

Freels, substituting; for MHA Reid, St. George's - Humber, we have Minister

Crocker, Carbonear - Trinity - Bay de Verde, substituting; we have myself here

as the Chair; we have MHA Wall from Cape St. Francis; substituting for the MHA

for Placentia West - Bellevue, MHA Dwyer, we have MHA Conway Ottenheimer; and we

have MHA Jim Dinn who is on the Committee.

Just to give you a general sense of how this is going to go, hopefully we'll be

able to take a break somewhere between 10:15 and 10:30, depending on where we

are at the time. Also, for the Members who are attending who are not Members,

substitutes of the Committee, we can solicit an agreement on how this is going

to proceed.

I believe last evening there was an agreement – now, this is a different

Committee I'm aware; however, there was an agreement that the Opposition would

speak for 10 and the NDP would speak for 10. It would go 10,10,10,10 and then

the independents could speak for 10 for a maximum of 20. Is everyone in

agreement with that?

MHA Conway Ottenheimer.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Yes, I would support that proposal, Madam Chair. That way we do give the

independents an opportunity to participate. We believe that's a fair and

reasonable proposal that's been put forth.

Thank you.

CHAIR:

Thank you very much.

Does anyone else wish to contribute to that? No? Okay.

I'm just reminding everyone to please identify yourself when you speak and to

wait for your button to come on there so that it's recorded in

Hansard .

Now, we're just going to go around and get everyone to introduce themselves.

Kim, does it matter what side I start on?

CLERK:

(Inaudible.)

CHAIR:

Okay.

We'll start on this side and we'll start with Minister Hogan.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you.

I'll introduce myself. I'm John Hogan, the Minister of Justice and Public Safety

and Attorney General.

This is my first Estimates meeting, having been sworn in as minister on April 8.

I'll thank all of you in advance for your patience as I endeavour to answer as

many of your questions as possible here this morning.

As I know you can all appreciate, I'll take the liberty to pass your questions

on to my officials, who are in the room as well this morning. I invite them to

fill any details at any time, if necessary, as they're the experts in the

department regarding the content that's before this Committee today.

I think now, perhaps, is a good time to let all of them introduce themselves and

then I'll have a few more comments before we get going this morning. I'll start

to my right.

J. MERCER:

Good morning.

Jennifer Mercer, I'm the Deputy Minister and Deputy Attorney General for the

department.

A. GREEN:

Good morning.

Andrew Green, Departmental Controller.

T. HAYWARD:

Good morning.

Thomas Hayward, Manager of Budgeting.

D. BARRON:

Hi. Danielle Barron, Director of Communications.

J. TURNER:

Joanne Turner, Director of Provincial Court Services.

D. BALLARD:

Donna Ballard, Assistant Deputy Minister responsible for Courts and Corporate

Services.

P. OSBORNE:

Hi, Philip Osborne. I'm the Acting Deputy Minister for Legal Services.

D. WOODROW:

Denise Woodrow, Acting Deputy Minister for Corrections and Community Services.

L. STRICKLAND:

Good morning, Lloyd Strickland, Director of Public Prosecutions.

T. KELLY:

Hi, Tara Kelly, Assistant Deputy Minister for Public Safety and Emergency

Services.

J. BOLAND:

Joe Boland, Chief of Police, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary.

CHAIR:

Okay.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you to everybody. As I said, I've only been working with this group of

people for a very short time but I want to thank –

CHAIR:

Excuse me, Minister Hogan, I'd just like to do this side.

J. HOGAN:

Sorry.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Helen Conway Ottenheimer, MHA for Harbour Main.

J. DINN:

Jim Dinn, MHA for St. John's Centre.

S. FLEMING:

Scott Fleming, Researcher, Third Party caucus office.

P. TRIMPER:

Perry Trimper, MHA, Lake Melville.

M. WINTER:

Megan Winter, Researcher with the Official Opposition caucus.

J. WALL:

Joedy Wall, MHA, Cape St. Francis.

D. BRAGG:

Derrick Bragg, MHA, Fogo Island - Cape Freels.

A. PARSONS:

Andrew Parsons, MHA, Burgeo - La Poile, Montreal Canadians fan.

S. CROCKER:

Steve Crocker, MHA, Carbonear - Trinity - Bay de Verde.

P. LANE:

Paul Lane, MHA, Mount Pearl - Southlands, disappointed Leafs fan.

CHAIR:

I ask the Committee Clerk to call the numbers, please.

CLERK:

1.1.01 to 1.3.01 inclusive.

CHAIR:

1.1.01 to 1.3.01 inclusive.

Minister Hogan.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you.

Sorry about that for jumping the gun. I guess to Member Lane, disappointed Leafs

fan is probably redundant. Everybody realizes that by now.

As I was trying to say, I want to thank my team here behind me. I've only worked

with them for a short time, but as you'll see over the next few hours they're

very knowledgeable, they're hard working, they're great and I want to thank them

for putting all the time and effort in to what we're about to do here this

morning.

I will just make a few quick comments, a slight overview for everyone here

today. It is a large department and the total budget for the Department of

Justice and Public Safety is roughly $258 million.

Given the size of the department, you'll see throughout there are, of course,

some small variances of hundreds of dollars or a few thousands of dollars here

and there. I'm happy to address these. In the interest of time, we may be better

served by focusing on some of the larger areas in the department's Estimates. I

will, of course, leave it to you asking the questions to decide how to spend

your time here this morning.

Budget decisions this year include approximately $5.2 million for public

inquiries; $1 million has been allocated for this fiscal year to conclude the

Ground Search and Rescue inquiry and $4.2 million has been allocated to

establish the inquiry into the treatment, experience and outcomes of Innu in the

child protection system.

In Capital, we are continuing with the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary's

four-year fleet replacement strategy in an effort to replace aging patrol

vehicles. As of May 4, 2021, across the department, there are 1,647 total

position control numbers. Of those, 1,353 are full-time staff, 259 are temporary

and 35 are on contracts. These numbers do not include the RCMP.

The departmental attrition target balance for '21-'22 is $127,000, which is

intended to cover two positions. The difference has been allocated

proportionately across the department. In 2020-2021, JPS identified five

positions for attrition totalling $337,900. Government wide this is achieved

through the elimination of vacant positions and retirements. You will notice

salaries across the board are largely down this year, that's due to the removal

of the 27th pay period offset by adding salary increases. Department wide that

cost decrease is $1,974,700 outside of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and

Legal Aid.

I'm sure as we go through this, we will get requests to provide information that

we may not have here this morning. Anything that we provide to one MHA during

this process, we will endeavour to provide to all of you.

With that said, I'm happy to get down to business this morning.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Minister.

This will be my third Estimates and I can say that it has always been a valuable

learning experience for me. I have always been impressed in the last two

occasions with the tremendous knowledge and expertise that comes forth from the

government officials. I look forward to another very informative Estimates

meeting and I thank you all for your attendance. I also ask for your patience

with my questions as well in case there is any repetition.

Thank you.

CHAIR:

MHA Dinn.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

This is, what, my second time or third – I can't remember now; I lose track of

it – but I do find these more informative sometimes than the debate in the

House.

I do thank you in advance for your questions and also for your patience with any

of the questions, which more likely will get repeated.

Thank you.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay.

First of all, I have a few general introductory questions before I get into the

subheads.

As the minister has indicated, there is an attrition plan. Minister, could you

just explain if the structure has changed of the attrition plan? For example,

what are the changes for last year and this year, if there are any?

J. HOGAN:

Okay, I will pass that on to one of my officials here, but if there's something

you can point to specifically. We're here to go through this line by line and it

might be a little bit easier if we can do that. So if there are going to be sort

of questions like that, I would ask maybe if we could focus to what's in the

binder before us, but we will try and answer that question, I'm sure.

Maybe the deputy has an answer for that.

J. HOGAN:

Andrew, sorry.

A. GREEN:

With respect to the attrition plan we're currently working under, that was

assessed under Budget 2020 and it was

a two-year target for the department. I believe our totals were around $442,000,

total, over two years, which also included seven positions. Last year, in that

plan, we were able to identify five positions, totalling I think $373,000, as

the minister alluded to earlier, which means we have a remaining balance of

$127,000 for two positions.

The attrition plan, in general, hasn't changed since

Budget 2020 , so we're really looking

for an assessment of vacant positions and potential retirements.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you, that's very clear.

A. GREEN:

You're welcome.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you very much.

Minister, how many people are employed in the department, again, please?

J. HOGAN:

I can confirm – I guess, maybe, again, Andrew will know – the numbers that we

just gave are accurate. It's 1,647 total position control numbers: 1,353 are

full-time staff, 259 are temporary and 35 on contracts.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

With respect to retirements in the last year, I know that in the previous year

there had been 35 retirements. Could you clarify, again, what the number of

retirements are?

A. GREEN:

(Inaudible) I was going to answer the question on retirements.

J. HOGAN:

Yeah, go ahead.

A. GREEN:

So for retirements we had 45 retirements in fiscal year '20-'21. We had a

retirement expenditure of approximately $690,000 related to those retirements.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

How many vacancies are not filled in the department? I realize there were 104

last Estimates.

A. GREEN:

I would say approximately 90 to 100. That number is very fluid, depending on the

status of requests for staffing actions.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Have any positions been eliminated? If so, what are they?

A. GREEN:

No positions have been eliminated, to my knowledge.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Layoffs: Have there been any layoffs occurring in the department in the last

year?

A. GREEN:

There have been no layoffs in the department.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

With respect to new hires, did we see any new hires take place in the last year?

A. GREEN:

We would always have new hires, just based on the number of retirements that we

have. It's a very fluid operation. We often have people move within divisions or

outside the department and into the department.

I wouldn't have the exact numbers on new hires for '20-'21 with me right now,

but I can definitely provide that at a future time.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Andrew.

Did your department receive any funds from the COVID fund? If so, what were

those funds for?

A. GREEN:

The department received no funding for COVID. We did incur COVID expenditures of

approximately $875,000 across the department, which were absorbed from within

savings, operating savings that occurred just because of the COVID shutdowns for

various areas.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

How has COVID impacted service delivery? In answering that, could you please

speak about any backlogs, which are occurring within the court system; RNC, for

example, Corrections. There are a couple of areas: the courts, RNC and

Corrections.

J. HOGAN:

Again, we'll try to answer some of those questions this morning. Our preference

would've been to go through this line by line, but there are – Chief Boland

here, I'm sure he can speak to it as well. We'll give him an opportunity and we

can speak to the courts.

It is a very broad general question, which my understanding wasn't the purpose

of Estimates this morning. Perhaps I will hand it over to the chief first to

talk a little bit about it, because I know it is an important issue. Obviously,

COVID affected everybody and it certainly affected the RNC, our courts and our

department.

Chief.

J. BOLAND:

Helen, if you could, could you just repeat the question that you …

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Chief, we're just wondering about the backlogs that may have occurred.

Specifically, with respect to your area, the RNC – for example, with respect to

RNC service delivery – have there been any impacts with respect to service

delivery or counter service or anything like that?

J. BOLAND:

Yeah so, certainly, we changed our model. We took some of our priority trees,

which would be lower, and we went to an online reporting system. We found that

to be very helpful. Quite frankly, it allowed us to be able to capture the

information, and through intelligence-led, be able to apply our resources more

effectively and efficiently in that way.

There were areas where we incurred significant cost when it came to especially

PPE and some of the changes that we had to do with regard to technology, but I

would say overall that we saw savings when it came to travel, for instance. It's

a significant travel budget that we have to take us outside, especially for

training, in that area. That came out of our budget.

Then we would have seen areas impacted. There is no doubt that we had an impact,

but I don't think it crippled us in any way in being able to provide a very

effective and efficient service to the people.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

CHAIR:

Any further?

Minister Hogan.

J. HOGAN:

You had two other entities. There was Court Services –

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Yes, the other two areas – I mean I'm asking them now; I could ask them later.

It doesn't matter –

J. HOGAN:

Donna Ballard would be able to speak to the Court Services.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, that's great.

Thank you, Donna.

D. BALLARD:

Ms. Conway Ottenheimer, I can speak to the Supreme Court.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay.

D. BALLARD:

The Supreme Court actually faired very well over the course and where we are now

with COVID. As was experienced by all of us in the early days, there were

shutdowns and we were trying to respond to that, but right now, the courts are

functioning very, very well. What has happened in the early days, of course,

bail hearings and criminal matters and things that had to be heard were heard.

We expanded from CourtCall. We're now using some Webex, we're using some Skype

and we're using video conferencing more.

We've increased our e-Filing in the courts. If you need to go into probate, you

can go by appointment. If you need to drop something at the probate office, you

can do so at the door. We've expanded in terms of space, for example, with our

juries. In St. John's we would use the School for the Deaf where we have more

space and also audiovisual. It's the same as what we're doing in the regions.

Right now, anything that was delayed, in terms of those early days in the Alert

4 period, has been rescheduled. In all senses, the courts are pretty much

working well because we responded with technology. It isn't open to the public

in the way that it had been. So if you wanted to attend a criminal trial as a

member of the public, that's not necessarily available, but there is some video

available in certain circumstances. Right now, we are managing very well in the

Court of Appeal, the Family Division and the Trial Division.

I'll pass it over to Joanne Turner, who's the director of the Provincial Court,

to speak of the Provincial Court.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

J. TURNER:

Provincial Court faired very well also. In the March 2020 lockdown, obviously,

we had to return home, but Provincial Court had to maintain its operations to

some level, which we did so. We quickly pivoted to an online world and video

conferencing was available within a month or so. We've been operating with the

video conferencing, Skype and there is e-Filing, as Donna Ballard had mentioned.

Our operation has kind of flown quite well with the changes with the chief

medical officer announcing various levels from 4 to 2 and whatnot. It's still an

experience that we're dealing with. In all court centres throughout the

province, there was an individual present throughout the entire time.

Yeah, we've done very well with the COVID-19 lockdown. We also went to

teleconferencing instead of CourtCall, which made it much easier for people to

have access to the court. While our doors may have been closed throughout

various Level 5 scenarios, people could always access every courtroom throughout

the province, whether it be video or teleconference. That was for media, for

family members and whatnot, because we are still operating in a relatively

limited environment.

Even though it's the people's court, not everyone can just walk in off the

street today, sit down and watch a random court matter. That's why we have the

teleconference and video conferencing available there for anyone who requests to

access the court. So while our doors may be closed in some court centres during

Level 4, for example, which we're experiencing right now in Gander, Grand Falls

and Stephenville, our court is very much still accessible to the public.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

CHAIR:

We're going to move to MHA Dinn now, please.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Chair.

Before getting into just a few general questions, with regard to a recent

article that “Labrador's slow courts dissuade sexual assault victims from

reporting.” Is there an explanation as to why the courts are slow and what is

being done to address that? Is it a personnel problem?

J. HOGAN:

Go ahead.

J. MERCER:

Good morning.

There are two sitting Provincial Court judges in Happy Valley-Goose Bay right

now. Yesterday, Justice Stacy Ryan was sworn in at the Supreme Court. She is a

resident of Goose Bay and sitting in that court. The Crown's office is all but

fully staffed now. I'm turning to the DPP to tell me I'm wrong, but I think it

is fully staffed. Legal Aid, I think, has a full complement.

There certainly is turnover in those offices and there always has been and I

suspect there always will be, but efforts are continually made to ensure that

any need is met, whether that's flying people in from the Island to cover or

otherwise.

With Provincial Court and Supreme Court, I think they experience the same sort

of turnover but are close to fully staffed on most occasions. Again, I'm looking

for Joanne or Donna to tell me I'm wrong.

I don't know specifically the article. Unfortunately, there are delays in

Labrador sometimes due to weather, due to witness availability, that sort of

thing. To my knowledge, we are not experiencing any concerning delays with

sexual assault prosecutions in that area or any other area of the province.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

That was a Globe and Mail article.

J. MERCER:

Yes.

J. DINN:

Okay. So, as I understand it, the staffing issues have been addressed then?

J. MERCER:

Yes.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Have we put more money into crime prevention, especially towards resolving

issues around drug use or family violence?

J. HOGAN:

As was announced yesterday in the budget, and something that I've dealt with

already when I've talk to members of the judiciary and members of my team, you

would have seen yesterday announcements about specialty courts. I think it a

very important thing and it is a modern approach to judicial services in this

province.

I'm sure the Member will be happy to see that money is being put towards those

specialty courts and we'll grow them over the next few years. That, I think,

will allow these services and justice to be better served as we move forward. I

look for the support of all Members in those initiatives. The judiciary supports

them and has asked for them and is very happy with how they've gone so far.

Obviously, they'll go better as we expand across the province including into

Labrador.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

When we will be seeing action to implement recommendations from the ATIPPA

statutory review?

J. HOGAN:

I haven't – nobody has to my knowledge – received the report from former Chief

Justice Osborn on that yet. Obviously, it will be impossible for me to comment

on that when we don't have his recommendations yet. As soon we get them we'll

obviously review them and members of the public can look at them and all Members

of the House of Assembly can look at them and give their opinion and input.

We'll certainly look at them closely and make decisions on what changes, based

on the recommendations, need to be made to that legislation.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Has there been any work since the last budget to advance the necessary work in

response to the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls inquiry? Which

initiatives are coming and which have been implemented?

D. BALLARD:

Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls: There is a national action plan

that is set to be released. It's not just a federal plan. There's a federal plan

that's separate and there is a national plan that is set to be released on June

3. Internally, the province has reviewed all of the 231 calls for justice.

That's an ongoing project in which we are looking at this calls for justice and

lining them up with work that is ongoing and how we can enhance that work.

Our intention is to continue to collaborate with the Indigenous organizations

and with the federal government as we move forward for an implementation plan.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Is it possible to have an update on the Restorative Justice Program for

offenders not accused of violent crime? What are the results from this program

and are there plans to expand it?

L. STRICKLAND:

The program went very well in the Western region, that pilot program. We are

certainly very eager to expand beyond there. It is a matter of trying to

finalize arrangements with various partners, various charitable organizations

that would assist in implementing that program. But it has gone very well in

Western.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Is it possible to have an update on the expansion of the Mobile Crisis Response

Team services, how many cases they're handling and is there evidence that

they're resolving crises with more success?

J. BOLAND:

I can get you the numbers. But what I can tell you is that there is a

significant increase in the number of calls for service for the mobile crisis

unit.

We currently have approximately 70 per cent of our patrol services in St. John's

trained in crisis intervention training, with 100 per cent in Labrador and

Corner Brook trained. It's a very effective response, as you probably are aware.

We have taken basically a uniform response and incorporated a responsive of the

health care clinician, along with an officer.

It's been a drastic change in improvement into how we respond to these types of

crises in our community. I don't ever see policing changing and going away from

that model, quite frankly.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

In a given year, how many ATIPP requests come to government –

CHAIR:

Excuse me, MHA Dinn, Minister Hogan would like …

J. DINN:

My apologies.

J. HOGAN:

Sorry. Thank you.

I just wanted to follow up on what the chief said, and certainly as is a bit of

a theme for me, I've only been here a short time, but I've gotten emails from

people who have used the mobile crisis service unit and have been very satisfied

with it. As the chief said, it's a change to the way policing has been done and

this is fantastic to see that Chief Boland has implemented that. I think him and

his team should be very proud of the work that that's done and the service

that's provided to people in our communities.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

In a given year, how many ATIPP requests come to government departments? If we

can't have a breakdown by department is there a total figure?

D. BALLARD:

I have the total for 2019-2020, which is 2,879; government departments: 1,943;

and the others being public bodies: 936.

The most recent number I have for '20-'21 is 2,800 altogether; government

departments: less than 1,800; and other public bodies: 1,000.

I don't have the breakdown, but I expect that we can provide that to you.

J. DINN:

Thank you very much.

Just one final question in general questions. There was a comment made – and I

forget by who – that there was an assessment carried out of vacant positions, I

guess, in determining whether they're going to be filled or how they're going to

be filled.

Is it possible to get an understanding of how you go about those assessments in

determining, I guess, if a position is needed or if it should be eliminated

through attrition?

A. GREEN:

As I alluded to earlier, we have approximately 90 vacant positions. That's very

fluid so that changes weekly, definitely monthly.

With the requirement to kind of come up with some positions through attrition

based on the parameters that we are working with, which is an assessment of

vacancies or pending retirements, we would kind of work with our divisions on

any vacancies to assess if the ability to perform that work can be done from

within existing resources. It's an assessment we do on every position that we

fill: Have you considered this for attrition and have you considered the duties?

Are they able to be absorbed from within?

The positions we identified last year were long-term vacancies, so any of the

duties that were being performed by these positions would have long been

absorbed from within existing complements within the department.

CHAIR:

All right.

We're going to move back now to MHA Conway Ottenheimer.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Just going back to the impacts of COVID with respect to Corrections, I'm just

wondering, for example, if someone could comment on Corrections and the impact

of COVID.

D. WOODROW:

Overall, COVID certainly has been felt throughout Corrections. At the beginning,

our numbers in many counts were very low, but they slowly crept back up to a

more regular number. I think it corresponds with court opening, closure and

their operations as well.

Financial, I don't have an overall number, but COVID certainly impacted several

of the areas, for example, some of our revenues would be down in Fines

Administration. As well, costs were low because of care of inmates. Medical

costs and that kind of thing would have been low when our numbers were lower.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

One final general question: Did your department receive any funds from the

contingency fund? If so, what was it for?

A. GREEN:

No, JPS did not avail of the contingency fund from the Department of Finance.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Okay, going to subhead 1.2.01, Executive Support, under Salaries: In '20-'21,

Salaries were budgeted to be approximately $1.2 million, but revised to

approximately $1.4 million. Can you please explain this increase?

A. GREEN:

The increase is related to an ADM position, which was on sick leave for a

significant portion of the year. That was backfilled, so we wouldn't have had to

budget for the backfill. Then when that ADM position eventually retired, there

were retirement expenditures related to that person.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Under subhead 1.2.02, Administrative and Policy Support, under Salaries: In

'20-'21, there were salary dollars unspent, yet the budget is still being

increased to $2 million. Can you please provide an explanation?

A. GREEN:

The actual expense for '20-'21 for this budget included block funding for the

expansion of the Family Violence Intervention Court, approximately $400,000,

around there, and block funding for students, which is approximately $100,000

for the department, which we didn't avail of last year because of COVID reasons.

The other variance would be some vacancies throughout the year for these

divisions.

The budget increased, so in this budget is a block for the Gun and Gang

agreement and that agreement went up. In addition to that, we have a new

agreement for the Divorce Act funding

and there's a position funded here to be the implementation coordinator of that

Divorce Act funding agreement.

There's a new divorce act coming which requires bilingual services in the

courts, so we have funding in here to hire an implementation coordinator to get

that agreement up and running.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Under Supplies, in '20-'21 Supplies went over budget, $167,200 was spent. Can

you please explain why?

A. GREEN:

With that Gun and Gang block funding, so it's block funded up in Salaries and

that's a crime-prevention initiative. Because COVID shut down some of the

training that we would've received for that agreement, we were able to pivot to

get approval from the federal government to buy equipment for police. It was

bought by the police but we charged it here because that's where the agreement

is, that's where the budget for the revenue is. But I think we bought some vests

for the police.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Under Property, Furniture and Equipment, in 2021 this went over budget

significantly: $146,400 was spent. Can you please explain that?

A. GREEN:

The majority of that over budget would be a large departmental laptop purchase.

We realized the first shutdown in March that we were very deficient in our

ability to work from home and we had a lot of aging assets so there was an

initiative to replace aging assets. We have approximately 250 laptops that are

2015 and older and we were given the ability to purchase 110 to replace some of

those assets.

We bought the laptops and then when we had the second shutdown in February, they

weren't assigned yet, we were in the process of getting ready to reassign them

to replace those aging assets. We were able to pivot about 50 of those laptops

to staff to be able to work from home that otherwise wouldn't have been able to.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay. Thank you.

Under Grants, who receives these grants and how are the recipients determined?

Last year, I believe in Estimates, these were referred to as ministerial

discretionary. I don't understand, can you please explain that?

A. GREEN:

The large percentage of this grant funding is not discretionary for the

minister. There is $220,000 budgeted here for community constable positions.

They are in Hopedale, Rigolet, Nain and Makkovik.

There is $100,000 budgeted for NLSARA, or Newfoundland and Labrador Search and

Rescue Association, for equipment replacement. There is $91,000 budgeted for

NLSARA for an operating grant.

The remaining balance is about $39,000 and we support, annually, we pay the

motor carrier expenses for the PUB, we pay the National Judicial Institute and

we pay to be part of the Uniform Law Conference of Canada. The balance remaining

for what we would call discretionary grants is approximately $15,000. Those

would be requests to the minister or to the department for things that are

related to Justice.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay. Thank you.

Under Revenue - Federal, can you please explain where this revenue comes from

and how are the amounts determined?

A. GREEN:

The federal revenue in this division is specific to the Drug Treatment Court,

which we have a federal agreement; the Gun and Gang funding; and in the actuals

you see $1.288, that was an incorrect allocation for drug-impaired driving

agreement. We received about $620,000 for that agreement that really should have

been in the RNC's revenue, but it was an incorrect allocation by staff in my

division.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Can the minister give an update on the Labrador and Central Family Violence

Intervention Courts? Last year, the minister said it would be hard to bring them

out of the city because of the wraparound services. How does the minister think

we can overcome this challenge?

J. MERCER:

We have hired somebody to work specifically on expansion of the Family Violence

Intervention Court.

I think the reference last year to the wraparound service was on the challenges

that are faced with partnering with community groups and their existence or

availability in smaller, rural areas throughout the province. For example, John

Howard provides a support service here in St. John's for the Family Violence

Intervention Court, but there's no existing Family Violence Intervention Court

in Central. We contract with them to provide service in Stephenville.

Trying to find, I guess, ways of doing this that are not going to be incredibly

expensive and where we can tap into resources that already exist. For example, a

client at Family Violence Intervention Court may very well be on a probation

order, so we look at what services are provided if one were on probation and how

can we capitalize on those in the Family Violence Intervention Court setting.

We've hired a policy analyst to do work on that expansion. She started – time is

a bit fluid for me over the last six months as it is, I think, for many, but she

started within the last couple of months. We're really hoping to get that moving

forward.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay.

I know the original intent was to have four Family Violence Intervention Courts.

We know that this has not happened and I'm understanding the information you're

providing. Is it still the intent?

J. MERCER:

Our focus right now is on moving towards Central. We have St. John's and

Stephenville. We'll look at Central and then, yes, Labrador after that for sure.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

CHAIR:

Okay, we're going to MHA Dinn now.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Chair.

Referring to 1.1.01, I note that the actual spending for Transportation and

Communications was much lower this year. I assume that's because of the

pandemic. Correct?

A. GREEN:

Yes, that's correct.

J. DINN:

Okay.

Under 1.2.01, Executive Support, there is an actual increase in spending on

salaries here last year. What accounts for this sudden increase? What accounts

for that sudden increase, please?

A. GREEN:

The increase in salaries for Executive Support was an ADM position that was

sick, that was backfilled and then there were retirement expenditures for that

ADM position.

J. DINN:

Okay, thank you.

Again, spending on Transportation and Communications and Supplies and Purchased

Services also lower, why was that?

A. GREEN:

That would be COVID related.

J. DINN:

COVID related, thank you.

Under 1.2.01, I note that again Employee Benefits are higher than anticipated

last year. I think you explained in the Salaries that there is block funding for

Family Violence Intervention Courts and students. Would that be the same reason

why this is budgeted higher, that the Employee Benefits are higher as a result?

A. GREEN:

Did you say 1.1?

J. DINN:

1.2.02, sorry.

A. GREEN:

For Employee Benefits?

J. DINN:

Yes.

A. GREEN:

Employee Benefit costs are the workers' compensation payments that the

department incurs. We incur them in this division.

J. DINN:

Under 1.2.02 only a fraction of money set aside for Professional Services was

actually spent, why? Why is this budget for this item reduced this year by

another $16,500?

A. GREEN:

The Professional Services in this division is for the Commissioner of Lobbyists.

Also the expenditures related to the Criminal Code review board. My

understanding is because of COVID some of those review board meetings did not

occur as planned or as scheduled.

The reduction in the budget is based on zero-based budgeting and historical

analysis. We would assess spending over a number of years and determine that the

spending is actually down in this line. We would have moved it somewhere else in

the division or the department to cover overages.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Given that COVID has created a recession and its effects are leading to

increased partner violence, mental health problems and drug use, will we expect

to see an increase in the use of the Family Violence Intervention Court and the

Drug Treatment Court? I noticed, I think, in an answer to my colleague's

question, that a person was hired specifically for this. Are we expecting an

increase?

J. MERCER:

Certainly, there's an interest in directing more files to our wellness courts or

our therapeutic courts, as we would refer to the Mental Health Court, the Family

Violence Intervention Court and the Drug Treatment Court. Our numbers in the

Drug Treatment Court I think have been less than 20 in total. I'm looking to

Donna, she can fill that in, perhaps, after I finish in terms of numbers.

I think we're going to try and move more files towards those courts with the

goal of having better outcomes at the end of the day. So our policy analyst is

going to try and push that through. We're hoping to see an expansion through the

federal government of the Drug Treatment Court pilot project so we'll get

funding there. We don't know the details of that yet, but the goal is, again, to

expand that as well. I think, as the minister said, that's really the new focus,

and how we should be looking at rehabilitation and reduced recidivism is using

those therapeutic courts.

Donna may be able to give you some numbers for the courts.

D. BALLARD:

The Drug Treatment Court, the latest numbers that we have are April, so for the

last fiscal, 2020-2021, I think the most significant number is the people who

are active because, of course, it's a long-term treatment plan. So we have 20

people active in that court last year.

With regard to the Mental Health Court, we had 30 people appearing in that

court, 18 completing the programming and 10 pending, still in the program. For

the Family Violence Intervention Court, for the last fiscal, we had 135 people

appearing, 25 completed programming, 14 currently in programming and some people

opted out or were ineligible.

As the deputy indicated, we're putting a focus on these specialty courts in the

coming year.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

I thoroughly, totally agree and support this approach.

I would assume, then, based on what the answer was, that there will probably be

more people diverted to this, but better outcomes and less expense and stress on

the rest of the system.

CHAIR:

Minister Hogan.

J. HOGAN:

Yeah, that obviously is the goal. As Jen said, and as I talk to some judges down

there, some people are down in these courts that shouldn't be there. They have

committed crimes and they do need to appear and justice needs to be done, but

rehabilitation is the goal. To streamline them away from the normal system or

the old system is the goal. Obviously, they don't have to keep coming back. It

won't be a revolving door for these individuals who get caught in the system for

whatever reason. But to keep them coming back year after year for other issues

that they can't get out of. So to put them in these therapeutic courts and to

find a solution for them would be the goal. Obviously, if they're not coming

back it will reduce the burden on the courts now, we won't need as many

resources and it's better for society and it's better for these individuals.

J. DINN:

I agree.

Has there been, or is there any sort of a cost-benefit analysis being done? I'm

sure it's got to save the system and it's probably going to have better

outcomes, but is there any analysis being done of the benefits of that?

J. HOGAN:

I'll let Jen speak to that. But to be clear, this does require resources, right.

J. DINN:

No, I understand that.

J. HOGAN:

Just having a different court with a different name on it doesn't mean that we

don't need people down there. I guess the system now – and Lloyd can speak to

this – is there's a Crown, a lawyer and a judge and the therapeutic courts

require other things like social workers and psychiatrists and rehabilitation

workers, et cetera, et cetera.

I will let Jen speak to if there's a cost-benefit analysis, but it's not as easy

as just saying let's just do these different courts and everything is going to

be great. We need to put effort and time and resources into these so that people

that are in the system that are stuck in it, we can help them. It does cost

money, it does take time and it does take resources. It's a priority of this

department and, as you can see in the budget yesterday, it's a priority of this

government.

J. DINN:

And let me rephrase it then, because I agree with that.

J. HOGAN:

Yeah.

J. DINN:

In terms of, obviously, if you're not putting people in prisons and so on and so

forth, obviously, I agree that you're going to need other resources, but I'm

just looking is there, in terms of the outcomes, any analysis being done as

we're going through that? That's what I'm looking at.

J. MERCER:

So I can say with the Drug Treatment Court that's a federally funded pilot

project. Part of that pilot is to do an evaluation. That is under way. I don't

believe it's concluded – I'm looking to Donna to tell me I'm wrong. We don't

have a built-in assessment system for the Family Violence Intervention Court or

mental health care and Treatment Court. We do track recidivism and it's

something that we can certainly look at in terms of accountability.

The minister is right though. I don't know that it's about necessarily pushing

people through more quickly, it's about the positive outcome at the end of the

day. I think that probably costs some additional dollars. For example, someone

who is in Drug Treatment Court has, as the minister said, a judge, Crown, Legal

Aid lawyer, court staff, of course, but we have two people on staff for Drug

Treatment Court right now and then they partner with other departments and

community resources to support one individual. We've had some very successful

graduations from Drug Treatment Court. Hopefully, that assessment will serve us

well in a positive outcome at the end of the day.

J. DINN:

I fully support that. A great idea. Thank you.

CHAIR:

I would ask if one of the independents would like to ask – MHA Lane.

P. LANE:

Thank you.

First of all, just a quick comment. I was glad to see some movement in the

budget with the specialty courts. I agree, it's a positive move. I definitely

noted that actually when the Budget Speech was being read. I think it's

positive.

Just wondering about, first of all, the Jordan rule. Since we did this last

year, has there been any cases dropped as a result of the Jordan rule? I guess

sort of a follow-up question to that: Would COVID-19 impact the Jordan rule?

Will there be other cases now because things have been delayed for another year

because of COVID? Are we at risk of having more cases thrown out, say in this

coming year?

L. STRICKLAND:

I'm only aware of one case in the last year that has been dismissed on account

of a violation of the Jordan ceiling in terms of delays in criminal cases.

In terms of the backlog that has been occasioned by the pandemic, courts across

the country have consistently found that postponements and adjournments caused

by public health shutdowns do not count towards the Jordan ceiling, because they

are obviously something that could not have been foreseen and can't be avoided.

COVID doesn't cause any issues in that respect for us. We are beginning to

address the backlog now. I understand in the Eastern region in particular, the

number of cases is beginning to level off.

P. LANE:

Perfect, thank you for that. I appreciate it.

I've ask this, I think, every year I'm sure, but has there been any analysis

done on the Whitbourne correctional centre or boys' home or whatever you want to

call it? Again, this is just hearsay, I suppose, but the last conversation I had

with somebody I was told there was one person there, one resident, yet we have

three or four buildings and staff and everything else and only one young

offender, which seems like a total waste of money. Maybe the information is not

accurate, but if you could give me an update, I'd appreciate it.

J. HOGAN:

If there's been a recent analysis, I'll pass it over to Jen to just answer that

question. It's something that I have talked about with people in the department.

They've expressed the same question, I guess, as you: There are very few

individuals out there for a large space.

I think the downside is that there is a great deal of space that's required for

youth that are out there. You can't just sort of put a small building out there.

There needs to be a kitchen; there needs to be an area for schooling; there

needs to be an area for a gym and outside time, et cetera, et cetera. That's

something that has to be there. It's something that maybe we will look in the

department about how we can deal with it, but it's not an easy answer just to

say: Well, there's only one person out there. Put them somewhere else where

they're smaller.

Jen can probably provide some further details on that.

J. MERCER:

The minister is correct. We have two youth out there right now, but two youth

means we still have to have a principal and I think we have two teachers on

staff right now. There's a gymnasium; there's art. That is all required by law

because if we're detaining youth in custody, we have to provide them with

schooling. There's a cafeteria to serve them food and they have a bed. They have

counselling, obviously, psychologists. We have a nurse practitioner who's

contracted to provide. It's something that we are required by law to do. We

can't put a youth in an adult facility. When a youth is sentenced to serve

custody, we have to have an appropriate place to put them.

It's a very challenging and I will even say frustrating situation because of the

costs that are associated with running Whitbourne and the numbers. I think we're

left with little choice in terms of what we have to provide. I don't know if the

minister can …

J. HOGAN:

Yes, so the bad news is – I don't know if it's bad news, but the unfortunate

situation is we do have to provide all these services and items and issues. I

guess the good news is that there are very few youths out there. In that

respect, it's good that we're having that conversation, as opposed to saying:

Look, the facility is overrun and we need to solve that problem. I guess we have

to look at the bigger picture context.

It is something that we will continue to look at. If anyone has any solutions or

ideas send them over.

P. LANE:

I have to say that I understand what you're saying but I find it kind of

astounding when you say we have to have a principal and two teachers and there

are two youths out there. Why can't we have one teacher and do we need a

principal? If you need a psychologist or something can't you transport him to an

appointment as opposed to – let me ask this question: We have two youth, how

many staff in total? How many people are employed to look after two youth?

A. GREEN:

Quickly, I just want to say that the division is approximately 50 per cent

funded by the federal government, partially because of the requirements to have

some of the facilities and staffing that we are required to have.

In terms of positions, I don't have the position count for them right now but I

can definitely –

P. LANE:

Do you have a rough idea?

A. GREEN:

Pardon?

P. LANE:

Do you have a rough idea? Are we talking 20 staff or a hundred?

A. GREEN:

I would say anywhere from 30 to 45 maybe.

P. LANE:

Thirty to 45 people to look after two kids, in this case. Wow.

A. GREEN:

So you would have staffing 24-7 for the youth facility, so any 24-7 model would

have to have a significant number of staff because I think they can only work

37.5 hours a week.

P. LANE:

Yeah. Okay, thank you. I appreciate the information, I understand you are saying

there is no easy solutions. I'm sure if there was they'd be implemented, but I'm

just saying you're looking at it and we have two kids and 30 to 40 salaries and

I suspect they're fairly substantial salaries to look after two youth.

Something, to my mind, is amiss but anyway.

J. HOGAN:

Two quick comments, boys youth and girls youth have to be kept separately as

well, that just adds an extra layer.

P. LANE:

I understand that.

J. HOGAN:

I totally understand the question, that is a lot of people to look after two

youth as you say. But it is two youths today, right.

P. LANE:

Yeah.

J. HOGAN:

That's not a set number, as you know.

P. LANE:

I understand that.

J. HOGAN:

That can go up and down so that's why those staff need to be out there in case

that number goes up, I hope it never does. It is a very complex issue, it is not

as easy as –

P. LANE:

I understand, but I really think, Minister, it needs analysis to try to –

J. HOGAN:

Yup.

P. LANE:

– find some solution around it. It just seems, I don't know, crazy to me. But

anyway, I'm no expert in anything.

Now –

J. HOGAN:

Hansard ,

got that?

P. LANE:

Oh, I don't mind saying it. Put it on

Hansard . I'm the first to admit that.

Just wondering about capacity at HMP. Where are we to with capacity at HMP?

Again, these are hearsay and so on, I don't have facts, I'm asking the question,

but I know that there used to be issues, for example, someone gets picked up for

impaired driving and they're supposed to serve weekends. They go into the pen,

they sign the book saying they tried to check in at the inn, there was no room

so they go home so they're really not serving any time because there is no room

to put them.

I'm just wondering is that still happening and is it happening for other crimes

besides impaired driving? How many people are getting turned away from the inn

on, say, on a weekly basis or a monthly basis?

D. WOODROW:

I don't have the number of how many people are getting turned away on a weekly

basis. I can try to see if I can get that number for you. At the moment, we're

not at full capacity but we are close. For example, at the moment, we have 138

people at HMP. The numbers are lower at the women's correctional centre.

P. LANE:

Okay, thank you.

I'm wondering about – I guess it will be my last question – Support Enforcement.

I've had a couple of constituents over the last year or so dealing with the

department on support enforcement. I understand there can be issues if someone

loses their job and whatever, but, in these cases, at least, it was more about

vindictiveness and just trying to keep the money away from the spouse and so on.

But that spouse is having to go through a lot of hurdles and delays and

everything in dealing with Support Enforcement trying to get paid, trying to get

her money. It seemed like a lot of delays.

I'm just wondering is there a staffing issue or is it Support Enforcement

perhaps is not being as aggressive as they could be or are there any issues

there?

D. BALLARD:

No, we have a full staffing component at Support Enforcement right now. As you

can appreciate Support Enforcement is just that. We're a conduit for money in

and money out. The money coming in and the money going out, we're basically

implementing or the staff are implementing the orders. The orders are from the

court. If there is a circumstantial change that an individual has, they have to

go back to court to have the order changed. It's not necessarily a matter of the

staff because the staff can't change the order, it has to go back to court.

Now, I know, Mr. Lane, there's been a number of calls that have come in through

my office that I've sent out to the agency and, in my view, they're handled

quite promptly in terms of trying to deal with individuals and give them the

information that they have in order to move forward.

We don't have a backlog right now. Of course, people are frustrated because a

person losses their job, they still have an order that they have to pay Support

Enforcement, but that can only be changed by the court. I'm not sure if there's

any – there's definitely no backlog in terms of addressing those issues through

our people in Corner Brook.

P. LANE:

Thank you.

The issue wasn't about someone being ordered to pay. The couple I dealt with was

more about the person who is supposed to pay still having the ability to pay but

just being lax on doing what, in this case, he was supposed to do and perhaps

out of vindictiveness on certain issues.

CHAIR:

Okay, we're going to move to MHA Conway Ottenheimer now.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

I just want to go back to subhead 1.2.02, just two questions there.

In reference to the federal revenue with respect to Gun and Gang, can we please

have an explanation, specifically, how the province is using this funding?

A. GREEN:

(Inaudible.)

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

How we're using this funding.

A. GREEN:

I can definitely get that information from the analyst who's providing it.

The intent of the agreement is to reduce gang involvement and some of that could

be police resources, some of it could be Crown resources and some of it could be

training and community supports. But we have an analyst who would have the plan

built out for the full agreement and we can certainly provide how we intend that

plan to be implemented.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, a breakdown would be great.

A. GREEN:

You're welcome.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

The last question on this subhead: Can you please provide an update on the

electronic monitoring program? I know there were three units in service last

Estimates and I would just like an update on that, please.

D. WOODROW:

Currently, we have seven offenders on our electronic monitoring program. Close

to the end of the fiscal year, we awarded a contract for new units, so we have a

contract for the next couple of years for further units.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Under subhead 1.2.04, Administrative Support, Capital, and I know that there was

mention about the fleets, there's a four-year fleet replacement plan. Can you

just repeat what the current size of the RNC fleet is again, please? That

includes cars, trucks, snowmobiles, ATVs, et cetera.

J. BOLAND:

I don't have the exact number of vehicles. We have about 125 in our fleet. The

challenge that we had, Helen, is with our Patrol Services, which run 24-7, and

the stress that goes on that vehicle. The mileage was up on that and we were

lucky to be able to come up with a replacement plan that is done out over four

years.

On average, we would get in about 16 vehicles. Mainly those vehicles would be

identified for our Patrol Services here in St. John's, Labrador and Corner

Brook. There is flexibility within that budget when you look at our CID cars. A

CID car in an RNC fleet would last somewhere around 10 years. You take a patrol

vehicle; you're lucky if you get three years out of a patrol vehicle.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Last year we heard that some RNC vehicles were having trouble with their

computers. Is this still happening? If so, what's being done about it?

J. BOLAND:

We just had a purchase of MDTs for the vehicles. I'm not sure exactly where it

is, but I think we ended up with 20 new MDTs, which covered the pressure that we

had in that area.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

A. GREEN:

OCIO were supportive in providing the funding to replace the 20 mobile units.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you. That's helpful.

Under sub 1.3.01, Fines Administration, Revenue - Federal, $74,900 was budgeted

last year, but not received. It's now budgeted for this fiscal.

Could you please explain, Andrew? Thank you.

A. GREEN:

That is revenue related to the

Contraventions Act agreement. We did not receive any revenue related to

fines for that agreement, mainly because we didn't have the position filled. We

currently have the position filled, so we expect that we will see that revenue.

It's revenue for the position and some of the operating expenditures that the

position would incur. The position is filled and we expect that you'll see

revenue received there in next year's budget.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Revenue - Provincial: Only $232,700 of the budgeted $920,600 was received. Why

is that?

D. WOODROW:

There are a few things behind – at least a good portion of that related to

COVID. The Canada Revenue Act intercepts have ceased for a period of time

because the federal government didn't want to run into taking money from CERB

payments that were coming out. So there was some revenue down there. As well,

MRD and City of St. John's ticketing. A lot of our revenue is generated from the

ticket-processing fees. There was simply less movement, less tickets issued and

therefore less tickets processed.

As well, the courts closed and that kind of thing. There was less revenue paid

through the courts that way, so there was less. But the fines admin program has

been accepting payments throughout COVID and so I think it's just a matter of

the balance there.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Can you provide an update of what is outstanding to date to be collected in

terms of fines?

D. WOODROW:

So the recent number that I have for year-end was $32.5 million outstanding.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay.

I note that from last Estimates it was approximately $42 million, I believe. Can

you account for that difference?

D. WOODROW:

Sorry, I have to correct an error there. The outstanding is $43.5 million and

$32.5 million is what we're looking at as potentially being uncollectable.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

We've talked about this in Estimates in the past about the ability of people to

volunteer to pay off their fines and we know the difficulties that were

experienced with implementation due to COVID. Can you provide some commentary

and update on that?

I know last Estimates we were told that there was an increase in people making

payments and they're still in the development stage. Where are we with that now?

D. WOODROW:

We're still in the development stage with the fines options program. Again,

there have been some impacts with COVID because we need to partner with

community groups for supervision of people offering volunteer placements. That's

been kind of stagnant as a result of not being able to place people out in the

communities in order to do that.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

That completes my questions for this head.

CHAIR:

I was just looking at the time. We'll probably continue on to MHA Dinn, finish

this

section and vote before we take a break. Is everyone okay with that?

J. DINN:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

In 1.2.03, spending on Salaries came in about $100,000 below budget last year.

Is this due to vacancies? If so, which positions remain unfilled?

A. GREEN:

This is due to vacancies within the Legal Information Management Division, all

positions are currently filled.

J. DINN:

Thank you very much.

Again, in that section, spending on Supplies and Purchased Services are also

slightly higher than anticipated last year, what was the reason for that? Was

that related to the positions that were filled?

A. GREEN:

No, the Supplies allocation is for legal publications and there was just an

increase in some of the costs of those publications have gone up over the number

of years. Then for Purchased Services, the increase is related to shredding,

document storage and document retrieval.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Though we were anticipated to receive modest provincial revenues here last year

and this year we received none in the actuals for 2021, I think we're still in

section 1.2.03. Why is this?

A. GREEN:

The revenue allocation here is revenue provided – it is grant funding from the

Law Foundation and it's based on their ability to receive funds from their trust

accounts. That's how they receive their funds, they get interest on their trust

accounts. They just had less revenue to provide grants. This is one of the area

that they reduce their grant funding.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

One last question in this

section for us, that has to do with – we're now

actually in 1.2.04, Administrative Support. Which capital projects received

funding from this source?

A. GREEN:

This allocation is specifically for vehicle replacements within the RNC.

J. DINN:

Okay. Thank you.

That's it for us.

Thank you.

CHAIR:

Okay.

I ask if there are any additional questions for this section.

Hearing no additional questions, I will ask the Clerk to call the grouping.

CLERK:

1.1.01 to 1.3.01 inclusive.

CHAIR:

Shall 1.1.01 to 1.3.01 carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

Carried.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01 through 1.3.01 carried.

CHAIR:

All right, we'll take a short break now for 10 minutes. It's 10:27

Recess

CHAIR:

I ask the Clerk to call the next set of headings.

CLERK:

2.1.01 to 2.4.01 inclusive.

CHAIR:

Shall 2.1.01 to 2.4.01 inclusive carry?

We will start with MHA Conway Ottenheimer.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Under Professional Services, can the minister please explain what matters

required outside counsel for the past year? As well, in another related

question, can you please explain why the budget is being increased to

$5,084,200? It is a significant increase of expenditure.

P. OSBORNE:

Due to solicitor-client privilege we can't tell you the exact nature of what

funds were spent on; however, I'd be happy to provide you with a list of the

firms that have received money from last year.

Generally, there are 40 lawyers at Justice. There are seven that do litigation,

10 that do family litigation and the rest service government. That sounds like a

lot, but there are a lot of complex issues. We go to outside legal counsel, for

instance, for class actions. We have several class actions on now, so we've

hired outside counsel to train local counsel so we have that expertise for that.

With respect to expenditures, there are three basic heads of Professional

Services; one is AG – Attorney General – funded counsel. That breaks down as

amicus attorney, court-appointed counsel, or judicial indemnity. We have no

control over that. The court orders it; we pay it. General is other matters.

When we lack capacity or if we need expertise, we retain that. Or there's

litigation expense if we need to hire an expert for litigation.

With respect to the increase for next year, I think NAPE has said publicly that

there are employees that are covered by the agreement who need legal services in

relation to the matter at the penitentiary. So we're anticipating increased fees

for that.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

A list would be appreciated, thank you, with respect to the firms, other than

the counsel involved. You mentioned several class actions. I know there are

privacy issues, but can you just identify …?

P. OSBORNE:

Sure, there's a class action in Deer Lake. It's related to flooding. There's one

in Mud Lake, also related to flooding. There's a youth-in-care class action and

there's one related to the travel ban.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Under Allowances and Assistance, last year $10 million was budgeted and $1.2

million spent. This year, $5 million is budgeted. Could you please provide an

explanation of these amounts and who receives this funding?

P. OSBORNE:

No, that's a product of settlement privilege. That's not a statute, that's the

common-law privilege. The court made the law. It doesn't just belong to us as

paying it. It belongs to the recipients. We can't go into the specifics on who's

received what. It was lower last year because of COVID.

Before government pays out any funds there's diligence done. We do discoveries;

there's case management. A lot of that slowed down during COVID. We expect it to

ramp up again and we've seen it ramp up this year.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Under 2.1.02, Sheriff's Office, under Salaries: Last year the salary line was

under spent by $635,700. Were positions vacant? If so, how many?

A. GREEN:

Some of the reduced expenditures in Salaries would have been reduced overtime

requirements because court was not operating. Sheriff officers would have

overtime run through lunch or if court goes late. They also have WASH court

overtime requirements.

There have been vacancies in the division. I had a note here on – I think we're

averaging about eight to 10 and they have a complement of 104 positions.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Under Purchased Services, this year the budget is being increased to $243,000.

Could you please explain why?

A GREEN:

When we do the budget, we work with the divisions on what their needs would be.

What we would have here are expenditures related to jury trials. There is rental

of equipment, possibly AV equipment and maybe even space, to accommodate jury

trials.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Revenue - Federal: $109,900 was budgeted last year but not received. It is now

budgeted for this fiscal. Could you please explain that?

A. GREEN:

That is Contraventions Act funding.

That agreement hits in Fines Administration, Sheriff's and Provincial Court.

This was because the position wasn't filled. We currently have the position

filled so we expect revenue to be received for that part of the agreement in

this division.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

2.1.03, Support Enforcement: Last year under Purchased Services, it went over

budget; $104,800 was spent. Please provide an explanation.

Thank you.

A. GREEN:

That is the banking fees on the trust account. Because it's a trust account, we

can't charge the account for those expenditures. Those expenditures are

continuously rising.

You see the budget was $24,000. We agreed to assess those expenditures and deal

with it from within existing funds throughout the year. We also had a missed

banking fee payment of approximately $20,000 due to COVID last year, so it was

an old-year payment that was expensed in the new year.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Just two questions under 2.1.04, Access To Information And Protection Of

Privacy, Supplies: Last year, Supplies went over budget; $40,200 was spent. Can

you explain why?

A. GREEN:

About $38,000, $39,000 of that was an error in accounting. It's actually related

to Professional Services for the ATIPPA review. When we coded it, it was

originally coded in a different division. When we did what we would call the

journey voucher, we moved that money; we just put a four instead of a five in

the line object. Then it was coded there and it was missed until we saw it in

the book.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Getting to the ATIPPA Statutory Review, the question was asked and the minister

indicated that we haven't received a report from Justice Orsborn. Last year,

here in Estimates, we had a discussion about proactive disclosure and some work

was being done to get more information posted proactively. Since then, we

haven't really seen an increase in proactive disclosure of information, so can

you please explain where we're at with that?

D. BALLARD:

I know that it is ongoing. Proactive disclosure is ongoing, but slowed down a

little because of COVID. Of course, our focus has been on the last year

addressing and participating in the ATIPPA review. We expect some

recommendations on that coming out of the review, so we'll be reviewing and

addressing it then.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Under subhead 2.3.01, Legal Aid – actually, no, I think we've answered those.

Those have been answered. The lawyer is now practicing. Actually, I'll move on

from that.

2.3.03, Other Inquiries: I just want to ask, generally, about the expenses

listed here for Other Inquiries. I'm aware that the amount spent in '20-'21

largely depends on the timing and the needs of the inquiry, but how were the

amounts for this upcoming year calculated?

A. GREEN:

For any inquiry, we would do a general assessment on what we expect the needs of

that inquiry to be, plus anything we've learned from previous inquiries to build

a budget. Again, the building of this budget would be an estimate, and once a

commissioner is named in either inquiry that would really determine the driver

of those costs. We try to be as accurate as possible in our Estimates based on

historical – based on our experience, but, again, it's up to the commissioner on

how those costs are spent.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

I see that I'm running out – under 2.3.04, Office of the Chief Medical Examiner,

the first question is just about Salaries. There were some vacancies; can we

have an explanation as to why?

A. GREEN:

Sorry, I didn't hear the last part of it. It was why Salaries were down?

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Yeah, there were some vacancies in 2021 with respect to Salaries it appears.

We're assuming that there were some vacancies.

A. GREEN:

There definitely were some vacancies in the division. We had budgeted for two

investigator positions, which were vacant for the majority of the year,

partially due to COVID. They are now filled. There's a 0.75 medical examiner

position that's vacant.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

CHAIR:

Okay, we're going to move on to MHA Dinn.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

In 2.1.03, Support Enforcement, spending on Salaries was just over $100,000 more

than anticipated. What accounts for that variation?

A. GREEN:

The Support Enforcement officers received a reclassification of a JES appeal.

There was retro-impact going back a number of years, which was approximately

$110,000.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

2.1.04, the low amount spent on Transportation and Communications, is that

attributable to the pandemic?

A. GREEN:

Yes, that would be attributable to the pandemic.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

The spending on Professional and Purchased Services was far lower than

anticipated and the budget for both items this year is significantly lower than

last. What accounts for these variations?

A. GREEN:

For Professional Services there was an accounting error. That would be the

ATIPPA review and over $100,000 would have been the expense there. The shutdown

in February would have paused some of that review at that time, so the expense

would have stopped at that point. We don't have a budget allocation for it this

year, but it's intended that whatever overages would be covered from within our

existing budget complement.

The Purchased Services line, the reduction, that's also related to travel

because the ATIPPA staff go and do information and education sessions to

municipalities across the province. Part of that expense is room rental or AV

rentals. It's the travel plus any expense related to rentals.

J. DINN:

Thank you very much.

Under 2.2.01, I'm not sure if this question fits here or somewhere else, but

I'll ask it: With regard to a sexual assault nurse examiner, I understand that

there is one in St. John's, but is there one or planned to be one staffed for

Labrador that would help the victims make informed choices about reporting to

the police? Just wondering if that – it follows up on my earlier question on the

court system.

J. HOGAN:

That will be, I would suggest, a question directed to the Department of Health.

J. DINN:

Department of Health? Thank you very much.

Under 2.2.01, actual expenditures on Salaries were slightly higher than

anticipated than had been last year. Why?

A. GREEN:

We would have positions that we have to meet Jordan requirements. The funding

for those positions was only a couple of years but we kept the positions to

still meet those requirements. We're funding that overage from within existing

budget.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Why has the budget for Supplies more than doubled this year? The same reason?

A. GREEN:

The Supplies budget was increased. We did zero-based budgeting analysis work

with the division and one of the items that the division was hoping to avail of

was redaction software. We built that supply budget up to allow them to achieve

the purchase of redaction software.

J. DINN:

Who knew there was such a thing? I thought people went through it.

Spending on Professional and Purchased Services was lower than expected last

year. The budget for these items this year is also lower than last year. Any

reason why?

A. GREEN:

For Professional Services it's conflict matters where we have to hire outside if

the Crown is in conflict, or if we hire – I think Lloyd can probably correct me

but when they do their annual general meeting, we hire someone to perform Crown

duties during those times.

For Purchased Services, some of these expenditures are related to witness fees.

Because courts had reduced capacity, there were less witness fee expenditures

throughout the year.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Under Property, Furnishings and Equipment, spending was four times over budget

last year. What was bought? You may have already answered that.

A. GREEN:

No, I haven't, I don't think, answered this one.

There was an ergonomic assessment, which would include office-related

expenditures. You will see that across the board there were some erg assessment

issues. Also, we had to replace a certain amount of iPhone 6s which were no

longer supported by OCIO. With our new mobility contract, we saw savings in the

T and C line. We used to get the benefit of a free phone on the old contract.

Now we have to pay for the phone charges. Those costs are booked under 07.

J. DINN:

Perfect, thank you very much.

Under the same section, under Revenue - Federal what are the sources for federal

revenue here?

A. GREEN:

That's the flagging agreement. If you need more information, I think Lloyd can

provide it.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Under 2.3.01, Legal Aid, how many Legal Aid lawyers are currently paid for using

the Grants and Subsidies here? Did this one go entirely to salaries or are there

other expenses.

P. OSBORNE:

I'm sorry. I missed your question.

J. DINN:

Under 2.3.01, Legal Aid, how many Legal Aid lawyers are currently paid for using

the Grants and Subsidies here? Does this money go entirely to salaries or are

there other expenses?

P. OSBORNE:

There are currently 132 positions at Legal Aid. Ten of those are management, 67

solicitors and 54 administrative. That is spread over 18 offices.

J. DINN:

Okay. Thank you.

After removing the counsel-of-choice provision from the

Legal Aid Act , have there been any

long-term or short-term implications of doing so?

P. OSBORNE:

I don't (inaudible). I have met with the Legal Aid board and they didn't raise

any issues in that regard.

J. DINN:

Okay. Thank you.

How are compensation policies and practices currently determined within Legal

Aid?

A. GREEN:

Legal Aid follows Treasury Board Secretariat compensation policies and

practices.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

What is the source of federal revenue here? Why is it higher than anticipated

last year?

A. GREEN:

I think all legal aids in Canada receive a portion of federal revenue to support

their programming. The increase would have been an amount received in previous

year for this year. We had the ability to fund up to 80 per cent of this year –

usually we file those revenue agreements in June of the year, but the federal

government allowed us to avail of up to 80 per cent of our current year

expenditures so we got the money. We almost got two years at once.

J. DINN:

Okay. Thank you.

Under 2.3.03, Other Inquiries, is the money in this

section for the inquiry into

the treatment of Innu children in care?

A. GREEN:

Yes.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

The cost of Transportation and Communications is slated to increase. Is this

money for research trips, town halls and other meetings?

A. GREEN:

I would expect so.

J. DINN:

Okay. Perfect.

The amount budgeted for Professional Services has increased by nearly $2

million. Which services will we be contracting and how many people will be paid

or employed on the inquiry out of this money?

A. GREEN:

To be determined by the commissioners of both inquiries.

J. DINN:

Okay, good.

And I guess it might be the same here then: The amount budgeted for Purchased

Services is also slated to increase by more than $100,000. What services are we

expecting to receive for this money? Similar answer?

A. GREEN:

Yes, to be determined by the commissioners of the inquiries.

J. DINN:

Excellent.

That would go, too, for the projected increases for Property, Furnishings and

Equipment?

A. GREEN:

Yes.

J. DINN:

Perfect. Thank you.

Actually, I'll leave this and turn it over to my – because I'll carry on with

questions at the next chance.

Thank you.

CHAIR:

MHA Conway Ottenheimer.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Returning to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, 2.3.04, under

Professional Services. In 2021, Professional Services went over budget. $349,100

was spent. Could you please explain why and what services were purchased?

A. GREEN:

This is strictly pathology services. There was just an increased demand for

those services across the province.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

For Purchased Services in 2021, Purchased Services went over budget. $496,000

was spent. Could you please explain why and what services are included?

A. GREEN:

The majority of the overages related to increased forensic testing with the labs

and the transportation of human remains.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay. Thank you.

Under Revenue - Federal, could you please explain why there was no revenue

collected last year and explain where the $154,900 will come from?

A. GREEN:

We work with our partners in the federal government. I think there's a

statistical agreement with whatever agency that is in the federal government.

There just wasn't an agreement last year or we didn't have the staffing or –

sorry, for this one, we haven't completed the forms to file to get the revenue.

We're going to receive that revenue probably this summer; it just wasn't

completed in time. That agreement is increased a little bit this year.

I can provide, at a future time, the spirit and intent of those agreements.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

I would appreciate that. Thank you.

Last year in Estimates, we were told 50 of the 65 recommendations from the Bowes

inquiry were partially or fully implemented. Could we please have an update on

the progress? Specifically, I'm interested to hear what has not been implemented

and why.

J. MERCER:

I think that number is still the same, 50 of the 65. Some of the outstanding

recommendations will relate to the federal agreements that Andrew mentioned.

We're entering into agreements with Canada to do statistical data analysis,

collection and a few other things. I think we're still working through. Staffing

was one of the other ones.

I'm turning to Denise to help me, to poke me if there's anything that I've

forgotten.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay.

Would we be able to have a list of what has not been implemented?

J. HOGAN:

Sure, we can get that.

Just in terms of the staffing, a second forensic pathologist is working quarter

time. Additional staff members include a manager of Corporate Services, a

medical examiner investigator, an information and management analyst and two

administrative supports.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay. Yes, that would be appreciated, a list with respect to the recommendations

and what has not been implemented yet.

Thank you.

Under 2.3.05, Human Rights, just two questions and then that's it for me for

this area. In '20-'21, Professional Services went significantly over budget.

$76,000 was spent. Could you please explain why? What services were purchased?

A. GREEN:

That was for a board member who was a long-serving board member who submitted

invoices related to multiple fiscal years. They waited until the conclusion of

their term to submit the invoices for their file, so it was a significant hit on

the Professional Services.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Final question, Revenue - Federal: Could you please explain how $55,800 was

collected last year and explain where the $109,200 will come from?

A. GREEN:

I have a write-up on that federal revenue that I'm going to grab.

In the fiscal year, last year after the budget, the feds approved a federal

agreement. It is the Canadian Heritage agreement under their Anti-Racism Action

plan to develop a community-based conflict-assistance clinic. So that would be

we hired someone to do some implementation around that. That would be the

revenue we received and the budget is to conclude what that plan is.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

CHAIR:

MHA Dinn.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Chair.

With regard to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, a question about

security of bodies – especially in light of the cremation of the wrong one. I'm

just wondering though, in terms of security of bodies that may be from a

forensic point of view from criminal cases, what security measures are there to

ensure bodies that are part of an investigation are secure from tampering and

the like?

J. HOGAN:

I will let Denise Woodrow answer the question about security of bodies, but I

just want to clarify that the issue you're referring to with the bodies was not

an issue with the chief medical examiner. That wasn't the recent one in the

news. That was an issue with Eastern Health.

J. DINN:

No. In light of that I'm just wondering –

J. HOGAN:

I just want to clarify it. You're saying in the light of it. You brought it up

here in the Department of Justice. For his sake, too, we don't want to talk

about a mistake that wasn't made by him. I know he expressed to me that he

wanted to make sure that it wasn't an issue with his office. Not to say that it

wasn't, obviously, an important issue and a sad and terrible mistake.

Go ahead, Denise.

D. WOODROW:

For security of the bodies, they would have two people confirm all of the

information that identify the body; otherwise, I can get some information for

you. I'm not exactly sure if your question was relating to security of the

bodies and what happened with the incident that Minister Hogan referred to;

otherwise, I can get back to you on that.

J. DINN:

My understanding is that the bodies that might be used in, let's say if it's in

a murder investigation or what, are stored in the same facility as people who

might die of natural causes and so on and so forth. I'm looking at in terms of

considering how the evidence there might be used in a court case, tampering and

so on and so forth, I'm just wondering what layers of security are there,

because I would assume those bodies would certainly require an extra layer of

security. That's what I'm asking about.

J. MERCER:

I can answer that. I know the chief was going to weigh in as well, but when a

body comes in as a suspicious death, comes into the OCME, the initial review

I'll call it, is done. If the cause of death is not determined to be suspicious,

then that body goes to the Eastern Health morgue. It is a shared facility in

that sense, but there is a separate location to hold bodies until the medical

examiner has concluded their examinations. I don't know if the chief has

anything to add to that.

J. BOLAND:

Yes, the continuity of the body is encased. It goes into a case; it's locked in.

The officers then take the keys. The keys are kept with us. I think the medical

examiner has as well, so it's a two-lock system. When the medical examiner is

going to do the examination to determine the cause of the death, then they

unlock. The officers come back in and the investigators. From, say, the scene to

the hospital, it's constantly under the continuity and care of the investigating

officer.

J. DINN:

Thank you very much.

Under 2.3.05, Human Rights, what accounts for the rise in Salaries? Is there a

new position being created?

A. GREEN:

The increase in Salaries is related to the federal agreement.

J. DINN:

Okay, thank you.

A. GREEN:

That position has already been created.

J. DINN:

Spending on Professional Services was lower than anticipated last year, though

we're budgeting more money towards them this year. Why is this?

A. GREEN:

Do you mean Purchased Services?

J. DINN:

Professional Services I had here, I figure, but maybe – it's lower than

anticipated.

A. GREEN:

The lower Purchased Services was related to the cancellation of the Human Rights

Awards. We're anticipating or hoping that will go ahead this year.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Under 2.3.06, what accounts for the rise in actual revenues this year?

A. GREEN:

The revenue receipted from the Office of the Public Trustee is revenue that they

have on files that they cannot find an estate to. Part of their act is that if

they cannot find an estate, they have to submit it over to the Consolidated

Revenue Fund. There was just an increase in the ability to get through some of

those old files.

J. DINN:

Okay. Thank you very much.

Finally, under 2.4.01, Legislative Counsel, it's not much but I'm just

wondering. The actual spending on Salaries was approximately $35,000 over budget

last year. Why is that?

A. GREEN:

At the time of budget last year, some of the positions were vacant. We have a

policy in government to budget positions at the lowest step, but when we filled

the positions, they were filled with senior solicitors. That would account for

the difference.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

That's it for

section 2 for us.

CHAIR:

All right.

MHA Trimper.

P. TRIMPER:

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the Committee for an opportunity to ask

some questions of this department.

I think I'm going to start, first of all, with the Labrador Correctional Centre.

I wonder if the minister or if some of the staff could explain the $6.17 million

and how it's going to be used. Also, two years ago $1 million was indicated to

be allocated to that facility to support the accommodation of women. I wonder if

those two points could be tackled in a response.

Thanks.

J. HOGAN:

Do you have a specific line that you're referencing here?

P. TRIMPER:

Yeah, it was identified in the budget yesterday: $6.17 million for extension of

the Labrador Correctional Centre.

J. HOGAN:

From the budget yesterday? That wouldn't be in this department. It would be

Transportation's budget.

P. TRIMPER:

Okay, I understand.

Does the department have any opportunity to explain how that's going to be used?

Specifically, is it to – I won't put words in your mouth; I'm just wondering

what is it being used for?

D. WOODROW:

Generally speaking, it's going to be used towards increasing capacity, housing

for females, and to allow for increased programming in culturally sensitive

areas such as smudging ceremonies and that kind of thing. There will be some

space built into the designs for that. Otherwise, the design would rest with

Transportation and Infrastructure and their planning.

P. TRIMPER:

Thank you. That's great news.

I feel that the $1 million announced about two years ago, 2019, was probably

insufficient to meet some of the needs. It sounds like it's getting to where we

want. It's also rolling into my next question.

Just for an update on the cultural programs at the LCC. I've participated in

some of them in the past; I think they're very, very important. It sounds like

you have some plans coming as part of this announcement. Thank you very much for

that.

I look to the deputy minister. I thank her publicly for her support and that of

her team – years gone by with the correctional officer recruitment training, the

court. I'm not sure where we are with staffing but I sense a need for another

court. I just wondered if it's in the works to address the ongoing staffing

challenges.

D. WOODROW:

Agreed. Staffing is always an issue, particularly, in Labrador. We're looking at

doing some training for new officers and recruiting for some officers

specifically in Labrador.

P. TRIMPER:

All right. Thank you.

I think that next I'll go to caseloads. Moving very carefully here, certainly

caseloads in the two detachment locations in Upper Lake Melville, in Happy

Valley-Goose Bay and Sheshatshiu, there's no question, I think, statistics-wise

I've had presentations from municipal leaders, through discussions I've had with

Innu Nation the last several weeks.

I'm just wondering if the department is moving to respond. There have been

overtures in the past at previous Estimates discussing the idea of having

meetings between senior officials in Justice and Public Safety and municipal

leaders on the need for more resources. Everything from dedicated drug

enforcement teams through to additional officers and so on, but certainly the

caseload, I believe, is the highest in the province at those locations.

J. HOGAN:

I'm not sure what the specific question is there, to be honest with you MHA

Trimper.

P. TRIMPER:

I'm just wondering if the department is aware and if it's thinking how it might

respond to the caseloads that we are seeing as community leaders, if that's been

translated to the department. I believe the answer I've had in the past is – and

certainly in both of those locations – it's the responsibility of the RCMP and

they would probably come to the department saying we're going to need to deploy

more. I'm just wondering if there's any overture in that way in terms of

interaction.

J. HOGAN:

So that is the answer. The RCMP makes operational decisions about detachments

and staffing and where the resources are allocated. The funding that is provided

from the government is then given to the RCMP to make those operational

decisions. I haven't had any discussions with the RCMP. I've only had one

meeting with them since I've been minister.

We've broadly discussed the resources and allocations and detachments and things

like that. I'm sure we'll talk about it more in the future, but I didn't have

any specific conversations about the detachments you mentioned. I don't know if

the deputy has anything further to add. But you are correct, the money is

provided to the RCMP. There's federal money as well that comes to the RCMP for

other specific issues that the RCMP have to deal with. The allocation of those

resources is solely within the authority of the RCMP.

P. TRIMPER:

Okay, thank you.

Innu Nation also have been raising with myself the department's position on more

use of things like sentencing circles, halfway houses, opportunities for people

who, instead of facing incarceration, perhaps to do time in the country –

Nitassinan they call it – if that would be a possibility of any cultural

explorations between your department and Indigenous leadership?

D. BALLARD:

Yes, absolutely.

We work with the Innu Nation as a part of the Innu Round Table, which are

provincial representatives and federal representatives and there is a

subcommittee of the Innu Round Table on Justice and Policing services. There

certainly are ongoing conversations with regard to – and they have a proposal to

the federal government. We're hoping to have some federal funding for those

restorative type of initiatives, as well as community officers. So there is

ongoing dialogue as a part of that Round Table on those issues.

CHAIR:

Minister.

J. HOGAN:

If you do want to pass it on; I think you said someone asked you to ask that

question.

I've had one brief conversation with the federal minister of Justice and that

was something that him and I did discuss. It's something that certainly,

obviously, the department has been working on for some time and it's something

that I've talked to the federal minister about as well.

P. TRIMPER:

Sounds like we're – somebody in the back (inaudible).

T. KELLY:

I just wanted to add that there is new funding in the federal budget as well for

expansion of the FNPP, which is the First Nations Policing Program. So there's

new initiatives coming out there and we've been engaged with our federal

counterparts. Also, like Donna said, through the Innu Round Table, and we're

exploring how that will roll out, what could be done and the models that could

put in place in those areas that you referenced.

P. TRIMPER:

Okay, thank you.

I guess another thought is, you know, I always think about jurisdictional scans

as someone else may be showing us the way elsewhere in the country, and if there

are other jurisdictions that we may be paying attention to. I'm just wondering

if you had any comment to about that.

T. KELLY:

For me? Yeah, certainly.

Well, the issue of Indigenous policing, in general, is one that has come up

quite a bit lately. Like I said, there's an enhanced federal focus on it and

therefore, quite rightly, we're all quite interested in it as well. I'm sitting

on a number of FPT groups where this is a topic of conversation and we're really

trying to learn about the different models. Across the country we see very

different, I guess, stages of readiness and activity from the different

Indigenous groups. So that's something that we're continuing to discuss, really,

and try to figure out what would be most appropriate, I guess, for our people in

our province, right, the residents here.

P. TRIMPER:

Okay, thank you.

I wonder if I can get an update on the Senior Officials Working Group, I believe

the deputy is involved, for transient homelessness and addictions issues that

we're facing in Upper Lake Melville.

J. MERCER:

I should defer on that to the deputy minister of Labrador Affairs who's leading

that. I can tell you that I had a call last week, I think it was, with Michelle

Kinney, who is the deputy minister with Nunatsiavut, along with Michelle

Watkins, the deputy minister of Labrador Affairs. Actually, I was chatting with

Michelle Kinney yesterday via text and we're going to circle back and have

further discussion later this week. That is still moving along.

For particulars, Michelle Watkins would be the best one to engage with. I can

certainly alert her to that inquiry as well.

P. TRIMPER:

I raised it here, unfortunately, because I don't think that department is

scheduled for Estimates, so I raised it here.

Unfortunately, I'm out of time.

Thank you.

CHAIR:

Okay, are there any additional questions on this section?

Seeing no additional questions, I ask the Clerk to recall the grouping.

CLERK:

2.1.01 to 2.4.01 inclusive.

CHAIR:

Shall 2.1.01 to 2.4.01 carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

Carried.

On motion, subheads 2.1.01 through 2.4.01 carried.

CHAIR:

I ask the Clerk to call the next heading.

CLERK:

3.1.01 to 3.2.01 inclusive.

CHAIR:

3.1.01 to 3.2.01 inclusive.

I'll start with MHA Conway Ottenheimer.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

3.1.01, Supreme Court, I have two questions.

Purchased Services: This year the budget is being increased to $217,500. Could

you please explain why? What services are being purchased?

A. GREEN:

The increase is related to the Divorce

Act agreement and it's to provide, potentially,

interpretation services in

the French language.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Under Revenue - Federal, could you please explain how $368,600 was collected

last year and explain where the $744,900 will come from? What accounts for the

increase?

A. GREEN:

The revenue for last year was Family Justice Services's federal agreement. That

is budgeted every year. The increase in revenue is related to the

Divorce Act federal agreement. It's

the Family Justice plus Divorce Act .

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Under 3.2.01, Provincial Court subhead, with respect to Supplies, last year

Supplies went over budget, $72,700 was spent. Can you please explain why?

A. GREEN:

Supplies would have been PPE expenditures, the majority of which was cleaning

supplies, masks and wipes.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay. Thank you.

Purchased Services: Last year Purchased Services went over budget. $556,900 was

spent.

A. GREEN:

There was a renovation at Atlantic Place to expand the court to accommodate

people in a socially distanced fashion. That renovation came in at approximately

$172,000.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, so COVID related. Thank you.

Revenue - Federal: Could you please explain why $397,400 was collected last

year? Explain the $715,200. Where will that come from and what accounts for the

increase there?

A. GREEN:

The Revenue - Federal here is the

Contraventions Act agreement. We had a budget of $429,000 and we were able

to achieve approximately $400,000 of that agreement.

The agreement allows for $900,000 to be split across the department. We had

previously reduced that funding a couple of budgets ago. Joanne can speak to

this. She's worked with her federal partners to maximize the funding agreement.

We've increased it back up to $900,000 and the $900,000 would be here, Sheriff's

Office and Fines Administration.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay. Thank you.

My final question under the Provincial Courts subhead is: Last year in Estimates

the minister spoke about the various infrastructure needs for the courthouses

across the province. Minister, what renovation work is scheduled for this year,

if any?

J. TURNER:

In terms of renovation work, we would work closely with TI to plan and execute.

The courthouse in Happy Valley-Goose Bay is, I think, on

schedule and planning a

new courthouse there. It's a build-to-lease space. I think we're supposed to be

in that July, September on schedule.

The Supreme Court works directly with – the CEO of the Supreme Court, who

unfortunately isn't here today. She had hoped to be, but she was at Justice

Ryan's swearing-in and is on her way back. She works closely and directly with

TI to plan renovations for the Supreme Court facilities, Duckworth Street and

throughout the province.

Generally, my infrastructure meetings with TI would include courthouse

renovations, but other than – I mean if the question is are we moving, are we

expanding or are we building something new, that's not in the plan at the

moment.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

That completes all of the questions I have under the Law Courts head.

Thank you.

CHAIR:

MHA Dinn.

J. DINN:

Under 3.1.01, there is an increase in the budget for Salaries of over $200,000

for this year. Is this in anticipation of increases to justices' pay?

A. GREEN:

Supreme Court justices' pay are not budgeted here, this is federal pay. The

increase is related to Divorce Act

funding.

J. DINN:

One follow-up on that. You noted in an answer to Purchased Services that it is

provided for Indigenous groups in Indigenous languages, or is it just strictly

A. GREEN:

My understanding of the Divorce Act

J. DINN:

Thank you.

J. MERCER:

interpretation services in Provincial Court and Supreme Court. We would pay for

those out of our budget as well.

J. DINN:

The Divorce Act agreement as well?

J. MERCER:

The Divorce Act agreement would be to

J. DINN:

Okay.

J. MERCER:

But both courts would have

interpretation services available as needed.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Just two last, maybe three. Under 3.2.01, Provincial Court, even though

Transportation and Communications came in under budget last year there is an

increase to the budget for this year. What extra activity is anticipated?

A. GREEN:

Some of the allocation there is an historical budget analysis. In a non-pandemic

world, this is a pressure account for Provincial Court. They often have to

travel to circuits along the Coast of Labrador and the Northern Peninsula on the

Island. It has always been a pressure issue, so we're trying to fund what we

anticipate the pressures to be in a non-pandemic world.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Almost none of the budget for Professional Services was spent last year and the

budget for this year has also been cut approximately three-quarters. What

accounts for this? I am assuming that it's the same issue?

A. GREEN:

The budget last year was an error. It was money accounted there for the

Provincial Court judges' tribunal, which should be in a different allocation,

not Provincial Court. We just corrected it. The spend here is for court-ordered

psychiatric assessments, which are demand-driven, I would say. We can't

determine – they were down this year; they may be up again next year.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Finally, why was spending on Property, Furnishings and Equipment over budget

last year? What increases in cost are anticipated this year?

A. GREEN:

Some of this would be related to COVID expenditures for I think some Plexiglas

that we installed in the courts to provide for staff and the patrons of the

court. There were also some laptops purchased throughout the year, in addition

to the departmental laptop purchase, to support work from home or to replace

aging assets.

J. DINN:

Okay. Thank you.

That's it, Chair, for me.

CHAIR:

Were there any additional questions?

Seeing no further questions, I ask the Clerk to recall the group.

CLERK:

3.1.01 to 3.2.01 inclusive.

CHAIR:

Shall 3.1.01 to 3.2.01 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

Carried.

On motion, subheads 3.1.01 through 3.2.01 carried.

CHAIR:

I ask the Clerk to call the next group.

CLERK:

4.1.01 to 4.2.02.

CHAIR:

4.1.01 to 4.2.02.

I'll start with MHA Conway Ottenheimer.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Under the subhead 4.1.01, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, I'm wondering if it

would be possible in the interest of time and efficiency if I could just submit.

There are only five or six questions on that and they are pretty perfunctory. If

that's acceptable.

J. HOGAN:

(Inaudible.)

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

The other two subheads that I have some questions on are 4.2.01, Adult

Corrections, and then I have a couple of questions on 4.2.02, Youth Secure

Custody.

With respect to Adult Corrections, can the minister explain, with respect to

Revenue - Provincial, more revenue was received last year than anticipated.

Could we have an explanation as to why that is the case?

A. GREEN:

The collection of revenue here would be the provincial fine surcharges. I guess

it just was increased – there were increased payments made. Every court

conviction or fine would have a provincial fine surcharge attached to it, so

there must have been an increase in those payments.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Do we have an explanation as to why there would be such an increase in those

fine surcharges?

J. MERCER:

It's victim fine surcharges. It funds our Victim Services Program. Every fine

that's ordered has a surcharge attached.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Can the minister provide an overview of the capacity of each facility? If they

are full, if they have space available and, if so, how much?

D. WOODROW:

I can give you an idea of the counts for each facility for recently, in the last

day or so. At Bishop's Falls, we had 22 inmates; Labrador Correctional Centre,

41; Corner Brook lock-up, one; HMP, 136; Newfoundland and Labrador Correctional

Centre for Women, there are 11; West Coast Correctional Centre, there are 38. I

think that's the numbers. When it comes to capacity, we do have some capacity.

We're not full in any of our facilities at the moment.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

D. WOODROW:

That's a point in time, I should just say, though. That's a very fluid number,

but that's where we are at the moment.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

Can the minister please provide an update on the new adult correctional

facility, the replacement for HMP? Do we have an updated timeline available for

the build?

J. HOGAN:

I can say that we are working with the Department of TI now and we expect that

the RFP will be issued for that soon.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Pardon?

J. HOGAN:

The RFP we expect will be issued soon, the request for proposals for that.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay.

With respect to the Jesso report, there were 17 recommendations. How are those

recommendations going in terms of implementation? Can we get a list of what ones

have been implemented?

D. WOODROW:

There were 17 recommendations from Jesso, all of which were accepted in

principle. I don't know the exact number of the ones that are outstanding,

except to say that several of them were related to the replacement of the new

facility. Some of those will be forthcoming when the facility is replaced.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Under subhead 4.2.02, Youth Secure Custody, two questions, one under Salaries:

Last year Salaries went over budget with approximately $4.47 million being

spent. Could we please have an explanation for that?

A. GREEN:

Some of the overage for Salaries would be retirement expenditures. Salary

increases overall in the department weren't budgeted here, so they're now

reflected in the budget. There would've been some salary increase impacts. Plus,

we had to backfill some long-term sick positions.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay, thank you.

And my final question under this subhead is Revenue – Provincial: Last year,

$9,400 in revenue was received but not anticipated. Where did this revenue come

from?

A. GREEN:

What subhead?

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

That would be the last subhead, which is 4.2.02, Youth Secure Custody, with

respect to Revenue - Provincial.

A. GREEN:

I don't have Revenue - Provincial.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

4.2.02, Youth Secure Custody, we don't have that?

J. HOGAN:

We have federal revenue. Provincial revenue is zero, zero, zero. That's what I

have.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Okay. Thank you.

I guess that completes all of my questions for this head of Public Protection.

CHAIR:

MHA Dinn?

J. DINN:

Thank you, Chair.

4.1.01, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. Spending on Salaries was over budget by

$13 million. Why was the amount higher than expected? And the budget for

Salaries this year has also increased by $3 million over last year.

How many officers do we currently have on staff – I think you might've mentioned

that – and by how much are we planning to expand the force?

A. GREEN:

I can speak to the salary overages and increases. In 2021 there was a

retro-impact for a collective agreement. That was approximately $14 million. The

difference would've been offset by some vacancies, because I don't think it was

over by $14 million. The increase would've been the forecast adjustments for

those increases.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

And do we have how many officers then on staff now then? Just to make sure I got

that right.

J. BOLAND:

We have 403 officers on staff. That's our full complement.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Are we planning to expand the force?

J. BOLAND:

Not that I know of.

J. DINN:

Okay.

Why is spending on Supplies and Property, Furnishings and Equipment lower than

anticipated? COVID, or …?

A. GREEN:

I would expect supplies to be down – basically we had less fuel expenditures,

probably related to COVID.

J. DINN:

Okay. And the overruns in Professional and Purchased Services?

A. GREEN:

Professional Services overruns would be related to external legal costs required

for internal investigations for labour employment and civilian oversight. The

overages in Purchased Services would be related to – some COVID-related

expenditures were here and some of it is repairs and maintenance. Then we had

the cadets who went to Holland College, so that expense would have been booked

here as well.

J. DINN:

Okay.

Federal and provincial revenues were lower than expected last year, any reason

for that?

A. GREEN:

The federal revenue, we identified earlier, was mistakenly put in Administrative

and Policy Support. So we would've expected to see around $620,000 there and

that was for the drug-impaired driving agreement.

J. DINN:

Under 4.1.02, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: How many officers are currently

providing provincial policing services and how many detachments are in

operation?

T. KELLY:

We have 44 detachments and we have 436 members between the provincial policing

agreement and the FNPP.

J. DINN:

Why did we receive no federal funding last year?

A. GREEN:

The federal funding is related to the drug-impaired driving agreement and that

expense is actually netted against their invoices as opposed to revenue.

J. DINN:

Okay.

Under 4.1.03, the RNC Public Complaints Commission: How many complaints have

been received in the previous year and does this represent an increase or a

decrease in complaints?

D. BALLARD:

Sorry, if you just give me a minute, I'm looking for those stats; I may not have

it at my fingertips. I have last years. Just give me a second.

J. BOLAND:

I can tell you that all our stats are down. Our public complaints, our criminal

complaints and our internal investigations are down significantly over the last

five years and we've seen a steady decrease. To give you an idea: The public

complaints are around 27; the criminal complaints, we were down to one, I

believe; and the internal complaints were at 17.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Professional Services were more than double the budget last year. The amount

budgeted this year is also significantly higher than last year. What will

account for these variations?

A. GREEN:

The overage last year was related to greater than anticipated requirements for

the division in terms of external counsel. That was just based on the nature of

how the matter proceeded. The increased budget allocation is related to the

salary for the new commissioner.

J. DINN:

Okay. Thank you.

Under 4.1.04, can we have an update on how SIRT is doing now that it's fully

operational? Last year, the minister mentioned it was working on 25 cases. How

many are currently under investigation by SIRT?

T. KELLY:

I just got an update from the director there yesterday. He told me that they

have done 41 files: 27 of those are concluded and 14 are active. He's released

seven reports and two files have led to charges being laid against subject

officers.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Spending on Salaries last year was nearly $50,000 under budget. Is there a

vacancy here?

A. GREEN:

There was a vacancy.

J. DINN:

Okay.

The actuals last year for all Operating Accounts, except for Employee Benefits,

were far lower than anticipated. Why is that?

A. GREEN:

Partially related to COVID and just getting operational in the fiscal year.

J. DINN:

Getting operational after coming out of COVID more or less.

Okay. Thank you.

The budget for Supplies this year has increased fivefold. There is also a budget

increase for Professional Services. What new expenses are anticipated?

A. GREEN:

No new expenses per se. We've built the budget without fully knowing what a

fully operational division would look like. That budget may change as the

expenditures are incurred.

J. DINN:

Thank you very much.

Why is the budget for Property, Furnishings and Equipment being decreased? The

same reason?

A. GREEN:

Yes.

J. DINN:

Okay. Thank you.

4.2.01, Adult Corrections: Last year, we asked for an update on the government

support program, which was providing free legal advice for victims of sexual

violence offered through the Public Legal Information Association of NL, PLIAN.

Could we have another update on funding for this program? Has it increased? Has

uptake of this service increased from last year?

D. BALLARD:

That is the funding through PLIAN. To date, since the program was put in place,

we have 227 clients have accessed the legal support and 187 referrals have been

made to participating lawyers. Legal navigators have offered 165 accompaniments

and in-person meetings to clients and 786 hours of direct client support.

Interestingly, despite COVID, in this current fiscal year – or in the 2020-21

fiscal year – the actual number of clients served was increased to 88.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Are there any plans to revamp the current training and support programs for

corrections officers in the wake of the murder of Jonathan Henoche?

D. WOODROW:

Yes, we'll be looking at policies of adult corrections to determine where we can

improve, and to the extent that if there were training issues that contributed

to that incident or any incident for our correctional officers.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Could we have an update on the staffing issues at HMP? How are we dealing with

the challenges related to overtime, sick leave and addressing the stresses that

come with these jobs?

D. WOODROW:

We are continually recruiting for positions and looking to ways we can improve

those recruitment efforts.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Once the new penitentiary is open, it's being considered to use the extra

capacity to house federal inmates, especially since we are expecting our own

crime rates locally to decrease with an aging population. Has there been any

discussion about how to support the extra influx of federal inmates after they

serve their terms and begin to reintegrate them into society? Will there be

additional costs associated with this?

D. WOODROW:

Yes, we are continuing to work with community groups to find ways that we can

support inmates on their reintegration into the communities.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

CHAIR:

MHA Conway Ottenheimer, no additional questions?

MHA Dinn.

J. DINN:

Workplace safety for the folks at HMP has been raised in the media a number of

times. Is it possible to provide us with an outline of any initiatives that have

recently been undertaken to address workplace safety issues?

D. WOODROW:

Workplace safety is a significant issue for us. It's going to be something

that's front and centre with our advising and our development of our new

facility in the way we do security and other issues. For the immediate, we have

increased training and we are getting all our training up to date with respect

to the correctional officers.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Can you give us a sense of how many federal prisoners we are currently housing

at the penitentiary? I know that last year the federal government was providing

us with a per diem of $303 to keep them in prison. Has this figure changed?

D. WOODROW:

I can say that I'm not sure exactly the number of federal inmates that we have

today, but the number has been slightly increased over the year just because

there have been less federal transports of inmates. They're still providing us

with the $300-a-day per diem.

I see my colleague, Andrew, has his hand up so he has some more information for

you.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

A. GREEN:

That rate is assessed every year based on previous-year accounts and

expenditures. The rate currently is $315.49.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

Spending on Purchased Services was lower than anticipated last year. Why was

more than $1 million left unspent?

A. GREEN:

Less than anticipated catering costs across the province.

J. DINN:

Okay.

Under 4.2.02, spending on all items under Operating Accounts was below budget

last year. Why was this? Spending on Professional Services is projected to

decrease by $135,000 this year. What accounts for that decrease?

A. GREEN:

Spending would be related to inmate counts, so counts would have been down. The

Professional Services line has been reduced after a recommendation of the Youth

Centre. That aligns with their federal agreement and how they can access the

funds for special clients that require them.

J. DINN:

Okay.

I think the last question I have is the source of federal funding under that. Is

this money to cover the cost of housing inmates? How much, then, would that be

per prisoner per day?

A. GREEN:

Under 4.2.02?

J. DINN:

Yes.

A. GREEN:

That's part of their federal agreement.

J. DINN:

Okay. That's it.

Thank you, Chair.

CHAIR:

Are there any additional questions?

Minister Hogan.

J. HOGAN:

Not a question but I just want to clarify for Ms. Conway Ottenheimer, I think

you'd asked about provincial revenue under 4.2.02.

The binders that, I guess, me and Andrew have say there's none but when I look

at the official Budget 2021 Estimates

it does have $9,400 in there. The total number that we have here is all under

federal: $2,489,900. The total hasn't changed in this book but it looks like

$9,400 has been moved out of federal into provincial. He might have an answer.

A. GREEN:

That was for canteen sales within the facility to any clients of the facility or

any of their family members. The canteen would have had sales and it would have

been expensed as a revenue.

CHAIR:

Seeing no further questions, I ask the Clerk to recall the group.

CLERK:

4.1.01 to 4.2.02 inclusive.

CHAIR:

Shall 4.1.01 to 4.2.02 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

Carried.

On motion, subheads 4.1.01 through 4.2.02 carried.

CLERK:

5.1.01 to 5.1.04.

CHAIR:

5.1.01 to 5.1.04 inclusive.

MHA Wall.

J. WALL:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Joedy Wall, MHA for the beautiful District of Ca

Document details

Collection	Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees
Citation	2021-06-01
Type	committee
Volume / chapter	committees_standingcommittees_socialservices_ga50_2021-06-01sscdepartmentofjusticeandpublicsafety.html
Language	en
Format	html
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	cb8955b0cc42a78ee63af11cf43355c753b735f1

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