HALIFAX, THURSDAY, OCTOBER 30, 2003
STANDING COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY SERVICES
9:00 A.M.
CHAIRMAN
Ms. Marilyn More
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Good morning. I think we are still waiting for Bill but it has been suggested that we get started and if he wants to join us, that will be great. I know some people have some other commitments mid-morning. Why don't we go around and introduce ourselves? Stephen, would you like to start?
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Would staff like to introduce themselves?
[Staff introduced themselves.]
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Welcome. Well, this is my very first meeting of this standing committee so I may need a little guidance as we go through but it is basically an organizational meeting. I think you all have the agenda in front of you. The only thing I will mention is that if we have time at the end, I would like to add a little discussion on whether or not you want a subcommittee on agenda setting and procedures, which would basically be one representative from each of the three Parties. There are other ways of dealing with this but this group could make any sort of last-minute adjustments to the agenda, for example, if witnesses couldn't appear, whatever, or we could just do it more informally but let's leave that for now. If we have time we might discuss that at the end.
Are there any changes you want to make or is there agreement on the agenda for today? (Interruption)
Okay, let's move on. The first item is the election of a vice-chairman. I think this is probably a very good idea just in case I can't be here and it might actually turn out to be a person on this other subcommittee.
1
MR. GARY HINES: I nominate Mark Parent.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Do we have a seconder?
MR. JERRY PYE: I second the motion.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Are there any further nominations? Are there any further nominations? Congratulations, Mark.
MR. MARK PARENT: Thank you very much.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Well, that was quick. Wonderful.
Overview of Briefing Material. I am going to ask Mora to just explain the procedure for getting our background information for each meeting.
MS. MORA STEVENS (Legislative Committee Clerk): What members, first of all, receive for this meeting, we sort of informally call this the bible for the committee - no offence intended for any religious purposes. You can see, as you go through it, it has the terms of reference of the committee, the actual mandate of the committee, the home page of the committee that's set up through the library and the Legislature's Web site and that has information on meetings, all past Hansards. It also has past publications of the committee, so all of the reports. You can just go down and click on the Hansards and they are there if you want them. You can find out what other witnesses have said.
Also in here is a list of every meeting the committee has had and the witnesses who have come before them since 1988, I guess, since we started this office, just so you can get a good idea as to what this committee has dealt with in the past. It has some previous witness lists so you can see. I have draft reports. I have the last published report of the committee in here and there was also a draft synopsis of activities because, of course, last year, with the election, we could not have an annual report because it wasn't finished before the election writ was dropped so all those things die on the agenda.
There is also a section on rules and procedures just for committees, how committees work, what the procedures are, parliamentary-wise. Then there is a section on witnesses and what their rights are. Now this is a little more informal than, say, the Public Accounts Committee or some of the other committees but you still have all the rights and privileges and as witnesses are called, they are actually testifying before a court so nothing they say in this room can be used against them unless they step outside this room and speak. They have all the same privileges as you do in this room, just like you do in the House, just so you are aware of that.
That's just a brief overview of this package. Now what members will normally get at the beginning of the meeting, or actually a week before the meeting, is a background package. You get it about a week before and with this committee, if it meets on Thursday, we are hoping to get it out Wednesday so if you are in town for your caucuses and things, you will have a full week with this briefing material. It gives background on the topic that's coming before you. It has a clippings section, if there is something to do with legislation it would be in here. If it has reports on the subject, depending on what the topic is, of course, it would all be in your briefing binder.
This is just meant to be a guide. It is put together here at the office, by myself as the clerk, and it's not meant to be partisan in any way, it is just an overview. When it is given to you, you take it to your caucus and researchers are assigned and then you go through this. If you ever find things lacking and missing that you know about, just let us know and we can ensure to incorporate those. But it is just meant to help the members and we also give copies of this to the witnesses so they know what the members have in front of them, as well.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Just to be clear, this is sent to our caucus offices about a week . . .
MS. STEVENS: Yes.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay. So if the Legislature is not in session we have to make arrangements to have that sent on to us, or pick it up?
MS. STEVENS: Yes, and I can e-mail you when the package is sent over just to let you know, so you are aware the package is in your office for the meeting on such and such, so you will have it.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Would people like that reminder that the briefing binder is available at your caucus office or will you remember?
MR. PYE: Historically, it has always been that we have had it in sufficient time so as to be prepared for the meeting. It never seemed to be a problem in the past, in the five years I have served on the committee, anyway.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay, great. Is there any other information, particularly in the initial binder, that people were looking for as background for the committee as a whole? Thank you very much, Mora.
Let's move on to No. 3, Discussion of Meeting Days and Times. Do you want to fill us in on what has happened in the past and we can take it from there.
MS. STEVENS: Certainly. Traditionally, this committee has met on Thursdays, usually Thursday mornings whether the House is sitting or not sitting, but that is certainly determined by the committee. It depends how far members have to come. When the House isn't sitting, they might like to meet in the afternoon.
Usually what the committee does, since it has met on a monthly basis, is pick a certain Thursday of the month. Now it has been the last Thursday of the month but for my own sake, I was going to ask the committee since so much of the work tends to fall at the end of the month for other committees as well, that we are trying to get maybe the second or third week of the month. That way all of the members don't have meeting, meeting, meeting, meeting, on all different topics, so it's not all congested. It would be easier for the members and it would certainly be easier for the research, so we were kind of hoping it might be the second or third week of the month; that way, it sort of evens out the workload. But it is whatever the committee decides certainly.
Traditionally, it has been Thursday, we have other committees that have booked in on Tuesday, and those days are getting quite full. We have Economic Development, Resources and Human Resources. Public Accounts generally always takes the Wednesday, so that would leave a Thursday date for Community Services.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you. The other thing we have to discuss is frequency of meetings. I guess traditionally this committee has met on a monthly basis and I don't know if there is any reason to change that or not. I would like to suggest that if we have to cancel a meeting because of a storm or something else that comes up, rather than skipping the whole month, if we could just automatically assume it's going to just be postponed one week, rather than until the next month. Then at least we can keep somewhat on schedule.
MR. HINES: That's another good reason for being on the second Tuesday. If you had to skip a meeting you would be on Wednesday which would still fit with Mora's schedule.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Good point. So how are people with the suggestion of meeting on the second Thursday of each month?
MR. HINES: Sorry, I meant Thursday.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Will we also agree that if it has to be cancelled, mostly for weather - I can't think of any other reason but possibly something might happen to one of the witnesses as well - that we would just reschedule for the next week?
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Time of day. Stephen.
MR. STEPHEN MCNEIL: Morning would be great for me coming in from the Valley. Most of us, I think, have caucus meetings on Wednesday, that would allow us to stay overnight, do the committee meeting in the morning and hopefully, get back to our constituency for the afternoon.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Do you want to suggest a time?
MR. MCNEIL: Yes, 9:00 a.m. would be great.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: How do others feel?
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Okay, so I think we have consensus, 9:00 a.m. on the second Thursday of each month; the third Thursday if for any reason it has to be postponed. Great. Do we need motions on these?
MS. STEVENS: No, if you have consensus, that's . . .
[9:15 a.m.]
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. The next item. There was one outstanding topic from the previous Community Services Committee, and that was the Youth in Care newsletter project. While we understand that the business of one committee is not necessarily inherited by the succeeding committee, apparently this is a very worthwhile initiative and they are very interested in appearing before our committee to explain. It's a real good-news story. I'm just wondering how you want to handle it - do you want to discuss it as part of our agenda setting for the coming months, rather than dealing with it separately, or do you want to deal with it now?
MR. PARENT: Let's deal with it as part of all the agenda items, I would think it would make sense.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay, do we have agreement on that?
MR. RUSSELL MACKINNON: Could we have a little more detail on what it's all about?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: This particular initiative?
MR. MACKINNON: Yes.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Sure. Mora, do you want to . . .
MS. STEVENS: It's a Youth in Care newsletter project funded by various levels of government, from Children's Aid, the federal Department of Justice, and Youth Employment. It's a project that's been set up to deal with issues of the youth who are in care in Nova Scotia. They're writing newsletters, they're getting their opinions out, they're teaching them how to express themselves, and they're actually putting together newsletters throughout Nova Scotia. There is a set-up in Halifax, as well as in Amherst. It's gathering opinions of the youth in care and under the province's protection, and they're writing their experiences.
There is actually a binder, because we were scheduled to have them appear in May, but unfortunately it was cancelled. It's just a very good youth aspect on the realities of living on social assistance. They spread the word, and they help each other. It was a very good-news story, and the committee asked, when they had to cancel their meeting in May, that it would be forwarded to the next committee for consideration.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: We will pass the binder around, and you can take a look.
MR. PYE: Madam Chairman, I just want to know, and I have to tell you, I didn't attend that meeting, obviously. Is this a province-wide Youth in Care organization that we're talking about, or is it stationary to a point?
MS. STEVENS: Two areas in the province have this project. It started as a pilot project in Halifax, and then they've opened sort of a satellite operation in Amherst; it just started up in the Spring of last year.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay, we can discuss it further on the next item, which is setting our upcoming agenda. You were all asked to submit suggestions for the agenda, and we have received them. I believe you have copies there in front of you. I have a suggestion that I would like to put before you. I did a little analysis, and what I would like to suggest - and we can discuss this - is that possibly for the first three agenda items, the first three meetings, that each of the Parties gets to choose its top choice. That would look after month one, two and three and then, depending on what we do with this other initiative, there was agreement by two Parties on three more issues, transition houses, social housing, and cost recovery of social assistance overpayments.
It looks as though there is some general agreement that those are issues that the committee would like to discuss further. Then, as the year goes on, we might be able to handle some of the other issues that were left over from the submissions from the three Parties. How do you want to handle setting the agenda? Russell.
MR. MACKINNON: The practice on other committees that I've served on is we go through - I like the idea, given the fact that all three caucuses have submitted lists, that we try to pick out the commonalities and get that benchmark established. Then we look at the merits of each of the remaining issues. As long as we don't overload ourselves with a whole series of issues, just forgetting them on the agenda, because we will probably never call them on.
If I could, I noticed with the PC caucus, their number one priority was secure care facility, and that's also an NDP priority issue. On their Page 2, under the title Other topics, it says, "Community Services: Children's Aid, children's advocacy groups", and then they have, "Subject: secure treatment centre in Truro." So there seems to be some symmetry in where they're going there. Maybe that would be one way to satisfy the number one priority of the Conservative caucus. We don't have a problem with that. We would certainly support that.
I noticed the number one priority of the Liberal caucus, transition houses, that's also identified as a priority with Nos. 3 and 4 for the NDP caucus. So it seems we have some fairly good symmetry there. Our No. 3, social housing, is also the number two priority for the NDP.
Starting off, I would certainly support an agenda item, the secure care facility, recommended by the PC caucus, that would be my first. No. 2 would be transition houses that we have identified. No. 3 would be social housing. Somehow, we can blend the concerns of Nos. 3 and 4, if there's some way, and we can do them separately or collectively, it doesn't matter. Jerry has more experience on community services issues on this committee than I. That would be an opening benchmark. I would certainly recommend those.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: So you're suggesting that we look at the topics that more than one Party has suggested, as a first priority.
MR. MACKINNON: I like your idea of being fair, each one. That's what we did Tuesday in the Economic Development Committee. Each caucus brought in x number of recommendations, and we picked at least two that would satisfy each caucus. Then we put additional ones on that we thought would be worthy of debate. That would be pretty much in line with what you're saying, Madam Chairman. We allow each caucus support for what they feel is the topic of most interest to them, then we look at the rest on the merit, and just set up an agenda, maybe a half-dozen or eight different topics. Obviously the NDP caucus has put a considerable amount of thought into it, they have a fairly extensive list here. I don't
think it would be fair to the NDP caucus to just have them here, and allow them for a subcommittee on a future day. There's some really good material there.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mark.
MR. PARENT: I concur with what Russell had to say. No. 1, secure care facility; No. 2, transition houses; No. 3, social housing. Why not then stick in the Youth in Care, No. 4 and then pick two more, which would take us to a half-year session, and maybe stop at that stage. As we move along, other things will come forward. That would be at least the top four, that would give us four right there.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Jerry.
MR. PYE: Madam Chairman, I think I'm going to throw a wrench into this. Although I know we're putting forth, at this committee, items that we can mutually agree upon and ones in which there is a consistent pattern with respect to support, there are some issues that I think the standing committee should appropriately address in advance. One is a very important issue that I think we tend to ignore and have never really addressed at the committee level. That's the cost recovery of social assistance overpayments.
I hope that when we were talking earlier, Madam Chairman, that we weren't itemizing the list as to what we were going to do. If we are itemizing the list, then that's the kind of message I received from the Kings North MLA, that we were actually putting out an itemized list and going to follow that through. If that's not the case then I would recommend that we really look in the direction of making sure that we put forward a list that we know is going to be one that we should address.
The other one, since the Youth in Care is one that has been outstanding, I would recommend, if it's as important as we had discussed, that be one of the very first ones we deal with. It's one that we do not want to lapse four or five months down the road. I think they were keen in making a presentation to this committee and I think the importance of their keenness indicates to us that they want to tell us something. I think that we ought to be open and receptive to their issue. I would recommend that we put that at the top of the agenda and then go with the rest, but make sure that No. 3, or even No. 2, becomes cost recovery of social assistance overpayments because I think that's important.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The suggestion has been put out that we have the outstanding item from last year as perhaps our first or second topic. Is there agreement on that?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay, what will decide that placement is the availability of the people who want to appear before us. I believe there may be some students involved so they will have to work out the arrangements with the appropriate schools.
MR. MACKINNON: Madam Chairman, just so we can start the ball rolling here, with that having been dealt with, maybe I would make a motion that we accept No. 1 on the Conservative caucus agenda and Nos. 1, 2 and 3 on the Liberal list - that being transition houses, cost recovery of social assistance overpayments and social housing on the Liberal list, as two out of those three are on the NDP list.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: But not their top priority. I do have to . . .
MR. MACKINNON: No, that's fine. That's why I'm putting it out there as a motion so that your caucus can respond to it.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Just let me get Russell's motion. Do you have that down, Mora?
MS. STEVENS: The motion as I understand it is that Mr. MacKinnon has moved forward to deal with agenda items - No. 1 on the government caucus list would be secure care facility as well as other items. The top three priorities from the Liberal list are transition houses, cost recovery of social assistance overpayments and social housing.
MR. MACKINNON: I so move.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Parent.
MR. PARENT: I'm just wondering, No. 1 and No. 2 are no problem. No. 3 and No. 4, out of fairness, perhaps we should let the . . .
MR. MACKINNON: We're not speaking to No. 4 on this motion.
MR. PARENT: What are we speaking to?
MR. MACKINNON: Nos. 1, 2 and 3.
MR. PARENT: Okay, so what's No. 3 then, transition homes?
MR. MACKINNON: Social housing.
MR. PYE: No. 1 is secure treatment facility, No. 2 is transition houses, No. 3 becomes cost recovery of social assistance overpayments and No. 4 becomes social housing, as I see it now.
MR. PARENT: Wait a second - No. 1 is Youth in Care, right?
MR. PYE: Yes. That's aside.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes.
MR. PARENT: But I mean the order of how they're appearing as witnesses. No. 2 is secure care facility, right?
MR. PYE: That's right.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes.
MR. PARENT: No. 3 is transition houses, No. 4 is social housing?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Cost recovery of social assistance overpayments and No. 5 is social housing.
[9:30 a.m.]
MR. PARENT: Okay, what's that do? Madam Chairman, you've stated that No. 1 on the NDP list is continuing care and yet it doesn't . . .
MR. MACKINNON: Well wait now, the motion is on the floor. The thing is, perhaps we'll let the NDP speak to whether they're happy with that. They've identified the symmetry of our No. 1 and No. 3, so that's why I put it in the form of a motion to see if that's agreeable.
MR. HINES: Can I speak to the motion?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Certainly.
MR. HINES: In respect to the motion, I will just ask a question of Mora and probably Jerry who's been around longer than I - I don't know if you've had experience with this committee or not, but in relation to the Liberal request for presenters, they have the minister. Is it normal for the minister to appear?
MR. PYE: Yes.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: I don't know the answer to that, but I'm thinking, Gary, what we might do is get the first five or six topics agreed to and then we'll go back and look at possible witnesses under the first few anyhow, and get agreement on that. So we will have
a chance to discuss that. That's a good question and I don't personally have the answer, but we will get back to that.
MR. HINES: Okay.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The motion on the floor then is that after we have the Youth in Care presenters, that we have the secure care facility, transition houses, cost recovery, social housing. Is there any further discussion?
MR. PARENT: Is cost recovery and social housing the same?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: No, sorry.
MS. STEVENS: The cost recovery of social assistance overpayments.
MR. PARENT: So are we having social housing, or that's not addressed in your motion?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes. That would be the last topic in the motion.
MR. PARENT: So that would give us five, okay.
MR. PYE: Madam Chairman, can I say that before we make a motion to move, because we're setting an agenda here and we're doing it in advance, four or five months, that there be room for friendly amendments, so that if we want to make an amendment to the agenda that we're able to do that. The one that I'm saying is a concern is one that has been a priority issue with us, and it is with respect to continuing care, particularly around home care in Nova Scotia and the services that are now being cut by a number of people in home care, and we would like the government and witnesses to come forward. There's a significant change in the delivery of home care services to those in need in Nova Scotia. This is not just centrally Halifax, but across the province, so there's a very important need to do that. If we set the agenda and if someone doesn't show, I want to make sure that we have the flexibility that we can put that in, and if there's an amendment to that . . .
MADAM CHAIRMAN: I'm just wondering, Jerry, if you should move an amendment that . . .
MR. PARENT: Do we need a motion?
MR. PYE: No, there doesn't need to be an amendment on that.
MR. PARENT: There's a motion on the floor, I guess.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: A motion has been moved.
MR. PYE: But before the motion on the floor goes, I would so move that we add continuing care as No. 6. That way, it will give us the opportunity to move it up on the agenda should a witness not appear.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Is there any discussion on the amendment to add home care services to the list?
MR. PARENT: Agreed. I'm not terribly sure we need motions, but anyway . . .
MR. MACKINNON: But I do . . .
MADAM CHAIRMAN: We started and accepted it, so I think we have to formalize it a little bit. Let's have the vote on the amendment to add home care services to the agenda list.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
The motion is carried.
Is there any discussion now on the agenda as amended? Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. Abstentions?
The motion is carried. Agenda adopted.
So, am I also hearing that if there is some difficulty in getting witnesses for a topic, we can substitute with one of the others and we will come back to that topic at the very next meeting?
Okay. Excellent.
MR. HINES: Would that be something that a subcommittee might do? If, in fact, we didn't go to a . . .
MR. PYE: We've never had a (Interruptions) Excuse me, Madam Chairman . . .
MR. HINES: I think what it allows you - if I might - is some flexibility in terms of when we're not sitting in the House it would be easier for the chairman or for Mora to get hold of three individuals if we were in a position where we had to make an immediate change.
MR. PARENT: Can I make a suggestion?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Sure.
MR. PARENT: Why not, if we need to change the order of witnesses - normally we would just let you do it, but if you want some backup, just give me as vice-chairman a phone call and say we have to move this to that because of witnesses and . . .
MR. MACKINNON: Wait now. Madam Chairman, with all due respect, this is a scheduling matter and usually the clerk of the committee will go through the list of witnesses - it has been the practice on every other committee that if witness X can't come in, then you go to the next one on the list and you keep going . . .
MR. PARENT: Agreed. There's no real problem with it.
MR. MACKINNON: This idea of a subcommittee, perhaps that could be very easily severed off until a separate agenda unwittingly or not with any ill intent - but I think the whole idea is to set the agenda with all members, so that we will have a very fruitful discussion and everybody is satisfied, whether they agree at the meeting or not.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: No, I agree.
MR. MACKINNON: So I think we can put some additional witnesses into the mix as well. Just because we set these as a priority list doesn't mean to say that we're holding fast and hard to them, but at least we have to have a benchmark to start with. We can look at all the other potential witnesses and see if we can put a few more into the mix, maybe get seven or eight in there. I know the NDP caucus has brought quite a considerable list. We brought what we thought was a fair list and still there are two other items on the Conservative list. So we put enough of them into the mix for consideration and then leave it as a scheduling issue with the clerk.
MR. HINES: I'm fine with that. I wasn't trying to complicate things. I was just offering assistance if Madam Chairman found it more convenient to work with an individual.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Right and I have to admit this was my idea and I think it was partly because of my inexperience with this. I thought it might be better to have a representative from each of the Parties involved if we have to make any changes in between meetings. It certainly wasn't meant to replace the open discussion and setting an agenda or anything, it was more the last-minute adjustments that sometimes have to be made.
MR. MACKINNON: That's a scheduling issue.
MR. HINES: Mora can handle that.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Sure, not a problem. One last thing, we should go back.
MR. MACKINNON: Madam Chairman, on that point, are we agreeable maybe we could . . .
MR. PARENT: Add a few more.
MR. MACKINNON: . . . each of the caucuses put two or three more into the mix? I guess I am at the call of one of the senior members who has sat on the committee before, Jerry Pye. I'm not sure what the protocol has been. Have you had a whole bunch into the blender or what?
MR. PYE: I would just suggest to you, Madam Chairman, that there are sufficient witnesses before us at the present time. When we meet each time, if we want to add to the list as we see how it has progressed, we would do that. That's been the consistent pattern of the committee since I've served on the committee.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: That would allow us, you know, if there is a changing environment out there, in six months there may be some other topics that are not relevant now but would be mid-winter or whatever.
Let's go back to Gary's point about who's going to actually be our witnesses for these topics. In terms of Youth in Care, I assume, we pretty well know?
MS. STEVENS: Yes, that would be the project coordinator, Andrew Safer, and he was talking about bringing in some of the kids who write the newsletter. So he coordinates the overall project and then there would be a few of the children.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: So is that satisfactory in terms of who we're going to ask to appear before us on that topic, the project coordinator and some students?
MR. PYE: So agreed. It's a relatively new project, so we need to know a bit more about it. In the future, should there be a need to bring them back again, we would certainly know that.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: In terms of the secure treatment centre, it has been recommended that Children's Aid, children's advocacy groups, and there aren't any suggestions I guess from the government members.
MR. PARENT: Who is the director of the secure care? Shouldn't he or she be the one?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: We have added that to the list. Can you think of any other people or organizations who might want to speak on that?
MR. PYE: Someone from the appropriate government department should be given the opportunity to at least appear before the committee if they choose to do so.
MR. PARENT: The executive director was . . .
MR. PYE: But the executive director would . . .
MR. PARENT: Are there any parent support groups?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: That's a good question. Why don't we put it down as a suggestion and check it out. There may be something either formally or informally.
MR. PYE: There used to be some groups - KIN, Kids in Need, comes to mind. It was an organization that was newly formed - I'm not sure if that's the appropriate name, but they were newly formed - in Sackville about three or four years ago when the secure treatment issue was paramount and important. There are a couple of organizations out there that, in fact, have themselves organized as a result of the need for secure treatment for their children. So it might be a matter of searching them out and - thank you, Mark - it's important that we let them know as well. I think we might have that on file, Mora.
MS. STEVENS: Probably Darlene has it on file.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Is there agreement on that list then for that topic?
MR. PARENT: Sure, agreed.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: The next would be transition houses.
MR. MACKINNON: We outlined our witness. Cathy Love, the Executive Director of Bryony House I thought would be good and perhaps maybe to give a balanced perspective, the Deputy Minister of Community Services.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: I think there is a transition house coalition as well. So we should probably have a representative from that group.
MR. PARENT: You have to be careful with too many witnesses, because of the time factor.
MR. MACKINNON: You can leave that to the clerk. As long as we have two out of three, that would be balancing views. Is that fair enough?
MR. PARENT: Sounds good.
MR. PYE: I just want to say with respect to the transition house coalition, they normally have someone who is there with respect to all the transition homes and they usually appoint someone who will come to the committee as their witness. So I would leave that up to them to make that suggestion.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: What's the practice? Do we sometimes invite a client or someone who has actually used these services to appear as well?
MR. PARENT: We usually try to get representative groups, don't we, who represent . . .
MR. PYE: We avoid individual clients.
MR. PARENT: . . . this is a client support group and they have someone who is a chair. But just to pick a client out at random we don't do. We try to get representatives of various groups or some official.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Perhaps we could try to get a representative then.
MR. PARENT: But if there is a client support group, if they have some organization that could speak, and I'm sure there must be.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: We can check on that. So, are we satisfied with that list?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Sure.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Now, the cost recovery of social assistance overpayments. The one you asked about, Gary. What's our policy? Do we invite ministers?
MR. MACKINNON: Actually, there is considerable precedent for this and Mora can certainly reflect on this. We've had a Premier, we've had Cabinet Ministers, we've had MLAs come before other committees of the House, particularly the Public Accounts Committee, to give testimony, so it is not out of the ordinary. It's not unprecedented by any means. Actually it was a precedent that was set by the Conservative caucus.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: We have Mark and then Jerry.
MR. PARENT: I have no problem with bringing in the Cabinet Minister if you want, but I guess in the nitty-gritty committee work, I would rather get more information than what you're going to get from the political representation. I would rather get someone who is actually administering the program, who can tell us how it works. It would seem to me that
the committee, if we're going to do some real good work, the three of us together, that the problem with bringing in a minister is it becomes a very politicized sort of thing. Well, if we bring in people who are actually involved in the process I think we can do more substantive work. That would be my suggestion.
The committees that I've chaired have not brought in ministers but we can bring in whoever we want. I mean, that's really our choice. So I don't disagree that we can do it, I'm just wondering if we want to be more constructive. I'm really not sure if that session, I think, probably, we would just be sitting here in the Conservative caucus protecting our minister and you would be over there making other comments. I really would prefer to get someone
who's actually involved in the program. I'm not sure that David would know that much about the program. He would know the general (Interruptions)
[9:45 a.m.]
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Excuse me. Rather than having a back-and-forth discussion, I'm going to recognize Jerry, but I'm going to suggest we don't get hung up on this. Why don't we list the people we actually want to hear from, and it may be that the minister doesn't make the top of the list. Jerry.
MR. PYE: That's my point, Madam Chairman. First, the minister should be given notice to want to attend. If the minister turns the notice down and sends someone in his stead, then that's fine, the deputy minister or a director of the department. Most importantly, I want to hear from an advocacy group with respect to the consequences of overpayments from Community Services. I would so recommend the Community Advocacy Network, because they have experience in this field, of the consequences of asking social services recipients to pay back their overpayments and so on. I think that's the side we want to hear from, with respect to the hardships that causes, as well the minister or the minister's department justifying the need for requesting the overpayments and how they go about setting that up. That's something we can talk about another day, but that would be my recommendation, that we balance it off, that we balance each of the witnesses off.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: I would like to hear some other suggestions of people you would like to appear on this topic. I think we will find that that may bump the minister down. For example, I think Jean Fay has worked very closely - is she with Legal Aid?
MR. PYE: She's with Dalhousie Legal Aid. Excellent point.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: I would recommend that she has a lot of experience in this. Are there some other suggestions on this topic?
MR. HINES: I think someone within the department, perhaps who deals directly with that aspect of the department, as well as having the deputy minister.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: So the executive director of that program that deals with that.
MR. PARENT: That would be my suggestion.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes. Fine. Any other suggestions? Do we actually need to invite the minister?
MR. MACKINNON: I think it's a matter of protocol. Madam Chairman, I was a little disappointed to hear the member for Kings North suggest that the minister wouldn't be aware of what's going on in his department.
MR. PARENT: I didn't say that. I said he would know the general . . .
MR. MACKINNON: He would know enough about the topic to . . .
MR. PARENT: No, he would know the general outlines, but if we want to get into the nitty-gritty, we have to get in the people who actually administer the program. That's who we want. (Interruptions)
MADAM CHAIRMAN: I think the point here - if I can interrupt - is, are we going to get more information from perhaps having a deputy there or the minister? We've already got three witnesses.
MR. MACKINNON: I think we will get more from the deputy. I do agree.
MR. PARENT: Agreed.
MR. MACKINNON: But it becomes a matter of policy.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: I am sure that whatever comes out of that meeting will be going back very quickly to the minister.
MR. MACKINNON: That's the essence of where I'm going, because ultimately . . .
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Can we get agreement then that we will invite the deputy, the executive director of that program line, community advocates and Jean Fay?
MR. PARENT: Agreed.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Great. Thank you.
MR. PYE: Also, Madam Chairman, in fairness to the member for Cape Breton West, when in fact you are dealing with government departments, I think it's a matter of courtesy to invite the minister. The minister has the authority then to give directive to his/her department head as to whom the minister will send in their stead. I would just say it's a matter of courtesy, that it's appropriate. Hopefully the minister would use his good judgment and send the appropriate . . .
MR. MACKINNON: I could certainly support that, Madam Chairman.
MR. PARENT: Every committee I've worked on before, this has not been . . .
MR. PYE: An issue.
MR. PARENT: It's not been an issue. We go directly to the people who know, hands-on, the program. I'm sure that the minister knows that if he wants to appear at this committee, he would ask us and we would be very happy to have him. It seems to me that this is a different procedure than we've followed in the past. I don't understand . . .
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Perhaps I could ask for some guidance from Mora. Obviously this committee has been meeting for years, so what's our practice in terms of inviting ministers?
MS. STEVENS: I've only been the clerk of this committee for two years. Darlene was before me. Usually what I find and have experienced, not just in this committee but in other committees, once the topic is chosen, and if it's representatives from a government department, it's the executive director or deputy minister - it can be a minister, but if you actually issue the invitation to the minister, there will be correspondence back and forth, yes, no, who you should send, or who the appropriate officials are, but what does happen - how can I put this?
When I send the invitation, they always know. The government department that would be coming in, I would always let them know, their communications people, their minister, all of those people that that meeting is happening. They're always invited if they want to attend, maybe not as a witness. If they want to have somebody here - you will find, if there's a meeting with the Department of Community Services, a certain official there, as a courtesy the deputy is always informed, the minister is informed and their communications people can actually be in the room as observers, whatever they would like to do, because they know it's going to go back to their minister. That way, nobody is caught unaware. For any group that comes, you inform many people. It helps the flow of the meeting. That's what's usually done.
MR. PYE: Madam Chairman, I have to go. I said I would leave at 9:45 a.m., and I do apologize. If I can - and thanks to the honourable member for Waverley-Fall River-Beaver Bank - I think what you have to recognize here, Mora, is you set out the framework by which things are done, but protocol, if in fact protocol is important and protocol is from the minister down, then if we ask the minister, you've gone through this before, there's ample time to notify the committee with respect to who the minister designates, so there's not a problem with that formality. If the minister chooses not to appear, that's not a criticism on behalf of the minister, but it brings it forward. (Interruptions)
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: I just wanted to add something before Jerry leaves, regarding the overpayments, maybe the director of eligibility review should be the person who would appear here as a witness.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Good suggestion. I'm sorry, you were next on the list. Gary, Mark and then Russell.
MR. HINES: I agree with Jerry in that respect. I think that it's a good step to informally invite the minister, and let the minister designate. Obviously that has been a practice. I think we have to be careful that we don't usurp the duties of a committee in terms of working co-operatively and so on, by putting the minister, any minister, in a spot where we're coming out and formally presenting an invitation. It's not common practice for a minister to refuse to attend something that's formally requested. Also, it allows a political landscape there, that the minister can be, at some point in time, down the road in terms of politics, victimized by a formal request to attend.
I think the information we want can be better derived, regardless of who the minister might be, from those who deal with it on a daily basis, at the executive levels and so on. I also think that one thing we have to bear in mind is that we can, if we formally request the minister's presence and he refuses, as a committee, force that individual to attend. So we have to be careful that it's a very informal invitation. Under all circumstances, the minister is more than likely contacted to appear if they wish. I think we have to be careful we're not driving a wedge in there.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mark.
MR. PARENT: Can I just summarize what I've heard so far, and see if I'm right? Informally protocol is always we inform, we inform the minister and the PR people for that department. In terms of the formal witness list, what we're looking at is the individuals we already named, right?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes.
MR. PARENT: Informally, yes. You wouldn't want to call somebody from someone's department and not let them know that you were looking at that topic. I think there's a difference between communications and protocol and a witness list. That's all I wanted to check.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: I think the others may be protecting the right that in some circumstances it may be appropriate to issue a formal invitation to the minister, and that's the individual the committee wants to talk to. But in this case, I'm not getting the impression that that - okay, Russell, you're next.
MR. MACKINNON: If I may, Madam Chairman, first of all I want to speak to the point made by the previous speaker. It is not uncommon to make a formal invitation to any minister. In fact, at the last session of the House, a member of the Conservative caucus made a motion to invite the Minister of Energy before the committee. That minister responded, that is fine, we moved on to the next level of protocol. So your point doesn't hold on that.
As well, the committee has extended numerous invitations to ministers from the Public Accounts Committee. They haven't always accepted but they send someone in their place. Ultimately, the minister speaks for the department, whether the minister is acutely aware of all the micro-detail within the department, that is another matter. But as a matter of protocol, ultimately the minister speaks for any and all matters on issues and personnel within a department, so it's a protocol. I can assure you, this caucus would not push the issue but I think an invitation to the minister is a matter of protocol, and given the underlying reason is because this - as your colleague, the member for Dartmouth North, has suggested - has been an outstanding issue for a considerable amount of time, which has risen to the highest level within the department.
So if the minister can't come, well that's fine, the deputy minister and whoever the executive director in charge of that is, is fine but I certainly submit that a formal invitation should come. As a caucus, we will not push the issue, if he decides he doesn't want to come. I don't think it is the end of the earth, that we're not going to be able to get to that detail, but at least, as a matter of protocol, given the magnitude of this issue, that is why the minister was included. I would certainly put a motion forward to that effect, that the minister be given a written invitation, as Mr. Pye has suggested, the member for Dartmouth North. If he doesn't, he can certainly designate, and there is ample opportunity from the time of the invitation to the time of the meeting to arrange alternate witnesses. I don't see the harm in that.
This is not just about partisan politics, it's about accountability at the highest level for an issue that both the Liberal and NDP caucuses have identified as an outstanding issue, without address.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: So the motion on the floor is to issue a formal invitation to the Minister of Community Services in regard to the meeting on the cost recovery of social assistance overpayments. Any discussion on that? Mark and then Gary.
MR. PARENT: Well I thought we had agreed on our witness list previously. I guess any motion is acceptable on the floor but we agreed on three other people and now you want to add on a fourth.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Actually, I think there are four on the list.
MR. PARENT: Four already, now you want to add on a fifth. I don't think, in all fairness, to compare this to the Public Accounts Committee, although we are all Standing Committees of the House, the Public Accounts Committee is a different critter. The motion is on the floor and we will vote on it but we have the four witnesses already agreed on and now you want to add on a fifth. I just don't know how it is going to be possible, basically. I will be voting against it.
MR. HINES: Just out of curiosity, did the minister, at the Public Accounts Committee, ever reach the floor or was it a request that was made and it was decided that he not appear?
MR. MACKINNON: He appeared. Different ministers, in fact, we even had a Premier appear before the Public Accounts Committee; and backbenchers.
MR. PARENT: Can I ask a question?
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Certainly.
MR. PARENT: In your experience on any of the other committees - Community Services, Economic Development, Resources - do ministers normally appear?
MR. MACKINNON: No, but they have been invited by all three caucuses, as I indicated in the last session of the House. It was the Conservative caucus that recommended the minister for that department come.
MR. PARENT: So you are saying the Public Accounts Committee?
MR. MACKINNON: No, no, I'm talking about the Economic Development Committee. And he said no, and that is fine, so we just moved on to the next line of protocol.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Everybody understands what we are voting on? This is to issue a formal invitation to the Minister of Community Services.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
Perhaps we need to raise hands because I wasn't sure of the count.
MS. STEVENS: I have two-two right now.
MR. GORDON GOSSE: What was the question? A formal invitation to the Minister of Community Service to appear before this committee?
[10:00 a.m.]
MADAM CHAIRMAN: On this particular topic of the cost recovery.
Would all those in favour of the motion please raise your hand. Contrary minded, please raise your hand.
The motion is carried.
So we will be issuing an invitation to the minister.
The fifth topic is social housing and we've had suggestions, again the minister.
MR. PARENT: This is where it becomes a little, to have the minister in becomes rather bizarre because you could, on almost every topic we're going to be looking at, as a Community Services Standing Committee, have the minister in.
MR. MACKINNON: The social housing is not as high in terms of the protocol of an outstanding issue as the other one, so we're certainly acceptable to the deputy minister, director, or any other . . .
MADAM CHAIRMAN: So the deputy minister has been suggested, the director of - is it the Halifax Housing Authority?
MR. MACKINNON: Well, yes. The rationale to that is there seems to be considerable growing evidence of displacement of housing units in terms of accommodation within metro. The code word is, I guess, "over housed". Now what that means is that 20 years ago there may have been a family live - you know, a couple with two or three children would be housed in a public housing unit, and 20 years later two, or maybe three of those children have grown up and moved away, and in some cases that couple still maintains the unit that has the capacity for a family of five.
So that's essentially what it is, and I'm led to believe that there's an over house capacity - it could be upwards of 50 per cent - here in metro. That's an issue that could help to resolve a lot of financial problems within the Department of Community Services, as well as metro housing, as well as a lot of clientele, without additional dollars, and I think that was my logic.
MR. PARENT: Could I make a suggestion for another witness? I agree that that's a good witness, but we have a wonderful co-op housing program throughout the province and we have one in the Kentville area that would be good to have in - they just celebrated their 25th Anniversary. We have quite a social housing problem in the Kentville area in terms of need and I see the co-op program as being one solution to that. Now, maybe someone else from the co-op housing, but there are co-op housing societies across the province and one that has worked very well, according to all intent - some haven't worked as well as others - the one that has worked very well is the one in the Kentville area, and I just put that one forward as one we might want to talk to. The co-op housing, to me, when it works well, is a wonderful way to deal with housing problems.
MR. GOSSE: I would like to see the Cape Breton Housing Authority director, myself, personally.
MR. MACKINNON: I believe we have that in there.
MR. GOSSE: Yes.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: I just want to caution you that there are a number of voluntary sector organizations involved with social housing. If we go back to our earlier principle of trying to invite a representative from perhaps a provincial association, it might cover some of the different sectors in a better way. I'm not sure if the housing authorities have a provincial association, but could we check that out and that would free up one more space in terms of another voluntary sector group, or advocacy group, or a tenants' group or something like that. But if we had two people from the housing authorities, it may be a bit of . . .
MR. MACKINNON: Well, we could break it down into separate meetings or something.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: But can we check to see if there is a provincial association and just have one person from the housing authorities?
MR. MACKINNON: The Halifax Housing Authority, I believe that's one that there's considerable opportunity for government, irrespective of which political stripe, has an opportunity to save money, provide a greater service to a clientele that's on a waiting list that needs help. There are problems, as we know. The federal-provincial housing agreement there
for an additional 1,500 units, that's fine, but there's a genuine need there. I think this issue has never really been examined and it seems to be, I think, creating a lot of problems for people unknowingly in metro. I think it could help a lot of low and fixed income individuals and families.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Let's agree then on an initial list. If it turns out that we need to add a second meeting and invite further people, let's give ourselves that option. It is an important issue and if you are perhaps suggesting the committee hasn't looked at it in a while, it may be worth having two meetings on it. So let's agree who's going to come to the first meeting; obviously, some people who can give us the big picture issues rather than a general overview.
MR. PARENT: Is my suggestion of a co-op housing society on the table and we could pick which one. I'm just suggesting one from my area that I know works well, but it could be from any area.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay. Obviously we would want - do we want to go with the deputy minister or do we want to go with the executive director of the division that looks after housing services and community services? Perhaps to give a general overview to start out with, the different types of social housing?
MR. HINES: We could have both.
MR. MACKINNON: Well, we could have, I was thinking, maybe the deputy minister and executive director for that division and then maybe the director of the Halifax Housing Authority in another meeting.
MR. GOSSE: And the director of the Cape Breton Housing Authority, the new director. I would like to know what her issues are.
MR. MACKINNON: Or we could have the two executives . . .
MADAM CHAIRMAN: So perhaps we have the co-op and another advocacy group on housing at the first meeting, and then the sub-topic for the second meeting might be housing authorities. Good.
Now, the last one, home care services.
MR. PARENT: May I make a suggestion? All the scheduling is done in Halifax now. We've had a lot of problems in the Valley area when the scheduling got moved down here so whoever does scheduling. Scheduling, I don't know if it's a problem for other MLAs, but for me it's been a major sort of headache, particularly when it's been centralized; it was, I think, to make it more efficient. When people don't know the areas as well and then the
families, it's not as hands-on. It's been difficult. I don't know if you've had a lot of cases, but, whoever's in charge of scheduling would be someone I would love to have here before the committee.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Okay. Obviously, whoever's the head of that division within the Department of Health. This is another very complex, huge issue. It may be that we will have to set aside a couple of meetings for the topic. We would obviously want to get the overview from the department's point of view. Do you want to invite a couple of the special interest groups on that as well to the first meeting?
MR. MACKINNON: We're open on that.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: We've made some suggestions there, but I know the Group of Nine provincial seniors' organizations have researched home care for every year and presented it to the ministers for the Senior Citizens' Secretariat so some of these groups are involved. I wonder if we just ask for a representative from the Group of Nine through the Senior Citizens' Secretariat? It might look after the seniors' groups and then we could add the Family Caregivers Association of Nova Scotia perhaps to that initial list. Would that be okay? We will leave ourselves the option of adding some more witnesses once we have a better idea where some of the problem areas are.
MR. GERALD SAMPSON: Madam Chairman, just the fact that I agree with Mark, that when you take local input out of it - and we see that all the time with the ambulance service, when they're scheduled out of Bedford and they do not know the little local areas and sometimes they're sent awry. If there's somebody scheduling for home care, I'm thinking of my own area, north of Smokey and extremely rural areas, because it's two names on a paper, they say, I will send Betty to Neils Harbour this morning and then she can go to Ingonish this afternoon. What they don't realize is there's an hour and a half of driving in between whereas a local person would say, no, no, no, while she's there, she can do A, B and C and let the other one do that. So local input is absolutely necessary for those things.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: So Mark's suggestion of having the scheduler come might . . .
MR. PARENT: There's a director of scheduling, I think, in the province and that would be the one.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: And we could get at some of those more local concerns through that. Well, that looks after our official list. Is there any more discussion on the subcommittee or we've decided just to let that slide?
MR. MACKINNON: It didn't even get to first base.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes, not a problem. Thank you very much. So our next meeting then . . .
MR. HINES: The day after Remembrance Day, November 12th.
MS. STEVENS: No, that's a Wednesday, so it would be November 13th. If it's Youth in Care, I might be able to get them, I mean the package is certainly done, I would just need to update it, but they might be able to come easily for November 13th. I can check with them.
MR. GOSSE: We have a caucus meeting on that day.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: Not until 1:30 p.m.
MR. GOSSE: So that would be perfect. We have a caucus meeting at 1:30 p.m. So if this meeting is at 9:00 a.m., we're fine.
MS. STEVENS: Yes, 9:00 a.m. until 11:00 a.m.
MR. GOSSE: Yes, that would be fine.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.
MS. STEVENS: And I will contact them right away.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: A motion to adjourn?
MR. MACKINNON: So moved.
MADAM CHAIRMAN: We stand adjourned.
[The committee adjourned at 10:12 a.m.]