HANSARD

Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services

Ms. Maureen MacDonald (Chair)

Mr. Chuck Porter (Vice-Chairman)

Mr. Keith Colwell

In Attendance:

Ms. Darlene Henry

Legislative Committee Clerk

Mr. Jacques Lapointe

Auditor General

HALIFAX, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2008

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

11:30 A.M.

CHAIR

Ms. Maureen MacDonald

MADAM CHAIR: I'm going to call the committee to order, please. Welcome back, everybody, after our summer break. Today we have several things we need to do to get back to a more active Fall agenda.

The first thing I'd like to do is welcome Darlene, who is now the clerk assigned to our committee. (Interruptions) Yes, lucky Darlene. I said to her she drew the short straw. (Laughter) Anyway, I'm sure we'll have the kind of support that we need and Darlene has much experience in this area, working with many committees. So welcome.

MR. KEITH COLWELL: Madam Chair, along those lines, is it possible that we bring back to our whole committee that we've had a great deal of difficulty keeping our clerks because of the tremendous workload they have? Is there any way we could maybe put a motion to our committee that Darlene get whatever support she needs and the financial resources to do that? This committee has been very, very active and we don't want to see another one of our clerks suffer the fate of being overworked and not the resources needed to do some of the files we're working on, it's very difficult. I don't know how we do that, but Darlene has been with the office for a long, long time. She knows what she's getting into, but if she doesn't have the resources, again, we don't want to see that happen to another very good member of the staff here.

MADAM CHAIR: I would totally agree with you and think maybe what we should do, specifically as a subcommittee first, put on our agenda, maybe for the next time we meet, a half-hour or so to discuss this matter so that we can develop a good recommendation for the full committee on what it is we would be looking at. At that time we can discuss what other Public Accounts Committees have been doing across the country and in the House of Commons to deal with the growing workload for Public Accounts Committees and specifically having research staff in addition to administrative staff.

Right now we have a clerk who does all of the logistics of getting witnesses lined up, the scheduling, the dates, all of this stuff, keeping track of the paper, follow-up for documents, and at the same time the Library has assigned Sandy to help us get the packages of information. Some Public Accounts Committees actually have a dedicated researcher who works with the clerk, writes reports and works on research, as well, for the committee members in a non-partisan way around the various topics that are going on. It frees the clerk, really, to do the logistical piece and then some of those other things are done by a researcher.

I have talked to Margaret, certainly, in the Library, who oversees the staffing to some extent for this committee about this, but let's have a fuller discussion, make a recommendation, take it to the committee for discussion there and see where it goes.

Is it agreed?

It is agreed. Thank you.

Okay, the first thing I want to do, we have a list of topics and witnesses and I want to add the NDP list which is very short. There are two items the NDP caucus would like to bring forward for consideration. One is the Department of Health Promotion and Protection, the off-highway vehicle buy-back program. The other is the Nova Scotia Pension Agency and the Department of Finance with respect to the state of pension investments in Nova Scotia right now. Given the turmoil that's occurring on the markets it would be, I think, an important topic and of great interest. So I'd like to add those two items to the agenda.

I see that in the items we have in front of us there is some duplication between two of the caucuses on the Department of Health Promotion and Protection and the off-highway vehicle buy-back program, so I'm assuming that topic will get some priority for that reason.

Jacques is here today, we have scheduled the first meeting of the Public Accounts Committee on October 1^st, at which time the final report on the Provincial Nominee Program will be released and available to the committee. We're also going to have a bit of a discussion this morning about the logistics of that particular hearing. In addition, Mr. Lapointe has asked that November 5^th be set aside for his regular report as well. The Public Accounts Committee as a whole had already approved the South Shore Regional School Board, and we had been attempting to have them scheduled before we recessed for the summer and, in the end, we just couldn't get them available when we were available.

We have, in fact, scheduled them for October 8^th. So we have the first two weeks in October already scheduled, so we're ready to hit the ground running with the Public Accounts Committee. So now all we have to do is start giving some consideration to the list in front of us and then we will be able to bring this back to the full committee for approval.

MR. COLWELL: What about the Nominee Program, what are we going to do with that? Are we going to drop that or continue with it?

MADAM CHAIR: Well, we have the final report on October 1^st. We certainly have the option, depending on the report, of what we want to do following the report, in terms of recommendations and hearings. Mr. Hebb, are you looking to . . .

MR. GORDON HEBB: It seems to me you've got an issue of the subpoenas before you and that you've got two options and you shouldn't just leave them hanging. You should either say that you want them to provide the material, in which case you'd have to make a report to the House because there's not much you can do because they haven't provided it; or you should vacate them.

That may well be what you want to do but I think you should not just leave them sitting there. You should either proceed with them or say no, you're satisfied that the government has provided the material to the Auditor General, which was really the purpose, and that information has been provided.

So if you're not going to proceed, you probably should formally vacate the subpoenas so they're not sitting there. That's up to the committee but I don't think it should be left hanging, I guess is my point.

MADAM CHAIR: I agree with you. I was sort of making the assumption that at the point when we get the Auditor General's Report on October 1^st and the committee has a chance to speak to the Auditor General, at that point we have an opportunity to also ask the Auditor General to what extent he had access and was satisfied with the access he had to enable him to do the work that he has done. Then that would give the committee some basis on which to determine how they felt about the subpoenas and whether or not to pursue or vacate. That was my thinking.

[11:45 a.m.]

MR. JACQUES LAPOINTE: The report will, in fact, address that issue. So if you wanted to, you could work from what it says, there's going to be a section on it.

MADAM CHAIR: Mr. Colwell.

MR. COLWELL: Well, with that in mind - and I agree with that approach and I think that's a prudent approach to it - we have one meeting set for October 8^th, but maybe we could just set one more because we've got to be consistent, too, with the other people we invite to come in, and then have a meeting after Mr. Lapointe's presentation, which we can talk about the staffing issue and that issue by itself. It will give us a couple of weeks to get things in place and issue whatever we've got to do.

MADAM CHAIR: Absolutely. Mr. Porter.

MR. CHUCK PORTER: That's fine with us as well, I think. And yes, we probably shouldn't book even perhaps over October 8^th if we already have October 1^st and 8^th booked. After the report comes out we may want to take time during that next couple of weeks or so, through October, if we're planning to call anyone else with regard to the file, at that time.

If we're going to book, perhaps we should be looking at November-ish and leave those couple of weeks vacant and move them up.

MADAM CHAIR: Just to be clear, in terms of the process, after we look at our list today and we approve the next set of witnesses, Darlene won't actually leave here and start booking people because the committee has to approve that list, that's the next step in the process. So the list we approve today will go to the Public Accounts Committee on October 1^st for their approval. They can modify it, add to it, detract from it - it's just our recommendation to them.

MR. PORTER: That's fine.

MADAM CHAIR: So it does give us a little bit of space.

MR. PORTER: So then perhaps we should put a couple of subjects up each, then she can take us forward through to the Christmas break or whatever.

MR. COLWELL: And give her the chance too, in case there's a conflict with booking.

MADAM CHAIR: Yes. Okay, so with that in mind, can we just talk about the topics? Then I'm going to go to Mr. Lapointe after we've agreed what we see to be the topics that we'll bring forward and we'll talk about the October 1^st date specifically around process.

So as I indicated, we have two items that are on two caucus lists - or one item that is on both caucuses' list - the Department of Health Promotion and Protection. So generally it is the practice of the committee to say okay, that's a priority issue because a couple of people agree with this. Mr. Porter.

MR. PORTER: Thank you, and I would also refer to the same, I guess, in both ours and the Liberal caucus. I believe our No. 2 and their No. 2 are sort of speaking the same language and should be considered the same way. They're reflective of one another obviously, so we would certainly be looking to put that somewhere in this Fall, early on, to talk about that.

MADAM CHAIR: Okay.

MR. COLWELL: The next priority on our list - it isn't in the right order here, but the next priority from our list would be the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulations. So that's one we would like to have - that's our No. 1, whatever order we decide after that.

MADAM CHAIR: And we have only one other topic, which is the Nova Scotia Pension Agency in the Department of Finance.

MR. COLWELL: Which we would agree with. Maybe Mr. Porter has one, too, and we can . . .

MR. PORTER: Yes, I was looking at our No. 4, which is the road safety issues and the school zones.

MR. COLWELL: Yes.

MR. PORTER: Some of that, I guess, as I sit and think about that now, may be covered in the debate with the South Shore Regional School Board. I suppose some of that is probably going to arise, some of those similar issues I would anticipate. I would think we're probably looking at that anyway.

Let me just change that to our No. 3, the Environmental Home Assessment Program. I think a lot of that's going to come up, Keith, actually.

MR. COLWELL: I think that's a good one, too. That's a real good one, actually.

MR. PORTER: A lot of that will come out, so that would do us for a couple of weeks.

MADAM CHAIR: Okay, that will do us, certainly, for a bit. So we're essentially agreed, then, on the issues that we're going to recommend to the full committee? Okay, good, great.

So then let's talk about October 1^st. Last time we met at 8:30 a.m., in camera, the Auditor General provided us with a copy of his interim report. At 9:00 a.m., or just before 9:00 a.m., the report was tabled with the Speaker. At 9:00 a.m. we went into an in camera session, as a committee, to ask questions of the Auditor General and staff for about an hour, I think. At 10:00 a.m. we came from in camera to a public session, which ended at 11:00 a.m. It worked quite well, I thought. I don't know how other members thought.

MR. COLWELL: That sounds fine, it worked well.

MADAM CHAIR: I thought it worked quite well. I'm thinking we could do the same thing again, but with the one question of whether or not a half-hour for that lock-up - it was a lock-up from 8:30 a.m. until 9:00 a.m. - if a half-hour is enough for the full report. The full

report will probably be a little more extensive. So it's a question that I have to members, what do you think, do we need more than half an hour? Mr. Lapointe, you might help us on this.

MR. LAPOINTE: You would be hard-pressed to read it in half an hour. I've just been going through the draft and right now it's 25 pages, but that's just in typewritten, so it'll be more. It's fairly lengthy and kind of dense, so if you want to take more time and come in earlier to read it, we can be there at whatever time you like. I recommend it might take an hour . . .

MADAM CHAIR: Yes, maybe . . .

MR. COLWELL: Madam Chair, why don't we set an hour aside, or more, whatever is needed, because we don't want to hurry the Auditor General's Report because as soon as you get the report, you're going to present it to the Speaker anyway, as soon as we're done.

MR. LAPOINTE: Yes, I'll let you go over it for that hour, or whatever you choose, and at 9:00 a.m. I hand it to the Speaker and have a quick discussion, then come in and give you an in camera presentation. My thinking is that, as with last time, if you had a chance to read it we could keep that presentation focused on the key issues and not take too long. It might be, say, 15 minutes, which gives you about three-quarters of an hour to question us and discuss it and go over it, if that works for you.

MR. COLWELL: Maybe we could still start at 8:30 a.m. and go until 9:30 a.m. to make sure we have enough time.

MR. PORTER: That will give us time in that hour and a half to brief it and then do some questions probably - I would think that would be ample time.

MR. COLWELL: That would give the Auditor General time to give it to the Speaker.

MR. PORTER: I mean we're just going to come right back in at 10:00 a.m. publicly and do it anyway - probably much is repetition-wise for the most part.

MADAM CHAIR: Okay, you're saying keep it to 8:30 a.m.?

MR. PORTER: I'm okay with 8:30 a.m.

MADAM CHAIR: Lock-up at 8:30 a.m. until 9:00 a.m., release at 9:00 a.m., an in camera session with the Auditor General from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. - with the provision it could be longer if we need it, 10:00 a.m. or 10:30 a.m. - and then we'll do the public piece?

MR. COLWELL: When we do the in camera, can we do it here rather than in the Red Room?

MR. PORTER: That would be a good idea.

MR. COLWELL: Just that part of it because then it would give us time to shift around, and this room is big enough to do that. It's really geared up more for that.

MR. PORTER: It can actually be locked away here and discuss it and talk about it as you wish, in camera, without . . .

MADAM CHAIR: And then go over to the Chamber?

MR. PORTER: And then just go over to the Chamber afterwards, yes.

MR. COLWELL: For the public part of it.

MRS. DARLENE HENRY (Legislative Committee Clerk): So you want to do the lock-up and the in camera portion here - from 8:30 a.m. until what, 9:00 a.m.?

MR. PORTER: From 8:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.

MRS. HENRY: Until 10:00 a.m.

MR. PORTER: Allow until 10:00 a.m. - it may not be that long, but allow that . . .

MR. COLWELL: Until 10:00 a.m. or 10:30 a.m., just to . . .

MR. PORTER: Whatever, and then we'll go over there for an hour or whatever.

MADAM CHAIR: Legislative Television can manage this? Okay. (Interruptions) We'll have to be getting more staff for that end of the operation.

MRS. HENRY: Well, we can work it out.

MADAM CHAIR: Yes, we'll work it out. Okay, that's what we'll do then.

MR. COLWELL: It's better here too because we can do an audiovisual presentation and everything is here, so it's easier for staff as well.

MR. LAPOINTE: Just allow yourselves five minutes or whatever to walk over to the Legislature. Then you'll be doing it public for an hour?

MADAM CHAIR: Yes.

MR. COLWELL: Probably something like that.

MADAM CHAIR: We'll have to ask for a little leeway on the other end, beyond 11:00 a.m., because we may go . . .

MR. COLWELL: Why don't we schedule it from 8:30 a.m. until 12:00 noon?

MADAM CHAIR: Yes, that's a good idea.

MR. COLWELL: And then if we're finished at 11:00 a.m., that's fine, or if we're finished at 11:15 a.m., or whatever the case might be.

MADAM CHAIR: That's a good plan, yes, a very good plan.

MR. COLWELL: That way if it takes us 15 minutes to get over there it doesn't matter.

MADAM CHAIR: Perfect, okay.

MR. LAPOINTE: I'll schedule a press conference - I'll give myself a little leeway in case you go over a bit - I'll make it for 1:00 p.m., how's that?

MADAM CHAIR: Absolutely.

MR. COLWELL: And even when you're making your initial presentation, if it takes you a bit longer, at least you've got the time and we don't have to worry about the time.

MR. LAPOINTE: Okay.

MADAM CHAIR: Okay. Is there anything else we need to talk about, Jacques, around the AG's Report? November 6^th is your regular report, we generally do that in camera, I think that's the way we do it, isn't it?

MR. LAPOINTE: The process might work well as we've been doing it. We're looking at six or seven chapters, the usual kind of report. What we've done is had a two-hour in camera session and then you set a public session at some point later on.

MADAM CHAIR: Yes.

MR. COLWELL: Which makes more sense.

MR. LAPOINTE: It gives you time to decide what you want to do in the public session, I think it would work. If you would like, we could also revise the format a bit to give you time to read it or at least read through the essentials of it before we start on the presentation. It seemed to work with this one, we haven't done it for the general one, so it lands in your laps and we're right away giving you a presentation on it. It strikes me as a little difficult for you, I don't know. If you wanted to have a half-hour or something to take a look at the report before we start in, we can do that too, do our presentation and then do the discussion. It's just a thought I had that if this worked for you, you could . . .

MADAM CHAIR: It's a great idea. We could do the same thing on November 6^th. We could meet at 8:30 a.m. here, have a half-hour and then start at 9:00 a.m. with the presentation on it, in camera, all of it, a lock-up from 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.

MR. COLWELL: Yes, because we don't want anyone to walk out after they've read it - not that anyone would do it on our committee.

MR. LAPOINTE: That gives you a chance to take a look at it before we start talking about it, get the basic idea by skimming through and looking at the executive summaries and the introduction, at the very least, and you can see the essential idea.

MADAM CHAIR: So we'll make that recommendation to the full committee that we do it that way.

MR. LAPOINTE: In terms of what we're doing, we'll count on you doing it that way.

MADAM CHAIR: Yes.

MR. LAPOINTE: We will also, in terms of our presentation, as we discussed before, we'll think in terms of trying to point out to you what we think of the six or so chapters, which the top two might be, in our opinion, that might have the most meat, that you might want to follow up on. We can have a discussion about that at that time as well, because the chapters are never equal in terms of impact, some of them really have more than others. So we can point out to you what we figure - these two seem, in our mind, to have the most impact.

MADAM CHAIR: More attention, yes. Okay, that sounds great, that sounds excellent. Is there anything else in terms of topics and process?

The only other thing I have to follow up on, I have a letter from David Wilson, of the Liberal caucus, who is the chairman of the Standing Committee on Human Resources. Some time ago the Human Resources Committee was asked to look at - you'll remember this - the Nova Scotia Association of Health Organizations, called before the standing committee, and we determined that really wasn't appropriate. We sent it to Human Resources and they

determined it wasn't appropriate, so Mr. Wilson is telling me why his committee has decided that it's not within their mandate. He's suggesting that the Standing Committee on Community Services might be a better venue for this topic so I may send this to them, and I'll ask Darlene to do that.

So outside of that, there really is no other business, as far as I can tell. Does any other member of the subcommittee have anything else they want to raise at this time? Is everything okay from the Library's perspective around research? Yes, good, thank you, Sandy. Yes, Keith.

MR. COLWELL: One other thing around the meeting we're going to have next time, around staffing, it might be nice if the Library and our clerk could maybe put their ideas down on paper and see what they feel they need for support.

MADAM CHAIR: Absolutely. Maybe Margaret would like to come to that discussion as well.

MR. COLWELL: As well as our clerk.

MADAM CHAIR: Yes, oh, absolutely.

MR. COLWELL: Definitely, because we see the difficulties that are created with the workload but it is oftentimes you can't tell what the solution is until you ask the people who are actually having the problem with the workload.

MADAM CHAIR: Yes, absolutely.

Okay, since there's no other business, I guess we stand adjourned.

[The subcommittee adjourned at 12:00 noon.]