MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to bring the committee to order.
The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, would you please call the estimates for the Department of Transportation and Public Works, Resolution E32.
Resolution E32 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $233,469,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Transportation and Public Works, pursuant to the Estimate and the business plan of Sydney Environmental Resources Limited to approved.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Transportation and Public Works.
HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to be here today to address the Committee of the Whole House on Supply as it considers my estimates for 2001-02. I will introduce members of my staff who are up in the gallery as well as on either side of me. To my right is the Deputy Minister of the Department of Transportation and Public Works, Howard Windsor; to my left is our Director of Finance, Greg Penny. In the gallery: Martin Delaney, Executive Director of Highway Operations; Al MacRae, Executive Director of Public Works; Brian Gallivan, Director of Policy and Planning; Don Sutherland, Director of Real Property Services; and Laura Lee Langley, Director of Public Affairs and Communications. With that host of introductions, you can see I will have lots of budget support if there are questions that come along that I don't understand, or don't know the answer.
Transportation and Public Works is an assembly of talented people who are committed to achieving vital and varied goals across the entire province. Our mission is to construct, maintain and manage provincial highways, buildings and related infrastructure, and to provide accommodation, property and procurement services in support of sustainable economic growth and social well-being. We do an outstanding job while fulfilling that mission of serving all Nova Scotians and all people within government. We are committed to delivering the highest level of service to Nova Scotians and to make sure taxpayers are getting the most value for their money.
Can we do our job better? We want to and we have to; the old rules of government no longer apply. This government, this department has to balance its books to trim whatever fat we can, and to do only the things that we can afford. We need to look for new ways to do things more efficiently and cost-effectively. The previous budget put us on the right path to do those things, and this budget stays that course. Our budget is set at just over $233 million in 2001-02; last year's operating budget was $243.5 million.
In 2001-02, the department transferred about $26 million to individual departments to allow them to pay for their individual accommodation leases. We received $16 million in funding as postal services, technology services, utilities and procurement were transferred to the Department of Transportation and Public Works. DPW's Highway Operations budgets, including maintenance, remain stable at $123.4 million. The 2001-02 infrastructure capital budget has increased to $81.4 million from $51.6 million in 2000-01, an increase of almost $30 million. Of that, $5 million is set aside in this fiscal year for the twinning of Highway No. 101, if federal cost-shared funds become available.
Another $5.3 million has been set aside for various construction projects, including the building of a secure treatment facility, justice buildings in Port Hawkesbury and Yarmouth, and a poultry building at the Nova Scotia Agricultural College. This increased capital budget includes an additional $11.4 million in new capital funding for highways and bridges. This funding is part of a three year plan to fulfill government's commitment to increased funding for road construction by $31 million. This new capital road funding, combined with last year's money dedicated to highway projects, brings the total construction dollars being placed in roads and bridges this year to $76 million.
This sounds like a lot of money, and indeed it is, whether you are Bill Gates or a provincial government trying to get its finances in order. I would ask that you consider our mandate, our responsibilities, the services we provide, the infrastructure we build, and the infrastructure we maintain. Considering the enormity of our role, perhaps you will even think that we are a bargain. The department is in charge of maintaining more than 24,000 kilometres of road in Nova Scotia; the department builds and maintains more than 3,500 bridges; and from one end of the province to the other we employ more than 2,000 people. That makes us one of the largest employers in government.
This department is responsible for the 25 provincial buildings and courthouses across Nova Scotia, from Yarmouth to Sydney. We are responsible for warehouses, base areas, and maintenance sheds. In total, the department is responsible for about 2,200 buildings across the province. We handle utilities, such as those found at Cheticamp and Landrie Lake. The department also administers government procurement and supply processes, provides postal services for government, and administers industrial parks and malls. Some of these operations came to us recently as a result of reorganization of government services. To make government operations as cost-effective and as efficient as possible it was decided to centralize these services under one operation, and the Department of Transportation and Public Works is the umbrella for those groups.
This funding is a sign of the government's commitment to making our infrastructure strong. This funding is also a sign that government has made investment in highway infrastructure an ongoing priority, one that will lead to continued growth in Nova Scotia. It is not as many dollars as we would like; it is not as many dollars as we need. However, it is a sign that after years of reduced funding we are headed in the right direction. Capital funding for our roads and bridge infrastructure is going up and, Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that this is good news.
Our most difficult challenge is managing public expectations. An increase of capital funding will increase expectations of the public, but the amount of roadwork requiring investment exceeds funding; in fact my department estimates the province's road and bridge infrastructure deficit at $3.4 billion. This is a severe problem, but one that my department and this government will address. We understand the important and vital role that this infrastructure plays in the economic and social life of Nova Scotia. We understand the important bonds that roads create. A better highway system rewards all Nova Scotians in the long run. Better roads mean more economic prosperity. They mean trouble-free driving for commercial trucks for transporting goods to and from this province. They open more opportunities for commerce inside and outside the province.
Solid infrastructure may not be glamorous, but it pays dividends in the form of better-priced and more-varied goods for all of us. Well-designed, engineered and maintained roads and bridges can mean much more. They can help prevent accidents, save lives and, by doing so, friends and families are spared pain and anguish that cannot be quantified in terms of dollars and cents; at the same time, preventing accidents reduces the burden on our health care system. It is difficult to quantify precisely, but every accident avoided spares the cost of emergency treatment and care, hospital time, medicine, rehabilitation, lost time at work, and so on.
Better infrastructure also means safer, more enjoyable driving for commuters or for Nova Scotians exploring our province. It means a better visit for thousands of tourists who won't hesitate to sing the praises of the province to their friends, or come back themselves, and that means more tourism dollars to stimulate our economy. This department is well
aware, however, that not everyone is singing the praises of the road system these days, and nowhere is the chorus louder than in rural communities, and justifiably so. Some of our roads are in terrible shape, and I know that as Minister of Transportation and Public Works. It is a comment that perhaps is one that is adverse to the province; however it is a truism. That is why we have increased, this year, our funding to local rural roads to $10 million from $9 million last year.
This program, called the Rural Impact Mitigation fund, obviously will not allow us to patch and pave everything we would like, but it has been a good start, as we recognized our rural roads were ignored for far too long. Just as an aside, one of the things that I think was most noteworthy last year as a person travelled around the province was the impact of that rather small amount of money, that $9 million, in RIM last year. We got a lot of bang for our buck.
Unfortunately, rural roads are not the only ones in need of attention. Our 100-Series Highways, the arteries that handle the vast majority of traffic, have deficiencies that must be addressed. To help fulfill these needs, to make that happen, we have consistently spoken out about the need for a new cost-sharing agreement with the federal government. It is a message each and every provincial government in Canada has sent to Ottawa. It is a message that the Premier of the province, Dr. John Hamm, has sent to Ottawa with his Campaign for Fairness.
It also seems to be a message that Ottawa has finally heard. The federal government has promised to spend $485 million across Canada on highway infrastructure over five years. Nova Scotia expects to receive some of that money this year to begin an urgent twinning of Highway No. 101, and that is good news. The bad news is that the federal government's funding is a temporary patch on the road infrastructure problem across this country. Experts estimate that Canada needs about $17 billion to stabilize and repair this country's national highway system - we are only talking about the national highway system when we are talking about federal government funding.
When we compare the funding levels in Canada with the United States, the United States Government is spending $177 billion U.S. on road infrastructure over the next six years, about $0.25 trillion on highways. Let me say that again - the federal government in the United States is spending $177 billion U.S. on roads over the next six years. America is Canada's largest trading partner, one of our biggest markets and we need to keep pace.
That is why we have asked Ottawa to participate in a five year, $270 million agreement to be cost-shared on a 50/50 basis with this province. This proposal will allow for $180 million of repaving and $90 million of new construction on the national highway system in Nova Scotia. It is fair and appropriate that Ottawa contributes half the cost to any roadwork that takes place on parts of the national highway system. In this province that includes highways such as Highway Nos. 101, 102 and 104. This roadwork nets out to about 70 per cent of our 100-Series Highways.
[10:00 a.m.]
In this province Nova Scotians pay about $137 million a year in federal motive fuel taxes; that kind of money would go a long way to helping our highway system. We think it is only fair that a reasonable share of that $137 million comes back to this province to go directly into roads. (Applause) To date the federal government has guaranteed Nova Scotia about $17 million over five years, out of its $485 million highway infrastructure fund. This is welcome news. Our pockets are not deep. On our own, we cannot afford the kind of highway projects we need, but cost-shared dollars help us push projects further, providing value for the province.
To help us fund our highway needs, this province is putting an additional $31 million in funding by the year 2003-04 for highway construction and maintenance. As you are probably aware, our top priority for highway work is the twinning of Highway No. 101. Traffic on this road has swelled over the past decade to the point where it must be trimmed. It makes sense in terms of economics and travel, but more than anything else it must happen so we can prevent accidents and save lives.
Last year, we began the first steps of preliminary construction on the twinning of Highway No. 101 with the upgrading of the interchange at Mount Uniacke; we have also cleared the right-of-way for the first 20 kilometres. To speed up the process, the government has set aside $5 million to begin twinning the highway; this money is contingent upon Ottawa helping with cost-shared funding this year. The province is doing our part, everything is in place and now we need Ottawa to step up to the plate.
The department is also committed to finding value for taxpayers' dollars. The department wants to find the most efficient, cost-effective ways to do work for Nova Scotians. In other words, every dollar we waste is less money being spent on pavement, and that is why new methods of doing business have and will continue to be examined. This includes projects such as the road weather information system. This is a system that places high-tech sensors, buried in the asphalt along our highways, to allow our departmental crews to know the temperature of the blacktop almost immediately, and crews can then put salt on the road before storms hit, thus reducing the amount of material needed to achieve our goals. This saves time, and hopefully this will reduce accidents and lead to better road surfaces in the wintertime.
We are also introducing better handling of salt storage at our bases across the province. We have built, or are in the process of building seven salt/sand storage handling sheds. This will allow for all salt and sand to be handled indoors, thus protecting our environment and decreasing the loss of valuable goods. We have to take stock of all things we do, and ask if we are indeed the ones who should be doing them; we have to ask if we are doing them in the right way, for the right reasons and at the right time.
This need for value extends to projects such as the Johnston Building, just across the way. My department has budgeted $8 million this year to renovate the Johnston Building, to return it to a vibrant and operational centre of activity. Overall, this project will cost about $12.6 million, however the value returned is many times greater than that. To replace this building, to build a similar structure from the foundation up, would cost a great deal more. The renovation will also make this building more energy efficient, saving taxpayers' money, however replacement costs alone do not tell the whole story. The Johnston Building is a landmark in Halifax and in this province, and our ability to renovate it, to protect a piece of history while being fiscally responsible is a real savings for the people.
Clearly, we are embracing innovation. Another sign is the ongoing development of our Web site, which gives the public instant access to an extraordinary amount of information. Our site not only outlines what we do, it provides simple, easy access to departmental reports, studies, and statistics. Anyone with access to the World Wide Web can see all the data with a few clicks of the mouse. Only a few years ago that sort of access would only have come about by making telephone calls, writing letters, or making trips to the Government Book Store.
We are continuing to build on the success of our Web site. It is a wonderful way to remove the barriers, to cut through red tape, and to ease the flow of information between government and the public. The Department of Transportation and Public Works is also setting new standards when it comes to the environment. In January of this year we introduced an environmental policy which demands that all employees act in an environmentally responsible way.
We want to be leaders in this field, and this policy is one way of allowing us to do that. We have also introduced an environmental management pilot project in our eastern district. Our aim is to look at the ways we do business with our resources and improve upon our conservation methods. For instance, we are aiming to reduce the energy usage at our bases, and we are aiming to reduce our stockpiles of products such as solvents, by using existing supplies before reordering. These are sometimes simple measures, but they lead to savings for the taxpayer and for the environment.
We have carried out Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments at 42 of our garage sites around this province. We have initiated cleanup at a number of these sites. We now have a three year plan in place for the remediation of these sites. As you know, these facilities are essentially like a gasoline station and, as such, over the years pollution has occurred in areas around those bases and, as I say, we have a three year plan for remediation of those sites.
We are also ready to commence with the identification and quantification of regulated materials at all our provincially-owned buildings, and this includes materials such as lead paints. This information will be entered into our regulated materials inventory computer
program; this is seen as a positive step in managing regulated materials in these buildings. Our goal is to promote a healthy community and a prosperous future. It is a goal shared by our staff in the communities we serve. We are focusing on the right solutions, solutions that are socially acceptable, environmentally sound and economically responsible.
The government owns furniture and equipment valued at $320 million. It is important that we manage this inventory properly, and we do. We monitor and verify the condition of these items; we reallocate this property, as needed, to the proper government departments, or dispose of it through public auction or tender. We do this as cost-effectively and efficiently as we possibly can. If there is a trend in our first two budgets, it is a move to find new ideas and solutions but, at the same time, get back to basics, to the core of what our department is designed to do.
Let me spell out what we see as our core duties, duties that are reflected in this budget. Transportation and Public Works constructs, maintains and manages provincial highways, buildings and related infrastructure. The department also provides accommodation, property, procurement and government services in support of all government departments. Transportation and Public Works also provides policy direction to ensure an effective air, rail, and marine transportation system in support of sustainable economic growth and social well-being.
The people of Nova Scotia have entrusted us with the responsibility of making choices, making changes, and rebuilding our finances. Every dollar must be accounted for; every dollar must be spent wisely. The old ways have to be questioned. Just because something has been done for years and years doesn't necessarily make it sound policy. If a program can be improved, there can be no argument against trying to do just that. We have to, as a department, deliver value for our taxpayers' dollars. That is why this government is committed to addressing the deficit and debt. As the province's fiscal situation improves, the government will be able to put additional funding into highway infrastructure, and this will allow continued investment in our rural roads, our highways, our communities and our people.
Mr. Chairman - last page - Transportation and Public Works is getting back to basics. We are getting back to roads and the basic services that Nova Scotians deserve. All of the trimming, the efficiencies, the extra funding is being done in the name of investing more money in our roads and the people who use them. Back to basics. Back to basics is the answer. I will be pleased now to entertain any questions on the budget of the Department of Transportation and Public Works, or any questions related to highways, buildings, or what have you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to thank the Minister of Transportation and Public Works for his comments this morning.
The honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect.
MR. WILLIAM ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I thank the minister for some of his introductory comments. I am appreciative of the fact that we have to distinguish between millions and billions. The number of zeros is important these days, particularly when it comes to using the limited resources that we have at hand. In particular, I want to also add my congratulations and thanks to the Department of Transportation and Public Works staff, not just the people who work downtown and in these offices here in Halifax, but the people who are out there, the people who are on the front lines, the ones who are accountable, the ones who are dealing with the issues that I think all of us, as MLAs, contact.
The Area Manager, Suburban, Paul O'Brien, for example. Mr. Minister, I want you know that he is extremely professional, competent, and very conscientious in his job, and please pass on to that particular member of your staff, the valuable contribution he has made over the years that I have been the MLA for Timberlea-Prospect. Of course there are other people in the Beechville shed that I could mention; those are the people on the ground that we have to recognize.
I am also very pleased - and I want to have this on the record for someone's attention - that the Five Island Lake remediation process is well underway, and the local community is very appreciative of the light at the end of the tunnel and the commitment that your department has taken up the challenge after the Environment Department identified this, and that it is going to be reaching a conclusion. Again, I thank your department and the budgetary decisions for fulfilling that commitment to the community of Five Island Lake. That is for the record, for every member in here who is interested.
AN HON. MEMBER: Particularly the member for Cape Breton West.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Yes, well, one member in particular, just for the point of clarification.
There are a couple of things that tweak my interest, if I can say that, before I begin. There are a couple of comments that I want to make about various things that maybe just grab my attention as opposed to the principle of some of the concerns I have, which we will get into during the remainder of my time.
I should point out that I will be sharing my time, probably the last five minutes or five seconds - I haven't decided yet - with the member for Halifax Fairview, who has an important concern to bring to the minister's attention.
If I could, these are items which are of some interest to me. It must be my cobweb-like mind because these are the things that stick to me, and I would like to direct your attention, Mr. Minister, to the Supplement to the Public Accounts, Province of Nova Scotia,
Page 188. There is an absolutely interesting item there on Page 188, called Pothole Patchworks. Pothole Patchworks has, over the recent year, the opportunity - I suppose for various reasons - to receive $144,145.20. I have to ask this, just out of interest, what is Pothole Patchworks? In addition, how come we only spent that little amount of money?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, you must admit that Pothole Patchworks is a pretty appropriate title for a company that is involved in dealing with road repairs, and that is exactly what it is.
MR. ESTABROOKS: This is a private company hired to go in at the request of the department in certain areas to repair potholes?
MR. RUSSELL: This is the normal contracting put out by the department for repairs to highways. It could be a shoulder repair, it could be the patching of a pothole in the road, or it could be perhaps doing other work associated with the maintenance of a highway. It goes out to tender, and this is just simply a company that has that name. Dexter, which you would recognize, is a company that bids on the same kind of work; this is a much smaller company.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I would like to move, if I could, and I would like to stay within the same context of these line items that are of some interest to me because of the interest it has caused. Sojourn Enterprises Ltd., on Page 190, is a company that I, through a service club, have dealt with in the past. I am aware of the fact, if you look at Page 190, $80,599, they make signs, or that is what they have done for the St. Margarets Bay Lions Club in the past.
Sojourn Enterprises, obviously, is in the business of providing, I would assume, signs for the Department of Transportation and Public Works. The Truro sign shop, from my understanding, is a thing of the past, or is soon to be a thing completely closed. Sojourn Enterprises Ltd. is obviously picking up contracts, through tender, for various sign work. I would like you to explain - Sojourn Enterprises Ltd. is doing the job that the Truro Sign Shop did for so many years - why has that decision been made?
MR. RUSSELL: That's a very good question. There was a rumour floating around about a year or so ago that we were going to close the Truro sign shop at the time we were doing a study of the various activities of the department to see if they were cost-effective and managing their responsibilities in an efficient manner. The Truro Sign Shop certainly was and is and will continue to be so. This company that the honourable member is referring to, Sojourn Enterprises Ltd., supply some of the materials needed for the sign shop in Truro to actually build signs.
I can assure the member opposite that our sign shop in Truro is a competitive division of the Department of Transportation and Public Works. They stand up insofar as the cost of producing signs very well, compared to private enterprise. At the present time, certainly, there is no intention to dismantle that very important division in Truro.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I am really reassured. I know the people who have so competently worked in the signage department of Transportation and Public Works will be reassured by that commitment.
I was under the impression we were getting out of the golf business for various reasons, and I realize that your department was responsible, of all things. I remember the first time in dealing with estimates and looking at myself as not a golfer of renown, and suddenly we are talking about Transportation and Public Works and we have golf money being spent in here.
Mr. Minister, there are some items, and I can bring them to your attention if you wish, Miller Golf Printing & Supply Ltd., Page 187; The Golf News, Page 190; Wilson Sports Equipment Canada Ltd., Page 192. Those are golfing items, from my understanding. Are we still in the golf business, or is that a thing of the past?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, we are definitely out of the golf business; however, prior to the sale, there is a pro shop at the golf course up in Cumberland County and there was stock purchased to replenish supplies in that particular pro shop, and that kind of thing. That was all part of the normal operations of the golf course before we dispensed with the ownership of that particular course.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I would like to continue, if I may, on a very interesting item that I am going to bring to the House's attention. In fact, a member of our staff, in the NDP caucus, has been trying to get some information from your staff on this item. That is on Page 200 of the same book, Supplement to the Public Accounts that I have been referring to. There is an item listed almost at the bottom of that page, R. Hurlburt Construction Ltd., for $270,204. Now, Mr. Minister, I have reviewed this situation and I would like to point out to you - your staff is probably aware of this because we have been in contact or a member of our caucus staff has been in contact with Transportation and Public Works staff - in 1997, R. Hurlburt Construction Ltd. received $8,846 worth of work; in 1998 there was no money according to the records, that I have been apprised of, assigned to R. Hurlburt Construction Ltd.; in 1999, the figure goes to $35,958; in the year 2000 we have a jump assigned to R. Hurlburt Construction Ltd. of over $270,000.
My question, Mr. Minister, and it is the question that a member of our NDP staff has been asking your staff, could you please explain or table at a future date what were the items covered under this $270,000 . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: Was it tendered?
MR. ESTABROOKS: I am sure it was tendered, I assume that. I would like some details on the fact that this particular company, situated in Yarmouth, has done extremely well it seems, lately, moving from $8,000 in 1997, to $35,000 almost $36,000 in 1999, to the year 2000 of over $270,000. I would like some explanation, please, on what that work involved.
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, the honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect was doing so well, and I thought we were going to have a very civilized conversation. I don't appreciate, really, drawing aspersions on a particular name. This is a company that tenders on highway work. The tenders, as I hope the honourable member is aware, is a public process. The tenders are open in public and the lowest tender is normally accepted. If the lowest tender is not accepted then, indeed, there is an explanation due. In this particular case, it was a tender on a contract for roadwork in Lunenburg, they submitted the lowest tender and they were awarded the job. I see no difficulty with that. I will find out why it was that you had such difficulty getting that information, because I don't think there is any reason why you shouldn't have had it available if you had requested it.
Mr. Chairman, with regard to the company itself, there are thousands of small contractors around this province who continuously chase the Department of Transportation and Public Works for business and they bid on contracts. These companies, when they start getting business, start to expand. If they start to expand then, obviously, they are going to get more business. If they are submitting their tenders and their tenders are accepted, good for them; they get bigger and bigger. This, I would suggest to you, is such a company in Nova Scotia. Rather than pummel that company for its success, I think we should be applauding it.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I was once in the business of pummelling things, and that was no pummel. I was the one who was asking a question because of a follow-up from staff, and the inability of the staff to be able to get the information. As I said earlier, it is an interesting topic. I guess the concern I would like to move to, and it is no reflection of pummelling of a particular company, but that name, let's face it, jumps out at me as I do my job. I requested a member of my caucus staff to request of your staff, could you tell us how or what this money was spent on. I thank you for the explanation, for the Lunenburg job, but I can tell you, Mr. Minister, that call was made a number of times and the answer was not forthcoming. That's why I brought it to your attention here.
I would like you to explain, and maybe someone in the department could explain that how come under Liberal Governments there seems to have been no work, or very little work assigned to this particular company. Is it a coincidence that this particular company that received little or no work in previous years has received this contract of $270,000 now that this government is in power? That is aspersions, not towards that particular company, but the
tendering process. Is it a coincidence that in previous years this particular company - and you have had lots of experience in this business, Mr. Minister, I am looking at the tendering process here because I am questioning whether it is a convenient coincidence that this is happening at this time that R. Hurlburt Construction Ltd. has received $270,000 because they are well connected with your government.
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, as I say, if the honourable member would step up onto the sidewalk he would certainly get more information, perhaps. (Interruption)
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The minister has the floor.
MR. RUSSELL: There is absolutely no way that I could tell the honourable member what went on when the other crowd was in government, I don't know. I can tell this honourable member that insofar as the present tendering process, and as far as I understand it, the tendering process in this province has always been that way, that the lowest tender has been accepted wherever possible. However, there have been some exceptions made along the way where perhaps a company has submitted outside of the parameters of the tendering document.
I don't know what else I can tell the member. He can come on over to our tender office any time. I welcome him over there to any tender opening we have, we have dozens of them every day. Come on over and see what the process is and you will find that it is fair and open. One of the reasons - and I bring this to his attention because perhaps he isn't aware - we are getting more and more tenders from small companies all across this province is because now we are on the Net and all our tenders are there for anybody who owns a computer.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Before I recognize the member for Timberlea-Prospect, I would ask him if he would yield the floor to the member for Dartmouth North on an introduction.
The member for Dartmouth North.
MR. JERRY PYE: Thank you, member for Timberlea-Prospect. In the west gallery today, this morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Legislature, are students from the Shannon Park School. They are here with their teacher, Sean Aucoin, and members of the citizens' group: Wendy Bell, Heather McLeod, Marcus Murrin and Neil Tramble. They have been here touring the Legislature and watching what is going on in the Legislative Assembly. I have informed them that everyone may not be sitting in the Legislature today, all the members may not be here. The budget estimates are taking place and there are some budget estimates going on in the Red Room as well as in this Legislative Assembly. The students who are here today are sitting here taking in this, and I do want to acknowledge that within the student group, I believe, there is a nephew of the member for Dartmouth-Cole Harbour,
as a matter of fact. They are here and I would hope the House will give them a very warm welcome. (Applause)
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would also like to say that the House welcomes you.
[10:30 a.m.]
MR. ESTABROOKS: I welcome the students here to see democracy in action in the people's House. Mr. Minister, you mentioned earlier during your opening comments, the rural roads mitigation fund, I believe is the title for it. It has gone from $9 million to $10 million and it is another $1 million, and I know that you, in your travels around the province, are aware that much more money is needed. When it comes to the fact that there is a fund of money - if I can say, a pot of money - that is available for a particular issue across the province, the question that inevitably comes up is, how is it going to be used?
I know I have heard many times that - and maybe your department would realize this - people are constantly told that this road or that road, or this project or that project, is on the mythical list. The list. I suppose, sarcasm aside, I should ask is there a list? A priority list? Is that priority list actually in existence and, if there is, for example, on this rural fund that includes $10 million, is it prioritized so that you could tell us, your members, this side of the House, what are the priority projects for that $10 million fund that is very much needed in rural roads? Is it a myth or do we have a priority list?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, it is an unfortunate fact of life that, yes, there is a list. That list contains every rural road right across this province at the top of that list, if such a thing is possible. In other words, we have a transportation system in this province where you can go onto any road in any area of the province and you will find that money has to be spent, or should be spent on that particular road. That is the problem that we face. We do have to make decisions, we do have to make priorities perhaps that are just offhand in trying to get the money out there to patch roads just to keep them in place. Our problem today is that unless we get to those roads and do a little bit of work on them, in another year or two they are no longer going to be paved roads. We are going to have to tear them up and they are going to become gravel roads or, if we intend to asphalt them, we are going to have to rebuild the road completely from the base up.
It is policy of the Department of Transportation and Public Works, at the present time, that we are not paving gravel roads. In other words, we have said to people who live on gravel roads, look, we are sorry, we don't have the dollars available at the present time to pave your roads because we are taking that money and saving the pavement on the other roads around this province. When you say the list, the list today is meaningless, because of the fact that we don't have road A that has got to be fixed, but road B is in great shape. We just don't have that luxury.
Having said that, how are we going to divide up the RIM money? The RIM money is divided up among the regions in the province based on the number of kilometres of road that there are in that particular area. The OS for the area, I presume, comes up with the work that is to be tendered out using the RIM funds that are available. I believe that the OS's we have in place around this province are all very approachable and I think that no matter what the political stripe is of the member that approaches them, that they are going to talk to you, they are going to listen to what your priorities are, as well as the priorities of the department.
I would like to emphasize that because, as the honourable member knows, when he travels around his riding that you come across situations where you see things for yourself and you say, why the heck hasn't the Department of Transportation and Public Works seen that obvious deficiency and fixed it? It becomes a priority of yours to see that it is done and you bring that to the attention of the OS and, hopefully, he will do something about it. It helps you, it helps the department and that is the best we can do for the time being.
We have to have more money in the Department of Transportation and Public Works. We have to have a massive infusion of money in the Department of Transportation and Public Works. We need about $150 million to $160 million per year for capital construction to maintain - and remember that, to maintain - the present system that we have. At the present time we have something in the neighbourhood of $60 million. As you can see, there is one heck of a shortfall.
MR. ESTABROOKS: I thank the minister for some clarity that perhaps - and I don't know if all members present heard that explanation, but I think it is of real consequence, if I understood this correctly, that on the RIM money fund in particular, you said based upon the percentage of highway that a particular OS is responsible for, that he or she would receive the money out of that fund based upon the total number of kilometres, based on the kilometres across the province. For example, if I may, the teacher in me is coming out and the students up here might have to do the math, but if you are saying that of the 120,000 kilometres - sorry for the figure, in particular - if 12,000 of those kilometres are in Timberlea-Prospect, 12,000 of 120,000 is 10 per cent. Right, students? Thank you. I got a nod from someone up there - 10 per cent. My math fails me, you are saying that 10 per cent of the RIM money would go to Timberlea-Prospect, is that correct?
MR. RUSSELL: I understand that the allocation of RIM money is based on the number of kilometres of paved roads within a constituency. For instance, in some areas there are a considerable number of what we call K-class roads, which are sort of logging roads, et cetera, those don't count in the overall numbers.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you for that point of clarification. I would like to turn to the Estimates, Supplementary Detail, please, on Page 24.5. This is really one of the crux issues with the future of the department and the direction that it might be going if my suspicions - and I am in the business of suspicions sometimes when it comes to dollars and
cents. I want to draw the minister's attention to Operational Support - Summer, and the money assigned. Then if we go down further under Operation Support - Winter, and that money that is assigned. Those are items, as you can see, that of course were not in previous estimates of 1999-2000, 2000-01. I would like for the minister to explain what Operational Support - Summer involves and then, secondly, what Operational Support - Winter involves.
MR. RUSSELL: The two headings that the honourable member is referring to, Operational Support - Summer, and Operational Support - Winter, apply to sums of money that were formerly included under the heading, Field Operations. Operational support in the summer includes the operation supervisors, it includes the operations of the sheds and other things that go into maintaining roads in the summer, and the same thing applies in the winter, except that it is winter maintenance.
MR. ESTABROOKS: So, to clarify the issue for myself, the first word that I think of when I see that sort of operational support in either season, that is within the men and women who work for us now, who work for your department and for us as Nova Scotians, that those people in no way will be threatened with any kind of privatization. That the privatization, as you once said, I believe, model which was quite coincidentally, if I understand correctly, the Beechville shed, the one that I work with, and the men and women who work in that particular operation, that the privatization model is no longer going to be part of the future of your department?
MR. RUSSELL: Before I field that question from the honourable member, I have just been advised that when I said that that contract that was awarded to Hurlburt's, it was in the Lunenburg area, that is incorrect. It was on Pleasant Street, was one particular contract for sidewalk repaving and the other one was in respect of Prospect Street in Yarmouth, and that was for installation of culverts and catch basins.
So, having corrected that information I gave him, getting back to the privatization model, the trip I did around the province last summer was very enlightening. I had the chance to visit, I believe every garage, I may have missed one or two along the way, but I think I got to all of them and I had the opportunity to meet in every instance with a number, not always all but a number of people involved at the front end of the department; the people who are out there in all weather, winter and summer, doing a job on the roads. The people at that time were disturbed because they knew that the government was looking at alternate service delivery. Alternate service delivery was simply placing in the hands of the private sector certain of the operations of the provincial Department of Transportation.
We did look at that as one of the options that were available to government, but in the end we decided not to go with that particular option. We did decide that there were some areas where perhaps the private sector should be involved to a greater extent. What I said to people involved with the operations, both summer and winter, in those meetings that I had with them was that their particular positions were not going to be affected by any changes
in the way we do our business. We may change the way we do business but, however, the people who are involved in certain operations of the government would continue to be involved with the Department of Transportation, and that is what I told them and that is what we have done.
As the honourable member is aware, government has, over the past year, decreased the number of full-time equivalent employees in this province by 608 people, I think it was last year. This year we have 80-odd people being deleted from government employ. None of those people, under that deletion process, came from the Department of Transportation out in the field. In other words, the people who are working out in operations were not affected by those cuts.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Minister, I want to use this as an example. You well know that I can't go through estimates or probably a question in this House without asking about Porcupine Hill or the Long Bog or some of those notorious stretches. I want to use this as a scenario that is a concern to highway workers in my particular community. Is there a possibility within your department that snowplowing, as a responsibility, could change to the extent that the department could be responsible, for example, Route 333, which is the Prospect Road around Peggy's Cove, and that the subdivisions and the adjoining roads, whether it is the expanding subdivision of MacDonald Lake Road or Brookside or down over Porcupine Hill into Terence Bay, is it a possibility that your department will only maintain responsibility for the main road, as we call it, Route 333, and that the subdivisions and the adjoining roads could be handed over to private snowplow operators?
MR. RUSSELL: The honourable member raises a very good point. Sometimes it appears that the Department of Transportation and Public Works is inefficient in that it plows some roads and some roads it goes right by and doesn't plow. The HRM has been increasingly active in pursuing the Province of Nova Scotia to perhaps work out some kind of a process that will be more effective and more efficient for the Department of Transportation and Public Works, the Province of Nova Scotia, as well as for HRM. It is no secret that HRM and the Department of Transportation and Public Works have had considerable discussions but, to date, they have simply been that, and I assume those discussion are ongoing at the present time with HRM.
The primary thing we want to do is to provide a better service to the public wherever possible, we want to do it at the same cost or less, and we will all be very happy if that can be accomplished.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I just want to clarify this with the minister, it is of some importance to understand that the HRM and the amalgamation that was brought forth by this crowd here is not well-received, whether it is snowplowing, recreation or whatever else. I am not talking about the core areas, because we have that distinction you know. There is the core area in so many different ways receive a treatment - and I know I see
the chairman and perhaps I shouldn't tell this but he is nodding his head, and there are many MLAs present who are concerned about the fact that there seems to be, if we want to say it candidly with certain expectations, almost a two-tier approach when it comes to the maintenance of roads and, of course, snow removal. We are outside of the core area here, and these expanding subdivisions who pay these big taxes are well outside of the core area. That's the concern that is brought to my attention by these residents, and it is just a point of clarification.
On a beautiful day like today, let's talk about winter, as if we haven't had enough. On Page 24.5, if I understand this correctly - and I am talking about snowplowing, I am talking about salting, I am talking about sanding because, of course, there are certain roads, and I live on one of them, that have to be sanded as opposed to salted because of the dug wells in the community in which I live. If I look at those budget figures there, snowplowing - the budget has been decreased, especially after the winter we have just had - if I look at these numbers correctly, we are decreasing the budget for salting, we are decreasing the budget for sanding. Considering what we have just endured and the yeoman service that the men and women who work in your department have provided, I would like you to explain those decreases to me?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I can agree with the honourable member, I think we have had enough winter for this year, in fact, we have had enough winter for several years. The first thing I would like to point out to the member for Timberlea-Prospect is that the snow removal budget for this year was considerably exceeded by about $4 million or $5 million. That is very, very bad news because of the fact that the money spent on snow removal in any given year has to come from somewhere. It comes from the same budget that supplies money for other maintenance functions, such as pothole repairs, putting up guardrails and looking after culverts and shoulders, et cetera.
The numbers the members see there year after year, if you could keep going back into old books, you will find it has been somewhere around the order of $32 million every year is about the average amount of money that we spend on ice and snow control. This year we are very close to that number, I think we are actually at $34 million total, compared to about $31 million last year, but to that we have to add operational support. When you add all those things together you will find that actually our expenditure this year will be roughly the same as it has been year after year. There has been some change in the numbers shown for snowplowing, for salting and sanding, that appears that there is less money there than was in our estimate last year, not our forecast, in the estimate, but that is simply because of an accounting change where some of that money has gone into operational support, rather than going directly into the cost of plowing, salting and sanding.
MR. ESTABROOKS: The operational support money under winter includes some of that money, that was the explanation? (Interruptions) Okay, thank you.
The Auditor General feels that it is important for government departments to produce annual general reports. The Department of Transportation and Public Works last released an annual report, from the records that I have been informed of, in 1992-93. You or your staff can correct me if I am wrong on that. Mr. Minister, do you think it would be appropriate to follow the direction of the Auditor General and that each year your department should have the responsibility of producing an annual report?
MR. RUSSELL: There are two parts to this question, one is do I think it is a good idea to have an annual report? I am very much divided in my opinion and I will tell you why in a moment. Are we going to have annual reports? Yes we are because we are required to now by the Treasury and Policy Board directive, that federal departments will provide for the Legislature an annual report. However, getting back to annual reports, are they worth the money of producing them? I am not too sure, in fact, I think an annual report probably should just be five or six pages of foolscap, run off on the Xerox machine and distributed.
Annual reports cost a lot of money and they are very slim reports that don't really contain all that much in the way of information that isn't already available, it is just compiled in one place. Having said that, we are going to produce annual reports and we are going to have to pay for them. There also has been adverse comment from the Auditor General in years past about the cost of annual reports, so I think there are two sides of the story.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I would like to share my time at this stage of my questions with the member for Halifax Fairview.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview. You have 18 minutes.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Minister, as I am sure you are aware, my constituency is primarily an urban constituency. There are only small parts of provincial roads within my constituency, a portion of Northwest Arm Drive and also a portion of the Bicentennial Highway. That portion of the Bicentennial Highway has been an irritant of long-standing to the residents of School Avenue in my constituency. For people who aren't aware of School Avenue, I am sure they have seen it, as one goes down the hill connecting to Bayers Road, on the left-hand side and the north side of the Bicentennial Highway is a street of residents who are my constituents. Their concerns have been raised before and I would like to raise them again.
Mr. Minister, I took the unusual step, I think, of giving you advance notice of these questions in the hope it would give your staff time to look into the questions I wanted to raise. To a large extent, the problems of School Avenue relate to the fact that the municipality and the province are arguing over who is responsible. While the residents put up with concerns of noise, dirt and a whole variety of concerns that come with living right beside a major highway, the municipality says it is the province's responsibility and the
province says it is the municipality's responsibility and, meanwhile, over the course of more than several years, nothing has been done.
The first question I would like to pose to the minister is this. Does your department know or does it have a position on where exactly the dividing line is between municipal responsibility and provincial responsibility for that portion of the Bicentennial Highway?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the member for giving me advance notice, because obviously if we are talking about School Avenue, it might not mean very much to anybody, but having advance notice we know where it is. I also happen to know where School Avenue is because I, too, went knocking on doors up School Avenue, not with the honourable member opposite but with some other aspirant of a few years ago.
To answer that specific question, School Avenue does belong to the province. It does at the moment; it may not always, but at the present time it is our responsibility.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister, for the answer. I would ask the member for Halifax Fairview if he would yield the floor to the member for Dartmouth North for an introduction.
MR. STEELE: I certainly will.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth North.
MR. JERRY PYE: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the member for Halifax Fairview, as well as the minister, for the time. Once again there is another group of Grade 6 students here from Shannon Park School today. They are here with their leaders, Michele LeClaire, Suzanne Kennedy and Mary Edwards. They are here taking a tour of one of Canada's oldest Legislative Assemblies. They are here now watching the process in work. I want to advise them, although all members may not be present, that we are in budget estimates now, and that budget estimates take place in two areas, one, the Legislative Chamber and in another place, the Red Room. The Minister of Transportation and Public Works is now having questions put to him by members of the Opposition Parties.
Mr. Chairman, if we could give a great hand of welcome to those Shannon Park School Grade 6 students, again, I would greatly appreciate it. (Applause)
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would also like to welcome you here this morning.
MR. STEELE: Mr. Minister, I want to make sure that I am crystal clear about your answer. Is it the province's position that you own not only the Bicentennial Highway and not only the fence dividing the highway from School Avenue but also School Avenue itself. Is that your position?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, when the Department of Transportation and Public Works acquired the right of way for the Bicentennial Highway, they also acquired School Avenue. The property still belongs to the Department of Transportation and Public Works, and we own the fence. However, if he is referring to who looks after the street at the present time, that is the responsibility of the HRM.
MR. STEELE: Since it is the province's undisputed position that it owns the fence dividing the Bicentennial Highway and School Avenue - and just for those people who don't know, the only division at the moment is a chain-link fence that is in rather poor condition - will the department consider, as a capital project, some kind of landscaping or some kind of soundproof barrier or some kind of improvement to the wholly inadequate fence that currently divides the residents of School Avenue from a major provincial highway?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, there have been ongoing discussions about the fence for a long time. In fact, I was made aware of that problem, as I said, when I was on the street knocking on doors. It only came back to my mind that that was the street after I got the briefing note from staff in response to your particular memo. The issue of putting up some kind of a sound barrier has been investigated by the department. Unfortunately, the existing chain-link fence is going to remain there as long as we have the present budgetary restrictions that we have.
[11:00 a.m.]
We have had ongoing talks with the HRM about a variety of subjects, as I was saying to the member for Timberlea-Prospect, with regard to certain responsibilities. This is one of the responsibilities that we are talking about with HRM. There may be a solution to this problem in the offing; however, at the present time, I can't suggest to the honourable member what it would be.
MR. STEELE: Mr. Chairman, to the minister again, it is apparent to me that not everyone on School Avenue would like, necessarily, a soundproof barrier; there is some consideration of the effect that it would have on the view and other considerations about how it would affect the street. One thing that I believe all the residents can agree on is that the fence as it currently exists is an eyesore and a garbage catcher. Will the department consider some kind of landscaping or other improvement to the fence that would cost far less than a proper soundproof barrier but would go a long way towards addressing the concerns of the residents?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, that is a very sensible suggestion. Certainly, it is one that can be considered. At the present time, as I said, we don't have the funding available to do anything. However, I don't want the member to assume that because we can't do it this year it is off the program for next year, not necessarily. We will try to do something with that, because we recognize there is a problem there. We hope we can do it in concert with
the funding from HRM, perhaps we can't, but we will try to do something in the foreseeable future.
MR. STEELE: Mr. Minister, I appreciate that very much, and I am sure the residents of School Avenue will as well. My last question on this subject, before I turn our time back to the member for Timberlea-Prospect is, what are the department's future plans for that portion of the Bicentennial Highway? By way of background, it has been suggested to me that because the department has a long-term plan to widen the Bicentennial Highway, which would involve expropriating some or all of School Avenue, that that is the reason why the province has had no particular interest over the years in actually spending money on improvements. My question to the minister is, what are the department's plans for the medium to long-term, and do they include the possibility of widening the Bicentennial Highway, that portion of it that passes School Avenue?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, no plans exist at the present time, and I don't believe there is any thought within the department for doing that. Quite frankly, we just don't have the money now and we will not have the money in the foreseeable future to do that particular project, if it was required.
MR. STEELE: Mr. Chairman, at this point, I would like to turn our time back to the member for Timberlea-Prospect.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect.
MR. WILLIAM ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, the department has the responsibility for, I assume, air quality in buildings, and as you mentioned before, the Johnston Building, and the excellent work that is being done there by, I want you to know, Mr. Minister, two graduates of Sir John A. Macdonald High School, both of whom I had the pleasure of teaching, the Morash - I want to call them boys, but they are men now. Coastal Restoration is involved in that project. Of course, most government buildings are old, or some are, and there are potential air quality problems. I would like to ask you what standards are being used to test the buildings for which your department is responsible?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, the department, when requested, goes out and checks the air quality in the buildings, and we try to maintain a standard that is acceptable as the best practice for air quality.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, on this topic, of course, there are many government buildings that are accessible to disabled citizens of this province. I would like to ask what plans the department has to make more buildings that we are responsible for completely accessible. Do we have money in the budget to continue this process?
MR. RUSSELL: Just one moment, perhaps I better read the briefing note to make sure that I am giving the honourable member the correct information. The executive director of the Disabled Persons Commission approached Transportation and Public Works in 1997 to seek support for a program that would ensure barrier-free access. From that time forward to the present, persons with disabilities benefit equally from all services that are offered to the public. In other words, those services that require face-to-face presentation with the public, we are giving those particular facilities the number one priority. I think that the majority of that work has been done.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, if I read your lips correctly, I have four minutes left?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, you read my lips correctly.
MR. ESTABROOKS: It is amazing. I have read your lips many times. It is the first time you have ever said four minutes to me.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, and now you have approximately 3 minutes.
MR. ESTABROOKS: And you are cutting into my time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I am sorry.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I would like to talk for a moment on an issue of some concern, the close connection between tourism routes and the importance of the decisions which your department has to make with regard to the maintenance of roads. You have heard me, many times, Mr. Minister, speak about a recurring problem at a very prominent - it is sort of ghoulish to say it this way - tourist destination of the Swissair Memorial site. There, of course, are three of them. One at The Whalesback, one across the bay over on the Blandford side and, of course, the other one, which you have no responsibility for when it comes to roads because it is the third point in the triangle and it is actually out where Flight 111 went down.
Mr. Minister, could you tell me of any plans or confirm that your department has a solution for the parking problem that continues to grow as Nova Scotians and people from throughout the world stop at the Swissair Memorial at The Whalesback in Indian Harbour?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, it is hard to say that this is a tourist attraction but, in point of fact, it is in some way an attraction along Highway No. 333 to this memorial to Flight 111. I don't think anybody truly believed that there would be traffic generated specifically to go out and view that particular memorial. As a result, our parking facilities out there are very limited and people have taken to parking on the highway and that has created problems. I know that we have had representations from the honourable member and we
have had representations from the RCMP. We have had representations from the Peggy's Cove Commission to do something.
I must confess that, for a time, we didn't think that we could do anything simply because of space and because of the fact that you had to get from the parking lot onto Route 333 and do it with a sufficient line of sight to do it safely. However, it was looked at by the department and a solution has been found. I believe we are increasing the parking lot from 6 to 20. The number is larger anyway. I think it is 20 spaces, however, I may be incorrect and it is hoped that that work will get underway very shortly.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The NDP caucuses' time has expired and thank you for your contribution.
MR. ESTABROOKS: On a point of personal privilege, if that is appropriate, Mr. Minister, I would like to thank you for responding to that need and I would like to thank your department for making that a priority. It is much appreciated. Thank you for your time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton West.
MR. RUSSELL MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, just to clarify some unfortunate ambiguity that seems to exist regarding that particular contract, R. Hurlburt. That was a tendered contract, was it not?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, yes, it was.
MR. MACKINNON: Well, I ask that because anyone that has run a business will certainly appreciate the fact that, irrespective of who you are, if you tender and you win that tender, then I don't think you should be unfairly chastised. I think it is very unfortunate that a member of this House has been treated with that type of disregard. I wanted to go on the record for that. It would be a little different if he was a member of the Executive Council or has some type of an extended relationship in that regard. So I wanted to go on the record because that is certainly not indicative of any reasoned business person that would treat an individual or a company in such an unfair fashion.
Let's go on to some detail that I would like to secure from the minister and his department. Under the Aid to Towns heading for the upcoming budget, I notice that there are no figures in this. Has that been eliminated?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, there were two programs: the Aid to Towns program and Aid to Municipalities. The Aid to Towns program, we provided the Nova Scotia Union of Municipalities one year's notice and the program is no longer in existence as of April 1, 2001. The Aid to Municipalities is still in place, however, there is no money in that program either, simply because we have placed that program in abeyance for the time being.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, the minister indicated the RIM program that he has budgeted for this year, has he allotted on a county-by-county basis how that particular money is going to be divvied up and, if so, would he provide the details of it?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, in response to the honourable member, the area managers and the OS's in the districts have been advised of the amount of money they have and now it is a matter of them formulating whatever their particular plans are for their particular districts.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, does the minister have the figures that are being provided to each of these divisions?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, we don't have them here but I have no difficulty at all in providing them to the honourable member.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, under capital construction, the primary focus for myself would be repaving because the minister has indicated no new paving and I would think that would be quite unfortunate for a lot of the stakeholders across rural Nova Scotia. Just because they live on a gravel road, they still pay taxes much the same as those that are on paved roads. I know there has been quite a philosophy within the bureaucracy of the Department of Transportation and Public Works that seems to reflect what the minister had stated earlier about not supporting any new pavement. I think that philosophy is misguided, to say the least. In some cases, I can certainly appreciate what the minister is saying and the fact that we have so many paved roads that are in a deteriorating state.
I would also like to suggest that all those that are living on gravel roads pay taxes too. Sometimes the movement of dollars around on these shared agreements between the federal government and the province aren't necessarily going in the right direction as per the intent, as best as I can determine, at times, not all the time but sometimes. That is, perhaps, because the province is trying to make do, at best, with limited dollars.
With regard to repaving, does the minister have a breakdown as to what repaving projects - I guess that would be capital - he has lined up for this fiscal year? If so, will he provide that detail for the committee?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak about, before I get down to the paving contracts, the business of paving of gravel roads and the condition of gravel roads. As the member rightly pointed out, everybody pays taxes if they live on a road, however, the taxes they pay are being paid to the municipal unit not to the provincial government. There is, if you like, a little bit of a twist there from the point of view that taxpayers pay taxes to the Department of Transportation and Public Works through licenses, registration and gasoline taxes. It is unfair. Life, I suppose, is just not fair.
People who live on subdivision roads that were put in place after 1996, now the subdivider is required to pave those roads, prior to that they were not. Prior to the present, the Department of Transportation and Public Works used to cost share with the municipal unit to pave those roads that were in existence before 1996, which are classified as subdivision roads. When we cut this program, this aid to municipalities and didn't fund it - and the same thing with towns - what we are doing to residents on those gravel roads within subdivisions is we are saying, look, we are not going to help you, at least not at the present moment.
That certainly doesn't seem to be fair. I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately, we don't have the funding available to be fair to everybody. What we have to do is to pave the main arteries that are going to get people from A to B and onto the 100-Series Highways, if they have to use the 100-Series Highways. It is not fair, I admit, however, that is the way it is.
With regard to the last question, as to paving, the paving program for this year is going to be limited, the same as it was last year. I really can't say anything more than that. Some tenders have been put out, there are some tenders that have not yet come to the attention of the contractors because they haven't been decided on and advertised, and there will be some tenders that will have to be put off until the fall. It would be nice, as I said a long time ago when we started this discussion, to have enough money just to maintain the system, and to do that we need about two and a half times the amount of money that we presently have, and we just don't have it.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I want to comment on the minister's comment on my observation on the gravel roads, because a lot of these individuals pay fuel tax as well. They pay provincial tax, they pay federal tax, it is not just municipal property tax. I wanted to leave that with the minister, that we are not a little misguided here, and I think the minister knows that. Would the minister be able to indicate the total number of dollars he has committed, province-wide, for repaving this year?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, the amount is approximately $57 million for repaving and bridges. Bridges fall into that category, too. We have 2,000-plus bridges, I believe? (Interruptions) We have 3,500 bridges in this province. Many of them - and when I say many I mean hundreds of those bridges - are 100 years old, so we do have to spend a considerable amount of money on repair, replacement and maintenance of those bridges, they take money out of paving.
MR. MACKINNON: What the minister has just said is thanks to the Government of George Murray we had all these good bridges built, that good Liberal Government back in 1901. It is good that the minister acknowledges that the Liberals built all these bridges that would last for so long. I would encourage the minister to take up the challenge there. That having been said, out of the $57 million, does the minister have any idea what percentage of dollars is going to go to bridges and what percentage is going to repaving?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, a couple of points. One, he was talking about gravel roads, and although we are not spending paving dollars on those roads, we are, of course, spending money on the upgrading and gravelling, et cetera. As a matter of fact, there was a question asked of me yesterday by you, Mr. Chairman, with regard to gravel roads and the application of chloride. As I am sure all rural members know, if you get the chloride on the road and then you go in and gravel the road or you grade the road extensively, then you lose the effect of the chloride treatment. The question was asked, whether or not chloride treatment is covered or could be included in the RIM Program, and yes, it can. When the road is gravelled, then a chloride treatment would be placed on the road, which helps stabilize the surface and, of course, contributes to keeping down the dust.
In relation to bridges and repaving, I said $57 million for capital, actually that is $57 million for repaving, and there is an additional $10 million for bridge projects. The honourable member and any member who has a pencil handy might be interested in this, which was just generated in the last couple of days. This is the funding distribution of RIM money: in the western district, $3.1 million; in the central district, $1.7 million; in the northern district, $2.4 million; and in the eastern district, $2.7 million, for a total of $10 million dollars.
MR. MACKINNON: That is $2.7 million in the eastern, that is on bridges, is that correct?
MR. RUSSELL: This is RIM money, those numbers that I gave for the districts.
MR. MACKINNON: Does the minister have a breakdown of the $57 million on a region-by-region basis?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, first of all, we have $57 million for repaving. Our number one priority in this province, and I know that living in a rural area that is some distance away - right now, I am living in downtown Windsor, I am close to Highway No. 101, but normally I live some distance from Highway No. 101, and I know that paving projects on the 100-Series Highways sometimes aren't the top priority for rural members. Unfortunately - I shouldn't say unfortunately, but we do as a requirement have to provide the funding to keep that 100-Series Highways system in good repair, because if the 100-Series Highways system ever gets down to a state where we have to rebuild, well, we will never catch up.
What we have to do, every year, is allocate sufficient money to maintain that system, at least to its present standard, not upgraded necessarily but just to keep it to its present standard. That costs us something in the order of about $20 million that comes out of our capital program. In other words, of the $57 million that we have, you automatically deduct something like $20 million or $22 million, which has to go on the 100-Series Highways. You are left with something in the order of about $35 million for the secondary roads.
That money is then broken up into the districts, according to the priorities within the districts, from the priorities that members have given to me as individual priorities. We try to endeavour to do our very best to meet as many of those demands as we possibly can. We can't meet them all in one year. There are some years where you are going to have a dearth of tenders, other years you are going to do rather well.
It is my hope - and I won't be around, I don't think, to see this - that we are eventually going to get to the stage where they got to in Saskatchewan this year. In the Province of Saskatchewan they had roads, and it is hard to believe but they were worse than the roads in Nova Scotia; they were in dreadful shape. In Saskatchewan they have turned the corner and they are now getting into budgetary surpluses, and they allocated additional funding to the Department of Transportation.
Mr. Chairman, they increased their capital budget for paving by $170 million this year, and they intend to do that for the next five years. They have the same problem we have, so we have to get to that stage too, and we will because we have to. We have to maintain the highway system because people drive cars, and when people drive cars they have to have highways, and they have to have highways that are reasonable to drive on. I am sure that you all, as members of this House, get letters and phone calls from people who say look, I was driving down such and such a road, I hit a pothole, lost a tire and bent my rim. I need an alignment, the bill is $300, and I would like to sue the Department of Transportation and Public Works to get that $300 back.
Unfortunately, if we had to fulfill every one of those claims against the Department of Transportation and Public Works, claims that are made, then we wouldn't have any money left to do anything else. All we can do at the present time is put up a sign that says there is a bump ahead and for people to drive cautiously. Now that we are into the spring, we can start on our annual pothole repair and upgrading to the extent that we can with the money that we have.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I thank the minister for his rather lengthy dissertation, but he still didn't answer my question. My question was, does he have a breakdown on a region-by-region basis of - well, if you are dealing with the $35 million, do we know how much is going to each of the regions for this fiscal year?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I can't answer that question at the moment because, as I said, the money and the tenders are not all out. Some, as I say, are going to stretch into the fall. At the end of the year I can probably give you an indication of the amount of money that was spent in any riding across the province - well, I say any riding, yes, I guess I can, across the province - but I can't at the present moment.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, the minister indicated that the district superintendents, or engineers I guess, from the various regions submitted their priority lists. Naturally, my focus would be on the eastern region. My understanding is that the number-one priority for the eastern region, in my community at least, was Highway No. 327, at least a portion of that for repaving. Are there any plans to fulfill any of that request? This particular highway - it is what they call the Marion Bridge Highway, between Sydney and Marion Bridge - I think it has been identified as the number-one priority in that entire region. Quite frankly, it is almost 30 years since any amount of substantive work has been done, and that was under different flags, for what it is worth.
MR. RUSSELL: Yes, as a matter of fact, again it is a road that I am familiar with because I met with some people just two days ago, in the House, who just happened to have raised a petition relative to that particular road. The point that the honourable member made, that it is so many years since the road was paved, is interesting because you can go across this province and you can find some roads that were paved 35, 45, 50 years ago and they are still - I won't say as good as they were when they were paved, but they are still - good, usable roads without too many problems. You can go out to some other areas and you can find a road that was paved maybe only five years ago, and this spring that road is all broken up, potholes and what have you.
[11:30 a.m.]
This is something that we, as a department, have to look at because, quite obviously, we should try to get at least 25 years out of a road. It is possible; it can be done. It may cost us a little more to get those kinds of roads, but in the long term it is going to pay off. There are new techniques, new types of asphalt, new types of paving products that are out today which we are looking at. In fact, the honourable member, if he is driving back to Cape Breton, as he is driving along Highway No. 102, he will notice that there are areas where they say a pilot project for paving or something of that nature, these are areas where we are conducting tests on different types of asphalt, different mixtures, different formulations to determine what kind of asphalt is best suited to that particular area, but it is only suitable for that particular area, and that is an important point.
We have to get a lot more knowledge about the substructure of the right-of-way in the future when we are going to be talking about building roads and repaving roads. In some areas of the province, for instance, we can do sandsealing, we can do chipsealing, and it works wonderfully; in other areas you do that same thing and it doesn't last any longer than a year. Mr. Chairman, I suppose what I am saying is the age of a road really isn't indicative of whether or not it should be paved. What is indicative of whether or not it should be repaved is whether or not the road is breaking up and in danger of complete collapse.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I believe the minister would readily agree - I concur with his observations - but it has been identified as a top priority. Short and to the point, will any of that highway be repaved this year? Part or all? Quite frankly, from the minister's comments, I would suspect not all, but there are some really terrible sections. It is 10 kilometres - the first kilometre coming from Marion Bridge back towards Sydney and a couple of kilometres coming out of Sydney towards Marion Bridge, they are the worst. It is so bad this year that people are actually losing their mufflers because of the depth of the frost bumps. They are dragging the undercarriage of their car.
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I might as well give the honourable member the bad news first, I guess. It will not be paved this year, quite frankly. However, that doesn't mean that we don't accept it as being a priority. A priority in one district has to compete with priorities in other districts because we are trying to solve problems all across this province. I can really appreciate the feelings that people have, who are so upset if you like, with the current state of their roads that they would travel from Marion Bridge to the Legislature down here to get, I think I gave them 15 to 30 minutes of my time, and then travel back again. These people, they have a concern, and I recognize their concern. I wish I could solve their concerns, but at the present time, as I said, we just can't do that.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, it is not good news, but at least the minister was honest enough to state it clearly, right up front. Out of the $35 million, how much will be spent in Cape Breton County this fiscal year? Surely to heavens, the minister must have some idea of what will be spent in Cape Breton County.
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I don't have that number. However, what I will try to do is have the department generate a number that will approximate what we will spend there in this fiscal year; it will only be an approximation. I presume that we can do that, can we? We can do that.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, in the Tory blue book, the government promised that they would develop a 10 year plan for the completion of the 100-Series Highways. Has that plan been completed yet? If so, would the minister make it available?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, in response to the member's question. The plan is completed as such, there are a few little tiddly bits in front, a letter from myself, et cetera, those kinds of things to be added to it. I had hoped that it would actually be tabled in the House about a week ago, but it wasn't ready. I was just speaking to the deputy and it will be ready, I am told, very, very soon. If the honourable member knows the term "very, very soon" he knows how soon that is, so I will leave that with him.
MR. MACKINNON: There was a Premier in this province who used to say that every time he stood up, and I believe the honourable minister sat in his Cabinet; I guess it is rubbing off a bit. The government, also in this blue book, indicated that in the second year
of its mandate it would dedicate all the fuel tax towards highway improvement, capital construction, maintenance, bridges, what have you, and I notice that is not being done. Is there any particular reason?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, we generate about $220 million from motive fuels, including registrations and licenses, et cetera. At the present time, we are slightly shy of that amount. Our target will be met, I can assure the honourable member; however meeting that target doesn't mean anything, to be quite honest, because it doesn't represent sufficient money to do the job that has to be done by the Department of Transportation and Public Works.
We will get to that 100 per cent of the amount generated by motive fuel taxes and licenses and registrations, we will do that I would think by the end of next year. Okay, by the end of the term we will certainly be there. It would be my hope, to be quite honest, that we can get a lot more money than that in the forthcoming year, because we have to. It is just that we have to get the kind of injection of funds that for instance the Province of Saskatchewan got, what other provinces are ramping up to.
The target is a good one. It means something to people who say we buy fuel, we pay taxes, those taxes should go to maintaining the highway system, and I agree. It still isn't enough though, we need more on top of that.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, what the minister is saying is that the government will not meet its commitment of the Tory blue book to have 100 per cent of the fuel tax going toward roads this year, but it will at the end of its term. That could be a year, a year and a half, maybe a two year delay; we are off target there. Approximately how much is collected on this fuel tax, and what percentage goes into roads and what percentage goes into general revenues?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, the amount generated in provincial fuel tax is $220 million. The feds also have a tax and it brings in $137 million, and those are year 2000-01 figures. Vehicle licensing and registration fees account for another $61.5 million, so the provincial government receives, if you will, in the combination of fuel taxes and registration and licensing, $281 million. TPW expenses are $242 million, almost $243 million, and from that we take away the amortization - in other words the amount of money that is spread over years for amortizing - of $43 million, and we add capital spending of $50.9 million, which gives us a TPW expenditure for this year of $250.1 million. The commitment that is required to reach the commitment made in the blue book is another $31.3 million. We are meeting $11 million of those this year.
MR. MACKINNON: The increase of gasoline and fuel, home heating fuel and so on, as of late, as we all know, has taken a bit of a jump. Has the government calculated the additional revenues that will be generated because of this unexpected increase?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that answer is probably better forthcoming from the Minister of Finance, however it is true that the province has picked up an additional amount from fuel taxes this year. I should also warn the member that what the Minister of Finance said is absolutely true, as the price of fuel goes up consumption goes down. It doesn't go down as much as the fuel price goes up, but nevertheless you do not capture, from the same number of litres, the additional profit.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, last September the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities held a meeting, and apparently there was a provincial draft report presented to the delegates which essentially stated the province wanted to download responsibility for 12,000 kilometres of road to the municipalities by the year 2005. Would the minister be kind enough to apprise members of the committee as to the status of that particular proposal that was presented to the UNSM?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to answer that question because there is a lot of incorrect information circulating among the municipal units and other people with regard to what actually occurred. First of all, it was not - it was not, it was not, again - a provincial initiative, it is was not an initiative by the Department of Transportation and Public Works, by the Department of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, or any other arm of government; that proposition came forward from a committee that was struck between the municipal units of the UNSM and provincial officials. They were looking at service exchange. I don't think I am going to have to go through chapter and verse of service exchange before this House, because I think everybody is aware of what that was about.
MR. JERRY PYE: I'm not . . .
MR. RUSSELL: You are not? I thought you invented it, honourable member for Dartmouth North.
This committee, as I said, made up of municipal members from the UNSM and members of staff of various government departments were looking at things that could possibly be moved around and the responsibility perhaps picked up by either the province or the municipal unit. One of the many things that was on the table at that time was roads. They were discussing roads, but there was absolutely no intent to do anything; it was simply a proposition that they brought forward to the attention of the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities. That is the committee struck by the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities that reported to the Union what they had found out about various things, various services that could be exchanged and, as I said, one of them was roads.
Somehow, when that report was released to the union, it was immediately circulated to all the mayors and wardens and councillors around the province and everybody jumped to the conclusion that the government was trying to download roads onto municipalities. It is completely, utterly untrue; that was not the intention and is not the intention at the present
time. If indeed the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities wants to come and discuss with us about taking over something from the government and, in return, the government take over some roads, we are willing to discuss those things, but at the present time it is just simply something that has been generated by a committee within the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities. It is not being discussed, I don't believe, actively by the Department of Transportation and Public Works or by Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations or by the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities. Nothing is going to happen, at the moment anyway.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, the minister is very clever, at the very end he says "at the moment." So really what he is trying to tell all members of the committee is to stay tuned, because there could be something in the near future. That is a relative term, but we will leave it at that, and move on to another topic because he seems to be getting a little exercised on this one. I was quite surprised how exercised he did become.
With regard to Highway No. 104, the Cobequid Pass agreement apparently is somewhat - I don't know all the particulars myself, but I understand that it is somewhat - of an omnibus agreement and there is a provision in that agreement that would make provision to forgo the 50 cent increase in the tolls which occurred last January. Given the fact that the traffic volume is such that they are well beyond the projections made when the highway was opened, would the minister be kind enough to explain why he did not exercise his option to forgo that 50 cent increase?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, going back to my previous answer, I said not at this time at the end because, obviously, sometime in the future, long after I am dead and buried, they may decide to do something, and I wouldn't like at that time to be accused of having misled the House. Within this term with this government anyway, let me say that it is not our intention to proceed with that.
Getting back to the Cobequid Pass, the honourable member said that it was an option that we had. It was not an option, it was in the agreement that the previous government - of which he was a member - signed and there was a requirement in that for periodic increases of tariff, as well as periodic increases because of cost-of-living increases in the province. So we had no option, except that the corporation could have gone to the individual bond holders and asked them to waive that particular fee increase, however we didn't have the option to say no, we are not going to pay it.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I guess we will have to agree to disagree because that is not my understanding.
Back in November 1998, the Minister of Economic Development, who is the member for Digby-Annapolis - I believe I have the right constituency - tabled a petition in this House calling for completion of Highway No. 101 from Digby to Weymouth by the year 2000. I believe the honourable minister endorsed that petition at that juncture. Would the minister
be kind enough to apprise the committee as to what progress has been made with regard to that resolution?
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, I thought we might have carried on with the Cobequid Pass for a moment or two because I really didn't (Interruption) Well, it was good for me. I didn't mean to really stop there because I think it is important to point out that whereas the road itself was amortized over, I believe it was a 30 year period with the original agreement, that amortization period now, because of that increase in payments, is down to something like 15 or 16 years. If things continue, that period will continue to decrease and, at that time, we can finally tear down the toll booths at the Cobequid Pass, and that would certainly be a step in the right direction.
Coming back to Highway No. 101 and the section that is between Digby and Weymouth. As the honourable knows, you come to a grinding halt just after the overpass into Digby because the road then just follows the coast down to Weymouth before you cut back to the new highway, Highway No. 101. That section in between, Mr. Chairman, is slated to be completed, I believe it is in our 10 year program. It is part of the national highway system, so it is eligible for federal government funding and, again, it is contingent upon receiving that funding from the federal government.
We have however, I believe, identified the route and we are in the process of acquiring some land down there along that route so we will be able to complete the highway when we want to. We are, at the moment, hiring a consultant to carry out an environmental impact assessment on the route and that process should be completed by the fall of 2002. One of the bugbears of the national highway system is the fact that you not only have to meet the provincial environmental standards, you also have to meet the federal environmental standards. If the two worked hand in hand, it would be fine and dandy, however the federal requirements are different. They are not necessarily more strict, but they are different to our requirements, and as a result of that, once we have completed our assessment, then we have to do another assessment to meet the federal standards.
So it is a long, involved process, I can tell you that personally. When I was getting re-elected in 1999, I know that I made several statements about Highway No. 101 and how we would be out there with the bulldozers the day after the election. As a matter of fact, regardless of whether we had the money or not, we couldn't do that because we still hadn't completed the federal environmental survey, which had changed between the original routing and survey back in 1993, I believe it was, and 1999 when we came back to government. So we have to start off back at square one and go through the environmental process.
That was in the fall of 1999. I can tell you today that there are still some areas on that route, I believe there are two short areas on that route that still have not received final environmental approval. We have had approval to move forward and do certain things admittedly, but however there are still two points that have got to be resolved. So it is a long,
involved process. So when we say that we are starting the process now, that doesn't mean that we can build that section of Highway No. 101 in the very near future, it is going to four or five years down the road.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, just a little sidebar on that. I suspect the honourable minister, during the campaign, forgot to mention that little tidbit about the environmental requirements to his constituents. Well, in fairness, it wasn't the Opposition here that said he was going to be on the dozer the day after the election and building the road, it was another . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: Tell him his apology is accepted.
MR. MACKINNON: Well, yes, his apology is accepted and I am sure the good people along Highway No. 101 acknowledge that.
How much time do I have, Mr. Chairman?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member has until 12:10 p.m., or approximately 14 minutes.
MR. MACKINNON: With regard to Cumberland County, I understand back in January there was a request from the Cumberland County Municipal Council to clean up the sewage spilled in the Joggins area. To be honest, I don't know all the details of it, but I understand that request was made. Has the department taken any action on this particular issue, the request by Cumberland County Municipal Council? If so, what?
MR. RUSSELL: As the honourable member said, to be honest he didn't know about the concern, and to be honest I don't know either. If he could provide me with some details, I am sure I could probably get him an answer, although it may still be within the Department of Environment, not yet with the Department of Transportation.
MR. MACKINNON: Yesterday morning I had a rather interesting discussion with a constituent of mine who is a retired coal miner, he lives in the Mira district, he is from New Waterford originally, worked in No. 20 and No. 18, and No. 26 eventually. He indicated to me, with regard to the Sydney tar ponds, a rather interesting proposal. It may sound a little off the beaten track, but the more I think about it the more perhaps there is some substance to what the gentleman says, some merit. The fact that we have these abandoned coal mines in Cape Breton, anywhere from 700 to 800 feet beneath the ocean bed, has any consideration been given to the possibility of taking a lot of this toxic sludge and loading it on rail cars and taking it to these abandoned mine sites, or at least one of them anyway, and containing it within the utilized coal seams?
MR. RUSSELL: As the honourable member, being from the Sydney area, probably recognizes, the JAG went out for proposals about 10 months to a year ago and received a large number of proposals as to how to best clean up the tar ponds and the coke ovens site and what have you. They are down to 10 different methodologies that they have under consideration, and some of them are quite innovative and quite different to what we normally think of as being the normal way of dealing with an environmental problem such as that. I don't know if, among that group, there is one that says we should pump the contents of the tar ponds down into a mine; I don't know. Certainly, I think that somewhere in the not-too-distant future, they will decide on what process they are going to use and hopefully we will resolve this problem once and for all.
[12:00 noon]
The most innovative suggestion that I have heard for cleaning up the problem is simply that - as I say, they had 26 organizations that came forward with a plan to cure the problem and they sent to 10 of those proponents a sample from the tar ponds to see whether or not their process would work. These samples were quite small and somebody came up with a suggestion that we should actually send about 20 tanker loads to each one of these proponents for testing and that way we would probably drain the tar ponds and we would have no problem. So, there are ways, I suppose, of tackling the problem that can be described as thinking outside the box, and putting the stuff down in coal mines I suppose is one of them.
MR. MACKINNON: I realize my time is getting a little short and I really haven't gotten into the Public Works side of the department. The minister indicated the extensive number of complaints that come in due to auto damage, whether it be broken rims or mufflers or windshields, or whatever. Would the minister be able to give us a number, a breakdown, on that particular information? I have a pretty good idea of the figure in terms of dollars that are paid out, but the total number of actual claims and the total number of claims that the department settles with?
MR. RUSSELL: We get approximately 1,000 claims a year against the department for damage to rims and wheels and tires and shocks and windshields and what have you. The numbers that are accepted as being the responsibility for the department is quite small. I can probably get you that number, I would think. Yes, we can get you that number of successful claims.
MR. MACKINNON: On a local issue. It is Highway No. 22, extending from Sydney to Louisbourg, and it is generally referred to as the parkway because of its distinction, leading to the Fortress of Louisbourg. Has there been any discussion between the province and the federal government in terms of repaving that or doing some upgrading? This year I think, checking with the local staff, you will find that it is probably the worst that it has ever, ever been. Even the snowplow operators are having such a hard time to plow it because it
was that rough. It is one, I understand, that would certainly require some federal involvement. Is there any discussion or anything in the works in the not too distant future in terms of trying to address the state of this highway?
MR. RUSSELL: The honourable member is speaking about Highway No. 22? I shouldn't be asking you the question but, when you say federal involvement, do you mean because of the fact of Fortress Louisbourg? There are no ongoing talks that I know of anyway. The roads to tourist attractions are of considerable interest to me; that, and roads to resources. I think that our tourism industry is of sufficient importance to us today that we can treat our road to a tourist attraction, such as Fortress Louisbourg, as being the same as a road to a mine or to a person who is bottling water or something of that nature.
I really believe that we have to do something and if we can get the federal government involved - where it is a federal attraction - then I think it would be great. To my knowledge, there are no ongoing conversations with regard to Route 22. However, I am sure the honourable member is aware that Route 4 is one that has been the subject of a lot of discussion of late and probably sometime in the future - and I am not saying when, but sometime in the future - we are going to have to take a look at the route between St. Peter's and Sydney.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, on that note, I would like to acknowledge and thank the minister for following through with the commitment that had been made. When we were in power - I think we did six or seven kilometres through the Big Pond area and, of course, as the minister well knows, I mean, you put two tractor-trailers beside each other from west coast mirror to west coast mirror, that that is actually wider than the width of the asphalt. That is how deadly that highway can be in some places. The fact that the department is taking those rough turns out of there this year, from my perspective, I would say you are certainly saving lives or preventing some serious injury there. It is because of the increased traffic and it is just not stopping.
I would ask the minister if he would be kind enough to raise this issue of Route 22 with his federal counterpart at the next opportunity, or if he would be kind enough to at least send some correspondence. At least raise the flag, recognizing that there are a lot of other competing demands but the fact that this is about the single largest economic generator we have in that area, it is starting to show it is strained. Tourism numbers, I think, will start to suffer if we don't start taking some steps to do something. The ill-fated Fleur-de-lis Trail project seemed to have hit a brick wall, so that obviously shifts the focus back over on Route 22 and puts considerable pressure there to have something done. One of the two things has to be addressed, otherwise we are going to lose the economic benefits that would be realized otherwise.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Transportation and Public Works has a little over two minutes left in this session.
MR. RUSSELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We were talking about whether or not there are ongoing discussions and I said no, there are not. This matter was raised, maybe somewhat obliquely, with Intergovernmental Affairs, who are conducting quite a bit of traffic between various ministries and the province at the present time. It is certainly one worth pursuing.
I was also talking about roads to resources and that kind of thing, and this is where there is a spillover between departments. For instance, my colleague, the Minister of Economic Development, we have had a number of discussions, and at the deputy minister level there have been a number of discussions as to how we can encourage the Department of Economic Development and all their funding bodies outside of government to perhaps inject some money into the Department of Transportation and Public Works to do work that will accommodate the traffic needs of industrial development around the province. It's a very real need for industry that wants to develop a plant or mine or some other type of business that is going to generate a lot of truck traffic to have roads that are available year-round. At the present time, that isn't so.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton West, you have 20 seconds.
MR. MACKINNON: I would like to thank the minister for providing the information he has provided. On the issue of Route 22, I raised this with the Minister of Economic Development during his estimates, and I had requested if he would write a letter to you flagging this as a concern and he refused to do so. So, maybe you could nudge him along, as well. On that note, I want to thank the minister.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The member's time has expired.
The honourable member for Sackville-Cobequid.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Chairman, there are many things one could touch base with the minister on, but I won't go through all of those as others have, there are other issues I want to raise. I just want to touch first of all, if I can, on one particular issue, a local one. Mr. Chairman, I am having trouble and I wonder if the minister can help me locate something. Before now, I know there was a former government, Conservative Government, that had initially made the promise that the Sackville expressway was going to be built from Sackville to the Burnside Industrial Park. As hard as I keep looking, and I haven't gone to the Minister of Tourism's map because I know that it has been defective in the past, but I haven't been able to find the entrance to the Sackville expressway that would join Sackville over to the Burnside Industrial Park.
I am not sure, but I think the current Minister of Transportation might have been the minister of the day back in the late 1990's, and it was even in the 1980's that it had been promised as well. It might have actually been the minister who made the commitment at that time, he was certainly a member of the Executive Council. I am wondering if the minster could tell me, where is the entrance to the Sackville expressway located?
MR. RUSSELL: To answer your question, I don't know. However, I should advise the honourable member that that particular expressway is not on our priority list at the present time.
MR. HOLM: Mr. Chairman, I figured it wasn't on the government's priority list and I am not surprised he doesn't know where the entrance is because it's not there. It ain't been built. I wonder if the minister could tell us when it dropped off the government's priority list and could he give some indication as to when it may get back on it?
MR. RUSSELL: It fell off our priority list, if you will. It wasn't actually on a priority list, it was on a to-do list, like something you would have on the fridge door and it is no longer on the fridge door. It won't get back there again until such time as the finances of the province have improved to the extent that we can get around to doing things of a lesser priority. Quite frankly, that is not a priority item for the government at the present time.
MR. HOLM: Mr. Chairman, I wish that the government of the day had told the people of Sackville when they were out there doing their grandiose announcements that, really, they were just being put on the fridge door. The minster says that it never was a priority, it was just on the fridge door as part of a to-do list. Well, that to-do list had time frames, time frames when various sections of that road were to be built, when the design work was going to be done, the interchanges were going to be done, and people should be motoring along at the present time, according to the on-the-fridge - as the minister calls it - to-do list.
I am sure that his colleague, the member for Bedford-Fall River even would be interested in that, as would his colleague, the member for Sackville-Beaver Bank. There is tremendous growth that is going on in those surrounding communities and the existing roadways are getting backed up and backed up tremendously. Magazine Hill has major problems, and if the minister is not aware, check with your department officials and find out how many accidents occur on the Magazine Hill. Many of them may not be reported because they are not major, serious accidents that require hospitalization or where people have been killed, but there are accidents along that road nonetheless. The traffic is often backed up well along the Bedford bypass.
As the growth continues in that area, those problems are getting even greater. The member for Sackville-Beaver Bank can tell you, as well or better than I can, about the amount of growth that is occurring in his constituency, up the Beaver Bank Road, for
example. The member for Bedford-Fall River can tell you about all the growth that is occurring in that area. All of that is putting more traffic.
So, I am wondering if the minister could tell us when that road was supposed to have been finished and when the minister - he was sort of vague in his comments, it will be back on the planning stages sometime when the province's finances permit. That is a catch-all phrase you can use to erase any commitment. I would like to know from the minister, more importantly, the residents who are there and the residents who are moving into these growing areas, approximately when, what stage are we at in the design work? Has the corridor finally been set? I know it had been originally, then there was some rejigging and discussion about changing the route that it was going to go, moving it further away from the quarry that was in the area, different things that would reduce the cost. I would like to have an update, and I think the residents who were promised this road well over 10 years ago have a right to know where that stands at the present time.
MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Chairman, it's an excellent question. I have the pleasure of driving the Magazine Hill, normally, on a daily basis and I certainly know what the traffic is like over there. The honourable member is familiar with the envelopes, and I would like to go back to envelope number 1, and opening that up and blaming the previous government. However, that is not going to achieve anything significant. There were a number of projects that were on the front burner back in the early 1990's and this was one of them, along with Highway No. 101, if I may mention it. Those projects got moved further and further back on the burner and some of them have never been resuscitated, and one is the Sackville expressway.
The Sackville expressway was never actually a name of a specific road - it is an extension of Highway No. 107 and it is going to go from Highway No. 102 through to Cobequid Road, as I understand it. We still intend to actually do that project, whether it will be the original route or not, I can't answer. We do have the original routing but, beyond that, we are not going to progress for some time until sufficient money becomes available.
It is a nice project, it is one that is necessary to move people and goods and services expeditiously, but as I said much earlier this day, our funding at the present time has to go to maintaining what we have rather than doing things that are nice and necessary. We are going to have to wait to do those things until the money becomes available. It will be done sometime in the future. I can't say that it is going to be within the next three or four years or something, but perhaps in the next five, six or seven years we could make a start on that project. It is also an expensive project, as the member is well aware.
MR. HOLM: No, I know it wasn't called the Sackville expressway by