[Page 263]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The Committee of the Whole House on Supply will now be called to order. I understand the member for Kings West was the last one. The honourable member used 36 minutes on Friday.

The honourable member for Kings West.

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm pleased to continue with some questions today to the minister and her staff. One of the areas that I want to take a look at today is public housing, affordable housing. This certainly is a very, very significant area of need through my riding and through the Annapolis Valley, generally. The last estimate that I had in regard to the western area, which is the Annapolis Valley/South Shore Housing Authority, there was a requirement of 689 families, 521seniors, 227 non-elderly, for a total of 1,437. That was roughly about a year ago, but I'm told that these statistics have not varied very much during that time.

So I guess the time has come to take a hard look at what is a plan here for one year, or three years or five years out, to try to meet some of those needs. I know that we have certainly had a number of announcements, federally, with dollars. The Department of Community Services 2006-07 Business Plan indicates Phase II as starting this year with an additional $18.9 million, bringing total financing to $56 million by the year 2010. I'm just wondering, where does the Annapolis Valley, the western part of the province, fit in terms of some of that plan?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Community Services.

[Page 264]

HON. JUDY STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, it's a pleasure to resume discussion, debate with my honourable colleague who brings a very important issue to the floor here this afternoon. The Housing portfolio is one that is extremely challenging, as my good colleague knows and understands. He referenced the wait lists, and those wait lists, of course, are something that we attempt to work with and to get rid of, would be a perfect-world scenario. In doing so, we have various programs available to us. We have approximately 13 housing programs under the housing menu. Those housing programs exist all across the province, of course, and we endeavour to meet the needs of each of the regions the best we can.

Now, of course, we have some statistics in the province that are indisputable. Of course, we have a very aged housing stock. We also have a lot of private ownership of homes, Mr. Chairman, and certainly that proves to be a challenge, no question.

Now, when it comes to dollars and commitment and a plan, we know that the federal government, through their housing, through Phase I, committed approximately $39 million. We were able to access those funds. Phase I, 928 units across the province have all been committed. Those projects exist in the form of home preservation, rent supplements, the student housing program that we offer through the universities, as well as the repair and renovation programs that we were able to roll out as well.

Now the individual programs and the individual projects in each of the ridings, I would be happy to share that list with my honourable colleague after debate, if he would like to get the specific locations, as well, as the specific locations of the projects, the projected completion date. Some of our projects haven't been completed yet, Mr. Chairman. Of course, we have discussed here in the House some of the challenges that we have encountered because of that. We, of course, have the pressures that exist within the construction industry, labour shortage issues that, although we can provide the funding and have the projects approved, if indeed the workers aren't available and the developers aren't able to get the project off the ground, then it's something that's out of our control at that point. So some of those projects that my honourable colleague is looking for would fall into that category.

We have completed projects for a couple. For example, Mr. Chairman, 15 units would have been completed in Middleton; Westville, four units - I'm trying to look for the western region - New Minas, 24 units, these have already been completed. Again, in an attempt to come to some type of complete number, 273 of those units have been completed to date. We have 270 that are currently under construction and, of course, we have 114, though none of those 114 are in my honourable colleague's constituency riding, but we are holding out for land issues and development complications. So, again, as we roll out those projects, they have all been completed.

Now my honourable colleague asked about Phase II. Of course, we have put out the tender for Phase II. We received 33 proposals. Those proposals are currently at the department, Mr. Chairman. They are ensuring that all of the necessary documents are

[Page 265]

provided. The Phase II, we will attempt to get out the door as soon as we possibly can. The dollars have been secured for that and as soon as we ensure that all of the documentation has been provided, we'll roll out the approval of that Phase II as well.

As well, my honourable colleague knows that we used a certain portion of the trust money for elevators, and those types of upgrades to some of our housing facilities as well, to ensure that we were drawing down the best possible case scenario for our clientele, Mr. Chairman.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you very much, Madam Minister, for the overview of where affordable housing is, where it's going, and of course the challenges that are presented. In terms of Phase II, have tenders been called there? What are some of the timelines when we could say that families will in fact see that those homes are in a move-in condition? I just wondered if there's anything there that can bring some hope to a very, very challenging situation. I know that the Cobequid Housing Authority is still trying to provide some additional stock in our area, because it is an area with very, very high demand. We are now seeing more of a migrant farm worker that moves into the area and decides they're going to stay, and finding housing or apartments that are affordable for rent. I'm just wondering if any of those are possibly of Phase II, what kind of a rollout plan is there?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, my honourable colleague brings to the floor a couple of issues that are extremely important and one that I find particularly intriguing. Phase II, the RFP went out to the public, the tenders closed February 15^th, so as of February 15, 2007, tenders had closed. Upon that date we had received 33 applications. Those 33 applications are in the process of being reviewed by the department to ensure that all supporting documentation that is required is indeed there, to ensure the projects that truly do need to be made available are, in the most timely fashion.

I have instructed staff that I would like that turnaround to be as fast as we possibly can, of course doing due diligence. We don't want to have any knee-jerk reactions, but with that February 15^th close date of the tenders, I would anticipate that in early Spring, mid-Spring, we would be able to turn around to the developers and make them aware of the successful proposals that are found within that portfolio of Phase II dollars.

My honourable colleague brings forward a very interesting challenge though. It's one I would appreciate discussing with him either in further discussion here today, or outside the Chamber, and that's on the migrant workers and the housing stresses that causes. I know my honourable colleague comes from an agricultural sector of the province, he would know all too well, with the seasonal labour shortage, the challenges that presents, and as those migrant workers come into an area. I would be quite interested to find out what types of discussions have gone on with some of the other departments, whether it be agriculture, and through the Federation of Agriculture perhaps they have some suggestions.

[Page 266]

I know in the past, we've worked with the Christmas Tree Producers' Association when it came to the Harvest Connection Program that we rolled out. I'm wondering what kind of advice some of those stakeholders may have and what kind of input they may have. I would look forward to receiving that and finding out what the scenario is in some of our agricultural sectors, some of our agricultural communities.

[3:30 p.m.]

MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, before the group moves out and back to the Valley, I guess they would like for me to go outside, so I'm going to ask one more question and then turn the floor over to the member opposite.

My question is, one of the groups, as well, that are finding it very difficult and challenging around housing needs are the 55- to 65-year-old group, where there is chronic disease, there is limited income, CPP disability, these types of income are the ones that are there. Recently, I had a letter from a group in Wolfville, I believe it's called the Wickwire Co-operative group, who want to get into a partnership with the Department of Community Services, with government, to build units and then have them move forward with the operation. I'm just wondering, is there some kind of model like that that you currently have?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I would very much look forward to receiving a copy of that correspondence and/or having my housing folks meet with that particular group - it sounds like a very worthwhile partnership.

Indeed, that's very important, that we work in partnership with our community organizations, with the stakeholders, who have vested interests in what goes on in our communities. Currently, under Phase I, there are certain criteria involved for funding. The same holds true for Phase II; I'm not sure if this group put a proposal in under Phase II. If they did, hopefully they'll be successful with their tender call. If they didn't, then it would be something that I would look forward to discussing with them in-depth, with my housing folks, because as we well know, the whole issue around - and we've discussed it before - aging in place - and even I like to add aging in place with grace - certainly is extremely important to all of our communities, Mr. Chairman. So that certainly is a project that I would be interested in hearing more about from my honourable colleague.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth South-Portland Valley.

MS. MARILYN MORE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I brought along my own backup musicians and cheerleaders this afternoon.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I noticed. (Laughter)

[Page 267]

MS. MORE: Madam Minister, I'm going to focus my questions around my critic area for the people with disabilities in the province, just to give you a heads-up on my main theme. I would be curious to know, it was interesting in looking several times over the past nine or 10 months that I've had that critic area, at the Web site for persons with disabilities, and I'm always struck by the inclusion of the word "voluntary" in there. I will, perhaps a little later, get into that, because I'm just curious to know the department's reason for using that term. Does the department feel that there are any mandated programs and services for persons with disabilities, or are they all voluntary, just at the will of the government?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As much as we're perhaps all enjoying the cheerleaders, I was trying to get clarification for the question being asked and what my honourable colleague was looking for.

I believe, if I understand correctly, it is the issue of voluntary versus obligation, and obligation on the government's part versus voluntary for services for persons who find themselves with disabilities. Certainly the onus, or I should say the responsibility, I believe, is a communal responsibility, is a societal responsibility. As we look at the services for persons with disabilities that we provide across the province, there are increasingly more challenging issues that our clientele with disabilities find themselves facing.

Mr. Chairman, if I can, I will use a small example. Just two weekends ago we attended the opening of a new residential apartment complex in Fairview. I had the pleasure of having Ralph Ferguson and Anne MacRae, the president and chairman of the Board of the Disabled Persons Commission, with us at that announcement. We were talking about the importance of accessability, because this apartment building was celebrating the fact that it had accessible units to live in and all of their units were accessible for visitation. The delight on the faces of the individuals who were there representing the commission, you could see the delight. I leaned in and said to Mr. Ferguson, is this a choice? At what point do we encourage? So it was a bit of a learning opportunity for me, in consultation and discussion with Mr. Ferguson, about what building codes require versus what is voluntary on the part of developers.

Mr. Chairman, I believe that it truly is a societal, a communal responsibility to ensure that persons with disabilities find themselves able to access programs and services, as well as a recognition and, along with that recognition, of course, always goes the education component, which is extremely important. The education component, of course, we have a shared responsibility there, and government can lead by example, and we can do so with all of our stakeholders, all levels of government, and indeed the groups we work with within the communities, to ensure that responsibility is shared amongst all of us.

MS. MORE: Mr. Chairman, well, it's interesting, I went to a consultation that the Disabled Persons Commission held in Truro probably three weeks ago now, and the mother of a young adult man with severe disabilities got up and told the story of her son, and she

[Page 268]

finished with a rhetorical question that has kept me thinking about it ever since, she said why are people with disabilities treated worse than prisoners in prisons in Nova Scotia? It startled me. So I started to do a little bit of research about what human rights apply in Nova Scotia to persons with disabilities. It's interesting, because certainly one of the main purposes of the Human Rights Act is to affirm that every individual living in Nova Scotia is equal in dignity and rights, and it says without regard to physical and mental disability.

The purpose of the Act is to ensure that persons with disabilities, as well as other marginalized groups, can enjoy a full and productive life, and that failure to provide equality of opportunity that threatens the status of people can be considered discrimination. Because I'm trying to reconcile my very superficial understanding of what persons with disabilities deserve to have under our Human Rights Act with the current situation that I think a lot of persons with disabilities, especially those living in poverty, the kinds of services and programs they're offered in Nova Scotia, I'd like to ask the minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, what is the wait list for persons with disabilities in Nova Scotia, for people who have met the criteria for residential support and vocational day supports but are not entitled to those programs?

It's only, as I understand, as resources allow, that is how much money is in the budget for those programs. They're not entitled to that service, although they're eligible for it because they meet the criteria. So just taking perhaps two of the major programs that government provides, residential placement, and vocational and day supports, how many people are waiting to get service there?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague, I just want to go back to the statement that she referenced at the beginning. What a very emotional, powerful statement. As elected officials, we all find ourselves, at various times, reflecting on the human side of exactly what it is that we're doing, and sometimes it's much more poignant and much more emotional than others. I can't imagine that it was an easy statement for that mother to make, and I can't imagine it was an easy statement to hear. I could tell that my colleague has been wrestling with it. I thank her for bringing it, because I'm sure I will wrestle with it myself. It's not one that we can dismiss. I'm sure that the challenges that mother and that family have faced have been very real, and I would not dismiss those with any type of fact or figure that I may give here today. So I want to acknowledge that's a very realistic statement, and I'm sure very realistic for that family.

Now, Mr. Chairman, when it comes to services for persons with disabilities and our whole issue of programs, program delivery and wait lists, it's a challenge - it's a challenge that we deal with. I will reference a few examples for my honourable colleague that go to the point of why it becomes so challenging. There is no magical number that I can quote right here, today. I can get, for my honourable colleague, different numbers, as they exist around the regions, because each region would have various wait lists of various length for different reasons. A very simple example to prove that's the very successful program that we launched

[Page 269]

last year in Cape Breton - the Independent Living Support. In introducing that to the Cape Breton region - of course, we had the three new programs, but I'm specifically talking about the independent living one now, very successful in that the community received it and the community embraced it.

We've had a phenomenal response to that program. As a result we've increased the budget allotment for that specific component of the program. We've rolled it out in the northern region in this fiscal, and we will also roll it out to the two other regions by the end of this year. So when we talk about the success of that program, we have alleviated some of the wait lists that would have existed, because they've opted for a different program. But now we find ourselves with a wait list for that program. So the wait list will vary and I think my honourable colleague can understand where I'm going with this - that it's not an easy number answer to give.

The other component that I'll bring to the floor today, of course, involves small options homes, group homes, residential facilities. We know that we have challenges with beds and with spaces being available in that variety of options - we don't always have the option available, Mr. Chairman, that the individual or the individual family is looking for. We have endeavoured through consultation with our stakeholders to put on the ground level those three very successful programs - the family support, the alternate family support and the independent living. Recognizing again that they've been so successful, we have increased the funding for those. So, again, the wait lists will vary region to region depending on what programs are available in those regions, and they will also vary depending on what level of service we have in each of the regions.

MS. MORE: Mr. Chairman, I commend the department for putting various options in for families and persons with disabilities, but I think the numbers that the minister might be talking about are so minuscule compared to the need for those programs. So, for example, it appears that the Independent Living Support Program last year only had 10 people in it, and I understand that you would like to increase that to 90 over the coming year, but that suggests to me that there could be another 80 people possibly on that wait list.

[3:45 p.m.]

The same with the Alternative Family Support Program, last year eight clients were placed and your target for this year is 38 clients. So I'm suggesting there are probably 30 people waiting on that list and on and on. Some of the others, I suspect the wait lists are in the hundreds, which brings me back to another point, has the department released its accountability report for 2006-07?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to ask for elaboration on the accountability report, I'm uncertain of what my colleague is looking for.

[Page 270]

MS. MORE: Mr. Chairman, I looked on the Web site and I saw the business plan for the upcoming year, but for the last three or four years there has been what has been called an accountability report. It actually listed the goals and the measures, and it gave baseline data for different things so you could actually compare between budget years. I couldn't find it this year and I'm just wondering if that information, that baseline and comparison information, which allows me to look at the accountability of the department, I'm wondering, is that available and when will it be going on the Web site, or perhaps it's not listed in that area?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, as always, it's extremely helpful to have knowledgeable staff with you at times like this. It's my understanding that the report that my honourable colleague is looking for traditionally follows the business plan and the estimates, so it's not available at this time. Certainly it has not been released yet, and when it is released I would be more than pleased to provide a copy for my honourable colleague.

MS. MORE: Thank you for that and I will look forward to that. You mentioned yourself the small options as perhaps being one of the most used and most popular of your residential supports available. There has been a freeze on small options for a number of years - some people suggest as high as 14, but I don't know if that's accurate - how long would you, as minister, say that freeze has been on the small options availability?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, my honourable colleague brings an issue to the floor that I find becomes quite challenging to respond to. As individuals say to me about a moratorium, or a freeze, I freeze myself because I don't like to think of a freeze or a moratorium being in place. I have stated numerous times that while the department has been undergoing a residential review, we have been looking at the different options that are available out there. We have been looking at funding formulas, a consistent funding formula for our service providers, we did stakeholder consultation, et cetera, and I know it has been ongoing for a long period of time. An exact figure - it was before my time, so I couldn't give an exact date.

I have asked for all of that to be expedited so that we can get to the job of putting programs and services in place. I don't stand and wait for the report to come - we've moved forward as we've been awaiting the result of some of those documents coming to the department. My honourable colleague would be well aware of the options I'm referring to, that I've made reference to in this House before, and so I won't take her time and repeat them here this afternoon. But I do know that it's a concern. I get the feedback from clients and clients' families that it is indeed time to move along. I've attempted to do that and commit to doing it in the days to come to the best of our ability without holding onto the reports any longer than is necessary.

MS. MORE: I think all of us on this side of the House recognize that small options homes are expensive. Part of the reason is because they're probably the most effective way

[Page 271]

of providing supportive accommodations for people with severe disabilities. Often the most challenging clients are placed in those small options homes, but they are a huge and very necessary piece of the continuum of supports that must be in place in this province.

I know, for example - because I've spoken to him a number of times - I have a couple in my constituency who have provided emergency and long-term placements for the most severe disabled persons in Nova Scotia, who are actually trying to turn their operation into a small options home. I have actually read their business plan and it's extremely impressive. This couple - one's a counsellor and the other has her master's degree in counselling - and it really amazes me that they cannot get permission to open up as a small options home and become licensed when they are the preferred placement by the department for some of the most challenging clients in your care.

I'm just wondering, what hope can you give to entrepreneurs across Nova Scotia who have invested lots of time, money and energy into training, into modifying their residences and facilities to meet the criteria - in fact, exceed the criteria - for small options homes and can't get licensed to open?

MS. STREATCH: Again, the entire concept of the continuum of options, the continuum of placements, the continuum of services we provide is one that is extremely important, because not every case can have a label attached to it. They are so diverse and complex in their individual needs, the cases and the specific instances, that it's incumbent upon us - and I know that each and every day in the department, staff work to be extremely creative, in some instances, in finding the right fit.

We recognize and we value what all of our service providers do for Nova Scotians. I can't even begin to tell you some of the amazing individuals I've met and I know my honourable colleague speaks of a particular couple - I don't believe I've met them personally, but I have met with other such individuals and service providers who do work with those who need us the most.

We value what each of these service providers is able to provide to the community. I would look forward to hearing more about this particular couple specifically, because we've been able and we will be even more able to do so once we get the review - the review will guide us through how we best fit the small options home, the group home, the more complex cases, it will help us figure out how to best fit in our communities, and it may be that this very case becomes one of those best fits for us.

We have, in the past, been able to work with what best fits. So I'd be pleased to discuss the particulars of this with my colleague outside the Chamber, to get the details and encourage the couple my colleague references to continue to work with us, to find a balance that works for all of us, so they can continue to provide that great care that they do to the community.

[Page 272]

MS. MORE: Well, I certainly look forward to having that discussion, because I think the freeze on small options homes has provided more pain and suffering to Nova Scotia families than almost any other decision, or lack of decision, made within the department.

I hate to feel cynical after only four years in this Chamber, but I'm told that there has been a series of reviews on residential placements within the department going back 10 and 15 years. Some people would suggest, I'm sure, that review and study has become a synonym for delay and lack of decision making. All of the reviews that have been done on supports necessary for persons with disabilities in this province suggest that there has to be an investment of public dollars to bring them up to standard.

I'm really, really worried that continuing to review when we know what the answer is going to be is just delaying a much-needed decision making and it's downloading the burden of looking after, especially persons with severe disabilities, it's downloading that burden to the families and to the communities and to the charities and service organizations in those communities.

Take, for example, technical aids. I can't tell you the number of people who have phoned MLA offices - I'm sure everyone in this Chamber has had the same experience - looking for financial assistance for motorized scooters, for hearing aids, for power wheelchairs - apparently the Department of Community Services suggests to people that they need to go to the charities to get these.

I know we have a demonstration project, the adult wheelchair recycling demonstration project, and I think it has proven its worth but it needs to be expanded very, very quickly, plus the criteria to be eligible for it are too restrictive. Because the majority of the money is going to persons on the Employment Support and Income Assistance program, only 20 power chairs, for example, are available for the rest of the population through this program.

I've had a woman who is living on $12,000 a year contact my office. She has to replace her power wheelchair and she is not eligible for this program because she has a very small, private medical plan that will contribute possibly $1,200 or $1,500 toward an $8,000 wheelchair and that disqualifies her; whereas someone else who perhaps is making $20,000 but doesn't have any private insurance plan is eligible to get a wheelchair through the program. So through you, Mr. Chairman, to the minister, is there any intent in this current budget to both expand the recycling demonstration program for adult wheelchairs and will the criteria be loosened to allow those in true need to be able to benefit from it?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, my honourable colleague began this last round of questioning with the concern, and I share her concern. We cannot as government, we cannot as elective representatives, study to death issues without putting a plan in place. I certainly want to assure my colleague and all members of this House that we have been moving

[Page 273]

forward and I will continue to move forward. April 2000 has the been the time frame for the receipt of that review and it is no longer, as my colleague pointed out, necessary to study this issue to death. We absolutely will continue to move forward, and I make that commitment.

The evidence of this government's commitment to the programming, Mr. Chairman, I think is reflected in the three dollar figures that my honourable colleague will see, $89 million up to $90 million and estimated for the next fiscal, $105 million for community-based programs. I think that's extremely important to note, that it's not a downscaling, it's not a cutting, it is indeed an addition and an adding to the programs because we recognize the value of those community-based programs. Again, we will do due diligence to ensure that we get the continuum right, and work with our stakeholders to ensure that their input is absolutely involved in that.

[4:00 p.m.]

Now, specifically, the $1 million commitment to the Abilities Foundation, Mr. Chairman, is something that we are extremely pleased with in the department and as a government. I know that we are awaiting some feedback and response from the foundation to deal with the issues like my honourable colleague brought forward here today, so when we hear back from them we will be able to better react and adjust or amend the regulations and the specifics about the program to decide what the go-forward looks like.

MS. MORE: Mr. Chairman, in going back to that particular topic, I just want to reinforce the understanding of the minister in that if we want to keep people independent in their own homes we have to make sure that the modifications and the technical aids and assistive devices that they need to stay independent and self-sufficient are in place; otherwise they are going to move over to the side where we need to consider residential placement and that's a much more costly alternative. I realize that she understands that, but we need to make sure that the supports in the community are there.

I want to go back to something that the minister herself mentioned early on and that was the visitability standards that are in place now in some new construction. I would like to suggest and ask the minister if the department has looked at putting those standards in all the new affordable housing options in Nova Scotia, or also making that part of the building code. I understand that it would be less than $1,000 per unit to put in basic barrier-free standards in new home construction, and this would be a very proactive, cost-effective way of creating accessible housing stock both now and for the future, and considering that Nova Scotia has one of the highest rates of disability, if not the highest in Canada, I would suggest that doing these things proactively, at low cost to the public purse, would certainly be the route to follow. So I would like to ask, through you, Mr. Chairman, whether the department has made this recommendation.

[Page 274]

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, we often talk about the importance of cross-jurisdictional and cross-governmental responsibility. As I was listening to my honourable colleague, that was one of the questions that I had asked at the time when we were discussing what jurisdiction exists where, who has the ability to make those recommendations and those requests? So I understand that there is a Canadian building code, there are provincial standards and municipal standards. I believe it is incumbent upon governments to co-operate, to ensure that we work within the parameters of those three, but also that we involve the stakeholders who best understand the challenges that come along with that. So, certainly, that is something that we take very seriously.

I believe, and I can get the specifics of the tender call, Mr. Chairman, but I believe in the tender call itself, for our housing developments, we have an accessibility requirement. Certainly, as we continue to respond to the ever-pressing issues of society when it comes to accessibility issues, that's a must, and it must continue.

MS. MORE: Mr. Chairman, just one other question before I pass it over to one of my colleagues. Canada has signed the UN Convention, so I'm just wondering, does your budget for next year reflect any of the necessary action that Nova Scotia may have to take as a result of signing the UN Convention? Thank you.

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, indeed, I was hoping my colleague would bring that forward, as I know she brought it forward in the House before. I'm pleased to say yes, Nova Scotia certainly has supported Canada signing the UN Convention. It was a bit of a learning curve for me, because I had to understand the difference between signature and ratification. Canada signing on, of course, is a commitment to move forward with the Convention, Canada, of course, as the federal jurisdiction, to work with the provinces that have the jurisdiction, the responsibility for that, to work with the provinces before ratification, as it would be ratification that would incur any financial responsibilities or costs to the provinces. So we will continue to have dialogue and discussion with our federal counterparts and, as we move forward toward ratification, that certainly would be included in any budgetary discussions.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Citadel.

MR. LEONARD PREYRA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Through you to the minister, I have a series of very short questions that arise largely from cases that arose in my constituency that I also believe raised policy questions. A couple of them relate to my area as Youth Critic.

I'd like to start by asking about Spencer House, which is a seniors' home in my constituency. As you know, most seniors would like to live in their homes as long as possible, and in their communities, and the government's stated goal is to make that possible.

[Page 275]

Spencer House provides a hot meal to seniors who drop in. There are recreational facilities, there is music, there is a great deal of companionship and recreation, and it is a very important resource to my constituency. Yet, despite the government's statement about creating more opportunities for seniors in their communities, Spencer House has essentially lost resources since 1999.Their funds have been effectively cut back, they have had to lay off people. It used to be open on weekends and now it is open only on weekdays, and it is a tremendous success story.

I wanted to table a newspaper article about that, just to give the minister some background. The Minister of Health made a statement at Spencer House not that long ago, and I talked with him about it, because it was somewhat an inappropriate location for a good-news story about seniors because they in effect cut back, and he undertook at that time to consult with you, and he said that the situation at Spencer House would be reviewed. I want to know, has he consulted with you and have you reached any decision about Spencer House and about seniors' homes in general, in providing more resources to them in their own communities?

MS. STREATCH: I welcome my honourable colleague to the discussion today and appreciate him bringing forward particular cases that take place in his constituency that are important to all Nova Scotians, but in particular to the member himself. Spencer House is one of those locations I've not been to myself yet, but would welcome an opportunity to go, and perhaps my honourable colleague would go along with me.

I know the Minister of Health was there, I wasn't able to be there for that announcement, but would look forward to having a visit, because the information, the discussion I had with my honourable colleague from Health was indeed that it was a spot that I should make sure I get to myself. Perhaps I'll take that up with my colleague outside the Chamber and we'll arrange for a visit ourselves.

Of course, as with all budgetary pressures, as we move through the budgetary process, we will be examining those pressures as they unfold. Again, I know my honourable colleague referenced cuts in funding. It's my understanding the Department of Community Services maintained their funding and we were not one of those who cut funding to that facility. That's always good news, when you're not one of the ones that has and so we take pleasure in being able to say that.

So the maintaining of that funding is important, as well as a positive relationship with the folks at Spencer House, to ensure we work together, to maximize any fundraising opportunities they may have, to maximize any programming that may exist within the department or outside of the department that we can assist them to access. It would be in that vein that I would welcome a visit and an opportunity to meet with the folks from Spencer House to see if there are some other components that we can access together to ensure they maximize their available funding.

[Page 276]

MR. PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, through you, I thank the minister for her very open response. I will definitely take her up on her offer to visit Spencer House. I can tell you, the seniors are very articulate and their executive director, Deborah Dostal can be quite passionate and quite convincing, so I welcome the opportunity to visit with you at Spencer House.

In terms of funding, I did not suggest that funding had been rolled back, but that funding had been frozen since 1999, and that's in effect a cutback when you consider the costs of running a seniors' centre.

The other question I have also relates to seniors. I conducted a survey of seniors and seniors' homes in my constituency and asked them what issues were important to you, what did you like about the current arrangements and what didn't you like? Two issues kept coming up regularly in the surveys. The return rate was about 40 per cent, which is quite incredible.

The first issue revolved largely around transportation. Many seniors, especially in winter, feel trapped in their homes and they can't access services that are available to them and they would very much like to improve Access-A-Bus services. They would like to have it longer in the evenings, they would like to have it on weekends so that they can get out of their homes and apartments and participate more actively in events that most of us take for granted.

My question is, on transportation - perhaps I'll give you the second part of my question as well. The second theme revolved around recreation for seniors in seniors' homes. For the same reason, they felt trapped; they're very sociable and many of them are lonely in their apartments and they'd like to get out and engage and get involved with their communities. They would very much like to see more recreational facilities.

I guess that's a two-part question. What is the minister planning on doing to provide better and more accessible transportation for seniors and also, are there any plans to provide additional services for recreation in seniors' homes around communities?

MS. STREATCH: I want to begin by applauding my colleague for doing something that's challenging. When you ask the question, you have to be prepared for the answer. So reaching out to the seniors and asking them their concerns is something that we could likely all do more of. So I want to applaud my colleague for doing that and a 40 per cent return rate is phenomenal. So whatever tricks he used, we should all take a lesson from that because a 40 per cent return is really great, and I would encourage him to share that information with any other department or minister who might benefit from some of that information. I certainly will do that after today. I will take the issues that my colleague brought up and I will take them to the departments that could benefit learning that information as well, and I would encourage him to do so as well.

[Page 277]

So when we talk about transportation, again, it's important to recognize that there's no question, transportation can be a challenge. I know my honourable colleague has an urban riding and it's a challenge for the urban seniors to get out and about within the community, equally as much of a challenge as it is for our rural seniors to get out and about in their community and find activities and opportunities to socialize, to exercise, et cetera.

The Access-A-Bus, as I understand, is a municipal responsibility but certainly, again, I don't believe that we should allow walls to exist that prevent us from discussion. I will certainly bring the issue to my honourable colleague, the Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations, as well as the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection, which is where I'm going with the recreational facility answer as well, because I think collectively we have to appreciate that - I know that the government has made a commitment in this budget to expand the number of recreation facilities across the province, Mr. Chairman. There's a commitment to a dollar figure and I won't put that dollar figure in the mouth of my colleague, but I believe it was in the vein of $50 million. So certainly we would want to ensure that all of our constituents, young and more aged, are able to access the facilities that those dollars will go to create.

I do want to bring one other topic to my honourable colleague's attention though and that is the new pilot program that we're bringing in this year through the Department of Community Services. That is an assistance for seniors to stay in their homes and access resources as a part of that ability to stay in their homes longer. So as we roll out the details on that, certainly I will make those available to all of my colleagues and I know that my honourable colleague will be interested to see the details of that pilot, Mr. Chairman.

[4:15 p.m.]

MR. PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, I would like to put on the record that it was a social worker at Metro Housing who helped me get that 40 per cent return rate and if it's not inappropriate, I'll name her, Sara Campbell is the social worker and she is assigned to Joe Howe Manor.

I have another set of questions related more to my critic area and more specifically the McEvoy inquiry. I have a letter here and I won't table it because I see that the minister was copied on it. It's from the Halifax Peninsula Community Health Board and I'll summarize some of these recommendations to you. The Nunn Inquiry, as you know, recommended that the department develop a public, comprehensive and collaborative, interdepartmental strategy to coordinate provincial programs, services and supports for children and youth at risk and their families.

In particular, there have been challenges revolving around schools and youth at risk in schools and youth who come into contact with the justice system and with health, particularly mental health and addiction. I'm wondering, what specific programs have been

[Page 278]

put in place? I don't expect the minister to give me a comprehensive answer at this stage, because it hasn't been that long ago, but I would like to know what your department has done recently, or plans on doing, to meet some of the recommendations of the Nunn Inquiry on collaboration.

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I really want to thank my honourable colleague for bringing this forward. The horrific tragedy of the Theresa McEvoy death provided the opportunity for us to learn from this terrible tragedy. The opportunity presented itself through the Nunn Commission and I was extremely pleased to be part of that team that unanimously accepted all 34 recommendations of Justice Nunn.

In doing so, Mr. Chairman, we did not do that lightly. We accepted all 34 with the understanding that it came with a financial responsibility, it comes with a visionary responsibility and a social responsibility. As I've stated before on the floor of this House, for those who have not read Justice Nunn's report, I would encourage you to, because it is extremely moving and there's no question that there are challenges out there that we need to address and take very seriously.

As my honourable colleague identified, we have been made the lead on this, on the response, on the action, the move forward. We've accepted them and now we have the move forward. The $3 million commitment in the budget is financial proof to that commitment, but even more so is the commitment as lead minister; in discussion with my colleagues in the various other departments who are involved here, we know that the collaboration piece is key. All too often, clients come to us who say we couldn't access it, we know it's out there somewhere, but we weren't sure how to access it. So that's absolutely essential in taking up the recommendations of Justice Nunn.

Of course we will be creating the Family and Youth Services section within the department. That's being carved out as we speak. We did advertise for the position of the individual who would create that youth strategy; that process is going through due diligence and we would anticipate that individual to be hired in the very near future. We didn't say we were going to wait, because we told Nova Scotians we would report in June, so we didn't sit and wait for these other components to fall into place.

The deputy's committee has been working very diligently to put together the culmination of the resources that are available out there and how we better access them through some of those facilities that we have across this province. When you look at the family resource centres and the education at the schools and what they're doing in some of these areas, it's amazing. We need to make sure we bring together all of the components to ensure consistent service delivery and to ensure that those who need us most are able to not only find us, but find us and then access those services.

[Page 279]

MR. PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, I have three, I hope, short questions on the follow-up on the McEvoy inquiry. One question relates to the collaborative work the department is supposed to do with the Director of Youth Strategy and Services. If the minister has the McEvoy inquiry, it is Recommendation 29, which is part of the province's strategy for children and youth at risk:

". . . the Department of Community Services should consider establishing a separate division that will provide a range of services to families directed toward the promotion of the 'integrity of the family' similar to those set out in section 13 of the Children and Family Services Act."

Where is the department with that and is there a specific set of proposals that's going to be coming out from the department related to meeting that particular recommendation?

MS. STREATCH: It's my understanding, as I indicated earlier, we have accepted that recommendation, we are doing that. Within the department we are creating that section, the director is currently in place and we will be moving forward with the regional coordinators. I believe we are advertising, or have just recently advertised, or will be advertising in the very near future for regional coordinators.

MR. PREYRA: I thank the minister in particular for the short answer to that question, because I know they probably have a lot more on the go in meeting that recommendation. Two other questions, one is, in this letter I referred to earlier, the Capital District Health Board recommended the creation of a 211 system, which is a system that I believe the United Way has recommended in other provinces and I see the Minister of Health nodding that he has heard of this before, probably from me as well. It really relates to youth at risk and their families and their ability to navigate their way through the Community Services system.

One of the subjects of the Nunn inquiry was that many of these services were available to Archie Billard and his family, but they were just unable to find it in time, they were not able to take advantage of it. The 211 recommendation essentially says that perhaps families and youth at risk can call this 211 system and have a fairly quick way of finding the services that they need, very early in the process, so that Community Services can intervene - I'm not talking about specifically intervene, but provide for an intervention of some kind that would help these families. Is the department willing to consider a request like that, or are they considering something like that, similar to the Cancer Care patient navigation system, I believe?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, a very good question as I understand a briefing is coming up any day now. So my honourable colleague is preempting the briefing that I understand the department will be bringing to me, to consider this as one of the options that we do consider, as we move forward. We know we have the successful youth help line, of course, the cancer line that my honourable colleague referenced, so we

[Page 280]

know that there are options out there and this is one that I look forward to being briefed on in the very near future.

MR. PREYRA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have one final question in the time I have left. I'm into overtime, I believe. The minister mentioned family resource centres. We do have a family resource centre called Family SOS in my constituency. Family SOS has a very interesting program which tries to reunite children who are in care, in custody, in foster care and bring them into contact with their parents who had initially put them up for adoption, because the circumstances of those parents have changed for one reason or the other and they believe that they have a record and they have the evidence to show that many of these youth at risk would benefit from it. We're not prejudging it, but that they should explore the possibility of supporting a program like that, to get some help to these youth at risk. I'm wondering, has the minister considered, or is considering, or will be willing to consider a proposal like that from Family SOS?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, of course, as we move forward, we will be looking at all options as they present themselves, all of the varying components that the different agencies have out there. It doesn't go unnoticed that the director actually comes from Family SOS, the new director that I mentioned earlier. I'm sure that the components and successes of that agency will certainly be taken into consideration.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou West.

MR. CHARLES PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Minister and staff, I'm pleased to have a few minutes here to discuss a few issues of importance, I guess, from my perspective as MLA for Pictou West. I guess, after rural roads, the biggest issue I hear about at the constituency level is around Community Services rates. A lot of people are having to struggle to make ends meet. The money is all gone before the end of the month comes. People who are on social assistance are trying to make enough to feed their children or to look after their shelter and their food, clothing and school costs, if they have children and so on. It's a tough battle and I'm sure the minister is aware of that. I guess we can say thank goodness for things like food banks and churches that sometimes fill that gap. Still, it's a difficult struggle for many people who are in this position, that they find themselves on social assistance.

I know, last year, there was a very small increase - I think it was $4 for some that was received, but it didn't really meet the cost of living. I guess my first question to the minister is, how often does the department review the process? When are the rates actually going to come to a level where there's a decent amount to deal with the ever-escalating costs of living? I'd just like to get her comments on that.

MS. STREATCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I welcome my honourable colleague to the discussion here this afternoon. He certainly brings to the floor an issue that

[Page 281]

is extremely important and I'm sure an issue that is not a surprise to any member in this Chamber. My honourable colleague references that the personal allowance, the income assistance rates - and of course we always, at the Department of Community Services, balance out and I like to use the visual beside me here today. We have the accountant who represents the fiscal responsibility and accountability, and of course we have the ever-esteemed social worker who represents the social responsibility. So that's a true indication of how we approach these issues within the department.

As my honourable colleague indicated, there was an increase in the personal allowance, Mr. Chairman. Actually, for the record, that increase was for three years in a row, and that increase amounted to about an 11 per cent increase over that period. Along with that, we had a two-year increase consecutive in shelter allowance. So, again, another indication that this government and the department take very seriously the challenges that do face our clientele. Certainly, for my honourable colleague's information, effective October 1, 2007, a commitment made by this government that we are pleased to fulfill, is the increase for personal allowance will now be based on the consumer price index and will come into effect October 1, 2007.

MR. PARKER: Certainly, Madam Minister, if there is anything your department can do to assist our clientele, I guess all of us, really, our constituents, we all deal with, it is a struggle. It truly is a struggle for many families and individuals out there and anything that could be done to assist them would be helpful.

As time is a factor here, I want to move on to my next topic. It's around the housing component of your department and probably it's the third biggest issue that I get as an MLA. Are there some grants? Is there some help that I can get to assist in repairing or maintaining my ability to remain within my own home?

The most common complaint, I guess, after the long wait list, I think there are 800 on the wait list in Pictou County, but the more common concern after that, after they have gone through the process, is that they're told, sorry, you are not eligible for a grant, your income is too high. In reality, the income cut-off is quite low. I think it's somewhere around $18,000 or so for a family that is non-senior and if they are seniors - I believe my figures are correct - it's somewhere a little over $23,000. That's the concern of most people who come back, they are $1,000 over, $2,000 over, whichever, but basically the cut-off is too low. Are there any plans by the department to raise those levels both for non-seniors and for senior individuals or families?

[4:30 p.m.]

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, again, another issue that is extremely important to all of us. I know my honourable colleague brings it to the floor here because it is one that affects quite a few individuals, of course in the urban area, but as well, and perhaps more

[Page 282]

particularly, in the rural areas. So my honourable colleague brings forward the issue of income levels that allow an individual to be eligible or not eligible.

Those household income levels - we refer to them as the HILs - those HILs are reviewed on a regular basis. The HILs are something that we negotiate with CMHC, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. So we do so in partnership with our federal counterparts and we have recently raised those HILs for the Nova Scotia component, the provincial component. So I would bring that to my honourable colleague's attention and I am more than pleased to provide him with a chart that lists those rates as they vary in different zones across the province. So I will bring those to my honourable colleague's attention in chart form.

As well, Mr. Chairman, we did raise the allowable amount for a loan from $3,000 to $5,000 and so that provided - because we knew that the dollar figure was increasingly more challenging to have those repairs done for the $3,000, so we increased that to $5,000. Again, it's almost a Catch-22 situation. As my honourable colleague knows, you increase the income level, you now have increased the potential clientele. So we have to balance that out and so the wait lists, we have an ever-existing wait list. We process approximately 2,000 to 2,500 applicants per year and, again, we end up with 2,000 to 2,500 on our wait lists to work with. So it's a challenge, but we continue to do the best job that we can with the resources and we have continued to provide money for those repairs and renovations for our seniors and families across the province.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. The time has expired for the NDP caucus.

The honourable member for Annapolis.

MR. STEPHEN MCNEIL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, minister, staff, it's nice to be part of the budget estimates. I'm sure I may have missed some of the questions, so I want to apologize if I'm repeating some of the questions that other members of this House have asked you. As an MLA for the riding of Annapolis, your department is probably the department that I would deal with the most in terms of helping some constituents find their way through and dealing, quite frankly, with the frustration that they face, at times, dealing with your department.

Dealing with some staff that you have in my constituency, and I want to first of all tell you how pleased you should be with the quality of the people who are working on the front lines that I deal with in the riding of Annapolis, but if I was to have one concern, it's that I'm not sure there are enough of them. Many of them have a tremendous caseload to deal with and they find it quite difficult when you move forward, and also clients accessing it find it difficult to feel that they're getting the kind of - a little more one-on-one that they would like. I'm wondering, could you just address that in terms of whether your department has any suggestions on what they are going to do with the front-line workers?

[Page 283]

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I welcome my honourable colleague to the discussion, to the debate and I know his questions will be well thought out, sincere and with his constituents at the forefront. I want to thank my honourable colleague for his comments regarding the front-line workers and the staff. Do you know, it has never ceased to amaze me, the phenomenal work they do, oftentimes, and I acknowledge, they have very heavy workloads. That's not a surprise to me. It's a reality and each and every day they rise to the occasion. So I applaud them. I'm extremely proud of them and I know the hard work they do is for all the right reasons.

My honourable colleague brings the question of what the plan is. Mr. Chairman, we have absolutely no plan to do anything that would affect the FTEs, the full-time equivalents. Our staff are valuable - I will note, for the record, an $11 million commitment in this year's budget for salary increases and benefits for our staff. They are well worth every penny of it.

MR. MCNEIL: That commitment, whether we will see additional front-line workers or whether that money, the $11 million that you speak of, is really to enhance the salaries and benefits of the existing employees.

One of the other issues which comes to my constituency often is the issue around somebody who may come in who has been cut off, someone whose assistance has been stopped for whatever reason. They have the opportunity to appeal, but it's almost in reverse that you're found guilty before you have an opportunity, you have to prove you're innocent. We want to know - what it comes down to is if somebody is deemed to be in receipt of income assistance and there's a problem, why isn't the appeal process allowed to take place before we cut them off?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, to answer the first question raised by my honourable colleague, yes, indeed, the $11 million is for salary and benefit of current staff levels. I will state that for the record. However, I do want to add that as we have seen a decline in our caseloads for various reasons, economic stability, folks are able to get off the system and into the workforce, as we see that decline, we do not decline our caseworkers as well. So we're hoping that the decline in those caseloads can provide for a little buffer with the staff, that they don't feel an increase in their caseloads. So we're hoping that will be the case there.

The issue that my colleague brings forward is one that I know he has addressed with me in the past. I know it's part of the ESIA policy and regulation policy framework that exists. It is one that I have - it has been brought by my honourable colleague. I am prepared to look at it and take it to staff, because it does seem, at first glance, to be counterproductive. So it's one that I do want to take a look at and we'll ask to have a review of that particular component and see if we can't have some move on that one.

[Page 284]

MR. MCNEIL: I look forward to that discussion and an opportunity to perhaps correct what I think is wrong in the system.

Career Seek is an announcement that you made and I know it's a program that you're very pleased with and your department's pleased with, one that many members of this House would applaud. The only problem that we - and I can speak directly for myself - that I have with it is the fact that we limit it to only 50 people per year. I want a little explanation from your department - I know we're talking about budgeting issues, but what we're basically saying to Nova Scotians who qualify to go to a four-year, post-secondary education is that we will allow you to keep your benefits while we give you a student loan as well.

We're not giving it, we're allowing them to have - they will pay that student loan back. So I'm wondering how that affects your department and why it wouldn't be a benefit for Nova Scotians to have as many people attending post-secondary education for a four-year period, to allow them to better themselves and move off the system completely.

MS. STREATCH: My honourable colleague absolutely raises a program that I am very pleased with, that we were able to introduce in the department. I'm looking forward to seeing some of the tangible results. I know my honourable colleague expresses concern about the limitations and I accept that concern.

In the discussion and the creation of this four-year pilot, I think it's important that we do due diligence, that we look at the success rate, and I fully anticipate and expect it to be success rates of 50 per year for a four-year period to a 200 total. I think it's important to address that we are very cognizant of the challenge that goes along with potentially adding to one's financial burden. I don't want to find ourselves in that - I don't want people to find themselves in that position. The intent of the program is to work with the individuals who are able and willing and want to take on a four-year university program, clientele who have worked with the counsellors, the labour experts to ensure that they will have success at the end of the programming.

As we move forward, as we see the first round of successful applicants and successful entrants, I would be more than pleased to review the component, the entry component and let's see what the uptake is, let's see where the pressures are, and I'm more than pleased to review that as we move through the pilot.

MR. MCNEIL: Keeping with Career Seek, has there been a review at this point? Have you spoken to the applicants who are presently in the system and how are they feeling after the initial beginning of this program, whether it's meeting their needs, whether the component is right? And what was the uptake? Was there a huge backlog in terms of applicants who are applying for those 50 spots?

[Page 285]

MS. STREATCH: We operate on all sorts of different time frames in our lives for different reasons. The school year is one that provides a particular challenge. We introduced this program, we worked with our staff, we educated our staff and we got our social workers and caseworkers well informed of the program. We got word out to the communities that this was a program that we were looking forward to seeing success with. Because of the calendar year, we did not have any uptake, of course, in the Fall of 2006.

January was not acceptable for any of our applicants, so we're looking forward to September 2007, as being the first real indication of the uptake and the interest. At this point, I do not have a number of combined interests, nor regional breakdown, but I would anticipate with the school year, we will see the true results of that.

MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, just to follow up, have there been people who've been guaranteed they would be in the program come September, at this point?

MS. STREATCH: It's important to note that there are various components of Career Seek that are put on up front to ensure that we do not add to that burden. As our caseworkers and our social workers work with individuals who are interested in the program, they attempt to ensure that there is reason and rationale, as well as desire, to fulfill the number component. As we move forward, there are no guaranteed spots per se other than the 50 that we've committed to, that we will continue to work on in an individual basis with each of our clientele.

MR. MCNEIL: Are there 50 applicants now who are filling those 50 spots?

MS. STREATCH: I don't, at this point, have a list or a number for the individuals who have expressed interest. I can certainly put an all-call out and get that number from staff across the province if my honourable colleague would like that outside the Chamber.

MR. MCNEIL: That would be fine. My concern is that if applicants don't know they've been fit into the program now, they have to also now go through the process for applying for student loans. That's another process that has to take place, plus applying for the program that they want at university, to ensure that they will be ready to go in September. I'm just wondering if there's a timeline that we could maybe pull that all together so that the applicants would know when they could take the next step.

MS. STREATCH: It's my understanding that staff have been working with individuals across the province to ensure those who have expressed interest have all of the requirements fulfilled and they're working with them to ensure that, come September enrolment time, all of that paperwork would be done in advance.

MR. MCNEIL: There was a program announced called Harvest Connection that allowed some of your clients to participate in a work program with the agricultural

[Page 286]

community, allowing them to earn up to $3,000 a year without the clawback taking effect. I'm just wondering if you could tell the House what the uptake was on that program and where we are now with it.

[4:45 p.m.]

MS. STREATCH: Again another program that we're very pleased to put in place through the department for a variety of reasons. I know my honourable colleague comes from an agricultural community and understands the pressures that exist in that agricultural community, as do many members of this House, as it pertains to workers. Through Harvest Connection, we provided for the agricultural sector as well as the Christmas tree producers, to access potential workforce that we have through our contacts at the Department of Community Services.

We recognized that with any program the biggest challenge is getting the word out there, so we worked with the Federation of Agriculture, the Nova Scotia Christmas Tree Council to transfer that information through them to their membership, as we needed the registration of those farmers and those Christmas tree producers. We then provided the same information and educated our staff so that they would be able to work with their clients to do a match up of the clients with the particular farmers.

We look forward to expanding that, of course hoping that we will get an even greater uptake in the days to come. I can give my honourable colleague a specific number, I know that's what he's looking for, so the initial uptake of the program has been fairly low. We have had six people who were able to benefit from that program and we would hope that would grow exponentially in the seasons to come.

MR. MCNEIL: I'm surprised, I thought there would be a larger uptake on that. I want to say this to the minister, I think part of the problem may not be the program, it may be in the application process - not for your client, but for the agricultural business that is actually going through the process of wanting to hire somebody. I don't know if that has been mentioned and voiced to you as a concern, and in terms of the Christmas tree operation in Annapolis, we haven't seen a lot of that, I know in Springfield, but has that been an issue for the Christmas tree growers as well?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, absolutely, my colleague has hit the nail right on the head. In the case of the Christmas tree producers, they were very interested to learn about the program and they've actually requested staff to work with them to better understand how to benefit from this program and how to capitalize on this program for the benefit of all. So I know that at their annual meeting, which is upcoming, we will work with them to ensure that they get the information necessary so that they can then take it forward, and we will endeavour to do the same with the Federation of Agriculture, to ensure that their farmers

[Page 287]

have the best information available to them. I should reference for the record, those six people were over a three-month period.

MR. MCNEIL: We are also now coming into a season where the agricultural community will begin looking for people to come and provide them assistance. One of the good things about this program is that you could earn that $3,000 over an extended period of time or in a very condensed period of time. I would encourage your department to look at the application process though from the farm business perspective, because I believe that's where the biggest issue is. Many of them would be more than willing to participate in the program. It is a program that I fully supported when it was announced and I still support. I do believe there need to be some administrative improvements, but I'm wondering, has your department now looked at broadening beyond the agricultural community and beyond Christmas tree producers into some of the other sectors, particularly where we have seasonal work?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, my honourable colleague brings the point and it has been duly noted that if it indeed is the application process that is providing challenges for farmers or for Christmas tree producers, that's something that we absolutely will look at in the department and we will ensure that if that's the stumbling block or if that's the challenge, the barrier, we get over that and we will do so through the department, through an information process. So I thank my honourable colleague for mentioning that. We've made note of that and we'll ensure that application process is cleaned up, or simplified, so that we can get the maximum benefit out of the program, out of the Harvest Connection.

Now, my colleague also brings forward the issue of the option of expanding it. I have discussed this with other members during these estimates and it's absolutely something that we need to look at. It's a good program. It is a program that makes sense. It encourages the return to the workforce, which we all know is key. It encourages the ability to take a void which is there in a seasonal employment and fill that void with an individual who needs to be in the workforce and who wants to be in the workforce.

So as we move forward, I absolutely have and will continue to look at, are there other components, are there other sectors? Some provide, you know, for that seasonal ability. Is there an opportunity there for us to perhaps fill some of the void? I had the issue raised by one of the urban members who said it really wasn't beneficial for the urban members, because they didn't feel that their constituents were able to access the seasonal work through the agricultural component or the Christmas tree component.

So certainly the short answer, Mr. Chairman, to that question is yes, we will be looking to see if we can expand it.

MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, I'm glad to see that it was raised by urban MLAs, because I believe that the issue of this program can go beyond the resource-based industries,

[Page 288]

particularly into the tourism industry. I also believe that we need to begin to look at not punishing people on income assistance for every dollar they earn - the 70/30 rule. I think it's really a disincentive for anyone to go out and earn money. I know there has been - your department actually has hired people in my constituency to go out to shovel walkways, and at the same time they've clawed back 70 cents to the dollar and people say, why would I do that? What's the incentive for me to do that? I'm being punished.

I wonder if we looked at the possibility of perhaps saying, regardless of what it is that you're doing, that you could earn up to the $3,000 limit in a 12-month period before we start instituting the 70/30 rule, before we start doing that clawback, and providing a real incentive for people to go out and earn that extra income.

We all, in this House, have talked about the fact that the benefits are low, don't meet the basic living standard that we believe Nova Scotians should be living to. This will allow an opportunity for somebody on income assistance to increase their income without being punished by the 70/30 rule, so I'm wondering where your department is with that.

MS. STREATCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. As my honourable colleague knows, it absolutely is essential that we look at all the components that go toward the ESIA programming and success of the ESIA programming. We've seen a continual decline in our caseloads on the income assistance end because we have funneled so many resources through the employment support end.

We want to continue to do that because, of course, we recognize that the value of families and individuals getting off the system and becoming independent is a win-win. It is a win from a financial point of view, because as individuals and families come off the system and go independently on their own, of course, that becomes a benefit to the economy of the community and the province; but even more importantly, it becomes a tremendous feeling of self-confidence and a tremendous feeling of success. We want to always keep that at the forefront, Mr. Chairman.

So as we discuss issues like the available income that can be earned before it works as a disincentive, I know that there are varying ways of looking at that. We don't ever want to create disincentives for individuals to go into the workforce, we don't want to create disincentives for individuals to not live up to their full potential. Mr. Chairman, it is a challenge to keep that balance of the disincentive that goes along with the ability to keep a certain percentage of the wage, with the incentive to get off the system. I know that situations like the income tax refund that we brought into place last year, the 30 per cent allowable income tax return, was a step in the right direction.

Mr. Chairman, I know that my honourable colleague has brought this, along with the standing committee, to the attention of the minister and I know that it's in a letter to my attention, through the second round of the Poverty Forum. It is an issue that I certainly will

[Page 289]

look at, that the department will continue to look at, to ensure that we have the incentives in place that truly benefit all of our clientele.

MR. MCNEIL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have the honour in my constituency of having a number of facilities that your department manages, the adult residential center being one of them; the apartment facility, which is an addition to that residential centre; I have Carleton Road Industries, which is a workplace environment for people with disabilities to come and provide, to put skills together that they can work.

One of the concerns that I hear in every one of those, regardless of whether it is the workplace environment or in the living facility of the apartment off the residential centre, is around the issue of the per diem and the food allowance. In particular a number of my constituents - Kirk Grady comes to my mind right off the bat, a young person from Bridgetown who is a Special Olympian and, I should add, won a gold medal while he was in New Brunswick more recently. The issue that they come to is in order to eat, according to what is a healthy standard, one that the Canada's Food Guide says we should be eating to, they are unable to do that.

One of the other challenges for them, in order to go out, they are limited, they can't drive, they don't have the transportation. In order to go to some of these stores to buy the healthy food choices that we want them to do, it is extremely difficult. So I'm wondering if your department has looked at the per diem, whether or not there is some flexibility in the budget that they have. I know that this is how much you have for food - I wonder if they can allow some flexibility in terms of allowing the client to adjust the money they have and spend it the way they choose.

MS. STREATCH: Please allow me to preface my statement saying that we value the tremendous work, as I know my honourable colleague does, that goes on in all of the facilities across the province, be it the adult service centres, the residential care facilities, you name it. The value of the service provided truly is invaluable and that being said, we know there are pressures out there, we know that the service providers have daily pressures upon them and it's for that reason that we hired Mr. Hogg. We are awaiting the Hogg report in its entirety and we will be reviewing that report, because that report looks at the funding for our service providers across the province.

There have been, over the years for various reasons - municipalities had certain responsibilities and then the province took over responsibilities with the increased demands on society, we've had a variety of funding formulas in place. We need to streamline that, we need to ensure that consistency and fairness and accountability are in place. We look forward to the full analysis of that Hogg report, and I certainly will share the review of that report with my honourable colleague and any colleagues who would be interested, to ensure that the valuable work they do is recognized and treated in a fair and equitable manner.

[Page 290]

MR. MCNEIL: That would be Hogg II, Hogg III. I know last year during this time, I invited the minister to my riding to view some of these facilities and I know our schedules - you had offered to come a few times and my schedule was difficult to connect and it was a real challenge. I will be busy at least for another 30 days I think, but I do want to make the offer again and to make it happen. I think it's important for you to get an opportunity to come down and see the great work that's being done at Carleton Road Industries, as well as to get a chance to come and see and hear first-hand from the clients who are having these issues around budget issues for them. They provided some flexibility, they have some good answers really.

[5:00 p.m.]

There's a committee in Bridgetown called People First, it is a branch of what is I'm sure all over Nova Scotia. They would love to have the minister come just so they could have a sit-down and explain to you the challenges that they face and where they think the existing dollars that they get, to allow some flexibility, and how it's spent would maybe alleviate some of the problems that we're talking about. I want to make that offer to you and I will attempt to be able to be free when you're willing to come down. I want to acknowledge that you did make the offer to come and it was my schedule that was the problem last time, so I would encourage you and ask you to allow us to bring you into the riding again so that we can show you the facilities first-hand.

I want to just change gears a little bit and talk about the early child care and early learning and the $3.9 million that has come down. I know $4.4 million roughly has been spent and there's $35 million and I've been on record saying we have waiting lists, let's act, let's move. I want to hear your views on that and why Nova Scotia families who are looking for child care, when they hear that figure of $35 million still with the government and the department, they're saying, how come we don't see spaces that our children can access or we as a family can access?

I also want you to talk a little bit about the issue of portability around that, the issue of the cap around portability too. I'll be on record saying I support the issue of portability and I've said it in many places, because I think it allows some flexibility for families and children to have flexibility around their specific needs. But one of the challenges that has been brought to us by daycare facilities has been the issue of the cap. They say in order for portability to work properly to the best interest of the child and that family, then we need to remove the cap. I'm wondering if your department has been looking at that and when we can see the additional monies moved out and allow Nova Scotia families to have benefit of it.

MS. STREATCH: Of course, to my honourable colleague, I would be delighted to come to his riding. I can't imagine what's occupying his time these days, but I know that he's very busy and, who knows, he may very well be even busier in the days to come, but I certainly will commit again to visit with my honourable colleague in his riding. I had the

[Page 291]

opportunity to travel across the province over the last 10 months and I look forward to continuing to do so.

I think it goes to a point that my honourable colleague made. What I have learned from actually getting out into the communities and visiting with so many of the agencies, the facilities, the groups, what I have learned - not to say that what staff briefs me on and tells me about isn't extremely valuable as well - but what I learned out in the communities is really invaluable. They have some very creative ways, very creative and innovative ideas and they think outside that box on a regular basis.

Most of the groups and service providers have learned to be very creative when it comes to their funding and they have some very interesting ideas around how to maximize that funding. So I would like to visit those spots in my colleague's riding and I certainly do commit to coming to his riding when it works in our schedules. We will do our very best to get there.

The entire issue around the child care plan, I know my honourable colleague has a certain amount of time here and I'm not going to take his time by going back over all of the parts of the plan because I don't think that would be fair. I know he's well versed on my answers in the House. I know he's well versed on the information that was provided by my deputy and my staff at standing committee and I know he's well versed in the components of the plan and the roll-out that we've done so far.

I will just add a couple of key components. Of course, the issue around portability is the one that my honourable colleague asks about. There's no question that when you look at the issue of the portable subsidized spaces, it's truly essential that we recognize that the subsidization and the portability of that space truly goes with the family. So the family are able to take that space, they're able to use that subsidization and they're able to do so at a child care centre they have confidence in.

The 150 new spaces we rolled out last Fall, the 100 that we will bring out this Spring and bring out for the next three consecutive after this Spring, for the total of 550, I think are extremely important. They speak to that need of those portable subsidized spaces that my colleague raised.

We are looking at the entire issue of portability. My staff are looking and will continue to review the issue of a fixed number of portable spaces and we certainly are open to reviewing all of those components of the child care plan.

MR. MCNEIL: Just a follow-up to that. Going back to the $35 million which we have set aside, the question that I would ask is why are we rolling out those 500 seats slowly as opposed to introducing them all now? We know there's a need.

[Page 292]

The other question is around the cap and portability. You're right, the portability allows me, as a family, to have flexibility where I move my child to, but if that region doesn't have the ability to accept another portable seat, I can't move in there because there's a cap, there's a limit according to what we're hearing from the daycare facilities in regions. There's only a certain number of subsidized spaces that are allowed. I'm wondering why the cap is there, if it truly is about portability and flexibility for the families and that child, why we don't just remove the cap, commit to a subsidized number of spaces and allow them to be flexible and move with the family?

I may live in one community and work in another and prefer to have child care where I'm working as opposed to where I'm living. So, I'll just give you an opportunity to respond to that.

MS. STREATCH: Again, recognizing that my honourable colleague has a certain amount of time, I don't want to take up all of his time, but I do want to get on the record the issue of rolling out pieces and components of the plan in a thought-out process. I think it's important to note that what we've done thus far, as part of the $130 million plan, is that we've laid the foundation - and my honourable colleague has heard me say this and he knows what I mean - we've laid the foundation so that the rest of the components of the plan can now fall into place. As we rolled out 150 of those subsidized spaces, as we put those operational grants in place that represent a $54 million commitment of that $130 million total, as we rolled out the repair and renovation loans, we did it so that the sector could provide for the foundation to now receive those additional spaces. So we have the issue of the operational grants, which was for the retention and the training and the recruitment of staff because, Mr. Chairman, the expression, if you build it, they will come, isn't necessarily the case. We could build it, we could provide the spaces, but if we don't have the workers and we don't have the centres at a position where they're able to receive those spaces and those children, it would be a backward approach to it.

So the approach that we've taken is laying the foundation, getting those resources in place and now I will let my colleague know that I have expedited the process for the creation of the spaces with the additional federal dollars that will be coming our way, through the additional money that was allocated through the $7 million allocation this year, once the federal government gets their budget in place. That $7 million is meant to be on the ground this fiscal year for the creation of those spaces. The grants and the dollars that need to be provided to the centres to actually create those spaces for the expansion grants, that will be done. I have asked for that to be done as soon as physically possible, to allow the sector to absorb that because, of course, we don't physically build the spaces, the sector does; but we provide the resources, and so it's that resource provision that I have indicated to staff, I want out the door as soon as possible.

But to my honourable colleague's point about the cap, we are reviewing that and we are looking at that, to see if the cap on the portability need to be adjusted and as we move

[Page 293]

forward, with the long-term component and the sustainability of this plan, we will certainly take that into consideration.

MR. MCNEIL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The question around your waiting for the $7 million to come in from this federal budget. Either it's misinformation that's out there or we have $35 million still there. I guess my question would be, why are we waiting for the $7 million? Why don't we just start moving with the $35 million that we have and start flowing it out to allow families to access those daycare spaces as quickly as possible?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and no, indeed, the monies are there, simply because they weren't spent, they haven't been removed. They are still there, and excuse me if I misled my colleague. It wasn't that we're waiting for it. We're anxiously waiting for it because we know it's an additional $7 million on top of what we had already planned for, so we know it can help us expedite the process.

MR. MCNEIL: Mr. Chairman, I assume a lot of the prep work has been done, that we know the areas where we're going to begin to add these spaces as we go along, and I look forward to hearing the announcement that the additional daycare spaces will be beginning and I really am encouraged by the fact that you're looking at the cap because I believe that in order for affordability to actually work properly, we're going to have to do something about the cap, either eliminate it completely or adjust it upward quite substantially, in order to allow that flexibility for the individual families.

I'm going to share a little bit of my time with my colleague but I would be remiss if I sat down without asking you about the poverty reduction strategy. I know all members of this House unanimously endorsed a resolution recently, and when we can see a roll-out. I think this is fundamentally one of the largest, or probably the biggest thing facing us as a province, is the issue around poverty and it's unfair that you're the person being constantly asked about this because you are dealing with the results of our inability and our willingness not to deal with it. The Minister of Justice has a role to play. The Minister of Health has a role to play. The Minister of Education has a role to play. The Minister responsible for the Advisory Council on the Status of Women has a role to play. Almost every minister sitting across from us has a role to play with this issue, but it lands squarely on your desk and you're the one who has to deal with it constantly.

I first of all want to say that I was thrilled that this resolution was passed. I want to see some action though. I don't just want to see it land on you. This is also a plea to your other colleagues who are sitting across from me, not to expect it all to come out of your budget. I'm asking for the other ministers to say, this is a benefit to our departments as well. We're prepared to step up with some people resources, some financial resources, to deal with this issue in the way it should be dealt with, in a very comprehensive way. It's not just a community service issue. I can tell you, as a family of law enforcement officers, it's a justice issue. As a family with some educators, it's an education issue. My colleague, the member

[Page 294]

for Halifax Clayton Park will often tell you, it's a poverty issue, the face of poverty is feminine. So it's an issue for the Advisory Council on the Status of Women.

I want you to explain a little bit about how the departments have come together to form this strategy and whether or not we are now in the process of reaching out to the communities and to the people on the street who are dealing with this issue on a day-to-day basis, who really put together a comprehensive strategy on how to deal with the issue of poverty.

MS. STREATCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The issue of the poverty reduction strategy is indeed one that I too, am pleased that we have unanimous consent of this Chamber and I am pleased to hear my colleague - and I know he has on the record stated this before, I am pleased to hear him state it today - that it is interdepartmental, it is a combination. It is governmental and I would go as far as to say this is a societal responsibility, and when I look at the potential that we have to truly make a difference, I don't want a report to be the outcome of this. I want a true, meaningful, measurable reduction and move forward, and I think in order for that to be realistic, it has to include business. It has to include all levels of government. It has to include all departments of government, but I think too, our community stakeholders have a tremendous responsibility and ownership of this as well. So I think, together, we absolutely do need to go at this as a collective - and I used the statement when we were talking about the Nunn Commission and I'm going to use it again - about silos coming down. Because we tend to live in our silos, in our departments, and we cannot when it comes to issues that are this broad.

[5:15 p.m.]

So I certainly have included all of my colleagues in any way, shape or form that I can and I will continue to do so. I know that we have a working committee that involves a variety of the other departments that is looking forward to getting some work done. I have met with senior officials in my own department on this matter. As with every strategy, we are looking at, what's the best use of our resources and our time and in which direction do we go? We know a lot of this has already been done. I referenced earlier, a lot of reports have already been done. The phenomenal work that was done by the standing committee, through their round table and their presentations. That work's done. The women's centres across this province have a wealth of knowledge and information that they can share with us so we don't have to reinvent the wheel. So we absolutely do need to engage the stakeholders and we will, but it's a matter of, if it has already been investigated, reported, why would we investigate and report it again? So let's make sure that we use all that information to the best of our ability, and there's no question that it needs to be interdepartmental and it needs to be a governmental initiative and I look forward to working with my colleagues and all members of this House as we move forward on this issue.

[Page 295]

MR. MCNEIL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to make a comment and then I'll share the time with my colleague for Kings West. I was pleased to hear you say that we're reaching out to the business community to take part in this because there is a real willingness, I believe, on their part, to want to deal with this issue. I also want to encourage you to not rely on the work that's already been done, not because it's not valuable and not because it doesn't have true input to the issue we're dealing with, but I think the stakeholders in the community need to feel they need to be part of this process for them to have some confidence in it. It's not government, it's just in general, when we talk about the issue of government and the bureaucracy, people on the ground dealing with these issues every day have lost confidence in us, as a collective. And I'm not meaning government, but I mean collectively and I think they lost confidence in our willingness to deal with some of these tough issues.

This is a tough issue. It's an issue that's facing all of our communities and, in some ways, all of our families. So the reach-out to the stakeholders is as much, in my view, to build back connection and confidence with them that we, collectively, are really serious about this issue and we want your input and we're going to deal with it. They have done some great work and so has the Committee on Community Services. It would be a way to reach out and say, we're committed to this. We want you to buy in. We're moving forward. We have the business community. We have the number of departments on-line. If I stand up much longer and ask you many more questions, we will have solved most of the issues related to not only your department, but all the other departments, so I'm going to share the rest of my time with my colleague for Kings West and I want to thank you for that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Kings West.

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll continue on the housing area, which is where I had left off, and I know it's a huge piece, dealing with housing. I'll start off with just a very general question, at first. There are proponents - and I can safely say inside of Community Services, as well as outside - who feel that perhaps a split with the Housing Department and other Community Services issues, more on the direct services to clients and so forth, would perhaps make for better organization, better delivery of meeting needs. I'm just wondering if the minister has a thought on this, a perspective? I know the two are very often linked together because we do have housing as one of the critical needs of those who are on low incomes or fixed income, or income assistance, and I'm just wondering if there are any directional pieces there in that regard?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I would be remiss if I didn't thank my honourable colleague, who was prior to the current member, for his discussion in the debate here today. So I certainly should get that on the record.

That's an interesting question that my honourable colleague raises and as I'm sitting here, I don't know what my gut reaction, my immediate reaction is. I know we've been there, done that before. There has been - if I understand the history correctly - a separate

[Page 296]

Department of Housing in the past. Currently it is not something we are discussing in the department. As my colleague mentioned, the correlation between some of the housing pressures and the ESIA programming that we provide, the senior programs that we provide, there's a natural fit there, I guess is what I'm trying to say. There's a natural fit. So while it is a challenging portfolio, and I would be more than happy to share with any of my colleagues some of the more challenging parts of my department, at this time it is not something that is in discussion at department level and we'll continue to keep that collaboration together between the components of the department that work well.

MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, and moving onto a different area and that is persons with disabilities. I'm wondering, have you developed a person with disabilities allowance that has been promised and talked about?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank my colleague for bringing this up. It's the first time it has come up in estimates debate and it is something that I have looked at and the department has looked at, and we take very seriously. There's no question that services for persons with disabilities and the issue of a disability allowance is something that we have looked at in the department. We've had discussions at the senior level. I also will let my colleague know that I have had discussions with our federal counterparts on this issue, because as the federal government looks at the issue of a disability allowance and the issue of a federal responsibility, we have had discussions and we will continue to have those discussions, and I will continue to encourage my federal counterpart to recognize that there is a federal component to this and that there is a federal responsibility to this. I will continue with that discussion.

This is an issue that deserves a complete understanding of what's at stake here and I don't want to make light of the issue, so I think when we discuss the allowance issue it's something that we have to look at very seriously, it's something the department takes very seriously and as we move forward this government has made a commitment to a disability allowance. I want to make sure all members of the House understand that is a commitment we absolutely will commit to keep. It's getting that commitment right that is the most important aspect of that issue today.

MR. GLAVINE: I was wondering if you just could confirm the rates now payable to a single person with a disability for shelter allowance, personal allowance and transportation allowance. If I could just have those figures, please.

MS. STREATCH: As we're getting the figures here, if I understand correctly, it's a single individual with a disability allowance? So, $535 for the initial and then the $200 basic allowance in addition to that.

MR. GLAVINE: Of course, I guess perhaps nothing's separate then on transportation. We know that transportation is a huge piece in terms of rural Nova Scotians with disabilities.

[Page 297]

It's obviously costlier and often private transportation or limitations with public transit are certainly issues in this area. So, I'm wondering if the government has addressed any provisions, or made any provisions within the budget this time or, as you look forward to addressing this issue more adequately.

MS. STREATCH: I would again be remiss if I didn't identify that, of course, we also have the funding provided for special needs, as special needs pertain to each individual circumstance - a $20 million commitment in this year's budget to the special needs funding. That, of course, is done in consultation with the caseworker and the individual family or client as necessary.

The issue of transportation is one that I find very interesting to discuss here today. We know there are challenges, whether it be in a rural area or an urban area, that pertain to transportation. We have rates that vary, and I bring that up because it's important to note that if there are special, extenuating medical circumstances, we certainly provide transportation funding around those special instances and circumstances. We do have a funding formula that's in place for general transportation.

I have asked staff to have a look at the entire issue around transportation because there are some factors that exist in a rural component that don't exist in an urban component and then vice-versa. I have asked them to have a look at that to see if there is a better way to deliver those transportation dollars to ensure the clients are getting the best possible formula that works for them.

MR. GLAVINE: One of the programs around support for people with disabilities is the Alternative Family Support Program. I've had a little bit of personal contact with the Kentville office in working to get a few families engaged in this program. I haven't had direct contact with them for a couple of months, I'm just wondering at what stage is this program developed? Is it across the province? Also, if it isn't, what are the plans for the Alternative Family Support Program?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you to my colleague for the opportunity to discuss this very important and very successful program. As my honourable colleague knows, the three programs that we put on the ground to assist persons with disabilities to be able to stay in their homes, a big success.

The Alternative Family Support Program, of course, is one that we do provide across the province. It is province-wide. It was one of those three that we introduced. It has been extremely successful. We continue to expand that program, Mr. Chairman. The service providers, the families who assist us with the delivery of that very successful program, are invaluable. The loving care and the professional care that they provide in their homes is, of course, second to none and, of course, this government recognizes the importance of those

[Page 298]

programs and the expansion of those programs, and $2.2 million was added to the budget this year to ensure that those programs continue to expand.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Madam Minister, for that update. You also talked about and made a commitment to put a stop on the clawback of CPP disability benefits and I'm just wondering, how is that plan or initiative going?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, of course, with every year you have to prioritize certain initiatives that will move forward, other initiatives that will not move forward, that will be deferred and so, of course, the CPP clawback that was referenced by my honourable colleague is one of those ones that we are examining. The department is looking at how best to make that work in the true nature that it was intended and how best to make that work respecting jurisdictional and Charter challenges that we have been alerted to as a potential complication. So we're working within the department to see how we can best do that with the intention that it was first committed and certainly it's something that we'll continue to look at.

MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, the Nova Scotia League for Equal Opportunities, LEO, wants 25 per cent of affordable housing units to be accessible. They've been talking about this now for a number of years and I'm wondering, is this a consideration, is it achievable, and what percentage would currently exist?

[5:30 p.m.]

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, that's a good topic for discussion. To be honest, the exact percentage of public housing today that is accessible is not a figure that I have with me right now. I certainly will get that for my colleague. I have referenced earlier the project that I visited that we announced just two weeks ago, the successful project here in Fairview that was celebrated by Ralph Ferguson and Anne McRae along with myself. They were very pleased with the advances that had been made.

I understand from my Housing staff that when our proposals go out, when we have those requests for proposals, a component of that is that the units must be accessible, of course, for mobility challenges, and that's something that becomes a societal responsibility as well as a governmental and housing authority responsibility. So certainly as we move forward with the commitment of the housing dollars through the federal government, partnered with our commitment for housing dollars, we certainly will ensure that accessibility remains a priority in that funding allotment.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member has approximately a minute and a half.

MR. GLAVINE: Mr. Chairman, one last question then, I'm wondering if there is currently a moratorium on small options homes and if there is a plan to lift that. We know

[Page 299]

there's a great movement now to, you know, deinstitutionalize our society where possible, and that may be a great step towards certainly some degree of independence. If you could make a comment in that area, it would be much appreciated.

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, certainly my honourable colleague has answered a component of this question for me already with his discussion about the Alternative Family Support Program and the success of that. What we've done is we've taken that program along with the independent family living and the direct family support to complement what currently exists in our continuum of services and programs that we provide across the province and to all Nova Scotians who need our assistance. So that continuum of services and programs is one that we work with. I'm awaiting any day now that residential review, so we can have a look at what we have, where some of the gaps are - we recognize that there are some gaps out there now - see exactly where those gaps are, how we can best use the resources we have to fill those gaps and what exactly it is that we need to move forward with on a priority basis. So as we move forward, things have not come to a halt.

I like to make sure that I reference that every possible chance I get, that the department has continued to work with the complexities that are faced by us every day. We continue to roll out options for the individuals who find themselves at our department with needs and we will continue to roll out those options, Mr. Chairman, in a manner that best satisfies all of those complex needs, as we know that some individuals their challenges are best met with programs like the alternate family support, others with small options, others with a more individual case plan. We do that each and every day and will continue to do that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. The honourable member's time has expired.

The honourable member for Pictou West.

MR. CHARLES PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to have this second opportunity to ask a few questions to the department, to the minister. Madam Minister, you might recall - I'm sure you've had lots of interventions between when I was last up - I was asking partly about income assistance rates and how perhaps inadequate they are and it is really tough for many families, for many individuals out there.

Secondly, I was speaking out on the housing income cutoff levels for individuals and for seniors. Again, with the rates being as low as they are, it is hard for some people to qualify who really are in a bad position. They have a roof that is leaking or they have a furnace that is no longer working or an old mobile home, perhaps 30 or 40 years of age, and it is just falling apart around them. When their income is just barely over the line, it really makes it tough.

These people come to their MLA asking for help and we guide them through the process to get their name before the department and look for help, and then after many, many

[Page 300]

months of waiting, because of the wait times, they're told no, sorry, you don't qualify, your income is $500 over the limit. So it is certainly discouraging for those individuals when they think there is some hope that they might get some help.

I guess what I want to ask in relation to that is, what happens then? Is there some help for a family or an individual, even though they are over the limit by a few hundred dollars, and a real crisis in their life is when their furnace breaks down, or their roof is so bad it is causing mould problems in their mobile home or whatever. In spite of the fact that they are over the limit, is there some type of emergency help for them to be able to cope with life as it presents it to them?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I welcome my colleague back to the discussion and appreciate the ability to chat a little bit more about these two issues that he raised that are very important. If I can preface my statement, we were talking earlier about income assistance allowance and shelter allowance and the challenges that that creates for some families and individuals.

I do want to also identify, though, that on top of the personal allowance and the shelter allowance, of course we also do have another series of programs and services that are available. I just reference, for instance, Mr. Chairman, the child care subsidies that would exist, the training opportunities that we provide through ESIA, the housing component that goes along with our ESIA and, of course, situations like Pharmacare and then, as well, special needs funding. I want to go to special needs funding because I think that's where we can also tie in the idea that we do have, Mr. Chairman, as my colleague asked, avenues available if a family, if a senior, finds themselves or themself above those hills, those household income limits.

Of course, the entire issue around emergency funding and emergency health and safety repair and renovations is something that we take very seriously. I would encourage my honourable colleague, if he finds himself in the position where there are specific cases, to please, don't hesitate to come to us and come to me personally or come to the department, because there are often times, Mr. Chairman, extenuating circumstances that we're perhaps not aware of that we need to be made aware of and staff need to be made aware of. Sometimes, it's many MLAs and members in this House who bring those issues to our attention that we're then able to fully understand and put in place the different resources that we have available to us, to meet their specific needs.

MR. PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the minister. That's good to know that there might be some consideration for special circumstances. I can think of one particular case, not so much to do with her home but it was a personal health need. She was quite hard of hearing and her doctor advised her that she needed a digital hearing aid. Now perhaps that's not necessarily within your department, maybe it's more the Department of Health, but several thousand dollars to pay for that, she had no way really of

[Page 301]

paying for that, yet it was what she needed in order to be able to hear what's going on. Is that something the department would consider, or is that something that you coordinate with the Department of Health, or where can this individual go for the help that she needs?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and just to be clear, of course if we're talking about income-assisted clients, then we do have special needs funding and financing that is available to those special needs clients for a variety of medical reasons, or dental reasons, or health related reasons. If it's outside of the income-assisted clientele, then we would work, as all departments and all members would work, with service clubs in our areas or with our counterparts at Health, in an attempt to ensure that those needs were being met. But as a direct responsibility of the Department of Community Services, not outside of our income-assisted clientele would we have available funding.

MR. PARKER: I guess the other issue that I wanted to raise, every once in a while, as an MLA, we all get very difficult cases, and often it's multifaceted, there are complications. I'm working with one right now, I guess it's precipitated by one of the partners going into a nursing home, the other one's left at home. There's a lot of bills piling up that she's not able to pay - not only the household bills, but some of the responsibility of looking after his care in the nursing home. There are other complications with children and so on in the home with no income. Just on it goes. It's complicated. Does the department, in cases like that or similar circumstances, is there an intervention system or is there somewhere families can turn to maybe get some advice or some help? Yes, they turn to me as their MLA, we can advise as best we can but does the Department of Community Services have somebody on staff or within the various regions who can sit down with the family and try to sort through these multilayered difficulties from financial to mental health issues, to other pressures on the family? Does the department offer any service like that?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, there's no question that my honourable colleague brings a very important issue and that is that all too often it is a multifaceted problem that exists. It's not a simple answer. It's not a simple issue. It's not one, and when you're dealing with the case like my honourable colleague has mentioned here today, the varying components and the complexity of that can be overwhelming for us, as MLAs, when individuals come to us, let alone those families who find themselves in those situations.

I want to take this opportunity to say that anytime MLAs or individuals find themselves in cases where they have that multifaceted component, please do come to the department. Come directly to our department here in Halifax. For sure, go to the regional department. There are individuals - there is no one single individual who would take on the responsibility of the circumstance that my honourable colleague prefaced but there are a multitude of individuals within the department who take issues like that, who work with families to ensure that any programs, any resources that we have, that folks are able to access them.

[Page 302]

Again, to my honourable colleague, the introduction of this new program for seniors, it may not fit this particular case, I'm not suggesting that it does, but the introduction of this new program for seniors, where seniors are able to access funding and resources to stay longer in their homes, that may be something that, as we bring this pilot program forward, many of our seniors in our communities will be able to access and benefit from and it will provide some assistance and reassurance for those families who are faced with some of those challenging questions and situations like my honourable colleague brought forward.

MR. PARKER: Those are all the questions, Mr. Chairman, that I am going to ask. I want to thank the minister for those comments. There are some institutional challenges that we have in Pictou County and I know my colleague, the member for Pictou East, is going to bring those forward. So, again, thank you, Madam Minister.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou East.

MR. CLARRIE MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, it's a pleasure for me to stand here and have an opportunity to raise some concerns with the minister at this level during the estimates. I'm going to refrain from individual situations, and also from policy perspectives as well, because I think they have been well aired and we do get a good response from staff in the local area.

[5:45 p.m.]

What I want to address first and foremost is the Riverview Home, the adult residential centre in Riverton, which is in my constituency but it is a concern to all three members in Pictou County. Now the situation involving the Riverview Home, this is a facility that has existed since 1920. It is 87 years old and the member for Pictou West and I - and I have raised this in the House in relationship to some remarks regarding my constituency but I didn't have the opportunity to raise it to the minister in the estimates. This structure is in desperate need of renewal, of being totally revamped. In the tour of that facility that we had a number of months ago, we went from the basement to the attic and there are so many things that have to be looked after: the wiring, the kitchen, the number of toilets that there are, the number of baths. There is just not enough there.

Worst of all is the accommodation area of those residents. We have, in many rooms, 100 square feet of space being shared by two individuals. It's my understanding that the department has been looking at that facility and some staff have indicated that there will be action in relationship to the Riverview Home and even the idea of it being carried out over three years has been advanced. So, Mr. Chairman, I ask the minister, when will an official announcement be made in relationship to that facility and the badly needed overhaul of it?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for the opportunity to discuss the issue that he brings to the floor here today. Again, I will preface any statements about

[Page 303]

finances or renovations or repairs with the fact that the work that goes on at Riverview Home, the work that goes on across the province on behalf of those who need us most, those who find themselves in a vulnerable situation, is invaluable and any statements made after that fact, Mr. Chairman, I think always requires that commitment. I know my honourable colleague understands that. I know my colleagues from all of the Pictous met with the board, had an opportunity to visit Riverview Home. My colleague, the member for Pictou Centre, met with me in my department and brought the issues that the board had brought to him and to the other members directly to my desk, and it's not something that has fallen on deaf ears.

Certainly the pressures, we know that the building has its challenges. We know that the health and safety concerns of staff and the clientele are of utmost importance to the board. So certainly when we worked through our budgetary process, we were able, Mr. Chairman, to provide the board with some dollars this year to address some of those concerns. One of the biggest concerns that exists for some of our adult residential centres, of course, are the deficits that they carry. I know that the deficit sits heavy on their shoulders because, as we all know, fiscal responsibility and fiscal accountability is extremely important, and to offset those deficit pressures allows the boards and the centres to then be able to move forward with their projects.

Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to inform my honourable colleague that we were able to provide funding of $375,000 to Riverview Home to offset that deficit pressure, and that's something that we were very pleased to do. As well, I want to make my honourable colleague aware of the fact that for health and safety reasons, for immediate repair and renovation challenges, we also were able to provide Riverview with $80,000, to put some of those dollars immediately into place for immediate repair and renovation that were causing some health and safety concerns.

Now, Mr. Chairman, on top of that, of course, that won't solve the issue of the long term. I know my colleague mentioned a three-year plan. I think it's important to note that the department is extremely aware of the challenges that are faced by Riverview and we want to ensure that the best possible fit is what works. So we'll be going forward with a major undertaking. We'll be meeting with the board very soon to discuss the specifics of that to ensure that it's done in the best possible manner, and we're anticipating that that will take place through our housing authorities because we can do better with mortgages through the housing authorities. So we look forward to the meetings with that board in the very near future to address those very serious pressures.

MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, I'm very delighted with the response of the minister in relationship to the $375,000 and the $80,000. However, that having been said, certainly the board itself has been looking at either a replacement or, as it's being referred to now, as a total renewal, the word renewal. I guess the concept of replacement, you're talking multi-multi-million dollars and I just want to bring home the situation. I know other members are concerned about this, but it is in my riding and my personal history with that

[Page 304]

facility goes back many years. My first tour of that facility was in 1970 as a 24-year-old municipal councillor in Pictou County. I used to go there with the Lions Club at least once a month and be involved with dances involving the residents there and so on. Certainly George Durling, a native of Pictou County, has been involved in going there on a monthly basis to provide entertainment at a very high level for decades.

What I am most excited about in that facility is the staff. Despite the situation that the kitchen is so depressing, that the rooms are in such horrible shape, that the lifts that are there to get people into tubs out of wheelchairs, actually came out of the Cole Harbour facility. The scuffs and scrapes in the walls there and so on, the maintenance staff, the people who are working there, are doing a phenomenal job and they keep referring to having that facility recognized as a facility of excellence.

I would ask if the minister would consider coming to that facility and touring it with all three MLAs from Pictou County. I think you would be inspired by the staff, you would be inspired by the residents and you would be appalled at the situation that does exist there. One of the things that was most discouraging