[Page 467]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Good afternoon, the Committee of the Whole House on Supply will now be called to order. We will begin with the estimates of the Department of Community Services.

Revolution E2 - Resolved that a sum not exceeding $748,123,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Community Services, pursuant to the Estimate and the business plan of the Nova Scotia Housing Development Corporation be approved.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Minister of Community Services to introduce her staff and make some opening comments if she so wishes

HON. JUDY STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, it is an honour to appear before this committee and present the Department of Community Services budget for the 2006-07 fiscal year. It is still early days for me as I get immersed in the role and responsibilities that come with being minister of this huge department, but may I say that the more I learn, the more humbled I become.

Mr. Chairman, it didn't take me long to learn that I'm working with a dedicated group of people. These people are employees who serve those Nova Scotians who need our help most. Not only do we have a staff of more than 1,100 people, we have about 50

[Page 468]

offices throughout the province, ensuring that our staff are close to our clients. I'm sure that for any members of this committee who may have had dealings with Community Services staff throughout the province, you will agree with my assessment that these people serve our province extremely well. Two of those people are with me today: George Hudson is the Executive Director of Finance and Administration, and Bonnie LeFrank is Manager of Budgets and Results. While I've learned a lot in the last two weeks as Minister of Community Services, I'm happy to have two right hands on whom to rely in this Chamber.

This estimates debate gives me a chance to profile the Department of Community Services, especially important for new members of the House and for our more seasoned members, a preview of our programs and services for the upcoming fiscal year. The most important piece of news is that our overall departmental budget is increasing, allowing us to direct more money to where it is most needed. The Community Services budget for 2006-07 is $748 million. That's an increase of $32 million over last year. That's $32 million more on behalf of low-income Nova Scotian families and in support of thousands of Nova Scotians in need.

There are four key program areas within the Department of Community Services: Persons with Disabilities, Family and Children's Services, Housing, and Employment Support and Income Assistance. Mr. Chairman, one of the first things I learned at the department is you have to understand the acronyms, so if I slip into SPD or ESIA talk at any time please remind me at any time to fill in the rest of the letters.

Here are some of the ways we will be helping Nova Scotians over the next year. Families. Mr. Chairman, this government's entire budget is built around families and our future, and nowhere is that more evident than at Community Services. Focus on child care, more than $130 million over 10 years. Nova Scotia remains committed to providing quality child care. The province is committed to a 10-year plan which is in excess of $130 million. This will provide more flexibility for parents and better training for child care workers, especially in rural areas. Pharmacare for children in low-income families, $2 million annually. Children of low-income families will benefit from extended prescription drug coverage. More than 33,000 children under the age of 18 will benefit from Pharmacare through a $1 million investment by the province this year, increasing to $2 million next year.

Mr. Chairman, the continued rollout of services for persons with disabilities renewal, $1.5 million. We will soon offer three programs to help those with disabilities: Direct Family Support, Independent Living Support and Alternative Family Support. This budget includes $1.5 million to continue the Direct Family Support Program and enables us to extend last year's Independent Living Support pilot project in Cape Breton to the rest of the province. We will also implement the Alternate Family Support

[Page 469]

program. This new program helps people with disabilities live with another family when they cannot live in their own home.

[12:45 p.m.]

Help for foster families, Mr. Chairman, to the tune of $400,000. Nova Scotia's foster families provide a valuable service for children who need a home. The province will increase base rates by 5 per cent for foster families, to $14.46 per day for children under the age of 10 and $21.02 per day for children 10 years and older. This represents a $400,000 investment to make life easier for foster families and the more than 1,200 children in their care.

Extending the age limits for the bursary program for children in care, $200,000. Currently youth in care are eligible for a bursary program to cover their post-secondary education costs. Government is pleased to extend the age limit from 21 to 24 years so that students who were formerly in care can continue their studies.

The introduction of post-adoption services, $200,000. We are putting more supports in place for parents who adopt children with special needs with this investment. Mr. Chairman, these parents deserve special recognition for the nurturing role they play, and our thanks for making a difference.

Housing - providing more affordable housing - $42 million over three years. In 2002, the province signed the Affordable Housing Agreement with the federal government, committing $56.18 million to create affordable housing by 2009. As of March 31, 2006, $37.3 million has been committed for the construction or renovation of more than 900 units. In the next two years we will commit another $20 million to invest in this worthy project.

Affordable Housing Trust, $23 million over three years. A further $23 million from the federal Affordable Housing Trust will also be allocated for the renovation or creation of more affordable and social housing over the next three years. We are prepared to invest these funds in various forms of affordable housing, including existing social housing. Investments will be delivered across a range of projects and programs. This means we will be creating and maintaining more affordable homes for low-income Nova Scotians.

Investing more in emergency home repair programs, $4.5 million. Nova Scotia has some of the highest rates of home ownership, but some of the oldest homes in the country. We will invest an additional $3.5 million in the Senior Citizens' Assistance and Provincial Housing Emergency Repair Programs. We also have access to $1 million under the Department of Health's Continuing Care budget, to deliver emergency repairs to seniors' homes.

[Page 470]

Income Assistance - increasing income assistance to $5.6 million annually, total. For the third consecutive year, income assistance rates will be increased. Effective October 1, 2006, all income assistance clients will receive a personal allowance increase of $10 per month. Basic shelter allowance rates will be raised by $15 a month for single renters, and $20 a month for families. There is $2.8 million in this year's budget and this will be increased to $5.6 million next year.

Income assistance clients to keep a portion of their income tax refund. Income assistance clients will be able to keep 30 per cent of their income tax refund, Mr. Chairman. With this program, household income will increase as people keep 30 per cent of their tax refund, above their current level of assistance.

Increased dental fees paid on behalf of income assistance clients. Income assistance clients may be eligible to receive emergency dental coverage. We will increase the dental rates in the Employment Support and Income Assistance policy by 6 per cent. Clients will see a reduction in the amount they pay. It may also allow them to have emergency dental work that they wouldn't have been able to otherwise afford.

Mr. Chairman, and fellow members, these are just the highlights for the Department of Community Services for 2006-07. I would be happy to turn things over to you to begin the discussion.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Dartmouth North.

MR. TREVOR ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, I would like to open by congratulating the honourable minister for her new role in the current government and to thank her, as well, for the efforts that she'll make over the next eight hours, along with her colleagues, in answering some very crucial, important questions that will be posed.

Mr. Chairman, I must inform you that it is, indeed, an honour for me to stand here as the Opposition critic for what I believe to be one of the major building blocks of this government's budget. I can tell you that standing here today I am quite troubled by the fact that the poor in Nova Scotia are amongst some of the poorest in Canada, and not only do we have the highest poverty rate, we have people living in some of the most severe cases of poverty across this country. Even more troubling is the fact that one in five children in Nova Scotia lives in poverty. I must tell you, right now, that Breakfast for Learning programs and food banks are only stop-gaps for some of these families who are experiencing these levels of poverty.

Today, Mr. Chairman, I stand before you with an opportunity to keep one of my very own campaign promises I made during the election. During the election, the third week of the election, I was accosted by a lady from our community who was frustrated, very frustrated, and she was in one of the more well-to-do areas, we'll call it. As she

[Page 471]

approached me and my fiancée, she expressed her concerns to me that the government of the day - in particular, me - would not forget those who are in need of a hand-up, or some assistance to help them out of a mere rut. I pledged that day to make a consistent effort on behalf of her, as her representative, and a voice to the government, of her concerns.

Now some may say I'm naive because I have a lack of experience to this forum, but, Mr. Chairman, I must tell you, for 16 years I've been a home-care worker, I have seen those who have battled addictions, I have worked on the front lines of local food banks, and I have also witnessed the struggles of seniors who've been abandoned by their family members and who have only the "system" to rely on.

Mr. Chairman, if you walk around the streets of HRM, drive by most intersections, you can see for yourself the troubles many are facing in Nova Scotia. These are not only problems in the Regional Municipality of Halifax and Dartmouth, they are problems that are increasing drastically in our rural communities due to job losses, students, and family members moving away.

Mr. Chairman, my future wife says to me, Trevor, you always see the good in people. Well, today I stand here as an optimist. However, in saying that, I want to inform the honourable minister that although each issue she will speak on and express as being important to both her and her government, I want only to say that history sometimes repeats itself.

This government's commitment to those who find themselves in need and who live in poverty, continue to struggle merely to survive each day to the point of barely existing. Case in point, Mr. Chairman, in 2006, the NDP-led Community Services Committee held an open forum on poverty in which stakeholders presented their ideas and concerns, along with several recommendations, to this department. On the first day, only one Progressive Conservative representative showed up. On the second day, no Progressive Conservative members saw fit to attend. I can only hope, today, after listening and answering these important questions, the honourable minister makes a commitment to work, listen, and join in the efforts of the many organizations whose only goal is to improve the lives of all Nova Scotians.

With that being said, Mr. Chairman, I want to move on. My first questions will be in and around the Progressive Conservative platform, Building for families, Building for the future, which I can table. The Tory platform included the province to take the following actions - on Page 12 of the platform, it states: "legislate annual adjustments to the Department of Community Services' basic personal allowance."

Since the province de-indexed increases to family benefit rates in 1990, social assistance rates increases in Nova Scotia have been purely ad hoc, and for many years,

[Page 472]

from 1993 to 2001, did not increase at all. From 1989 to 2004, welfare incomes in Nova Scotia, adjusted for inflation, decreased by 65 per cent for single, employable persons; 26 per cent for persons with a disability; 43 per cent for single parents with one child; and 31 per cent for a couple with two children. The 2006-2007 budget proposes an increase for the basic personal allowances component of social assistance rates by $10 per month for all income assistance clients - this will increase rates from $190 personal allowance to $200, as of October 2006.

Mr. Chairman, my first question to the minister is, will this minister confirm that the government will be introducing changes to the Employment Support and Income Assistance Act to entrench the indexation of the personal allowance component of social assistance rates?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I want to say welcome to my honourable colleague. As we work our way through the next eight hours, and indeed in the days to come, I would like to publicly state that I share my honourable colleague's optimism and I share my honourable colleague's optimism for the future. There was a quote that my mother used to use on a regular basis - it's one of the things that I've kept and held dearly from her memory - and that was that we look to the future and we learn from the past. I commit to all members of this committee and all members of this House that I, indeed, will live by those words, from my mother, that I hold so near and dear to my heart that we indeed will look to the future as we move forward in the days to come.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to review, briefly, in answer to my honourable colleague's question, the personal allowance history. In August 2001, the new Employment Support and Income Assistance Program increased the personal allowance rate to $180. It remained unchanged until 2004 when the rate was increased to $184. In 2005, the rate was increased by $6 to $190 - this 3 per cent increase was higher than the Nova Scotia inflation rate of 2.8 per cent. According to the Bank of Canada, the inflation rate for 2005, indeed, was 2.2 per cent. So I am pleased to be able to increase the personal allowance rate by $10 to $200 per month, effective October 1, 2006. This represents a 5.3 per cent increase over the previous year.

Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague, approximately 35,000 individuals will benefit from this increase, and it will cost the province roughly $4.2 million annually. So I propose to my honourable colleague that indeed this is three years in a row, but this is the first year of my mandate as I make that move to the future and move forward. I certainly will commit to this House that, as is the case every year, we will analyze budget dilemmas and budget issues, and I'm pleased to be able to come to the floor in this, my first budget, with a $10 per month increase to that allowance.

[Page 473]

[1:00 p.m.]

MR. ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, I thank the honourable minister. In regard to the question I just posed, I'm wondering if the minister can also confirm that the indexation for the basic personal allowance referred to in the government's election platform will provide for the automatic annual and full indexation in accordance with increases in the Statistics Canada consumer price index?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, as we make our way through different pages and documents, the question my honourable colleague poses regarding an annual statutory increase, certainly my honourable colleague needs to know that if that, indeed, is the promise of this government and the platform commitment of this government, it will be my personal commitment, as well.

MR. ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, I'm hoping to develop relationships in the future in my role as the critic, and I'll hold the honourable minister accountable to those very words. Bearing in mind that the recent conclusions of a UN committee, which severely criticized Canada and the provinces for providing social assistance at levels that are inadequate to permit poor people to meet their basic shelter needs, why, I ask the honourable minister, has the government not made a promise to also enact legislated annual adjustments with respect to the shelter allowance component of the social assistance rates?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I thank my honourable colleague for the opportunity to discuss the second component to this that I'm very pleased to be able to bring forward in the House today. In 2004, of course the shelter rates for single renters and single boarders was raised by $50 per month and $25 per month, respectively. The current rate for single renters is $285 per month. I am pleased to be able to increase the shelter rate for single renters by another $15 per month. Effective October 1, 2006, the maximum rate for single renters will increase to $300 per month. This increase will assist nearly 800 single renters, and carries an annual price tag of $140,000.

Now, there remains a gap between average market rents in a number of areas in the province, and the shelter rates under ESIA, and no adjustment has been made to family shelter rates for a number of years. So, Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased, again, to be able to increase the shelter rate for two-person and three-person families renting by $20 per month. Effective October 1, 2006, the maximum rate for two-person families will increase to $570 per month, and for a three-person family the rate will increase to $620 a month. This increase will assist over 5,400 families, and carries an annual pricetag of $1.3 million. I offer to my honourable colleague that, indeed, again, we see a positive step forward to assist those who most need our assistance.

[Page 474]

MR. ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the numbers, and the government's commitment to this part and support of those who need it, but I believe my question was as to whether or not - I mean, I'm standing here in hope that the government will look at this on an annual basis and continue to look at the increases. In saying that, I just want to make a note that if we look at the region of Halifax and Dartmouth, on average, and I'm sure the honourable minister is aware of this, the price for rent has gone up. A normal three-bedroom apartment runs around $946, a two-bedroom apartment at a level of $762, and a one bedroom at around $552 per month.

In saying that, I just want to make it known to the honourable minister that when people are facing housing situations, they're often taken advantage of by landlords, based on the amounts they get. I guess that's what I'm hoping to convey to the minister, that she'll take back to her government that we should indeed look at this on an annual basis.

I want to move on - the second part of the election platform that I want to address, again on Page 12, states the Conservative Government would like to "Establish a new Persons with Disabilities Allowance that recognizes that many Nova Scotians are unable to work due to a permanent disability." That's on Page 12 of the platform.

Prior to the enactment of the Employment Support and Income Assistance Act in 2001, people with disabilities received assistance pursuant to a separate legislative regime, the Family Benefits Act. Disability advocates did not support having a separate scheme to providing assistance to people with disabilities, as it served to further marginalize people with disabilities by presuming that. Along with all other people in receipt of social assistance, they cannot contribute to the workforce either, with or without additional supports. Such supports are currently available and provided for under the Employment Support and Income Assistance Act, the ESIA. According to the creation of the separate social assistance scheme, it would serve to marginalize and disadvantage people with disabilities - in short, it would be a big step backwards.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the honourable minister, will the proposed "persons with disabilities allowance", announced as part of the government's election platform, recreate separate social assistance legislation for people with disabilities? If so, what consultation has the government and the minister conducted with disability groups with regard to the proposed new disabilities allowance, and what have those groups advised the government regarding the advisability of the separate regime?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I will address your question in a moment, but to go back to the last statement - again I'm pleased with the shelter commitment that I'm able to make here in the House today, and I want to make sure that my colleague knows that I will continue to press forward. It would be premature for me, in my role as minister, to presume what I will be able to work my colleagues toward and what I won't be able to, but certainly my honourable colleague needs to know that I'm pleased to be

[Page 475]

able to make the commitment today, in this year's estimate, and that that bodes well for future years' estimates efforts on my behalf.

The questions that you raise regarding the platform are indeed very important and very pertinent questions. As we discuss and debate the estimates in front of us today, I have to remind myself that before I get ahead and move to years in the future, I need to address the estimates that are in front of me. So the estimates this year, certainly regarding the allowances and the commitments that we've made for this year, I'm pleased to speak to those specifics.

Now the specifics to the platform commitment, Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague, I cannot commit today; that would be premature. As we move forward in the days to come, I will be in consultation with the Disabled Persons' Commission and the other member entities to create this persons with disabilities allowance to ensure that maximum benefit to our stakeholders and to our clients and all Nova Scotians are at the forefront. So as we move forward in those consultations with the key stakeholders, I want to assure my honourable colleague that we will certainly do due diligence with regard to all those who are concerned.

MR. ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, again I applaud the honourable minister for her honesty and her future efforts. I'd like to go back to the personal allowance increase of $10 per month. I think it has to be borne in mind that when the province first introduced the Employment Support and Income Assistance Act, August 1, 2001, the personal allowance it provided to the persons in need was $180 per month, which, if merely adjusted for inflation, would currently be over $205 per month. In other words, the budget announcements to take place in October 2006 regarding the increases for personal allowance doesn't even keep up the pace with the increases in the cost of living.

In May of this year, in response to the reports of the Government of Canada and Nova Scotia filed with the United Nations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights noted the following: "It notes with concern that in most Provinces and Territories, social assistance benefits are lower than a decade ago, that they do not provide adequate income to meet basic needs for food, clothing and shelter, and that welfare levels are often set at less than half the Low Income Cut-Off."

As of 2003, social assistance income for single, employable people in Nova Scotia represented only 30 per cent of the poverty line, and 50 per cent for the single people with disabilities. The most recent report by the National Council of Welfare says that welfare policies in Canada are in utter chaos, and calls upon legislators to take action. The council also states: "Perhaps this year's dismal report will finally make people in the public life sit up, take notice and do something to remedy the situation."

[Page 476]

For its part, the UN committee urged all levels of government to establish social assistance levels which ensure the realization of an adequate standard of living for all.

Mr. Chairman, my question to the honourable minister is, given the fact that the announced increase in personal allowance won't even provide the same purchasing power as when the government introduced the Employment Support and Income Assistance program in 2001, and given that the United Nations has very recently urged the provinces to comply with international human rights laws by proving adequate social assistance, will the minister announce that the Government of Nova Scotia will undertake and review all social assistance rates in Nova Scotia and commit to ensuring that new rates will be introduced that meet the Statistics Canada low-income cut-offs?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague across the way, again the optimism, that I would like to believe that this is just the beginning, that we will review, as we have in the past, these rates on an annual basis. Indeed, this is the third consecutive year with an increase. That bodes well, that provides a level of comfort and certainly a level of optimism. We review them continuously, and we'll take all factors into consideration.

Mr. Chairman, I would also reference for my honourable colleague, as I've learned over the last few weeks, the importance of some of the other programming and other funding that we're able to provide for our income assistance clients. Those include the National Child Benefit, the brand new Pharmacare Program, that I'm so very pleased to be able to bring to the floor of the House today, indeed, our $130 million child care plan, that I'm actually as excited about moving forward on, and special needs funding that factors in on a regular basis. So, indeed, with those other programs in place and the other funding opportunities in place along with that optimistic continual review of the rates, I look forward to the days ahead as we continue to build on addressing the needs of those Nova Scotians who most need our assistance.

[1:15 p.m.]

MR. ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, again, I want to say that this government is making an effort, and I'll acknowledge that. I also want to inform the government that I'm here today for a reason and that reason is to speak out for the people that those programs aren't touching. To make known that there are people still living in poverty. So, as these programs unfold, I hope, and again, as the honourable minister has stated herself, I too am optimistic.

I want to move to the business plan and the budget and draw the honourable minister's attention to Page 6 of the Community Services Business Plan. On Page 6, the plan states that the trend over the course of the past five years has been positive. Declining by 11 per cent, from an average annual caseload of 36,210 cases in 2000-01,

[Page 477]

to 32,245 cases in 2004-05. Further reductions of caseloads will become increasingly difficult to attain. Then on Page 26 of the Performance Measures, it states that the department's target is to maintain the average monthly caseload at or below the 2003-04 base year level, by ongoing monitoring of client eligibility.

Through you, Mr. Chairman, I ask the honourable minister, shouldn't the determination of how many caseloads are on employment support and income assistance, be the actual need in the province versus artificial reduction targets that only end up tightening the restrictions for people who are in need of this program.

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague again, an opportunity to discuss something that does come almost like a double-edged sword. While we celebrate, and indeed we do celebrate in this province the decrease certainly from 1999, over 38,000 caseloads, to an estimated just over 30,000 caseloads for the 2005-06 year. That is an opportunity to celebrate the success of programs and programming and available assistance, the employment support programs that we have in place that indeed are successful in getting more Nova Scotian families back into the workforce and indeed, back on their own self-sufficiency and we're pleased to be able to work with those families and those individuals along the way, to assist them in times of need, when they do most need us. This indeed is a success to celebrate, that we are able to decrease the caseload, meaning more Nova Scotian families are succeeding on their own and more Nova Scotian families have the opportunity to experience that self-satisfaction.

Mr. Chairman, I have to just take a moment to share with my honourable colleague, going back to my years in the classroom, the unbelievable feeling of self worth and the elevation of the self esteem of young individuals, that I know exists in adults as well, when you're able to achieve and do things on your own. That indeed is something that I take with me in this new responsibility of mine and I know as we continue to aid and assist more Nova Scotian families and more individuals to be able to stand on their own two feet and move forward, having assisted them along the way to the point where they are now able to do that on their own, I take great satisfaction in that and will work to continue to decrease those numbers even more.

MR. ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, again, I'm standing here and as I have said in my opening, I've been a home care worker for 16 years, I've worked on the front lines of food banks, and I can honestly tell you that "the system" is in place and the monies are budgeted to it, but I too have witnessed many people who are receiving benefits. In all honesty, they're merely getting by. They're existing. The people I've spoken with have told me, Trevor, we're tired of just getting by, why can't we live?

So, again, I want to say that with the proposed programs this government has tabled in this budget, I can only hope that some of those people who are on these

[Page 478]

programs do indeed follow through and eventually end up breathing and living some sort of life. Again, I'll say I'm optimistic.

I'll go back to the business plan again. It references increasing complexities of needs among the ESIA clients and multiple needs of children in care. Given that it is the case, I want to look at 4.8 of the estimates in the supplementary details. Under Maintenance of Children, the budget in 2005-06 was underspent by nearly $2.5 million. The 2006-07 budgeted amount for the maintenance of children is a modest 2.8 per cent increase over the last year and it's still $2.5 million less than the $70.7 million budgeted two years ago.

In the same fashion, if you look at the Child Welfare and Residential Services line, the budgeted amount of 2006-07 is $1.9 million, which is just a shade above what you spent two years ago. Given the complexity of needs of these children, which you document in your own business plan, why are the budgets that directly affect children in care at or less than two year old funding levels?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you to my honourable colleague for taking us to the Estimates Book and allowing me an opportunity to speak to some of the more specifics.

Certainly the maintenance of children represents the direct costs incurred by our six department child welfare offices and 14 children's aid societies related to the apprehension and care and custody of children. These services include everything from counselling and family support at the prevention and the child protection spectrum to full service parental-style services at the care and custody end of the spectrum. There are approximately 2,000 children and youth in need of protection who, I understand, are in the care of the minister. I went from being the mother of four to being the mother of 2,000 - certainly looking forward to those Mother's Day cards.

Placement services for children in care vary from subsidized adoption and foster care to licensed children's residential facilities. There are approximately 1,100 children in over 700 foster homes in Nova Scotia. The province has commenced a long overdue comprehensive review of placement services with the objective of improved services to the children in care of the minister, including the repatriation of some 17 children presently served in and out of provincial facilities.

The 2005-06 costs reflect declining caseloads and economies achieved through improved casework and continued scrutiny of contracted services, increased National Child Benefit revenues for children in care and savings in our secure care facility due to staff turnover.

[Page 479]

The 2006-07 estimate reflects an additional $400,000 for increasing foster care rates, full funding for secure care, and the application of the NSGEU negotiated salary increases for staff in the children's residential facilities.

MR. ZINCK: I want to move on to the topic of poverty. During the recent election campaign, I must say again, as in my opening remarks, I was confronted by numerous people. Through my weekly work at the local food bank, it is of a concern to me. Groups like the Affordable Energy Coalition, the Nova Scotia Association of Social Workers, business groups, poverty activists and others all expressed a deep concern over the impact of poverty on our province. Many are calling for poverty action plans and for the implementation of suggestions put forward by the Community Services Committee, following the two-day forum on poverty held earlier this year.

One of the measures the Department of Community Services has announced is that it intends to help families struggling to survive on employment support and income assistance; that they will allow families to keep, as was mentioned, 30 per cent of their income tax refunds, instead of clawing back the 100 per cent that normally takes place.

Through you, Mr. Chairman, to the honourable minister, I ask this question; since this is not the government's money to begin with, why not allow families to retain 100 per cent of those refunds so that they can help buy better quality food, clothes for children, school supplies and pay for the skyrocketing utilities and heating costs?

MS. STREATCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know that my honourable colleague has a copy of the Party platform so I don't believe I need to table this, but if you would like me to, I certainly would be pleased to. I want to add to the record, and certainly add my commitment to the commitment made, by reading aloud, indeed, the commitment of the government: "Develop and implement - in consultation with poverty advocates, social workers, educators, employment experts, business and community leaders - a multi-year Poverty to Work Strategy, aimed at reducing poverty, particularly among women and children, and generating more meaningful employment through a variety of ways to improve the standard of living of Nova Scotians struggling on low incomes."

Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague, certainly that is a commitment made by this government and one that I certainly intend on keeping.

I would like to preface the statements regarding the allowable income by stating that my honourable colleague mentioned the work of the Community Services Committee. Indeed, I had the pleasure of serving on that Community Services Committee for some time before being named to Cabinet, Mr. Chairman. The work being done at the committee level is, indeed, extremely valuable. I know that many recommendations have come forward, and I know that I was part of that committee as we sent some

[Page 480]

recommendations forward. Certainly in my role as minister, I am going to be looking at those recommendations again, to ensure that the valuable work done by that committee is not lost on my ministry or on my department. I wanted to make sure that my honourable colleagues in the House knew that I certainly would be taking a look at that myself to ensure that those issues are addressed under my purview.

Certainly, Mr. Chairman, when we talk about the income assistance retaining a portion of their income, and I believe that is a 30 per cent allowable retention of their earned income, again that is a positive, because what we are trying to do, as I stated earlier, is support those who most are in need of our assistance. Indeed, when we take a look at the caseloads, the income assistance is based on a budget deficit, Mr. Chairman, if I may. So the assets that our income assistance clients have are used to establish a proper amount that is required to meet their individual needs.

[1:30 p.m.]

Certainly we look at that on a regular basis. The 30 per cent allowable retention right now is certainly something that as we move forward in the days to come, we may look at other ways of allowing individuals to expand upon that. As I referenced earlier, there are a multitude of programs available that I am very pleased and, hopefully, will get a chance to speak about today in this Chamber, the Pharmacare Program that we have for our children, and indeed the child care plan and certainly the National Child Tax Benefit. All of those factor in when we consider those budget deficits and where indeed we are able to provide that income assistance allowing, of course, our clients to retain 30 per cent of their earned income.

MR. CHAIRMAN: To the honourable minister, we would request that you table that document to which you referred, just for the record.

MS. STREATCH: Certainly.

MR. ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, I just want to go back - I have so many important questions and I think I can be assured today that I will go over some of these questions at a later time with the honourable minister - to the question that I posed and give a small sample of one of the situations that I recently had to deal with regarding income tax.

I'm not going to mention this person's name, but she's a senior citizen who is being supplemented by social assistance; she's also a Canada Pension recipient. When she recently had her taxes done, it was unknown to her that Canada Pension was taking extra monies from her. So what happened was there were monies showing up as income. There was a $300 refund that was given to her and when she called me - and keep in mind she's 67 years old, and when I found out that she was living on, or existing on, basically $7,500 a year combined, you know, I said to myself, gosh, I'm either lucky or

[Page 481]

just ignorant to the fact that so many people in this province are living at those rates - she asked me, is this my money? I said to her, let me look into it, but I'm telling you now not to spend the money because, if you spend that money, you're probably going to lose it, but I'll get back to you.

I have to say that for somebody who is existing on $7,500 a year, living on her own, a senior citizen, having an extra $300, she's going to want to eat, there's going to be rent to be paid - find it very frustrating that what indeed happened was exactly what I told her would happen. The department found out and immediately took that money off her next paycheque. I say that - and I wanted to bring this up because it's something that I want to broach with the minister at a later time - perhaps a better communication could have taken place in this matter, perhaps a caseworker could have looked at this situation and said that maybe we can take it out over a couple of months instead of one lump sum, because what had happened was that when the monies came out all of a sudden, this senior was left short on her monies to pay her rent at the end of the month or to buy food. And I just wanted to bring that case up in reference to that question, because I think communication is definitely something that people in the department have to become better attuned to.

I want to move on. Earlier in the sitting of the House I was able to table a resolution in regard to food banks. I want to say that the people on employment support and income assistance are the largest group of food bank recipients in Nova Scotia and, of these clients, the majority are lone parents who are responsible for feeding over 8,000 of the province's children. The department has increased the personal allowance for adults on the ESIA by $10 yet, in 2001, children's personal allowances were eliminated and replaced by the National Child Benefit supplement, which is less money.

Mr. Chairman, through you to the minister, I want to ask, would the department address the child poverty and food insecurity that's currently running rampant in this province by either reinstating the children's personal allowance or by increasing the Nova Scotia Child Benefit?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, before addressing the answer to my honourable colleague, again I want to make a couple of general observations if I may. Certainly, as I had already invited and indicated, I would welcome the opportunity to sit down with my honourable colleague and discuss matters that we share in common. I look forward to being out of the House and being able to do that on a less formal basis, as we move forward some of the issues that we will share in the days to come - I wanted to get that on the record.

The second issue, although I would never speak to the particulars of any case any more than my honourable colleague wants to, I would say that I would like to discuss the particulars of the case that you mentioned in private and in consultation with staff here.

[Page 482]

Indeed, those types of cases, as a general rule, would not qualify for income assistance - as a senior, the GIS and CPP should be sufficient. So I do want to discuss that case in particular with my honourable colleague, Mr. Chairman, to make sure that all needs of all Nova Scotians are being best met by this government, indeed, by my department.

Mr. Chairman, to the question, certainly the National Child Benefit coupled with the Nova Scotia Child Benefit, I am told, equals or exceeds the costs associated with raising a child, and therefore the coupling of those programs together is able to assist parents.

The other footnote that I would add, to my honourable colleague, he brought forward the good work that is being done in our food banks across this province. Indeed, there is no question that the individuals who work in our foods banks and the individuals they serve are very important and valuable. Food banks have been in place in many Nova Scotia communities for many years, with some receiving municipal support that has been continued by the province. I make the commitment today to my honourable colleague that we will continue to work with all our partners, working to meet the needs of our vulnerable Nova Scotians, through these food banks.

MR. ZINCK: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I am going to move into the increases that you spoke to in regard to housing, and acknowledge the fact that the province is making an effort - some would say be it small - to increase the allowance for shelter and, hopefully, it will help some of the families who are struggling.

One of the things - a lot of people I have dealt with and you have probably heard of cases - that happens is when there is an increase in shelters, landlords see fit to automatically increase or gouge the rental properties that these people are trying to be housed in. I just want to know, why has the department focused the majority of its housing money on for-profit developments instead of encouraging the non-profit and co-op housing, where these people are in more stable situations and not being taken advantage of by these landlords?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, indeed, the issue of affordable housing is one we have been able to make great gains in, I would suggest. Certainly under the Affordable Housing Program Phase II, just to remind members of this House, we were able to exceed 900 units in this province. As proposals come in, we analyze those proposals, we review those proposals, but I would review for this House that we had 570 new rental units, 178 individual home preservation units, 104 rental preservation, and six new home, as well as 70 rent supplements. That's just a small breakdown of the over 900 units that were able to be afforded to Nova Scotians under the $37.2 million Phase I.

As we move into Phase II, of course we will be looking for additional units to be positioned around the province as need is addressed. Indeed, we'll be looking again at

[Page 483]

a variety of ways to maximize the benefit that we can put these dollars so that all Nova Scotians are able to access more affordable housing across the province.

MR. ZINCK: Mr. Chairman, housing is a huge, huge problem in this province and I'm sure it's going to be discussed over the next few hours, I think a real definition as to what a collective group in this province would term affordable housing - I think we have to come up with a real sense of what affordable housing is, and not what the current standard has set out.

I want to move on to early childhood learning and child care. The department states that funding for early childhood learning and care is a priority, yet I'm wondering if the minister can explain why the 2005-06 budget for early childhood programs, as outlined on Page 4.8 of the Supplementary Detail, initially set at the rate of $52.2 million, was under-spent by half, with only $26 million being invested into the sector?

Further to that line of questioning, I'm just wondering if the honourable minister wouldn't agree that the funding increases are only funding increases if they are actually spent. I would like to know - and in the early stages of this new appointment maybe the honourable minister isn't able to do it - I'm just wondering, where did that money go and how can we be assured that the entire $42 million that is budgeted for 2006-07 is actually going to be spent?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, indeed, child care is a priority for this government, for all Nova Scotians. It was quite appropriate and prudent that the $20.4 million in federal funds designated for child care was preserved so we could turn $20.4 million for one year into a 10-year plan that the child care sector has blessed.

Let me go through a little bit in explanation of that. In co-operation with the child care sector and parents, the department held a series of consultation meetings in August and September of 2005 to help develop what was then a five-year child care plan. That plan was ready to be released when the new federal government came in with their $1,200 universal child care benefit for all families and children under six.

We had to develop a new plan, Mr. Chairman, which we did, and provided our child care working group, which represents various elements within the sector, non-profit, commercial, education, et cetera, the opportunity to review the new plan. That group helped to identify issues in support of creating a 10-year plan, a sustainable plan worth more than $130 million.

Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague, to his question, we have our $20.4 million in the bank, and along with the second-year funding of $18.8 million, put that towards the $130 million that will help the industry to begin creating new child care spaces.

[Page 484]

On May 8^th, Mr. Chairman, I was pleased to be a part of the early learning and child care plan announcement at the Leeds Street Child Care Centre. At that event, Elaine Ferguson of Child Care Connections said, "This plan will provide a foundation for Nova Scotia to continue to build on. It is reflective of the many voices heard over the past year of consultation between the sector and the Department of Community Services."

[1:45 p.m.]

We're ready with the funding and will begin implementation in the coming days. So, Mr. Chairman, just to repeat to my honourable colleague, indeed it was prudent of us to maintain that $20.4 million so that we could combine it and create a better, more sustainable plan for all Nova Scotians.

MR. ZINCK: I have to say that when viewing the former minister several months back when that proclamation was made, the announcement of the 10- year plan was to be put in place, it was on the news, it was on TV, and I couldn't help but notice that the actual owner of that daycare had stated there was a waiting list of 450 children. I have to say that a 10-year plan - you know people are frustrated, people need it now, 50 per cent of this province makes less than $25,000 a year and I believe we have a situation where not only are low-income people struggling, but we have working poor who are struggling.

Those working poor, they're just not going to be able to wait 10 years to continue to have some sort of life, because we want to live in Nova Scotia, we don't want to just get by. I think to say that you've held on to the money for this bigger, grandiose plan, it's like the health care wait times - it's frustrating to people. People need that now; people want to live now, they want their children taken care of now.

I have to say that this government's cousins in Ottawa have destroyed the funding of the universal day care plan in Canada. The $100 a month, it's a taxable income that people aren't even aware of. I've had many calls on this and it's frustrating because there's a divide in this province right now and it's between the middle class and the lower- income people. The working poor are frustrated that they're not going to fully benefit from these programs, the programs the federal government has pronounced, the programs and the 10-year plan of child daycare.

The other thing I want the honourable minister to know - I'm sure, Mr. Chairman she's aware - in recent days I've had an opportunity to meet with daycare workers, daycare directors, and the way this plan is being rolled out is very, very scary to the not-for-profit daycare situations, the reliance or the emphasis being put on these big box daycares and the monies that are going to be allowed to open these situations with this 10-year plan.

[Page 485]

I'm frustrated, but again I will say that in the days and weeks upcoming, I will work with the honourable minister on some of these situations and, again, I'll remain optimistic, but right now I just want to ask with regard to daycare - the $100 per month, at the end of the year people are going to become frustrated when they realize that it is a taxable benefit and the actual gain out of that will not allow them to have that daycare need met, and the fact that a 10-year plan being rolled out does not meet their needs now - I want to ask the honourable minister, with all but the outright disappearance of the federal funding for child care, what is the province's plan to continue supporting and building this sector now, not 10 years from now, to help the working poor that need it now, who want to live?

MS. STREATCH: My honourable colleague raises a series of questions that I'm pleased to address with a few comments. I guess I would start by reminding all members of this House that in this upcoming budget the provincial tax portion of that federal child care will be tax exempt. So, while I won't speak for the Minister of Finance, I can indicate that that is a positive move on behalf of the Government of Nova Scotia, in recognizing that the provincial portion of this will be tax exempt. It certainly would be inappropriate for me to suggest how the federal government would handle their taxation.

I will move on for a moment, though, to briefly outline over the next number of years - and certainly I realize that when people hear a 10-year plan they envision the far end of the 10-year spectrum, so I would like to specifically talk about the first five years really, Mr. Chairman, and to my honourable colleague, that is when we will really see this plan truly unfold for Nova Scotian families, that indeed in the first five years the plan will be implemented and it is sustainable for a 10-year period.

So over the first five years of the plan, investments will be directed to the following areas: family home child care, which is one that I hold near and dear to my heart, an increase in the funding to child care provided in the care provider's home - this increases the availability of child care in rural areas and allows a family-like atmosphere and flexible hours and may be better suited to infant care; and specifically to my honourable colleague's question about child care spaces, a 10 per cent increase in the number of licensed, full-day spaces. Mr. Chairman, that is 1,000 spaces for families here in Nova Scotia and, specific to that, an increased number of full-day infant spaces, approximately 200 spaces, as well as make funding available to centres for repair, renovation, energy upgrade and accessibility.

Certainly the subsidized spaces, which are extremely important across the province, a 20 per cent increase in the number of portable subsidized daycare spaces to the tune of 550, and I want to speak to those for a moment, Mr. Chairman, because in the upcoming days we are slated to put 150 of those on the table. Those will be made available so that families can access those in the immediate - so, while we talk about a

[Page 486]

10-year plan, we have to remember that the first five years we will see the rollout of those spaces year after year, which will alleviate some of those wait lists.

Mr. Chairman, I acknowledge there are wait lists across the province. My honourable colleague's comments do not fall on deaf ears, I acknowledge that. This is the way we are going to move forward to address those wait lists.

Mr. Chairman, if I can make a couple more comments - we feel that this child care plan, this 10-year sustainable plan, is in the best interests of all Nova Scotian families, that it is a blended approach, a made-in-Nova Scotia approach that joins together the availability of the federal dollars going into the hands of Nova Scotian families along with the plans that we have for the increase in our subsidized spaces, as well as the over 1,000 new spaces that are created. We believe, to my honourable colleague, that we are providing choices for families in Nova Scotia and, indeed, it is those families who are best suited to make those choices for their children and their families.

MR. CHAIRMAN: You have just a few seconds, honourable member.

MR. ZINCK: I will just finish up very quickly with one question in regard to people with disabilities. As I have mentioned several times throughout this process, I have been a home care worker for 16 years. One of the frustrations of many people facing various disabilities is the availability and accessibility to enjoy their lives, to be able to go and visit particular businesses or restaurants or functions. While I have only a short time to go into this, I will pose one very quick question to the minister. I would just like to know, what funding is in the current budget to address accessibility to businesses and organizations ?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague across the way, while we have a variety of programs certainly that exist within the department, the specific request from my honourable colleague, I believe, would fall within the parameters of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations and their accessibility dollars that are available to businesses, and to Nova Scotians for accessibility. So indeed that falls with my colleague, the Minister of Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Your time has elapsed.

The honourable member for Preston.

MR. KEITH COLWELL: Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to congratulate the new minister on her new post. I'm sure the congratulations - as time goes on, she'll wonder why she took this post. It's a pretty difficult position to occupy with many

[Page 487]

demands and very difficult decisions that have to be made. I know the minister is up to the challenge. I had the privilege of working with her brother on the regional council and if she is equal, and she'll probably say the better of her brother, it's going to be very nice to see her in this position, quite frankly.

I've got a few questions I would like to ask around housing grants to start. Most of my questions are going to be on housing today, but the housing grant system we have now works very well as long as the people can meet the income criteria and there's enough money in the program.

The big problem we run into on a regular basis is that the people are just slightly over the income criteria. Usually when the problem is there, it's a retired family with modest income and when you're talking about, I believe it's $14,000 or $23,000, I can't remember the exact numbers, the thresholds for receiving a grant for a new roof or a new furnace, or whatever the case may be, in an older home, a home that people have probably occupied pretty well all their lives, it becomes very difficult when they get an answer back from the department that says, no, we can't help you and they've got no money in a savings account, no way to fix this, and in some cases to the point that they almost have to leave their home or, even worse, they're living in very unsafe conditions.

I was just wondering if I could get the minister to tell me if there's any consideration of moving the income limit up a little bit? I know there's never enough money in this program, but move the income limit up a little bit and maybe make the grants a little bit larger so some of those people could be taken into consideration. Now, it doesn't matter how much you move the income limit up or how much money you put in a program, you're not going to satisfy everybody, but some movement in both of those areas would be very helpful.

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, may I begin by thanking my honourable colleague, the member for Preston, for his kind words on my family pride, and certainly I take great pride in the kind words that you have to say regarding my older sibling who sits in another Chamber than this.

Specifically, Mr. Chairman, without dancing around a bunch of numbers, it's my understanding that the income thresholds indeed are negotiated with CMHC, which puts the majority of the dollars into the program and, therefore, it would be in negotiation with them that those income levels would be set. So certainly any negotiations that take place, my honourable colleague can certainly rest assured that we will continue to make sure that we're able to maximize the dollars that we have for our Nova Scotian families and individuals who need those repairs most and certainly at any point when negotiations do take place, we will certainly bring that issue to the table.

[Page 488]

[2:00 p.m]

MR. COLWELL: Thank you very much, Madam Minister. I would just like to get your reassurance on that, and I believe that's what you told me anyway, that at least your department will look at the amount of the grant and, again, it's a dicey situation because the bigger the grants you make, the fewer grants you can do. The higher the income threshold you do, the fewer grants you can do, but if you don't do the grants properly and you don't properly repair someone's home, it's for nothing. So correct me if I'm wrong here, but the impression I got from your answer was that you will look at both the income threshold and the grant levels to see if those can't be improved to help many seniors in Nova Scotia?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I was just confirming the two separate issues, one with regard to the income thresholds, certainly that is in negotiation with CMHC, and so certainly that would be something that we would continue to negotiate in good faith, recognizing the income levels of Nova Scotians. The other issue as to the dollar amounts for the repairs, certainly we have increased over the last three years the monies available to Nova Scotians for the repairs, for emergency repairs as well as health repairs based on health and safety, and indeed we have made available to seniors an increase from $2,500 to a $5,000 repair level.

So that's a step in the right direction and indeed my honourable colleague can rest assured that we will continue to move in those steps forward to ensure, because what we have to remember, and I know my honourable colleague is well aware of this, the more repairs that we can do, the longer people can stay in their homes. The longer people can stay in their homes and truly have that quality of life that they so well deserve, the better off all Nova Scotians are - government, families, indeed all Nova Scotians. So certainly those repair dollars and the increase in the budget this year, as you see in the Estimates Book for those repair dollars, in my view and I believe in my honourable colleague's view, would be dollars well spent.

MR. COLWELL: I totally agree with the minister. I mean if you look at the cost of housing somebody in a nursing home - I'm guessing in numbers now - probably about $2,500 a month or more. If you put $5,000 into someone's home so they can stay there, they're only going to stay there two months and you've got your money back as far as taxpayers are concerned plus the individual has the pride and the reassurance that they're living in their own home and are usually healthier because they are. It's important that people who can't afford to look after their homes, that it's done in that way.

Now, the problem is with a lot of it and the $5,000 amount for repairs in a forgivable grant is a step in the right direction, but often what happens, the roof goes, the furnace goes, the pump goes in the well, everything seems to happen within a year of that. Is there any consideration for health and safety reasons, and I stress health and safety

[Page 489]

reasons, for seniors that they can get more than one grant in - I believe it's a five-year waiting period? If the roof and the furnace - I mean for catastrophic things, not just because they need new windows because they look better or they might heat the house a little better, but I mean catastrophic things you require to live, that they could have grants more often than - I believe it's a five- year period?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, a couple of comments, if I could, in direct response to the question. Indeed the program that you're referencing is the RAP Program and, as my colleague would well understand, that's a federally regulated program. So where I can't change those regulations, certainly we can work with our federal counterparts and colleagues to make sure that indeed those repairs that need to be done for health and safety reasons can be done. So certainly that's something that I'll take forward in negotiations and in discussion to make sure that, as my honourable colleague indicated, the longer we can keep seniors in their homes, the better. The point that you made regarding the couple of months which provides a lessening effect for the Department of Health, I believe that was likely part of the negotiations as to why the Department of Health has funded our repair program actually to the tune of $1 million this year. So you'll find in the Estimates Book $1 million from the Department of Health to our department to provide for just exactly what my honourable colleague was referencing, these repairs for health and safety reasons for our seniors, the most needy sometimes in the province.

MR. COLWELL: Well, I'm pleased to hear that the minister is moving in that direction. I am going to go on to another specific case this time. This is not a very happy one, and the minister was not involved, she wasn't even elected at the time. This is a specific case, and I realize that the minister cannot divulge particular information on a particular individual, but this has been in the newspapers and it is a real tragedy.

What happened last year, there was a lady who lived in Cherry Brook who had her house repossessed by the department. I am going to give you some history on this, this is a really unfortunate, sad story. It should not have happened. In 1984, a mortgage was taken out for 20 years for $48,000 on a very nice home, a three-bedroom home, for a family of a gentleman who actually worked at that time for the Department of Housing, an actual employee of the Department of Housing, a position he held for between 25 and 30 years with the department. Now in 1984, a $48,000 mortgage, of course, the interest rate at that time was 13.5 percent, which in 1984 was not a bad deal. In today's terms, it is a terrible deal, but you have to go with the terms of the day and that was a good deal. It was the only way that these two people and their family - because they have children, a large family at home - could afford to buy this home. It was a wonderful thing that happened for them.

Unfortunately, the gentleman died in early 2000. I don't know if it was 2000 or 2001, in that time he died and therefore, his income which was brought into the

[Page 490]

household was reduced. Actually, he had retired in the meantime from the Department of Housing. When he passed away, of course, his income reduced. His widow got in a situation where she was faced with paying a mortgage and the mortgage payments at that time, if you could just give me a second to go through my notes I have here, were about $700 a month. Now $700 a month in mortgage payments today is not very high, but for a lady who has very limited income, who is a senior, that $700 a month was absolutely impossible. Added to this problem was that the lady is illiterate, she cannot read or write. So when the department sent out bills and notices, she just laid them aside, she had no idea what they were for. Unfortunately, by the time this was brought to her attention by some of her relatives who came home and read these things and said look, you had better look after this, it was too late. The house had already gone to the legal process for sale.

Now at this time the remaining mortgage was $31,000. Now they paid diligently between 1984 and 2001 on this mortgage and only reduced the thing down to $31,000 from $48,000. They paid $110,000 in interest back into the system. Well, the dilemma gets worse. The total amount of arrears required at that time was $3,600, because she had been paying what she could pay on the mortgage all the way along, which sometimes wasn't very good or very much.

Well, when the house went for sale, they sold the house at auction for $55,000. So the house was still in pretty good shape. It needed some work and that wasn't the issue at all. So for the $55,000 option - and this is her home, her home that was built for her and her deceased husband and her family, her home is going away. So the family at this time got involved and said well, we are going to have to get this house, the lady will be absolutely emotionally destroyed.

Now when the thing was all said and done, and the family bought the building back the way they had to do it - and I won't go into the details of that but, on a personal basis, I could tell you what the details were, it cost the family over $100,000 to buy out the $31,000 mortgage that originally was there. By the time the legal fees were added - and a gentleman bought the property, a speculator bought the property, the only way they could get it back was they had to pay $75,000 to buy the property back. It is just a horrible story.

Amongst all this - and I met with staff in the department regarding this case - nobody in the department went out and actually sat down and talked to the lady and said this is the problem. When the process started to go through - which is the way I handle problems of this nature in my community, and I am sure you would do the same as MLA in your area - that didn't happen. So the lady didn't understand what was happening to her and her home.

So, as this thing progressed, things got worse and worse and worse. One good thing about the deal was, when it sold at auction for $55,000, the family did get $14,000,

[Page 491]

which was eaten up by the new mortgage they had to put in place, which really didn't help a whole lot. What had to happen, her daughter and her daughter's husband and family had to move into the home, sell their home to buy this home. A really tragic story; this is an unbelievable story.

When you look back at how this was handled, and when you look at the paperwork - and your department was very generous with the information they gave me, and I thank them for that - it was handled the way on paper it should be handled, on paper. I think the paper has to be changed. It has to be changed. People should go out and do a personal visit and talk to the people and explain to them what could happen before it gets to the lawyers who are going to take it to a repossession sale. That has to change in the department, that has to change.

The other thing that has to happen - especially where this gentleman was an employee of the Department of Housing, it makes it even more tragic - there should be support within the government ranks for colleagues who work in the department, that should be there as well. Not special treatment, but there should be some extra effort put into coming forward and saying, look, this is one of our own workers here, what has gone wrong, why aren't these payments being made, and actually sit down and go through what the situation was.

Then, to make it more complicated, the family, who clearly told the department and told the lawyer who was looking after this - who did nothing wrong, the lawyer didn't do anything wrong, again, he processed this as he was supposed to do, as the contract had with the Department of Housing - went to him and said look, we are trying to negotiate a mortgage on this, it is going to take us some time to do that. They would not even give them the time. Housing would not extend that situation to give them the time to put this in place. That is why it sold at auction, they couldn't get the financing in place quickly enough to buy out the $31,000 mortgage, or even go to bid at the auction to buy it. They couldn't guarantee that they would have the funding. That is something else that has to change. It has to change in the department that if the family is truly doing that - and that is easily checked out, you can go to the financial institution, get a letter from them and say yes, we are working on this, but it is going to take us this length of time to get it done, that has to change.

So when all this is done, here is a situation with a young family with children, living with their mother. Which is a good situation if that is exactly what the family wanted to do all the way around, it is a very happy situation. This is a very happy situation in that regard, because they are all wonderful people and they love living together, but a young family who should be in their own home had to sell their home to pay out the mortgage on this one for the family. Now, not a lot of families would do that. That is how serious this was to the family.

[Page 492]

I can go on with all these details and indicate that - what has to be done here? I really believe, this is my own personal opinion, I would like to sit down with the minister and go through this in detail with one of the family members to describe exactly what has happened. I would like the commitment, first of all, from the minister that you would do that.

[2:15 p.m.]

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, one thing that I'm sure my honourable colleague, and all honourable colleagues in this House, will agree to is sometimes some of the stories and some of the situations that we find ourselves in as MLAs are truly heartbreaking. I can tell from the passion in my honourable colleague's voice that this, indeed, was one that he was very passionate about and, indeed, is very sad. Mr. Chairman, through you to my honourable colleague, as you indicated, if a family chooses to come together and support each other by choice, then that's a cause to celebrate. If it's done out of necessity, unforeseen circumstances, then that's a different case altogether.

Certainly, let me state for the record, Mr. Chairman, absolutely, I would meet with my honourable colleague, and would be more than pleased to sit down and discuss the specifics, not that I can change the past, but as I indicated earlier, and perhaps my honourable colleague wasn't in the room, we look to the future and we learn from the past. If there are protocols in place that provide for situations like this to take place, then I want to be involved at the ground level to make sure that those protocols are reviewed to ensure that what really should happen in the best needs and the best interests of all Nova Scotians is what takes place. I would certainly make that commitment to my honourable colleague, that we would move forward in that manner.

MR. COLWELL: I'd like to thank the minister for that. I knew that would be your answer, and I appreciate that. Could you give me a timeline when this could happen?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, as always, in due time, as we get out of the House, and if we can get beyond the pressing needs and I meet with my stakeholders, I'd be more than happy to make the commitment to my honourable colleague to sit down at the earliest convenience, certainly within a 30-day parameter, to discuss the particulars and to be brought up to speed, if I could, on the particulars of this case to see if we can move forward together.

MR. COLWELL: That would be very satisfactory. I realize the minister is new in the department, and something like this is going to take some time for you to review before you actually have a meeting and talk to staff about it. It's an extremely unfortunate situation. The situation is one that has repeated itself, I'm sure, in different circumstances all around. In all of the years I've been in politics, and I've been in politics a long time,

[Page 493]

this is probably the worst tragedy I've ever seen for a family. It's been emotional, it's been very, very expensive for them financially, and it has taken more than just the individual who is working on this into the mix of things, it has taken extended family into it as well. That has been very heart-wrenching for everybody and extremely expensive.

We will supply the information, detailed information about just exactly how stressful this has been to the family. For the record, and I know the minister can't comment on this, I want to put the person's name on the record so we have it there, so we understand who we're talking about. I can do that, I have signed authorization from the person to do that. It's Shenner Williams of 24 Cherry Brook Road in Cherry Brook. She's a lady from the Black community, just so the minister knows. Again, I thank the minister for agreeing to meet on this topic to see if we can't work through this and ensure this never happens to another Nova Scotian family.

On housing issues, again, I can't stress enough how pleased I am with the department and staff when it comes to housing grants. I want the minister to know that, I want that to be on the record. We have a lot of very difficult situations in our community, as all communities do in Nova Scotia, but we have a lot of older families who have homes that they've worked all their lives to get and anything that the department can do, and they've been very helpful, I must admit, in doing things and helping people in the community stay in their homes and that's very, very important.

I want to make sure that the minister is aware that the staff she has working at that level have done an excellent job and have really helped us - not us, because it's not us that they help, it's the people in our community they help - and if they can't help, they tell us why, they explain it very carefully and they go on from there. Sometimes they can offer alternatives that may be suitable, sometimes they're not, but at least they try and they do everything they can. They really do care about the people they're working with, and that goes from the person who answers the phone to the person who signs off on the agreements. So I want that on the record for the staff - I can't express my gratitude enough, on behalf of my constituents, for the work they do in trying to help.

I really want to push the minister to make sure they go after the federal government to get more money for the program, a more generous amount of money for each person and the income they have because that is the key to this - our population is getting older, and in my area the community hasn't had the opportunity in some areas that other parts of Nova Scotia have had, and that is starting to show up now. The pensions aren't as high as they should be, the homes are in bad shape to start when they retire, and they just deteriorate more when they physically can't do the work themselves and the work goes on and on.

[Page 494]

So it's a worsening situation - the families really help the seniors and the seniors are held in very high regard in the community, but they need the money to buy the materials. Again, we really have to look at that, and I'm going to ask the minister, are there any special programs that can go into the Black communities that would help them, considering some of the situations that happened in the past?

MS. STREATCH: I want to thank my honourable colleague for his comments about the staff, because I can't think of a greater compliment than for a minister to receive the goodwill from the members of this Chamber in regard to the very valuable and dedicated staff. I made reference in my opening comments about the over 1,100 employees and over 50 offices, so indeed to the staff of the department I say a huge thank you and thank you to my honourable colleague for putting that on the record. All too often as elected members we deal with some of the more difficult and frustrating cases and to know that the staff is handling them in a manner that is professional, and with all due respect it certainly makes me as the minister of the department feel very proud, and I want to thank you for those comments.

In your comments you were talking about the need to press the federal government - I want to assure my honourable colleague that there will be many issues that we will certainly move forward and continue to press the federal government on. Housing is one that the federal government, through Phase I and Phase II, we were able to move forward with some housing projects and now, as we take into context the federal housing trust and as we develop the protocols around that commitment, we will be continuing to work in a co-operative manner with our federal brethren to move those issues forward.

As my honourable colleague well knows, as I made reference in my opening statements that we have some unique situations here because we are one of the original founding provinces. We have homes in Nova Scotia - first of all, we have a very high percentage of home ownership and indeed we also have a very high percentage of older homes, and it makes it even more important and more pertinent to the Government of Nova Scotia to have those very serious discussions with the federal government to ensure that those factors are taken into account, whereas some of our other provinces across the country may not be in the same situation as we are in those two regards.

Now specifically to my honourable colleague's question regarding Black initiatives, I have to say that I'd be pleased to sit down and discuss that with my honourable colleague and indeed with my colleague, the Minister of African Nova Scotian Affairs, because as our department deals with all Nova Scotians, we deal with need on an across-the-province basis and that does not preclude certainly any community, but indeed includes all Nova Scotians. Of course, I would be more than pleased to sit down and discuss that with my honourable colleague as well as the Minister responsible for African Nova Scotian Affairs.

[Page 495]

MR. COLWELL: Thank you very much, I appreciate that commitment. I want to table a document here that I received a little bit late on the other issue of the home that I talked about. It basically gives you the authorization to discuss that here in this Chamber if you wish to do so. I won't ask for that today, I can come back at a later date if you wish to do that, but that gives you the authorization and it's notarized so you know it's not something that somebody made up which normally you're not allowed to do.

Also just one quick question and this is an unusual request, if the minister could possibly come into my community, there are some living conditions I would like you to see first-hand. I would like to do this on an unofficial basis that you could go and visit some people to see the homes they're living in. This would be a friendly visit to talk to people and just say hello, no commitment that you're going to do anything, nothing like that. I just want you to see what I deal with every day, that you can go to see some of the people and say hello, no more than that, so when you come back and you're negotiating with the federal government, you know what we're trying to accomplish in communities, and it's just not my community, there are many communities like this. In areas that I represented before, the same situations existed and I want you personally to see this first-hand so you know that when you're there fighting for more money and a more generous thing from the federal government, you can visualize these people and their homes in your mind, that you know that you're doing for them, and these people may never apply for a grant.

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague across the way and indeed to all members of this House, time is such a valuable thing. As we all reflect on the hours that we've spent in this Chamber and the hours that we're about to spend, or the hours that we spend in our jobs as MLAs and indeed as ministers, there are only so many hours in the day. We all have numerous tasks to juggle and everyone feels those pressures and those strains. Certainly upon being appointed Minister of Community Services, I began to reflect upon what type of personal causes, or what type of personal commitments I would like to make and champion. Having been born and raised in this province, having spent all of my years here in Nova Scotia, I realized that there are indeed many aspects and many parts of Nova Scotia that I, myself, have not visited.

Now, my honourable colleague's riding is not one of those. I have indeed on many occasions been to my honourable colleague's riding and, of course, he would know that I taught school in the Eastern Shore for many years and am familiar with quite a few of the communities along the area as well, but certainly I would be more than pleased to visit all 52 ridings in the province in the days ahead if indeed my schedule allowed for it.

HON. ANGUS MACISAAC: Alphabetically.

[Page 496]

MS. STREATCH: Alphabetically says the honourable member for Antigonish. Indeed, Mr. Chairman, I would love to work my way across the province to get to know some of the stakeholders and the service providers, the staff, and the individuals whom I will work with and deal with each and every day.

[2:30 p.m.]

So while I can't commit to a specific date or a specific time frame, I certainly would be more than pleased to visit the riding of my honourable colleague and walk and talk and meet with the fine folks of Preston and, indeed, in an attempt to make my way around the province and fulfill my requirements as Minister of Community Services for the entire Province of Nova Scotia.

MR. COLWELL: I understand the time constraints the minister has, being a former minister myself. It's pretty tough and it's going to get tougher, I can tell you that, as you go through the process. With those comments, I again want to thank the minister for her straightforward answers. I appreciate it. I'm going to turn this over to our House Leader to continue the questioning.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Cape Breton South.

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, how much time is left in our hour?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Until 2:56 p.m.

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Madam Minister, I, too, want to welcome you to your new portfolio. I don't know if you know my background, but prior to a political career that's now in the 28^th year, I was a social worker for the City of Sydney for 10 years. I did a bit of reading at that time about the changes that were made in the Department of Community Services, as it's now known. I go back to reading books about the Elizabethan poor laws in Nova Scotia, and then giant strides forward were made when the government took it over and called it the Department of Welfare in Nova Scotia. Then it moved from that to the Department of Social Services in Nova Scotia, and then it moved from there to the Department of Community Services and Housing.

So here we are today with the Department of Community Services. Also today, we have the age of computers in that particular department. I can recall, Madam Minister, when I was working in municipal Social Services - which was called the front lines at that time - dealing directly with clients, I had a motto in those days, when in doubt, give, to our social workers and people who were dealing with clients on a daily basis. Unfortunately, if there's one thing that has happened in the department, and it's certainly no reflection on you or the people working in the department today, it's a fact of life that

[Page 497]

we're into the computer age, and people dealing with clients today in that department are basically dealing with statistics, and they're dealing with everybody in what I would refer to as a melting pot. If you're eligible, you get it, if you're not, you don't, there's no grey area, except in some emergency areas. But on a whole, the discretion for workers to deviate from the policy is not there anymore. Workers will be the first to lament that.

I'm going to say a little bit more about that, and then I would expect you to respond to my opening questions. Then I have a specific question for you. The problem has been that field workers, front-line social workers don't have the latitude in dealing with clients that they once had in Nova Scotia. I'm not so sure that's a good thing. I'm not so sure it's a good thing that the Department of Community Services should pride itself on balancing its budget rather than providing service to those in need in Nova Scotia. It seems to me that the former is taking precedence over the latter.

I had a chance before to question your deputy minister, at some point - I forget when it was now - but it had something to do with one of the committees of the House dealing with Community Services. I lamented the fact - your deputy minister and your senior people are well qualified - that graduate social workers are no longer running the Department of Community Services at the deputy minister level and in senior positions, in some cases. We used to have people running the Department of Social Services at the doctorate level in social work degrees and certainly at the master's level. Their whole concern was trying to make life better for those in Nova Scotia who are less fortunate than we in this House are.

It seems to me that the policies of the department have been moved slightly, if not dramatically in some cases, away from that mission statement to a mission statement of balancing the books in that particular department. Indeed, the previous minister of that department took great pride in the fact that his department came in under budget. As a former person working in that field, that would be the last thing that I would want to say to Nova Scotians, that we saved money off the backs of the poor people of this province. I believe that there has to be a rethinking of the mission statement of this department - I'll give you that as food for thought.

Can you tell me whether or not you've had any discussions about the mood of the people working in your department, or any representation from the Nova Scotia Association of Social Workers, for example, as to the possibility of the mission statement of your department being changed?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I want to say thank you to my honourable, esteemed colleague, 28 years in public life - I can honestly say that I hope to emulate my honourable colleague and have as many successful years in public life, and I look forward to the day when I can look across the room and think back fondly on my years as well. I know that I've had many discussions with my honourable colleague, outside

[Page 498]

as well as inside this Chamber, and we've shared some stories that I had learned from my father, who knew my honourable colleague well, long before I - so we've shared a few of those, and I've appreciated that opportunity.

I did indeed realize, Mr. Chairman, that my honourable colleague had a social worker background - I didn't know in what capacity - so, certainly, I'm sure that he speaks quite passionately when he talks about the changes over the years that have come through and to the department, and he would know full and well what we all know, change can be good and sometimes change can be just that - and that is change.

So I want to make a couple of points about my honourable colleague's opening statements and then answer his questions specifically. While I appreciate the fact that the front line is the first line of defence and the first line of contact, and as MLA I have experienced those front-line workers myself, and they are an amazing, dedicated group of individuals who indeed deserve the high praise of all members of this House as they work through the challenging days, that they deal day in and day out with very challenging and sometimes very complex cases, and I know I share my honourable colleague's kind words that they do their very best under those circumstances that can sometimes be very stressful.

I also wanted to make reference that the challenge becomes, as my honourable colleague indicated, that we do not allow ourselves to become cases and case numbers, that we don't take the "personal" out of what we do. I say that in all honesty and all humility, Mr. Chairman, that we cannot allow ourselves to be so technologically connected that we lose the human touch. So I share that concern with my colleague and certainly understand his comments in that regard. I will, in the days ahead of me, investigate exactly what is at the discretion and what is available to those front-line workers. I believe there is emergency funding available and special need funding available should it be required - to what extent, I must acknowledge, I don't know the details of that, but I will look into that myself to ensure that it does remain personal from the caseworker point of view.

As well, Mr. Chairman, in my few short weeks in the department, I must indicate that the fine professionals that I find myself surrounded by at the senior level, and indeed as I hope to work my way through the department with all of our employees, the fine level of professionalism is certainly something that I'm very proud of. It's not about being of one profession or another, but I find myself being pleasantly and quite often pleased with the reception and the interaction that I have with my senior staff at the department.

I want to make a statement about assuring my honourable colleague - quite often I'm asked in a political capacity what it means to me to be a Progressive Conservative. It's something I learned at a very early age, and I take this with me into this new

[Page 499]

department, but I think it's important that my honourable colleague knows, for me, being Progressive Conservative, and it's that that I will take with me into the department, has always meant that I pay my bills and look after those and work with those who can't.

So, while we celebrate the importance of balancing our budgets, which is a grand celebration, in a broad sense, it is equally as important to ensure that we help those who are in most need of our assistance, Mr. Chairman. So, certainly, I want to assure my honourable colleague that I will carry that thought with me, that it is not all dollars and cents, but it is about programs and helping all Nova Scotians, and those Nova Scotians who are most in need of this department.

Directly, to answer my honourable colleague's question regarding the mandate and the motto of the department, I have not to this date had the opportunity to go into detail with staff regarding that, as I've been immersed in the last two weeks in getting to know my department, getting to know my budget and preparing for the House, I haven't had an opportunity to do that, but I certainly want to thank my honourable colleague for bringing it to my attention that perhaps I should take a look at that and review what it is and decide if that matches the government of the day.

I thank my honourable colleague for that and will take that into consideration.

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Mr. Chairman, I guess the challenge is there, and I would also welcome your department balancing its budget as long as your clients are looked after, and their needs are looked after, in this province. I'll give you some examples. The challenges of the disabled in this province, for special needs, special diet, prosthesis, this kind of stuff, there's always a cloud between what the department can do and what another department can do, and the client becomes very frustrated when they don't seem to be able to access some of these services they need in order to perform their daily chores or live normally on a daily basis.

The other issue is, and this is a huge challenge, the challenge single mothers face in Nova Scotia, or perhaps in other jurisdictions as well, but I know Nova Scotia better than any other place and I know Cape Breton better than I know this part of Nova Scotia, I can tell you, the frustration that single mothers are going through in terms of their education requirements, if they're trying to get off the system by bettering their education in Cape Breton, the ones who I deal with.

Also, the problems they have with the court system regarding payments from delinquent fathers, and the problems they have in accessing student loans, because the policy of your department, Madam Minister, and I don't know whether you're even aware of this yet, but it's discriminatory in the fact that if a single mother, or anybody, for that matter, who is on community service assistance applies for a student loan, they're cut off their assistance and expected to live on the student loan. Madam Minister, not that

[Page 500]

they are cut off when they get the student loan, they're cut off when they apply for the student loan. That's a very frustrating experience for people who are trying to go to university to get the necessary education so they can get off the system, as they say. That's the term they use. They want to get off the system. Some of these single mothers who I deal with are very bright, and because of circumstances surrounding their marriage they find themselves in a situation that, for the most part, was not of their doing. They want to get off the system, they want to get a better education so they can go out and contribute in the communities in which they live, in particular, the community I know best, my community.

There's the whole matter of the two-year program, the community college versus the four-year program in university. There's some discriminatory practices going on in that particular regard right now whereas there seems to be more access to a two-year program in my area than there is to a four-year program at the bachelor's level, and perhaps to go beyond that, perhaps another level such as a B.Ed, which a lot of the people I deal with, constituents of mine, would like to be able to access a B.Ed, very bright people, and if they had that they could go out and not only contribute to the community, but look after their family.

So, those are challenges they face and again, you know, practices of the department sometimes are discriminatory there. I'm sure that some of those have probably been brought to your attention already, particularly with the frustration that some of your line workers have when they say I would like to help you but I can't, policy does not allow me to do that.

[2:45 p.m.]

So it's a serious problem for them. What do they do? If they apply for a student loan, they run the risk of being cut off assistance. Now, do they run that risk and try to make it on the student loan when it comes in, or do they just say I'm not going to bother this year, I'm just going to continue to get social assistance because I need the ongoing and the certainty of support on a monthly basis for my children? That's a serious dilemma that these women have - and I say "women" here, Madam Minister, because they're the most vulnerable, they're the ones who are most affected in our community.

It seems to me that the department should have some kind of a special policy to assist single mothers who want - not just assist them, but encourage them - to continue to upgrade their academic qualifications so they can do what they dearly want to do, and that's support their own children without the need for public assistance. That's a goal that is consistent with the ones whom I've talked to, that's what they want. They don't want to be, as they say, on the system, they want to be independent of the system. So I think it would be good business practice, if nothing else, for your department to set that

[Page 501]

procedure in motion to make it easier for them to do that - and I would just like your comments on that, Madam Minister.

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, to my honourable colleague, again I appreciate his heartfelt comments as they relate, and I understand when you say that it's not just single moms, but that tends to be the category that a lot of the cases that you're referencing certainly fall into.

In my learning curve in this department, I've been very pleased with some of the programs that even I didn't realize were there - and I know that my honourable colleague recognizes the programs that are there - but certainly the two-year program, we have a phenomenal group of individuals who work with our clients to ensure that the programs that they need are best served, and sometimes we find that the programs that we best can help with are the coming out of high school program, the literacy program, and certainly the two- year program that my honourable colleague referenced would, of course, provide a wealth of opportunities in Nova Scotia, given the wonderful community college program that we have here in Nova Scotia that I know a lot of people are taking advantage of and realizing the full potential of those two-year programs.

Mr. Chairman, I would also reference the fact that we have in existence the opportunity for other programming to assist. We, of course, have the National Child Tax Benefit which assists our clientele; we have the Nova Scotia Child Benefit Program which assists our clients; and one that I'm extremely pleased about, of course, as I referenced earlier, is the Pharmacare Program which, again, can assist those income assistance clients of ours who find themselves in a position where the costs of the Pharmacare for their children may be prohibitive for them to move forward. So that program that we're rolling out this year is one that I think can make a huge difference indeed for our clients who most need our assistance when it comes to these types of programs. My honourable colleague also mentioned those special-needs cases and situations, and there is quite a list. I was reading the list that specifically indicates the special needs, whether it's emergency dental, or eye wear, or those types of special needs or special diet, Mr. Chairman, that's required, that the caseworker will work with the client to ensure that those special needs are addressed and dealt with. So those special-needs cases, there is a component available for that.

The other specific reference that my honourable colleague made regarding the maintenance, although I know it's out of my purview and I would not pretend to speak for the Minister of Justice, but I know that there are moves afoot within the Department of Justice to help in some of the shortcomings, or help in some of the casework, the caseload, as my honourable colleague has referenced the additional staff that will be brought on line to assist, again, those who are most in need of our help.

[Page 502]

So, I welcome my honourable colleague's comments about the need to go even further, and, in the days to come, I certainly hope to be able to look and analyze the details of the department and move forward in some of those areas where we might be able to fill that gap, Mr. Chairman.

MR. MANNING MACDONALD: I know my time is drawing near here, but I'll be back later because there are some other questions I would like to ask. Just a comment on that. What we're talking about here and what I was talking about earlier is the problem with deadbeat dads in the system. It would make the lives of the vulnerable people who I'm talking about a lot easier if the courts, in a timely fashion - and I know the Minister of Justice is concerned about this as well - would ensure that those people who owe their children money, pay the children their money in a timely fashion so that these people are not subjected to going back and forth to Community Services and saying my cheque didn't arrive now. Community Services would then lend them the money and then claw it back, and it becomes a serious problem for them. So, hopefully, a two-pronged approach from your department, and the Minister of Justice and his department, would make that process run a lot smoother than it is now. It's all about enforcement, it's all about having the tools to do the job in both departments, I realize that.

The other thing is, when I left Community Services in Sydney - Municipal Social Services it was called then - and went to the lofty position as mayor, from that job in Sydney I thought that I was going into a much more difficult job and, unfortunately for me, I guess, or fortunately, depending on what side of the fence you're looking at, the job followed me into the mayor's chair in Sydney. I had an open-door policy in dealing with my former clients, and I told the people who were working in our Social Services department to have an open-door policy with their clients, and all too often that's not the case today, where people have to call and make appointments, sometimes a week, two weeks. As I always felt, these people need assistance; the people who have to access your department need it now. They don't need it in two weeks time, or a week's time, and they don't need to be confronted now with locked doors and intake workers who are behind a screen and all this kind of stuff. I think it's intimidation that sets in.

We've moved so far in that direction, in this particular department, over the last few years that it makes it harder for the clients to access the service and harder for them to sit down and talk face to face with workers. I don't know whether it's a problem of the number of clients that each worker has, the availability of the workers, or whether it's safety on their part, whether they've tightened up security in the departments, but certainly access to the department at the front line is not as easy as it used to be. I would hope that someday we could get back to our system where, if the Mayor of Sydney can talk to a client face to face in his office without a security fence there, I'm sure that clients should be able to talk to Community Services workers in the community without having to first of all make a week or two-week appointment because they're busy, or secondly, be subjected to the kind of security that seems to be in place now, okay.

[Page 503]

MS. STREATCH: As you were speaking, I was reflecting again on my days in the classroom when your door is always open; indeed, you're always accessible - and I used to marvel at some colleagues who would say you don't publish your telephone number in the telephone book, do you? I would say, of course I do, that's the way people can contact you.

So, I certainly share my colleague's desire to have that one-on-one relationship and that open-door policy and, though I would never speak to the specifics of a case, I was very pleased to be able to meet with the mother of one of my clients just the other day here at Province House - it was very satisfying for me and for the mother. So that was an opportunity for me to have that one-on-one, and I would share my colleague's feelings in that manner.

When it comes to the department, again Occupational Health and Safety is the utmost concern and that would be the rationale and the reasoning behind some of those barriers that my honourable colleague was referencing. But, certainly, I share your open-door policy, Mr. Chairman, I would share that with my colleague and would hope that I could continue to have that myself, as my honourable colleague does himself.

MR. CHAIRMAN: That's the time allotment. The House will recess for a comfort break for four minutes, with the intention of reconvening in five minutes.

[2:57 p.m. The committee recessed.]

[3:00 p.m. The committee reconvened.]

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

MS. MARILYN MORE: I want to begin by welcoming the minister and her senior staff. This department is very near and dear to my heart, and I must say I've been somewhat reassured by some of the responses the minister has made to previous speakers in terms of the sincerity she has been displaying in response to the issues raised and her openness and flexibility in willing to deal with the issues in an ongoing manner. I really appreciate that, and it's in that spirit that I will be making my comments and asking questions this afternoon.

I'm going to start off a little differently - I'm going to tell you the three things I think the department needs to do, and then I'm going to ask some questions and look for some clarification. I was the previous Community Services Critic for the NDP caucus and I have to say, over the three years that I held that position, I had increasing concern that the mantra of the department seemed to be more about cost containment rather than working across levels of government, working across sectors, across community groups,

[Page 504]

and involving all those most directly impacted by their policies in developing a genuine social safety net for Nova Scotians.

I really think we need to get back on track because there are no quick, easy answers to the complex issues, many of which have been raised in the department's business plan for the coming year. I don't think the solutions to those problems are totally within the control or the ability of the department, which means all the more that department officials have to be working with the voluntary sector, with consumers and clients, with people within their department, from the front- line workers up to the minister, and involving all departments within government to work on these issues.

I'm sure it's no surprise to the minister, but I would suggest probably 75 to 80 per cent of the casework that I do and my assistant does within my constituency office is the result of poor policies or misunderstood policies of her department. I have to say, only half jokingly, that at times I have been tempted to invoice the Department of Community Services for the wages of my assistant. I'm thinking that if my assistant and the assistants of all the other MLAs of this province are working as sort of client representatives or navigators, or ombudsmen, for the clients of Community Services then this is a real indication that there is something wrong with the current approach. I feel, and I've mentioned this within the Standing Committee of Community Services, as well to the deputy, I think the department itself needs to set up a division or a group of people who can work with clients directly, in terms of helping them understand what the policies are, what is available to them, helping them navigate the different levels of the department, and acting as a patient representative does in the hospital system. That model works extremely well. It creates a high degree of satisfaction from everyone who is involved with that system. I really feel there's a huge void there in the department, and it needs to be met directly by the department because they best understand what can be done rather than the CAs and community-based groups who are trying to support the clients in the community. So that is my first suggestion.

My second suggestion is that there definitely needs to be an improvement of policies and funding rates. I will get into that a little further.

The third one is that I think the policies and legislation governing the department needs to have a gender-based analysis. The majority of staff of the department are women, the majority of clients of the department are women, and I'm not sure anyone fully appreciates how unfairly some of the decisions and the policies of that department impact disproportionately on women compared to male clients. I think that's an area that needs to be looked at. Again, I will give some examples in a few minutes. So if you get nothing out of what I ask today, please take those three recommendations back to the department.

[Page 505]

I want to move on to the policies. Unfortunately, and I think it's been raised by earlier speakers, a number of the policies of the Department of Community Services actually discriminate and prevent the clients from doing the very thing that the department is trying to achieve, and that's to increase the independence and stability of families and their productivity - being able to get out to work and improving their standard of living.

It's interesting, I see in the west gallery, Carolyn Earle, who was actually part of the presentation of the Face of Poverty Coalition to the two-day Forum on Poverty that was held in January. I welcome you Carolyn. During that two-day forum, those of us who even felt we were somewhat informed about the issue of poverty I think had a very startling awakening to how serious the situation is in Nova Scotia. A couple of months after that forum, I was asked to do sort of a summary of the information and recommendations presented to the forum for all of the community health boards in the Capital District. It was interesting, because when I went through a number of the presentations, I would say that probably three-quarters of the recommendations - coming from a broad collection of coalitions and community-based organizations as well as individuals who had been impacted by poverty - dealt with changes they would like to see in policies of the Department of Community Services.

It was startling, I think, to all of us. I won't go into the details, because the minister well knows, the Standing Committee on Community Services sort of short-listed some of the recommendations they felt should have been included in the Spring budget, and the responses back from various ministers whose responsibility it would have been to include those in their department's budgets, basically, the answer was no. Even though these recommendations made sense, they would prevent the downward spiraling of many women and children in our province to further poverty. At some point we have to say stop. So I guess my first question to the minister is, how open are you and your department officials to looking at the policies of the department to see which actually prevent your clients from getting on with their lives?

MS. STREATCH: Excellent, thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank and acknowledge my honourable colleague's work that we did together in the short time that we had on that Standing Committee on Community Services. I know, as all members of this House know, my honourable colleague does so with the best of intentions and with a true heart full of sincerity - it is not for political gain, it is not for any personal gain, it is out of a true commitment and I respect and recognize that publicly for all members of this House.

Indeed, under her chairmanship we certainly did attack and approach various aspects and certainly now in my capacity as minister I look forward to moving some of those perhaps onto my own plate and would welcome the opportunity - I have reviewed numerous documents in the last couple of weeks, I indeed did review some of the

[Page 506]

information that came from the standing committee because I was looking at it with a different set of eyes this time and I certainly wanted to have a fresh look at that - I would welcome the opportunity, and we spoke about a time earlier, but if my honourable colleague could find time to sit down with me and walk me through some of those areas that she felt the committee had indicated as priority.

Mr. Chairman, I am going to ask clarification on one thing from my honourable colleague, because one of my trusty sidekicks might have gotten it but I didn't quite get the second of her three that she wanted me to go away with. I know it was pertaining to funding but I want to make sure that I had the exact words, so when I leave here I make sure that I am indeed on the right track on that one. So if I could have clarification on the second, then I'd like to address the question regarding the gender policy.

MS. MORE: I think the order I gave them was working towards a genuine social safety net, the need to improve policies and funding rates, and the third was the gender lens on policies and legislation.

MS. STREATCH: Thank you to my honourable colleage - it was the funding rates that I had only gotten half of my shorthand down on the page.

Mr. Chairman, to my colleague's inquiry regarding the gender balance with regard to policy, again I have to acknowledge that a lot of the policy in the department I haven't had the opportunity to fully digest because it is still such a learning curve. Certainly I always remind anyone who knows me knows that when I attack a subject or go about a project or take on, whether it's a political commitment, or a community commitment, I do so as a proud individual. I always ask people to look at me first and foremost as a capable, competent individual and then to factor in my gender, if it pertains. Sometimes you're able to do that and sometimes it doesn't quite work that way - certainly I would not want to indicate to my honourable colleague in any way, shape, or form that I would accept policy that was gender biased.

If indeed policy does exist within the department that is gender biased, I would like to become more familiar with all of the policy in the days ahead and I do know that policy is reviewed on a regular basis and indeed it's being reviewed as we speak under the umbrella of a whole review of different aspects of the department. I will be watching very closely to ensure that some of those specifics that my honourable colleague indicated, certainly if we can rectify any of those and ensure that the gender balance is in place in those policies, we certainly will do so.

[Page 507]

[3:15 p.m.]

MS. MORE: I do want to move on, but I just want to mention to the minister that when I'm talking about gender-based analysis, that I'm not necessarily talking about bias, I guess it's more on how the policy impacts differently on men and women.

Just to give you an example of something, let's look at the new policy of the department that does not allow single parents to attend training institutions or universities for courses longer than two years. The gender imbalance there is that 80 per cent of the 41 per cent of lone-parent families supported by the department are headed up by women. A policy such as that prevents more women from going on to get university education than it does men.

So that's the kind of unintended consequence that could be discovered by putting sort of a gender lens on policies and interpretations and legislation before it actually has that negative impact. When you consider that the majority of your caseload in your department are women, and most of those women have children, it also increases the poverty level of the children in those single-parent families. That actually leads to my next question, and that is about child poverty in our province.

It was interesting, even in the department's own business plan for this year, you admit, in the general sense, your department admits that there are 2,000 more children living in poverty in Nova Scotia than when the Progressive Conservative Government took over in 1999. Now, I would be bold, but I will suggest that part of that is because of the policies of the Department of Community Services. It's interesting, because later in the business plan it mentions that the Nova Scotia Government, probably the Department of Community Services, is actually the lead province for the evaluation for the National Child Benefit program, which was started, federally, in 2001. The business plan for this year from your department suggests that the evaluation of the National Child Benefit program will show positive results for low-income families. I'm wondering if the federal plan is improving the results for low-income families, yet more children in Nova Scotia are living in poverty, why the disconnect? Where's the problem?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I apologize to my honourable colleague, but I'm wondering if she could clarify for me the additional 2,000 children that she is referencing in the business plan, please.

MS. MORE: Mr. Chairman, the minister will find that information, I believe, on Page 5. Just to elaborate, if you look at the 1999 figure, 24,000 children under the age of 18 were in low-income households, and the 2003 figure shows 26,000 children. I believe that's an increase of 2,000.

[Page 508]

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, thank you, to my honourable colleague for pointing out the specific location of that, and indeed I certainly recognize what she's referencing now. We do use those factors as a component to the creation and evaluation of such programming as the $10 a month increase for income assistance, the factors that we use for a variety of our programming, and so that is calculated in there. With reference to the National Child Tax Benefit and the Nova Scotia Child Benefit Program, as I stated earlier, the two together, I understand, are what are considered to be an amount equal to the national average for raising a child in Nova Scotia, or indeed in Canada, in both.

MS. MORE: Mr. Chairman, I think that proves my point, that the two combined together do not allow children in this province to be raised in dignity and have an adequate or reasonable quality of life. Between 40 per cent and 50 per cent of the food bank users in our province, not that they physically go but they're the ones who benefit from the food received from the food banks in our province, that food goes to children under the age of 18 - between 40 per cent and 50 per cent - and those are figures that come from Feed Nova Scotia.

The loss of the child allowance or the capacity for the department to add that into the rates that families on social assistance in this province receive is not - I mean that loss is being felt by families and children in this province. Their parents, or parent, are forced to go to food banks to supplement the personal allowance and so despite the fact that there's been a very small increase each year over the last couple of years, that in no way meets the nutritional standards necessary to raise healthy children in this province. So I'm wondering if the minister would like to comment on that, and if it might be more motivation to raise the personal allowances or bring back the children's allowance portion of social assistance rates?

MS. STREATCH: Mr. Chairman, I guess I would make a couple of comments to my honourable colleague's question. It's my understanding that the creation of the Nova Scotia child benefit was indeed to remove the child as a factor in the income assistance rates or monthly allowance and to treat that as separate, so that it's not used as a disadvantage, if you will, toward the monthly allowance. So, therefore, that was done in a manner to offset and to not penalize, if you will, the children of the families looking for income assistance.

As I stated earlier, and I know my honourable colleague is well aware, when we see the passage of this budget, Mr. Chairman, the third year in a row for an increase in the personal income allowance is something that I'm very pleased to be able to come to the floor of this Legislature in my very first mandate and be able to bring forward. That $10 a month increase which is, as I say, the third consecutive year of increase, certainly is something that I'm very pleased to be able to do and something that is very welcome amongst our income assistance clients. I know that it would be in everyone's interest to

[Page 509]

increase everything if we could, if such a world existed, but certainly keeping within our means and being able to provide the maximum for our clients is certainly a priority for me and as we move forward in the days to come, certainly taking into consideration each one of those increases along with the shelter increase and the other programs that we're able to put in place certainly would hope to help bridge some of that gap.

I don't want to take all my honourable colleague's time, but the other thing that I hope to get an opportunity to discuss with my honourable colleague and other colleagues in this House is the Pharmacare program for children, which, again, is another program that we can use that we can maximize the assistance that's able to be provided to our clients, to those Nova Scotians who are most in need of our assistance. It is one that I think can be used, Mr. Chairman, in a very positive way. Thirty three thousand children in Nova Scotia - their parents, of course - will be able to now access that medication through the Pharmacare program, which allows them to better use those funds in other areas that they see fit.

So, again, it's another program that we're able to introduce and bring forward that will hopefully alleviate some of those other concerns and additional burdens for the parents.

MS. MORE: Mr. Chairman, I recognize where the minister's trying to go with that, but, actually, that program is going to benefit the children of modest-income families in Nova Scotia, and that's a worthy goal. Currently, I'm talking about the children of the lowest income families in our province, those families who are directly the responsibility of the Department of Community Services.

Before I leave this, I just want to give you an example. The minister may be aware that some excellent research work has come out of an initiative that's being coordinated by three of the women centres in Nova Scotia. The initiative is called the Social Assistance Reform: Moving Forward A Women Positive Public Policy Agenda. Their information indicates that for a lone parent - and I've already suggested that most of those under the purview of the department are women, so single mother families - currently, the National Child Benefit Supplement would be $143.50; the Nova Scotia Child Benefit, $37.08. This coming year, the National Child Benefit Supplement will go up to $162; the Nova Scotia Child Benefit Supplement remains at $37.08.

I just mention that because that does not replace the amount of money necessary to raise a child in this province, especially if you're handicapped with - which is often the case, and the department's own business plan refers to this. There are complex problems with these families. It's not just inadequacy of income,