[Page 65]

MR. CHAIRMAN: Good morning. We're going to continue with the estimates of the Department of Agriculture and we're going to pass things over to the Liberal caucus. They have 38 minutes left.

MR. LEO GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We'll pick up on a couple of the areas yesterday that were addressed. The first one is with the orchard renewal program. If you could just outline the time frame that program will be carried over and what is the split between federal and provincial support for that - or is it totally a federal program that we're looking at here?

HON. BROOKE TAYLOR: Thank you, Leo. I do know that it is a cost-shared program between the two levels of government. It's the same formula as the business risk management and other programs that we partner with the feds on. It is on a 60/40 basis and it is a great - and I think you would agree - example of government, industry and the research community working together to find new economic development opportunities. We have, as a department, a lot of confidence in the Nova Scotia Fruit Growers' Association and we certainly believe that the way they implement and manage the program, and the accountability they bring to the table in their professionalism, will continue during this next phase.

The department has received the 2007-08 Honeycrisp Orchard Renewal Program, a year-end progress report, and growers who met the terms and conditions of the program received funding for their Spring plantings. The Nova Scotia Fruit Growers' Association reports that 73,267 trees and 148 acres were planted under the program since its inception back in April 2005,and 45 farm businesses have participated in the program since it began

[Page 66]

Preliminary estimates for 2008 indicate an additional 160 acres and 84,721 trees of new plantings, including the new approved varieties of Ambrosia, Gala, and special market opportunity varieties as well. So it's on target to meet its target of 120,000 trees and 225 acres.

We received a request to extend the program until 2012, and that is under consideration and this would include an additional $1.175 million, which includes overlap years for 2008-2009, to cover increasing planting. We just gave the program an additional $238,000 and just received acknowledgement, if you will, regarding that advancement, but I have to give staff a lot of credit because we had to be - obviously there's a lot of support for the program and it was certainly a challenge for the department and for us to meet that demand - but we believe in it strongly and we did advance the $238,000 to cover that off.

Anyway, that's the short outline, so to speak - and everybody knows the goal of the program is to provide assistance, of course, to the apple growers and to replant orchards.

MR. GLAVINE: There's no question that the Honeycrisp program, which I guess has become identified as perhaps, even though there are some other varieties that are being planted, it's really part of a positive renewal of the apple industry in the Valley, and there's a great deal of optimism starting to come back to the apple sector in the Valley which for a good number of years was in decline. A lot of the old varieties were no longer the ones that were wanted on the fresh market, and it's the fresh market varieties that of course bring in the best value for the farmer. So this has been a very positive initiative by government.

In the midst of this program, however, there was, I guess, another group of apple farmers who weren't as content with everything that the Nova Scotia Fruit Growers' Association was doing. I think government has opened the door a little bit more to allow them to participate in this next program. Is that confirmed, Mr. Minister, as to how it will go forward?

MR. TAYLOR: I do know that a farm organization from Falmouth and thirteen other growers met with representatives from the department and from the fruit growers' association - I think it was back in July of 2006 - to discuss the programs. Since that date there have been a number of meetings and telephone discussions among the group, the department, the fruit growers and us. The dissatisfaction with the program brought forward by the group, it is certainly known now, and the non-members of the fruit growers, as you know, pay a 30 per cent administration fee for the program and members pay a lower level, at 15 per cent. The dissenting group feel that's unfair.

Anyway, I think that is, as far as I know, still a bone of contention. So we're still trying to work through that, but again I have encouraged the non-members - and the

[Page 67]

department has, too - to become members of the group. We'll continue to dialogue with them.

The higher administration fee for the program is consistent with the Nova Scotia Fruit Growers' Association policy and other areas of their association businesses - whether it's newsletters or seminar conferences, marketing information, industry news. It also reflects the past 10 years of the program development, strategic planning for overall industry vitalization and production. We would like to see them - I've been clear, haven't been wishy-washy on it - I'd like to see everybody come under that one umbrella, the Fruit Growers' Association.

Our position has been communicated to - you would know Mr. Davidson and the group. Anyway, they formed their own association and, as I've been told and we believe, there's still certainly some disagreement between the two groups, but it has been long standing. My deputy tells me, probably some good news that the new federal-provincial program will be administered by the department so there wouldn't be any differential in the fees.

MR. GLAVINE: That's what I was wanting confirmed. I guess I had heard at the street level, the grower level, I don't think I had anything formal that was going to be the case at this stage. That is starting to roll out now and for how many years will that program be? There could be, in other words, two very valuable programs parallelling one another - the federal program and then if the provincial program were to continue on, which has been very effective. So, I'm just wondering how many years that program is designed for because if you actually drive, especially, down, probably the 221 and the No. 1 highways you will see this Spring a number of orchards where old trees are being pulled out of the ground. It's a very active time for the apple growers and I'm just wondering how much longer that federal program will be in existence?

MR. TAYLOR: Yes, it would be over three years.

MR. GLAVINE: Three years. That program provides for both the cutting down and the pulling out of the trees as well as a fee towards a new tree? A new planting? Is that how that will work?

MR. TAYLOR: You're referring to the orchard and vineyard transition program?

MR. GLAVINE: Yes, that's right.

MR. TAYLOR: The $3.8 million is to help address industry pressures such as changing consumer preferences, low-cost imports and increased production costs. There are approximately 907 producers eligible under the program who can access assistance for existing crop replacement with more productive and higher yielding varieties.

[Page 68]

Replacing existing stock of fruit trees and vines with new varieties for which markets are stronger, require expensive, long-term investments. There is a period of several years between the establishment of a new stand of fruit trees or grapevines and the first harvest. There is no revenue generated in these years.

Assistance to remove less productive trees and vines will help the industry revitalize crop acreage with more productive, high-density and variety options.

Anyway, it's certainly targeting or designed to help the grape growers as well, Leo, with the program.

MR. GLAVINE: Thank you, Mr. Minister. I know just one other area relating to the apple industry. We know that most of the growers that remain, that are full-time orchard farmers, have been able to improve their current position and looking out perhaps are starting to generate revenues that weren't there for a number of years. When you get an apple like the Honeycrisp that will bring you $500 a bin versus $100 for Macs, which is pretty well about a break-even point, this is very definitely good news. It's looking like perhaps our climate here in Nova Scotia may be even better suited for Honeycrisp than Washington State where it originated, so it is a very good news story indeed.

One of the things, however - and we talked about it yesterday and I think both of your critics - dealing with Select Nova Scotia and trying to increase our consumption of locally-grown food. Is it possible under existing legislation to put a ban on some of the imports of apples? When we go to the main food chains we know there are apples from other countries yet we grow some of the best apples, again, that you'll find anywhere. It makes expansion, unless we have definite markets, in other areas or is it one of those situations where we wouldn't want a Nova Scotian apple to be part of a ban somewhere else? Is that a true give and take situation?

I'm really interested now that we're able to take a Honeycrisp apple and today you can get one that has been kept in storage since last October and the quality is just exceptional. That's one of the areas which has been a little bit tricky from day one with the Honeycrisp, is having it extend right into practically the next season. I'm just wondering is there more we can do to actually continue to keep the apple industry growing? We know on a production level it's about a third of what it used to be around the Second World War period when the apple industry was at its height and in the post-war period, of course, consumer taste changed and also, some of our markets in Europe in particular. So I think Honeycrisp, Ambrosia and now another new variety, I think it is Minnesota 1918, has tremendous potential and I'm wondering what more we can do to get apples in our schools, apples in our hospitals, our institutions and increase that local consumption factor which, again, is something we all believe in pretty strongly? I'm

[Page 69]

just wondering if the minister could comment on any initiatives there around getting more apples on the store shelves of our Sobeys and Loblaws stores, in particular.

MR. TAYLOR: Leo, just before I go there, you mentioned the orchard and vineyard renewal program. Eligible producers can receive 80 per cent of the cost of tree and vine removal up to a maximum of $4,000 per hectare. I just wanted to point that out and it is a very important program.

I don't believe through the Select Nova Scotia Program we could look at banning apples from other jurisdictions. I think the federal trade laws and some of our own inter-provincial trade laws would prohibit us on that front. Just the same, I want to concur with the Liberal Critic that the Honeycrisp apple is extremely popular and the producers are getting an excellent return on that apple, there's no doubt about it.

Mason Apples, one of the biggest, I'm not sure if they are the biggest producer, but Mason ships these apples all across Canada, so you'd really have to talk to the stakeholder, the producers as to how they feel about that. I don't think there would be - no pun intended - any appetite as far as Mason's go, to look at rejigging the trade laws because if we were to get a little, we'd have to give a little. I know you know that.

Now, on the school front, we are working through the Department of Education and on the health front as well, through the district health authorities. We've made a lot of inroads, especially at our provincial institutions. But we met with the fruit growers and they brought that same concern forward, and that was the Fruit Growers' Association, that group. Again, I want to point out why I think one association is so beneficial. They spend a lot of time and effort on behalf of all fruit growers trying to bring forward the virtues of being a member of that group. They're lobbying the government hard to see if we can't do more.

Some is being done, there has been some progress made - junk food, for example, has been banned now from our schools. The logical step to me would be to put in good agriculture products in the schools and in the institutions. Yes, the Minister of Transportation is in the room, the former Minister of Justice had signed - I guess you would call it an order - I would, if I received it at the jails, at the justice centres across the province, that required them to buy local, use local products. We are making progress with the other departments, but I do want to commend the Minister of Transportation for really working with the Department of Agriculture and taking that necessary step.

[9:00 a.m.]

But we should be able to do it, Leo, I would think, on all fronts. I don't think there would be any disagreement among Parties on that, promoting local. But, again, we have to respect procurement contracts, the interprovincial and trade laws we're bound by,

[Page 70]

but I'd certainly like to do more. It would obviously have to be to the advantage of our producer.

MR. GLAVINE: Just to switch to another area. Yesterday I referenced the fact that throughout Nova Scotia, generally, and in particular I look at a place like Annapolis County where the amount of agricultural production now and use of the land has gone down substantially. There's a great controversy raging now on whether or not the use of the growing of corn for ethanol should have ever gotten the approval and the kind of the American view that we can match Brazil with the production of biofuels. That looks to have been a very, very short-sighted view of use of the land, growing of corn. It has had some pretty widespread implications for us.

However, in looking forward, probably having some participation in biodiesel and looking at making some positive impacts, at least, on fuels of the future, is the Department of Agriculture, looking at fast-growing cellulose trees, in particular, whatever. We know, for example, there are some trees, poplar, for example, that grow very, very fast. I'm sure there are some others that we could put into field production and be harvesting on an annual or at least biannual approach.

I'm just wondering if there any initiatives relating to the use of agricultural land for looking long-term, setting up something around a possible pilot in this province with biodiesel, biofuels?

MR. TAYLOR: Yes, the land use issue, not just in Annapolis, but in many farming communities, is very, very topical, but there seems to be almost now a disproportionate amount of former farmland that's not in use. We're not, at this point, trying to lead the way as a province or, I guess, a country, in terms of corn production for ethanol, you know, and I think too, from just reading a story yesterday on the world stage and it is a global economy, you know, they were criticizing, in fact, two or three different governments for raising all this corn to fuel SUVs and there are people going hungry. We don't expect to see that here in Canada but just the same, I guess there are advantages and disadvantages but the Minister of Environment in this province is actually charged with the mandate to explore those type of alternative fuels and options along those lines.

I think too, to be honest, I mean I just learned this week that the sugar beet company that had planned on establishing in P.E.I. is, in fact, coming to Nova Scotia. Now, with the Department of Environment probably we'll be given the opportunity to receive a presentation on just what they plan on doing but we do note that the P.E.I. Government, for reasons right now that we're not entirely sure of, pulled back from that proposal. So, anyway, they have asked to come to Nova Scotia and bring forward their plan.

[Page 71]

So at this stage it hasn't even been received, I can tell you that, you know, in terms of even hearing what they have to offer but we thought, I guess the Minister of Environment felt, that it would be necessary to hear them out to see what they're up to so to speak but, again, we're not encouraging people or companies at this point because, you know, for the perceived advantages of moving to these so-called cash crops, it could possibly compromise the food chain in this province in the future. So we would have to learn more about that.

MR. GLAVINE: Just going back to one of the questions I asked yesterday, was around the dumping of milk, and I was just wondering if you had an opportunity to investigate that or is that something that you will get back to me on as an area that, you know, I've heard some issues around recently and so is it something that you still have to investigate a bit and come back to?

MR. TAYLOR: Yes, it is, Leo. We haven't had a chance between last night and this morning to get you the answer on that but the department has noted that and we will get you an answer on that front.

MR. GLAVINE: Sure, okay, thank you. One of the areas that we're all hopeful about is the development of a Maritime beef strategy and the plant in Prince Edward Island is certainly an integral part of that plan. I'm just wondering if you could bring us up to speed here on the last few months because it's almost going to be needing monthly reports to kind of gauge how things are going there. I know that when the province gave $2 million towards the effort to save the plant, it was good to see that there were some criteria put in place as to what the plant would need to do in order to get that guarantee of the $2 million but, nevertheless, with that investment made I think Nova Scotians, and in particular the Nova Scotia cattle industry, are looking closely at how that's looking. Then I'll have a second question related to that, but I'm just wondering if you could give us a little picture of how things are going?

MR. TAYLOR: Yes, thank you, Leo. I had a fair amount of involvement as the Minister of Agriculture in this province with the other provinces and the federal government regarding the file and I'm glad that I didn't come in during the middle or the end of those conversations because it was a long, drawn-out affair, to be quite honest. I think all governments would agree and certainly staff members would agree.

Speaking of the Nova Scotia funding, the $2 million was released based on a number of conditions set down by Cabinet. Those conditions included a commitment by all funding parties, federal and provincial, we made that very clear from the start that the Province of Nova Scotia wouldn't be, I wouldn't be, as minister, going and asking my colleagues for $2 million if, in fact, P.E.I. wasn't at the table, New Brunswick and the federal government.

[Page 72]

MR. GLAVINE: So that was money that was released prior to this budget year?

MR. TAYLOR: That's right, $2 million, yes, it was. So that $2 million was released and it was contingent on a number of conditions as set down by Cabinet. We required the establishment of an in trust and monitoring system and there would be and is representation by all four governments. Nova Scotia's representatives are Derrick Jamieson from the Department of Agriculture and Andy Hare with the Department of Economic Development.

We had asked for organizational - and when I say "we", we agreed with the other provinces, including P.E.I - that the Atlantic Beef plant in Borden had to restructure its organization. We required the establishment of an accountability mechanism, implementation of a substantial business plan covering financial, staffing, operational and communication aspects of the operation, reporting of milestones based on the business plan against the original report from PricewaterhouseCoopers. PricewaterhouseCoopers did a couple of reports for the provinces but it was and is the property of Prince Edward Island.

I'm pleased to say a new board of directors is in place and that new board is set up as well as an advisory team. The board consists of Jim Lutes, Carl Larsen and Ernie Boutilier, all successful businessmen from Atlantic Canada. They've taken a lead role in moving the operation toward future sustainability. Meetings between the new advisory team and the steering committee are held monthly.

Under the advisory team, efforts are being made to restructure the human resource side of the plant, staff rebalancing with the operational and marketing capabilities of the operation, financial statement updates and marketing realignment are being reviewed against operational efficiencies.

The Nova Scotia Cattle Producers and the Maritime Beef Council has supported the concept of assistance with the understanding that a communications strategy will occur between the Atlantic Beef plant operations and their organizations. There is some background stuff, but I don't think I need to get into that at this point.

There have been a number of changes and we're hopeful, I think you are as well, that this will evolve to become a very important part of the overall beef strategy.

MR. GLAVINE: But at this point, however, the bleeding, the loss of money has not been curtailed, is that correct, Mr. Minister?

MR. TAYLOR: Yes, to date, the losses at the plant are still occurring. Now they're not as substantial as they had been, thank goodness, they seem to be moving in the right direction. Projections indicate that the losses that are being lessened or mitigated

[Page 73]

at least are being done because of operational efficiency that has been taking place since the restructuring began. I'd like to be able to sit here and say that, you know, I think in time though they will turn it around and start to make a profit. Obviously, that's our hope and they are moving in the right direction, there's no doubt about that.

MR. GLAVINE: If that model is successful why wouldn't we be prepared to take a look at the same kind of thing for a Maritime hog strategy? While P.E.I. has pulled the plug on supporting the plant there and, of course, we probably all have a little more problem with constant monies going into a processing plant and never seeing any light at the end of the tunnel of the investment, however, to keep growers and to keep our agricultural community strong, there may be a way in which P.E.I. is going to continue supporting their hog farmers.

New Brunswick now seems to be stabilized with some commodity left but isowean operations seem to be one of the biggest areas of their growers and if we set a maximum number, I mean if we could produce 100,000 hogs in terms of some type of risk management approach in order to keep the plant viable, if that came into the mix with Maple Leaf in Berwick or even Tony's, for example, I mean is that something that you, as minister, or as government, be willing to take a look at?

I guess when I've seen how strong that industry has been in this province and I know the dynamics and the inputs and all that have changed, but it seems that - well not seems, government did change the course and allow the industry to collapse. I'm just wondering if you see some element of hopeful signs that there could be a Maritime view of at least keeping some operational dollars, both into a plant or into a hog industry.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you. The pork industry certainly is going through very challenging times, I think we all agree with that, and it's not just here in Nova Scotia, it's right across the country, even where the producers are much, much closer to the feed stock and the input costs are less, every government is wrestling with this.

[9:15 a.m.]

We do, in fact, work with the Maritime Agriculture Departments and we have spent a lot of time with Tony's, a lot of progress has been made, in terms of the value chain and working with Tony's and assisting them as they develop new lines of products that the consumer would hopefully be inclined to purchase. There has been a change in consumer trends and pork producers and retailers will tell you that. We are working through the value chain on that front.

As well, we have, as Maritime ministers and governments, through the Atlantic Beef plant in Borden, there's an arrangement, of course, where the ground meat is being done through Tony's in Antigonish. So it's not perhaps on the scale that you're talking

[Page 74]

but there are certain agreements and understandings that we trust will see Tony's sustained and, in fact, become even bigger and hopefully expand in the future. Of course you have to have a product going into Tony's to sustain it. So on that front I'm more optimistic than I am about the future, in terms of plants that are competing in the North American market model.

Leo, I've said before and I don't want to come across as crass or anything but I've said before that I won't, and my colleagues have said and obviously, as minister responsible - but clearly I don't think it's fair to ask the provincial government - you said to me, as minister, as long as I'm minister, I can't ask my colleagues through the taxpayers' dollars, to support failing operations in terms of trying to keep them going, just for the sake of saying that we have a pork industry in the province, but if they're being subsidized to the tune of $50 or $60 a pig, which happened in the past, even the loss was more than that, we feel it's more appropriate to support other sectors, i.e., the beef - I hate to say one over the other - but we think there's more opportunity there. That's not to say we're getting away from the Tony's or the beef plant, we want partnerships, we want to see a pork industry that is profitable.

MR. GLAVINE: I think I have about a minute left. I didn't drill down into the budget here but in the past we've had some significant disasters around very, very dry seasons and we know that farmers do take out crop insurance. Is there anything - does government have a policy around disaster relief if we have one of those years where we have a climatic and weather event, for example, we had a major hailstorm back, remember a few years ago that destroyed some of the apple crops. So do we have some provincial assistance, in addition to crop insurance, when it's a major climatic event?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The time has elapsed for the Liberal caucus.

The honourable member for Pictou West.

MR. CHARLES PARKER: Well thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Mr. Minister, and all your staff here today. Glad to have a few minutes to talk on some agricultural issues. I grew up on a family farm in Pictou County so it is sort of near and dear to my heart, this whole department for sure.

I guess one of my memories certainly of growing up on that farm is it was a mixed farm, we had a variety of animals and produce that we grew. I can remember Dr. Allan MacKay, he was our local veterinarian who was always faithful and always showed up whenever we needed him. For many years he was the vet who serviced our farm.

My first question, I guess, is related to veterinarian service. I've had some calls from beef farmers in particular in Pictou County who are wondering about what is happening with our veterinarian service in that county. There's only one vet who is

[Page 75]

serving large animals at this time and there is some concern that perhaps he is retiring or cutting back on his practice or just going part-time. So the speculation is that the service might be provided by a vet from Shubenacadie or Amherst or from some distance away. I've talked to Leo Muise in your department about this and I guess the last time I talked to him it was unclear on just what was happening. I know he was going to be talking with chief veterinarian Dr. Finley. I was just wondering if he can give us an update on what might be happening on the veterinarian service to the farmers of Pictou County?

MR. TAYLOR: Yes thank you, Charlie. I was aware that you had some conversations with Leo on this front. It is a problem, especially in Pictou County. We are reviewing, at the department, the veterinarian services in this fiscal year and at the vet college. We've increased the number of spaces from 11 to 15, there are four additional spaces there.

So in the short term, we're trying to make arrangements as we go along but currently there still is some concern, especially in Pictou County.

MR. PARKER: The issue really is about response time. The quality of the vet, I'm sure, is not the issue, whether they're from Amherst or Shubenacadie or wherever, but it's just when you are in an emergency situation and the calf that is not being born properly or another animal is in trouble, the farmers need that local, prompt service on a very timely basis, especially in an emergency.

Can you give any indication if the present service is going to continue or does it look like veterinarians from other counties will have to be called in to provide the service?

MR. TAYLOR: Well, as I said, we are reviewing the vet service across the province, and I would think unfortunately from time to time there will be shortcomings, there will be a need for possibly vets to come in from other areas to help with the difficulties.

And as well yesterday, as I pointed out, one of the 10 new extension workers will be a veterinarian and the interviews have been completed so hopefully that will assist, as well, with the difficulty we are facing on that front.

MR. PARKER: Okay, I am just bringing it to your attention once again, directly. Certainly, it's an important issue to the livestock farmers in Pictou County and if there is an update at any point in time that you can offer to me, I would certainly appreciate if there is any change in what is happening if you could let me know.

Another issue, then, that some farmers have brought to me, and I know this has probably been discussed already, is around the specified risk material disposal, SRM.

[Page 76]

Again, I have had some calls from farmers saying, how do I get rid of dead stock, if something occurs. Can they bury it? Can they compost it? Is there a pickup service? Rothesay used to provide that service at one time but there seems to be some uncertainty on what is allowed. What is the policy on SRM?

MR. TAYLOR: We had a good discussion on this yesterday and the situation is, in Nova Scotia, that you are unable to bury. You can compost and you can still dispose of it on your own land. I think some farmers are doing that. We are working with the federal government. All provinces are trying to come up with a new agreement regarding specific risk material as to how we can better dispose of the SRMs. Your colleague to your left has suggested that we might look at doing some testing because largely a number of farmers as well believe that it is unnecessary.

It is really a federal thing, as far as the decree that it has to come out. The feds, I think, put, I am not sure in the Province of Nova Scotia whether it was $6 million to assist with the removal and the disposal. Currently the situation is that we are shipping to Quebec, at considerable cost. We are still trying to come up with a better arrangement with the federal government. We have had some discussions with New Brunswick because they have six landfill sites that are able to help the farming community in the Province of New Brunswick but their Environment Department has legislation that prohibits the importation from other jurisdictions.

So it is not as simple as making arrangements to take it to Memramcook, for example. We have tried and the Minister of Agriculture for New Brunswick and I thought we had reached a fairly good deal for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and P.E.I. was even looking at it. Then it basically fell through. There is a stigma with the whole thing, too. We had plans to do something in Antigonish and, again, that is sort of not completed. The arrangement hasn't been completed there as well. So there is a problem.

MR. PARKER: There is a problem and farmers aren't quite clear on what they can do with it. You are indicating that Quebec is willing to take it. So is there a pickup service or do the farmers have to take it to some point somewhere?

MR. TAYLOR: There are some companies that do some dead stock removal and the farmers are aware of that situation. I think the product is transported to the Valley, the SRMs. It is transported to the Valley, frozen and then when it is economical, a tractor trailor load is transported to Quebec at great cost for disposal. I think we have received some notice from the Quebec Government that we might have to make other arrangements on that front but that is taking place today.

MR. PARKER: So that is one of their options but they also can bury it or compost it as another option, is it?

[Page 77]

MR. TAYLOR: Yes, my deputy tells me you can compost it. As we said yesterday, you can compost it and it will reduce the volume but the disposal of the residual that is left, getting rid of that is still not clear how you're going to do that.

MR. PARKER: I guess it's an ongoing issue your department is working on to try to find a solution here, but it's a real concern to many livestock producers nationally.

MR. TAYLOR: It's national. Not that it makes it any easier, but I just point out, it is a problem, we're trying to find a solution.

MR. PARKER: Absolutely. I want to switch to another topic around energy costs for farmers. It's certainly rising, as it is for all of us, but as we know, farmers have the ability to buy marked gas so that's a help in some respects, but nonetheless, it's still going up.

I guess I'm coming around to alternatives to gasoline or heating costs on the farm. Some farmers have been switching to heating their buildings with wood pellets. In Pictou County we have an innovative individual who's building outdoor wood furnaces. He started with wood and then he converted to building hay furnaces now, a round bale that actually chips away at the outside until it's gone. He's now building stainless steel furnaces that can use grass pellets or hay pellets. With the total amount of land that's out there vacant, there's all kinds of hay land that can grow good grass. I'm just wondering if there's any encouragement in the Department of Agriculture to look further at hay pellets or grass pellets.

Here we have an individual that's producing these furnaces that can burn hay pellets, we have all kinds of land out there that can grow the crop. Is there any initiative to put two and two together here and try to marry the two that can produce our own energy right here in the Maritimes?

[9:30 a.m.]

MR. TAYLOR: Yes, that's another issue that's facing the farmer - the high energy costs. There's no disputing that.

We recently facilitated a workshop on energy - the Department of Agriculture has in Truro - and there's certainly great interest in alternative sources of energy. We've committed to the Federation of Agriculture through Conserve Nova Scotia, that we want to pursue this further. Hopefully we're going to be able to establish a chair position regarding ways and means to assist the farming community with their energy costs. I know that through the farm investment fund, which is a very popular fund if you're eligible to access it, some farmers have established wind turbines on their farms.

[Page 78]

I have approached the Minister of Energy and the Minister of Environment and the federal minister to see why more programs couldn't be designed specifically for the farming community. They seem to be, for whatever reason, whether it's inadvertence or whatnot, excluded from a number of these programs that are derived and put in place.

The price of one of those windmills - I'm thinking of the Jennings farm, an egg producer up in Masstown, is about $75,000. He has three of them, we'd like to have a fourth, but he looked at his return and believes the addition of a fourth one has merit. I didn't realize myself, but those wind turbines are actually wired right into the fuse panel and the way he explained it is that when you're using less energy than is being generated, you actually get a credit. You can build up credits, I guess it's done on a point system and he thinks it's very economical. In fact, his father would like to have one as well to not only run the farming operation, but his household. So, they're looking at that.

But, he did that, made that capital investment, pretty much on his own. By gosh, I certainly concur and have, I haven't just said it, I've appealed to my colleagues that are responsible to see, if in fact, we can't do more to help the farming community on that front. I've had calls from folks not too far from home to look at other sources too of renewable energy - growing different varieties on your land that would help generate energy, bring what now is vacant or dormant farmland into production to help with energy.

We've had discussions, through the department, with potential energy producers and we're going to continue on that front.

MR. PARKER: Okay. Certainly the wind energy is great, once you get your capital equipment paid for, it's generally free. That's a good source of energy, but I'm going to come back to the hay pellets, or grass pellets, just that it's a win-win. I think, not only for energy costs but for our farming community in that we have thousands of acres of land out there that could produce hay or grass. We're great in the Maritimes for doing that and where the technology is there, I mentioned this individual has a stainless steel outdoor furnace that he tells me will last for 100 years because it is stainless steel. We have the capability of a cash crop for many farmers in the area. If we could just marry the two together, it seems like a natural to me. I'll leave that thought with you, I guess your department is looking at it.

I want to switch to another topic and that's new entrants coming into the industry. I can think of one farm that has been established now in Pictou County. Two young farmers in their late 20s, early 30s that are trying to establish an organic farm. Last year they grew I think about three acres of vegetables, plus a greenhouse operation, that's Chad and Tyrel Murray, near Meadowville in Pictou County. They're just an example of young farmers that are scratching and digging and trying to get established, but especially in the organic farm business, there's real potential, there's real market for

[Page 79]

those products. I'm wondering first of all what incentives might be there for new young people getting into the industry; and, secondly, what incentives are there for those trying to establish an organic type of farm?

MR. TAYLOR: Charlie, that is an issue that's certainly front and centre at many of the meetings I attend regarding the overall agriculture picture in the Province of Nova Scotia. With the demographic, there's no doubt about it. The farming community is getting older, so to speak.

We do have, at the Department of Agriculture, a program with an annual budget of $600,000 and there are grants paid out over two years, up to a maximum of $20,000. The Department of Agriculture works on many fronts regarding this whole issue of new entrants and succession planning. The federation, the Agricultural College, regional development authorities and we're working with the rural communities as well to develop programs and options that encourage new entrants into the industry.

The program activity from - I could go back and give you the number of people that applied and how much was paid out, but we have an annual budget of $600,000 for new entrants, to assist them. A person must be purchasing a commercial farm or acquiring at least 25 per cent controlling ownership in a farm business for a first time in order to qualify. The individual has to be over the age of 19. Clients of the Nova Scotia Farm Loan Board and/or another recognized financial institution in the province, may qualify. As I said, the maximum program benefit is $20,000. A business plan has to be, of course, submitted and we require that on most of our programs.

Specific to organic farming, of course the department, through the ARC in the area and as well through AgraPoint has a lot of information on organic farming. In fact, I attended a forum in Antigonish - I mentioned it yesterday - with the federal minister and the MP for the area and the MLA, Angus MacIsaac. The new entrant issue was probably the most predominant issue during the course of the meeting. There was an organic farmer there from Cape Breton who said, in fact, that he was pleased with the number of programs and the help that he received from the Department of Agriculture in terms of R and D information and what crops are suited for what soil and is the climate conducive to the type of farming that . . .

MR. PARKER: Any specific programs just for organic farming or just to encourage them to continue on in that field?

MR. TAYLOR: Well, I am going to have to do my best to read the deputy's writing here. He is writing on the fly. But there are some programs for organic farmers - and deputy, you correct me if I'm wrong - I did mention earlier, at the Nova Scotia Agricultural College, the Organic Agriculture Institute of Canada. It's headed by Dr.

[Page 80]

Ralph Martin. Yes, Ralph Martin. I met Mr. Martin and, John, I'm sure you did and maybe Charlie did as well along the way and probably Clarrie, too.

As well, as I said, AgraPoint has specialists in this field. The department ARCs for the area have a lot of information on organic farming and if, in fact, somebody you know had wanted or required more information, we would certainly try to get people to help with answering questions and see that the programs that are available would be made, the individual would be made aware of those programs.

MR. PARKER: Thank you for that. I guess my time is about up and I am going to pass it over to my colleague.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Pictou East.

MR. CLARRIE MACKINNON: Thank you very much. I was going to join my colleagues over there but I will stay on this side. Please recognize where I belong, though, all right?

It is always a pleasure to talk to you, minister, and I interact quite often with farmers in the East River Valley and the Willowdale area, in the Lismore, Merigomish Shore and so on, the few who are left down in that area, in the shore area. East River Valley, of course, has some fairly big farms. One of the things that some of the farmers out there are running into is the increase in the cost of grain. We are looking at mixes sometimes of soybean and corn. One farmer was telling me that the cost has actually gone from $320 a ton up to $470 a ton and by changing the mix, he was able to come up with a price of $425, which is still a major increase. In two years, another farmer was saying that barley has gone from $120 a ton to $220 a ton, over a two-year period.

So what one farmer was putting to me was that he believed that the department should be putting some more emphasis on grow local because years ago the grain coming in was relatively cheap but today, with the increasing costs - and costs that will increase further with the price of fuel going up - the point that I'm making is that there was some belief that there should be more emphasis on research within the department and more actual dedication of time to local grain production. I put that in the form of a question. Is that a possibility?

MR. TAYLOR: Well, first of all, the input costs that the farmers are facing are extremely high and feed is something that ranks right up there with fertilizer in that it keeps increasing year after year after year. There is some work going on and progress is being made on trying to develop a high-moisture grain at the Nova Scotia Agricultural College. There is a project that is being undertaken on that front because I think you would agree, too, it's no good to grow it if it costs more to grow it and then the product

[Page 81]

that is yielded isn't just what the farmer needs. So there is work taking place on that front. It's a problem that is facing the farming community. There is no doubt about it.

Yesterday, while we don't like to point fingers to the past, but sometimes it is necessary. I think it was a cardinal sin when the federal Liberal Government of the day cut out the feed freight assistance that was in place. It greatly hurt the East Coast of Canada. Not just the farmers, but it certainly helped a lot of the traditional resource-based industries because it was quite an assistance, quite a help. So we are working to try to assist. Grain is grown in Nova Scotia in some places. There is no doubt about that and there is work taking place, especially in the Annapolis Valley. You know we certainly would be interested in discussing things a little further if you wanted that farmer to, in fact, touch base with our department, we would do everything we can to facilitate, share information, progress reports. The Agricultural College is studying a way to develop a grain, a feed, that would be helpful to Nova Scotia farmers in particular.

[9:45 a.m.]

MR. MACKINNON: One of the farmers was mentioning to me that the Ag reps do a great job but Ag reps today spend a lot of time dealing with the non-farm community in relationship to subdivisions that have gone in and so on and are concerned about problems that the farm may be creating. I think we have to realize that the farmers were, in fact, there before a lot of the subdivisions that have come along in rural areas. I think we will be using a lot more natural products on the fields, manure and so on.

One farmer was mentioning to me, at one point, that hired help is hard to come by that if there were, in fact, a course, just a basic course in animal husbandry, it would help quite a bit. Is there something that can be done in that regard?

MR. TAYLOR: We actually, on that front, absolutely right, especially during harvesting, it's a real problem for farmers, especially in the Annapolis Valley, to obtain employees and things of that nature. We did partner up with the Minister of Community Services and developed a program where income assistance folks would be given an opportunity to work on the farm and not be penalized in terms of a clawback for their income during the period of harvesting. Unfortunately, I forget the numbers but Judy did tell me that there wasn't a big take-up on that program.

So that is one program that is in place and that was just developed last year. We hope to broaden that and make sure that the farmers know that that is available, that folks who are able-bodied and willing to go to work on the farm, to help the farmer for their employment shortages, will not be penalized. I think it does have a specified time. I don't think it is indefinitely but you can go for a number of weeks, go to work on the farm. Your income assistance will continue and you can generate employment. But I think Judy

[Page 82]

told me that there weren't a lot of people who actually took up the program, for whatever reason. I think probably because it might have been the first year.

I know that depending on the commodity, the commodity through the Department of Agriculture, through the federation, put on workshops and seminars and things like that. So those tools are available but not everybody wants to go to work on the farm.

MR. MACKINNON: Another major concern, as you know, minister, is the lack of processing facilities in the Maritimes. One real concern which may get us in trouble at some point is that in the dairy industry when the culls take place, when older animals are culled out, they have to be sent to Pennsylvania and Quebec for processing. This is a very serious problem because the culls of course are not the best animals. We have a lot of what are called downers that do arrive at market. Tony's in Antigonish, I'm hopeful that there will be an expansion there because that is one ray of hope at least with Fraser Hunter and Herman Berfelo and others involved in that business. I'm not sure how well that's going but it is a new entity involved there.

Processing is really important. With the situation in Prince Edward Island I have fundamental concerns about animals that have to be trucked all the way to Pennsylvania and Quebec.

MR. TAYLOR: There is a cull cow line at the Atlantic Beef plant, Clarrie, you are aware of that no doubt. As well, Tony's have increased their processing, actually it's tripled from the time the new owners Fraser and Herman took over. They're doing most of the ground beef work for the Atlantic Beef Products plant as well now. I think they do have, of course if things go according to their plan, thoughts about expanding even further. There's no doubt it is a problem and it has been a great problem for too many years now.

MR. MACKINNON: One of the real concerns that I have, and I think farmers throughout this province have, it seems that the dairy industry, the egg industry, the market supply end of the industry seems to be doing okay, but the World Trade Organization makes a lot of rumbling. I am not concerned about the provincial government but I am concerned about our federal government and perhaps what might be a super right-wing philosophy that may come along there could in fact hurt our farmers. I'm wondering what we are doing as a province and you are doing as a minister to ensure that we're not sold out.

MR. TAYLOR: I take every opportunity as the Minister of Agriculture to defend the supply management system. While it may seem small and a token I was pleased just this week when we had an all-Party unity on the resolution I ran through in support of the stable supply of safe Canadian-produced food and the supply managed system. On the federal-provincial-territorial talks I've had the pleasure of knowing both the outgoing

[Page 83]

minister, Chuck Strahl, and our new minister from Saskatchewan, Gerry Ritz. There has been a change perhaps for the better I believe in that front as far as supply management goes.

Mr. Ritz, I believe, contrary to the strong right-wing stance that you're speaking of, is extremely supportive of the supply managed system. Even provinces from the West, I am proud to say they park their parochial views in support of supply management. Now I will say they are not as passionate about it as Ontario and East provinces are but B.C. is there, let me tell you that. Mr. Bell, the Agriculture Minister from British Columbia is a strong advocate of supply management.

We hammer away when we are given the opportunity of how important supply management is. I'm the product of a dairy farm in the Musquodoboit Valley and I know full well as Minister of Agriculture that I think it's over half of our farming in Nova Scotia, between 50 and 60 per cent of our farming, is done through the supply management system. Can you imagine? I impart this view every chance I get amongst my federal and provincial colleagues that the programming that we derive is generally our ad hoc programming, our business risk management. Most of those programs are for non-supply managed commodities. If something was to happen to supply management, something for the worse, something that would put more imports in Nova Scotia and in Canada, then our programming would be certainly mitigated for the other commodities because we'd have to work.

I've written a number of letters, I've done resolutions, I've stood shoulder to shoulder with my colleagues in support of it. I am pleased to say that even the western provinces, although they don't get into any great amount of passionate detail about their support of it because they see opportunities to the South that would probably generate more revenue for the oil seed and grain producers in Alberta, Saskatchewan and the western provinces. Still as a country we stand united on that front and the federal minister, I'm pleased to say, Gerry Ritz, is also a supporter of supply management.

The Bloc Quebecois, for example, have done a resolution in support of supply management. Hopefully our negotiator on the world stage will be successful but I haven't seen the latest draft that has come out of those talks. Not just supply management but we should be very concerned about these talks on the world stage. I am certainly for helping developing countries, but as you know, charity begins at home.

MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Minister, I know my time is running out and I have no fear of your philosophy whatsoever. I don't fear the philosophy of the federal Minister of Agriculture too much but I do fear the philosophy of that minister's boss. I just want to go on record as having said that. The last comment I want to make is in relationship to the farming community and infrastructure. What I'm hearing from farmers, from others throughout the rural areas, is the state of our roads and bridges. How can we

[Page 84]

possibly sustain good farming communities when our roads and bridges are in such desperate shape?

One of the main farms in my riding has a bridge that needs to be replaced very badly. It's actually dividing part of this huge farm and even the fire truck in the area will not go over that bridge so I don't know how we get heavy farm equipment over it and so on. So roads and infrastructure we really have to do something with and I hope the minister across from me will listen to me and that plea. Thank you very much for your time and I commend you for some of the things that you've tried to do.

MR. TAYLOR: I do want to say if I can, Mr. Chairman, just on roads, I think it's worth noting I've been around this place for a couple of years now, I can tell you when I came to office in 1993 one of the first departments that was nearly gutted was the Department of Transportation's capital budget. In my riding, the beautiful Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley, we couldn't get a teaspoon of asphalt to fix up our roads. I think the government of the day thought well there is one area we can make cuts. Granted, I would admit and acknowledge they had some difficult decisions to make to get our finances in the province back in order, but I think they took the easy solution.

They brought forward the scalpel and they cut the capital budget to, I think it was a paltry $40,000 or $45,000, but since we took office in 1999 and not just the current Premier, although he is very supportive of Transportation and Public Works, we had a lot of catching up to do.

The infrastructure deficit between 1993 and 1999 increased phenomenally unfortunately. I used to, given the opportunity, could grab up a little pebble and show the government of the day that this was more asphalt than I was actually receiving on the roads. It wasn't just in my riding, but in a number of ridings, even in some of the Liberal-held ridings. I don't see any of them here at the table to defend the atrocities that they committed back at that particular time, but the chickens are coming home to roost today in areas that you're speaking about but, thankfully, we have, I mean it's never enough, you know yourself, and I think the price of asphalt alone has gone up over $200 a ton to something between $600 and $700 a ton.

So we've increased the budget and the current minister, I'm happy to say, is certainly working very hard in support of doing more. He's lobbying. In fact, he has an agreement with the federal government now, too, you know, a more secure, a more long-term agreement that will see better roads, better infrastructure in the Province of Nova Scotia. Now, Mr. Chairman, I know I'm not here to speak on behalf of the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal's budget, he will have his day but I do want to say that it was shameful. I have to go back and concur that it was shameful to cut the budget like they did back at that time.

MR. MACKINNON: I need billions of teaspoons on one road.

[Page 85]

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.

MS. MICHELE RAYMOND: Mr. Chairman, I would like to follow just a little bit on one of the early comments my colleague was making there. As you know, I represent an urban riding in Halifax Regional Municipality and the area that I do represent, however, has been largely a farming area in the past. I'm sure you've heard me say before that every square inch of this province is included in a municipality. So one has to look at the municipal bylaws and their impact.

[10:00 a.m.]

Unfortunately, this municipality has become a laughing stock across the country recently because of the issue of the backyard chickens. You know, I actually still have - not as many as five years ago but still have - people who at least supplement their income by selling eggs. It's a very real question for them as to what exactly is the Department of Agriculture's role inside any given municipality, what input you have into the kinds of bylaws that will restrict, you know, certainly that. There's some difficulty with the harmonization of the previous towns, municipalities, accessory livestock and so on. So what has been happening from Agriculture's point of view?

MR. TAYLOR: I would tell the member that I also am a resident of the Halifax Regional Municipality. I live in a rural part of the county and, literally, a next-door neighbour of mine, to the left, both physically and politically, has some chickens and roosters that are out and about and laying eggs. I certainly, as a proud product of a dairy farm, which was mixed farming, and I'm certainly supporting the residents who are so inclined to raise a few chickens, keep laying hens and things of that nature, but at the end of the day, as you know, the Municipal Government Act confers that power in terms of making bylaws on to the municipalities.

I have even, during I think the quite well-known issue with the lady and the three little hens, I had asked the Halifax Regional Municipality not to come too heavy-handed on the young lady, but I have to be honest, it's a municipal responsibility. It's in the same category, not to downplay it at all, in fact, because it's very, very important, as are all bylaws but, you know, noise bylaws are a municipal responsibility, unsightly premises and they have a bylaw that I think was articulated through the media pertaining to that issue in the urban cores but, me, I think it's something that - well, they have actually taken steps I guess to revisit that issue and they're supposed to come back with a staff report to council and then a decision will be made. We have lots of areas of jurisdiction but that's somewhere that is municipal.

MS. RAYMOND: Although, as you say, I mean there are noise bylaws and unsightly premises bylaws and this is one which specifically purports to deal with animals. So I just wonder whether there is, in fact, some room for the province's

[Page 86]

jurisdiction because, quite literally, the potential is there for every square inch of the province to have its agricultural ventures dealt with through municipal bylaws and that doesn't seem to be a particularly good way of ensuring the strength of the province's agricultural community. You know we see these conflicts coming up repeatedly, I think it was mentioned earlier, subdivisions and so on coming up, but there are scopes of bylaw and certainly, it seems to me, there's a scope for the Department of Agriculture.

A much smaller one, of course, in that way is, you know, the difficulty, in fact, that many areas have had in establishing community gardens. That has basically been dealt with. I think that's less of a problem but there is still the fact that inside towns and municipalities there is the room for, and it has in earlier legislation been seen as mandated, that food production is, in fact, one of the legitimate functions of any integral community.

One thing that I was wondering about, and perhaps my colleague has asked before, is what steps the department has taken towards ensuring that there's institutional use, that in Nova Scotia Government institutions which can include everything from schools, prisons, government cafeterias, to ensure that Nova Scotia product does, in fact, receive at least preferential consideration or receives consideration even, that this is a factor in procurement policies?

MR. TAYLOR: I thank the member for that question. We spoke a little bit earlier.

MS. RAYMOND: Yes, sorry.

MR. TAYLOR: And I was actually commending the former Justice Minister because during his tenure, the now Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal issued a decree, I think it was to the Department of Justice that, in fact, they at every given opportunity provide local products in the provincial institutions relating to Justice.

We, as well, have had talks with the district health authorities regarding getting fruit and vegetables as well into our hospitals. There are some procurement arrangements that have been made in interprovincial trade laws that we have to be in compliance with, but we are making progress on that front.

I was very pleased that, through the Premier and the Minister of Health Promotion and Protection, "junk food" has been banned from our schools because I clearly believe that agriculture products - B.C. has a model and I'm getting some good information as to how they proceeded with putting agricultural products into their schools. So we're looking at all that stuff and clearly I think we're going in the right direction but we do have, you know, some restrictions that we have to find ways around and we are doing that, but I have to say that we are getting good co-operation from other government ministers relative to their departments and the placing of local food products in those

[Page 87]

institutions and, yes, I would like to say that if you get a jail term that's two years less a day, you should be fed local products.

MS. RAYMOND: I was going to say let's hope it's not just hospital food and prison food.

MR. TAYLOR: I don't want to say that too loudly because people might want to go to jail.

MS. RAYMOND: Exactly, that's what I'm thinking. New Brunswick has some very good models as well I would suggest.

MR. TAYLOR: Yes.

MS. RAYMOND: So I would be interested to know some more of the details of that at a later point. I've got two very, very quick questions. Something that was mentioned earlier was the question of shortage of agricultural labour and one thing I would suggest is that as we have an increasingly urbanized population, it becomes less and less likely that people are even familiar with what this means. I've always been a great fan of the 4-H curriculum and so on, and I'm just wondering what discussions you have with the Department of Education in terms of enhancing, even as adjunct provisions with agricultural components in the curriculum, in the tech ed and so on, whatever it's called right now.

MR. TAYLOR: Well, we have a number of programs obviously at the Nova Scotia Agricultural College.

MS. RAYMOND: In secondary schools.

MR. TAYLOR: Yes, in secondary schools and, as well, as I was saying a little earlier on, just last year with the co-operation of the Department of Community Services, we brought forward a program that we felt would help address the seasonal shortage of employees because generally during harvesting time, apple picking, Christmas tree harvesting, it's really hard for the employers to find employees. So the Department of Community Services agreed to not claw back - you know they have, what is it you are allowed to earn as an income assistance recipient - you are allowed to earn a small amount of money, it is not very much, so that had been completely removed, you would receive your income assistance, if you were so inclined, able-bodied and so on. There wasn't a big uptake on that program so we're going to continue with the program but we're going to try to make sure that not only the farmer knows it is out there as well, we want to make sure through Community Services that, in fact, it is more widely known.

[Page 88]

We have, in fact, through the Department of Education, other than the guidance counsellors and through the regular programming and in terms of what is available through Nova Scotia agriculture, we've done a lot of that but we try at every opportunity to promote agriculture. There is a promotion of agriculture careers in Halifax and through an ag awareness group, some of that is being done but I'm just going to ask my deputy again here if he could - participation in high school curriculum, yes, okay, through ag awareness. There are programs on that particular front.

MS. RAYMOND: I'm sorry, through the Department of Education in the schools, at the secondary school level?

MR. TAYLOR: No, this is done through high school.

MS. RAYMOND: It is, okay, so it is secondary school, okay. I would certainly be interested in knowing more of that and I realize the Department of Education is looking at expanding some of the credit programs and so on, so I would suggest that might be something to look at.

A final question, again very quick, maybe you could fill me in on the details of support, specifically for organic agriculture in the province.

MR. TAYLOR: Well your colleague had asked us that question just a short time ago. We do have, through, again, the Nova Scotia Agricultural College, a lot of work and research that is taking place on organic food generally. I did attend a forum and I don't want to harp on this, but in Antigonish where there was an organic farmer in attendance and he was very pleased with the Department of Agriculture. If there's any individual who requires additional information, we still have, in spite of views contrary, we have a number of ARCs in the different regions, we have professionals at AgraPoint that help people with what their climate is suited for, what is the soil best suited for in terms of growing and what can you raise in the area. There are programs that are specific within the department for organic.

MS. RAYMOND: So it's still mostly through extension services then. I guess I'd just like to stress the importance of that, though, because if we talk about value added, this is . . .

MR. TAYLOR: My deputy tells me - I'm sorry, I'm listening to him and I should be listening to you - next week, in fact, we're going to continue. There have been discussions with the feds on organic farming and the agri-food industry and next week those discussions will continue.

MS. RAYMOND: Because there is money allocated through the federal government, as I understand it, which presumably should be either flowing through the

[Page 89]

province or, ideally, augmented by the province. So we'll certainly be looking towards some kind of announcement on that because really, as I think it is being recognized at least federally and probably and certainly at the local level, this is one of the most important ways to do value-added to the province's agriculture is, in fact, to recognize the value of organics, so we'll be looking forward to something on that in the near future.

MR. TAYLOR: We'll follow up on that.

MS. RAYMOND: Okay, thank you.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you very much.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Hants East.

MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that. I appreciate the input of my colleagues as well. A couple of things I'd like to get over before my time does run out. One thing I want to draw your attention back to was your comment yesterday about the 2003 campaign when the NDP candidate said that BSE wasn't a crisis.

MR. TAYLOR: Oh yes, yes.

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, you remember. That wasn't the comment, the comment was that it wasn't an issue in the campaign and she was right. I was the Agriculture Critic. At no point through that campaign did anybody raise BSE. As a matter of fact, your Party was the luckiest Party in a campaign that I can remember because in May we had the discovery of the animals with BSE. We went to a summer election. There wasn't even a platform piece by your Party on BSE or how to deal with it and it wasn't until after that election that really things kind of hit the fan. I always thought that it was a fairly major issue that went right under the radar for a whole election campaign. That was the comment of my colleague who ran, that it wasn't an issue in the campaign, not that it wasn't an issue in the world.

So I think your comment to say that she said it wasn't a crisis was inaccurate. That wasn't the word she used. She used the word issue and she was right. I ran that campaign. I was the Agriculture Critic for the Opposition and it wasn't an issue during that 2003 campaign. So I'm assuming from your reaction that you want to respond.

MR. TAYLOR: I would just say it has been referred to in the House many times by the Speaker that this is a disagreement between two honourable members. I recall that it was an issue from where I was standing and from the visits that I took, it was an issue. Anyway, whereas the other person isn't here to speak for themselves, I would just defer

[Page 90]

to other business that you may have but I can tell you, we clearly disagree on the position that your Party took and the position that my Party took.

MR. MACDONELL: Well, I think that is pretty fair of you. So I think if you had deferred to other business before you made the comment, that would have been even nicer.

MR. TAYLOR: The next thing you will be telling me you were a member of our task force.

[10:15 a.m.]

MR. MACDONELL: No, I'm not going there.

I am only going to touch briefly on the SRMs again because my colleague, I think, raised some good issues there. I just want to emphasize that for some operations, in particular abattoirs, if you were to look at say, Northumberlamb, for example, and I think they stopped their beef kill line there, if I am not mistaken, simply because of the cost factors. When this federal money runs out, I'm not sure what is going to happen with specified risk material. Northumberlamb, I don't know if you have been to their abattoir . . .

MR. TAYLOR: In Brookside?

MR. MACDONELL: Yes, Brookside.

MR. TAYLOR: Yes.

MR. MACDONELL: There is no room there. I mean they are not going to be composting in Brookside. So it is something that we should be really concerned about. Once upon a time, Rothesay used to pay for the offal material that came from abattoirs and they rendered it. Well, now they charge those plants for that material, rather than pay them for it. So that has added an increased cost and they are not taking the specified risk material. So I do think that testing would have been a cheaper way.

As a matter of fact, the advantage of testing would have been - here is my view what nationally we should have done - we should have tested; we should have called the Japanese or any other jurisdiction that was testing, say what is it you are looking for and opened up another market and tried to work away from the American market. That would have really clearly identified our product as a very healthy product. I think it would have eliminated all the federal dollars that got spent and provincial dollars that got spent and we would have probably secured a new market, a better price for producers and I think would have had a healthier market today.

[Page 91]

Actually, it's still a road we could go down. I know this is not something the minister or the government can do on their own. I think it would take a fair bit of head-butting, maybe, with the CFIA and maybe not. Maybe they, at this point in time, they would say, look, go ahead, we don't see it as an issue. I think if we had tested for BSE, we would have found that in Nova Scotia the amount of infected animals was so minimal, if any at all, to handle that specified risk material out of an infected animal would have been quite cheap compared to what we are doing. We are treating every animal like they are infected, basically. That's, I think, a little too costly. I will let the minister respond, unless he is waiting for his deputy.

MR. TAYLOR: No, actually, as I said yesterday, I tend to agree but I do wonder, whereas this is a federal requirement, CFIA has brought it in and I say this with sincerity, I am surprised that on the federal stage there hasn't been more said on that front. I mean this is a decree that came down from Ottawa, basically administered through CFIA. It has created quite a financial burden and hardship for the farmers of this province. We did offer those types of scenarios and the minister before me has written correspondence. Basically, it was turned down, quite frankly. I think, as you said, actually there probably wasn't any.

MR. MACDONELL: I agree.

MR. TAYLOR: I think that was a political thing, it wasn't based on science. We did, in fact, bring forward concerns that it was creating a hardship. Let's look at another way of doing this but we have what we have through the CFIA and I trust, if I could, that all federal Parties, including yours, are in fact petitioning the government to revisit this, take a look at it because it is not just Nova Scotia that is being impacted.

MR. MACDONELL: I agree and I appreciate the fact that you agree. I know if CFIA has their heels dug in on this like they did with the long-horned beetle . . .

MR. TAYLOR: It's true.

MR. MACDONELL: A couple of other things, one is, I get calls quite often, every time the price of milk goes up, I get calls.

MR. TAYLOR: So do I.

MR. MACDONELL: Actually, I have written every milk marketing board in the country and I have compiled a file on their responses and I really haven't had a chance to go through that yet, to try to evaluate why milk prices are different in Ontario compared to here or wherever and a couple of those agencies have called me and I have to get back to them. So I'm not really sure what the scenario looks like across the country or what their explanation is but can you explain, we have a minimum retail price and

[Page 92]

other jurisdictions don't. I don't necessarily see that as the issue only because if it was the issue, our price would be down to the minimum retail price. If competition was forcing the price down, we would be down to the minimum retail price and if you remove the minimum retail price, the price would drop lower, so you would think. But we are not near it. We are well above the minimum retail price. So it would seem to me the competition is not forcing the price down.

I'm not one for advocating to keep the minimum retail price, I'm just stating the facts as I see them. It strikes me that if producers across the country get basically the same price per litre for the milk they produce on their farms, that there is something happening at either the processing or retailing sectors that allows for milk to be sold at different prices but it seems that in Nova Scotia we are fairly high, especially on four-litre containers. So do you have any explanation as to why we always seem to be fairly out of step with other jurisdictions?

MR. TAYLOR: What I can tell the member, Mr. Chairman, we have asked a lot of questions since I have become minister on this front. The Natural Products Marketing Council supervises all regulations under the Dairy Industry Act and, of course, they have legislation that clearly speaks to the Natural Products Marketing Council. Retailers are selling milk at prices that, if I can, follow the regulations as dictated by the Natural Products Marketing Council. The council does not set the prices that milk is sold for in the stores, only the price that milk sold cannot fall below.

In most retail stores, the prevailing price of milk is well above the regulated price. Some non-traditional retailers, like Costco, Shoppers Drug Mart, have been selling at the regulated minimum and I know a young retailer in North River tried to do the same thing for a while. I'm not sure if he is still doing it. Processors generally feel that the regulated minimum price, as established in the Fluid Dairy Pricing Regulations is too low and processors are concerned that the discounting activity taken by retailers will continue to move across the province and spread to various container sizes at the more traditional retailer, Superstore or Sobeys. If this happens they feel the market and subsequently the industry would destabilize. Again, a number of retailers have tried it, there have been allegations that the big players have tried some intimidation tactics. I've heard that from one of the retailers in a small community in Colchester North.

The Natural Products Marketing Council has that jurisdiction and they supervise all the regulations under the Dairy Industry Act. It is a difficult one but if you talk to the farmers, like you said, they essentially get the same for a litre of milk across the country. I note here that the Natural Products Marketing Council office receives an average of one call per week on the price of milk in the province, mainly from consumers comparing the price of four-litre containers in Nova Scotia with other jurisdictions. I'm wondering why they're only getting one call a week when we're getting quite a few. On the other hand the office has received calls from the producer concerned about what they perceive as

[Page 93]

discounting milk. They expressed their concern about maintaining the stability of the system. Again, I'm not sure if you're suggesting that we would look at amending legislation.

MR. MACDONELL: I'm just looking for a reasonable explanation I guess. I'm not sure if I see a need for the minimum retail price. I missed your explanation about the thing that would go to destabilizing the industry. Can you go back? What were the thoughts there?

MR. TAYLOR: The processors are concerned about the discounting activity taken by retailers. We have the minimum price that they can't go below and then they can go - I don't know if the sky is the limit - but nonetheless some people would say that it is. Processors are concerned that the discounting activity taken by retailers will continue to move across the province and spread to various container sizes at the more traditional retailers like Sobeys and Superstore. If this happens they feel the market, and subsequently the industry, will destabilize.

MR. MACDONELL: Well, I'm not sure that I agree but I'm not sure if I'm agreeing because I understand what they're talking about which is a bit worrisome. There's a couple of things that play in milk pricing that either I think shouldn't happen or somebody should explain why they can happen. I had somebody approach me and said, I was in Yarmouth - or wherever - and they were selling milk at cost. This individual said he was selling milk at cost. So I contact Dairy Farmers of Nova Scotia and say you know this person's saying a store was selling milk at cost. They said no that really wasn't cost, they're only selling it at what the invoice indicated the cost was, but that retailer was getting a rebate from the dairy on the milk. So his cost was actually lower than the cost he identified. He was only identifying the cost on the invoice as his cost. He wasn't telling the consumer that he actually got a rebate on the milk which actually would have made the price of milk lower.

MR. TAYLOR: From the processor.

MR. MACDONELL: From the processor. I don't know about the small corner stores, I don't think this happens there, but certainly for the large retailers I think the dairies have to pay shelf space, don't they?

MR. TAYLOR: As far as I know they do.

MR. MACDONELL: They pay thousands and thousands of dollars. Somebody has got to be picking up that tab. It would seem to me that the consumer is more than likely the person that's doing that. Have you ever looked into what kind of dollars the processors are paying for shelf space and how that's being filtered down to the consumer?

[Page 94]

MR. TAYLOR: I can speak to that a little bit. The Natural Products Marketing Council has to ratify each time the producer price changes, it needs to be ratified. Of course it was effective February 1^st. Normally this is an increase and it's passed on to the consumers along with any cost of production increases. This year producers received about two per cent increase on their milk that was shipped. Retailers/processors then increased the retail price by about twice that, passing on their increased cost. The Natural Products Marketing Council commissioned a consultant to review the policy and regulatory framework governing the marketing of fluid milk in Nova Scotia. The review provided an opportunity for the marketing council and fluid milk stakeholders to re-examine and if appropriate adjust the policy objectives and regulations affecting this part of the province's dairy industry. The council is currently reviewing the consultant's report and has asked for additional input from the Dairy Farmers of Nova Scotia Advisory Committee. The council has convened a stakeholders group for May 13^th to discuss this study.

The review has evoked a great deal of discussion among advisory committee members and they question the accuracy of the consultant's work and members of this group are the only people who have seen the study at this particular time. I know I haven't. Greater distribution of the study is also a concern for the committee itself.

Nova Scotia milk producers received approximately 68.93 cents per litre of milk sold in Nova Scotia last year, pretty near 69 cents per litre. This is the same price as producers in Quebec, Ontario, New Brunswick and P.E.I received. The price paid to producers is based on a three-part formula; 30 per cent of the Consumer Price Index, 30 per cent on the Personal Disposable Income Index, and 40 per cent on the Producing Cash Cost Index. The price is approximately 41 per cent of the consumer's dollar.

MR. MACDONELL: Could I have a photocopy of that please? I'd really appreciate that. It's just more grist for the mill really, not that I come out with much flour at the end of that. I'm going to add it to my supply of material and sometime try to digest it. I know I'm running out of time so I'm just going to touch on a few things.

[10:30 a.m.]

My colleague mentioned the energy side and you mentioned the windmills. I see the possibility for energy production as a way to help the bottom line for farmers whether they're just trying to cut the cost on the overall operation or they want to produce energy to sell it on the grid of whatever. I would like to see some kind of opening up of that system, better payment schedules and plans so that farmers could actually think seriously about the energy production as a way to help the bottom line.

I think in your area, am I wrong, but isn't Ross Benison working on a project on hay pellets?

[Page 95]

MR. TAYLOR: I think he is part of the group that is looking at it.

MR. MACDONELL: I think he's actually working in conjunction with my colleagues, the gentlemen that he talked about. It was somebody from Pictou who built a prototype for the hay pellet so they seem to be ironing that out. I am not entirely convinced that if I was going to grow hay that I could get any more out of it just from talking to Mr. Benison. Hay will be worth whatever hay is worth and I'm not sure that it's worth a lot. Depending on where you are, if there's lots of horse people around, you can get quite a bit out of hay, but if you're not in one of those areas then you're not going to get too much.

I think to emphasize that agriculture is not just mainland Nova Scotia. Cape Breton is a place where agriculture is trying to thrive and certainly Boulardarie Island is an area that has great potential for agriculture. I am not a big supporter of growing corn or other grains for ethanol. I think the numbers are in on that, it's not cost-effective and it is having a negative impact. When my colleague mentioned the price of grain, I've heard that the weed seed on P.E.I is anywhere from $600 to $800 a ton, you know, to buy the seed to plant this year and maybe that's even higher now. It was a couple of months ago when I got those numbers.

So I guess a couple of last things, one is I think the province should really be concerned about something we don't hear a lot about and that's soil compaction and what the impacts are going to be on yield because of soil compaction. It's right under the radar. I'm not saying nobody is talking about it, I would be wrong. In Cooks Brook, I went to a federation meeting one night there and one of the guest speakers, that was the topic, and I was quite impressed and surprised to find out what the impact on yield is going to be as a result of soil compaction.

So I would like to think that this is something that the department, if they're not doing research, that they've kind of got their ear to the ground so to speak, and I'm wondering when my colleague mentioned about the chickens in HRM, you said it was a municipal bylaw. My colleague, the member for Halifax Chebucto, introduced a bill the other day but basically what it is, it's around clotheslines in the HRM. So it does seem to be appropriate that, you know, if the government actually wanted to move on chickens in the HRM, you could probably draft legislation that would tend to address that issue.

I think it's not a bad idea actually and I would think that if those three chickens had been three pheasants, nobody would be raising any consternation about three pheasants running around the neighbourhood. They would have thought it was great but as far as size-wise and looks-wise, you could mistake a pheasant for a chicken and with all the bird feeders in the HRM, I would think that the grain going on the ground

[Page 96]

attracting rats is probably, you know, sufficient. So you can't really blame chickens for that.

The fruit growers, the Honeycrisp issue, the two different bodies, I think the government would be well advised to administer those programs themselves rather than pit farmers against farmers. They're all farmers and it's taxpayers' money and I think that they all should be able to apply for that taxpayers' money, you know, and I don't think the administrative fee should be necessarily greater for one than the other. As a matter of fact, I would think the government should be very cognizant of whether or not any one organization is making money or having their bank account look a little better because of charging an administrative fee with taxpayers' dollars.

I think it's money in and money out and that if all the money you intend for the program actually winds up putting trees in the ground, I think that's a very good thing, but for the most part I think, even if you're thinking of extending this program or extending money to encourage this Honeycrisp program, I think the next phases of it, you really should consider whether that would be more appropriately done within the department and allow all, you know, whether you belong to either one of these organizations or you don't belong to any organization, if you're a farmer in Nova Scotia, it would seem to me you should have access at an equitable rate to taxpayers' dollars for the program. Otherwise, it seems a bit unfair to me to do that any other way.

I do appreciate the efforts of the fruit growers to be an advocacy group for their members. I think that's entirely appropriate but I think to charge a fee greater to other people who are not members is not in the best interest of the taxpayers' dollar where we all contribute.

My colleague mentioned about stopping other product coming from other jurisdictions. The interprovincial trade agreement, Chapter 9, has a limiting clause that you can't interfere with the flow of agricultural goods and this is one that the government would really seriously have to work out a negotiation with other jurisdictions as to how. You could say, well, we'll allow you 50 per cent or we'll allow you whatever, but that is exactly what it is, it's a limiting clause and it does impede your ability to intervene on the flow of agricultural goods. The institutions, I know the minister mentioned the Department of Justice, so is there any way to know whether the consumption by our institutions has increased on local product? Is there any raw data, you know, procurement information, anything that would indicate that we're actually increasing the volume that goes to our institutions?

MR. TAYLOR: Well, the member has certainly been all over the agriculture field here just in the last two short moments . . .

MR. MACDONELL: I'm running out of time.

[Page 97]

MR. TAYLOR: . . . and painting with a wide brush, raising a lot of issues that he feels are very important, and I tend to agree. I had said earlier that as far as the new program, orchard and vineyard renewal, that is going to be administered through the Department of Agriculture. We believe that we have and continue to treat the farmers fairly. I don't know, I'm not sure, but perhaps the concerns that you have with the two groups of fruit growers, you could, I have certainly been up front with both groups and asked them to work together, to treat them fairly.

But I don't know if you had the opportunity to sit down with the fruit growers and actually explain to them that you basically are saying that all they are is an advocacy group. They do a lot of good work. They brought forward a case as to, you know, they certainly convinced me and the department at that particular time as to why they have justification, as they administered it, you know, that program, it's their . . .

MR. MACDONELL: Well, they should speak for their members. I think that's what I would expect they would do and they seem to do that well.

MR. TAYLOR: They do great for, you know, I think both groups certainly are commended by the Minister of Agriculture. I wish they would both come under the same tent and we will continue to encourage that. The new program is going to be administered through the Department of Agriculture, the Business Risk Management Division.

MR. MACDONELL: That's good I think.

MR. TAYLOR: We do have, yesterday, John, you asked for the Select Nova Scotia evaluation. I have that report for you today and you did get the copy regarding the fluid milk prices and the Natural Products Marketing Council.

MR. MACDONELL: Yes.

MR. TAYLOR: I have that report today. Like I say, we carried out before and after evaluations and have done some assessment. We can get it from the Department of Justice, I don't think we have the specific breakdown but, obviously, if the jails in the province now are using local products, there would be an increase in consumption on that front, but we will try to get more information on that front.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, the time has elapsed for questions and I thank both caucuses for their questions. I'll give the minister the opportunity for some closing comments.

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I do want to thank you and all members for their indulgence as we work our way through the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture

[Page 98]

for the fiscal year 2008-09. If I could, I just wanted to respond in summation, Leo brought up a point about the new Agricultural Policy Framework about disasters that can take place in the agriculture community. The fact is, today, we don't have a program specific. As a consequence of the federal-provincial-territorial meetings and now agreement, we do have in place an agri-recovery element to the business risk management suite of packages. I can tell you, honourable member, that there was a lot of discussion before we had an agreement on that program.

Now, the parameters of it, we can speak to perhaps a little later on as to how that's going to work, but the farming community generally, or at least the Agriculture Ministers are generally pleased with the federal government's support on that front. We do have some information that had been asked for, John, and we'll share that. We have some more information here regarding questions you had yesterday on our infrastructure program. Let me see here, we have the summary of the evaluations, the strategic infrastructure investment program. We have the criteria in terms of the applicant eligibility for the infrastructure investment program. We have the calculations of the annual net sales and payment for the Nova Scotia Beef Kickstart Program, and of course we have Select Nova Scotia evaluation.

I think, Mr. Chairman, we went around the gamut. I think we covered pretty near every single commodity in Nova Scotia. There are a lot of them and we tried to explain the government's position. We do very highly prioritize agriculture, consider it to be the backbone of rural Nova Scotia. With that, Mr. Chairman, I'll turn the floor back over to you, thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Resolution E1 stand?

Resolution E1 stands.

[10:44 a.m. The subcommittee recessed.]

[10:59 a.m. The committee reconvened.]

MR. CHAIRMAN: I call the subcommittee back to order. We will deal with the Estimates of the Department of Justice.

Resolution E13 - Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $262,244,000 be granted to the Lieutenant Governor to defray expenses in respect of the Department of Justice, pursuant to the Estimate.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable Minister of Justice.

[Page 99]

HON. CECIL CLARKE: Mr. Chairman, to all members of the committee, as you have indicated, you have been able to provide an overview of the amounts of expenditure and part of what I know we will have an opportunity to get into is the detail and some of the initiatives and questions that arise associated with the implications of the budget but more importantly, its programs and initiatives.

I have with me prepared comments both for the Department of Justice, an overview, as well as the Public Prosecution Service. However, I have provided a copy to my honourable colleague from the New Democratic Party and will do likewise with my Liberal colleagues, to provide them with an overview in the interest of time that they can look at as we proceed during these deliberations and for their due consideration any questions that may arise from the details that otherwise I would like to highlight.

Obviously I am very enthusiastic about where we are and our plan forward as a result of our 2008-09 fiscal plan and more importantly what it can do to improve outcomes within the justice delivery system and whether that be within the Department of Justice, the ongoing work of the FOIPOP office, now that we have a new director with the Human Rights Commission, our Police Complaints Commission, as well as the Public Prosecution Service.

So there are many things that I would be pleased to address. Some I have with me, as well, today. My Executive Director of Finance Administration, Clarence Guest, and Robert Purcell, Executive Director of the Public Safety Division and a number of other officials who will be at the ready, depending on the questions that get raised and our ability to respond and, again, as we move forward, I look to the level of engagement and ability as well to provide any clarity that may not be evident in what we would take and understand in the normal course of business within the portfolio of Justice and to further enhance our ability to have a level of dialogue here within the House of Assembly that will enable us and I hope provide assurance to honourable members that indeed our fiscal requests are supportable when the budget vote comes forward.

So again there have been a number of initiatives that I'm quite pleased with that people are aware of because they've been part of public initiatives that I've undertaken since coming to the position and assuming the portfolio of Justice, and again I look forward to the questions and maybe without delaying into the details again, my colleagues will have copies of my speaking points in detail and I'll be happy to address them in fullness as we proceed.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect.

MR. WILLIAM ESTABROOKS: Mr. Chairman, I do thank the minister for his brevity, also the heads-up on the statement, and I'll assure you that I won't necessarily

[Page 100]

make it bedtime reading over the next few hours, whether it will be something that I'll have a look at to make sure that we understand some of the directions of the department.

Firstly, as the Justice Critic for the NDP, I want to thank members of your department, Mr. Minister, who have been more than patient with me, particularly when it comes to the fact that I come from another background, a challenge that I wanted as an elected official, to be able to take on another critic responsibility, and your department has been more than co-operative and you, personally, also have been. It's unfortunate because I could be accused of taking a cheap shot but I'm going to bring it up. I know that your predecessor comes with a longstanding commitment to justice with his background and let me assure you that in no circumstances do I hold you personally responsible for anybody escaping from the back of a van, unlike some other people who perhaps point fingers and make comments on hard times which I call inappropriate.

I'll address those matters personally with the Liberal Justice Critic but it seems to me that you, as a minister, are well intentioned. You work hard at your job and you're surrounded with some good people and hopefully together we can make the Justice Department, the Correctional Services, the Crown attorneys, the various parts of the department that you're responsible for work as efficiently as possible.

As the minister is probably aware, I became the Justice Critic because of an incident - or I asked Mr. Dexter to make me the Justice Critic for our Party because of an incident that took place in Timberlea. Paula Gallant was an outstanding young teacher and the tragic event, of course, happened when our community found that Paula had been murdered. As a follow-up to that, of course, our community will never be the same. The children involved in terms of Paula's class that she had that year will never be the same and it continues to be something that sticks in our community. We didn't think that we would see our fast-growing suburban community suddenly as a headline but we continue to be reminded of it because it's an unsolved murder.

I would like to also point out that aside from knowing Paula personally as a teacher, when I had a real job, but also knowing Paula and her family, the Blackburn family are personal friends of mine, I have known them for many years as people in our community. So I would like to bring to your attention the concerns that Lynn Blackburn and her sister, Lana Kenny, have brought to my attention about Victim Services. I have a letter and I know you received a copy of it. I'm not going to quote from it extensively because I would like to look at some of the criteria when it comes to Victim Services.

This is a March11th letter to Lana and to Lynn from John Joyce-Robinson, the Acting Director of Criminal Injuries and Counselling Program. In the letter it's quite clearly explained - the frustrations, of course, that the Blackburns and the Kennys have faced particularly when it comes to the fact that this is an unsolved murder and counselling services have certain criteria that the family completely disagree with. The

[Page 101]

key factor is who is actually eligible, if that's the correct word, as family members when it comes to counselling.

I'm, of course, aware of Alain and Lynn Blackburn's two boys as young men in our community who were gravely affected by the murder of their aunt. These two young boys continue each day to adjust the best way they can to the fact that they no longer have Aunt Paula to drop in to see them or to check out how they're doing at the hockey arena or what their marks are in school.

I'm wondering if you could, at your ease, explain to me the criteria for receiving help for family members when it comes to Victim Services?

MR. CLARKE: Thank you very much. You do come right to the core of something and that's the impact of criminal activity, especially something as heinous as the type of murder that occurred. The impact that has, especially when it comes to an unsolved case, and something that has necessitated and I think has involved a greater awareness amongst officials and how to respond.

What I will do - I know we may have some back and forth, Bill, just in terms of the level of discussion. So, I'm fully prepared that it might take some time to answer complete questions around this and I do have Chris Mosher from Court Services that deals with this, that has joined me. I'll have a reference point to help with that. I do want to recognize that I don't expect one answer is going to be sufficient in any way, shape or form.

I do want to note that I have recently responded to some correspondence and what I'll do, I know we'll probably be back on Monday, is make sure I have a current copy of my most recent correspondence to Ms. Blackburn in relation to the correspondence I had received. We will bring that forward for further discussion on Monday.

However, the Victim Services program, I think, has recognized both concerns that were raised. First and foremost, you talked about who gets to be encompassed in the immediacy in terms of the family. Normally, immediate family members for counselling eligibility would be grandparents, parents, siblings, children and grandchildren within that unit. Then there's the wider extended family that some of these concerns have raised.

It's my understanding, beyond that, to get into a wider classification, to bring in others that would be affected and in need of counselling is the requirement for a medical determination or diagnosis of the impact and the need for counselling around that. Again, we have seen - regrettably - in this province serious and violent crimes on the increase so therefore to your inquiry on Victim Services, it's very timely because it also speaks to the fact that it is impacting people because of the severity. Paula Gallant is a very signature case that affects that.

[Page 102]

Now, in terms of where we are in responding, the program allowed for up to a maximum of $2,000 over two years in counselling. That was based on a $65 an hour rate that was available. We've increased that amount in terms of access to counselling which is now $85 an hour of eligible to get more readily experienced people.

At the same time, the $2,000 maximum is in effect, but also through our work with Community Services, as well, we are dealing with some - maybe we can get into that separately, Bill. Some of the issues we're dealing with the impact on children and counselling that's available for them and the impact of crime. That's a separate initiative which is a new one and new funding so it allows us to be able to look at where the specific needs are for an individual.

We are making progress forward. I do believe, as well, in trying to first and foremost, get to this matter. The Paula Gallant case, has also, as you know, within the Department of Justice we've established the major unsolved crimes registry offering up to a $50,000 reward for information to lead to this. The most frustrating point in all of this and I think for the family is that no one, regrettably, has been able to connect all the necessary evidence, the evidence chain is lacking and the ability to get that intelligence to provide that type of clarity. The outcome is known and there are other things that have been impacted.

The counselling budget overall, as part of our crime strategy, I just would note as well, has been increased by an additional $175,000 to deal with that. Again, I know that's a start and maybe we'll move forward from there for a dialogue.

MR. ESTABROOKS: I look forward to the information you can provide to me at the first of the week, thank you, Mr. Minister. The concern is not just the criteria of who is eligible but the time frame and the circumstances and I would hope - and I understand that people in your department consider these particular circumstances, the time frame for how counselling would kick in because Paula's nephews, of course, will always be affected by the loss of their aunt, but I think the circumstances of having an unsolved crime has to be very carefully looked at as these young men continue to adjust to the problem. I look forward to pursuing that topic further at the first of the week and thank you for the Victim Services comments, that will be helpful to the family, to reassure them of their particular concern.

I was warned not to do this, but your Education Critic is always famous for asking about bills for taxis, so I've got to get this out of the way from the get-go. Taxis were always a very sensitive topic when I was the Education Critic, so when I was talking to Karen this morning - and my best to Ms. Casey, of course, who is going through a bit of a rough time these days with her mom. Supplementary Information, Volume 3, Public Accounts, March 31, 2007. It doesn't come out in the package as it used to when we received information from the budget, but it does appear about halfway through the year

[Page 103]

when suddenly this wonderful list of expenses is made available from travel expenses of people in your department, to our own travel expenses.

[11:15 a.m.]

Of course, from recent comments from the Correctional Services people, I'm looking at Page 136 - if you have the same book as I do, this is not one of the budget documents. It's Volume 3, Supplementary Information. I'm sure the Education Minister is quite relieved that I will not be asking questions on such petty matters, but hey, I'm going to bring it up.

Casino Taxi has a bill of $30,523.55. Now the obvious question is, we're not transporting inmates out of that budget money, correct?

MR. CLARKE: No.

MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you, that's a given, I assume. But when you look at other departments and I'm not expecting a specific answer at this time, what are some of the uses that the Department of Justice uses for taxis? For the record, the minister is bothering me, he wants to see his own expenses.

MR. CLARKE: We can lend you the supplement after we're finished with the questions here. With that, maybe a few things, as we all know in going about the course - for us in the Department of Justice, with 2,000 employees who have to tend to business, a lot of that can be specific to the Capital Region here and specific to Casino would be the Capital Region. As you know, we're located on Terminal Road and there is a case for wellness and walking, but also there is the efficiency that is required in terms of timeliness to make our course of business. So we have issues of getting to regularly scheduled departmental business, issues with the transport of staff needing to attend to court-related matters, and then just the normal course of travel. The sheer number itself and the volume does add up. Again, with that, this year it is transferred over, as you know from time to time those contracts are renewed and usually here in the HRM, that would be between Yellow Cab or Casino and I think now we have gone to Yellow Cab as the current provider now that it is tendered out.

A lot of the cases, the other thing is we may have people that are clients we need to get to appointments, we will cover the cost, so those costs are borne in that as well.

MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you. I'm aware of the fact, of course, with that number of employees but the number does jump out at me and I'm obliged to ask these questions because I guess that's just who I am.

MR. CLARKE: It is estimates, so you're right.

[Page 104]

MR. ESTABROOKS: I'm looking at Page 142 in the same book and I'm asking the question without even understanding - and thank you for reassuring me on the taxis, particularly considering some headlines with Correctional Services. I knew that was not going to be the case, it's just too much of a professional operation. On Page 142 there is a line item there, Valley Armoured Car Services Limited, $5,767. I was just wondering what that involves?

MR. CLARKE: In fact, that one there, that $5,767, that actually is for the secure transfer of money from the courts to the banks. There would be fees and payments that would be made, I think specifically if you had bail or any fees paid. In other words, it eliminates in this case a risk issue of staff travelling with sums of money on their person.

MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you for the details. I'm glad we got taxis out of the way without getting into a hassle about it. Okay, let the record show that the member for Timberlea-Prospect, see those headlines under Education, don't look at those, Mr. Minister, please.

I'd like to turn to Correctional Services, if I may. Again, of course, aside from the headline items that we've been concerned about, there are a number of things I'd like to ask the minister particular about specific questions. I had the opportunity to attend Public Accounts Committee, at which time there was some information exchanged. No reflection on Mr. Honsberger, but I find it difficult to believe some of the answers that I was given that day. He is a well-experienced person who has worked his way through Correctional Services.

A couple of clarifications from you as minister or from your staff would be appreciated. First of all, if possible - and I don't expect you to have it at your fingertips - I would like to know the number of so-called part-timers who work in Correctional Services? If we have that number I would like to know - and I made the comment to Mr. Honsberger, I think, that day when he was before the Public Accounts. We're not talking about people in the retail industry here, we're talking about people who are in a very important position. What are we doing dealing with part-timers in Correctional Services? You either have a full-time job in the service or you don't. I'm not saying they all have to be card-carrying union members, but how many part-timers do we have as correctional officers? More importantly, why do we even have such a created position?

MR. CLARKE: Thank you, very much, Bill. We have approximately 280 staff that work as correctional officers. Of that, approximately one-third, to your question, would be part-time staff, at 100. Again, that is all associated with how the union contract has been structured. As people gain seniority, so when they become full-time status, it is based upon their seniority as part-time correctional workers when they become a full-time employee.

[Page 105]

MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you for the specific answer. The concern I have, however, is that many part-timers are working 40 hours a week. They are putting in as many hours as regular staff. The part-timers, in certain situations, are put in circumstances that perhaps they are not trained for but that will come back in another issue that I am going to address with you.

One of the concerns that I have, and you have to understand that when I was the Education Critic I heard from teachers all the time, from schools all the time, who would call me at all hours of the day and night and never used their school and never allowed me to use their name. Now I am in the same business but I am dealing with correctional officers, I think mainly because of the fact that some people are aware of the fact that my first teaching job was in a federal maximum penitentiary and my father was a penitentiary guard at Dorchester for 25 long years.

So I hear from these officers and they have concerns about various topics. I don't want to get into an argument necessarily with Mr. Honsberger either about the morale of the people who are working there but I would like you to discuss with me, if you could, the role of the captains in the correctional services, the role of the captains. More importantly, from what I have been told, it is not in the same wavelength as Mr. Honsberger said to me during the Public Accounts Committee, the people who become captains in the Correctional Services of Nova Scotia don't necessarily have a lot of experience in that particular vocation, they have not worked their way up through the system. In some cases, they become captains for various other reasons and they do not have experience, actually, within correctional centres in this province or other provinces.

So it is two-part question, if I may, Mr. Chairman, to the minister. I am looking at how do you become a captain, is it necessary to have experience in Correctional Services? What is their role in the operation of the facility?

MR. CLARKE: Mr. Chairman, through you to the honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect, first of all with the role of captains, as in any environment with the equivalent of a team lead, it is necessary that they do have the requirement of experience and that they, indeed, are qualified fully to take that on. As in any work environment, I would assume you always have varying opinions from various staff as to what people see as the attributes or qualifications of a person and sometimes, as you know, you do affect how people look at qualifications to do a job versus the personality associated with the individual there. I think sometimes that is where you can obviously, in a workplace, have discrepancy over people looking at a qualification.

As far as a captain itself, it is a front-line supervisor. They operate in a 24/7 operation. To become a captain, you have to go through a competition and part of that competition for anyone applying is going to be to meet the core competencies of that job.

[Page 106]

Again, that would be made available to those with experience within the Correctional Services division.

MR. ESTABROOKS: You see, my experience is based upon the fact that when I worked in a federal maximum penitentiary, the most important person in the running of the penitentiary wasn't the warden or the deputy warden but those who were called the keepers. I know that's a terminology which we probably don't use in 2008 anymore but the keepers all had experience as they worked their way up through the system. These were men, all men in this case, who had begun as correctional officers, not necessarily within that penitentiary, but they worked their way through the system. They, at one time, had been on the same beat, on the same range and done the same jobs which they were asking the men, and in this case the men and women, to do the same job for them. However, the concern I have is when it comes to criteria for hiring captains, is experience in the Correctional Services considered a top priority?

MR. CLARKE: And with that I can say to the honourable member, Mr. Chairman, that yes, it would be, having that experience. All people who would be assigned with a classification of captain and taking on that responsibility would have to work their way through the system, that someone has evolved and has made their way to the point that they have qualified to undertake that role. I do appreciate as well, you know, myself with a family member who works in the federal penitentiary system, also look at the changes and there are probably some structural aspects on a smaller scale with regard to provincial correctional facilities, but nonetheless the adherence to appropriate practices and fair hiring on merit and qualification has to be the overriding and guiding principle, otherwise I think it compromises the integrity of the service.

MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you, Mr. Minister. So the captains in many cases are the people on the spot making the tough decisions when it comes to an issue that's taking place that day, on that range, in that particular part of the facility. In that case, the captain who made the decision to have two part-timers escort Mr. Carvery on his destination to the local hospital, was there any kind of disciplinary action directed to that particular captain? Because of the fact, in my view, based upon the comments that have been given to me, Mr. Carvery had a record. He had, in fact, already escaped from the farm camp, if that's the appropriate expression at Dorchester, Mr. Carvery was not just any other inmate. That captain made a decision to send out two part-timers that day with Mr. Carvery as he was on his way to his appointment. Surely there had to be some sort of review of Mr. Carvery's incident but, more importantly, the captain who made that decision, has there been any disciplinary action directed towards that person?

[11:30 a.m.]

MR. CLARKE: I guess, Mr. Chairman, in response to the honourable member's inquiry, and we all do know clearly of the incident he refers to, a couple of things, there

[Page 107]

had been immediately, of course, the discussion and the investigation post-incident with the correctional workers. When people talk in terms of a part-time employee, I am aware that in looking and analyzing as well that the minimum criteria for anyone to be able to undertake an escort is at least 500 hours of on-the-job experience and training associated with undertaking a transfer. So there is a requirement for experience because you're not just hired as a part-time person and sent out to immediately do that.

I do acknowledge as well, and this is part of it I guess, to the member, that there is a report being finalized now which will be finished next week that will involve the process of the workers as well as the supervisors, in this case the captain, with the incident because there is a tier of staffing required when you look at the risk.

Now, what I'm not able to look at as well is that when you have a medical transfer and someone is deemed to be in need of attention at a health care facility and going in for that, I can't talk to the specifics of that and, again, I know from a staffing point of view it would be normally considered, of course, something you would do for the well-being of the inmate but the report hopefully next week will be able to provide greater clarity. So again, once I have that detail, I will be able and willing to offer that to you.

MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you. I want to just address this issue one more time. I've said it on many other occasions, when the captain makes that decision, he, or she, would be making that decision based upon the circumstances involving the inmate. More particularly, are there not escort teams?

I can tell you of an incident that I was involved in personally involving my father, who was involved in an escort team where three federal penitentiary guards regularly escorted inmates from a maximum federal penitentiary - remember, there was no Renous - from Dorchester to Halifax. That's what their job was when there was someone to be escorted for a destination, in this case, a major trip from Dorchester to Halifax, an escort team who were particularly trained to do that. Is there any such thing as escort teams where you work with the same partner, you travel with the same men, in this case, where you travel together with your partner and the inmate? Or is it, you two will go today - you might never have worked with that officer before?

It would seem to me if that's the case, I come back to this, I understand what you're saying about the number of hours of training, a part-timer with a full-time person perhaps would have been a better mix, but not to get involved in the circumstances there, do we have escort teams who take inmates when they're out on visits?

There's a huge importance that you have faith in your partner when you're travelling in a risk situation, no matter who the inmate is, can someone please explain to me whether we have escort teams and if we don't, why shouldn't we?

[Page 108]

MR. CLARKE: Thank you very much. One of the things that, I guess to immediately answer your question about escort teams, there's no established escort team process that's in place. As I understand it, on a case-by-case basis, the analysis is done on the potential threat or risk that any offender or inmate may present. As well, one of the things we have in a provincial correctional facility is the frequency of transfer issues that are much higher because of the nature and often times between the facility.

I know when you look at Nova Scotia, I think the statistic for last year is that there were in excess of 34,000 transfers in our provincial correctional service. Now, that's all transfers, including those for medical or other reasons of which that number would be somewhere in the 1,400 or 1,500 number of overall transfers.

Again, there is that matter at hand. However, I will say to the honourable member that I'm looking to see the report that's finalized. I've had concerns raised to me by the NSGEU and the representatives of the No. 480 bargaining unit. This has been something that has been raised, there have been wider issues associated with it. When I have the final report of this incident, I'm sure it will provide us with some of the direction that we will go forward in terms of protocols and procedures into the future.

I will say to my honourable colleague, it is not my desire, nor is it the intention of anyone to have an issue or an incident where the safety of a correctional worker or a member of the public or anyone else in a care facility is put at risk. The question then becomes, what are the needed protocols? There were, when you follow through what I do know of this particular incident, in this case, the arm and leg irons were put on in the facility. There are outstanding questions that, quite frankly, we want to get to the core of. We did respond with regard to ordering new, specifically keyed irons that will eliminate the incidence of someone fleeing or trying to replicate some sort of device to use as a key.

Those are items that I take very seriously. The other issue with regard to the number of individuals, that is something we will look at in general, in terms of all transfers. As well you've highlighted the issue of those that, while they have a certain level of powers that are required to do the transfer, to your point about teaming, to look at where appropriate, again to deal with experienced, long-term employees with new, because you still have to give people experience and if you're not in the field and I do understand what you talked about in terms of the experience that your father and others would have had.

So we're looking again to get to the core of it. One of the things I've tried to do as well is make sure that when we have these things, I'm looking to get this information and make it public. It's very much in the public view, it's very much in the interest of getting to the core of this, so when we do have our report, we're not going to try to hide behind that. There are unfortunate things that have occurred; there were long-standing

[Page 109]

practices that by and large have been very safe. Workers have undertaken their tasks successfully, but I also know that there is no worker, regardless of how many hours they have in, whether they've worked just over 500 hours or 5,000 more hours in doing that, that they themselves want to have a breach occur.

So I am fully cognizant of the fact that we want to make sure we mitigate that. There are the issues that arise with regard to the type of offenders or persons for transfer and we have to look at what threat or risk they possess. I know it relates even further into the issue that has been raised about the type of arming of workers versus a secure nature of an offender. So again to the honourable member, when the report is finalized we will look at that. Again, there is a frequency issue here but I will definitely have them looking at the numbers.

As I say, when you look at overall transfers in our system right now, well in excess of 90 per cent of all transfers that occur, in terms of in custody, are done by the Sheriff Services and that is something, as you would know, that has grown substantially over the last number of years, in terms of the resourcing for that service, the equipment and the like, as well with the transfer issues being less than 10 per cent within the in-custody, in terms of facility to another facility for treatment or to attend an appointment.

MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you. Those are a lot of transfers, it's a lot of risk, but I point out again, based upon my limited experience, Mr. Carvery just wasn't any other inmate. Mr. Carvery had some special circumstances and hopefully when that report comes through we'll be able to look at exactly what transpired and the mistakes that were made.

MR. CLARKE: I can say, Mr. Chairman, to the honourable member, I will acknowledge that Mr. Carvery is not what you would profile as an average inmate, in terms of the situation. This is a very skilled or "knowledgeable of the system" type of person, as you've referenced before an incident from a federal environment where he had been incarcerated. So again, part of the efforts that are ongoing is to apprehend him. One of the things we have to do in the immediate term is to be learning from and responding to all these incidents and that's what we're undertaking to do.

MR. ESTABROOKS: That's certainly a skill that we don't want to pass on to the young people in our community, for sure.

I have a number of - I keep a press clipping file of the minister, how many times I see him in the media, how many times I see his smiling face. I have a picture of you here with the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Health and you're the only one in focus, of course, because underneath it says: Clarke - name youth offenders, February 10, 2008, from the ChronicleHerald.

[Page 110]

Now that headline, of course, can be misleading at times. David Jackson wrote the article, not that David would mislead us in any way, as we well know is a journalist who we work with or who works with us here at Province House, he doesn't write the headlines. I'd like to give the opportunity to the minister to explain where the Justice Minister favours this move after the second charge. Now I understand where the statement was made, it was at your Party's annual meeting. I'm sure there were lots of people supportive of that particular point of view around you at that time, but how serious are you about naming youth offenders?

MR. CLARKE: Well, thank you very much. As you indicate, that was at policy session during the annual convention for the PC Party. Subsequent to that, as a result of that, I articulated it further, as minister, in terms of something that I would pursue at the national table. Subsequent to that I have, and I just wanted to be clear what I was advocating for - and there are different interpretations - is that anyone who was previously convicted of an offence and then was subsequently charged with a new offence, that it was in the public's interest, in my opinion, and shared, from a policy point of view, by the members who are part of the Progressive Conservative Party, something with regard to public awareness and the ability and the right for the public to know that are concerned.

Part of the background of this, again, when we talk about this, this is not about - as we know, most offenders who are youth offend once and it's a single incident and there are processes, such as restorative justice and the normal means of restitution and personal responsibility that come into play.

This is not about trying to go after individuals for misdemeanour matters but it's to deal with the wider aspects of those which we say is a small group of out-of-control youth that find themselves in conflict with the law and are prepared to challenge it constantly. Now we're seeing again, as I mentioned, more aggressive and violent behaviour, so to get to a conviction may mean that someone has had several prior charges prior to even a conviction being provided.

[11:45 a.m.]

Now it has been argued by others that it should be after a violent offence versus any offence they've been convicted of. I did, as I indicated, go to the national table and present this when Minister Nicholson convened us earlier during the winter months, with my colleagues from across Canada. Again, in Canada there's a very broad spectrum of interpretation of how they see even the current Youth Criminal Justice Act, let alone the issue of naming young offenders. It is something that I, as a member of my Party, do ascribe to and will own that statement and, at the same time, I believe the wider public has that concern and if people are going to be repeat offenders, then part of it is to make

[Page 111]

the public aware and they should know if people are continuing on a pattern that suggests they are out of control, they should have that right to know, in my opinion.

MR. ESTABROOKS: Thank you, Mr. Minister, welcome, Mr. Chairman, I've noticed you there.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I've been here for an hour.

MR. ESTABROOKS: I won't comment on that. You know even the comments that you've made over the past few moments, Mr. Minister, reassure me that you're looking at other circumstances because you know as a school teacher, I'm always concerned and I know as parents we're concerned about the fact of course that the huge majority of teenagers are respectful young men and women, you know, they are concerned.

I can tell you about the young girl who got off the bus stop in the middle of the difficulties we were having at one of our junior high schools with bomb scares and threats at the first of the year. Ridgecliff Middle School in Beechville was in the headlines every day and this little girl got off the bus this day - she's not a little girl, she's in Grade 9, a young woman - and said to me, Mr. Estabrooks, I'm so embarrassed for my school. I told her, you know that's the sort of thing you talk about in your class and you bring up with your fellow students, that's the sort of thing that you should say openly, that you're embarrassed with the behaviour of a couple of the students in the school who misbehave to this extent.

It's very important to understand, and I hope the public understands, that young people make mistakes and they're not necessarily the most serious mistakes but they are involved with the court system for one reason or another, but that is their one and only mistake. Many, many young people learn from that mistake because of support from the parents, because of support from the school system, because of support from the legal system. It's the unfortunate other ones that we have to deal with who are regulars in court. So I think it's really important that we clarify the fact that if this is a violent crime, the circumstances perhaps should be looked at quite differently, as opposed to a boy, a young man, who makes two mistakes, not necessarily of a violent nature, but for one reason or another we're going to name him or his family publicly.

MR. CLARKE: If you look at where that is, and it speaks to a wider accountability and interestingly enough, as part of the democracy forums going around the schools, it's interesting to your very point that even the co-chairs of Democracy 250 are hearing from young people who are coming together in groups of about 100, who are engaging and they are identifying themselves not on any other question, they're identifying their concern about youth crime. They are also concerned about its impact on themselves, as a peer group, but also they don't appreciate having that stereotype

[Page 112]

associated with them or how it reflects on them. So it's just an interesting aside on that front.

Also, one of the things that I've done and we continue to advocate with the Government of Canada on many fronts, but specific to dealing with youth who are out of control. Again, I agree and I also believe our Crime Prevention Strategy is very much targeted at the intervention piece and the prevention initiatives that are so necessary.

We're now seeing community groups come forward, just even with the grants program that we have, just before the last fiscal we were able to have over $400,000 in different initiatives. I can think of a recent one where a community came forward. The mayor wrote and said, we have the facility, a community drop-in centre, it's available, but other than basketball and I think it was floor hockey, or something to that effect, it was very limited, and they came up with a list of a number of things that would enable them to engage other young people on the weekend nights and week nights and very positive activities that start catching a whole group of other people. So a list that came in with less than $5,000 of an ask, encompassed the ability to deal with a few hundred children in a proactive way with existing volunteers.

The Crime Prevention Strategy, I think, is working out there. I have done some research with regard to the wider public opinion around the youth issues of out of control. We do want to focus on that and we do want to discourage it. I do agree, it's not about vilifying any young offenders, it's not about taking someone who makes a mistake. We were all young, that is not what this is about.

We are now seeing as well, and I have concurred, even just in public opinion that I've been able to assess, and some research we have, and I'll be able to bring that forward and show you some of the public opinion, the public is very much wanting to see that in violent crimes that those people are named, much more than people who are just repeat offenders. I have to look at where the public opinion is in relation to some concerns, but again, we can look to that, address it, but one of the things we have to do is that if people are going to be, regardless of age and that's the thing, with adult offenders we expect people to be aware of who they are, that are out of control and who have been repeat offenders. If there is a young offender who has been violent in their actions and is a repeat offender, I think the wider public needs to be able to be aware of that and at least protect themselves in terms of knowledge, in terms of whether that's locking their doors, their cars, or whatever the case may be.

I don't want to suggest in any way, shape or form do I think it's out there with an assault on youth with regard to this, but, again, even younger people are tired of it. We hear about it as well just in terms of a young response with bullying in schools, we see it with the positive things that youth, themselves, are taking on and I think there is a

[Page 113]

reverse peer pressure that's occurring which is a very great and a phenomenal thing that has occurred.

As we go forward, in advocating, when I look at the Nunn Commission and you know there is now Bill C-25 before the House of Commons, which we believe is the next step with regard to enacting some of the Nunn Commission in response to the tragic death of Theresa McAvoy, when you look at the circumstances that surrounded that and the findings that were there. There is the subsequent private member's bill that was brought forward by MP, Geoff Regan, that looks to encompass more of that and I welcome that as well. What I've indicated to the member is that we want to move on Bill C-25 which deals with pre-trial detention and allows for a denunciation and deterrence in sentencing. So very much to the point that you raise is that those who are out of control, there's an ability to denounce certain activity and to put it into effect in the sentencing and also to deal with pre-trial detention and that is if someone is showing that pattern and there is a harm and a potential of re-offending, they can be held for pre-trial detention. So I think that's a next step.

I do welcome MP Regan's bill but I also know the process right now, there are certain paralyses in the Justice Committee. While Bill C-25 in itself has cleared second reading, it is held up in committee at this point. I know Bill C-27 is a bill ahead of it that has procedurally held up Bill C-25, I've heard there are some wranglings with that, while we would like to see it held up. So from Bill C-25 and Bill C-27, C-525 with regard to the bill that MP Regan has brought forward, I am supportive of that but I'm also recognizing we need to look at how we get some co-operation to move forward on what is there.

The one thing about Bill C-25 that I have comfort in is that it has been discussed at the national table with all provinces and territories. I was at two federal-provincial-territorial meetings where this has come up where there has been fine-tuning as a result of concerns that were raised because it's not just the House of Commons making any changes to a federal piece of legislation, it's how the provinces respond. So on Bill C-25, to get consensus at a national table bill I think to go to the core of dealing with the out-of-control aspect, that's a major step forward. Now, that's something I'm trying to get brought to the national table, that this has just not come out of the blue. Can you imagine if we put all the Nunn recommendations in, what type of dialogue we would have to have at the national level to get other provinces and territories to support it, but I do agree with you and I don't want to leave any impression that I'm looking at the person who makes an unfortunate but nonetheless mistake in their youth and commit a crime.

MR. ESTABROOKS: I appreciate your comments. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining - 10 minutes? Thank you.

[Page 114]

In the middle of the Cecil Clarke file, if I may use your name here at committee, and all the pictures that are in focus of you making these statements over the past number of months, I have one of Stockwell Day. I'm sure you're there at the announcement, I was there, but they didn't include you this time.

MR. CLARKE: I would have been just slightly to the right of that . . .

MR. ESTABROOKS: Is it possible to be to the right of Stockwell Day, but let's not go down that road. The headline again, this time the article is written by Amy Smith, Ottawa sets $1.9 million to fight gangs in HRM. Now, if you want to scare parents, all you have got to do is talk gangs. I can tell you from first-hand experience they are here, perhaps not in the high-profile role that we might hear of in other cities but there are gangs of criminals, young and old, and they're operating in the HRM. What is the role of the provincial Department of Justice in this particular initiative from the federal minister?

MR. CLARKE: Well, first and foremost we welcome those dollars to deal with some of the impacts of crime. As I indicated, we are trying to take a very broadly based approach because there are a number of areas where there's complication. However, organized crime and thus through organized crime efforts and I guess enticements, then you start to have in some cases the formulation of gangs and, as you say, it may be not as sophisticated as in some areas but the pattern is disturbing and alarming and something we want to deter.

Part of the funding approach by the federal government was to deal with a community-based initiative, working with in this case the Halifax Regional Municipality, and with the policing services as they've identified neighbourhoods where there are challenges and, more importantly, where they see youth at risk of getting into these patterns and then becoming part of what would be deemed a gang related activity and trying to look at alternate forms of programming that can help in those very localized areas that are specific where the police are trying to work, give them some resources to do that programming, work with the local resource officers. Again, it is something we are very concerned about to the point that on a larger scale, we have been trying to do significant effort to do with organized crime and cracking down on the impacts of organized crime within our communities.

One of the things, ironically, that has been discussed federally, I know Minister Baker, when he was a minister, went to Ottawa over, I do believe, the car theft issue. Off that car theft issue, now there is new federal legislation that I think encompasses, a week and a half ago, there was federal legislation to deal with auto theft. Part of that becomes part of that pattern with regard to where gangs are and who is engaged because oftentimes, whether it is drug-related activity and, of course, organized crime has many tentacles, as you know, but a lot of these gangs cluster at a lower tier of that organized

[Page 115]

effort and often they are just the pawns in a bigger game and are dispensable from those who are at a much higher tier and they are often oblivious to that and don't recognize how vulnerable they really are and they feel that the strength or the empowerment, or whatever, comes from being involved in this activity and oftentimes it is quick money and the rush that provides and accesses versus what they normally would have. However, it is something that is of a grave concern.

So that is why when we talk about our policing efforts, you will notice recently there has been a good series of positive announcements of interventions by police that affect organized crime and the drug trade and its impact. I think a lot of youth . . .

MR. ESTABROOKS: Particularly in Cape Breton.

MR. CLARKE: Particularly in Cape Breton, but if you look at the South Shore, if you look here in the HRM, the extra police - our commitment, the Boots to the Streets but also our extra commitment with working through the 250 this year. With approval of the budget, we will add another 70 officers. What they are collectively able to do with those resources is to be able to apply the time and effort, do the extra investigations, get to that next tier. The things that we talked about just previously, some of those things that would be considered to be even maybe - and not to diminish them - but more of nuisance crimes, are items that now can be dealt with in a much more comprehensive network.

[12:00 noon]

So what we have done as well, through our Crime Prevention Strategy, in this case they were targeting gangs. In fact, to your point, Halifax has been identified as having organized groups with the intent of illegal activity and undertaking patterns, again, where it is not helpful and they will prey on the vulnerable. We are saying how do we, in those neighbourhoods, help out. That is what we are going to hopefully achieve.

This, as well, that $1.9 million is intended as a pilot to see what can be done. It isn't a fix. It is not the solution but it is recognizing there is an issue and a circumstance that needs to be addressed.

MR. ESTABROOKS: I realize I just have a few more moments and before I turn the time over to my Liberal colleague, I want to point out that I have attended the mayor's round table. You hear Stockwell Day making comments, initiatives from our own provincial government. Everybody seems to be sticking a fork in the issue but I wonder who is actually in charge of the whole menu. If that is the wrong analogy, I hope you know where I am going. It seems to me, particularly when I look at the mayor's round table, and I know you probably have officials who attend there or interested citizens who attend there, it seems to me that everybody is taking a shot at reviewing the issues when it comes to crime. I would hope there would be a great deal more

[Page 116]

coordination, particularly between the municipal levels, the provincial levels and, of course, Mr. Day's announcement that money has been made available. It is something that we want to reciprocate and take good, positive reaction to.

Does the Department of Justice actually have any interaction with HRM and his round table as we wait for this infamous report that is now how many months late, but that is another topic? Does the Department of Justice have any role in the mayor's round table?

MR. CLARKE: We have been involved with that round table process, Bill, and I attended and presented to that round table at city hall in the early days of my involvement with the portfolio, as well as dealing with Chief Beazley and his officials, the RCMP, as well as looking at some of the joint initiatives. That's the other aspect of adding police officers, is adding resources as well to deal with some of the specific areas that we are being asked to address. We've seen that last year here in the HRM, I know the chief has recognized some key improvements as a result of the additional officers. Last year there were 23 police officers added to the Halifax Regional Police and 15 to the RCMP service in Halifax.

It was a significant add-on and there were some issues theat came up about how to do some community or neighbourhood-based policing initiatives. I know Uniacke Square was one of those areas that was identified to be proactive on.

I've indicated that once the report comes back, in terms of the round table on violence, I had volunteered and offered when I was there to go back and look at it, examine it and go back as minister to talk about where we go with next steps. We want to look at what is coming and what the public have said, what our initiatives have been, what we've been planning to go forward as we add even more police officers and resources, but also our program aspect with the Crime Prevention Strategy.

When we undertake certain initiatives, as you know, in the budget is money for a mental health court and that's a whole other area we end up discussing as well. But a number of things to try and respond to situations that have presented themselves. I think we are on the right course and I have indicated that what comes out of that round table I will come back as minister and respond.

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

The honourable member for Richmond. You have until 1:04 p.m.

MR. MICHEL SAMSON: I want to start off, I regret I did miss the minister's opening comments and Mr. Estabrooks' comments. The joys of technology gives me the ability to have been made aware of some of those comments.

[Page 117]

Minister, do you accept the notion of ministerial responsibility under our British parliamentary system that we have here in Nova Scotia?

MR. CLARKE: I do.

MR. SAMSON: Okay. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, I believe I've heard you on several occasions make the statement - most recently on ATV News - I believe you said, as Minister of Justice, the buck stops with me. Am I correct in that statement, have I not heard you say that?

MR. CLARKE: The statement, as you would know, that flowed from that was indicating that the responsibility and accountability for a matter stopped at one of the senior managers and my indication is, no, it stops with me, the buck stops with me in terms of being responsible for the Justice portfolio.

MR. SAMSON: That's right and I ask you that and I fully agree with that, having been a Minister of the Crown previously, I certainly accepted that as well. That's the way our whole system works. Previously, for example, when Leroy Legere was the Minister of Labour, he was forced to accept responsibility for the Westray disaster. We all know that Leroy Legere was not a labour inspector and he did not go down in the Westray mine, but at the end of the day he was expected to accept responsibility for the tragedy that took place.

I look at John Fraser, for example, when he was the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and he was forced to accept responsibility for the tainted tuna scandal. To my knowledge, I don't believe that Mr. Fraser was an inspector of tuna while he was Minister of Fisheries. But, that is the way our system works.

When I, as a member of the Legislature, criticize the Minister of Justice for what has taken place in his department, I believe that is the appropriate place to give the criticism because at the end of the day, whatever has happened, the Minister of Justice must react and make the changes necessary and to take cheap shots at civil servants, I believe, is completely inappropriate in our system.

Mr. Minister, to Mr. Estabrooks, I will not hesitate to hold ministers accountable when there are problems that exist in their department and I find it most interesting that Mr. Estabrooks would take a cheap shot at me for trying to hold you responsible for what took place in your department and some of those deficiencies, yet have to sit here and hear him thanking Mr. Honsberger for his help today after publicly calling on him to be fired a mere few weeks ago. I find that unfortunate and just hope that maybe after 10 years of being elected, Mr. Estabrooks will take some time to educate himself a bit more on the way our parliamentary system works because at the end of the day, civil servants can only work with what they are given to work with.

[Page 118]

It is you, Mr. Minister, who must seek the necessary funding, the necessary tools and the necessary equipment for your department to function properly and the fact that you did publicly say that you accept responsibility for what takes place in your department, I believe, was the responsible answer and I believe it is our role, as elected officials through this process, to hold you responsible for what takes place in your department and to seek the changes from you because, ultimately, you are the one who will sit at the Cabinet Table, you are the one who is presenting this budget here today, not the hard-working men and women of your department.

So, with that, after having corrected that matter, Mr. Minister, allow me now to proceed with some of the questions and what better way to start off with than with the Carvery matter. First of all, could you indicate whether your department had any previous experiences where inmates, under your control and care, had been able to fully escape or even partially escape from these leg irons in the past.

MR. CLARKE: Mr. Chairman, through you to the honourable member for Richmond, I do know with regard to a hospital transfer, the case in point and we can go further, as I understand that in the last 14 years, with over 20,000 transfers that have been done, Mr. Carvery's is the first with regard to an in-custody with staff issue. I do know, further, in October 2005, there would have been an instance where someone did leave a medical facility once they were in as a patient in the facility.

MR. SAMSON: Did your department have any knowledge or is it aware as to whether these specific leg irons have been problematic in any other Canadian jurisdictions or any other jurisdictions that you may have been aware of?

MR. CLARKE: What I understand is it was not brought forward as an issue of concern from another jurisdiction or evidence in another jurisdiction with regard to the leg irons that have been traditionally used.

MR. SAMSON: You have purchased new leg irons. Is that not correct?

MR. CLARKE: Yes, we have purchased new ones.

MR. SAMSON: How many have you purchased?

MR. CLARKE: There are eight sets of new ones.

MR. SAMSON: And where are they?

MR. CLARKE: They are distributed among the five facilities, so every facility would have at least one and I suspect central Nova Scotia would have the balance.

[Page 119]

MR. SAMSON: Okay. Are there any of the old leg irons still in circulation?

MR. CLARKE: As of this point, the new cuffs are being used. The leg irons are still the standard leg irons at this point.

MR. SAMSON: So it is new handcuffs but not new leg irons. Is that what I understand?

MR. CLARKE: Yes, there are new sets of cuffs but there are not new . . .

MR. SAMSON: Not new leg irons.

MR. CLARKE: At this point.

MR. SAMSON: But I thought it was the leg irons he got out of first.

MR. CLARKE: It is my understanding that the new cuffs have a lock box that are on them and they also have new waist restraints and the leg iron itself, and just with that is the standard leg iron as well.

MR. SAMSON: Okay, just so I'm clear here, the leg irons from which Mr. Carvery escaped, they are still the same leg irons that are being used here in Nova Scotia's correctional facilities.

MR. CLARKE: Yes, they're the same ones that are used here in North America.

MR. SAMSON: So you bought new handcuffs but not new leg irons, new leg restraints?

MR. CLARKE: It's my understanding from our officials that the issue of getting out is that the new cuffs, and maybe we can have a demonstration at some point for you . . .

MR. SAMSON: We'll put them on you first.

MR. CLARKE: If you'd like to have a viewing of how they work, we can arrange for that, as you know.

MR. SAMSON: That's fine, that's fine. I do my best to avoid going anywhere near any handcuffs. The leg irons is what I understand he got out of, that the handcuffs were secondary. When he escaped it wasn't the handcuffs that he was free from, it was the actual leg irons. Do I have that wrong or is that not what happened?

[Page 120]

MR. CLARKE: He got out of both.

MR. SAMSON: But the handcuffs were subsequent. When he did flee, he was still handcuffed when he fled the van, yet he had broken free from the leg irons?

MR. CLARKE: Well as I indicated to Mr. Estabrooks before, we will have by next week the report coming back with regard to the review and the investigation on the incident. In this particular case he did get out of both; the leg irons first and then subsequent to that, the handcuffs.

[12:15 p.m.]

Again, part of the other thing that's being looked at is the waist restraint. The waist restraint would be a belt around which the handcuffs are put onto, in addition, so there won't be an ability to move the hands to get to the leg restraints at that point.

MR. SAMSON: Okay, obviously I must be the one who is confused because the way I understood it was that it was new leg irons that had been purchased, not new handcuffs, because he got out of the leg irons. I don't know how much you can answer about this but when you found the handcuffs, had they been jimmied open or were they actually cut - which one was it?

MR. CLARKE: We'll have the report next week and I'll provide that. I don't have the full report with regard to the Carvery incident.

MR. SAMSON: Okay, because you've got a couple of reports on the go here, so which one are you referring to next week? Which one is that one?

MR. CLARKE: The Carvery.

MR. SAMSON: And who is doing that report?

MR. CLARKE: That's an internal report with regard to the incident, the workers, the captain and the finding of recommendations coming out of that. So I'll be able to give you detail on that next week.

MR. SAMSON: And you're going to be fully disclosing that report?

MR. CLARKE: I plan to action, and as I indicated previously as well, there is no desire to try to paper over an incident like this because there is, in fact, a great desire to make sure that we mitigate this occurring again, that's what we're attempting to do.

[Page 121]

I will clarify it for the honourable member and I will indicate and accept myself that I have said before about new irons as well being keyed. So again, it is the handcuffs and I will clarify that if I've indicated that it was the leg irons as well, then I would have left that impression. So again, just to be clear for your questioning, in terms of if you're confused about that then I might have left that.

MR. SAMSON: Well I do remain a bit - I don't know if I would say confused - but a bit puzzled in that if the leg irons have been proven to be able to be jimmied open, even though you've bought new handcuffs, what is to prevent another inmate in a transfer from being able to once again open up the leg irons and make a similar escape, especially now that there is knowledge throughout Nova Scotia that these leg irons, one way or another, can be jimmied open. I don't know how but obviously that knowledge is out there.

I'm puzzled as to why you would not ensure that the leg irons would be replaced as well and why you're still continuing to use the same ones that have proven to be faulty.

MR. CLARKE: One of the things, as was indicated, of course the handcuffs with the individual keying lock, with the waist restraints and part of what will come forward is the issue of where the positioning of the officer is and is required to be in a transfer, in terms of the monitoring and the supervision of the individual. It is deemed to be, by all standards, that with those protocols and I guess in this case it is an issue as well to deal with the protocols and procedures associated with that transfer, and that is something that the investigation around that will provide in the report and recommendation.

Again, that will be something that we will be able to detail, as I say, in a week's time.

MR. SAMSON: Okay, so new handcuffs, no new leg irons and no waist restraints, as of yet, is that correct?

MR. CLARKE: Yes, they are using waist restraints.

MR. SAMSON: You do have the waist restraints?

MR. CLARKE: Yes.

MR. SAMSOM: And the waist restraints, all they do is actually keep your hands closer to your body so it makes it a lot harder to move, apparently.

MR. CLARKE: Yes, correct.

[Page 122]

MR. SAMSON: When you're transferring an inmate, is one of the correctional officers, as part of the transfer, expected to be in the back of the vehicle with the inmate?

MR. CLARKE: The vehicle in question this time it was a Tahoe. It was a secure vehicle, a Tahoe vehicle, which would have had a glass partition that would have been in place. It's my understanding that the two officers were in the cab of that vehicle. One of the things that will come forward is with regard to having an officer who would be in the secure area as well, supervising the inmate in transfer.

MR. SAMSON: So you're expecting that in the recommendations next week?

MR. CLARKE: Yes.

MR. SAMSON: So that's a review of what took place, plus you're going to have some recommendations coming out of that?

MR. CLARKE: Yes.

MR. SAMSON: Okay, but that's strictly internal.

MR. CLARKE: That's correct.

MR. SAMSON: Okay, but now on the issue of providing the correctional officers with any form of weapon and that, you've sent that out to some sort of study or something, haven't you?

MR. CLARKE: We've, as I indicated, initiated an external audit with regard to it, and prior to undertaking the audit, there were the matters that were being raised and there were concerns that were raised by the NSGEU and I had a meeting with representatives, with their president, but also representatives from Local 480, all the facilities were there. There were, I think, a dozen individuals who were in a meeting with me.

What I did address at that time is that during the audit process, that their concern would be part of that, that was added into the terms of reference for the audit, as an external audit, that they would also have an opportunity to meet, that the auditors, in starting their process, that they would meet separately, both with management, as well as have a separate meeting for gaining a baseline information understanding of operational and other management concerns with the union as well. So they would be given that as an independent opportunity for them to provide fully any of the operational or management concerns that they would have, and that is part of the audit process that has been initiated.

[Page 123]

MR. SAMSON: Who is doing the audit?

MR. CLARKE: Deloitte is the firm that is doing that and the individual - the key consultant on that is Saad Rafi. He is the former Assistant Deputy Minister of Corrections for the Province of Ontario.

MR. SAMSON: And when do you expect that report to be completed?

MR. CLARKE: They indicated, and we were looking at a timeline between three to six months. The issue with regard to the timing, it is my hope that we would have that report within a three-month time frame. However, part of the audit process is to make sure that there are site visits to all five facilities that we have and operate, as well, and part of this is to look, as we go forward with planning for two new facilities and subsequently with any upgrade of the Cape Breton Correctional Facility in the future. It was important that they have those site visits to understand the concerns that are being raised because we have new, mid-life and older infrastructure that is being assessed.

MR. SAMSON: How much do you expect this audit to cost?

MR. CLARKE: I would expect at least $200,000.

MR. SAMSON: And is that included in your budget?

MR. CLARKE: Yes, it is.

MR. SAMSON: Where is that included in the budget?

MR. CLARKE: It would be under our Finance and Administration budget for the department.

MR. SAMSON: You mentioned about correctional facilities and that leads me into another topic I wanted to speak of. Mr. Minister, you would have been part of the Hamm Government in 2001, I believe, you had been elected by then, hadn't you?

MR. CLARKE: Yes, I had.

MR. SAMSON: You would have been part of the government that decided to close jails in Guysborough, Lunenburg, Truro and Kings. The decision there meant the total loss of 138 beds from correctional services in Nova Scotia. You would be aware as well that the 1999, 2003, 2006 election campaigns included a significant portion of the Progressive Conservative Party platform dedicated to crime and justice issues and getting tougher on crime matters and safer streets was one of the key words used in, I believe,

[Page 124]

all three of those campaigns. Is it your position today that at no time did your government think you were going to need to build new facilities to make up for that loss of beds?

The Burnside facility was well underway before the Hamm Government came in and the Yarmouth facility was just a replacement of an existing facility. At what point did your government finally realize that there was going to be a shortage of available beds in jails throughout Nova Scotia?

MR. CLARKE: As you know, with the closure of other facilities came, as you've indicated, the Central Nova Scotia facility opening up. As well, what we've seen over the last 10 years but specifically in the last few years is the remand population has gone up substantially and in some cases, up to 60 per cent of the inmate population is on a remand basis as of today. Previously, we have not had the level of remands that we've experienced, especially in the last few years, so, again, in the go forward that would have been there and actually in the best practice of the day, it was facilities that were constructed at that point with one bed per cell, versus the normal standard of two beds per cell.

MR. SAMSON: That's interesting because I remember when the Yarmouth facility opened, at no point during the announcements do I recall the minister of the day or anyone else in government saying, it's 36 beds today but just keep in mind that we built it knowing that we can put double the occupancy in this jail, so we're preparing for the future and here's what we have in mind. Had you said that, then your new plan, I would say, well they kind of let us know when they built the facility that this is what they were looking at. You didn't do that which leaves me very suspicious that that was never your intention when that new facility was built.

This is a measure that has been put in place because of the fact your government got caught not having the proper amount of beds in our correctional facilities. Again, it's one thing to be caught in a problem like that that was not of your own creation, but in this case, Mr. Minister, it's one thing to blame the remand issue, but you have to accept responsibility that it was your government that eliminated 138 cells from the Nova Scotia system. Remand is one thing but you are the author of your own misfortune in a way here.

I heard all of the reasons why these facilities were closed and I'm sure the member for Kings North would be able to tell us why his facility was closed, but just the same, I'm at a loss during all this, for a Party that campaigned so strongly on justice that there wasn't a stronger focus on corrections and preparing for that. Hearing the excuse that has come out about remand and everything else, I must say does ring a little hollow because when we did have the opportunity to have the deputy minister and Mr. Honsberger in front of the Public Accounts Committee, one of the questions I put was at what point did Mr. Honsberger start indicating to the government and to the Minister

[Page 125]

of Justice that there was going to be a need very shortly for new facilities in Nova Scotia and the answer was, two years ago.

So it is 2008. You started being told in 2006. Now I realize you weren't the minister back then but you were a member of government, although I guess the Speaker, I am not sure what role you played with Cabinet or what knowledge you had, and maybe you can answer that for us. But obviously the government was aware up to two years ago that there was a need for new facilities. Unfortunately, if I am not mistaken, I don't see anywhere in your budget where you are building new facilities this fiscal year. So my question is, why did you not heed to Mr. Honsberger's concerns which have proven out to be correct, that there was a need for new correctional facilities in Nova Scotia?

MR. CLARKE: Well, on a clarification point, any time that I served as Speaker, I would have been aware of things only when the House wasn't sitting in the due course of caucus as opposed to Cabinet, which is a totally autonomous process, as you know.

However, with regard to facilities, as we go forward, we do recognize that there is the capacity within the space that is available to accommodate additional inmate population, that the use of portable beds, and I have seen these cells and I have seen the units. I also recognize that any of the planning that was done on a best practice model, I don't want to suggest that was in any way a flaw but we have realities and we have the capacity to handle the population within our infrastructure.

But as we go forward, and to your point, as we look at replacing the Cumberland and the Antigonish facilities, that review is being done right now. Efforts are ongoing with Ottawa to try to advance infrastructure to meet these needs but I can say that as the two facilities for Cumberland and Antigonish Counties come under the planning review and for funding, that they will be two beds per cell design and build. The other thing, it is my understanding, as well, that within the Yarmouth facility there is an additional capacity that it could be added on, an additional pod, I believe, that could be built in terms of the design. As well, when I toured Burnside, in terms of future need, there is an ability to add on capacity in Burnside, aside from any renovation considerations that may be undertaken.

[12:30 p.m.]

So, again, I recognize that we do have increased numbers. I am not suggesting that we do anything but accommodate those numbers and we have the ability to do that. We are adding resource. We put a plan in place that will deal with the Yarmouth facility, that will go from 38 to 76 beds and the ability to do that. What will occur there is people who are on a sentence of two years minus a day, that those inmates would be the primary population there, other than regional remand capacity. Not suggesting that we would have full capacity but the ability to accommodate those numbers.

[Page 126]

We have put the money in place within this budget process for $1 million for the Yarmouth facility. That will add, in addition, 20 extra staff that we brought into place to serve that facility, as I committed we would make sure. Any adjustments will provide the necessary staffing levels that are appropriate. An additional $0.5 million has been allocated in the budget to deal with incremental demand that would be at the Burnside facility and also noting that we are trying to have more of a sentence population within the Yarmouth facility to allow for the ability to deal with the remand pressures that we are experiencing.

MR. SAMSON: How many additional staff at the Burnside facility?

MR. CLARKE: At Burnside, this time, there is one additional staff member per every incremental 20 inmates and, additionally, any requirement for part-time staff who would be required. I have, whether I have been in facilities meeting with officials or staff, I've indicated to the union representatives that I will make sure that we will have the appropriate staff complement necessary to ensure the effective and safe operation of those facilities.

MR. SAMSON: I guess time will tell on that. I'm curious, you made a comment and you said that when the new Antigonish facility, and I believe the Central Nova facility, when these new facilities will be constructed, you said they will be constructed on a double cell basis.

MR. CLARKE: Two beds per cell.

MR. SAMSON: Two beds per cell. Will those cells be the same size as the current cells that are at the Yarmouth and Burnside facilities?

MR. CLARKE: Yes, they will.

MR. SAMSON: So they're exact same proportion, no difference at all?

MR. CLARKE: There may be . . .

MR. SAMSON: You'll have two fixed beds in the same size as the single cell that you have at Yarmouth and Burnside right now?

MR. CLARKE: The square footage of a cell right now is 80 square feet. What will occur, the new cells will be built and designed on the same 80 square feet, but there may be the layout, interior of the cell, will shift, but the total square footage will not.

MR. SAMSON: The layout will shift. I take it the washroom facilities will be a bit more strategically placed than what they are currently. My understanding is with this

[Page 127]

portable bed that one has to almost walk over another person to be able to reach that so I'm assuming that's one of the changes that would be made.

MR. CLARKE: That wouldn't be the case. I've been on site to look at the way the two beds per cell will go in. If you actually look at more of an 80 square foot kind of a rectangular set up, there is the cell door to the left of that that moves over to the right. You would proceed in, there is a portable bed that is on the floor to the left. There is a fixed bed that is against the back wall that goes from the left to the right of that. As soon as you go in the door, there is the sink and toilet unit and then there are a couple of shelves there that are used for personal effects and the like that are in the room. You don't have to climb over anyone to go to the washroom.

MR. SAMSON: Okay. You said $1.5 million, I believe you said additional, money would be provided to Yarmouth and Burnside. Is this additional funding to corrections or is it coming from the same corrections envelope?

MR. CLARKE: No, it's additional, it's new budget dollars in this 2008-09 budget that was just presented by Minister Baker for these two facilities.

MR. SAMSON: Okay. Has there been a decrease in the funding for the Antigonish facility this year over last year?

MR. CLARKE: Just one moment, I'll get that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Just, if I may, before you answer that question, I'm a little confused about the time and I don't want to trespass on your time here. We are either adjourning at 12:40 p.m. or 1:04 p.m. - which one is it, do we know?

MR. CLARKE: It's 1:04 p.m.

MR. SAMSON: I think it's 1:04 p.m.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Thank you.

MR. CLARKE: Antigonish, from last year to this year will go up approximately $90,000.

MR. SAMSON: So there has been an increase over last year of $9,000 for Antigonish?

MR. CLARKE: No, $90,000.

[Page 128]

MR. SAMSON: What about the Cape Breton Correctional Facility - what's the budget last year to this year?

MR. CLARKE: Cape Breton will have gone up an additional $200,000.

MR. SAMSON: Okay. So, this $1.5 million then is additional to the Department of Justice that you didn't have before, or is it taken from other areas within the Department of Justice?

MR. CLARKE: It's new dollars.

MR. SAMSON: It is new dollars. Okay.

MR. CLARKE: Just for clarification, I want to be clear, that is on top of any other operational increases as you've indicated for other facilities. This is specifically to deal with two areas - Yarmouth and Central Nova Scotia. So, it was added on and added in because I would note, as I'd look for the contingency plan for this, one of the things that became a requirement was a need to have it articulated in the budget because otherwise, to come out with this plan, if it hadn't been there, it would have then been subject to appropriate criticism. So I factored in the dollars with the Minister of Finance.

MR. SAMSON: Is there any money allocated in this year's budget towards the construction of new correctional facilities in Nova Scotia?

MR. CLARKE: The Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal is working on the design elements. So in terms of the design work there is, between both those facilities, an allocation allowed. It is a six- to eight-month process, however, there is $1.2 million allocated for the design work for the new facilities.

MR. SAMSON: So two years ago Mr. Honsberger started to tell you that you needed new correctional facilities in Nova Scotia, or at least replace two of the existing facilities. Today the budget talks about $1.2 million for some design work. When I did ask Mr. Honsberger at Public Accounts Committee his best guess, if construction was approved today, which was a few weeks ago, what was the best case scenario, I believe his answer, quite honestly, was two years.

You haven't done the design work yet, which I assumed had been done. Is it your position today that it is not May 2, 2008, that it is realistic to expect that we could have two new, larger correctional facilities built in Nova Scotia by May 2, 2010?

MR. CLARKE: There are Class D estimates in place with regard to the design work, so a lot of the preliminary work has been done. This is moving forward with the

[Page 129]

process, in terms of what would be tendered to Class A, for tender-ready documents. So in terms of all the initial design and components that were there.

The other thing is building on; the Burnside facility was the blueprint upon which the design elements of Yarmouth were incorporated. They were looking at where and how one would make design improvements on that and that has been an operational basis and any of those other elements would be put into the two new facilities as well. So it's not that there are not plans or layouts and square footages required in terms of the costing of that, the money that's in place is to move with the detailed design work. At the same time, as you know, the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal is having both of those facilities examined as part of the strategic infrastructure partnership review at this time.

MR. SAMSON: As Minister of Justice and Attorney General, are you prepared to commit today that by May 2, 2010, we will have two new correctional facilities built and operational in Nova Scotia?

MR. CLARKE: We will commit to building them as soon as we possibly can but you and I know that would not be appropriate for me to make that commitment, nor will I, quite frankly, make such a commitment. What I can say is that I've met with Minister Stockwell Day and Minister Rob Nicholson and we are presenting to them to try and accelerate construction of that but also deal with other justice system delivery advancements we're trying to make for this province and garner additional support to be able to do that. Part of what we face in Justice for any tangible capital asset is the fact that, as you know, on the floor of the Legislature there are any number of priorities for the dollars we have available to us.

Again, we are responding, as we have items brought to our attention, but as far as the inmate population management, there is a plan that has been put in place, is resourced for the near term and as soon as we can proceed with new facilities, we will.

MR. SAMSON: Were you a member of Cabinet back in 2001 when the four correctional facilities were closed by the Hamm Government?

MR. CLARKE: No, I wasn't.

MR. SAMSON: You were not, all right. I could ask your colleague next to me here because he would have been, but we'll save that for another day.

I want to ask about the electronic monitoring program that we have here in Nova Scotia. Who is operating that program for us right now?

[Page 130]

MR. CLARKE: The firm's name is Gentech and that contract is actually for the monitoring and maintenance of that. It is over a three-year period, the value is approximately $1.2 million, if I recall my stats on that. There was a shift, it had been Mammoth Communications. There were some persistent issues that kept occurring on the technical side that were not being resolved, thus the move over to Gentech. That would have been done probably in the late Fall of 2007.

MR. SAMSON: How much was paid to this first company you mentioned?

MR. CLARKE: Let me find out. So the year ended March 31, 2007, it had been $57,000.

MR. SAMSON: Now what is Gentech? Where are they? Where do we find them, where are they located?

MR. CLARKE: They're based in British Columbia.

MR. SAMSON: Do they have a presence here in Nova Scotia?

MR. CLARKE: They would not have a presence here in Nova Scotia, however, they are the signature provider service, but we did try to have that delivered locally from Nova Scotia and we did not meet with the success we had hoped for.

[12:45 p.m.]

MR. SAMSON: How many inmates - or with electronic monitoring, I guess they're not inmates, obviously - how many Nova Scotians are currently under this electronic monitoring program?

MR. CLARKE: We have 45 as of now. There is an additional $125,000 in the budget for this year for expanding that. One of the areas we will be piloting is part of the youth supervision as well.

MR. SAMSON: So these 45, these are the ankle bracelets, are they?

MR. CLARKE: That's correct.

MR. SAMSON: Okay, so this is a company in British Columbia that is monitoring these 45 individuals. How do you keep track of them? Do they send you a daily report, or do you just call and ask when you want to? How does this work?

[Page 131]

MR. CLARKE: As you can appreciate, what it is, it is automated, it is GPS and so it is a tracking device that is done digitally and electronically with regard to monitoring.

MR. SAMSON: To your knowledge, have there been any incidents where these 45 people being monitored have breached their terms and conditions or gotten into any other trouble?

MR. CLARKE: I do know there was one individual who did manage to somehow get their foot out of one of the devices, if I'm not mistaken. There was an individual but they didn't go anywhere but somehow, whether it was just the scenario in place but the person did manage to get out of the device that was there. I don't know enough about the individual in question. Anyway, it was detected by the staff and then followed up on.

MR. SAMSON: The extra $125,000 that you mentioned that you've budgeted for this, what is that meant to do?

MR. CLARKE: That will make now up to 80 units available.

MR. SAMSON: It will make 80 units available. Now when you say 80 units, the cost of operating those units is rolled in . . .

MR. CLARKE: That's going from 45 to 80. It will increase it an additional 35. It will take it from 45 to 80 units that will be available for . . .

MR. SAMSON: So it's an additional 35 units?

MR. CLARKE: Correct.

MR. SAMSON: Okay. When you first announced this program, how many individuals did you intend to actually have being monitored by the system?

MR. CLARKE: Between 75 and 100.

MR. SAMSON: Between 75 and 100. So this will bring you up to 80. How quickly do you expect these 35 additional units to be in use?

MR. CLARKE: That will be brought up into that over the course of the next year. Again, part of that is, as I mentioned, looking at piloting it with regard to youth. It is something new. The other thing with ankle bracelets, it is a tool. It isn't a solution. Where there was the one breach, and subsequent to that, there have been no others, and I guess part of it is looking at the actual application of the device but this is with regard to complying with conditions. So over the course of this year, the fact that 45 are in use,

[Page 132]

I would think that we would have that up, I can't say at what volume or rate they would do that. We have an official staff member who oversees that program.

MR. SAMSON: Can you tell me, have you broken down the cost per unit on a yearly basis?

MR. CLARKE: I don't have that figure but we can get it for you and provide it to you. We will be back, I know, on Monday, so I can get you a number.

MR. SAMSON: You have mentioned that you do have someone in the department who monitors this program. Who is that individual?

MR. CLARKE: That would be Brian MacDougall from the Sydney office.

MR. SAMSON: So he is the only individual who is working on this.

MR. CLARKE: So he works with his associated colleagues but he is in charge of that particular component.

MR. SAMSON: So that is the only staff member that you have dealing with this designated program, as far as the administration of the program.

MR. CLARKE: Yes.

MR. SAMSON: Is it your intention to continue using this program into the future?

MR. CLARKE: Yes, it is. We have indicated, not only with this technology, and again, as I say, it is a tool. There also was the piloting and use of the voice verification technology with regard to compliance with conditions. We are looking at a mix of use of technology to help with monitoring and enforcement of conditions because we have heard concerns that get raised about people being non-compliant. This does help. As I indicated, with the person in question who did manage to remove a bracelet or get free of that bracelet, it was the fact that the staff noticed it hadn't moved and went in and while the person wasn't doing anything, did manage to get out of it. So the technology was monitored and it flagged for them an anomaly.

MR. SAMSON: Has the department, at any time, undertaken a cost analysis as to what your cost was previously to this program and the cost of administering these new ankle bracelets and is that part of the review being undertaken, is Deloitte looking at this at all or is this outside of their review?

MR. CLARKE: This is outside of that review.

[Page 133]

MR. SAMSON: It is outside of that review.

MR. CLARKE: Just for clarity on that, Deloitte are looking specifically at correctional facility and/or inmate interaction associated with that facility only in their audit. They are not dealing with out-of-custody issues.

MR. SAMSON: You have pretty much indicated that your department and your government is committed to building two new correctional facilities. That is correct, right?

MR. CLARKE: Yes.

MR. SAMSON: But yet Deloitte is looking at the issue of both the Antigonish and the Central Nova facility. I am just confused. What are they looking at if you have already committed to building the two new facilities?

MR. CLARKE: They are looking at that representatives from those locals are bringing up operational and management concerns. The type of issues that would arise in those facilities are totally different than what would be the case in a large facility like Central Nova. So, again, if there have been issues raised by the local representatives, what we have said is they have an opportunity to bring those concerns independently to the auditors to have any of those concerns addressed. It's about operational as opposed to structural.

MR. SAMSON: Who were they taking those concerns to before or did they have anyone?

MR. CLARKE: They would have their normal bargaining unit process that you deal with, the occupational health and safety process which is, as you know, arm's length from that, would be the other means. All of these other matters that have come forward of late, I said we want to address in fullness. More importantly, if there are operational matters that have to be addressed, I want them addressed because we don't want to be proceeding, really, with a new standard of facility which is based upon the central Nova Scotia model, for future delivery, with issues that can be resolved now. So we will not have and hopefully will mitigate and reduce these types of issues in the future.

MR. SAMSON: Prior to the Carvery matter, were you aware of any outstanding concerns among correctional officers in the facilities throughout Nova Scotia or were you under the impression everything was going fine?

MR. CLARKE: Prior to the Carvery matter, other than the inadvertent releases associated with some paperwork, which people are aware of as well, aside from that matter, I was not aware of any concerns about people fleeing from custody, no.

[Page 134]

MR. SAMSON: It's not just a matter of fleeing from custody, I also had the opportunity to meet with the President of the NSGEU and representatives from the different correctional facilities and we were exposed to stories about lack of basic equipment in the facilities. One facility had only one helmet for the correctional officers and apparently that helmet had been used, at some point, for painting and was covered in paint. It was unbelievable, to me, some of the concerns that I was hearing in 2008 that basic equipment would not be made available at these facilities should there be an uprising or any sort of disturbance at those facilities. So is it your position, again, that prior to these problems, what I have just said with concerns over equipment and safety and everything else, you had no idea, as minister, that those kind of issues existed within the correctional facilities?

MR. CLARKE: When I toured facilities to see, I guess I will call it a muster station, where they come together for all of the secure areas for equipment that they would use, that they have been very well stored, presented, ready for use. If you have specific examples of an institution that has been referenced, I will look into that matter but I have had nothing provided to me in writing and/or statement to me about those matters and, again, we expect people to be properly equipped. I expect them to be properly resourced with regard to staff to do their work. I am on the public record about that. If you can provide any specific details about a facility, I would look into that but I am not aware of any facility right now that is lacking the appropriate equipment to deal with the situation.

I have just been informed that both Cumberland and Antigonish do not have riot gear because neither of them would have maximum security inmates in those facilities.

MR. SAMSON: All right. Maybe that is where the problem lies. Unless you are maximum security, you don't get provided that gear. Is that the standard that we use?

MR. CLARKE: It would be based on the need and that gear would exist in all three others - Cape Breton, Central Nova, South West Nova facilities have all that material at hand. It is the two oldest facilities, again, which are not maximum security that wouldn't have that. Again, I will be able to provide, when we are back on Monday, an analysis of the other two facilities for you.

MR. SAMSON: When I hear that, Mr. Minister, it makes me think of, it is almost as if you gave someone the advice of only wear your seatbelt when you are driving fast because if you are driving slow you should be all right. One never hopes to see a riot or to see any sort of disturbance at our facilities but to say, because of the fact you are not maximum security, we are not going to give you that same type of equipment. I am not sure how much this equipment costs but just for the peace of mind and for the security of those officers, I don't understand why you would not make that available because

[Page 135]

obviously you have less staff so you don't need as much as you would need in a maximum security which have much greater staff.

Again, I go back, it is almost like telling them only wear your seatbelt when you are going fast because if you are going slow everything should be okay. Is that something you are prepared to review because those are some of the facilities that I have heard the complaints coming from, that even though they are not considered maximum security, they do have an inmate population which the potential still exists for an uprising or for disturbances in those facilities and they don't feel that they are properly equipped to handle that.

MR. CLARKE: Both of those facilities, Antigonish has 17 beds, Cumberland has 25. They are not classified for that but, again, for the worker representatives who are raising these concerns, I have indicated there is a full opportunity under the audit process to bring those concerns forward and, again, those facilities will be analyzed separately by the outside experts and I would offer that they should bring that forward. As indicated, it is our intent to replace those facilities as soon as possible. There isn't a current plan in place to adjust with those two facilities. However, any of the concerns that they bring forward, again, should be addressed in the audit and, again, I am allowing that process to operate independently. If they offer advice, we will be actioning appropriately.

MR. SAMSON: I appreciate that. It always concerns me that when safety issues are raised that someone would suggest wait for an audit and wait months down the road when someone has raised a safety issue. I don't think it's the kind of matter that should wait for an audit or that should wait for recommendations. Nor do I think it should be part of the bargaining process as well. Wages and benefits should be bargaining process, not safety and not safety gear. I find it unfortunate that that seems to be the way it is going and that even though these concerns have been raised that you are still willing to put those on the back burner until an audit actually tells you whether there should be action or not and, God willing, you won't have to come to regret that one day and that there won't be any unfortunate matters.

Back to the issue of the wrongful releases that we saw take place in the Spring of this year, are you in a position now, Mr. Minister, with the changes that have been made that you have indicated to the practices and procedures, to assure Nova Scotians that this will not happen again?

[1:00 p.m.]

MR. CLARKE: A couple of things just to address that but further, there is an occupational health and safety process in place and any worker who feels that their safety and security in the workplace is not being properly addressed or met has a means, through and arm's-length process, through occupational health and safety. It isn't about

[Page 136]

saying, God forbid, if there is a process. We have two facilities that have been very low risk without incident and if there are worker concerns, I have a totally independent process for them to identify that. In the meantime, aside from anything that they would deal with as bargaining issues on behalf of their members, there is another process to deal with occupational health and safety and if the occupational health and safety process deems a corrective measure must be taken, then that measure will be taken.

So there is an ongoing process for those concerns to be raised regardless of the audit process. So if there are immediate concerns that affect the well-being or the safety of the employee, they do have that mechanism at their disposal. Again, we are making every effort we can to address the concerns that are in place.

As for the transfer issue or release issues, there were, I know through court services, some amendments made working with the judiciary. I know we continue to look, as well, and part of our dialogue with Canada is how to use technology to help reduce the number and the volume of people being transferred as well as using technology in that transfer process. I believe people feel that the process has been moving satisfactorily. The knowledge is there. The protocols among workers are in place with regard to the checklist that they would use. Nothing has been brought to my attention that would indicate that there have been subsequent concerns or issues that have been raised but we do continue to work on an ongoing process of dialogue and that involves everything from the judiciary to the facilities themselves as well as law enforcement officials to make sure that we have security of paperwork and the individuals associated with it.

MR. SAMSON: On January 17, 2008, following the wrongful release of an individual at the Cape Breton facility, it was reported in the news that an internal review was underway in light of that. Do you have that review?

MR. CLARKE: That wasn't a corrections issue. That was a prosecutions but our Director of Public Prosecutions is here. That would have been a separate review under the PPS.

The matter, back to January 18^th, the Public Prosecution Service, through the Chief Crown Attorney, did that review. There was an issue with regard to an override on, I guess it's an e-mail. Anyway, there was an administrative error that was made. It was a human error. That matter has been corrected in a protocol, to make sure that would not occur, to mitigate that from occurring again. You can never guarantee but it was identified as an administrative error.

MR. SAMSON: Can we have a copy of that review?

[Page 137]

MR. CLARKE: There is a communications summary of that review and I can get that to you.

MR. SAMSON: I'd like to see the whole review. Why would you not make available the review that indicates what the problem was and what corrective steps have been made?

MR. CLARKE: Well again, it is about - looking at it, if there's a staff member involved, I'm not trying to . . .

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. I just want to tell members that the time for the Liberal caucus has expired. As well, four hours of debate has expired for today. So we will begin on Monday with the NDP caucus.

So we are adjourned.

[The subcommittee adjourned at 1:05 p.m.]