Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, there may be a disposition to waive private members' hour today.

Madam Speaker: Is there leave to waive private members' hour today? [agreed]

Mr. McCrae: I move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Justice (Mr. Toews), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

Motion agreed to.

Mr. Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order.

This afternoon, this section of the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 254 will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Family Services. When the committee last sat, it had been considering item 3.(d)(1) Residential Care Licensing on page 53 of the Estimates book. Shall the item pass?

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Before we finish this line, I wonder if the minister has answers to any of the questions that were outstanding from previous days for me?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): I have a copy and copies that I will table of the memorandum of agreement between the government and the Manitoba Funeral Services Association, and I guess there were some questions on the grants and what changes there were.

* (1440)

I will read the changes, the increases or decreases or elimination. The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research is no longer receiving a grant. It was the end of a commitment. The Vanier Institute is a new grant, $15,000. That is a three-year commitment; $15,000 a year for three years. Winnipeg Child and Family Services, you can see there is a significant increase, $0.4 million. Child and Family Services of Central Manitoba, there is an increase of $34,000; Child and Family Services of Western Manitoba, an increase of 79.3 thousand. Jewish Child and Family Services had a reduction of 47.9 thousand. Part of that grant was converted to a per diem, therefore the change. Churchill Health Centre, a decrease of 62.4, and it was the same thing, a conversion to a per diem for part of the grant.

Ndinawemaaganag, that is a new grant of $212,000. The Family Centre of Winnipeg got an increase of $42,000; Marymound, an increase of 4.6 thousand. The Inner City Review Committee, that is a new grant, 6.3. Women's Shelter saw a decrease of 598,000. Facility grants were transferred to the Department of Housing, and they are being funded at the same rate through the Department of Housing.

L'Entre-Temps, an increase of 7,000; Lakeshore Women's Resource Centre, an increase of 5.3; Pluri-elles, an increase of 12.3 thousand; Native Women's Transition Centre 7,000. Day Care Centres and Homes had an increase of 129,000, primarily for children with disabilities.

Was there anything else outstanding?

Mr. Martindale: I think I had asked the minister for the percentages of welfare fraud compared to the caseload.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we do not have that at our fingertips. I will endeavour to get it and put it on the record before the end of today if possible.

Mr. Martindale: Going back to the line that we are supposed to be on. I have had concerns raised with me, and so has the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), regarding Alho Guest Home, which is licensed under the licensing branch of this department, and the member for Wolseley wrote to the minister on May 10, 1996. So the complaints have been going on there for a long time. I am wondering if the minister can provide us with an update on whether or not they are meeting current orders and licensing requirements and whether there is any change planned in their status. I understand they might be wanting to not be licensed anymore.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, indeed, they are not licensed anymore. Their licence has been pulled, and I think the 16 residents that were there have found alternate locations. It really was a mental health facility licensed through our residential licensing branch, but it has in fact been shut down and the licence is no longer in place.

Mr. Martindale: Is it possible that the same operator could continue to operate with the same kind of clients but have them live in a rooming house licensed by the City of Winnipeg?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I am advised that he could run a rooming house, I suppose, subject to rezoning by the City of Winnipeg, but in fact he could not deliver the kinds of services he was delivering to the kinds of clients that were residing there.

Mr. Martindale: I just have a couple of questions about the Vulnerable Persons' Commissioner. Can the minister tell me how many substitute decision makers have been appointed?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, a total of 30 substitute decision makers have been appointed to date.

Mr. Martindale: Does the minister have a breakdown as to how many of those are individuals who were under an order of supervision and how many who have never been under an order?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, there were eight applications for persons without an order of supervision. Three of those are still in process, one was dismissed, three were withdrawn, and one substitute decision maker was appointed.

Mr. Martindale: Under subappropriation 9.3(e) one of the expected results is to review and assess approximately 500 orders of supervision under The Mental Health Act. Can the minister tell me if that goal will be met? I guess this is in the coming fiscal year. Do you expect that the Vulnerable Persons' Commissioner will review 500 orders of supervision?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me how many staff there are who are employed by Family Services working with individuals under the VRDP funding?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, there are 20 employees that are cost-shared on a full-time basis, and there might be a few others, where part of their job is related to VRDP, which would be able to be claimed.

Mr. Martindale: How many individuals are those staff working with in total?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we provide direct service to about 600 individuals through our Regional Operations in the department, and there are another 400 that are served through three different agencies that we give some support to: SMD, CPA and CNIB.

* (1450)

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me if those 20 staff are primarily involved in finding employment, including support of employment, and in job coaching?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, it is the mix of tasks that staff have to undertake. Part of it is job finding, but they also provide counselling, individual training plans, and help them to access training support dollars. So it is mixture of those kinds of activities.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me how many jobs these 20 staff found for their clients in the last year?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we do not have good statistics or data, but all indications are that about 50 percent of the clients that are worked with are in employment of some kind. Whether in fact all of those individuals are as a result of our staff finding jobs for them or whether they find jobs on their own, we do not have that kind of information, but some, I guess, we do not have hard data. Our guess is that about 50 percent of those that are served do find jobs.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me how this compares with organizations like Sturgeon Creek Enterprises and local ACL groups in terms of finding employment?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, the functions of our department versus Sturgeon Creek Enterprises and those agencies are not quite the same. What we do is the counselling, the individual training plans and helping them access training dollars. What they do through Sturgeon Creek is direct supported employment placements, and they perform job coaching functions. So they are slightly different.

Mr. Martindale: When your staff find the training dollars, do they go to organizations like Sturgeon Creek Enterprises?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, the department and the staff within the department deal with different types of individuals, so they are not all quite the same. Sturgeon Creek Enterprises would deal primarily with those who have mental disabilities. SMD and CPA might deal with those who have physical disabilities. In the department, we deal a lot with individuals who have mental and psychiatric disabilities. So the roles are a little different. We may use Sturgeon Creek Enterprises, and we may not. I guess it just depends on the individual, the circumstances, and the needs of that individual.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if the department sets goals for the number of people whom you would like to find jobs for in any given year, since we know that people with disabilities are vastly underemployed, many of whom want to work but find themselves on social assistance?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, in the past, we have not necessarily monitored or set goals or followed measured outcomes. As a result of the ongoing work with the federal government and in consultation with the disability community, those will be the kinds of things that we will be doing. We will be focusing on working with those in the community that we know want to work and setting some goals and some objectives and doing some follow-through to see how many individuals actually get into employment and keep their jobs or how many come out of the labour market. So that is part of the process that is ongoing right now with the federal government and the disability community.

* (1500)

Mr. Chairperson: Item 9.3. Community Living (d) Residential Care Licensing (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $259,200--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $33,500--pass.

9.3. (e) Office of the Vulnerable Persons' Commissioner (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $220,500--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $244,000--pass.

Resolution 9.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $106,865,700 for Family Services, Community Living, $106,865,700 for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1998.

Continuing on with Resolution 9.4 Child and Family Services (a) Child and Family Support (1) Child, Family and Community Development (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $4,295,700.

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, I have in front of me a letter from Keith Black, board member of Winnipeg Child and Family Services, dated October 1, 1996. The main reason that he wrote this letter was to inform the staff of his resignation and to thank them for their work.

In this letter he said, and I quote: If it is ever possible to establish a relationship with the government that reflects the reality of your work, things would improve greatly. While there will no doubt be major changes in the next several years, the bottom line is that you have the toughest job in all children's services.

He was also interviewed by the media, and he said he was frustrated by the rocky relationship between Child and Family Services and government and of funding arrangements he called unclear and archaic, and he commented on the poor relations with government. He said there will continue to be tensions unless there are changes in funding arrangements and the level of service that should be provided. Can the minister tell me if these concerns have been addressed since the resignation of Mr. Black?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It is always nice again to be in opposition and to take excerpts out of letters, not in the full context. I am sorry I do not have the letters in front of me, but there are two letters; one that went to staff and one that came to me as minister. I am trying to get those right now and will provide them for my honourable friend.

I do want to indicate that yes, there have been some problems between the Winnipeg agency and the government, extreme frustration over many issues. Funding issues are one issue when we see the kinds of significant increases that have gone into our Child and Family Services system, especially in the City of Winnipeg, with millions of dollars of additional resources being provided on a year-by-year basis, and yet we do not seem to be seeing any significant impact on the number of dysfunctional families or the number of kids that need to come into care.

I am not sure what the answers are. I do not think there are any easy answers, but the reality is that we have as many kids or more kids in care. Their needs seem to be higher, and no matter what additional resources we seem to put in, we do not necessarily seem to be having a positive impact on society as a whole as a result of the things we are doing in Child and Family Services. So that is extremely frustrating for a government, and I know it must be extremely frustrating for those that work in the system, too, because many of them are doing just a fantastic job of trying to resolve the issues.

We do know and we hear from the Winnipeg agency that 70 percent of their caseload is aboriginal, and yet we do not seem to have the aboriginal community working with us in a significant way through our Winnipeg agency to deal with those issues, although we have reached out and I have encouraged, very strongly encouraged partnerships with the Winnipeg agency and some of the nonmandated agencies like Ma Mawi out there to see whether we can, in fact, have a significant or a positive impact on the issues that we are faced with as a result of increasing caseloads being of aboriginal background.

We cannot deal with those issues without the aboriginal community on side helping us to resolve those problems. I recognize that very clearly. One of the issues that is very frustrating for me, and it is probably frustrating for the agency, too, as I say, how many aboriginal staff do you have working in the agency to help you address the issue of a significant number of aboriginal children and families? The answer from the agency is we cannot keep aboriginal workers. That is frustrating to me, as I am sure it is to them, but I think we have to examine why that is happening, and maybe the agency has to look at a different way of recruiting and attracting and keeping aboriginal employees. They have to be a part of the solution, and we want them to be.

So I guess, yes, Mr. Black was frustrated. I am frustrated as a minister, and we are frustrated as a government that keeps pouring millions and millions of dollars more into the system on a year-by-year basis and not seeing any positive impact. I guess for me the question is, is more money going to mean better service or healthier families? I am not sure we do not have to re-examine exactly what we are doing, how we are doing things. Have we asked child and family service agencies to be all things to all families and children, or do we need to be looking at a better way of delivering that kind of service and support? I am not sure I have an easy answer to that question, but we are working with the agency to try to see whether, in fact, we cannot identify what needs to change and see how we can make that happen.

Are you saying, are the problems resolved? No, they are not resolved completely. I would be silly to try to admit that there is not frustration on both sides; at the board level at the agency; I am sure at the working level in the agency, and I am sure at the level of community where we are not seeing a significant impact and significantly increased numbers of healthier families in our Winnipeg community, Winnipeg society.

So I sense Mr. Black's frustration. He has been a great board member, and my letter to him did indicate that I valued his contribution. We will try our best to identify how we can fix the problems. As I said, no easy answer. I wish I had all the answers.

Mr. Martindale: When Mr. Black wrote his letter to the staff, the government would have been in the process of doing its budget for this fiscal year, since the letter was dated October 1, '96, and Winnipeg Child and Family Services, as the minister indicated earlier this afternoon, received an additional $1,783,400, if my arithmetic is right.

I am wondering if the minister feels that she has made some progress with Winnipeg Child and Family Services. Has the relationship improved? According to the Free Press article, Mr. Black said it was a rocky relationship. Since that time, their budget allocation was increased and, presumably, the minister has had time to work with this agency to make improvements. What has happened since October 1?

* (1510)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we are at present and have been going through a joint process to try to determine what the actual budgetary requirements of the Winnipeg agency could be. We are working there as a committee, the department and the agency working together to try to identify what service we are buying from the agency at what price. So that is a process that is ongoing right now.

We also have a committee that is working together looking at options to improve services. They are looking at the foster care issue, they are looking at aboriginal issues, they are looking at emergency care issues, and at trying to see whether we can come to some agreement on how we can best deliver those services in the most efficient and effective way. So there is a process that is ongoing right now, trying to resolve some of these issues and identify exactly for us what we are purchasing from the Winnipeg agency and for them what their requirements are going to be.

(Mr. Peter Dyck, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if Winnipeg Child and Family Services had a deficit in their most recent fiscal year?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, Mr. Chairperson, they did have a deficit of $4.3 million.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me if the increased allocation of $1,783,000 is going to cover the deficit or is it going to be used to accommodate more families if their caseload increases?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I guess we were only half listening to the full question, but can I indicate that we did get supplementary funding last year to cover their deficit. And the second part of the question was?

Mr. Martindale: Well, since the new funding is not going to cover the deficit, is it going to provide services to children?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes.

Mr. Martindale: The minister expressed extreme frustration and listed three items: funding, an aboriginal agency and the number of aboriginal staff. I guess we could talk about funding for a long time, but I would like to move on to the aboriginal agency. If I heard the minister correctly, she said the aboriginal agency is not working with government. Is that correct?

Mrs. Mitchelson: No, Mr. Chairperson, I would hate to leave that. That is not what I said, I guess, and I would not want that impression left on the record. What I indicated was that I have really, really encouraged the Winnipeg agency to work very closely with Ma Mawi. When we first set up The Family Support Innovations Fund, I was hoping that partnerships would develop with mandated and nonmandated agencies. I encouraged Ma Mawi and Winnipeg Child and Family to work together to bring forward proposals to use some of that innovative money to deal with the children that they had to deal with and the families they had to deal with, and for some reason or other it was very difficult for the two to get together and develop a partnership. That just cannot happen.

So it is not government not working well with Ma Mawi. As a matter of fact, we have a very good working relationship with Ma Mawi, and my honourable friend probably does know that Josie Hill is over at Ma Mawi now. We talk about Josie Hill quite often and her significant commitment and contribution to a lot of the issues that I have to deal with and a lot of the issues in my honourable friend's constituency. I do really believe that around the prevention and the family preservation issues, our nonmandated agencies have to be as involved as our mandated agencies in finding the solutions.

So I have been frustrated as a result of that kind of activity not happening all the time. It has to work, and we all have to be on the same page when we are looking at support for families and working with families.

Mr. Martindale: Is it the minister's view that because there is now a more co-operative relationship with Ma Mawi and the Winnipeg Child and Family Services that some of the problems in the past are being sorted out?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, absolutely. I think it is critical that that happen and it will happen. I think if you look at the document we put out in July of last year that sort of preceded our public hearings around The Child and Family Services Act, it speaks to the community and to mediation, family conferencing. A lot of issues, I think, that were raised in that document were certainly moving in the direction of what a lot of aboriginal people would think would be the right direction to go to preserve families and work with families.

I really believe that we will shortly have some announcements to make that will look at some pilots and some models of delivering service in different ways. So I am not at liberty to discuss those today, but I think you will hear some very positive things in the very near future which I am sure my honourable friend will agree with.

Mr. Martindale: The minister expressed frustration about the number of aboriginal staff, I guess really the lack of aboriginal staff being hired by Winnipeg Child and Family Services, and I guess it is the agency's view that they do hire them, but they cannot keep them. Actually, I ran into a graduate of Winnipeg Education Centre when I was knocking on doors during the federal election who has been applying and cannot get a job and would like to be working as a social worker.

I wonder if the minister can tell me why it is that Winnipeg Child and Family Services cannot keep aboriginal staff.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Well, Mr. Chairperson, I wish I knew. I mean, that is a challenge for them, and they are going to have to deal with that issue. It certainly is not as a result of any directive from government. They are an agency that runs their own show, so to speak. I do not interfere in the hiring process at the agency level, so they would have to be asked that question. I am not sure what the answer is, but I might ask my honourable friend if he has the name of the person who has graduated and I would ask whether she has applied to Winnipeg Child and Family. I am not sure you would want to share that information with me, but maybe you could intervene on her behalf and ask her to write or to apply or help her, in fact, to see whether that might be an option for an opportunity for employment for her.

Mr. Martindale: I will certainly discuss it with this individual.

* (1520)

I have the Order-in-Council No. 268/1997 regarding The Family Support Innovations Fund and the amounts of money and the agencies that the money goes to. Can the minister tell me if any of this money is given by the agencies to other organizations or do they spend it all internally?

Mrs. Mitchelson: The majority of the money stays right with the agency to deliver those programs with the exception of the family reunification project with Winnipeg Child and Family, and that is a partnership with the Family Centre of Winnipeg. There are three nonmandated agencies that have received funding through The Family Support Innovations Fund; that is, MacDonald Youth Services, Andrews Street Family Centre and Rossbrook House.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if The Family Support Innovations Fund has been at relatively the same level in recent years or has it been increasing?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It has been the same level since it was introduced, $2.5 million.

Mr. Martindale: Since the minister mentioned the family reunification, I had a question later on about that. I assume that this refers to children who were adopted out of province, out of country.

Mrs. Mitchelson: No. These are children that are in care that could possibly be moved back into their own families. It targets families living in Winnipeg's core area with children under 10 years of age where neglect issues have been identified, but the family is willing to effect changes in lifestyles and parenting approaches.

Mr. Martindale: I have some questions about that, but I will save them for later, so I do not lose my place here. Could the minister tell me if I have an understanding of the administrative structure here? Can the minister tell me if this is accurate? Is it true that the director of Children's Services reports to the assistant deputy minister who reports to the deputy minister who reports to the minister?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes.

Mr. Martindale: Why are there so many layers of the bureaucracy? Why not have the director report directly to the minister?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I guess one of the reasons for that would be that in fact the assistant deputy minister has several responsibilities; not only child welfare but Family Dispute, Family Conciliation and Children's Special Services. That is all amalgamated under one assistant deputy minister. Oh, and Child Day Care also. It is the Child and Family Services division, so there is one assistant deputy minister for all of those areas, and the director of child welfare reports through him. I suppose we could have a structure where the director of child welfare reports directly to the minister, but we would still need some administrative function for all the other areas. It just seemed to be the most efficient way to reorganize the department and bring all services related to children under one assistant deputy minister.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me how many staff there are in the Child and Family Support branch?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We have 61 staff years, and that is including 38 staff years at Seven Oaks.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me what these staff do other than the ones at Seven Oaks?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, of course there are a variety of activities which are ongoing in this area. The one new focus that we have placed in this area is compliance, having the agencies comply with the standards that are set by the department. So we do have a director of compliance and we have activities that are related to that. We have a co-ordinator of intake and inquiry. We do protection and abuse work, the Child Abuse Registrar. We have program consultants. We have a co-ordinator for foster homes. We have people who work on the Child and Family Services information system. We have an adoptions co-ordinator and the activities which happen around adoption. We have support staff, records clerks, data entry people, some financial support, accounts clerks. We have a co-ordinator of native services, agency relations manager, training co-ordinator, a co-ordinator for residential care. I guess that pretty well covers the variety of activities that are ongoing in this area.

Mr. Martindale: Why is it when there is a controversy or a crisis like moving up the announcement of the closing of Seven Oaks by several months because there is a letter being read on Peter Warren, instead of the minister attending a press conference she sends the assistant deputy minister for Child and Family Services and the director of Child and Family Support to meet with the media and answer their questions?

Why would the minister not attend the press conference and answer the media's questions?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I was just trying to remember whether I was around on that day or not and I guess I was but, in fact, there are two different kinds of activities that might take place when there is an announcement being made or sometimes there is a news conference, sometimes there is a press release. I think in the instance of Seven Oaks, it was in the planning stages but, when the letter came up and there was some criticism, we thought we might as well tell everyone that, in fact, we were in the process of closing down Seven Oaks. These is some sensitivity, of course, around staffing issues because, when staff hear that kind of thing through the media rather than first-hand, sometimes it has a very negative impact and presents some uncertainty for staff.

But anyway, because of the detail surrounding and the technical detail, it was better for staff who had been working on the whole process to provide the detailed, factual information. I could have been there to say, yes, we are closing Seven Oaks, and turned it over. You have seen many announcements that are made where the staff from the department give the technical background and the detail and the minister is there to answer questions after, and I was there to answer questions after the technical part of the announcement and the detail had been made. So that is the way it happens sometimes.

Mr. Martindale: Well, I certainly knew that Seven Oaks was going to close and it was fairly obvious that the announcement just got moved up but, on the other hand, this minister, every minister is ultimately accountable for every decision of government and, when the minister is unwilling to make an announcement and answer questions, it looks like the minister is ducking that accountability, and this is not the only occasion that the minister has done that. I can think of two occasions, one other occasion when the minister got the same staff actually to meet with the media.

I am wondering why the minister is not willing to take the questions and ask her staff, like she does in Estimates, if she does not have the detail.

* (1530)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I cannot really say that I have ducked any accountability in the Department of Family Services or in the Department of Culture when I was the Minister of Culture. Ultimately, I am held accountable and the people of Manitoba will hold the government accountable. My constituents will hold me accountable in the next election campaign. I have been open and up front, and I will argue with my honourable friend that I think that when it is important for staff to be there to answer the detail they will be there, and when it is important for me to be there as the minister because there is a certain policy direction that we are taking as a government, I will be there.

I want to indicate to you that because I have such good staff in my department, from time to time the media call and request those staff be available to answer questions. As a matter of fact, I want to indicate that I know I am going to be on Peter Warren. My time will come sometime in June, towards the end of June, but Peter Warren has also asked for my staff to do a morning show with him because he values their opinion and their ability to talk about some of the details of some of the work that is ongoing in the department.

I want to indicate that not always is it me ducking. It is because there is a specific request for my staff to be present to answer certain questions. From time to time that happens, so I take great pride in knowing that there is staff in my department that are up to speed and working very diligently to see that change will be made when it needs to be made and that if they are asked to make comment I have every confidence that they can do that. They have the ability to do that, and the more Manitobans are informed with the facts around the change and the way we are going, I think the better off Manitobans will be.

I have no hesitation in saying that my staff is very competent and very capable of being able to provide the facts and the detail around significant change, and I have every confidence that every time they are asked or every time the decision is made that they provide that technical detail, they will do so professionally.

Mr. Martindale: It is my understanding that the staff at Seven Oaks Youth Centre were told in 1996 that nothing would happen to Seven Oaks until there were system-wide changes including a review of The Child and Family Services Act. Now we know what is happening with The Child and Family Services Act, but does the minister really consider that there have been system-wide changes which I guess enable the place to be closed?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I know that by the time Seven Oaks is closed the changes and the new system will be up and running, and it will not be closed until that happens. We have made a commitment to try to ensure that happens by the end of this year. I want to assure Manitobans that we will not close Seven Oaks down completely until the crisis teams are in place, stabilization is there and the new beds are available, the psychiatric beds and also the treatment beds.

There was a news release, and I am sure my honourable friend saw it last week. We anticipate that the girls' unit may be able to be closed by fall, and it will take a little longer for the boys' unit at Seven Oaks. But we will not, and we have made that commitment. It would be foolish to close down Seven Oaks until we had all of the other pieces in place, and they will be when we ultimately shut the facility.

Mr. Martindale: If this information is accurate, the staff are told that nothing would happen until there are system-wide changes. Does the minister consider these things that she announced in the press release to be the system-wide changes she was referring to?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes.

Mr. Martindale: The staff were told that there would be a review of other community-based facilities. Has that taken place?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes.

Mr. Martindale: What was the result of that review?

Mrs. Mitchelson: As a result of the working and bringing together of the treatment facilities, I am talking Marymound, Knowles, New Directions and Macdonald Youth Services, we have had significant discussion around the intake process and trying to ensure that the right kids are in the right beds for the right kind of treatment. We have been assured that all of that will happen, and it will happen at the intake process and also at the discharge process so kids will not be discharged until they are ready to be discharged to something else.

Actually they are very excited about the prospect of being able to do business in a different way. We know that the youth psychiatric beds will be available through the Department of Health. We also know that Marymound--and I think that is public information now--will be the girls' receiving unit. We are still in negotiations but pretty close to determining where the boys will reside. That is why it is taking a little longer on that side, but we are pretty well geared up to ensure that Marymound will have the capacity to look at the girls' treatment beds in the community by fall.

So that consultation, that discussion has taken place, and I think everyone is on board in trying to do things a little differently into the future.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me where the 10 psychiatric beds will be located?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, it is not 10, it is four new beds, four psychiatric beds, and they will be at the Health Sciences Centre. Those are inpatient beds. The crisis stabilization beds, there will be six to eight for boys and six to eight for girls. I indicated that Marymound would be the site for the girls. We are in the process of working on the boys' facility.

Mr. Martindale: What is the holdup in finding a boys' facility?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We have been working, I guess I can say publicly, with Knowles Centre, and we are close to finalization. We just have not got the i's dotted and the t's crossed.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister confirm the target date for closing the facility entirely?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We are targeting December 31, but I would not want that to be a firm date. If it takes a few months longer, I would rather do it right than close it too soon.

Mr. Martindale: What is going to happen to the staff at Seven Oaks Youth Centre?

* (1540)

Mrs. Mitchelson: We have been working through our Human Resource branch of the department pretty aggressively with Seven Oaks, and we know that they will no longer be employed at Seven Oaks, but we are hoping that any of those individuals who are trained to fit into the new system--because, obviously, there is going to need to be more community staff support through the different facilities that will be accepting the children who previously went into Seven Oaks. If, in fact, they can be retrained, we are offering that option or opportunity if they are wanting to do that, so we will try our very best to accommodate those who want to continue to work in the youth system.

The union and the department have established a joint Workforce Adjustment Committee to assist employees.

Mr. Martindale: It is my understanding that currently Seven Oaks Youth Centre takes youth that other facilities will not, including MATC and the youth centre.

Can the minister assure me that when agencies in the community and the police and anyone else are looking for a crisis facility that the kinds of facilities that the minister announced in her press release will be available for these troubled youth?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I want to point out to my honourable friend that this is not a correctional facility. It is a facility for those who are involved with Child and Family Services, so it is not a holding facility for Corrections.

In the news release, it spells out quite clearly the whole process. We will have six to eight more treatment beds on the girls' side through Marymound. We will have another six to eight stabilization beds on the boys' side. We will have four additional adolescent psychiatric beds. The people who will come together to be part of the mobile crisis team--it will be multidisciplinary. So we have MATC, mental health, child welfare, occupational therapy, psychologists, all of those individuals who will be involved in the mobile crisis team, and the crisis stabilization units I have already indicated will be at Marymound and probably Knowles.

We will have brief treatment teams that within one day of the crisis will provide intensive and timely interventions and do some short-term planning with a view to a long-term case plan. We will have home-based services available if we feel that a family can be kept together and that there is no danger to the child or the family if that family is kept together, and resources can be put in to try to work out the problems. I indicated if we needed short-term psychiatric beds, that those beds would be available through the Department of Health at the Health Sciences Centre psychiatric unit.

So it is a comprehensive plan. It has been worked on for several years now. We have been talking change. How do we best deal with the issues of treating children or youth at risk rather than just warehousing them at Seven Oaks? The original intent of Seven Oaks was not to have long-term placements, but it was to be short-term crisis stabilization, and then they were to move on to treatment.

What has happened, admittedly, over the years is that it has been a facility that has warehoused some of our most difficult children in most need without any real treatment plan, and with the new focus and the new way of delivering services we will be focusing on a case plan and a treatment plan at the earliest opportunity. So we hope that through this process we will have children that are better served in the new system and they will not just be sitting around doing nothing, receiving no treatment and no ability to resume a normal life, if that is possible.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if in recent years Winnipeg Child and Family Services underwent an operational review?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes.

Mr. Martindale: Was that review supposed to be made public?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Ultimately, yes, it can become a public document. Right now we are working with the agency on some of the issues that were identified through the operational review and that will eventually be a public document.

Mr. Martindale: This joint committee, would that be the implementation committee of the agency and provincial staff?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, Mr. Chairperson.

Mr. Martindale: I have a document--I am not sure where I got it--but it is kind of interesting reading: Winnipeg Child and Family Services Program Description Summary. The initiative is called Family Focused Services, and the program title is Family-Centred Reunification Program. I guess it is kind of dated now, but I notice one of the footnotes had a report called The Final Report on First Nations Children in Care for Winnipeg Child and Family Services written by Bruce Unfried in 1994. I am wondering if I can get a copy of that report.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Sure, we can get that. I am not sure we have it here, but we will get it and provide it.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if this program went ahead? The document that I have says the program is targeted for October 1994. Did the Family-Centred Reunification Program get implemented?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, that was one of the projects under The Family Support Innovations Fund, and it was approved. That was the one project that I said was a partnership between the Family Centre of Winnipeg and the Winnipeg agency.

Mr. Martindale: I guess I am going to be jumping around a little bit here, but I noticed that when the minister was undertaking The Child and Family Services Act review, I found a description of it on the Progressive Conservative Caucus of Manitoba home page, and I am wondering why it was not on the government of Manitoba home page. I never would have thought of looking for it in the PC home page.

Mrs. Mitchelson: My understanding is that it was on both home pages, and if my honourable friend has any different information, maybe he could provide that or share that, but it is our understanding that it was on both.

Mr. Martindale: Well, the date that we were browsing or surfing, I guess the ninth month, the 20th day, 1996, it was not on the government home pages, just on the PC home page, but that is ancient history, so we will pass over that little anomaly.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Can I just indicate that it might have just been the excitement of my colleague the honourable member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe), who was really pleased to chair that committee, that it may have got on that home page before the government one, but we will certainly check that out.

Mr. Martindale: I am glad that the minister reminded me about the member for River Heights. I wonder if the minister could have a little chat with her colleague from River Heights and tell him that the next time he sends a letter to his constituents about decline in welfare caseload, if he could print accurate figures or at least tell people what the figures are that he is publishing. Certainly the number of cases indicated in his letter was no where near what the actual numbers are.

Now, the minister did provide some corrected information and tell me that it was single parents, so I wonder if she could advise her colleague that next time he sends out a letter to everyone in his constituency that he tell his constituents what group it is that he is talking about and indicate that this is only the single parent caseload if he is going to do that again and try to make the government look good with misleading statistics.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Certainly, I know my colleague the member for River Heights would certainly want full and factual information provided to his constituents, and I know that he did provide that through the letter. Employment First was targeted at single parents with children a certain age.

* (1550)

So when he talked Employment First, he was talking about those individuals in that category. The information that he provided was factual, so I would just like to remind my honourable friend that I know my colleague the member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe) certainly would never mislead his constituents in any way, that the information was full and factual.

Mr. Martindale: Well, we might have to come back tomorrow so that I can have the letter in front of me again. Numerous people have expressed concern about the caseload, particularly by Winnipeg Child and Family Services. I wonder if the minister could tell me the number of children in care by Winnipeg Child and Family? Also, I have a chart of days care comparing districts in Winnipeg and I am wondering, since the chart that I have is '95-96, if the minister could provide me with a more recent chart--and I will pass over the one that I have so the minister's staff can see it.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I will share this with staff in the department. I am not sure whether we have the same breakdown. But I want to indicate a frustration of mine to my honourable friend, and my staff hear it all the time, and I am sure I have discussed this with the agency on several occasions. I mean, days care does not really tell me anything. I do not know what it says to my honourable friend. I guess, it says that there are a certain number of children in care for a certain number of days, but it really does not tell me what the issue is with that child. How many children are high needs, special needs, require significant cost? Are they children that are in the system for two or three or four or five years, or are they permanent wards forever? Are they in our system for 18 years?

I mean, I get extremely frustrated with trying to analyze the days care issue. You know, I need to know, are they children that go back into their home and are apprehended again? Are they in and out of the system? Are they there for years on end? Are we doing the right kind of case planning around children? Anyway, I just thought I would throw that in as the comment for my honourable friend, because I find it extremely frustrating to try and analyze what we are doing and how we are trying to budget based on days care when we really do not know what the cost of days care is for individual children.

Can I ask my honourable friend where he may have got this from? Was this out of the annual report for the--we do not have this breakdown. This would have come, I guess, from the agency, and I am wondering if it might be something that would be published--would this be in their annual report? We do not have any data or information collected in this manner. So it might have come from the agency.

Mr. Martindale: So the minister is saying that you do not have stats on the number of children in care--or, sorry, the days care?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, we do, Mr. Chairperson, but it is not broken down in this manner.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister give me handouts on the number of days in care?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we would have to undertake to get that and provide it for my honourable friend.

Mr. Martindale: Whenever a child in care dies, the staff often are blamed for not providing adequate service or protection or apprehending a child that might be at risk, but when one talks to the staff, especially the front-line staff, one hears a lot of frustration. For example, the Filmon government has forced them to close their offices for 10 days a year. Sometimes the legal system does things that they have no control over, like, saying that a parent can have legal custody of a child, and they have huge caseloads.

For example, I am told that protection workers have up to 35 cases, whereas the Child Welfare League of America recommends 10 active ongoing protection cases and for active investigations. I have also been told that workers sometimes have 50 to 75 cases, and that this has increased since centralization, but there has been very little increase in staff. I am wondering if the minister shares the staff's concerns about the level of work that is expected from the staff in terms of caseloads per worker and the ability of those staff to effectively monitor those families, or even do home visits or meet with the families, so that they are providing the kind of service that they should be able to provide so that children do not fall through the cracks, so that children do not die in homes that are unsafe. Does the minister share these concerns?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, certainly, I share concerns that every child is in a safe and secure environment. I know that no one would go into work in the child welfare system if they did not have that as their first and foremost priority. So, I guess, I recognize and I realize that there are many, many out there that are doing a very good job in some very difficult circumstances and situations.

I always say that it would be wonderful if we did not need a child welfare system. If every family was responsible and did not neglect or abuse their children, then we would not need a child welfare system. Reality is we always will need one. What happens in the child welfare system is that the system is having to pick up the pieces after there has been dysfunction, abuse and neglect in a family, and sometimes the issues are not very easy to deal with. So I certainly respect and admire those that work on a day-to-day basis with some of the most significant issues that need to be dealt with in society today.

Can I indicate that there have been additional resources and additional staff that have been hired at the agency? I am not sort of aware of exactly what those staff positions are doing. I know a lot were hired with The Family Support Innovations Fund initiatives to deal with some of the special projects that are being undertaken. I guess, part of the dilemma that we have, too, is trying to determine really what our mandated agencies should be doing. Have we asked our mandated agency to do too much, or be all things to all families, or are there certain things that should be done through other systems? The big question in my mind, and it is one that I have asked out loud, I have spoken to the agency about that.

I think we are working with the agency through the operational review to determine really what our functions are. Is there ability to streamline and do certain things differently so that resources can be freed up to do the front-line activity and work? Those are all things that need to be examined very closely and we need to work with the agency on. As I said, no easy answers before. It seems to me though that a lot of the issues are more complex. The issues that the child welfare system has to deal with today are more complex than they used to be, and I will tell you that we need to be trying to deal with issues up front before children hit the child welfare system.

* (1600)

We need to look at early intervention. Some of the things we are trying to do with the Perry preschool programs, getting parents involved in parenting and understanding. I always say that the biggest responsibility any of us ever undertake is to parent. We need to take those responsibilities very, very seriously, and that should be our No. 1 priority and, gosh, none of us do everything right. We all make mistakes along the way, but it is important for us to have at least the grounding and the understanding that there is help out there, and we can get that help when that help is required in our families.

So the issues around teen pregnancy, adolescent pregnancy, 14-year-old girls parenting and choosing to parent their children when they have never been parented themselves, really leaves us in a double-jeopardy situation where you have not very much of a chance of a very positive childhood experience if you have a parent that does not understand that parenting is a major and significant responsibility. So we have to work to try to ensure that we deal with those issues and do the up-front early intervention so that hopefully we will not see as many children in the child welfare system as we see today.

It is difficult to change our focus from, you know, sort of, the back end, dealing with the issue after it happens rather than trying to prevent the dysfunction or the neglect or abuse from happening in the first place. Those are the major challenges, not unlike the challenges that are being faced right across this country by all governments of all political stripes. I think we all recognize and realize that dollars spent up front are dollars well spent and will save significant resources at the back end if we can spend them wisely.

So we are all attempting to find the right answers and some of the right programs that might have a positive impact on families and their ability to cope in today's world. I have probably rambled on a little bit, but I think it is important that we recognize that we are dealing in the child welfare system after the fact with families that have broken down, and we need to start to look at how we can do things differently at the front end and relieve some of the pressure on the system at the back end. No question that there are many that work very hard in our system, and we will have to continue to try to find some of the answers.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if the deficit of Winnipeg Child and Family Services is mainly due to child maintenance?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, it is. It is mainly due to special needs circumstances and cost for those services.

Mr. Martindale: Is the minister aware that Winnipeg Child and Family Services has an emergency fund from which workers are authorized to draw in order to provide groceries for families where there is no food in the house?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We are not aware of the detail, but we do know that through after-hours service there is the ability, some flexibility to provide that kind of service if it is required.

Mr. Chairperson: Before we proceed, if we could have a short recess, is there agreement? [agreed] What is short? About 10 minutes? Okay. Recess for 10 minutes.

The committee recessed at 4:05 p.m.

The committee resumed at 4:24 p.m.

Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. When the committee recessed we were on Resolution 9.4 Child and Family Services (a) Child and Family Support (1) Child, Family and Community Development.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me how many children are housed in hotels and motels on average? My understanding is that two hotels are being used and at least one motel. The minister might have more accurate information on that, but I am interested in how many children are staying there.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, it averages around 40, but it has been as high as 80.

Mr. Martindale: The reason I am asking is that some of these facilities are apartment suite hotels, they are staffed 24 hours a day, and there must be a tremendous cost to this. I am wondering why such a large number of children are being provided temporary accommodation in this way.

Mrs. Mitchelson: My honourable friend has raised an issue that is of major concern to our government, and I think the cost annually for kids in hotels is around $2,500,000, and that is significant. It is of great concern and it is something that has been identified as a real issue, and we are working with the agency to try to resolve it. I know at one point in time the agency indicated that they did not have enough foster homes to place children in, and, as a result, I said: Well, why are you not doing some sort of a recruitment or an advertising campaign? I think they did as a result find some additional foster parents, but I think it is not certainly a place of choice or the treatment of choice. We need to address that issue.

Mr. Martindale: Well, I would assume as well that it was a lack of foster homes, and I am wondering if the minister can tell me why she thinks the agency cannot find sufficient foster homes. Could it be related to the reduction in rates that have happened in recent years?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It is interesting to note that many of the children that are in hotels are young children. Many of them are aboriginal children, and I think that comes back again to the need to involve the aboriginal community in a significant way in trying to identify what some of the care options might be. I know in our discussions with Ma Mawi they have indicated that they are prepared to aggressively pursue recruitment of culturally appropriate foster homes, so we are working on it. I would hope that by next year we could report some significant improvement in that circumstance.

Mr. Martindale: What is being done to assist or enable Ma Mawi to find more foster homes?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we have requested that Ma Mawi and the Winnipeg agency sit down and develop a course of action that might enable recruitment of foster homes, and they are presently going through a process where I believe Ma Mawi has indicated that they believe they can find 40 foster homes. So that process is underway. They are sitting down, and they are talking at the present time.

Mr. Martindale: This minister often talks about family intervention and family unification and keeping families together and preservation and prevention. It seems to me that, if all of these initiatives were working, we would not have so many children in hotels and motels. Why is it we allocate money for these new initiatives but we still have an increasing number of children in hotels and motels?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I indicated it is as much a concern to me as it is to my honourable friend, and I think that is probably one of the reasons we put out our document called Families First: New Directions for Strengthening the Partnership. In the document it talks about a community-based approach to dealing with some of these issues. I know I have had the opportunity to sit down with aboriginal women around the table in my office and ask whether they felt there was a desire to participate in a very meaningful process with a community approach where they might become involved early on in the case planning, in the identification of what might be the most appropriate plan, do some family conferencing, family mediation, case planning in a very significant way, and they are prepared to work with us. I think that was one of the reasons we determined that we should probably move in this direction.

Let us, when it comes to trying to maintain or develop healthy families, look at those in the community that have been successful and see how they can share some of that experience and expertise with others that are struggling. Through the community consultations that we have had, I think time and time again there is a desire, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, to have community, community agencies, community organizations involved in the process of helping to provide the kind of support that is needed to strengthen families.

*(1630)

So I indicated that we will be making some announcements fairly shortly on some pilot projects around the province that will in fact look at this model as a very really option for families.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if there has been an increasing number of children requiring Level 4 and 5 foster care?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, there certainly have been requests from the agency for additional costs for exceptional circumstances of children, so there is not necessarily a higher number of children. It is a price issue or a cost issue, and they are requesting more money for exceptional circumstances.

Mr. Martindale: And has the minister agreed to provide additional money for these exceptional costs?

Mrs. Mitchelson: That has been some of the issues around their deficit and we have picked up those additional costs through special warrant or additional funding, so I guess the short answer is yes.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister confirm for me that Winnipeg Child and Family Services is contracting with Medox to hire employees for staffing hotels and motels?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, yes, they are.

Mr. Martindale: Do these staff have any training in child care or anything related to the kinds of children in their care?

Mrs. Mitchelson: The agency has the responsibility to ensure that the appropriate staff with the appropriate training are hired to provide the services, and they inform us that the individuals that are performing these services are licensed and have the ability or the capability to deliver that service.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister explain what she means when she says that they are licensed, the individuals are licensed?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I do not whether licensing is the appropriate terminology to use, except to say that these people who would be hired through Medox would have to meet the requirements of any professional or paraprofessional that delivered nursing services or home support services in the health care system, and that would probably be a requirement of being hired by Medox to deliver a service. So I guess that is what I am trying to indicate is that they would have to be qualified based on the standards that would be set by a firm like Medox or any other firm that they might use to deliver those services.

Mr. Martindale: Well, it is my understanding that Medox requires that they only have a Grade 12 education and that they are getting paid $6.50 an hour and that they have almost no qualifications. In fact, I was told that one worked at a hotel, another one was a waitress at a bar. So are these people being hired primarily to do babysitting, or are they actually required to have a child care background or social work background?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I guess I will reiterate that the agency has the responsibility to ensure that the staff that are caring for children in care have the right qualifications, and I guess that, if my honourable friend has some circumstances or individual situations that he is aware of that tells him or me that that is not the case, I would certainly have to approach the agency and consider that a very serious concern. So, if there is information that we could share, and we do not have to do it on the record, but I would certainly want to investigate and ask some very direct questions of the agency to get the answers.

Mr. Martindale: Well, I thank the minister for that undertaking, and I will try to verify the information and provide it to the minister. Can the minister tell me if there is any kind of training available for foster parents?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Training for foster parents is delivered on an agency-by-agency basis. We fund agencies, I think, 50 cents per day in care for training for foster parents, and then it is the agency's responsibility. But I understand that we have just recently called together the provincial foster care co-ordinators and foster parents to look at some sort of a strategy to see whether we can have a province-wide training process, so that is in the works right now.

Mr. Martindale: Do all of the agencies provide the training?

Mrs. Mitchelson: My understanding is that there is not a consistent approach agency by agency. Some do more formalized types of training, whereas others do smaller groups, mentoring type of training. I guess that is one of the reasons we have called the co-ordinators together around the province to see whether there cannot be some consistent format that is used for training of foster parents.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister provide for me the list of the current foster care rates in effect in Manitoba?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, we will get that and provide it.

*(1640)

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if there is a policy regarding foster parents having ongoing contact with foster children who leave their homes and go to another foster home or to a permanent placement?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It is my understanding that a plan is developed for every individual child based on their individual needs, and in some cases that may happen and in others, not, I guess depending on the individual circumstances.

Mr. Chairperson: Resolution 9.4 Child and Family Services (a) Child and Family Support (1) Child, Family and Community Development (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $4,295,700--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $2,860,400--pass; (c) Maintenance of Children and External Agencies--

Mr. Martindale: On several occasions the minister and I have discussed the minister's policy of whether or not she would release recommendations made by the Chief Medical Examiner regarding children who die in the care of a child welfare agency with the caveat, which I cannot remember right now--with the caveat that the recommendations, I guess, do not have any legal implications. I cannot remember what the caveat is. The minister will remind me because the minister always has the caveat, but on several occasions the minister has publicly promised to make public the recommendations. We are still waiting. The minister has not acted on this promise. I am wondering if the minister is finally willing to make public recommendations made by the Chief Medical Examiner.

Mrs. Mitchelson: We have been working on this and discussing this with the Chief Medical Examiner, and sometimes the nature of his reports is very difficult. I mean, you are sort of--if we take the onus or responsibility of pulling out of his reports what we believe is not confidential or not identifying, it is difficult from time to time. I guess we have been discussing the nature and the way his reports are written and whether we need a different format so that a certain portion could be released that would be standard. There are still some issues to sort out with this. I want to indicate, though, that we have made a commitment that we will release recommendations, and we will do that. I am not sure exactly what that format will be, and we have been back and forth and up and down. It is not a really easy issue to deal with, but in fact we will be releasing the recommendations. I just wish I had a clearer answer for my honourable friend, but it will happen. It will be at least on an annual basis at minimum, and the format still has not been completely finalized.

Mr. Martindale: Well, this kind of reminds me of the minister's commitment to proclaim The Vulnerable Persons Act, which she said she would do soon, and to get a course at Red River College, a full-time training course for youth care workers, which was promised soon. I am not going to hold my breath. I might be asking the same question next year in Estimates, but I will expect some progress in that regard.

I do have some of the recommendations to the minister from one of the Chief Medical Examiner's reports, and it is not really necessary to say which report or which death it is because

I think the recommendations are good ones. I would be interested in knowing if the minister and if the agency being referred to have made any progress in implementing any of these recommendations. Now I believe these recommendations apply to Winnipeg Child and Family Services where the Chief Medical Examiner recommended that the agency implement the information system in its daily casework. I presume that refers to the computer program.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, it does, and that has been done.

Mr. Martindale: It was recommended that the Child and Family Support Branch perform an immediate qualitative assessment audit of child protection files in Winnipeg Northwest area to ensure that program standards for case supervision and case documentation are met. Has that taken place?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, Mr. Chairperson, that was done.

Mr. Martindale: It was recommended that the agency comply with program standards for social assessments with respect to child protection cases. Has that been done?

Mrs. Mitchelson: As a result of some of those recommendations or that kind of recommendation on an ongoing basis, we have restructured the branch and put an additional focus on compliance. We have a director of compliance now that is ensuring accountability of the agencies for enforcing or following the standards. What we are in the process of doing right now, though, is trying to make those standards more user-friendly. It is very difficult when you have a set of standards this high. What is the priority, and how do you start or begin to ensure that you are following standards? I think we are trying to put them into a format that the agencies will be able to use more comprehensively as a result of clarity of--with a particular emphasis on safety issues as a priority in following standards. We are in the process of doing that, and I think we are near completion of the rewriting of those standards so that they will be much more user-friendly and staff in the agencies will be able to follow through.

Mr. Martindale: It was recommended that the agency comply with standards of service planning and implementing service plans on all protection files. Is that taking place?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, that is the kind of thing that we are focusing on through our director of compliance and that function, and that is to ensure when we identify through an audit of a file that standards are not being followed or things are not being complied with that in fact we bring that to the agency's attention immediately and ask for it to be resolved. But this is all part of the rewriting of the standards that will very soon be shared with the agencies and implemented right across the province.

Mr. Martindale: It was recommended that the agency review with its staff the relationship between family violence and the assessment of risk for children. Is that being done?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We will be indicating very strongly once we get the new standards shared with the agencies. One of the concerns, I guess, of ours has been is that the risk estimation has not been consistently followed, and we will be demanding that of agencies.

Mr. Martindale: The Chief Medical Examiner recommended that the Child and Family Support Branch develop and implement a standard for custody assessments by independent nonagency assessors. Has that taken place?

*(1650)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I guess one of the compelling reasons for bringing services for children together under one roof was to ensure that Family Dispute, Family Conciliation, and Child and Family Support were all together. There are different programs, and I guess what we wanted to ensure was that there was an assessment tool right across all programs in different areas of the department. So we have brought all of those areas together, and we want to ensure that there is consistency in our approach program by program.

Mr. Martindale: I am not sure I understand the answer to that question. The recommendation was about custody assessments by independent nonagency assessors.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I guess we share the same concern that agencies that are hiring outside assessment are hiring people that are qualified and competent to do the job, and I would imagine that there may be more light shed on that individual circumstance in the months to come that would help us determine what needs to be asked of the agencies. I do not want to get into--

Mr. Martindale: I do not want to get into specifics either, and I do not think the recommendation is specific. I think it is a general recommendation that there be standards for custody assessments by independent nonagency assessors, presumably, the standard would apply to all nonagency assessors. Has there been a standard implemented?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, Mr. Chairperson, we are creating a standard for quality assessments, but we have not been able to influence who agencies hire to do those assessments. So there could be a standard for the quality, but we do not ultimately hire the assessment people. It is up to the agency themselves to hire that person and ensure that they meet the standards of a quality assessment.

Mr. Martindale: So, in other words, the minister is saying that because a child and family service agency may hire someone to do an assessment, the minister does not have any control over it and there is no assurance of quality, because anyone can hang out a shingle saying they are a social worker or a psychologist, and a child and family service agency could hire such a person and the administrator or the branch could not enforce the standards at this time.

Mrs. Mitchelson: That is, I guess, exactly the reason we have a concern and why we are trying to work toward finding a resolution to that problem. We can set the standards but we cannot--I mean, I guess, we cannot necessarily control each individual case. My honourable friend is right that I would just hope that the agencies, when they are choosing people to do those kinds of assessments, would be checking into the background and ensuring that they have the qualified people. So we are concerned and we are trying to find a way to make that happen.

Mr. Martindale: But the minister controls the purse strings. Why can you not say we are not going to authorize any funds to your agency to hire X, Y or Z, but we would authorize funding if you hire A, B and C who meet the standards? Why do you not use your funding as a method of compliance?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I guess, therein lies the dilemma in the whole child welfare system in the supports that go to families, not only through social workers but for any type of practitioner that does deal with children. It is an issue that has been discussed at the national level. Interprovincially, we have discussed this at ministers of social services meetings indicating that there really is a dilemma around the whole issue of licensing or having some sort of a governing body that is responsible for people that work with children.

We are not unique in the country. There is not any province that has anything in place, and when you see some of the issues that have arisen in Manitoba, in Ontario and British Columbia around children--can I say--falling through the cracks and dying as a result of circumstances that have taken place, I think it is very important that we start to look at what can practically be done. I guess, the issue in this area or this field is that it is not necessarily only social workers that practise--licensing the social worker profession is not necessarily the answer because there are many others that work with children in the child welfare system that are not social workers. So it is what kind of certification or what kind of a recourse is there if someone does not do good practice with children, whether it be social worker or any other kind of work.

I suppose one of the reasons no province has moved on this is because it is a very complex issue. I think when you look at the report that was done as the result of the review of The Child and Family Services Act, you will see that there is a recommendation, and it is not a legislative recommendation, but it was a recommendation that we need to start to look at some sort of a licensing or certification process. We have agreed as a result of that recommendation to strike a committee of an interdisciplinary committee. We have not struck it yet, but we will be to take a look at the whole licensing and certification issue.

I am not sure it is going to be a short-term easy solution to come to, but we have to start somewhere. I think, it is the kind of information that we have agreed as ministers of social services to talk about at our annual meetings and to see whether there is any information that we can share or any direction that we might be going. Is somebody any further ahead than we are? Is there anything we can learn from that experience? As I have indicated, it is a dilemma for all of us because none of us have anything in place, and it is kind of scary.

Mr. Martindale: It was recommended that the Minister of Family Services request that the Department of Justice explore the possibility and legal ramifications of law enforcement personnel sharing with Child and Family Services information that they may have in their files. Has this discussion taken place with the Department of Justice?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, in fact, there are amendments in our legislative package that will address that issue.

* (1700)

Mr. Martindale: It was recommended that a computer link be established between the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner and the Child and Family Services Information Systems to facilitate the preparation of future reports. Was that acted on or not?

Mrs. Mitchelson: There is not a computer link per se, but we share all information that is available within 24 hours of an incident taking place.

Mr. Martindale: What does the minister mean by "an incident"?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It would be a child's death.

Mr. Martindale: What kinds of information would be shared?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Any information that we have in the department and any information that the agency has.

Mr. Martindale: During the public hearings regarding amendments to the Children's Advocate section of The Child and Family Services Act, it was very interesting to learn new and very positive things about some of the aboriginal agencies in Manitoba. I guess the one that impressed everyone in the committee the most was Awasis Agency, and it seems that they have made some fundamental changes, I think, without permission from the department but, I guess, the changes must have been good ones and then tacitly approved somehow. It seems to me that the changes that they have made must be working, because Awasis is not in the news anymore and they have not been for a couple of years.

Meanwhile, we have other agencies, namely Anishinaabe who are in the news from time to time, and I understand from a Free Press article that they agreed to have someone from the Child and Family Support branch in their agency in an active capacity. I could go into all kinds of detailed questions about the problems at Anishinaabe, but given the time restraints I would rather ask, I think I am forced to ask, a much more general question and that is: Why can we not transfer some of the very positive learnings and changes and success stories from one agency and implement them in another? Other than, I guess, the fact that they are autonomous agencies, it is a little hard to force those changes on them. But another example would be West Region, where I understand that the average level of the staff has increased about five or six years in the last eight or nine years. West Region is very seldom in the news as well. So can the minister tell me if there is some way, or is she interested, or are you trying to get other agencies to learn from some of the success stories, so that they can turn their agencies around so that the political interference that has been a problem will no longer exist?

In fact, I was quite pleasantly surprised when I found that the chiefs constitute the board at Awasis. I never would have guessed that had I not been told because other agencies--I constantly hear complaints about political interference because the board is made up of chiefs, but obviously they are doing something very different at Awasis. I am looking forward to finishing the book that they have written about their agency, and the executive director has sent me a copy of his thesis, and I am looking forward to reading that as soon as we get out of Estimates in another week or two. I wonder if the minister can answer this general question about how we can transfer some of these learnings and success stories to other agencies that are perennially plagued with problems?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Interesting comments. I wish I had an easy answer to that question, too. I think it does take leadership in order for that kind of--and an open mind to a new way of doing things. I mean, certainly, I think Awasis would be very prepared to share their success with anyone that was willing to look at a different way of doing things.

I think that we have learned something as a government from some of the successes in the aboriginal agencies. I think some of the models that we have presented in our Families First document and the partnerships with community, family conferencing, family mediation, working together to preserve families, looking at extended family, as some of the solutions to the problems are probably certain things that we have been able to learn and discover have worked in the North in some of our aboriginal agencies and very possibly could work in sort of a restructured or redirected Winnipeg agency. So I think there are some positives that not only could other aboriginal agencies learn, but we certainly have learned some things from their positive experiences.

I cannot force Anishinaabe to invite some of the positive experiences or the people from Awasis in, but I think through the individual that is working with Anishinaabe from the department, we can try to replicate, educate those that are working on the front lines at Anishinaabe to some of the successes that have taken place so we can, through that process, introduce the kinds of activities that are happening at Awasis and, hopefully, could be positive for Anishinaabe. So that is one of the reasons we have someone in there. I think us having that ability to share what has worked elsewhere, hopefully, will have a positive impact on what is happening at Anishinaabe.

Mr. Martindale: I certainly hope that there is some success in transferring these ideas. Maybe we need to put the executive director from Awasis in there for a while. Something certainly needs to be done.

I would like to move on and ask the minister some questions about MacDonald Youth Services. My colleague the minister for Osborne (Ms. McGifford) wrote to the minister on December 17, 1996, regarding funding for their youth resource centre. They were requesting an additional $40,000. I see from the grants to External Agencies that their grant is the same this year as last year, so I am wondering if this request for additional funding was met or not.

Mrs. Mitchelson: The program has been maintained at MacDonald Youth but it has been through reallocation of resources internally within MacDonald Youth Services which we have worked on with them that has allowed the program to be sustained, so it would not be an increase in their grant. It was sort of reprioritization or reallocation of resources internally.

Mr. Martindale: MacDonald Youth Services is happy with this arrangement?

* (1710)

Mrs. Mitchelson: We will continue to work with them. They would like to see a long-term commitment to fix this problem. I think that would be our ultimate objective, too, so we are working with them to try to accomplish that.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if the repatriation program only has federal money in it or is there a provincial contribution as well?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Okay, I am not sure what my honourable friend is asking, because there are a couple of different types of repatriation and one of them is adopted children that were adopted out and were trying to--

An Honourable Member: That is the one I am thinking of.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Okay. There has not been a request since 1993, but we do have an allocation of $25,000 in our budget should it be required.

(Mr. Jack Penner, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

Mr. Martindale: I have with me an article from the Free Press dated September 21, '96, entitled Native Agencies Hit Cut and this has to do with a federal cut of $2.2 million in funding for preventive services. The story says that Elsie Flett, director of West Region Child and Family Services said she and other agency directors estimate the resulting increase, the number of children in care, will cost about 15 times more than keeping children at home. The story also said that they were going to Ottawa to protest this cut and try and get the funding restored. I am wondering if the federal government did restore this funding or not.

Mrs. Mitchelson: My honourable friend raises a real issue, certainly an issue that I have discussed with native agencies, and it just seems to be going in the opposite direction to the direction we are going as a province. We have talked about strategies. I know that they have certainly grudgingly signed their new funding agreements with the federal government with a caveat saying that they are not pleased, but they almost felt like they are being blackmailed into signing these agreements.

I have raised this at provincial meetings, at our meetings with our federal counterparts. I guess, we have been successful in restoring some of the money as a result of our complaints. The big issue will be now that the Liberal government has another mandate in Ottawa--did they restore the money on a one-year basis to get them through an election campaign and will we see that money disappear again? I do not know, but it is a concern that we have and we want to do everything we can within our power, along with the native agencies, to ensure that that money is maintained in that direction, the direction that continues to be taken, because we did feel that if you have to take kids into care to get the funding, that is going in the wrong direction especially in view of the success that Awasis has had in reducing the number of kids in care and developing healthier families.

Mr. Martindale: It is just too bad that the independent members of the Manitoba Legislature are not here today to hear this discussion. I would like to ask the minister how many names have been added to the Child Abuse Registry as a result of Bill 35 of last year?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We will have to get that information and provide it.

Mr. Martindale: I wonder if, in a more general way, the minister could tell me if the law is working the way it is intended, that people who have been convicted are having their names added to the registry?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes. They are.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 9.4. Child and Family Services (a) Child and Family Support (1) Child, Family and Community Development (c) Maintenance of Children and External Agencies $104,264,700--that is a big number--pass; (d) The Family Support Innovations Fund $2,500,000--pass.

9.4(2) Family Conciliation (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $727,700--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $156,700--pass. [interjection] Pardon? I am sorry, $156,700. We just about gave you $100 million. Just about.

9.4(3) Family Dispute Services (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $300,100.

Mr. Martindale: I would not want to give this minister more money than what is in this budget. I have some questions about shelters. The first one has to do with the length of stay, and it is my understanding that the Pedlar report recommended that the initial allowable stay for a woman at a shelter be increased to 30 days from the current 10 days. I am wondering if the minister, since she has had the Pedlar report for some considerable time, can tell me if this was considered and what the result was?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I think Manitoba is held out as a very progressive province with a continuum of services that certainly is not available in many other provinces for not only the shelter system but other services for abused women which might be second-stage housing and counselling services.

There is not any set number of days that a woman remains in shelter. I think what we want to accomplish is to ensure that there is a safe place for a woman to go but that because we have a continuum of services that can move and support women as they move into second-stage housing and become more independent, that we assess the length of stay based on an individual basis. Shelters do determine on a case-by-case basis how long a woman needs to stay in shelter and where she might go and develop a plan for that woman as she moves out of shelter and into some other form of support service.

If a woman needs to stay in shelter for 30 days, she will be in shelter. If she needed to stay longer, that would be accommodated. There is no set time. I guess, the main goal and objective is to try to ensure that there is a plan that will lead to some independence at some point in time, and sometimes that can happen sooner and on a case-by-case basis than it can in other circumstances. So a shelter is not always the best place for a woman that is abused; it is communal living. There is a lot of stress associated and related and it might be to a woman's advantage to move into some other form of support service, whether it be second-stage housing or some form of independence sooner rather than later for the benefit of that individual. So it is on a case-by-case basis and the stay can be as long or as short as is required.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me if funding shelters includes funding for counselling children and youth?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, it does.

* (1720)

Mr. Martindale: Given the funding cutbacks by the federal government, can the minister tell me if shelters in Manitoba are going to have predictable and stable long-term funding?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, very definitely, Mr. Chairperson, and in spite of federal reductions we have been able to maintain and, in some circumstances, provide more support. So I am very pleased to say that we have one of the most comprehensive support systems for abused women right across the country. Many provinces call on a regular basis and look to Manitoba as a leader in this area and, in some instances, follow our direction.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister indicate where there has been increased support?

Mrs. Mitchelson: The three areas of increased support in this year's budget where support for L'Entre-Temps, second-stage program, or Lakeshore Women's Resource Centre, the crisis office there, and Pluri-elles was the other. The Native Women's Transition Centre got some increase. There is some additional money, another $100,000, that will be announced as allocated in the very near future to certain projects.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister indicate if there were any plans to restore funding to the Flin Flon/Creighton Crisis Centre?

Mrs. Mitchelson: The Northern Women's Resource Service and the Flin Flon-Creighton Crisis Centre have joined forces, and they will be opening a new blended service model in Flin Flon in June, I believe, of this year that will provide a safe home, a short-term stay, counselling services and follow-up.

Mr. Martindale: Given that when women leave abusive situations, frequently their lives are in danger, is the minister willing to guarantee these women after they leave a shelter that they will have money in their social assistance budget for a telephone, primarily for safety reasons?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We do provide telephone services where it is indicated that there are health issues or security issues.

Mr. Martindale: It is my understanding that some provinces are moving to a new system whereby men are removed from the home rather than a woman fleeing from an abusive situation. I wonder if the minister has any information about this and whether any studies have been done as to the effectiveness of this system and whether it is a better, more viable system, or whether there are risks for women in this very different matter of dealing with domestic violence.

Mrs. Mitchelson: We do not have a structured program as such, but from time to time we certainly do have the capacity here in Manitoba to remove the male from the home situation. The police can come out and arrest a man and take him away, and the woman can get a restraining order, so that does happen from time to time now, where the woman and her children may be able to stay in the home with a restraining order. I think it is sort of assessed on an individual basis. Is their safety and security and anonymity required for a period of time, which would mean that a woman and her children might have to be moved out of the home circumstance and start a life somewhere else.

But I think it is--well, it is usually determined on an individual basis based on the circumstances, the situation, and what is in the best interests of the woman and her children.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): 9.4(a)(3) Family Dispute Services (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $300,100--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $87,600--pass; (c) External Agencies $5,538,000--pass.

9.4(b) Children's Special Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $293,000--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $276,800--pass.

Mr. Martindale: I almost missed Children's Special Services.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): I was just rolling through it.

Mr. Martindale: I would not want to do that because, of all the parts of the minister's budget last year, I think the biggest screw-up occurred in this budget line. I have a rather thick file of letters from parents and phone calls from parents. I did not bring it with me today. I am quite sure the minister is familiar with all my correspondence, because most of it was copies of correspondence to her. I am sure that her file is even thicker.

The most amazing thing to me, and I am just going by memory, I do not have any questions written down, but I remember it vividly, I am sure the minister remembers it vividly, is that we approved the budget in late May or early June, and on July 29 people got a letter saying that their respite service was cut for the rest of the year. It was unbelievable that this would happen so early in the fiscal year.

Somebody really, really got the budgeting or something wrong last year. It was a disaster. The minister knows that as well as I do. Her colleagues in the Conservative caucus got lots of letters, and I am sure there was lots of pressure on the minister. The minister went to Treasury Board, and she should be commended for standing up to the big boys and getting some money out of Treasury Board. Not all her colleagues are willing to stand up to the Minister of Finance and the secretary of Treasury Board, but this minister did, and I think she should be commended for that, even on the record, because she got some more money. I do not think that happens very often, especially now at the beginning of a fiscal year.

We have special warrants and we bail out Child and Family Services and other agencies near the end of the fiscal year, but considering that this was in the middle of the fiscal year, it was almost miraculous. But I do have some questions, and I would like to ask the minister: What happened with the budgeting process last year? Why were these parents all of a sudden told that their respite hours were cut so drastically?

* (1730)

Mrs. Mitchelson: If I can try to explain what happened, Mr. Chairperson, I guess from the year before we tried or attempted to meet the demand that was out there, and I guess the budget was overexpended. Then we got into the new fiscal year and I guess we had not accommodated for a full year's costs for the money that we had allocated on a part-year basis the year before so, therefore, when it was annualized in a full fiscal year, there was not enough money.

So that is what happened. I guess as we went back then and looked at the budget and certainly as a result of the issue being brought forward by parents that were experiencing some problems, we assessed, evaluated, and looked at immediately the situation. I went back and managed to get some additional resources to fix the problem. I do want to indicate to you that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) is, quite frankly, very supportive of a lot of the programs and the issues in the Department of Family Services. He certainly understands the issues. I would not want to leave on the record the impression that I agree with my honourable friend when he talks about the big, bad boys.

Mr. Martindale: I did not say they were bad. I just said they were big boys.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I am not sure what the terminology or phraseology was, just that the Minister of Finance and I have a very good working relationship. Certainly he understands and sympathizes with the issues that we have to deal with in Family Services.

Mr. Martindale: I am sure that all those parents who needed respite were grateful as well that the minister had a good relationship with the Minister of Finance and was able to get bailed out of this crisis. Could the minister tell me how much additional money was requested and received from Treasury Board?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Midyear last year we got an additional around a million dollars. On top of that, we have another $1.965 million this year.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me what the additional money will be spent on for this year?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It is basically for supplies, equipment, and respite.

Mr. Martindale: Is there a list of external agencies that the minister could table or share with me?

Mrs. Mitchelson: There are only three external agencies in this area. One would be SMD; the other would be the St. Amant outreach program; and the other is Community Respite Services.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): 9.4(b)(3) Financial Assistance and External Agencies $8,844,400--pass.

9.4(c) Child Day Care (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits.

Mr. Martindale: I have very few questions here as well. I am not sure that it is because things are all that different. I suspect it is because the minister appointed a review committee and the committee is working co-operatively with the child care community, the Manitoba Family Day Care Association and the Manitoba Child Care Association, so there are very few complaints at this time.

Does the minister plan to have the current committee that is meeting about regulations continue to meet on an ongoing basis?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, Mr. Chairperson.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister indicate when there might be amendments to the regulations?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I think the committee is looking at short-, medium-, and long-term issues that need to be dealt with. There will be some that by fall will be changed. Others will take longer, and others will take considerably longer as they work through the process. They will determine what can be achieved and what there is consensus on up front, then what will take more dialogue and discussion to fix.

Mr. Martindale: I said I only had one question under Child Day Care. Maybe I should say one significant question. I do have a number of questions, as you can see, but most of them are fairly general. Last year I got numerous complaints, and I am sure the minister's office did and the Child Day Care Branch did about reallocation of subsidy cases. There were quite a number of daycare directors who were upset that they lost supposedly vacant cases, but they all had reasons why these cases were only temporarily vacant. That all died down, and I am not sure why. Is it because people got subsidy cases back? Is it because they learned to live with the new system, having lost those cases and not got them returned?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We did not reallocate cases as such. I guess what we tried and what we are trying to do on a pilot basis is, we have 400 portable cases that can be provided on an as-needed basis throughout the system where there is a demand for support for working. Some of them will be used by Taking Charge!, but others have been used, and obviously it seems to be meeting the demand and it seems to be working fairly successfully, but it will be part of the ongoing regulatory review. We are looking at how we can best use the spaces that we have and the resources that we have available with input from parents and from those that are working in the system. It seems to have worked fairly well, and we will continue to monitor that.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister use the regulatory review committee, the joint committee for future budget decisions?

* (1740)

Mrs. Mitchelson: We always take advice from the community on what they believe the requirements might be in any specific area but, ultimately, budgetary decisions are made through a government and a Treasury Board process. We certainly do value the input from anyone that makes recommendations on where our need might be but, ultimately, it is a government decision on what would be allocated.

Mr. Martindale: I believe all of us as MLAs receive an annual report from Red River Community College. They survey their graduates and compile the results. Under Child Care Services they have got a four-year comparison of employed respondents as to the number of employed respondents and training-related occupation and average annual salary. For their child care graduates the average annual salary, I guess this would be recent graduates, newly employed in child care centres, $20,423 in 1994-95. This is the most recent report that I received. I believe it was $18,628. Can the minister tell me why the average salary of their graduates--in one case you are talking about 18 graduates; the most recent survey 21 graduates--why has the salary gone down almost $2,000 a year?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I do not think we have an easy answer to that question. Maybe what we need to do is examine the annual report from Red River Community College and try to make some sense of that and discuss this when we have that information together. So it is the annual report of Red River Community College?

Mr. Martindale: It is possible I do not have that correct. It could be actually a survey of their graduates that I am referring to, but I will give you the page, and you can always phone Red River College and get more information. If the minister could add that to her list of things that she is going to get back to me on, I would appreciate it.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Okay.

Mr. Martindale: As the minister knows, we had a very tragic fire in Manitoba within the last year where a child died. I am wondering if the minister has considered requiring sprinkler systems in daycare centres.

Mrs. Mitchelson: The sprinkler systems are a building code issue. In some instances they are required. In other facilities, they are not. We are not looking at making it a requirement at this point in time. What we want to do is ensure that there is a plan of action should there be any fire. I mean, there should be a fire procedure or process in place at every facility.

Mr. Martindale: So the minister considered making sprinkler systems compulsory but decided not to?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, at this point in time we are not looking at making a sprinkler system compulsory.

Mr. Martindale: Is there some reason why not other than the cost?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Cost is one of the factors. I guess if we have dollars to spend, we would want to ensure that staff are trained and that there is a fire preparedness plan of action should anything occur. I think that our dollars would be best spent trying to ensure that there is a plan of action in place. I suppose in some instances, a centre that has been around for a long period of time and has never experienced any problems or any difficulties, under the circumstances, might not think that a sprinkler system is the highest priority.

Mr. Martindale: Well, I am disappointed it is not a priority for your government. The minister has had correspondence, and I have had correspondence from an individual who has children who have a peanut butter allergy. My understanding is, when this parent went to the board of directors of her local daycare where her children were enrolled, asked that the daycare have a rule requiring that parents not send peanut butter with their children, that the board would not agree and would not pass such a rule.

However, it is a life-threatening situation, as the minister knows, that some children who are allergic to peanut butter could die from contact or ingesting peanut butter. I am wondering in the course of the regulation review if the minister is considering or would consider a ban or restriction on peanut butter in daycare centres?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I think the individual issue has been resolved. Certainly the regulatory review committee is examining the issue very seriously. They have been working with Children's Special Services, Education and Training, and we have also been working with children's allergists to try to determine what the best course of action should be. I think education of parents and child care providers is the first thing that really needs to be done to focus on ensuring that children with life-threatening allergies are safe in child care settings. So that is one of the focuses, I think.

Through the process of review and through the regulatory review committee, they have come to a decision that parent education is one of the key factors, that they are not sure that they will ban peanut butter across the board but, if in fact there is a circumstance where a child does have an allergy, it would be banned in that centre? I am trying to get a nod.

* (1750)

In addition to that, it has been recommended by the allergy specialist at the Children's Hospital that in fact when the regulatory review committee is reviewing the regulations they write into regulation a ban on serving of peanut butter to any child under the age of three years, because it is their immune system that is not developed up until that time, and there is more of a chance of a severe allergic reaction. So he has recommended that, and I think they are considering that seriously as an amendment to the regulation.

Mr. Martindale: This maybe is not fair to the minister since all her staff at Income Security are not here, but the deputy minister is here, a very knowledgable person. Is the minister considering contracting out or privatizing any part of Income Security?

Mrs. Mitchelson: No, Mr. Chairperson.

Mr. Martindale: Is the minister or her government entering into any contracts with Andersen consulting in the area of Income Assistance?

Mrs. Mitchelson: No.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): 9.4(c) Child Day Care (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,964,500--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $478,900--pass; (3) Financial Assistance and Grants $40,503,900--pass.

Resolution 9.4: BE IT RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $173,092,400 for Family Services for the fiscal year ending the 3lst day of March, 1998.

The last item to be considered for the Estimates of the Department of Family Services is item 1.(a) Minister's Salary $25,700--pass.

Mr. Martindale: I know that the Chairperson would not allow that to slip by me. I have some concerns about the minister and how she handles parts of her department, particularly policy decisions in the area of Income Assistance or whatever the new name is now. I did compliment the minister for going to Treasury Board and getting some money for respite for Children's Special Services, but I am not at all convinced that the minister is as understanding or aware of the problems in the area of Income Assistance and poverty. I am not just talking about the rates of assistance, but I am talking about job creation and a whole bunch of things.

For example, this minister has told us that, well, in a press release that about 800 single parents got jobs. As we know, it is a very small percentage of the over 12,000 single parents that are on Income Assistance. We also know that the government, when they announced their so-called welfare reform last year, deemed single parents of children six to 18 years old employable, and we did not quarrel with that particularly, but what we have quarrelled with since then is the inference that single parents with children under six did not have to work or seek employment.

However, we have discovered that there is a huge loophole in this part of the regulations that says that if they have received any kind of employment, training, or upgrading that they are deemed employable. Consequently, I am getting phone calls from individuals with babies as young as 10 weeks where the employment expectation is on these single parents. It is extremely difficult for them to find employment when they have such young children, unless of course they are fortunate enough to have subsidized child care.

The result is that all kinds of horrendous stories and circumstances are coming to our attention. For example, a single parent, and the minister will be familiar with some of these examples from the media, a single parent who got a job in a doughnut shop making around minimum wage and only getting three to five days a week of work. Consequently her work income was hundreds of dollars less a month than Income Assistance. She had so little money that she could not afford even private babysitting arrangements. So a friend in the same apartment building is looking after the child, and sometimes the only food that was sent with the individual was a banana.

Now I think that there is something fundamentally wrong when an individual with young children is forced to work and their income is less than social assistance, when they should be able to benefit from going to work. They should be at least allowed the work incentive which I believe is $90 a month, that there should be an exemption from earnings that makes them better off financially rather than worse off.

I know of another example where an individual wanted to go to an adult learning centre, and the worker would not allow the individual to go to the adult learning centre. This example was a very interesting one because it was her grandmother that phoned me and said, you know, I was aware of the minister's announcement and so I said to my 17-year-old granddaughter, who is a single parent, you have six years to get an education and get yourself ready for work so that at least within the six years you can get into the paid workforce because after that there is going to be increasing pressure for you to find work. So this is your opportunity to do something about it now.

Her granddaughter took that seriously, and she applied to go to an adult learning centre, I think, to get her Grade 12, and her worker would not let her. Instead, the worker coerced her into taking a parenting course which she did not want to take. Then when she applied to go to the learning centre she was told she could not because she had taken a parenting course. Now, it seems to me that there is something wrong here when someone wants to get a formal education and is told to take what is essentially a babysitting course. Now, that individual did advocate for herself, or her grandmother did, and the result was that she was allowed to go to the learning centre. It was only because of publicity. It was only because, you know, this minister did not want it on the front page of the Free Press, because this is one of the examples where the individual might have gone public because she had other people advocating for her.

Now, most of these individuals will not go public, and so when I phone the minister's department, or when I raise these examples in Question Period or Estimates, the minister says, well, give me the names and we will investigate and see if there is something we can do. But we cannot, because these individuals are so intimidated that they are unwilling to come forward. In fact, I tried to arrange a meeting with a group of single-parent women, and they were unwilling to meet with me because they do not trust people in government even though I am not in government. I am official opposition. They were unwilling to meet with me in spite of being told, you know, who I was and what my role was. They are so oppressed, these individuals, that they will not even allow other people to advocate on their behalf.

In the few minutes remaining before we have to adjourn I would like to have the minister respond, particularly to the problem I am raising of the hardships that are being placed on single parents with children under six because of this very unrealistic work expectation being placed on them when we know, if you look at statistics of people in the paid workforce, that there is a natural progression from parenting to paid work when the youngest child reaches six. The statistics will tell you that if you care to look at it, that most people get a job when they are able to because their children are full time in school. But, in fairness, I should give the minister a little bit of time to respond today before we continue tomorrow.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, there certainly are a lot of comments that I need to put on the record to rebut a lot of the things my honourable friend has said that are in reality not factual at all. I have some numbers that I can provide for him that indicate how many single parents with children under the age of six have had the work expectation placed upon them and for what reasons that has occurred, and indicate to him, too, that some of the information that has been in the media--

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): I would like to interject here. Is it the will of the committee to extend the sitting for a few minutes to let the minister respond? [agreed]

Mrs. Mitchelson: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. Some of the comments that were in the media were in fact not factual when we looked into the individual circumstances around some of the issues that were reported. I do want to indicate that there have been less than a handful of women with children under the age of six--I cannot remember the exact number, I do not have my staff here to tell me now, but I think it was somewhere around three or four individuals that had work expectations placed on them because of unique circumstances around the kinds of training and the resources that we had placed into those individuals in order to help them, because of their choice, train or become educated to enter the workforce. So when you look at the thousands on our caseload and you look at the number that have had expectations placed on them, it is a very minimal amount. It is less than five, I know that.

I would like to take some exception to the comments that my honourable friend has put on the record in regards to people not being eligible for work incentive and not being able to get subsidized daycare. I mean, one of the--what is the word I am looking for? If we are going to be placing work expectations upon individuals it is because, No. 1, there is a job available, there is subsidized child care available for those individuals, and when everything is in place then a work expectation is placed on a single parent with children over the age of six. If she refuses to participate when there is a job, when there has been training provided, when there is subsidized child care then, in fact, we can reduce her monthly benefits by $50. So we go through a significant process. There have been very few women that have had work expectations placed on them or have lost any money as a result of them not participating.

The whole thrust of Employment First is to look at individual case plans, have people thinking that a life of poverty on welfare is not the only choice or option that they have and that they should aspire to greater hopes and dreams and independence than a life of poverty on welfare. If in fact we can work with individual women to develop their self-esteem, their independence, and move towards the workforce rather than welfare, not only do they benefit but it is their children who benefit, too.

So for every single parent that becomes employed, there is at least double that number of lives that are impacted in a positive way as a result of that woman becoming independent and self-sufficient and being able to support her family and feel better about herself. So I would argue very strongly that we have moved in the right direction and that as we continue to work with individual women towards a life of independence and self-sufficiency, in fact not only are we helping them to benefit, but their children will benefit also.

If I had an opportunity--I do not know how long we want to go on--but if we can take a couple more minutes and I can talk about the national child benefit and how that will impact in a very positive manner--[interjection] Can I take one minute? Okay--how that will impact in a very positive way those who are working on low incomes. The whole principle behind, of course, the national child benefit is one, to reduce the depth of child poverty; two, to ensure that you are better off working than on welfare; and the third objective was to reduce overlap and duplication between federal and provincial governments. So if we see the federal government taking all children off the welfare system through the national child benefit and having the benefits continue to low income working parents that are available to those who are on social allowances today, I think you will see a very positive impact on many of those who are working and earning low wages.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 9.1 Administration and Finance (a) Minister's Salary $25,700.

The hour now being six o'clock, committee rise.