Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): I move, seconded by the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources be amended as follows: the member for River Heights (Mr. Radcliffe) for the member for Assiniboia (Mrs. McIntosh).

Hon. Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, a number of bits of information on House business. First of all, I would ask if you could canvass the House to see if there is a willingness to waive private members' hour for today, of course being on the understanding that we will be using Thursday morning for Private Members' Business.

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to waive private members' hour today with the understanding that we will have private members' hour Thursday morning? [agreed]

Mr. Praznik: Secondly, the opposition House leader and I are working out ministers and critics for a series of committee meetings involving a number of annual reports, and although we have finalized one or two of them, I look to the opposition House leader. I understand there are still one or two more of the committee hearings to be matching ministers and critics, and then we will be making an announcement for a series of Tuesday morning committee meetings. I hope to be able to do that tomorrow or the next day.

Thirdly, Madam Speaker, I would ask if you would find if there is consent of the House for the Estimates of Consumer and Corporate Affairs to be considered in the Chamber on completion of Executive Council today. Executive Council is scheduled for here. Should that be completed, is there unanimous agreement?

* (1440)

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to allow the Estimates for Consumer and Corporate Affairs to be considered in the Chamber upon the conclusion of the Estimates of Executive Council? [agreed]

Mr. Praznik: Secondly, Madam Speaker, again the consent of the House for the Estimates of the Department of Highways and Transportation to be considered in Room 255 on completion of the Legislative Assembly Estimates.

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House for the Estimates of the Department of Highways and Transportation to be considered in Room 255 upon completion of the Estimates of the Legislative Assembly? [agreed]

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, for the information of all members, consideration of the Estimates of Family Services will continue in Room 254.

I would then move, seconded by the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Gilleshammer), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and that this House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Most Gracious Majesty.

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, the honourable Minister of Family Services had commenced her opening statement. The honourable Minister of Family Services has 52 minutes remaining. The honourable minister, to continue her opening statement.

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Chairperson, I will just begin at the start of the last paragraph I was reading when we finished last time.

Since our government began reforming the welfare system in 1996, the caseload for clients participating in welfare reform has dropped by 9,900. This means that more than 18,300 people supported by welfare have left the rolls, the first time in two decades where there has been a decline in the number of welfare recipients.

The new policy initiatives I have recently announced will help sustain and expand on the success of our previous reforms, the first being work before welfare. When able-bodied individuals apply for assistance, they will first be directed to job opportunities. Family Services will provide employment referrals and other supports to help people find work. They must then show proof of their job search efforts prior to being eligible for assistance. During this period, Family Services will provide assistance in emergency situations.

Next, work for welfare: Every person capable of working must make a contribution as a condition of receiving income assistance. All clients will be required to contribute up to 35 hours of community service each week, with contributions varying on capacity to work and availability of placements. Participating will be mandatory. Exemptions include single parents with children under six, the disabled, and the aged. Community organizations and municipalities will identify projects and then provide direction and supervision of those projects, such as cleaning up graffiti, sidewalk and street cleaning, participating on neighbourhood crime patrols and school patrols, or assisting lower-income seniors or disabled persons. Recipients will only be assigned to school and senior projects after background checks are conducted.

Community mobilization initiative: I am pleased to indicate that our Premier (Mr. Filmon) will personally be writing to community and business leaders to request a voluntary commitment from them and their staff to act as advisors and mentors to people on welfare. Such mentors could provide welfare clients with valuable advice on resume writing, interview preparation, and in making business contacts. In addition, the Premier will be asking for volunteers to work on community group projects with welfare recipients.

Incentives to work: To help people make the transition from welfare to work, Manitoba currently offers drug, dental, and optical benefits to single parents and disabled clients who leave welfare for employment. Coverage is currently available for up to one year. To make sure people can keep on working under this initiative, benefits will be extended from 12 to 18 months.

Program Compliance: Our government is also committed to ensuring that assistance gets to those in need. Abuse of the system is not acceptable. Our past efforts to target abuse, such as our welfare fraud line, specialized investigators, preintake orientation sessions, and expanded information sharing agreements, have been successful. To build on that success, we are taking steps to do even more. We are going to intensify efforts by introducing a parental support maintenance enforcement unit, a housing investigator, enhanced enrollment investigations, and income and asset investigators.

I would again like to point out that these new initiatives will not apply to the disabled, single parents with children under six, and the aged.

While some of these initiatives will take effect immediately, the work for welfare and Program Compliance components will begin to be phased in this fall.

Over the years, we have implemented several early intervention and prevention initiatives that work toward ensuring our children get off to a good start in life.

EarlyStart focuses on prevention and is designed to provide three years of early intervention with children ages two to five to help ensure that they are ready to learn when they reach school age.

BabyFirst is a community-based, early childhood program for children from birth to three years of age. It emphasizes positive parenting, enhanced child-parent interaction, and improved child health and development. The Women and Infant Nutrition Program helps meet the nutritional needs of pregnant women and children under one year of age.

Another of my recent announcements builds on our past efforts. The provision of an additional $500,000 each year to create more spaces for addictions treatment provides new hope for Manitobans, particularly parents. Parenting is the most important responsibility in our society. Those parents with addictions face great challenges, and our government is committed to helping them help themselves, which ultimately helps their children. After all, for addicted parents on welfare, how they can support their children when they are also supporting an addiction? We want to ensure we are doing everything possible to get the support and treatment services to parents in need to change that.

Prior to the province taking over the City of Winnipeg's welfare system, the city required its clients without children who had a chemical dependency to attend a treatment program. The city would terminate benefits if the client did not attend. Upon implementation of one tier in April, the Department of Family Services adopted this policy, and we are taking steps to ensure that we are more aggressively encouraging addictive clients to get treatment.

While parents with addictions will also be included in this initiative, their benefits will not be terminated for noncompliance. Our first priority will be the safety and security of children. We will exhaust every effort to ensure connection to early intervention initiatives. In the case of continued refusal of treatment, Child and Family Services will be asked to put the necessary safeguards in place to ensure that children are not placed at risk.

* (1500)

It is estimated that funding will provide treatment to approximately a hundred parents each year. In most cases, treatment will be provided during the day while children are in school. For parents with young children, additional funding has been set aside for the child daycare program and overnight care. Depending on the needs of each client and the severity of the dependency, the treatment may include residential detoxification, day programming to address the addiction and ongoing support services to help clients improve their life skills, prepare to look for a job and find work.

Our government knows that it is difficult to be a teen parent. We also know that dropping out of school increases the risk that they will fall into the trap of welfare dependency. Effective January of 2000, teen parents aged 16 and 17 years on welfare will be required to take parenting courses. Those with a child over six months will be required to attend school as well. Where there are no family supports, government will provide additional assistance for such things as child care and transportation.

If a young parent with a child over six months refuses to continue his or her schooling, welfare benefits will be reduced on a graduated scale. Sanctions include reducing payments by $50 per month for the first three months and by $100 per month after that. Any money deducted will be placed in a fund to be administered by a staffperson of a special support unit and will be used for items which will benefit the child and ensure that his or her needs are being met.

The special support unit will be established to work with young parents to both encourage continuation of their schooling as well as to ensure that their children are not being put at risk. Our government will be providing $1.2 million toward providing such things as parenting programs, child care, transportation, training services and staff for the special support unit.

We want young Manitobans to gain an education and be better parents so they are able to care and provide for their children in the years ahead. This is not about forcing youth to go to school as much as it is about ensuring youth recognize the importance of an education, both to them and their children. After all, if a parent is not prepared to help themselves, how are they going to be able to help their children?

By reaching out to these young people and by putting supports in place to help them stay in school and gain an education, we believe we can help more Manitobans stay on the road to self-sufficiency, instead of falling into the trap of dependency. Young adults 16 and 17 years of age without children will be obligated to go back to school, be in training or do community service as a condition of receiving employment and income assistance.

Currently, all income assistance clients with work expectations are expected to look for work or prepare for work. Under this new initiative, young adults under 18 on welfare must go to school, go through a more structured and intensive job preparation and job search effort, or do community service. If an individual refuses to comply, welfare benefits will be terminated. We are also continuing to invest resources to help people find and keep work, especially single parents. These initiatives complement our Making Welfare Work strategy, which has resulted in many more people working and lower income assistance caseloads.

In 1999-2000, our government will invest a total of $6.5 million in making welfare work programs to help Manitobans make the transition from welfare to work, including such programs as Taking Charge!, Community Services Projects, Rural Jobs Project, and Opportunities for Employment.

We will continue to work in partnership with other jurisdictions to improve the situation of lower income families and children. As part of this co-operative work, the first phase of the National Child Benefit was successfully launched in the past year and has been recognized throughout the country as a good start in addressing child poverty.

This national initiative is the product of a co-ordinated effort involving the federal, provincial, and territorial governments. It has the commitment of governments of all political stripes to work together to develop and expand programs which prevent and reduce the depth of child poverty and promote attachment to the workforce. We will continue to encourage the federal government to remain an active partner in addressing child poverty by significantly enhancing its investment to the National Child Benefit in the future.

In 1999-2000, Manitoba will be increasing spending for children, youth, and their families by $25 million, of which $11 million will be in initiatives which qualify under the National Child Benefit. Anticipated recoveries under the National Child Benefit, which are available for reinvestment by Manitoba, are estimated to be $7 million. Accordingly, the province is investing more than $4 million from new provincial funding in 1999-2000. We are investing these additional funds because of our commitment to addressing the needs of children on a long-term basis.

This year Manitoba's reinvestments are building on the approach introduced in 1998-99. We will again focus the largest portion on child care. We will add $5.3 million to the child daycare program to fund additional subsidized spaces, increased grant funding, and provide more funds for extended-hour care. Our total budget for child daycare will be more than $53 million.

You will remember that I mentioned earlier the WIN program. I am pleased to advise that we are expanding this program. Introduced in 1998, the WIN program provides lower income families with access to community-based programming that covers a wide range of topics, such as the nutritional requirements of prenatal and postpartum women, infants and children, newborn care, parenting, child development, cooking, and shopping.

Families on income assistance who attend these programs are eligible for a nutritional supplement of $65 per month starting during the last trimester of pregnancy and continuing throughout the child's first year of life. In 1998-99, $1.8 million was allocated to the program; $960,000 in additional funding has been allocated for 1999-2000.

A number of initiatives introduced through the Children and Youth Secretariat will be expanded as a result of the reinvestment of funds under the National Child Benefit system. The additional funds contributed by the province include EarlyStart, BabyFirst, and adolescent pregnancy programs.

I am pleased to note that the C.D. Howe Institute, one of the top think tanks in the country, recently released a nationwide study that says of all the provinces, Manitoba is making the best use of its share of the National Child Benefit to help fight child poverty by providing low-income families with added benefits and services.

The C.D. Howe report commends Manitoba's 1998 and '99 NCB investment of $15.2 million into early childhood intervention initiatives, school readiness programs for preschoolers, nutrition counselling for families, and other preventative approaches. It argues that the other provinces should adopt variations of Manitoba's strategy by investing NCB funds in intervention programs to improve the prospects of children in disadvantaged circumstances.

As we all know, disabled people often experience higher daily living costs than nondisabled people. As well, they often face special barriers to employment and require ongoing support services that make it difficult for them to become financially self-sufficient. Our government recognizes and wants to address these special circumstances and challenges. We want to establish an income assistance approach that best meets the needs of Manitobans who have severe and permanent disabilities.

Currently, there are about 12,000 disabled Manitobans receiving EIA benefits. Many of these clients are eligible for additional benefits under the EIA program's Income Assistance for the Disabled component, which helps cover the extra costs associated with being disabled and living in the community. In 1999-2000, an additional $1.4 million has been allocated to the Income Assistance for the Disabled program, increasing benefits from $70 to $80 per month.

* (1510)

However, we have been asking ourselves would disabled clients be better served by a separate income support program or does the existing program need to be modified? These are some of the questions we are looking to find answers to. A number of other provinces, British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario, have established separate income assistance programs for people with severe and permanent disabilities. Other jurisdictions like Manitoba have adopted special policies and provisions for the disabled within their existing income assistance programs. However, it might be time for a change.

To determine which route is best, our government will be consulting with all segments of the disabled community and their families about the merits and possible design features of any new initiatives. A reference group will be established to work over the summer to develop and co-ordinate a consultation process to be implemented in the fall. It will have representation from Manitobans who have interest in programs and services for the disabled community. Over the next several weeks, community members will be appointed. The reference group will ensure that meaningful input is received from Manitobans with physical, mental, psychiatric, learning and other disabilities, and their families. Particular attention will be paid to the views of disabled people currently receiving Employment and Income Assistance benefits.

Based on the results of the consultation, our government will determine specific proposals which could include the introduction of new legislation. We are looking to make the program fairer and more comprehensive. As we move into the next century, we want to ensure that we have a program that meets the needs of Manitoba's disabled community.

As I am sure my honourable friend is aware, a single system of income assistance in Winnipeg was successfully implemented as of April 1, 1999. The new system will reduce the administrative overlap involved in two levels of government providing similar services. Services required to meet specific needs of clients will now be delivered from locations designed to meet those specific needs. During 1999-2000, we will begin to extend the technological improvements associated with the introduction of one tier to our rural regional Employment and Income Assistance offices.

The Community Living Division provides co-ordination, direction and support for adult community living in vocational rehabilitation programs, the Manitoba Developmental Centre, regional delivery of social services and residential care licensing of adult care facilities. We continue to place a high priority on programs and services for adults living with a mental disability. Community-based services have been expanded and funding support for residential and day services agencies has been enhanced.

For the past four years, $22 million has been added to the Adult Services budget to assist those adults living with a mental disability who are in critical need of community living supports. This year we have added $8.7 million for services and supports for adults living with a mental disability, an increase of 12 percent over the previous year. This increase will provide additional residential and respite services for over 130 individuals. In total, approximately 3,350 adults with a mental disability will receive supports to live in the community in a variety of settings including family homes, supported independent living and licensed residential care facilities. The funding increase will also allow for an expansion of the day services programming for over 90 individuals. Approximately 2,200 individuals will participate in day services programs.

Residential and day services agencies per diems will be increased by 5 percent in order to assist service providers in recruiting and retaining staff. We will continue to work closely with service providers to ensure that individuals with mental disabilities are supported in daily living activities and are provided with the opportunity to live independently and participate in community life to the greatest extent possible.

We will also work closely with community groups to develop pilot projects for seniors with mental disabilities and to test innovative approaches to family support, client-centred planning and self-directed care. In the area of assisting Manitobans with disabilities to obtain and maintain employment, Manitoba signed the Employability Assistance for People with Disabilities agreement which took effect on April 1, 1998. The EAPD agreement places greater emphasis on employment outcomes and measuring program effectiveness.

Representatives of the disability community participated in an extensive consultation process with Manitoba officials. Their views, along with those of national disability groups, were taken into account in the development of the multilateral framework for the EAPD agreement. Our vocational rehabilitation program and other staff will continue to engage community representatives in the implementation of the EAPD agreement. The Child and Family Services Division provides central program management for child and family services programs. While the division as a whole will see an increase in its budget, the child, family and community development component will see an increase of $8.8 million in its maintenance of children and external agency support area.

Keeping children safe and protected from abuse and neglect is a primary objective of the department. The recent amendments to The Child and Family Services Act will strengthen our ability to meet the needs of children who are at risk. This year, we will continue to be active in implementing this legislation as well as in contributing to efforts to intervene early in the lives of children and families to prevent longer-term difficulties. The new Adoption Act will enhance our ability to facilitate adoptions to provide permanent homes for children.

In 1999-2000 through the Winnipeg Development Agreement, the province is providing almost $500,000 in operating support and $346,000 for refurbishing living space for a parenting support project for at-risk adolescent mothers and their children. We recently announced that the Family Dispute Services branch has been renamed the Family Violence Prevention branch. The new name, implemented as of April 1, 1999, was done partially as a result of the Lavoie inquiry recommendations but also in keeping with the general direction to address issues of family violence on a much broader level.

For 1999-2000, we will increase support for services for families affected by domestic violence. Community consultations are currently underway to identify gaps in services and how these issues can be addressed through community-based initiatives. Supervised access service, which has been implemented in the communities of Brandon and Thompson, will be expanded to Winnipeg. This service allows custodial parents to arrange for their children's visits with the noncustodial parent without needing to have contact with that parent. A high-quality child care system is an important part of my government's commitment to working parents. We understand the need for a system that is flexible and responsive to the needs of families.

We are continuing to implement the recommendations of the child daycare regulatory review committee. Alternative child care arrangements will continue to be explored and created to meet the changing work needs of families. In 1999-2000, funding for the child daycare services has increased by $5.3 million for infant and preschool care, including an addition 500 subsidized spaces. Since 1987-88, almost 5,000 additional spaces have been created for the benefit of children and their families.

As recommended by the regulatory review committee, the 1999-2000 budget provides resources to move towards a unit funding model for funded child care centres. This model ensures that funding takes into account the staffing levels required by regulation, as well as the need to improve salary levels for early childhood educators. Operating grants for full-time child care centres and infant preschool spaces will be increased by 15 and 10 percent respectively. Grant funding is being provided this year to approximately 1,600 currently licensed expansion and nursery school spaces.

The 1999-2000 increase includes $1 million for the Children with Disabilities Program, to ensure that families with children with a disability are able to access child care support. A 2 percent increase in operating grants for all family daycare spaces is provided in this year's budget. In addition, the budget includes funding for all nonprofit nursery schools, including 2 percent to operating grants.

Our 1999-2000 budget also provides increased funding for the development of rural child care. New operating grant funding of $500,000 will support the development of an additional 385 infant, nursery and preschool child care spaces outside the city of Winnipeg. In the Children's Special Services area, an additional $645,000 will provide support for an increase of approximately 150 children and their families as well as funding for a Thompson site co-ordinator for the FAS telediagnostic model.

* (1520)

We created the Children and Youth Secretariat in 1994 to provide a vehicle through which policy and programs for children could be co-ordinated and early intervention and prevention initiatives could be initiated. A number of important early intervention and prevention programs have been introduced as a result of the co-operation and co-ordination efforts of the Children and Youth Secretariat.

As mentioned earlier, in 1999-2000, we are expanding the EarlyStart program which provides focused early intervention for young children to increase school readiness and decrease the need for costly education, health and social services interventions in the future. We are also adding funds to the BabyFirst program to provide services to families living in conditions of risk. BabyFirst emphasizes positive parenting, enhanced parent-child interaction, improved child health and development and optimal use of community resources. As well, we are implementing initiatives to delay pregnancy in adolescents.

Finally, and in closing, I want to emphasize that in our allocation of expenditures for 1999-2000 we have made a concerted effort to achieve and maintain a balanced approach to renewing and preserving services for the most vulnerable members of our society. We have taken very seriously our responsibilities to Manitobans who require support and assistance in their time of need. We have also taken very seriously the needs of future generations of Manitobans, those children of families who require our assistance today in order to help ensure a positive future. In this effort, we have taken every opportunity to engage the community in meeting these challenges in the spirit of partnership and shared responsibility for meeting the needs of vulnerable families and individuals. As we move forward this year and in the years to come we will continue to work with existing and new community partners. We will continue to develop innovative initiatives to help people to find work and to become self sufficient and to enhance the outcomes for children and families at risk.

So I am looking forward to the dialogue and discussion around the departmental expenditures this year, and I certainly welcome comments from my honourable friend and his colleagues around some of the good things that are happening in Manitoba. I know we always have dialogue, debate and discussion around some of the things my honourable friend may feel are not happening, but I certainly look forward to his comments, suggestions, recommendations and ideas on how we can continue to make our programs as effective as they can possibly be for those who need the support and the services from the Department of Family Services. Thanks, Mr. Chairperson.

Mr. Chairperson: I thank the honourable minister for those comments. Does the official opposition critic, the honourable member for Burrows have an opening statement?

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Some good things are happening in some parts of this minister's department, but this minister has a long way to go before she gets even a passing grade. In the past, this minister has had several nicknames. Last year I dubbed her the minister of pilot projects. This government likes to talk about partnerships, partnerships with business, partnerships in education, here a partnership, there a partnership, everywhere a partnership. There is one partnership this minister should be ashamed of and her government should be ashamed of; they are partners in poverty.

This government does not care that they have been the child poverty capital of Canada for several years and have been in the top three of the highest levels of child and family poverty for many years in a row. Welfare cases have grown. In the 1998 annual report, 74,000 people were recorded as being welfare recipients. In 1988, there were less than 62,000.

The one-tier project or amalgamation of city with provincial welfare was plagued with problems from the beginning. It began with an untendered IBM contract. Then there was the senior civil servant who violated conflict of interest guidelines by leaving government to work on a contract he helped design, then attended meetings with government officials less than a year later.

After the April 1 change when the Province of Manitoba took over the City of Winnipeg's caseload, some people did not get their cheques, some cheques were late. Winnipeg Harvest had the largest ever number of people walk in requesting food. Some cases were not transferred from the city to the province. Direct deposit information was not transferred. People did not know which office to go to. People could not find the office on Rorie Street because there is no signage. People could not get through on the phone. I am told there were 15,000 calls that were not answered. This government likes to brag about being an efficient government. There is no efficiency when 15,000 calls go unanswered. One person tried 140 times to get through on the phone, gave up, went to the office in person, and got so frustrated he began taking his clothes off. Only then did he get an appointment. People were told they had to have an appointment. They could not walk in. It took three days to a week to get an appointment, if they could get through on the phone.

Under the supposedly new and more efficient amalgamated system, the case co-ordinators have caseloads of 170 or more. They have to do everything that was formerly done by support staff and spend 50 percent of their time serving the bureaucratic needs of the system and too little time with clients helping them get off welfare and into a job. This minister is intent on eliminating staff with social work degrees and deprofessionalizing the staff. Staff are now case co-ordinators so there is no time or role for counselling abused women or protection planning. I am told by people on the front lines the intake assessment tool and the new intake process work very poorly.

Staff transferred from the city to the province say the city's computer system was better, even though the province apparently spent $8,710,000 on new computers. Explaining the new system to clients was last on the government's agenda as it took months, repeated letters and phone calls from St. Matthew's-Maryland Community Ministry staff and phone calls and letters from the MLA for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) and I before Income Assistance staff were finally allowed to go to St. Matthew's-Maryland Community Ministry and face the people most affected by the amalgamation to explain the new system and answer questions.

If I were the minister, I would have gone myself, and certainly this minister, if she had the courage, could have gone in person and answered all the questions. Why you and your staff are afraid to face people who are poor and powerless is beyond me. At the very least, if you are going to make changes in the system, you should be prepared to defend the changes and even explain them.

Last week's warmed-over Mike Harris announcements are a damning admission that this government has failed to move people from welfare to work. A similar situation exists in child care centres where dozens of centres are advertising for ECE IIs and ECE IIIs and cannot get them. Those who are still working in child care are inadequately paid, considering they have two years of post-secondary education. Dozens of centres have provisional licences because they do not have the required ratio of qualified staff to children. The result is that the quality of care has been compromised, and what was once the best child care system in North America under the NDP is deteriorating under this government's watch. Most of that time it has been under this minister's watch, since she has been the minister since 1993.

There is a huge gap between this government's rhetoric and its actions. In the 1995 election, the PC Party said, and I quote: Our children are the most fundamental social investment we make in our society.

But according to the National Council of Welfare, the child poverty rate in Manitoba in December of 1998 had grown to over 25 percent, the highest rate in Canada. Manitoba was condemned by national organizations and the United Nations for provincial government policies which have contributed to child poverty.

In the 1995 election campaign, the PC Party said: Our health, education and social services must be child focused if we are going to make a positive difference in the lives of our children as they develop into healthy, competent, responsible citizens who will participate in enhancing the quality of life in communities throughout Manitoba.

But according to the government's own Mason Report, quote: In Manitoba the Departments of Health, Education and Family Services are all reducing service. The contraction of the human service envelope is exposing both natural and foster families to greater demand for child and family services.

In the 1995 election, the PC party said: The Filmon government will maintain its ongoing commitment to finding and implementing more effective ways to successfully keep families together rather than intervene by taking children into direct, formal care. But, according to Winnipeg Child and Family Services, between 1991 and 1998, the number of permanent wards brought into care rose by 42 percent at an increased cost of $10.8 million in one agency alone. Today we have the highest rate of children in care in the country.

* (1530)

In the 1995 election, the PC Party said: The safety and care of children is of paramount concern. In situations where the family is unable to provide such care, the children should be placed in a safe, supportive environment. But, according to the Department of Family Services, the Filmon government spent $7.8 million in one year alone housing hundreds of children in hotels and shelters staffed by shift workers. By 1998, Winnipeg Child and Family Services stated that the use of hotel and shelters was at an all-time high.

Under Mr. Filmon's watch and this minister's watch, Manitoba had the highest rate of child poverty in Canada for several years, and for the most recent year for which statistics are available, Manitoba was virtually tied for second. Children make up over 40 percent of those using food banks in our province. Food banks went from an unknown phenomena to year-after-year record growth.

Cuts to prevention services such as speech and hearing have compromised children's readiness for school. Cuts to education have compromised our children's ability to be prepared for the jobs of the 21st Century. Cuts to recreation programs, such as the elimination of provincial funding to friendship centres, meant a cut in programs that have resulted in youth turning to destructive alternatives such as street gangs. And the list goes on.

I would like to illustrate the list with some newspaper clippings. I will spare the minister the details. I will just read the headlines. For example, on January 17, 1998, this headline: "Manitoba leads in teen pregnancies." From the Winnipeg Sun of June 14, 1998: "'New poor' turn to food banks." The first two paragraphs say: "People who use food banks are more educated, healthier and younger than most people think, a recent Montreal study shows–a trend which is mirrored in Manitoba. 'We find, when we do a snapshot of our users, about 25 per cent of the people are working or in transition,' said David Northcott, co-ordinator of Winnipeg Harvest."

From July 4, 1998, by Nicholas Hirst of the Free Press, a column entitled "Focus on inner-city kids." He points out that "last year there were 71,000 occasions that a child spent a night in short-term placements including hotels." He has some suggestions for solving these problems. I do not agree with two of them, but a third one says: "Work on the root problems of a poverty-stricken, disillusioned, depressed core area. Create 24-hour community centres out of schools and other community buildings. Have an inner-city housing program to rebuild and improve the stock that is there. Work with the community groups to do that and employ inner-city workers to do the building."

July 8, 1998, a Free Press headline says: "Child benefit no extra help to recipients. Single mother in 'total shock' after finding provincial welfare reduced by the same amount." July 28, 1998: "Crumbs for single moms." August 31, 1998: "City's poor are among poorest in land. Three of Manitoba's wealthiest areas in Winnipeg: Stats Can." The first paragraph says: "The least affluent neighbourhoods in Winnipeg are also among the poorest in Canada, according to a study released this month by Statistics Canada. Incomes in the Winnipeg postal codes which begin R3A and R3B rank fourth- and fifth-last in the country when it comes to median income reported on 1996 tax returns."

From The Globe and Mail, Friday, September 11, 1998: "Food-bank users immune to economic good times. Handouts rationed as number of Canadians requiring emergency supplies jumps 5.4%." From the Free Press September 16, 1998: "The market isn't working." September 11, 1998: "More people are using food banks in province to make ends meet." From December 8, 1998: "Manitoba labelled child poverty capital." December 3, 1998: "Sad progress on child poverty," the Winnipeg Sun.

It was not just Winnipeg papers that noticed this. The editorial in the Thompson Citizen for December 4, 1998, says "Poverty capital of Canada unchanged," referring to Manitoba. December 14: "Feds fight child poverty, but province claws back." From December 3, 1998: "Poverty's small faces. 72,000 children were living in destitution in Manitoba in 1996. Poor families find it a never-ending struggle to make ends meet."

December 1998: "The other world intrudes," Frances Russell talking about "Two different worlds are becoming ever more visible in Manitoba and Canada," the two different worlds being one for the haves and one for the have-nots. December 4, 1998: "Poor fall further behind." December 5, 1998: "Canada gets failing grade on treatment of its poor. UN panel cites homelessness, rising use of food banks, welfare cuts." December 30, 1998: "Quick way to cut poverty" headline on a story regarding attempts by governments, including this one, to redefine poverty in order to make the stats look better.

From July 3, 1998: "Child workers' caseload a danger," referring to the high workload requirements of Child and Family Services staff. July 10, 1998: Child and Family Services "to split up siblings in bid to cut hotel stays. Separating children 'contrary to everything we've ever done.'" The first paragraph says "Winnipeg Child and Family Services officials want to keep kids out of hotels at all costs–even if it means separating them from their brothers and sisters." It really shows how desperate the situation is. From November 1, 1998: Child and Family Services "volunteers face an uncertain future."

Now that we are into the spending Estimates of Family Services, we will see where the government is turning on the spending tap in a pre-election spending binge and where they are tightening the screws on the most vulnerable, also in a blatant attempt to get votes in a pre-election period, an election postponed because they knew they could not win.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Dyck): We thank the critic from the official opposition for those remarks.

Under Manitoba practice, debate of the Minister's Salary is traditionally the last item considered for the Estimates of the department. Accordingly, we shall defer consideration of this item and now proceed with consideration of the next line. Before we do that, we invite the minister's staff to join us at the table, and we ask that the minister then would introduce her staff that are present. So if they would please move forward.

The honourable minister, to introduce her staff, please.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I would like to introduce my deputy minister, Tannis Mindell; and assistant deputy minister for Administration and Finance, Kim Sharman.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Dyck): Thank you. We will now proceed to line 9.1 Administration and Finance (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits. That is on page 65.

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, I would like to ask the minister for the list of grants to external agencies. I went through the Estimates book this year and made a list of them. I do not know why I did not ask for all of them in previous years. That was a mistake on my part.

I will give you the whole list, and if I can get these tomorrow that would be great, or as soon as possible: the Community Living and Vocational Rehab programs, Maintenance of Children and External Agencies, the Family Support Innovations Fund, the family violence prevention External Agencies, and Children's Special Services Financial Assistance and External Agencies.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I know that we have provided the list of grants to external agencies in past years, and I know there was a recommendation by my honourable friend, or a request, that we break it down into different divisions for him. Just to show how very accommodating we are, we do have that list here today, and it is broken down I believe in the way he has asked for it. So I am prepared to be certainly as co-operative as I possibly can in providing information to my honourable friend.

* (1540)

Mr. Martindale: I would like to thank the minister for following that suggestion and for having the list available so quickly.

I would like to ask the minister, I guess I am going to have some questions on the first section here. Since this includes Policy and Planning, I am wondering if there has been an evaluation of Taking Charge! and if the minister could make it available for me.

Mrs. Mitchelson: It is my understanding that that report is almost completed in its final stage. It has to then be reviewed by the project review committee which is both federal and provincial appointments. Certainly once that has been finalized, it will be released publicly, and I will ensure my honourable friend gets a copy as soon as it is able to be released.

Mr. Martindale: I thank the minister and look forward to getting the report. Can the minister tell me if there are plans to extend the Taking Charge! program, or are you awaiting the evaluation?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Although the federal government has finished its funding commitment to Taking Charge!–the five-year pilot project is finished–there certainly was significant value in some of the programming that took place at Taking Charge! with I think over 1,200 women and their children moved from assistance and into the workforce as a result of various different programming activities. We have continued our provincial funding in this year's budget, and we have added an additional $400,000 through Education and Training to Taking Charge! The federal government has directly flowed I think it is around $900,000 to Taking Charge! for one additional year, so they have some commitment for this fiscal year, but they say that will be the end of their funding.

As a result of the reduction in funding, Taking Charge!, the board and staff have had to take a look at what programming they have done, what programming has been the most effective and has had the greatest impact and determine what they are going to fund into the future, what kinds of programming they are going to fund. There is a significant reduction that has caused them to take a look at what has worked well and what has not. As with any pilot project, we know that not all pieces are successful. It is important that an evaluation is done and that you build upon the strengths of any of the program components, and that is exactly what Taking Charge! is looking at right now.

I think what they are beginning to focus on in a more significant way is those single parents who have the greatest needs and significant support required. We know that that is not always the cheapest program, that sometimes they are the most costly programs, but when there are multiple needs and there is a lot of work to do, I think they feel that that is probably the area where they need to focus their attention and direction. That is what they are in the process of implementing as they move forward and look at the resources they have and where they can best be spent.

Mr. Martindale: I understand that Taking Charge! is funding some adult literacy programs, and I am wondering if those are going to continue or if they are going to be terminated, I guess.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I do not have a specific answer to that, but I can certainly undertake to get that information from Taking Charge! and provide it.

Mr. Martindale: Under Information Systems, it is my understanding that Information Systems have been contracted out to Systemhouse. Is that right?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Right across government, government-wide, we have gone to a desktop management system with Systemhouse that will provide standardized software and hardware right across the board. So it is a government-wide project.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me how many staff went from Family Services to Systemhouse?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Six staff from the Department of Family Services went to Systemhouse. Four of these were as a result of the desktop initiative.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if the contract with Systemhouse is available to me or it is confidential?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I am told that because it is a government-wide initiative, the initiative reports to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gilleshammer) through the Office of Information Technology. So the contract would be under the auspices of the Department of Finance, where that question would be most appropriately asked. We do not have individual contracts with Systemhouse. It is a government-wide contract.

* (1550)

Mr. Martindale: Is the contract broken down in any way so that you would know how much the services provided to your department are worth?

Mrs. Mitchelson: If we look at page 73 of the Supplementary Information, it will indicate what the Amortization of Capital Assets for information technology are for the Department of Family Services. For the Desktop Management Initiative, the capital for this year allocated from the Department of Finance to the Department of Family Services is $2.569 million. That would be our portion of the whole initiative that would be assigned to Family Services from the central contract.

On page 35 of the Estimates, the amount that would be seen here would be our central support for Information Systems. Then you would find within different divisions or branches some additional costs for implementation of technology. So there would be some allocated in here. This would be our central support piece. There is some in every division then.

Mr. Martindale: Going back to page 75, where it says Family Services $8,710,000, does that refer to computers as well?

Mrs. Mitchelson: On page 75, this is the capital investment for information technology to develop the one-tier system with the City of Winnipeg.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me, on page 73, if the $3,177,000 is also for computers?

Mrs. Mitchelson: The amount on page 73 would include the hardware for the one-tier system, and on page 74 would be the building of the system, the software for the one-tier project.

Mr. Martindale: Would it be accurate to say that if you add $3.1 million and $8.7 million, that is what the department is spending on computers?

* (1600)

Mrs. Mitchelson: For clarification, when you talk about spending on computers, are you talking hardware and software combined or are you talking about purchase of computers, or what are you talking?

Mr. Martindale: Both hardware and software.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I am not sure if I am clear on the question that was asked, but on page 73, it is the hardware, right? It is the computers. On page 75, it is the development of the program which is a one-time cost for the implementation of the one-tier initiative. Does that answer the question?

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, I thought the question was fairly easy, and that is how much are you spending on computers this year, hardware and software? I thought if I added the number at the top of page 75 and the number at the top of page 73, I might get the total, but it does not seem to be that clear.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I think I have it. The total IT budget excluding capital is $9.2 million, and then if you add the capital from page 73, the 2.569, that is the total expenditure of the Department of Family Services on IT this year.

You asked for the total costs with capital, and I guess you are looking for hardware and software and staff. That is the total number.

Mr. Martindale: If that is the number the minister is giving me, then I guess that is the number that they spent this year on computers. I would like to ask the minister, on page 35 under subappropriation 09-1G, Other Operating has increased from $12,000 to $144,000. I wonder if the minister can explain that particular line.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Of the $9.2 million that we indicated that was spent on Information Technology, the Other Operating, this is part of it. As we said, it was allocated throughout the department. The $144,000 is in this line.

Mr. Martindale: If I could clarify, I think the minister was trying to tell me in a previous answer and this one that the costs of operating the computer systems are spread throughout your department, so on several pages there would be a similar operating line? Okay.

Going back to the computer system, presumably if it says amortization, it is amortized over a number of years. I wonder if the minister can tell me how many years the computer acquisition is amortized over.

Mrs. Mitchelson: We have a government capital policy, and that is amortization over 15 years. So this is part of the overall government policy.

Mr. Martindale: In a brochure that I got about the help desk, it says that it is available 24 hours a day. I am wondering how many civil servants are working after midnight. Is there a demand for a 24-hour-a-day help desk, and, if so, what is the demand?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It is run by Systemhouse. It is a help line and it would be available there for those who are having difficulty with their computer system after hours, so anyone who works after-hours hours, whether it be, I suppose, in Corrections, Citizens' Inquiry, any type of after-hour service that might be provided through our regional services.

Any of those activities that are ongoing throughout government that would be the nontraditional working hours, the help desk is there and available and it is part of the contract with Systemhouse.

* (1610)

Mr. Martindale: Well, I am glad to know that 24-hour help is available for your hard-working civil servants. I know one of them phoned me at 6 a.m. which is one of the advantages of this modern technology, you know who called you and when, which, as we know, is causing the Minister of Justice great problems right now.

I do have a question about that. I understand that, you know, civil servants often work until five or six o'clock because I frequently talk to them between that time, but are you paying for a service that is not used very much? I mean, how many people are working after six o'clock every night.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Given that there is a government-wide contract, each department provides some support to the after-hours help line. I guess my honourable friend might be critical of that support being available, but I guess I would have to question whether he would think that during a forest fire or a flood situation where the citizens of Manitoba might need support from Natural Resources or Emergency Measures that we do not have any support available and if there are things on the system that need to be accessed by those that are working providing that kind of emergency services in our correctional facilities if there was a problem with the computer and those who are working shift work or evenings or nights within our correction system could not have access to a help line if they needed to get some information off the systems.

Or in Regional Services, I know that in some of the regions, I know some of the areas of our province are served by child-mandated Child and Family Services agencies, but I know that our department provides that service throughout many of the regions of the province of Manitoba. Especially in the North, if there was a child in need of protection and we needed to access some kind of information after hours, I would sense that, I would hope that if his party was in government they would believe that the citizens of Manitoba should have that kind of support and service, and we should be able to access information to provide the most appropriate and timely support possible.

Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): I am going to ask for my two colleagues to allow me to do this. I am trying to monitor three committees right now. I have some questions in the area of investigations in income security. I am wondering where that comes. I do not know if I will be able to be here when you get to that line, but I was not here at the start of this department's hearings.

Are you going line by line? What line would that line be in, income security in regard to the investigations? I will be asking questions in regard to the emphasis on proactive investigations and the number of investigators since the amalgamation of the two. Where would that be, and any idea when you would be getting to that?

Mr. Chairperson: I did not recognize the honourable member as a point of order, so I am not going to rule on that. I did understand that the honourable member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) conceded to the honourable member for The Maples, so hopefully your question has been dealt with.

Mr. Martindale: I thank the minister for her answer. She mentioned things that I had not already thought of which probably justify having 24-hour help. In fact, I am one of the people that could use 24-hour help except that it is not available to me, but perhaps maybe after the next election it will be available to me.

I would like to ask the minister if the IBM contract for the one-tier system would be available to me. I have a copy of the business case but the contract, I presume, is somewhat different. I am wondering if that is available for me.

Mrs. Mitchelson: The contract with IBM around the one-tier system is not a separate contract with IBM. There is a contract with IBM for Better Systems which is the one-tier project, plus some projects in Education and Training, Consumer and Corporate Affairs, Finance and the Department of Labour, so that is one contract with IBM, and that falls under the Minister of Finance (Mr. Gilleshammer) again. There would be information available on that contract. I guess, ask in Finance Estimates.

Mr. Martindale: I wonder if the minister could tell me how much the one-tier part of that contract is worth. What was it costing your department?

Mrs. Mitchelson: That is the number that is on page 75 in the Supplementary Estimates. It is $8.7 million.

Mr. Chairperson: Item 9.1. Administration and Finance (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $521,500–pass; (2) Other Expenditures $80,700–pass.

9.1.(c) Social Services Advisory Committee (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $207,800–pass; (2) Other Expenditures $159,100–pass.

9.1.(d) Human Resource Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $831,800–pass; (2) Other Expenditures $88,800–pass.

9.1.(e) Policy and Planning (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $816,100–pass; (2) Other Expenditures $177,700–pass.

9.1.(f) Financial and Administrative Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,756,800–pass; (2) Other Expenditures $493,400–pass.

9.1.(g) Information Systems (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,519,000–pass; (2) Other Expenditures $818,900–pass.

9.2. Employment and Income Assistance (a) Client Services (1) Salaries and Employee Services $21,246,000.

* (1620)

Mr. Kowalski: I have some questions in regard to the investigative unit in this department now. I am going to ask to be sort of educated into how the department is run and some background information, especially concerning the amalgamation of the City of Winnipeg income security with the provincial.

Just so I know either the positions or the persons, I would like to relate it to what my knowledge is, a person by the name of Don Feener. Now, I am not too sure what his role is, if he is an associate director of that. Could you tell me what his position is and who he reports to and what the chain of command is before the amalgamation, before the amalgamation of the two departments, where he was?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I am hoping I am answering the question. Don Feener is the director of Investigations reporting to the director of Compliance who is Lawrie Cherniack who has just arrived at the table here. I also did not introduce Gisela Rempel when she came to the table. She is our ADM of Employment and Income Assistance.

Mr. Kowalski: Was that the same situation before the amalgamation? Was it the same structure and the same personnel before you amalgamated the City of Winnipeg and the provincial income security?

Mrs. Mitchelson: The structure has been changed as a result of the amalgamation. In the past we had a head of Investigations. With the amalgamation, there was a position created, director of Compliance, which is a new structure.

Mr. Kowalski: Does that signal any change in emphasis or direction? Investigations can be proactive where you are searching out fraud, people who are not needing or not deserving of social assistance. You could do proactive investigations, whether it is working with other government departments, whether it is–at one time I believe you had an informant line; I do not know if you still have that, whereas Compliance to me sort of indicates less of a proactive role and more of a role of just looking at the applications and ensuring that the information is right.

Has there been a change in emphasis? Is that idea of Compliance a change of direction?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It is not less proactive. I have to indicate there have been a lot of other functions, and there are a lot of other issues to deal with. Now, as a result we have an amalgamated system, and we have to ensure that people who might have in the past been on the City of Winnipeg caseload as single employable individuals are not cohabiting with someone that might have been–I mean, there are issues around trying to ensure that we are only paying one welfare cheque for one reason to an individual.

We also, with our announcements that were made last week, are going to be much more proactive in trying to ensure that we work with single parents to ensure that they are getting all of the maintenance that they should be getting from a partner. We are going to be, because I know that sometimes within the Justice system it is not one of the highest priorities, hiring paralegals within the Department of Family Services to work proactively with women to ensure that we are holding the other partner accountable for–

An Honourable Member: Not always women.

Mrs. Mitchelson: No, and that is why I said the other partner–accountable and ensuring that there is some onus and responsibility to ensure that you are supporting a child that you may have been somewhat responsible for. So we are going to proactively seek that kind of support and ensure that people are contributing financially to the support of their children.

Mr. Kowalski: I am looking now for numbers. Prior to the amalgamation, how many investigators were there in the provincial end of it and how many investigators were working with the City of Winnipeg investigating? My understanding is that possibly the City of Winnipeg did not have dedicated investigators as much as they relied on their case workers to report on it. What is happening now? Have we increased the number, decreased it? Has more of an emphasis been put on the case workers to investigate fraudulent claims as opposed to a special unit?

Mrs. Mitchelson: In our past structure, before we took over the employable caseload from the City of Winnipeg and amalgamated, we had four investigators, two specialists and one director.

An Honourable Member: Four investigators plus the specialists?

* (1630)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Two specialists and one director. The City of Winnipeg, for all of the employable caseload, had one investigator.

Mr. Kowalski: The laying of charges, as far as actually for those who do apply for income security when they are not eligible and they either give incorrect information, lie about other income and that. Will this new amalgamated department still lay charges or will you just be ending assistance? Will there be as many charges laid under this new structure?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We will continue to lay charges when that is warranted.

Mr. Kowalski: Because I come from a background of investigations and I receive stuff from the Canadian Police Association, I am aware in other jurisdictions that are looking at identification. Some of it, I think for some libertarians it will scare the heck out of them. I am not as concerned. If I have done nothing wrong, I have nothing to hide, and I would not be scared. I feel that quite often possibly we would have more resources for people who need it if a few who were not fraudulently obtaining income security were not obtaining it.

Now, there have been conferences and that about looking at different ways of identifying people who are receiving benefits. This would stop people from going to Alberta, Calgary in one day, picking up income security there, going to Regina the next day, going to Mike Harris's Ontario the next day, and repeating it. Now, everything goes from retina scans, I guess, you know, people, they use different terminology, but basically it is fingerprinting, retina scans or whatever method of identifying those people so there is not duplication. I believe Ontario is moving to a system like that. What is happening here in Manitoba?

Mrs. Mitchelson: As far as identification, certainly we are open to exploring options and opportunities. I know that Ontario is looking at fingerprinting. I cannot tell you for sure whether or not they have implemented anything. I am not sure whether they are even close to finalizing anything.

I do know where we have become more proactive in Manitoba is with information sharing agreements with other provinces. I know since I have been minister we have signed agreements with Ontario, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Alberta. So what we have tried to do is ensure that there is a reciprocal exchange of tapes so that we can ensure that we do not have the same person on caseloads moving back and forth across provinces.

One area that we have had some difficulty is getting the federal government on board in exchange of information. That has been more difficult. We would like to see that happen. They have not as yet been supportive of that taking place.

I am not aware of any province that has put in place any specific identification model. I do know that Ontario has talked about it. They are looking into possibly fingerprinting. I think they talked about it at one point in time. I would have to try to get an update on where they are at with that, but I know that they have nothing in place or nothing imminent.

Mr. Kowalski: Maybe I have forgotten already, but you indicated that there were four investigators, two specialists, a director in the province, and one person in the city. So that is a total of eight people who are looking at welfare fraud. How many people are there now doing the same function?

Mrs. Mitchelson: That was before the amalgamation. Now we will have 10 investigators, one director, and one director of Program Compliance.

Mr. Kowalski: I am curious as far as what role the caseworkers are expected to fulfill as far as weeding out welfare fraud and what role the investigative unit. Does the investigative unit look at patterns and it is up to the individual caseworkers to refer cases, or is the investigative unit going and testing, examining cases to look at ones where there is a possibility? How do these active files come to be? Whose initiative are they?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, the 10 investigators have been decentralized into the field, so they will be working hand in hand with the caseworkers at different locations and they will be moving from location to location. They are located primarily on Market street in the new office, but they will be going out to other offices, so they will be working with caseworkers. They will be doing sort of random investigations. They will be working with caseworkers as caseworkers identify issues that maybe need to be investigated. They also will receive referral from the fraud line that has been set up. They may need to go to caseworkers to get additional information, if there is an anonymous call, so they will be working together more as a team.

* (1640)

Mr. Kowalski: You mentioned the fraud line, and because of recent events, I guess the first question in regard to the fraud line is: if it is a government number, is it still blanked out?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, it is true that 9-4-5 numbers did show up on the fraud line previous to, well, even still today, I have to say, because MTS and Centrex are trying to figure out how to fix it, and I am told that it should be fixed by the end of the day.

Mr. Kowalski: You just have to go to a different exchange, 9-4-2, to solve this; easy matter and that is it.

I guess because of questions that have been going on in Question Period in regard to justice, if government numbers were displayed, was the minister briefed on any numbers?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Absolutely not. When the issue came up last week in Question Period, I went directly to staff and said: is this something that is happening on our line? They looked into it and got the information. I have never been briefed, and I say that with all honesty. It was not even an issue.

Can I indicate then that from time to time, the critic from the opposition does call one of my staff members at home or personally on specific issues, and they usually indicate to me that they have tried to answer his questions, but that is the only extent. I have no information on the fraud line.

Mr. Kowalski: Okay, we will go to another area. When the head of MPIC was before the Public Utilities committee, we talked about some investigations there. They have shown a strong cost-benefit analysis that for every investigator that they have put into their department, the number of claims that were either denied or fraudulent ones, that it has been tenfold the costs for that investigator. I have read some statistics, mostly from the United States, where they have increased the number of investigators, investigated, analyzed more cases, and the amount of money put into that effort was recuperated tenfold by doing this.

Has your department ever looked at the amount of claims that an investigator finds as fraudulent, the amount of money recovered and investigated, and used that as an analysis to determine how many investigators should we have in a province of this size?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I do have to indicate that the results from the setting up of the welfare fraud line and calls that come in–and they continue to come in. We have saved on an annualized basis now since the inception, I believe that was back in 1994, we can indicate that we save $13 million as a result. Now, it has been about $2.8 million per year and another 2.8 on top of that. We are looking at an annualized saving of about $13 million, so we do know it has been cost-effective. Under the new structure and with the amalgamation, we will have gone from four investigators to 10 investigators. We will be putting paralegals in place to deal with single parents and try to get more maintenance, so that will mean we will have to pay less in welfare. Under the new Compliance that was announced last week, we will have, at the intake process, some investigators attached to that, a couple of additional ones.

The whole issue here is to try to ensure that the dollars that are needed to support those that need it are used in that way and that no one should take advantage of hard-earned tax dollars. For every dollar we are paying out when someone is claiming when they are ineligible, that is one less dollar that we can spend on health or education or other programs within government. It is important that we try to ensure that the money is going to those who need it and that we are vigilant.

Mr. Kowalski: You have gone from four investigators to 10 investigators. You say that, as a result of the welfare fraud line, you are saving $2.8 million annually. If there is a saving, if you had more investigators, would you save more of the public's money? Has an analysis been done? What is the right number? How did the figure of 10 come? If you had 20, would you save twice as much? If you had 30? What analyses have been done to determine the cost-benefit ratio?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I recall that, when we first set up the fraud line, there were statistics right across the country that said they were somewhere between 1 percent and 2 percent of fraudulent activity in welfare programs. I recall that anyway as being sort of a figure that people thought was a realistic figure, so there must have been some analysis at the time. That was back several years ago, back in 1994.

That is what the literature says anyway. I know our percentage is not 1 or 2 percent. I guess the question that you are asking is: have we done any analysis to see whether–and I will try and get the number for you. I guess, certainly it would be worth some sort of an analysis to say: if this is what we have saved the taxpayers as a result of this kind of activity and our target should be 1 percent to 2 percent, what more or how many more people would we need to enable us to ensure that we are catching more of the activity that should not be happening?

Mr. Chairperson, we are running at a little over 1 percent right now. It might be worth certainly an analysis. Those would be the numbers based on before we amalgamated. You might say we almost have twice the caseload now, and we have the single employable caseload, which we did not have in the past. I know the city only had one investigator looking at that activity. So we have increased that to 10. It certainly is worth taking a look at to see whether we have the most appropriate–we do not want to be bureaucratically heavy and not achieving savings or going after people in a meanspirited way, but we do want to ensure that those that are receiving are people that should be receiving welfare.

* (1650)

Mr. Kowalski: Going back to the identification of persons and so many records are based on name and a date of birth. In might be corroborated with some birth certificate records, with marriage records and stuff, but not necessarily. The systems that they have instituted in some of the States with retina scans, fingerprinting, whatever, it identifies the actual body, that person to the cheque. I know people grimace at it, but it is to protect the public's money. Right now, never mind going about other provinces, information sharing with other provinces, within our own province, we can have people going to different areas of the province giving a different name, giving a different date of birth, and obtaining multiple cheques. I have not heard the minister say of any proactive study or analysis; I do not know if you send anyone away on courses to look at this as a way to making sure that we are not giving money to people who do not deserve it.

The sharing of information is not sufficient. I could walk into an office in Calgary and say: I am Joe Blow, born in '47, and walk into the next office in Regina and say: I am Jerry Blow, born in '48, and so on, until there is some kind of identification, some way of identifying the person in relating the cheque to the person. I do not hear the minister saying that there is any study, analysis or proactive look at this. I know the political sensitivity of it. I do not have any problem with making sure that people who deserve income get it and those people who do not–that is why I am willing to look at more investigators looking at this type of thing. But is there anything proactive that the minister is doing in this area?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I guess my honourable friend makes a good suggestion. I have to indicate to him that in the past, until we amalgamated to a one-tier system in Winnipeg, we had responsibility for the disabled caseload and single parents. That was called the provincial caseload. I would venture to guess that, if you looked across the system, those who might be sort of travelling from province to province and place to place, you would find it would be the single employable, for the most part, and that was the City of Winnipeg's caseload. As I said, we had four investigators for the disabled and single parents; the City of Winnipeg had one investigator for the whole employable, single, able-bodied caseload. We now have amalgamated that system. We have just taken over.

Contrary to what my honourable friend in the New Democratic Party might say, we are finding that things are starting to work there. There are always some glitches when you amalgamate a system. Nobody went without shelter or money for food or cheques. Things were handled as quickly and efficiently as possible through the amalgamation, but it does give us the opportunity to take, now that we have responsibility for that employable caseload, a look at what we are doing and how we could better do things. I am not certainly opposed to taking a look at some sort of technology that would identify and make sure that we are appropriately paying support. It is something that no one across the country has done, and I would certainly take my honourable friend's suggestion seriously. It might be important for at least someone from the department to take a look at what is happening in other jurisdictions, probably to the south of us, because there is not much happening across Canada, to see what might be appropriate.

Mr. Kowalski: I will just wind up in this line here and then pass over to my colleague. I skimmed the paper, and it was from New York City. Of course, it is a very different reality, the numbers and that. In that one, when they went to a way, and I cannot remember which one they used, retina scanning or that, where they had a phenomenal number of people who were getting multiple cheques with different names. Once they did that, and they were able to tie the cheque to the body, it very quickly decreased. The amount of money they invested in technology and investigators was saved tenfold by doing that. I do not know how applicable it would be in the province of Manitoba; maybe more likely some place like Toronto or Vancouver, but I do not know. Until you look at it, you will not know if the saving is there.

Another paper I read in regard to a magazine for investigators was this problem working within the social agency environment and being an investigator. This investigator who wrote this article talked about how their senior management all came from a social work background. They had their masters of social work and were trained to help people to train to do that and viewed investigators as their opposition. Even their own bosses, they were always fighting for more resources, more money.

I hope that does not happen in this department here. I do not know the director of Compliance. I do not know if that person has a background in social work and in the helping profession and that. I do not want to get into any personalities. I do not want to know; that is none of my business. My comment is that investigators can save a lot of money to the province, and that money could be used to help others.

So I hope that these investigations will see the analysis is done to see that there is enough resources in spite of the political sensitivity about welfare fraud and this. So with that, I will pass the mike over.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I was just wondering whether my honourable friend would share any articles or any information that he might have on this issue with us and make sure that we have–

An Honourable Member: Yes, sure.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Thanks.

Mr. Chairperson: Is it the will of the committee to take a five-minute break? [agreed]

________

* (1710)

Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. We will resume the Estimates of the Department of Family Services, and I was about to recognize the honourable member for Burrows.

Mr. Martindale: I have some questions about the Community Home Services Program. I have had some complaints from some of my constituents and other MLAs have as well. It kind of surprised me because I do not think I ever got complaints, or if I did, maybe very few, when the City of Winnipeg ran it, but we have received numerous complaints since April 1, when the province took it over. For example, a person I will call constituent No. 1 has only had her grass cut once all spring. She was told that there were only four men available for the entire north end. Another constituent told me there were normally 12 and they only had six, and that is why they could not cut grass as often as seniors would like.

Constituent No. 2 has only two hours allotted once a month. In fact, I was told, I think by staff, that service was changed to once a month, instead of biweekly, due to the transition from the city government to the province and due to a shortage of staff. Staff, I presume, meaning people working for Community Home Services, although it could be civil servants, I am not sure. I am sure the minister will enlighten me shortly. Constituent No. 2 said that the worker left before the job was done. I guess because the two hours were up. She had to wait a month before the grass was cut. The grass was 12 inches high. She would also like her windows washed.

Constituent No. 3, the grass was not cut until May 27. It was 12 inches long. My constituency assistant spoke to staff at Community Home Services who said that they hope that by July service will be biweekly; that is every two weeks. On June 3, constituent No. 3 was told that she would have to wait two to three weeks. By the time the grass got cut, it was 18 inches long. The worker had to leave before it was finished. This is an 83-year-old woman. She went out and finished it herself, and her family were quite upset with her.

I am wondering if the minister can tell me why her department is having so many problems. I have been told actually that one of the problems is that there are 62 positions to fill and that the reason that staff could not fill these, in spite of the fact that they had just recently acquired 11,000 employable cases from the City of Winnipeg, is that the economy is booming and people are leaving Community Home Services to get jobs. It seems to me that out of a pool of 11,000 employable cases that there should not be too much trouble finding 62 people, if indeed that is the number of vacancies. Unless, the minister has figures which are different. So maybe the minister can tell me about some of the problems that you have, obviously, been having and what solutions you are working on.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I guess I would say that I am quite pleased to know that many of the single employable individuals that have participated in the Community Home Services project have moved on to full-time jobs. I think that that shows some success to the program, where people get some experience and do perform some sort of work and then progress and move on to something more meaningful, so I think that must speak to the success of the program.

Indeed, the same person that was running the program for the City of Winnipeg is running it now as it has moved over to the provincial program. Yes, it does take some time to identify our first and foremost priority. I am sure my honourable friend would agree that the first priority would be to transition the caseloads over and ensure that with reassignments to new caseworkers and new locations that we would want to ensure that people got their money in a timely basis. I know that was one of his primary concerns.

I know in his opening comments he alluded to the fact that people did not get transferred and people did not get paid and people missed getting their cheques. I would think that he would agree that our first and foremost priority was try to ensure that there was not any disruption in the service and support available for people that really needed that support. We have tried our very best. That was why we set up a help line and a line that people could call if they were experiencing some difficulty. So we try to make the transition as good as possible.

He has indicated in his comments that he has been told that the program should be up and running by the beginning of July. That is only a couple of weeks away. If there was some disruption, I would anticipate that this would be the only time there would be disruption in the program because of the transition and because of our priority focus on trying to ensure that everyone had a new caseworker in the new system, knew where to go and had an opportunity to at least ensure that their benefits were continued. That was our No. 1 priority, and we will endeavour to try to ensure that the people that need the support and services from the Community Home Services project will receive that support. It does take some time.

I know when people move on to bigger and better things and permanent jobs, we do need to identify new people and we will do that. Our expectation is that by July 1 we will have the workers in place to perform that kind of activity.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister assure me, then, that the 60 positions that are currently vacant in Community Home Services in terms of workers to do yard work for seniors will be filled by July 1 so that people will get biweekly service restored?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I think I need to correct the record and say that last year the City of Winnipeg had 100 positions filled. When the transition took place, there were 40 vacancies, so that meant there were 60 still working in the program. Of those 40 vacancies, 20 have been filled already, and there are another 20 to go. There is a process that has to be undertaken when you are hiring someone to do work for individuals: criminal record checks which sometimes take a bit of time, and we are now implementing Child Abuse Registry checks too, which were not done in the past. Those are things that need to happen before we place people in those positions. We are expecting that those 20 positions should be filled and working very shortly.

Mr. Martindale: The numbers that the minister mentioned are quite a bit lower than the Estimates book, page 42, which says 340 clients. I am wondering if clients mean homeowners, or does it mean people in the program? If it means people in the program, I suppose it could be a total because some people would move in and out of the program.

Mrs. Mitchelson: There always have been 100 positions. What normally happens is people come into these positions, get some work experience, and then move on to permanent jobs or other opportunities, so we anticipate that there will, through the 100 positions, be about 340 people that get some work experience done through those 100 positions.

* (1720)

Mr. Martindale: Just a final question on this, would I be accurate if I phoned these three constituents and any other that my two part-time constituency assistants have been trying to help and assure them that by July they will be getting biweekly service in terms of grass cutting or whatever it is that is being done for seniors?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Just a comment from staff that says, weather permitting. On the serious side, I think that, if my honourable friend would like to share just a bit of detail and background, we will certainly look into the specific situations. I have every expectation that, if people are on the list to receive services, they will receive those services.

Mr. Martindale: I appreciate the minister's offer to look into the individual circumstances, but either myself or staff have contacted people in your department about the individuals already. I did visit them all on Saturday night and their grass was short. They were not very happy, but at least their grass had been cut either by Community Home Services or by a neighbour or someone else. I will be phoning them since the minister assured me that, depending on the weather, I guess, depending on whether it is raining or cut, people can cut grass, they will have biweekly service by July. I am sure they will be happy to hear that because they have been very unhappy for the last three months.

I have one question about Taking Charge!; depending on the answer, it could be a series of questions. I contacted one of your senior staff on June 24, 1998. It is not really relevant who the staff person is. I do not want to get her into trouble, but it is just that that person is representing the minister and the answer that she gave me would be whatever the minister's policy is. I was told, when I inquired about the evaluation for Taking Charge!, that it would be sent to me after the board gets it. Now, since June 24, 1998, there must have been several board meetings, and I am wondering what the holdup is. The minister told me today, earlier, that I would get the evaluation after the board gets it, which is the same answer that I got almost exactly a year ago. I am wondering if the minister is stalling or what the reason is that the excuse given a year ago is the same as the excuse given today.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I think that if my honourable friend goes back and checks my comments today, I indicated it was the project review committee that would be receiving the report. It is not the board. The evaluation was done on behalf of both levels of government, and that is what comprises the project review committee. Prairie Research, I think, who was doing the evaluation, has talked to the board, has talked to both levels of government, but ultimately the report comes to the joint steering committee, that is the project review committee.

It has been in draft stages. There has been discussion with both Taking Charge! and the levels of government around this. The report has been presented to both levels of government. There is a meeting that still needs to take place between the project review committee, which is both levels of government, before it will be released publicly.

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, I would like to thank the minister for that information, and I stand corrected. I am wondering if the minister can tell me if it is being held up by the federal government or by the province. Is there some reason why it has taken a year to go from Prairie Research to the board and both levels of government? How long has the project review committee been studying this report?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, my understanding is that there is a working group that worked with Prairie Research in reviewing the documents that Prairie Research prepared, and that is a working group comprised of federal officials, provincial officials and officials from Taking Charge! There would be a process where pieces of the report would be submitted to that working group. They would have some input into ensuring that the information was factual and correct, and that is at the working level. Once that did take place and the working group was satisfied that at least the facts in the report, not the conclusions, but the facts and the information were accurate, it was finalized and sent to the project review committee for their finalization and signoff of the document in order for it to be made public.

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, can the minister tell me approximately when the report might be released to me?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I think it will be very soon; I would venture to guess within the next month, maybe sooner.

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, if I am lucky, we might still be in session and then I could ask questions in Question Period on it.

I would like to change to a different area.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, you just remind me that I have not introduced Dan Haughey who is our director of Welfare Reform.

Mr. Martindale: This year, I believe in January, I was in the city of Thompson. I joined a member of Parliament, the member of Parliament for Vancouver East, Libby Davies, on her homelessness tour both in Winnipeg and Thompson. One of the very interesting and disturbing places we went to visit was the new holding cells for the RCMP.

Homelessness is a big problem in Thompson, and currently–well, it would be my understanding that there is only one organization that is taking responsibility for that now, and that is the RCMP. There were two organizations, because there was an organization called Night Riders which was providing temporary shelter on a night-by-night basis to homeless people.

* (1730)

At the RCMP cells, we were given a guided tour. We were actually present when the RCMP were dispatched to pick up somebody on the street who otherwise might have frozen to death. They brought them into the cells and searched them. We were able to watch while they were booked in. There is a very large number of people who are housed in RCMP cells simply because, currently anyway, there is no other place for them. My guess is that this is a very expensive way of providing emergency shelter for people. We were told that there are always two officers who book people in. While we were there, there were two other people behind the desk, which has video cameras monitoring every cell.

Now, Night Riders was organized by people in Thompson to provide temporary shelter. It has been on and off again over a number of years. My understanding is that every time their funding runs out they close down.

In Winnipeg we have Main Street Project, which is really an alternative to police cells, although they also have a detox function. But Main Street Project takes the place of what I understand was formerly a police function.

Now, I am wondering, since the government pays for Main Street Project, and I guess that will be a question, if there is some sort of per diem from this minister's department that goes to Main Street Project. I am not sure. I do not find it on the grants to external agencies list. But I am wondering if the minister would consider something similar in Thompson, either Night Riders or something else, which would really be very similar in function to Main Street Project. My guess is that it would be much, much cheaper than the RCMP providing that service.

It seems to me that there are some jurisdictional issues. It would require a fair amount of co-operation, because if indeed all of that function was transferred from the RCMP to Night Riders or some other organization, you might not need so many RCMP officers, although I am sure there would be other communities that would be quite happy to pick them up.

I am sure the minister is familiar with this issue. I am wondering if she can tell me if her department would consider funding Night Riders or some other organization.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I appreciate my honourable friend's comments. I do know that I am aware of the Night Riders program and I know that it has been closed, I think since March sometime, due to lack of funding. The issue for me is, I mean, we discussed and looked at it. You know, our social assistance program is a program of last resort. We do pay per diems in an emergency situation, but we do not support people who are ineligible for financial support from the province of Manitoba through our Income Assistance program. I think many of the people who end up in facilities in Thompson may choose to come to Thompson and spend the night there, but they are not our clients or our responsibility. So it is a very dangerous precedent, I think, to get into supporting or funding through a program of last resort some of the individuals who chose to be in Thompson on the evenings that they were there.

I do want to say that the Department of Family Services does not fund the Main Street Project. That is a program that is funded through the Department of Health. The issue is one that I do not think our welfare program can solve. So what I have done is asked the three departments to come together, Health, Justice, and Family Services. We have taken the lead on inviting the other departments to come together around the issues in Thompson and see what might be the most appropriate way of supporting individuals in the Thompson area.

That work has begun because, as I said, sometimes it is not–I think we have to be very careful that we do not set precedents with our welfare system, which is a program of last resort, but if there is a genuine need, and I believe there is a need for some sort of co-ordinated approach up here, we want to be able to get the most cost-effective solution to the issues that we are dealing with. So that process is underway. I will await the results of that discussion and dialogue to see what the recommendation might be on some sort of a program or project in the Thompson area.

Mr. Martindale: I am happy to hear that this minister is involved in consultations with three government departments. I am sure that the people I have talked to in Thompson would be happy to hear that, as well, if they are not aware of that.

Is the minister saying that people who are homeless in Thompson are ineligible because they are mostly from reserves and are therefore a federal responsibility?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Here again, if they are from reserve and are a federal responsibility welfare-wise, they are getting their welfare cheque or payment from the band through the federal government, and then to be paying again when they temporarily move off reserve, that would, in essence, be sort of double-dipping in the welfare program, so that is an issue that needs to be looked at in the whole overall context of how we provide support.

That is why I am saying that our welfare program may not be the most appropriate program because I do not think we want to set a precedent in saying that we will, you know, the federal government will pay at one end and we will pay again a second time, so it should not be welfare per diems or the welfare program that is supporting these individuals. What should the appropriate support be, where should it come from, and we all need to be figuring out what is the most appropriate form of support for individuals that find themselves in these circumstances.

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, it would be my understanding that RCMP costs are shared jointly by the federal and provincial governments, so it seems to me that the most germane issue is how to provide this service on the most cost-effective basis because right now it is being provided on the most expensive basis, RCMP holding cells. Can the minister tell me if either the RCMP or the federal government are involved in negotiations with the three departments in the province?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, through the Department of Justice in the Province of Manitoba there would be that consultative process.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if it is correct to say that both 55 Plus benefits and CRISP benefits have not been increased to reflect the cost of living since, I think, 1989? Is that true?

* (1740)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, yes, that is true.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me why the number of people receiving benefits, namely, seniors and families with children, is declining every year? I know that there was a big decline when there was a change of policy, and we discussed that in previous years' Estimates. But I am wondering if the minister can enlighten me as to why the numbers continue to go down.

Mrs. Mitchelson: We have not cut or denied anyone the service. It is by application and as people apply and are eligible, they receive the support through the CRISP or the 55 Plus program.

Mr. Martindale: Can the minister tell me if she has statistics on what percent of eligible families receive CRISP benefits, and what percentage of eligible seniors receive 55 Plus benefits?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We could not provide that because we in the Department of Family Services do not keep statistics on income levels for working families or seniors and their financial circumstances. That would not be information that we would gather or have readily available.

Mr. Martindale: Would the minister be willing to request that information from the Minister Finance?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I do not believe that our Department of Finance provincially would have that kind of data or information. I believe it would be something that the federal government might have through Revenue Canada, but I am not sure it is something that our province would have. I will certainly ask the Department of Finance for that to see whether they have that kind of information or not. We do not traditionally have a lot of success in asking the federal government for information and obtaining it, so my honourable friend might want to try to write to the federal government and see whether he might have more success. I can ask that question of our Finance department here, but our sense is that they probably do not have that kind of data and information.

Mr. Martindale: The minister will be aware that the Manitoba Society of Seniors met, I believe, with the government caucus as well as our caucus, and they presented us with a position paper sometime in 1998. One of their recommendations on page 6, No. 3, says: MSOS recommends that appropriate measures be taken to ensure that the decision as to when CPP retirement or disability benefits commence is a genuine choice for the individual and that people are not forced to take their benefits early when this is not to their advantage.

Now, my understanding would be that this recommendation comes because the provincial government made a decision several years ago to upload this expense to the federal government and force–[interjection] Well, I am sure the minister would be looking for creative ways to do this in more situations, but in this case it penalized seniors because at age 60, they are forced to apply for CPP if they are on social assistance. That means that their benefits are about one-third less to age 65 and one-third less after age 65 for the rest of their lifetime. So this certainly penalizes seniors, especially those who have fairly low benefits to start with.

The recommendation from MSOS is that seniors be given the choice as to whether they apply at 60 or not, which my understanding would be that that was the case in the past, and then they could decide which would be more beneficial, to wait to age 65 or to take at age 60, whichever they felt they were better off doing. I am wondering if the minister is aware of this recommendation and what she thinks of it.

Mrs. Mitchelson: As welfare, again, is a program of last resort, we require individuals to access all other available resources before welfare support. This is a practice that happens in most jurisdictions right across the country. It is not an exception to the rule in Manitoba. I can certainly provide the information on what jurisdictions–I do not have it right here today, but it is one of those issues that is general practice across the country. As I said, because the nature of the program is a program of last resort, we expect that all other avenues of resource income are used first.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Item 9.2. Employment and Income Assistance (a) Client Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $21,246,000–pass; (2) Other Expenditures $7,324,600–pass.

9.2.(b) Income Assistance Programs (1) Employment and Income Assistance $268,188,100–pass; (2) Health Services $29,138,900–pass; (3) Municipal Assistance $5,675,700–pass; (4) Income Assistance for the Disabled $11,708,800–pass.

9.2.(c) Making Welfare Work $2,770,000–pass.

9.2.(d) Income Supplement Programs (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $596,800–pass; (2) Other Expenditures $333,300–pass; (3) Financial Assistance $8,335,100–pass.

* (1750)

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, the minister may not have all her staff here for Community Living. However, we have only got a few minutes. I am sure the minister can spend 10 minutes answering my first question, and I know that she has the deputy minister and the assistant deputy minister here. So my first question is quite general in Community Living.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Resolution 9.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $355,317,300 for Family Services, Employment and Income Assistance, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 2000.

Item 9.3. Community Living (a) Regional Operations (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $15,360,600. Shall the item pass?

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, there has been a large increase in this part of the budget, so this is a very general question. I wonder if the minister can tell me, since the budget has gone up from approximately $119 million to $131 million, where in Community Living the new monies will be expended.

Mrs. Mitchelson: There is a total of an $8.7- million increase and 8.1 of that into Supported Living Services to provide residential and respite services to 132 individuals and day services to 93 individuals. In the residential services, there is an increase of $5.8 million, and that is to assist 85 adults with a mental disability to live in the community in licensed residential care facilities, either with natural or foster families or independently, and a 5 percent increase in funding levels to residential care agencies. That is in the residential services. Then in the day services, there is an extra $2 million to expand day service programming to more individuals and to increase funding to the day services agencies by 5 percent.

In respite, $123,000 for respite services for an additional 51 families, family members with a mental disability, and $200,000 for crisis services. That is the annualization of the four-bed crisis stabilization unit that we announced last year, and also to provide crisis intervention in the community. St. Amant Centre gets $332,000 for their five-year strategic plan and vocational rehab to provide a 1 percent increase in the per diem funding to evaluation and training centres. So that is basically where the money will be going.

Mr. Martindale: I have received a lot of correspondence and the minister has. In fact, a lot of the correspondence that I received are carbon copies of letters that were sent either to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) or to the Minister of Family Services from boards and staff of agencies, most of them, I believe, providing residential services to persons living with a mental disability.

It is my understanding from this correspondence and from previous correspondence and even from raising this issue in Estimates in previous years that the organizations, on the one hand, were asking for a 15 percent overall increase, and the minister's response was to spread it over three years. So it looks like in this budget there is a 5 percent increase for staff salaries. Is that correct?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, that is not absolutely correct. When we started before this year's budget and last year's budget, we met with the residential services people and they specifically asked for a 15 percent increase over three years, so we were able to provide 5 percent last year to operating grants and another 5 percent this year.

We have not, of course, made the commitment for next year, but we understand the issues that are being faced out there in recruiting and retaining staff again to try to ensure that we can provide the support and services to people living in the community. So we did respond; we have responded two years in a row to the residential services piece.

I think last year in our budget we provided 2 percent for day programming, and we have increased that to 5 percent in this year's budget. So what we are trying to do is provide the resources and the operating grant for facilities to begin to address the issue of salaries of workers, and we will continue to look at the issues surrounding the care and support of those with mental disabilities.

Mr. Martindale: In the correspondence that I have received and that I have read, the agencies are telling this minister and telling me that they are having great difficulty, first of all, attracting staff and hiring staff, that when they do they have to spend money training them, that starting wages are very low, in the area of $6.25, $6.50 an hour, and that when these people can get a better-paying job, they frequently leave. So then they have to start the process all over again of advertising and hiring and training them and that this has an effect on the quality of care. I know the minister is familiar with an identical issue in child daycare as well.

The agencies are telling us that they are concerned not only because they feel that the people that they are hiring are inadeqately remunerated, but it has a big effect on the quality of care because they would really like to provide continuity of staff and they would like to be able to attract well-qualified staff and retain well-qualified staff.

Now, they are not the only organizations that are having this problem. I talked to the director of a program that has a residence for adolescents and youth. He told me they hire anyone who comes in off the street with a Grade 12 education and no criminal record. Now that is not the kind of people that they would like to be hiring. Ideally they would like to be hiring people that have taken the two-year program at Red River College, the youth care worker program, but there are not enough graduates from that program and there are not people who have a lot of experience working with youth that are willing to work in a residence at very low pay.

So I guess I would like to ask the minister if she thinks that this 5 percent a year over three years is really adequate to address the concerns that have been raised given that we are talking about a very small increase in wages after years of wages being frozen and rolled back. For example, if we are talking about people making $6.50 an hour, we are talking about a wage increase of about 35 cents, which is not very much when you are looking at only a 5 percent increase. So I wonder if the minister can tell me if she thinks that the concerns of these agencies that are writing to her and writing to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and writing to me are being adequately addressed.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I think it is going to take more than a minute for me to get into some significant discussion around these issues, because I think they are very important issues and I think it requires a significant amount of time to discuss the ever-increasing pressures in our system around supports for the mentally disabled. I hate to get started because I know once I get on a roll, it is going to take me a considerable time.

Mr. Chairperson: Is there a will of the committee to call it 6 p.m.? [agreed]

The hour now being 6 p.m., committee rise.