FAMILY SERVICES

Mr. Deputy Chairperson (Ben Sveinson): Order, please. When the committee was last considering the Estimates of the Department of Family Services, it was on line 1.(c)(1) on page 51 of the main Estimates book. Shall the item pass?

The minister has some staff at the table here. Perhaps she would like to introduce them?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Absolutely, Mr. Chairperson. My Deputy Minister Tannis Mindell; Associate Deputy Minister Doug Sexsmith; Bev Ann Murray, who is the director of compliance in the Child and Family Support branch; Ron Fenwick, who is the executive director of Regional Operations; and Jim Bakken, who is the assistant deputy minister of the Child and Family Support branch.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Thank you.

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Chairperson, I would like to continue asking questions about the annual reports of the Children's Advocate. I guess I will concentrate on the '94-95 annual report. The first grouping of recommendations have to do with the Children's Advocate and the legislation. I think I probably will not have any questions on this section because there will be a review of the role and the function of office of the Children's Advocate.

Under (b), recommendations concerning the Child and Family Support branch and the act, we have the minister's response in front of us. There are some things that the minister chose to respond to and some the minister did not respond to. For example, the recommendation by the Advocate that less energy be spent on serving political and bureaucratic requirements, there is no comment on that recommendation. I am wondering then if the minister can tell us if that recommendation has been acted on?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I fully recognize that the Children's Advocate has made a recommendation, but I think it is very important for my honourable friend to recognize that on a daily basis the issues surrounding children that need support and protection come to the attention of my office and to the department and to staff.

If we can look at the number of issues that do make the headlines in the newspapers on a regular basis, there are a lot of issues around the support and the protection of children and families, and I make absolutely no excuses for being brought up to speed on difficult circumstances and situations in families or when children have been removed from families. I want all of the information that can be provided to me in order to make the right decisions on behalf of children. So I would rather err on the side of caution and ensure that I am fully informed around the circumstances and situations around individual children and families. Of course, I do want to be up to speed when my honourable friend does ask questions, when we are in session, so that I can speak with some confidence around the direction that we are taking to support families and children.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister then tell me what it is that the Family Support does, in addition to preparing the minister for Question Period, that the Children's Advocate considers serving political and bureaucratic requirements?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, the exact interpretation by the Children's Advocate, I cannot completely speak on his behalf. What I do want to indicate to my honourable friend is that there are many different mandated agencies and many nonmandated agencies throughout the width and depth of this province that do provide support and services to vulnerable families and children.

I know that the support branch works on a day-to-day basis, meets with the agencies, mandated and nonmandated, and the regions of the province that directly deliver the service and provide support in that manner. They, can I say, put in a full day's work in trying to ensure that we are dealing in a sensitive fashion with families and children. I can get some more detail from my department on some of the activities that they do undertake.

I know that right now one of the major issues that we are having to deal with are some of the issues around the native agencies, the desire by the federal government and our aboriginal community around the dismantling of the Department of Indian Affairs. Of course, child welfare is one of the issues that is high on the minds of the leadership of the aboriginal communities. We have been meeting on a regular basis with the leadership at AMC, with some of the native leadership, to try to determine what the issues are around child welfare and how we can best work together to ensure that children are being protected in their communities. You also know that there have been some tragedies in our province where children have been abused and actually died while in the care of Child and Family Services.

* (1550)

There are many issues that the department has to deal with on a day-to-day basis. We work with agencies on a regular basis to try to understand how case planning is done and how children are best served. There is a lot of activity that is ongoing, and I believe that staff are working extremely hard to try to deal with the issues that face us on a day-to-day basis.

Mr. Martindale: Under Section C. Recommendations concerning funding, I believe that this is an area that not only the Children's Advocate has commented on but also the Provincial Auditor. My concern here is that I believe both the Provincial Auditor and the Children's Advocate have suggested that the funding has been inadequate in the past to meet the needs of Child and Family Services agencies and have been critical of the government for not providing adequate funding, for not providing realistic funding.

Maybe we will get into this again in Child and Family Services, but I suppose it would also be appropriate now. It seems to me that increases in subsequent years may have actually been used to pay off the deficit of the preceding year rather than doing it the other way round, and that is having a realistic budget so that there is not a deficit at the end of the year.

I wonder if the minister could tell us if she thinks the recommendations regarding adequate funding have been met.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I guess it would be very difficult for my honourable friend or me to determine exactly what would be the right amount of money to ensure safety, security and protection of all children. I am not thoroughly convinced that more money necessarily means better service. We have put $13 million more into the Winnipeg agency over the last five years.

Do we have better service today? Are our children being protected or served better as a result of that very significant increase in funding. I do not have the answer to that question; I wish I did. I am not sure that my honourable friend could speak with any authority and give me any indication of what amount he thinks is the right amount and how, with that dollar figure that is allocated, he could assure Manitobans that every child would be safe and protected in the province. I am trying to come to grips with the issues of how we better serve children. I do not think we have a system that is good enough at this point in time, but I cannot say with all confidence that more money is going to mean better service for children.

We are presently with the Winnipeg agency undertaking an operational review to determine what we are funding, where that funding is going and how it is meeting the needs of children. If you look at the last several months, we all know that there have been some tragedies in our child welfare system. Would more money have meant that those would have been prevented? I do not believe it was a money or a funding issue. I think that we have to look at the system in some detail--the system that we have in place today--and we have to try to determine whether it is working in the very best manner possible to ensure safety, security and protection of children.

I think rather than saying, you know, another $5 million or another $10 million could ensure safety, I cannot say that with any confidence. Maybe my honourable friend has more information than I might have on what exactly the right amount would be and whether he would say that would be adequate, that would be sufficient, that would be the right amount of money that could guarantee safety, security, protection of all children. I have no hesitation in saying the system that we have in place is not meeting the needs of every child in our Manitoba community, but I cannot say with any confidence that more money or in what area more money would provide that better protection and that better service.

Mr. Martindale: Well, I believe that there are some connections between funding and caseload, for example, and I do not pretend to be the ultimate authority on the adequacy of funding. However, I think that the minister does get requests from agencies as to what they think a realistic budget is so I would like to begin by saying, is that observation accurate? Does, for example, Winnipeg Child and Family Services submit a budget to the department which the minister either meets or provides more or less than what their budget request is?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, the process for funding of agencies is determining or establishing what service we expect the agency to deliver within and there is certain criteria around how much funding goes--it is a fairly detailed process. But, in fact, there are certain amounts of money allocated to agencies for certain services that they provide and the budget is based on the last year's funding and what our expectations are for service delivery for each individual agency. So it is a process of purchase of service from agencies for delivery of that service to families and to children. The one area that we have placed an emphasis on is the Family Support Innovations Fund. There has been $2.5 million provided to agencies and to organizations throughout the province that are testing new models of delivery to try to keep families together and provide that support in the home or in the community so that they do not have to be removed from their family circumstance or situation if in fact there is not a serious protection issue surrounding those children. I mean, I believe that wherever possible, if a child is not at risk of need of protection, that we try to work within families and communities and put the supports in place to keep families together and to build healthier families.

You know, I guess I go back again to saying, how much money is going to ensure perfect service for protection of children. I think our focus needs to be on ensuring that the service is delivered in the most appropriate fashion to meet the needs of the children.

Mr. Martindale: Would it not be true to say that the agency, to use Winnipeg as an example, Winnipeg Child and Family Services have felt that the funding they got from your department was inadequate?

* (1600)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I guess you can look right across all of the services that government provides funding for, whether it be health, education, family services, highways, communities. You look at every department within government and everyone would like more money.

I guess the key issue for me and what I am trying to determine right now is what is the money that we are providing for the service doing to ensure the protection and the safety of children. If I had an absolute answer, I would give that answer. I do not. I do not pretend to have all of the answers, but I believe we need to know what we are purchasing, for what dollar and what the outcomes and what the results are. Are the dollars going into the right place to do the appropriate things? If you look at funding right across government and not only funding to the mandated agencies but to all of the agencies that we provide funding to as a Department of Family Services--the Department of Health, Department of Education, Department of Justice, all provide support in many, many ways to families--I believe that we need to look at what service we are purchasing from all different departments and look to see whether we are delivering service to families and children in a comprehensive way or whether we have fragmented services throughout different departments that are dealing with pieces of children and pieces of families.

You know, if we take a look at the dollars that are going to many of the nonmandated agencies, you take a look at the dollars that are going through the Department of Education, through the Department of Health, through the Department of Justice for children, are the dollars that we are spending, significant dollars that we are spending over and above the funding that we provide to Child and Family Services agencies, are those dollars going to organizations, to families in a co-ordinated fashion? That is one of the reasons--and I know we will get into that in the Estimates debate a little later on in my Estimates--we have looked at setting up the Children and Youth Secretariat, to try to find a more co-ordinated way of delivering the service, trying to determine how much actually we are spending across departments and determining whether those dollars are going in a co-ordinated fashion, in the best fashion possible to serve the needs of families and children.

Mr. Martindale: I notice the minister is now asking questions. Maybe she would like to be the critic and give me a chance of being the minister.

Who is in a better position to determine the need in the community? I would think that the agency who have frontline staff in people's homes and who are dealing with children on a daily basis would have a much more realistic idea of what a realistic budget would be, and I think the minister should listen to those people. Another tack I would like to take is it seems to me that the minister is really acknowledging the inadequacy of their budgets and of her budgeting process when she makes up their deficit. Now, I have heard that this minister has gone to the board of Winnipeg Child and Family Services and said we are not going to cover your deficit and then the next year the minister provides more money, some of which I presume goes to pay off the deficit in the previous year. Is that not what has actually been happening?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I think if you look right across government we have made very clear statements that we will not cover deficit funding in many areas and you will see that governments across the country have asked those that receive funding from government to live within the budget that is allocated to them. There are very difficult decisions to make, just like we as a government have made a commitment to the taxpayers of Manitoba that we will have a balanced budget, we will not run a deficit. We will not burden our children and our grandchildren with the debts and the deficits that successive governments, regardless of political stripe right across this country, have run up.

We know that we are paying $600 million in interest on our debt in the province of Manitoba every year and that is $600 million that cannot go into services for children, whether it be through the Department of Health, the Department of Education, the Department of Family Services, and those who are in vulnerable positions in the province of Manitoba cannot have the access to those dollars that go on interest alone on the debt. So we have made a commitment to the taxpayers of Manitoba today and to our children, to our grandchildren and to successive generations, that we will no longer burden them with the debt and hamstring their ability into the future to provide the services that may be needed at the appropriate time in the appropriate fashion.

So I make absolutely no excuses for being able to set a budget which in the city of Winnipeg through the Child and Family Services agency is $13 million more today than it was five years ago. There are not many areas within government that have received that kind of increased support, and it is because we care about the children and we care about the services that need to be provided. All we are asking of agencies and those that we fund with precious, hard-earned tax dollars is to manage that money in the most efficient and effective way possible and ensure that the maximum amount of support and resource goes into the families and children who need it. I do not think that is too much to ask. We are trying to work in a co-operative fashion to ensure that the dollars we provide and the significant increase in financial resource that we provide is directed in the most efficient and effective manner to ensure that children can be protected, can be safe and secure in their environments.

Mr. Martindale: Of course, there are some significant exceptions to what the minister is saying. For example, the operating-loss agreement for the Winnipeg Jets which is going to cost the taxpayers of Manitoba something in the order of $57 million to $60 million, a rather significant exception to covering debt. Also, this minister and this government's policies of increasing poverty means that there is going to be more child abuse which means that there is going to be a greater cost to Child and Family Services agencies and to government and society because we know that there is a link between poverty and abuse.

I would like to ask the minister, how much of this year's budget of Winnipeg Child and Family Services will be used to cover last year's deficit?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we provided supplementary funding to cover their deficit last year and we have increased their base accordingly.

Mr. Martindale: So what I was alleging earlier is actually true. This government's budgeting is not realistic, it is not adequate as observed by the Auditor's department and by the Children's Advocate. The government does not give them enough money, at the end of a year they have a deficit, and then this minister covers the deficit in the subsequent year. How do we know that this is not going to happen with this year's budget for '96-97?

Mrs. Mitchelson: That is exactly why we are undertaking an operational review in conjunction with the agency in the city of Winnipeg to determine what we are funding, how we are funding it and what is the appropriate level of funding for service for children in the city of Winnipeg. There is a steering committee that is working on that from both the agency and our department to go through that evaluation and make a determination on what the appropriate level of funding is to provide the service that is mandated by the agency.

* (1610)

Mr. Martindale: So then I take it from the minister's response that there will not be people who need service such as 16- and 17-year-olds being denied service because this minister is suggesting that the funding is more realistic this year, so then I should not have to raise questions next year in Estimates about individuals who are denied service because of the inadquacy of funding. Is that correct?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, there is no one who is denied service if they are prepared to co-operate with the service plan that has been developed by the agency and by the community. If, in fact, someone does not want to be involved in any kind of a plan to be served, I believe that is not a terribly great use of taxpayers' dollars and that the dollars should go to those who are there who want the service and can be helped through the provision of that service.

Mr. Martindale: Well, perhaps we will get into this area again in the future.

The next set of recommnedations from the Children's Advocate has to do with service to children and families, and one of the very serious concerns is about children who are in foster homes and experience abuse in foster homes. I see that the minister has responded to all the recommendations in that section. Does the minister consider that she has adequately responded to all of the recommendations in that section?

Mrs. Mitchelson: No, I do not consider they have been adequately responded to as yet, but we are in the process of developing plans to respond to the recommendations.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister elaborate on the plans that are still being worked on, particularly regarding the safety of children in foster care?

Mrs. Mitchelson: One of the things that has already been undertaken is in fact the restructure of the branch and an increased focus on compliance with standards, and that will be the new focus on the new director of compliance and that part of the branch.

The other is the development of a training module for foster parents that has been developed, and we will be starting implementation of that shortly. We are right now in the process of looking at how we can structure an independent panel for investigation of allegations of abuse in care.

Mr. Martindale: Is the independent panel the only initiative in terms of making improvements to the foster care system?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I think I also indicated that we had developed a training manual for foster parents that is in the process of being implemented and that the case audits and the case studies and the quality assurance program will in a more comprehensive way monitor care in foster homes.

Mr. Martindale: Those are the only two initiatives then?

Mrs. Mitchelson: The branch is in the process of doing major audits and reviews of foster homes, and we are checking for compliance and I guess providing the additional support when that support is needed.

Mr. Martindale: The Children's Advocate recommended the establishment of an aboriginal program directorate. I do not see that that has been addressed in the minister's response in the second annual report. Could the minister tell us if she has looked at that recommendation and rejected it or is it still being studied? What does the minister think of that recommendation?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, that was a recommendation that was made by the First Nations Task Force report. It was one of the key recommendations, but it also followed from a recommendation that said the federal government should establish child welfare legislation, national legislation. We have not received any word from the federal government around--that was the first and primary recommendation and we indicated support for a native directorate as a result of the federal government putting in place national child welfare legislation.

My honourable friend does know the issues surrounding the offload of significant support by the federal government for aboriginals off reserve. I think in my opening comments I talked about the total dollar figure that Manitobans have had to absorb in welfare and child welfare, around $94 million over the last five years, a significant amount of offload. When you say Manitoba has not put any more money into or is not funding to an adequate level, we certainly have increased and maintained that support that the federal government has offloaded. So there has been significantly more contribution by Manitobans to child welfare and to welfare.

I do want to indicate that the issue just is not quite as simple as setting up a directorate. We have a large aboriginal population in the city of Winnipeg. We have many band-based or, not band-based, but aboriginal mandated agencies outside of the city of Winnipeg. There are differing opinions in the aboriginal community around what a directorate would look like, who would have responsibility. The aboriginal community in the city of Winnipeg does not believe that the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs represents them or their constituency in Winnipeg, so it is not a cut-and-dried issue. I think we want to be sensitive to the aboriginal issues in child welfare, but it is not a simple matter to resolve.

We have stated that in the absence of federal legislation, it would be very difficult for us to set up an aboriginal directorate when we, as a Manitoba government, have responsibility for all people with all different cultural backgrounds. Is it precedent setting to set up without federal legislation recognizing the federal financial and moral responsibility and constitutional responsibility to aboriginal people an aboriginal directorate and not set up a directorate for every other cultural group in the province of Manitoba? We have responsibility for children of all backgrounds, all cultural backgrounds, in the province of Manitoba. So there are a lot of issues that need to be thought through very carefully.

I am not sure that one aboriginal directorate would satisfy those aboriginals in the city of Winnipeg that would not agree that a directorate that was mandated under the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs would meet the needs of the children in Winnipeg.

Mr. Martindale: Under the recommendations in regard to the Suche report, I see that there is a working group and a number of subcommittees and recommendations are being prioritized and some things have been implemented. There has been a long-standing recommendation and need for a residential care worker's training course at Red River College. The minister's response says that there has been a submission to have such a course. My understanding is that we are really waiting for the province, either Family Services or Education, to decide whether to fund it or not. People have been advocating for this for some time. There is certainly a need for this kind of training. It is a very difficult area of work, and I am wondering why we have not seen this government fund this program at Red River College yet.

* (1620)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we are committed and supportive of and I am sure we will see in the not too distant future a program at Red River Community College.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell us when that is going to happen? My understanding is that this proposal has been there for at least two or three years and there have been promises in the past that it is going to be funded and nothing happens. Will we see a course beginning for residential care workers training in September of this year, for example?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we are working toward that end.

Mr. Martindale: It sort of reminds me of the minister saying that the Vulnerable Persons Act would be proclaimed soon when we were in Estimates last year.

Going on to recommendations specific to agencies and workers, could the minister tell us if she believes that all of these recommendations have been implemented since she responded to all of them?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, the competency based training initiative is well underway and plans are there for continuation of that program. The quality assurance program has been expanded to residential care facilities and there are 22 reviews that have been undertaken.

Mr. Martindale: I would like to go back to recommendations in regard to the Suche report and ask what the minister's plans are for Seven Oaks Centre. I have been getting phone calls. People are very concerned. They are afraid that this government is going to close the centre and sell off the land so it is causing some turmoil and concern amongst the staff there. I am also told that there is no alternative facility for the kinds of adolescents who are located there. So I wonder if the minister can tell us what her plans are for the Seven Oaks Centre.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I think we are getting a little off track here. We are discussing the Child Advocate's report and this is an issue that should be dealt with either through the Child and Family Support branch line or when I have staff from the Child and Youth Secretariat because there has been a lot of interdepartmental work that has gone into discussion around the Seven Oaks and the future of Seven Oaks Centre.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 1.(c)(1).

Mr. Martindale: I guess a similar question would have to do with the first recommendation under other recommendations so maybe I will ask that under a more appropriate line.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: 1.(c) Children's Advocate (1) Salaries and Other Employee Benefits--$213,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $94,400--pass.

1.(d) Social Services Advisory Committee (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $192,600.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell us how many appeals there were in 1995-96, if it is not too early after the end of the fiscal year?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, there are 1,120.

Mr. Martindale: How many of those were successful?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, 68 appeals were allowed, 448 were dismissed, 450 were withdrawn, 78 did not appear, and 36 were outside of the scope of the committee. There are 40 still pending.

Mr. Martindale: I think the minister earlier said there were 1,120 appeals. Of those, only 68 were allowed. Does that mean that only 68 individuals appeared before the Social Services Advisory Committee?

* (1630)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, I guess maybe I need to clarify that. There were 1,120 appeals received, and those would have all been heard. Okay.

Mr. Martindale: Okay.

Mrs. Mitchelson: But 78 did not appear to be heard; 36 were outside of the jurisdiction of the committee; 450 were withdrawn. When I said 450 were withdrawn, they were withdrawn before the appeal process took place or at the time of appeal. They voluntarily withdrew the appeal. Mr. Chairperson, 448 were heard and were not successful, and 68 were heard and were successful.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister, since I am sure she has number crunchers at the table, tell us what percentage 68 is of 448 to give us the number that were successful?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I think our calculations are right; it is 13 percent.

Mr. Martindale: That sounds about right, given what I remember from previous fiscal years. So we know that a very small percentage are successful on appeal.

Since the Canada Assistance Plan has been repealed, can the minister tell us if she plans to keep the Social Services Advisory Committee in place in Manitoba?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, yes.

Mr. Martindale: The Estimates book says that the committee acts in an advisory capacity to the minister, so could the minister tell us what advice she has been getting from the Social Services Advisory Committee?

Mrs. Mitchelson: The one very significant piece of advice that I have received from that committee is advice that I think we have followed through on. It was information that many single parents who have been on social allowances since the time of the birth of their first child till the time their youngest child turned 18 and became independent--and I have talked about this many times in the Legislature and outside to different groups and organizations that I have met with--are women who had no education, no self-esteem and, all of a sudden, become employable at the age of 35, 40, 45 years old when their youngest child turned the age of 18 and found that they were not employable and would very often apply for social allowances based on medical inadmissibility or whatever the word is, the terminology. They would go to try to get a doctor's certificate to indicate that they were not medically fit to work because they had no ability. They were not marketable as people, as human beings.

So that was an issue that the Social Services Advisory Committee brought to me and indicated that we had to as a government look at a way of trying to ensure that these women did not end up in that circumstance or situation where they were in fact unemployable with absolutely no skills and no self-esteem and, all of a sudden, were turned out there into the world to say, go out and get a job.

That is exactly one of the reasons that we have changed our Social Allowances Program to ensure that we do not create that kind of dependency on our Social Allowances Program. That was one very concrete piece of advice that they provided to me, and that would have been as a result of hearing and seeing those circumstances and caring very much about those women who just had lost all hope of ever being independent and productive members of society. I think that is a very sad situation.

I will say again that that was one of the reasons we took a very serious look at our program and the dependency that we had created on committing single women to a life of poverty on welfare. In many instances, there just would not be the ability for them to turn their lives around. So that was one of the reasons we looked at putting in place an employability focus on those single parents whose children were in school full time, to start the process of leading to a life of independence and not dependent on welfare and a life of poverty as their only hope for the future.

Mr. Martindale: How many single parents are we talking about on provincial Income Security?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, around 12,400.

Mr. Martindale: How many does this department plan to find work for through programs like Taking Charge!? What is the government's job creation goal for these single parents?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Under all of the interventions that will be taking place as a result of our welfare reform announcement and announcements that happened previously, we believe that over the next year Taking Charge! will see about 1,100 individuals enrolled in their programs. Now, can I say to you all of those people will be employed at the end? I cannot say that, but I will say that they will receive some sort of support and some either training or on-the-job experience. I am confident we will have 1,100 people through that program started off on their road to independence as a result of the initiatives that will be undertaken through Taking Charge!

We know that the Community Services program that is run right now by the City of Winnipeg looks at some short term, some longer term employment opportunities for 800 individuals. The Rural Jobs Project, which has been ongoing for a couple of years, we are anticipating that there will be 50 with short-term or long-term work experience or opportunity. The Conservation Corps that we announced will provide opportunity for a hundred individuals to obtain some work experience. Opportunities Manitoba, which was announced with welfare reform too, is looking at placing 105 people in permanent job opportunities, and the Youth NOW program that was announced by the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. McIntosh), we are looking at around 600 individuals, young people who will be into employment.

* (1640)

We do know there are initiatives ongoing with the call centres that will create permanent job opportunities for people. I have indicated there have been a couple of those programs, graduation programs--Taking Charge! We will be working with them, and we will be working with them on direct referrals from our department as we change the focus to employability away from dependency.

We are working with the fashion industry right now, and we know that we have had some success, although small, with direct referral to training and job opportunity in the fashion industry. Based on the number of jobs that are available in that industry we will be working very proactively to try to find employment in that industry for some of our welfare recipients. There is the single parent program for rural and northern Manitoba that our expectations are that there will be 300 people employed or in training through that initiative.

Through the employment development centres in the Department of Education and Training, there is Employment Connections that work with people to place them with job opportunities, and we are looking at around 700 individuals for that program. We know there are several jobs in the trucking industry, and we are developing partnerships with them to try to place people in those jobs. We are working with Pathways, which is the aboriginal employment initiative.

So there are all kinds of opportunities out there for people to become employed. I know that the City of Winnipeg right now is experiencing businesses calling them indicating that there are job opportunities and asking whether they have an inventory of people on welfare that might be possible matches with the job opportunities that are there. So we will continue to work. I do not want to set expectations really high and unachievable but I do want to say that the whole focus of our welfare reform is employment first, and as the job opportunities are there we are going to work extremely proactively with those who are in our social allowance system to help them develop an independence plan and a way out of a life of poverty and welfare.

Mr. Martindale: Well, this minister and this government certainly could not be accused of having job expectation goals that are high and unachievable because there are not any. I asked the minister how many jobs will be created and all I got was a list of the numbers of people that would be in various training programs. None of this had to do with job creation goals. It only had to do with the numbers of people who would be in various training programs.

I would like to ask the minister, why was the director of the Social Services Advisory Committee replaced with an acting director?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, just before we go on to that and before I get the information from my department on that, I do want to comment because, obviously, my honourable friend was not listening. I have to say that most times I believe he listens very carefully to what I have to say, but obviously today when I was putting some numbers and some programs on the record, there very definitely are job opportunities, through the Community Services Projects that we run with the City of Winnipeg, through the Rural Jobs Project, through the Conservation Corps, through Opportunities Manitoba, through Youth NOW, through the call centres, through the fashion industry, through the trucking industry. There are job opportunities and there are vacancies and we have made an absolute commitment to ensure that those that are on social allowance have the opportunity to train and enter those areas of growing demand as a result of the economic initiatives that our government has put into place.

So I hope I have made myself clear and I am sure my honourable friend has heard now that yes, in some instances, people will need to be in training programs in order to obtain employment, but there are many employment opportunities there now, and we are hopeful that many of those opportunities will be on-the-job training that leads to successful full-time employment.

From time to time within the department people are given new opportunities and new challenges and it was an opportunity for a new job for the person that was in that position and an opportunity for--the person that moved into the acting position was a person that had been employed in that area and was given an advancement opportunity.

(Mr. Frank Pitura, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

Mr. Martindale: In a previous answer, I distinctly heard the minister say that there is no guarantee that people would get jobs when they graduated from programs like Taking Charge! and I appreciate the minister being candid because certainly there are no guarantees. However, only about 20 percent of the 12,400 single parents will be even in a training program. So next year, I am going to ask the minister in Family Services Estimates how many of those 2,100 people actually got jobs.

What is really going on here is that this is the Manitoba version of workfare whereby the budget of the single parents was cut by 2.7 percent, and that was only the minister's figures or spin on this particular cut because that figure was based on the total budget of these individuals, whereas in fact their cut was approximately 5 percent of the items that were affected, food, clothing, personal needs, household needs, so that the cut was much larger than what was actually announced. What this minister and this government is doing is putting incredible pressure on individuals to get a job when the jobs are not there, because the job creation efforts of this government are pathetic.

I see that there are the same number of SYs for the Social Services Advisory Committee, but does the minister not expect there will be an increase in appeals due to her welfare cuts and daycare cuts?

* (1650)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, the staff support should be adequate to look at any increase in appeals. It is actually the panel members that are involved in the hearing process, and I have every confidence that they will be able to meet any increased demand.

Mr. Martindale: I would hope that a lot more people would appeal because these budget cuts are going to have a great effect on many, many individuals. Has the minister ever considered changing the appeal process so that people could appeal to the courts on a matter of legality?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, the whole process is set up to try to expedite the hearing of cases of individuals who feel they have a concern or an issue around the support they are being provided. Here I go back to asking a question again, but I would like to ask my honourable friend whether he feels that money for legal fees is the best use of taxpayers' dollars in this process. I would venture to guess that more money would go into the hands of lawyers and the court process than would go into the hands of the individuals who are seeking clarification of the amount of resource that they receive.

Mr. Martindale: Once again, the minister is not answering questions; she is asking them. I think she wants to be the critic instead of the minister.

I notice in the annual report for 1994-95 that 9.(1) (d) is missing. I find 1.(a), 1.(b), 1.(c), 1.(e) and I cannot find 1.(d). I am wondering if it is on a different page.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, it is on page 95.

Mr. Martindale: Thank you.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Pitura): Section 1. (d) Social Services Advisory Committee (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $192,600. Shall the item pass?

An Honourable Member: No, just a second.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Pitura): The item is accordingly passed.

Mrs. Mitchelson: No, he has a question. Do we want to take a five-minute break?

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Pitura): Is it agreed that we take a five-minute recess?

An Honourable Member: All right.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Pitura): Agreed.

The committee recessed at 4:53 p.m.

________

After Recess

The House resumed at 5:04 p.m.

(Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. I was told that 1.(d)(1) was about to be passed. Item 1.(d) Social Services Advisory Committee (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $192,600--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $157,900--pass.

1.(e) Management Services (1) Financial and Administrative Services (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,789,900.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell us if there have been any changes recently in health benefits to social assistance recipients?

Mrs. Mitchelson: No.

Mr. Martindale: Are there any changes in drug, dental or optical benefits?

Mrs. Mitchelson: No.

Mr. Martindale: Have there been any drugs that have been delisted recently for social assistance recipients?

Mrs. Mitchelson: No.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister provide me with a list of grants to external agencies at this point?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, we can get that and provide it on Tuesday.

Mr. Martindale: And could we get a copy for the Liberal critic as well?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, absolutely.

Mr. Martindale: Would it be appropriate to ask questions on this line about the role of the department in funding external agencies?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, if I might make a suggestion that once the grants listing is provided, unless there is a specific grant under this area, and I am not sure that there is, but I would be prepared to answer any questions on any external grants at the time the list is provided. Even if we have passed the line, I will make the commitment to answer any questions once the list is--unless there is a specific external agency that my honourable friend thinks relates to this line.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable member for Burrows asked that a list of grants be supplied for himself and for the Liberal critic. What member is that? If the honourable member for Burrows would--

Mr. Martindale: Well, I will try to ascertain that.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: I did not mean to crack a joke. I was trying to get some clarification.

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, the reason I thought it might be appropriate under this line is that I see in the annual report under Financial and Administrative Services that program budgeting and reporting approves external agency contracts, and I had some policy questions and questions about one particular agency.

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, program budgeting and reporting, as outlined in the Estimates book, under the new structure no longer exists, and it has devolved to the different branches and divisions within the department. That is part of the new structure that was not in place when the Estimates book was printed, so you will find those grants throughout, but I have made a commitment to answer any questions on any grants to external agencies. [interjection] Well, I suppose it all depends on whether it is applicable to income assistance or not. If not, it would be in each division, and I will answer those questions at a later time.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: 1.(e) Management Services (1) Financial and Administrative Services (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,789,900--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $646,800--pass.

1.(e)(2) Human Resource Services (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $767,800--pass; (b) Other Expenditures $97,700.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell us what progress is being made in terms of affirmative action, beginning, first of all, with women being promoted to senior management positions?.

* (1710)

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, in response to the first part of the question, the number of women employed in the department is at almost 70 percent, 69.79 percent, and the government target is 50 percent in that area. Aboriginal is 7.58 percent, and the target is 10 percent. So we are a little bit on the low side there. For the physically disabled, we are at 3.8 percent, and the government target is 7 percent. So we are a little on the low side there. For visible minorities, we are at 2.25 percent. Government target is six. So we are on the low side there, too.

As far as women in senior management positions, 34 percent are women. Last year, it was 28 percent. So we have had a fairly significant increase.

Mr. Martindale: I would like to thank the minister for providing the percentages in each category. I presume that very little hiring is being done and that probably, through attrition, there may even be fewer employees in this department, which means that it is difficult to hire new employees in these categories. Would that be correct?

Mrs. Mitchelson: My honourable friend is quite right. There is not a lot of new hiring. We do not have more employees in the Department of Family Services, and it does make it somewhat more difficult. Still, when we look at the percentages, there has been a slight increase in the percentage of female, aboriginal and visible minorities. So, although our percentages may be low in some of the categories, there has been an increase percentage in the number of employees in those categories.

Mr. Martindale: In the physically disabled category, is the percentage the same as last year or lower?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It was 3.92 percent last year, and it is 3.79 percent this year, which might translate into one person less.

Mr. Martindale: Are there affirmative action goals for promoting people within the department, for example, from middle management to senior management, for example?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, there is a conscious effort within the department, and just as seen with the most recent reorganization, there were four or five women who were promoted through that process into more senior positions.

Mr. Martindale: Where hiring is taking place, is the minister's department trying to achieve their affirmative action goals by hiring people from these categories?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Every branch and division within the department has an Affirmative Action Plan. We try our very best to increase our component.

Mr. Chairperson: Item 1.(e) Management Services (2) Human Resource Services (b) Other Expenditures $97,700--pass.

1.(e) Management Services (3) Information Systems (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,492,400.

Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, it is my understanding that the City of Winnipeg Social Services Department has their own computer system. I assume that Income Security of the Province of Manitoba has its own computer system. What is going to happen when these two departments are amalgamated? Will there be a new computer system or will just one of the current systems be used?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Both the system at the province and the system at the city are somewhat outdated, antiquated, and with part of the whole process of putting in place a business plan, there will be consideration given to building a new system that is more updated and certainly more user friendly.

Mr. Martindale: I assume that this will be rather costly if there is a new system. Can the minister tell us if they anticipate that this will be a major expenditure then?

Mrs. Mitchelson: It is a little premature at this point to determine what the cost or, in fact, what type of system might be required, but I think we need a system that brings us into the '90s and beyond and provides us with the information that is most useful for us in order to deliver the programs.

It is a little premature to determine exactly what that system might look like or what the cost might be, but I think it is important that we have a system that works and provides the kind of information we need on a timely basis to deliver the program.

Mr. Martindale: On this page, I see that Supplies and Services increased from $91,000 to $271,000, which is a huge increase. The footnote says the increase is primarily related to the information systems outsourcing agreement. Would the word “outsourcing” refer to contracting out?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, this is part of a new initiative in the department called Partners in Progress, where it is a partnership with IBM, Online Business Systems and ISM to provide a single point of contact, help desk for our computer systems throughout the department.

Mr. Martindale: Was a tendered contract involved here?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes.

Mr. Martindale: Why is this department spending a lot more money on presumably advice and management of their computer system when I have just been told there is going to be a new computer system when the two welfare departments are amalgamated?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, it is my understanding that this is helping us to become much more efficient. What has happened in the past is that computer systems have been built division by division where there is not the ability for one division or one branch to talk to or be on the same--well, I see my honourable friend roll his eyes. I guess that is what happens, is technology moves ahead in leaps and bounds. So it is important, I think, for us to have an efficient system where all branches that are providing services to families have the ability to co-ordinate their energies and their efforts and ensure that we have the most efficient and effective system possible to deliver the service that is needed to our clients.

* (1720)

Mr. Martindale: I am glad to hear that provincial Income Security is making progress in this area because certainly they have been lagging behind departments of the City of Winnipeg, at least in the past. So maybe they are just catching up now. I have a suggestion, since individuals are going to be able to network with people in the same computer system. Would the staff at Income Security, particularly those who approve rent payments, communicate with the City of Winnipeg department of environmental health and not pay the rent on premises where there are outstanding work orders or inspection orders?

Mrs. Mitchelson: We would love to be more efficient in that respect, and I thank my honourable friend for the suggestion. I think we have a system in place that does not pay rent to very derelict accommodation, but I think there is more work that can be done and more improvement that can be made. So I thank him for his suggestion, and we will continue to work to try to improve our ability to do that.

Mr. Martindale: I thank the minister for following up on that suggestion.

Not very long ago I went with a client to make application or enroll in income security. It was quite an interesting experience especially since the intake worker had a computer at their workplace but it was not used. The enrollment was done manually. It is my understanding that after everything is written down with pen and paper that then it goes to somebody who does data entry. When I asked why, I was told that it was thought to be too impersonal to actually type on a computer while a client was sitting there being enrolled.

That kind of surprised me because everywhere you go, whether it is a bank or any other institution, the staff have a computer on their desk, and they type right in front of you. In fact, usually they turn the screen so you can see what they are typing. I do not understand why we cannot do that in Income Security. Surely it would be a lot more efficient and effective, which this minister and this government like to talk about all the time.

Mrs. Mitchelson: That is exactly the kind of improvement we would like to make. That is one of the reasons we have gone into a partnership with Partners in Progress to bring all staff up to speed on the most recent technology and our ability to deliver services in a more efficient fashion to those clients that we serve that need our service.

Mr. Martindale: Well, I sure hope this department is not spending almost $200,000 to get that kind of basic advice from IBM.

I would like to ask the minister about something that is mentioned in the annual report, that Information Systems completed a feasibility study which investigated technical alternatives for the daycare subsidy program. What was the result of that feasibility study?

Mrs. Mitchelson: The results of that study said that we needed a new system, and we are in the process now. I guess government sometimes moves a little more slowly than the private sector does. We do have a very outdated system in child daycare that needs some substantial work, and obviously again there needs to be some financial commitment.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 1.(e) Management Services (3)(a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,492,400--pass; (3)(b) Other Expenditures $297,200--pass.

Item (4) Policy and Planning (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $704,700.

Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me what the staff in this part of her department will be doing in the absence of the Canada Assistance Plan since some of them used to prepare and negotiate Manitoba's cost-sharing claims under CAP?

Mrs. Mitchelson: They are winding down, but there still is an awful lot of work to do because we are always a year to two years behind in ensuring that we have claimed everything and are in receipt of payment from the federal government. So there still is work to do but it is winding down.

Mr. Martindale: What programs are being evaluated by Policy & Planning currently?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, some of the evaluations that are ongoing right now are the evaluation of the pilot project for the disabled, In the Company of Friends, the evaluation process for Taking Charge!--we are involved in a committee on that along with the federal government--and the Community Services projects that we have partnered with the City of Winnipeg on our Welfare to Work initiatives. Those are some examples of the ongoing activity in that area.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The time being 5:30 p.m., committee rise.