* (1640)
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Peter Dyck): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This section of the Committee of Supply will be considering the Estimates of the Department of Family Services.
Does the honourable Minister of Family Services have an opening statement?
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Yes, Mr. Chairperson, I do. I have copies for my honourable friend. If I provide copies to the committee, could we ensure that all the independent members get copies should they so choose? Okay.
I am pleased to present the 1998-99 Expenditure Estimates for the Department of Family Services to this committee for its consideration. I look forward to a constructive discussion on our programs and of the policy directions which our government has set for the department.
Provincial governments have been challenged to adjust to the loss of millions of dollars in federal transfer payments which occurred in conjunction with the introduction of the Canada Health and Social Transfer. This loss in funding has made it all the more necessary for government to assess what we do and how we do it. We have examined our program delivery mechanisms to ensure they are cost effective and have ensured that our programs are focused to meet the needs of our most vulnerable citizens. I am pleased that we have been able to maintain and enhance our essential programs and our commitment to those most in need.
Our government's overall consistent emphasis on fiscal responsibility and a competitive tax structure have helped to build confidence in our province. These directions have helped us achieve a strong vibrant and prosperous economy. A strong economy is required if we want an effective and sustainable safety net for those who are having difficulty providing for themselves and to finance the services which improve the lives of children, families and vulnerable persons. By carefully managing our financial resources, we have helped ensure the availability of high-quality social services for our citizens.
I am pleased to indicate that we have been able to increase funding from our department for 1998-99. Particularly notable is an overall funding increase of 7.6 percent for the Community Living Division and an 8 percent increase in the allocation for the Child and Family Services Division. Through our Employment First efforts, there have been significant reductions in income assistance caseloads which have enabled us to redirect resources to other areas within the department.
Before providing members with a detailed overview of the department's expenditure plans and new initiatives, I would like to say a few words about the department as a whole and its structure. The department has as its main focus a number of critical goals. They include encouraging individual, family and community responsibility, independence and self-sufficiency, while assisting Manitobans in times of need; keeping children safe and protected; supporting adults living with a mental disability to safely live and participate in the community; continuing to develop partnerships with the community in the development and delivery of services; continuously improving the quality of services and the results experienced by clients; and ensuring services are delivered in the most effective and cost-efficient manner possible.
In terms of the department's structure, there are four main operating divisions: Administration and Finance, Employment and Income Assistance, Community Living, and Child and Family Services. In addition, the department is supported by two internal service providers: Policy and Planning, and Human Resource Services. The Social Services Advisory Committee and the Children's Advocate are associated with the department but report directly to me.
In 1996, our government introduced a bold new approach to delivering welfare in this province. Through the Employment First initiative, we have placed a high priority on providing supports and services to enhance employment skills, encourage self-reliance and facilitate the transition from income assistance to employment. Assistance with personal job planning and job readiness sessions have helped clients access gainful employment. Partnerships across departments and with community and business groups have been forged to help place many income assistance recipients in jobs.
This practical, co-operative approach has helped move us forward in a significant way because it represents a break from the old welfare system which fostered dependence and reliance on government. With the very best of intentions, that of helping the most needy, we have in the past encouraged a cycle where generation after generation of families remain on welfare. I have said on many occasions that the best form of social security is a job. Our government will continue to work to create an economic climate which generates jobs and employment opportunities for all Manitobans.
I am very pleased to see that income assistance clients have responded positively to our government's challenge to seek work. It is clear that clients want to work and to support themselves and their families. As a result of our efforts and those of clients, we have seen a substantial decrease in the provincial caseload. Since the introduction of this initiative, the single-parent and general assistance caseloads have decreased by more than 1,800 or over 13 percent. In fact, single parent caseloads have reached their lowest point since 1990-91, and general assistance cases are at their lowest level since 1980.
Our government's welfare reform initiative has resulted in even greater reductions in the municipal caseload. Compared with the May 1996 level, municipal assistance cases have declined by more than 6,000 or over 30 percent. This caseload is now at its lowest level since 1991-92. In addition to those who have achieved financial self-sufficiency, large and increasing numbers of provincial clients have reduced their dependency on income assistance through earnings. Since May of 1996, the number of clients reporting earnings from employment has increased by 40 percent.
These very positive developments have made it possible to reduce the expenditures in the Employment and Income Assistance division by over $21 million while maintaining our support for persons who continue to require it. The savings which we have achieved in this area are being invested in important new initiatives and enhancements to existing programming. In addition, our government will be moving forward to build on the successes in the areas which we have achieved to date. Manitobans have told us that they approve of the steps we have taken to help get people off welfare and back to work. In the coming year we will continue to build on this approach in the strong belief that employment is the best form of social security and the surest way of avoiding poverty in the long run.
I would also like to take a moment to mention the one-tier project. An important component of welfare reform has been the commitment to develop a one-tier approach to income assistance in Winnipeg. Work continues towards the implementation of a single system which will reduce the administrative overlap and duplication involved in two levels of government providing similar services.
I am very pleased that we have been able to significantly enhance our funding for programs which fall within the area of community living. Adult Services programs include a range of supported living and day services to assist adults with a mental disability to live as active and contributing members of the community. They also include vocational rehabilitation programs to assist adults with a physical, mental, psychiatric or learning disability to acquire or enhance employment skills, to adapt to and participate in the workforce. This fiscal year we have increased funding for Adult Services programming by $7.1 million or 10.7 percent. The funding increase for supported living will assist more adults with a mental disability to live in the community in community residences, with natural or foster families or independently with supports. As well, funding levels paid to residential care agencies are being increased in order to stabilize and enhance the quality of residential support services provided to vulnerable adults.
* (1650)
A further $300,000 has been made available to establish a four-bed crisis stabilization unit in Winnipeg for individuals experiencing breakdowns in their living arrangements due to medical or behavioural crises. Additional funding support for day services will make services available to more adults with a mental disability and will also provide for an increase in the funding levels allocated to day services agencies.
We are always striving to explore innovative approaches to supporting individuals in the community. My department has been working closely with the Manitoba Coalition of Service Providers, the Manitoba Supported Employment Network and the Association for Community Living-Manitoba to look at options for improving the current system.
Three working groups have been established to develop pilot projects to test alternative approaches to providing support services for adults with a mental disability. The family care project for adults is aimed at providing supports for families to care for their adult children with a mental disability. This project is being operated by St. Amant Centre in co-operation with ACL Manitoba with partial funding assistance from the federal Community Inclusion Initiative. A working group on alternative generic services for seniors has been established to examine more appropriate day services for seniors who are mentally disabled. A third working group will develop pilot projects which examine the feasibility of enhancing support for natural and foster families, providing direct individualized funding in support of self-managed care and introducing alternate approaches to case management and individual planning functions.
Our commitment in the Adult Services area will include provision for improvements to facilities and programming at St. Amant Centre. Our government has approved a five-year strategic plan which will incorporate improvements to living space within the centre, facilitate a more effective school program and adult day program and strengthen supports to clients and families in the community.
These projects and the funding we have provided demonstrate our government's commitment to this priority area. I am pleased that our government has once again been able to increase funding to provide services and supports for adults living with mental disabilities to assist them with living and participating in the community.
Our government has worked actively with other jurisdictions towards the renewal of the federal-provincial financial arrangements to support vocational rehabilitation programming for persons with disabilities. The new funding framework, called Employability Assistance for People with Disabilities, will place greater emphasis on activities that assist Canadians with disabilities in getting and keeping jobs and on measuring and evaluating program effectiveness and outcome. Manitoba recently signed an agreement with the federal government regarding the new funding arrangement. It will remain in effect for a five-year period and will ensure federal cost-sharing support of up to $7.9 million annually over the life of the agreement. The Province of Manitoba will also spend an equal amount on these valuable services.
Throughout the discussions with the federal government, Manitoba has engaged in ongoing consultations with representatives of the disability community to obtain their views with regard to the new framework. We very much appreciated the involvement and contributions made by members of the community. Their contribution to this process, through the sharing of ideas and suggestions, has been invaluable. My department will continue to rely on their active participation.
Our government continues to promote an active and very exciting agenda for new initiatives and enhancements to existing programs for children. Children are the future of our society and of our economic life. Our government believes that investing in a good start in life can ensure that children will become healthier adults who will be better able to work productively.
During the prebudget consultations, which my colleague the Honourable Eric Stefanson, Minister of Finance, held in the fall, Manitobans asked that more resources be made available for early intervention and healthy child development programs and for additional supports for children in lower income families. We are making substantial new investments in such programs this year.
As outlined in the 1998 budget, our government has significantly increased spending for children, youth and their families. Most of this additional funding will be directed toward a continuum of early intervention and prevention programs that respond to the nutritional, learning and social needs of children. These initiatives will help ensure that children are ready to enter the school system and are more likely to be successful in that regard.
In response to the priorities identified by Manitobans, the following investments will be made: $2 million for early intervention programs emphasizing positive parenting, healthy child development and preventing adolescent pregnancy; $2.1 million for children's nutrition programs, including new partnerships with community groups; and $2.6 million for early literacy programs and initiatives to help ensure children are ready to learn and are more likely to be successful when entering the school system.
Additional resources are being targeted to expand and to develop programs which provide the benefits and services lower income families need to participate in the workforce, including $2 million for strategies to help income assistance in lower income families to enter the workforce, including initiatives which provide employment placements and training opportunities; over $5 million for child care, primarily for direct child care supports which enable lower income parents to work, including improved accessibility and flexibility of child care options; and $1.7 million for families on income assistance who are making the transition to the new National Child Benefit.
Our government has been actively involved with the federal government and other provincial and territorial governments in development of the new National Child Benefit. The National Child Benefit marks an important step forward for Canada's children and for addressing the issue of child poverty.
The initiatives I have previously mentioned are those which qualify under the criteria for the National Child Benefit. They will be funded from $10 million made available through Manitoba's participation in this initiative and from $5 million in new provincial funds.
Under this new approach the federal government will improve the income-based benefits that it pays on behalf of children. Families receiving income assistance will not see a change in their overall benefits, while lower income working families will receive more supports to remain in the workforce. As families on income assistance receive the new benefit, dollar-for-dollar adjustments will be made and reinvested. Provinces and territories will focus their efforts on new and expanded programs which meet the two main goals of the National Child Benefit system: preventing and reducing the depth of child poverty, and promoting their parents' attachment to the workforce.
The new early intervention and prevention programs targeted to high-risk families will help children to develop into healthy and productive adults and to break the cycle of poverty in some families. Lower income assistance families will gain financial independence by entering the workforce and retaining jobs as a result of our efforts to increase access to placement and training options and due to the availability of quality flexible child care arrangements.
Increased support for child care is an important part of our government's commitment to working parents. As members may recall, our government consulted extensively with Manitobans on the matter of child care. A child daycare fact finding mission, led by my colleague Marcel Laurendeau, MLA for St. Norbert, and the regulatory review committee made up of community representatives received many helpful comments and recommendations from the child care community on, among other things, funding issues affecting child care facilities and child care services for children with disabilities.
Our government has listened carefully to Manitobans. As a result of this positive collaboration, I am confident that we have an improved child care system that is more flexible and responsive to the needs of families and one which promotes the well-being of children.
I am pleased to inform you that we have increased overall funding for child daycare by over $5 million in 1998-99. The province will spend a total of $48.3 million. The improvements being made include providing for over 1,000 additional subsidized spaces and ensuring they are portable and flexible in paying subsidy for the hours of care actually needed; establishing a single funding rate for eligible infant and preschool spaces to simplify and equalize funding for centres and family daycare homes; offering full funding to approximately 2,000 existing infant and preschool spaces in eligible centres and homes that were partially funded or unfunded; increasing operating grants by 2 percent for infant and preschool spaces in centres and family daycare homes; providing an additional $197,000 to extend the Children with Disabilities Program to all nonprofit facilities, including family daycare homes, to increase options and flexibility of choice for parents and providing additional funding of $200,000 to introduce new extended hour child care options to support parents' changing work patterns. The flexible child care initiative will create up to 400 new child care spaces for parents needing more flexible services.
* (1700)
Improvements to the subsidy program are being made to ensure that child care subsidies follow the child. This particular change is a positive step towards increasing flexibility and accessibility to the subsidy program and will benefit both parents and child care providers. Child care facilities will be better able to accommodate part-time care needs. As well, a new simplified subsidy application form has been designed which will improve services to families.
Other regulation changes for child care facilities include disallowing peanut products for children under three years of age, placing restrictions on certain foods which pose a choking hazard, and making a number of regulations simpler and more flexible. Also, child care workers will now be designated early childhood educators. Manitoba has one of the finest child care systems in the country. We will continue to maintain our high standards to ensure the provision of quality child care that meets the needs of families. The changes we are making are positive steps forward in enhancing the current system.
While the health and well-being of Manitoba families is primarily the responsibility of parents, there are important roles for government to provide supports where needed. One such area is providing support to families who have children with disabilities. In 1998-99, our government has allocated $9.4 million for Children's Special Services programming, an increase of over half a million dollars over last year. The additional funding reflects the anticipated increase of 300 disabled children and their families requiring services. I am pleased that we are able to increase our support to families of children with disabilities to ensure that they have access to respite care, child development programs, supplies and counselling.
Ensuring the protection and well-being of children at risk continues to be a high priority for my department and for our government. As I have said on many occasions, money alone will not ensure that Manitoba's children are safe. The protection and well-being of children is a responsibility shared by all of society. Our government will continue to work in partnership with the community on new and innovative ways to ensure that the best interests of children are being served.
By tapping into the strengths of community partners, we have redesigned youth emergency services to provide crisis support for high-needs youth in a more effective and less intrusive manner. A partnership between residential care and treatment providers will reform and revitalize youth emergency treatment and residential care services, replacing the services previously provided by Seven Oaks Centre. Components of the youth emergency services system include mobile crisis teams, crisis stabilization units and crisis stabilization support services. This innovative approach will improve the services which were provided by Seven Oaks Centre and will help to ensure the effective use of resources to provide a critical service when it is needed.
Through the Family Support Innovations Fund, our government has provided support to family group conferencing pilot projects. In these projects, families will be actively involved in problem solving, care planning and decision making to encourage responsibility for developing plans that result in healthy and safe children. Community partnerships and supports are an integral part of supporting the family and the care plan for the child.
Last year, I was pleased to introduce important new legislation, The Adoption Act and The Child and Family Services Amendment Act. This legislation came about as a result of an extensive community consultation process through which we sought advice from Manitobans on a broad range of matters falling under The Child and Family Services Act, including the protection of children, foster care and adoptions. A portion of The Child and Family Services Amendment Act was proclaimed on February 2, 1998. The balance of the amendments to this act, as well The Adoption Act, will be proclaimed this year.
I would also like to make a few comments about the plans of the Children and Youth Secretariat. As I mentioned at the outset of my comments, our government recognizes that early intervention is critical to healthy child development. The Children and Youth Secretariat is spearheading efforts to ensure that children get a healthy start to life. The ChildrenFirst strategy emphasizes the importance of families and the social investment in children and youth. The Children and Youth Secretariat, in consultation with its seven partner departments, is embarking on a series of projects which apply best practices, and which are focused on the principles of prevention and early intervention. We have designed these initiatives to improve long-term outcomes for Manitoba's high-risk children. These initiatives, and the additional funding we have provided demonstrate our government's commitment to children and families.
I would like to note that, as part of the Better Systems initiative, important work will be undertaken to examine innovative options for service delivery and to consider development of integrated case management tools and information systems in the human services area. The integrated case management project, which is being managed within this area of the department, will ultimately improve client services and streamline case management of social programs across departments.
I would like to conclude my introductory remarks by indicating that we have taken many positive steps towards improving our social services system. We have consulted with Manitobans and have developed numerous partnerships with community agencies, businesses and other governments to seek new and innovative ways of providing service. We believe that by working together with families, neighbourhoods and communities, we can best ensure the most efficient and effective delivery of social services.
As we look towards the future, we will continue to build on and strengthen those measures which are working for individuals, for children and for families in need. This will assist us in meeting the new challenges that we face in an ever-changing society. We will continue to strengthen partnerships with the community in recognition that the well-being of Manitoba's children and families is a responsibility that we all share.
I believe we have taken a proactive approach to setting our budget for 1998-99. The substantial investments we are making in Manitoba's children and families and in programs for persons with disabilities in 1998 will provide lasting benefits. We have been able to maintain our support for those in need of income assistance. Our efforts to encourage and assist those in need to become financially self-sufficient have resulted in some wonderful personal successes. I look forward to this committee's review of my department's Estimates and welcome the comments from my honourable friend. Thank you.
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Dyck): We thank the Minister of Family Services for those comments. Does the official opposition critic, the honourable member for Burrows, have any opening comments?
* (1710)
Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Chairperson, the Minister of Family Service has put on the record her version of how well this government is meeting the needs of Manitobans. It is a glowing, rosy report that, if believed, would suggest that everything is fine and her government is doing a great job. The reality is there is another Manitoba, one that this government does not want to look at, admit to or seriously address.
The other Manitoba has the highest rate of children in care per capita in Canada. This has been true for several years and shows no signs of getting better. The other Manitoba has a high rate of runaway children, many of whom are living on the streets or living in situations of high risk to themselves and to others.
The other Manitoba has, or had, during the International Year of the Family, and I am quoting from a Taking Charge! handout, "the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Canada." In Nova Scotia the provincial government has started to look at targets for reducing the rate of teen pregnancy, a good idea that could be replicated here.
The other Manitoba has a very high rate of students dropping out of high school. The most recent statistics for 1995 showed that 8.7 percent of girls drop out and 22.3 percent of males drop out for a total of over 30 percent, and we all know that persons with less than high school have a very poor chance of finding meaningful employment.
The other Manitoba has an alarming rate of children born with fetal alcohol syndrome. According to an article in The Globe and Mail on April 6, 1998, quoting Mr. Ken Murdoch, the program director of Winnipeg Child and Family Services: "about 450 of the 1,100 permanent wards in the Winnipeg child-welfare system have been identified by social workers as having FAS." He also says, "We have the poorest of the poor on the Prairies." According to Murdoch, it costs taxpayers $340 a day to keep one 11-year-old in a group home with two full-time social workers. Over the next decade the tab to care for this one child will likely reach $1 million. The potential cost to taxpayers of 450 children at $1 million each would be $450 million. In spite of this, very little is being done by way of prevention, education or treatment.
In the other Manitoba, thousands of Manitobans are forced to go to food bank outlets to make ends meet. In Winnipeg 3,400 people and 14,350 children depend on Winnipeg Harvest food bank. For the first time since the Dirty Thirties, food from eastern Canada is being shipped by train to food banks in western Canada including Winnipeg for distribution. David Northcott says: "It's based on a percentage of population by province that has need, and in Manitoba, we are near the top."
What do people actually get on the receiving end of public charity? Here is a description of the food handout at St. Matthew's-Maryland Community Ministry. I am quoting from a letter that they wrote which I believe she also sent to the minister. "What happened on Monday, November 24, 1997 is typical. On that day we had registered for food assistance 31 families consisting of 57 adults and 38 children. The amount of food we had available for the registered families doesn't sound too bad, until you realize they are only entitled to this help once every two weeks. Our total supply consisted of 45 cans of soup, 48 packets of dry cereal, 45 Kraft dinners, 2 boxes of almost completely rotten and unusable bananas, 45 dozen eggs, 45 packets of frozen french fries, and three boxes of frozen turkey meat. This for each family works out to about one can of soup, one package of cereal, a dozen eggs, four or five mostly inedible bananas, a package of french fries, a Kraft dinner, and a piece of turkey meat--no milk, no bread."
This letter concludes with the observations that Winnipeg Harvest, however wonderful as a volunteer operation, simply cannot meet the needs of the hungry in this city and that public charities including church operations like theirs are no replacement for adequate income support.
A story in the Saturday Free Press of May 2 this year says that 22 percent of adults miss a meal daily, that is users of Winnipeg Harvest, and 25 percent went a day or more without food before their first visit to a food bank and 16 percent of children in the survey had missed meals in the past month. An article in the Free Press of December 23, 1997, speaks of the gap between the rich and the poor widening.
It says: "Canada's rich are getting richer while its poor get poorer--again.
"That's the word from Statistics Canada, which yesterday released figures showing incomes of the wealthiest Canadian families rose 1.8 percent in 1996 over 1995.
"At the other end of the scale, the poorest 20 percent of families saw their incomes drop by 3 percent."
We recently had, in the NDP caucus, public hearings on children, and I would like to quote from a couple of the presentations. One presentation that I heard was by Ruth Diamant, the chair of the steering committee for Healthy Start for Mom and Me. They surveyed the mothers in their program. In their report it says: Here are some of the real-life multiple challenges faced by expectant participants. They are low income, lack of food--75 percent say it is hard to get enough--inadequate housing, a variety of health issues, diabetes, epilepsy, eating disorder, et cetera. Those single mothers, many of them are living on social assistance, and if they had adequate income, they would not be lacking food and inadequate housing and have so many health issues.
Another very interesting presentation was by the parent council at King Edward School, and it was presented by the parent council president, Cindy Stroppa. I would quote extensively from this brief, because she talks about the problems facing children in their school. She mentions that the federal government, actually the Parliament and all parties in Parliament, I believe in 1989 agreed to eliminate child poverty by the year 2000.
Cindy Stroppa says: Talk is cheap. The problem is continuing to worsen. I really feel that the term "child poverty" is very misleading, as these children are not living in poverty alone. It is called family poverty. She goes on to say: I think it is a shame that so many children are in need of the breakfast program at our school.
We have, and I am quoting our principal, Ms. Seiler, seen the numbers double from around 40 to 90 in just one year. We have just over 400 children in our school. With poverty on the rise, our need for the breakfast program is even greater. As well, we are seeing the very youngest of the children eating two to three bowls of cereal plus fresh fruit and milk and toasted bagels. Our principal has had to apply to the division for an extra aide to help the staff who run this program. Our school staff are seeing many families coming to the school who do not have anything to eat in their homes. Quite often the staff are purchasing food for these families out of their own pockets. They are bringing in their own children's clothing when they have outgrown them because so many are without adequate clothing. Some are even purchasing jackets for these children. Quite often many mothers have shown up at the school to say that they are feeling helpless and have to give up their children to Child and Family Services, not because they want to, but because they cannot feed them and they cannot provide the basic quality of life that each and every child should have a right to. I cannot even imagine the anguish that these mothers are feeling.
She goes on to say: A lot of parents are starting to complain of being unable to afford many of the fundraisers at the school such as hot dog day, especially if they have more than one child at the school. I think that it is very sad that we have to collect pennies for a playground to try to raise money for our much needed playground structure. There seems to be no help available for schools with nonattendees, and there are many of them for various reasons. Also, we are very fortunate to have a full-time counsellor at our school. Many schools have only part-time counsellors. There are not enough prevention programs available, and Child and Family Services usually only deals with crisis situations.
Recently I was walking down Flora Avenue and then down Parr Street, close to King Edward School, and noticed that what children were playing with were boards, including boards with nails in, and pipes, presumably because they were having to create their own recreation, and there was no equipment or toys or other things to play with.
I would like to go back to--well, I have not really gotten away from child poverty, but I have some statistics here which show that in Manitoba the poverty rate in a number of categories went up from 1995 to 1996. For example, children, the rate went up from 23.2 to 26.6; and for seniors, 65-plus, went up from 20 to 24.3 percent. The overall rate for Manitoba for child poverty, as I said, was 26.6 percent, which compares very unfavourably with Canada, where the overall rate was 21.1 percent in 1996.
We have seen an increase in poverty rates of children in two different family types. In two-parent families, it has gone up from 16.4 to 18.4 percent from '95 to '96, and in female, single-parent families, from 66.2 percent to 71.4 percent from the year 1995 to 1996.
I received a very interesting document called Responding to the New Economy: Investing in Solutions That Work for Everyone. This is in preparation for a workshop, and it is a co-operative venture by a number of groups, including the Manitoba Federation of Labour, the Social Planning Council of Winnipeg, the Volunteer Centre of Winnipeg, the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, the Winnipeg Labour Council, and Winnipeg 2000. It has an executive summary documenting the effects of the new economy.
One is, under wages and income, declining average real wages over the past decade in Manitoba, and poverty, poverty rates above Canadian averages for most groups.
* (1720)
We are very disappointed that this government, when they were given new money by the federal government in the National Child Benefit, chose to claw back all of it from social assistance recipients when they could have spent that money in more creative ways. They chose to spend it on programs and to target it to the working poor, but David Northcott is quoted as saying that people do not need more government programs, that they need access to more money in their pockets, that people cannot eat programs. He also said that many parents just need a few extra dollars each month to buy groceries and criticized the government for doing nothing to improve the minimum wage, welfare benefits or tax cuts for the lowest income groups.
Finally, this government still has an inability to budget. They had to pass a special warrant to fund Winnipeg Child and Family Services to the end of the fiscal year in the amount of $8.8 million. Now it is good that the government continues the money, that it continues to flow so that services can be provided and needs can be met, but the fact that they had to pass an Order-in-Council to do so on March 11, 1998, shows that their budgeting for Winnipeg Child and Family Services was very unrealistic.
There are many other serious problems in this department, especially in the area of Child and Family Services, and we will get into them as we go through the Estimates of this department.
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 a 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 . We ask that the minister introduce her staff present.
Mrs. Mitchelson: I am sure colleagues around the table know my Deputy Minister Tannis Mindell and the ADM of Admin and Finance Kim Sharman.
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Dyck): We will now proceed to line 9.1. Administration and Finance (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $491,400. Shall the item pass?
Mr. Martindale: Not a chance. I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services if she is familiar with The Conflict of Interest Act in the Province of Manitoba?
Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, if you would like me to recite it for him, I will probably say no, but I can certainly attempt to answer any questions around the conflict of interest.
Mr. Martindale: Section 19(1) says: No member, minister or senior public servant shall communicate either directly or indirectly, with another member, minister or senior public servant or with an officer or employee of the government or of a Crown corporation for the purpose of influencing the government or a Crown agency to enter into a contract or to confer a benefit in which the member, minister or senior public servant or in which a dependant of the member, minister or senior public servant has a pecuniary interest.
Could the minister tell us what she believes "communicate" means in this context? What do you think the intent of this legislation is when it says that there must be no communication?
Mrs. Mitchelson: If I can indicate to my honourable friend, the Province of Manitoba's conflict of interest policy is administered by the Civil Service Commission. I know those Estimates have just wrapped up and finished, but there are probably questions that would concern the interpretation or the application or the administration of specific provisions of that policy, and those are referred to the Civil Service Commission. So that would be the appropriate place to ask any questions. If there is a perceived conflict, it is the Civil Service Commission that does review that or give advice to individuals around conflict of interest.
Mr. Martindale: Is it not up to this minister, Mr. Chairperson, to see that a former employee, in this case, former Assistant Deputy Minister Mr. Sexsmith, has no contact with her department? It is a former employee of her department. I think it would be--well, I am asking the minister: Does she not think that it is her responsibility to see that a former employee of her department has no communication with the department for one year after the date on which the public servant left office?
Mrs. Mitchelson: I will reiterate that it is the Civil Service Commission that is the vehicle within government that has the expertise and the understanding around the conflict of interest rules and guidelines. So I know where my honourable friend is coming from. I know he has asked questions in the House around this issue. I will repeat again for his information the process that was followed, and it is that the Civil Service Commission, in consultation with legal counsel, reviewed Mr. Sexsmith's circumstances, and they provided direction regarding the conflict of interest guidelines with respect to Mr. Sexsmith. I will read those into the record.
Mr. Sexsmith was precluded for a period of one year from using his influence to secure new business for IBM. He could not be involved himself in ongoing contractual discussions between IBM and the Manitoba government with respect to One Tier and Better Systems for a period of one year, but he could, however, be involved in internal IBM discussions regarding these matters. Number 3, Mr. Sexsmith could play an internal advisory role with IBM on how it may conduct its affairs with the Manitoba government. He would be permitted to play a more visible role with IBM and its dealings with the Manitoba government with respect to the implementation of One Tier and Better Systems projects once negotiations on these matters were concluded. This could include being present in a resource capacity at informational meetings relating to implementation of these programs. So I am completely satisfied that our department proceeded correctly on all matters regarding potential conflict of interest. We follow the established procedures in our department and receive direction from the Civil Service Commission to ensure the necessary compliance with established policy.
So, if my honourable friend has some concern or question about the impartiality and the decisions and directions that were made by the Civil Service Commission, if he has some issue to take with the Civil Service Commission and their interpretation and advice to our department, I would suggest that he should have been at the Estimates of the Civil Service Commission to ask those questions, and should deal with it through that in that manner. There is a standard procedure that is followed right across government. So, if my honourable friend has some concern or some question about the credibility of the Civil Service Commission, I would like him to indicate that or I would like him to pursue that matter through the appropriate vehicle. He probably should have been here asking those questions just an hour or two ago when the Civil Service Commission was going through the Estimates process.
Mr. Martindale: The problem I have is with the credibility of this minister. We know that Mr. Sexsmith was working on the request for proposals for the one-tier before he left government and that after he left government he was working on the one-tier file for IBM. He attended at least three meetings. It is this minister or her staff, in which case the minister is ultimately responsible, who invited him to those meetings. So there is, I believe, a violation of The Conflict of Interest Act. I would like the minister to admit that there is a problem here, at least a problem of perception when someone helps negotiate a contract and then leaves government to go to work on it when the act says they are not to have any communication with the government for one year after leaving government employment.
Mrs. Mitchelson: I take great exception to the comments and the direction that my honourable friend is coming from. I want to read into the record again what happened. Mr. Sexsmith tendered his resignation from his position as ADM in Family Services on November 25 of 1996. On November 29, 1996, the Civil Service Commission provided direction regarding the provincial government's conflict of interest guidelines with respect to Mr. Sexsmith. I read those into the record just a few minutes ago. He began attending some one-tier project meetings in a resource capacity on July 2 following the conclusion of negotiations with IBM. So he was not involved in the negotiations with IBM. What happened through the process of developing a one-tier proposal with the City of Winnipeg was that there was a tender process that was undertaken to select a firm to move ahead with the one-tier project. The selection of that successful bidder was a unanimous selection, and there was a six-person steering committee that was involved in making that selection. It did include officials from both the province and the City of Winnipeg. It was an up-front process.
* (1730)
I do want to indicate to my honourable friend that I take great exception to the kind of attack he has taken on the public service and a person who did a significant, good job, not only for our administration and government but for the former New Democratic government, someone who has been a long-time, very credible civil servant through several administrations, did not act in any political capacity. I take considerable exception to the kinds of comments. I am not sure what the motivation is behind my honourable friend's questioning of someone who I do not believe deserves the kind of questioning and the kind of personal attack that is being placed on his name and his reputation as a long-time civil servant who made a significant contribution to the Province of Manitoba under different administrations and under a New Democratic government for many, many years in this province.
We have guidelines. We have interpretation by the Civil Service Commission that this person acted aboveboard. I am extremely offended at the very personal attack that my honourable friend is taking on someone who has made such a significant contribution to successive governments in the Province of Manitoba for many, many years.
Mr. Martindale: I do not have a problem with this individual. The problem I have is with this minister's judgment in this case. The minister said that Mr. Sexsmith was not involved in negotiations with IBM. It is my understanding that he was involved with the request for proposals. Could the minister confirm that?
Mrs. Mitchelson: He was one person of the six-person committee. He certainly had no personal influence, and again I take great exception because no matter what my honourable friend says, or how he tries to--I mean let him attack me and my credibility personally, but I have great difficulty with him attacking the name and the person. This is politics at its slimiest, Mr. Chairperson, when I see the credibility of someone like the character of Doug Sexsmith being attacked in this manner. If my honourable friend has some personal concerns about my integrity as an individual, that is fine.
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Dyck): Order, please. The member for Burrows, on a point of order.
Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, I wonder if you could seek advice from the Clerk's office about the expression, politics of the slimiest, and see if that is in order. When they have had a chance to consult Beauchesne's, if you could rule on this point of order, and if in fact it is unparliamentary, ask the minister to withdraw.
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Dyck): It is not on the list. We would have to, in order confirm this, call a recess, if this is what the honourable member for Burrows--or we will take it under advisement.
The honourable minister, please, to continue.
Mrs. Mitchelson: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairperson, and you will have to forgive me for getting a little worked up over this issue, but all is fair, I say, in love, war and politics, and my honourable friend has taken me personally to task at other times on other issues. But I do take great exception. I know that from time to time there are political appointments within the bureaucracy, and it might have been under the former NDP government where there were people that were politically affiliated that were appointed through direct appointment under their administration. I know from time to time that has happened under our administration, and I have been taken to task from time to time for those kinds of direct appointments. That is all fair and valid, and governments and ministers get that kind of questioning, but I do take great exception to someone that has served our province in the capacity and worked his way up through the bureaucracy under different administrations and with no political appointment. He was not hired or fired based on which government was in power.
I know that there are many, many people in the bureaucracy that worked in the Department of Family Services and every other department throughout the government, under the New Democratic administration and they are still here under a Conservative administration, because they are excellent civil servants, public servants that are doing their very best to implement policy no matter which government or which policy direction the government is taking. I have to say that I commend them, and I certainly rely and depend on many, many who are here in government long before we were government, or I was the Minister of Family Services. They are people that have done an excellent job providing that kind of service, and I find it terribly offensive that a critic from the opposition would publicly malign an individual. I would stand up for anyone that sort of came through the system and has done a good job year after year for the people of Manitoba to have that person be publicly, politically maligned in a very unwarranted way.
Mr. Martindale: I would like to reiterate that I do not have a problem with Mr. Sexsmith. It was this minister who agreed to have him invited to meetings.
Could the minister confirm that Mr. Sexsmith was involved in the request for proposals?
Mrs. Mitchelson: He was one of the six people on the steering committee, yes.
* (1740)
Mr. Martindale: Could the minister confirm that when Mr. Sexsmith left the department he went to work for IBM on the same file, or on the same project that he worked on in government, namely, the one-tier project?
Mrs. Mitchelson: No, that is false.
Mr. Martindale: Could the minister tell me why Mr. Sexsmith was attending meetings with senior staff after he left government?
Mrs. Mitchelson: If I could get my deputy to speak to this, well, then--
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Dyck): Do we have unanimous consent that the deputy can speak?
Some Honourable Members: No.
Mrs. Mitchelson: Obviously my honourable friend does not want to hear the facts, so I want on record that he does not want to hear exactly what capacity Mr. Sexsmith, or what role he was acting in. I will try to reiterate the whole process again of what happened. Well, I will leave it at that and I will try to get exact detail, but I do want to leave on the record the fact that my honourable friend does not seem to be really interested in the facts or he would try to get a full and thorough explanation from my deputy.
I want him to know also that I am not involved in the day-to-day micromanagement of my department, as no minister is. That is the job and the role of the deputy minister and the senior administration within the department. The policy direction is set by government. We approve that policy direction, but I do not, on a daily basis, sit down and review absolutely every meeting that my department is having with every individual from the business community or the service community that works with our department.
That is why we have people with the credibility like a Doug Sexsmith who used to work for government, like a Tannis Mindell who is the deputy minister right now, and all of the other senior support within the department, to manage the department's day-to-day activities. I set the policy direction and try to ensure that we are working co-operatively. That is why we put our trust in our officials to do the micromanagement and manage the day-to-day activities within the department.
But I will try to explain for my honourable friend exactly what happened in Mr. Sexsmith's move from the public sector to the private sector. By the way, I do want to indicate that I think it is extremely healthy for interchanges and exchanges between the public sector and the private sector, great for someone from the private sector to come in and work in government from time to time and understand the internal workings of government and great for those who are working in the public service to move into the private sector from time to time. I think those are healthy exchanges, and I support those kinds of interchanges wholeheartedly.
But if I can try to explain, Mr. Sexsmith tendered his resignation from his position as associate deputy minister in the Department of Family Services on November 25, 1996, and subsequently assumed the role of general manager of social services for IBM Canada Limited. His responsibilities on a national level were as a subject manager expert. Mr. Chairperson, it was determined at the senior departmental level that Mr. Sexsmith, with his expertise, should be invited to meetings in a resource capacity in July of 1997, after the conclusion of negotiations with IBM, after the term sheet was signed on June 26 of 1997. So the negotiations were completed, and he was invited to attend one chair meetings in a resource capacity which, by the way, I read into the record awhile back, the Civil Service Commission had said was quite above board.
Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, the reason that I believe the minister should answer the questions is because in a parliamentary democracy the minister is ultimately responsible for everything, and this minister is quite good at answering questions. She does not really need the deputy minister to answer questions unless, of course, she wants to be evasive. Normally, when ministers do not know the answer to a question, they can ask their deputy for advice, in any case, which occasionally this minister does.
Now I do not expect this minister to micromanage her department, but the one-tier system is a major initiative in her department, a major change in how social assistance is delivered in Manitoba. So I do know that the minister knows what is going on in this file. Could the minister confirm that Mr. Sexsmith was involved in negotiating with IBM in that the request for proposals advertisement said that proposals were to be mailed to him at his address on Garry Street?
Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, he was designated as the contact person on the RFP, but he was not involved in negotiations.
Mr. Martindale: Mr. Chairperson, the minister said that he was on the committee of six that were involved in negotiations.
* (1750)
Mrs. Mitchelson: I want to indicate what the process was for the selection or the development of a contract for the one-tire system. There was a steering committee set up. At the political level at both City Hall and the Province of Manitoba there were discussions and some sense that we should move ahead and amalgamate the welfare in the city of Winnipeg. As a result of that political decision at both levels, there was a steering committee that was set up and it had six people on it. It was the deputy minister, Family Services, the ADM of Family Services, someone from Policy Management Secretariat, someone from Treasury Board Secretariat and two people, two senior people from the City of Winnipeg. That was the steering committee that was set up.
They did a proposal call to see who was interested in developing the business case for the one-tier system. They had several proposals that were submitted and they were assessed by the six-member steering committee. As a result of that assessment, three proposals were invited to make presentations, IBM being one of them. The six people that were on the steering committee then came to a unanimous decision to move ahead with IBM for the business case. So IBM was the firm that was selected to move ahead with the business case. Once that business case was done, it was up to government as a whole to make a decision on where we were going to go from there. So basically we took the business case forward through Treasury Board and through cabinet, and ultimately the decision was made there to go with IBM for the full contract.
Mr. Martindale: So, Mr. Chairperson, the minister is saying that IBM made a presentation to the steering committee on which Mr. Sexsmith was one of the members, and then IBM was selected and a contract was signed which, you know, confirms what civil servants and former civil servants were saying to me. Mr. Sexsmith worked on the IBM contract and the call for proposals and then he left government and guess what? He works for IBM.
I wonder if this minister understands that generally there are restrictions on people who are working at a department from representing other people back to the department for a period of time, because obviously they know who to get to and they know who is working on what and therefore they have an unfair advantage over other people. So, generally for a period of time, sometimes six months, sometimes a year--in Manitoba it is a year--there is a restriction on representing people back to the department you worked in or in advising policies and programs in a significant interest or involvement, which was exactly the position that Mr. Sexsmith was in.
Mr. Chairperson in the Chair
He was on a committee that heard proposals, including from IBM, then he left government, went to IBM and ended up working on the same proposal and meeting with senior officials in her department.
Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Chairperson, again my honourable friend has it all wrong. I do not know how many times I have to repeat for him the process that was followed and the advice of the Civil Service Commission that was followed by Mr. Sexsmith. I will read again into the record, and I do not know, my honourable friend can try to come at this from many different angles. I know he has tried before, and I do not think he has been terribly successful in his arguments because his arguments do not hold water. The general public and everyone else out there sees through my honourable friend and the tactics he takes, but I will read again into the record, and you know, we can spend a considerable amount of time but I know the facts of the situation and I know that the facts that have been vetted through the Civil Service Commission. The Civil Service Commission has dealt with this. They have indicated very clearly that the conflict of interest guidelines were followed with respect to Mr. Sexsmith. I have that verification, and so we can talk about it for as long as my honourable friend would like to, but I want to forewarn him that my answer will be exactly the same, no matter what angle he tries to take, because he keeps trying to find an issue of conflict where in fact we have been told that there is none. So let me take the opportunity just to read into the record again what I know to be the facts around this situation.
The Province of Manitoba's conflict of interest policy, as administered by the Civil Service Commission: Questions concerning the interpretation, application or administration of specific provisions of the policy are normally referred to the Civil Service Commission. In accordance with the established practice, Mr. Sexsmith's circumstances were forwarded to the Civil Service Commission. The Civil Service Commission, in consultation with its legal counsel, reviewed Mr. Sexsmith's circumstances. On November 29, 1996, the Civil Service Commission provided direction regarding the provincial government's conflict of interest guidelines with respect to Mr. Sexsmith as follows:
Number one, Mr. Sexsmith is precluded for a period of one year from using his influence to secure new business for IBM. I will repeat again, Mr. Chairperson, that the contract to go with IBM was a unanimous decision of six people from the city and the Province of Manitoba. No one had one vote. It was a unanimous decision to go with IBM before Mr. Sexsmith left and went to IBM.
Number two, Mr. Sexsmith cannot involve himself in contractual discussions between IBM and the Manitoba government with respect to One Tier and Better Systems for a period of one year. He could, however, be involved in internal IBM discussions regarding these matters.
Number three, Mr. Sexsmith could also play an internal advisory role with IBM on how it may conduct its affairs with the Manitoba government.
Number four, Mr. Sexsmith will be permitted to play a more visible role with IBM in its dealings with the Manitoba government with respect to implementation of One Tier and Better Systems projects once negotiations on these matters have been concluded. This could include being present in a resource capacity at informational meetings relating to implementation of these programs.
I want to reiterate that we followed the established procedures and received direction from the Civil Service Commission to ensure that the necessary compliance was with established policy, and that is the direction we went, that is the advice we got from the Civil Service Commission, and we followed that advice.
Mr. Martindale: It seems that we get a little bit of information. Then I ask a question, and instead of the minister answering the question, she repeats her answer again about the Civil Service Commission, so I will try again. Is it not true that Mr. Sexsmith was part of a committee of six that heard proposals, including a proposal from IBM, then he left government, then he went to work on that proposal for IBM? Is that not the sequence of events?
Mrs. Mitchelson: I have spelled out very clearly what happened. I have indicated very clearly on the record that Mr. Sexsmith was one of six people on the steering committee that heard formal presentations. There was a unanimous decision on the committee to go with IBM, and again I have indicated exactly what the Civil Service Commission said. Mr. Sexsmith did nothing different. He certainly did not use his influence to secure new business for IBM, because IBM had the business. He could not involve himself in contractual discussions between IBM and the Manitoba government, but he could be involved in internal IBM discussions regarding these matters. So he was not involved in the ongoing contractual discussions between IBM and the Manitoba Government.
Mr. Chairperson: Order, please. The hour being six o'clock, committee rise.