Minister Lee.
No, $45,000.
Oh, $45,000. Okay. That’s fine. So you’re suggesting that we might train one worker three times in a year. Is that correct?
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Mr. Heide.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To clarify, to bring in workers for one round of training, a full room of workers is approximately $45,000. Not one worker; one training.
Thank you, Mr. Heide. Ms. Bisaro, your time is up. I’m going to go to the next person on the list. If you want back on the list, let me know. The next person on the list is Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sitting here, flashback for the last 16 years. I think I’ve heard the same excuses from this department. To find a way to avoid doing what you’re legally obligated to do. Right now we went out of our way to have a public review of legislation that was brought into place back in the 13th Assembly. Four Assemblies later we’re still talking about the same issue.
We have some 600 children in care -- 600 -- at a cost of over $12 million a year to keep them in that system. I think it’s critical to realize that we have to find a way of breaking that cultural style of dealing with children. We have to find a way to reunite those children with their birth parents and find a way to get them to remain in our communities, not be taken away, and make the appropriate investments on prevention.
I heard all the Members talk about prevention is key. Preventing the system from getting there in the first place. Intervening early enough that you intervene with the families that you know are having social challenges. That you’re dealing with the fabric of what those families are going through, whether it’s substance abuse, poverty, addiction. That is the core problem we are having with a lot of these families. The key to that is to have a system in place that’s transparent and includes communities solving the problems at the community level. That’s why it’s critical that these committees be activated, implemented and given the adequate resources to do it.
I mean, we’re spending $12 million. If you can even take 60 of those children out of the system and reunite them with their families, just think that you’re saving yourself 10 percent. That’s $1.2 million. That’s the money you’re looking for. The achievement is 10 percent of what we have right now. Is there a way that we can decrease those numbers by 10 percent in this fiscal year and also going forward? Can we achieve that under the system that we have?
I have to disagree with the Minister saying don’t worry about it, we’ll work it into the next budget. Excuse me, but this is the last budget of the 16th Assembly. This is it. This is what we have to work out of to see any major changes going forward.
I’d just like to ask the Minister about re-profiling the dollars that we already have in the system, the $12 million we’re already spending on children services, and also looking at the resources we’re spending on structures such as boards and agencies. I need to illustrate again that the Beaufort-Delta health board has a budget of I think $41 million with an increase of I think about $6 million from the previous year. It’s $12 million. There’s an increase from last year to this year for $4 million, but again, you don’t have a board. It’s the public trustee that oversees the board, so that money that’s there for the board that’s not being used for the board, can those dollars be used to establish these types of committees? That’s an option that I’m putting to the Minister. There’s money identified for board type of activities such as the health board in Inuvik that does not exist. It’s in the budget. Can you move those dollars to establish those types of committees in the Beaufort-Delta region?
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister Lee.
Mr. Chair, I think the challenge we have here is a timing issue, because the standing committee report came out in October. By then we had gone through the business plan review, the budget was wrapped up in January and presented to the House in February. There was not enough time or space in the budget to incorporate as much as the Members thought that we should. We did accept many of the recommendations but there are pending resources.
The second thing is why don’t you just take 60 kids out of the system and use that money. I’d have to say if any of those 60 kids could be taken out, they shouldn’t be in there in the first place.
I say again what I said to MLA Beaulieu, that I agree with you that we need to make some decision to put the money up front. Children and family service committees in the long run, if well resourced and well run, would work with the communities and within the communities with the community leadership and the community people to take on the responsibilities about how to address child protection issues so that they don’t get into the foster care system. Okay. That is a long-term goal that I agree with. To do that properly I’m saying that we need to at least follow the models that we have that work, like the community justice committees and such.
I know some of the Members say why don’t you just lump up with them, but there are some rules and structures in place that we need to change. We’re talking about changing the way we do child protection, which I agree with, but it is not as easy to just say, okay, just take that money, take the kids out, reduce the foster care payments or any of the residential care and just use that money. I have to tell you that would have a consequence.
And the board money, I have to tell you that we are under a system deficit, so there is not money for me to take out to do this. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I’m not too sure where the Minister is coming from by taking 60 kids out of the system, that basically it’s not going to solve the problem for me. There are probably 60 kids in the system that technically shouldn’t be there in the first place. It’s because the process did not allow for transparency and a program to be in place to prevent them from being there in the first place. I don’t think you can ask any kid that’s in foster care do you want to be there. I don’t think they want to be there. I think the issue has to be how can we as government live up to the obligations we have under legislation, called the child and family service legislation, and live up to the obligations that are in that legislation.
We as a committee went out and spent months on the road on this issue, we heard loud and clear from people right across the Northwest Territories, and they all were saying the same thing: we have to prevent the system to happen in regard to the children that are now finding themselves in the system regardless if it’s foster care, youth justice, and more importantly, what is going to happen after the residential school nightmare we’ve all gone through. This is nothing different. We’re doing something that basically has happened in the past that we’re trying to do using a different method, but again, we’re ending up with the same results.
I’d just like to ask the Minister, like, Fort McPherson, using numbers, just rough numbers, they’re spending about $30,000 a month on kids in care in Fort McPherson; a month. That’s almost $400,000 a year in one community. If you were able to establish a committee to work with the families in that community, get those kids reunited with their parents and also take them out of the system where they should be, again, I’d like to know how can we, as a government, bring down the cost of delivering this system in our communities, get the number of kids that are in that system, find a way to work with the child and family services committee, which is key, find community prevention to community problems and allow the communities to work it through using these committees. I know for, like myself and the Minister and meeting with the child and family services committee in Fort McPherson and also with the deputy, these people mean well. They’ll do it practically for nothing as long as they can help the families in their community.
I’d just like to ask seriously is there a way of reprofiling that $7.4 million or $7.6 million in regard to foster care in regard to prevention programs to find a way to work the system so that we can try to pull the kids out of that system of being institutionalized, regardless if it’s foster care and taken away from their communities, their families, because I think the legal costs in the long run and also the cost to the system is going to be a lot more than a $200,000 investment now in regard to preventing and also finding ways of working in the system. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Your time is up but I’ll go to the Minister for a response. Minister Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We do continue to work with Fort McPherson to set up that committee there and part of what I would like to see happen there is to have less children in care in McPherson. I agree with the Member that Fort McPherson has one of the highest number of children in care. So that is a long-term goal and we will continue to do that. I want to make that clear. We will continue to work on setting up more children and family services committees.
In the communication I had when I met with the committee on the recommendations of the CFSA review it was made clear to me that you wanted immediate action and a lot more aggressive strategy to do that. This is why I’ve said, when we reviewed how do we jump start and get ahead on what we’ve been doing until now, the missing variable is we need to resource this.
I think we should be careful when we speak about children in care, because there are lots of children who are in care who are there because they were neglected or they were sexually abused. They are suffering. While we can talk about preventing and helping families so that children don’t get to that neglect and abuse, the fact of the matter is a lot of children in our care have been abused and neglected.
The long-term work of children and family service committees is to have a community presence, a committee of leaders and concerned citizens who are supported and resourced and who will take on the task of working with families, helping them, working with child protection workers, working with health and social services, working with any other people in the community so that the families are supported, children are supported so that they don’t get into the system. This will take a lot of concerted effort.
Mr. Chairman, I want to say I am committed to doing that. I think Fort McPherson has the best chance of getting ahead of this than any other community, but to do it with five committees, because so far we’ve been relying on our staff and management in the authorities to do it as part of their work. I think we need to create a position that’s tasked to doing this or else it’s not going to happen as quickly and as well as the committee wanted it to happen. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Lee. Next on my list, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to get back to my earlier questions about the cost and some of the responses that we are hearing from the Minister. This cost is too high; there is no question about it. This also assumes a 12-month fully functional committee, five fully functional committees from April 1st to March 31st, 2011-12, at this cost. We heard that, yes, it costs $45,000 to train a child protection worker to switch from a court system to working with a committee. Well, if that is the case, and that probably is the case, then we are training five of them at once in order to set up this committee.
I am still not understanding the half a million dollars worth of training that would be required in order to get these committees running. That is still not connecting with me. We have $45,000 to train all five of them to come in as a group to work with committees versus courts. Okay, that is good, but the budget is $500,000, so there is quite a discrepancy there.
Again, we also are looking at this budget here in children and family services. We are looking at a 12-month budget again. That is assuming that these committees are not up and running and there is no impact whatsoever. What we are saying is the committee is, if we get these committees up and running at a lesser cost than this and they are functional and they have an impact, which we are suggesting it will have a positive impact on the budget here, we should be able to do it. I don’t know what our next moves will be, but I am really curious about why this number is here. Why would the department present a number to us at, say, a quarter of a million dollars to set up one committee, more importantly, half a million dollars just to train five community protection workers to be able to come out of the court system? That is 125 times five communities, right? I guess it is $625,000 worth of training that the department is proposing in their responses to train five people to work out of the court system into a committee. These are people that are social workers that have the degrees in social work, is my assumption, but the department is suggesting that it is going to cost $625,000 to train these guys as one. That is the most glaring. The rest is not too bad. That is the most glaring one of the costs that were provided.
I would like the Minister just to explain that cost to me in that context, five people, $625,000 worth of training required within this time period in order to get these committees functional. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Minister Lee.
Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to reiterate that if the committee is happy or it is acceptable to them, that we continue working on setting up these committees as the way we have been and do our utmost to get them set up, I am happy to accept that and we will continue to work on that. We will be obviously using existing resources to do that, but I was under the assumption that the committee wanted us to get more aggressive about it. This is why we came up with a plan. I would like to ask Dana to give you details on how we arrived at these numbers. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Lee. Mr. Heide.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For clarity, the training isn’t about training one worker per community. It is training all the workers in the community to work with that, not only the community child and family services committee, but it also is around building community capacity, working with the leadership in that community, changing the way the community treats children, changing the way we as a community treat children that either are in jeopardy of harm or require intervention.
For clarity, I have done presentations in communities on child and family services committees. I have worked with communities around developing these committees. That takes a tremendous amount of care and feeding of those committees to continue that progress. People drop out when they feel that they are not quite suited for it, when the community is not quite ready. It is about developing communities to be able to step up and take this forward.
The $125,000 is a number worth shaking heads at and looking at, but when we bring people in for training, we have to bear all the transportation costs, all the replacement costs, all the training material cost as well as changing practice. So it is not just a matter of bringing someone in and saying you will do this differently tomorrow. It is around building that capacity in the worker to do it differently.
As was referenced earlier, this is the only jurisdiction that has this type of system. So even though workers may work somewhere else or be trained at whatever university or come from a community, the practice to date has not been working with children within a child and family services committee. That is why the expensive training. The training is one time and we move on and that training will be ongoing as we move to different regions and different communities, but it is a one start-up cost. We have to remember that start-up costs for any type of changing behaviour, changing activities in a community is expensive. It is worth the investment.
Thank you, Mr. Heide. Mr. Beaulieu.
Mr. Chairman, that is fine.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Next on my list is Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to say I appreciate the Standing Committee on Social Programs’ belief that they wanted more answers on the review of the Child Family Services Act. They wanted some money. They wanted some commitments from the Department of Health and Social Services. They wrote to the Minister and the department three weeks ago. From where I sit, I see this is the last week we have to approve the budget. The timing of this is very suspect. To bring a response back to the committee in the last week at the 11th hour when we know our backs are up against the wall, there is little room for concessions, there is little room for negotiations. It leaves a lot to be desired.
I think that the Standing Committee on Social Programs is owed a better way of doing things than what has transpired here. To take three weeks to get back to them, we have been through this process before. The Minister has been here a long time. We know how things work around here. We know we get bogged down. We know we don’t have a lot of time left, so what is the department’s answer? We will hit them with this response. We know it is not what they want, but we will hit them with it on a Monday during the last week of budget session. Well, to me, that is not good enough.
I think you should have been back to the Standing Committee on Social Programs much earlier. There should have been more time to talk. There should have been more time to negotiate. Your budget has been deferred. Who knows what is going to happen from here, Mr. Chairman? You have to answer questions and you have to compromise and you have to work with the standing committee. I don’t see a lot of flexibility left in this process right now. There is some frustration here.
Again, I think if responses were given back to standing committee in a more appropriate time frame, I think we could have avoided this. I am supporting my colleagues on the Standing Committee on Social Programs to get some more information and to get addressed what issues they wanted in that letter. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. I didn’t hear a question, but I will go to the Minister in case she wants to make some sort of response. Minister Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t have anything to add to that. I don’t agree with him, but those are his comments.
Thank you, Minister Lee. Next on my list is Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, I am hoping that the Minister will try to give a little bit here because I think that is what is going to take to get us out of this challenging problem realizing that we are dealing with a budget which basically has major capital expenditures but also we have to realize that there are flexibilities in regards to re-profiling the dollars in regards to community health programs. We have some $69 million in that area. We have money for mental health addictions. We have dollars in regards to dealing with the NGOs in our communities and I think somebody touched on it earlier, but we have interagency committees in our communities that meet every month. We have mental health and addiction workers, we have social workers. There’s got to be a way somehow that they can sit down and formulate either through a committee structure or working in conjunction with each other.
You know we had a very interesting presentation from the Minister of Justice today of trying to find ways of dealing with the justice system and basically you’re preventing people to work out situations, especially when it comes to family matters and avoiding using the court time and the court processes, but committing to an intervention program that works with the Department of Justice. They’re doing that and I was glad for the presentation, but again, the department is doing it with their resources in house. They’re not asking for money outwards.
So it’s using the expertise. I know that in regard to the cost of having people fly back and forth, the technology is there today. In every health centre we have telemedicine, we have systems in regard to the Internet. We have boardrooms set up for teleconference through conference centres. These are already in place. You can avoid the cost of travel nowadays because of the technology that we’re using. So that cost savings that you’re talking about could be used to integrate these systems.
I’d just like to ask the Minister in regard to the resources that we’re expending in the budget, and again, I think the health boards are the key. The health boards are the ones that hold the resources, we block fund them, but if those dollars aren’t being expended where they’re supposed to be going, then we have to find a way to either redirect those funds so they go directly to the areas, such as the establishment of the child and family services boards in the different communities.
I have to follow up on Mr. Beaulieu’s point. We should be focusing on where we have the highest number of children in the system. Focus in those communities and try to find ways of preventing and bringing down those numbers in those communities with high numbers. If we do that, I think the savings we’re looking at will pay for this initiative tenfold.
So I’d like to ask the Minister, can you consider those alternatives and options realizing that we have to find a way around this. We can’t keep blaming each other. I think by doing nothing, we know what’s going to happen. We have to do something here. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m not familiar in detail with what Justice has proposed. I’ve had a look at it, but I don’t know exactly how it’s funded, so I’m not able to compare.
But I’d like to just reiterate that the department is and has always been committed to working to set up these committees and the one that we are closest to getting some results is Fort McPherson. If the Member’s wish is that we continue to work in that and use whatever resources we have within and the staff we have, the management and the authorities to do that, then we will continue to do that because that’s part of our mandate and nothing will change, nothing has changed from that. I just thought that the committee wanted us to be a lot more aggressive and including honorarium and doing it differently, because as I said to you, and I’ll be the first to admit, that we have not seen as much results as I think the committee recommendations would like us to see. So if it works for the committee that the department continues to work on this within the existing resources but still continue work on presenting this as a new initiative and go for allocated resources, I could do both.
So I think for some reason somehow the communication was that we are not interested in setting up committees and that’s not what we meant to say. We are committed to setting this up as we see it. To see some real concrete results we do need investments into that initiative. So we will proceed to do that for the next business plan, but if the Member is saying, and I think that’s what he’s saying, is that you should continue to see what resources you can use to see what we can do, sure, of course, we will continue to do that and I have no problem doing that.
I don’t think I need to say to anybody here that almost all programs under Health and Social Services are a bit stretched, whether it’s mental health or anything. But we will use our existing resources to see how we can move forward. Thank you.
Just to remind the Minister and also Members of the House that in order for these committees to be established, they have to basically request it. Right now there’s only one board that has requested the establishment of child and family services. So technically under the legislation you have to receive a request from a particular community to carry this out. So it’s not saying we’ll get five out there today. It’s sort of an application-based format that you have to go through under the legislation. By the legislation where you basically have to request of the Minister that you accommodate your community’s wishes by establishing of those committees. So all we’re asking is that you consider a possibility of achieving five communities in this fiscal budget cycle. Again, those communities have to request the establishment of these committees. Once you have them established or the community requests them, then you can basically address the dollars as the requests come in.
So my understanding of the legislation is that in order to establish these things, you have to get a formal request from a community to establish these child and family service committees. So we’re looking at that process to take place, but the direction we should aim for is trying to accomplish five of those within the next fiscal year. So that’s acceptable to the Minister that we try to form like that and I have to agree, let’s focus on working with those communities that have high numbers, get them applying for establishment of those types of committees and then look at the resources it will take to implement them. Thank you.
I can accept what the Member is saying because that is basically what we are doing, which is continuing to work on setting up five committees within the resources we have and using our existing staff. We won’t be able to do honorarium and other things that we would like to do, but using our existing resources to do that. The Member is right; I’m not sure that the legislation requires that the community request it, but certainly we couldn’t get this started without having the interest and participation of community leaders and some focused energy on it. I would like to just ask Dana to give you some information on what our experiences have been in consulting with the communities.
Thank you, Minister Lee. Mr. Heide.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The MLA is quite right, that to formally establish the committees takes a request of a community. However, for us to begin working with the committee and working with the community, all it takes is a phone call. We have written all of the communities over the past year and tried to sell our services, tried to encourage the community to become part of an ongoing dialogue of how these get created. When we get a request, we go into the community and we’ll meet with the leadership and other interested parties and do presentations. I myself have done a couple of presentations over the last while, but the formal, under the legislation, the formalizing of a committee under legislation takes a request for the communities, but actually starting that dialogue all it takes is for someone to talk to somebody. Whether that’s a community social worker, talking with the band council, whether that’s a CEO on their trips into the communities to talk about programming that’s available. We are open for business and we try to make that clear with communities. We will travel and we will work with communities to develop these committees. The stumbling block is always supporting them through training, through the development of the community and through supporting them through honorarium and other monies.
Thank you, Mr. Heide. Mr. Krutko, your time is expired. I have nobody else on my list. We’re on page 8-29 with Health and Social Services, activity summary. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that this committee defer consideration of the department summary for the Department of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. A motion is on the floor and is being distributed.
A motion is on the floor. A motion has been distributed. The motion is non-debatable. Non-debatable, according to the Clerk. Non-debatable.
---Carried
We will defer further consideration of the Department of Health and Social Services. What is the wish of committee? Mrs. Groenewegen.
I’d like to carry on with the Department of Justice, please.
Is committee agreed?
Agreed.
Ms. Lee, if I could get you to please thank your staff and, Sergeant-at-Arms, if could please get you to escort the witnesses out of the Chamber.
Next step is to go to the Department of Justice. Once the witnesses have left the chamber I’ll go to the Minister for some opening remarks. Mr. Lafferty.
Okay, committee. I think we’re all set to roll. Is committee agreed that we can proceed with the Department of Justice?
Agreed.
I’ll ask the Minister if he would like to give opening remarks.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes. I’m pleased to present the Department of Justice main estimates for the fiscal year 2011-2012.
The 2011-2012 budget was developed to carry on with a number of priority initiatives identified by the 16th Assembly. The department’s operations and maintenance budget of $106.206 million represents an increase of 4.8 percent over the 2010-2011 main estimates. This increase consists primarily of forced growth in supporting the core operations of policing and corrections, and collective bargaining increases. It also reflects modest strategic investments in several areas.
Throughout the life of this government, the department has worked to develop and deliver effective services and programs to the people of the Northwest Territories to build a system of justice that is open, accessible and responsive to individual and community needs, and to support the administration of our courts. Front-line staff work with individuals and families in times of personal crisis. This could be a youth in trouble with the law, a victim who has been assaulted, parents who need help working through separation or divorce, people who need lawyers, or an offender who needs the right supports to make better choices once released from jail. We also recognize the absolute necessity of working with other social program departments to support the Assembly’s vision of “strong individuals, families and communities sharing the benefits and responsibilities of a unified, environmentally sustainable and prosperous Northwest Territories.”
Mr. Chair, the justice portfolio is a challenging one, but it is also very rewarding. Our programs address important issues facing families and our communities. During the 16th Assembly, I received input from standing committees that helped us all make the best possible decisions to meet the needs of NWT residents. Some decisions have been very difficult, and the current fiscal reality requires that we continue to use our resources wisely so that we can continue to deliver our core programs and services.
Mr. Chair, our focus is on meeting the needs of our residents. The department provides an array of core programs and services mandated by federal and territorial statutes. Justice has made it a priority to ensure these programs and services have the appropriate funding to provide effective and efficient programs. That is why we see an increase in forced growth funding in the amount of $8.9 million, which includes $1.7 million in collective bargaining increases and a further $1.7 million for increased RCMP human resource costs and for radio replacements for the RCMP. This budget also includes a total of $4.7 million for corrections to fund additional probation and facility positions so that there are greater supports for offenders as they work towards their rehabilitation.
In addition to managing our core operational costs, Justice also proposes investments in a number of areas that support the strategic themes of Building Our Future, Managing This Land and Refocusing Government. For example:
$150,000 is proposed to create an office of the children’s lawyer to give a greater, more effective voice to children in legal proceedings;
$100,000 is identified for the development of a comprehensive long-term Community Safety Strategy, an initiative that includes working with communities on local issues and strengths so that community-based approaches are identified and implemented;
$118,000 is proposed to fund a FASD consultant position to provide knowledge, expertise and best practices research to the department, front-line workers, community partners and key stakeholders on how to best provide supports and services to those with FASD and other cognitive disorders;
$109,000 is identified to enhance advice and support to GNWT departments and other public bodies on matters relating to privacy of, and access to, information; and
$350,000 is proposed to establish a two-person consultation unit that will provide GNWT staff with training and access to policy and legal advice regarding effective consultation with Aboriginal governments.
Mr. Chair, these investments represent ways in which Justice is working to fulfil its mandate, further its goal of developing an open, accessible, responsive system of justice, and advance the overall strategic initiatives, priorities and goals of the 16th Assembly. I look forward to our remaining months in office to continue our work with Members to make a difference to the people we serve.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. With that, I’d like to ask the Minister if he will be bringing in witnesses.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Is the committee agreed that the Minister can bring in his witnesses?
Agreed.
Sergeant-at-Arms, escort the witnesses in.
Mr. Lafferty, for the record, could you introduce your witnesses?
