[ Page 3779 ]

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Pension (Elected Municipal Officials) Act (Bill M201). Mr. Davidson

Introduction and first reading –– 3779

Committee of Supply: Ministry of Social Services and Housing estimates. (Hon. Mr. Richmond)

On vote 61: minister's office –– 3779

Hon. Mr. Richmond

Mr. Cashore

Ms. A. Hagen

The House met at 10:07 a.m.

Prayers.

HON. MR. DUECK: Mr. Speaker, in the House today we have board members of the Registered Nurses' Association. These are the people that care for our sick and elderly with commitment and dedication. The board members are Alice Chen-Wing from Terrace, Pat Semeniuk of West Vancouver, Helen Niskala of Vancouver and Ruth Ann English of Vancouver. The executive staff are Pat Cutshall, executive director, and Evelyn Carroll, director of professional services. Would the House please make them welcome.

HON. MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, in the House today is Mr. Bill Grant, president and chief executive officer of a couple of major corporations and manufacturing companies in British Columbia, former federal Progressive Conservative candidate for Port Moody and a good supporter of the province of British Columbia in all of its economic initiatives. I hope the House will make him welcome.

Introduction of Bills

PENSION (ELECTED
MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS) ACT

Mr. Davidson presented a bill intituled Pension (Elected Municipal Officials) Act.

MR. DAVIDSON: Mr. Speaker, this piece of proposed legislation simply provides a pension plan for elected officials in accordance with guidelines established by the UBCM, and allows any municipality to do so.

Bill M201 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Orders of the Day

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Pelton in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
SOCIAL SERVICES AND HOUSING

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I'd like to make a comment with respect to procedure. The minister has extensive notes on his opening address this morning, dealing with programs that he will be introducing, and it would be appreciated if the committee could maybe offer an intervening speaker if required. We can assure you that that courtesy will be extended to Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition if they need the time for an intervening speaker when their critic is responding to our minister. I'm just saying for the benefit of the committee now that if a courtesy is extended to us, we will certainly reciprocate.

On vote 61: minister's office, $224,319.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I am pleased to present the expenditure plan for the Ministry of Social Services and Housing for the 1988-89 fiscal year, but before I do and before 1 get in to all the detail, I would just like to take a few moments to thank and acknowledge once again the many people for the effort and dedication they bring each day to the delivery of social services in British Columbia: first of all, the staff of the Ministry of Social Services and Housing, who show compassion and skill in their work; secondly, the thousands of care-givers, foster parents, community agencies and small businesses who work with the ministry to deliver services, and the volunteers, churches and community members who bring such energy and caring to those in need in their communities. On behalf of the government and the people of British Columbia, I thank you.

The Ministry of Social Services and Housing is dedicated to serving British Columbians in need. In 1988-89 government has allocated $1.38 billion for the delivery of income assistance and social service programs in the province. Our expenditure plan is built around fulfilling the ministry's mission and achieving its service delivery goals.

The mission of the Ministry of Social Services and Housing is to meet basic needs for food, shelter and clothing, to receive and investigate complaints of child neglect and abuse, providing care for those children who cannot remain with their parents, and to provide care and support services to the mentally handicapped, to assist in their integration into the community. Our goal is to provide service in a way that promotes maximum self-sufficiency and independence for families and individuals whenever possible. My ministry is prepared to meet this challenge in 1988-89.

Our major expenditure priorities for the new fiscal year are to reorganize for the improved delivery of income assistance and social services in the province; to increase services to families, children and the handicapped; to continue supported community residential placements and day programs for the mentally handicapped who are moving away from home or out of institutions; to increase social housing for those in need in this third year of the federal-provincial social housing agreement; to increase day care services in conjunction with the federal government; and in cooperation with other government ministries, to implement new programs in support of families. I would like to discuss each of these priorities in greater detail.

First of all, reorganization. In 1988-89, the Ministry of Social Services and Housing will reorganize the delivery of income assistance and social services to the citizens of the province. Why reorganize? This ministry has one of the most decentralized and complex service responsibilities in government. It is essential that we keep pace with changing clients' needs and service demands throughout British Columbia. This was reinforced for the Cabinet Committee on Social Policy during our visits of the past year to a number of locations throughout the province. We heard the views of individuals and community or provincial organizations, many emphasizing the need for equity in the distribution of quality social services in British Columbia.

Over $800 million is spent annually in providing GAIN benefits to people in need. Economic growth has meant fewer people require GAIN, but my ministry remains committed to providing opportunities for independence wherever possible, and the safety net of income assistance where there is need.

Demands for child protection and family services are shifting in the province. Whether families live in rural or large urban centres, their needs are of equal importance to this ministry. Community understanding, interagency coop-

[ Page 3780 ]

eration and the Helpline have increased our awareness of child physical and sexual abuse. My ministry will ensure that child protection and family support services are available equitably and consistently throughout the province.

[10:15]

Community living for the mentally handicapped, whether they are moving away from home or out of institutions, requires extensive planning, parental and community involvement and ongoing support. This ministry will dedicate services to the needs of the mentally handicapped.

The ministry's current structure has to change in order to provide the kind of service delivery, supervision, planning and management required for a more effective response to this broad range of changing service needs. The number of field offices will increase from 172 to 262 to improve service to clients in each of the major ministry programs. The new model will provide specialized offices in most communities. The exception will be in 40 small communities, where offices will continue to provide the range of ministry services.

I would like to spend a moment describing how this new model will be restructured.

First, income assistance and employment initiatives: 103 field offices will deal exclusively with these programs. One hundred and fifty additional positions will permit the delivery of more responsive and efficient income assistance and employment rehabilitation services. In the area of family maintenance, 68 additional positions will ensure that those who are responsible to support family members meet their financial obligations. These offices will provide accountable income assistance services, with a focus on opportunities for client independence.

Second, services for families and children: 98 field offices will deal exclusively with this program area. The distribution of social work staff in the province will change to reflect changes in the demand for child welfare services. Over the past ten years the population of school-age children in the province has declined by an estimated 3.5 percent while the number of social workers has increased by 6 percent. More importantly, since 1981 the population of school-age children in the province has shifted.

The decline is most dramatic in Vancouver and Victoria, which show a drop in school-age children of an estimated 14.5 percent and 8 percent respectively. The reverse is true of Surrey, for example, where the number of school-age children has increased by an estimated 29 percent over the past seven years, or in Saanich, where it has increased by an estimated 11 percent. In response, 46 of the 686 existing ministry social work positions dedicated to family and children's services will be reallocated from Vancouver and Victoria to areas where service demands have increased, such as the Fraser Valley, the north and the north Island.

As well, we recognize the need for family support in the inner cities. To that end, we are placing family support workers in the inner cities of Vancouver and Victoria. There will be ten placed in Vancouver and two in Victoria. A pilot project is also underway involving police, hospitals, public health staff and caregivers, using a provincewide phone line with emergency access to ministry social workers. This is in addition to the Helpline, which continues to provide excellent service to children as well as adults in our communities that have child abuse concerns. These measures will ensure consistent child protection and family support services throughout the province.

Third, services for the mentally handicapped and special needs day care: 21 field offices will deal exclusively with these services, and 135 existing social work positions will deliver services — such as assessment, placement planning and service monitoring — to mentally handicapped children and adults. These staff will work closely with families and community agencies to ensure that individual plans and ongoing support services are in place for the mentally handicapped.

This represents a consolidation of current ministry efforts in this area — not a change. Dedicating offices to serve the mentally handicapped will permit us to address the critical issues facing community integration.

I would like to emphasize at this point that there will be no decrease in the number of ministry fieldworkers. In fact, the number will increase, as I have outlined, and existing social work positions will be reassigned in light of changing service demands.

Effective supervision, planning and management are priorities in this reorganization. Each of the 262 district offices in our communities will have a district supervisor with specific program knowledge to provide service monitoring, local budget control, case consultation and leadership to the workers delivering services. Fifty-eight area managers, skilled in the major ministry programs, will plan and manage the coordinated delivery of quality services that meet the needs of our clients and maintain high standards of public accountability. They will be visible and accessible to members of the community. They will work cooperatively with local governments, agencies and other ministries to address community needs.

Professional service delivery and staff retention are priorities in this reorganization. Staff recruitment, retention and expertise will be addressed through the development of professional and practice standards, with recognition provided through the establishment of a senior social worker position.

Service to our clients will be improved by a focus on specialized staff training to be offered jointly by ministry staff, universities and private agencies. This reorganization will increase the ministry's capacity to plan and deliver services efficiently and with a high degree of public accountability. Reorganization will also achieve an equitable distribution of office locations to meet client needs and service requirements throughout the province. A monitoring and evaluation plan is in place to ensure that ministry goals are met.

I would like to turn now to services for families and children. This government is committed to the goal of supporting the integrity and independence of families. The internal strength and resilience of the family are remarkable, despite the pressures of society today, but when families need help, this ministry is dedicated to providing it. Further, let me reinforce my ministry's commitment to building better working relationships with native people through the development of protocols for child welfare matters. Native child welfare projects have been established with the Carrier-Sekani and the Nuu-chah-nulth Tribal Councils, and a working agreement has been signed with the McLeod Lake band. In all areas of the province, bands and tribal councils will be involved in planning for the welfare of native children.

In 1988-89, we will spend over $114 million on family and children's services, an increase of 8 percent. This additional $8.6 million will be used as follows: to expand Project Reconnect to urban areas throughout the province in an effort to break the cycle of street life and reconnect youth with

[ Page 3781 ]

positive social and community supports; to expand family support services designed to maintain or restore the integrity of families, programs that provide help at home, such as homemakers and special services to children — rehabilitation resources for help at school serve over 2,800 families and children each month; to continue a successful foster home recruitment campaign and to increase financial support to foster parents, who bring such commitment and skill to the temporary care of children — with over 50 percent of children in care placed in foster homes, foster care is clearly the backbone of our child care system; to increase the ministry's capacity to provide emergency and temporary specialized care for children, while their parents are assisted to resume care. The ministry will also expand care to handicapped infants, children and their families through programs that address the need for strong family support and specialized resources. We will build on an existing network of services, including the infant development and special care home programs that provide support to over 4,000 families and children in the province.

This government is meeting its 1981 commitment to assist the mentally handicapped to live and participate to their potential in the community, whether they are moving away from home or out of institutions. In 1988-89 the ministry will spend $136.6 million — an increase of 11.8 percent — to provide community support and residential care services for the mentally handicapped.

This additional $14.5 million will be used to provide the following services. With the help and cooperation of parents, community agencies and all levels of government, 190 institutional residents and 109 individuals who can no longer live at home will be placed in community resources this fiscal year. In 1987-88 approximately 2,100 mentally handicapped people were accommodated in community residences. Many people have commented on the success of community residential placements, and over the past few years I think that more and more of us can see for ourselves how well former institutional residents are doing as members of our communities. Additional training and support services provided through achievement centres and self-help skills programs in the community will be available to help clients progress to more independent living. Professional support services providing assistance in service planning and effective care for the mentally handicapped will now be available to parents and day program operators as well as residential caregivers. A provincial review team, community advisory committees and an accreditation system now under development will ensure that high standards of care for the mentally handicapped are monitored and maintained in both non-profit and proprietary community-based resources.

It is important to note that a wide range of ministry services is delivered in partnership with agencies and small businesses throughout the province. An additional $5.54 million has been allocated to assist these agencies in meeting increased costs of delivering services.

The federal-provincial social housing agreement is based on this government's commitment to deliver cost-effective social housing programs to those in need. The units delivered under the 1986 and 1987 programs will house approximately 2,640 seniors, 2,850 people in family units and 522 people with special needs, providing a total of 6,012 people with affordable shelter. For 1988, 1,886 units have been committed. This will provide housing for a further 3,461 people: 756 seniors, 2,595 people in family units and 110 disabled people.

Opportunities for independence from income assistance are a priority for this government, and in the 1988-89 fiscal year $26.7 million has been allocated to my ministry for employment and training programs for income assistance recipients. In combination with the ministry's reorganization and GAIN initiatives, which I will outline in a moment, we will promote permanent jobs for income assistance recipients and remove barriers to their financial independence.

Negotiations are underway with the federal government regarding British Columbia's fair share of funding for a new child day care initiative. This government has allocated an additional $3 million to the ministry's day care budget. Further funding will be made available pending the outcome of negotiations with the federal government, which we hope will be concluded this summer.

On April 5 the Premier introduced a new program of initiatives to strengthen families, involving services delivered by the Ministries of Social Services and Housing, Attorney-General, Education and Health. This ministry will receive an additional $16.35 million to provide the following new and enhanced services.

A new infant day care subsidy rate will be introduced to assist women to maintain their independence by returning to work or school after the birth of their child. Estimated cost of this program is $6.1 million.

Supportive residential options will be made available to women who need alternative living arrangements during pregnancy and after delivery. A user fee will apply, with financial assistance provided to those in need. The estimated cost of this program is $3 million.

Ministry family support services will be expanded to provide homemakers, counselling and support to mothers at home or in school as needed.

A new teen support program developed in cooperation with local school boards will help young mothers finish school by offering child care as well as parenting and life skills training. The estimated cost of family supports: $6.9 million.

The Adoption Act will be reviewed to ensure that it reflects the changing social attitudes and practice regarding adoption. More special needs adoption projects will permit further work on developing effective placements and ongoing support in adoptions of children with special needs. The estimated cost is $350,000.

Cabinet has reviewed the report of the GAIN Action Committee appointed by the Premier in October 1987. The committee made a series of recommendations intended both to assist income assistance recipients towards independence and to streamline our system for better service and for increased monitoring and follow-up of recipients. Membership on the committee included representatives from the business community who were clearly sensitive to social policy concerns, and the GAIN action plan provides an excellent example of cooperation between government and the private sector in improving the delivery of services to those in need.

[10:30]

The following decisions have been made by cabinet.

The designation of "unemployable" will be limited to situations involving the health of recipients or their dependents, and that of "handicapped" will be reviewed periodically and will no longer be a lifetime designation. This is intended to avoid inappropriate labels or disincentives to seeking financial independence.

[ Page 3782 ]

The current eight-month waiting-period for the higher benefit rate will be removed for unemployable recipients. The enhanced earning exemption will be extended to include those receiving GAIN for the Handicapped and will be limited to one year for all recipients.

A work transportation allowance will be provided for one year to single parents and GAIN for the Handicapped recipients who become employed. This is in addition to the current extension of medical and dental benefits for one year to these groups. Day care costs in excess of the maximum subsidy will be paid for one year for single parents who become employed.

A private sector approach will be introduced to the assessment of business viability when determining the eligibility for income assistance of small business operators. Community agents will receive funding to assist in creating employment for income assistance recipients, and as I previously announced, we will ensure that single parents receive adequate and regularly paid maintenance.

Further, in an effort to reduce the problems associated with cheque-issue day and provide positive support to recipients, St. James Social Services, DERA and the ministry are working together to implement a pilot project in Vancouver's downtown east side. This project will provide for the administration of recipients' income assistance cheques, along with counselling programs provided by St. James Social Services for clients willing to participate. In addition, DERA will help clients use local banks, with the ministry arranging a direct deposit of income assistance cheques to bank accounts.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that this ministry faces many challenges and opportunities this fiscal year in the delivery of income assistance and social services to the people of British Columbia. The mandate given by government is clear: to meet financial and social need while fostering the independence of individuals and families. This will be possible with the assistance and support of service agencies, groups and volunteers in communities throughout the province.

I realize that my remarks were lengthy, but there are a lot of new initiatives announced in there, and I know it's a lot for everyone to absorb in just these few moments. I apologize for the length of it, but I'm sure that once the members have a chance to look through it, they will realize that there are a lot of very positive announcements there.

MR. CASHORE: I wonder if I could have some clarification. I thought the minister said at the beginning of his remarks that he was going to ask for an opportunity to continue his remarks. Perhaps you could just clarify that for me.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I understood that to mean that if he went over the allotted time we would let him continue.

MR. CASHORE: Okay, thank you.

I am pleased to rise in the House at this time to begin our response to the estimates of the Ministry of Social Services and Housing. I would like to reiterate the comments of the Minister of Social Services and Housing in expressing appreciation to those who work within the ministry and to those volunteers throughout the province who participate in so many ways in seeking to enhance the social fabric of our province and in an awareness that, by enlisting participation and commitment to a developmental approach to the delivery of social services on behalf of all people in our society, we all benefit.

I have heard some cynics say that one of the reasons the Social Services and Housing ministry estimates come first is that it is believed that in some ways these are not seen as some of the more important estimates and that as we get towards the wonderful days of summer when some of the other ministries are coming up, there is pressure that those estimates won't go on for so long. I don't believe that view. I believe that in having these estimates at this time, we have an opportunity to survey the alternatives we have and put them forward as a contrast to the approach this ministry is taking in its work.

However, I have been reviewing the estimates from last year, and with all due respect to the minister, whom I have come to appreciate in many ways over the year and some months that I've had an opportunity to get to know him, I think he is one of the members of this House who have that characteristic sometimes described as an ability to "eat the clock." I think that sometimes the answers are unnecessarily lengthy. As a matter of fact, I think that a five-minute question on our side of the House results in a 15-minute answer on average, so we are going to try to be concise and to the point.

Interjection.

MR. CASHORE: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I realize that the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Couvelier) is being pointed to as a model, but I think he learned the craft from the Minister of Social Services and Housing. In all seriousness, I hope that we could agree that as we go through these estimates, we will be as precise as possible in responding to some of the issues being raised.

I know that the big thing today is the ministry reorganization, and I also know that reorganization is appropriately set in the context of the estimates for this ministry. As such, that reorganization reflects the philosophy of the ministry, but we must go beyond that and say that it reflects the values of this government that we have in British Columbia at this time.

In looking at the reorganization first of all, I think what we have here is a process that led toward the announcement that we heard this morning, which has some good aspects to it in terms of consultation. I would like to take this opportunity to say that I am pleased to see the deputy, Mr. Jim Carter, in the House and that it has been a real pleasure to get to know him during the time he has been in the ministry. I believe that the ministry, through the work of Mr. Carter, has sought to make use of a process of consultation in developing this plan, and I appreciate that. However, I would say that anyone given the task of effecting a reorganization within this ministry has an impossible task.

The impossibility of that task relates to the history of Social Credit governments in this province which have taken an inappropriate attitude towards the delivery of social services, a very negative attitude towards the opportunity for economic improvement by a more appropriate philosophy of how you deliver social services. We have never seen anything approaching a recovery from the disaster of 1983, the restraint program, when indeed things needed to be a lot better than they were. Therefore, a process we would have to recognize as a kind of institutionalized poverty has been allowed to continue within this province.

We find that this deputy minister has been called on to reorganize a ministry, but with very limited financial

[ Page 3783 ]

resources available. So what we get is something akin to shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic. We get a situation where good people who seek to do a good job, who have as part of their modus operandi and part of their awareness of how to approach their job within the practice of providing support within the social services system, whether they be financial support workers, social workers, clerical staff, administrative staff in the various aspects.... All of these people are being called on to try to make do with the very limited resources that are still a legacy of that restraint budget of the previous administration.

What we have is an attempt to address the very serious problems that have developed in this province, problems that can be clearly related to the restraint budget and to the approach of this government since that time. We have had an increase in poverty in this province. We have had an increase in the incidence of pressures on families. We have had an increase in the incidence of the need for child apprehension and in abuse experienced by children. Then we have the concerns with regard to budgets that seem to target seniors in seeking to gain revenue. We have the concerns with regard to the situation of single-parent families and the need for affordable and available day care. We have the problems of inadequate decent, affordable housing for so many of our citizens. We find that there is going to have to be much more than the kind of reorganization that says: "Make do with the resources you have available, but somehow reorganize it; let's do it differently and try to put forward at least a facade that we are going to effect a better delivery of social services in this province."

Having said that, there are one or two points that I would like to acknowledge within this reorganization which I think do address real problems.

For instance, it is well known that there have been severe morale problems among staff in this ministry, especially since 1983, and I do commend the deputy minister for seeking to address those problems in the reorganization. One of the things we find is a recognition that there really is not much opportunity for advancement among people who work within the ministry, and that the wage benefits and the benefits of being employed in that vocation do not compare well with other provinces. They certainly do not compare well with other professions requiring similar training. For instance, if you compare what a social worker gets and what a schoolteacher gets in our province, you'll find that there is a very real shortfall.

We also find, Mr. Chairman, that we're dealing with a category of employees within government service who have experienced a tremendous amount of the kind of scapegoating and dissatisfaction expressed throughout the years of restraint. Unfortunately, while the Minister of Finance puts forward the view that we are in times of prosperity, the fact nevertheless remains that within this ministry we are still in times of restraint. It emphasizes that we have a system in which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. We have a system in which, when the benefits start to come, when the trickle-down theory starts taking effect, it is a benefit only to those who are very well off. Those whom the ministry in its mission statement seeks to help are nevertheless finding that their experience of poverty continues to deepen. It continues to deepen, no matter what statistics are trotted out to demonstrate that that is not the case.

As I mentioned before in my remarks on the budget, there's a graph in the budget speech indicating the improvement in the numbers of people on welfare in the last year. However, if that graph was to go back to the mid-1970s, it would become readily apparent that in the late 1970s there were fewer than half the number of men, women and children depending on welfare that there are now.

[10:45]

Mr. Chairman. this government has a concept of the delivery of social services that is wedded to the idea of crisis prevention and crisis prevention only. It fails to recognize the opportunity that exists in a preventive approach. That philosophy is going to cause us in British Columbia to see this situation repeat itself. Somehow I really do not like the prospect of hearing, ten years from now: "These are situations that we can't change. We are doing the best we can." Can we afford to have the numbers of people on welfare double every ten years, and somehow say that it's the norm, it's okay? Clearly, Mr. Chairman, if we are going to be calling upon people to effect the reorganization that is going to deliver the best possible services for this province, we are going to do so by giving them the opportunity by giving them the resources to work with that are going to make it truly possible to begin to recover from the devastation that was caused and from which we have never recovered, even though some parts of the economy have, since 1983.

Mr. Chairman, I mentioned that graph a few moments ago. The fact is that since November — I haven't seen the statistics for February yet; I think they'll be available quite soon if they are not at the present time — the number of people on income assistance has been rising again, I believe by the number of 11,500 people. If we're going to show a graph and try to express to the people of British Columbia that things are improving, I think that we have to be more appropriate and show a more long-term graph.

In the budget we see a $42 million decrease in GAIN. Obviously the ministry is optimistic that reorganization will have an influence on reducing the number of people on GAIN and therefore justify that reduction and that figure. But I must say that it sends a shiver down my spine when I hear the comments of the minister this morning talking about some of the measures that are going to be used to deal with people on income assistance.

I was not able to get everything down, but I think I heard something about a redefinition of a person who is on handicapped persons' income assistance. During his remarks the minister talked about consulting with some business people with regard to opportunities for employment. I would hope that the people from that part of the disabled community were consulted as part of the process, because I would think that that announcement in itself, if I heard and understood it clearly, is going to cause a great deal of unrest and consternation among disabled people in this province.

We heard the explanation of the four or five initiatives of this reorganization; for instance, that there would be a streaming into income assistance as much as possible being handled in one set of offices; another streaming of family and children's services into other offices. We saw with regard to the family and children's services that there would be 46 positions going from Vancouver and Victoria to other areas.

The minister can cite statistics about declining numbers of children in the urban area, if he wishes to do so. That nevertheless does not take into consideration the mounting problems that we have in the urban area. The public of this province is extremely concerned, for instance, about hungry children. That's an issue which certainly shows up in the urban area.

[ Page 3784 ]

We've also heard the minister talking with some satisfaction — and I certainly can understand that — about the contracts, the agreements, that have been made with various tribal councils with regard to native Indian child welfare. But at the very time that these social workers are being removed from urban areas because of the fact that the resources say, "Well, you've got to reorganize it, " we nevertheless have a situation where at least half of the native Indian people in British Columbia live in urban areas, and an extremely high percentage of them in Vancouver and Victoria. The ministry must have on its agenda the need to begin to consult those urban native Indian people with regard to a myriad of child welfare issues. So the thought that we would at this time in our history be removing social workers from the urban areas of this province is inappropriate.

However, having said that, I do recognize — and I want to make it very clear — that the need for additional support for family and child services in the hinterland of the province is also a great necessity. If we are going to be responsible in some kind of a reorganization that brings about recovery from the devastating decisions made in this Legislature in the past, then surely we need the kind of family support out there in the hinterland and in the city that enables us to really do that. So while I'm sure the ministry would like to think that the public will look at this reorganization and say, "Well, my goodness, at last things are changing in this province; at last we can see a better day coming and things are really going to improve for the people of British Columbia, " the fact remains that when they look at the actual detail of the reorganization they will recognize that the deputy minister and those who worked so hard to bring about reorganization did so with very limited resources, and therefore the only way they could resolve the problem of the need for more social workers out in hinterland was to remove them from urban areas, where they are all so desperately needed.

I do recognize that under this reorganization, which is moving towards more opportunities for people to be in management, that could in fact have some positive effect on some staff seeing the opportunity to move up the scale in terms of their work placement. If we are going to have employees who feel positive about their work and that their work can be rewarded by having the opportunity to move to another level, perhaps a supervisory level, that is indeed worthwhile.

I would also be interested in hearing from the ministry what measures are being taken to ensure that the people who provide very needed family and children's services and work within the income assistance area are in a position where they would not be enticed into other provinces because of better wage packages and that sort of thing. I say that as an economic measure, because if anyone talks to people in Prince George, Fort St. James, Powell River, Trail and places all throughout this vast province, staff in the Social Services and Housing offices will tell you that we have a tremendous problem with frequent turnover of staff. I've heard of people who were involved in seeking to adopt a child, who in a process of two years had had as many as seven social workers working with them. I know that members of the ministry staff will know I'm not exaggerating.

Mr. Chairman, we heard about the plan for fostering and adoption services; we'll be getting into more detail on some of these things. But unless we have the stability among the staff that enables those people to deliver the best job they possibly can, then this reorganization won't be worth the paper it's written on. I do not say that as a criticism of the people who have effected this reorganization. They had the task to do; they had to work within the confines of the resources available.

Mention was made about people on income assistance who should be in the workforce. That concept is not one that anyone would say should happen, but when you look at the language it's couched in the Speech from the Throne and the budget — and this happens year after year — the terminology is: "only for those in need. " We see those words every year. Somehow a political agenda enters the fray at that time, being put forward on the backs of poor people, seeking to fan the flames of the argument that says they're a bunch of ne'er-do-wells and malingerers out there ripping off the system and that we're all being ripped off.

We went through this in the estimates last year, Mr. Chairman, and I hope we don't have to go through the whole gamut with it again this year. But it was recognized in last year's estimates that the number of people on income assistance who are seen to be dishonest within that system is not alarming by any means. We can compare it to other segments of society where fraud exists, and we can see that it's not only the poor people who sometimes get involved in illegal things. As a matter of fact, I talked to somebody who lived in a retirement community — I won't identify it — and he told me that in a particular supermarket, the majority of the problems with shoplifting were with seniors. I do not believe for one minute that those seniors were shoplifting out of anything other than the necessity of hunger.

Interjection.

MR. CASHORE: Well, you know, you might want to take a look at the story of the bishop's candlesticks; maybe you should read something out of history. Remember Jean Valjean? You might find that edifying, that when a society uses a lowest-common denominator attitude with regard to those people, struggling with poverty, the society is in danger of losing something of its own soul. I would remind you of that.

I have acknowledged that there are cases of dishonesty, as there are in any segment of society, including politicians. Having said that, when we put forth year after year a program that says it's going to go only to those in need, it supports my contention that this a political football and that it's not really all that sincere. If we were really sincere about this, we would simply put in consistent, supportable, socially responsible programs, and as a result we would see the changes coming. We wouldn't have to fly it as a flag every year, seeking to appeal to a certain portion of the population that likes that sort of thing.

Mr. Chairman, I think that one of the things that is going to be important to be canvassed later today is the whole issue of the evaporation of JobTrac. JobTrac, it seems, has evaporated in this province. When JobTrac came into being a year ago last fall, I believe, it did so with a great deal of fanfare.

MR. MOWAT: You were against it.

MR. CASHORE: Well, it has evaporated, so you must be against it. It's interesting to think of the kinds of glowing arguments that were presented, and now it's not there. It would seem that this new initiative we're going to be hearing about is something that's been brought back within the

[ Page 3785 ]

ministry. I am very pleased to see that that confidence in the ministry staff is being expressed, which obviously wasn't there previously. I have to ask myself what has changed. One thing that hasn't changed is the minister, but one thing that has changed is the deputy minister. Mr. Chairman, I would leave it at that.

[11:00]

However, when it comes to programs to enable people to get back into employment, we have to ask what kind of programs they are going to be. Are programs going to be made available that aren't limited to two years? For instance, if a person has the capacity to go into a program that takes longer, is that type of program going to be made available? Are we going to be considering the fact that if people don't have decent, affordable housing, if they don't have adequate day care, they are not going to be able to avail themselves of some of those jobs? Is this minister, in dealing with other members of cabinet, going to come to terms with the fact that no matter how good a job his ministry does of trying to help unemployed people become employed, if we don't have the creative economic initiatives taking place within our economy that start improving the availability of meaningful employment out there, where people can have decent wages and care properly for their families . . . . If we don't have that happening, then one really has to wonder about the public relations aspect of this part of the model. It raises the question, that's all I'm saying. If we do not have the concomitant economic development support taking place within this province, programs that create jobs, then we're going to find that we still have this problem.

Poverty in this province has not gone away. We still have 235,000 men, women and children depending on welfare. We still have, I would estimate, close to 200,000 men, women and children depending on unemployment insurance.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. members, the time of the designated speaker has expired, so perhaps someone would intercede briefly so that the member can continue.

MS. A. HAGEN: I would like to pick up on the comments of the member for Maillardville-Coquitlam in the vein in which he has been pursuing them and make some comments at this time in our discussion of the minister's estimates.

In this broad-ranging ministry and the scope of the comments that the minister made this morning as he discussed the reorganization of his ministry and also the thrust of his ministry's budget, I will try to make my comments within a specific area.

The member for Maillardville-Coquitlam began to make some comments about the economic circumstances of the province in which this budget is cast and in which the goals and mandate of the minister must be achieved. It is interesting that in all of the language of the throne speech, the budget and, indeed, the minister's comments this morning there is very little that puts it into context. That's quite a contrast from last year, when there was a good deal of discussion about economic development and the government's initiatives in that regard. It seems to me that there is a deficiency, then, that we should address as an immediate problem in looking at the ministry's goals.

The economic situation in the province is pretty graphically told to us each month by two sets of statistics: the unemployment statistics in British Columbia and the statistics that come from the ministry on those people who are so without resources that they must turn to the ministry for income assistance.

If we look at the employment pattern in B.C., it's one which sees us consistently fifth from the bottom in the whole of Canada in unemployment levels. Only the Atlantic provinces exceed British Columbia, and at various times some of those provinces with chronic unemployment have a better record than we have. If we look at many areas of the province, we find that unemployment rates are still up around one in five or one in eight persons. They're ranging from 12 percent to 20 percent, and that is a consistent pattern.

If we look at the minister's statistics on the recipients of social services, we see a pattern at odds with the minister's optimism that the number of people who will require social assistance is going down. 1 was interested to observe a graph in a recent publication from the government that charted the rate of unemployment in the province, and the time that it dipped most significantly was around last October. It's been on the rise ever since, and that's borne out by the unemployment statistics and the increase in the number of people in receipt of social assistance benefits in November and February. There is a significant increase in total recipients — an increase of about 31,000 in that period of time.

One of the reasons for the dip we saw last October could perhaps be related to the very program that the member for Maillardville-Coquitlam mentioned — the JobTrac program — which I suspect was in its fullest flower in October in providing short-term jobs, which in many instances were of six months' duration for people on social assistance.

In this year's budget, in the perspective of this ministry, we don't have anything to indicate that we have economic development initiatives and job creation initiatives that would assist those people on income assistance. While we will all be critical of those jobs for their short-term nature, they do provide some opportunities for people to get back into the workforce and sometimes to receive needed training. My first comment is that many of the goals suggested in the ministry's budget are cast in an economic climate, against the policies of his government, that will make it very difficult for him to see improvements in the number of people on GAIN. Therefore the decrease in the dollars available in the budget and the absolute absence of any formal job creation activities, such as were a part of last year's and the previous year's budget, will make it more difficult. In that context we have, as my colleague has suggested, people struggling in poverty with incomes, either from GAIN or from work that pays inadequate wages, which do not make it possible for them to achieve even the basic standard of living that we consider acceptable in this province.

Therefore I would like to look at some of the initiatives that have been a part of the previous year and to begin to lay out some questions that I would like the minister to address as our estimates proceed. When we look at the work that has gone on with this ministry and the federal government, there has been a three-year program called the "four comers agreement, " which I understand has still some time to run. That program was targeted to social assistance recipients. In fact, some of the dollars that were available in last year's JobTrac program came out of those joint initiatives. There's been no mention of federal programs, except very briefly when the minister indicated that there were some negotiations taking place. The minister was so intent on using as little time as possible that it was difficult to get anything more than the flavour of some of the remarks he was making.

[ Page 3786 ]

Last year there was about $15 million in that budget for social assistance recipients from the federal government and $81 million from the provincial government. This year, in the minister's own estimates, there's about $16 million noted particularly under something called "Opportunities to Independence, " and there may be some dollars within another ministry that may be working in cooperation with the Ministry of Social Services and Housing — the Advanced Education ministry. A significant decrease appears in provincial dollars, and there's no acknowledgment as yet of federal dollars. In the context of this year's goals — to put more people out of need of GAIN and into employment — the minister has certainly given us no indication as yet, other than in words, how he hopes that might happen.

The minister has also noted in his comments that there has been in existence, sometime in the past year, a group which I believe he called the GAIN Action Committee. It's a committee that I was not aware of; nor have I heard members who are working in close association with this ministry note it. So it appears that it has been a quiet committee working without any kind of public mandate or public discussion. The minister did note in his comment about that particular committee that it included business persons who were sensitive to the needs of people who were on social assistance, but he certainly didn't give us any indication whether it also included representatives from the community who work in advocacy ways in a wide range of areas to assist people who are in need of assistance. I would certainly like the minister to give us some additional information about the nature of that committee and what its mandate was.

It seems that much of the initiative is designed to limit the number of people who will be able to qualify for social assistance and to provide some very small initiatives that may help them towards — to use good language — independence. But at this stage, in economic development terms, in job creation terms, in specific dollars that will deal with trying to alleviate some of the high levels of unemployment in many of the communities of the province with at least short-term job creation activities, there is silence. My colleague from Kootenay (Ms. Edwards), for example, has spoken about the Community JobTrac program, which had $20 million last year and which, according to the ministry's own records, provided jobs that made for good incomes for people for a short time.

I wonder if the minister is in fact in some kind of an interregnum at this time. Many of these people who last year were on social assistance and who have worked through some of these job creation programs may very well be off the social assistance rolls for a time, because they'll be on unemployment insurance. Perhaps we have, with that program for last year, bought the provincial government some relief; and they may feel that they may be able to relax because the federal government will be dealing with the income needs of that population for up to a year with its unemployment insurance program, since many of these people will have worked for six months. It may be that that's the reason for the absence at this time of any job creation activities.

[11:15]

Just to conclude this portion of my remarks, I would welcome some kind of economic overview from the minister that tells us that the cast he has put on his estimates this year is based not just on reorganization — which can, I'm sure, bring an infusion of some new energy into a ministry that has been hard pressed over the last five years and where, for its many dedicated people, the morale has been very low and the workloads very high .... Are we, in fact, dealing with economic circumstances, in the resources available, that can give us any optimism that the goals the minister has enunciated are within reach?

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I'll try to address some of the comments made by the two members opposite. First of all, I was remiss in my opening remarks by not introducing the two gentlemen who are in the House with me. Sitting behind me is John Pickering, the director of financial planning, and, of course, beside me is the deputy minister of the Ministry of Social Services and Housing, Mr. Jim Carter — a resounding welcome to the House.

To address some of the statements made by the member for Maillardville-Coquitlam (Mr. Cashore): he came up with some kind of convoluted reason why my estimates were first. I didn't quite follow exactly what he was getting at, but I think they're first because they are so important and we have so many good things to talk about, and we want to do it while everyone is fresh and full of energy and vigour — like I can witness across there — and not anxious to get out of here on June 30. We don't want to rush these estimates through the House. So having said that, we want to go into this ministry's estimates in the greatest detail possible.

He mentioned that reorganization reflects the values of government. I don't really know what he meant by that, either; but there seems to be some kind of resistance to change of any kind coming from that side of the House — everything should stay the same as it was. He mentioned that no matter what happens to the populations of children, the number of social workers in Vancouver should always remain the same. There's some kind of resistance and reluctance to change anything.

We are convinced, after going into it in great depth, that the reorganization of this ministry was very necessary and will provide us with the means of delivering social services in this province in the most efficient way possible. He said it was an impossible task. Well, it might be for lesser people but not for people like Mr. Carter and the rest of the tremendous staff in this ministry. It's not impossible at all. In fact, it will prove to be most beneficial for all those on income assistance.

He talked about the status of the social worker in our province, and I'm glad he did because it's something I've been cognizant of for some time. I know he didn't have a copy of my speech, but this is on page 9 — in case you had it catalogued, Mr. Member. I did mention staff recruitment and retention and expertise, and with recognition provided through the establishment of a senior social worker position.... I agree with you and have felt for a long time that the status of social workers needs to be improved. We have general agreement on this principle, and are working out the details at the moment for a senior social worker position.

The other comment made by that member was that we were "doing nothing to reduce the numbers of income assistance recipients, " as nearly as I can remember the quote. That's not true. We have increased the staff on the financial assistance side of the ministry by 150 FTEs — fulltime equivalents — for the very purpose of reducing the number of people on income assistance. He talked about the increase in the number of income assistance recipients. It started last November, and the member knows perfectly well that that's a seasonal increase. It happens every year at about

[ Page 3787 ]

that time. In fact, last year it started later than usual. It usually starts in about late September-October; last year the seasonal increase didn't occur until November. Then in the spring, of course, as is happening now, the numbers go down.

Mr. Member, I can assure you that the disabled were consulted on the announcement we made that their designation as disabled would not be permanent, for life, because a lot of these people make tremendous strides towards independence. With new technologies and new skills acquired, many of them move off the disabled classification and are quite proud of the fact that they get back into the workforce. So the disabled were consulted, and a lot of thought was given to that. That doesn't mean we're going to start moving people off that designation holus-bolus; it just means that from time to time individuals' circumstances will be reviewed, with a view to finding meaningful employment for them.

The problems in urban areas that the member addressed. I think we have started to address those. We started last year with our Reconnect program, which is being expanded this year to assist in the youth or teen problem in urban areas. And if he was listening, again in my opening remarks, I mentioned family support workers who would be put into the inner city because of the problems peculiar to the downtown areas of Vancouver and Victoria.

He mentioned a few other things that we're very much aware of, such as the turnover of staff in the north. There's no question that it's been a problem for some time. We are attempting to address that problem, and reorganization of the ministry will go a long way to address the problem we have of not only recruiting but retaining staff in the northern parts of our province, in the more remote areas.

Another remark that was made by the member for Maillardville-Coquitlam I take offence to because it's almost as if he were trying to put words in my mouth, when he says that we look at the people on income assistance as, to use his words, "ne'er-do-wells and malingerers." Those are your words, Mr. Member. They have never been spoken by myself or, to the best of my knowledge, by anyone on this side of the House. So if you choose to use those words in describing people on welfare, that's your business, but please don't try to attribute them to me. I have never said such a thing, nor do I think it.

When you talk about dishonesty of people on welfare, I don't think there are any more dishonest people on welfare — or income assistance, if you like — than there are anywhere else. In fact, it's somewhere around 4 percent or less in the ministry. We recognize that it's there, and we don't use it as a political football, as you suggest. The main intent is to get people back into meaningful employment, to get them independent and off the welfare rolls. By far the vast majority of people on income assistance don't wish to be there; they want to get off as quickly as possible. We recognize that, and we're doing our best to assist them.

JobTrac is another program that was mentioned. Yes, JobTrac is no longer, but it was a program that wasn't intended to be there forever. It's interesting: you were against JobTrac last year when we announced it, and now when it's not there you're all for it. When we put into place the program we announced this morning, you'll be against that one too, and if we cancel it next year you'll be all for it. But it's going in regardless.

Both members asked what we were doing economically in B.C. to assist people. Well, I can tell you — and these are facts, not opinions. Last year there were 90,000 jobs created in British Columbia. In fact, in March of this year there were more people working in British Columbia than ever before in our history. So we have a larger workforce, more people working than ever before. That the economy is improving in the province is, I think, more responsible for the decrease in income assistance recipients than anything else. When we have a larger workforce than we've ever had before, the economy must be improving.

1 want to bring to members' attention the fact that while JobTrac is no more, it doesn't mean that a lot of the money that was being spent on silviculture in JobTrac is not being spent. This year this province will spend $223 million on silviculture. It will not be spent by this ministry, and it's not a program solely for income assistance recipients. But there will be many jobs created out there in reforestation because of the $223 million that will be spent, and those jobs will be available to everyone. Those who want them, I'm sure, will go after them, and many people will be successful.

That follows the comments made by the member for New Westminster (Ms. A. Hagen) about unemployment statistics. Yes, I guess we are about dead centre in the country — about fifth from the bottom or fifth from the top, whichever way you want to look at it. It's interesting that the negative side always comes from that side: we're fifth from the bottom. Over here we're fifth from the top. But you can dwell on the negative, I guess, because that seems to be your mandate. You've done it ever since I've been here, and I'm sure you're going to continue to do it.

MR. ROSE: That's why we're called the opposition.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Yes, that's right. You talk about unemployment statistics but you don't talk about employment statistics. I was just trying to tell you that there are more people working in B.C. than have ever worked in B.C.

Unemployment is a serious problem in this province. It's probably as serious in our constituency — or more so — than most places in the province. We realize that, and have for quite some time. That's why so many of our efforts are put towards improving the employment picture in our constituency. In fact, I should mention that we had an excellent meeting the other day in Kamloops with the second member and me, the mayor and the MP, Mr. Nelson Riis, and have instituted a strategy to try to pull everyone together so that all our efforts are a little more collegial — I think that's the buzzword these days — and so that we're all working towards the same goal and working together. We've all been working on the problem for some time, and I'm sure that we'll be able to do something about that problem.

We are negotiating with the federal government at the moment regarding the four-comers agreement that the member mentioned. In fact, perhaps as early as next week we will have concluded those negotiations, and naturally we will be going for the maximum possible.

The GAIN Action Committee mentioned by the member was announced last fall. There was nothing secretive or clandestine about it, as was intimated. It was chaired by an assistant deputy minister from my ministry and was designed to have a look at the GAIN program and the delivery of GAIN. They came in with a series of recommendations, some of which were accepted and some of which were rejected.

[ Page 3788 ]

1 think, Mr. Chairman, that answers most of the questions I heard from those two members.

MS. A. HAGEN: I thank the minister for his comments.

I want to ask some specific questions. The minister is now leaving the House, and I presume somebody will be taking notes for him in preparation for his response.

[11:30]

Let me just spend a moment on the issue of unemployment, and note that while the minister may have taken some initiatives in his own riding to deal with this particular problem, no matter how we cast it, it is a problem. Whether some of us cast it more negatively or more positively, it is an issue. The same thing holds true when we're dealing with people who are in poverty. It is an issue. Some people get out of that situation in their lives, other people move into it, but it remains a problem. We need to address whether this ministry is able and willing to address that problem in the interests of the well-being of the people whom it is charged to assist.

If we can get rid of some of this exchange from the other side of the House — that when we raise questions we're being negative — it would be helpful. We raise questions about what we genuinely believe to be the mandate of government and what we genuinely believe our tax dollars and our policies should be addressing. There is no question in my mind that by virtue of constantly reforming some new and better way of dealing with some of the problems that occur, we are in fact leaving the impression that there is no longterm plan to address these problems on a continuing basis.

I want to come back to the question of JobTrac, which was a major initiative last year, one that certainly did not leave us with the impression that it was a short-term initiative. There were mountains of material in flashy kinds of booklets, pamphlets and so on to promote it. And we certainly had an indication that on the government side of the House there was — to use the minister's own term — an attempt to be collegial and cooperative among a number of ministries to deal with some of the issues that relate to people on social assistance, who very often have a limited education. Very often they have limited opportunities to appropriate training, which they need to have, in addition to access to opportunities for training and job preparedness, and to support services that include child care and transportation but also life support services.

All of those things, it appeared, were at least being given lip-service in this particular program. We are now going back to a kind of unilateral approach, ministry by ministry, and I would like some indication from this minister — I'll be asking this of other ministers as well — whether that program has in fact failed or simply been deemed too expensive to a government primarily concerned with keeping costs down. So the question is: why was JobTrac terminated, and what is taking its place? The minister has not in any way indicated to us what is taking its place, except that fewer people will be classified as unemployable, and some limited assistance will be available to people in the first year of their employment, if they have been on assistance.

Because this is the only time when we have any opportunity to look back on the work of the ministry in the previous year, I would like to ask the minister some questions about a very specific aspect of JobTrac that we did in fact visit in the estimates last year: a contracted program that had started prior to the end of the last fiscal year in Surrey and in his own riding of Kamloops and was then expanded to a wide range of I communities in the province — something in the order of ten different regional districts where offices were opened by a group variously known as the Hewett Group or by its society name, Hewett Productions Ltd.

Last year the ministry, I believe, would have spent something in the order of $3 million for services contracted to that group with what appeared to be, at very best, the most token of tendering procedures. I've never been satisfied that there were any genuine tendering procedures involved. In my communications with the minister, he has indicated that these dollars came out of the $11 million that he had available for the Opportunities for Independence part of his budget.

In a recent report from the Advanced Education ministry on the whole of the JobTrac program, we have some indication of the number of jobs created out of all that effort — a very limited number of jobs in relation to the number of jobs that came out of a number of other initiatives. A total of under 2,000 jobs came from JobTrac and the Hewett Group last year — 1,843. It would appear from that figure that every one of those jobs cost something in the order of $1,600 or $1,700 of service from the Hewett Group.

That group, the minister also told us, was assessing many clients of the ministry in various parts of the province to create a data bank that would be available to assist the ministry on a long-term basis in matching social assistance recipients with possible jobs in the community, particularly jobs subsidized by this government. It's my understanding that that data bank is now defunct; the Hewett Group is no more. In fact, the ministry agreed almost immediately after we discussed it in estimates last year — certainly at the time when the new deputy minister came on stream — that that program really had very little value for the ministry.

We have in that record of the Hewett Group then, an example of the kind of programs that are put together in a hasty way, that take limited dollars that are available to assist social assistance recipients to get back into gainful employment, and that provide no ongoing resource to the ministry. It's part of a practice and a pattern that has existed since the mid-seventies whereby almost annually or bi-annually a new program is created to supposedly work with business or to find some new pattern to help people to independence.

The point needs to be made again and again, I think, that what we're looking for is something that suggests some stability and continuity, some genuine support that is available on an ongoing basis, and staffing that is consistent and ongoing within the ministry. It may be that the minister has a new vision on the way to Damascus and is going to retain services and staffing within the ministry to deal with this issue. But last year, at about this same time, he was presenting to us a most vigorous defence of the work of this particular group, which had been out and about in the province working very much with unskilled, untrained people, very often with questions of confidentiality, with some implied threat and intimidation in some of the offices — not all of them; some of them have been run very well. But in some of the offices, some threats and intimidation have left both people within the ministry and the recipients of those services very uneasy.

It's the kind of program that rose like some kind of wonderful manifestation of how we were going to use computers and technology and some quick fixes to assist people into employment. I want to have some information from the minister on the results that were anticipated from that particular program, and — at least, as I understand them — the

[ Page 3789 ]

kinds of reports that were there. These are: statistical analysis of client participation; assessment of the utility of this system; assessment of the positive impacts of the project; recommendations regarding continuation or expansion — obviously that has already been dealt with; a report of the availability of employment relative to caseload size, something that would be very useful to the minister at this particular time, when he's looking at new initiatives in light of the rising caseloads of GAIN recipients and consistently high unemployment, particularly in the interior; and a report on what actually happened to people who were employed as a result of the marketing of the job subsidy program — the 1,800 people who, according to the minister's own standards, were to go into those jobs with the expectation they wouldn't be just short-term jobs of four or six months but ongoing jobs and, in fact, an opportunity for the people who received them to go on into continuing employment. This particular project was conceived in haste, was very poorly planned, used very short ministry dollars and, I believe, produced very little, if anything, in the way of tangible results.

We are now looking at some other initiatives that I believe are implicit in the reorganization. I want to have some revisiting of last year and some discussion of what the minister's plans are this year within his own ministry to deal with this matter.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: I'll respond as precisely as I can to all the questions. First of all, we are announcing a program this morning for income assistance recipients I believe the figure is $29.6 million, from my ministry to assist people on income assistance in getting a job in which they can actually learn a skill, get back into the workforce and have something on their resume, so that when the job ends they can go and seek other employment, hopefully having learned a skill and having something they can be proud of on their resume.

As I said earlier, we are still negotiating with the federal government on the four-comers agreement. They have committed to $15 million and have offered much more than that. But we hope to have agreement in place as early as next week or maybe the week after. Thirty-five percent of the spaces in that program will be available to income assistance recipients, so that amount, while still not settled, will be at least a $30 million dollar program — 15 from the feds and 15 from us, but it could go higher than that. It is for job re-entry, job development, etc. But just to repeat, 35 percent of those dollars will be for income assistance recipients.

To address the Hewett Group pilot projects, just let me say that we entered into several contracts with the Hewett Group last year to do pilot projects for us, starting in Surrey White Rock and Kamloops, not just to provide a data bank; that was not the primary function. It was to develop a program for us so that we could use computers and computer programs to match income assistance recipients with what was available, whether it be a job, a training program, education or whatever. To that end, the Hewett Group did a fine job for us with that program.

It was not intended as an ongoing program, and I said so at the time. It was a pilot project to develop this expertise and the software for us so that we could then take the program inhouse — which we have done — if that was our decision, and it was. We now have the program in-house to provide just what the member has said: some long-term stability and continuity. It was not designed as a quick fix, and it did help us assess caseloads. As 1 said earlier in my remarks, we have increased the financial assistance side of the ministry by some 150 FTEs, so that we can use this type of program and others to do more counselling and get more people off income assistance.

[11:45]

So the Hewett contract was successful, as far as it went. The contract expired; we didn't renew it. We decided we would take the program in-house, and we have done just that.

MS. A. HAGEN: I wonder if the minister would elaborate for us on what he means when he says we've taken the program in-house. Has a program been developed that is compatible with ministry programs, where the data that has been collected by the Hewett Group is transferable into ministry records across the province?

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Yes, the program is being developed now along the lines of the Hewett program. It might not be directly transferable, but as we get more into the computer age in our offices the program will then be available in virtually every income assistance office for the financial assistance workers. The data that we got from Hewett is being used to develop our in-house program. We felt that we could do it better, having got started with the pilot projects. We saw the value of it; we could do it better by taking it in-house and having the program available in every office.

MS. A. HAGEN: I understand from what the minister has said that the data collected by the Hewett Group is not immediately adaptable. Those are records that the Hewett Group developed, and they are a separate set of records. Whatever is going to happen is going to have to be dealt with as a program that the ministry will develop. There wasn't and isn't a relationship between the contract work the Hewett Group did in assessing however many income assistance recipients it assessed, in recording their educational background, their training, their job experience, their aspirations, and all of that sort of thing.... That record, which was one of the aspects of the contract, is in fact a dead record. I hope it is in the ministry's hands, but it's not a set of records that is usable except by working through an entirely new program, which is going to be the ministry's program.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: A great proportion of the work done by Hewett is directly transferable onto our equipment; some of it is not. But the data is not lost. We have all of the data. There is a team now working to adapt this program to our ministry's needs. So we still have all the data acquired by Hewett. It's not dead. It is adaptable to our system, but maybe not directly; it might have to be rewritten.

MS. A. HAGEN: Can the minister give us any indication of what the costs might be of rewriting that program?

HON. MR. RICHMOND: No, I can't at this time. I don't have the number for you.

MS. A. HAGEN: It might be speculative that it will simply be at least the cost of the program we had last year — plus, so that in fact much of that is lost.

Can the minister provide us with any information about the number of clients who were actually interviewed or

[ Page 3790 ]

processed — I don't know what the language is that would be appropriate to the contract — by the Hewett Group? Can he comment about the fact that, in some of the areas where the Hewett Group operated, not one single job was arranged through the marketing arm of the Hewett Group, which had as one of its responsibilities selling the ministry's job subsidy program in the communities in which it was working? To rephrase the question: how many people may have been assessed? I know the total number of jobs that were in place as of a late date, but I would be interested in knowing the number of ministry clients that the Hewett Group have had some workings with. If you can break those down into the number of people who actually had an assessment done by the Hewett Group, that would be useful.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Mr. Chairman, to suggest that transferring data would cost as much as the original program is absolutely ridiculous, and I think the member knows that. I don't have the answers to her other question as to how many people they talked to. I suppose it's available somewhere, and if the member is truly interested in it, I will endeavour to get that number to her. I doubt if I can get it by the time my estimates are over, but we'll make note of it and see if we can get that to her. I don't know of any place where Hewett had a contract where they were not successful in placing anyone. If you know of such a place, I can research it for you.

MS. A. HAGEN: If this was a pilot project, it would seem reasonable that the ministry would have requested a report at the end of that project. I remember very well that when we discussed this particular issue last year, as of April I he had an interim report on the pilot project for the first three months. He indicated that the ministry would certainly be following quite closely the work of this project. I would anticipate that it would be reasonable for us to expect that, although the report as of today may not necessarily be in his hands; but it is something we should expect, and I would request that he table it with us at the earliest possible opportunity.

I have information, Mr. Minister, that in the Williams Lake area there were in fact no jobs made available. I also have indications from that area that there were some very severe breaches of confidentiality; that people were given information about social assistance recipients, that those records were available to people who were not even working under supervision but working in their homes. It is the kind of situation that really makes me shudder, when we consider that GAIN recipients are in fact protected by a promise, a commitment, to confidentiality, although there were in fact numerous instances where concerns were raised about both pressure on clients and confidentiality.

That kind of situation, when you're dealing with people under stress and in difficult situations, is partly a product of non-trained, non-professional staff doing the kind of work the Hewett Group was doing. The ministry is obviously going to bring some of that work under its own aegis again, and I welcome that particular initiative. But I would hope, that we're going to get more details in the announcements about, that we're not going to see any kind of pressure on people to unrealistically deal with life situations and leave their home responsibilities in pursuit of employment.

Within the population that receives social assistance there are many characteristics that need to be dealt with in addition to their being financially independent. We have any number of people with families and children, and all these things are matters that have to be addressed by a sensitive, well-trained staff. We didn't have that in much of the Hewett Group's operation last year, and I would hope that the philosophy that allowed that group to be in place will not be a philosophy that we would see any retention of in the year ahead.

HON. MR. RICHMOND: Well, Mr. Chairman, first of all, to repeat, they were pilot projects that we did follow very closely. We monitored them very closely, and I even reported to this House on the progress they were making on several occasions. We will table the figures, or make them available — I guess that's better — to the member. We have all the information that she's talking about; I just don't have it here at my fingertips.

Another thing we should mention is that the Hewett Group pilot projects were never compulsory — there were allegations at the time that they were — and I made that clear at the time, and I'll make it clear again. There was nothing compulsory, it was on a voluntary basis, and the only confidentiality that was broken was broken by a contract person in the Williams Lake area who was sworn to confidentiality. I suppose we are dealing with human beings and that can happen, where a person is sworn to confidentiality and breaks that confidence, and that is what happened. But employers were never provided with the client information. The allegation was that they were, but they were not.

I guess we had a human failing in one of the contract people who broke with confidentiality, and I suppose that happens, but the Hewett contract did enable us to have a pretty close look at getting into the computer age and told us if we were on the right track. We think we were. We appreciated the work that Hewett did for us, but we did make the decision that we could do the program more effectively if we took it in-house. The contract was simply not renewed. The pilot projects were a success as far as we were concerned, and we feel we can do it better ourselves now.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

The committee, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

HON. MR. STRACHAN: I will advise the House that we will be sitting tomorrow.

Hon. Mr. Strachan moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 11:56 a.m.