ORDERS OF THE DAY

Committee Changes

Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): I move, seconded by the member for Broadway (Mr. Santos), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources be amended as follows: Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) for Transcona (Mr. Reid) for Tuesday, June 15, 1999, for 10 a.m.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, given some changes in the availability of ministers and critics, my colleagues in the House leadership in the opposition, we have been attempting to accommodate as much as possible, and I hope members do bear with us in accommodating so many interests as one has to.

The first thing I would like to do is ask today, given that we had our private members' session this morning–I believe if you canvass the House, there will be a willingness to waive private members' hour.

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to waive private members' hour scheduled for this afternoon? [agreed]

Mr. Praznik: Secondly, Madam Speaker, we have some changes to make in the order of Estimates, again to accommodate a variety of members. The first one, and I would seek approval of the House to make these changes, is that the section of the Committee of Supply meeting in the Chamber will consider the Estimates of the Department of Energy and Mines today, and I look to my colleague if we could agree for Monday as well, understanding that we will be likely back in with Executive Council in the Chamber on Tuesday. As the member is aware, I believe the Premier (Mr. Filmon) is attending a particular function. That will have to be confirmed with respect to Monday. We will do that on Monday. I look to my colleague. I believe some confirmation is required, but I wanted to mention it today to give notice to members as much as possible.

So for today I will be seeking leave to move the Department of Energy and Mines into the Chamber for today, and we will report back to the House on Monday with respect to Monday.

* (1440)

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House to permit the section of Committee of Supply of the Estimates for Energy and Mines to meet in the Chamber? [agreed]

Mr. Praznik: We have moved the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, now in consideration in Room 255, I believe. That will continue today. I just look to my colleague whether or not there is agreement for Consumer and Corporate Affairs just today or to continue in there until it is completed in the order of Estimates. Well, then, we will ask simply for leave for today.

Madam Speaker: Is there unanimous consent of the House for today to permit the Estimates of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs to meet in Room 255? [agreed]

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, this does not require consent of the House. The Department of Labour is continuing in its Estimates in Room 254. Just for, again, information, it is my understanding that those Estimates may perhaps be completed today, in which case it is the Civil Service Commission which is next on that order. I just only say that so that all concerned are aware that that may be called later on today.

Madam Speaker: We do not need unanimous consent for that, but I will reiterate the statement if you so desire.

Department of Labour Estimates will continue to be dealt with in Room 254, and upon conclusion of the Estimates of the Department of Labour, the Civil Service will be dealt with in Room 254.

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

* (1450)

Mr. Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon, the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 254 will resume the Estimates of the Department of Labour. When the committee last sat, it was considering item 11.2. Labour Programs (k) Worker Advisor Office (2) Other Expenditures, on page 116 of the Main Estimates book. Shall the item pass?

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Mr. Chairperson, I have had a chance to collect my thoughts. When we ran out of time yesterday afternoon, of course, I was somewhat hesitant in that regard. You had indicated with respect to the Worker Advisor Office that each of the worker advisors has a caseload of approximately 50 Workers Comp case files and that there are no waiting times for individuals who call in at the present time.

Can you give me an indication of the fluctuation in the number of cases that the individual caseworker might face? I am sure there must be some fluctuation throughout the course of the year in what has been the experience of the Advisor Office?

Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Labour): Mr. Chairman, in response to my honourable colleague's question, the fluctuation in each worker's caseload would be as low as 35 individuals as open files, and it could go even as high as 55. I mentioned 50 as an average caseload yesterday, but, in fact, sometimes the burden does ebb and flow depending on the exigencies of the moment, but it would be as high as 55 open files at any given time. The mean average of the number of files processed or handled in a given year of clients or files would be about 140 per person.

Mr. Reid: If the average caseload is 50 per advisor–and I know you say it fluctuates in there–how often would we be communicating with the claimant, the Workers Compensation claimant in that regard? So if you are doing 50, would you get to one claimant every month and a half, for example? How do you prioritize the communication there and the workload with respect–do you do it based on when the appeals are coming up?

I am looking here in the sense of service or level of service to the individuals and the communication that would take place, considering if you do one every working day it would be nearly two months before you would get back to a claimant again.

Mr. Radcliffe: There is a standing protocol, I guess, in the department that each officer must respond within 24 hours to a call from any individual claimant who is seeking assistance or help. Beyond that, I cannot really comment because there is no monitoring or hands-on supervision or looking over the shoulder of each individual worker. So, therefore, the contacts with the individual claimants vary as is required by the individual clients from time to time. If they need a lot of care, they get that. If they need sporadic or intermittent care, they also get that.

So it is not something that is mechanized or minimal standards that, you know, you must call through your lists once a month and talk to everybody. You talk to them and you do the job as required, when required, and if it is intense, you work through the intense period, and if it is somebody who is less intense, well, then, you deal with that accordingly.

Mr. Reid: I am sure, at least this was my experience from last year, that there is some turnover in the Worker Advisor Office with respect to staff, and I am wondering if you have a list of the names of the advisors, not necessarily put on the record, but just a list of those individuals available so that I might see whether there has been turnover in the last year. If that information is not available here today, it is not crucial, and perhaps you could supply it with other information that may be coming forward.

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, I do undertake to supply my honourable colleague with a list of staff in this capacity. For the purposes of this discussion, I would advise my honourable colleague that there are two new employees who are worker advisors at this point in time that were replaced between now and this time last year in the existing complement.

Mr. Reid: Can the minister give me an indication of where these two new employees may have come from? In past experience, some have come from outside of any involvement in any government agencies or departments. Last year there was one, I believe, who came from Justice, and one has come from within the Workers Compensation Board. There have been shifts of staff internal to government operations, so I am trying to get an understanding here of where these two individuals would have come from.

Mr. Radcliffe: One individual came from Workers Comp, and the other person came from the Alzheimer's Society. The one position was filled by way of secondment and then an infill of a vacant position. That was the Workers Comp person. Then the second position required bulletining. That was done, and this person responded to the request.

Mr. Reid: I am not quite clear. You said one was seconded and came from the Workers Compensation Board. If that is accurate, then, can you tell me, because the Worker Advisor Office is supposed to be viewed and separate from the functions of the Compensation Board, how would the Worker Advisor Office handle a situation if the person came from the Compensation Board then and had dealt with the files or had some contact or knowledge of the files for which in the cases now they are in a position of having to be acting as an advocate on behalf of that claimant?

* (1500)

Mr. Radcliffe: I am told that the department has basically what is tantamount to a conflict-of-interest protocol whereby the Workers Comp person self-declared if in fact this worker had a face-to-face communication or any file knowledge even, however remote, not even a hands-on file management, but even a knowledge of a file, and that person withdrew and had nothing to do with that particular application or situation as a worker advisor. Further to show that in fact this protocol was effective, there have been no complaints, no comments, no feedback to the Worker Advisor Office that anybody felt aggrieved or had any problems with the individual person.

Mr. Reid: In that regard, I do not believe I have had any claimants contact me with respect to that individual either.

When you mention seconded from the Workers Compensation Board, I am just wondering: is that the appropriate term to use? Did the worker advisor or the deputy minister perhaps go to the Workers Comp looking for people, or did that individual actually make application to transfer over, because seconded looks like we are searching instead of bulletining out for job vacancies?

Mr. Reid: The minister mentioned it was for a one-year placement for that particular advisor. Why would it be for one year? I do not understand the functioning of why you would bring someone in for a year. I mean there must be some level of training that is involved in that. Is there a condition or a reason that it was only for the year?

Mr. Radcliffe: Basically, this was a managerial or administrative undertaking or arrangement between the Workers Comp and the Worker Advisor Office that the person would come for one year, be placed with the department for that particular year, and, at the end of that year, would be reviewed with regards to the success of the placement, I would presume, and further decisions made.

Mr. Reid: So at the end of that year then the individual would be sent back to their original employment, original position, and that we would have to then seek out another person, or am I misunderstanding the process that you have in place?

Mr. Radcliffe: The whole basis for this movement of staff, Mr. Chair, was a matter of partnering or facilitating communication and comprehension of the different environments. So the department wanted to foster a degree of understanding amongst the staff of what the Worker Advisor environment was like. On the other hand, when a Workers Comp person comes over, worker advisor colleagues would understand some of the attitudes, some of the principles, goals, and reality of the Workers Comp Board. So the idea, the concept, was that the person would come over from Workers Comp in order to foster greater communication and understanding. At the end of the year, that person would be reviewed with regard to whether that person would stay on or not, and, before the year expired, a vacancy came up in the Worker Advisor Office. So that person who came from Workers Comp then moved into the vacant position.

There may well be opportunities in the future for Worker Advisor people to move over to Workers Comp Board to facilitate greater understanding between both sides, so that one is not looking at an adversarial abyss with two isolations but rather a working partnership, and an issue more of conciliation and facilitation between the two arms of administration. So that is sort of the general vision; that is the purpose. In fact, in this particular case, the scheme was never fulfilled, because in fact the person was permanently placed. But who knows, I mean, there might be further administrative changes in the future of this type.

Mr. Reid: So is the Worker Advisor Office or the ministry considering other secondments to come in for training purposes to further that objective that you indicate of trying to provide for some cross-understanding between the functioning of the two operations, the Worker Advisor Office and the Workers Compensation Board? Is that part of your plan for this year?

Mr. Radcliffe: Right now, Mr. Chairman, there is no forethought of extending the participation to the Workers Comp Board, but, in fact, the department is looking at almost a clerkship or internship situation with employees from the Manitoba Federation of Labour or the MGEU. There is a training component that goes on where the worker advisory does assist in training some of the people from these other organizations, and this would be an extension or a complement to their academic training. So this is what is anticipated may very well happen.

Mr. Reid: I look at this from the point of view of the claimant. As a claimant, there is often–at least the calls that I get to my office, and I am sure that my office is not much different than what other MLAs have with respect to the caseload involving the Workers Compensation Board. But how does this further the understanding or the perception of the public, the claimant in these cases, when this information is no doubt public to some degree? I mean, it is not that big a secret. Friends and neighbours and relatives talk to each other about where they work, and there is word of mouth.

* (1510)

If a claimant becomes knowledgeable of someone who was working in the Compensation Board in what many view to be an adversarial relationship for at least 15 percent of the claimants of the Compensation Board, judged by the survey numbers, the raw numbers that were given to us some time ago, and yet the individual then could be transferred over to the Worker Advisor Office where we are trying to build the understanding that the Worker Advisor Office is for the benefit, acting as an advocate on behalf of the claimant, how do we maintain that separation between the two functions?

I understand that they are dealing with the same legislation and the interpretation of it in many cases, but how do we continue to build the public perception or not do anything to undermine that belief that there is a separation between the Worker Advisor Office and the Workers Compensation Board if we bring people and we actively seek people from the Compensation Board's side and bring them onto the Worker Advisor Office side?

Now, I understand that there may be a benefit to doing that with respect to the limitations on training time required, because if you are working with the act on the Workers Compensation Board side, of course you would have knowledge that you would carry over and you would be able to put that to good use, obviously, but I am looking here at how we are in the best interests of the claimant who would come to the Worker Advisor Office.

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, I guess I can cast myself in a litigant role for a moment because I did spend 25 years of my life being an advocate for litigants. What one does when one enters this sort of a role as an advocate is that one espouses and presents the interests and the concerns of your client of that moment. That clientele can change from time to time. It is very important to maintain an objectivity. It is very important to have an understanding of the other side of the coin, and so I can share with my honourable colleague that for years I was a defence attorney, but it was very important for me when litigating in the criminal courts to have an understanding of the mentality of the Crown, how the Crown works structurally, what their value structure was, the priorities under which they dealt.

One often finds, and I can look around the defence bar today in Winnipeg and I can point to some leading defence attorneys today who started out their life as Crown prosecutors. So it is very important that if one is going to be effective in this sort of an environment, that one have a working knowledge, a real internal understanding, of both sides of the line, that in addition to the fact that this is not a court of law but rather a matter much more of conciliation. One does not sacrifice claimants' views or claimants' interests, and I think the proof of that is that there have been no complaints and no comments made to the Workers Advisor Board over the past year with regard to this individual is the proof of the pudding, that nobody has perceived that there has been a conflict of interest. I think, in addition, the protocol that has been set out and followed vis-a-vis a conflict of interest has also been effective.

Mr. Peter Dyck, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair

I would look again as an example to try and illustrate the point for my honourable colleague, Mr. Chairman, that when a judge is appointed from the private bar or from the Crown in our province, the bar in Manitoba is a very small community, and it is a very intimate community. The people who are often active in the courts system are a very small select few, and judges are able and capable very quickly of obtaining an objectivity, even though they may have at one point in time been an insurance attorney, or they may have been a plaintiff's lawyer, or they may have had a particular bent to their private practice. They are able to turn the corner on that and deal with cases not in a conflict of interest, because, obviously, there is a waiting period within which one does not receive cases when one is on the bench from one's former firm for I think it is a period of at least five years. There is a cooling-off period.

What I am trying to do is to explain to my honourable colleague that from the employee's side, that I am sure that the employee has travelled this road of objectivity, of assuming a new identity, of assuming a new role, while at the same time bringing a wealth of knowledge from the other side of the fence. The public, obviously, has not been concerned with this, and I am sure that management being whom they are and aware of legal principles and aware of natural justice, that if even there was a scintilla of a doubt of infringing, these precepts of administrative law would interpose themselves immediately if, in fact, any function would be jeopardized within the Worker Advisor Office.

Mr. Reid: I can only give you anecdotal information here. I cannot say that I am knowledgeable of any complaints that have gone to the Worker Advisor Office or to the ministry in this regard. I know that each of us who deal with these cases sometimes have to take them with a grain of salt, and you have to kind of put your own test to the cases or the information that is brought to your attention.

There are cases where I have had people tell me that they have tried to use the services of the Worker Advisor Office–and I am not saying they do not do a good job because I think by a very large part they do. But there are the occasional cases that come along of individuals who say that they have tried, and, of course, there has been no success or they were not 100 percent satisfied. I will not say they were totally dissatisfied, but they were not 100 percent satisfied, and they have gone on and then come to our office seeking assistance in that regard.

I am trying to preserve at least the perception of the independence between the two bodies, and if the actions of seconding services from the Workers Compensation Board undermines the public perception that I think exists of the good work that the Worker Advisor Office does, I think that that would do a disservice to the Worker Advisor Office and to the overall advocacy role that they have played on behalf of claimants. That is what I am worried about when I raise the matter from that point of view.

In the Supplementary Estimates, it indicates over a thousand cases, and I know the annual report talks of actual results of last year; I am talking '97-98, 1,235 cases. Can you tell me what the total number of cases was for 1998-99?

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, 1,352 cases.

* (1520)

Mr. Reid: So we have seen about a 118 or 115 case increase year over year. Can you tell me what is your success rate in the handling of those 1,352 cases?

I would imagine that some of them are still perhaps outstanding and unresolved, but perhaps you can indicate how many of those in that case and how many of them were resolved at various stages, whether through the process of going back to initial adjudication or the numbers through appeals or the numbers that were disbanded or perhaps moved on to final levels appeal, including MRP.

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, I am told that the successfully appealed cases at a primary adjudication level by the Worker Advisor Office is 70 percent. Then the percentage of cases successfully appealed at the final Appeal Commission level is 38 percent. Then there is an interim level of resolution which is more formal than the primary level that I have discussed and that is the review office, and 49 percent of those cases are resolved to the claimant's satisfaction.

Mr. Reid: Could you give me a breakdown on those numbers? I mean the percentages obviously do not add up to 100, for obvious reasons, but I am looking for the number of cases that would move to those different levels. So, in primary adjudication, if you had all 1,352 moving to that level first seeking some resolution, how many would move on to the review office and then the number that would actually be moving to the Appeal Commission for some resolution?

Mr. Radcliffe: We do not have those actual numbers here today, Mr. Chairman. We will undertake to supply them to my honourable colleague.

Mr. Reid: Can you tell me how many of the cases would normally carry over from year to year so I have an understanding?

Mr. Radcliffe: The carry-over from fiscal year '98 to '99 to '99-2000 was 132.

Mr. Reid: Going back to my question of first contact. I think it was indicated that first contact is made within 24 hours. I think that was the information the minister supplied. In your report here, it talks about case assignment, in the Supplementary Estimates, and then first contact with the client occurring within four weeks, 80 percent of the time. Can you give me an understanding of–I mean, four weeks if someone has just received a letter of benefit termination from the Compensation Board, which is usually the precipitating factor for someone to pick up the phone and call the Worker Advisor Office or an advocate. I am trying to get an understanding here of what is the accurate picture. Is it 24 hours when someone calls the office with respect to that or do they have to wait four weeks for an appointment with that worker advisor after it is assigned, and that is after the 24-hour contact period, or give me some indication of how that functions?

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, the process of induction or intake is approximately as follows, and this is a generalization so there are always exceptions to the rule, but normally what happens when someone contacts the Worker Advisor Office, the Worker Advisor Office will, if the person has not come in directly to the office but rather contacted the office by mail, an authorization form will go out to the claimant, the claimant will sign the authorization and that will be returned to the office. That is an authorization permitting the Worker Advisor Office to have access to the WCB file.

So as a general rule, and again, I caution my remarks, there can be shorter times and longer times, this usually takes about a week in the experience of the office. Then the office sends for the physical file from the WCB. So by the time the correspondence is generated, mailed over or transported over to WCB, the file located and transported back to the Worker Advisor Office, that is a seven to 10-day process. Then as a working guideline, the Worker Advisor Office allows the particular worker advisor a five-day opportunity to review the file, become familiar with the material, digest it and internalize it so that they have a working familiarity with the material that is on the existing file. At that point then the advocacy rolls forward. At any time, either during the intake process or through the active management of the file, if the claimant should phone the officer, the working rule is that it is a 24-hour turnaround time to respond to the person's phone call.

Mr. Reid: What happens in the other 20 percent of the time if your results here are first contact in four weeks 80 percent of the time? What happens in the other 20 percent?

Mr. Radcliffe: That other 20 percent of the time represents the obvious and human situation where perhaps the claimant takes their time in returning the authorization, does not understand it, does not sign it, has to follow up on it. It could be that there would be delay at the Workers Comp Board on retrieving all the parts of the file and making sure that it is reproduced and sent over. It could be that the file is of such a voluminous nature that the advisory person needs more than five days to wade through all the minutia of the file.

Obviously, you know, some of these are very straightforward, and sometimes when you get into very complex medical matters that have been ongoing for some particular time, with a lot of technical medical evidence that has been submitted, they do take a significant length of time and you have got to be sitting there with either your medical dictionary or other source books in order to wade through and understand really what the issues are. I can attest to that from some of the material that I have received in my office where I too get claimants who contact the minister's office thinking that I am an office of ultimate appeal. I am afraid not and do not want to disabuse my honourable colleague of that fact. In fact, again as I have said publicly, I am the keeper of the process.

* (1530)

My concern is to make sure that there is expeditious response, that files do not get lost, that people are treated with courtesy and dignity, that the process is working. But it would be very, very, improper for me as a political person to interfere with the substance of the files and interpose myself as a medical officer, which I am not, or interpose myself as an adjudicatory person when I am not. My role is to see that the process itself runs in an appropriate, humane and compassionate manner.

But I can assure my honourable colleague, and I am sure you have had the same experience, that when you get a three-page detailed letter of a tale of woe from some claimant who is angry and frustrated and obviously sincerely hurting and has had three years of experience at battling, there is a lot of detail that you have to absorb in order to understand it in order to react intelligently. Then I have an assistant who goes back and relates to the Workers Comp Board, and often I will ask questions to satisfy myself that the process has worked properly and if not, draw it to the attention of the appropriate manager that I would like a response given or I would like somebody's file brought forward and considered. Sometimes files get lost and that has happened. That is my role as watchdog to make sure that the system works and works well for these people. But sometimes, in order to talk intelligently, you have to absorb the stuff and it can take a number of days to work through it.

Mr. Reid: Well, I think when we were having our earlier discussions with respect to staffing, I had asked about individuals that the minister has for his staff, and he has indicated that he has a person who works on compensation cases that would come to his office. I think it would be probably the best way of describing that. So what role does that individual play then in his or her, I guess it is his in this case, capacity when the minister's office obviously does get cases dealing with the compensation act? The process between the minister, his staffperson, the work advisor and the Workers Compensation Board, how do those pieces all function together? What is the role of that individual then? Do they communicate with the Worker Advisor Office and let the worker advisor do that advocacy work, or does that individual that the minister has on staff communicate with the Compensation Board and deal with those matters, and what advice do you provide to that individual doing that work?

Mr. Radcliffe: It is a problem-solving technique of a general nature and so the employee in my office would either contact the point person who is the liaison with the Workers Comp Board or managerial level of the Worker Advisor Office or in fact even sometimes the individual worker advisor, depending on where the issue may lie, obtain the facts, obtain the perspective from the Workers Comp side. Having been a professional of some 25 years, I have learned, I guess, to be able to read between the lines often on different explanations as to when something has the patina of fairness and reasonableness and when in fact something may have fallen apart. If something has fallen apart, then that is obviously brought to the attention of management, and it is rectified. So that is the general overall relationship.

The minister does not ring up the general manager of the Workers Comp Board or the chair of the board of directors because that then smacks of interference. This way removing oneself a step or two away from the function, you get the opportunity to overview the function and still keep oneself out of the issues of substance and the of trying to exchange oneself for making individual hands-on decisions, which one should not do as a minister.

Mr. Reid: Well, then, what direction does the minister or deputy minister provide? I think it is Mr. Robinson who does, as the minister's assistant involved in the handling of Workers Compensation cases. What guidance do the minister or the deputy minister provide to Mr. Robinson? Do they leave it to his sole discretion to decide on what needs to be done with respect to cases that may come to the minister's office seeking attention?

Mr. Radcliffe: Well, I have a number of standing orders, I guess, or principles that I employ in communicating with members of the public. Whenever a letter comes in from a member of the public, my staffperson would immediately respond, acknowledge receipt of the letter and saying this matter is under review and we will be back to you shortly. Then, as a general rule, unless there is some good reason why not, I like to have a response back from the bureaucratic level or the management level or the actual working level of the file within seven to 10 days. I like a response back in my office with an explanation as to what has happened.

Generally speaking, I have found that there are often matters of communication, and you have to understand, which I am sure my honourable colleague does, Mr. Chairman, that often these people are emotionally involved. They are not people of a high education level. They are people who are feeling threatened and vulnerable, and you have to take that all into account when you are making these inquiries and dealing with their matters. You have to deal with them very sensitively. Then a letter will be prepared in my office by my staffperson, either summarizing the inquiry that we have had or presenting the material that we found in a clear, concise, simple and direct manner. There can be often a follow-up with a reference for that person to contact a worker advisory person so that there is some remedy that the claimant can follow. So the person is not just left dangling, with a shallow piece of paper in their hand, but rather that there is a course of action that is being recommended so that the claimant can follow up with a human being, and they are redirected at an appropriate level.

Often, I have found that people sometimes become frustrated with the maze of government or the maze of administration because there are so many people, and you have to tell your story so many times and you are never sure which is the right person you should be speaking to. So part of our role is to focus the question, focus the direction, come up with the right level and the most effective person that the claimant should be speaking to so that they can get a hands-on answer. We make it very clear in my office that, in fact, I am not an appeal court of last resort because that is a common difficulty. For example, sometimes I do take people into the office and interview them just to get a feel for what is happening, because I think that is important as well that you actually get a chance to meet the real people and they are not just pieces of paper crossing your desk.

I can recount to my honourable colleague that one Friday afternoon, I was pushing paper across my desk and this woman came storming into the office. She had a very thick European accent and was very distressed. She wanted to speak to the minister, so I said, fine, you are speaking to him, sit down, have a cup of coffee. I put her in my armchair and poured her a cup of coffee, and I listened to her story.

The conclusion I came to was that she had come from another culture and, obviously, another country in middle Europe. She had been used to a different system of justice and almost a different rationale for problem solving. So I took it upon myself at that point to find a co-nationalist, a co-ethnic person as a social worker who could go and speak to her from her own community in her own language, and through my own personal contacts I located that type of a person. I then shared the social worker's name with the claimant, and the claimant then went on her way and decided her case and her remedies for herself.

That gives you a flavour. I like promptness, I like direction, I like clarity in communication with members of the public, with members of the board. I also like to have an open door for individuals so that if they feel that they have to come and tell me their problems, I am there to listen. I will listen, sometimes much to the chagrin of my staff, but I feel it is important that one do this as long as you can still function and until they consume you, which often does happen. Then sometimes there are the people who are–how should you say it? They are the chronic attenders. They are part of the backdrop, like the Greek chorus in a–[interjection] I am sorry.

An Honourable Member: I have a few to send you.

* (1540)

Mr. Radcliffe: Oh, you have a few to send me. Yes, they are the regulars. There is the gentleman who camps on the front doorstep from time to time. I have had some in-depth conversations with him and got to know him personally and, in fact, greet him warmly when I see him on steps. I am not sure if he knows who I am yet, but I have certainly talked to him and am aware of his personal situation and satisfied myself that he, in fact, is receiving a disability income at this point in time.

This is all part of the backdrop of the responsibility for this position. So it is a mix. I want efficiency, I want clarity, I want directness, and yet you still have to have the open door and the soft, compassionate touch in order to deal with the members of the public who understandably are often in positions of grieving.

Mr. Reid: Well, I am just trying to get an understanding here for my colleague. When she becomes the Minister of Labour she knows how the previous Minister of Labour would have handled the functioning of the office. Can you tell me, then, is there a practice in the office dealing with cases that come in? Because I am sure Mr. Robinson in handling these cases is going to need some direction from time to time. Does the minister actually sit down and talk with his assistant or with the deputy with respect to the handling of these cases and how best to resolve these, or do we leave this to Mr. Robinson to handle himself? In other words, I am looking here to see if the minister is providing some guidance and some advice into these cases and how best they can be resolved, and perhaps where Mr. Robinson should go seeking out the support necessary or providing some direction on a case file.

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Robinson, and I can say this for all members of my staff who handle any of these Workers Compensation files, they are very well trained, I would say, in the role of what the minister does, what the minister's jurisdiction is and how the system works, who the cast of characters are within the system to speak to. They have been well trained to know that the minister does not get in and manage the Workers Compensation Board, and so from that perspective there is that ministerial line beyond which a minister does not transgress. That is very clear.

As to daily or weekly communication on the particular issues, yes, there is communication that goes on back and forth over a particular letter. I will want to know: is the person somebody who is suffering from an intellectual disability or an emotional disability? I can think of one person right now who gives me some considerable concern, because just in the short time that I have sat in the chair and been on watch, I have seen a series of letters come in of an increasingly emotional rancour which, in my eyes, as a professional and having been trained for 25 years in dealing with members of the public, you can see a pattern developing. I am on the verge of referring this matter to the City of Winnipeg police.

Mr. Reid: For psych services.

Mr. Radcliffe: Yes. Or psychological services. That is right. One gets to know the people whose anger is getting out of control, and so we sit and discuss these matters. Sometimes there are people who are just plain frustrated with too many phone numbers, too many files, too many pieces of paper, too many Latin terms in medicine. Sometimes it is a matter of people who feel that they have not been heard. Part of my experience that I guess I have learned in this political process is that very, very often a politician–and, in some cases, a minister–performs a very useful function to the public by just listening. Often that is all people will want, to come and vent and tell the minister what their frustrations are. They are not looking for you to fix anything. They just want to come and talk.

So we will review that on the correspondence and discern whether in fact that is part of what is going on and what the need is for the particular claimant. You have got to look at it on a very sensitive basis. There is frequent communication over the particular correspondence that comes into my office and the individuals that come into my office.

Mr. Reid: I understand that there has to be, or at least the government and the minister and his predecessors have always taken the role of separation between church and state, so to speak in this regard.

Mr. Radcliffe: Am I the church or the state?

Mr. Reid: No, I think you are the state. I have always found it very frustrating in the cases that have come to me and the claimants that come to me asking me to be the advocate on their behalf. I assure the minister I look at the case on the merits of the case. I do not just take everyone that comes to my doorstep, because I think there are cases from time to time for which an individual has been through every conceivable appeal process level. The final result is still the same. There is little likely that I would be able to do in that regard, but from time to time we need to have the ability to have perhaps some common and reasoned thought given to some of the cases that come along.

Has the minister ever had occasion to be involved with any of the cases on a direct basis whether from within his own constituency or from outside of the constituency and other parts of the province, perhaps for which he may have had to play a role or involve himself directly in the resolution of some of those cases?

Mr. Radcliffe: First of all, my legal practice did not take me to the Workers Compensation milieu, so I can say from a professional basis that I have never had any connection with the Workers Comp Board, at least in the last 10 years of my practice. I think maybe early on I did consider some Workers Compensation matters, but that would have been more than 25 years ago.

One thing I guess I want to put on the record right now is that I find sometimes the correspondence that is prepared for me expresses principles in a general nature which I choose sometimes to interpret may not be particularly responsive to the inquiry which another colleague has sent me. I sometimes redirect correspondence for redrafting, so that the particular issue that my colleague has raised with me is responded to because I feel that is important.

I try to put myself in the position of either my critic or a member on the opposite bench of receiving a letter from the minister. So I want the particular member to know that the points that that member has raised had been received, had been considered, had been understood, and there is a response. Whether the person likes the response or not is a wholly different issue. But it is very important for me in the correspondence to know that there is substance to the correspondence. Have I been personally involved in the prosecution of any case? No–recently as minister. What I have done is taken it upon myself to ensure that there has been timeliness, and if there has been untimeliness in some responses, I have sent the message along that I want immediate attention and I want something fast-tracked, if say something like 30 days has gone by and there has not been. There are exceptions to the rule, we are all human. With the number of cases that come before the board and are considered at the Worker Advisor Office, sometimes a file will get stuck and that does happen.

I know of two or three cases where I have come across issues where people have come and complained, and I have actually done a paper search or done a search of the correspondence and looked at it. On the face of the record there has been an unusual length of time, so that has been through staff. That has been drawn to the attention of management, and it has been rectified forthwith, and the appropriate responses have been given to the claimant or person involved. So I do not look on that as personal management or personal prosecution of a file, personal handling of a file. Again that goes more to process. I deliberately try to stay out of substance because I think it is wrong. I do not think that a politically elected person should be involved either from a constituency level because, of course, to me that would smack of being a classic conflict of interest, that somebody to whom I am responsible as a duly elected member and then on the other hand being the minister responsible for an arm of government would be putting me then in the classic conflict of interest case. That has not happened, and I would hopefully be on guard to make sure it did not happen.

* (1550)

Mr. Reid: I know the minister is fairly new in his responsibilities, but is there any knowledge within the department of perhaps previous ministers or deputies being involved in resolution of some of the cases directly instead of leaving that to other staff, perhaps referring them on to the Worker Advisor Office. Is there any knowledge in that regard of predecessors?

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, no, there is nothing from the deputy minister's level, the minister's level or any other administrative level, any knowledge of any cases that have been hands-on interference or management or dispute resolution from the minister's office at the deputy's office.

Mr. Reid: The Worker Advisor Office obviously has a great deal of experience in what I would consider probably some of the more difficult cases involving The Workers Compensation Act. Does the Worker Advisor Office provide any feedback to the deputy minister, the minister or other members of the department with respect to shortcomings of The Workers Compensation Act? In other words, because they get an overall view of what is happening, they can see where there are stumbling blocks within the system or bottlenecks in the process, in the legislation. I am wondering if there is any feedback of communication that occurs between the worker advisors and the ministry.

Mr. Radcliffe: In response to my honourable colleague, the Worker Advisor Office is from time to time in communication from the board, the nature of the request being to comment on either practice or policy of the board, and they do respond on some of the operational side. That sometimes could possibly go as high as the deputy, but there is nothing that comes to the minister's office on that. However, what I do and I am perpetuating a practice that my predecessor had was that once a quarter I do sit down for an informal meeting with the three citizen representatives on the board of the Workers Comp and just talk about issues of a general nature, a policy that they might see going by that are matters of concern to them, service levels, something of that nature, that would require legislative change or regulatory change or hot spots that are potentially happening just so I am kept aware of the progress of the administration. It is almost like as minister you have the right to be advised. You have got to be scrupulous then not to get your fingers into the pudding.

Mr. Reid: So then the Worker Advisor Office will communicate with the Compensation Board and we leave it to the Compensation Board to assume the role of an advisory council or committee to the ministry on any problem areas within The Compensation Act or any short-comings of the act itself. Is that the process that occurs here? If that is the case, would it not be more appropriate to have perhaps the director or staff of the Worker Advisor Office having the ability to communicate directly with the ministry, because they act as an advocate on behalf of the claimant? They see the problems from that side of the issue, where the Compensation Board looks at it from the other side, and they have a certain interest that they have to protect from the other side as well. I know they try to do it fairly in most cases, but the two roles are slightly different. I am wondering if the Worker Advisor Office does not have that communication role directly with the ministry, why would that not be the case? Would there not be some advantage to having that occur?

Mr. Radcliffe: I have no doubt but that if there were something of a legislative or a regulatory nature that needed attending to, it would be brought to my attention, but the level of communication that I was trying to express is more of practical operational feedback from a day-to-day level of people who are mixed up in the system, and that is not something that the minister should be involved with. If the matter is working well, then, you know, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Do not look for a problem to fix.

But I have every confidence that should, as I say, a legislative or a regulatory or a policy matter come to the attention of the Worker Advisor Office, I pride myself that I do run an office with an open door, that they would feel welcome and they are welcome, and by virtue of putting this on the record today, I am making the statement that they are welcome to come forward to my office, if it is a matter of a legislative issue.

But if it is a matter of an operational level, then that should be handled by the general manager. If the general manager does not solve the issue, then the recourse, as I see boardsmanship, is that somebody has recourse then to the board of directors. But there again, you see, the board of directors, I would suggest, has one employee, and that is the general manager. If the general manager does not do a good job, then you have a career decision to make. But the board of directors, a board itself, ought not to be involving itself in the everyday tinkering of a department or of a board. I am not sure if my honourable colleague has had occasion to go to any seminars or do any reading on the Carver principle of boardsmanship, but I am a devotee of that, and I found it to be a very effective method of boardsmanship.

Okay. Carver is an American and has a concept or policy, and you could even apply this to government which is actually very applicable, but it is applicable to volunteer boards, not-for-profit boards, and even public boards, that a board of directors, and Carver comes out with the pie-shaped chart, and he says that the board concerns itself with policy. Policy is the outer rim, and then as you go deeper into the circle, there will be principles that a board will deal with, for example, that there should be fiscal responsibility, there should be accountability, there should be transparency, there should be, oh, I do not know, principles as to revenue source and all these sort of things.

But the actual management of the person at the computer or answering the machinery or dealing with the public is left to the chief executive officer. It is a grave mistake of protocol for a board person to step over that line and interfere with the work of the chief executive officer, so you can liken that, in this case, to government that the Cabinet is the board of directors of the operation, the manager or, in this case, many managers are your deputies, and the deputies have the hands-on responsibility from day to day of the management of the department. If they do not do a satisfactory job, it is not up to the board to go in and rectify the problem and start running their departments. You go and get a new deputy who can do the job.

* (1600)

So that is what Carver proposes. He has written some quite extensive material on it and has come up here. I went to a two-day workshop that he did for MAST a couple of years ago, and we employed a lot of these board policies in a not-for-profit, I think it was the Museum of Man and Nature that I was involved with at that point in time. My wife was with me and she ended up as a chair of an independent school and applied that concept of boardsmanship to the independent school and found it very successful. It really works, it is very effective. Then staff know their limits. Managers know their limits, and board know their limits, and you do not cross over and do the other fellow's job.

Mr. Reid: I stand corrected here. A person's job, I think, is the more appropriate term of reference.

I appreciate the minister sharing that information with me. It perhaps would be some good reading material for a time when perhaps we are not in this building on a full-time basis.

Mr. Radcliffe: My relationship is with the chair of the Appeal Commission, and I have done a cursory–I will not say particularly in-depth, but I have done a cursory review of the annual report of the Appeal Commission. I had some questions on volume capacity with the chair of the commission. I was looking at issues of timeliness, and I wanted a response which I got. Here, again, my concern as minister responsible is that the chair of the Appeal Commission has the resources with which to do her work. In other words, are there skilled individuals, trained individuals that she has access to to form her commission?

That is my job. I have to supply her with the resources. I am concerned the appropriate training be given and that they be handling their appropriate volumes. Again, the timeliness and the quality of the adjudication from a professional point of view is a matter of concern, and that there be clear, unequivocal, understandable decisions being delivered from the commission. What the merits of each individual judgment are is not something that I should be involved with as minister responsible. But I do communicate with the head of the commission with regard to the overall management and are the tools there to do the job; is there a satisfaction level; is there an area for improvement; what are the goals, visions, objectives–those are the sort of things that I feel are properly the purview of the minister.

Mr. Reid: The minister talked about overall satisfaction level of the clients. Does the Worker Advisor Office survey its clients to find out–because it indicates here four to five client satisfaction rating. How do you determine that you have a satisfaction rating? Is there some information, do you have a survey that perhaps you can share with us or some statistical data that I might be able to see the questions that were asked and the results of that particular survey if one exists?

Mr. Radcliffe: I have for sharing with my honourable colleague a 1997 client satisfaction report for the Worker Advisor Office prepared by Outlook Market Research and Consulting, February 16, 1998. The client survey questionnaire is included, and the executive summary consists of scaling of the questions, general trends, next survey, performance indicators. The exhibits include statistics, bar charts, correlations, T-tests and cover letter and survey. I would ask the Clerk if they could reproduce this because in fact we just have one copy, but I would like my honourable colleague to have a copy of this.

Mr. Reid: I thank the minister for the information. I will read through it.

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to add for purposes of the record, when my honourable colleague said client satisfaction, there is also, I believe, an issue in administration of the satisfaction of the employees, the satisfaction of the adjudicator. Do they see that they are fulfilling their mandate and their function, or are they unhappy? That is also, I think, a very important issue that a minister responsible should be aware of. If somebody is not right for the job or has changed or does not have the goals, you have to keep in touch with these people to make sure that the job they are fulfilling really fulfills their needs in their life at that particular point in time. If it is not, then you have to be aware and flexible and react.

* (1610)

Mr. Reid: I think the minister must be reading my mind because that is the direction I was heading in. I dealt with the Worker Advisor Office, and they provided me with good advice and guidance on the occasions I needed to turn to them for some direction. When cases do come to my office that I think, perhaps having utilized the service of worker advisors, or would be best served, I do refer cases to the Worker Advisor Office for assistance. There would be no way individual MLAs can handle the number or the volume of cases that would come in, so we do refer our cases there.

I know, from time to time in talking with worker advisors, that there are frustrations that happen. Some of the cases, if you get case files that are six inches or eight inches thick–perhaps some of them are larger–[interjection] Yes, a shopping cart would be a good way to describe how you would transport the case files. It can become a very long and very onerous process, very frustrating to have to have to deal with those in circumstances where perhaps appeals have been tried and failed previously. Do we have some kind of a debriefing process that would allow for the ability of the worker advisors to sound off, to have some ability to influence some of the changes that they see as being stumbling points within the system?

This goes back to my earlier question with respect to communication between the worker advisors and the ministry. I am looking to have a channel of communication that would allow for a free flow of the frustrations and where they see problems within the system here. I do not know the relationship that exists between the director and the ministry, but I am wondering how that free flow of information would go from the advisors who do the groundwork, the day-to-day work, to make sure that their thoughts are being heard as well.

Mr. Radcliffe: I am told, Mr. Chairman, that internally there is good communication between front-line staff and administration and that there is frequent internal review as the case needs arise. Also, management has a human relations policy where they try to ensure that the individual case advisors do obtain a general broad body of knowledge, so that nobody gets stuck and goes stale in one particular type of work, that they get a cross-section and a variety so that it keeps life interesting for them. Also, they obtain a wider cross-section of skills themselves of dealing with different cases, different people, different situations.

As I am sure my honourable colleague can appreciate, this often can be a very emotional business. You are dealing with pain and you are dealing with that very powerful Anglo-Saxon word which is two letters and begins with N and ends with O, and often, that is very difficult for people to reconcile.

So it is something that has to be dealt with with compassion. Management are aware of these sorts of difficulties and are supportive of the front-line workers in this respect.

Mr. Reid: Well, I know of at least two situations, and I am sure there are more, where the worker advisor had done all the groundwork and there were others who acted as advocates and got the credit. One was dealing with the Falzarano case, which I am sure the ministry is aware of. A few years ago Mr. Falzarano, unfortunately, took his own life, was a claimant of the board, and also the one dealing with the survivors of the Federal Pioneer Electric firm, and the Worker Advisor Office, I believe, did the groundwork in those cases as well.

Unfortunately, they did not get credit for the work that was done and the success that was gained out of that process, but I do pass on my best regards and respect for the work that they do on behalf of the claimants who come, and I know them. Some of them are long-standing cases, and they have had success in regard to some of them. I know it is sometimes just a few victories as shining moments in amongst a whole bunch of other black space, but I would hope that we would have a process in place that would be able to recognize their efforts and to kind of keep up the morale, so to speak, in the performance of their job.

Another question that I have that comes to mind involves the worker advisors in their role and function involved with medical review panels. I have had claimants say to me that because going through the appeal process is very strange territory for those who have never had to deal with it or encounter it, many of them do not want to take lawyers into the process, and they look to the Advisor Office for that support and assistance, to provide the guidance and to actually act as the advocate or the lawyer, quasi-lawyer in cases like that.

Did the worker advisors go into the medical review panel hearings and actually participate or assist the claimant in those matters, or do they deal strictly with the results that would come out of the MRP when it goes back to the Appeal Commission hearing?

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, as a rule, the worker advisors do not attend the medical review panels. The medical review panels are more of a clinical or scientific collection of data is the nature of the exercise there. These are involving physicians, and I am sure my honourable colleague is very aware of the process. But it is where physicians review charts, blood work, X-rays. They conduct an interview with the claimant and they make observations. But it is not a forum where opinions are communicated or expressed necessarily or at all, and it is not a place where argument is made. If the claimant feels from an emotional support basis that they would be comfortable with the advisor going with them, then the advisor is most willing to go. But the worker advisor would be there in a support capacity, not in an advocate capacity because that is not where the advocacy occurs. It is for the collection of data, the collection of objective and extrinsic evidence.

So the mandate or the role of the worker advisor does not fit that forum, per se. I believe one of my colleagues at the table here said that in five years of practice, he has had occasion to go once to such a review panel. So that gives you an idea of the frequency on which this happens.

I just wanted to be responsive as well to my honourable colleague's remarks, Mr. Chairman, and I guess this is perhaps of a personal or objective nature, my response that often I feel that individuals obtain satisfaction in a particular field of endeavour when you know that a particular cause that you have pleaded succeeds, whether you are there for the final day and the cheering and the accolades or not. I have found through my years of practice that often I have not been present for the final success but have gained great satisfaction of knowing that something I started has come to culmination and been successful. I am sure that that probably does transcend down into the department as well, that individual workers probably gain a lot of satisfaction when they see causes, principles, ideas succeed that they had started but not necessarily on the file at the end of the day.

Mr. Reid: There are probably a million different types of personalities in the world and perhaps more, each one having its own variances. Some like to be recognized, some can take satisfaction in their own endeavours or achievements, and others would want to have some recognition of that. So I would hope we would not miss out on opportunities where good work is done to recognize that and to point that out from time to time.

I have no other questions at this time with respect to the Worker Advisor Office, Mr. Chairperson. I thank the minister for answering the questions and for providing the information, and I look forward to the other information that you have indicated that you will be sending forward. I am prepared to move to the Fire Commissioner's office, I believe is the next point.

* (1620)

Mr. Chairperson: Item 11.2.(k) Worker Advisor Office (2) Other Expenditures $166,200–pass.

The next item on the agenda is item (m) Office of the Fire Commissioner. There is no amount entered in here that we are allowed to ask questions of the minister.

Mr. Reid: I have a number of questions involving the Fire Commissioner's office seeking some information.

I would like to start off first with an issue that I had raised last year. I do not know if this has been resolved to this point in time, but it involves, I think, Three Bears Day Care in Pine Falls. Can the minister advise: is he able to comment directly on the Fire Commissioner's involvement, both from the inspection side of that particular daycare in Pine Falls, and also the results of any investigation with respect to the fire that occurred at that particular daycare some time ago?

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, in response to my honourable colleague's inquiry, I can only state that there were criminal charges laid at one point in provincial judge's court against different individuals. Those charges, as my honourable colleague knows, were stayed.

There was an inquest ordered in May of 1999, and we anticipate that the inquest will be held sometime in September of 1999.

But, most importantly right now, I am told that the individual participants or people who were aggrieved and suffered loss have filed a statement of claim against the United Church and against the government of Manitoba. This statement of claim was filed in November of 1998, and so therefore it would be inappropriate for me at this point to make any further comment in face of civil litigation against the entity which I represent until this matter has worked its way through the courts.

Mr. Reid: Are you able to comment on the functions of the Fire Commissioner's office prior to the fire that occurred at that particular structure? I do not want to do anything that would prejudice the case one way or the other with respect to the government's defence or those who are bringing forward the prosecution. I am just trying to get an understanding of where we draw the line and at which point I can ask questions prior to that point. That is why I am asking that.

Mr. Radcliffe: I think that I would refrain from making any comment on any activity of the government of Manitoba, the Office of the Fire Commissioner, involving this daycare, either at any time before the fire, at the time of the fire, or any time subsequent to the fire. I think what I should do is confine my remarks to the general operation of the Fire Commissioner's office, what their general policies are, and matters of a general nature of policy. But anything to do with this particular daycare I feel would legally jeopardize the position of counsel or of the parties involved and would be misinterpreted and would be inappropriate.

Mr. Reid: I have no knowledge of whether or not this matter is actively before the courts or is there only court action contemplated or proceedings that are underway. Perhaps the minister can advise in that regard in this case.

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, I do not have personal conduct of the litigation, obviously, but what I can do is I can tell my honourable colleague that a statement of claim has been filed in the Court of Queen's Bench as of November of 1998. The defendants sued were Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Government of Manitoba and the United Church of Canada.

I do not think the matter is at issue by any means. It is a long way from being at issue. I cannot tell at this point and I do not know whether statements of defence have been filed, whether interlocutory proceedings have been conducted, whether examinations for discovery have been held or exchange of documents. Any of those sorts of things I cannot comment on, but I can counsel my honourable colleague that a perusal of the file at the prothonotary's office would reveal what stage the litigation is at. I do not have that knowledge at hand.

Mr. Reid: I was just going to go to the events leading up to the fire that occurred. I was not going to talk about the point after that. I understand that there is an inquiry that will be underway. No doubt, there will be, hopefully, a thorough investigation, and all the facts will come out at that point.

I was only going to confine my remarks more directly to the role that the Fire Commissioner's office played on the inspection side. Now, I do not know whether or not that would in any way create any difficulties. Perhaps the minister can advise, because this goes back I think, if I recall correctly, back to '91, maybe even to that point, with respect to the investigations and difficulties with follow-up. I think that date is right, and I stand corrected if the actual date is wrong.

But there is a problem with the follow-up on the inspections, and I am looking for some guidance on the process that you had within the Fire Commissioner's office when that inspection was performed.

* (1630)

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, my honourable colleague is probably aware that what will happen in the normal course of litigation is that counsel or the parties exchange pleadings, which is a statement of claim. The statement of claim embodies the general principles or headings of loss, the allegations of negligence, if any, or the types of relief claimed, the parties that are involved, and a general and very concise recitation of the facts which give rise to the heading of loss.

The statement of defence is a response of the defendants who are sued, and that statement puts in issue particular facts, and makes the denial or a cross-appeal, a cross-claim to other parties. There may be third-party pleadings or counter-claims issued. All these sorts of things are framed in the pleadings.

After the pleadings are exchanged, the parties then are entitled to demand production of documents from each other, documents that are in the possession of each party. The demand for production are documents which the parties will be relying upon for the assertion or defence of their case. Also, the parties have the opportunity to examine each other as to the facts that give rise to the allegations. So, for example, if–and I cannot even tell you who the litigants are–the executor to the deceased person in the fire or members of her family were litigants, and if they were alleging negligence against the government of Manitoba or the United Church, they would have an opportunity at an examination for discovery to demand production of the Fire Commissioner staff.

A person knowledgeable and in charge who had direct knowledge or as good as knowledge as available, as possible, would be obliged to be produced to answer the questions that counsel would level at the Fire Commissioner. At that point in time the Fire Commissioner would attend and go through such issues as prior inspections, quality of inspection, depth and length of inspection, what they found at the inspections, what records were maintained, what recommendations if any arose from those inspections and a whole myriad of other things, you know, limited only by the imagination of counsel and the expertise of counsel involved trying to ascertain perhaps the cause of the fire, the activity and behaviour of public officials representing government, to ascertain whether there is any liability that could be visited upon Her Majesty the Queen and the Province of Manitoba.

So any questions that would touch on the relationship between the Fire Commissioner's office, the government of Manitoba, as the provincial Crown, and this event, anything that would touch upon the rights, the facts, the law surrounding it will be reviewed at an exam for discovery in I am sure significant depth. For me as a minister responsible in a public forum for the Fire Commissioner's office to comment at this point in time would only succeed in either binding, conflicting, affecting and influencing the position of counsel and would in fact be contrary to the best interests of Her Majesty the Queen. So as a member of the litigant at this point in time, I must refrain from any comment at all governing or touching upon any of the facts with this daycare and any inspections or any relationship or any inquiries or any results that arise out of this situation for these reasons.

I am sure that production, interrogatories, discoveries, all of these things will unfold in the fullness of time in civil litigation, and I would not want to impact on counsel. Having especially been counsel myself in times gone by, I know how difficult it is for counsel if members of the parties make inappropriate statements that then have to be refuted or explained or contradicted or whatever at a subsequent date.

Mr. Reid: I guess then in cases like that, I know I tried to argue this point last year unsuccessfully, I might add, with respect to information, and I was not exactly sure at what point the line would be drawn this year, so I had to ask and find out. Now the minister has advised me. So while I may disagree with the limitation on my abilities in seeking information, I will respect the process that is in place, and we will have to wait for the hearings, the inquiry to commence, and any matters involving court action that is contemplated.

Mr. Chairman, if we could just–one minute till the minister is able to respond. I guess what we will do is I will go on to questions that perhaps the minister can answer with respect to the functions of the Fire Commissioner's office.

Last year, I had asked questions with respect to licences for dealing with daycares, and the Fire Commissioner's office, I believe, was, or perhaps still is, involved in doing some of the inspections with respect to fire codes and perhaps other matters.

Can you advise the role that you are playing in inspecting daycares? I do not know if you have any statistical information with respect to that, personal care homes, other public facilities, et cetera, and if you can give me some background information on that. It is my understanding that there are a number of daycares that are currently holding provisional licences awaiting inspections, and my understanding is that they have requested inspections, fire code inspections. I am wondering if the Fire Commissioner's office can indicate how many daycares, for example, are currently waiting for their inspections and that their licences are only provisional at this point as a result of that.

* (1640)

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, I am told that the role of the Fire Commissioner's office is that of being a resource, a training authority for local fire authorities. This is mandated in legislation and in regulation, so therefore unless employed or engaged by a local municipal authority or a local fire authority, the Fire Commissioner's office performs no function of fire inspections. This is particularly spelled out as well in the daycare code, a series of regulations which were published in June of 1998, and that is CCSM 158 and in the definition section it makes reference to the definition of local authority which is the operational entity that does the fire inspections.

I can comment that generally there are some daycares that are outstanding that are functioning with provisional licences. How many, we have no idea, and we cannot comment on those. Those questions are probably best asked of Family Services. Likewise, with personal care homes and public facilities, the local fire authority is the appropriate entity that does perform the fire inspections.

Mr. Reid: I think the minister will know, if he was to check Hansard, going back to the Department of Family Services, that the Fire Commissioner makes the report. So I am getting bounced back and forth between the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Family Services like a ping-pong ball here. All I asked for is the number of daycares that have requested fire code inspections of the Fire Commissioner's office. My understanding is the Fire Commissioner's office does that work on a fee-for-service basis now, for-profit basis, and I have asked for that information. I do not want to be bounced back and forth between the two departments. I do not think that that is reasonable to occur.

That was the indication that was given to me last year to go to that department. We went to that department to get some information with respect to the number of daycares in the province, and what we are asking for now is how many of the daycares have requested fire code inspections of the Fire Commissioner's office.

Mr. Radcliffe: I would inform my honourable colleague that he was probably quite correct in the citing from Hansard which he did at the time that it was done, but that is now time dated, that relationship, and in fact the whole reporting system is done at the local authority level now. There has been a movement to remove the Fire Commissioner's office away from the position of doing the active inspections, doing the active reports. So, unless requested or employed so to do, the Fire Commissioner will only train the local fire authority to perform this function.

Having said that, there are four daycares in the province of Manitoba who have directly contacted the Fire Commissioner's office for fire inspections. In addition, there is a memorandum of understanding between the City of Winnipeg and the Fire Commissioner's office that the Fire Commissioner on a one-spot only, or a pro tem basis, is going to perform for value some inspections for the City of Winnipeg Fire Department on daycares. And these we believe to be 196 in particular. This is to catch up the City of Winnipeg Fire Department people so that they are on an even playing field, but the role of the Fire Commissioner's office on a regular basis is not to do fire inspections unless particular arrangements are made with the local authority, and then the Fire Commissioner's office does that service and does it for value and charges.

Mr. Reid: So, if I understand correctly, you mentioned 196 daycares that are required to have fire code inspection and the City of Winnipeg Fire Department has asked the Fire Commissioner's office to be involved to undertake those inspections and then provide the report back to the daycare or the Fire Department. If there are any deficiencies with respect to the inspection, improvement orders, et cetera, will they be handled through the Fire Department or would they go directly to the daycare, or do both get a copy and then they can be worked on immediately, et cetera?

Mr. Radcliffe: The reporting line is back to the Department of Family Services.

Mr. Reid: The fees that are associated with inspections, when I asked for that information last year, the previous minister indicated, and I quote: "It is anticipated that there has to be a regulation change over these inspections."

That was with respect to my request for a list of the fees that are charged. I am wondering if you have that list of fees now.

* (1650)

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, in response to my honourable colleague's question, the standing fee for the Fire Commissioner's office, under the relationship which I have already described, to do a fire inspection is $250 per inspection. In the unique case with the City of Winnipeg, under the memorandum of understanding, Family Services is covering the cost of one staff year at the Fire Commissioner's office, which is the sum of $66,400; plus there will be an additional charge from the Fire Commissioner's office if there is any requirement for revisiting any of the premises.

Mr. Reid: Can you tell me, if there are 196 daycares that are requiring this inspection, is this the current outstanding amount, or was this the global amount that was asked or assigned by the city or Family Services to the Fire Commissioner's office or a request for assistance? How many of those have been inspected to this point in time, and what is the waiting time with respect to the inspections?

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chair, there is an MOU that has been drafted. It is right now in the Department of Family Services. It has not been signed by Family Services at this time. The Fire Commissioner's office has not yet started and will start immediately upon the execution of the document. It is anticipated that on the execution of the document, and this is for the term of one year, and one year only, at this point in time, that the individual designated inspector will do five inspections a day and that will take a period of approximately two and a half months to go through the backlog of daycares that are existing right now. The Fire Commissioner's office anticipates that there will then be future work assigned to this person from Family Services. The reporting line is back to Family Services and the fire inspector will be completing a form that has been set out and prescribed by Family Services and will be working to a code that has been laid out by Family Services. It is their particulars and substance that form the parameters for the inspection.

The Fire Commissioner's office knows that there are some 235 daycares in the city of Winnipeg but cannot comment at this point in time how many daycares will be assigned to this person to go and inspect. So all we know at this point in time is that there is a tranche of 196 that are backlogged right now that the City of Winnipeg Fire Department cannot get at, and that is the first step in the assignment. It is anticipated that there will be future work for this person and that this person will be engaged throughout the course of the year, but that is all we know at this point in time.

* (1700)

Mr. Reid: The minister referenced that there is a possibility that a memorandum of understanding will be signed between Family Services and the Fire Commissioner's office to the benefit of having a full-time staffperson for this coming year of $66,400 cost to the Family Services department. Now, that $250 inspection fee, is that paid for by Family Services or is that paid for by the daycare? Is that additional monies that would go to the Fire Commissioner's office for this work? What is the arrangement with respect to that fee?

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, the $66,400 plus any fee for reinspection to be negotiated is the sole reward at this point in time to the Fire Commissioner's office. The $250 is a flat charge which is done outside this MOU. So, in other words, if there was a casual inspection came down the line, casual requests, independent of this one assignment of work or arrangement, then that would be the charge. But in this case there is not going to be a per inspection charge. The only cost is covering the staff year for the particular individual plus the additional costs, so one is not related to the other at all.

Mr. Reid: Because you mentioned that there are 196 daycares that have been requested to be part of the inspection process, which you indicated will take two and a half months or thereabouts to inspect, my understanding is there is quite a larger number than that in the province. You said 235 in Winnipeg. There are 526 in the province, from my understanding, not counting the home daycare. When did this 196 start? In other words, when were you asked to take on this responsibility, this inspection? So I would have some idea of when these requests came in.

Mr. Radcliffe: Apparently the Fire Commissioner's office was asked about three weeks ago to undertake this service. I just want to make it clear to my honourable colleague that these are the licensed daycares and in the city of Winnipeg.

Mr. Reid: I am sure that the numbers that the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson) referenced would be centres for which her department would be responsible, which would be the licensed centres. There are 526 that she has indicated that there are in the province. There are another 534 home daycares, for a total of 1,060 facilities. I am just trying to get an understanding here. What do the other daycares do? Do they go directly to the local fire departments to do that inspection? Do those fire departments require a fee for their service to do those inspections? Who would oversee to make sure that that is occurring?

Mr. Radcliffe: My honourable colleague is correct, that it will be the local authorities who will perform the fire inspections. These will be done under the aegis or authority of the local municipality. It would be up to the local municipality whether a charge is assessed or not. That is policy at the municipal level. The Fire Commissioner's office will provide training free of charge to the local authorities and has international status on their training program. The Fire Commissioner's office has volunteered to be a fall-back position until January 1, 2000, for an inspection service if the local municipality is unable to perform that function. That will be at the rate of $250 an inspection which would be paid by the local daycare.

So, after 2000, presumably the situation would have to be readdressed, and we have no policy yet on that. We are a fall-back position, but the Fire Commissioner's office does provide training free of charge to the local fire entity.

Mr. Reid: In the question with respect to home daycare centres, who is responsible for ensuring the fire code is met with respect to those operations? Is it Family Services? Would they request the Fire Commissioner's office to be involved in those, or is the Fire Commissioner's office involved in training the inspectors from the Family Services office that would go into those homes? Perhaps you can give me some indication whether those people have all received the training through the Fire Commissioner's office.

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, this department is not aware of the requirements, the responsibility line of who should be inspecting the home daycare. It may well be the local municipal authority, but if the home daycare is licensed out of Family Services, then this is probably a question that more properly lies under Family Services.

I can add to that that the responsibility for carrying out provisions of the fire code is the responsibility of the owner or their duly authorized agent, but beyond that the Fire Commissioner's office is not involved and so cannot comment any further.

Mr. Reid: With respect to school inspections, and I have raised this question with the minister before in Question Period. I mean, I have had the opportunity to talk with trustees and risk managers and custodial people and get an overview of what is happening in schools, and I was not comfortable with what I was hearing.

I would like to know what role the Fire Commissioner's office plays with respect to the inspection of, what, some 700 schools in the province of Manitoba, and if you have had a request, if that is the process, by the Manitoba Association of School Trustees to be involved in the inspections, and if perhaps you are also involved with the risk manager who I believe is on staff at MAST for those inspections.

What role does the Fire Commissioner's office play in the inspections of schools for fire code conformance?

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, the situation for public schools or independent schools, parochial schools, whichever, that my honourable colleague would reference would be very similar to the situation outlined for the daycares, that if the local school board wishes an inspection, their recourse is to go to their local fire authority who would perform the function. But the Office of the Fire Commissioner is not in the business of doing fire inspections. It is in the business of a training resource, of an inquiry, an investigatory function, but it does not perform regular, routine fire inspections.

Further, there has been no contact by MAST to the Fire Commissioner's office to perform any tranche or group of inspections of schools.

Mr. Reid: So, I mean, it is pretty simple math. You have one risk manager working for MAST. You have 700 public schools in the province of Manitoba, public schools, not counting private or religious schools. Dividing the number of workdays in the year into the number of schools times one tells you pretty clearly how many schools you would have to visit in a single day, and knowing the size of schools, how do we ensure that our schools are safe? Who is doing the follow-up?

Mr. Radcliffe: This would be, I believe, Mr. Chair, the responsibility of the local school board who are the owners of these properties and the local fire department, which is governed by the municipality in which these areas are found, and I can appreciate my honourable friend's concern, my honourable colleague's concern.

I mean, I do recall having attended Kelvin High School myself, which was a three-storey brick veneer building that was the mate of St. John's High School in its day. It had, I think, steel joists, but wooden floors and lathe-and-plaster construction and brick veneer, and that school, then as now, poses, of course, a concern for members of the public. The Fire Commissioner's office, as I say and I keep repeating, is a resource for education and is a resource for training for the local fire departments. The responsibility for maintaining the code levels would be with the owner of the building, would be with the local municipality and the local school board.

* (1710)

Mr. Reid: Well, I understand what the minister is saying. Not necessarily agree with it, but I understand what he is saying. Can you tell me: what was the role of the Fire Commissioner's office prior to becoming a special operating agency? Were they in the business of fire code inspections, or were they just an educational body as the minister has indicated they are now?

Mr. Radcliffe: In years gone by, the Fire Commissioner's office did, when resources were available and upon requests, perform fire inspections. The Fire Commissioner's office at one point in the recent past did review their act and realize that there was no authority for the Fire Commissioner's office to perform these fire inspections. On legal advice received by the Fire Commissioner's office, they were apprised of the fact that, by performing these fire inspections, they were faced with a difficulty because they were incurring potential liability. The Fire Commissioner's office had no authority in their legislation to enforce any of the orders or improvement or work orders that might arise from a fire inspection. The advice that was given to the Fire Commissioner's office was that they had no obligation to perform this function.

Mr. Radcliffe: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I misspoke myself. In fact, the Fire Commissioner, under The Fires Prevention Act, does have legal authority, and I want to correct that on the record, does have legal authority to enforce its orders. In fact, my honourable colleague raises a very cogent point, that the authority to maintain buildings to code is assigned by the Fire Commissioner's office to the local municipality for enforcement purposes to the local fire authority and then also under The Municipal Act. The local municipality does have authority to enforce fire code. So that is under The Fires Prevention Act assigned to the local municipality, and under The Municipal Act.

Mr. Reid: How do I assure my constituents that the two dozen or so schools in my community are inspected on an annual basis, at minimum, for fire code inspection, and that we will have annual inspections of all of the schools, knowing that there is only one risk manager working for MAST, and the amount of time that is involved in a structure of that size, that physical size–I mean, what follow-up is there to make sure that these inspections are being undertaken, and that, where required, any defects or deficiencies would be corrected? I am looking for someone that is going to do those inspections on a minimum of an annual basis and perhaps more frequently, but also having a follow-up to make sure that, if there are any problems, they are corrected, and that the schools are safe environments for our children to go to.

Mr. Radcliffe: In response to my honourable colleague's question, the first and primary responsibility for the maintenance and safety and well-being of the individuals contained within these buildings rests with the owners and operators of the buildings, and that would be the respective school boards who control and own the buildings. They, in turn, have responsibility and would look to their local fire authority to maintain the service such as my honourable colleague has outlined, and I would suggest, and I think my honourable colleague would concur very readily, that it is wholly impractical, if not impossible, for one risk manager person from MAST to physically perform all these inspections. I do not think that is a reality at all.

So, to sum up, the initial responsibility lies with the local school division, and the local school division looks to their fire authority as a resource to perform the service that would be reasonably required for either annual or semi-annual or whatever inspection and investigation that should be required. That would be a policy that should be set out by the local school divisions, I would suggest.

Mr. Reid: It always comes down to questions of dollars. The school division looks at, if I have to do this work, where am I going to get the money from? When there are tight dollars, scarce resources, the next question that comes, if I have to hire somebody to do risk assessment or fire code inspection, what paraprofessionals are going to be cut, what teacher is going to be lost to recover those monies to pay for that particular service being done? So you win on one side and you lose on the other.

Mr. Chairperson in the Chair

This is a difficulty that the school divisions have before them. I know I have talked to my colleagues about this in their divisions as well. It always comes down to fire code inspections, risk reduction, and to balance that off with a loss of teachers. So that is the decision that the school board is faced.

Can you tell me, with respect to other public facilities, because there are schools and daycares that I have asked about, but I am sure there are others where the public is involved, for example, personal care homes where the elderly and infirm are living. Also, can you tell me what requests have come into the Fire Commissioner's office for inspections so that I might have a clearer picture here in understanding of what requests or workload they have in that regard? If there are a significant number of them, give me a breakdown, perhaps by type of facility, for example, personal care home, schools, daycares, et cetera.

* (1720)

Mr. Radcliffe: I want to make it very clear to my honourable colleague that, and I do not want to berate or beat the issue to death, there are virtually no requests for fire inspections coming in to the Fire Commissioner's office. I believe we said there were four for particular daycares, and that was charged for value or for service, but, over and above that, public buildings, personal care homes, any building of any nature and kind whatsoever–and I just have to repeat myself–these requests are not coming to the Fire Commissioner's office. The responsibility for maintaining fire code is on the owner, and I concur with my honourable colleague that, in fact, there is one taxpayer, and one consumer, and one producer of wealth, and the buck stops with him–[interjection] Or her, yes.

My honourable colleague reminds me of an anecdote that I could recount at this point, touching on that gender sensitivity, that my children were once engaged in a sail instruction course. They came home to me and said: Daddy, Daddy, the sailing instructor has now informed us that the journal or volume from which we learn our lessons can no longer be referred to as a manual. I said, why is that? They said, well, because it is not gender sensitive. I said, well, you go back and you inform the instructor that in fact the word "manual" derives from manus which is hands, and this is a book that is held in the hand. But I do sit corrected–[interjection] Exactly. I do sit corrected from your honourable colleague that in fact the language should be nonspecific and gender sensitive. I will try to amend my remarks accordingly. However, I do concur with your honourable colleague that I would love to see Latin reintroduced into the schools because if you do not understand Latin, then you have significant difficulty understanding English. But that is a subject for another discussion.

Mr. Reid: With respect to the inspections, fire code inspections, the sole responsibility rests with the various municipalities to which the responsibility has been delegated under the act. Those particular municipalities and their fire departments, either full-time or part-time volunteer, are responsible for conducting investigations for public facilities like personal care homes, hospitals, schools, daycares. How do we monitor whether or not these inspections are being undertaken, or do we wait until the structure burns to the ground, people get killed, and then we find out nobody went in and did an inspection?

Mr. Reid: The bigger question then with respect to volunteer fire fighting forces in the province if they are in charge of doing inspections, whether it would be the local fire chief who in some cases is a volunteer, as well, has full time employment at another occupation. If I was a volunteer and it is my assigned responsibility either from the Fire Commissioner's responses or the local municipality, local government district, et cetera, there is also the insurance provisions, law suits, et cetera, that come into play. I am not sure if I was a volunteer I would want to put all of my possessions on the line at risk of being sued in that regard. So I hope that there would be some provisions or protections that the municipalities would have to have in that regard. Perhaps the minister can comment on that in a minute. I will also ask with respect to contracts that the Fire Commissioner's office, I think it is the fire college, if that is the appropriate term, I have asked for this information past with respect to contracts. If you have that information here, I would appreciate receiving that. If you have information relating to travel that the department may undertake through the college or also any staff with the Fire Commissioner's office, I would appreciate receiving that information with respect to where and purpose and costs. I am looking for information relating to court actions, prosecutions with respect to the act as well. I will open that up to the minister and see if he has that information available, then I have a couple of other questions.

Mr. Radcliffe: I am advised, Mr. Chairman, that there is a provision in The Municipal Act to cover liability for municipal representatives. I am not personally familiar with it. I am just told that it does exist, so I would direct my honourable colleague's attention to that, because in fact I think he makes a very valid point that there is significant liability that attaches from being well meaning as a volunteer and attending. I can only recount that at one point, I had some clients who were farming in the R.M. of Westbourne and some young lads who belonged to this particular colony were lighting fertilizer bags at the time of spring seeding. Unfortunately, we had not had rain since the previous June, and a significant wind came up and one of these bags blew into the verge of the field that got into the local tree break that in fact wiped out a local hog farmer. It turned out in that particular case that the local volunteer fire brigade who attended started a backfire. I was able to discern through litigation and through actual walking the ground and recreating the events of the day that it was very possibly the causa sine quanons of the actual loss to the farmer was the firebreak that was lighted in order to consume the available fuel, so that the fire that my clients had started would not sweep the township. So my honourable colleague does raise a very real point. [interjection] That is right.

Mr. Chairman, I have for my honourable colleague's perusal and inspection a list of contracts supplied or performed, I should say, by the Fire College which indicates the party involved, the type of training that was involved, the date that it occurred, the location that the training occurred, the contact person, the amount of money that was paid and the contact within the department.

The second page consists of some seven items which are again parties, and in some cases some fees that have been negotiated to date and a brief description of the work. These are potential contracts that are in the offing but not yet signed or executed but work that is anticipated that will be performed. We do not have travel details at this point in time, nor prosecution particulars but undertake so to produce.

* (1730)

Mr. Reid: Okay. If the information is available perhaps in a day or so, a couple of days, the beginning of next week, that is fine. I am looking for–it was the information with respect to the contracts that the department has that will be coming and the information associated with that, who the parties are in involved in that and the values, et cetera. The travel will be coming, court and prosecutions information is coming as well.

A question with respect to the levy that is charged on the insurance premiums of the province. Can you give me the percentage that we have in place and also is that flexible? Is that varied throughout from year to year or is that fixed, and whose discretion is it to vary it if it does, and also the money that is in the fund currently for the last year which would be '98-99, I guess?

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, I have for perusal and consideration of my honourable colleague a copy of the annual report, 1997-98 annual report. [interjection] I sit corrected. My honourable colleague informs me that he has copy of the annual report, so that is redundant at this point in time.

The authority for the fund, the levy, is contained in The Fires Prevention Act, which states that a levy on every fire insurance policy may be up to 2 percent of the premium value. The levy right now is fixed at 1.25 percent. The Fires Prevention Act also states that there must be a reserve of $4 million kept in the Fire Prevention Fund. The Fire Commissioner's office has an annual expense of approximately $5.2 million; $3.2 million in any given year is drawn from this Fire Prevention Fund to run the Fire Commissioner's office, and the reserve is then also maintained as well. The additional revenue comes from permits and the sale of services. The authority that sets the actual rate of levy on these insurance policies would be the provincial government.

Mr. Radcliffe: Mr. Chairman, I, too, would like to put on the record that I would thank my honourable colleague for the quality and nature of the questions that have been issued in this Estimates process and the discussions that we have had the opportunity to have. I would like to assure my honourable colleague that if, in fact, he does not have a revelation on the road to Damascus, he can look forward, I would suspect, to a long and happy sojourn in the opposition benches, and we would look forward to renewing this acquaintance this time next year.

Mr. Reid: Well, Mr. Chairperson, being the nonpolitical person that I am, I will just confine my remarks to thanking the staff that have waited here very patiently over the course of the last five days or so, and their willingness to assist the minister with answering the questions. I know some of my questions have, perhaps, not always been as clear as they should be or precise, so I do appreciate the staff being here and the minister's agreement to have them provide the information back to us in the next few days. So I thank the staff for participating in this process as well.

Mr. Radcliffe: I would echo my honourable colleague's remarks in that respect.

Mr. Chairperson: Resolution 11.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $13,231,000 for Labour, Labour Programs, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 2000.

Resolution 11.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $320,400 for Labour, Amoritzation of Capital Assets, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 2000.

* (1740)

The last item to be considered for the Estimates of the Department of Labour is item 11.1.(a) Minister's Salary. At this point, we request the minister's staff to leave the table for the consideration of this item.

Item 11.1.(a) Minister's Salary $27,000–pass.

Resolution 11.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $506,400 for Labour, Labour Executive, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 2000.

This completes the Estimates of the Department of Labour.