HANSARD
Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Mr. Keith Colwell (Chairman)
Hon. Judy Streatch
Mr. Keith Bain
Mr. Chuck Porter
Mr. Howard Epstein
Ms. Vicki Conrad
Mr. Leonard Preyra
Ms. Diana Whalen
Mr. Harold Theriault
IN ATTENDANCE:
Mrs. Darlene Henry
Legislative Committee Clerk
[Page 1]
HALIFAX, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2007
STANDING COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
9:00 A.M.
CHAIRMAN
Mr. Keith Colwell
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, I think we'll bring the committee to order. We'll start by going around the room and introducing ourselves so the recording staff can see who is here.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We also have some new people with us today. We have a new committee clerk, Charlene Rice here. She has no idea, I think, what she is getting in for but anyway. (Laughter) Also, from the Legislative Library staff we have Heather Ludlow. Heather is here seeing what is going on today so she will be safe. (Laughter)
We are here to do a couple of things today - it should be a short meeting - a selection of meeting topics. Do any of the caucuses have any additional things they would like to put in that they haven't put forward so far?
MR. HOWARD EPSTEIN: Yes, actually I was looking back at some of the suggestions we've made in the past and I think there actually is a longer list. I think the list that appears here on today's handout is perhaps something that was earlier identified as being some of the priorities from much longer lists that we actually put in, so we do have other possibilities.
It has also been the case that this committee has dealt with some of the ones that we've suggested. I think what has emerged is that given the parity of the Party representation around the table, what we've tended to do is essentially leave it to each caucus to determine one topic of their own choosing.
[Page 2]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Just a second now, before you start running the meeting for me, I'm going to cut you off right there.
MR. EPSTEIN: Okay.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Typically what we would do in the meetings - which I'm going to pursue unless there's concern from all the caucuses - the first thing we would do is go through and see if there are any common items on there and we can put those on the list. Then after that, we would go down each caucus and pick an item from there. Is there any argument about that?
HON. JUDY STREATCH: Sounds fine.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. I was just asking if you had any more things to add to the list, if you could please go forward with that.
MR. EPSTEIN: The answer is yes. Perhaps since it is not here, I'll ask the clerk if copies could be made of these two sheets. These are topics that we've put forward before. So Darlene, could I ask you to make copies of it?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Does the PC caucus have any additional topics?
MS. STREATCH: We're good to go, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, we'll wait until we get Mr. Epstein's list. You have another list that you got a copy of this morning.
[9:15 a.m.]
Okay, so everybody has had a chance to review the list. We've gone down through the list. I'm going to start with the NDP list here. I was just talking with the clerk and a lot of this stuff has already been done and I want to make sure that you want to reconsider this stuff again.
Superintendent of Pensions was done in 2006; Atlantic Association of Universities was done in 2006; Office of Immigration, that was done last year; the Skills Nova Scotia, that was done last year in Human Resources Committee. It was a very interesting one but the Human Resources Committee went through that and there are minutes of that.
Access Nova Scotia, on your next page, that was done in March 2007; Electricity Marketplace Governance Committee, that was done in January 2007 and labour market, employment was done in June 2007. Is there anything different about the ones that you want to consider?
[Page 3]
MR. EPSTEIN: There is. I think when it comes to consideration of energy issues, which is in part what we had implied by the Electricity Marketplace Governance Committee, we still think there's potential to examine that further.
Following your suggestion, am I wrong in seeing the offshore as being common to all three Parties?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The offshore is common to all three Parties also. Do you want to put that down as number one on the list? Would you propose that?
MR. EPSTEIN: I guess is seems logical from these lists, if I am reading it, but if you're asking which one after that we could come up with, it would have to do with the state of play for development of alternative energies in Nova Scotia. That was partly what we were getting at when we looked at the Electricity Marketplace Governance Committee.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you want to change the title on that?
MR. EPSTEIN: I think it's actually - it's alternative energies in Nova Scotia; how they're developing, what the prospects are.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, let's get agreement on - I like your second one there, by the way. Do we have agreement on the first one, we'll talk about the offshore? Everyone agree with that? That's number one.
If you could just hold your number two, Mr. Epstein, I'll go to the PC caucus. Would you have a number one choice? Anything that's a common interest in this?
MR. CHUCK PORTER: We would go with the NSBI there, Mr. Chairman, as our number one choice. Quickly reading through, I thought I saw that on others as well. Maybe it was the former list of the NDP.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, we have it on our list as well - not our list but the Liberals have it on their list.
MR. PORTER: Yes, you do have it there, that's correct. We would move that as our first choice.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on that? Okay, fine with everybody? That will be number two. And from the Liberal caucus?
MR. HAROLD THERIAULT: I'd like to propose the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.
[Page 4]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, the Progressive Conservative caucus agrees with it. Does the NDP agree with that?
MR. EPSTEIN: That's also fine, thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Epstein, we'll go back to you again for your number two choice.
MR. EPSTEIN: Thank you. The way I think we're thinking of it is alternative energy - essentially the current state of play in Nova Scotia on development of alternative energy.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, any discussion on that?
MS. DIANA WHALEN: Mr. Chairman, I think that's a good one because we have renewable energy on the government's list and Environmental Industry Association on the Liberal list. So really we were thinking again about energy.
MS. STREATCH: We would concur with that choice, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's a very good one, actually.
Okay, the PC caucus, do you have a second choice?
MS. STREATCH: We did offshore, we did renewable, we did NSBI, we've got OTANS. Yes, we're up for suggestions, we've pretty much looked after all of ours.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, I'll go to the Liberal caucus. Do you guys have a second choice?
MS. WHALEN: If I could, Mr. Chairman, I think the next one I'd like to see would be the export trends - Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association and perhaps other witnesses could come. It does tie in, I mean there are a lot of pressures, like the Canadian dollar, but we're also falling behind on exports so I think it's really important for us to look at the trends and the opportunities.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay.
MR. EPSTEIN: Would that extend to something like the Atlantica proposal, or the Gateway?
MS. WHALEN: Well, that might be something they see. I don't know where the CME stands on that, what their position is on it. I was looking more at - you know, they monitor and they work with exporters. What are the challenges? What can government do?
[Page 5]
What are the barriers in their way? That could help because they're clearly having a hard time right now - our exports are down. That's what I was thinking of, not so much the larger Atlantica issue, unless they raised it.
MR. EPSTEIN: I'm happy to hear from CME, I think that'll be fine.
MS. WHALEN: And if there are any suggestions on others who might be able to speak about exports, that would be fine, too.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Does the PC caucus agree with that?
MR. PORTER: Sure.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Now why don't we leave it at five? I think five will get us far enough into the year to move us forward. So if we could get the clerk to arrange the meetings, set the meetings up. If any caucus has any particular witness that they would like to have come, let the clerk know right away on any of these topics, so she can make arrangements to contact them and we'll go from there.
Okay, so there's nothing else for the agenda? Mr. Epstein.
MR. EPSTEIN: We won't offer a second one at this point. I think you're right - five are plenty for now and it'll certainly get us through the season.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, and as we go forward, if something changes we can add more to it, or if something critical comes up we can add to it.
Okay, so let's talk about our next meeting date, then there's one other item after that that I want to talk about. The clerk was telling me that one caucus is out of town from the 16th, which would normally be our date, or the 9th of October. The 9th of October is the day after a long weekend. Are there any problems with that with anybody? I know some people travel at that time.
MR. THERIAULT: I won't be around.
MR. CH AIRMAN: Okay, do you want to look at a different day or a different time?
MS. STREATCH: Can we push it to the next week, Mr. Chairman?
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's the 16th but there's going to be an out-of-town caucus.
MS. STREATCH: The week after that, I was thinking.
[Page 6]
MR. CHAIRMAN: The 23rd?
MS. STREATCH: Does that push it too far out?
MR. CHAIRMAN: No. There is a committee meeting that morning so we'd have to do it in the afternoon. I'm up for discussion if there are any suggestions, so we're just looking for suggestions here.
MS. WHALEN: If we go with the day after the long weekend, maybe we could just get substitutes to come. How many others could not be here?
MR. EPSTEIN: I thought the long weekend was the weekend before.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The weekend is the 8th.
MS. WHALEN: The 9th would be our normal Tuesday. I'm just staying to our normal Tuesday. I'm not sure if it's going to affect anybody beyond Junior.
MR. EPSTEIN: What about the following Monday instead of the Tuesday?
MRS. DARLENE HENRY (Legislative Committee Clerk): There's an out-of-town caucus that Tuesday.
MR. EPSTEIN: So the Monday as well is not available, the 15th?
MRS. HENRY: We normally don't meet on Mondays. Monday is constituency day.
MR. EPSTEIN: Is that right? How long does that out-of-town meeting go, do you know?
MRS. HENRY: I have no idea, I just know they're out of town.
MS. VICKI CONRAD: I'm just wondering, if we do push it up to the 23rd is that going to make a squeeze for all of them? I mean we have five identified and barring that from the 23rd on nothing else happens and we get back on a regular schedule, we should be able to get those five in, but if anything else happens - I'm fine with the 23rd myself, Howard.
MR. EPSTEIN: It's okay with me, I was just worried about letting too much time go by.
MS. STREATCH: I'm just wondering, talking amongst ourselves, not to add another challenge to this, but will we be meeting as a committee when the House sits? I assume not.
[Page 7]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, I'm going to bring that up after we set the date. We'll set the date first then we'll discuss that. So give me a firm suggestion from somebody.
MR. THERIAULT: Well one weekend or the other in October is not going to make any difference for a six-month period.
MS. STREATCH: So, Mr. Chairman, I would suggest we meet the 23rd. Hearing from my colleague, the member for Digby-Annapolis, the 9th doesn't work for him, I have support from my colleague that the 23rd will work for him so I would propose the 23rd as a starting point for us.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any discussion on that? It would have to be in the afternoon.
MS. CONRAD: That's fine.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, the 23rd it will be, in the afternoon. Great, thank you very much.
Now the next item we want to talk about is whether the committee sits during the time the House is in session. I'd like to entertain some discussion on that. Who would like to start? Mr. Theriault.
MR. THERIAULT: I believe at the time while we're sitting in the Legislature, if it's an issue of the present day or if it's an issue that needs to come to this committee - I mean, it is probably just as important as being in the Legislature. If it's an issue of that type, I believe we should be in this room addressing it. I don't care what is sitting.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any comments? Ms. Streatch.
MS. STREATCH: The challenge would be schedule, which is a growing monster once the House starts to sit, for all of us. So that would be the only challenge that I would have, trying to schedule a meeting during House hours as well as trying to fulfil all of the other scheduling challenges that come with the House. That would be the only hesitation that I would have.
MR. THERIAULT: I'm not saying, stay on the schedule, or what we've scheduled here today. I'm saying if an issue comes up, reconvene the committee for that month, whatever issue that may be, a present day issue or . . .
MS. STREATCH: That's a good compromise.
MR. THERIAULT: If we have to, I believe we should be open to come to this committee, for the issue of the day or whatever it may be. I'm not saying stay on this
[Page 8]
schedule for November or whenever the House is sitting, but if there's a pressing issue at the time, if something happens, we should be open to come back to this committee, if called.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Porter.
MR. PORTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would agree with Mr. Theriault. I believe that maybe what we've done with some of the other committees is decided if there was an absolute need to come back for a matter of great importance, that we would certainly schedule it in. Whether it was on the given day that would be normal or not, it doesn't matter, we would work to make every effort to come back to this table.
MR. THERIAULT: At the discretion of the chairman.
MR. PORTER: Absolutely, we would agree with that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thanks. (Laughter)
Mr. Preyra.
MR. LEONARD PREYRA: I think there is a bit of too strong language there, in terms of whether there's an absolute need or there's some kind of extraordinary situation. I think the committee should meet, period, and shouldn't rule out the possibility of meeting or set strong conditions on the committee meeting. I think it is important that we leave that option open. Even if it's just a question of sticking to our agenda, I think it's important enough and there should be a compelling reason for not meeting, I think.
MR. EPSTEIN: What would be the November date that we would normally meet? Would it be about the 9th?
MRS. HENRY: It would be the 13th.
MR. EPSTEIN: I guess that would probably be just about the time that the House may well go in at that point. I would agree with Leonard on this - we should just schedule our meeting because we don't know. We haven't had notice of the House dates, for one thing. We know that with any luck we'll be getting to the next topic down, which I guess is NSBI, aiming for them for the November date.
[9:30 a.m.]
I'm suggesting we think about targeting that date, trying to plug in NSBI, and if for some reason it turns out that we can't do it, maybe we'll have to postpone but surely there's some flexibility. If it's a Tuesday, we could start at 8:30 a.m., I don't know why not, and just
[Page 9]
get through it before the House. The House wouldn't normally sit until, what, if it was a Tuesday?
MR. PORTER: Do we not go in the mornings on Tuesday? I know that we were often late going into the House, at times, because of committee meetings, we would be behind.
MR. EPSTEIN: I think on Tuesdays, it would start at noon.
MR. PORTER: Well again, that's open. I know that hours get adjusted as well during the sitting. In the short time since I've been here, it has been adjusted every sitting, we've had hours adjusted.
MS. CONRAD: I have, from previous sittings of the House, on Tuesdays it is 2:00 p.m.
MR. PORTER: On a normal day but I know that we've been there in the mornings and I guess that is what I am getting at. The House hours tend to be very flexible, as we all know, and the only thing I was considering is - not to take away any from the importance, Howard, as you are suggesting - it is a shame to book them in and then cancel them. I mean we want them to come, set up their date firmly, they're arranging for staff people for whoever is coming. I think it is a lesser evil, perhaps, to not have to cancel them on an occasion or two.
MS. CONRAD: I agree with my colleague, Howard, that I think it is important that we follow through with our next scheduled day after the 23rd, which is November 13th, and schedule the witnesses. If we do have to reschedule - I mean, we do that with most of our busy lives anyway. We set up most meetings tentatively, and I think we go through with that process. If we know in advance that on the 13th it looks like we will be in the House or something else has changed, the nature of the beast is that we will have to call and reschedule.
MR. EPSTEIN: Have I followed this correctly, Mr. Chairman - is it the position of the other two caucuses that we shouldn't meet while the House is sitting?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Not quite. If a pressing issue comes up, the Liberal caucus suggested that we should meet, whatever the issue is, if it is something topical of the day. Other than that, my understanding was - and correct me if I'm wrong - that we wouldn't meet. The PC caucus, what's your position?
MS. STREATCH: I'm just wondering, Mr. Chairman, could I ask what is the past practice of this committee during House sittings? Have we sat? Have we stuck to the schedule or have we veered from that?
[Page 10]
MRS. HENRY: We sat.
MS. STREATCH: We sat, and we had scheduled witnesses, or did we do issues that came up?
MRS. HENRY: It was a combination of both. We had scheduled witnesses but then if something pressing came up, I would put that in and reschedule a set witness. We have done that several times.
MR. PORTER: Just one more comment, if I could, Mr. Chairman. As well, when we did sit and there were issues, conflicts with the hours of the Legislature, what happened, there were members coming and going, if you recall, in a variety of different committees, members would come in and stay for 20 minutes and leave. Certainly the respect to those folks coming and taking the time to be here and us going through this process and requesting them to be here as well, I think should be considered.
If we're going to sit, I'm okay with that but if we made a commitment to have them come in, then we should be here. That would be the only other comment that I would have.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Whalen.
MS. WHALEN: Mr. Chairman, thank you. It seems to me that we don't sit very often and if we're missing a meeting because the Legislature is sitting, and I do appreciate how busy and hectic it gets at that time, maybe we can reschedule and catch up.
I know when I was first a member of this committee, we were doing two meetings a month. Now some members have said that shouldn't be continued. We did it for quite a period of time where there were two because there was a backlog of issues, but we could certainly ensure that we make up a meeting if one isn't held early in November. Perhaps we could do two in January.
I'd like to see us get through our list and have a good number of meetings for the year but I do agree that when we have invited guests to come and help us understand issues, we want to be here and have our full attention on it. So I certainly would support the idea that we not sit during the legislative session but it's likely to be only a few weeks. Perhaps we could even do two between then and Christmas, or two in January and again, we're still on schedule.
MR. THERIAULT: Yes, Mr. Chairman, can we just go ahead and schedule what we planned here and if something comes up that the chairman sees that we have to cancel, we can leave that to the discretion of you, Mr. Chairman, again.
[Page 11]
MS. WHALEN: Is that suggestion, then, to continue on just the regular schedule and do our best? I'm fine with that as well. So let's do it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Here's my interpretation of what has been said and correct me if I'm wrong: We will schedule the meetings as we have listed here, on the regular dates. Why don't we do it like this; when the Legislature sits, probably we can do it through the clerk, I can do an inquiry to each member of the committee and say, is this date satisfactory? The hours of the Legislature change all the time; if we happen to sit early in the morning and we can't meet well then maybe we'll have to put the meeting off, but I'll do that in consultation with the whole committee. Does everyone agree to that? Agreed.
Okay, so I think that will serve all of our purposes well.
We are in agreement with that so now we have some direction and I'll be in trouble no matter what I do, but that's okay. (Laughter)
Are there any other topics for the meeting today? If not, we stand adjourned. Thank you.
[The committee adjourned at 9:37 a.m.]
