Thank you, Minister McLeod. Any further questions on the active positions? Mr. Robert McLeod.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for that, Mr. Minister. One word I heard that struck me right away was “regions.” My next question: were these vacant positions or were these filled positions? How many were from the regions and how many were from headquarters?

There were seven in all.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Any further follow-up on these two pages? On active positions? Mr. Abernethy.

I just want to follow up on that question, Mr. Chair. Seven total were proposed; five were accepted? Does that mean two of them

were from the regions and they weren’t accepted, or does that mean that seven additional ones were proposed and not accepted?

Thank you,

Mr. Abernethy. Clarification, Minister McLeod.

That were seven additional that were not accepted.

Seven additional positions that were identified and rejected? Were they vacant or filled positions?

Three of the seven were filled positions.

Any further questions on these two pages? I’m hearing none. We’ll move on to our first votable item, on 2-55. Under Human Resources, Operations Expenditure Summary, $705,000, under Directorate. Let me repeat that: under the Directorate, Operations Expenditure Summary, $705,000. Agreed? Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is perhaps the appropriate place to ask some questions, considering the directorate provides leadership and direction to the department and is under the authority of the Minister. Getting back to the notification letters that went out to the affected employees, I want to get a better understanding of what advice the Department of Human Resources gave to the Minister and gave to Cabinet that would see those letters go out. Was the advice to send the letters out or not send the letters out?

I’m not sure what letters the Member’s referring to, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. This question seems to be beyond the estimates, here. Mr. Ramsay?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll try to keep the question related to the estimates that are before us. The letters are the notification letters that went out to employees.

When we’re talking about the Main Estimates, Mr. Chairman, we’re talking about a reduction in staffing. Fundamental to that was the decision to either send the letters out or not send the letters out. The question I have for the Minister is: what advice did the Department of Human Resources give to the Minister and, in effect, Cabinet to either send the letters out or not send them out? That’s germane to the whole discussion we’ll be having here for the next three and a half weeks.

The department put forward a position that was supported by the union — recognizing that there are 5,800 employees that were concerned about the discussions on budget

reductions that we took to Cabinet recommending that we provide early notification.

We’re all interested in this reduction exercise that took place and the notification letters that went out to employees. Between the time the letters went out and Regular Members actually found out exactly which positions were being impacted and affected — it took approximately three weeks to find out. Mr. Chairman, my question for the Minister is: why did it take three weeks? What was happening in that three-week time frame? We were left answering calls and concerns from our constituents in that three-week time frame without any knowledge of what was happening. I’d like to know what was happening during that three-week time frame, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr.

Ramsay. We are getting into an area that’s probably more appropriately addressed during question period, but I will allow the Minister to respond if he wishes.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair. I

understand the Premier already addressed this and provided a response at a number of meetings with the standing committees. He also talked about it yesterday in question period. I think that would be sufficient.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. I’m not going to decide for anybody what’s sufficient here. But I’d say, and I repeat, it’s probably more appropriate in question period.

I’m not going to challenge your direction, Mr. Chairman; however, if the answers were sufficient, we wouldn’t be asking questions in this forum. It’s your prerogative, and perhaps we will ask those types of questions in question period.

I’ll go to Ms. Bisaro. Again, questions on the Main Estimates here.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to ask a question relative to the Other Expenses item listed for the ’08–09 Main Estimates. There’s a significant jump from the ’07–08 Revised Estimates. It is a similar amount to the Main Estimates from ’07–08. Under the details of the expenses, fees and payments are $302,000. Can I get an explanation of what those fees and payments are used for?

The main change to the Revised Estimates is because of the technical service centre chargeback adjustments. That was the main reason for the change.

I just wonder if I could get the amount of the TSC chargeback, please.