The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order please!

Admit strangers.

Today, the House of Assembly would like to welcome thirty senior high students from Jackman All-Grade School in the District of St. Barbe. Accompanying the students are teachers, Graden Pelley, Kay Brake and Beth Crocker; chaperone, Tori Hann; and bus driver, Bruce Martin.

Welcome to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Members' statements today are by the following members: the hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave; the hon. the Member for the District of St. John's East; the hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley; the hon. the Member for the District of Mount Pearl North; the hon. the Member for the District of Ferryland; and, the hon. the Member for the District of Kilbride.

The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to congratulate Jordan Thomas and Tiffany Parsons, two students from Amalgamated Academy, Bay Roberts, who placed first in the TV/Video Production at the eleventh annual Provincial Skills Canada competition, held on April 4.

Mr. Speaker, Jordan and Tiffany have been invited to join Team Newfoundland and compete at the national skills competition which will be held in Calgary between May 24 and May 28 of this year.

This is indeed an honour, Mr. Speaker, and I ask all hon. members to join me in wishing them both the best of luck as they go on to compete in at the national level.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. John's East.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUCKINGHAM: Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to recognize the scholastic achievements of a young lady in my district as she pursues her quest to become bilingual.

Ms Jessi Drohan, a student at Vanier Elementary School, has received the first place honour for the provincial Grade 6 competition of the Heather Huxter Memorial Story Writing Contest.

Each year the Canadian Parents for French, or CPF, sponsor this contest which gives French Immersion students in Grades 4, 5 and 6, or Intensive Core French students in Grade 6, the opportunity to practice their French writing skills. Submitted stories to the contest must be between 150 and 250 words long.

The award is named in honour of Heather Huxter, the nine-year-old daughter of Dr. Robert and Elaine Huxter of Steady Brook. Heather lost her life in a car accident on the Trans-Canada in November 2000.

Heather was very involved in her school's French Immersion program and loved reading and writing French stories. This contest is an effort to carry on Heather's legacy of her love of the French language by providing an opportunity for students her age to express their thoughts by writing in French.

Jessi Drohan's story was entitled, "Si J'etais un Animal" - or, in English - "If I was an Animal". My apologies to my francophone colleague.

In recognition of her accomplishments, Jessi was presented with a plaque and an I-Pod by the president of the local chapter of CPF at a recent school assembly.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join me in wishing Ms Jessi Drohan of Vanier Elementary School congratulations on her accomplishments, and every success as she continues towards becoming bilingual.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in this hon. House today and pay tribute to the SEDLER Community Development Corporation. SEDLER is an acronym that stands for Supported Employment for Deer Lake and Extended Regions.

Mr. Speaker, this organization was established in May 1994 to address the needs of people with developmental disabilities. As a non-profit organization, their efforts are focused in two main areas: first, to seek paid work employment for clients in occupations that are suited to their individual interests and abilities; and, second, to assist and support clients who wish to pursue self-employment initiatives and encourage the establishment of small business as an option to community economic development.

Mr. Speaker, SEDLER is committed to the conviction that every person, regardless of the extent of the individual development disability, has a right to both meaningful employment with equitable pay, and equal employment opportunities.

The Employment Corporation is governed by the volunteer Board of Directors, an Employment Co-ordinator and Placement Officers. These members are committed to the attainment of equity and employment, in conjunction with people with developmental disabilities. This is accomplished through networking, public education, and establishing partnerships with local business.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in acknowledging the marvellous work SEDLER does on behalf of their thirty-five clients in the marvellous District of Humber Valley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize the Mount Pearl Skating Club and congratulate its members on a successful thirty-first Annual Ice Show, "Fun on Ice 2008". This event was recently held in Mount Pearl, at the Mount Pearl Glacier.

Mr. Speaker, the Mount Pearl Skating Club offers a variety of skating programs for all ages and ability, including CanSkate, StarSkate, Syncroskate, and Competitive skating. Skaters at all levels participate in provincial competitions and events of many varieties.

Mr. Speaker, engaging our young people in activity encourages them to be healthy. Good practices and well-being and fitness that our youth develop at a young age will serve them well as they move into adulthood. The Mount Pearl Skating Club offers many programs that benefit young people in the Mount Pearl area.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating the Mount Pearl Skating Club on their success at this year's ice show, and wish them continued success in their efforts to offer support to those with an avid interest in skating for sport and leisure.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Sunday evening, April 27, my colleague from the District of Kilbride and I had the pleasure of attending a Youth Appreciation Night hosted by the Goulds Recreation Association to mark the start of National Volunteer Week.

Some thirty-nine youth were in attendance at this event which recognized seventy-nine youth from the Goulds area for the contribution they are making to their community through volunteering. This involved youth that have volunteered their time to groups such as the Goulds Leo Club, the Girl Guides, Boy Scouts, the Volunteer Fire Department, the Skating Club, St. John Ambulance, St. Kevin's Senior and Junior High, Goulds Elementary, St. Kevin's Parish, St. Paul's Parish, and the Goulds Recreation Commission.

These young people were nominated for this recognition by the community organizations in the Goulds, and many of the volunteers were nominated by multiple organizations.

Many of these programs offered by these groups could not be possible without the volunteers. They have given freely of their time so that the people of the Goulds can lead happier, healthier and productive lives.

In today's society, where we often hear about troubled youth, it is very encouraging to see so many of our youth giving back to their community and taking on such a leadership role.

I ask all hon. members to join with me in commending these youth for the services they are providing.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to recognize and show by example how the young people of our Province have become so aware of environmental protection.

Many of our schools have embraced the beverage container recycling program as a way to show their concern for the environment, while at the same time raising much-needed funds for school supplies and projects.

One of these schools is Hazelwood Elementary in my District of Kilbride. Hazelwood Elementary has been conducting a very successful recycling program for several years. This year, the Grade 6 students and their teachers have taken responsibility for this program. Each day, the Grade 6 students go to each and every classroom and collect recyclables. They sort the recyclables and keep the recycling containers clean.

The four teachers and eighty Grade 6 students volunteer their time to promote and run the program, and once every month they help with a recycling blitz for the whole school community. This April alone, the school community collected approximately 18,000 recyclable items.

Recently, Ever Green Recycling recognized the efforts of Hazelwood Elementary for having the second-highest amount of recyclable items for an elementary school in this Province.

Over the last two years, Hazelwood Elementary has received $15,497.59 for its recycling program. Approximately $5,000 of this money has been used to provide reading materials for all the classrooms of Hazelwood Elementary.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in congratulating the Grade 6 students at Hazelwood Elementary, their four teachers, and the program co-ordinator, Miss Kathy Duff, for a job well done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak about a number of initiatives in Budget 2008 that the Department of Justice is undertaking which will provide better access to justice, particularly for women and children in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, Budget 2008 has also allocated $279,000 to fund a Family Violence Court pilot project in St. John's. Family Violence Courts are specialized courts that help break the cycle of violence and have worked across the country to help lower the burden on the legal system. Most importantly, these courts work with victims and offenders to find solutions best suited for all involved with an end goal of breaking the cycle of violence. It is our responsibility to ensure that justice is carried out, victims are treated fairly and offenders do not appear before our courts again. The Family Violence Court initiative will lead the way in helping families who have unfortunately been impacted by violence find the road to recovery.

As well, the Department of Justice will provide $254,900 to staff the Legal Aid Child Protection Section in Corner Brook with a lawyer, a paralegal, as well as a full time social worker. This team will provide representation for parents when authorities have intervened in the lives of their families. Intervention, in many cases, involves an application to court and parents have a right to seek both legal advice and representation. Legal Aid has always provided lawyers for these cases, however this initiative will enable Legal Aid staff to work very closely with Child, Youth and Family Services and will be of great benefit to parents and families who approach Legal Aid for assistance during times of crisis.

Further, Mr. Speaker, an additional $200,000 has been committed to establish a Legal Aid office in Labrador West, a matter of concern raised by women's groups in the region. This office will support the re-establishment by our government, of the Provincial Court in Wabush in 2007.

These initiatives demonstrate that our government is committed to providing improved access to an efficient and representative justice system and that we are thinking outside the box to find solutions that work best for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

I would certainly say that all three of these initiatives are good initiatives; there is no question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: It goes to show as well, Mr. Speaker, that you do not need a lot of money, necessarily, to get some very positive and necessary results.

With respect to the first initiative, the family violence, I realize it is a pilot project at this point, and hopefully it will indeed prove to be successful and get to the point where we can have it on a permanent basis, because it is certainly needed. I would say to the minister, as well, hat's off, because the people I check with advise that not only was there good consultation between the department and different groups who are impacted by violence, but it is good see that the consultation was followed through on and we actually see the initiative.

With regard to the Child Protection Section in Corner Brook, I can attest from personal experience that that is definitely a needed initiative and hopefully that will get off the ground. To parents and families who are impacted when the child protection teams get in place, it just causes frustration beyond expectation and it just cannot be dealt with. So, it is good to see that.

With respect to the Labrador legal aid one, I think Noreen Careen deserves a lot of credit too because she has been very active for years and years in promoting improvements for legal aid benefits in Labrador.

I would encourage the minister, however, to keep the feet of the federal government to the fire because they have fallen down on the ball in terms of their contributions to the share of legal aid services in this Province and they have done so repeatedly for the last ten or fifteen year.

It is good to see this, they are worthy initiative, and I hope they all turn out to be very successful and permanent. In the meantime, keep the pressure on the feds.

Thanks you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy.

Obviously, I am so pleased that all of these initiatives were in the Budget. I am very pleased to have you announce them here today.

I will not speak to each one of them separately. I do know in particular the Labrador West one is something that the Status of Women in Labrador West has been looking for, for a long time. You had meetings with them and I am glad to see those meetings were successful and you were able to come through for them.

The more that we can do to help women and children in this Province with regard to dealing with violence, because most of the things they are dealing with are violence related - they are also related to the need to seek their own lives and having to separate from partners, and having every bit of assistance that can be there can only be beneficial.

I look forward to hearing news from the minister with regard to Happy Valley-Goose Bay, discussions I know that have gone on with regard to a new jail for young offenders and female inmates. That is something that I continue to look for from the minister, but I certainly thank you very much for what you have announced today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, more than 80 per cent of the Province's land mass is Crown land and it accommodates many uses including timber harvesting, farming, recreation and roads. Crown land plays a critical role in habitat conservation and the protection of watersheds and biological diversity.

Many people throughout the Province, Mr. Speaker, wish to avail of Crown land for personal and business reasons and, as such, make application to the Crown Lands Division of the Department of Environment and Conservation for the issuance of legal land titles. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the division fields more than 100 public inquiries per month regarding Crown land applications, and approximately 100 applications per month require site visits to finalize applications. The division also performs highly specialized legal analysis on more than 1,500 land surveys each year to ensure the land applied for is the actual parcel of land surveyed and does not overlap with any other existing land titles or private land claims.

It is important, Mr. Speaker, that the people of the Province avail of this service in an effective and efficient manner. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased to announce as part of Budget 2008 an investment of $720,000 to help improve service delivery to the public regarding Crown land applications. It will assist in the reduction of wait times for inquiries regarding the acquisitions of Crown land, and add surveying resources to reduce the processing time required for analyzing legal survey documents. This funding, Mr. Speaker, includes the addition of three new land management officer positions, one in each of our Central, Western and Labrador offices. Two land survey inspector positions will also be created. The Crown land application process will be expedited as a result of this investment, and residents of the Province will have better access to this natural resource.

Mr. Speaker, it is important that we continue to ensure the long-term protection of Crown lands, as they provide environmental, social and economic value to the Province. As such, $75,000 has been provided in Budget 2008 to commence the development of a comprehensive Land Use Management Strategy. This strategy will focus upon developing land use policies and plans, land registration, management framework, as well as the overall administration of provincial land. This was a Blue Book commitment made by the Williams government in 2007, and I am delighted, Mr. Speaker, that we are working toward delivering on that commitment.

Our unique natural heritage is critical to ensuring a healthy environment, economy and communities for the benefit of present and future generations. We must continue, Mr. Speaker, to ensure access to our provincial land resource, while also sustaining and protecting the resource. These measures will certainly go a long way in helping us achieve that goal.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement.

Once we see from this statement the large masses, I guess, of Crown land throughout our Province, there is no doubt that protection has to take place for whatever development might go ahead.

There are a couple of things I want to touch on, I guess. One of them is: it is a serious situation when people go in and try to find out what is Crown land and what is not Crown land. It is very confusing going back and forth from the office, trying to find out and determine if they are on land that they can really acquire. Mr. Speaker, it is good to see that there is additional staff being hired in the various areas.

With regard to the Land Use Management Strategy there are a couple of things I just want to mention to the minister, not in a critical way. Maybe one of the things that can be looked at is the mapping, because I know in our areas out there, the Denny's Pond area, that landfill that is not so good those days is not shown where it should be on the map, when there are people looking for the Crown lands, the lots.

The other issue is, this year at Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador I think one of their twenty-seven resolutions was to call on government for any land that could be used for economic development that is adjacent to them. They would like to have it turned over to them free of charge. I think the way it is looked at now, it is being sold to the municipalities for a fair market value.

I agree with the overall view of the statement and hopefully the minister and the department would look at those two initiatives to the strategy plan.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy.

The one thing I think I would like to say is that I would like to see a bit more priority being given to the Land Use Management Strategy. I am concerned that we continue to sell off Crown land and yet we still do not have our Land Use Management Strategy in place. The language is just a little bit too slow for me, that as such $75,000 has also been provided in Budget 2008 to commence the development of a comprehensive plan and then to say that we are working towards delivering on the commitment. I would really urge the minister to see that this development of a Land Use Management Strategy is done as quickly as possible because I really do believe that has to have top priority over the selling off of Crown land.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

Before the Speaker calls oral questions, I would again like to remind hon. members, whether they are reading from prepared texts or whether they are giving speeches in the House, it is just as unparliamentary to refer to people in the House by their names as it is by referring to them in debate in the House. I ask all hon. members from now on, when they read documents, not to refer to any member by their name.

Oral questions.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, nurses in Bonavista are protesting today because of staff shortages and workload concerns. We know the Minister of Health and the Premier will meet later today with pathologists in the Province to address similar concerns in their workplace.

I ask the Minister: have any immediate actions been taken, or are you willing to take some action to address the concerns that have been expressed by nurses consistently since last year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As a government, I think, Mr. Speaker, we have demonstrated very clearly that we are always ready to respond to the changing needs in our health system, to respond to some of the challenges that we have in recruiting in some locations. Bonavista is one location, I say, Mr. Speaker, where Eastern Health has had some challenges in trying to recruit some nurses, and last year they came up with some new financial incentives that have given them some success.

As I understand, Eastern Health is trying to work through now with each of the facilities that they operate; each of the facilities has a responsibility to provide their staff some vacation time for the summer. I think the issue being discussed in Bonavista now, today, as I understand it, is the issue around summer vacations, and how they might be accommodated. Eastern Health is working through that issue.

I, myself, will be meeting with the Nurses' Union over the course of the next week to discuss some of the issues that they think are important, that we need to be addressing in the short term.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe the minister could give us an update in the House once those discussions are completed, because last year this was a problem in which nurses in this hospital and others around the Province could not get the vacation time they wanted.

Mr. Speaker, these nurses in Bonavista have also decided that they no longer want to do bookkeeping duties between the hours of midnight and 8:00 a.m. They believe that patient care should be their priority.

I ask the minister: Why would nurses in our system today be required to complete duties such as bookkeeping as part of their job description?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as many of you would know, as you have been patients in clinics or hospitals around the Province, there are patient charts that are maintained on every patient that you see. The clinician who has seen that patient has a responsibility to do their own charting. So, whether it is nurses or physicians or any other clinician, they would do their own charting as a normal course of practice in seeing their patients.

One other thing that happens in some clinics throughout the Province, I say, Mr. Speaker, and Bonavista happens to be one of them, during the midnight hours, when the normal clinics are not operating, there is a physician available, together with a nurse available, to provide services to patients who may present in an unscheduled way for an emergency visit. When that happens, the nurse involved would be the person who may have been involved with the registration of that patient. It would happen as individuals come in - because it is an unplanned visit, I say, Mr. Speaker. It is coming through the emergency department. Sometimes it may be a very busy evening, but more frequently than not after midnight it is a very slow night, so there is not enough clerical staff to be able to provide ongoing service twenty-four hours a day. So, what happens is the nurse provides that when it happens.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That is it.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, these nurses really feel that their job is to provide essential medical care in those particular hospitals. They also feel that other support workers should be hired to do bookkeeping or certain levels of record keeping that is required.

I ask the minister: Will you meet with Eastern Health to ask if those kinds of services or support staff can be put in place?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: The answer is yes.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My next question is for the Minister of Education.

In the last couple of days, I have asked the minister a number of questions regarding the new teacher allocation formula. Mr. Speaker, we know that this allocation formula will remove teaching units from certain schools in the Province.

I have to ask the minister: At what point will they start looking at the quality of education, and preserving the integrity of the programs in smaller schools, as opposed to just slashing teachers and transferring them out?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, the whole essence of the new method for allocating teachers is based on being able to provide the prescribed provincial curriculum in every school in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we do regular evaluations of the curriculum to ensure that there is a quality education in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, what we have in this Province is a situation where we have a declining birth rate. As I indicated yesterday, since 2003 we have almost 12,000 less students in the schools, and over the next seven to eight years, Mr. Speaker, we are also going to be losing another 10,000 students. In saying that, we also have schools where there is an increase in the school population. So we wanted to look at a formula and a way and a method to allocate teachers that would first start with the school, look at the programming requirements in that school, and the needs of that school. As opposed to a top-down, here are your numbers, go make it work.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer.

MS BURKE: So each school will develop a plan as to how they can provide the prescribed curriculum for the numbers that they have and, in consultation with the board, the determined allocation is made. Then, that is how we allocate the teachers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, teachers in those schools that I have spoken with have told me that, although population is declining, the needs of the students are not fewer than they have been yesterday or the day before. In fact, Mr. Speaker, they feel that there are larger problems related to learning disabilities and behavioural problems, and other illnesses that some children face.

I ask the minister: Are you concerned that fewer teaching units in some of these schools will see certain students falling through the cracks in our education system, especially in rural areas?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, one issue we talk about with this method of allocating teachers is the cap on classrooms. We have it now at twenty for Kindergarten and twenty-five, for September coming, from one to four, which will roll out in Grade 5 and Grade 6 in the subsequent years, and twenty-seven at Grade 7.

Another important component of this teacher allocation is also that in our smaller schools where there is multi-grading we also have maximum cap sizes on those classes so that, if there has to be a combination of grades that come together, at no point will that exceed fifteen students.

There were caps in place in the previous formula that we no longer use, and the formula that we have, in some cases, mirrors it but certainly is more generous.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the minister talked about capping the number of children in a classroom, and we have no problem with that - in fact, we think it needs to be done – but we do not think that requirement should be met by moving units out of rural schools to meet that particular requirement, Minister, and we have concerns about it.

I ask you: Why are you not prepared to cap the number of grades that will be taught in one classroom?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, in some of our smaller schools in Newfoundland and Labrador we actually have a number of schools that have less than twenty-five students from Kindergarten to Grade 12. We also have many schools where there is multi-grading, where we have one and two students per grade. Sometimes, in the configuration, say, from a K-6 school - that will happen in St. Lewis next year - there is actually one grade where they will be no students, so we will not be teaching that curriculum.

Every school is different, every school is unique; the composition and the numbers are there. That is why it is so important that, as we allocate teachers, we start right at the school level as opposed to just basing it on numbers.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister - this morning, when she was on Labrador Morning, she made a comment about a program for Aboriginal teacher allocation, and the fact that there was $750,000 to be invested into that particular initiative - can you tell me how many teachers will be hired, and in what schools they will be placed?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, once we have that information finalized then I can certainly speak to it. At this point, I can indicate that there are two guidance counsellors and, as well, there is another teacher that will be working in the school in Nain.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It seems like the minister really has very little information when it comes to this. Yesterday I asked her how many teachers would retire from the system; she did not know. I asked her how many new teachers would be hired; she did not know. I asked her how many were going to be hired under this new Aboriginal program; she seems not to know that.

Mr. Speaker, from yesterday, has the minister now had an opportunity to look at the number of teachers that will leave the system this year, and the number of new teachers that will be hired to replace them?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, what is important here is that we felt, based on the new allocation of teachers, that in essence we would see more teachers in Newfoundland and Labrador next year. We actually increased the Budget by over $3 million to accommodate the fact that we anticipate more teachers.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to be perfectly clear that there will be no rationalization of the number of teachers in our schools based on the number of retirements. We will determine how many teachers we need in the system, and we anticipate we will need more teachers next year than what we had this year.

If a number of the teachers in the allocation that we require for next year are present teachers who retire they will be replaced, but in no way are we counting retirements or being cute about this or somehow using attrition. If we have a required number of teachers, and a number of them retire, we will hire the teachers that will replace the ones that retire.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the school boards have already made decisions and schools have been contacted.

I ask the minister again - she makes a good speech, but - how long will be have to wait to see the number of teachers that are coming out and the number of teachers that will be hired to replace them? A very simple question.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I will try to give a very simple answer because I have answered this question every day this week and I will continue to answer it again today.

As soon as we have the information available, whether it is next week or the week after, or in three weeks time, as soon as we know what the final allocations are we can certainly make that public.

It is not something that we are going to try to hide, how many teachers we have hired. It will be reflected in our budgets, it will be reflected in the reports from our schools boards, and, Mr. Speaker, once we have those final numbers I will only be more than too pleased to release them publicly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Is the minister also prepared to do another evaluation of the units being removed from schools in Labrador - almost every school from the South Coast to the North Coast - and look at how this is going to affect the programming in those schools, the multi-grading in those classrooms, have a good hard look at it and see if there is something that you can do to maintain the complement of teachers that is presently there?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, it begs the question: Is our method of allocating teachers and the fact that we did an extensive consultation, we had a report from our commissioners, we did extensive analysis on it, was it only to say that we will not move any teachers or schools would not lose teachers? We have examples where schools will actually not be offering the grade they had the year before, so it just does not make sense that, you know, we will come up with a method so that everyone is protected.

What we have to do and what is prudent in this Province is to make sure that as we have shifting populations, a declining birth rate and a prescribed curriculum that we have to offer, that we have to do it in the most responsible way we can. Mr. Speaker, just to assign numbers was not good enough. We want to make sure that we look at the needs from each school and that is how we then determine the number of teachers to provide that particular curriculum.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Most of my questions have been related to rural schools, but I was contacted yesterday by a teacher who told me there was a guidance counsellor position being eliminated at I.J. Samson school here in the centre of St. John's.

The minister launched an anti-bullying campaign in most of the schools around the Province and drug awareness programs, all which these individuals are responsible for in the schools. We know that centre city schools have their own set of very unique problems when it comes to these things.

I ask the minister: Why is a guidance counsellor position being eliminated in this school while the staff there are telling us that there is still a very strong demonstrated need to maintain that unit?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, one thing that did not change for next year in our new method of allocating teachers was the ratio for guidance counsellors. The reason why that was not changed was I felt that the guidance counsellors do a significant amount of work in the schools. There was a new ratio that was recommended in the report but it did not provide enough rational or accountability.

We actually have someone hired right now who is doing a piece of work to look at the work of the guidance counsellors to help us with the accountability to make sure that we understand how much work they are required to do, what is reasonable to expect any particular guidance counsellor to do and how do we ensure that that work is done in the timeframes that are suitable to the school, to the students and to the parents.

Mr. Speaker, there has been no chances in the allocation for guidance counsellors for next year, but it is a piece of work that I think is very significant that will guide us in the future as we allocate guidance counsellors.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My next questions are regarding the gas price regulation. I am not sure which minister is responsible, so I guess whoever answers.

Mr. Speaker, there was a freeze on gas prices in Zone 11 in Labrador and that freeze was lifted today, far earlier than it would have been in any other year, and usually the service is delivered from what we call tanker to tanker. It is fuelled up in the spring. When the tanker comes in to refuel in the spring, the price changes. However, that price changed today and I would like to have an answer as to the reason for it.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the Zone being lifted, but I do not have the details as to why at this particular time, so I will take the liberty of coming back to the House with the answer when I consult with my officials.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, last evening I received several petitions from residents on the Northeast Avalon, in particular those living between Torbay and Pouch Cove, regarding the route of the proposed Torbay Bypass Road. These people feel that the current proposal will turn two kilometres of the road through Torbay into a five-lane highway. Instead, they suggested a new route that should start at the boundaries of St. John's to improve the safety and congestion for those concerned.

I ask the minister: Has a final route been chosen by government for the Torbay Bypass Road?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: I thank my hon. colleague for the question.

The design work and our field survey work is nearing completion. An environmental review is required under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act prior to the project being approved for construction or to meet the requirements of the funding agreement. A revised draft will be sent to Transport Canada and work cannot be completed until we have an environmental report approved.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, during a recent information meeting at Torbay, there were, I guess, officials there from the department as well as approximately 120 residents. The concerns that they expressed were about the six side roads and the many driveways which will come on to that main highway. It affects some 214 residents.

I ask the minister: Will government consider constructing a highway that will totally bypass the Town of Torbay?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, the survey data collection and detail design and the property acquisition has been ongoing for some time with regard to the Torbay Bypass Road, and it is nearing completion. The utility relocation design and the construction to accommodate the bypass route is also underway, so all that is in the design right now. There has been a fair amount of design work put into this particular project. It is ongoing and we are looking at the best route to alleviate the congestion and the traffic coming out from Torbay.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker.

At that particular recent meeting, some of the people living along those routes were concerned about their property and the highway taking away their lawns, as a matter of fact. That was the way it was explained to me. Others were concerned about the construction, the delays that will happen there, more or less a bottleneck where the traffic is fairly much tied up at this present time.

I know the minister said that the plans are ongoing, but I was just wondering if she could give us an approximate date when the start up would be for the construction of this highway.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker.

I thank my colleague for the question, but I cannot provide a date for him right now. That process is still taking place and as soon as I have a date that I can make him aware of, I certainly will do that for you.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Labrador Affairs.

I ask if he is aware that the price freeze in Zone 11 was lifted today and that consumers in that region are paying twenty-two to twenty-three cents more for petroleum products today on a product that was stocked in October, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

MR. O'BRIEN: As I informed the hon. House, this lies within the Public Utilities Board. They have jurisdiction over that which is within my responsibility as the Minister of Government Services. I will endeavour to consult with those officials and determine the reason why it was lifted, and if it was lifted early I will determine that as well and get back to this House at a later date.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is obvious the Minister of Labrador Affairs has no knowledge of this, but what I will say is I have contacted the Petroleum Pricing Commission, Mr. Speaker, and I have spoken to individuals there and there was no rationale given to me as to why this was done. I think it is unacceptable that people should have to pay twenty-two cents more today for fuel that was stocked in October at October's prices.

I ask if you can work immediately to consult with them and to see if this reversal can be made.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

MR. O'BRIEN: As I just informed the House in the past two questions and two occasions, I will endeavour to determine why it was lifted so early – if it is early, in fact – if there are resources there and fuel capacity there to keep the zone restricted. I will determine that and I will get back to the House at a later date.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My next question is for the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.

From the information that we have received regarding teaching units being transferred out of North Coast schools, were you aware that there could be up to twelve positions, Minister, being removed from schools in your district? I ask if you are concerned about this, and if you have had any consultation with the Minister of Education or the school board on the matter.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS POTTLE: Mr. Speaker, for the last week I have been on the North Coast of Labrador. I have talked with school councils, with parents, with principals and with the school board, and they brought their issues and concerns forward to me. I have forwarded them to the Minister of Education.

Right now the allocations are not finalized, and I have asked to be briefed on that as soon as things unfold. I will be keeping up on it, and I am up on it.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister if she is concerned that taking those units out of those particular schools will affect the programs being offered in North Coast schools, especially the school in Nain.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS POTTLE: Like I said, Mr. Speaker, the allocation allowance has not been finalized yet.

I am concerned with some numbers that are out there; but, like I said, they are not finalized so it is kind of premature for me to base my comments yet. We will wait for further information on that, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the minister was meeting with principals and in the schools, she would also know that they were contacted by the school boards and they were given those particular numbers.

Is she telling me now that the school board has since changed its mind and that they will be revamping their numbers?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I want to confirm what we had said yesterday, that a number of

teachers had been given layoff notices because in their contract there was date by which they had to be notified of their positions for next year. If there was an ongoing process that was not finalized, legally, until they had a position that could be offered, they would have to be notified of the layoff.

Mr. Speaker, that is what has been happening this week. We do not necessarily have the finalization, the final numbers, for every school in this Province. As I have said, whether it is in Labrador or any other part of Newfoundland, when these numbers are finalized we will be releasing them publicly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just a quick question for the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

In the Estimates on Tuesday evening, I asked the minister questions with regard to a number of fisherpeople in our Province who had sold their licences, retired their licences, under a federal government program dating back three to four years ago. Many of them feel that they had to meet discriminatory tax laws under Revenue Canada at that particular time.

I ask the minister if he would support an all-party committee of the House of Assembly to advocate on behalf of these individual fishers in our Province to try and improve their benefits and to try and help them seek remuneration that they were owed by the federal government. I ask if has had a chance to entertain that, and if he has made a decision on it.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think the member will recall, at the time that she asked the question, I indicated that I certainly had no difficulty with it in principle, I would take the matter under advisement and give it some thought, and when I was finished that process I would report accordingly.

I have not completed that process yet, Mr. Speaker, but perhaps in due course.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

The Auditor General highlighted the lack of a 911 service in this Province in his report released in January 2006. He pointed out that Newfoundland and Labrador is the only Atlantic Province without Province-wide coverage for land-based 911 and recommended that the government consider implementing a 911 emergency response service.

I ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs why this government has not yet even taken steps toward implementing a full Province-wide 911 service?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to inform the hon. member that we have taken some steps. We are taking steps. When I became Minister of Municipal Affairs back in November, my first meeting with the FES officials was to put 911 back on the table in terms of moving it forward.

Right now we have some money there to engage a consultant to see where we are going to go, because it is not just simply turning a switch and you are into 911. There is a significant amount of co-ordination. There is a certain amount of sophistication that has to go into it. There is a certain amount of people that have to be involved.

I had an opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to go to Nova Scotia and look at their 911 system. When I talked to the people there, it is just amazing how many things they had to go through to make it a reality.

Mr. Speaker, we are from ground zero - we are moving forward. We have a lot of hoops to get through, and we want the consultants to show us the way to get there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am glad to know that the minister has started moving on this, but he must know that this is really urgent in the Province. Not all people are aware they do not have 911. Children are conditioned to think that 911 is the number to call in an emergency, and the Department of Tourism forecasts more travellers to the Province, all of whom think we have a 911 system.

How long do you think this process is going to take, Mr. Minister?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell the hon. member how long it is going to be.

Like I said before, we have to move from getting – just think about it, Mr. Speaker, the number of communities we have in Newfoundland and Labrador with no numbers, just civic addresses on them. Just think of that part first. That is only one hurdle that we have to get over. That is a monumental task on its own. Just think of that one, the co-ordination of ambulance services, the co-ordination of hospitals, the co-ordination of police services, fire departments, volunteer and composite fire departments - that is significant.

To give a date, Mr. Speaker, is unrealistic right now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, surely, if the minister has consulted already with one province and knows what they went through, he should be able to at least tell us if we are talking a year, two years, three years.

Can you not give us some specifics? The people in this Province are waiting to hear those specifics, Mr. Minister.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Mr. Speaker, I could give a very brief answer but I will not do that because that would not be becoming of me as a member.

Mr. Speaker, I said before, the thing here is that we are moving ahead. It is on the agenda for us to do something. I have to look at where we are, where we are going, and how we are going to get there. Like I said, there are a lot of hurdles to jump over. We are going to take our time to make sure it is right; because, as I said, the co-ordination is very, very important. It is not like just turning a switch and you are on 911 today and everything is all hunky-dory. It is not that case, so to give you an exact time would be very premature for me to do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

The time for Oral Questions has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

MR. RIDEOUT: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I would like to raise a brief point of order for Your Honour's consideration, coming out Question Period, and not as much for what took place today but perhaps for future guidance in case it takes place again.

The hon. Leader of the Opposition questioned my colleague, the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, regarding teaching units as it relates to the Coast of Labrador. She asked the questions in the context, as I understood them, of how the minister felt about those matters, whatever the answer to them might be, relative to her position as a Member of the House of Assembly representing the North Coast of Labrador.

There are two points I want to make on that, Mr. Speaker. Number one, ministers can only be questioned in Question Period on matters that are relative to their departmental responsibilities. The Minister of Aboriginal Affairs has no responsibility or jurisdiction over the allocation of teaching units. Therefore, it is against the rules of order to question the minister regarding that matter. The question ought to be appropriately put to the Minister of Education.

The second point is that, while the minister has responsibility for Aboriginal matters, she does not have responsibility for education in Aboriginal communities, and the allocation of teaching units.

I bring that point to Your Honour's attention because it theoretically could happen again at some point. I remember the very first question that I got, as Minister of Transportation, was about a matter related to transportation in my district, then, of Lewisporte. Of course, the Speaker noticed it right away and intervened accordingly. It is inappropriate to try to question members as members. You can only question ministers as ministers regarding ministerial responsibility for matters that fall under their jurisdiction.

My colleague here has a lot of jurisdiction related to Aboriginal matters, but one of which she does not have - she can give her opinion as an MHA, but she cannot give her opinion as to the appropriate allocation for teaching units because that is solely the jurisdiction of the school board concerned and the Minister of Education. The Minister of Aboriginal Affairs does not have that jurisdiction.

I just bring that to Your Honour's attention.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, I would assume?

MR. PARSONS: Yes, to the point of order, Mr. Speaker.

I would certainly not agree with the comments made by the Government House Leader. The Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, I would think, unless we are all completely wrong here, is the minister responsible for anything that concerns Aboriginal Affairs. Now, I would think -

MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: I say to the Government House Leader, you do not normally interrupt when anyone is speaking.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

MR. PARSONS: Maybe you should follow your own advice and let me finish and then you can certainly respond. You do not normally do that.

To finish, Mr. Speaker -

MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

MR. PARSONS: Again, Mr. Speaker, it is very unusual for the Government House Leader to be so disruptive and interruptive.

What I was saying here, Mr. Speaker, is, it so happens that the Member for Torngat is also the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. As the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, I would think she has the say about anything that concerns Aboriginal Affairs. I would think the quality of education for Aboriginal people in her district is a matter of Aboriginal Affairs. That seems pretty logical to me. It is the same as if there is a policing issue, the same as if it is a municipal issue, the same as if it is a health care issue, any issue, an environmental issue.

We asked questions in this House of that Minister of Aboriginal Affairs concerning Mealy Mountain a couple of weeks ago. If we are not going to be able to ask the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs a question that impacts Aboriginal people, what is the purpose of it? That is my first point.

The second point I would make is, I absolutely, fully agree that it is up to government who responds. The Leader of the Opposition or any member of the Opposition has the right to ask the question. Now, it is up to government – if the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs decides that she does not want to stand and answer it, the government can designate who they want. They can have the Minister of Municipal Affairs, if they want to, get up and answer that question. That is totally the government's prerogative as to who responds, but it is certainly the obligation and appropriate to ask a Minister of Aboriginal Affairs questions about Aboriginal people.

In this case, the question was about the quality of education the Aboriginal children are going to receive as a result of the teacher allocations.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House leader to his point of order or further explanatory statement.

MR. RIDEOUT: I will make one point and one point only.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I ask the hon. members for their co-operation.

MR. RIDEOUT: I will make one point and one point only. The question was about the number of teaching units in schools on the North Coast of Labrador. That was the question, Mr. Speaker, and that is the point I am bring to Your Honour's attention.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I ask members to my right for their co-operation.

The Government House Leader raises the point of order under an interesting scenario, one that the Speaker certainly does not have the knowledge to refer to right now, but the hon. the Opposition House Leader is 100 per cent right and correct. Opposition members have every right to ask questions and government has every right to either answer them or to direct a person to answer the question or not to answer them at all. It is entirely under the purview of the government of the day.

The Chair will take the Point of Order as raised by the hon. the Government House Leader and report back to the House in a reasonable period of time.

Presenting reports by standing and select committees.

Tabling of documents.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand today to table the Annual Report of the Public Utilities Board on Operations carried out under the Automobile Insurance Act.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents.

Notices of motion.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act to Amend the Legal Aid Act," Bill 29.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act to Amend the Partnership Act," Bill 30.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act to Amend the Provincial Court Act 1991," Bill 31.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions.

Answers to questions for which notice has been given.

Petitions.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition to present and I guess it is in relation to the questions I asked the minister today. The petition reads,

WHEREAS there is a need for a Torbay Bypass Road; and

WHEREAS the route proposed by government will cause safety problems and create increased traffic congestion; and

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, call upon all members of the House of Assembly to urge government to reconsider the route being proposed for the Torbay Bypass Road.

Mr. Speaker, I have petitions here signed by the residents of Torbay and Bauline Line, Torbay and Pouch Cove, and Middle Cove, I think.

Mr. Speaker, the questions they are asking - they know that this road is well underway of being constructed. What they are asking government, is wondering if the route can be changed to start at the limits of the City of St. John's, which will take the route two kilometres which is going to go through the Town of Torbay. That is the concern of the residents.

I know when they had the information session there, the engineers did outline some reasons for the route, the way it is going. One of the concerns that they raised was the watershed area, but the people are saying that Bay Bulls–Big Pond and Windsor Lake are close to highways as well.

The other issue was with regard to possible expansion to the St. John's airport, even though there is no request for it now, and the landscape, they thought, was fairly hilly and would be too steep for vehicular traffic. The residents are saying, if that is the case, how would you be able to extend the airport if the terrain is not suitable for a road?

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, they have made their concerns about it, and they have asked us to bring forth the petitions as I presented today. Like I stated earlier, the concern is, there are 215 residents in that immediate area and they are saying at peak times now there is major congestion there, and they believe that this will create more problems.

I am just asking government, through the minister - and I appreciate her answers today - to reconsider the route, and hopefully the Torbay Bypass Road will totally bypass the Town of Torbay and take the route that was proposed at this public meeting.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am very pleased to be able to stand and present this petition that has been signed by hundreds of people from rural communities and various parts of the Island.

Whereas 911 emergency number services are available only in the Northeast Avalon and Corner Brook regions of the Island portion of Newfoundland and Labrador; – well, we now know it is being extended to Labrador West - and,

Whereas there is no single emergency services number or government sponsored public education campaign for residents and travellers and tourists in the non-covered areas of the Province; and

Whereas 911 is a universally recognized emergency service available in all the other Atlantic Provinces, and citizens of this Province are unaware that the service is not available Province-wide, which may actually hinder the timely receipt of emergency services;

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge government to immediately undertake measures to install a Province-wide 911 emergency number service, and put in place a public safety education campaign designed to help the general public, travellers and tourists, be safer and better prepared.

This, Mr. Speaker, is an urgent situation. People around the Province, besides the hundreds I have in my hand today, there have been thousands of people who have signed a similar petition. I won't promise the minister that I will stand up 50,000 times and present this petition over the next Parliament – it would take the next Parliament more if I did that - I will present them in hundreds, but I do want the minister to know that it is thousands of people who have signed this petition.

Mr. Bob Simmons, whom some of you know, has spearheaded this effort and he, himself, has gotten about 90 per cent of the signatures.

The minister has announced today, and I am glad that he did announce, that he has begun to take steps with regard to the setting up of a 911 emergency service, but what I want to really urge the minister to realize is how urgent this is.

We have had situations in the Province where people have assumed there is a 911 service, and they have used the 911 service expecting a response, and getting nowhere because they do not know that a 911 service does not exist.

It is very bothersome that even inside of our government we do not seem to be aware that a 911 does not exist everywhere; because, on their Web site, with regard to the anti-violence initiative in our Province, the Violence Prevention Initiative - and this is very disturbing - this is an initiative that, on their Web site, is giving information for emergencies to the people of this Province and at the very top it says: Emergencies - Call 911.

It does not indicate that only means something at the moment if you live in Corner Brook or if you live in St. John's. So, even people inside of our government agencies who have put Web sites together to help the people of this Province are not aware that 911 is not available throughout our Province.

I look forward to having many times when I can stand and speak to this, Mr. Speaker. I see my time is up now. I promise the House and I promise the minister, I will come back next week and speak again to the issue.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to present a petition on behalf of residents in the Province who are concerned about the new approach to allocating teachers in schools, especially in schools where teaching units are being transferred out of their school into other regions.

Mr. Speaker, many of these people believe that it is being done so that the minister can meet her own requirements on classroom size and capping the number of individuals who will be in a classroom.

I do not think anyone in this Province, Mr. Speaker, is against that particular policy. In fact, it is something they have been asking for, for quite some time, but I think it is wrong to try and do that and to meet that regulation and requirement by transferring teachers out of smaller schools in this Province in order to meet that complement.

Mr. Speaker, the residents in the Labrador region are particularly concerned about this, and it is unfortunate that we have not heard from the Labrador members who are in the caucus of the government, especially those who claim to be in ministerial positions, Mr. Speaker, and how they feel about it, because it will affect the programs that are being offered in many of these schools.

Schools in L'Anse au Loup, in West St. Modeste, in St. Lewis, in Port Hope Simpson, in Rigolet, in Cartwright, in Black Tickle, in Postville, in Hopedale, in Nain, every single one of these schools will now lose teachers; and they will not be transferred into other regions of Labrador, but they will be transferred right out of Labrador, and it will affect the programs that are being offered to many of these children right now.

Mr. Speaker, I know for certain that many of the kids who go to school in multi-grade classrooms are only now being offered the basic programs. That means enough credits to allow you to graduate when you get to Grade 12 and allow you to be able to go into a post-secondary education program. A lot of the courses they do are already being offered on-line and they have the option to study those credits in that format or not have any credit, which is unfortunate in many cases. Sometimes you look at it in terms of the technology being available. At least it allows them the opportunity.

Right now what we are going to see with the reduced number of teachers is more grades being put in one class. I have no problem, Mr. Speaker, with multi-grading. I was educated in a multi-grade classroom in a small school, but I certainly was not in a classroom with seven other grades. I was always placed in a classroom where there might have been two grades or three grades with one teacher. I know how difficult that was for that one teacher being able to deliver the curriculum of three and four different grades whether to one student or to ten students. It is very challenging.

I think that what the minister needs to do and the government needs to do is look at what are the minimum standards that we will accept. At what point do we say three grades or four grades in a classroom is enough and therefore we should have two teachers teaching Grade K-6 and not just one teacher? This is the issue that they are raising. They are petitioning the government to have another look at it and I certainly hope they will.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions.

Orders of the Day.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to call motion 3 which is the Budget debate. I believe last day the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi finished her time and the next speaker would revert to our side of the House.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a great pleasure for me today, as the Minister of Labrador Affairs and certainly the Member for the District of Lake Melville, to get on my feet here and have a few minutes to talk about the Budget and to have a discussion, I guess, to inform the people of Labrador and certainly people of the Province of some of the great things that are happening within Labrador and the great things that our government is doing in Labrador.

Before I do that, this is the first opportunity that I have had since the election to stand in this hon. House, I want to say that I certainly want to send out my sincere thank you to my constituents in the great District of Lake Melville, to the communities of Churchill Falls, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, the community of Sheshatshiu, Northwest River and Mud Lake.

Mr. Speaker, I am very, very pleased to sit here in this hon. House with this government, to be a part of this government under the leadership of Premier Williams and to sit with my Cabinet colleagues as we continue the road of prosperity for our Province.

Mr. Speaker, the 2008 Budget without question is one of the best budgets. I think, when we look at the issues that have come back and the comments, I suppose, that have come back, it is very clear that the people in this Province are pleased with the way in which we have shown great leadership under Premier Williams and our government.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is hesitant to interrupt, but for the second time the hon. member has reverted back to something that the Chair has raised here several times in referring to members by their names. I ask the hon. member for his cooperation, I know it was a slip of the tongue, but if he would be kind enough to abide by the parliamentary procedure here it would be appreciated.

MR. HICKEY: I apologize, Mr. Speaker, and I will try to certainly live up to those expectations.

Mr. Speaker, one of the documents that I am very pleased to have been involved with right from the start is the Northern Strategic Plan for Labrador. You know, when you look back over the years, certainly in my municipal life as a former mayor and a former town councillor I dealt with many governments. I dealt with governments under then Brian Tobin, I dealt with governments under then Roger Grimes, and certainly I can tell you in my municipal life it was very frustrating. It was very frustrating for the people of Labrador from the perspective that we could not get any commitments, any investment from the provincial government of the day. I will say to you, that under this Administration under the leadership of Premier Williams that we have made great investments in Labrador.

When I look at the Northern Strategic Plan - and it is our plan, it is Labrador's plan - it is a plan in which we look to the future and we look at the investments that we are going to make in infrastructure. I just want to highlight some of those investments, Mr. Speaker, because it is very, very important. I remember the days, Mr. Speaker, when the hon. crowd on the other side and the Leader of the Opposition who is there now - she was the member then for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair - in which we saw the government of the day want to take $97 million of the Transportation Initiative Fund and put it into the general revenue of the Province. I can tell you that did not go over well and they did not do it.

I will say to you, Mr. Speaker, that when we looked at the Lower Churchill, I remember then Premier Tobin coming in to Churchill Falls and everybody had all the bells and whistles. I think it was Bouchard, the Premier of the Province, who was coming up. They did not even have the foresight to invite the Innu and to consult with the Innu nation, whose very land was eligible for land claims.

I have watched all of this over the years. We have watched the Trans-Labrador Highway. I always, at every opportunity over the many years, have fought - and not only I but many leaders in Labrador - have fought for this Trans-Labrador Highway. I take every opportunity to certainly recognize the efforts of the late Lawrence O'Brien for his dedication in ensuring that the federal government put in the $340 million to get that road work.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: I am glad that our government saw that this is a major project, the most important transportation project for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I will say it here today, as I always do, the future of this Province lies in the development of the resources of Labrador. We do not need to be sending our children to Alberta because we are going to develop Labrador for the benefit of Labradorians, Labrador communities and for the people of this Province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, from the Labrador perspective there are many, many issues, of course, that arise, and there are many, many challenges. I want to go through, certainly, the transportation side because this is very, very important. This is probably one of the most important issues that has faced Labradorians and Labrador leaders over the last while. I am very happy to say that with the work that was done by the two former Ministers of Transportation, myself and the present Minister of Transportation, that we have moved the Trans Labrador Highway from a dream to a reality. We are moving that forward in a very big way, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, when we talk about the Northern Strategic Plan and we talk about the great initiatives, we will see close on $300 million, Mr. Speaker, spent on the Northern Strategic Plan for Labrador. You know, when we look at some of the infrastructure, even the member, although she will get up and she will get on her high horse and talk about the terrible things we are doing as a government, you are not doing this and you are not doing that, let me tell you, her district, the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, has benefited greatly from this government.

When I look at issues like the new school that we are putting in Port Hope Simpson, the new school that we are now in the process of constructing down in L'Anse-au-Loup, when we look at a new depot that we put in Chateau Pond, why, we would have to put almost $2 million in. Because she was the member who was a part of a government that moved the highway, caused the rock cuts, our government had to come in and spend close on $2 million for the depot to keep that road open during the wintertime. I have to say, Mr. Speaker, we had great success on that.

I want to mention the new airport for Port Hope Simpson. I can tell you, when I was the Minister of Transportation and Works, she had that buried that far in the bottom, in the bowels of Transportation and Works, it took us three or four days to get all the paperwork up to the minister's office so we could find out where it was. For the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair to get up on her high horse and say this and say that, we know the history and we know that she did not deliver for her district, but this government has delivered for her district.

I can say to you, when it comes to the small communities of Norman Bay and Williams Harbour, they were paying fares on the ferry twice what they should have been paying. They were paying twice what they should have been paying and sometimes three times what they should have been paying for freight. They were being gouged, and it happened under her watch, Mr. Speaker. The people out there I am sure that are dealing with those types of issues know that.

We look at the Apollo and dropping the fares on the Apollo. This government has had the Apollo on earlier and later than the hon. crowd when they were in charge on the other side. I can say to you, Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to be a part of this government that has done those good things for the people of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair and for the people of Labrador.

One of the things that has been a huge issue for us in Labrador also, Mr. Speaker, is regarding the issues of infrastructure. I am happy to stand in my place here today and I am happy to say that in my district alone, in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, they will see over $54 million worth of new infrastructure with a new long-term health care facility. They talked about it, but they never did it.

A new auditorium: again, they talked about it but they did not do it.

We have a new administration building, close on $3 million, that is being put there with the Grenfell-Labrador regional health board.

Mr. Speaker, we will see a new francophone school established there, this year, start of construction on that.

Of course, this year we will also see the expansion of the Government Service Centre, Mr. Speaker, that is going to give us full service. I want to say to the Minister of Government Services, our appreciation to have expanded that service in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, that will serve not only the people of Happy Valley-Goose Bay but certainly the people of Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, health care is a huge issue and has been a huge issue for a long time for us in Labrador. I know in Labrador West - and I want to speak to the hospital in Labrador West. The hospital in Labrador West is a very old hospital and needed to be replaced. I have to say, while we have had movement and commitment to spend close on over $60 million for a new hospital, I am a little disappointed with the Iron Ore Company of Canada and the fact that we have some issues regarding the site. I can tell you our government is committed to a new hospital in Labrador West, and they deserve it, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: I can tell you, the Member for Labrador West, he makes sure everybody in this government is aware of that need. The fact is, I can say to you, Mr. Speaker, that I hope we will get a resolve to the land issue there and get the construction going sooner rather than later.

A new college building is going over in Labrador West at $22 million. Labrador West, Mr. Speaker, and let there be no mistake about it, is giving to the resources of this Province through the mines, the Iron Ore Company of Canada and Wabush. I have said this many times before, with the wealth of the natural resources in Labrador, the wealth of the natural resources in Labrador, I see great things happening for Labrador West. I see it, as I often say, as the new Fort McMurray of the East. I can tell you, infrastructure is going to be a key challenge for us. Affordable housing has got to be something that we, as a government, are addressing and working towards. Working with the different departments and ministers, we are going to address that, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as we move forward with our plan, there is another initiative that I want to talk about this year particularly. I want to certainly commend our Minister of Justice. He has been to Labrador I believe six times since October. Last week he was just up on the North Coast of Labrador. The tremendous work that the Minister of Justice and the Department of Justice is doing now in Labrador is unprecedented. I want to say, the correctional centre in Happy Valley – Goose Bay - the hon. Gerry Ottenheimer was the minister of the then Peckford government that built that facility and opened it. Until our government came into power, there had never been a Justice Minister under the old Liberal administration inside of that building. Some of them should have been there, but I can say to you, Mr. Speaker, we have had all of the Ministers of Justice there going through that facility and we are making great improvements to the justice issues in Labrador.

I am very happy when the Department of Justice and certainly the minister made the announcement that we are going to spend some $300,000 this year toward advancing the cause of a new correctional facility there, an add-on certainly for the women who right now have got to go outside of Labrador. We also are going to look at the issues of young offenders and the fact that they, too, Mr. Speaker, are going to have a place in which we can house them, rather than what has happened in the past.

The other one was the Legal Aid Office in Labrador West. That was something that Labrador West had been looking for, for a long time. I am happy and I commend the Member for Labrador West for keeping that on the front burners of this government for me and every minister here; how important that was. I can tell you, the present Minister of Justice saw the need, and his department was not long in seeing the need either, when he focused them in on it. I can tell you, that announcement was very welcome over in Labrador West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, I could go on here all day talking about the good news that is coming out of Labrador. There was one piece of good news that came out of the elections in October - and there were those on the island and in Labrador, some of them, that said, oh, no, she's gone. She will all go red. Well, I can tell you, she did not go red. We got our three seats in Labrador, and I am happy to say here, Mr. Speaker, that we have a colleague here - she is a colleague with me - as the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and the MHA for Torngat Mountains, and I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, there is nobody as passionate as the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs with this government about the issues of Northern Labrador and the Aboriginal people of Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: It is a great honour for me to serve with her at the Cabinet table and to call her a colleague as we sit around and talk about and ensure that the issues of Labrador are dealt with in a most expedient manner, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the provincial Budget was good news for Labrador and I want to take a few minutes because, while we work hard each and every day, all of us, as ministers and MHAs to advance the cause of our districts and our regions, it is Budget time, really, in which we see the fruits of our efforts.

While I can get up and talk about this Budget all day, and it is all good news and it is all good investments, when municipal leaders from Labrador put out press releases - and I want to relate to one we got on this Budget. This was from Mayor Jim Farrell and Mayor Graham Letto from the Town of Labrador City. I just want to put into the record what Mayor Farrell thought about this Budget, and I want to quote him because it is important. He said: I think it was a wonderful Budget, especially for the Coast of Labrador - said Jim Farrell, the President of the Combined Councils of Labrador, who represents thirty-two communities - I think it is a tremendous Budget, actually. We want to encourage tourism to come to Labrador, and have a good highway, and every dollar we spend towards that highway is a positive thing in my estimation.

The Mayor of Labrador City also gives great accolades to this Budget. He also reminds us about the resources of Labrador, and the fact that we have been a giving part and a giving region of this Province for many, many years, and it will be many, many years to come we have more to give.

All Labradorians have ever wanted is our fair share. All we have ever wanted is our fair share, to be a part of this Province, and I can tell you, under the leadership of Premier Williams and this government we are making great headways when it comes to those issues, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Even in my own hometown, Mr. Speaker, we had certainly great accolades from the Mayor of Happy Valley-Goose Bay. I want to read them into the record. Mayor Abbass also stated that, "Measures announced…" - in the Budget – "…will affect the town's budget in a positive manner. The elimination of the RST on insurance and the increase in the payroll tax threshold alone will save our taxpayers over twenty thousand dollars. A twenty per cent reduction of the cost share ratio on capital works for the next three years…" will see a savings of over six hundred thousand dollars to the community of Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

Mr. Speaker, they are very, very pleased. So I say to the Leader of the Opposition, while she is going around with all the doom and gloom, we will start sending her some of these press releases to get her up to speed, because obviously she has lost contact with the people of Labrador. She is so busy trying to become Leader of the Liberal Party, and making sure she keeps the seat she has, and all of that - and we all understand that; that is a tremendous pressure. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, we are doing great strides when it comes to the people of Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of other investments that I would like to also talk about here today when it comes to Labrador, particularly when it comes to the Department of Natural Resources. I want to commend the minister for her work and her department's work, along with the work that has been ongoing between the Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs and Natural Resources.

Certainly we will see close on $1.5 million from Natural Resources and Environment into new officers, a land management officer, a land surveyor inspector, an engineering technician. Many of those positions, Mr. Speaker, were taken away from Labrador by the last Administration.

Tourism, Culture and Recreation, we have seen $500,000 going to be continued by this government to be invested into the Labrador Winter Games to mark its tenth anniversary, Mr. Speaker, and I can tell you the people of Labrador are very excited about the Labrador Winter Games that will happen in the winter of 2009.

When we come to justice issues, there were a couple of points I missed when - and I want to talk about certainly the close on $700,000 that has been allotted by the Department of Justice for additional RCMP officers with the detachments in Labrador. As part of this we will see some great investment when it comes to the Department of Justice in Labrador.

There are a couple of other ones. Certainly, the $60,000 that we are going to be putting into the sheriff's office, this is something that has been wanted in Labrador for a long time. I want to commend the Minister of Justice for pushing that forward because this is very, very important. It is a very, very important opportunity for us to invest, and it is a great investment, I think, in the justice programs in Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, this Budget is, without question, one of the best budgets that we have seen in this Province, and for us in Labrador I will say I am very, very pleased. I am very, very pleased with the work that we have been doing, and I am very pleased with the commitment.

There are challenges, Mr. Speaker. There are challenges. There have been always challenges in Labrador. It is not easy to do work in Labrador. It is expensive to do work in Labrador, but let me say, Mr. Speaker, we are moving forward with a great lot of pride and support from the people of Labrador on all of our initiatives. I can say to you that I look forward to future budgets, to bringing home more money to Labrador to address the – and even, yes, even to the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair –

MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): Order please!

MR. HICKEY: - we will make sure that her district gets looked after, too, because I get the calls -

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

MR. HICKEY: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

MS JONES: Give him a few minutes to clue up.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HICKEY: The Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair is really enjoying this. I am glad she is listening.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of good things happening in Labrador. I want to say that it has been a great pleasure for me, as the Minister of Labrador Affairs, to be working with all of the different departments. That is the beauty about the Department of Labrador Affairs. While we may only be a small department, Mr. Speaker, we have the opportunity to work with the different ministers and the different departments, both at a bureaucratic level and at a ministerial level, to advance the issues of main importance to the people of Labrador.

I want to say, Mr. Speaker, I am very passionate about Labrador. It has been my home since I was a small boy, and certainly I want to see us gain the maximum benefits of our resources. I want to see our communities grow and prosper, and I want to see our Province as a whole continue to move forward.

The fact that we have always been known as a have-not-Province and today we are on the verge of being a have-Province instead of a have-not-Province is because of, without question, the leadership of our Premier and the leadership of this government.

When it comes to rural Newfoundland, I had the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to go out to many of the regions and to drive on many of the roads, and I can tell you it was a sad state, but we have put significant investment into transportation initiatives and I will say to you, Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province can expect more good work from this government as we move forward in our mandate over the course of the next three years.

Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for the leave and I will be up maybe some time in the future.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly want to have a few words on the Budget, and I think I probably have an hour this afternoon that I can speak, so I will take the opportunity to deal with some of the things that we have seen in the Budget in terms of how they will impact people, and some of the glaring omissions, I guess, that we would have discovered as well in relation to how it affects the broader population of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, I have no problem giving leave to any member in the House of Assembly, I say to the Member for Lake Melville, to get up and to speak. He has done it very rarely since this session of the House opened, so I certainly understand his need to take a little bit of extra time.

Mr. Speaker, I will, before I move on, make a couple of comments on some of the things that he has raised. It is obvious how desperate they are for good news and good attention to the Budget when you have to stand up in the House and start reading what everyone else had to say about you. If I had to stand up here every day and read every single e-mail or every single note that I received with regard to an issue in this Province, I would not get anything else done, I say to the hon. member. I guess when you are desperate for good news, you do that.

Mr. Speaker, one thing that he did say that I somewhat agree with is that the Member for Cartwright–L'Anse au Clair did very well for her district in this Budget, and I make no excuses for not acknowledging that, Mr. Speaker, because I did. I think that the people in my district have been very active, they have been very diligent in trying to pursue the interests and the infrastructure that they require for their communities. I am just happy to have had the opportunity to be able to support them, to meet directly with ministers within the government who saw fit to bring forward to their colleagues these kinds of infrastructure to be funded, and certainly supported the people in my district and supported me in making that happen. I have no problem acknowledging that on any occasion, Mr. Speaker.

What I did take exception to was his comment in which he said I moved the highway. Well, Mr. Speaker, in my day I have been accused of doing lots of wonderful, fabulous, unknown things but one of them was not picking up a highway and moving it, I can honestly say that to you. I certainly appreciate the comment in terms of the strength and endurance that I would carry in being able to transport a piece of highway from one location to another. I say to the hon. member, he gives me far too much credit when it comes to that because it is certainly not something I could or would endeavour to do.

Mr. Speaker, having said that, I do not want to get into taking up the valuable time that I have in debating the Budget to refer to some of the rhetoric that has been raised, because I think on any given day we can get up and talk about any kind of fluffy, puffy stuff that is going on within the Province or within our own districts. There are also important things that need to be acknowledged when dealing with the economic progress of the Province and where we are going in the future.

Mr. Speaker, very early on government said that they would use part of their revenues to pay down the deficit that this Province carries, and very early on I said I had absolutely no problem with that. I think good leadership is represented in how well you can keep your house in order and keeping your house in order means that you have to look at the long-term and not just the short-term. It means that if there is substantial debt that hangs over your head, then you must be able to carry that debt and you must have a plan to retire it over a period of time. In fact, Mr. Speaker, we expected to see much more money being paid down on the debt than we did see in this Budget. In fact, what we saw was small compared to what we had thought government would actually pay.

Having said that, we do see where they made other investments that we did not bank on. Although there was $350 million or so paid down towards the debt, there was well over $300 million alone that was invested in Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. Mr. Speaker, $100 million of that went into building the equity base for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, whereas another $200 million of that went into investment capital for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

I have some concerns about that, and I will tell you why, because this is over $300 million of taxpayers' money that is now being funnelled out from government into a Crown Corporation that is arm's-length from government. It is being placed there to invest in future projects that yet we have not seen a deal signed on. Yet, we do not know what their investment equities will be, but here it is laid out and preserved for that purpose.

We are also investing money to build up the equity within Hydro at a time when Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is filing a rate review with the PUB to increase the hydro rates of every single consumer in this Province. Why would they be out there looking for more money to pay for increased fuel costs and so on when we, as taxpayers, are already funneling well over $300 million into their corporation this year?

I think that people need to stop and think about that. Even at a time when we have a surplus budget that reaches $1.4 billion we still have to be concerned about where the money is going and whether it is going into the right places.

Mr. Speaker, I would challenge government, I would challenge them at this time, as to whether over $300 million of our money – I think the exact figure is around $319 million –is the right place for this money to be going today to be sitting in the equity fund and investment funds of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. What is the long-term gain for us on that money? What is the short-term loss for us on that money in terms of services, programs and infrastructure in the Province? These are the kind of questions that we need to ask ourselves when our money is being laundered in this particular way.

Mr. Speaker, when I looked at this Budget I said, in my initial comments to the media, that it looked like a bankers' budget to me. I said that because like every bank they hold lots of money. This government was holding lots of money. In fact, like a banker they went out and they said, we now have your money, it is $1.4 billion this year in surplus, and this is where we will spend it, just like the bank would do.

I thought the Budget lacked vision in many cases, Mr. Speaker, because it did not provide for the opportunity for industry growth in the renewable sectors of our economy. I think that is very important, very important especially when we have reached a time in our history where balancing our books and our surplus budgets are dependent upon, basically, one industry and the fact that industry is deriving a high price for its commodity. That is where we are right now. We need to be very cognizant of the fact that we have to invest in other areas.

When you look at a budget that has a 10 per cent, I think, a $9.5 million increase in program spending – and I stand to be corrected on those numbers, because I do not have it right in front of me – but there was a substantial increase in program funding that has to be carried over on a year to year basis. If we are going to be able to sustain that, we need to at least see the price of oil stay where it is today, or higher, or start investing in the renewable sectors of our economy so that we can generate more growth and more wealth. Mr. Speaker, it was short on vision when it came to those things, and that was the reason I called it a banker budget. Like a banker, Mr. Speaker, the money came not because of anything the bank did, and this money came not because of anything this government did. The money that we are spending today is derived on oil deals that were done by previous governments; oil deals like Terra Nova and White Rose, Mr. Speaker, and Hibernia. Right now we know that in some of those oil fields today that we have already drilled over half the inventory. We have already drilled over half the inventory, which shortens the life-span of these particular oil projects, as we all know.

Mr. Speaker, we know that is where the bulk of the revenue came from, and it was not deals that were done by the government opposite. In fact, we have yet to see one deal inked on the oil industry or the gas industry since this government took office.

Where is the rest of the money coming from? From new developments in the mining industry, developments like Voisey's Bay, that in mineral tax and royalties alone is deriving well over $200 million into the coffers of this government; a deal that was done by a Liberal government back in 2002-2003, and a deal that many government members who were in opposition at that time stood up and voted against. Today, Mr. Speaker, they are spending the royalties and the profits of Voisey's Bay.

I did not hear the Member for Lake Melville, when he stood today, talk about how good the Voisey's Bay deal has been for Labrador and for the Province. We did not hear those comments from him, but I am sure he has appreciated the millions and millions and hundreds of millions of royalties alone that have come from this particular project.

Yesterday we saw in the news, the settlements being paid out to the Innu Nation, that had negotiated something like 3 per cent of the royalty on this particular deal; a very small amount in relation to what government themselves have negotiated, where they have seen something like $9 million dropped into the laps of two communities. That was real benefit on a resource that was developed in their particular area.

Mr. Speaker, we had asked government as well that, once the royalties started flowing from the Voisey's Bay Project, realizing our new fiscal position in the Province today, that we would see a special fund allocated for Labrador. We asked that $10 million a year be taken off the royalties of Voisey's Bay and that it be placed into an investment fund for Labrador communities, but government was not prepared to go for that.

It was new money coming into this Administration, money that they did not have to calculate in previous years to cover education and health care in the Province, money that they did not have to calculate for in previous years for programming. It was new money, new money that could have been invested into Labrador communities which, for many years, went through neglect of infrastructure and needed the money in order to play catch-up and to diversify the local economy. It would have come right off the top of the Voisey's Bay deal.

Even taking that $10 million out a year, the provincial government still would have gained well over $200 million for your own coffers. So it was a very small percentage that we were asking for. Unfortunately, it did not happen and that disappointed me; because I thought, for the first time, this was an opportunity. We were moving from being a have-not-Province to a have-Province. We were moving from a place where we were always vulnerable from a capital position, and looking for extra money, to a place where we could stand on our own two feet and budget for the services that we were able to commit to the people of the Province. It was the first time in our history that we could have been creative in launching a new investment capital fund for the Labrador region, for the communities that are feeling the crunch of losing industry. We could have done it based on the royalties from Voisey's Bay and government would not have even missed it gone. They would not have even missed it gone. Unfortunately, that did not happen.

Mr. Speaker, the point I started to make was this, that is was a banker's budget simply because, like the bank, the money came from deals that were done by other governments - the Voisey's Bay, the oil and gas deals - and this government was merely the banker. They held the money and they said where we will now invest the money.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the day when I can see this government actually sign a deal - actually sign a deal - in this Province. They talk about the refineries; they are going to build new refineries. Hopefully, with any new refineries will come new jobs and we do not have people out on the picket lines like we do today, with the current refinery that we have, but that is another issue.

They talk about building refineries; we have yet to see it. They talked about launching the gas industry, and what they will do there, looking at compressed gas, looking at piping gas; we have yet to see anything happening in that industry. They talked about negotiating deals with Hebron-Ben Nevis; we have not yet seen a deal signed on that.

Mr. Speaker, maybe some time before the end of the next mandate of the government opposite we will see a deal signed that will actually bring some revenue into the Province over and above what has been done by previous governments.

Even when you look at the agreements with the federal government, they have not been successful in signing those deals even. They have launched a good campaign. They sold the people of the Province in terms of rallying on the bandwagon, and at the end of the day there was nothing secured. At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, it became nothing only an exercise in public relations and standing for what you believe in. There is nothing wrong with that - I am all for standing for what you believe in; I do it every day of my life - but sometimes you can have a lot of hype with very little results, and that was exactly what we had in the government's campaign to the federal government on equalization. That was exactly what we had, a great deal of fanfare, a full concert orchestration, Mr. Speaker, but very little results: at the end of the day, only an opportunity for us to be proud of who we were with very little money again coming forward under that particular agreement.

Mr. Speaker, we will look forward to seeing the time when this government can get their socks up, pull their socks up, and sign a deal that is going to bring revenues into the Province that they can say: This is what we have done to generate royalties in the economy.

Let me tell you something about the price of oil. When we were in government in 2003, when we left I think the price of oil was around $24 to $25 a barrel. The year preceding that, I think it fell as low as $18 a barrel. Well, you know today the price on a barrel of oil has reached $120. That is the difference. The government opposite is receiving $100 more today for a barrel of oil than the previous government received, and then you talk about your fiscal house in order. It is the first time in our history, no matter who sits in government, it is the first time in our history that the ability has been there and the royalty on a resource has been there in this Province to allow it to happen.

Mr. Speaker, that realization needs to be there as well, that these members are not having the privilege today of managing this kind of money in the Province simply because of great deals they have done or decisions they have made. It is simply because, Mr. Speaker, the fiscal realities in the global market dictate today that we are able to earn more money, more royalties on our resources than we could five years ago.

Is it a stroke of luck, Mr. Speaker? I would say it probably is a stroke of luck, and a stroke of good luck, not just for that government but for every last person in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. They should feel lucky today, that we are able to get those returns on our resources. Do you know something? I hope it never changes. I hope it never changes. I hope, Mr. Speaker, that we will always get top dollar for the royalties that we have and the developments that we do, because that is the way that we will be able to play the catch-up that we need to do in this Province. That is the way that we will be able to really diversify our economies and make the investments in people that people expect of us.

I know, I listened to this Budget, and do you know something? There are a lot of good things in this Budget. There is a lot of good spending in this Budget. It is spending that people have been asking for, for a long time in Newfoundland and Labrador. I have been in this Legislature, Mr. Speaker, for twelve years, almost thirteen years now, and I have seen governments on each side petition for different issues and different subsidies and different benefits, all throughout the years. I am glad to say that I am finally in a position to see a lot of it starting to happen throughout the Province. I think that is a wonderful thing. I think it is a wonderful thing when you are able to give back after so long to the people of the Province. I think it is excellent, Mr. Speaker, to make investments in them, but people's expectations are going to be high. You know they are going to be high, simply because they have gone without for such a long time. I think that all of us are in the same position.

I will be the first to admit that no one can do everything overnight. No one can do everything overnight, but sometimes government needs to be questioned for the decisions that they make. Like yesterday in the House of Assembly, when we raised the issue around home care. Mr. Speaker, for a number of weeks we pushed the issues around home care and the minister agreed that the financial assessment tools that were being used were inadequate. They were outdated and they were not applicable to today's current fiscal realities of what the people's standard of living needed to be and what the cost of it would be.

Mr. Speaker, he did agree that he would have another look at it, and that was fine, but we also realized that there were a lot of people in this Province who needed emergency services for home care and right now they were not getting that service unless they were prepared to live below the poverty line wage. That is what they were being asked to do. They were being asked to take a poverty living wage to reduce your financial situation to poverty level and then you can avail of a subsidy under our program. That is unacceptable. We raised that yesterday and we raised in the context that government had seen fit to invest $15 million into a caribou study in the Province but did not see fit to implement an emergency home care program until the full review of that program was completed.

That is our job, Mr. Speaker, to point out where government could have made better decisions and invested their money in a wiser way. Just because they are the banker, just because they control the money in the bank, does not mean that they are always going to make the right decisions. That is our job to point out when those decisions could have been made to the better interests of people and encourage government to go in that direction. We are going to keep doing that, Mr. Speaker.

People look at the economy of the Province, and I think that we should be proud to realize that we are going to come off equalization. I think we have all played a role in that. The private sector that has been through some very difficult years in this Province, Mr. Speaker, when industry was down, they stuck it out. They did not all move away. Some of them stuck it out. Some of them continued to operate their businesses and build their businesses, contribute to the taxes in the Province, the income tax, the retail sales tax and the business tax. They still believed there was opportunity and they stuck around. There are many others out there, Mr. Speaker, who really held out through a lot of lean years until the economy started to shift in this Province.

Being a have province is a sense of pride for a lot of people, there is no doubt about that. It is a sense of pride for every one of us here, because we know as well that we were part of a government and part of individuals in the Province who supported previous governments' decisions to strike deals and to invest in deals that today we are seeing real return on for the Province. We have a certain sense of pride of where we are going as well.

Mr. Speaker, we also have to be cognizant of the fact that being a have province also comes with it the expectation that we can rise above the levels of poverty. It comes with it, the expectation that I can afford things in a way that I could not before, in terms of a cost of living and a standard of living. It comes with it as well, Mr. Speaker, an expectation that I will have employment and that I will be able to see services maintained in my community. These are all things that come with an expectation of being a have province. You cannot be a have province when your out-migration levels are still at a net rate. You cannot be a have province when your unemployment rate is still climbing to well over 13 per cent. These are the indicators that we have to focus on getting down as well. We have to focus on reducing the cost of living for people in the Province. That was the reason we put forward the option for government to look at the gas tax, to look at reducing the amount of taxes that were being charged to people in the Province on gasoline.

In the last twenty-four hours we have seen another increase in gasoline. For example, Mr. Speaker, the provincial government today is charging 16.4 cents on every litre of gas that you put in your car at the pumps. Every time that you put the nozzle into your gas tank, every time that you click off a litre of gasoline on that pump, you are paying to the provincial government 16.4 cents on that litre over and above the regular taxes that are there on gasoline in Newfoundland and Labrador.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, it is the highest provincial fuel tax being charged anywhere, I think, in the country right now. In fact, it is far higher than most provinces even come close to. Even in Atlantic Canada, Mr. Speaker, we would have to lower our gas tax, provincial gas tax at the pumps, by more than 4 cents on a litre to be on parity with the rest of Atlantic Canada. Every time one of you out there goes to the gas pumps and fuels up you can remember that 16.4 cents on that litre of gas is going to the provincial government as an additional fuel tax over and above the regular taxes that you pay.

We asked, Mr. Speaker, that that gas tax be reduced. We asked that government bring it in-line with the rest of Atlantic Canada, that they would reduce it to at least 12.4 cents bringing it down by 4 cents or 4.4 cents. This would have seen savings of up to $10 million to consumers in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador over the next twelve months. That would have instituted $10 million in savings at the pumps, I think it was, based on the numbers. Mr. Speaker, that was an option that government had that they could look at, but they chose not to, and still today we see the rates climbing. Many people out there are having trouble putting their head around the reasons why government would not institute that tax break for them.

Once you become an oil-producing province, Mr. Speaker, and you have the accolades of being an oil production province in Canada and you have all the accolades of being the province of wealth, the province of rising GDP, the province, Mr. Speaker, that will move from being have-not to have, a province that will move itself right out of the equalization subsidies being offered by the federal government – with that particular title, Mr. Speaker, of being an oil-producing province comes an expectation of getting a break at the pumps on your oil prices.

I can honestly tell you, not just on gasoline but on home heating fuel as well - we have seen, Mr. Speaker, in this Province, home heating fuel increase. Let me give you an example. It went up again today but I will just use the example that was given to me for the 24^th of April of this year.

First of all, go back five years to when this government came into office. Five years ago, in April of 2003, the price of home heating oil in this Province was at 47.29 cents per litre. We will round it off, a little more than 47 cents per litre. That was in 2003, when this government came to office. Today, or by April 24^th which is the price I have here, it was nearly $1.12 a litre. It was almost three times more per litre this spring than it was five years ago when this government took office. That is a huge increase in home heating fuel.

When people hear that we are finally a have province, that we are producing $1.4 billion surplus budgets, and they know that their home heating costs have tripled in the five years that this government has been in power, then obviously there is an expectation: there should be more money for me to subsidize my home heating costs. I should not be paying the highest rate in the country today to heat my home. Sure, I am an oil province, I am rich! Why should I be paying this high price? Mr. Speaker, with the accolades, with the title, comes an expectation.

Look at gasoline, for instance. If you go back to when this government took office, gasoline in the Province was less than 88 cents a litre. Today, Mr. Speaker, it is up over $1.35 a litre, I think it is. I hardly know, because in my own district it has reached almost $1.55 a litre, so it is a bit different, but in St. John's, I think it is close to $1.35 now or maybe even more. Look at the difference, Mr. Speaker. From 88 cents to over $1.34 or $1.35 a litre is a huge increase in the price of gasoline, and on that price is the 16.4 cents that the provincial government collects over and above the regular tax. These are the reasons why people expect that they are going to get breaks on those kinds of taxes, Mr. Speaker. When they hear that things are going well and that we are doing well, obviously they want to see how they are going to benefit themselves.

I looked at a poll, actually, this morning. I think it is on one of the Web sites. I forget which one of the media Web sites it is. I remember looking at the poll, and I think it must have been there for a while because a number of people had voted. The question was: How has this oil money trickled down to impact you? I think it went something like, very satisfied - some people, I know, are satisfied, some people, I know, are not satisfied, and I am still waiting to see how it is going to affect me, or I am still waiting. Do you know something? Those who did not see any impact and those that are still waiting for an impact made up 60 per cent of the people that responded in this poll.

Even though there were huge surpluses, even though a lot of money was handed out in the Budget, the reality is that 60 per cent of the people out there who responded on this poll, at least, still did not feel how this money was trickling down to help offset their cost of living. Mr. Speaker, I think these numbers were a good indication of how a lot of people are feeling, and I will tell you why. Since the Budget came down, most of the calls that we did get were from people who expected to see certain things in this Budget, that would have helped reduce their cost of living or help them improve their standard of living, that were not there for them, personally.

I am not saying that the things that were done were not beneficial. I am not saying that the initiatives that government is planning are not good. What I am saying is that there were a lot of people out there who did not feel the initial impact of where these investments were being made. Maybe they will over time, maybe they will over the course of the next twelve months, but there were a number of them who did not feel it right now.

Mr. Speaker, right now we have 37 per cent of the royalties that we get that are coming from non-renewable resources. Just now, I talked about oil and gas and the mining industry, more particularly. Twenty-seven per cent of the revenue that we get is coming from the federal government through transfer dollars, not necessarily equalization. I think a small part of that is equalization, but I think the bulk of it is coming as transfer dollars, either into Health and Community Services, into Human Resources and Employment, or into Aboriginal programs and so on. As we know, there is a tremendous amount of federal money spent in transportation in this Province.

Altogether, if you look at the revenue we get from non-renewable resources and the revenue that we get from the federal government transfers, that makes up nearly 65 per cent of the revenues that we get in the Province. The other 35 per cent of the revenues comes from other revenue sources. I guess that could be investments that government would make, fees that they collect, things of this nature. Mr. Speaker, that is basically where the breakdown of income is.

Mr. Speaker, it is very evident that we have become very dependent upon the oil and gas revenues and those other revenues from non-renewable sectors. We need to move away from that full dependency. I started to talk about this earlier. We need to start investing more in industries like the forest industry, like the fishing industry, like the tourism industry, like the manufacturing sector, because in many areas of the Province these are the industries that are going to sustain those regions for the long-term. They are the industries that will be required to sustain the entire Province long after we have depleted the oil reserves and taken the minerals from the ground. Now, I may not be here to see it, none of us may be here to see it, but there will be other generations that will. You need to be careful of that and we need to invest into those other industries.

In the past couple of years, for example, we have seen a complete eroding of the forest industry in this Province. We have seen it to the point where Abitibi mill in Stephenville closed down and now Stephenville, while they are doing financially very well as a community, it is because of the oil reserves in Alberta. It is because they have a transient workforce that travels, Mr. Speaker, to Western Canada and works and is able to bring their money home. Thank God for the fly-in, fly-out concept I would say. It is what is saving the economy of a lot of regions in this Province today.

I know this, Mr. Speaker, because I have had an opportunity to talk to a lot of them. In fact, it was only a couple of weeks ago I was on a flight on the way back from Toronto - I believe it was on a Saturday. I was sitting on the airplane, in domestic, I say to the members, with an individual from the Community of Bonavista. He told me he was working in a diamond mine up in the Northwest Territories and had been working up there in the diamond mine for some time. He told me his family still lived in Bonavista. He had gone away in January, he was home now for a month on his turnaround, and then he would go back to work again. I said to him: Are there any other people in Bonavista working in this diamond mine in the Northwest Territories? Do you know what he told me, because his answer nearly floored me? He said: Between my community of Bonavista and my neighbouring community of Port Union there are fifty-five of us working with our company; fifty-five people just from those two rural communities working in the one diamond mine in the Northwest Territories, Mr. Speaker.

Where is the wealth in this Province coming from right now when it comes to income earners and the increases we are seeing in personal income tax in the Budget? It is coming from those that are traveling West to work and bringing their money home so that their families can live here and that they can at least have a home to come back to.

Mr. Speaker, I say Thank God for the fly-in, fly-out opportunities that are afforded to the residents of our Province. I want to acknowledge those mining companies that are prepared to do that, because I think it speaks well of them. I think it speaks well of them that they are able to allow for certain standards of living for their employees, that they do not expect them all to pack their bags, leave the Bonavistas and the Port Unions of the world and to go to work in the Northwest Territories, but they are prepared to fly them back and forth.

Mr. Speaker, when I look at the fact that the indicator for personal income tax remittance is going to increase I am not a bit surprised. I am not a bit surprised because if Bonavista and Port Union have fifty-five employees working in one mine in the Northwest Territories my guess is so do a lot of other communities around this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I know that there are a number of them in Stephenville who have gone out West, after the mill closed out there, because I have talked to them myself. They are not all in one mine, as it is in this case, but they are spread out in different jobs throughout the country and they are able to travel back and forth for work, so they are still contributing to the local economy. They are still buying their car at home. They are still buying their camper at home, Mr. Speaker, so they are able to still contribute to the economy, and that is a good thing, but acknowledge where it is coming from. Acknowledge where it is coming from. Do not stand up and take the credit for this when you know that it has nothing to do with anything that you have done to make it happen. It has to do with the fact that these individuals are skilled, they are educated, they are employable, and they are prepared, Mr. Speaker, to go away from home to go to work and to be able to fly back and forth and to keep their families here.

I want to pat them on the back for that. I do, because there are many people who would not be able to do that. It puts a lot of strain on a family, and we know that. Probably politicians know it better than anyone, because probably every one of us here in this Legislature has to be away from our families to do our job. It is required. It is a part of the job, and we know how difficult it is. We know that you are not always going to be home for that special birthday or anniversary or the school play or whatever is going on. Such is the case for thousands and thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians because they have to go away to work as well.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I was talking about what has happened in the forest industry in the Province. What we have seen happen, Mr. Speaker, in the forest industry is this: we have seen a mill close in Stephenville. We have seen the number 4 paper machine close down in Corner Brook. Now, whether that paper machine will reopen, I guess we will wait and see, unless it has reopened, but back about three weeks ago, when we talked to the company at that particular time, they had not made a decision as to whether they would reopen it even on a temporary basis but they were having some discussions.

We have seen layoffs in Grand Falls, right now at the management level but we do know that this particular mill has been asked to achieve savings in the millions of dollar range for their company over the next little while; and, as a result of it, they will be reviewing what the other staff requirements are and where they will make cutbacks. We have been told by the unions out there that they fear there could be anywhere between eighty and a hundred people laid off. Of course, like every employer and like every union, they are working to see where people may be able to take an early retirement program, or some other kind of program, where they can see some of their older workers making the adjustment, and allow the opportunity for some of the younger workers to continue the work, but we will be certainly watching to see where that goes.

We have seen a number of sawmills in this Province close down. On the Northern Peninsula in particular we have a seen a halt of forest activity for quite some time. In fact, I read a comment that was made by the owner of Holson Products up in Roddickton, a while ago, in which he said: Yesterday we had no industry. Tomorrow we may have an industry because of this announcement with the pellet plant. – but, Mr. Speaker, we also know that the pellet plant concept is a frugal one at best. I know, I have read the studies that were done by Halifax Global, the consulting firm that the minister hired to do two studies, actually: one on the Island of Newfoundland, and what the projected markets would be for new developments in the forest industry, and another one that she did on the Coast of Labrador. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the two studies almost mirrored each other in terms of the recommendations, and what they both recommended is that there was opportunity for pellet production or a pellet plant in Newfoundland and Labrador. In fact, they recommended there was opportunity for several, and I know that they are looking at a couple of locations – Roddickton being one, Goose Bay being another – but I also know that these initiatives, while government is prepared to fund them, and I have no problem with that, they also have to be private sector driven. So there has to be an interest in the local area to take it on and to run with it. Whether that be through some kind of a co-operative forum or through a private sector company, we know that has to happen.

The other thing we know that has to happen, is that there has to be a market. There has to be a market developed for those wood pellets. It is all right to say we will convert hospitals in the Province or schools in the Province so that they can use this pellet, and that is fine - I think it is something we need to look at, especially when you look at where the price of home heating fuel is today; that has to be considered as a fuel option or a heating option on a go-forward basis - but you also need to have an export market, and I think work needs to be done in developing those markets. Whether it be in the Scandinavian countries, or in the Iqaluit region, there needs to be some work done on developing those particular markets before you are actually going to see any of this move forward.

Mr. Speaker, we have seen lots of setbacks in the forest industry. In my own district we had sawmills that employed up to twenty-eight and thirty people just closed down in the last two years - closed down because, when the Abitibi mill in Stephenville shut down there was nowhere to sell their by-product, which was the pulpwood. They could saw the logs, they could saw the lumber, and they could sell the lumber, but they had nowhere to sell the by-product for the industry, and if they could not sell that then it was not feasible for them to stay in business. So, what happened? A sawmill that employed twenty-eight to thirty people in a community ended up closing its doors and all of these people were laid off. Well, do you know where they are today? Almost every one of them, I think, with the exception of maybe two or so, are working in Ontario or in Alberta. That is where they are today. This was a small community. Losing thirty jobs in a community of 400 people is every bit as devastating as losing 200 jobs in a community of 5,000 people, but there was no compensation provided to these people. They had to make their own way, and they had to find their own way to survive. The only way they could was to move away. I think there could have been other things done to be able to maintain that industry and that operator; but, of course, it all went by the wayside.

Mr. Speaker, there are lots of challenges in the forest sector, but government needs to put their head around what direction we need to be going in and start investing with partners to build on that industry. The only way that we are going to be able to do it from a self-sustaining entity is if we can develop good export markets for our product. Whether that product is the pelleting of wood or the sawing of lumber, one or the other, there has to be markets developed for it.

Mr. Speaker, there are lots of other industry pieces that I do want to talk about, but I also realize that I will have other opportunities to speak in relation to the Budget, and I guess I wanted to switch now to talk about a couple of other initiatives right now. One is with regard to the current issues developing around teacher allocations in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, back a few weeks ago - and I have to confess, when the minister went out and announced the new advanced education formula for teachers in the schools, I listened to what she had to say. I read the press release and I said, you know, this looks like it might be pretty good. I listened to the President of the NLTA, who nearly jumped out of his suit trying to praise up the formula that the government had there and the minister had there. I said, well, you know, this is probably going to work pretty good because it is based on programming; they are going to look after the programs that are in the schools, and that was my priority and where I was coming from – but, Mr. Speaker, I did not sit down and read the document at that time. I did not read the full document, because I just took it at face value that this new formula is not going to be focused on numbers, that we are not going to be counting heads in the classroom any more, we are going to look at the programs that we are going to offer to the children of this Province no matter where they are, no matter what area they live in, and we are going to look at the programs that we are going to offer to the children of this Province no matter where they are, no matter what area they live in, and we are going to make sure we have an advanced teaching formula that will be able to provide for those standards. I did not read the minister's full document, I confess. I took her comments, her press release, the statements by the NLTA, looked at it for what it was and I said, you know, this might just work. This just might be the thing that preserves the integrity of the system.

I was absolutely shocked when I received the first phone call about two weeks ago from a teacher in the Province telling me that this was not the case. I actually practically had an argument with this teacher on the phone, because I was so convinced by the information that government had put out that that was not the case. Anyway, I had the discussion with this particular teacher and I looked up the sections that she told me to look up and I had a very careful look at the report that came out back some months ago. Then, Mr. Speaker, I get a call from another teacher. This is going back over two weeks ago now. I had another chat and again it was brought to my attention that they were going to lose units, that they, as particular teachers, especially in primary and elementary, were going to be responsible for teaching more children, more grades in the classroom, come September.

Mr. Speaker, even at that point I still had some doubts as to whether this was actually the way that things would transpire. Then, over the weekend the calls really started to come in. When the CEOs of the school boards started contacting school principals around the Province and saying to them, you will lose one unit come September, you will lose two units, you will lose three units and so on, and in the case of Nain you will lose eight and a half units come September, well then, of course, the phones really started to ring and we started to realize that there is a problem here.

The information that was given to us that the units of teachers in schools would be based on programming needs and delivering an adequate standard of programs was no longer there, that was out the window. Now we were back to counting heads again, Mr. Speaker. Now we were back counting what the enrolment was in the school verses how many teachers they would require. It had nothing to do with programs, it had nothing to do with curriculum, it had nothing to do with maintaining a standard of education for the children in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I have a problem with that because what I think is happening here is this: I think that there is going to be a volume of teachers that will retire this year, as it is every year. I think that in addition to hiring the required numbers that government should be hiring they are going to transfer a lot of these units out of those small schools to fill those gaps. In fact, I had a call yesterday from one teacher who told me he is now going to be transferred to fill a position of a teacher that is retiring in another school. That is the reason I believe that is what is happening here.

The other thing I believe, Mr. Speaker, is that a number of the regulations that the minister has announced, like capping the classroom size for certain schools and for certain classes, is fine. It is fine, but if you are going to set the regulation and that will be the new standard you provide the resources to meet that requirement. You do not start robbing those teachers out of other schools to meet the regulations that you have just put in place. It defeats the purpose. To try and ensure there is a better quality of education for students in our large schools by capping the class size so that there is more individualized learning, so that the teacher does not have to deal with as many students in one particular class is a good option, but why do it at the risk of reducing the standard of education that you are going to give to children in smaller rural schools. I have a problem with that.

My district alone, Mr. Speaker, will be tremendously impacted by this. There will be a teacher removed from almost every school in my district. I think there is only one or two that will not lose a teacher out of this new, advanced education formula, as the government calls it. I know it is going to affect programming in those schools, because like every other member in this House I go to the schools too. I talk to the children, I talk to the teachers, I talk to the principals, I talk to the parents, and I talk to the schools councils just like everyone else, I am sure, does in their capacity as an MHA. I know for certain that it will have an impact on the programs in those schools. I think it is unacceptable by today's standards that you would even expect a teacher to go from teaching Grades K-3 in one classroom to September go to teaching Grades K-6 in that classroom simply because of the number fifteen; because it is fifteen students. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, that should change.

Mr. Speaker, I have a problem with that and I think the Minister of Education should have a problem with that. In fact, I think she should be very, very concerned about it, Mr. Speaker, because it is her job to be concerned about it. It is her job to be concerned that children in this Province may not receive the level of programming and the standard of education that they should be receiving.

Mr. Speaker, I have asked her to look into it and I have not gotten a response that is adequate, in my mind, not even a response that says to me: Yes, I will look into it. I mean, for a minister to say that and not at least be willing to go and have another look causes me grave concern. I have to be honest, there have been lots of tough issues raised in this House of Assembly and lots of ministers have had to deal with tough issues. Sometimes they have had to come to a realization that that might not have been the best way to do something. They were always prepared to have another look at it. They were always prepared to make a correction if one needed to be made. We have a Minister of Education today, Mr. Speaker, who does not want to have a look at it even, who does not even want to sit down and look at the programs that are going to be offered in these schools, to ensure if they are adequate or not. Every single school on the North Coast of Labrador is impacted.

Maybe I was not allowed, today, to ask a question of the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, but, Mr. Speaker, she is the minister, she is getting paid to be the minister. She was just visiting every school on the North Coast. I am assuming she was doing it as the minister, because if not, if she was not on ministerial business, she should have been here in the House of Assembly. I can only assume she was up there as a minister visiting those schools. If not, as I said, her responsibility, what she is paid for as a Minister of the Crown, is to be here as part of her job to answer questions.

Mr. Speaker, I asked her today: is she concerned about it? She should be concerned about it. She should be, and so should the Minister for Labrador Affairs. Any time that you have over eighteen teachers looking at being transferred out of local schools, rural schools in Labrador, it should be a concern for someone over there in the government and in the Cabinet. If the Minister of Education is not prepared to look at it, surely God the two ministers from Labrador who are being propped up with their big salaries, should be prepared to look at it and see what is going to be done. I find it to be unacceptable, Mr. Speaker.

Do you know what the only response from the government was on this today? It was that I should not have asked a minister a question. Mr. Speaker, you can ask any minister in this House a question. I am entitled to, just like anyone else. It is up to them if they get up and answer. Those are the rules of our House. I can stand here every day and ask the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs questions. I can spend thirty minutes in Question Period asking that one minister questions. Whether she chooses to answer them or not is entirely up to her. I have no control over that, absolutely no control, but what I do have control over, Mr. Speaker, is the questions that I ask.

Right now there is an issue that is ongoing in this Province regarding teaching units in rural schools that I am very concerned about. It impacts my district and it impacts the northern region of Labrador. It impacts every rural school in the Coast of Labrador, and is there anything wrong with asking two Cabinet ministers who are supposed to be representing Labrador as to whether that is acceptable or not? I do not see anything wrong with it, Mr. Speaker.

If it is not their job to be concerned, if it is not the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs' job to be concerned with the education of Aboriginal children, what is her job? I would like to know that. I would seriously like to know. There is a Department of Aboriginal Affairs. There is a minister assigned to that department. Now, what is her job? If it is not to be concerned about the educational issues of Aboriginal students, if it is not to be concerned about schools in Aboriginal communities, if it is not to be concerned about the programs being offered in Aboriginal schools to Aboriginal children, what is her job? What is she being paid to do? I would like to know the answer to that, and I guess I will have to ask it in Question Period, if I want the answer to it, because it is a legitimate question.

Today, we had the Government House Leader stand up here and tell us it was not her job. So, I would like to know what her job is. What files in her department is she managing? The Minister of Justice answered every Aboriginal justice question in this House. The Minister of Environment answered every single question regarding parks and Aboriginal groups in this House. The Minister of Education answered every single question on education in Aboriginal communities in this House, and the Minister of Health, back in March, answered every single question on social workers in Aboriginal communities in this House, so what is the job of the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs?

In fact, Mr. Speaker, the Government House Leader made a good point today because, up until then, I never really thought about what her job was. All I knew was that she was in a department, she was getting a $5 million a year budget from the government, she was getting paid a ministerial salary with a ministerial budget, and I never really questioned what her job was until today, but it is a very good question.

When I reflected on it, I realized something: that, of every question that I asked in this House of Assembly regarding Aboriginal issues in this Province, another minister answered the question on that side of the House.

That was a very good point the Government House Leader made today, and it caused me to have some concern. So, Mr. Speaker, I will be looking for the job description of the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, what her responsibilities are, so the next time I ask a question in the House of Assembly it will be directed accurately to that particular minister, Mr. Speaker, so that I know for sure and for certain it is her file, it is her issue, and that she can answer it.

Mr. Speaker, that was a good point that the member made today, and I will certainly reflect on it further. I will reflect on it further. I have only had a little bit of time to reflect so far but it did pose a number of questions for me, and certainly ones I will seek answers to.

Mr. Speaker, I know my time is almost finished and I would like to clue up because I know I have another hour on Monday that I am able to speak to the Budget as well. Mr. Speaker, in conclusion I have to say that this issue around teacher allocation, regardless of who over there in the government is responsible, is going to have an impact on schools in Labrador in Aboriginal communities and non-Aboriginal communities, and it is something that someone should be concerned about and at least be prepared to look into.

Mr. Speaker, I guess I will have to ask for leave because I know the clock has run out.

May I, by leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave to clue up.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I really appreciate that, and I am certainly almost finished but there was one other issue I wanted to raise today and I did not get to it, and that was the issue of the baby bonus.

Government ran out before an election, around September 18 or 19, somewhere around there, and announced a new baby bonus program for the Province. Now, Mr. Speaker, their idea of bringing this program in was, they were going to boom the population of Newfoundland and Labrador. We were going to see a lot more children being born because of this incentive. We were going to see more people staying in Newfoundland and Labrador because now you were going to get $1,000 if you had a baby and $100 a month while you were on maternity.

Do you know something, Mr. Speaker? When that commitment was made in the height of an election campaign, people out there in the Province really believed that this program would be implemented and come into effect at the time the announcement was made. Mr. Speaker, these people legitimately felt that this was a commitment made by the Premier at that time that would be retroactive to October, at the time the announcement was made. None of them ever dreamed - none of them, Mr. Speaker, that I had talked to, ever dreamed - that this program would only come into effect in January, and those who had their children prior to January would be exempt.

Let me tell you, in Newfoundland and Labrador between October and December there were somewhere around 1,100 babies born in this Province during that period of time. There were 1,100 women out there who thought they were going to get their $1,000 benefit plus their $100 a month on maternity. They are finding out today, Mr. Speaker, that they are not getting it, and they are very disappointed. In fact, Mr. Speaker, some of these women had their children December 27 and will be on maternity leave for the next twelve months, right up until December 2008, and do you know something? They will not get the $100 a month, but their friend down the road - in fact, one case I have here, a woman who had her baby on January 3 will get her $100 a month right up until December 2008 from the government but her friend will not because her baby came three days early. Although they are on maternity leave together, although they both need the supplement because their income is cut in half while you are on maternity benefits, one will receive it and one will not. I think that is an unacceptable standard.

It is one thing for government to say there are 1,100 women out there who had babies who are not getting this bonus because you had your baby before January 1, but I think it is absolutely wrong to say to those women who are on maternity leave today: You cannot collect it for the remainder of your maternity leave.

I think if you are on maternity leave today you should get your $100 a month until your maternity leave expires. I think that should be the protocol and the process for the program. If you were on maternity leave when the program started January 1, you should get your $100 a month until your maternity leave has run out, whether that be for three months, four months, nine months or ten months. That would make the program fair to all people. Right now, the way the program is structured it is not being fair to a whole sector of women who are looking to collect this benefit, and I think it could be easily changed. There is no reason why it cannot be changed. I certainly hope that the minister will, on reflection, realize that it is the appropriate thing to do and certainly instate that benefit for those particular women who are impacted.

Mr. Speaker, on that note, I will conclude my comments. I will certainly have time for further debate on tomorrow or Monday when the House sits again.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was ready to talk about the Budget and some of the good news that came out of the Budget that would probably affect my district, because it is always nice as a backbencher and an MHA when you can get up and talk about your district and what is happening, but the Leader of the Opposition sort of swayed me away from that for a little while. I may be able to get back to my district if I have the time.

The Leader of the Opposition is wondering what the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs is doing. Well, if we just go through some of the Budget highlights - and I think I am really impressed with what they are doing in Labrador, and it comes under Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs. For education employment, there was $60,000 for an Aboriginal Literacy Development Consultant position to be placed in Labrador, and I am sure that this stuff did not come about without the work of the minister for that department; $200,000 under the Poverty Reduction Strategy for the Northern Allowance; $200,000 funding for feasibility, engineering and environmental studies related to establishing a fibre optic link to Labrador; $45,000 to hire a program coordinator for the Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs; $50,000 to provide grants to Aboriginal women's groups and organizations; $50,000 for funding to the Aboriginal Sport and Recreation Council; $32,800 in support to assist in the analysis and implementation of recommendations arising from the National Aboriginal Women's Summit in June of 2007; $275,000 for a new winter trail groomer in Postville; $200,000 to enhance the winter trails on the North Coast: and $75,000 for a groomer shed in North West River.

This is all to do with Aboriginal –

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. FORSEY: For the information of the Leader of the Opposition, because it seems like any time that we are up talking she always has lots of information for us, it does say Labrador. When I started it said Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs. It is there is you want a copy of it.

The other thing she said about being lucky, that we are merely the bankers: well, we all remember, back a couple of years ago - and I think the Minister of Fisheries referred to it yesterday, our House Leader, that, yes, we could have settled for $1.4 billion, but we did not. I do not think it was luck that this Premier decided to go back to Ottawa, and said, no, that was not the Atlantic Accord, that was not the right deal. Yes, we may be the bankers but we are also the bankers for funding that our Premier fought for. This government is surely, of course, reaping the rewards from it, but, in turn, we are investing into infrastructure needs and needs for everyone in the Province.

Just to touch on Labrador - I would just like to stay on Labrador now. I will say that the Leader of the Opposition complimented and applauded this government on Labrador initiatives. They did not come about without the efforts of the members down there, the Member from Lab. West, my colleague from Lab. West, my colleague from Lake Melville and my colleague from Torngat. They sat in on the Budget preparations, and they were very generous to the Leader of the Opposition, who happens to be the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, by providing $2.1 million for a new depot in Cartwright Junction.

I have travelled that road many a times, and when you get off the boat in Blanc-Sablon and you drive up through L'Anse-au-Clair, L'Anse-au-Loup, and up through Pinware, West St. Modeste and Red Bay, and all the way down to Cartwright – I believe that the Minister of Labrador Affairs, my colleague from Lake Melville, made a statement about the road there that runs along by Lodge Bay and Mary's Harbour and these places. There are rock-cuts there that are probably a lot worse than what we go through in the Doe Hills, and we know what happens out there in the winter. The same thing happens in Labrador. I guess with the proper engineering, and if they had listened to the right people, they would not be running in to these problems today over there. However, this government see a need and is now investing $2.1 million into a new depot in Cartwright. Hopefully the residents of Labrador, in southern Labrador, in the district where the Leader of the Opposition now resides, will see better roads, better clearing and better, safe driving.

Just to go through the capital investments in Labrador: she is talking about schools and teacher allocation, and I would like to get to the teacher allocation shortly, but investment in Labrador, in Southern Labrador may I add, $7 million for a new school in L'Anse au Loup; and $1 million for a school in Port Hope Simpson. Now, that is just in her district. I can go on in Labrador West and I can go on in Lake Melville and Goose Bay and see the money that is being invested in the college down there, in the hospital down there. They are no doubt reaping the benefits of some of this money, and so they should. I certainly do not begrudge them any of it. They have contributed as well as the rest of us here on the island. It would not happen without the members who were actually at the Cabinet table and the members representing Labrador West and Lake Melville and of course our Minister for Aboriginal Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, this past weekend I had the opportunity to go back to the district and I managed to attend a couple of events. One was the annual inspection and review of the 512 Air Cadet Squadron. This was the 59^th annual review, and it is certainly was participated in by all the parents and grandparents and families. They get a chance to show their displays after all year and the work that they have done. The awards are presented and some of them are very prestigious awards indeed. It did not go without the Budget being discussed.

When I was going through the district last year in October and the same thing last weekend, there were a number of issues that were of concern to the people in the district at that time. Number one was definitely the insurance tax, the health care and of course income tax. They were sort of the three that took the lead last October when I was going around knocking on doors. Just recently, back in the district this past weekend, I had a number of people saying it was a great Budget, a good Budget. Then I would ask them: Well, what did you like? It was always a different, I guess, interest in what they received. No doubt the 15 per cent sales tax on insurance premiums was a big one. While I was doing that I said, okay, let's look at the tax reductions, and of course none of us like paying taxes but unfortunately we do. If we are going to supply the services that we need in health care and education and transportation and communication and so on, we do need revenue.

I just ran through four of the tax initiatives that were brought in this year by this Administration. Last year and this year of course we ended up with the lowest income tax in Atlantic Canada. We are now the fourth lowest in Canada. That reduction actually put $94 million back into the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. I am sorry - the insurance tax put $94 million back; the personal income tax reduction is putting back $155 million; motor registration fees another $10 million, and the employer's payroll exemption, $6.5 million, for a total of $265 million in taxes that we reduced, eliminated and now goes back into the pockets of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I have had organizations say to me, I have had businesses say to me, 15 per cent insurance tax. Some were saying that they are saving $200. I believe I had one report with something like $7,000. This has an effect on every one; volunteers, businesses and municipalities, because they have to insure their vehicles. That money now is going to go back to the community, to the towns, and the council now will have that money to hopefully invest somewhere else and invest in probably much needed infrastructure which of course will go a long way.

AN HON. MEMBER: What a government!

MR. FORSEY: What a government!

Health care was the other, and I always touch on health care. One of the reasons is that it is the biggest part of our Budget. This year, with a $2.3 billion investment in health care, we have come a long way in the last four years.

There is no doubt there are needs out there and we need to work toward those needs; however, people have said to me, in the district, they have been pleased with the drug programs, they have been pleased with the insulin pumps, and they have been pleased with the diagnostic equipment.

Actually, several of my colleagues and I went out one night last week to, I guess, a presentation by the Diabetes Association. They had a young fellow there, somewhere around fourteen years old, who now has an insulin pump. He got up and spoke. If anyone was there to listen to him, it was certainly encouraging to see, and overwhelming, because the young fellow said that basically now we have given him back his life, that he has been able to avail of this insulin pump. So, many things have been done in health care.

Just looking at a couple of the expenditures and investments this year: $133.5 million in capital spending; $79.1 million investment in infrastructure; $52 million for the purchase of equipment such as the digital mammography, CT scanners, and, of course, we are getting an MRI for Central Newfoundland; and, as my colleague from CBS proudly spoke on the other day, much needed and welcomed news is the purchase of the PET Scanner. We have had incentives for recruitment and retention of nurses, and bursaries for the third and fourth year nursing students.

I can go on about health care investment, and I can also probably go on about what we need to bring in. I think our Minister of Health stated it well yesterday, that the policies that he has brought in, whether it is the drug program or whether it is to do with equipment, we need to put together a solid policy that is going to work for everybody and it is just not going to be a band-aid solution

Education is always key, and the money that has been invested in education in the past couple of years by this government has just been unprecedented: over $1 billion invested in infrastructure, teacher retention, investment in skilled trades in the high schools, free textbooks, tuition freezes, and then we will hear, of course, from the Opposition saying: Well, you know, we are the only Province that doesn't have this. Well, guess what? This Province has a lot of things that the rest of the country does not have. One of them is the Poverty Reduction Strategy program. Right now we are taking the lead on that and we are getting requests from all over Canada, wanting to know more information about it, and they would like to follow the program that we have in place.

In education, I think the minister stated it well yesterday when she said there is not going to be any reduction in units or in teachers, and if we had to follow the process or policy that was brought in years ago by the Liberals, since 2003, we would now have 544 less teachers.

Now it was only, I would say, three or four days ago that I spoke to a teacher who is teaching out here somewhere in Paradise. I know him. He is from Central Newfoundland. He has been there ten years. He had nothing but good things to say about what we are doing for education.

I have seen it out in my district. I have seen it there with the investment in infrastructure, I have seen it with the skilled trades programs, and I have seen it with some of the ISSP programs. Any time that programs are cut, probably because the numbers and the enrolment is not there, then naturally allocations are made and there is rearranging done. It is always a policy of the school boards that notifications must go out to the teachers on May 7.

That does not mean to say that all of them are out of a job; because, with the allocations – correct? My colleague from Humber Valley says that is correct – that does not mean that they are losing their job. It just means that it is going to be done on a needs program and we are reallocating. So, we are not getting rid of any teachers. The retention is there, the allocation is there, and it always seems to be the way of the Opposition to try to just put a little scare into people, get them a little upset, for what? For nothing; I guess because they have nothing else to talk about.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources made a great announcement on the West Coast last week by putting another $14 million into the forestry initiative fund. Forestry is big out our way, in Central Newfoundland. They are spending more money in silviculture, but what I like is that there is also going to be money put towards the private contactors.

The private contractors are out there right now and they go in, regardless of where the fibre is, where the wood is, they have to go in and cut it. In some places you might need to be a mountain goat to get up there, and they need to get a loader up there and they need to get their harvester up there, and it costs them more to get there, costs them more to harvest it, and now they are going to be putting an initiative in there that they can go in and do it but they can save money because hopefully the royalties will be reduced. This was a very important issue last year, because actually I did take a tour with one of the private wood cutters out there. Of course, he explained to me what was happening and we listened, the department listened, and now they brought in the initiative which is going to be good for the people of the Central region.

I know my time is getting short, but in the few seconds that I have the most important thing right now, I believe, is - and I see the Minister of Municipal Affairs is always there to take a compliment. It was probably one of the greatest initiatives when he made the announcement last week on the new cost sharing ratio for municipalities, no question about it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: In the past, a population of 3,000 or more, most municipalities had a cost share of fifty fifty. Now, their cost share is going to be eighty twenty. That is going to give municipalities out there, between 3,000 and 7,000 population, a better opportunity to probably get the infrastructure that they need without raising taxes to their residents, and then probably get upgrades that they need done and then move forward with their capital works programs.

Mr. Speaker, in saying that, that was a great initiative. It is going to be great for our district; it is going to be great for rural Newfoundland.

I see a lot of positives coming out of this Budget and I am sure we will get a chance to talk on it again.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate an opportunity to have a few words again on the Budget speech. It is 4:33 p.m. right now, I guess I have about twenty minutes or so to make a few comments.

I listened intently to all the members who had their comments, not only my colleagues in the Opposition, of course, but I also enjoyed listening to the government members. Not everything I agree with –

AN HON. MEMBER: It makes more sense.

MR. PARSONS: - but I certainly listen to them and I certainly would not agree that it makes more sense.

I would say, though, I was a bit confused on Tuesday past when the Government House Leader got up and gave his speech, I must say. I did not know sometimes if I was in the House of Assembly or in the church. I do not mean that disrespectfully, but there was a lot of reference to God and immorality flying around and sermons on the mount. I must say, it was old time politics, and I appreciate that. Here is an individual who did not have a note in his hand, but give him the soapbox to get on and he can put it out. I say to the Government House Leader: sir, when you finish your time in politics we definitely know that you have a calling somewhere else. There is no question about it.

It is nice to see that he lifts everybody's spirits, not only the government members. I saw members on the government side grow twelve inches in their seat over there, or they stood up with such pride and vigour because his passionate and emotional speech rose them to the occasion. That is good to see when somebody can do that. I always enjoy listening to him. I have not seen much of him so far in this sitting in that way, but it is good to see he is getting back to his old form again.

On the Budget itself, I spoke at length last week concerning the Budget. I said, at that time, there were certain good initiatives in it. I think anyone would be foolhardy to suggest that there are not some good things in this. A lot of the focus seems to be on what the government did with the surplus, but we have to recognize that the Budget is about more than where you spent the surplus. Of course there are all kinds of annual expenditures that had to be taken care of in our Province:- health; education; social service needs; roads; transportation; infrastructure needs; payment of the public service; and so on. All of those things happen as per usual.

The big thing that happened this year, of course, is that we had far more money in the till than we normally would have. That is where a lot of the focus came from, because when you have more money than you normally have to spend, people out in the community then have certain expectations that they might not usually have. For a lot of years in this Province it was always a case of, we are limited in what we can do, we cannot do everything. Here we are, we have seen some surpluses. We had some Draconian measures taken back in the 2004 Budget, but in 2005 and 2006 and 2007 there were surpluses and now in 2008 we had a whopping $1.4 billion surplus. When people look at you, the word in this Province is, we are loaded with cash.

Now, where is the government going to spend it? The first time you heard those expectations, it was raised in the context of the public sector unions, most of them saying, and the Premier, in fact, saying, yes, they have had some pretty harsh times and restrictions placed upon them in the past and when it comes around to negotiations this time, there is going to be a reward, I believe was the word that he used. That is in the works now. We will see if it works out that everybody gets the same deal. The Minister of Finance is on record as saying that the template has been struck with the 8 per cent, 4 per cent, 4 and 4 over a period of 4 years. Calculated out, cumulatively, I believe it works out to be about 21.5 per cent raise over the 4 year period.

My understanding is that not all the unions agree with that. I understand NAPE, that nurses' union - have not heard anything from the teachers' union, but certainly NAPE, I believe, and the nurses union have indicated that that is not going to be their template. They have other special needs and considerations and they expect that to be honoured. We will see as negotiations unfold if in fact we have what they call pattern bargaining where the template is one fits all or whether there will be special one-off deals in some way or other for certain public bargaining sector unions.

I guess the comments I would like to make today - we can stand up here, and it is not the role of an Opposition member to stand up and praise the government for what you are doing in the Budget. That would not be the role of an opposition. An opposition's role is to be constructively critical of what you deal with in this house. Give praise if it is due, and that is why this member is not saying it is a bad Budget, not in any manner saying it is bad. It is good to see that we have money to pay for some of the services that we need in this Province. The question that has been debated here most is: was the proper, appropriate balance taken by the government in how they spent the money?

We heard a lot from the Minister of Finance, talking about paying down on the debt, and we needed to pay down the debt. I do not think anybody agrees with not paying down the debt. Now, my question from last week still stands. I have yet to be shown, in these Budget documents, where and how a portion of the $1.4 billion is paid down on the debt. I look forward to that. The minister has not been on his feet yet to give any of those answers. We do, of course, go through a process called Estimates Committees, and I will be certainly asking the minister there, if I do not get an opportunity to have him inform us and educate us in the House in that regard. We have gone through the Budget documents, and I would just like to understand his rationale as to how he disposed of the $1.4 billion surplus.

As I pointed out the last day, there are some things we understand that he did. He had to put aside a certain pot of money for the public sector raises. I think it is around $200 million. The question then becomes - we know he put $300-plus million into the Energy Corp. and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to fix their debt-equity ratio, and to put some money into the Energy Corp. to purchase the equity stakes on a go-forward basis in the offshore projects. The question is, what happened to the rest of it, and we will see that.

That does not take away from the fact that there are lots of other needs in this Province that were not addressed. It does not take me to stand up here and say that they were not addressed. Anybody in this Province who has been listening to the news reports or the open lines or reading the newspapers, watching TV, since this budget came down, is well aware of some of the issues that the people of this Province, not only this member or the Opposition thinks was missing, but the people of this Province think was missing and was not properly addressed. Now that cannot be overlooked. You might say all you want, that we think we were very, very good in the Budget, we did A, B, C, D, and that is all good and done, so keep quiet and do not be greedy and do not be selfish, but that is not how life works, and life right now in this Province is unfolding that there are a number of things that people still are not pleased with. I am going to deal with a couple of those.

One of them is health care. Probably the biggest, no doubt it is, not probably, it is the single biggest part of the Budget expense in this Province; no question about it. Add education to that, I think, and we are probably up well over 50 per cent for education and health in this Province. The health sector itself is divided into a number of sectors. If you have been following, not only the questions in question period, but following the news reports and listening to the open line shows, there is not a government member in this House who can tell me, in all honesty, that you have not heard, since the Budget came down, concerns expressed about some sectors of the health care system. Now, if you were to tell me that, I would say you are deaf and mute, and I am sure none of you are. You cannot deny that has been the number one issue in the public sector.

Home care, for example, there is no question we have heard about home care. We had a debate in this House, a private member's debate. The Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs said yes, they were all on the road. Well, I guess you were not all on the road yesterday, I say to the minister, when we had a private member's debate here and, at the end of the day, the minister was one of the thirty government members who stood up and would not agree to put any more money into the home care system. He was not on the road yesterday; he was on his feet. He was voting with his feet yesterday, when he voted against that, putting any money into the home care system.

I did not speak very lengthy yesterday, if at all, on that issue of home care, but a lot of people really do not understand the impacts and how important home care is in this Province. In fact, I came across some statistical information that I was not aware of myself. Obviously, home care is an array of services that can be given. It is not just one thing. It enables individuals to be cared for at home as opposed to being cared for in a hospital setting.

The reason, of course, you try to have home care versus a hospital comes down to cost. It costs, in this Province right now, today, in a long-term care facility, per month, $4,200 a month to keep a person in a long-term care facility. It costs more if you are going to keep them in a hospital. Obviously, the name of the game is: the more you can keep people at home, and keep them out of hospital and long-term care facilities, the better you are off in your pocketbook.

Sixty-four per cent of the people who receive home care in this Province are seniors; they are over sixty-five years of age. Yes, a certain portion of home care costs are for people with disabilities who may be under sixty-five, but a whopping 64 per cent of people who receive home care are over sixty-five years of age. Principally, home care is a seniors' issue.

We have people in their homes who cannot get proper home care. We had the case of the Connors, which is nationally known now - not only locally known or regionally known, known nationally - a family here in the city who has to take one-half of their income to pay for home care; one-half to pay for home care.

Now, I think we also delved into the issue of: What is wrong with it? We understand that the assessment tool that they use to decide how much you can qualify for is flawed. That means it is defective. That means it is not working right. That means it needs to be changed. The Minister of Health has publicly stated we are going to change it. The problem is that, if it is like a lot of other things that change in government, we could be here a long time seeing it changed. That is the concern that we have, as an Opposition, when you talk about balance and you talk about where you put your money.

MR. DENINE: (Inaudible) change for a while yet; (inaudible) change in government.

MR. PARSONS: That is right, I say to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, it is not going to change for a while yet when it comes to the home care, and I am sure the minister wants me to pass that on to Mr. and Mrs. Connors, that there is not going to be any change for you, Mr. and Mrs. Connors, in your home care situation, and the fact that you are in dire, desperate need. There is not going to be any change, and the Minister of Health is on record as saying that. You sit tight, Mr. and Mrs. Connors, and we will look after you when we get around to deciding that the assessment tool is going to be changed, what it is going to be changed to.

I raised it before, in the debate on the private member's motion. We can change the assessment tool for long-term care facilities - did it last year. We do not have to go back and create the template, that has been done, but yet we have to wait until fall to figure this out; and how many people are going to fall through the cracks in the meantime? That is the issue: how much hurt do we inflict upon people between now and then?

This government - we can deal with an emergency if there is a flood in Stephenville; it was the human, proper thing to do. We have an agency in place that deals with it. We dealt, and the former Administration dealt, with the emergency we had in Badger. We can deal with that; that is an emergency.

For this government to suggest that it is not an emergency crisis situation right now in our home care is to avoid the obvious. It is to close your eyes to the obvious. Yet, what does government say? We do not care if it is an emergency. We can't be bothered at this time about the need. We are going to do it on a long-term - I believe the Member for Grand Bank said: We are not going to do this by the seat of our pants and on the fly. We are going to take our time and do this.

Well, I say to the Member for Grand Bank, that does not reflect the truly compassionate government that reacts to emergency situations. It is fine if you are in a circumstance or a predicament where you can take the time to think things out, to put a well-though-out process in place, no problem with that either, but we are not talking here where you can sit back and there are no negative effects about your tardiness. We are talking about, for every moment that is wasted here and this issue is not dealt with, it has serious psychological, emotional, stressful impacts on people, and that is what we are supposed to be all about as a government. That is where I say this Budget has fallen short - that is just one angle - on the home care piece.

We talk about the gas tax issue. It is fine to say we gave all kinds of relief - and there has been some relief, a 1 per cent tax reduction, I do believe – but there are lots of cases where there was no relief, and that is where the debate comes in: Did the government do the right thing? We did A, B, C, but should they have done E, F and G?

Nobody got to debate this, by the way. Nobody in the public had any part of that debate. That was a thing called Cabinet that had that debate, the government, who sat down in the back room with the spoils and said this is where we are going to put it. That is how it worked. This was not a case where - they did some Budget consultations, but it is pretty obvious and clear from what showed up in the final document that a lot of the things that were said in the consultations were not paid attention to.

Does that mean, because you put some nice things in a Budget, you cannot talk about the other things and say: Wow, maybe the government should not have put so much into payment of the debt. Maybe they should have - because we still have some tough times around us - given more credence at this time to services rather than debt reduction. That is where the debate is coming in.

I discussed earlier in this House the issue of the gasoline tax. As of today, May 8, under the Public Utilities office, the Public Utilities Board, the Petroleum Pricing Office, as of today, May 8, in the Avalon region, it is costing $1.339 for a litre of gasoline at the pump. Of that amount, this Province is taking sixteen point five cents in tax. I went through the details the last day. This government, for the sake of $20 million, could knock four point five cents off of that tax rate. Right now they are charging sixteen point five. We are highest in Canada. We are the highest in Atlantic Canada. Yet, for the sake of $20 million, the question then becomes – because the government is famous for saying this too, but we try to do it so that we help the most people. We try to put money in people's pockets. Well, whose pockets would benefit from that $20 million investment?

I will give you an example of some of the people it would help: Anybody who has a driver's licence in this Province. Anybody who is a commuter in this Province would be helped. Anybody we hope to attract to this Province as a result of our tourist industry, who is going to drive here, would be helped. Anybody who owns a business in this Province, who can benefit from those tourists coming in here, would be helped. Anybody who runs a business, such as the Sobeys of the world, who have to bring in foodstuffs - and I do believe, because we live on an Island, about 90-plus per cent of our foodstuffs are trucked in - they would be helped. Because right now, folks, what is happening is that gas goes up, the cost goes up to the businesses, and do you think the businesses are heading that cost? Obviously not; they are not absorbing that cost. They are passing it on to the consumers. I would think, therefore, the whole 506,000 of us mortals here on the Island and in Labrador are going to benefit if it goes down by that 4.5 per cent.

Anyway, I am getting down to the end of my discussion so at this point as well, before I run out of time, Mr. Speaker, I would like to move a sub-amendment, actually, to the non-confidence motion that has already been made.

Moved by myself, the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile, seconded by the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, that the amendment - that is the non-confidence motion amendment - be amended by changing the period at the end, thereof, to a comma, and by adding immediately thereafter the words, "and deplores the way government has failed to deal with the crisis in health care, the home care needs of many seniors, and the needs of public sector pensioners".

Mr. Speaker, I have about thirty-nine seconds left. I will move that amendment and I believe that takes my time in this session.

I understand from the Government House Leader that the additional time that I would get pursuant to the sub-amendment, I would take on the next setting day of the Legislature whenever the Budget Speech is called.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): The Chair is going to have to take a recess, not only to look at the amendment as put forward by the hon. the Opposition House Leader but to see if it is in order for the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair to second the sub-amendment, since she has already spoken to the amendment.

The Chair is going to need some clarification and to take a recess, because the Chair is of the understanding that if the member has already spoken to the amendment then she cannot second the sub-amendment.

The Chair is going to have to take a recess and will report back.

This House now stands in recess.

MR. SPEAKER (Mr. Fitzgerald): Order please!

The Chair has had an opportunity to confer with other jurisdictions and to refer back to precedents of this House. While the moving of a motion and the seconding of a motion are certainly not in our Standing Orders, precedents of the House have clearly shown that in order to move a motion, especially a budget motion, there has to be a seconder. In order to move a sub-amendment, there has to be a seconder, and the seconder of the amendment or the sub-amendment has to be somebody who has not already taken part in that particular debate.

Marleau and Montpetit quite clearly says it on page 510, "A member who has already spoken to a question may not rise again to propose or second an amendment….." In this particular case, the hon. the Opposition House Leader has proposed a sub-amendment, and unless there is somebody else in the Chamber who plans on seconding the sub-amendment, then the sub-amendment cannot be entertained, because there is no seconder.

So I say to the hon. the –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I say to the hon. the Opposition House Leader, that while he has proposed his sub-amendment, I will ask for a seconder, and if there is no seconder within the Chamber then the sub-amendment is out of order.

Is there a seconder for the sub-amendment, as put forward by the hon. the Opposition House Leader?

Being no seconder, the sub-amendment is ruled out of order.

Shall the amendment carry?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

Since the debate is now over on the amendment, all members have spoken, unless there is somebody from the government side who wishes to rise?

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, we are prepared to park the discussion for now, it is 5:29p.m., and move that the House – well before I do that, there is some other business, brief business.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: The Estimates Resource Committee is going to meet in the Chamber immediately following our adjournment this evening to consider the estimates of the Department of Business. On Monday, I believe the Government Services Committee will meet at nine o'clock to discuss Finance and Public Service Commission budgets here in the House. At 5:30 in the evening, the Government Services Committee will review Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs here in the House of Assembly, and at the same time the Social Services Committee will be meeting in the executive dining room over in the West Block to consider Justice.

Mr. Speaker, it being five-thirty, I now move that the House do adjourn until tomorrow, Monday at one-thirty.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that this House do now adjourn.

All those in favour, aye.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.

The motion is carried. This House now stands adjourned until 1:30 of the clock tomorrow, being Monday.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Monday, at 1:30 p.m.