The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

MR. SPEAKER: The following members' statements will be heard: the hon. the Member for the District of Mount Pearl North; the hon. the Member for the District of Kilbride; and by leave, the hon. the Member for the District of Conception Bay South.

Does the hon. Member for Conception Bay South have leave to participate in members' statements - the hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

The hon. the Member for the District of Kilbride.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate Mrs. Elizabeth Connolly on the occasion of her 100th birthday.

There are few people who have witnessed the historical events of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Mrs. Elizabeth Connolly is one of those individuals as she turned 100 years old on December 1, 2009.

She was born on December 1, 1909 to Michael and Elizabeth Connors of Pouch Cove, Newfoundland. Elizabeth and her nine brothers and two sisters were raised in rural Newfoundland and endured two World Wars, the Great Depression, Confederation and countless historical discoveries.

Elizabeth married Thomas Frederick Connolly on October 15, 1934, and they were blessed with two children. Elizabeth and Fred celebrated their golden wedding anniversary in 1984, prior to his death the following year.

She has lived with her daughter and son-in-law in Kilbride for the past twenty-five years. She has five grandchildren, five great-grandchildren and many other friends and family members who love her dearly.

Elizabeth is a remarkable woman who loves to share stories of days gone by. She has shaped and touched many lives over her remarkable years, and we wish her good health and happiness as she celebrates this incredible milestone.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members of this House to join me in congratulating Mrs. Connolly on this happy occasion.

Thank you.

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 very much, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize the Mount Pearl Lions Club for its commitment and years of service to the City of Mount Pearl and its residents.

The Lions Club organization is the largest service organization in the world, with over 1.3 million members. In Newfoundland and Labrador alone, there are fifty-three clubs in N4 Eastern Newfoundland and Labrador, thirty-nine clubs in N3 Western Newfoundland and Labrador, which includes over 2,000 members.

The Mount Pearl Lions Club is very active in our community, offering its services to many programs that serve our residents. Club members run youth speak-offs, the annual Santa Claus parade, and numerous annual fundraisers to ensure that those in need receive the assistance they require.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating the Mount Pearl Lions Club on the good work they have been doing in Mount Pearl and wish them continued success in the future. I believe that the Mount Pearl Lions Club is committed to building a strong community, and they have helped significantly in achieving this goal in Mount Pearl.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Conception Bay South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate Master Corporal Michael Bursey, formerly of CBS, now residing in Brandon, Manitoba.

On November 13, 2009 the Governor General, the Hon. Michaelle Jean awarded the Medal of Military Valour to Master Corporal Michael Bursey for displaying courage and decisive leadership when exposed to enemy fire. Master Corporal Bursey repeatedly returned to a burning vehicle to help the injured and tend to causalities while being ambushed by the Taliban. Due to his efforts, five people were saved; however, three of his comrades were killed.

I would like to recognize the tremendous contribution he has made and is making on behalf of our country. None of us can truly understand the environment that our Canadian Forces work in, but yet we do know that without people like Master Corporal Bursey and his comrades, we cannot continue to enjoy the freedoms we enjoy today.

I have known Michael and his family my whole life and I am truly honoured to speak to his accomplishments here today.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join with me in congratulating Master Corporal Michael Bursey on being recognized for his outstanding service to our country and wish him God's speed in all future assignments.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the provincial government delivers a suite of financial and non-financial programs focused on helping local businesses address labour market conditions, explore avenues to maximize productivity, and to open doors to new opportunities.

As a government, we have introduced more than $87 million in programs that provide local businesses and organizations with greater access to financial resources that help get projects off the ground.

Equally important, is the broad spectrum of non-financial programs that provide participants with direct access to sector and trade specialists who can help connect them to available resources, along with information and networking opportunities designed to help them realize success.

To date, Mr. Speaker, workshops on manufacturing, business development, export readiness, and large scale procurement have proven beneficial for individuals and businesses across all regions of our Province.

In particular, workshops aimed at helping small and medium-sized enterprises enhance their understanding of the benefits of effective intellectual property protection have been positively received. The diverse mix of the more than 200 attendees of five sessions in St. John's, Corner Brook, and Gander reflects the progressive nature of the local business community and their keenness to acquire knowledge as part of improving their competitiveness.

Sessions cover the various types of intellectual property protection and that includes trademarks, patents, trade secrets, and copyrights. More importantly, Mr. Speaker, it emphasizes the importance of these measures and provides valuable advice about how and when to apply them.

Mr. Pat King, the owner of King's Enterprises in Springdale, reported that the intellectual property session in Corner Brook was extremely informative. Since the session, he is applying information gathered to prepare a business plan and commercialize his patented idea.

Mr. Roger Power, the CEO of Versus Technologies in St. John's said, "We are now better able to license our television software applications to customers throughout the world. Our markets have expanded to include a dozen countries including the United States, Portugal, Greece and China. The Intellectual Property Workshops connect the experts in the field to innovative small businesses like ours. It is invaluable."

That is just a snapshot of some of the value that has been communicated in response to the workshops. These free workshops ensure that businesses can explore all matters relating to protecting their valuable assets. It is an issue that should be heavily considered by all businesses when commercializing their products and seeking to improve their competitiveness. Early in the new year, workshops will be held on the Northern Peninsula and in Labrador.

I encourage all interested businesses and individuals to contact the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development for more information.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of this statement, and acknowledge that it is great to do whatever government can to support small business across the Province.

Entrepreneurs need more capital, more information and certainly a reliable labour supply. It is well known that the rural labour supply is tight and getting tighter all the time. So, intellectual property information, while it is complex and can be difficult for the small business person to access, any efforts in those areas are useful for those who need it. Certainly, to see it going further out into rural Newfoundland is encouraging.

Thank you.

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

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

I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement, and thank him, actually, for following up on responding to a question I asked earlier this year with regard to uptake on the workshops that the department was doing. So it is good to get this information. Being able to access money for development certainly helps small to medium-sized business indeed.

I notice that the minister, in his statement, encourages, at the end, all interested businesses and individuals to contact the department, and I would be interested in knowing how proactive the communication is to get small and medium-sized businesses involved. Is there contact besides just advertising in the media? That would be interesting to know from the minister as well.

I am delighted to know that these workshops are going on, not just for the learning of the small to medium businesses, but I am sure that during the workshops, the department probably also gets an opportunity to learn more from the businesses – what they need from the department.

So thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, December 4, I had the privilege of attending the graduation of correctional officer recruits at the Canadian Forces Station St. John's Drill Hall. This ceremony was afforded the pomp and circumstance appropriate for the graduation of such a distinguished class.

Twenty-seven recruits, Mr. Speaker, graduated from an intensive twenty-week training program, which includes two weeks instruction, fourteen weeks work placement, followed by an additional four weeks of instruction. This comprehensive program covers important topics such as mental health awareness, suicide prevention, and substance abuse, use of force and arrest and control. The training regiment of our correctional officers now includes them as some of the best trained and prepared in the country.

We have taken a progressive step forward, Mr. Speaker, and hired correctional officers from regions of the Province where correctional facilities are located and these officers will work at those facilities. It is also noteworthy that these twenty-seven correctional officers join twenty-seven other officers already trained and working in corrections since January 2009.

Mr. Speaker, this program is a direct result of the efforts put forth by our government to address the recommendations of Decades of Darkness: Moving Towards the Light, the independent review of adult corrections. Following a recommendation of that review, the current graduating class consists of one-third female officers. This initiative supplements our creation of an additional six female designate correctional officer positions.

Mr. Speaker, our government has invested heavily in adult corrections, including an additional $7 million since receipt of the review. Budget 2009 increased funding to over $37 million. These new officers will be working in a much improved environment as seventy-three of the review's seventy-seven recommendations have either been implemented or are in progress. This can largely be attributed to improved leadership in corrections, and thus improved staff relations and morale. Evidence of this is the fact that this year for the first time in twenty-five years, Mr. Speaker, we signed the first collective agreement with correctional officers without resorting to arbitration.

Mr. Speaker, psychological services are now present at all facilities, and an additional 1,600 square feet of space for programming, medical services and offices at Her Majesty's Penitentiary have been added. A full-time psychologist and a second nurse are now present at this facility. We are also re-establishing the land-based program at the Labrador Correctional Centre, and we have increased partnerships at Her Majesty's Penitentiary with stakeholder groups such as the Canadian Mental Health Association, Turnings and the John Howard Society. Similarly, Stella Burry Community Services are providing counselling and support to inmates at the Newfoundland and Labrador Correctional Centre for Women in Clarenville.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in offering congratulations to the twenty-seven new correctional officers who have joined the ranks of our corrections service and I wish them well in a rewarding career.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. We, too, would like to congratulate these new correctional officers; they have certainly entered upon a worthy and worthwhile career. It is one of the very stressful environments to work in, of course, when you work in corrections, but we know these initiatives of government have indeed enhanced the morale of those persons who are involved in that particular area of employment.

As well, a lot of these initiatives that have been undertaken, of course, give the correctional officers some appropriate intervention options when it comes to dealing with the complex needs that arise from time to time in the institution.

Also, of course, with more staff you can do things that sometimes you do not get time for such as recreational opportunities and so on. So I understand that is on a better par than it was.

There were a couple of things, as the minister alluded to, that are not completed yet, and I raised some questions about that earlier the week. One being the pretrial detention centre in Happy Valley-Goose Bay – and hopefully that will proceed in a timely fashion, because I do believe that was a very important part of the proposals and recommendations that were put forward, as well as the hiring of the addictions counsellor. I think the sooner that happens, the better of course for all concerned.

Ultimately, of course, we look forward to seeing the replacement of Her Majesty's Penitentiary, because I do firmly believe, as do a lot of others in the legal profession and so on who deal with this, that unless we ultimately replace HMP, a lot of these well worth and worthwhile initiatives may not come to their true fruition.

Thank you.

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement, and I happy to join in congratulating the graduates on completing their twenty-week training program. I am also very glad that the minister noted that one-third of the graduates are female officers. That is a really good step in that direction.

It is good news that seventy-three of the seventy-seven recommendations have been put in place, as has already been noted by my colleague, but unfortunately, we do know the state of the penitentiary here in St. John's, HMP. I fully understand the discussion that is going on between the Province and the federal government, but I would urge the minister to recognize that the Province does have a responsibility to the inmates of HMP, and even if it means that we have to say we are moving forward to build a provincial facility only, maybe that, in itself, would force the federal government to do something, but we cannot continue to have both inmates and staff down there for much longer.

It is going to take time to build it. The sooner we get a decision to build a new penitentiary, the better. Having been there, having toured in recent times in the late summer, I cannot say how appalled I am that we do have people living and working in that situation. The programs are being affected; the staff and inmates told me that the success of some of the programs is actually being affected by the facility itself.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

Oral Questions.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, last spring we raised the issue of asbestos problems at St. Pat's nursing home in St. John's after hearing from workers concerned for their health. We recently obtained, under the access to information act, occupational health and safety reports regarding the asbestos exposure at this facility. They confirmed that the building's asbestos management plan was not followed prior to 2007.

I ask the minister today: Why wasn't an asbestos management plan being followed, and have any changes been made since to protect the health of workers, patients and families at this facility?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can indicate to the member opposite, we obviously are concerned about the safety and well-being of all residents in long-term care facilities in this Province. I am not aware of that specific study; it is certainly I will look at and have a view of and see what steps have been taken. I can report to the Leader of the Opposition on that.

Also, Mr. Speaker, I can indicate that earlier today I was going through a number of documents in relation to the Budget, and there are a lot of proposals for repairs to long-term care facilities in this Province. So not only are we spending money, Mr. Speaker, in terms of building new long-term care facilities, but we are also doing our best to ensure that the facilities that we do have are kept up-to-date.

As soon as I find the answer, I will report back to the Opposition Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Documentation and e-mail correspondence was exchanged within government on this issue. One departmental official of Government Services stressed the need for a medical surveillance program to be implemented to assess any adverse health impacts on staff and patients who may have been exposed to asbestos.

I ask the minister: Why did you not follow this advice and why was the monitoring program not implemented?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate what the Minister of Health has said, each and every one of the residents of our long-term care facilities are the utmost in our minds and certainly in regard to their safety.

We all understand that various buildings built in the past have had various asbestos problems, so we moved through that in a strategic way in regard to addressing those problems. From our occupational health and safety side of it, we set up a plan and then we moved forward with that plan and we continue to do that on a continual basis. We cannot move it in such a way that it corrects all the problems today, but certainly we correct them as we go through with the plan in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The recommendation was for a medical surveillance plan or program to be put in place. Obviously, this would be for the protection of the workers and the residents.

The report also stated that the employer had not fulfilled the responsibilities for effective asbestos management, and as such, the same deficiencies in workplace controls that were noted in the past continue to exist today.

I ask the minister: In light of this information, are you prepared now to commit to implementing the monitoring program that was recognized and recommended by officials in your department?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Each and every one of our reports by our occupational health and safety officers are taken very, very seriously by myself and my officials. I have every intention of having a look at that report, making sure that we have implemented whatever needs to be implemented, and to make sure that maybe the actual corrective action has taken place already and it do not need to be implemented. Certainly, if anything has to be put in place in regard to the protection of the employees and the residents themselves, I will have a look at that in the very, very near future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Registry of Deeds, which is located in the basement of Confederation Building, and is accessed by the general public on a daily basis, legal title searchers employed with various law firms throughout the Province work in a vault of the registry where older property titles are kept. These workers have expressed concerns about potential asbestos exposure in this area of the registry, especially after fourteen out of thirty-five of these workers have now been diagnosed with cancer over the last five years.

I ask the minister: Have you completed an intrusive asbestos inspection of the Registry of Deeds, and if so, what were the findings?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, there have been studies done on various buildings, including this one, itself, in regard to any asbestos content in any building throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, including the East Block and West Block, or wherever it may be. Also, the Registry of Deeds is in the process of moving down to Elizabeth Avenue to a new location, which should happen very, very soon – a matter of fact, probably by the end of the new year, or early into the new year. So they will have a new place of residence and conduct their business – which will be actually more beneficial to all concerned.

Certainly, we have done all kinds of studies and investigations with regard to asbestos. Asbestos has been a huge problem for this government and past governments, in regard to the life of our buildings that we find throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. So we will move forward and have a look at all those types of things.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the minister confirming that there was some testing done. I ask if he could release the findings of that testing so that those employees could see what was contained in the report.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have no problem of identifying the actual investigation that may have taken place over in the East Block in that particular area. If there is a report, I shall certainly release it to the public.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Over the summer a provincial working group was formed with a goal of banning the cosmetic use of pesticides in the Province. The coalition, which was comprised of a number of professional groups, raised a public awareness over the use of pesticides and the potential health impacts.

I am aware that the minister met with her Atlantic counterparts to discuss this issue, and I ask her today: What analysis has your department done since that time and what timelines and assurances can you give to the public that your department will take action on that request?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, earlier on, I made a commitment to meet with all of the stakeholders that would be involved in the issue of cosmetic pesticide use. I have met with the Canadian Cancer Society and the Lung Association. I have met with people involved in the industry itself in terms of applying the pesticides. The Minister of Health and Community Services and myself has also made a commitment, now that there is a new minister in that department, to meet with the Canadian Cancer Society and the medical association again in the future.

As you said, we continuously do a review of the various regulations in other provinces, and we will make a commitment to ensure that this issue is first and foremost here as well.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The coalition, which is made up of the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association, the Newfoundland Nurses' Union, the Canadian Cancer Society and the Lung Association, along with many others, has also been working with Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador to have a resolution passed, which recently did at their convention. It was calling for a province-wide ban on cosmetic pesticide use.

I ask the minister: What action is planned to address the resolution that was just passed at their convention and endorsed by all of the municipalities in the Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, we are aware of that resolution. In fact, I have been in touch with Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador. I also would like to add to that, I believe the City of St. John's has also passed such a similar motion as well. Again, we will continue to work toward the issue. There are some things that we are looking at. You have to look at, in the case of Ontario or Quebec, I am not sure at the moment, but there is an outstanding lawsuit now against one of those provinces for banning a particular pesticide. So we want to be careful if we do anything that we certainly do it right and we do not end up in a lawsuit. I would certainly welcome the comments of the member opposite as to where your position is on the pesticides use as well.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Under the Municipalities Act, communities cannot enact by-laws banning the cosmetic use of pesticides, as this piece of legislation does not provide local jurisdiction over safety or general welfare powers. That is what I understand from dealing with the Federation of Municipalities. Without a directive from the department or an amendment to the Municipalities Act, local leaders can do very little to act on this issue without the provincial government bringing forward some kind of legislation.

I ask: If you will commit at the minimum to make amendments to the act to allow these municipalities to have more control and autonomy to enforce these kinds of regulations?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Yes, Mr. Speaker. In response to the question from the member opposite, obviously when concerns are raised - as we have seen concerns raised in this House on any number of issues – we will work with Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador. We will work with the groups to make sure, and within departments, to try and ensure that we take the right course of action.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Now that the Minister of Transportation and Works is up, I have a couple of questions for him. I am waiting to see if he has an early Christmas gift, Mr. Speaker, for the people of Labrador. As we know, work is continuing on the Trans-Labrador Highway between Cartwright and Goose Bay, and many people are hoping that this road will be connected prior to Christmas.

I ask the minister: If he can give the people of Labrador and the people of the Province an update on this highway connection and when it is expected to be open to the general public?

He is so excited, Mr. Speaker, he cannot wait for me to finish my question.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: I say, Mr. Speaker, I do not want to look like a scrooge or anything, I want to look like a Santa Claus in this one.

In response to the member opposite, this is a commitment this government made that Phase III, the piece of highway, the Trans-Labrador Highway between Cartwright Junction and Happy Valley-Goose Bay, 287 kilometres. We indicated that we would do everything possible to get it done in this time period of 2009. I say to the member opposite, we are very, very close in the sense that the crews have indeed connected up both sides.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: That is the Santa part. The other part is that of course in coming together there is still a fair amount of work to make sure that that highway section is up to the standards for safety wise. So the crews are working extremely, extremely hard. They have to put down a larger culvert and do some other work but we are very, very hopeful that yes, we can get that open as soon as possible.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the great Christmas present but it is certainly an historic event and a lot of excitement in Labrador around it.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to ask the minister today, because as you know, with regard to the ferry operations between the Island and Labrador, there are periods of the year where we have some problems in terms of navigating that particular service because of ice.

I ask the minister today: Has any consideration been given by your government to establish a year-round ferry service between Labrador and the Island now that we will have a road connection over the next year and be open and operational?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Again, Mr. Speaker, the first priority was indeed to get the road open, which we are still working on. Of course, consideration must be given now that that connection is close, that we look at year round. However, that is under consideration and I would have to report back at some time later as to whether we are going to go in that direction, but, again, we need to make sure that we do the proper consultation with the parties involved to see that there is a need and if indeed, how we can fulfil that particular need.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are also for the Minister of Transportation and Works.

Mr. Speaker, the MV Gallipoli, which operates from Burgeo to Ramea, is scheduled for annual refit in the coming weeks. For the first time in the history of these refits the whole crew is being laid off. These workers have years and years of service with the department; yet, at this most sensitive time of year they are being sent home.

My question for the minister is: Why are they being sent home, and is this really necessary?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, on this particular issue, obviously, I would like to check with my officials to make sure I have the facts correct and then I will certainly bring those along to the House at the earliest convenience.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the required maintenance and painting and upkeep of the ferry, of course, is always done by the crew during their annual refits because it cannot be done while the vessel is actually in service. Now it appears that for this attempt to save a few bucks, we have disrupted the lives of these employees, we have forced them on to unemployment, and we have compromised the vessel maintenance program.

I ask the minister: If you could check into this and see if this decision, which appears to be short sighted and not well thought out, could in fact be halted before it has these negative consequences?

Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Again, Mr. Speaker, obviously I indicated I would report back, but in saying that, as well, we have an obligation as a government to make sure that our ferries that are operating in the various parts of this Province are in good shape, that they are up to scratch, up to whatever standards are. Fortunately or unfortunately, they have to come out of service at particular times in order for to get that work. I suspect that that is the case here, and unfortunately, in taking out a ferry, that we do have some ramifications. Those I will check on to make sure that they have been done in a manner that is in the best interest of all.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, during September of this year there were about 200 Memorial University students who were on a wait-list for on-campus housing in St. John's. These wait-lists were reported to be the longest the university has seen for some years. In addition to this shortage of student housing, the vacancy rate for housing in St. John's was at about 2.2 per cent, which is also an all-time low. Although there was money allocated for the construction of two new residences at MUN campus in the 2007 Budget, at the moment that project is at a standstill and the space originally intended for the new buildings is currently being used as a parking lot.

I ask the minister: Why has the project been put on hold, and when can we expect to see construction resume in efforts to alleviate this housing shortage?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the member opposite, probably one of the challenges with the housing is the result of the lowest tuition in the country that is attracting students to come to Newfoundland to study.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: The project itself, Mr. Speaker, is not on hold. As a matter of fact, it is far from being on hold. We have had discussions with officials at Memorial as early as the day before yesterday. There are a number of challenges that we face there, that we are trying to work through. If the member opposite is aware of the issue, he would be fully aware that there are multi-millions of dollars committed to this project already. We are in the final stages now of nailing down exactly the number of beds that we are going to build and how much the project is going to cost. I say, Mr. Speaker, the project is very, very, very far from on hold. It is actually a lot closer to moving forward than anything else.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We certainly appreciate what low tuition fees can do in the student population, for sure. Sir Wilfred Grenfell College in Corner Brook is also experiencing a shortage of student housing which poses many problems for students trying to find a place to live, and Corner Brook is currently experiencing a vacancy rate of 0.6 per cent, which is the lowest rental vacancy rate of any large community in the Province. Back in August it was reported that the college was still waiting to hear back from government with regard to additional funding for an expansion of the proposed residence. It was reported at that time that the college had been waiting for over a year to receive an answer on the additional funding.

Again, I ask the minister: Has government committed additional funding for the resident project in Corner Brook, and when is it anticipated that the residence will be open to address the student housing shortage in that area?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the member opposite for his question. It is always a pleasure to stand here and talk about Memorial, and of course Memorial's sister on the West Coast, Grenfell. We are very proud of the programs we offer over there, and for the same reason we are challenged in St. John's we are challenged in Corner Brook, because people want to come to Grenfell and they want to study there. They recognize the quality of the programs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: We recognize, Mr. Speaker, the value in Grenfell College and what is over there. That is why we have invested in nearly $30 million for a new academic building within the last three months, Mr. Speaker, for the West Coast.

The answer for the housing for the West Coast is the same as it is for Memorial because it is a part of the same project, Mr. Speaker. We could move forward today and we could do half of a job with a project, but we are committed to do the best we can with the amount of money we have available. Grenfell and Memorial, and their leadership teams are committed to work with us to ensure that when we announce that project is moving forward, it is moving forward with the maximum number of beds we can get and the best dollar value for that project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, student housing continues to be an issue, not only for MUN but also for CONA, the College of the North Atlantic. At its Labrador West campus, as well as its St. Anthony campus, there are housing shortages. While government has planned to invest $2 million to expand academic buildings, there is nothing on the books in terms of addressing the housing shortage in Labrador West.

Again, I would ask the minister: Will the government also provide funding to address the student housing needs in Western Labrador?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the member opposite is fully aware that if we do not continue to invest in programs and facilities, there will be no need for student housing because there will be nothing to study in.

Mr. Speaker, I say, first of all, we have to ensure that we have quality facilities that are tailored to the program offerings that we have across the Province, and that is for Memorial University and it is for our public college system.

Mr. Speaker, the commitments that we made demonstrate our commitment to post-secondary education in this Province and we will continue to follow the path we followed for the last six or seven years on that, Mr. Speaker. We will work with the College of the North Atlantic as they identify priorities that they have for growing their programs and growing the enrolment in their programs. If housing is identified, then we will obviously work with them to address that as well.

Mr. Speaker, we have a plan laid out to follow with the College of the North Atlantic, as we do with Memorial. It is a strategic plan to grow the programs and to grow the student enrolment and make sure that the facilities we have there are safe and secure for students and faculty.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the minister of tidings of great joy today. Mr. Speaker, the provincial government's decision to download operational and maintenance costs for the planned extension to Team Gushue Highway to the cities of St. John's and Mount Pearl is creating tension between the two communities.

I ask the minister: Why are you downloading your responsibilities to municipalities who will be forced to increase taxes or make cuts to afford these services?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: Ho, ho, ho.

MR. HEDDERSON: No; no, ho, ho, ho's for me, Mr. Speaker.

Again, this road was planned way back in the 1970s. It is a road that is advantageous to St. John's, Mount Pearl and the surrounding area. It was in the works for as long as I can remember and now it is coming to fulfillment. We believe that we acted in the best interest of the city, the City of Mount Pearl and the surrounding areas. We have done what we needed to do. It is there and if there is tension between those two groups, that is something that they will have to deal with.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, there are fourteen members of government in the capital region who are sitting idly by and allowing their government to treat their constituents in such a heavy-handed manner. This road is a key piece of infrastructure to the capital region and the provincial government should not only build, but also maintain the highway as they do with all other provincial highways in the Province.

I ask the minister: If both St. John's and Mount Pearl refuse to cover the operational and maintenance costs for the highway, will you continue to build this highway or is this a way of forcing them into submission?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again, talking about heavy-handedness; we as a government have put in, I believe this year, $800 million in infrastructure throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: If that is heavy-handed - I say to the member opposite, if that is heavy-handed, yes, we are a heavy-handed government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, creating this type of uncertainty and downloading additional costs to municipalities who are struggling to balance their budgets every year is unfortunate. Mount Pearl has already stated they will not cover any cost of maintaining this highway because it is a provincial responsibility.

I ask the minister, again: Why are you refusing to take responsibility for what is certainly a provincial highway?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again, we see this road as a priority, and as a priority we are certainly looking at a 50-50 funding with the federal government to complete this highway. We realize the importance of it. The only thing that we ask, is that when the highway is built I would see that the - I think the City of St. John's will take over the maintenance of it. That is co-operation. That is where we need to be, and that is where we are as a government. Again, I would say to the member opposite, we have delivered and we will deliver on this as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, this is a question that I had left over the other day when I asked the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

Mr. Speaker, last year government committed to more than $10 million in its budget for cleaning up contaminated sites including the New Harbour landfill. When the department tested the site in 2005-2006, the concentration of PCBs detected in the soil samples were 66.7 milligrams for one kilogram of soil, which far exceeds the fifty milligrams per kilowatt of soil.

I ask the minister: How much contaminated soil has been removed from the site since last year and what are the soil samples of concentration at this time?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, perhaps we will have to start on the Lower Churchill to get the kilowatts to the landfill.

I will tell the member, last year we did remove 120 tons. Last year we did remove 120 tons of materials with PCBs in them and further delineation work has been done so that further removal can be done in the future. So, 120 tons was removed.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Finance, in releasing fall update 2009, said he was not happy with the percentage of the GDP taken up by oil revenues. He spoke about the need for diversification, yet the update document only talks about large major projects, mainly oil related.

Mr. Speaker, diversification sounds great, but what does it really mean? We have not heard anything about diversification from the Department of Business, or Natural Resources, or the Newfoundland and Labrador Research and Development Council.

So, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Premier could give us tangible examples of what his departments and agencies are doing to diversify our economy.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The basic part of government's plan is so that we can diversify the economy, so that we are not totally relying on these non-renewable resources. That is why this government is committed to the Lower Churchill project.

When we first took office, we brought the Province back to surplus after many years of deficits. That enabled us to lower our debt, it enabled us to lower our interest costs, it enabled us to lower taxes so our people would have more money to pay their bills, and to expand the economy. It also enabled us to make investments, strategic investments in program spending and in infrastructure for the very purpose of diversifying the economy, with investments in research and development, with investments in ocean technology, with investments in aquaculture, with investments in agriculture – the list goes on and on and on.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I did not hear anything new in the list that was just thrown out by the Minister of Finance - nothing new at all.

Mr. Speaker, the economic update talks about the increased activity in the major capital projects, mostly in the offshore, and an increase of thousands of employment person hours in 2010 and 2011 related to that activity.

So I ask the minister: What efforts are being made to ensure that we shall have the workforces for this increased activity in 2010 and 2011?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member opposite is aware, the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development has a number of new strategies. An innovation strategy, which is supporting diversifying our local economies. We have an ocean tech strategy, Mr. Speaker, that we are using to bring new companies that are now in an embryonic stage to the point where they able to have programs that they have, and technology that they have into commercialization.

These industries are growing, Mr. Speaker; we have seen them grow ten-, twenty- and thirty-fold in the last number of years. That is the kind of investment that we are making, based upon the money we are getting from the oil and gas. That is the kind of investment that we are making into our knowledge-based industries to make sure that our Province and the companies in our Province are prepared to deal with the future, and deal with the new technologies that are out there, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the answer he gave, which was the answer to my first question – but I am still glad to get that information that he just shared.

Mr. Speaker, currently there is a gap between people graduating with a skilled trade, their ability to find an apprenticeship position and then being ready to enter the workforce, especially by 2010.

I want to know what the government is doing to get people with basic training the job experience that will be needed to be ready for the employment in these new projects that are in fall update, 2009.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, thank you.

I want to speak up a little bit on what my colleague had to say a few minutes ago. I thank the member for her question. We are very aware of the challenges that we face in apprenticeship in this Province. We are also very much aware of the demand that exists now and what it will be for the foreseeable future for skilled trades in this Province.

That is one of the reasons, as my colleague alluded to, that we made significant investment. As a matter of fact, I think it was June that I, myself, announced a suite of programs that our government is investing in for almost every single campus of College of the North Atlantic across the Province, and that ranges from Burin, to St. Anthony, to Port aux Basques and all points in between. Those programs, Mr. Speaker, are designed to provide some general skills in tourism and fishery-related occupations, but they are also very targeted to industry specific where we are training, for example, in Burin, for a particular course to suit the needs of a particular company in the area.

In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, we –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to conclude his response.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have also invested heavily in doubling our spaces in the college system to focus on the trades, but in addition to that, Mr. Speaker, we are investing to provide supports to businesses, and enticements, and whatever else we can do to open up spots to allow apprentices more opportunity to go to work with businesses in the private sector.

Mr. Speaker, I say to the member opposite that I hope to have something more to say about that in the coming days.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time allotted for Oral Questions has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

MR. SPEAKER: As required, under section 51 of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act, I am pleased to table the 2008-2009 annual report of the House of Assembly Management Commission.

The report includes audited financial information for the House of Assembly service and its statutory offices, as well as a report of the activities of the Commission during this reporting period.

Further tabling of documents?

Notices of Motion.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Teachers' Pensions Act. (Bill 57)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Orders of the Day.

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

From the Order Paper, I would like to call Motion 1. With that, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Finance and the President of Treasury Board to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Members Of The House Of Assembly Retiring Allowances Act, Bill 53, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded that the hon. the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Members Of The House Of Assembly Retiring Allowances Act, Bill 53, and that Bill 53 be now read a first time.

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and the President of Treasury Board to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Members Of The House Of Assembly Retiring Allowances Act", carried. (Bill 53)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Members Of The House Of Assembly Retiring Allowances Act. (Bill 53)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 53 has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 53 be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 53 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Education to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Implement Labour Mobility, Bill 55, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded by the hon. the Government House Leader to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Implement Labour Mobility, Bill 55, and that Bill 55 be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 55 been now read a first time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Education to introduce a bill, "An Act To Implement Labour Mobility", carried. (Bill 55)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Implement Labour Mobility. (Bill 55)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 55 has now been read a first time.

When shall the said bill be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 55 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Finance and the President of Treasury Board, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Government Money Purchase Pension Plan Act, Bill 56, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded by the hon. the Government House Leader to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Government Money Purchase Pension Plan Act, Bill 56, and that Bill 56 be now read a first time.

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and the President of Treasury Board to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Government Money Purchase Pension Plan Act", carried. (Bill 56)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Government Money Purchase Pension Plan Act. (Bill 56)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 56 has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 56 be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 56 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Health and Community Services, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Occupational Therapists Act, 2005, Bill 59, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Occupational Therapists Act, 2005, Bill 59, and that Bill 59 be now read first time.

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Occupational Therapists Act, 2005", carried. (Bill 59)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Occupational Therapists Act, 2005. (Bill 59)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 59 be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 59 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Transportation and Works, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Rail Service Act, 2009, Bill 60, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Government House Leader has asked leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Rail Service Act, 2009, Bill 60, and that Bill 60 be now read a first time.

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Rail Service Act, 2009", carried. (Bill 60)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Rail Service Act, 2009. (Bill 60)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 60 be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 60 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Education, that Bill 38, An Act To Amend The Memorial University Pensions Act No. 2 be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would like to ask the hon. the Government House Leader to repeat the bill to be read a third time, please.

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, that was An Act To Amend The Memorial University Pensions Act No. 2, Bill 38, which is number three on the Order Paper in our Orders today.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 38, An Act To Amend The Memorial University Pensions Act be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Memorial University Pensions Act No.2. (Bill 38)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 38 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Memorial University Pensions Act No.2", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 38)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Government Services, that Bill 39, An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 39, An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act, be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act. (Bill 39)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 39 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 39)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General that Bill 40, An Act To Remove Anomalies And Errors In the Statute Law be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 40, An Act To Remove Anomalies And Errors In The Statute Law be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

Carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Remove Anomalies And Errors In The Statute Law. (Bill 40)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 40 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Remove Anomalies And Errors In The Statute Law", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 40)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General that Bill 41, An Act To Amend The Law With Respect To The Definition Of Spouse be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt a motion that Bill 41, An Act To Amend The Law With Respect To The Definition Of Spouse be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Law With Respect To The Definition Of Spouse. (Bill 41)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 41 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that Bill 41 do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Law With Respect To The Definition Of Spouse", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 41)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Government Services that Bill 42, An Act To Amend The Vital Statistics Act, 2009, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 42, An Act To Amend The Vital Statistics Act, 2009, be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Vital Statistics Act, 2009. (Bill 42)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 42 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Vital Statistics Act, 2009", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 42)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation that Bill 43, An Act To Repeal The Newspapers And Books Act be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt a motion that Bill 43, An Act To Repeal The Newspapers And Books Act, be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Repeal The Newspapers And Books Act. (Bill 43)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 43 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Repeal The Newspapers And Books Act", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 43)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Government Services, that Bill 44, An Act To Amend The Engineers And Geoscientists Act, 2008, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 44, An Act To Amend The Engineers And Geoscientists Act, 2008, be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Engineers And Geoscientists Act, 2008. (Bill 44)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 44 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that this bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Engineers And Geoscientists Act, 2008", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 44)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General that Bill 45, An Act To Amend The Victims Of Crime Services Act, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 45, An Act To Amend The Victims Of Crime Services Act, be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Victims Of Crime Services Act. (Bill 45)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 45 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Victims Of Crime Services Act", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 45)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I call Order 13, second reading of Bill 48, An Act Respecting Condominiums.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act Respecting Condominiums". (Bill 48)

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to get up in this House today and take a little bit of time and a few words in regard to the Condominium Act, a new Condominium Act, I might say as well, because the current Condominium Act was drafted in 1975, and it was certainly intended to regulate the condominium industry within the Province and to provide consumer protection. As we all know, back in 1975 there were very, very few condominiums in the Province, and they have grown substantially since then. It has become, as a matter of fact, quite common in the St. John's area, and also across the Province, in that right now. I believe we have over 100 condominiums registered in this Province today.

Also, I will address as I go through, in regard to my thoughts and my speaking, in regard to the Condominium Act, I will also address that there are various types of condos now as well. People sometimes believe that a condominium is a condominium, a place of residence in a building, but you can have various types of condos as well. The current legislation was a first generation type of legislation. As I just said before, it does not, at this point in time, reflect the modernization of that particular industry, and also a way of life and a place of living that has been introduced in Newfoundland and Labrador back in the early 1970s.

The intended purpose of the act is to protect the consumer, first and foremost, the first time condo buyers, the present owners, and also to improve the day-to-day operation of condominiums and explore other types of condominium developments that are popular in other regions. Also, as well, I might say on this matter is that we did not just draft this piece of legislation. It is not new to the country. We actually looked at the various other condominium acts across Canada. We took what we thought was pertinent to our own Province, took the best of each one of theirs and incorporated it in the act.

We also went through a consultation process, in that we travelled across the Province in September and October of 2008. We had about 150, 160 individuals attend those consultations and get presentations, ask questions, give suggestions in regard to what was needed in the new act. We also sent out a consultation document to various stakeholders, the Newfoundland and Labrador Chapter of the Canadian Condominium Institute, who are very, very active in regard to requesting the current legislation. Also, their participation in the consultation process was valued by me, as the minister, and my staff. Certainly, they brought a lot to the table. Certainly, a lot of the things that they talked about was incorporated into the act and recognized.

We went across the Province, as I said, in regard to our consultations. We started off in Lab City and ended up in St. John's and across the Island over the couple of month's period. We had also twenty-seven submissions from a wide range of groups; everything from the credit unions to just individuals and condominium corporations itself in regard to their suggestions as well. They were all very, very good suggestions and a valued piece of work done. It helped us formulate our thoughts and also formulate the structure of the Condominium Act itself. As I said, the new act reflects a lot of things that were not addressed in the old act of 1975, which are certainly needed now that they have grown to such an extent, as I just referenced, in regard to 100 condominium corporations that are registered across the Province.

I would like to actually highlight a few of the things that are addressed within the Condominium Act that was very, very important to the current owners and also will be very, very important to the future owners in regard to their protection; in regard to their investment and also their future life. One of the things that we have in the act is a disclosure statement, in that the act would require a disclosure statement to be provided to the vendor or to the purchaser at the time the agreement of purchase and sale is signed. This gives a general description of the property. It lays out such things as: the location of development; surveys of the land; plan of the building; the specific boundaries of each unit; the number of units the developer intends to sell and-or lease; the estimated completion date for the construction of the amenities; a copy of the proposed declaration of by-laws which is very, very important to the future owner; what constitutes actually the common elements versus what constitutes each unit. That it is very, very clear.

In the past I have experienced, myself, because I do own a condominium here in St. John's as well that I use to carry out my duties as a minister. Sometimes in regard to the common elements, they were not defined clearly to the unit owners. So this sets this provision that they will be very, very clear to the potential buyer or the owner in regard to that particular corporation. It will also map out or state the percentage of ownership of each unit and the percentage each unit has to contribute to common expense fees, and also a copy of the reserve fund study which is also reflected in the act. The new act will require an appendix to the purchase and sale agreement, that the purchaser will acknowledge they have received all the contents required in the disclosure statement.

Also, additionally, the act will have what is called an estoppel certificate. It will be provided from the purchaser to the - in regard to the purchase of the unit, it has to be provided before the actual purchase is finalized. The estoppel certificate provides information regarding the amount of the condominium monthly fees, if the unit is in default of fees to the condominium corporation. In other words, the actual past owner of that particular unit had not paid up their fees in full. So, that would be disclosed in that estoppel certificate, the amount of the condominium monthly fees, as I said, and also in regard to the fees to the condominium corporation. The information regarding the management of the corporation will be reflected too, in regards to those by-laws. The common property of the condominium corporation has been mortgaged or transferred and information about the reserve fund and whether the corporation is being sued and any special assessments have been levied against the corporation.

This is all in protection of the consumer in regard to the future unit owner. In the past, in the 1975 Corporation Act, this was not reflected. So, at times, not that it has happened often - I do not actually know if it did happen in Newfoundland and Labrador - in that a person who bought a unit found out a lot of things about the corporation after the fact when they had the purchase of sale completed and there was default on monthly fees, the corporation was being sued or whatever it may be. So this piece will be reflected in the act and certainly in that regard the consumer is protected.

Also, as well, I might say in regard to the disclosure statement and the estoppel certificate, it provides the opportunity for the purchaser to take the information that is contained in those documents and then they can make an informed decision in regard to if they are going to buy a unit, if they are going to invest into a unit before they actually complete the purchase of that particular unit. In the past they were making decisions with regard to their future investments without that type of important information. So now they have that information. It will be in the act and will have to be provided, and certainly that information is very, very valuable information, Mr. Speaker.

There is also a cooling off period in regard to the new act as well. There is a ten-day cooling off period. That is a period following the signing of the agreement of the purchase and sale. They would be given a time to review, in detail, all of the documentation that is provided in the disclosure statement and if, prior to the expiry date of that ten-day period that the purchaser decides, for whatever reason, that they are not going to carry forth in regard to purchase of the condominium, the actual agree will then be null and void, and the deposit, if any, gets refunded to the purchaser.

In the case of new construction, in regard to the condominium, the declaration and by-laws were not always available when the purchaser signed the agreement of purchase of sale, and therefore the new act will provide a cooling off period that does not start to run until the purchaser receives these documents.

In regard to that new construction, the company may not be able to provide those by-laws in that particular time, so the ten-day cooling off period will start to run after the purchaser receives those documents.

There was a lot of interest in regard to the reserve funds and the reserve fund study. As I just mentioned previously, I actually have a condo here in St. John's as well. I certainly recognize the need, number one, of having that reserve fund. It is very, very important to have it because there are all kinds of common areas and common issues that may happen in regard to the full building, the condominium corporation, as they move forward and the building ages. Such thing as a roof is a common space that has to be addressed. So you have to be able to have a reserve fund that addresses those type of issues when they come forward on a rainy day, you do not have to go back to all of the individual units and ask for an absorbent amount of money in regard to taking care of that roofing problem.

I know in my own building, in the past year or so, we had such an issue and we had to address that issue. I think the actual repairs cost us somewhere between $20,000 and $30,000. So, if we did not have to have a reserve fund in regard to that issue, the board of directors would have to come to us, it would have been divided equally and then we would have to pay it upfront, or not we would have a problem in our condominium.

So, that reserve fund is very, very important. The reserve fund and the amount are determined, I guess, by the board of directors and by the corporation itself, but it is also determined by the reserve fund study. What I mean by reserve fund study is that each one of the corporations, ten units or more, would have to engage professional advice in regard to having a look at the structure of the building, be it the roof, be it the windows, or be it whatever it is in common space, and determine if there are any repairs or renovations in regard to deteriorating over the years, that would have to be addressed within that ten-year period. Then, that estimate would come forward from the particular consultation engineers or whoever they used on a professional basis. That would determine the projected amount that they would need in regard to addressing all those issues, and then the corporation would have to put a plan in place in regard to putting that fund in place for those future uses.

Under ten units, they do not require a reserve fund study if they do not want to do it, but they can. If they want to, as a corporation, they can decide on their own to bring in a professional and determine what may be their future needs in regard to maintenance and renovations and whatever may be needed. They do not require it under the act, but they have to maintain a reserve fund balance equal to 100 per cent of their annual operating budget. Also, once that is determined in regard to the annual operating budget, the act will prescribe the time period in which the reserve fund must be fully funded as well. I believe, if I can remember right, that is five years they have to have it actually fully funded.

Also, in the act, it will prescribe that the developer is also responsible for contributing to the reserve fund on units he or she holds, as well as those that are not yet sold. You could have a situation that there are X number of condominiums within a corporation that 70 per cent of them, 80 per cent of them, or 85 per cent of them are sold, but there are 10, 15, or 20 per cent of them that are not sold. So in that case the developer is responsible for the reserve fund fees in regard to those units. That means that the actual owners that are already moved in would not be subject to increased fees because of the ones that are empty.

I mentioned that the reserve fund studies have to be completed by professionals, the professionals in the field that have this type of expertise, and they also have to hold liability insurance, as well, in regard to their profession.

Also, I might add that the reserve fund has to be filed with the Registrar of Condominiums, and this will certify, confirming that the reserve fund study has been completed and has to be filed with the Registrar of Condominiums. It has to be updated every ten years.

It also would address the every day-to-day functioning of the condominium corporation. The department received many submissions that highlighted certain deficiencies in the current act in relation to the operating functions of the condominium corporation. The new act prescribes the minimum, and I mean the minimum qualifications, for election as a board member and outline the duties of the board of directors as well. The old act did not prescribe that, giving clear direction to directors and their responsibility and also to the minimum qualifications thereof.

There will be a mediation-arbitration piece too in regard to the new act. Right now, in regard to resolving any disputes between unit owners - I have not experienced either one myself, but I am sure there has been in the past that one unit owner has an issue in regard to another unit owner. The only way to resolve that right now was within the Trial Division of the Supreme Court. That actually presented some financial burden to the corporation. So recognizing that, which is not unique to us - we have seen this right across in regard to other Provinces that have enacted new condominium acts. I think the newest in Canada - and do not quote me on this; I know it is going to go into Hansard, but I am not absolutely sure if it is true or not. I think Nova Scotia is probably one of the newest ones that have been in place in recent years. I know Ontario has come with one too in the last three or four years.

Anyway, in regard to the new act, if there is a dispute between unit owners and that arises, the parties can attend mediation. Certainly, if they cannot agree at that level, well then they can choose binding arbitration as well. If that does not resolve it, well then they can apply to the Trial Division of the Supreme Court. I am sure the issue will be resolved at that level.

In saying that, to clarify that the only resolution mechanism on a dispute prior to the new act, which we are introducing here today, will be through the Trial Division, now it gives another means of resolving those issues between unit owners.

Their liens will be addressed as well in regard to the new act. The current Condominium Act, I think, allows the condominium corporation a right to lien if there is a failure of a unit owner to pay their share of fees. So, the corporation has also the right to register this encumbrance over the unit and this lien can be enforced in the same way of any registered lien, really.

The new act - in the past mortgages would take precedence over all liens. So, in other words, if there is a mortgage in place then the mortgage takes first right, and then if there is anything left over - in most cases there wasn't anything left over, so the lien was never realized. Now, within the new act, which is not uncommon in other jurisdictions as well, we will be allowing the condominium lien for unpaid fees to rank ahead of any mortgage, lien charge other than the lien for taxes. So taxes would come first and then, in ranking order, would be the unpaid fees, and then comes the mortgage and any other lien charge.

As well, we heard in regard to our consultation process, that there were issues in regard to the board of directors, constituting a board of directors. In the past act, the only people who could serve on the board of any condominium were the unit owners themselves. We heard loud and clear from the consultation process, and also the association itself, that this was kind of outdated in that most of – I should not say most of the people, but a high percentage of the people in regard to owning condominiums are senior citizens. Sometimes they are not able to serve on a board. They do not have the interest level to serve on a board, or actually they are travelling outside the Province for periods of time, three, four, six months at a time. Then when they are out of the Province, two and three of them at a time, because that could happen as well, in regard to a board, then you do not have a quorum to actually have a meeting. We addressed that in the act as well, in regard to allowing unit owners to designate someone who would be interested in serving on the board and certainly bringing their knowledge and their experience to the board. So we have reflected that too in the act.

We also included in the revision, I did not overlook the termination clause for this designate should the unit owner cease their ownership. In other words, if the unit owner has designated someone and then they sell their unit, well then, there is a termination clause for this designate in regard to carrying out their duties. So they would no longer be able to serve on the board.

The insurance is clarified within the new act, as well. You have two types of insurance, I guess. You have the insurance that is required by the corporation and converse and includes the full building itself and all the common areas but mainly the main structure and also the standard unit that was built. So, that is the responsibility of the corporation. They would have to carry insurance that would cover off all those things in regard to that, the structure, the unit itself in regard to the common standard or the standard unit.

Now, in regard to the unit holder, they are responsible on their own for the contents of their condominium. They are also responsible for any upgrades because some condo owners would go in and the standard countertop might not be enough, they might install marble or whatever it may be. So, the corporation would not be responsible for that under their insurance. That would have to be listed and included under the insurance of the particular individual who owns that unit. So both of those things are clarified and needed to be clarified in regard to the new act.

Also, in regard to the types of condominiums, which I referenced when I first started to speak, Mr. Speaker, because there are many types of condominiums now which I said that most people refer to a condominium as a condominium in a building. As a matter of fact, the long version that was first presented to me, I actually was not in favour of it because that is exactly what it said. A condominium as it pertained to a building, but there are many, many types of condominiums now. There are things such as common elements condominium, which only incorporates under the condominium the common elements of an area.

Vacant land can be used as a condominium. You could buy x-number of acres of land and then have that split up into various condominiums that people would own and then a corporation umbrellas that particular unit. You have commercial condominiums, where there are a bunch of businesses that get together. They form a corporation, they build a condominium, and then they have the various commercial operations operating out of that building in a condominium basis. So, each and every one of them within the building actually owns their own unit, no differently than an apartment or a unit under a residential condominium.

You have phased-in condominiums, which the legislation now permits a phase development of units and common elements that are to be added in stages over a maximum of a ten-year period. In other words, there is a detailed plan in regard to the expansion and the inclusion of the units within that condominium. That is a called a phased-in condominium. Certain areas of the actual corporation itself is outside the condominium for a period of time but phased in over a period of time.

Last, but not least, is hotel condominiums; you have that as well, in regard to particular people owning units within a hotel system. It serves as a hotel but also serves as a condominium as well. All those kind of things are reflected within the new act. That is, I guess, a fair bit of what was included in the act and addressed on most of the issues that were brought forward.

I believe, as the Minister of Government Services, that we had a great consultation process. We had great interaction with the stakeholders. We recognized back, really in 2007, that the need for a new act - to update that act. Actually, to update the act was actually out of the question because it needed so much of an update, it was just as well to rewrite and have a new act come in place. We went and had a look at that.

I really, really believe that this is probably one of the most important pieces of work that we will do in the Legislature this fall. It is well needed. It was well lobbied for and the people who currently reside in condominiums certainly need it, and all future condominium owners will certainly be protected by this act. Like it or lump it, I suppose, if you want to put it that way; even though I enjoy my condo, as a matter of fact, that this is a way of life. Condos are very, very common now and people are moving forward. I said there was over 100, I believe 101 condo corporations that are actually incorporated and registered under the Registry of Deeds in my department. That is growing, because the last time I looked at it prior to coming to the House today it was at ninety-four. That is the kind of thing that is happening in the Province and across the Province, especially here in regard to the capital city of Newfoundland and Labrador.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I think I have gone through it in detail. Certainly, I welcome any comments from my hon. colleagues across the House. As well, I will be listening intently and also I would hope that they would support this important piece of legislation because it was – we heard loud and clear that it was well needed in Newfoundland and Labrador at this particular time.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat and I will welcome the thoughts of my hon. colleagues.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure today to be able to take a certain amount of time to make a few comments with regard to Bill 48, An Act Respecting Condominiums.

First of all I want to thank the minister for giving us the opportunity to meet with several staff from his department. We met with them this morning and they gave us a briefing note with regards to Bill 48. I have to say, I guess, out of the bills that we have had this year through the department, a lot of them were only housecleaning items, but this is a bill of a considerable magnitude and the briefing that we received I have to say was very helpful in being able to go through the piece of legislation and understand some of the parts of that legislation that has been put forward.

As the minister stated, the Newfoundland Condominium Act was written back in 1975, so no doubt this is a tremendous piece of legislation. Mr. Speaker, as the minister stated it is all about consumer protection. That is very important. Not only for anyone who is buying a single unit, more so when you get involved with a condominium where there are many other units, many other individuals involved and you need to have the, I guess, the proper regulations put forward.

Mr. Speaker, from the information we received, once this bill goes through the House today, it will probably be mid-2010 by the time all the regulations are put in place and the actual bill becomes law. We can understand that because the bill contains some eighty sections and subsections of this new act, and by the time the regulations are joined to that, no doubt, it is quite a bit of work for the officials who will be involved.

Not only that, I think rightly so, the minister stated that this bill is not only something that they came up with. They consulted with many people, they consulted with the credit unions, the condominium owners and the corporations, the developers, the real estate agents, lawyers, municipalities and management companies. So there was an extensive amount of consultation with various stakeholders and also with previous and present unit owners throughout the Province. I think there were some 128 individuals. Beyond that, Mr. Speaker, they also went through other jurisdictions and saw what rules and regulations were in place in provinces such as Ontario and Nova Scotia.

We know from the legislation, from the notes we received, that consultation was right throughout this Province, as the minister stated, from Lab City, they were in Corner Brook, Grand Falls-Windsor, Gander, Clarenville, Mount Pearl and St. John's. So people had a tremendous opportunity to be able to get involved and take part with this new piece of legislation.

I also understand, Mr. Speaker, which is the reason - as we speak in second reading today, I can assure the minister I have no problems with that. I do not know if something might arise when we get into committee stages and so on that might prompt you to ask some other questions. From my understanding, from staff and the officials, that the consultation process that they had, everyone was in agreement with this. I do not think there was anything at all, or it was the way we were told, that did not get in to this piece of legislation, that people wanted to see there for the protection of the consumer.

As the minister stated, with regard to the disclosure statement and the estoppel certificates, it is very important, because under the disclosure statement it outlines quite a few things. It outlines the property, the number of units, whether there are recreational activities going on, the by-laws, the budget, and the statements. It is very detailed so that the individual has a thorough knowledge of what is entailed. The only difference, my understanding, from the estoppel certificate, is that everything is very similar, but more or less, there is a management agreement, and if there were any altercations went on with regard to the act, that would be listed.

One of the things that I think is very important to the consumer is a ten-day cooling off period, because all too often you probably sign an agreement, whether you go to the bank, whether it is for a car or a house or whatever, and once you go in there it is sometimes not explained very clearly to you, and nobody reads the fine print, or very few, but in this case here, there is a ten-day cooling off period - without any penalties, by the way. Those people can go in and sign an agreement, and then they are given ten days, whether they want to meet with their lawyers or whoever, to go over what is happening, and then they can determine if they really want to proceed with it or not. All this is without any penalty.

The reserve funds and the reserve fund studies. Once you get into and have a piece of legislation explained to you, those individuals are not only just buying a unit, but they are buying a condominium, because they are responsible for their own unit, but overall, each and every one of them are the owners of the condominium. So, that really brings into play many issues. So, with regard to the reserve fund, as the minister mentioned, that is very important, because if there were not a reserve fund, and something major like he mentioned happened, those individuals, they are responsible and they have to come up maybe with a tremendous amount of money, but if there is a reserve fund there, then some major or something that may have happened can be taken care of..

The other thing, every ten years the reserve fund must be updated. When this is updated that could mean, whether it is with regard to the cost of materials, that would change; contributions to the fund would also change. Once that reassessment is done maybe the fee that they are paying could either increase or decrease and this will be reviewed on a ten-year basis.

Also, it is very important to note that they are not just for the ordinary maintenance of the building. It does not include, say for any snow clearing or any minor things that would go on. This reserve fund is for any major issues that may come up which would cost the residents of that condominium a tremendous amount of burden after any lengthy period of time.

I believe the number is over ten units. If a condominium has over ten units, then they go into this reserve fund study. Under the ten units, they do not have to go into the study itself, but they are left with the discretion of the corporation, but what they usually do is after a period of time they put into the reserve fund an equal amount of 100 per cent of the corporation's annual operating budget. Even if a condominium has less than ten units, they still have to have a reserve fund, but they do not have to go into the study as outlined for any condominium in excess of ten units; so no study is required there.

The other thing, with regard to budget statement and accountability, it requires the declarant to develop a budget statement for the first twelve months. This is very important. The way it was explained to us - and I think it is good for the consumer - is that many times when a condominium comes on the market some buyers, they obtain a unit early on because maybe there is a little bonus or a little advantage by doing that, however, further down the road they determine and find out that the fee that they were told about initially may have increased. What happens here under the budget statement accountability, they hold 10 per cent for the first year. In other words, the unit owners would put up this 10 per cent. However, this would change because the once the unit is filled it may not have increased to the point beyond what they were told when they initially purchased.

Mr. Speaker, the minister also mentioned about the mediation and arbitration. I think that is very important because as it stands today if there is a dispute between the unit owners or between the corporation, condominium board and the unit owners, the only way, if they cannot come to an agreement, it is my understanding that it is through the courts. This piece of legislation now gives the opportunity for mediation and arbitration before they go to the court system.

As was mentioned, this can be very costly for those individuals - some of them, I guess, are on fixed incomes, but most of them are seniors. No doubt, as we were told, there are more seniors going into condominiums today than ever before. It is amazing to know when the minister stated that in this Province today there are over 100 condominiums that have been registered.

The other issue that is very important is with regard to the liens as the minister mentioned. Condo corporations can register a lien for failure of a unit owner to pay the common fees. It is very important for each and every individual in the unit to pay those fees because they are for the benefit of everybody in the condo. If several people decide that they are not going to pay, then that can become a problem. I guess it is discouraging to other people who are putting their money upfront. As the minister stated, one of the things now is that the taxes come first, but then ahead of the mortgage is when the liens would come into play.

Another thing that is very important, knowing that many of the people who occupy condos today are seniors, is that they can appoint a designate to take care of their responsibilities. Many of them could be sick individuals who are unable to care for themselves very much and maybe some of them have home care coming in to look after them. They can appoint a volunteer and that individual can be even appointed or elected to the board for that condominium corporation to run on the board. I think it says that it has to be a relative, but I am not quite sure of that. It is very important to know those individuals who are unable to care for themselves now can be represented by a relative or someone who they can put their faith in. However, if they move on, then the designate ceases to be a representative within that corporation.

As the minister has stated, and I guess one of the different types of condominiums with regard to the common element corporation, until that was explained I can assure you that it was not clear to me. Now I know where they are coming from because the common element corporation can be, whether it is the grounds around the building, the parking area or different recreational facilities, if there was a tennis court, or a boat deck, or a pool, then that becomes a part of the various types of condominiums and this one, in particular, would be the common element.

Mr. Speaker, the other one is the phased-in development corporations. That is where an entrepreneur, I guess, is going to build one, two, three or four units and eventually it would be registered as the one condominium under the one act. They might build one this year, another one next year, but at the end of the day they can be all phased-in and registered as one unit. The other one is listed, in the information I have here, as the vacant lands corporation. This is where a unit can be built, but the individual unit owner, they can do their own units, rather than going into a condominium where it is all built beforehand.

Mr. Speaker, the only other couple of issues that I want to note on is on the questions I asked about the insurance. How does the insurance work with regard to the overall use of the condominium and your own particular unit? My understanding is that the insurance, when it is paid for, it covers the full condominium and all units involved. The only difference is that if an individual should go in and upgrade their unit from what would be classified as standard, then once they do those upgrades, they would have to purchase their own insurance to take part with that requirement.

Mr. Speaker, we know that there are many issues with regard to Bill 48 that has been put forward. Personally, we believe that it is a good piece of legislation. It is a great starting point, not saying that maybe next year or a year down the road there might have to be amendments to the act and that happens from time to time. When it comes to consumer protection, we believe this is a great starting point and not only the corporation, there are various guidelines, and how they operate, if there are any amendments to any declarations that are already in place. I think it has to be 80 per cent satisfaction rate by the unit owners themselves. There are also rules and regulations about quorums with regard to the boards and so on.

Mr. Speaker, having said that, with regard to Bill 48, I think that is the only comments that I have to make at this time. The only thing I would say to the minister when it comes to consumer protection, it is the prime intent of government, and it should be called to task to provide the same protection to the following areas. We all hear all too often with regard to home inspectors. I know we have received calls. Newfoundland home inspectors are trying for government to regulate their industry. At this present time, they have not been able to make the grade, but we know that government is concerned by this bill here, that it is consumer protection. My only comment to the minister, hopefully, is that the home inspectors can be looked at in the same manner in the very near future.

So, Mr. Speaker, with that, I want to thank you for the opportunity with regard to Bill 48, and I will take my place.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

I am glad to get an opportunity to speak to Bill 48, the Condominium Act, 2009. I am very pleased, actually, to see this act come to the floor. We do know, and it has been presented by the minister, that condominium housing is something that is growing fairly quickly in the Province. It is mainly here in the capital city, but it is also moving into the Western Region and into Labrador West.

It is an interesting move when you think about it, because we do not have a lot of apartment living, apartment building living outside of the major urban centres in Newfoundland and Labrador, and people are very used to owning their own homes in separate detached units. There is a real pride among people in Newfoundland and Labrador with regard to owning their homes. In rural Newfoundland, of course, it is something that can happen a bit more easily than in the urban centres, because you still have families who own large pieces of land in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and people can share land with families. I know that is certainly happening, even on the fringes of St. John's in the suburban communities that have developed, because once a time these suburban communities were actually rural communities, and people owned large pieces of land and a lot of families have chopped that land up so that other family members can build homes, and they have sold parcels of land for home building.

So, it is interesting to see, in a culture like that, people in Newfoundland and Labrador catching on to the condominium notion. They are catching on to it, especially, as I have said, here in the capital city, and it is certainly going to grow. I have heard of some horror stories that have occurred where people who own condos have had difficulties, have had problems, and legislation was not adequate to cover situations in which they found themselves.

I am really delighted to see an act that, while it is certainly integrated and deals with everything with regard to the condominium movement and the management of condos et cetera, one of the most important pieces in the act is the protection of the consumer, the protection of the condo owner. I think that is so essential, especially here in St. John's, I am not sure about outside. There seems to be a move for senior citizens to own condos. Very often, especially if senior citizens have not been used to apartment living, for example, or have been used to owning their own home, they may not have an experience of the intricacies of being involved in the whole condo situation; being involved in owning a condo and being involved in having to deal with other people with regard to their home, with regard to taking care of their home. It is a whole new experience for them. There are some significant things in the act that I think help with that kind of situation.

One piece has been named by the minister and by my colleague from the Official Opposition but I would like to highlight it as well, and that is the ten-day cooling-off period after somebody indicates a desire to buy. There is a ten day period during which they have an opportunity to really learn the details because they get quite a package of information. It is really important for them that they really understand all the details that are there. The legislation allows for a ten-day cooling-off period during which time, without any penalty, they could say, no, I am no longer interested. I think that is so extremely important that that is in the act.

As I said, the whole thing of protection of the consumer is something in this that is so important. Another thing that helps I think with the condo owners, which is brand new, it was not in the former act, an act which was brought into place in 1975 when condos were not really big in this Province anyway and an act which was really not adequate for our current needs. In this new act we have a mediation and arbitration system called for, that will be made available to unit holders and to corporations. Previously, all complaints, if there were complaints within a condo setting either one person complaining or a group within the condo setting and if it could not be resolved at the board meetings they would have to go to court to get the issue resolved. That would be very costly.

Even though people who are in condos have to have the money to live there, they may not at the same time have thousands of dollars ready to fight something in court. It would not take much to cost thousands of dollars if you had to bring something to court. So the fact that the legislation allows for and makes mandatory a mediation and arbitration system or makes it available, I think that is extremely important to condo owners. It should help with people who are wondering whether or not they want to get into a condo situation, both of these issues, the thing of the ten-day cooling-off period and the availability of mediation and arbitration if there are problems would be two things, I think, that would say to them: do not worry, this is okay. You will be safe going into this situation.

The third thing that does that, as well, is the notion of the reserve funds that the new act allows for. Again, this is where some people have gotten burned in the city, where all of a sudden a big expense comes up for the condo complex and there are no reserve funds and all of a sudden each condo owner is expected to come up with a large sum of money per unit to help with the cost for which there was no reserve funding. So making sure that larger condos, above ten units, have a reserve fund that gets created from monthly payments from all the unit owners, I think is extremely important. I think it is also important that even those who are smaller units, ten units and under, even they have to have a reserve fund equal to one year of an operating budget.

There are a lot of protections in this condo act which I think is extremely important for people to know. It probably would be good for people in the Province who are interested in getting into condos to even make the act something that they learn about. Once the act is passed, once the bill is passed and the act is an act, they of course would be able to access it through the government Web site, and it would be good for them to do it if they decide they want to get into condos.

As I said a minute ago, condos are really in the high end of the housing market. In actual fact, they are part of the highest priced housing around. So we are talking about people who are in the higher economic scale, but that does not mean they do not need protection as well, because sometimes, especially with senior citizens, people who are retired and more elderly, sometimes you may get - and I know of some. You may get somebody who was widowed, for example, and all of a sudden this person is on her own with a large house and decides I will get out of that, but maybe does not have a lot of experience dealing with, as I said, dealing with something as complex as a condominium situation. They do need help. They do need protection.

The thing that – and I am really happy that we have this condominium act, and people in condos need protection. I would like to point out, though, that we do need other alternative forms of housing as well in this Province, besides condominium housing. One thing that we are not very big on in Newfoundland and Labrador – and, again, I know of situations in St. John's where it exists. I do not know how common it is outside of the city, but one thing that we are not very big on is co-operative housing. Co-operative housing is quite big, especially in places like Toronto and some other urban settings. Co-operative housing is something that I would like to see the government give some leadership in. Now, I know it has to come from the community and people have to bring themselves together in groups in order to form co-operative housing. It would be interesting if the government were to become involved in more education around what housing possibilities are out there, and co-operative housing is one that would be very interesting for people to learn about because you have co-operative ownership while one is part of the co-op. When one leaves, of course, one does not own the unit that one lived in, but while part of the co-operative setting, one is living in a situation where you very often have more affordable housing, because very often the people who come together, that is their goal, to create housing that fits their pocketbook. That is usually one of the goals of co-operative housing. Now, you can get co-operative housing among people who have all kinds of money as well, but I think it is really something that we should be looking at here in this Province in terms of, as I said, doing some education about, and giving some leadership in, helping people realize that there are ways to have comfortable housing; they cannot afford to buy a house, but they can still have very comfortable housing and have control over the housing situation. That is one of the things that is really good about co-operative housing. You have control over your situation, you have a board, just like with condominium housing, and you meet, you make your decisions together, but it is something that can really help people who cannot afford to buy their own place to find a decent place to live.

We have a lot of people requiring housing that fits their pocketbook in this Province. Newfoundland and Labrador Housing right now has a waiting list which still ranges annually from 750 to 1,000. They are doing a good job of trying to keep that list moving, and there have been initiatives over the last couple of years to do that, but we still have a waiting list that keeps getting added to as other people get moved off. People do no have to wait as long anymore, but a waiting list still exists.

A year ago, there were 2,800 people waiting for money from the Provincial Home Repair Program because they could not afford to pay for essential repairs on their homes. This is something that, again, is unfortunate, but these are the type of people, for example, creating co-operative housing might actually work. They might decide to sell their home, get into co-operative housing and be able to benefit from the money that they have made on selling their home. The thing about a condo is you may sell your home to move into the condo, but the money you saved goes into the buying of the condo. So, it does take some persons who have a fair amount of money to do that.

We do need to look at helping the people in this Province get affordable housing. I am sure that there could be condo situations where that housing could be made affordable as well, and I am sure that they exist; I am not sure that they exist here so much. I certainly would encourage the minister to also, in addition to the concern around condo housing, look at how the department might be able to do work around spreading the word of co-operative housing because, for those who know about it - and I have never lived in co-operative housing, but I know people who do and who have and I know the benefits of that housing.

I would like to come back to the act for a minute. I want to thank the minister for the briefing that was held today; I could not attend it myself, but two of my researchers were able to attend it and I got a full report from them. I was interested in the thing that the minister mentioned in outlining the act and that was the new condominium types.

There are four, I think, of new condominium types. You have the common elements condominium corporations or phased development condominium corporations and vacant land condominium corporations; these are three that are spelled out in the act. What is curious about these that these do not necessarily deal with buildings - some do, some do not. I have questions that have not been adequately answered yet for me. I will have more specific questions to put to the minister. I hope in committee to get a clearer rationale, particularly for the common elements corporation because the common elements corporation allows for a group to be called a common elements condominium corporation. That corporation can exist and can be created and can own land that does not get divided into units, but can be used for something that they hold in common, for example, for a tennis court or a golf course or something like that. That piece of land that is not divided into units does not have to be owned by this common elements corporation in conjunction with people living in residential condominiums.

I really have a problem with this one, and I know it exists in some places; I understand that it is certainly in the Ontario legislation. I have questions, as I said, more specific questions that I will be putting to the minister in committee and I will be looking forward to trying to get a clearer rationale for why we would be including this here. I am wondering, if we are talking about a group of people holding something in common such as buying a piece of land and building a tennis court or building a golf course or whatever, why that fits under the notion of condominium. It is common ownership, but condominium is not the only way to have common ownership. So I will be pursuing that notion a bit more in committee, and asking for a clearer answer from the minister. My staff did ask his staff today about that, and the answer was basically, well it does exist, there are some things that are happening in condo ownership. My response is, well that is fine, but does it mean we have to do it here, and isn't there some other way in which corporately a group could buy a piece a land together and own it together, without calling it condo. I am finding it a bit strange, so I will be looking forward to being able to be clearer with my questions on that for the minister when we come to committee.

I just want to close by saying I am delighted to see this act, but I do encourage the minister to give leadership in looking at what some other options are in the Province for affordable housing, and social housing. We do have more money coming for affordable housing from Ottawa's stimulous package that will have to be spent by 2011, but the provinces need to provide the matching funds. So I am really hoping that this government will be there to make sure that we can benefit from as much of that money as we can, so that all of the money, actually, that is allotted to our Province, I would like to see us getting. It means the Province putting money back in, but this would be a very, very important investment. We need thousands of affordable units, and taking advantage of the cost-sharing with regard to the stimulous package from Ottawa would be one of the ways to do it.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. the Minister of Government Services speaks now, he shall close debate.

The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I certainly stand here now to close debate. I welcome the comments, and listened intently to my hon. colleagues across the House. I want to refer to the hon. Leader of the NDP that the minister responsible in regard to such things as affordable housing and availability of housing in the Province is the Minister of Transportation and Works who is responsible for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

As well, we are putting a lot of money - I will reflect on that too, even though it has nothing to do really with this act. We have placed a fair bit of money now in regard to providing affordable housing. Can we do everything today? No, we cannot. Are we trying to do as much as we possibly can under our budget requirements and challenges? Yes, we are. Are the feds doing what they should be doing? No, they are not. We would implore them and advise them that they should address this issue because this is certainly a national issue as well. I have heard it and read it many, many times in regard to the papers.

Anyways, back to the Condominium Act. It is a very, very important act. It is very important to a lot of people. It is very important to the future of the Province. Certainly, we have tried to bring forward an act that reflects today's society and today's needs. Actually, it even reflects on things that might happen in regard to condominiums in the future. They might not be here today in regard to the various types of condos but they are elsewhere in the country and so we tried to reflect that too as well on a go-forward basis to have the most modern act that we possibly can addressing all the needs of the consumer and also the developer.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat in the House. Certainly, I welcome, and I will try to answer any questions in regard to the committee stage of this important act, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 48 be now read a second time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

Carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act Respecting Condominiums. (Bill 48)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a second time.

When shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

Now? Tomorrow?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, a bill, "An Act Respecting Condominiums", read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow. (Bill 48)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to call from the Order Paper, Order 2, Address in Reply.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure for me to speak on the Address in Reply. It is a debate that gives us a wide range. We can talk about a number of different matters that affect our district and affect the Province in matters of which we all have an interest. I just had the opportunity yesterday to introduce the mid-year update in my capacity as Minister of Finance.

Now, I think people watching this debate today, it might be helpful if we mention that when the Minister of Finance stands in his or her place and gives the Budget Speech, there are usually two things happening. The Minister of Finance gives an update on what has happened for the year that has just ended. Usually the Budget Speech is given in either March or April, just at the beginning of the fiscal year. The report is the last report or the last estimate of how we have done for the year that has just come to an end. Our fiscal year runs from April 1 of one year to March 31 of the next year.

The second thing the minister does is that he or she gives the Budget. The Budget is not actual numbers, the Budget is a forecast. It is a forecast to what the revenues are going to be over the next twelve months and it is a forecast of what the expenses are going to be over the next twelve months. Then the net effect of those two things, the predicted or the forecast, whether there is going to be - or whether the two numbers are going to balance each other out, in which case you have a balanced budget, or whether the revenues are going to exceed your expenses, in which case you have a surplus. If the expenses exceed the revenues, if you spend more than you are taking in, in that year, that is called a deficit. The deficit, of course, is financed. You have to pay for the deficit. I have said in this House before, my daughter used to ask me: how can you spend more than you have? Of course, the answer is that you go into debt. The deficit is financed with debt. If you have deficits year after year after year, the debt gets higher and higher which means the interest on your debt gets higher and higher and that affects – you are beginning the whole cycle again.

That is what the Minister of Finance does. Then approximately halfway through the year or in the fall, the Minister of Finance then gives an update. If it is a half-year update, a semi-annual update, you now have six months of actual results now in and you have six months of forecast still to come. Sometimes it is not done until the fall, and if it is done in the fall it is called the fall update. If it is done halfway through the year it is called the semi-annual update.

Yesterday I gave the fall update, and as I say, we now have actual results and certain numbers and we have four months left to the end of the fiscal year. We have given that update at a time when the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador, the economy of Canada, the economy of the U.S and the world economy is starting to come back from what the Opposition House Leader called an economic tsunami. It is coming back from what was the greatest recession since the Great Depression back in the 1930s. It came unexpectedly and it came about because of the U.S sub-prime mortgage crisis. That led to the collapse of America and European financial industries, and that led to significant financial challenges. It started out in the economic sector or financial sector and then immediately affected the whole economic sector.

It is interesting to note that as we give our mid-year update we can compare to what other provinces have done. I think we are the last ones to give our update, but essentially our news is relatively favourable considering that we are running a deficit this year, after four consecutive surpluses, which followed many, many decades, or I should say about thirty years of deficits with the exception of maybe one or two, and which got this Province into heavy debt. As usual, some of the revenues are higher than we anticipated. As usual, some of the revenues are lower than we anticipated. You always have some go up and some go down. The same with the expenses, some were up. Interest on our debt was down, other expenses are up. Overall, on the expense side there was $75 million of additional expenses, mainly arising out of the measures we took with respect to, to impact some of the negative effects of the closure of the Abitibi mill at Grand Falls.

Overall, revenues were up. They were up by $382 million. Expenses were up $75 million. Therefore, we were better off, if I can use those words, by $307 million. That took our deficit - our projected deficit at Budget time was $750 million. We are now anticipating an improvement of about $307 million. Now we will reduce the deficit to about $443 million at this point.

At Budget 2009, at the start of the fiscal year the Budget was done on the basis, or on the assumption, because when you make predictions you obviously have to base them on certain assumptions, which assumptions may or may not prove to be accurate. It was based on $50 U.S. oil with an exchange rate of about 80 cents. What we have actually found, that in the months of April to October, from the start of the year to the end of October, the prices have averaged U.S. $64.22, and the exchange rate is about 89 cents. We are forecasting, based on our discussion with experts and being prudent, from November to the end of the fiscal year, the price will average $71.81 on the exchange rate of 92 cents.

We talked to the economists at their major banks, we talked to an organization called PIRA, down in New York City, who we hired to provide us with advice, we looked at what the other provinces are doing, and we make our prediction. Sometimes we are accurate, and sometimes we are not. So the average for the year, instead of $50, we are now thinking the average price for the year will be $67.40 at an exchange rate of about 90 cents. That, of course, as we said, we are forecasting a deficit now of $307 million less than what we predicted at budget time – $443 million.

Why has revenue gone up? Well, the biggest thing, of course, is price. Now, the revenue we get from the oil companies is based on, obviously, the price of oil in US dollars, but it is also based on the production volume, and the production volume has been going down since 2007. In budget 2007, I think the production numbers were the highest ever. They were also high in fiscal 2008, but then the decline started. I remember one writer in The Globe and Mail said in Newfoundland that we hit a wall, and now we are in decline of production volumes. I am talking about millions of barrels of oil. Last year, for example, I think the oil companies produced 119 million barrels of oil, and this year we are now forecasting that it will be about 96 million barrels of oil. So there has been a general decline.

Also, the exchange rate – as the Canadian dollar rises, that affects us adversely, we have less money coming in. Someone once said to me, well, how can that be, that the US, the companies that are producing the oil offshore are paid in US dollars, so why should they be affected by the exchange rate? Of course, they pay our royalties to us in US dollars, and it is us, the people of Newfoundland, the Government of Newfoundland that is affected by the exchange from US dollars into Canadian dollars when the Canadian dollar is higher.

Now, when you compare to the other provinces, we have seen an improvement of $307 million. When we look at some of the other provinces, you can see that there are only two provinces that have provided their mid-year report who are doing better, or are forecasting that the results will be better at the end of the year than at the start of the year; that was Alberta and us. Alberta was predicting, at budget time, a deficit of $4.7 billion; they are now down to $4.3 billion. So that is a $390 million improvement in Alberta. We are second; we have improved by $307 million. Prince Edward Island is the same. Nova Scotia predicted, at budget time, a surplus of $4 million; they are now predicting a deficit of $596 million. New Brunswick was $441 million deficit. Their deficit is now $754 million; that is a difference of $313 million.

So, across the country the news has not been as good as it has been in Alberta and Newfoundland and Labrador and that has been primarily because of oil prices, or oil royalties I should say - the things that we have no real control over. We cannot control the price of oil; that is set in the world market. We cannot control production numbers; the oil companies do that. We cannot control what the American dollar is doing vis-à-vis the Canadian dollar or the opposite of that. Unfortunately, as the fields get a little older or they age and the production comes out, our royalties increase based on some of the brilliant negotiation of the Premier with the oil companies. So our royalty rates will go up.

The economy of this Province is heavily reliant on oil revenues, on the royalties we get from oil. We would like to be less reliant in terms of our total economy. We would like to be less reliant on oil revenues. We would like, and it is a goal of our government, to diversify the economy so that our GDP comes from a number of other factors, and oil is a lower percentage of the total GDP as it is right now. In the meantime, we will certainly accept the royalties that we are getting because it enables us to put into effect a plan to help the economy of this Province.

These oil revenues, together with some tough decisions that this government had to make when it came into office, plus the other brilliant move the Premier made is when he negotiated the Atlantic Accord with Mr. Martin, with Prime Minister Martin. The Premier was smart enough to get a minimum payment and was smart enough to get the check upfront, which is something I think we should all use as a good example.

That enabled us to turn our fiscal situation in this Province from one of constant deficits over the years to surpluses, and as I said earlier we had four consecutive surpluses. These surpluses now allow us to do some important things to affect the economy of this place. The first thing it did to support economic growth and to strengthen our commitment to financial security, the first thing it allowed us to do was to lower taxes. We were always considered to have the highest taxes in the country. I remember people saying: Well, you do not want to go to Newfoundland and Labrador. You do not want to invest in Newfoundland and Labrador; the taxes are too high down there.

Since 2007, the Williams government has placed $776 million directly back into the pockets of taxpayers in this Province in a number of ways. First of all, there were the reductions in personal income tax. We instituted back in 2008 the biggest tax decrease in the history of Newfoundland and Labrador. We also enhanced the seniors' benefit. Now this is money, this is about $800 that seniors who qualify - low income seniors who qualify in October, they get a cheque of about $800. If I recall correctly, that money only went to a couple – a seniors' couple. The money that went to an individual, a senior individual, was much less. Then in a more recent budget we made enhancements to the program so that everybody would get the $800.

We also removed businesses from the payroll tax rolls by raising the threshold to remove more and more businesses from that particular tax. We made enhancements to the low income tax credit. That means that people at the low end of the tax rolls – the lower income people of the Province were totally removed from paying provincial income tax. We did it back in 2005 and we then enhanced it. The Minister of Finance, my predecessor, enhanced the program last year. That has removed thousands of people from the provincial tax rolls.

We also lowered motor vehicle registration fees. We lowered ferry rates and we eliminated the dreaded and the horrible 15 per cent tax on insurance. That has made our economy more competitive. By lowering taxes, it is the same as giving people a raise. It raises the disposable income that people have to pay their bills. That is what one woman said to me when I knocked on her door. She said: You need to help me pay my bills. That is what lowering taxes do. Removing that 15 per cent of insurance, that puts money in her family's pocket to help them pay their bills. It also helps us attract skilled workers, people who make a higher income that we need, especially in the medical profession and the engineering profession. We need to attract them and they look at disposable income. They do not just look at what the gross pay is; they look at what they have got left in their pocket after the taxes come out.

The third thing it does, when you lower people's taxes, some people will invest their money and some people will save their money. Through the banks and through the financial intermediaries the money that is saved will get invested in bank loans, loans to business who will create, or presumably will create new business or purchase new business or expand business. That means jobs, because it is all about jobs. We do not just want to subsidize investment, we do not want to subsidize business, we are trying to create jobs for the people and opportunities for the people of the Province, and that is what lowering taxes does.

The next thing the surplus enabled us to do was pay down the debt. We have taken advantage of this opportunity because the problem with the debt is the interest on the debt. Our debt, because we were running deficits, the deficits had to be financed. The government had to go and borrow money to finance those deficits. The borrowed money means paying out interest on loans and they became higher and higher and higher and that is money that we can spend on better things. I do not want to spend money on interest on debt. I do not want to send money to pay interest to bankers in Toronto or New York or wherever they are. I want that money to go into health care. I want that money to go into education. We all do on both sides of the House, and the people of Newfoundland do as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: So, reducing debt is prudent financial management. It reduces our interest costs and it provides us with flexibility. Let me point out a warning, there is an economist at McGill University, I think his name is Chris Ragan, and he, I believe, has been assigned to the Department of Finance. He tells us that the baby boomers are going to hit retirement and they are going to hit the hospital system in about ten years from now, 2020 to 2040. So those baby boomers, that generation, and some of you may have read the book, The Pig and the Python which shows a python eating a pig and seeing the pig go through the python's body, which is the way that the baby boom generation is going through our society and has affected our society from when they were first born, when new schools had to be built.

As they get older, more long-term care facilities are going to have to be built. They are going to hit the hospital system, according to this economist, in a big way in 2020, ten years from now, and they are going to leave their employment. That means they will not be earning money. That means they will not be paying taxes and that means that government is going to have less revenue from that cohort, that large group of our population, and that population is going to be hitting the hospital system in a big way. That is going to be a crunch for all societies, including ours. One of the things we have to do, therefore, is we have to make sure that as soon we get over this bad time, this economic bad time and these times of deficit, that we get back to surpluses so that ten years from now and for the twenty years after that, that the government of this Province is in a position to be able to borrow money if it needs to in order to meet that fiscal crunch.

By lowering our debt, paying down our debt, this improved our credit rating. The other thing it enabled to do was to stimulate the economy to enable us to diversify the economy by investing, as I said earlier today, in things like ocean technology, by investing in research and development, by investing in aquaculture, investing in new agriculture initiatives like the cranberry industry. That is vitality important, because someday the oil that is providing us with all these revenues now, the oil is going to be gone. It is a finite resource, it is coming out of the ground. I mentioned previously how the production volumes are decreasing and one day, unless there are new discoveries, and we hope there are new discoveries. It has been interesting that there was a natural gas find on the West Coast announced yesterday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Hopefully, with Nalcor being given the money to go and help drive oil and gas exploration on the West Coast, in the Parsons Pond area, hopefully we will see more results there and we will see more results in the Bay St. George area, and we will see results on land.

We will continue to use the money we have because of surpluses to build roads, to build hospitals, to build long-term care facilities, to buy new water bombers, to buy air ambulances, to replace our ferries, our schools and our hospitals.

We have gone through a challenging period. We have gone into a great recession and as a result of that we had to stimulate spending even more. Even though we had introduced an infrastructure program, a three-year infrastructure program, the great recession hit and then we had to crank it up even more to stimulate the economy, to provide jobs and opportunities for our people.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time for speaking has expired.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, by leave in order to just take a minute to wrap up?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, by leave.

MR. T. MARSHALL: We had such prosperity. The world economy was booming and then all of a sudden, within a short period of time, we went into this great recession. It was like the Charles Dickens novel, A Tale of Two Cities. We went from the best of times to the worst of times very quickly, but, Thank God, we have had the benefit of lessons learned during the Great Depression.

Across the world governments have been stimulating the economy, and although that is the opposite of what we have been trying to do, it was necessary to do it. It was good public policy to spend more, to invest in infrastructure, to make the strategic investments that I referred to, to diversify the economy because that fights the recession and that provides jobs for our people when private demand and business demand is down; such as in the fishing industry, such as in the mining industry, although the mining revenues are starting to come back, and such as in the forestry industry.

As private demand is down, government stepped in by upping its spending and its infrastructure. Hopefully now, as we return to growth, and growth might be mild in the beginning. It might be tepid in the beginning, but it should speed up later on. Hopefully, private demand will come back which will allow our governments to get back to prudent fiscal management so that we continue to pay down the debt, continue to diversify the economy for the sake of the future.

We have to ensure our spending is sustainable. I will go and do pre-Budget consultations soon and in that I will ask people to advise me on what they think we should do and how we should spend the money. If people say to me we should spend money on new things, I welcome those suggestions. I look forward to what the people have to say, but we have to be responsible. We cannot spend now on programs that our children and future generations are not going to be able to sustain.

We have to be careful with the rate of spending. We cranked it up when we came into office because there were years of pent up demand. Then the recession, we had to stimulate even more. Obviously, we have to be prudent, we have to be wise and we have to ensure that our level of spending is sustainable.

I will end, Mr. Speaker, as my time has passed. I look in Newsweek magazine and the headline is: How Great Powers Fail. It says steep debt, slow growth and high spending kill empires, and America could be next.

Let's make sure that Newfoundland and Labrador is not next, by being responsible and by being prudent.

I will just talk about a little ditty that my grandfather taught me many, many years ago. He said when your outgo is greater than your income; your upkeep is going to be your downfall. That was correct in his time and it is correct today. If we are responsible and we govern properly and we ensure that what we do is sustainable, then this Province is going to do okay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Finance is certainly a hard act to follow, but I will do my best to add some commentary to support the Address In Reply to the Speech from the Throne.

It is a great opportunity to stand in this House and talk about some of the achievements of this government over the last number of years, and also to talk about our districts and the great investments that have been made in each of our districts.

As a result of recent by-elections and recent Cabinet shuffles, I find myself shifted to a new seat in the House of Assembly. It gives me a different perspective on things here in this great Legislature. One of the really interesting parts about it is now I have Harvey Hodder watching over my shoulder. As a former Speaker of the House, Mr. Hodder – his painting has been posted on the wall in this Chamber - he represented the District of Waterford Valley, which is now known as Mount Pearl North, the district I represent. He certainly has been watching over me, and certainly continues to be a great friend and a great contributor to community life in Mount Pearl.

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the new MHAs that have joined the House of Assembly since I last had an opportunity to address the House. I would like to welcome the Member for The Straits & White Bay North, as well as the MHA elect, Sandy Collins, for the District of Terra Nova, who will soon get the title of being the youngest current member of this House, once he is sworn in, in the next number of days. So congratulations to Sandy as well.

I certainly want to congratulate my colleague from Placentia & St. Mary's on his appointment to Cabinet as the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, and I know he is doing a fine job. The most recent appointment to Cabinet, the Member for Conception Bay South, who has been appointed the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, I certainly want to congratulate him as well. Both are fantastic additions to our Cabinet team.

There have been a number of other appointments as well. I certainly want to congratulate and welcome the new Parliamentary Secretary for Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, a new Parliamentary Secretary for Health and Community Services, and of course, a new Deputy Chair of Committees who, at present, occupies the Speaker's Chair, and I congratulate you as well.

Mr. Speaker, there has been a municipal election since the last opportunity I have had to address this House. In the communities I represent of Paradise and Mount Pearl, several new faces are now at the council table. We have, in the Town of Paradise, Elizabeth Laurie and Vince Burton, who have joined the council team. I want to congratulate them and wish them well in their new duties. There is a new face at the Mount Pearl city council table as well, Mr. Dave Aker. I want to congratulate all of these individuals, and I know they are already making a real contribution to their councils and to their communities.

It is also great to see such interest in the recent municipal elections. Thanks to the work of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, it was great to see a good turnout for the municipal elections, and also to see more people stepping forward. It is so critical to the future of our communities, that people step up and take part in municipal government. I have always said it is the government that is closest to the people. It is where a number of us got our start in politics, and I am certainly pleased to see so many people stepping forward, and I commend those who offered themselves for election in Paradise and Mount Pearl, and around the Province.

Mr. Speaker, I will now talk a little bit about the Throne Speech that was given in the spring. I would like to speak to a number of initiatives that were unveiled by this government during the Throne Speech. I was particularly pleased to see the announcement and the eventual establishment of a new department of Child, Youth and Family Services. It was created earlier this year. The new minister - and the first minister - for this department have already provided really strong leadership. There are a number of great initiatives under way. Funding has been put in place for program growth and system improvements. This government has also committed to improvements in the foster care rate structure, for instance; these things are having meaningful impacts on families not only in my district but right around our Province.

Mr. Speaker, last month we unveiled the Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy under the leadership of the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment. I had an opportunity to join several of my fellow MHAs on an advisory committee as part of that process, and we all recognized the need to work together, not just as a government, but business, labour, communities, all sectors of society to do what we can to curb youth out-migration. I think this new strategy truly positions Newfoundland and Labrador as a Province of choice for young people who want to work here, who want to prosper here, who want to raise their families here, who want to lead their communities, and ultimately leave a legacy that they can be proud of.

The new Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy outline eight directions which we will be taking. I am thrilled with the work that has been done already, and I am pleased to see the kind of funding that has already been allocated to ensure that these initiatives are brought to life.

The strategy is real and it is going to have incredible impact. It talks about youth engagement; positioning and promoting Newfoundland and Labrador; improvements in education; employment and job creation; improving quality of life and improving access to regional services; diversity in culture, of course, Labrador; and incentives for young people to stay in this Province and incentives for young people to return to this Province. I think this is great news for all young people and for generations that are yet to be born in this great Province of ours.

Mr. Speaker, the recent Throne Speech also talked about regional collaboration and the importance of encouraging communities to work together to advance sustainability. Despite the questions that we posed by the Opposition in Question Period today, I think it is important to note that one of the best examples of municipal co-operation anywhere in this Province, one of the best examples of municipal co-operation anywhere in this country is right here on the Northeast Avalon region. We have communities that are working together to provide public transit services, to provide water services, to provide waste management services, to provide fire protection services. The best example that I have found anywhere in North America, in fact, is right here in the Northeast Avalon region, and I am pleased to see the communities continuing to work together where it makes sense and when it is cost efficient and effective to do so. I think right across the Province we need to continue to encourage communities to work together to increase and enhance their sustainability.

Mr. Speaker, the Throne Speech also spoke at length about our oceans and the importance of them in the Newfoundland and Labrador economy and in our society. I am thrilled that this government is committed to our new ocean technology strategy. I think ocean technology is an incredibly lucrative sector, and I think that Newfoundland and Labrador is well on its way to being a world leader in this regard.

It is important to note though that this government is also investing in and growing our fishery as well. I was surprised to learn since I have joined this government that the fishing industry generates over 24,000 jobs a year in Newfoundland and Labrador. That results in hundreds of millions in returns year after year in this Province's economy and I think that is worth noting. The aquaculture sector continues to grow as well.

Mr. Speaker, since the Throne Speech we have passed legislation to create and establish a Research & Development Corporation for the Province. This is another great initiative of this government. We are bringing together stakeholders to finalize a research and development strategy that is really going to help us lead the way in science and in technology and in innovation overall, more good news for people, for communities and for businesses in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I want to thank the Minister of Finance for his comments this afternoon, and I would like to talk about some of the things in the Budget that are particularly good for the District of Mount Pearl North as well. It is important to note that despite this worldwide recession the economy here in Newfoundland and Labrador remains strong, and I think that has a lot to do with the kind of leadership and the strong decision making that this government has demonstrated.

This year we have seen personal income growth, we have seen disposable income growth here in our economy, we have seen growth in retail sales, and capital investment is on the rise. So, despite the world recession, Newfoundland and Labrador has weathered the storm and weathered it well. I think we continue on a great path towards continued prosperity.

I was pleased to see that the Throne Speech and Budget also spoke to small business. As a small business owner myself, I can certainly say that the initiatives that have been undertaken by this government over the last six years are incredibly good for business. One example, in this year alone, this government has increased the corporate income tax small business threshold from $400,000 to $500,000 effective January 1 of this year.

I could go on all day about the many programs and initiatives undertaken by HRLE and Innovation, Trade and Rural Development to support small business owners in Mount Pearl, Paradise and across the whole Province.

Mr. Speaker, I think one of the most significant announcements that have been made this year that affects certainly the communities I represent and the communities across the Province relates to infrastructure. It was mentioned earlier today by the Minister of Transportation and Works that this government has committed approximately $800 million in infrastructure investments this year. That includes $277 million for transportation infrastructure, $156 million for education, $167 million for health care, $103 million to municipalities, $28 million for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, $20 million for justice, and I could go on. All of these announcements directly impact the people that I represent in Mount Pearl and Paradise.

One example of that is the new east-west arterial, which impacts not only people in Mount Pearl and Paradise but people throughout this region. In fact, I would argue that everybody on the Avalon will benefit from the completion of this regional road network. It will be good for communities; it will certainly be good for business and for the economy as well. This is more good news for our communities.

Mr. Speaker, everybody in this Province is impacted by health care, and it is certainly an issue that my constituents talk to me about. They are really pleased to see our government's continued investment in health care. In fact, this year, as a result of the Throne Speech and Budget, we saw an investment of $2.6 billion in health care. Improvements in lab services and cancer care, health information management, new laboratory equipment, all of these things will result in even better health care for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I have had several calls in recent months from people in my district concerning parking at the Health Sciences Centre. This government announced funding to construct a new parking garage at the Health Sciences Centre. I have also had calls from residents about home support services and personal care homes. This government has announced improvements to home support services, and also increased and improved subsidies to personal care homes. I have several in my district that I am in touch with regularly.

Another significant announcement for the District of Mount Pearl North over the last year has been the continued development of two new schools for the Town of Paradise, as well as further improvements at Holy Family School which also serves Paradise. This represents a commitment of over $28 million by this government.

Recently, the Minister of Education visited my district as well as the District of Topsail next door. We had an opportunity to tour both of the new schools that are presently under construction. I am really pleased with the progress that has been made on both of these major projects. One of the schools, the second school, is located in Elizabeth Park at the top of my district, and I am pleased that project is on track. We hope to see the first school open in September of next year, and I hope that the school in Elizabeth Park will not be far behind. It is currently scheduled for January of 2011, and I know that efforts are being made to get both facilities up and running as quickly as possible. Certainly, the residents of Paradise and the residents that I represent in Elizabeth Park have been very supportive and very patient as those projects have continued.

In Mount Pearl as well, though, to some of our older schools there has also been a number of improvements. Just over the last year there has been a new roof placed on the gymnasium, and other improvements made at Mary Queen of the World School on Topsail Road

There is construction presently underway at St. Peter's Junior High. A number of constituents of mine attend that school as well. So, overall, we have seen an unprecedented investment in education.

I have students in my district, and parents as well, who talk to me all the time about the continued tuition freeze at College of the North Atlantic and at Memorial; free textbooks for K-12 students; our improved inspections program for our school buses; continued implementation of the ISSP-Pathways report; and a lot of post-secondary students and also former post-secondary students have spoken to me about this government's bold move to eliminate interest on the provincial portion of student loans. I think we have done an incredible amount to improve the education system in this Province, and the steps we have taken to relieve student debt has had a lot of impact on people I represent, and particularly on young families I represent in the District of Mount Pearl North.

Mr. Speaker, I volunteer with an organization that has given me an opportunity to travel to a number of other places in the country, and everywhere I have been, people talk to me about this government's new and improved tourism campaigns. Everywhere I have gone, people have talked about the tourism marketing that we are doing, and they talk about the creativity that is expressed that represents Newfoundland and Labrador. They talk about our strength and our culture and our uniqueness, and I think it has had a major impact. This government has more than doubled the tourism marketing budget for the Province to $13 million, just since 2004, and it is truly making a huge difference. I think it has improved how we see ourselves as a Province, and it has certainly had a major impact on how others see us – not only across Canada, but right around the world as well.

There are a few other things that people have said to me when I have had the occasion to travel to other places. People elsewhere in Canada stop me all the time and say: You know, you are so lucky to have a Premier who stands up for your Province. I wish we had a Premier who would stand up for our province the way that yours does.

I certainly commend the Premier and thank the Premier for his continued willingness to stand up for what is right for Newfoundland and Labrador, and to provide such a strong representation for us.

People in various sectors across the country have also spoken to me about our Poverty Reduction Strategy. It is a strategy that has received attention across Canada, and even beyond our borders, and it continues to have impact on low-income individuals and families right across this Province, in communities large and small.

I have also received a lot of favourable comments about this Province's management of our natural resources, and our ability to have gotten our fiscal situation under control. Certainly, the rest of the country is paying attention, and they are seeing what kind of possibilities exist in Newfoundland and Labrador and the kind of leadership that we have shown.

Mr. Speaker, for the few minutes I have left I would like to talk about some recent funding announcements that have taken place in Mount Pearl and Paradise in the last few months. Just earlier this fall this government committed over $620,000 to the expansion of the Paradise Wellness Centre. Paradise is the fastest growing community in Eastern Canada. There are an incredible number of young families in Paradise and there is a beautiful new community centre already in place, but the needs are immense. This government recognizes that, and I am really pleased to see such an investment in the new wellness facility.

I have 184 housing units from Newfoundland and Labrador Housing in my district, and I was pleased to see almost half a million dollars committed earlier this fall for improvements to units on Greenwood Crescent, which is off Topsail Road in my district, and there have been great infrastructure investments right across the Province in terms of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. I am seeing first-hand how that is impacting families in my district.

Over the summer there were some great infrastructure investments in both Mount Pearl and Paradise: a new skate park for Paradise; improvements to the Campia Gymnastics facilities in Mount Pearl; new outdoor fitness equipment for Paradise. We had an opportunity, with my colleagues from the District of Mount Pearl South and the District of Topsail, to participate in a sod-turning ceremony for a new artificial turf soccer complex at the Team Gushue complex in Mount Pearl off Smallwood Drive, which is also located in my district. This represents a commitment by our government of $630,000. It is going to be a world-class facility. It is a world-class facility, and in recent years we also provided funding to install lights at that facility. The sport of soccer is incredibly strong in Mount Pearl. Thousands of young people get an opportunity to participate every year, and this new facility will be certainly a great addition to the sport.

It is not just about recreation, though, and some of the social infrastructure that I have talked about. At the beginning of this summer, the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development visited Mount Pearl to announce support for a long-time company in Donovan's Business Park, the British Group of Companies, to provide support for them to explore new technology and to expand their business not only in Newfoundland and Labrador but around the world, and this is great news as well.

I want to recognize that over the summer, as well, Mr. Fred Bannister, a long-time resident of my district, was presented with one of five Seniors of Distinction Awards by the Minister of Health and Community Services and the Minister Responsible for Aging and Seniors. I want to congratulate Mr. Bannister on receiving such an honour.

The Minister of Education visited the district in June of this year to recognize Paul Holley who was then a Grade 5 student at Mount Pearl Intermediate. He won a poster contest and his artwork is featured on the Department of Education's new parent handbook.

Mr. Speaker, there has been lots of good news in Mount Pearl North in recent months, and I am pleased to have had an opportunity to stand and talk about some of those things. I would be remiss if I did not mention this government's funding commitment to a new arena, a new swimming pool in Mount Pearl that replaces two aging facilities in my district, also a new theatre. All three of these facilities are going to be located and connected to the existing Reid Centre and Glacier in Mount Pearl. It is going to be among the best recreation complexes in the Province. Work is already underway as Mount Pearl residents will be well aware, and I think that is great news for the people of Mount Pearl and for the people of the region as well. I am also pleased to see a theatre facility which will really allow the arts community in Mount Pearl to grow.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank hon. members for the opportunity to speak to Address in Reply. There are great things happening in Mount Pearl North. There are great things happening across Newfoundland and Labrador, and I am incredibly proud at this time to be a member of this government.

Thank you for the opportunity.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Kelly): The Chair recognizes the hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to say it is a great pleasure to stand before the House today to speak to the Address in Reply. I did not have the opportunity to speak to the Budget in the spring session. I had some time off as I was out doing my part to increase the population in the Province. I missed my opportunity to speak then, so I would certainly like to take the time now to talk about all the wonderful things that we are doing in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

We have a great story to tell in this Province about what we are doing, particularly in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and we do not do it often enough, Mr. Speaker, quite frankly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: You often hear critics, Opposition and others challenging us on what we do, so I thought I would take this time today to just give the tops of the trees as to some of the things that we are doing in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Twenty minutes certainly is not long enough to go into all of the great things that we are doing, but certainly you will see, from my talk today, that it certainly has a rural theme to it.

Before I get into some of the things that we are doing in the Department of Environment and Conservation, I would like to take a moment to speak to some of the wonderful things being done in the district. Of course, as any member in this House would know, particularly in rural areas, one of the biggest things that we all look for as MHAs in our district is roadwork. Certainly, many, many years back the roads have deteriorated. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that over the past five to six years, since I have been MHA, we have seen an infusion of over $16 million in roadwork for the District of Trinity-Bay de Verde.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Very rural, certainly a rural district.

I remember back to the time when I first campaigned, and I remember getting sick on a bus driving from one part of the district to the other because of how bad the roads were. Well certainly, it is a very smooth drive over that road today. We are making progress, it is not all done, but it is a significant difference and improvement as to where it was.

We also get great co-operation from the Department of Municipal Affairs in the district. This year alone, so far to date, we have seen an investment of $3 million into water projects in the district. Of course, it is a major focus for Municipal Affairs and my department as well, but in rural areas, this $3 million certainly goes a long way. We also get a lot of money in terms of recreation grants, heritage grants and so on. As any member of a rural district would know, a $1,000 grant, or a $3,000 grant, or a $15,000 grant certainly goes a long way in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

I would certainly like to compliment and thank my colleagues who have come to the District of Trinity-Bay de Verde. We have had the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation; we have had the Minister of Finance; we have had the Minister of Transportation and Works; and I have commitments from other ministers to come to the district; the Minister of Health and Community Services will be coming there in the very near future.

So I just wanted to take the time to highlight some of the wonderful things going on in the district. Most recent announcement in the district was a $450,000 investment into waste management to run a pilot project with all the communities along the north shore in Old Perlican.

Mr. Speaker, my district is very rural, and just the few minutes I just had, that totals almost $5 million this year alone. That is a quite significant amount of money.

From a departmental perspective, there is so much I can talk about, but I thought I would take some of the more key areas. Water quality – we all know this has been an issue in the Province, and certainly drinking water quality is something that we take very seriously. We want people in the Province to have access to safe and quality drinking water. Mr. Speaker, that is why between the Department of Municipal Affairs and the Department of Environment and Conservation we committed over $20 million to drinking water quality. Where does this money go for drinking water quality, Mr. Speaker? It goes into rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Our focus for drinking water quality is on PWDUs – Potable Water Dispensing Units. Just briefly, a PWDU treats a smaller amount of water. The average person drinks anywhere from two to five litres a day, so rather than treating the whole system, you can treat just the amount that you need for drinking, brushing your teeth and so on. As I said, we have already put one of these in Gaultois, we recently put one in Bellevue, and we have another thirty PWDUs ready to put into communities. Where are these going, Mr. Speaker?

MR. HICKEY: Rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador.

MS JOHNSON: Exactly. Thank you very much to my colleague. Every single one of these is going in to rural parts of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, along the lines of while we are talking about water, this year alone in our department, we have put a hydrometric station on Exploits River, we have done another video camera in Badger, and we have put another weather station on Humber River. Again, Mr. Speaker, all rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and of course, these are things that will help us with flood forecasting, it will expand our climate network, and also it will assist us when it comes to adaptation with climate change. Certainly, climate change is an issue that will face all of us here in the Province. We are not a very big contributor of greenhouse gases, but we are certainly going to get it on the receiving end, in terms of effects with storm surges and sea level rise and so on. So we are investing now in rural Newfoundland and Labrador because that is where we are seeing the majority of the impacts of climate change.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if any of you have noticed out in the parking lot, but there is a new water quality mobile lab that we have; you may see a van that is out there. This is a fabulous investment, particularly for rural Newfoundland and Labrador. We can now take that mobile lab, go to any part of the Province and assist the operators in that area with taking water quality data, pH levels, anything and everything in terms of water quality. It is a huge move in the right direction for water quality, and again, it is to help the people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

I would just like to switch gears for a minute, Mr. Speaker, and talk about our provincial parks. Of course our provincial parks, where are they? They are all in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. We have made significant investments in the provincial park system. In fact, over the last four years we have made a $4 million investment. Mr. Speaker, this year alone we have upgraded electrical services in many of the provincial parks. We have Dildo Run, La Manche, Notre Dame, Frenchman's Cove and J.T. Cheeseman. Again, Mr. Speaker, where are they? They are all in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and I am happy to report that the electrical upgrades for those sites are about 95 per cent complete.

Of course part of our provincial park system is our T'Railway, and as you know, back in 2008 there was a safety report that was completed by Transport Canada, and as a result of that report, we have had several bridges that were closed down for safety reasons. This year, as you know, government made a significant investment in infrastructure to the tune of $800 million. Part of that infrastructure investment, there was $2 million carved out for the T'Railway system.

I would just like to point out that we have a great working relationship with the T'Railway Council. They take some of the money that we give them, and then leverage that so that we can go beyond and get even more work done. They are a fabulous organization to work with, and they help us with identifying the issues along the T'Railway.

So, Mr. Speaker, that $2 million went a long way this year. We did a lot of vegetation control and drainage issues along the T'Railway and I have to say it is nice to see, because we have received many e-mails about the great improvements along the T'Railway, and of course they say: Now can you look at this area? So in the future we are going to continue to improve the T'Railway.

We all know how important the T'Railway is to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and particularly rural parts of the Province. This is a huge economic generator for people in rural parts of the Province, in terms of hotels and restaurants and gas stations and so on. So there are huge economic spinoffs that come with that, but also it is very important from a recreational perspective.

Mr. Speaker, with that $2 million this year, we were able to work on many bridges: Robison's East and Robinson's West, Middle Brook, Morris Brook, Codroy North Branch, Bear Cove and Crabbe's River. Again, Mr. Speaker, in keeping with my theme, these are all in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: These bridges are key links to the T'Railway system and, as I mentioned, they have been closed since 2008, so we are really looking forward to the reopening of these structures so that the key link can be closed, the gap can be closed, and of course the economic spinoffs and the recreational enjoyment can continue.

Mr. Speaker, that was a little bit on provincial parks and, of course, with the electrical services and so on, certainly that will enhance the camping experience for people in the Province.

I would like to speak a little bit now about climate change, greenhouse gases, and our Green Fund. Mr. Speaker, we have leveraged monies from the federal government, and we have put several million dollars into this ourselves, and a lot of the projects that were funded under this program we have put in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Just to talk about a few of the most recent ones we announced, my colleague, the hon. Minister of Justice, represented me at the Brother Brennan Environmental Education Centre just recently on the Salmonier Line where we invested over $192,000 into a wind turbine system there. This will allow for the generation of six kilowatts of power and, of course, the aim is to replace the diesel power there. A great example of a project that we supported in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

While not so rural, this one I think is worthy of note because it is a significant investment: nearly $900,000 into the Corner Brook area, but it is to make the city hall in the area a lead standard. This involves a lot of energy efficient measures, and it is one of very few in the Province, so it was a great project to invest in there.

We have an investment into Northern Seafoods to install a saltwater cooling system. Again, this is for energy efficiency. Mr. Speaker, where is this plant? This is in Conche, Mr. Speaker, in the district of the hon. member opposite, the District of The Straits & White Bay North. Again, another investment into rural parts of our Province. Of course, just recently we announced $160,000 for Cupids to invest in energy efficiency improvements in the interpretation centre that they are putting there for the 400th anniversary of Cupids.

All of these investments, Mr. Speaker, under the Green Fund, are all in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Yes, there are some of these that are in cities, but the majority and the focus are in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Of course, we can take away the knowledge that is gained from places like Northern Seafoods to see if the technology that is put in place there can be adaptable to other businesses and other similar types of industries. So, a wonderful program, we have had great success with this program, and it has been just a wonderful opportunity to get out into rural Newfoundland and Labrador and make some of these wonderful announcements.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak a minute about the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board. This year we had a new CEO join us. He has been there, I guess, about maybe three months now, and a wonderful job he is doing so far. Just recently we announced the closure of Garden Cove landfill on the Burin Peninsula. In fact, if anybody saw The Telegram, I think it was yesterday there was a Cheers to that piece in The Telegram, so that was really good to see; again, rural Newfoundland.

We have put a household hazardous waste pilot depot in St. Anthony – again in the member's district, the District of The Straits & White Bay North - and we also put one of these household hazardous waste management sites in Channel-Port aux Basques; again, all investments in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Of course, the idea of these depots is to collect information on the different demographics and geography of the particular area, so the intent is to have a permanent system in place in the future.

Mr. Speaker, not too long ago we were in Holyrood. It is twenty minutes outside, fifteen minutes outside, the city, but again a rural part of the Province, where we announced the first-ever composting yard, which is going to be run by the town there. The idea is to take the organic waste – meal scraps from your Sunday dinner, yard waste and leaf clippings and so on - and bring to the town, where they will manage it, turn it, and the idea is then people can go back the following year and take away the compost. I cannot think of a greater example of nature's way of recycling its own material; you are taking a waste material and turning it into something that has a valuable use. The point to note is that again this is in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. The first announcement of such a composting yard was in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

We also recently announced, through the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board, a fund under the Solid Waste Management Innovation Program. It was recently announced, so we have only had one application to date, but I would certainly take this opportunity to put the message out there that we welcome all applications from businesses, volunteer groups, schools, or any organization whatsoever. The idea is to find innovative ways to assist us in getting to half. As I said, there is only one application, and it just recently came in. I have not had a chance to go over it in detail, but we would really like to encourage more applications to come in, because we know there are a lot of ways out there to innovatively come up with solutions to reduce the amount of waste that is going to our landfills. Of course, every time we do that, that translates into more money into our pockets; because, if you are not having to pay for the shipment of waste here on the Avalon, to the Robin Hood Bay facility, then that is less trucks and less trucking time and, of course, less cost in tippage fees at the end of the day.

Of course, Mr. Speaker, I cannot speak about rural Newfoundland and Labrador without speaking to the work that we are doing in Labrador. Just last week in the House I did a Ministerial Statement about $100,000 we are spending in Labrador on climate change adaptation research, but I would like to speak a little bit about the work we are doing in Hopedale and Northwest Point. There have been contaminated sites there, as we all know, and government has been committed to working on these areas to clean up these sites. In fact, in last year's Budget we committed $1.6 million to Hopedale, and a quarter of a million dollars to Northwest Point.

The $1.6 million will include environmental site assessments, and human health risk assessments. It also included monies to remove some of the PCB material, the tar-like material that was there. That work has been completed. We know that there is more work to done, and we are waiting for the consultant's report to come back in the new year with the further work that is to be done, but this has been a commitment of ours and I have to say that both members from Labrador have lobbied and brought forth the concerns of the people of Labrador, and particularly Hopedale and Northwest Point on getting these areas cleaned up, Mr. Speaker. Certainly, it was not our government who caused the mess there in the first place, but we are very committed to having that cleaned up and to continue to work with that in the future. As I said, there was $250,000 for Northwest Point as well.

While we are on the subject of contaminated sites, I would like to take the opportunity to just give an update about the New Harbour site. I know the Opposition member has asked some questions on this in the House, but I would just like to point out the amount of work that has been done on New Harbour, and it is something that this government has been very committed to. Ministers before me in the department have done a lot of work. There is still a piece of work to be done, but to date, Mr. Speaker, we have spent about $750,000 on the New Harbour landfill. Some say it is the Cadillac of cleanups, I would say it is the Lamborghini of cleanups. It is a pretty expensive endeavour.

We have installed monitoring wells; we have done a lot of testing in the area. To the committee's credit, the Trinity Bay South Waste Management Committee, which takes in six communities in the area, they took it upon themselves to find a way to have this landfill closed. To their credit, on September 26, the landfill did, in fact, close and that waste is now coming to Robin Hood Bay.

We have some more work to do there in terms of grading and capping and, of course, once the grading and so on settles we have committed to putting a geomembrane liner on the site there I cannot remember the cost of that liner off of the top of my head, it was pretty significant, but we have purchased that already, and it is currently in storage and ready to be put in place.

I know this has been an issue for the Opposition member and also for the new member responsible for New Harbour because that used to be in my riding, but now, of course, it is for the neighbouring member.

Again, all of the things that I have talked about here today, and there is so much more that I can talk about, the Department of Environment and Conservation, it is not a huge department, we do not have a huge budget, but we do a lot of work in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. We are very much a regulatory department, so we often work with many, many communities in rural parts of the Province. I feel that we have made significant investments in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I know I focused on the majority of them in rural Newfoundland and Labrador today. As I said, there are investments we have made in cities, but every one of these that I have mentioned here today, from land site, landfill closures, to wind turbines, to pilot projects for waste management, to household hazardous waste, to roads in the District of Trinity-Bay de Verde, it is all rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, with my ten seconds that I have left, I would just like to clue up by saying we do a wonderful job in this government. We do not speak about it often enough, the great work that we do in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. A little goes a long way, and I know how much it really is appreciated because I heard it every day.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Chair of Committees and Member for Humber Valley.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It is my honour and privilege to stand here in this hon. House today and to speak a few words in Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne that was delivered in the spring by His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.

First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would like to compliment the previous speaker, the Minister of Environment and Conservation, on an outstanding job that she just did in her previous words about rural Newfoundland. I know from which she speaks because I know of the many positive things that are happening in my rural district, and in particular she mentioned a number of parks. There is a park in my district, Sir Richard Squires Park that this government has made significant expenditures in, in the last couple of years. Certainly, very much appreciated by the constituents in the great District of Humber Valley.

Also, this past summer, Mr. Speaker, I had the great pleasure of being with the minister in another part of my district in White Bay at Main River where the minister designated Main River as the first Provincial Waterway Park in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I am so proud of that, that it happened in my district.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Today, Mr. Speaker, I will highlight some of the key points from the Throne Speech. I would like to comment as well on yesterday's economic update, as well as talk about the Youth Retention Strategy that was recently announced. Also, I would like to give an overview of some of the many positive things that are happening in my district, which is a rural district in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I am so proud to stand here and say that this government has not abrogated its responsibility to rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Now we have had great challenges. In 2003, when this government took over, I guess the ship was not in good shape - the ship was not in good shape. The hon. Minister of Finance said earlier that we had a deficit that was approaching $1 billion; we had a provincial debt approaching $12 billion. Things were not great. The ship was in trouble. I do not think there was enough oakum, Mr. Speaker, in this Province or in the country to stog the leak. That is how bad it was, our ship was sinking. Thanks to the present Administration, thanks to this government, thanks to the Cabinet, thanks to the caucus, this government now has set a new course, and the ship is on track, the ship is on course, and a lot of very positive things are happening throughout the great Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: We have new benefits from the offshore. Our Premier has negotiated the new equity position in the offshore. We are now a have province; we have: have status. I did not think –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: I did not think that objective was achievable, Mr. Speaker, in my lifetime, but what a proud day to be a Member of this House of Assembly when it was announced last spring that we are indeed a have province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: The Minister of Finance earlier talked about the global storm that we now have. He talked about the great recession. He talked about this as being the worst recession since the Great Depression. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I think it is because of the responsible economic stewardship by the Ministers of Finance that we have had in this Province that we have weathered this economic storm as good as it could be done. We are an example, Mr. Speaker, to other Provinces; we are an example to other countries around the globe, Mr. Speaker.

This captain and this crew have set a course, a global course for others to follow, no doubt about that, Mr. Speaker. We have reduced the heavy burden of debt. When the Budget was brought down in the spring, there was a projection that there would be a $750 million deficit, but it was a good announcement, Mr. Speaker, even though we do not like deficits. The Province had been doing so well in the last number of years, knowing that the economic tsunami was on us, we decided to invest in our people, and it was, for the most part, the people of rural Newfoundland and Labrador that those investments were in – 80 per cent of our expenditures have been made to rural districts in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Cutting taxes, putting more money in the hands of those that need it, poverty reduction, an example to the rest of the country, increasing things like minimum wage, putting more money into people's pockets, this government, without doubt, Mr. Speaker, is doing the right thing time and time and time again.

We have a visionary leader who stands up for Newfoundland and Labrador - better deals. Just look at the new equity stakes in Hebron and White Rose. The Lower Churchill is on the agenda.

Mr. Speaker, the Opposition might not like it, but optimism in this Province is catching on in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: We have an outstanding team that supports the vision that was laid down in the spring in the Speech from the Throne. Our provincial deficit which was projected to be $750 million earlier, of course, thanks to the price of oil, now is going to be reduced to $443 million and, of course, that improves our overall financial capacity in this Province.

Program expenses have increased, too, Mr. Speaker, of course, with the mill in Grand Falls-Windsor. The projected deficit can be predominantly attributed to the federal government, Mr. Speaker, and the elimination of the benefits under the 1985 Atlantic Accord.

Our government is well positioned to manage its way through the downturn and the recovery, and we have taken an aggressive approach to lower taxes, pay down the debt, lower borrowing costs, and we have made strategic investments in programs and infrastructure in order to stimulate the economy and provide jobs for the most important people on earth: the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Consumer confidence is high. Housing starts are robust; housing prices are up 18 per cent last year. Our industries such as mining, fishing and forestry have been affected by the global recession. Our Gross Domestic Product, the GDP, which is the total value of goods and services produced in the economy in a year, is projected to decline this year by 8.5 per cent. Next year, it is projected that we would return to growth in our GDP, the value of goods and services produced, which is a very positive thing.

In Budget 2009 the government bolstered a strategy through an additional unprecedented investment of approximately $800 million in infrastructure projects. Now, what did those projects entail? Where did the money go? Where did the $800 million go, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker, the money went to roads, the money went to hospitals, the money went to schools, the money went to long-term care facilities in this Province, the money went to ferries, and the money went to water bombers, Mr. Speaker. The money went to rural Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Approximately 75 per cent of that amount has already been awarded, Mr. Speaker. Since forming government in 2003, more than 80 per cent of infrastructure expenditures have been in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, after years of neglect.

Mr. Speaker, in a previous life I was school administrator for thirty years. I can remember leaking roof after leaking roof after leaking roof. I can remember the custodians, the janitors, going around from classroom to classroom with buckets, garbage containers, as the water poured in through the seams, but since 2003 this government has invested significantly in education, significantly in infrastructure, and right now our expenditure in education is $1.3 billion, the highest in our Province's history, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Not only that, but we have done that and we have reduced debt from $12 billion to less than $8 billion in 2008 and 2009. The average person in this Province - in 2003, the debt load was nearly $23,000. Now we are just over $15,000 in those few short years. Mr. Speaker, what an achievement.

Financial experts and credit rating agencies continue to reaffirm that our plan is working and we are making significant progress. As a government we cannot alter from this course, especially as the world recovers from the worst recession since the Great Depression.

While we recognize our achievements, we must also continue to take a responsible and cautious approach to our investments and planning. We do not want those dark old days of 2003 and prior to 2003, when this government took office, to come back. Simply put.

Mr. Speaker, on November 5, I attended a launch in St. John's of the Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy and I was so pleased to be there. This strategy was developed in collaboration with youth, with the intent of countering the impacts of out-migration, strengthening the labour market, and supporting the economic development of this great Province, Newfoundland and Labrador.

It marks the beginning of a new partnership with the young people in this Province. The young people of our Province and our many partners will continue to work together to position Newfoundland and Labrador as a Province of choice for young people, a place for them to live and work, Mr. Speaker.

Some key areas in the Budget in regard to my district I will now highlight. They include: municipal infrastructure, transportation infrastructure, medical services, education, tourism, natural resources and, yes, Mr. Speaker, general overall economic development of my district.

My district, Mr. Speaker, is a rural district. The largest two communities in my district are Deer Lake, with a population of approximately 5,000, and Pasadena with approximately 3,000. All the rest of the communities are very small rural communities. I have a mixture of the larger communities and, as well, some very small communities with fishing industries and so on.

Prior to getting into politics, not only did I spend thirty years as an educational leader, a school principal – a vice-principal for thirty years - but I was also thirteen years involved with a municipal council, eleven years as a town councillor, and two years as Mayor of the Town of Deer Lake.

I can honestly say the greatest thing that was done for municipalities in this Province was when this government – this government, Mr. Speaker - changed the funding arrangement for municipalities. The larger towns in my district are now 80-20 funded, like Deer Lake and Pasadena. The other towns, like Jackson's Arm, Pollards Point, Sop's Arm, Howley, all the other communities in my district, are funded 90-10, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Prior to that, Mr. Speaker, the funding was 50-50 and as you can imagine that was indeed a challenge for many of these communities.

There has been multi-millions of dollars spent, Mr. Speaker, in my district on roads, water and sewer. Just this past year, on one project in Deer Lake alone, there was $1.8 million spent to accommodate a new hotel being built, an eighty-five room hotel in that municipality. There was several million dollars spent in Pasadena. Millions of dollars, Mr. Speaker, has been spent in my district.

Fire services and fire trucks are important. Mr. Speaker, I was so happy this year when my district received two fire trucks - two fire trucks. One community was funded 90-10, a $240,000 fire truck, and the other community received 80-20 funding on a $270,000 fire truck. As the MHA for the District of Humber Valley, I was so proud of that, Mr. Speaker. It was the funding arrangement that this government put in place that allowed these communities to access that equipment. Not only did the government fund fire trucks with that formula, Mr. Speaker, they also funded equipment. So any community, depending on their size, could also apply and get funding 90-10 or 80-20 in my district for equipment to be used by the fire departments - and several towns in my district did get equipment; Jackson's Arm and Pasadena are two that come to my mind.

Mr. Speaker, millions of dollars was spent in my district in the last few years in transportation as well. A problem on the Trans-Canada with rutting was finished; there was several million dollars spent on that. This past year the Main River bridge in Jackson's Arm, there was over a million dollars spent on that, Mr. Speaker. This past year, I was so pleased to see over ten kilometres of the White Bay area paved - five kilometres was a carryover from last year, five more kilometres this year. The Howley area in my district also received funding, the contract was let, but unfortunately the cold weather came too soon and that project will take place in the new year. The Nicholsville bridge, the taking down of the Nicholsville bridge; new lights for the Nicholsville bridge. A fortune spent, Mr. Speaker. Again, Mr. Speaker, rural communities.

The Deer Lake Regional Airport, Mr. Speaker. I was so proud this year when the government came onside with $3 million that enabled the Deer Lake Regional Airport to expand their runway with a $9 million investment in total, three from the provincial government, three from the federal government and three from the airport authority's own coffers, Mr. Speaker. That is a project that certainly needed to be done. It was shovel ready and it has now been done, thanks to this government.

Medical, Mr. Speaker, right now the budget in this Province is $2.6 billion for health care, which is quite significant when you consider that we have a population of 500,000 people. I was so pleased when the Deer Lake clinic got $200,000 for upgrades and also new X-ray equipment for the clinic that is being installed right now, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there are so many positive things. I only have twenty minutes and I notice I have just a couple of minutes left. I cannot believe the amount of positive things that are happening in Newfoundland and Labrador, in particular rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

The new hospital in Corner Brook, Mr. Speaker. I was so proud to be there when they unveiled the site. The Premier was there and – the regional hospital– and my good colleague, the Minister of Finance, also the MHA for the District of Bay of Islands was there. Many community leaders from around the entire region were there when the announcement was made for the site of the new location for the regional hospital that serves Western Newfoundland and Labrador. It is in a location that people are happy with because it is close to the highway and it is service to the entire region. This government was committed to health care, Mr. Speaker, because that was quite a significant investment showing its long-term, not only short-term, Mr. Speaker, but long-term commitment to health.

Mr. Speaker, I talked about the schools. When I was principal of a school one of the things that I always had trouble with was that there was a free textbook policy K-8. Students in Grade 9, in Level I, in Level II and Level III had to buy their textbooks. Some students made choices on what courses they would do depending on the cost of a textbook. I always thought that unfortunate and unfair. Mr. Speaker, I was so proud, so proud of this government when they changed that because those kinds of decisions truly make education free. For that I thank this government, Mr. Speaker.

Tourism, Mr. Speaker, the Humber Valley is a four-season tourism destination. Earlier this year, the Minister of Tourism announced the vision document, the blueprint for tourism to the year 2020. In that, he talked about the value of tourism in this Province going from $780 million to double that, $1.6 billion by 2020, as a contributor to the economy.

Mr. Speaker, where does most of the tourism take place in Newfoundland and Labrador? It takes place, Mr. Speaker, in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, showing again this government's commitment. All of the advertising that is being done, Mr. Speaker, when this government took office the budget for advertising was $6 million; this year the budget is $13 million. This government has been recognized for the quality of the tourism advertising campaign, and, Mr. Speaker, it is so nice to see.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, given the global recession that the Minister of Finance referred to earlier, our Province, in September, the tourism numbers were better than the previous year; that is unimaginable. It just shows the outstanding job that was done by the Minister of Tourism, and, of course, the outstanding job done by this government in promoting tourism in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Mr. Speaker, there are so many more things I could comment on; I have not reached the end of my notes. As an MHA for the District of Humber Valley, I am very proud to be a part of this government, very proud to be a part of this team and I am very proud of this government's commitment to rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: There is no doubt in my mind, Mr. Speaker, that this government has not abrogated its responsibility to rural communities in this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I hope some of the energy that is emanating behind me from the previous speaker, I can absorb and carry on in my presentation as well. We share a lot in common, the hon. Member for Humber Valley, being a former education administrator, former municipal mayor, and what not. In fact, Mr. Speaker – and as a former Chair of Committees, he has succeeded me. The only thing we do not have in common, Mr. Speaker, I tried to make a few dollars off of selling my court clothes to him, but they would not fit. As the hon. member himself pointed out, it would be a bit of stretch in order to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I would like, as well today, to congratulate the two new members in the House – the hon. Member for The Straits & White Bay North, and the Member Elect from Terra Nova - and welcome them to what is a very hon. profession, sitting in this House, contrary to what a lot of people might think. It is a hon. profession, and I wish them luck in their careers.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to preface my remarks today by referring again to something the previous speaker addressed and that is the status of have status in this Province. When it was announced earlier this year that we had reached have status, the name: have, Mr. Speaker, has been maligned by a lot of people, the naysayers in the Province, because they misinterpreted the word: have. They said: We are have status now; that means we can have whatever we want. We can have all our roads paved. We can have all our hospitals, which was not the case at all, and used satirically in a lot of cases. It is simply meant, Mr. Speaker, that what we have, we can pay for. We are no longer dependent on Ottawa for equalization payments.

It is significant, Mr. Speaker, because it shows from whence we came in 1949. It exemplifies the journey, the odyssey that we were on for fifty years. We can now say to father Ottawa, we are now on our own and can make our own way. I am a bit of a nostalgia buff, Mr. Speaker, and prone to a bit of romanticism on occasion, and I cannot help but reflect back on my father during the Confederation debates. Now, contrary to what some people might think in this House, I am not old enough to remember substantive issues of the Confederation Debates, but I certainly do remember him listening to the old Rogers Majestic radio, listening to the debates. While I was not aware of what was being debated; I can certainly see him with his ear to the radio, the old battery radio, and preserving the battery because he had to keep the battery – we were not allowed to listen to anything else, any music or any news - we had to keep it so that he could hear the Confederation Debates.

He had his ear always close to the radio. He was a bit hard of hearing, which might surprise some of you, particularly since it was an affliction he passed along to several members of his family. I remember how passionate he was with regard to those debates. He saw the poverty. He saw the need in Newfoundland, and the need for a new deal, a new direction. He was a very passionate Confederate. He was also a long-time Joey Smallwood supporter, a lifetime Liberal. As a matter of fact, when I was elected in 2006, Mr. Speaker, someone came along and congratulated me and said: Your father would be so proud. I said: No, he would turn over in his grave.

To get to the thrust of my comments, Mr. Speaker, we spent fifty years with cap in hand, surviving at the door of Ottawa. Not to belittle the monies we got; because, God knows, in 1949 we needed them, and we survived as a result of our partnership in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, the debate goes on about the benefits of Confederation, and what we gave up in 1949 and so on, but I think that most people in Newfoundland and Labrador today will realize and hold the fact that we have benefited from the Confederation, and that we are now proud partners of Canada. Most of the people in Newfoundland would hold to that position.

The fact that we have come in fifty years to the position that we are in, I think my father would have appreciated that. As much as he hated Progressive Conservatives, I think he would shake the Premier's hand. He was a fair man, an intelligent man, and I think he would appreciate who brought us there.

Mr. Speaker, listening to the comments of previous speakers, I can reiterate that we are the envy – we are the envy - of the other provinces, in the way we have come out of this recession. Who would have imagined, who could have imagined, that the approach we took this year was to spend ourselves out of the recession, to survive the recession by spending our way out of it? Who would have imagined that in 2003 when this government took over? Who could imagine back in 1949 when we entered Confederation?

Every day, Mr. Speaker, we see the news and the reports of the economic fallout of the global economic downturn in other jurisdictions. We cannot over emphasize the fact, and what we have done, where we have come from, and where we are today due to the leadership of our Premier and this government.

For so long we were the economic doormats of Canada, seeing the exploitation of our natural resources, the giveaways, eking out a survival on this windswept ocean rock that we love and call home, considered as poor cousins by our sister provinces. Here we are today, standing tall, standing proud as contributing partnerships to Canada, to Confederation.

We can take our place at the national table, Mr. Speaker, with dignity and with pride. We can say to Canada, we can say to the world: Look at us; we have arrived.

Now, how did we get there? What did we do that enabled us to get to this stage? Mr. Speaker, I figured it was not necessary for me to scribe some notes together, to put that in order, because it is stated so eloquently in the Speech from the Throne itself. People put it much better than I could, and I beg the indulgence of the House to allow me to plagiarize for a moment.

In the Speech from the Throne it says: We have charted a course for others to follow. World leaders can take it from this Province that optimizing the value of public spending is a strategy that works. Reducing our public debt over time to raise our credit rating and lower our interest rates is a strategy that works. Investing in infrastructure to lay the foundation for future investment is a strategy that works. Cutting taxes for employers and consumers and funding pension plans is a strategy that works. Investing in people by improving access to quality education is a strategy that works. Standing strong on principle and securing agreements that truly benefit the people of our Province is a strategy that works. These things my government has done, and because they were done early and done well, our Province is better positioned than most to weather the storm and emerge from it stronger.

Who could have said it better, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to now refer to my own district for a few moments, the District of Placentia & St. Mary's, a rural district, and I want to use it because I, too, want to reiterate and reinforce what the previous speakers have said about what this government has done for rural Newfoundland. My district, while it is on the Avalon Peninsula, is a rural district. It consists of forty communities, one of them, Placentia, with a population of 4,000, roughly, and the rest much smaller, ranging anywhere from 100 people to 400 or 500 people, to 1,000, all small communities. (Inaudible) community has 550 kilometres of road, most of it bad.

Mr. Speaker, I, too, wanted to reinforce what the previous speaker just said about the cost-shared formulas. I think they were the best thing that this government has ever done, since I have been here at least, the cost-shared formula that invokes the 90-10 formulas, the 80-20 formulas, for municipalities. It has tremendous impact on my district, Mr. Speaker, tremendous impact on my district, and most communities in my district have benefited from it.

Placentia, Long Harbour, Whitbourne, Admiral's Beach, have programs in place, water and sewer infrastructure programs in place, amounting to several million dollars in the last two years: $3.7 million in Placentia this last year; $1.5 million in Long Harbour has been earmarked; $1 million for Whitbourne; and $500,000 for Admiral's Beach, just to name a few.

In the communities of Branch, Point La Haye, Gaskiers and Deer Park, funding has been approved, pending engineering, for another couple of million dollars. We have proposals on the table from three or four other communities, Mr. Speaker, all looking for benefits from this program.

It is the best thing that has happened to our municipalities since sliced bread, and I compliment this government for it. It has been the saviour for our municipalities, because it was the opportunity for communities, Mr. Speaker, to upgrade their infrastructure, an opportunity which they never would have had, never would have been able to do without this program. The 50-50 formula just could not apply. They could not find the 50 per cent; it just was not possible. Municipalities voiced their concerns, Mr. Speaker, and the government listened. Government listened.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, in my district as well - you talk about fire trucks - my district, too, had the benefit of fire trucks: $500,000 for new fire trucks for Whitbourne and St. Joseph's.

Mr. Speaker, this past year saw significant work and money spent in the Placentia, Long Harbour area – roadwork - in excess of $15 million this year in roadwork in that area. That is a lot of money. The Argentia Access Road is completed, a state-of-the-art highway now from the Trans-Canada Highway to Argentia, the point of entry for tourists into this Province.

As well, the road from the highway to Long Harbour has been completely redone and they are in the process now of completing the connecting roads so that the whole network accessing Argentia, Long Harbour, the Trans-Canada Highway and the Vale Inco site will be completed. That is a lot of money, a lot of work, and it shows the commitment of this government to that part of the district.

These roadways, Mr. Speaker, will be used by people from all over the Province, because the volume of traffic in that area over the next twenty-five years will be voluminous. There will be a lot of traffic in that area and it is only reasonable that these roads have to be done, had to take priority, and they will be used, not only by people in my district from the Placentia, Long Harbour, Whitbourne area, Cape Shore, but also by the tourists coming in through Argentia on Marine Atlantic, and of course, all the people who will access the Vale Inco site.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to roads, when you have 550 kilometres of road in your district, there are obviously a lot of road demands. We have made a lot of improvements over the years, we have a lot to do yet, and we will continue to work at them, and they will continue to be done. You have a constant demand for roadwork in a rural district, and I appreciate the patience and the forbearance of the people in the other parts of the district who saw all the work being done in one particular area of the district, and were prepared to wait to get theirs done, because they realize that is makes a lot of sense to put the money in that area; that had to be done.

Mr. Speaker, as well, we saw this year development in Argentia, where D.F. Barnes combined with JV Driver of Alberta to put a manufacturing plant in Argentia that will be worth $10 million at start up this year, and the provincial government, through my colleague, the Minister of Business, invested $4 million in that project. Mr. Speaker, Argentia will complement Long Harbour – I am convinced of that – as an industrial site. So you will see an industrial site in both areas, because the people setting up in Argentia, the service and supply industries of Long Harbour while in Long Harbour and Argentia, will complement the Vale Inco site.

High-speed Internet continues to be a need in my district, and it is being addressed as we speak. Several areas have been hooked up already, and of course, when the government rolls out a broadband initiative in the spring, we are hoping to see further extension of that as well.

I want to, this time, Mr. Speaker, congratulate and thank those citizens in my municipalities who offered themselves as candidates in the previous municipal elections. As an MHA, I can attest to their importance, and I can assure you everybody in this House can, how important those people are to us as MHAs, because it is a good part of an MHA's responsibility and his work, is to liaise with municipal councils. It is on their shoulders rests the responsibility of trying to sustain the calibre of life in those communities, and to provide services, and they are very important people, and they provide a very important service, and they are to be commended for offering themselves. I look forward to continuing the good relationship that I have with these municipalities, and to help them grow their communities and provide the much needed services that their communities need.

Mr. Speaker, we have seen a tremendous turnaround in the Placentia-Long Harbour area. It has gone through several lean years since the close of the naval base and the closing of the phosphorous plant in Long Harbour, we have seen, in the Placentia-Long Harbour area, we have seen a devastation in terms of our population; it has dropped probably in half. We have seen businesses boarded up; we have seen infrastructure crumbling.

Mr. Speaker, I want to at this time, publicly, pay my tribute to those stakeholders who stuck with it - stuck with it and saw it through the lean times. I am talking about the town councils, the Argentia Chamber of Commerce, the business people in the area, the Argentia Management Authority and the small businesses and contractors who stuck with it in the poor times and lean times because, Mr. Speaker, unlike the response of this government to Central Newfoundland's situation, for example, there was no such response of previous governments to the economic deprivation in the Argentia area. There was no ministerial taskforce came from previous governments out to Argentia to help them alleviate the situation. They were left on their own resources to do it. They saw some lean times. They saw some lean times, but they kept preaching the positive word: Things will get better. It has turned around, Mr. Speaker, and for them I am delighted.

Mr. Speaker, no doubt that Vale Inco was the catalyst for that; Vale Inco was the catalyst for that. The Opposition will take some credit for Vale Inco, and rightly so, and I do not deny them that. In addition to Vale Inco and what they have done for that area, our government has stepped up to the plate in spades to supplement and complement what Vale Inco is doing - unprecedented spending. Unprecedented spending in that area this year.

In that triangle between Whitbourne, Long Harbour and Argentia, we are looking at over $40 million of government investment in that area this year. That not only will benefit that area, that will benefit the whole district because we already have people from the Cape Shore and Branch and St. Mary's Bay working in that area. It will benefit the district and it will also benefit the Province because we have people coming from all directions now to that site, hence the need for that investment.

I was particularly interested, Mr. Speaker, to attend a hydromet conference held in Placentia in September, which they hold every year. They bring all the businesses and companies together who have interest in the Long Harbour site. It was amazing to see the number of high-powered companies that want a piece of the Long Harbour action. When we talk about the site and the development of the Long Harbour project, we tend to forget the service and supply industries that feed off of it and that that will need over the next twenty-five years. It was just so positive to see that and the attitude that was there and the interest that they had.

Mr. Speaker, remember now, this is all rural Newfoundland. I have a rural district; this is rural Newfoundland. So it is upsetting to hear the old adage: We are doing nothing for rural Newfoundland. My district is proof positive, Mr. Speaker, proof positive what we did in rural Newfoundland, and I am sure every MHA in this House can stand up and say likewise. Every MHA in this House can stand up and say likewise.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: I think the figure was mentioned earlier - 80 per cent of the infrastructure spending has been spent in rural Newfoundland. My district is not unique. My district is not unique, not alone.

I do not have time to mention all the numerous smaller grants from $1,000 to $30,000, $15,000, $5,000 that are spent in the small communities. These grants, Mr. Speaker, are more important to the small communities. Five thousand dollars to put a roof on community centre, to fence a playground, to fix up a wharf, these are important spending and while they do not amount to much in dollars, they are so important to the communities of rural Newfoundland and we have to continue that.

There are several other things we could reference, and I do not know if we have time for another speaker or not, Mr. Speaker, but I just want to mention a couple of things. Education, of course, all the money we are spending in education. We have $13 million state of the art school presently under construction in Placentia. All the money spent in health care, all in rural Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, my time is up, so I want to close with another quote from the Speech from the Throne to demonstrate the leadership this Premier and this government is showing. For Newfoundlanders and Labradorians this is a moment to take pride, not merely in what we have done, but more importantly in who we are. We are determined to stand strong as leaders in this federation, proud of our achievements and confident in our future. Let the naysayers be warned, we will not be stopped short of success.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With that, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Transportation and Works, that the House do now adjourn.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is properly moved and seconded that this House do now adjourn.

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

This House now stands adjourned until 2:00 of the clock tomorrow, being Wednesday, Private Members' Day.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, at 2:00 p.m.