The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

MR. SPEAKER: Today we have members' statements from the Member for the District of Torngat Mountains; the Member for the District of Humber West; the Member for the District of Mount Pearl North; the Member for the District of Mount Pearl South; the Member for the District of Bay of Islands; and the Member for the District of Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair.

The Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to pay tribute to the founding fathers of the Nunatsiavut Government.

Mr. Speaker, it was the efforts of people like Mr. Martin Martin, Mr. Jerry Sillett, Mr. Sam Andersen, and I am very proud to say, my father, Mr. Bill Edmunds, who originally pushed for recognition of Inuit in Northern Labrador. Their efforts began early in the 1970s and it was through their persistence and their dedication on behalf of Inuit that there is now a regional Inuit government in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, although those individuals did not live to see the results of their efforts, they laid a solid foundation for the future through challenging times and personal sacrifice. They had a vision for their children and their grandchildren – a vision that would provide them with improved health facilities, a better education, and more career opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members in this House to join me in honouring these Inuit elders who paved the way for the foundation of the Nunatsiavut Government.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Humber West.

MR. GRANTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to stand in this House and congratulate Terri Woods-Boone on being selected to sail to the Arctic this summer, as the 2012 Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation scholarship winner. The award is an all-expenses-paid, two-week expedition to the Eastern Canadian Arctic with eighty other youth from around the world.

The Grade 9 student from Corner Brook won the award because of her commitment to the community and as a peer role model. Terri volunteers as a tutor at Dunfield Park Community Centre; helps supervise the Kids Eat Smart Program; and has attended several workshops on teen suicide prevention, drug awareness and prevention, bullying awareness, mental health and addictions, and first aid.

The expedition program educates students on climate change and other environmental, social, and geopolitical issues. Terri will participate in hands-on research activities while accompanied by a team of scientists, historians, educators, and polar experts.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Terri Woods-Boone on her achievements to date, and wish her well on her Eastern Arctic Summer Expedition.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate the members of the Girls 4A Provincial Indoor Soccer teams from O'Donel and Mount Pearl Senior High for respectively placing first and second in the Provincial Indoor Soccer Tournament.

Being involved in sports and athletics is vital in ensuring a healthy lifestyle. Young people are challenged today more than ever to be active. In a world that is largely based on technology, it takes effort to encourage our youth to get off the couch, put down the game controller, the mouse, or the cellphone and get moving.

I was thrilled to hear that both O'Donel and Mount Pearl Senior High represented Mount Pearl and Paradise in such high form at the recent Provincial Indoor Soccer Tournament, taking both first and second place. I would also like to congratulate all teams who attended the provincial tournament.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating the Girls 4A Provincial Indoor Soccer teams from O'Donel High and Mount Pearl Senior High for a great showing at the provincial tournament, and I wish them all the best for their future competitions.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Mount Pearl South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand in this hon. House to offer congratulations to a group of individuals who have made a tremendous contribution to sport in my community. The Mount Pearl Sports Hall of Fame was founded in 1995 by the Mount Pearl Sport Alliance. Since that time, it has inducted sixty-one tremendous individuals.

Today, I would like to acknowledge the achievements of five others. Gary Martin and the late Nellie Devereaux have been inducted into the Athlete-Builder category; Don Kelly in the Builder category; and the Special Olympics', the late Janet Maher; and hockey, soccer, and ball hockey player Patrick O'Keefe in the Athlete category. I would also like to acknowledge the 1990 Mount Pearl Under 16 Girls All-Star Soccer team who have been added to the team honour roll.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask all members of this hon. House to join me in congratulating these individuals on this significant accomplishment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bay of Islands.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the contribution of the McIvers Community Improvement Club.

Forty years ago, a group of women came together with the objective of raising money to improve the Town of McIvers, an objective which they have certainly achieved. Mr. Speaker, the club has raised over $100,000 and funds raised are used to cover the general maintenance cost and upgrades of the town hall. They give yearly donations to the McIvers Volunteer Fire Department and the Epiphany Anglican Church. The club also provides assistance of up to $500 a year to residents who have to travel outside the area for medical reasons. The club has also established a scholarship valued at $500 awarded annually to a Grade 12 student from McIver's attending Templeton Academy in Meadows.

Current members of the club include: Bernetta Park, Angela Lawrence, Ester Park, Vivian Blanchard, Glynis Park, Tina Pennell, Patsy Lovell, Beverly White, Kim Lovell, Marjorie Lovell, Vonnie Lovell, Krista Ricketts, Chris Blanchard, Rhoda Blanchard, Marion Pitcher, Marlene Lavhey, Karen Parsons, Bernice Parsons, Linda Wells, Doilie Burridge, Sheila Wheeler, Pauline George, Millie George, Maxine White, and Cindy Park.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join me in offering congratulations to the club as they celebrate their 40th anniversary and thank them for their continued service to the town and its citizens.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in the House to congratulate Ms Regan Burden, a fabulous young woman from my district who was awarded the URock Volunteer Award this past weekend in St. John's. This award recognizes the outstanding ways that young people give back to their community.

Regan, a Level I student at Bayside Academy in Port Hope Simpson, has certainly given back tremendously at such a young age. She has been volunteering on behalf of her community and her school since she was eleven years old.

Regan is a member of the Port Hope Simpson Recreation Committee, the student council, she sits on the advisory committee for preventing the cycle of drug use, and she is the founder and president of the Port Hope Simpson Environmental Club. She also organized the Shave for the Brave in 2011 and 2012, and participated by shaving her head. She is a member of the Junior Canadian Rangers and her team has done numerous cleanup projects in the community, and participated in bringing firewood to the sick and the elderly. Regan has been involved in various fundraising and recreational events for her community. She volunteers twice weekly with younger children's recreational activities, and she helps daily with the Kids Eat Smart Program.

I ask members of the House to join me in congratulating Regan Burden on being such a well-deserving recipient of the URock Volunteer Award.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

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

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to provide an update on an important early childhood learning initiative presently underway in this Province. As I have noted previously in this hon. House, we have begun implementation of an early childhood learning strategy, called Learning From the Start, which will include initiatives for children up to age six. Last year, we committed $4.8 million over three years with an initial focus on programs and services for children from birth to age three.

Mr. Speaker, one of those initiatives involves the distribution of resource kits to parents at key points in their child's early development. We have recently begun a pilot project in partnership with regional health authorities, where the first three resource kits are being provided to parents as their child turns two months, four months, and six months old, as part of their normal public health clinic visits. About seventy-five nurses received orientation and are participating in the pilot project, which is currently being offered at twenty public health sites. Following an evaluation of the pilot, Province-wide distribution of the kits will occur next year.

Meanwhile, we are finalizing the development of more resource kits aimed at parents of children aged twelve, eighteen, twenty-four, and thirty-six months old. They too will be piloted, with a view to Province-wide implementation over the next three years.

Mr. Speaker, these kits contain vital information for parents on how to ensure their child has the best possible start in life. They also include play materials, books, and CDs designed to support parents in their efforts to help their child develop the emotional, social, and language skills that will form the foundation of all future learning.

There is more brain development between the ages of birth and age three than at any other time in our lives, Mr. Speaker. So, while we are just at the beginning stage of this project, we look forward to seeing these important resources eventually get into the hands and homes of every new parent in this Province.

It is parents, Mr. Speaker, who are every child's first teachers. It is therefore important that we give them information and tools which will help their child develop skills that will prepare them well for school and for life.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo – La Poile.

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

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Certainly, I am glad to see this early childhood learning strategy program starting up. I think we can all agree that with parents being the first teachers, the better parents that we have, the better children that we are going have moving up through the system.

I hope the pilot is proven successful and I hope that it is going to be made available to everyone in this Province. I think overall it is a good it is a good strategy. I have some questions as to certain aspects of it, such as the blankets, which is a $60,000 price tag which might be better useful maybe in school lunch programs or something along those lines. Certainly, the fact that the blankets are being sent to everybody, regardless of income bracket, again I might question as to whether it could be better served to place that money elsewhere, but overall I think the strategy is a step in the right direction. The studies are showing that this brain development is occurring between zero and three. Anything we can do to make our parents better parents and provide better support for our children is only going to help this Province in the long run. I am happy to speak to this.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

I welcome this initiative but it is one small measure towards where we need to go with early learning and care in this Province. We know that any investment in early childhood education brings a big return. We also note this Province is currently ranked lowest in the country in this area. I agree with this minister when he says that children must have the best possible start in life, and I hope this minister will agree with me when I say that parents should not have to pay $60-and-more per day for one single, regulated child care space, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is dedicated to the conservation and management of wildlife in the Province, built on the common principle of sustainability. An important component of our conservation efforts is our health monitoring programs for big game which provide essential information on harvested animals.

Resident caribou hunters in Labrador were asked to participate in the caribou health monitoring program by submitting carcass samples from George River caribou killed during this year's hunting season. I am pleased to report the success of our campaign this season, Mr. Speaker, with a total of 181 sample kits returned to the provincial government for analysis.

With the recent decline of the George River herd, it is crucial that as much information as possible be collected and analyzed to ensure the long-term sustainability of these animals. The monitoring program is an important mechanism through which we gather information on the age and overall health of the declining herd.

For the past several years, Mr. Speaker, hunters in our Province were provided with kits and asked to provide samples from the harvested animals, the most common of course being the jawbones. Hunters also responded to the request this year in Labrador to collect other samples such as leg bones and blood samples. These additional samples will allow estimation of pregnancy rates, pathogen/parasite information, as well as genetic analyses - important information for a population in decline.

In 2010, Mr. Speaker, the population of the George River herd was estimated at approximately 74,000 animals, representing a significant decline from the previous census estimate of 350,000 animals in 2001. Conservation measures for the herd were announced including the suspension of the commercial caribou hunt, non-resident caribou hunting through the use of outfitters, and the resident caribou licence transfer system for Labrador residents. Additionally, the allowable harvest was reduced to one caribou per licensed hunter from the former limit of two. Conservation measures were further enhanced in the 2011-2012 season with the overall length of the hunting season for resident licence holders shortened from eight months to three months.

Mr. Speaker, we must continue to work collaboratively with hunters and all stakeholders to help ensure the future of this important herd and its place in the lives of Labradorians and the Province as a whole.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Mr. Speaker, I am glad to see initiatives being undertaken by the department to gain as much insight into the health of our caribou populations, especially since the George River caribou herd is still in decline.

Mr. Speaker, I agree that this information is crucial, and it is much needed as we strive to play our part in the health of our caribou. I again would like to thank the hunters for participating in this program. It greatly contributes to the biology of the caribou.

Mr. Speaker, one thing that we have seen in the form of conservation that has never been mentioned, is sadly with the decline in the caribou populations, accessibility by hunters is becoming much more difficult and that is based purely on the numbers that are out there now. Mr. Speaker, the George River caribou herd is an important part of the food supply to the Aboriginal community of our Province as well as others. I feel comfortable in saying that the Aboriginal community in this Province are prepared to co-operate with government in trying to protect this food resource, Mr. Speaker, so it does have much more importance.

I think, Mr. Speaker, there is still room for more measures. I think a total allowable harvest, as the minister stated in Estimates, is an option that is being considered. The other issue, Mr. Speaker, is the people in our Province are prepared to come forward but there are still issues with harvesters outside of our Province harvesting in Newfoundland and Labrador with very little or no regulation. These are just some of the issues that I have brought forward, and I am glad to see the department is taking measures to work towards conservation of our caribou.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would also like to thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. My thanks as well to those hunters who have participated in this study along with government; it was a great collaborative measure. Caribou amongst other species are under extreme pressures, not only by nature's forces like coyote but also through the pressure being exerted on them by humans. We should be aware that part of the pressure to the Labrador herds will be by the Muskrat Falls Project, as well as through hunting and their own changing environment.

We must be ever vigilant in caring for our natural resources like wildlife and be aware that they own this earth too. We may be the stewards, but we have to do all that we can to protect them from harm.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have asked the government in this House several times now about the debt-to-equity ratio for Muskrat Falls on the financing for Muskrat Falls. As you know, this is very important because it will let the people of the Province know how much they will eventually be on the hook for.

I ask the Premier: Do you have a better understanding now of what the debt-to-equity ratio is for Muskrat Falls?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I have had discussions with Mr. Ed Martin of Nalcor as to the financing model being used in this particular project and the debt-equity ratio. Mr. Martin has indicated that the way the project is proposed to be funded is not unusual in utilities, in that essentially what you have is a situation where the asset will pay for itself over a period of time. What you try to do is ensure that neither at the beginning or the end does one group of people bear too much of a burden.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: The reason why I ask the question is because the burden, the financial responsibility, will be within the next five years. It is going to be extremely important to this Province how much we will have to put into that, either through loan or through cash.

The debt-to-equity ratio is not about the Decision Gate 3 numbers or the Decision Gate 2 numbers, really. This would have been established through the initial meetings with the financial institutions. The CEO of Nalcor stated that it would have been from 57 per cent to 43 per cent equity, and that is if indeed it stays on budget. This would mean about at least $2 billion in equity.

Can you provide us an update on how much has been spent to date and how much of this will be considered our equity portion?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I met with the bankers in Toronto in terms of the funding of the Muskrat Falls development. What they have indicated to me – and I have said it previously in this House – is that until they are ready to go to market, until that point is reached, that final numbers will not be known. Until they know the final numbers, these ratios cannot be calculated.

The other thing they told me is that they have looked at the project and they have complete confidence in Ed Martin and his team at Nalcor. They told us that it would be likely our bonds would sell very briskly. One even said they would likely be sold out in fifteen minutes.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Really what I was looking for was an update on what Mr. Martin had said about two months ago, and that was his comments about the 57 per cent to 43 per cent.

Nalcor also owns 4.9 per cent equity in Hebron, meaning that we will be responsible for 4.9 per cent of the development cost. Now, as Hebron moves into construction, Nalcor will have to start obviously writing some cheques.

I ask the Premier: How much money will Nalcor spend on the Hebron development over the next five years, and where will this money come from?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Nalcor, indeed, has 4.9 per cent equity in the Hebron development, and that is a very significant equity share for the Province, Mr. Speaker.

The member opposite will note that in the money that was set aside for the equity investment for Nalcor this year, there is $75 million; that $75 million, Mr. Speaker, will go to oil and gas in terms of capital investments and operating expenses.

Last year, there was $348 million set aside as an equity investment in Nalcor, some of which was to go to oil and gas, Mr. Speaker, but Nalcor earned enough money through its other revenues to not need any of that equity. So the $348 million, none of it was used. We are hoping the same will happen again this year, but there is $75 million there available, if needed

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, over a year ago government paid $32.8 million and assumed another $40 million loan obligation for properties through the expropriation of the Abitibi mill. I think that was through SunLife or something, the $40 million. The only company that has been left out of the settlement was Fortis, and government stated that they were the last piece of the puzzle, but the negotiations were ongoing. It has been over a year now since we settled with the other companies.

The question is: What is standing in the way now of a settlement with Fortis?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Opposition Leader asked this question in Estimates yesterday and it was explained to him that discussions are still ongoing with Fortis. There is no resolution of the matter at this point, but that we are always moving towards a resolution and that those discussions, when they are finalized, will be announced.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: The minister is right, we did ask that question; but, we too understand that Nalcor has taken the lead in that negotiation.

So, the question is: Why is Nalcor doing the negotiation since it was government that expropriated the property?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons that Nalcor was set up like it is was to ensure that we have the expertise required in Nalcor. Nalcor then has a number of branches. We have Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and we have the oil and gas company; we have, Mr. Speaker, expertise in various areas. When it comes to negotiations as to hydro, they are the ones, Mr. Speaker, that are in the best position to deal with that. They are the ones who deal with it on a daily basis.

In fact, it is interesting, last week or it might have even been yesterday, in an article out of Nova Scotia, there were some complaints that their power had been turned over to a private company and whether or not it should be made public. What we tried to do in this Province, Mr. Speaker, is incorporate the best of the private and the public. We have Nalcor there, owned wholly by the taxpayer of this Province, so that we will benefit and the Province will benefit as a whole.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: I guess in negotiations what you have also done, in all fairness to the minister, is you have given them the chequebook, because they will determine what the final settlement would be.

Mr. Speaker, in August 2009, government made a $10 million investment in Holson Forest Products to set up a pellet plant in Roddickton. The plant started at reduced production, and only a short while ago, we understand that the plant is not operating at all; there are some operational issues, we understand.

I am just wondering if the government has had any discussion with the owner and what it is going to take to get this operation back on track.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The member opposite is indeed correct that there was a $10 million investment, I think a $7 million loan and a $1 million grant. Mr. Speaker, what we have done over three years is we have provided that money. We wanted to sustain the forest industry in the Northern Peninsula and we went a long ways towards that. As a government, there is only so far you can go; our role is to help people get their businesses going. They then have to find the markets and determine where those markets are. It is my understanding from the Holson situation that there are issues with markets in terms of finding and getting their product to market. We have done what we can; it is now time for that business to stand on its own two feet.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is really nice that if we were in a position, we could actually provide some oversight just to see what the operational issues were.

For a number of years this government has introduced a residential wood pellet rebate program. This was to encourage people to diversify from home heating into wood pellets. We learned in Estimates this week that this program has been cancelled.

I ask the minister: Why was this rebate cut at a time when the forestry industry is looking for government to help with these diversification initiatives?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The reality is that the wood pellet industry in this Province is so small that there is no major industry going to develop. The industry, Mr. Speaker, or the markets, I understand, are in Europe. What we did is we provided the rebate program to get people going and encourage people to use wood pellets, but like anything else in the Budget, decisions have to be made, Mr. Speaker. We have to look at where we are going to put our money. This year we decided not to continue with that program; the pellet industry should be on its feet by now and we are hoping that it will continue to develop and it will find the markets needed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, many people have to travel outside of the Province to access medical services and procedures that are not available in Newfoundland and Labrador, or the wait-list in our Province may be too long. I am dealing with several cases today where the financial burden of medical travel has left patients and their family members without the ability to pay for services like child care, medical supplies, accommodations, and many of the other out-of-pocket expenses. I notice that government did not allocate any additional resources to the program this year.

I ask the minister if there is any review of the out-of-Province medical travel program ongoing, or if she is prepared to have a look at this program to see if it is continuing to meet the needs of the families and patients who are using it.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, our MTAP, the Medical Transportation Assistance Program, is one of the most comprehensive programs in the country. We continue to provide transportation assistance, assistance for accommodations, and assistance for meals, depending on certain eligibility requirements and so on. We continuously evaluate our programs, Mr. Speaker, and we had done that this year, in fact.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, with the in-Province medical program, we are always getting a number of issues raised with us as well. One of them is that under the program, people can claim sixteen cents per kilometre for each kilometre they drive in excess of 2,500 kilometres. Meanwhile, a round trip from Port aux Basques or from St. Barbe to St. John's is less than 2,000 kilometres, so people can only make a claim part way through the second trip.

I ask you, minister: Have you given any thought to eliminating the 2,500 kilometre barrier or at least lowering it so that people are eligible to make claims under this program when they have to travel back and forth to St. John's?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we in fact did reduce the kilometres. At one point not very long ago it was 5,000 kilometres; it is now reduced down to 2,500 kilometres. We are continuing to make investments in this program on an ongoing basis.

When it comes to doing this, we are talking about budgeting; we are talking about making decisions. In health care, we have to make some tough decisions sometimes. We are constantly reviewing this program. We consider it to be one of the best programs in Canada and others throughout the country have told us it is one of the best programs as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

More and more people in our Province are having to seek medical services in the St. John's area. More and more people in our Province are being referred outside of the Province for key procedures and services. We are commonly getting those complaints in terms of the medical travel program not meeting the patient and their family's needs at this time. One of those examples was with regard to the amount of money that is paid out for meal allowances or per diems. If you are in the Province it is $29 a day, if you go outside of the Province it is $43 a day, for example, in Halifax; yet, Mr. Speaker, when we looked at the consumer price levels between Halifax and St. John's, there was absolutely no difference.

I ask the minister: Why would there be such a discrepancy in terms of that –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, MTAP – the Medical Transportation Assistance Program – is one of the ways that we continue to help patients in Newfoundland and Labrador who need to avail of services in other communities.

Mr. Speaker, one of the other things that we do, and one of the other investments that we continuously make is to invest in infrastructure and health care facilities right throughout rural Newfoundland and Labrador. A great example of that is what we are doing with dialysis. At one time we had seven sites in Newfoundland and Labrador where dialysis was available, we now have fourteen.

Mr. Speaker, we look at a variety of means to try to accommodate the needs of patients in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo – La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, last week the minister said that while they signed youth service agreements with sixteen year olds in need of protective intervention, the youth are responsible for finding their own accommodations. At the age of sixteen you cannot buy alcohol or vote, but you can live on your own; however, the department assumes that the youth are responsible for finding their own accommodations.

I ask the minister: Do you think it is acceptable to ask sixteen-year-old youth, who are already in need of protective intervention, to find their own living accommodations?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The research around this shows it is best to enable youth to help them to make their own decisions. Not only do we help facilitate accommodations, but we do so with life skills, job hunting skills, and all sorts of things. We have gone ahead and helped youth find accommodations, Mr. Speaker, but oftentimes they then turn them down. So, again, it is an enabling role, and yes, Mr. Speaker, we will certainly be there to help them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo – La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: We asked some questions on this last week, Mr. Speaker, in terms of enabling. We had a social worker at the department who actually found an apartment for a sixteen year old that turned out to be a safety hazard, the window would not open and the door had no lock.

I would ask the minister: How is it that officials from your department are involved in locating the rooms for the youth but there is no one providing oversight on the actual quality of these accommodations?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is very difficult to speak to individual cases, and there are a lot of youth under our Youth Services Agreement. Certainly if he does have a constituent who has an issue like that and safety is of concern, absolutely, contact my office. He has done it before. I have helped him in the past. That is what we are here for, is to help the youth of the Province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo - La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, many of our youth and most vulnerable populations live in boarding houses; meanwhile, the Residential Tenancies Act does not provide protection for tenants in boarding houses.

I ask the minister: What is being done to address this gap in the Residential Tenancies Act, which provides no protection to our vulnerable populations?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, the Residential Tenancies Act in Newfoundland and Labrador is designed to operate and function for all landlords and all tenants. Any time there is a relationship between people who rent properties and people who own the properties, the Residential Tenancies Act applies and helps develop and guide the relationship that occurs between the two. It also has a dispute solving resolution process as well that is available to both landlords and tenants who have a grievance against the other party.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, home inspectors in this Province are not required to be licensed. Anyone can call themselves a home inspector without proper training and education. Mr. Speaker, we have heard many times of consumers buying homes and getting caught with houses that are full of deficiencies, including mould, because they were not properly inspected.

I ask the minister: Will this government step forward and introduce licensing of home inspectors to protect homebuyers in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, the investment in a home, in most cases for people, is the most important investment and most significant investment people in Newfoundland and Labrador will ever make for themselves and for their families. It is a very serious process.

We encourage all people who are engaging in the process of purchasing a home to engage professionals who are qualified and competent to deal with the different aspects of purchasing a home, if it be legal services, financial services, and home inspection services. We depend on the consumer in Newfoundland and Labrador to ensure that they are receiving and availing of the proper services that are going to meet their needs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, the provinces of British Columbia and Alberta have already introduced mandatory licensing of home inspectors, and Quebec is in the process of doing so, to protect consumers.

I ask the minister: Does he believe that this Province deserves the same level of protection as those in other provinces when it comes to buying a home?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are afforded protection in this Province, and so they should be afforded protection in this Province. It is also incumbent upon the people who are engaged in activities for all types of consumer transactions to ensure that they are engaging in those transactions that are going to protect their own best interests. That is the regulations and the processes we have in this Province. I have spoken to home inspectors. I am aware of some of the concerns that are expressed by some home inspectors in Newfoundland and Labrador, and I have had discussions with them.

It is a good matter that the member brings up today. I encourage the people of Newfoundland and Labrador: if you are going to engage any type of professional service that you, for your own protection, ensure that the company, the business, the individual that you are retaining to operate on your behalf is the right person who is going to meet your needs.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

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

In 2008, the Auditor General noted his concerns regarding contaminated sites in the Province and the impact that these potential liabilities may have on the Province's overall financial picture. He recommended recording the clean up cost in the Province's financial statements. It is now four years later and we still have no accountability.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Will this government commit to presenting the Province with a clear financial picture that takes into consideration the true cost of environmental liabilities for the clean up of these sites?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the hon. member for the question, because it gives me a chance to explain to the hon. member some of the things that we have done over the last number of years when it comes to clean up sites in this Province, Mr. Speaker. It is very unfortunate that we have a legacy of some of these sites in the Province.

This is a government, Mr. Speaker, who reacts. I say to the hon. member opposite, she only has to go to Buchans, for example, and see what we have done, a significant investment by government over a number of years. Mr. Speaker, speak to my fellow colleague from Torngat, where we see the community of Hopedale with an over $6.25 million investment; $6.25 million spent last year, $2.05 million this year, and $2.05 million next year.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

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

In Estimates yesterday we learned that there is an interest expressed in the mothballed Abitibi paper mill in Grand Falls, an ongoing interest, I understand. Clean up of that site has been estimated as costing over $100 million. The dispute with the former owners over who pays the tab remains unresolved.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Will the $100 million clean up costs be included in the price paid by any future operator, or will the cost be borne by the people of this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we would not move to clean up an industrial site until it has been decided that site would no longer be used for the purpose it was intended. The business case, what we are trying to do is encourage another use for that facility in Grand Falls, something hopefully to do with the forestry industry. We are going to make that as attractive as we can based on a cost benefit analysis to the people, particularly of the central part of the Province. At the end of the day we are left with the responsibility, unless the Supreme Court of Canada rules something different, and the site will be cleaned up eventually.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This summer we will see oil companies drilling in the Orphan Basin, possibly setting another record for deepwater drilling in Canada. Mr. Speaker, a report commissioned by government and released last year showed this government to be utterly unprepared to deal with a deepwater blowout off our coast.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: What steps is her government taking to address this possible threat to our fragile marine ecosystem?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The protection of the environment is one of the primary concerns of this government. It is one of the reasons, Mr. Speaker, we are promoting the Muskrat Falls project: it is clean, green, renewable energy.

In relation to the oil exploration that is ongoing, let me remind the member opposite that right now, oil revenues are accounting to 30 per cent, 40 per cent of our revenues, so all of these programs that the NDP ask every day for us to put in place – everything from our poverty reduction to our medical transportation, Mr. Speaker – that money comes from oil. There has to be an environment where we balance the protection and safety of the individual first, secondly the environment, but we also have to ensure that we are open to do business.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let us have a little lesson in history and the dangers of deepwater drilling. It has been two years since the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Mr. Speaker, no matter what the industry says, they have yet to prove that they have the ability to deal with a Deepwater Horizon-type incident, the effects of which are still being felt all over the Gulf of Mexico, yet this government is still willing to let these companies endanger our oceans.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Is our government closing their eyes to the risks and hoping for the best, or is this simply a case of out of sight, out of mind?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the Leader of the Third Party is proposing that we shut down our offshore projects. It sounds like it. We are going to have to double the size of that calculator then, Mr. Speaker, given that over a third of our revenue comes from oil and gas. One of the reasons we laid out our vision of the economic future of Newfoundland and Labrador being in green energy, Mr. Speaker, is for the very fact that we know that these are non-renewables and in twenty years or thirty years, our children will be asking, what is a Hibernia. We have to find alternate ways to drive our economy. One of our greatest resources is the ability to generate green energy, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a great segue, talking about green energy and green jobs, Mr. Speaker. The tires that have accumulated in this Province are an excellent opportunity to create employment in areas that are plagued with unemployment.

Mr. Speaker, Alberta, amongst other provinces, has figured out what to do with their stockpile of used tires. Companies have been provided with incentives to use recycled tires in producing walking tracks, rubber mats, asphalt, and other products.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the question: Rather than waiting to ship these tires to Quebec, why hasn't government taken action and created incentives for industry to use these tires and create green jobs in this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am delighted to get up and speak about the tire situation, Mr. Speaker. We have taken all kinds of questions over the years about tires here in the House of Assembly. I am proud to report we finally have a solution for our tires. We have a yard in Placentia, Mr. Speaker, that is costing this government about $1 million a year. We are now in the process of moving these tires to Quebec. We are in the process of shipping them out.

Hopefully, Mr. Speaker, I invite the hon. member that some time next year we will watch the last tire truck through the gate and we save $1 million a year, Mr. Speaker. I welcome the hon. member out for the last truck to wave goodbye to it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, by the way the minister is talking, I will have a nice green space to set up my pup tent.

Mr. Speaker, at any given moment in this Province there are over 100 boil water advisories issued by this government. Many of these boil water advisories have existed for years and many people have had to resort to using bottled water, springs, and other untested water supplies.

Mr. Speaker, it is unacceptable in this day and age to expect people to continue living in this way, so when does the government plan to address this ongoing problem and can they give us an update on the situation?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member obviously has not been following the investments of Municipal Affairs in municipal infrastructure over the last number of years – $500 million in municipal infrastructure mainly in the water area, I say to the hon. member. He certainly has forgotten about our PWDU system in regard to providing proper water to the residents of municipal communities in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, as I said and I will finish off – maybe I should say it to you in this way, and I should have probably said it first: If you need a pup tent, I will buy you a family tent, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, not surprisingly, the word green does not appear anywhere in government's Outlook 2020 labour market report. Any forward looking government would have a plan to prepare for a green economy workforce.

So I ask the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills: What worker training programs are in place for energy efficiency, green waste management, environmental mediation, and other green industries?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I think the hon. member who just asked a question has no idea what Outlook 2020 is all about.

The document that was produced last year by this government for Outlook 2020 is able to position the Province and explain – do the analysis of where we are in our economy today, and as we look out, where the labour market gaps will be, to help us prepare for the future.

Mr. Speaker, we have some major resource developments on the horizon in this Province. We also have an aging population where people are going to retire. As a Province, we need to understand that. So we developed the appropriate policies and programs to help the people in this Province have the opportunity to attach to the labour market.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for The Straits – White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, 50,000 tons of pellets produced at Holson Forest Products can take approximately 11,000 homes off the grid. Mr. Speaker, after a $10 million investment, this government has cancelled its rebate plan, despite a promise revamped plan in the Tory Blue Book.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister why this government is not protecting their investment, pursuing and converting to pellets public buildings to create a local demand and save on energy costs.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the rebate program was in place for a period of time, and we invested money in it. From 2008 to 2011, there were 562 rebates at an average of $582 each. As we pointed out earlier in the question asked by the Official Opposition, Holson Products, there was a $10 million investment. What is it that we are supposed to do as a government? What our role is, Mr. Speaker, is to encourage development, to assist where we can, but you do not continuously bail someone out. The markets have to be found, Mr. Speaker. After a $10 million investment, I think it is not unfair for us to say, stand on your own two feet.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for The Straits – White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Residential Energy Efficiency Program has been successful in helping a limited number of people who were able to avail of this program to save on their energy costs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Environment and Conservation, why hasn't he offered similar grants for non-profit groups so that they too can save money on their energy costs, freeing up money in their often constrained budgets and help reduce their ecological footprint?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, for a quick answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, in response to the question from across the way, our REEP, which we deliver through housing, is one of the most successful programs that we have.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: It is geared to –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

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

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Ensure Access For Service Animals Used By Persons With Disabilities, Bill 17, and I further move that this said bill be now read the first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of Justice have leave to introduce a bill, An Act To Ensure Access For Service Animals Used By Persons With Disabilities, Bill 17, and the said bill now be read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the minister shall have leave to introduce Bill 17, and that the said bill be now read a first time?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce a bill, "An Act To Ensure Access For Service Animals Used By Persons With Disabilities", carried. (Bill 17)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Ensure Access For Service Animals Used By Persons With Disabilities. (Bill 17)

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

When shall the bill be read a second time?

MR. KENNEDY: On tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 17 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I just read the first bill – this bill should have more appropriately been read under the Orders of the Day. There is a second bill, will I leave that for the Orders of the Day or read it now?

MR. SPEAKER: Read them now.

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

I move, Mr. Speaker, seconded by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Legal Aid Act, Bill 18, and I further move that the said bill be now read the first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. Minister of Justice have leave to introduce a bill, An Act To Amend The Legal Aid Act, Bill 18, and that the bill now be read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the minister shall have leave to introduce Bill 18 and that the said bill be now read a first time?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Legal Aid Act", carried. (Bill 18)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Legal Aid Act. (Bill 18)

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

When shall the bill be read a second time?

MR. KENNEDY: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 18 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I table the following petition.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS there is an identified need for all levels of care in all regions of Labrador; and

WHEREAS the Paddon Home is suitable for all levels of care;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to conduct a needs assessment to identify the needs of all levels of long-term care in Labrador, and to reopen the Paddon Seniors Nursing Home, located in Happy Valley- Goose Bay, to provide all levels of care.

As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, it was good to see initiatives by this government with respect to making allowances for seniors, especially in the areas of licensing and servicing. This is the fourth time that I have tabled this petition, Mr. Speaker, and the level of need for seniors care in Labrador has not diminished by any standards. I am sure the Member for Lake Melville and the Member for Labrador West, as well as my colleague, the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair would attest to, Mr. Speaker. There are very little resources in Labrador for our seniors and we are still seeing a line up for people who are trying to get into the existing seniors facility in Goose Bay.

Mr. Speaker, every Thursday on my way home I drop up to the seniors home in Goose Bay and spend some time with the seniors.

Actually, Mr. Speaker, my grandmother is a resident there. It is good to see the level of care. When you talk to some of the attendants, Mr. Speaker, they inform me about the backlog of people that are trying to get into a seniors' care facility. I point out again that there is a facility there that is not being used; it is a facility that is designed for seniors' care. Mr. Speaker, I urge every member of this House to call upon this government to certainly address the seniors' care issue in Labrador and to reopen the Paddon Home.

Thank you.

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise again on behalf of the Burin Peninsula area to present the petition for the installation of cameras on the Burin Peninsula Highway.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the Burin Peninsula Highway is long and desolate, varying in elevation, with highway conditions that are often difficult, and

WHEREAS this stretch of highway does not have adequate cellphone coverage to allow for quick response times for people in distress who need help; and

WHEREAS this highway has innumerable hazards that have led to the death of travellers in this area; and

WHEREAS no highway cameras are currently operating to let travellers know about road conditions and warn of possible hazards.

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to install cameras on the Burin Peninsula Highway that will allow travellers to check on the road conditions in the area.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I guess this is probably about the sixth or seventh time that I have risen in this House to present this petition, and it is a very important matter to the people of the Burin Peninsula and, in general, the motoring public, as well as tourists that would probably be availing themselves of this particular service.

I think it is important to remember that there are ever-changing conditions on the Burin Peninsula Highway, and at present, there are no cameras that are in the elevated areas of the Burin Peninsula Highway so that travellers and the motoring public would be able to avail themselves of advance notice of road conditions in the area.

This petition, again, is signed by residents of the area: Garnish, Marystown, Mortier Bay, people from St. John's have even signed this one, Lewin's Cove, Burin; I can go on, Mr. Speaker, but I will not. The simple fact is that I believe that it would be a great safety measure and a great, positive step that this government can make by using the effective measure of installing safety cameras for the residents in that area and making them available on the Internet, as they do with other highway cameras. It was a great venture that government started, and we hope that government continues this venture, particularly with the next installation of cameras on the Burin Peninsula.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I bring this petition:

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS with declining enrolment, distance education by Internet is now an accepted way to deliver educational services to students living in small communities; and

WHEREAS students have little to no say in where they or their families reside; and

WHEREAS many families do not have the ability to relocate so that their children can access educational opportunities in larger centres; and

WHEREAS many small businesses rely on the Internet to conduct business; and

WHEREAS high-speed Internet permits a business to be more competitive than the slower dial-up service; and

WHEREAS no high-speed Internet service exists in the community of Highlands; and

WHEREAS there are no plans to offer high-speed Internet to residents of the community of Highlands;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to partner with the private sector and offer high-speed Internet service to these communities.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, the government has made certain strides in producing high-speed Internet to various parts of the Province. When you drill down, as they speak, and look at the numbers, what has been done, and what the cost has been, in 2003 approximately 60 per cent of the people of the Province had high-speed Internet. Now, after spending millions and millions of dollars, 85 per cent of the people of the Province have access to high-speed Internet. Over this period of time, for the last nine years, on the basis of population, we have been able to move up the scale from 60 per cent to 85 per cent. The 15 per cent of the people who are left behind are extremely concerned that they may be left behind forever.

Mr. Speaker, as people observe the Opposition bringing petitions from residents of communities within their own districts, they are coming from other districts. In this case, this is a petition from the community of Highlands asking for high-speed Internet to be extended to their community. The concerns are the same. The reasons are the same. People with children at home clearly want to be able to use high-speed Internet for distance education to obtain educational opportunities not available in smaller communities.

People in small businesses need high-speed Internet to make them competitive. Only within the last few days, we have heard of a small business in a town in this Province closing up because they had to have high-speed Internet. That is why this petition is brought.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise to present a petition regarding needed changes to the Department of Education's school bus transportation policies.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS school district restructuring has resulted in longer bus travel times and more hazardous winter travel for rural students of all ages; and

WHEREAS due to recent school closures, children living within 1.6 kilometres of school face increased barriers of congested streets and busy intersections in the walk to school, and parents without cars are having more difficulty getting children to different schools on foot; and

WHEREAS only those child care centres outside the 1.6 kilometre zone and directly on bus routes are included in the kindergarten noontime routes, causing hardship for working parents; and

WHEREAS the 1.6 kilometre policy has been in place since 1975 and student transportation policies have not been reviewed through public consultation since 1996; and

WHEREAS parents are expressing the need for more flexible policies for student transportation and school restructuring to meet the current needs of school children.

We the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to conduct a review of school bus transportation policies and school restructuring to ensure safe and quality education for all school children in the Province.

As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I have spoken in the past about the need for, perhaps a graduated system of school busing as opposed to the regulations that we have now. So you begin to think about it, children from kindergarten to Grade 3 would have one regulation, or one distance that would apply to them, then children in the next set of grades, let's say Grades 4 to 6, would have another applicable school bus regulation and children who are older would have another regulation. That way, those children who are smallest, the littlest ones who have the most difficulty navigating the dangerous streets and busy intersections would have an opportunity to be bused. Also, one of the things that is becoming clear to me as more and more parents contact me about this petition is that we need set rules for children who are being bused to and from child care and we need rules that really are more friendly to today's working parents.

I urge the members of the House of Assembly to hear the pleas of these petitioners and call this review as soon as possible.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits – White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the need for cellular coverage is far reaching in the District of The Straits – White Bay North; and

WHEREAS there is limited cellphone coverage in Route 430 from St. Anthony Airport to St. Anthony and there is little to no cellphone coverage in the communities surrounding Route 432, Route 433, Route 434, Route 435, Route 436, Route 437, and Route 438; and

WHEREAS residents of these communities require cellphone coverage to ensure their safety and communication abilities; and

WHEREAS the residents of The Straits – White Bay North district feel the Department of Innovation, Business and Rural Development should also develop incentives for further investment in cellular phone coverage for rural Newfoundland and Labrador;

We the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to support the residents of The Straits – White Bay North district in their request to obtain adequate cellular phone coverage in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

I present this petition on behalf of the petitioners from Conche, from Roddickton, from Hawke's Bay. We have quite a number of people who realize that cellular phone coverage is a basic need today in terms of being able to communicate and for safety. The residents who live in the district and also in many parts of Newfoundland and Labrador are calling for this action, Mr. Speaker. It certainly is essential and we should be able to work out a plan to provide better inclusive coverage of cellphone service.

Just in debate last night when we were talking about you have to be careful what you say on the Open Line shows and what you are promoting about there, the level of service we have, that it could impact the tourism industry. Mr. Speaker, I certainly would not want tourists coming to my district with the anticipation that they are going to get phenomenal cell coverage, because they are not. If there is a medical emergency, if there are different things that need to be there, they are not going to get it. It is the same thing with many other aspects of the district.

We do not want people coming to the district and then going back and promoting to hundreds and thousands of their friends via the social media and Facebook or Twitter, in that forum, and letting people know once they get to a cellphone area how poor the coverage is, or how inaccessible it is for certain providers. Certain competitors here have a true monopoly when it comes to building a ubiquitous network. We do not have that in the entire Province. I present this on behalf of the petitioners as a call to truly develop an advanced telecommunication strategy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Orders of the Day.

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

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

I move, seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that the House not adjourn at 5:30 o'clock today, Mr. Speaker, Tuesday, May 15, 2012.

I further move, Mr. Speaker, seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that the House not adjourn at 10:00 o'clock today, Tuesday, May 15, 2012.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that the House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 15, 2012; and, it has been further moved that the House not adjourn at 10:00 o'clock p.m. on Tuesday, May 15, 2012.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, I call from the Order Paper, Motion 1, to move that this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government, the Budget Speech.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very pleased to stand here today and speak to this amendment and the Budget of 2012, People and Prosperity.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday it was interesting to be here and listen to the various members speak pro and con on Budget 2012. As I reflect on yesterday, it is always interesting to see the pros and the cons. Some of the things that I reflect on yesterday – and sometimes it just kind of blows me away when I hear it; it is nearly like the Nike commercial, only it relates to money: just spend, just spend it, do it, get it done, spend it. Whether it be ferries, whether it be on social programming, whether it be on housing, it was just a matter of spending it, Mr. Speaker. I do not know if the Nike saying is just do it; but it seems to be the way: just do it. That is the way it is, just spend it and have it over with; no matter what the cost is, no matter what the implications, just spend it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who said that?

MR. LITTLEJOHN: I do not know. I heard that here yesterday.

Again, it is just that old attitude of just spend, spend, spend, Mr. Speaker. The other comment I heard yesterday was that this government is flush with cash. Well, when you are running your household, Mr. Speaker, you always try to have cash on hand for the unexpected. You could have to repair your roof, you may have to replace your car, unexpected travel, or someone could get sick.

AN HON. MEMBER: Education for your kids.

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Education for your kids – all these things, unexpected things, Mr. Speaker. You know at the end of the day you always want something to go back to. I have to compliment the Minister of Finance for doing just that, because you never know. We do not know what the world is going to throw at us or the Province is going to have to deal with come a day, a month, a week, a year from now, Mr. Speaker.

I recall Hurricane Igor. Look at the damage that Igor did. Mr. Speaker, if I recall correctly there was mass devastation in your district when Igor came through. If we did not have the ability to respond to that with some much-needed cash in reserve, I do not know what we would have done during Igor. Your district was a good example of that, Mr. Speaker.

You cannot just go about emptying the cupboards. The cupboards cannot always be empty. You have to have some reserve. I think we have made the point here today that we do not know in life in general when we are going to need that reserve. You cannot empty the cupboards.

We have a record since we came to government in 2003 of being responsible: being responsible to the people of this Province, and being responsible to the people who elect us. Mr. Speaker, let me assure the people of this Province that we will continue to be responsible with our money. We will certainly be responsible with our money and we will keep money in a rainy-day fund, if I could use that word.

Also, Mr. Speaker, I heard the Minister of Municipal Affairs speak so passionately yesterday about being sustainable. We hear it all the time from that minister. It is so important that we be sustainable and that we sustain what we can do. You cannot live beyond your means, Mr. Speaker; therefore you cannot spend beyond your means. I think it is a good point that everybody out there listening today needs to understand: you cannot live beyond your means.

As well, Mr. Speaker, when you are responsible and you are sustainable, I think that gives you credibility with the people. That makes you credible with the institutions you work with. I am sure when the Minister of Finance goes to the banks, the money markets, and all the rest, they look at how credible he is and this Province is. They are not going to give us money, Mr. Speaker, if we do not have credibility. The minister has been very clear when he spoke to the lending agencies. Standard & Poor's has given us our highest rating ever. Those people believe that we are doing a good job and they believe that the Minister of Finance, the Premier, and this government is doing a good job in being responsible with our money.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Speaker, I do not know where this doom and gloom attitude comes from at times. I do not know where it comes from at times; because, to be fair, I do not hear it a whole lot. Most people who I speak with are pretty happy with how Newfoundland and Labrador is progressing. Most people are happy with how they are seen by the rest of this country and the world at this point in time.

Mr. Speaker, we just went through, and we are continuing to go through, a debt crisis throughout Europe and the money markets in fluctuation all the time. Do you know what? We have survived those, Mr. Speaker. We are a beacon, Mr. Speaker. We really did not get hit with the debt crisis. I do not know where the doom and gloom comes from all the time.

Mr. Speaker, when you get down to it and you pull on the heartstrings and you do all that stuff, yes, I understand it. We would like to be able to do more, Mr. Speaker. We would like to be able to solve all the problems. I have heard the Minister of Transportation and the Minister Responsible for Housing say here many times: We would love to do more. Doing more is not the responsible thing; we are doing more than any other government in the history of Newfoundland has already done, and we will continue, Mr. Speaker, to do more than any government in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Speaker, we went through the doom and gloom, we went through an election campaign, and guess what? We were elected, Mr. Speaker. We were elected because we are responsible, we are sustainable, and we are credible to every person in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday my colleague for Conception Bay East – Bell Island talked at some length about what we have done, what this government has done in terms of recreation, poverty reduction, the physical activity, and all the rest. He also talked about his time in the public service during the 1990s. Mr. Speaker, I was also a public servant in the 1990s and I have my own recollections of what those days were like. I have my recollections very clearly. I remember being so happy back in the early 1990s, mid-1990s, when we had signed a new collective agreement, Mr. Speaker, had a significant wage increase and felt really good. Upon the election, Mr. Speaker, and all the rest we lost that increase. I can never forget that because that put a shadow of doom and gloom over the public service and it lasted a long time.

In fact, during that period in the 1990s, I lost my job. I had to go through the process of bumping and all the other things that goes on in public service, Mr. Speaker, and that is a very difficult thing to do. Not only did I lose my job and lose a job that was close to my home, I lost a job and I had to find one back here in the city and start commuting. In the last fifteen years, Mr. Speaker, that is what I have done every day of my life: I have commuted. Mr. Speaker, that is tough to do when you have to leave family and friends and a job that is fifteen minutes away and commute every day.

Also, Mr. Speaker, it made us relocate. We had to move, we had to change where we lived and become a little bit closer to here, but I continue to commute. I remember also, Mr. Speaker, in those days – and those days are not long forgotten, and I am sure my hon. colleague for Conception Bay East – Bell Island would agree with me. There is always some apprehension around Budget Day, Mr. Speaker. There is always apprehension and a sense of insecurity, because you are never quite sure what is going to happen after the Budget.

Mr. Speaker, I know leading up to this Budget there were a lot of people in a little bit of worry. There were some references made in the media to job cuts and all the rest, but, in essence, the Minister of Finance minimized that because he talked about his vision again. He talked about it cannot be crash and burn every time we have a downturn and every time we go into a deficit; it has to be a more long-term solution, Mr. Speaker. Because of the Minister of Finance and the Premier and this government's commitment, we do not need to do a slash and burn when we have a little downturn in our economy.

Mr. Speaker, I remember those days as well – and I do not know if my colleague for Bellevue remembers it, but I remember it very well. At the time, my colleague for Bellevue was the chairperson of a recreation commission in his district, Mr. Speaker, and he used to call me Mr. Nothing Littlejohn. He used to call me Mr. Nothing Littlejohn because every time he called me and he said, can I get a bit money for a playground, or can I get a bit of money for a swing, or can I build a ball field, my answer was: We do not have a program for that. He went around – and for years later I recall a colleague of mine, a former colleague of mine in recreation and sport went out and he said: Are you going to be the same as that fellow Nothing Littlejohn? Are you going to tell me there are no programs? Well, I remember it very fondly, and we had a good relationship. He would call, and I would give him the standard answer, we would have a great conversation, and we would go on our merry way. Six months later it would start all over again – I see my hon. colleague nodding his head; he remembers that as well as I do.

So, Mr. Speaker, those days were difficult, because as a public servant in those days, we did not have a whole lot to work with and it was very difficult. We were the front-line people. We were the people who were out there every day working with communities, dealing with people, and we were the people giving the message. In a lot of cases, Mr. Speaker, it was not like my hon. colleague, there was a little bit of nastiness on the other end of the line and sometimes it got into a heated conversation. Those were difficult days.

Mr. Speaker, I spent my last fourteen years basically working in sport in this Province. I thought if my hon. colleague could speak about community recreation, I should speak about what this government has done for sport in our Province, and what this government has done for sport in our Province particularly since Active, Healthy Newfoundland and Labrador, the strategy for Recreation and Sport in the Province was introduced, Mr. Speaker, is significant.

Mr. Speaker, we have been doing something in this Province that many other provinces are not doing. We are bucking the trend once again, Mr. Speaker. In actual fact, and I checked again today with my former colleagues in recreation and sport, we are bucking a trend. Sport in this Province, Mr. Speaker, is growing. When you think of it, sport in our Province is growing. I believe, Mr. Speaker, it is the initiatives that this government has taken through Active, Healthy Newfoundland and Labrador that continues to do those things.

It is easy, Mr. Speaker, to talk about Muskrat Falls. We have discussed Muskrat Falls and I am still not sure where our hon. colleagues on the other side of the House are. Some days I believe they are in favour, some days I think they are against, but they are getting closer, Mr. Speaker. They are still over there; they are doing a little bit of a waffle. Mr. Speaker, in sport we have held our own.

Mr. Speaker, if I could digress just for a second to pass along condolences. Mr. Speaker, when I first came to government back in 1987, Mr. Don Johnson was the Assistant Deputy Minister of Recreation and Sport in this Province. As we all know, Mr. Johnson passed away a few days ago. Even though Mr. Johnson has been retired for a number of years, I have had the opportunity to get to know Mr. Johnson. Periodically, we would bump into each other at the arena, at a recreation facility, at a softball field, maybe in the mall, wherever we would be. Mr. Johnson was always there, Mr. Speaker. During the election, and just after my election, I would receive words of encouragement. He was one of the first people who sent me a note congratulating me on my election and telling me on a job well done. Mr. Speaker, sport will be poorer in this Province for the loss of Don Johnson. He was probably our most famous sport ambassador. To his family and friends, I want to pass on my condolences today.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk a little bit about sport. Time is quickly slipping by but I just want to go through some of the programs and some of the money that this government is investing in sport in this Province. Mr. Speaker, we have a travel subsidy program. Our travel subsidy program is for teams that travel to national competitions. In the run of a year, Mr. Speaker, we support about forty teams travelling to national competitions to the tune of about $275,000. Mr. Speaker, this is money that parents do not have to raise. This is money that parents do not have to raise so their athletes, their children can go and compete against the best in Canada, and I think that is very important.

Mr. Speaker, we do not talk a whole lot about our elite athletes in this Chamber. We do not talk about our elite athletes in this Chamber and we need to talk about our Canada Games program. For anyone who is not familiar with Canada Games, the Canada Games program has been in existence since 1967 and it alternates summer and winter, alternating every two years. This Province, Mr. Speaker, has been sending teams to the Canada Games since 1967 and we saw some great, great results. We invest on an annual basis $500,000 to our elite athletes to go out there and compete against the best in the country during Canada Games. Mr. Speaker, the next set of Canada Games comes up next summer, 2013, in Sherbrooke, Quebec and I encourage people to go out and support our athletes.

Mr. Speaker, eight years ago we were looking to support our elite athletes, because these kids are out there and these athletes are out there and they are training very hard. To do the proper training, to have the proper nutrition, to travel to get to the proper sites, Mr. Speaker, is very expensive and we instituted the Premier's Awards Program. It started out with $50,000. Today, in its ninth year, we support it to the tune of $85,000 and that supports about seventy athletes annually, our elite athletes who compete in every sport and compete internationally, nationally, all over the world.

I would like to highlight, Mr. Speaker, athletes like Karen Hearn in rugby, who played for Canada at the World Rugby Sevens Championship. Our Paralympian, Katarina Roxon from my colleague's district here next to me in Port au Port, has competed at the Commonwealth and Olympic Games in Paralympic games. That program supports those athletes.

Mr. Speaker, as well, our Labrador Travel Subsidy program is two components. We have $500,000 to support athletes and teams coming from Labrador, youth coming from Labrador to participate in provincial competitions in over thirty provincial sports.

As well, Mr. Speaker, we provide another $250,000 through School Sports Newfoundland and Labrador to support school sport in our Province and enable schools from Labrador to come to the Island. We support this program to the tune of $750,000, Mr. Speaker – $750,000 to support athlete travel from Labrador to the Island for competition and provincial championships.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLEJOHN: As well, Mr. Speaker, we provide in excess of $150,000 for hosting grants, long-term athlete development, and coaching development. All these programs enhance opportunities for our athletes to participate in national and international competitions at home.

Mr. Speaker, a number of years ago we had a Capital Grant Program and it only had about $343,000. It was for small things; you might be able to buy a swing, you might be able to fix a fence, you might be able to buy one piece of playground equipment. In the last couple of years, Mr. Speaker, we have enhanced that program. We now have grants of $15,000 and $3,000, and we have invested over $1 million in hundreds of communities all across this great Province in recreation infrastructure.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Speaker, we do not realize the number of playgrounds, softball fields, tennis courts, and swimming pools, indoor and outdoor, that avail of this money that goes towards the livelihood of making our children more physically active, being better citizens. I think, Mr. Speaker, sometimes we undervalue the importance of these small grants to our communities and what that money really does.

As well, Mr. Speaker, this year we are supporting our Newfoundland and Labrador Games Program. If people are not familiar, our Newfoundland and Labrador Games Program supports over 800 athletes, summer and winter alternating every two years. We are putting $350,000, Mr. Speaker, into that program. We have the Newfoundland and Labrador Summer Games this summer in the great District of Carbonear – Harbour Grace. I hope the people will come to see it.

As well, Mr. Speaker –

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

MR. LITTLEJOHN: I have run out of time. I thank you for your comments, Mr. Speaker, and I look forward to speaking more on the Budget.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Thank you kindly, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to speak on the amendment to the Budget. First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would like to give special thanks to people in my district. Over the last few months we had a very hard time in our family, and the support that I received from the people in my district was unbelievable. Today I would like to just thank them for that.

I would also like to thank the different organizations, because there were different events that I could not get to, and stuff like that. It is the one thing as a politician that I really do enjoy, getting to all of these events. I apologized to some of them, but they all understood. They were very compassionate and understanding to my family and me. I thank them very, very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: I would also like to thank, Mr. Speaker, the members in this House on both sides of the House, and all parties. I must say, the support that you people gave me over the last number of weeks was very encouraging and was very supportive to me and my family. I think you kindly and very much too.

Mr. Speaker, today, I know the hon. Member for Port de Grave just mentioned Mr. Don Johnson. Mr. Don Johnson was a good friend of mine. I happened to attend the last two events he did. I spoke at one, the TELUS Cup, and had a great talk with him. I also went to the Don Johnson tournament where he was the honourary person.

He was a great individual with not only hockey, but he was really into sport in Newfoundland. I know that he really appreciated what this government was doing. I would just like to give my condolences to his wife Florence, Peter, Michael, Cathy, and all of their family. I played hockey with Peter for about ten years and I played hockey with Michael for a couple of years, too. It was great to know the family. They are a great family. Like I said, Mr. Johnson was an outstanding Newfoundlander and Labradorian, and he will be sorely missed.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start today speaking on this amendment. First of all, when we started this session, we started with our Throne Speech. That is what government sees for the future of this Province and what we see in the future of this year, basically. So we set out a couple of goals. We said there were three things we were going to look at.

First, we were going to refocus our government's approach to delivering services, making sure that we deliver everything we can in cost-effective way and making sure that our people get the best bang for their buck. That is what we did in this Budget.

Mr. Speaker, secondly, we said that we were going to give Newfoundlanders and Labradorians support that they need to seize the opportunities that are in front of them. That is what we did. We invested in our apprentice program and we invested in education. We never cut a thing when it comes to our young people and making sure they and all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians seize the opportunities that are here in front of them today.

Thirdly, we said we were going to improve the businesses and the communities to make sure they get the power to grow. Mr. Speaker, we did that and we are continuing to do that with all of the investments we are doing in Municipal Affairs, the Department of Business, and everything else. We are doing a great job there also.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I am going to talk about what our minister did. Our Minister of Finance, he set out a plan, a plan to make sure that this government and this Province, in the future, are going to be in a great fiscal position. He explained to the people of the Province that this year coming up we could have a little bit of difficulty, we may run a deficit. The reason why we are going to run a deficit – and he explained it pretty clear – we have two productions that will come in for retrofit, so we are going to lose the monies that we are going to have that they produce in oil. We are also losing the Atlantic Accord which is some $532 million.

Last year, forecasted was $59.1 million, but commodity prices and strengthening offshore production meant that we have a surplus of $776 million, which was outstanding. Mr. Speaker, what that enabled us to do was to reduce our debt by $361 million. The biggest thing that this government is doing, and most proud I am sure that most of the members here in the House of Assembly are, is how we are reducing our debt. For the last six out of last seven years, we have run surpluses and we have reduced our debt by $5.5 billion down to $7.8 billion. We have a long way to go. The Minister of Finance stated in his speech that is going to be the goal of this government, we are going to set that we can make that even lower and lower. We know the next couple of years it is going to be a little bit difficult, but hopefully commodity prices can go up and the production whatever it is, and maybe we will not run too big of a deficit. When you look at $258 million, it is not too bad when you look at the surplus we had last year.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by just talking about different departments and what this government is doing in supplying services and what we are doing for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. First of all, I would like to talk about the Department of Health. The minister, last night, I think she had about ten minutes extra, but I am sure she could have gone on for a couple of hours with the facts and figures that she delivered here. Mr. Speaker, we are looking at $3 billion that we are spending in the Department of Health. That is huge. That is 40 per cent of our Budget. Mr. Speaker, there are investments that we are doing to make sure that we have great long-term care facilities, we are supporting our communities, breast cancer screening, and we are making sure we have shorter wait times in our emergency units. Eight hundred million dollars is going into infrastructure projects alone in the health care system.

Mr. Speaker, we are doing projects all over this Province. There is not one part of this Province that we are not affecting people. We are doing projects in St. John's, Flower's Cove, Glovertown, Paradise, Harbour Grace, Grand Falls-Windsor, Corner Brook, Labrador, Carbonear, Lewisporte, Bonavista, on the Northern Peninsula, on The Isles of Notre Dame, on the South Coast, you name it, we are investing money into health care. That is very important because that is what we have to do and that is what we want to do as a government.

Mr. Speaker, I would say our biggest investment, by far, in the health care system is the investment we are making in the people who supply the health care system to us. Mr. Speaker, as I said, I had the experience now the last little while – I think since November I have been that popular at the Health Sciences and St. Clare's that I could give everybody here a tour. I was on a first-name basis with the boys at Tim Horton's and the ladies at Tim Horton's. So, if anybody wanted to know anything about those two hospital facilities, I could surely tell you. Mr. Speaker, I just want to talk about the people who provide the service. Right now in this Province we have approximately 1,100 doctors, and since the last five years we have increased that by 125 doctors, which is an increase of 13 per cent. That is amazing. Now, our population at that same time has only gone up by 1 per cent. So, Mr. Speaker, we are increasing and making sure that we have care for our people.

Mr. Speaker, I want to tell a little story. Basically, I was at St. Clare's – and the young people, the young doctors, we have coming through the system, and I am sure that most people agree with me, are unbelievable. I am so proud of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. I think it is the greatest place to live, and I think we are a caring people. I think that we care more than anywhere else in all the world. Mr. Speaker, when I looked at a young doctor who came in, she was an intern with medicine, and she was called down to the emergency unit, she leaned in over the rail and she had a talk with my mother, who was in the bed. She reached down, she held her hand, and that is all she had to do. She told her what she was going to do, and when she left my mother said: Wasn't that a lovely doctor? That is what I was so proud of: She was a lovely doctor, she was a Newfoundlander and Labradorian, and we have to proud of the people that we have in our health care system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, right now we have 6,300 nurses, 2,700 LPNs – that is the second most nurses per population ratio in Canada. In the LPNs, we have the largest LPN population in all of Canada. Now, those are stats, Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of. Doctors and nurses give us a great service, and they are doing a fantastic job in our health care system; but, we have support staff, we have the girls and fellows who come and take the blood, and we have people that do the X-ray equipment. There is so many different support staff, but you know what? They are caring people; they care about Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

I had an aunt who came from away and she was home two or three times, and she was just remarking to me all the time how caring our health care workers were. It is something I really wanted to get up today and say that I am very happy to be a Newfoundlander and Labradorian, and I am very happy to see these people working in our system. Thank you very much.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to move onto another department now; I am going to talk about the Department of Municipal Affairs. I would just like to say to the hon. Member for The Straits – White Bay North, if he gets a transit system up on the Northern Peninsula, I want one down in Torbay, Flatrock, and Pouch Cove too.

Mr. Speaker, Municipal Affairs is doing a great job for our municipalities. I represent five small municipalities and part of St. John's in my district. If you look at the investments that they are doing over the last number of years, last year there were twenty-one fire trucks that were given out to different municipalities. There was a total request of seventy-four. I am sure if the minister had his way he would give out seventy-four fire trucks for everyone, but it is all common sense; you have so much money to spend, you would like to do what you can – but twenty-one fire trucks.

I heard the hon. member from the Northern Peninsula, The Straits – White Bay North, last night complain about what we are doing with our fire departments and stuff like that. Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity on Saturday night to speak at the fireman's ball and their appreciation night down in Logy Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove. I had the opportunity to speak with the mayor. Last year they received, I think it was, seven bunker suits. He was so happy with just that investment of seven bunker suits in the department, and he said that is a really good investment. They have a request in for a fire truck also, but he was impressed with the seven bunker suits.

If you look at some of the releases that I have seen from the Department of Municipal Affairs, as far as I know, I do not think there is a fire department in this Province that has not had any support from this government. It is important, Mr. Speaker, it is very important that we support our volunteer firefighters. Our volunteer firefighters are the key to most of our communities. They go out on a regular basis and they put their life in danger. They go out and they go to accidents. They can be unsafe. They do a lot of different things. They are the first ones there all of the time.

Any fundraising, anything at all – I know the ones in my district, I have Pouch Cove Volunteer Fire Department, I have Torbay Volunteer Fire Department, and I have the Logy Bay-Middle Cove. They are great areas. It is unbelievable what they do for their towns, no matter if it is a Santa Claus parade or if it is breakfast with Santa Claus. They are there all of the time in the community.

Mr. Speaker, when I spoke the other night I said it is so important that we support the volunteer fire departments, but we also have to support their families, because when they leave at night and they go to a fire or whatever, it is the family members at home that are really concerned about whether their loved ones, whether it is him or her, are going to get back. It is very important that we do support our firefighters because we are supporting the families and we are supporting the communities.

Mr. Speaker, like I said, we have made huge investments. I had the opportunity last year to go with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and we did an announcement down in the Town of Bauline. Bauline is the smallest town in my district and it has a population of about 500. They had a town hall down there that was condemned due to mould and whatnot and they were told they were not allowed to use it any more. Anyway, they went and they applied through Municipal Affairs for some funding to build a new town hall. Now, this place they had before was a sixty-six-year-old school that they used to have their dances in; they had their seniors' dinners in it, and any event that went on in the community, no matter if it was a fiftieth anniversary or a ninetieth birthday or whatever. Once that went, they had nothing in their community.

Mr. Speaker, our government – it does not make any difference, whether you are a big community, large community, or whatever; we prioritize and make sure that we take care of our residents. We last year made an announcement down there that we were going to build this year. They have it started already. It is an investment of over a million dollars into a new community centre for those people and it is outstanding. I was so proud of that. It made me just feel proud that our government did that. It is something that all communities need; we need a place to gather, it is very important. They have their meetings now down in the church, so to go to a new community centre – I cannot wait for it to open, to tell you the truth. It is going to be really good.

Those are the investments that the minister and this government are making when it comes to municipal affairs, but not only in little things like that; we are investing in roads in our communities and we are investing in water and sewer in our communities. We are investing, making smart investments, and it is all over Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, those investments are key. I listened to the Member for St. John's East when he talked about a new fiscal arrangement and stuff like that for municipalities. Now, I was a mayor and I understand that, yes, there are a lot of needs. If you look at the needs versus what we can actually do, we are probably doing 10 per cent or 15 per cent of it. We have to all be realistic; we cannot take every cent we have and just give it out. We cannot take it out because there will be nothing left for our children and our grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, I know the minister is working with Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador to make sure that we do our best, but we have to be smart, because there are fire trucks needed, there are water and sewer things needed, and we cannot just give it out and make sure that there is no money for all municipalities.

Mr. Speaker, the next department I would like to speak a little bit about is the Department of Education. This department over the last number of years has made huge investments – huge investments, Mr. Speaker. We had new schools this year in Happy Valley – Goose Bay, Placentia, Port Saunders, Port Hope Simpson, and Bay de Verde, and we also have a new school in Torbay. Mr. Speaker, I have been down to the new school; I walk in on a regular basis, every event that I can go to, and walk into that school and meet the teachers.

The teachers were in Holy Trinity Elementary who were sixty years old. When you walked in the library, all you saw was books on top of you. Now you walk in a resource centre with a beautiful whiteboard down at the end, computers on every desk, and it is just unbelievable. A beautiful gym, a cafeteria, it is absolutely beautiful. Talk to the teachers and they are amazed with the facility they have.

Mr. Speaker, they are amazed with it, and the parents, when you talk to them, they just cannot believe how beautiful it is. Beautiful classrooms, everything in there is clean and tidy. It is so tidy it is unbelievable. The teachers and the parents are not the ones; the ones who are the happiest are the students who are getting an opportunity to learn in a number one, top-class facility. That is what we have been providing with all of these new schools. Mr. Speaker, we have five more new schools under construction in St. Anthony, Carbonear, and here in St. John's. If you take St. Teresa's and Virginia Park, once they get the situation straightened out, I am sure they will get a new school too, and the west end high school.

Mr. Speaker, if you look at the investment that we are putting into our children – like I said, education is so important – we are investing almost $867 million. Mr. Speaker, that is an increase of 44 per cent since 2005. That is amazing. If you look at the investments we are putting into our pupils, per pupil, the average per pupil was $7,400. Today, it is $13,229, an increase of 78 per cent. Those are huge investments.

Mr. Speaker, I heard yesterday, and we talked about poverty reduction and we talked about different investments we are making. I know myself, as a parent, when school started it was hard enough getting them dressed and everything else because they wanted top-of-the-line gear, but coming home and not knowing what the cost was, not knowing what the books would cost, and not knowing what the fees were going to be that year. Mr. Speaker, that is all eliminated. It is eliminated for everybody. It is a big worry off so many people. That is a big thing we are doing for all the families in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, another big thing we did in education was the new models of allocations with teachers and how many students are in the class. What we are doing means we have an additional 822 teachers who are still in the system, who would not be there today. That is huge, 822. That is a lot of teachers.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in my district, the growth down there is unbelievable. The growth in the Town of Flatrock this year was 20 per cent, Torbay 17 per cent, and Pouch Cove and Bauline were both in double digits. This government has put money in this Budget this year for major infrastructure projects for planning and design work for schools in Portugal Cove-St. Phillips, Paradise, Conception Bay, like I said, Torbay, Flatrock, and Pouch Cove. We are very happy with that investment. I thank the minister and I thank the government for that investment. The ball is rolling and we are going to keep it rolling, and I am sure that we will get a new school in my area.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to just talk a little bit about post-secondary. I know that post-secondary education - when you look at what has happened in Quebec, the riots and the people are on the streets. The students are all upset about what has happened in Quebec. That is not happening in Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker, it is not happening at all. There are lots of smiles on people's faces who are going to MUN and CNA. Since 2005, Mr. Speaker, we have spent $183 million to ensure that we have a tuition freeze for our students. Mr. Speaker, a huge investment, and we guaranteed them that they were going to get it again this year.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk a little bit about the fishery. Most of you guys do not know, but I have a pretty good background when it comes to the fishery. I heard the hon. minister on Issues and Answers, I think it is called, on NTV on Sunday. I will challenge anyone here to say that they cut out more cod tongues than I did, because I cut out a lot of cod tongues in my day, I guarantee you that. Mr. Speaker, I will tell you, at twenty-five cents a dozen, I wasn't getting a lot of money for them, but I cut out a lot of cod tongues.

Mr. Speaker, I grew up in a family where my father fished, and we owned –

AN HON. MEMBER: I have fifty cents.

MR. K. PARSONS: You have fifty cents; wow.

We owned a trucking company. We trucked fish out of Torbay, Flatrock, and Pouch Cove. We trucked on an average about 30 million pounds of cod a year and 15 million pounds of capelin. I do have a pretty good background when it comes to the fishery. My very first job, I used to drive along with the driver and I would receipt the fish slip to the fisherman, give him his copy and make sure that the weight was right on the truck.

Mr. Speaker, when the moratorium came in, the community of Flatrock and our trucking company and everything else, we just said she is gone; there is nothing we could do about it. Mr. Speaker, like the minister said Sunday, there are a lot of changing times in the fishery. The fishery has changed, but I am looking at the fishery –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. K. PARSONS: Can I have a little bit of leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, with leave.

MR. K. PARSONS: Just to clue up.

My point is, Mr. Speaker, that there are hard times in the fishery, there are real hard times in the fishery. I look at the fishermen who are in my area and they are doing very well today in the crab fishery. Actually, they are doing better today than they did before the moratorium came in because they diversified, they moved to a different thing. That is what we have to do in the fishery. The fishery is never going to stay like it is. We have to make changes and when the changes are here we have to come with them, too.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is great to get another opportunity to participate in the debate in this House on our provincial Budget; the Budget Speech was delivered on April 24 by our Finance Minister. This Budget, Mr. Speaker, is all about making responsible investments and securing a better future for Newfoundland and Labrador. It must be driving the Opposition members crazy to have to sit there and listen to all the good news, to listen to all the positive investments, to listen to all the positive decisions that are being made to secure a brighter future for this place that we call home. We will continue, despite the fact that they may not like it, to talk about many of the good things that are happening here in Newfoundland and Labrador. There is certainly much work ahead of us in many areas; nonetheless, I think we have a bold plan that will lead to a brighter future for all of us.

The Opposition Parties are always quick to be critical, but they are ignoring the fact that we are providing the very services that they accuse us of neglecting. This kind of short-sightedness, Mr. Speaker, demonstrates that they are really only focused on the issues of today, in their minds; they cannot possibly lay strategic groundwork for the future. I want to talk about the groundwork that we have been laying over the last eight-and-a-half years and the groundwork that we continue to lay through a number of initiatives in this Budget.

Someone said that the hallmark of maturity is to delay gratification for future reward. Mr. Speaker, we are a government that demonstrates maturity, that shows fiscal responsibility, and that demonstrates sound planning for the future. We are prepared to make the necessary sacrifices and the necessary tough choices that need to be made today to ensure that we have a strong future. It is all about fiscal responsibility, Mr. Speaker. We are ensuring fiscal responsibility while at the same time investing in infrastructure in key areas, investing in social programs, paying down our debt. All of those things that we are doing do require difficult decisions today, but there will certainly be many rewards reaped by this Province in the future. Our responsibility as a government is to provide for today and also prepare for tomorrow. That is why we are not going to allow ourselves to be swayed by the negative voices coming from the Opposition. We have set a strategic course for this Province, we are on course to reach our destination, and we intend to support the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, the families in Newfoundland and Labrador, as they create their own prosperous futures in this place.

Mr. Speaker, I was going to talk about health and I was going to talk about municipalities, but the hon. Member for Cape St. Francis has done a fine job just a few moments ago speaking to a number of issues related to health care and communities in this Province. I really applaud his honesty and his sincerity and his compassion that he just demonstrated, Mr. Speaker. The member is certainly a great man who cares for the five communities he represents, cares for his family, and I certainly was pleased to hear his comments, not only on health and on municipalities but also on education, on the fishery. I can certainly not claim to have cut out as many cod tongues as he has, Mr. Speaker, because I have not cut out any. I have eaten a few and did not particularly enjoy it, actually. So I will leave that to the Member for Cape St. Francis who I affectionately refer to as the member for Flat Rock.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your protection.

I do want to talk about Tourism, Culture and Recreation, because I was frustrated by some of what I heard on one of the Open Line call-in shows today, Mr. Speaker. I heard the member from the Third Party for the District of St. John's Centre talking about all the things we are not doing for the arts community and for cultural workers and to support the arts and cultural industries in Newfoundland and Labrador. I just find that hard to understand and even harder to accept, Mr. Speaker. So I thought I would share a few facts with the hon. member and with my colleagues in this House.

Mr. Speaker, the provincial government's allocation to the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council in 2006 was under a million dollars – a significant amount of money, but the amount of money was about $960,000 back in 2006. Mr. Speaker, at a time where we are being accused by the Third Party of abandoning the arts and not investing in the arts, I can tell you that today's investment is more than double what it was back in 2006 – at $2.11 million. Mr. Speaker, that is our allocation today to the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council, yet certain members opposite would tell you that we are doing nothing or we are not doing enough.

The fear mongering continues. I heard comments about how funding is being cut to artist programs and grants. Well, Mr. Speaker, I have heard the minister say multiple times that efforts are being made to minimize any impact on artist programs and grants. In fact, I have also heard that funding directly to artists is not expected to change in this fiscal year, Mr. Speaker. In fact, at a time when the Third Party would tell you that we are gutting funding to the arts community and to the cultural community, we are investing over $20 million this year in the arts alone.

Mr. Speaker, since 2006 – and the Third Party will not want to hear this either – we have invested $56 million in arts and culture. We are a government that is all about co-operation and partnerships and empowering people in our communities and working directly with stakeholders in our communities to get results. We continue to work closely with the arts and cultural industries in this Province, and we are putting our money where our mouth is, Mr. Speaker.

Since 2004, our investment in the Cultural, Economic Development Plan in this Province has tripled. In 2004, the funding in the plan was about $825,000. In the Budget this year, Mr. Speaker, that the members opposite are so unhappy with, our investment is about $2.9 million, which demonstrates how committed we are to putting our money where our mouth is, continuing to invest in the arts and in the culture and in the incredible talent that exists here in Newfoundland and Labrador. There are all kinds of economic spinoffs to those investments, Mr. Speaker.

The global budget, actually, for Tourism, Culture and Recreation has gone from just over $26 million back in 2003 to $66.8 million this year, Mr. Speaker. That is an increase of 156 per cent, but the crowd opposite will tell you we are not doing enough.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you for your enthusiasm.

Mr. Speaker, lots of good things are happening in Tourism, Culture and Recreation to support the arts and cultural communities in this Province, and that is all making a difference in growing our economy.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Cape St. Francis did a good job talking about some of our investments in education. Some of them are worth repeating. If you listen to the crowd opposite you would think we are a government that has not invested in education, but nothing could be further from the truth. You only need to look at the investments outlined in this very Budget that we are debating in this House today, the continuation of our enhanced free textbook policy. We are continuing to provide funding to school boards to ensure the continued elimination of school fees, and we have invested over $37 million in that since we launched that initiative back in 2006. Government provides close to $538 million, more than 62 per cent of the entire K-12 budget for teachers, substitute teachers, student assistants, professional development and other services for teachers. I challenge any member opposite, Mr. Speaker, to show this kind of commitment to education when they were at the helm. The truth of the matter is they will not because they cannot. There is more money being invested into our K-12 school system in this Province than ever before in our history.

Mr. Speaker, I want to also talk about early learning because we are just not limiting those investments to students and educators in the K-12 system. Again, the Third Party will tell you that the sky is falling, that this government is not concerned enough about early learning. In this Budget alone, which is a fiscally responsible and progressively conservative budget, I would argue, Mr. Speaker, we are seeing an investment of almost $1.7 million for the second year of implementation of our Early Childhood Learning Strategy, which is called Learning From the Start. Just today in this House, we heard another announcement from the Minister of Education relating to this very strategy. The Budget commitment is part of a three-year, $4.8 million investment, with a focus on the years from birth to age three.

We are also implementing a 10-year Child Care Strategy, Mr. Speaker. It is going to allow parents to pursue education or employment by increasing child care spaces in this Province, particularly for children under two years of age, which is outlined in our Family Child Care Initiative that was announced last year. We are now in the second year of the two-year pilot Family Child Care Initiative, and regularly we are hearing announcements by the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services on new spaces and new investments that are being made in child care around this Province.

We are also committed to maintaining the Child Care Tax Credit. You certainly will not hear the Third Party talk about that. We are also focused on not only retaining our early childhood educators, but recruiting more, providing grants for child care operators and also to support those operators in targeted expansion of affordable, regulated child care spaces.

Mr. Speaker, this government recognizes more than ever before the importance of early childhood education. We know that these years are crucial in the development of all children so that they are ready to face the challenges of kindergarten and their formal school years. We also want to ensure that our most precious resource, our kids, have the resources they need to become the leaders of tomorrow. They deserve it, Mr. Speaker.

Now I can speak as a father of two small children. I can say how proud I am of this government and its commitment to our children. I really feel confident that my kids will have an education system that really meets their needs in a world around us that is rapidly changing. Mr. Speaker, in today's society of a two-working-parent household, we see more than ever the need for child care. As working parents, we have to trust child care providers each and every day with caring for our children. They help mould our kids, they educate them, they care for them, and they feed them.

Mr. Speaker, I know the members of the Third Party surely on some level must appreciate the investments we are making in the long-term plan that we put in place. They may be quick to say we are not spending enough, and it will never be enough, but the reality is that we are on a great path and we have a real plan to grow and develop child care in this Province. We realize there is a great need for these investments and we are making them, investing in the well-being of children and investing in the well-being of families.

Mr. Speaker, in this Budget, the provincial government will increase funding to child care. We are doubling our investment as part of our 10-year Child Care Strategy, which will reach $56 million a year by the fiscal year 2021-2022. Some of the highlights of this strategy that are impacted by this Budget, we are increasing the number of regulated child care spaces through the Province and there is a local needs assessment in place to ensure that the spaces go where they are needed most; we are providing operating grants to child care centre operators in areas that require child care spaces; and there are also conditions attached to ensure the fees are maintained at a certain level. These private child care centres, Mr. Speaker, the Third Party would wipe them out. It is all about a new system, a public system with very little regard for the private child care centre operators who are doing some great work in many communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we are implementing a number of initiatives to address recruitment and retention of early childhood educators, as I mentioned. This is absolutely part of our ten-year plan. In addition to that, we are maintaining other components of our larger 10-year strategy. There is a supplementary Child Care Tax Credit, there is the Family Child Care Initiative, and both of those initiatives were introduced only last year.

I would be remiss if I did not mention our new regulated Family Child Care Initiative, Mr. Speaker. This is actually going to be instrumental in restructuring the care of infants up to the age of twenty-four months. It was announced just last month as part of Budget of 2012, and we are including $2 million for the second year of the two-year pilot program. This initiative is going to provide really needed regulated child care spaces throughout the Province with an emphasis on spaces for infants up to twenty-four months, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot more I could talk about in terms of what we are doing for children and youth. I hope to have another opportunity during this Budget debate to speak specifically about Child, Youth and Family Services and our many investments in the well-being of children who are most at risk in this Province. Knowing I do not have a lot of time, I will move on.

My colleague, the good gentleman from Flatrock, the Member for Cape St. Francis, talked about the good work we are doing for municipalities. I would like to pick up on a couple of those points. In addition to the $17.8 million that is provided annually through Municipal Operating Grants, we have also maintained an additional funding level this year of $4.6 million that was provided last year. We are continuing to work collaboratively with municipalities to develop a new formula for these operating grants that is both sustainable and also equitable for all municipalities, large and small, in every corner of this Province.

I think it is also important to note, Mr. Speaker, and you will not hear this from across the floor of this House, an investment of $130 million is being made over two years for new municipal infrastructure projects. Despite the incredible investment that has been made over the last eight-and-a-half years, the investment in infrastructure continues because we know it makes a real difference in the economies of communities in every corner of this Province.

We are a government that continues to invest in innovation, in business, and in research and development. I think it is safe to say that businesses across this Province have benefited from numerous programs and services initiated by this government that are supported through this Budget that we are debating in the House today. Personally, in my district, in the communities of Paradise and Mount Pearl, I have seen real growth in the business sector, and a lot of those businesses have availed of government programs to enhance their businesses. They have increased their staff, they have invested in research, and they have invested in developing innovative products and services.

We are continuing to invest and partner with the business community in Newfoundland and Labrador. In fact, in this Budget alone, Mr. Speaker, almost $2 million is available for businesses to facilitate growth and development in every single region of this Province. We have innovative incentive programs, loan guarantees, infrastructure investments, as well as business skills development programs, and they are all going to help grow strong businesses. They are also going to help diversify our economy, which is something we hear talked about across the way a fair bit.

One highlight that I would like to point out to the Member for The Straits – White Bay North is that we are investing another $2 million this year to advance the world broadband initiative which will further improve our Province's telecommunications environment. I think that is good news, Mr. Speaker, that we are continuing to make investments and improvements in this area but you certainly will not hear that acknowledged by the Third Party.

We are committed to responsible social investments, as well, Mr. Speaker. Our Poverty Reduction Strategy is award winning and it is a plan that would not mean anything if it did not include strategies to assist our most vulnerable citizens. Our goal is to provide programs and services that make a real difference in reducing poverty in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Department of Advanced Skills and Education is providing vital services to those who are in the low-income category. We are continuing to review and revamp those services and implement new programs to reach out, particularly to low-income families in this Province. Now, the crowd across the House would have everyone believe that we are failing the people of the Province who are in the low-income category. The truth of the matter, Mr. Speaker, is that this government has invested more money in social housing than any government in history. This government has invested more money in Income Support and support services than any government before us, and we continue to do so. We received all kinds of accolades for our Poverty Reduction Strategy and we realize there is lots of work ahead of us and we are continuing to do what we can to make life better for those particularly in a low-income bracket in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud of this government. I am proud of the investments that are being made in this Budget and in previous Budgets. We are fiscally responsible but we are also socially aware. We are committed to making the hard decisions today on programs and services that meet current needs but we are also planning for future concerns. We are investing more in social programs, in health care, in home care, in home support, in child care, in families – more than ever before. These initiatives will help the people of the Province. These initiatives will help all of the people of the Province. These initiatives will help seniors. These initiatives will help families. These initiatives will help children and youth, Mr. Speaker. We are reaching out to everyone everywhere.

Now, members opposite – try as they might – will have a difficult time disputing this government's commitment to investing in the future of our Province and the well-being of our people. We are in a healthy position, for sure, fiscally, but also socially in Newfoundland and Labrador. This is the first time in the history of our Province that we are experiencing such wealth – and we are spreading the wealth, but we have to be responsible, Mr. Speaker. Never again do we want to become a have-not province. Never again do we want to be dependent on subsidies from other sources. We are a strong Province, we have strong minds, we have great resources here, Mr. Speaker, and we are making the right decisions today so that we can reap the rewards later. We are making choices in the present that will benefit the future. There is no other way, Mr. Speaker, to be more responsible than that; there is no other direction that we should take.

Our track record speaks for itself. We are succeeding in addressing the Province's economic and social needs, and it shows. There is a brighter future here for everyone in Newfoundland and Labrador today because of the tough choices that we have been prepared to make, not only in this Budget, Mr. Speaker, but over the last eight-and-a-half years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. KENT: You can hear the hoots and hollers from across the floor, Mr. Speaker, because they do not want to hear it, but I can tell you that the future of this place will continue to get brighter as our Premier continues to lead this Province to future prosperity. Mr. Speaker, no government before us can say that.

I realize my time has run out, and I would ask for just a few moments to finish up.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the member have leave?

MR. JOYCE: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. KENT: Thank you. I thank my colleague for Bay of Islands for granting leave, and I will be brief, Mr. Speaker.

Other parties will find time to criticize, but they are not the ones who are doing this tough work. They are not the ones who are making the hard choices. We will stand on our record of success. They will stand on a record of criticism and effortless discontent.

I would like to finish with a quote, Mr. Speaker, from George Bernard Shaw; he is an Irish playwright and co-founder of the London School of Economics.

AN HON. MEMBER: A friend of yours.

MR. KENT: Not a friend of mine – I have never had my picture taken with him. I have not even run into him in a hotel lobby. Shaw once said, "People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it." I think that is some wisdom that maybe the parties opposite should reflect on and consider, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much. I look forward to an opportunity to participate in this Budget debate as it continues in this House.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is indeed a pleasure to have the opportunity to stand today to make a few comments and pass on a few words of reflection on the Budget. I want to first of all recognize over the last number of days we have had some tremendous speakers. I reference our side of the House of course, many of my colleagues who stood here and shared some tremendous experiences, personal experiences about their own life, their own district and what they bring to this House.

Mr. Speaker, there is no question, and I do believe the Member for Bay of Islands did reference this the other night when he said that everybody who comes to the House of Assembly comes here with great intentions and brings tremendous background, whether that is from teaching, or from the law profession, or working in the community. Whatever it is, Mr. Speaker, we all bring tremendous experiences that add significantly to the debate in this House of Assembly. As a result, all of us here ought to be afforded the kind of respect that goes with having gained the support of the electorate to come and take a seat in here.

I want to first of all acknowledge the number of speakers who have come ahead of me, and the tremendous insight that they bring every time they speak in this House to the debate and to the different perspectives. It really feeds all of us, Mr. Speaker. It feeds all of us when we are trying to make decisions, both at caucus level, government level, Cabinet, in our own individual departments. The information and the perspectives shared in this Legislature really serves to drive I believe better decision-making processes and better engagement. I acknowledge and reflect upon all of those speakers, Mr. Speaker.

This Budget is indeed a good Budget from my perspective. We have had a number of them that have been very positive on my own particular district, Mr. Speaker, and on the Burin Peninsula region. That is in spite of a number of challenging times that we are going through right now. We have industry challenges with the fish plant in Burin and Marystown in particular. Fortune plant, while closed right now, there appears that there is no decision made on the future of that by Ocean Choice, which I think it is fair to say it is a good thing. Because it means that they have not given up on possibilities for the future. I am sitting as part of this government an optimist and feel very confident that things will work out there and we will move forward.

There are certainly some challenging times, Mr. Speaker –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KING: – but we are working through those times and challenges. In spite of that, Mr. Speaker, we have continued to invest in the region. As an MHA, I work very hard with my colleague in Burin – Placentia West as well as my colleague in the Bellevue District. We worked hard to bring forward very progressive and very positive educational policies that support all of our K-12 schools. More than that, Mr. Speaker, it supports our post-secondary institutions, not only the private colleges but of course the College of the North Atlantic. Things like free tuition and those kinds of things certainly make it much easier for students from our region to access a good-quality post-secondary education.

We have also, Mr. Speaker, invested in health care. Probably from a social policy perspective, the most significant investment that we can make is to solidify a good-quality educational opportunity for our young people. All of us in this House, I am sure, recognize that the future of the Province is tied to our ability to achieve great things and our ability to do that is tied to our education level.

Certainly, Mr. Speaker, we recognize the value of education, but likewise we recognize the value of having a healthy society and a healthy population. That is not only for people who sit in this House and for those who are younger than us. Mr. Speaker, we have an aging population. It is very important as part of the vision of this government that we recognize it is very important to provide for seniors in our community, those who make such a significant contribution.

I have heard any number of members say, and I certainly have said it many times myself, representing a rural district with many communities, that the quality of life available in rural Newfoundland and Labrador is certainly enhanced by the number of volunteers we have out there. Mr. Speaker, this is not to shine a negative light on younger people, but the fact of the matter is that in many of our communities, the bulk of the volunteers are made up of older people and seniors who, in many cases, are retired or close on retirement but have collectively recognized that the quality of life in our communities is important. They give their all. We are no different.

So health care is very important, Mr. Speaker, because we have to look out for our population as they age. As people get older, all of us, we tend to have greater needs and challenges on our bodies and our person. It has been very progressive thinking from my perspective that our government has invested in health care. My colleague, the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor – Buchans and the Minister of Health and Community Services, talked today about not only the significant investments we have made as a government in the medical transportation program, but to recognize, Mr. Speaker, that there are two elements to that. As we work to provide greater financial supports to bring people from rural communities to larger centres for services, we are also doing something that many people do not recognize; we are investing in health care facilities and services like dialysis and lab and x-ray services in rural parts of the Province so people do not have to leave their small communities for every little service that they require or every opportunity to receive health care. A lot of it can be done now in the smaller rural areas. That is just a very small tidbit of the kinds of things that we are doing in health care.

Mr. Speaker, from my district perspective, I am very pleased with any number of budgets and the contribution that we have been able to make to the people that I represent and to the Province as a whole, because all of us as a government recognize that investing in social programs is an important part, a big part of the mandate of governments. We have to look at programs and policies and initiatives that support the people, support the taxpayers. It is all about investing money wisely and looking out to people. This Budget continues to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I want to shift focus for a few minutes to talk a bit about the fishery. We have had any number of discussions of late, probably almost every day as a matter of fact, on the fishery and what the future of the fishery is, what it means, the MOU process, and all kinds of perspectives brought forward in this House by many people on their interpretations. I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that I am not sure that everyone who stands to speak to the MOU has actually read it and understands it, but you know, that is an interpretation, just as people are going to interpret my remarks today. I accept that. That is the way it is when you stand in this House and you decide to offer up commentary on other individuals who sit here. We all recognize that.

That is why we are elected, Mr. Speaker. We stand in this House and we take on the challenge of debate and issues that we want to debate; when other individuals want to challenge us, they ought to do it here as well. That is all a part of it. We have had exchanges where individuals are choosing to do that through other mediums, but I see it that my role as minister and as an MHA is to represent my constituents in this House primarily and to make sure that when I have a contribution I feel I need to make to a debate – and not about individuals, but about debate and philosophy and what we are going to achieve – we need to do it here.

Mr. Speaker, the fishing industry has seen a lot of commentary. There is no question about that. I just finished doing an interview, as a matter of fact, with The Telegram, talking about the whole issue of canning kippers in the Province.

I have had a little fun with my hon. colleague opposite there, but I do accept his suggestions on the fishery, I think it is very important. My colleague for St. Barbe, who is the critic on the other side, I think he is making a contribution. We can, unfortunately, disagree on some things and I think perhaps more philologically than anything. I think it is great that he is prepared to stand in this House and put his ideas forward and challenge the things that we are doing and advocate for what he feels will be a different way of doing things. That is what it is all about. We all have different views and we bring them forward.

I guess a key difference that I see, as I said in the interview today, where the member opposite may go versus where we are trying to go, is we see the fishery as needing to operate as a business. The role of government is to support the industry and to –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries is delivering some very important information here and I would ask all members for their co-operation.

Thank you.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that.

Although, I have to say, I had not really noticed because my colleague for the Bay of Islands is very attentive and I might add, in one of the strongest fishing districts in our Province. I had a chance to visit with him recently. I have to say that, because in all seriousness there are some great things in the fishery going on out there in the Bay of Islands. I am going to get back there one of these days.

I am trying to pick up where I left off, Mr. Speaker. I was saying that the differing views of where the fishery is and where it is going to go, our view is that the industry has to be competitive on a world stage, Mr. Speaker. We are on an Island here. I know, I say this with the greatest respect, that people in the Province feel that we are the be-all and end-all with the fishery. Newfoundland and Labrador is about fisheries. We always have been and we always will be to some degree, Mr. Speaker.

When we talk fishery in the Province, we think we are talking about something that is so significant in the world. Mr. Speaker, when you step outside of our little box and you look at what is happening in the industry around the world, Iceland and places like that, Norway, you quickly see that we are but a very, very small percentage of the seafood produced in the world. If we are going to succeed - the vision of this government is very clear - we believe that we have to do a couple of things. We have to make sure, first of all, that we have a top-quality product going out of the Province, no question about that. There is no way we are going to compete on the world stage with seafood if we are producing second-class product. There is too much out there, and people have the opportunity many times over to say: No, thank you very much. I do not want to see it; your product is not good enough. We have to make sure we stay at the top of the heap, at least, with everyone else.

Number two, Mr. Speaker, we have to be price competitive. While it might be a little bit exaggerated, I have used the analogy on any number of occasions: Can we make automobiles in Newfoundland and Labrador? Yes, absolutely. We have the skill and the drive, the energy and the enthusiasm in this Province that I suspect we could do pretty much whatever we wanted to do. The question is, what is the purpose of building a car in Newfoundland and Labrador if we are going to try and have to sell it for $30,000 or $40,000 more than you can buy one that is produced elsewhere?

That is the issue with the seafood industry, Mr. Speaker, when we talk about processing yellowtail fish in this Province, for example. I know that we have beaten that one to death, but I keep referring back to it because it is the one the critics always refer to. The question is always raised: Why can't we process all of that quota here in Newfoundland and Labrador? The answer is that there is only one reason, and that is competition. We can take every ounce of fish caught and we can process it here in the Province but if the cost to do so does not allow us to be competitive in the world market, Mr. Speaker, then we are at a loss and we are done, we are dead in our tracks. We have to be competitive on a price per unit basis.

Our vision, Mr. Speaker, is that we work with industry, we provide supportive programs, technology integration for example, to make sure that processors are able to handle product, process fish quicker and do it with a greater yield so there is less wastage. At the end of the processing line, the product that comes out is superior. We are prepared to support that. We are doing that, Mr. Speaker. I could tell you of any number of companies that we are assisting with that today as we speak, we will continue to do that.

We also recognize the importance of marketing. That was an initiative that came out of the MOU, Mr. Speaker, that I will touch on in just a second. We recognize, like all of industry does through the MOU process, that marketing is critical for Newfoundland and Labrador. We have to move beyond fifteen, or twenty, or thirty, or forty different companies out there trying to market their little tiny niche, whether it is lobster, or a bit of a crab, or a bit of shrimp, or a bit of salt fish. We have to move beyond so that we can come together under a seafood sales consortium, or two or three, whatever it takes. We have to market Newfoundland product as one, Mr. Speaker, so that whether it comes out of Ocean Choice International in Fortune, or Triton, or Bonavista, or whether it comes from Allen's Fisheries in Corner Brook, we do not need to differentiate the product along those lines when it leaves Newfoundland and Labrador.

We need people to see that the seafood product coming out of this Province is a Newfoundland and Labrador seafood product, end of discussion. We accept that as the industry does, and we are focusing on that. We are working through a proposal now with a sales consortium that I hope we are going to be announcing something positive on in the very near future, Mr. Speaker. We are working toward the Seafood Marketing Council.

I want to digress to the MOU because it has been raised on any number of occasions in the House here. I want to touch on a couple of key points that came out of that. I am going to refer to two different sections in the MOU. I would encourage people, anyone interested, if they would like a full briefing, I have staff who were part of the process and can absolutely provide a briefing on any of the things I say here today and validate what I am about to say. We can provide you with a copy or whatever you like. I think it is important if we are going to talk MOU, the Memorandum of Understanding – which was developed by processors and harvesters, people from industry, as well as government participation; if we are going to talk about that here in this House, we need to understand what exactly it said and what its recommendations were.

Mr. Speaker, one of the key points in the Executive Summary, and I will share a few points here very quickly, it recommended that the Government of Newfoundland has to consider that in other parts of the world where buyouts were considered – and that was one of the significant aspects of the MOU, that we buy out the industry. The recommendation says that in other industries where that occurred it "only served to prolong the inevitable…" first of all, Mr. Speaker. Secondly, not only did it prolong the inevitable, but it did nothing – absolutely nothing – to restructure the industry. It amounted to nothing more than taking hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers' money on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and dishing it out into industry. Mr. Speaker, it served no purpose whatsoever.

The other thing that is very important that has never been raised in this House, the other thing that was noticed or recognized, is that the level of profitability of seafood companies in Newfoundland and Labrador is well below the Canadian average – well below the Canadian average, Mr. Speaker. I know there are some views out there that we have merchants running the industry, and so on and so forth. There probably are some companies doing better than others. I am sure members opposite could give me lots of examples.

Mr. Speaker, the point I am making on that one is that because profitability is lower than the Canadian average, the MOU suggests that companies are unable to invest in capital and make the kind of other investments in their businesses that they need to grow and prosper, and in turn become more profitable and allow them to pay more wages to their employees, thereby generating a more successful business. That is right out of the MOU, Mr. Speaker. It is not my words. It is right out of the MOU.

I know I am running a little low on time, but there are a few key points I want to touch on here. If I run out of time and you remind me, perhaps my colleagues will give me leave for a couple of moments.

Here are some significant conclusions out of the MOU, Mr. Speaker. First of all, the MOU says – and I have said this many times – the Newfoundland fishery is at a turning point, and it will not longer be in the future the way it has been in the past if we want it to succeed. Now, that is a very strong statement, but there is a very significant question to that: Do you want the fishery to succeed in the future? The entirety of industry that participated in this process told us very clearly that the fishery cannot succeed in the future the way it has tried to succeed in the past. It tells us very clearly something we all know, Mr. Speaker, and I have heard people say it here a dozen times, that the revenues generated in the fishing industry, particularly some harvesters and plant workers, but some harvesters in particular, is insufficient for them to maintain a decent income and lifestyle and support their families, and certainly insufficient to attract new entrants into the industry.

It acknowledged, Mr. Speaker, that the required level of rationalization if we were to do it, and that is the one thing that we did not do, was significant, very significant on the taxpayers' money, on the purse of the Province, and would have little or no impact on the structure of the fishery to allow it to succeed for the future. Now, that is a very strong, very direct, very clear message to any government, whether it is our side or someone opposite to us – a very strong statement to make and to consider when you are looking at what you are going to do for the future.

It recommended the lobster sustainability program, Mr. Speaker, not because of the mass buyout, but because there is a conservation element as part of that; we have done that, as members in this House know. We have a tri-party agreement with the federal government, and the FFAW, and industry. That is moving forward, Mr. Speaker, albeit slower than perhaps all of us would like to see, but we have to work through the process, and we are getting through it.

It also recommended that we need to have some significant changes to regulations, Mr. Speaker. There are two levels of the regulations that have to be looked at; one is on the provincial level, and one is on the federal level. We are having a lot of discussion publicly, particularly, about regulations around fleet separation. I know that my hon. colleague, the Leader of the Third Party, was on Open Line not long ago talking about and condemning the House somewhat for not having a motion on fleet separation.

MR. SPEAKER (Kent): Order, please!

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

MR. KING: By leave, for a few more moments?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, by leave.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and my colleagues from the Bay of Islands and Burgeo – La Poile.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a moment, if they would allow me, to put fleet separation in context, because fleet separation is but one policy, one policy of many that can either help or hurt the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr. Speaker, while my colleague from the Third Party was on criticizing government around where we are on that, the fact of the matter is that I have been clear and the Premier has been clear that we support the fleet separation policy. We have engaged with discussions with industry, we listened to people, and we understand the importance of it. If we need to do a motion in this House at some point, either I will bring it forward or my colleagues from one of the other parties are certainly welcome to do it. Every Wednesday we have an opportunity to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure that people understand fully what fleet separation means. Fleet separation means that those who catch the fish cannot process the fish, very simple. There are fleet sectors in the industry. Mr. Speaker, my critic for the Third Party stood today – and I give him credit as well by the way because he is bringing forward a lot of ideas. I think that is what he needs to do, we are talking about co-ops and other things that I think are great ideas if we can get people to support it.

Mr. Speaker, it is the mixed message that I am hearing and why I want to speak to it for a moment. While the leader is talking about support for maintaining fleet separation, the critic is using as a model for the future of the fishery the SABRI model, which is St. Anthony. Mr. Speaker, I invite the member opposite to have a chat with me after if she would like. The SABRI model has eliminated fleet separation. It is a quota assigned to the St. Anthony group and they in turn have allocated it to Clearwater. Clearwater catches the fish and Clearwater processes the fish.

I recognize every other argument that my hon. colleague made, very valid arguments and they bear repeating. I will sum them up because I cannot remember all of them. He talked about – and correct me if I am wrong – investments made in the community and the money that is going back in as a result of the profits being made by the SABRI model. I see members nodding, so I think I kind of have the gist of it. Mr. Speaker, here is the point, what the member is arguing is opposite of his leader because he is really arguing that you should do away with fleet separation because here are the benefits. He is holding St. Anthony up as a model.

Mr. Speaker, I recognize the success of St. Anthony, but I also recognize that like my colleagues opposite there are other challenges that all of us have to consider when we want to talk about getting rid of it or keeping it. I am sure we are going to debate that more. I think it is important for the House to understand that there are two different views coming across from the Third Party. The leader is saying keep fleet separation, while the critic is saying the best thing to do is to remove it because we will have more success.

MS MICHAEL: Leave denied.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member if he would conclude his remarks.

MR. KING: I certainly will. Leave denied by the Third Party. Fair enough, I appreciate that, there is a bit of criticism and it is hard to listen to.

Mr. Speaker, I will clue up by simply saying that the future of the fishery has to have a defined vision. I would be more than happy to stand at another point in time and talk further about where our government sees it going and how we will invest in it. I appreciate the leave afforded me by members of the Official Opposition.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly a pleasure to have an opportunity to make some comments and, in part, echo some of the comments that have been made in this House, and an opportunity obviously for people to speak about the provincial Budget this year, to speak about some of the things that are happening in government, and it is certainly an opportunity to speak about some district issues as well.

I have to say, obviously, I am very fortunate; I have a tremendous district, The Isles of Notre Dame. I have some thirty-seven communities. It is primarily a fishing district where we have been able to do some diversification through tourism and so on, but, Mr. Speaker, a tremendous district, one that is very well known in the Province. It has a rich history both in the fishery, in health care, and in tourism as well. I am very proud of the district that I represent and very pleased to have an opportunity to stand and make some comments about the Budget and tie it into our district as well.

Mr. Speaker, I want to speak a little bit about rural Newfoundland and Labrador, because I know previous to the election last fall there was much debate in this House about rural Newfoundland and Labrador and much criticism about what our government is doing, but this session it seems to be very little discussion about rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr. Speaker, we can take that as a positive or a negative, but I certainly see it as a positive, as a lot of good things are happening in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. There are challenges, without question, but overall rural Newfoundland and Labrador is strong and very vibrant in many, many areas.

I particularly want to reference a few things – some of the good things that are happening in my district. Coming up soon there will be an event in Twillingate, the Let Them Be Kids national program. They have done a national documentary on playgrounds and the capacity building in communities. The residents of Twillingate were fortunate enough to be successful with the program last year, some 400 residents showed up. I was a part of that for the day, it was an absolutely wonderful day, and we have been fortunate enough to be selected to be a part of the documentary, which will be aired on June 23, coming up. I certainly encourage people to come out; it is a great community event, great community capacity building as well.

Some other good things that are happening – I know we have some 50 Plus Clubs in our district, as many members do. I know the 50 Plus Club on Fogo Island and Twillingate and New World Island, very active, very strong groups, and we are certainly able to support them where we can, but I have to say good things are happening there for the 50 Plus groups, some good leaderships, some good activity. I understand that some of the social activities are certainly very important to get people out and engaged as well.

As well, Mr. Speaker, the minister, I believe, is doing a tremendous job in the fishery and is understanding of the issues in the fishery. I point to my own district. Obviously, some-thirty-seven communities have been born out of the fishery; right now the fishery has been strong in our district. I give credit to the processors who are working hard with the plant workers and harvesters. We are looking forward to success again this year. Certainly, the seal hunt was a tremendous success for those who had an opportunity to take part in it. That is something positive as well.

Mr. Speaker, another point that I will make is the whole Shorefast development on Fogo Island. I think people of the Province have taken notice. There has been tremendous marketing and advertising and publicity about the whole Shorefast development. It is a tremendous development happening on Fogo Island. Some sixty to eighty people have been employed full-time for over three years. Not only is it an economic driver but it is a recognition of the strength and the culture on Fogo Island. It has helped diversify the economy somewhat. We are looking forward to that opening up this fall, Mr. Speaker. I think it is going to be a great event. It is going to be a great opportunity. I think it is going to be a tremendous addition to tourism in this Province and will help us be on the cutting edge and leading edge of ecotourism around the globe. I look forward to that; it is certainly something very positive in our district.

Mr. Speaker, rural Newfoundland and Labrador; I have had an opportunity, obviously, to live in rural Newfoundland and Labrador all of my life and certainly have enjoyed it. There comes with it so many benefits in terms of seeing the volunteers; the sense of community is very strong. One could certainly discuss that rural Newfoundland and Labrador is evolving and is changing.

I cannot help but comment on areas such as the Burin Peninsula, Bonavista Peninsula, and Black Tickle; these communities, these one-industry communities, are going through a very difficult time. I will say that our history has not always been kind to one-industry towns. I know in Twillingate, our plant closed in the early 1990s. We can go to Baie Verte where the mine shut down, Stephenville and Grand Falls-Windsor where we saw paper mills shut down, and go down to Harbour Breton where we saw closures. It has been a challenge, but our rural communities are very resilient. They are strong. There is strong leadership; the leadership rises above. I am very pleased that our government, in terms of the new committee that has been formed, will take action and be proactive to work with these leaders, work with these people who have been currently displaced in their communities, and help them get through a very difficult time.

I can only point to some of the other communities where we have been able to have success and to offer them some sort of encouragement and support. Hopefully by working with government and working through these issues we are able to ensure that these people can certainly stay in their regions, continue on, and build a new economy.

Mr. Speaker, in talking about some of the rural areas and what we have seen, we can only point to the Burin Peninsula as well, in terms of the St. Lawrence fluorspar mine and new investments, new opportunity, and new jobs. It is exciting for the area and it is something that we have seen rise out of some desperate times previously before. It is a good example of what can happen and it is very near to the people of the Burin Peninsula.

Mr. Speaker, what has happened, a lot of our rural communities as well, as we know, have been dependent on the fishery. I still believe there are a lot of positives in the fishery, a very strong industry.

What we have seen is a diversification, as well, into tourism. We have seen tourism growth in this Province unprecedented. Some 12,000 people work in the tourism industry – tremendous investment from the private sector, tremendous support from non-profit groups and volunteers. Mr. Speaker, this industry last year was worth some $880 million in this Province. We are still experiencing growth; it is great for our rural economies particularly. What we are trying to do is continue to build on the strengths of our people, our culture, and our environment. I will speak to some of the tourism aspects a little later.

This is an opportunity to reflect on a Budget, to think about my own district and so many rural parts of the Province. When we look at this Budget, we will have an opportunity to stand in this House and vote for the Budget; Opposition members will have an opportunity, obviously, to ask questions, which is very important; they too will get an opportunity to stand and vote on some of the Budget decisions that will have an impact on their districts, just like it will on my district and others in this House.

Mr. Speaker, when we talk about a Budget, trying to find a balance, and trying to offer as much as we can to support a number of areas – we look at municipalities. We all have municipalities, volunteer people who are working hard to try and improve their community. We would like nothing better than the opportunity to be able to support them.

Mr. Speaker, whether it is through MOGs, whether it is through Municipal Capital Funding for road work, for water and sewer issues, for recreation infrastructure, all of this is important to our communities and important to our young people. It is important to help get young people to move to our communities. That is an important piece of this Budget. When we think about voting on a Budget we have to think about the impact on our municipalities.

As well, Mr. Speaker, we talk about education; people stand in this House and talk about – we hear some criticisms of our education system. Mr. Speaker, I spent twenty years in the education system and I talked to a lot of friends and colleagues who have been there and are currently still there. They comment on how much we have seen, how positive it has been in the education system and the investments that have been made to help ensure that we have safe, clean school environments. Where learning atmospheres, Mr. Speaker, are positive; where we provide equipment and whiteboards, computers and skilled trades units and phys. ed. equipment. All of that, Mr. Speaker, help improve our education system; added to new programs, after school initiatives, Mr. Speaker, and a tremendous investment of building new schools and taking care of building envelopes. All of this, Mr. Speaker, adds to our education system but it certainly adds to a community as well. These are important considerations when you are doing a budget. When we bring forward a budget with investments coming, we expect people to be able to stand and support that because we all want that for our communities.

We talk about health care, probably the number one concern of our government and throughout the Province. Without question, health means everything. Mr. Speaker, when we look at our health needs and we look at our rural hospitals and the need for investments in our rural hospitals and our clinics we have seen it in my district, Mr. Speaker, and we have seen it all around the Province because it is one of our priorities. When we put in new equipment and dialysis units, Mr. Speaker, invest in the provincial drug programs, and the list goes on of what we are trying to do. Mr. Speaker, we would be the first to say we want to do more. There are other areas we want to get into, and when we can we will, Mr. Speaker, but health care is obviously critical and important. When we are striking a balance to find and determine how we are going to spend our money in this year's Budget, health care is obviously a priority and we will have an opportunity to stand in this House. Opposition members will have an opportunity to stand in this House and support the investment in health care in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, when we talk about budgets and trying to do more, we are always listening and trying to figure out ways in which we can spend our money in better ways to benefit the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, but there is a reality, Mr. Speaker. There is a reality, and that is the fact that there is only so much money for us to make these decisions with. Right now, as we heard today, almost 40 per cent of the revenues in this Province comes from a non-renewable resource, that being oil.

Mr. Speaker, we know, everybody knows in this Province that we have gone through a period of prosperity. We have had an opportunity to reinvest, to help build the infrastructure of the Province; billions of dollars have been spent. Mr. Speaker, we have had an opportunity to pay down debt and save on interest charges so we have more money to develop, whether it is infrastructure or programming.

Mr. Speaker, we have invested in roads, schools, and health care, but there is a reality, that too will wear out and that too will need to be replaced in time. The question then becomes: Where will the money come from? How do we manage it now so that tomorrow we are still in a great place? Whether it is paying down debt or looking after pensions, Mr. Speaker, as well, making decisions with some vision and foresight that will enable us, when we move from the non-renewable resources into the renewable area.

We talk about Muskrat Falls. It comes up all the time, Mr. Speaker, and so far we are getting some mixed messages from the opposite side, but we will see when we stand and vote in this House. The reality is, Mr. Speaker, we have identified that we need power and we all know there are a number of options to get power. We also know through research and through the experts – and the debate will continue, Mr. Speaker – the least-cost option at this point is obviously to develop Muskrat Falls. If we need the power and it is the least-cost option, Mr. Speaker, there are so many benefits. There are benefits in terms of thousands of jobs. There are benefits in terms of development in Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, beyond all of that, the reality is in order for us to develop budgets to be able to continue to do what we are doing in this Province, we have to have the revenue. The development of a renewable resource will give us that revenue, Mr. Speaker. Beyond all of this discussion and making sure we are making the right decisions, there is still the issue of revenue that we will need to be able to make these investments and to be able to maintain quality living in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the other issue I want to talk about today are the ferry issues. There are a lot of reasons why I want to speak about the ferry issues, but in this particular Budget there are some $5 million recognized for the replacement of the Earl W. Winsor on the Fogo Island - Change Islands ferry run. Another good reason when this Budget comes forward that I would expect members of this House and certainly members of the Opposition to stand and support the Budget, because they have concerns with our ferry issues, Mr. Speaker, and we are addressing them.

I want to say to the people of Change Islands and Fogo Island; I have had many e-mails and calls. I get back to those and have many good discussions, Mr. Speaker. I fully realize the importance of the ferry services not only to local residents but to commercial traffic, to the business sector on the islands, to support for the Fogo Island Co-op, to support for health care needs, Mr. Speaker, and certainly for the travelling tourists as well. It is absolutely critical to the economy of these islands. I have had many discussions, and I have to say, Mr. Speaker, overall, people have been very understanding and co-operative. It is frustrating. It has been very difficult at times, but I can assure you, personally as MHA and certainly the Minister of Transportation and Works, we are engaged, have discussions just about every day, engaged on these issues, trying to do what we can to get, obviously in this particular case, the Winsor, back in service and get her back on the run for Fogo Island and Change Islands, and we will continue to do that every day until we can get it out. Hopefully, in the next couple of days, Mr. Speaker, we will get that positive news.

Beyond that, there are other challenges and issues that we are aware of, we are continuously working with committees and representatives from the community, and recognizing as well throughout the ferry system what happens on Fogo Island and Change Islands does have an impact on the lives of others in other communities, and that has to be factored in, certainly from the minister's perspective as well.

Mr. Speaker, we are moving forward. I think the most positive news here is that our government has made a commitment to a ferry strategy, we have made a commitment to support these rural communities, the islands, and we are currently following a path with our ferry strategy, Mr. Speaker. The announcement in the Budget of $5 million for the replacement of the Earl W. Winsor, we are right on target. In another week or two, we hope to have the final design and draft done for the replacement. It has already been announced. We will do an expression of interest, and we will go out and see what it is going to cost, what the time frames are, which is an important part of the process that has to take place. I am absolutely delighted that this Budget supports that process, Mr. Speaker, and more importantly, shows our government's commitment to the people of Fogo Island and Change Islands, and certainly to support their economy and the opportunities for people who travel back and forth.

So, Mr. Speaker, a very important issue, and one that I am looking forward to when the Budget passes we can get moving with this and help support what has obviously been a very challenging and difficult issue. Again, to reassure people that we are working every day on those issues, and I looking forward to some improvements and continuing good communication with the people of Fogo Island and Change Islands.

Mr. Speaker, I have about five minutes left. I just want to make a couple of comments, specifically about tourism, culture and recreation, particularly tourism and culture; one, because it is so important to the Province, and it is obviously very important to The Isles of Notre Dame as well. We are still getting some criticisms. The Member for The Straits – White Bay North stands up and talks about cellphone coverage. Mr. Speaker, the member fully knows that the issue of cellphone coverage, the issue of broadband in particular, it is an issue that is regulated by the CRTC of the federal government; it is an issue that requires the service providers to be able to determine a business case. Mr. Speaker, we are well aware of that, but as a government, we are making investments, significant investments to try and work with these service providers and to help improve the system. I understand a number of communities in his region recently were approved. Mr. Speaker, good things are happening, we are not ignoring that issue, we have come a long ways, we have what we call the last mile in a lot of cases, Mr. Speaker, and we are working with providers to do what we can.

To parlay that right into trouble with the tourism industry, when you can stand on your feet and say there are 30,000 visitors, when you can stand on your feet – and maybe he does not realize it, it is probably one of the premiere destinations in the Province. It is a place where tourists go and obviously cell coverage or the lack thereof has not been an impact if you have 30,000 visitors. Do you have any idea how many regions of this Province would like to get 30,000 visitors?

Mr. Speaker, the efforts of the tourism industry, the ads, the VICs, the support, it is absolutely working. Mr. Speaker, I want to say would better broadband help? Would cell coverage help? There is no question about that, Mr. Speaker, but I do not see that as a dark cloud, as a problem with our tourism industry. It is something we have to work towards, Mr. Speaker. You cannot stand and every time stand when – and the member's colleague who sits there gets on the Open Line shows and talks about the cuts to the arts, talks about the ads, the tourism ads and the wonderful ads that we have. Mr. Speaker, last night the member sat and said it is time. It is time to stop putting the dark cloud on tourism in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: It is absolutely time. We have unprecedented numbers in this Province, over 500,000 in 2010. We have wonderful ads that you say; we have so many volunteers, private investment, non-profit sector; we have the efforts of their tourism board, Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador; we have the efforts of our destination management organizations all working together to try to build a strong industry to be positive messaging. We are investing millions and we are having tremendous success. The last thing we need is someone to make the conclusion that the bottom is falling out of her and tourism is gone, because that is not the case, Mr. Speaker – it is not the case, not at all.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, the arts in this Province are absolutely critical; it is a part of who we are. I have stood in the House and I have supported the arts. Do you know what? I know the Member for St. John's Centre has a great passion – and I respect that and I am sure the people of the arts community do as well, and no doubt has a great background. Mr. Speaker, the issue of arts funding in this Province was a priority for this government. Let me give you some idea of far we have come: since 2006, we have spent $56 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. DALLEY: Fifty-six million dollars in culture and heritage in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, the Cultural Economic Development Program – that is the program, Mr. Speaker, where we can help directly fund those who are responsible for our arts and culture in this Province. That program itself has gone from $825,000 in 2004 to $2.95 million in 2011.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. DALLEY: Almost $3 million, Mr. Speaker, but yet, the cuts – all doom and gloom.

Mr. Speaker, we have invested in arts and culture centres, over $3 million. The Newfoundland and Labrador –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. DALLEY: By leave, to clue up?

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

The hon. Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, by leave.

MR. DALLEY: The Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council, Mr. Speaker, there was a time when they got $900,000. That $900,000 to the Arts Council, Mr. Speaker, is funding that went directly to artists; there are some administration aspects of it, but it goes directly to artists, and you know what? Money well spent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: These artists – particularly the opportunity to support them in their professional careers; we need them. They are great ambassadors for the Province. They were getting $900,000, money well spent. Now, Mr. Speaker, recognition – maybe what we need here is some recognition; this government stood up and we currently put not $900,000, Mr. Speaker, $2.11 million in to support the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: This funding, Mr. Speaker, goes directly to professional artists.

Now, Mr. Speaker, all of that – I will conclude. The negative comments do not help our tourism industry. It is a valuable industry, all of those people who work in it. The volunteers, the private investment, all of that is important.

Mr. Speaker, we have had tremendous success with our ads. I will say the opportunity to put more money will come one day and we will do that. The opportunity will come because of initiatives of this government that we will get broadband and we will improve cell coverage; when it does, we will continue to see the growth and efforts that we have seen from this government to help support tourism and grow the economy of this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It gives me great pleasure again today to be able to stand in this hon. House and speak about some of the good things that are happening in my district and speak to the amendment to the motion. I spoke last week on the sub-amendment and I did not support that. I want to say that I am going to speak today on the amendment and I am not going to support that either, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of things happening in my district. I just want to talk a bit about my district today, because my district is heavily involved in the fishery. Every weekend when I go out to my district I take a visit to the wharf to have a chat to some of the fishermen to see how things are going. It is good to see that a lot of my harbours right now are pretty much empty. The fishermen are moved to other places in Newfoundland fishing the crab and things are really, really looking up for the crab fishery in the district. I will speak a little bit more about that later on, Mr. Speaker.

I want to talk about some of the things that are really, really important to the seniors, the low-income family people, and to the people in my district in general. I want to talk about the housing program, for instance, Mr. Speaker. When I talk about housing programs I am talking the repair programs where the government pay a $5,000 grant to help people to repair their homes and that. Over the last four years in my district a lot of people have really taken advantage of these programs.

I want to tell you a story about something that I did. Since I have been an MHA, Mr. Speaker, I have been up on the roof of thirty-seven houses taking pictures and helping out the seniors in getting the grants. That is one thing that I can really pat myself on the back for. I am pleased with that and so are they; so are they, Mr. Speaker.

I was out to this home; I got a call one time during the winter. I do not get much time to do any skidooing or anything like that because I am always out in the district. In the event that somebody wants to see me or talk to me, I am always there for them. Myself, I am available at all times; I make myself as accessible as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I had my skidoo suit on one morning and I was going to go in the country. I had my skidoo taken out, started up, and warming up, and I got a call from this lady out in the district. She wanted to see me. I said, is it important? She said, not really, but when you get the chance, I want to see you. Mr. Speaker, my wife said to me, what are you going to do? I said, I will tell you what I am going to do; I am going to put my skidoo back in the shed, I am going to take off my skidoo suit, and I am going to go see that lady. That is what I did, Mr. Speaker. I am going to tell you now, that lady today is very pleased with the roof of her house done, some siding and windows on her home, to see the house done. That is really, really good news.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Mr. Speaker, the Prescription Drug Plan as well, has been really, really a good thing for the people in the district, not only in my district but throughout the whole Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I am going to tell you, a lot of people out there do not understand this Prescription Drug Plan, and a lot of people do not know how it would work for them. Some people are paying and do not really check into it. Some people do not make a call to their MHA and talk to them about the Prescription Drug Plan.

I had a lady back in, I think it was November of this past year, and she was in the Health Sciences. She called my office one day, and she was really upset because she was only making $875 as a senior single, and she talked to me about the drugs that she had to take, which was over $200. She was crying on the phone to me, she said: I do not know what I am going to do; I have $875 I am getting in a month. What am I going to do? I said, why, what is the problem? She said, I am already paying $300 in drugs right now and I have another $200 drugs that I have to take because it is life-threatening to me if I do not take it. Anyway, we took the names of the drugs and we checked out the drugs with the department. At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, when I called her back, she only had to pay $78 a month, which makes a big difference. These are the kinds of things that really help in the district, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: The adult dental plan certainly is a good benefit to people, and a lot of people in my district. I am hearing from other colleagues in the House that this dental plan is doing great. We are getting great results from all around the Province as well.

The freeze on tuition is another big one. Almost everywhere you go and you talk to some of the students, they are really, really pleased with the freeze on tuition. The home heating rebate is another one, Mr. Speaker. A lot of people were a bit scared this year that they were going to lose their home heating rebate because of other announcements that we made. We made things a lot better for the seniors and for low-income families. The home rental subsidy is another important funding for the district and has been used quite often from some people in my district.

The discount to seniors is another one. I listened to Randy Simms on Open Line, and I read an article one weekend about a couple of weeks ago in the paper that he had in there from – I guess the writing that he puts in every week. He was saying that he did not agree with the seniors getting the discounts, he did not really agree with that. He did not think they should be the only ones who should get it. He thought that everybody should get it, but there is only so much money to go around. We have talked about that in this House; a lot of people have talked about that.

The improvement to home care is another one that is important to my district. An increase in the wages of home support workers is another very important one. The increases in minimum wage and child care allowances, the Progressive Family Growth Benefit, and the Firefighters' Tax Credit is certainly of benefit to the people in my district, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, also over the last four years we have seen quite a bit of work done on the roads in my district as well. I am going to talk a little later on that. I am sure I am going to get another opportunity to get up on the Budget. I have a lot of things here I want to talk about, and I have my agenda set here so I am going to just carry on. Mr. Speaker, it certainly is a lot of important things in the infrastructure for instance with the towns, water and sewer projects, things like that. It is very important to the people in the district as well.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about the fishery, because the fishery is very important to my district and has been very important to my district over the many years. We have different fisheries in my district. We have the ground fishery in Arnold's Cove for instance. The other day there was a speaker up - I think it was the Premier - who mentioned about the money that we put in Arnold's Cove back a few years ago to maintain the plant in Arnold's Cove. She talked about Bruce Wareham, who is the owner of the plant down there and how he put his own money into the plant to keep that plant going. I must say, Mr. Speaker, I have met with Bruce Wareham several times, a very fine gentleman I might say.

The Arnold's Cove plant this year has taken a downturn because of the amount of cod that they were getting over the years. The cod fishery this year has been down. It has been down for a reason, Mr. Speaker. It is down because the prices for the crab fishery have gone up. We have seen that over the last couple of years really, in 2010 and 2011. We have been on the upswing with the crab again and now the cod fishery is pretty much on hold with the crab fishermen because once you make so many dollars in the crab fishery they do not seem to want to fish the cod. That might sound odd, but that is the way it is. We have a lot of people who are in the sixty and sixty-five-footers, the fifty-five-footers who holds a codfish licence but do not fish the codfish because they do not have the time. They have a shrimp licence, they have a crab licence and they have quite a bit of crab to catch. It takes pretty much all their year to get it.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to look at the global market with regard to shrimp and crab. If you look in 2008, for instance, 98.6 per cent of shrimp went into Denmark; Russia was 66.3 per cent; United States, 9.2 per cent; and China was 10.9 per cent; whereas Japan was 13.9 per cent. The crab for the United States in 2008 was 62.1 per cent; China was 62 per cent; and Japan, 24 per cent. Shrimp in 2010 in the United Kingdom was 76 per cent; Denmark, 99.6 per cent, which was up 1 per cent; and Russia was 90.7 per cent. The crab in 2010 in the United States was 71 per cent, and China was 59.2 per cent.

The groundfish, Mr. Speaker, in the United Kingdom was 17.7 per cent whereas the crab was up – and this is the point I want to make. The crab was going into the market, as you can see by the percentage, but on the groundfish, the United Kingdom was 17.7 per cent into the market. China was only 11 per cent; the United States, 9.4 per cent; and Russia and Denmark were less than 2 per cent, Mr. Speaker. So there is a big difference in the marketing of the product that is going into the markets.

We look at the fish plant closures we have today. My heart and soul goes out to the people who are in these plants because over the years, as I spoke last week, I worked in the plants. I lived through that and I know what it is like to be in a fish plant that closes down with no future left before you, only to go out into another world of other uncertainties. It is a little bit different today than it was in 1985 because a lot of the people in 1985, Mr. Speaker, were at a younger age. Today in Marystown and Burin, they are at a lot older age. When it comes to retraining and things like that, it is certainly going to be a difficulty for those people to retrain and to get into a workplace that they certainly would enjoy. They have been at for years, the fish plant was always their bread and butter, and that was their lifestyle.

Mr. Speaker, when I spoke last week, I spoke on the salt fish co-operation and I spoke how salt fish was one time a fishery. I heard my colleague on the other side of the House for Torngat yesterday when he spoke. He said that was a way of the fishery in Labrador, Mr. Speaker. It certainly was a way of the fishery in Labrador back in my father and my grandfather's day. My colleague here next to me, he said that his father or grandfather was also a skipper on the boats that used to go back and forth to Labrador. When we hear of the fishery changing, it is certainly on a cycle, Mr. Speaker.

When I talked about the restructuring in 1987 when FPI was restructured and took over from Bonavista Cold Storage and the Lake Group, I talked about similar to what we are saying today when we say: Let us form an all-party committee to see what we can do with the fishery. Well, Mr. Speaker, this committee was set up by Ottawa back in 1997. That committee went around the Province and met with everybody in the Province. They had all kinds of ideas, I might say. At one point, Michael Kirby was talking about putting an airport in Hermitage to fly people over to go to work over in Gaultois. That was the kind of ideas they were going to come up with – we restructure the fishery. That happened at that time.

The federal government pumped money into the fishery at the end, and I heard our Minister of Fisheries today when he spoke and he talked about how things were changing in the fishery and the MOU and how the MOU mentioned that you just cannot keep pumping money in because it is only band-aid solutions. When a product is not there, if you give a fish plant or a company $10 million to buy a product and the product is being governed by the federal government and it is still in the water, how do you buy it? How do you keep that plant open? That is the big question. If the fish is not there, they say that the cod fish is not there, and the scientists say it is not there.

I am going to tell you this now and I want this to go on record personally from me: Once the crab fishery fails, you will see the cod fishery come back. There is no doubt, no question in my mind, that that is going to happen in the years. It is only a matter of a few more years and we are going to see that happening, that change is coming back. Any plants that are out there like the Arnold's Cove plant right now is not getting the quotas, in a couple of years time, the quotas will be there. You rest assured of that, Mr. Speaker, that is going to happen. Because around our shores, in our bays, and I have a small boat myself and I go out in the food fishery and I am going to tell you when you cannot get the fish off the screen on your fish finder for cod fish that is in the bays, and you see that with a thirty-five footer, you see it with everybody who is fishing around the bays you can see it, when you see that happening, then there is a surplus there for somewhere down the road.

It is like one of the members from the Third Party said yesterday, the government has a $3 billion pocket or money in their sock somewhere; it is almost the same thing with the fishery. I think that it is all being planned as we move ahead into the future and I think that the fishery is going to come back. I honestly do, Mr. Speaker. There is a lot of healthy cod around this Province.

Also, I want to point out – I will get my notes back on track here - I want to look at the decreases of fish over the last four years as well, Mr. Speaker. I want to look at 2008. The cod landings in 2008 were 17,599 tons, Mr. Speaker. Landed value was $28,278,000.

Cod in 2011, just look at the decrease. The cod in 2011 is down from 17,599 in 2008 to 9,747 in 2011, a big decrease. This is why we are seeing the trend of our plants closing, because the products are not there and they have to make the decision.

Mr. Speaker, I was talking about the Arnold's Cove and the product in Arnold's Cove. Last year something happened in Arnold's Cove. They were into an eight-month operation; this year I think they are down to probably a four- or five-month operation. It is not because the cod fish is not there. The problem with Arnold's Cove is the cod fish is not caught. The licences – people have are crab licenses; they are not out fishing the cod. The quotas are there but the cod is not being caught. That is one of the things I want to point out with the Arnold's Cove plant, Mr. Speaker.

We also look at Marystown, for instance; Marystown used to produce yellowtail. In 2008, flounder and yellowtail was at 10,303 metric tons; landed value was $6,384,000, Mr. Speaker. Yellowtail in 2011 is down to 3,955 tons. You can see the landings are down and the value went down to $2,179,000.

The crab fishery, if you look at the upswing on the crab, in 2008 the crab was at 52,774 tons and today in 2011 we are at 52,946 tons. Mr. Speaker, here is the difference: in 2008 the landed value for crab was $179,596,000 and in 2011 the landed value was $250,957,000 – a big difference in the amount of landed value for the crab.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PEACH: This is why we are seeing the trend of the crab fishery versus the cod fishery. If you look at the cod that was caught in 2008 and 2009, and you look at the value of the cod that is caught now in the last year or two since the price of the crab went up, the value of the cod has been down; the groundfish has been down, Mr. Speaker. It certainly makes a big difference in the fishery.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about some other areas of the fishery that we spent some money in that are in our Budget. We look at almost $200 million available for businesses to facilitate growth and development in all regions of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker: $3.8 million for the next installation of a five-year commitment to fisheries science at the Centre for Fisheries Ecosystems Research and Fisheries and Marine Centre; $2.2 million for the Fisheries Technology and New Opportunities Program for fishing industry research and development as part of the three-year $6.6 million total investment; $1 million to expand support for the Canadian Centre for Fisheries Innovation; a further $300,000 over the next two years to the Fisheries Innovation and development of a Sustainable Fishery resource and Oceans Policy, bringing the total amount of investments to over $600,000, Mr. Speaker.

The annual seal hunt this year, Mr. Speaker, I just want to speak on that for a minute. The seal plant of Carino is in my district, and this past year the $3.6 million that was announced to Carino for buying of pelts in South Dildo was certainly a great investment for this government. It was an investment that kept that plant open, it was an investment that saw a lot of smiles on a lot of faces of the people in our seal fishery, and it certainly is keeping our seal fishery alive. There are a lot of benefits coming out of that, too, Mr. Speaker, a lot of benefits coming out of that, because we see twenty-five full-time jobs there this year that will be there, and also we see fifteen seasonal jobs, for a total of fifty.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave to clue up.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue, by leave.

MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I will be just a minute.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to get a chance to speak on the Budget again in another short while, so with that I am going to clue up. I want to thank everybody for their listening attentively to me and I will get a chance to speak again.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

It is a pleasure to rise today, and I want to bring some remarks around municipalities, particularly in my district, but before I go there I just wanted to recap something that I noticed last night. A few of us spoke to it, but I think it is worth mentioning again because it was a wonderful thing to see. As many of you do, we all tune into the news or watch VOCM or whatever the case is, we will look online. We cannot watch VOCM, listen to VOCM. Something very interesting happened.

As we all know, the federal NDP Leader was in town last week for their fundraiser. He came out in support – not in support, but fully in support of Muskrat Falls, which really gets me thinking. Of course, we hear a lot of the opposing of Muskrat Falls from the opposite party here, the Third Party. If you look across this country, not only was the late Leader of the NDP fully in support of Muskrat Falls, now the new leader. Not only is he in support, his full Quebec caucus is in support of it.

We have NDP MPs in Quebec fully in support of Muskrat Falls. I look across the way and I think I have found the only five NDP in the Country of Canada who oppose Muskrat Falls. For what reasons, I am not sure. The interesting thing was while it was called a belly flop of a speech yesterday, I would say it was a flip-flop of a speech, because I see the Leader of the Third Party starting to retract. She knows she is not going to win favour with the federal party and she is trying to fall in-line with the federal party. She sees obviously her direction where she is sending her party is not in-line with the federal counterparts. What we seen yesterday, we did not see her coming out and fully supporting Muskrat Falls, but we see her backpedalling somewhat. She is backpedalling. She is a little bit wishy-washy. I would say probably two days ago she was fully opposed to Muskrat Falls. I will give her credit now, she is on the fence.

I would say what makes a great leader is someone who can make tough decisions, and I think that is what our Premier has done. She is making a decision that is to the benefit of every Newfoundlander and Labradorian. This is what we lack from the Third Party, in particular the Leader of the Third Party. We have seen a transformation, we have seen it moving, and I think we are going to continue to see that.

I know the member behind me has made some prophecies about the fishery. I am going to make a prophecy tonight that the provincial NDP, all five, will be in support of Muskrat Falls before too long. Hopefully it is not too long, but I can see it in the very near future. We are going to have everyone in agreement because it is the right decision.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: I wanted to touch on municipalities. The Minister of Municipal Affairs today touched on it. Sometimes we get lost in the big numbers and he had made a statement there. Since 2008, we have spent $500 million on capital infrastructure in municipalities, which is huge. It is almost to the point where you cannot comprehend, the number is so large. I want to talk a little bit about my own district and how that relates. When you talk about the specific examples, it really puts it in perspective and you can see the good work government that has done.

First I want to speak to Glovertown, my own hometown, which is one of those towns - you are out around the bay, it is a town that actually has seen the population grow in the last number of years. It is a thriving community, lots of young families moving in. It is what you want to see in rural Newfoundland. There are a number of communities like Glovertown, which is a great thing.

I have just a couple of things; approval of a new health care clinic, which I was so pleased with. It was announced, not in this Budget but the one before. We have continued on with funding in this year's Budget. We are going to see construction starting on that some time soon. It is such a huge, huge thing to a small community. You are not in a city where obviously you have hospitals. We rely on G.B. Cross in Clarenville, as well as James Paton in Gander. Of course, our primary clinic is so vitally important. That is something that has been absolutely ignored for years and years. It was actually embarrassing. We had the Minister of Health, not the current one but the former Minister of Health out and looked at it. He seen it, soon after walking through the doors he saw the need and we addressed it. Like I said, that is going to be starting construction really soon and that is something, obviously, that is tremendous for the people in my district.

A new pumper truck, interestingly enough I heard last year, some people said: well, you have a fire truck given to Glovertown, that an election ploy. That is one of those election fire trucks. I reminded people, that actually since 2003 we have gotten new fire trucks for not only Glovertown, but Gambo, Port Blandford, Musgravetown, and even a refurbished truck for the Island of St. Brendan's. While people claim we have election budgets, I would argue that many of our budgets seem like they are typical election budgets because they have been so good, there has been so much stuff done.

Development of a beautiful marina; development, you want things that bring people in, not only tourists but residents, bring residents into the town. We have a beautiful tourism gem out there and a beautiful marina that has been developed. That was done through a combination of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development at the time, of course, IBRD now. Through CEP programs, which has been absolutely fantastic out in rural Newfoundland and Labrador; JCP programs, partnering was ACOA, the town, it is exactly how it should work, a partnering. It has been absolutely fantastic, so that continues.

A new municipal playground, we talked about recreation. This is not something that happened only in Glovertown, of course, this is something that happens throughout my district and throughout the Province. There has been so much money put into recreation.

Again, we preach we want a young, vibrant population. We want to attract people in. If we want people to come here we have to give them a reason to do so. That is the recreation, it is fantastic. Obviously, it is a big attraction for young families. Water and sewer infrastructure, again, loads spent in that, as well as municipal paving.

Now I just want to quickly go through district wide. Again, you have to recognize, this is just my district, of course, but there has been some huge, huge investments. A new municipal building in Gambo over $1.5 million; Bunyan's Cove, this is a town that only has a small population and for years and years it has been neglected because they could never, ever get anything through municipal capital works because, of course, the ratio 50-50, they just could not come up with their own cash. As we all know, a number of years ago our government came up with a 90-10. All of a sudden this opens a door for so many small communities that before could not afford any of these projects. It was just outside of their realm. Of course, through that they were able to get approved for over $500,000 for water and sewer, so vitally important.

Again, water and sewer right throughout the Eastport Peninsula; fire trucks I had said, a number of those. Much needed paving throughout every town, and that is something that has been neglected – and when I hear members get up and you talk about surveys on-line and where are the worst roads. My lord, what if we had a survey ten years ago? This Province has come so far with regard to paving. It is not the same place. Of course, there are needs, there is no doubt about that, and there is going to be needs because as you pave roads the road next to it obviously ages and our weather does not lend itself to having asphalt around for twenty-five years. We are not blessed with the weather of California. Obviously, it is a continuing process, we are always chasing after that, but this government has made huge investments in the road paving, and I think well spent, obviously.

Now, there was something that was brought up a couple of times actually, and I get to speak about ferries quite a bit because of course my neighbour here is from Bell Island, so we have discussions surrounding ferries quite often. I was one of the members actually who had the benefit of getting one of the first two ferries; I got the second one, the Grace Sparkes. It is funny because when you talk to the people in the town, I can remember when we did a ribbon cutting ceremony and I was fortunate enough to have the Minister of Transportation and Works come down, and the town was just so elated and the way that they treated us and the minister, it was great to see. It was something that they waited for, for so long. I am sure most of you have probably heard the Mayor of St. Brendan's on Open Line. Veronica is her name, and I am sure she would not mind me using her name. She is on there quite a bit and she is adamant, she said: If a Liberal ever stepped foot on this island again, I would kick them off within five minutes. I asked her why and she said: For years and years and years we have been neglected. They had at the time a minister who was in government and they used to plea with him all the time try to get us a ferry, because again this is our lifeline – no investments whatsoever.

When I hear members opposite talk about ferries, I cannot believe they even have the gall to mention the word ferry. Because if I remember correctly, I have heard a number of times the ferries before these two that were created were actually under the Peckford Administration that they were sanctioned. That is how long ago it was. We have had such a space where absolutely nothing was done with the ferries – a bit of paint. I say that and people might say well, there was more than paint; not much more than paint. The ferry system was just dismal. Of course we still have a ways to go, but we are working towards it. We have a strategy in there for six new ferries as well and we are putting our money into it. We have turned out two; we are going to be turning out more soon. I would say: Be patient, we are working throughout, we obviously see the need, and we have strong voices in government putting that forward.

It is always hard to follow up the Member for Bellevue if you are going to talk about the fishery, but it is something I want to talk about because, like many people over on this side, my district has a number of fish plants. I actually have four in the district: Happy Adventure, Salvage, Glovertown, Dover, and a small operation in St. Brendan's. I do not have to make up the hypothetical situation. I heard the Leader of the Third Party yesterday say: Well, what if I did have a fishery in Quidi Vidi? What if I did, would you help me? How foolish. What a statement: if I had a fish plant. Well, I do have fish plants. I have had numbers of meetings with processors out in my area, harvesters and fishermen, and I have also had the Minister of Fisheries out to speak with them as well. Things are going generally good. There are always challenges. Of course there are. They are going very good, and I speak to them on a regular basis. Obviously, I am on the ground and I do not have to give hypothetical situations. What if I did have one? I have a number of them.

Actually, my first job was in the fish plant, and unlike cutting out cod tongues, I made boxes for one cent each. I do not know how that would stack up against cutting out cod tongues, but I can remember I did that for the first three years of my working life. I do not have overly fond memories of it, but it was great as a young fellow getting a first job.

As some of you may know, I go on Twitter every now and again, and I see what is being said. Twitter is a great tool, if used correctly. The Opposition parties as well as government use it. I saw an interesting tweet – I do not know exactly when it was, I will say a couple of days ago – from the Leader of the Third Party. If I may quote her tweet, Mr. Speaker: I asked many times but not once did premier or minister discuss plan for rebuilding fisheries. They have no plan….

Is she right? I do not know. Did they comment on it? Did she get any type of interaction from government? Let us put this in perspective. Again, the Minister of Education will correct me if I am wrong, but I think it was twenty-three months that the Leader of the Third Party did not ask one question related to the fishery. If she had a mouthful of fish, she could not say the word – twenty-three months.

Now, are we just having problems with the fishery today? No, we have had challenges. Of course, I think we will always have some challenges, but we have had challenges over a number of years, but not one question. So I was thinking maybe she saw the election results from the last general election and she said: I did not do really well on rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Maybe it was because of the fishery.

Now, all of a sudden, we get this renaissance. All of a sudden, she is interested in the fishery. She is very interested. She is interested in rebuilding it. She is interested in interacting with government. How things have changed in a couple of months – how things have changed.

We actually had a private member's motion brought forward by the Official Opposition some time ago and it was a good private member's motion. Some of you remember, actually, both the government and the – well, of course, they brought it forward and they agreed with it. We saw the worth in it and we had a good, frank discussion and we all had speakers stand to it and speak to the motion. What party did not vote for that motion? Who was against it? The NDP. Again, you are speaking out of two sides of your mouth. You want change in the fishery but you are not sure how to get there and you do not want to discuss how to get there. Instead, you are bringing your questions to Twitter, which again is fine but let's do it – you are here for a reason, let's discuss in the House, let's discuss. I understand you are an urban party. I understand you have challenges in your own caucus understanding the fisheries, but I would say rely on your member for rural Newfoundland and Labrador. He can give you insight into it.

I was so glad when I saw the Member for St. John's East going to Gander this week. I was thinking maybe he will stop in some communities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador on the way out because Gander is not out around the bay, I will remind him. I can guarantee you; Gander is no more around the bay than St. John's. It is nice to see you getting out and getting the facts about the fishery, because it is not an easy subject. I think when the Minister of Fisheries rose today, it was so great. I saw members of the Official Opposition hanging on his every word. He has a lot to offer, he knows his stuff. I would say perhaps if you tune into that you might be able to take forward and formulate some more intelligent arguments, I would argue.

It was also very telling about the fishery, I remember one evening we sat in the House of Assembly and the Minister of Fisheries put out the debate. We had heard that the Third Party wanted to discuss the fishery, so we put it out. Well, let's have a debate. We will ask members to stand, and what happened? Member after member on the government side stood up and debated. I am so pleased when I hear members – I refer to them as townie members, even though Flatrock and Bell Island are not too townie, in the Avalon scheme it is pretty townie too, I suppose, but when you have members like that get up; they even know about the fishery. They have something to offer, whether it is cutting out cod tongues when you are a teenager and working hands-on in the fishery or whether it was managing a plant. We have so much to offer. Then, you look to the Member for Bellevue. My God, the man is like, you open it up and it is a book, it is an encyclopaedia of the fishery, real life hands-on experience; but, we did not have one member of the NDP, not even the fisheries critic stand up, not even the NDP fisheries critic stand up to discuss.

Again, you can take your Tweets and you can take your Facebook statuses and you can put it on social media, but again, you cannot stand here –

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Member for St. John's East, rising on a point of order.

MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, just to correct the record, at that particular time when the debate happened, this member did stand up and talk about the fisheries for (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

I recognize the hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR. S. COLLINS: A very good point. I would take this opportunity to say the best that the NDP have to offer is their Liberal member. It is great to see that the Member for St. John's East is getting involved, and I appreciate that. I appreciate that because I think you have an open mind. I criticize the Third Party but I really should not because I think the Member for St. John's East gets some of this and he is really trying. My apologies, I commend you if you did speak to that, it was certainly appreciated.

Now I only have four-and-a-half minutes left so I wanted to address something that was brought up. As a backbencher you do not get to speak everyday, so when you get to speak you have a wish list of what you want to talk about and the things that have been on your mind for the last week I guess. We had an unfortunate event happen here last week in the House of Assembly. It was surrounding Twitter, and not to beat a dead horse, I know the member stood up. The member for the Third Party stood up and he apologized. He knew what he did was wrong. He stood here as a hon. member should do and he apologized for what he did, and that was good to see. What happened afterwards, and it is something I take exception with, when I have a person here who obviously has a huge duty and responsibility because I do not take my job lightly. I certainly do not take this job lightly, and I do not think the people who elected me take this job lightly. It comes with great responsibility. I think you owe it to this job, you owe it to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, you owe it to the people who elected you to keep this House honourable and obviously keep the workings for the best of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

When a member calls out another member, and not specifically, he did not point to one particular person. He called out the people as a whole, everyone. It could have been the Official Opposition, we were not sure, but when you make blanket statements that someone in this House is lying. Mr. Speaker, it is disappointing. I was home to the district over the weekend, I had a number of people come up to me and ask me what had happened because they were interested. Of course, the media took this and held on to it and told the story obviously a number of times. It was really disappointing. The thing that really bothered me was it continued, and it still continues.

I know that the Member for Bay of Islands has extended an olive branch. He has asked: can we all get along? I think when we are in this House we need to be engaged, not backs turned, not ignoring one another. We do not have to take it to whatever social media we want to after the fact, bring it to this House. This is what we are paid to do. This is why the people put us here.

Again, while the member apologized for what he did and he recognized it was wrong, I urge everyone - and I am going to live by these rules myself as well, let's make sure a certain level of credibility we keep to this House. This is not a dog and pony show as some members of the Third Party had said. What a disrespectful thing to say to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who said it was a dog and pony show?

MR. S. COLLINS: I believe it was the Member for St. John's North, and again referring to – it is sad that I stand in this House and I have to refer to Twitter. Imagine. Imagine, tweets – what are tweets? How ridiculous is that? Before, we talked person to person, but now we have to talk about what a member did after the House was closed – cowardly acts. Then the call is placed, a dog and pony show – how disrespectful for the people who put him here. I can guarantee you if I was a resident of St. John's North, I would be absolutely disgusted – I would be disgusted. I do not know how they played ball in his other line of work, but they do not play it like that here, and this is no dog and pony show, I can assure you. I would ask –

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's North, rising on a point of order.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In my comments, in fact, to the media, I did not refer to this Assembly as a dog and pony show. In fact, I referred to the actions of this government as a dog and pony show – so, sorry.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR. S. COLLINS: Again, how disrespectful. It is one thing if you do something wrong – I remember my mother always told me everybody makes mistakes, as long as you own up to it and you change your actions. Now, my mother is a pretty wise woman, and I would say probably the same thing to the member across the way: Own up to it. You apologized in this House, you recognized what you did was not fit, and you stood on your feet in this House and you said: I am sorry; I apologize. What do you do after? What does that say about a person's character when you go out, after apologizing, you backtrack and you do the exact same thing again? What does that say about a member's credibility? It does not say much.

Again, if I was a resident of St. John's North, I would be completely disgusted. Do you know what? We have to face those people every four years. I can guarantee you those three years are not long away. When he knocks on doors in St. John's North, he will have people ask him.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. S. COLLINS: Leave, please?

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

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: I am sorry; leave has been denied. I ask the member to conclude his remarks.

MR. S. COLLINS: Okay, I am happy to be able to bring some insight.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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, it is a pleasure to be able to rise again today and have a second go at the Budget 2012. It is always a pleasure to make a presentation in this House and talk about the good things this government is doing, as we have heard from so many speakers in the last few days.

Mr. Speaker, before I do that, I too would like to join with my colleagues who have done so already, to express condolences to the family of Don Johnson. I knew Don Johnson for a long time, a great fellow, a great citizen, a gentleman, well-loved by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. He made his mark in sport in this Province and in a lot of other ways, and certainly who will be missed, and my condolences to his family.

Mr. Speaker, during the debate in the last week or so, it has been a very interesting debate, and we have heard from every member on this side of the House at least once, and now we are going through them a second time. It has been a very interesting debate. The members have spoken on the fiscal record of this government, on making the comparisons of where we are today and where we came from in 2003. They speak of these things with pride and it is uplifting to hear the energy and the enthusiasm that comes from the members.

The last time I spoke here, one of the first times I spoke this year trying to speak on the Address in Reply, I made the remark that it was easier to crack the lineup of the Toronto Maple Leafs than to try to crack the lineup of the speakers in this House. There are so many of us here, Mr. Speaker, and everybody wants to speak and you have to compete with people to get a chance to get your five cents worth in. Incidentally, I understand I offended some people at that time by deriding the Toronto Maple Leafs; I understand they have some fans in the House. I happen to be one of them, Mr. Speaker. I am one of the few people who saw the Toronto Maple Leafs win the Stanley Cup in black and white. I am hoping someday to see them win it in colour, but I live in hope.

Members have spoken about the highlights of the Budget, the significant investments in health, for example, education, infrastructure, and the great fiscal prudence of this government. They talked about tourism. Each minister spoke about his own department. Members spoke about the significant investments in their district. Ministers spoke about the significant investments in their departments and each speaker brought his own perspective and his own style to the debate, and it was very interesting to sit and observe it.

For example, my good friend the Member for Bellevue in his speech a few nights ago gave a very passionate speech with regard to his involvement in the fishery. He pulled no punches, he told it as it is, and he pointed the fingers where they should be pointed. Actually, he pointed the fingers in a few places that I think we are all happy that he did so. Some of the do-gooders of the day in the fishery who were the violators a few years ago, he singled them out, and rightly so, Mr. Speaker. He told it like it is. He has vast personal experience. It was a riveting speech; it was a passionate speech. He certainly had all of us paying attention. He spoke from the heart and I compliment him on it and congratulate him on it, as everybody else did on that night on that particular speech.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Terra Nova who just sat down, a few nights ago in his humorous and very entertaining presentation exposed the somewhat shallow and synthetic position of the Third Party when it comes to fiscal policies. He did a great job in a humorous way.

The Member for Gander, on two occasions now, in his two presentations, Mr. Speaker, has completely discombobulated the Third Party as far as their financial platforms are concerned.

AN HON. MEMBER: What was that word again?

MR. F. COLLINS: That word will be sought in Hansard now for the next month.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Grand Falls-Windsor – Green Bay South in the limited time he had to speak, brought the benefit of his longstanding tenure in this House of Assembly from his Opposition days. His brief presentation, Mr. Speaker, was a bit of a reality check from where we are today and where we were when he was in Opposition.

Every speaker on this side spoke with such enthusiasm and such pride and was so positive about a future full of promise and vision and energy. Mr. Speaker, you are talking about growth, you are talking about progress, you are talking about movement, and it was encouraging and energizing to hear them all speaking.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, as opposed to the threat of Armageddon that we get from the Third Party.

Mr. Speaker, all of that speaks to the cohesion on this side of the House. To the team approach that exists over here, the support for the government's programs. Mr. Speaker, it speaks to the vision of government, it speaks to the pride of this government that the members have in this government, it speaks to the promise of a bright future, it speaks to the level of comfort we have that this government is leaving a legacy, a good future for our children and grandchildren. It was encouraging and uplifting to hear.

Mr. Speaker, speakers in this House have spoken to big ticket issues like the fishery, for example. They have spoken to Muskrat Falls. They have spoken to health and education and all the great investments we are making in all these departments, in all these areas. They are speaking about the great fiscal policies, the leadership of our Premier and the leadership of our Minister of Finance and all good stuff.

Mr. Speaker, nobody speaks very much about justice. I thought today if anybody is going to speak on justice it is going to have to be me, obviously. The last time I spoke I mentioned the three cornerstones of a good justice system:, the police, good policing, the courts, and a good correctional system. We spoke extensively on the policing system the other day.

Today I want to talk about Corrections, because as far as justice is concerned, the biggest priority in our department right now, Mr. Speaker, is our department of Corrections. Most of the media comments and most of the public reaction to anything that happens in justice happen with respect to Corrections issues. The media love to talk about HMP. They love to talk about inmates. They love to talk about things that go on with the Corrections system. Most of the attention the Department of Justice gets today is through its Corrections system.

Everybody raises the question: What are we going to do with regard to the replacement of HMP? Everybody raises the question: What about Bill C-10 and the impact it is going to have on Corrections?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. F. COLLINS: What are we going to do going forward to improve our Corrections capacity? I want to speak to that issue today, Mr. Speaker, for a few minutes because I think it is important. You do not get a chance very often in Question Period because you do not have long enough to address these issues. They have been front and center for some time.

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-10 is a bill that has gotten a lot of attention in the last six months. It was an omnibus bill brought down by the federal government. Basically, the people were concerned about the impact it will have – the tough-on-crime focus – on Corrections and on Prosecutions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. F. COLLINS: A lot of people have asked the question: What provisions have we made in this Province to offset the impact that Bill C-10 is going to have? Bill C-10, allegedly, will take away the discretionary powers of judges with regard to minimum mandatory sentences. That might have an impact on our numbers. It also might have an impact on backlogs in courts, increasing the pressure on prosecutions, and so on.

Mr. Speaker, it is somewhat premature for us at this point in time, even though the bill has passed, to make predictions on what is going happen on the ground in terms of numbers for us in Corrections and Prosecutions. Ontario and Quebec have come out with specific figures and costs attached to what it is going to mean for them, but it is a premature prediction to do that.

This Province is part of an Atlantic committee on correction officials that was set up by the Atlantic premiers to look at the impact of the tough-on-crime legislation on this bill.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

While I am pleased to see that everybody is having such a good time here today, I remind members that the hon. the Minister of Justice has the floor. I ask members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

The question arises, then: What are we doing in Corrections to offset any impact this might have? As I mentioned, we are part of the Atlantic committee of correction officials that is set up to examine exactly that question. They did it, Mr. Speaker, when the federal government came out with a two-for-one legislation with regard to time served. They gave us some preliminary figures on that. Now they are working. We do not have a report from them yet with respect to what impact it might have on us.

With respect to prosecutions, our own prosecutorial team is looking at its own discretionary policies and any discretionary policies in the legislation, and also monitoring the jurisdictions across the Province with respect to what areas we can explore with regard to any impact on prosecution. It is premature, Mr. Speaker, at this point in time to make predictions on what impact that might have.

Mr. Speaker, what we are doing – we are not standing still – we have an in-house assessment ongoing –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. F. COLLINS: – with respect to our correctional facilities. We are looking at all our infrastructure. We have the penitentiary in St. John's; we have a facility in Stephenville; we have a facility in Bishop's Falls; we have a facility in Clarenville and one in Labrador City. They all have their own nuances, Mr. Speaker, and their own concerns with each one. For the most part, we are looking at all of these facilities.

We also, incidentally – as I mentioned yesterday in Question Period – have a facility in Whitbourne, a youth institution, which is also part of our infrastructure. We are looking at all those infrastructure facilities to see if there is any way we can modify, reorganize, retrofit, whatever –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. F. COLLINS: – and get a better bang for our buck in terms of capacity in all of these institutions. If at the end of the day we can get some information out of that assessment that can help us to make a decision on what is going to happen with respect to a new penitentiary or what is going to happen going forward with respect to our capacity needs, then that is money well spent. We have to look, Mr. Speaker, at our numbers for the next twenty-five years in terms of what our inmate population is going to be.

These factors have to be considered, and the impact of Bill C-10 will also have to be thrown into that equation. It is not a matter, Mr. Speaker, of just deciding you are going to build a replacement for HMP. There is a lot of information that has to go into that, informed decisions to see just what it is we are going to be needing going forward for the next twenty-five years.

With respect to federal involvement, we still think that the federal government has an obligation to us to assist us in this issue. We house –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. F. COLLINS: – approximately fifty federal prisoners in our institution. We can do that because of our special constitutional arrangement with the Government of Canada. We do not have a federal institution. We can send all our federal inmates out, but we opt to keep the lower-risk federal inmates and we get a per diem from the federal government for that. We think there are ways and means to negotiate with the federal government to get them onside to help us with respect to our future correctional capacity needs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, as I said, we have not exactly been standing still. We have been investing and we have to invest in our correctional facilities. We will continue to invest in HMP, as we have done already. We have made significant improvements in HMP. We are going to have to use it for a number of years. Since the Decades of Darkness, we have invested $7 million in total in our correctional facilities. We have made improvements in HMP. We have made improvements in the West Coast Correctional Centre. We have made improvements in the women's institution in Clarenville and significant improvements in Her Majesty's Penitentiary.

We have put almost $800,000 into a new ventilation system in Her Majesty's Penitentiary. We have also, Mr. Speaker, put $700,000 into improvements in the West Coast Correctional Centre. We have made improvements in the Labrador Correctional Centre. We have funded new security camera systems now in all of our facilities. Besides putting money into infrastructure as a result of Decades of Darkness review, which my predecessor, the current Minister of Natural Resources, commissioned in 2008, we have done a number of things with respect to programming and improvements in corrections.

I would like to mention some of them, Mr. Speaker. For example, since Decades of Darkness at the HMP, we have added two trailers for programming space; we have attached one for a medial unit. We have made renovations to their school and administrative space within the system. We have upgraded the ventilation system. We have funded a new security camera system –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. F. COLLINS: – we have a new master key system. We have had a number of practical improvements in living conditions. So, we continue to invest in these facilities. We have to invest in these facilities for the safety of our staff and our inmates.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to programming –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind members for the final time that the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General has the floor. I ask all members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

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

Mr. Speaker, there is more to corrections than just bricks and mortar. There are a number of programs happening within our system that have improved the system since 2008. For example, in programming enhancement we have addictions counselling; we brought in programs for addictions counselling. We have drug awareness programs, we have violence prevention programs, we have employment training programs, we have structured leisure activities, we have mental health improvements, and we have women's programming. All have been added to the correctional system in the last four years. We have strong partnerships with people at the Canadian Mental Health Association; we have John Howard Society, Turnings, and Stella Burry, all those groups delivering services to our correctional institutions.

Mr. Speaker, we hear mentioned quite often the mental health needs of inmates; it has been raised in this House, the folly or the mistake of incarcerating people who have committed crimes because of mental health issues. We have done a lot for mental health problems with our inmates since the Decades of Darkness report. Mental health training has been provided to all the frontline correctional staff; psychological services are available to all provincial prisons now, and a full-time psychologist is available now, along with an addictions coordinator, at Her Majesty's Penitentiary.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. F. COLLINS: The Justice Project being is offered by the Canadian Mental Health Association. We have an FASD coordinator in Labrador. We have a full-time Aboriginal correctional liaison training coordinator for Labrador. Mr. Speaker, we continue to invest significantly in programming and the needs of our inmates throughout this Province, and we will continue to do so.

So, Mr. Speaker, when they talk about corrections, all is not gloom and doom. We are investing a lot in corrections. You talk to the corrections people, our corrections force and the people who deliver services, and they will tell you that things have improved significantly in corrections in the last number of years, and we are happy to be part of it.

Mr. Speaker, it is 5:26 and we only have a couple of minutes left before supper, so I will stop there. I wanted to make sure that we got out the message that there is more to corrections than just the replacement of HMP. I wanted to make that clear.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, it now being 5:26 in the afternoon, I do move, seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, that we adjourn until 7:00 o'clock.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that we will now adjourn until 7:00 o'clock.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Contra-minded, if any?

Motion carried.

Pursuant to Standing Order 9, I shall now leave the Chair and the House will take a recess until 7:00 p.m.

The House resumed sitting at 7:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an honour and privilege to have an opportunity to take part in the Budget debate. At this level, we are debating the initial amendment moved by the Opposition. There is a general motion that I moved on Budget Day, that this House supports the budgetary policy of the government. Then the Leader of the Opposition moved an amendment of no confidence in the government, and then there was a sub-amendment. I am not sure who moved that. I do not know if it was the hon. Government House Leader who moved the sub-amendment. We debated the sub-amendment. We had the vote, it was defeated. Now we are debating the amendment, the non-confidence motion. Obviously, I am here to speak against that particular amendment. Obviously, I support the Budget.

Mr. Speaker, a Budget bill, a money bill gives us all an opportunity to talk about some other things. I know as the Finance Minister, as a Cabinet minister, sometimes we have to get up in this House and speak, and we like to be heard when we are speaking. We want to make sure that the people of the entire Province hear what we have to say.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: I certainly do.

Mr. Speaker, this will give me an opportunity to speak in more general terms, rather than having to restrict my remarks to what happens to be in a particular bill. I want to speak about what is going on, on the West Coast. I am from the West Coast, Mr. Speaker, and I am proud of that fact. I go home to the West Coast every Friday, with other people who represent the West Coast. I will retire and end my life on the West Coast, and I am proud of that. There are a lot of wonderful things that have happened on the West Coast of Newfoundland, and I am optimistic that even more good things are going to happen in the future.

I have to tell you, and I am very concerned right now with the seriousness, the very serious matter that is taking place in Corner Brook right now with respect to the mill, Corner Brook Pulp and Paper. We have seen in the past what happened in Stephenville, and we saw in the past what has happened in Grand Falls. That is on one side of Corner Brook, and then if you go to the other side of Western Newfoundland, you see what is happening in the NewPage mill, which is in Port Hawkesbury, Nova Scotia. We are seeing what is happening to the Bowater mill down in Liverpool, and we know what is happening to the forestry industry generally.

We know the demand for forest products and for newsprint has been falling, demand has been going down repeatedly, and as a result of that we are seeing the effects. We are seeing mills right across the country – and I know the Minister of Fisheries understands and realizes how important this is, and the Minister of Education realizes how important this is, because the strong mills, the ones that stay strong will be the ones that survive. The price of newsprint is set in the world market. Mills in Canada do not control that price; therefore, every mill is going to have to produce and sell and deliver to its customers a ton of paper at a cost that is less than what the market price is. Those mills that are able to do that will be ones that survive, and those who cannot do that will be the ones that do not survive.

Mr. Speaker, the mill in Corner Brook is having major difficulties because of the milieu in which it operates. For it to be one of those mills that survive it is going to have to make some tough choices and some tough decisions, we all know that. Thank God, the mill in Corner Brook has advantages that many other mills do not have. It has a source of power at the power plant in Deer Lake that was built many, many years ago. The cost of the plant is fully amortized. One thing about a hydroelectric facility, when you build it it lasts many, many years, and once it is paid for it still lasts a long time. I understand the one in Pouch Cove, the first hydroelectric facility built in this Province in Pouch Cove, I understand it is still operating and still producing electricity that goes into the grid, which is quite remarkable.

In addition to energy, Mr. Speaker, it has a workforce that has been making paper in the City of Corner Brook for many generations. They know how to make paper and they know what they are doing. That is advantage number two to the Corner Brook mill.

Mr. Speaker, the third advantage is where the mill happens to be located, because the markets in the mill, the markets for newsprint in the future are going to come from places like India and Brazil, and Corner Brook Pulp and Paper has been smart enough to obtain markets in those countries. The Corner Brook mill, being close to the shipping lanes, is in a great position to be the mill that serves those markets in the future. There is reason for optimism, but in the meantime some tough decisions are going to have to be made in order for that mill to become one of the low cost mills, one of the most efficient mills in the country, because that is how it survives.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources and I have met with the unions in Corner Brook. We listened to what they had to say, and we went to Montreal and met with Mr. Joseph Kruger and his executive team. We told them quite frankly what we had heard from the union, and we told them that the unions did not believe a lot of the information that the company was giving them, including the financial position of the company and whether it was doing well or it was not. It is not a public company. It does not trade on the stock market. Its financial information is propriety to the owner. It is not distributed throughout the public. He gave me the authority to go and meet with the unions to tell them the facts, which I did.

The Minister of Natural Resources has said that if the unions and the company can come together and agree on a plan that will be sustainable and could make this mill survive, then we will be there and the Government of Newfoundland will be there to help. The minister emphasized that we are not going to subsidize the mill. If the mill is losing money every year, we are not going to subsidize its losses. If it can show a plan that it can get over this hump and become an efficient mill that can be the one that survives in the country, the government will be there to help as we have helped in the past.

That process is now ongoing. That is a process that has to be determined by the company and by its employees. Government has no role in that process. Government should not interfere in that process.

What of course is happening is that the company has asked its employees to give it more time to fund up an unfunded pension plan. Mr. Speaker, I think people in this House know that in a defined benefit pension plan – which is a wonderful pension plan – well, if you compare it to defined contribution pension plan, you put the money into the plan, the employees contribute to the plan, the employer contributes to the plan, and depending on what investments you have, the plan will earn what it earns.

I know the Member for St. Barbe is very familiar with this. If it loses money, it loses money. If it makes money, it makes some money. The goal is to try to make that pot of money grow so when you are ready to retire you can take that pot of money and either buy an annuity with it or put it in a LIRA to provide a pension plan for the rest of your days.

A defined benefit pension plan is much more generous. A defined benefit pension plan uses a formula to determine what the pension is going to be. The formula will use an accrual rate of 2 per cent, 1.7 per cent, or 1.5 per cent, times the number of years you have worked for the company, and times what could be your career average earnings, your best five years, your best three years, or whatever the formula happens to be.

You can have this wonderful formula, but that does not mean there is money in the fund to pay the pension that the formula says you are supposed to get when you retire. Money has to be contributed into a pension fund. An actuary is hired, a professional called an actuary who does the calculations; the actuary will look at the formula, and if you are going to have a certain pension then a certain amount of money has to go in. If you are going to have survivorship then more money has to go in. If you are going to have disability more money goes in. If you want to have indexation, which is very, very expensive, then even more money has to go in. The money has to go in each month; it has to be paid by the employees, it has to be paid by the employers, it has to be invested to get the money to pay the pension promised. The problem is actuaries sometimes, obviously, do not hit; their assumptions are wrong. They do not see the future, either; they cannot tell the future, either.

I am one of the people that has to say in this House from time to time, we have to budget based on very volatile oil prices and very volatile production numbers, so it makes it very, very difficult. It is the same problem the actuary has. The actuary has to come back every three years to determine if there is enough money in the plan to fund the pension promised. In many cases there is not, depending on how the markets have done, or how the investments have done.

Under our law, under the Pension Benefits Act – and the Minister of Services Newfoundland and Labrador can tell you about this more eloquently than I can – under our law there is an unfunded pension liability. If there is not enough money in the pension fund to meet the promise, then the employer has five years to put the money in. The employer, under our law, promises to put the money in. A promise is only as good as a person making it when they are called upon to honour it. They have five years to put the money in, as I said, to amortize the unfunded liability over the five-year period.

Under our law is that if the employees and the retirees agree, the employer can have ten years to fund up that unfunded pension liability. That is what happened here. Abitibi in Quebec and Abitibi in Ontario were given fifteen years by the governments there to fund up their unfunded pension liabilities. Obviously, Corner Brook Pulp and Paper asked for an equivalent arrangement. Our government said it is not the government's role; the pension plan is between the company and the employees. It is the employees that will make the decision whether you can have the extra five years.

Under our pension solvency regulations, the company is going through a procedure in which it is asking its employees to give them another five years, to give them ten years in total in order to fund up the pension liability. That process has been going on.

Again, that is a process between the employees and the employer. Government has no direct role. Government should not be involved in the middle of that process. It is a process that is going on now and we have to ensure that correct information – or maybe a better way of putting it: that we eliminate any misinformation that is out there so that the whole process does not go off the rails, because after this process if finished, there is an even tougher process coming up, where the employees and the company have to complete the negotiation of what is a sustainability plan or a viability plan that they are both happy with. If they cannot do that, then I do not want to say what will happen. If they do that, then our government will be there to give that mill the support it needs to be one that survives in the future.

Mr. Speaker, sometimes incorrect information gets out there. Living on the West Coast, I grew up listening to a different radio station than people in St. John's listen to. I read a different newspaper than people in St. John's read, and I tell you, it is amazing. Every day I read two newspapers; I read The Western Star and I read the evening Telegram, but you know, the same story in both papers, with a different headline and a different picture, can give you a different point of view. You can have a different slant, so you have to be careful.

I know sometimes that information can get out to the West Coast that is not correct; if the people believe it, then we can potential problems, because they are believing false information. I will give a good example. When I was the Justice Minister, one of the divisions in the Department of Justice is the Support Enforcement Agency, which is situated in the Sir Richard Squires Building in the City of Corner Brook. I received a call one day from people in Corner Brook telling me that the Support Enforcement Agency was going to be moved from Corner Brook to St. John's. That was in 2004. I said, well, that is crazy. Surely, as minister, I would have heard if something like that was going to happen.

I called in the deputy minister and I said, look, is there anything happening here? Are there any plans to move Support Enforcement Agency from Corner Brook to St. John's? He said no. I said, well, how can these rumours be going around? I said, well, let's get the assistant deputy minister in. So we got the assistant deputy minister in and we asked her the same; we went through the same process and I said, is there any document, is there any suggestion from any official, no matter how far down in the system, that is suggesting this movement? The answer was no.

Then we called the director who was in Corner Brook, and he told us who was propagating this rumour. I said well give me her number. I phoned her and I said: I understand that you believe that Support Enforcement Agency is being moved from Corner Brook to St. John's. I said: I am the Minister of Justice and I want to assure you that it is not being moved. The response I got was, yes it is, oh, yes it is. She said: I can even tell you the day it is going to happen, and she told me. Now, that was eight years ago. It is still in Corner Brook. She was wrong, but no matter that I was the Minister of Justice telling her it was not going to be moved; no, sir, she was absolutely convinced that it was going to be moved.

So, the wrong information can get out there and take on a life of its own. We all have to be very careful that when we are making very important decisions that do not just affect ourselves, but affect our whole community, we have to make sure that we have the right information so that we can make the right decisions.

Of course, what happened here was that there was a commitment made in 2005; there was a letter written by Kruger or Corner Brook Pulp and Paper to the unions committing to making an enhancement to the pension plan that would become permanent, I think it was, after April 2014; then again, I do not know all of the information. That was done in 2005. When the company sought the extra five years, sought the ten-year permission under our pension solvency regulation, to have ten years, there was a clause in those regulations, clause 8.(1)(k), that essentially says that if you are going through this ten-year period, you cannot make any enhancements, you cannot make any additional enhancements to the pension plan for the first five years; they are restricted, any enhancements would be restricted. So, then there was a question whether the 2005 commitment that was made, since it would take effect in 2014 when the ten-year period is starting in 2011, whether that enhancement to the pension plan could go forward, given the restriction contained in the legislation.

So the former Superintendent of Pensions and the assistant deputy minister in the minister's department looked into it and had to seek legal advice; the legal advice was that the 2005 commitment could be honoured, that if the pension plan was to be amended, the amendment would be accepted and would be registered.

So the thing that concerned everybody turned out to be something that they do not need to be concerned about. In fact, government can simply change the regulation if it needed to do so, but the interpretation of justice is that the present regulations, the present wording, does not prevent the 2005 increase that would come into effect in 2014 from coming into effect.

I think this is what the excitement was about, this is what the concern was about. The reality of it is, is that the 2005 amendment can still come in if the company is prepared to live up to its undertaking, and I understand the company has agreed to do that.

So there are the facts. I hope those facts are disseminated to the union and the company and that cooler heads will prevail and that the company and the union can come up with an agreement to keep that mill operating and to have the mill successful for many, many years to come.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I had indicated last week that during the Budget debate I would have three opportunities to speak for twenty minutes at a time and I was going to use those timeframes to speak about Muskrat Falls.

I spoke last week about the need for power. Tonight I am going to speak about options and alternatives, and next week, Mr. Speaker, if I get a chance to speak again, I will talk about the effect of Muskrat Falls on electricity rates. I will talk about environmental economic benefits, debt, cost overruns, and things like that.

Mr. Speaker, last week I prefaced my comments with the two basic questions: Do we need the power? If so, what is the best way to deal with the issue for the need for power? What is the lowest cost option?

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the options, what are the options once we determine we need power? One is to develop Muskrat Falls for the Labrador-Island link; that is the interconnected option. The second is to refurbish Holyrood with a combination of small hydro and wind which would be referred to as the Isolated Island option; to develop Gull Island; to use natural gas. Number five, Mr. Speaker, would be to use wind; number six would be to recall power from the Upper Churchill; number seven would be to import power from Quebec; or to do nothing. Mr. Speaker, to do nothing is not an option because we need the power. We have heard other members in this House over the last week or so concede that point, that we need the power.

Mr. Speaker, while we would all like to develop Gull Island, which is approximately 2,000 megawatts of power, it is not an option at present because we cannot get transmission access across Quebec. Four decades of Newfoundland and Labrador politicians, Mr. Speaker, have tried to negotiate with Quebec to resolve this issue, all without success. With all due respect to the member of the Opposition last week who said it does not matter to him whether he deals with Nova Scotia or Quebec, there is no difference – well, Mr. Speaker, there is a significant historical difference in dealing with Quebec. There is no dealing with Quebec on the issue of hydro-electricity power in Labrador.

This all begins, Mr. Speaker, in 1927, with the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council defining the Labrador boundary and giving Labrador to Newfoundland. Quebec has never forgiven us for that. At some point in this House over the next few weeks, I hope to talk about the Upper Churchill; I will trace to 1927, along with documents that were relied upon in the 1960s, along with quotes from the Premier of Quebec and the Premier of Newfoundland at the time, Mr. Speaker, and René Lévesque, the Minister of Energy in Quebec at the time.

It is what is referred to, Mr. Speaker – I think it was a journalist in Quebec who coined the phrase, it was the revenge of geography, that the Upper Churchill had nowhere to go and we were back to that 1927 decision. In fact, we will still see maps from Quebec that show the border as it used to be still to this day, Mr. Speaker.

What we do have at present, Mr. Speaker, is a reservation to export 265 megawatts of power on Quebec transmission lines. We are currently in legal wrangling in Quebec in the courts with their Régie, or equivalent of their PUB, on obtaining open access.

We need to develop Gull Island. The most that we can export at present on the Quebec lines is 265 megawatts of power. Gull Island is not an option at present. As I think I said last week, Gull Island, there is a market for that power, certainly in Ontario.

We have all heard Nalcor has concluded that Muskrat Falls has a cumulative present worth of $2.2 billion, or is $2.2 billion cheaper than the Holyrood option, Mr. Speaker. MHI, the company hired by the Public Utilities Board, has also accepted that conclusion. We have a $6.2 billion project at present, subject to the Decision Gate 3 numbers, which break down as follows, in terms of cost to our Province: $2.9 billion for the generating station and $2.1 billion for the Labrador Link.

Mr. Speaker, last week I talked about the price of oil and why Holyrood becomes so expensive, when at peak it burns 18,000 barrels of oil a day. It only currently operates at 15 per cent to 25 per cent. What we have to plan for, what utilities plan for, is that coldest day in the winter when you need the most energy.

Last week I talked about PIRA and why the price of oil will continue to rise, at least in their opinion, Mr. Speaker. It has to do with the factors such as the activities in the Middle East, supply and demand, growth in China, growth in the middle class, and the issue of security of supply.

Interestingly enough, Manitoba Hydro International did a sensitivity analysis where even if oil went to $40 a barrel – we can say never say never, but the likelihood of that happening is minimal, Mr. Speaker – Muskrat Falls would still be cheaper than the isolated option by $120 million.

I think we heard this the other day: why don't we continue to use Holyrood till 2041? Mr. Speaker, Holyrood will not last until 2041. We heard the Minister of Transportation talk the other day on the environmental impacts of Holyrood, where closing down Holyrood would be the equivalent of taking 300,000 cars off the road. That is why we use the experts. That is why we use Nalcor, Mr. Speaker. We look at inherent risk and uncertainties; whatever project we do will have risks and uncertainties. Anytime you are looking into that crystal ball, in the future there are going to be risks and uncertainties. What we have to try to do is minimize those risks and identify the uncertainties, because if we need the power, we have to do something. It is that simple.

Now, Mr. Speaker, natural gas has been put forward as an option. There are two ways that natural gas could be utilized. The first would be the importation of natural gas where we would buy gas from, for example, the United States. The price of natural gas is currently less than $3 per million cubic feet, Mr. Speaker. That is not the cost, though, to deliver that to Holyrood, because what you have is a situation where you have to add liquefaction costs, transport costs, regasification costs. So the Henry Hub price, or the price of which gas is measured, is not the delivered price to Holyrood. Beyond the cost of building a terminal, Mr. Speaker, an LNG or liquefied natural gas terminal, you have to get your gas.

It would have to be, according to Dr. Wade Locke, at least $2.2 billion cheaper than Muskrat Falls. According to Dr. Locke's calculations, Mr. Speaker, natural gas would have to cost less than $5.75 delivered to be cheaper than Muskrat Falls. The spot prices that are currently being paid in Europe and in Asia are $13 and $16; we cannot compete. The amount of gas needed for Holyrood – we are not going to be burning natural gas here in our Province; we are not set up for that, Mr. Speaker, in terms of our homes.

That cost will continue to rise. The experts predict that it is only going to go to $6 for a million BTU in the next decade, but the delivered cost, what you pay will be much greater to have it delivered. We would be competing with China and Europe. We would be a very small player in a very big market, and vulnerable to a volatile market, because we cannot compete with these countries. Why would any company sell gas to Newfoundland and Labrador for such a small amount when they can obtain higher prices in the European and Asian markets? Mr. Speaker, we would still be dependent on volatility of fuel prices.

Mr. Speaker, even if natural gas was an option, it does not do anything for these mining projects in Labrador. What is it that we are going to do: change Holyrood to natural gas to provide power for the Island which we need, and then develop Muskrat Falls? Muskrat Falls is the only option, Mr. Speaker, which can deal with the needs in Labrador and the needs on the Island.

We have met with independent experts, market analysts, and industry representatives; we have heard from Dr. Locke, Mr. Speaker, and those are the numbers that we have today. The other option that has been put forward is to build a 350 kilometre to 600 kilometre pipeline from the Grand Banks. Mr. Speaker, that is a capital cost of a minimum $1 billion to $2 billion, but then, how do you get the gas?

There is a very practical issue of who owns the gas. According to the Atlantic Accord, it is governed by both the federal and provincial governments in terms of the C-NLOPB, so the Province cannot force the oil companies to develop. I have met with the oil companies, Mr. Speaker. The Atlantic Accord provides for joint management of the offshore and requires federal and provincial concurrence to development decisions or amendments.

We do not have any legislative authority, Mr. Speaker, to order an existing project to deliver gas to the Province, so the low price of gas at present is a deterrent to development. I think it went below $2 per million cubic feet in the last month. What we are told by the oil companies is that the price needed to develop it would be a minimum $10 to $12 per million BTU. The price in the next decade, we are told, will stay around $6. Natural gas, Mr. Speaker, is part of our energy plan, but there is no pressing present need to develop it. The reason that no proposal has been received to develop the gas and build the pipelines is because it is not economically viable. Mr. Speaker, the best way I can describe it is one oil executive who said: We are in the business of making money; if we could make money we would do it.

What we have decided to do, Mr. Speaker – I am just outlining the facts as I understand them today; what we are willing to do is to obtain a report that will outline these options, that will examine the options of both the importation of natural gas, and also the building of the pipeline. A company out of Calgary has been commissioned to prepare a report and when that report is prepared, Mr. Speaker, it will be provided to the public and to members of this hon. House, so essentially it will be exact.

Mr. Speaker, Nalcor's position, supported by MHI, is that wind is an important component in our Energy Plan, but at present only a small amount of wind can be integrated into the system as it exists. We cannot operate on wind only, even though we have the best wind in North America. Contrary to what the Member for St. Barbe said the other day, it only generates electricity 40 per cent of the time. Mr. Speaker, the development of the Maritime Link allows for the development of more wind to use as export.

We have a number of small hydro projects, Mr. Speaker, that amount to about seventy-seven megawatts of power. We have Round Pond with eighteen megawatts, Portland Creek with twenty-three megawatts, and Island Pond with thirty megawatts. It is MHI's conclusion, in the PUB setting, that Nalcor's estimate of the cost was reasonable, but the price would be more than what Nalcor has forecast.

Another issue or option being suggested, Mr. Speaker, is to recall power from Quebec. There is approximately 5,400 megawatts of power produced by the Upper Churchill. We receive two blocks of energy; one is what is referred to as the TwinCo block or 225 megawatts, which was a result of Twin Falls either closing down or being flooded and the power then being provided to IOC and Wabush Mines at a very low price, Mr. Speaker. Then we have a 300-megawatt recall block which goes to heat Labrador in the winter time where approximately 200 to 220 megawatts of energy is required. We can export excess power on the Quebec transmission lines where we have that 265 megawatt booking. We can export up to 265 megawatts, Mr. Speaker. That excess power was sold a couple of years ago in New Brunswick or it can be sold on the spot markets in New York or the North Eastern United States, Mr. Speaker, at prices that can range anywhere from $25 to $100 per megawatt hour.

The question then is: why don't we recall more power? Mr. Speaker, in the mid-1980s one of the cases that went to the Supreme Court of Canada was the issue of whether or not, under the contract, we could access more power, the power contract, for our own use. However, the Supreme Court of Canada concluded that the law of the contract, the power contract, was governed by the law of Quebec, and also there was no demonstrated need for power at that time. 92A of the Constitution was subsequently enacted, Mr. Speaker, and we have obtained legal opinions from leading jurists that we can potentially recall the power constitutionally, but because the contract is governed by the law of Quebec, we would be subject to a breach of contract action in Quebec.

So, Mr. Speaker, there would be no economic advantage, we would be tied up in the courts for years, and that certainty we are looking for, in terms of being able to provide power to the island and to the companies in Labrador, would not be there. So, this issue has been explored.

Another issue is sourcing power from Quebec; why do we not buy power from Quebec? Well, let me tell you how this would work, Mr. Speaker. We sell power under the power contract to Quebec at $2.50 a megawatt hour, or a quarter cent power. So, we say to Quebec: Will you sell us power? Now, there are issues of transmission lines, but that same power that is produced in the Upper Churchill could be sold back to us for thirty to forty times what they paid for it. Now, is that the kind of contract that people want to enter into? Did we not do that once, Mr. Speaker, in 1969?

So, what we have to look at, we would still be potentially held captive by Quebec: subject to Quebec prices, subject to the whim of their political masters, and subject to Hydro-Québec. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is not the way to go, because they are going to sell at the best price they can get, and that would be, I would suggest to you, the cost of electricity at Holyrood. So we could be buying power from Quebec that is generated in Labrador. There is something immoral about that, but unfortunately, as the power contract currently exists, it is not illegal. We need power for the island, so we buy power back from Quebec, if we could; we would have to build our transmission lines anyway to get the power to the island. What you are running into, Mr. Speaker, is that same issue of building transmission lines if you need the power.

When you compare that option to Muskrat Falls, there is not that same price certainty over forty to fifty years. I will talk about prices next week, Mr. Speaker, and hopefully illustrate the potential impact for people, people every day who wonder: what is going to happen to my power rates? Well, hopefully I will be able to give some help next week.

To date, Mr. Speaker, we have supplied 100 per cent of the power that we need in this Province. We cannot afford to become dependent on a supply of energy from Hydro-Québec. So, Mr. Speaker, that is the issue of sourcing power from Quebec. It is just not feasible.

The PUB report, Mr. Speaker, there was more than $2 billion spent. What came out of this report, Mr. Speaker, is something I would suggest to you is very positive; nothing they said in the report, but what we have done as a government as a result of their failure to answer the question that was put to them. MHI has been hired by the government to review the Decision Gate 3 numbers. Mr. Speaker, they will outline the costs and the potential overruns. There will be more certainty to the process.

As I have indicated, Ziff Energy of Calgary has been retained to provide reports on natural gas. We will have a study prepared on wind, Mr. Speaker, or a report prepared on wind. There will be full debate in this House of Assembly and a vote on the project. There will be full discussion. These reports will be provided to the public and to the Opposition in plenty of time so there will be informed debate. Then there is still the issue of the loan guarantee that has to be finalized, the issue of the Emera agreement and, most importantly, we will have our final Decision Gate 3 numbers.

Mr. Speaker, over the last week we have heard the endorsement of the federal Leader of the NDP, Thomas Mulcair; very significantly his Quebec caucus is supporting Muskrat Falls. As my colleague pointed out last night, you do not support the loan guarantee unless you support the project. The Liberals accept, Mr. Speaker, that we need the power.

I want to refer you to a couple of comments of Jim Prentice, a former federal Environment Minister, in a speech he gave, Mr. Speaker, on April 27, 2012. Mr. Prentice stated: "First and foremost, I believe that Premier Dunderdale has charted a wise and entirely reasonable course of action."

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Secondly, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Prentice described Muskrat Falls as "a transformational project for Atlantic Canada".

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Very significantly, Mr. Speaker, he stated that Muskrat Falls is "a game-changing regional energy plan for the 21^st century".

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, I will end on those words. Next week I will be back for part three to talk about electricity rates and other aspects of Muskrat Falls.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I heard the Minister of Justice when he got up there just before we recessed for supper saying getting to speak in the House is something like trying to break in on the Maple Leafs lineup. I am not so sure that would be really difficult to do these days, and I am a Leafs fan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, again, we are debating here this evening the amendment that was put forward by the Opposition House Leader – no, the amendment actually was put forward by the Leader of the Opposition. The sub-amendment was put forward by the Opposition House Leader.

We have gone through a cycle of speakers. Again, I feel the need to sort of explain to the people that watch this on television why it is that we have a succession of government speakers getting up to speak. Of course, we are now debating the amendment to the Budget. What has happened is that all of the members in the Opposition have had the opportunity to speak, and each time that one person in the Opposition got up, somebody from the government side got up; of course, that only gives eleven speakers on the government side, and there are thirty-seven of us. We feel that we have a story to tell, Mr. Speaker, and we feel that we want to get the message out, as does every member that is elected in this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: As I just sat, Mr. Speaker, for forty minutes, I listened first of all to the Minister of Finance, knowing what I have been reading in the media over the last number of days about a possible pension misunderstanding or whatever it was that was going on between Kruger and the employees over there; I have read the media reports and I have read some of the commentary that appears on the Web sites, and to have the Minister of Finance stand here today, in his very eloquent way, in his very clear way, explain what is happening.

Shortly after the Budget was delivered I went back to my district and I had a constituent of mine actually say to me: you know, you people have a real asset, because when the Minister of Finance gets up to speak, he inspires confidence and he inspires trust. I believe that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: I appreciated his words and his explanation this evening and it helped me to understand what is happening over there a whole lot better. Hopefully, it brings a degree of comfort to the workers in the mill.

Then, for the next twenty minutes, Mr. Speaker – and this goes back to the importance of all of us having an opportunity to speak. The Opposition gets their opportunity to speak, and their message goes out. It is not a message that we often agree with; it is a message that we often disagree with. In balance, it is important that we all get the opportunity to speak.

I just listened to the Minister of Natural Resources. There have been lots of questions about Muskrat Falls. The last time that I spoke here on the Budget, I spoke a little bit about my understanding of the project and some of the research that I have done in trying to dig out answers, the level of satisfaction that I feel that I have gotten, and the level of comfort that I feel around the whole project.

To hear the Minister of Natural Resources who, Mr. Speaker, I believe is a man who digs up the facts, who digs up information, and who is convinced, logically, intelligently, and economically in his own mind before he will come out, tell it to us, and explain it to us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: I do not think for a minute there is anybody in this House, anybody that would want to try to support a project that is not in the best interests of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. I listened to him talk about the interconnected link; the Isolated Island link; about possible Gull Island; natural gas; the possibility of using wind; recalling power from the Upper Churchill; maybe importing power from Quebec; or the possibility of doing nothing. One by one, in a very logical and a very systematic manner, he explained to us why it is that these things do not work, and why it is we should do Muskrat Falls.

From all of the information that we have right now, we do need the power, and that is the best option we have available to us. It is the most economic option. It provides us with more power than we need right now; therefore it provides us with an opportunity to look to the future, to have a vision for further growth and development. I certainly appreciate the minister's comments there tonight.

Mr. Speaker, what I wanted to talk about tonight – I have to get my glasses; the last time I spoke, I talked about how I appreciated the approach that we have been taking as a government. The whole approach of being responsible is the approach that I am talking about; I am using that as an umbrella: the approach of being responsible, of managing the people's resources in the right and the proper way, of spending properly, of going into the right amount of debt at the right time in order to keep us on a good clear, fiscal path. I believe that we as a government have been acting very responsibly as we take this approach.

More specifically, you look at, as a clear example, how we have reduced our debt from about $12.2 billion down to somewhere around $7.8 billion of net debt, Mr. Speaker. I understand the concept between debt and net debt, and the bottom line is still the same. Our fiscal position is still the same whether you talk about debt or net debt; if I have $10,000 in the bank and I owe $20,000, well, my net worth is still minus $10,000.

Our debt expenses, Mr. Speaker, have decreased over the last number of years. In 2004 we were paying 23 per cent of our gross revenues on debt expenses. We have now, at this current time, reduced that to 10.8 per cent of our gross revenues. We are throwing out an awful lot less money in interest costs and finance costs; therefore we have a lot more money now that we can use to support programs that certainly help the people of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, our economic growth is expected to increase by 1.8 per cent this year. Our unemployment rate is supposed to decrease again by another 0.4 percentage points. These are projections that we see in Budget 2012. Our personal income and our disposable income growth went up 5.4 per cent. We expect to see retail sales grow by about 4 per cent. It is all good news, Mr. Speaker, what we are projecting and what we see into the future. While we are going to take a dip over the next three years and run deficit Budgets, the projection into the long-term again is sustainability for us and growth into the future.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a little bit about students and education, mostly post-secondary education. I may talk a little bit about the K-12 system as well. I want to refer specifically now to post-secondary education. Our Budget provides about $66 million to reduce student debt and $44 million to the university and the College of the North Atlantic to continue the freeze on tuition.

How significant is that, the freeze on tuition? I have a daughter right now who has just finished her fourth year of university. Who pays her tuition and who pays her expenses while she is going to school, it usually comes back to me – actually, it always comes back to me. For the last four years while she has been in school, I have been paying somewhere around $1,500 a semester. She is doing five courses and it is around $1,500 a semester for her to do courses at the university.

One time last year when we were sitting in this House and actually spoke to this piece of legislation when we brought it in, we did a cross-Canada comparison. At that time, the lowest tuition rates in Canada for students who are at home was Newfoundland and Labrador. The only exception was Quebec, and that applied to Quebec students only. It was not like Newfoundland students could go to Quebec and get lower tuition rates because they could not. I understand that Newfoundland and Labrador right now has the lowest tuition rates in all of Canada.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, when you add up the cost of education, the cost of a post-secondary education, to be getting a break on tuition fees to the extent that we are getting it, because this is not a small break, this is in the thousands of dollars per year, even compared to our Nova Scotian cousins. If we had children going to post-secondary in Nova Scotia, it would be in the thousands of dollars per year that either parents would be paying or students would be running more and more into debt.

MS JOHNSON: Per semester (inaudible).

MR. VERGE: Per semester – thank you to the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services who has all of this to look forward to, Mr. Speaker.

In our schools, Mr. Speaker, in the K-12 system we have invested more than $115 million for new and ongoing infrastructure projects in the Province. An additional $29.3 million has been earmarked for priority repairs and maintenance. Mr. Speaker, $29.3 million as been earmarked for repairs. This is in addition to the infrastructure projects that we have on the go in the K-12 system.

I started out in education in 1985. I went to Lewisporte, actually, in 1987. While in Lewisporte, I remember I was in a Grade 7-12 school and just like the Member for Humber West alluded to a few days ago, I can remember morning after morning, as a principal, going in and moving around garbage buckets because it was spring thaw maybe and the roofs were leaking –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. VERGE: – or it was a big rainstorm and the roofs were leaking, so we were filling them up. Sometimes, you could be doing that all year before the problem was addressed. You know the problems that come from air quality, mould, and that kind of stuff, so you can imagine how much of that stuff was going on years back, and probably why some of the infrastructure that we had in the Province before we took office was in such bad shape because the ordinary maintenance and repairs were not done.

Mr. Speaker, I looked at a very interesting statistic too because we provide about $537 million, which is more than 62 per cent of the entire kindergarten through Grade 12 budget – and that is for teachers' salaries, substitute teachers, student assistants, and professional development. We are looking at over $500 million, really, goes out in salaries. I was talking to the current Minister of Education a few days ago about some of the great things that have been happening in education and one of the things that he shared with me, and I have heard him say in the House of Assembly: If we had stuck with the old formula, there would be 800 fewer teachers in the Province right now. If we had stuck with the formula that the Liberals had, I say to the Member for Bay of Islands, if we stuck with your formula, 800 fewer teachers in the Province than you would have had today.

Now, Mr. Speaker, how significant is that? How significant? Well, do you know Nova Central School District has 12,000 students and they have approximately 1,535 teachers? Nova Central runs from Eastport to Westport, everything in between, big district; they have 1,535 teachers. Just try and get a grasp. If there were 800 teachers, there is only 1,500-and-something in Nova Central, and I know we are talking about an entire provincial cut, but just try and imagine how many teachers would be out of the system. If they all came out of that district, half the schools would be shut down. Mr. Speaker, if we had stuck with the old formula we would have saved a lot of money, but we would not have had a very good quality of education.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to talk about some of the great things that have been happening in my district over the years, but twenty minutes goes by so fast. I am just going to refer to a few projects that have taken place since I have become the member in 2007. Around the spring of 2009, I tell everybody, we had a sod turning out in Lewisporte where we started the construction of a $30 million long-term care facility; $30 million. In the fall of 2008 we had the official opening of what was really a new stadium in Lewisporte, a $5 million investment. Our old stadium was completely redone.

We had the Minister of Transportation and Works, in 2008, come out and officially open a new Marine Services Division in Lewisporte. A short while later, we had the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment do a ribbon cutting on a new career work centre. In 2010, we had the Minister of Education come out and do a visit to schools, and we did a tremendous investment in a new playground in Norris Arm.

Last summer, the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services came out, and we opened up and did the ribbon cutting on a new family resource unit in Lewisporte. Also last summer, one of the things that gave me an awful lot of joy - $30 million, and those investments were great – but one of the things that I must say gave me so much joy was when the Minister of Municipal Affairs came out and we went down to Embree and announced they have a new fire truck.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: The Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, Mr. Speaker, the current Minister of Health, was out and we did an announcement on investments in the marina.

Mr. Speaker, our Premier, last year, in July or August, came out and to everybody's excitement, announced that we are going to be building a brand new, indoor swimming pool in Lewisporte. Tremendous investments, Mr. Speaker, tremendous investments!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Yes, you can all clap.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FORSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to get up again and speak on, this time, the amendment. Of course, like the rest of my colleagues on this side, will be voting against the amendment.

There is a lot of good news in this Budget, no question about it. Twenty minutes is hardly time enough to get into it. I know when I spoke the last time I had to give the Leader of the Third Party a lesson on traditional fishery. I had to also explain to the Opposition, especially the Opposition Member for Torngat, the type of investments we were doing in his district.

I have heard, even in the past month or so, the Opposition over there getting up and complaining about schools. Now I know that our Minister of Education definitely has the Safe and Caring School systems on his mind at all times, as well as his government and his colleagues. Let me tell you, because memories are so short, memories are very, very short. In 2003, there was an elementary school, and still is an elementary school in Bishop's Falls, and the member for the district at the time happened to be the Premier.

Now, our Minister of Education is certainly paying attention to what is going on with the schools in this Province, I say, Mr. Speaker. However, the people in Bishop's Falls had a similar problem with their school, and guess what the Premier of the day said in the local paper after they requested three different meetings with him, which there are still a couple of members over there on that side who were part of that government. He said no. He was the member, he was the Premier – and check for records – who made the statement, they were mob mentality. That is what we are getting from the other side. That is the way they treat their constituents. That is the way they treat the people of the Province. Well, I am sorry, that is why I am on this side. That is why I am with this government and this leader of today.

They get up and they bark and shout and squawk and cluck, and whatever else they do over there, about infrastructure and roads and depots, and winterizing depots. Well, let me tell you, when I got elected in 2005, I say, Mr. Speaker, two years I had gone back to 2003, when yes, the Member for the District of Exploits was the Premier. They had a big provincial road program; a big, huge, provincial road program because it was an election year.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much was it?

MR. FORSEY: Twenty-three million dollars. Our minister and our government, this year and last year, it was over $200 million in road infrastructure, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: That is what this government is doing, but we are doing it wisely. We are managing our money wisely. I listened very carefully to our Minister of Finance, and being on the Estimates Committees, I had the opportunity of course to sit in on the questions and listen to the minister explain how he is sort of running the Province, our fiscal management, pay down on debt but not cut back on vital services to the people of this Province, Mr. Speaker. That is what this government is doing.

I remember – again, as I said, memories are short so you always have to be bringing this stuff up. Even though it could be eight years ago, it could be ten years ago, I do believe that the Opposition – because they talk about promises, and that is all it is, is promises. It is out there somewhere. It is in space, but it is not in the Province in actual infrastructure and services that the people of this Province deserve. They promised in their election platform in 2003 a new cancer treatment centre for Grand Falls-Windsor, Central Newfoundland. Which is a regional facility, I say, Mr. Speaker, which is part of my district, in the beautiful district of Exploits and in the wonderful Exploits Valley. As the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor – Green Bay South said, Exploits is a very important part of the Central region. Promises, that is basically all we ever heard from the Opposition.

I will speak on another one. This was a huge one. This one was great. This one, everybody was smiling. They stood up with their Red Book and their platform: We are going to eliminate school fees – big, big election platform promise. Well, after all these years they were going to eliminate school fees. What have we done, Mr. Speaker? We have eliminated school fees. We have increased the apprenticeship training. We have expanded to the apprenticeship wage subsidy, continued tuition freeze, non-repayable grants for post-secondary students, no interest on provincial portion of student loans, I say, Mr. Speaker.

MR. KENT: That is not all.

MR. FORSEY: That is not all.

They get up there you see, and yes, they believe what they are saying. No question, and they try to make the people of the Province believe what they are saying, but if I actually saw something they did that was substantial and concrete, then maybe I would believe what they are saying. Maybe I would believe it, Mr. Speaker, because I can go back and look at so many promises, so much infrastructure that just failed under that Administration, under the former Administration.

I will go back to my district because everybody knows that my heart is in Exploits. I say to the Member for Burgeo – La Poile, yes, I will be going back to my district. I will. There were a lot of people who were –

AN HON. MEMBER: You and Captain O'Brien (inaudible).

MR. FORSEY: No, no, we could go with Captain Canada because that was a person who made a lot of promises. That is the same person who said to the Member for Bellevue: It is no good to come up here looking for money for the fishery. That is what you are getting from the Liberals. That is what you got from Captain Canada, and I do not have to say his name. I think everybody knows who I am talking about. That is the very same thing as we got from members from that side and members who are still part of that party and elected today, Mr. Speaker.

I remember back in the beautiful District of Exploits there was a school in Leading Tickles, that: Yes, we are going to repair it. We are going to put in new windows. We are going to get rid of the mould. The place was falling down, like a lot of other infrastructure in the Province, Mr. Speaker. Even though they closed down schools in the 1990s, and they rolled back wages, froze wages and everything else, they were going to invest in infrastructure for the people. I say, Mr. Speaker, they are far from doing that.

This particular school, yes, they were going to do it up. Oh yes, I was down there. They were going to spend money on this school. The member for the district and the Premier, I say, Mr. Speaker, he was going to be down there and they were going to do wonderful in Leading Tickles.

Anyway, guess what? I was elected in 2005, I say, Mr. Speaker, and that year we had to tear it down. It was not fit to repair. We had to tear it down, it was not fit. There was nothing left because it was falling down. The students went to that school, I say, Mr. Speaker, and the people of the community and the district were crying out for a safe school, a clean school, a clean environment, and they just ignored it.

MR. KENT: Who was the MHA before you?

MR. FORSEY: The former MHA, I believe I said if before, the Member for Exploits who happened to be the Premier of the day at that time.

Now we have, and I am happy to say, a new school down there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Thanks to their MHA, but also thanks to this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Now, Mr. Speaker, I know if people are watching this tonight and they say: Oh, yes, I remember that.

Now I am going to go back to the depots that they say you should not winterize and you should not do this and you should not do that. Although the Minister of Transportation and this government is coming out and investing over $200 million in road upgrades again this year, the same thing last year.

Well, out in Central, in the division they had a maintenance program, Mr. Speaker, which we all know what a maintenance program is. It is to get the workers out there to replace some guide rails, fix some pot holes, some shoulders, sanding; gravel, grading, and so on. They had a budget of $17,000, I say, Mr. Speaker. Today, the budget is around a half a million dollars, I say, Mr. Speaker, $500,000. They are out there now, the workers are happy. They have something to do. They have something to work with, and now they can get out there and actually provide a service for the people of the Province. That is all over, that is all around the Province, Mr. Speaker. Do we want to go back to that? I do not think so. I do not think we do. I could go on and remind the people of the Province what the Opposition did when they were in power, Mr. Speaker, but I would just like to touch on some things that really are important to my district, and important to the Province, but more so to my district.

The Minister of Finance got up and said he was from the wonderful West Coast. Well, Mr. Speaker, I am from the wonderful Exploits Valley in the beautiful District of Exploits. In Exploits and Exploits Valley, we have the home of probably the best recreational salmon fishery in the Exploits River, in North America, I say, Mr. Speaker. I know some of my colleagues would disagree and probably bring the Humber into it maybe.

I would also like to say that we have – I will see if the Minister of Finance wants to dispute this, well, because it is on the Northeast Coast he would not do it – the best deepwater port on the Northeast Coast, Mr. Speaker, on the Northeast Coast, in Botwood. We know what we have there and we are trying to utilize that, I say, Mr. Speaker, and through the supports of this government and this Administration we are getting there.

We are probably the home to some of the most unique manufacturing companies in the Province. I see the Member for Bay of Islands agreeing with me, and rightfully so. We have a number of manufacturing industries in Bishop's Falls that are unique, and I say unique because there is no other like them in the Province. We have Hi-Point Industries; we have Newfoundland Styro; we have Proweld. They are all unique unto themselves, Mr. Speaker, employing twenty-five, thirty, and thirty-five people in each one. That is what makes us a little different in Exploits, especially in Bishop's Falls, because these businesses are working and providing services throughout the Province and outside the Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hi-Point (inaudible) in organics?

MR. FORSEY: Yes, absolutely. Hi-Point Industries is involved in organics on the West Coast. That is a fact, and they produce for certain chain stores, such as Loblaws and people, and I think Canadian Tire as well. They also make containment bombs that are in big need in some parts of North America for environmental clean up and so on, Mr. Speaker. There are some very good industries in the District of Exploits.

There are a lot of good things in this Budget; a lot of good things. I wanted to get into them, but I always get thrown off by the Opposition and the members from the other side because they are so negative. I remember one member – well, when they were in government anyway – over in Ireland, when we had no money and they were freezing wages, buying Waterford Crystal. Yes, they started a nice program, Read and Succeed; no question. That took them all over China and Australia and other places, so we never had much money left to read and succeed with, not in regard to buying materials, but they certainly managed to travel a lot I say, Mr. Speaker. I never got into the travelling because –

MR. KENT: Because you love being in Exploits.

MR. FORSEY: I love being in Exploits. Absolutely, I say to the Member for Mount Pearl North.

We are always getting requests from the Third Party, especially the Member for St. John's North: You are not doing this and you are not doing that. I wonder sometimes if he knows that he is elected and he is a politician and he is there to try – so, I clicked on his site one day and it just so happens that there is personal interests there. His personal interests, besides being – what is that at MUN? Anyway, besides that, his personal interests were travel and camping, current events, and, oh yes, politics. Those were his personal interests. I would have thought when he was in this House that he would be first and foremost, as I am, a politician.

MR. KENT: Challenge him to stand up and explain himself.

MR. FORSEY: Well, I think that he is in full favour. If he wanted to disagree with me, I am sure he would and stand up and challenge me on it. It is true; I do not see any opposition to it. I guess the reason for that is because he agrees with me and it is too bad that he is not spending more time into what the people elected him for, Mr. Speaker.

Now, I wanted to get into some of the Budget items. I know I do not have much time. Here it is; this is what I was looking for. When the Minister of Finance goes around and does consultations, we always get asked the question: Are they worth it? Well, of course they are worth it. What we have seen in the past couple of years, Mr. Speaker, because of the exercise that the Minister of Finance gets into – he goes all across the Province and listens to the people – we listen, as a government, and the Minister of Finance listens. That is how we brought in some of the initiatives or incentives that this government has brought in, Mr. Speaker, such as the cost-share ratio for municipalities.

Can you imagine a municipality with less than 3,000 people can have a 90-10 cost share? Well, let me tell you –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FORSEY: The Member for Bay of Islands agrees with me.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the member that his speaking time has expired.

MR. FORSEY: Leave to clue up?

MR. JOYCE: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The member has leave to clue up.

MR. FORSEY: Thank you.

The Member for Bay of Islands gave me leave to clue up. I really appreciate that, because I want to talk about your former boss again.

Back in 2005 there was a by-election in the District of Exploits. That is when I got elected, in June 2005, Mr. Speaker; I will soon have an anniversary. I had a call from a local mayor from a small community of about 250 people. He said: Sir, if you get elected, will you have a meeting with us? I said: Well, I should hope so. That is what I am running for. I said: Why? Well, he said, the former member would not meet with us. He would not come into the school in Bishop's Falls because they were mob mentality. He would not come down to a small community in the district to talk about their infrastructure. He would not meet with them.

Because of the initiatives of this government, Mr. Speaker, communities like this today manage to get an infrastructure for new waterlines of $750,000. Today they have new fire hydrants and new waterlines going through their town. That is what this government is doing. We are doing wise fiscal management and delivering the services that the people need and deserve.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to rise this evening and enter my second round of debate. I know that one of my colleagues referred earlier and gave some explanation to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, who quite often enjoy watching the debates here in the House of Assembly, we know that sometimes we have visitors come to the gallery to watch debates and we know that the members of the House quite often listen to debates and participate in debates here in the House, but I would like to take just a couple of minutes to explain a little bit further than one of the members earlier referred to, in discussion.

What happens with the Budget is that the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board presents his Budget Speech and he lays down a motion that we approve the Budget as being presented by the hon. member, by the hon. minister, and then a debate begins. Then the Leader of the Opposition gets to speak in a very extensive amount of time; I think it is twice as long as the minister actually takes to present the Budget. Then what quite often happens, as happened in this case, is that the Leader of the Opposition lays down an amendment, as we call it. He amended the motion of the minister on the debate and then he gets to speak further on the debate, which is part of the process that takes place. Then what happens is we actually move to debating the amendment, the amended part of the motion. Then they lay down, subsequent to that, a third motion, a sub-amendment, and you debate that one. What actually happens then is that during the process of debate of the Budget bill, we actually debate the sub-amendment part first and everyone gets an opportunity to speak to that.

That is what happened. Members of the House of Assembly here rose in their place and took opportunity – we all get twenty minutes each; there is a clock here on the wall that gives an indication of when our time is about to run out. We know that we all have twenty minutes each to speak to the sub-amendment. When the debate wraps up on that, then you move back to the amendment, and we all get to speak for a period of time on the amendment and then we move back to the main motion.

People at home may wonder: Why are we continuing to get up to talk about the Budget? It is because we have three different motions on the floor that came to us regarding the Budget and we all each get a chance to speak to them. One of the rules where you talk about money bills in the House of Assembly, and that includes the Budget, is: What is it you are allowed to talk about when you get up in the House to speak about the Budget? When there is a bill before the House – and we all know it here in the House of Assembly – we are required to speak to the specifics of that bill. If there is a bill from my department that may be about distance service contracts – which is a matter, a bill, that we debated here earlier this session – when a member gets up to talk about it, a member of the House gets up to debate that bill, you have to stick to, and stay to, matters pertaining specifically to that piece of legislation.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) relevance.

MR. DAVIS: It has to be relevant, that is right. It has to be relevant to the piece of legislation that is before the House, but in the case of a money bill, or, in this case, the Budget bill, we are entitled to speak virtually on any aspect of what is happening in Newfoundland and Labrador, any aspect of governance or what is happening in government in the Province.

It is very much wide open; that is why you hear members get up and talk about many different things. They talk about many different things, but they are all relative to what is happening in government, what is happening and what is pertinent to us as MHAs. You hear members talk about important things that are taking place in their district and things that are happening in their district. That is what I want to do tonight is use my time tonight to talk about some of the things that are happening in my district. Then I am going to move on to talk about some things that have happened recently that affect my department and matters that have been brought to the attention of the House that are relevant to my department.

I wanted to move to that part and take some time to talk a little bit about my district, the District of Topsail, and talk a little bit about some of the things that are happening in my district. All districts are different. They all have different priorities. They all have different matters of importance. Some are located throughout the Province, obviously. I can drive to my district as I do every night. I live in my district and I drive home to my district every evening.

My district actually takes in a part of the City of Mount Pearl, a part of the Town of Paradise, and also a part of the Town of Conception Bay South – when you think about it from an MHA's perspective, three large, significant communities in our Province. The City of Mount Pearl has a population, I know, of just under 25,000, between 24,000 and 25,000 residents, a very well-established community, a very family-oriented community, and a community that is very active within itself.

There are numerous groups and organizations that work within the town for the best interest of the city, and the best interest of the residents of the city. There are a lot of events that take place in the city. It is a very urban environment and it is a very happening place from a family perspective. It has been that way for many, many years. It is a community that in some ways is unique in its own right, but is a very family-oriented community.

The majority of my district – and I should also say, by the way, that the City of Mount Pearl actually has three different districts that have parts in Mount Pearl. The District of Mount Pearl South is completely contained within the City of Mount Pearl. There is another one; I just cannot think now which one it is. Oh, yeah, right on – how could I forget? It is Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: He is over reminding me, so I just wanted to see if he was actually paying attention or not.

The District of Mount Pearl North is also part of the City of Mount Pearl. Then, move to the Town of Paradise; the far majority of my district is actually contained within the Town of Paradise. The Town of Paradise, quite often the mayor will remind me that it is the fastest-growing community in Atlantic Canada; it really is, and we know that last year's census information tells us now that there are almost 19,000 people living in Paradise. If you think about Paradise just a short time ago, ten years ago, it was a much smaller community than it is today. It is a very significant community today. It is 19,000, I say to the member opposite who did not catch it the first time, and it is very significant.

That community also includes part of Mount Pearl North. It has a portion of that community as well as Conception Bay East – Bell Island; it takes in a portion of that community, as well as my district, Topsail. Then I move farther west; my district actually goes into the Town of CBS. In CBS, we know the population is about 25,000 people – that is 25,000 people, if you never got it, 25,000 people in CBS. There are three districts as well in the Town of CBS, being Harbour Main District, and as well as the District of Conception Bay South, and then my district again, the District of Topsail.

So that is about 68,000 people, and three very busy communities. I have to tell you, I spend a lot of my time working with local groups and organizations, and attending events, functions, and meetings that are within those three communities. They are very vibrant communities, they are very active communities, and they are very positive communities, Mr. Speaker. I say to the House and I say to the people at home that they are very positive communities. They enjoy living their lives in these communities, and the people work very hard to make those communities the vibrant places they are.

There are many groups; there are healthy seniors groups, fifty-plus groups, and seniors groups, as well, in the three communities: the Seniors Independence Group in Mount Pearl, the Adventure 50 Plus group in Paradise, and the Worsley Park group in Conception Bay South are three groups, all with hundreds of members, hundreds and hundreds of members between them. They meet on a regular basis, carry out many events, and visited the House of Assembly here on occasions in the past. We have groups right down to the youth groups for young children that are involved in things from Girl Guides and Boy Scouts to sporting groups and other organizations in the community.

So, they are very busy communities. I quite often speak of the value that people give back to their communities in the Towns of Paradise, CBS, and also the City of Mount Pearl.

Mr. Speaker, we know that this government in recent years has reflected upon the significant growth in this area; as I said, those three communities make up 68,000 people, a very significant piece of our population. In recent years, the government has made some significant investments in these three communities.

In the last school year, there were two new elementary schools opened in Paradise. The former Paradise Elementary school was closed down a few years back. There were temporary accommodations made; we knew some difficult times and tough times, but there are two brand-new schools now and arguably amongst the nicest schools in the Province, one of them being Paradise Elementary and the other one Elizabeth Park Elementary. That was an investment of over $30 million by the Province to build these new schools in the Town of Paradise.

As well, in the City of Mount Pearl, I know that we have seen significant investment there and significant progress in infrastructure. Just last season, the new extension for the Glacier was officially opened and kicked off just last year. That was a project of approximately $20 million in that range.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DAVIS: That is right; there is a much bigger project underway there in the City of Mount Pearl that is going to be built in that entire area. That is going to be to the benefit of the residents of the City of Mount Pearl, as well as those who visit the city. As well, Mr. Speaker, last year we were quite pleased, I know all of us were quite pleased to participate in and to witness the announcement of funding for the Town of Paradise and also the Town of Conception Bay South for the development of two new arenas, very much needed arenas for that area. The Town of Paradise and the Town of Conception Bay South have relied on the aging Robert French Memorial Stadium. We know that the significant investment for the development of two new arenas for those two communities is going to be significant and is so much required, so much needed in that area.

They are two good announcements, and I will tell you that I will never forget it, because the Mayor of Paradise – and I know my colleague from Mount Pearl North and my colleague from Conception Bay South were there that day – I remember when he spoke. I remember when he spoke, because the Mayor of Paradise is actually a former member of this House. He is a former Cabinet Minister in a previous government; he was a former Cabinet minister in a Liberal government. I remember when we announced the arena that day and he had an opportunity to speak, he said at that time: everyone knows my past and everyone knows my background, but, he said, I want to be perfectly clear. He said: this government is doing it right. That is what he said: this government is doing it right.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: He stands by that. He does not hide or anything by that. He stands by those comments today. He has worked very closely with government.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DAVIS: He is; he has worked very closely with government and they have made significant investments. You look at the new overpass that is being built, the old time, lots of the old-time jokes about the overpass. There is a brand-new overpass going up there, a state-of-the-art overpass being constructed there.

We know that the old Paradise school site has now been cleared to make way for a new youth treatment centre for youth with complex mental health needs. We hear the Opposition parties on a regular basis questioning the Minister of Health and Community Services about mental health matters that are very important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. They are very important to this government, Mr. Speaker. I am quite pleased that this new centre is being built in the Town of Paradise. The site is now cleared and the project is moving forward.

I remember last fall when I attended a public meeting in the Town of Paradise. Some of residents of Paradise at the time had concerns and had questions about the site being selected and what was actually going to go there. Once the meeting was over and people had some time to think about it and some time to reflect on what the purpose of the facility is for – this facility, again, will be for youth with complex mental health needs, a very much-needed facility in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. It is very much needed for the youth and young people of Newfoundland and Labrador in this Province. Once they had time to reflect on it and think on it, I know they felt differently about it. As a matter of fact, I have not received a single issue or concern raised to me since that public meeting was held. I think people feel very differently about it in the Town of Paradise today.

As the Member of the House of Assembly for that area, I much look forward to that particular facility opening. I know families myself – and I know members opposite have talked about this – who could very much have used this facility. It would have been in the best interest of their young people, their children, who needed this facility to help them to become the best they can be and to become productive members of society. That is what we all want. We want the best for our children and we want the best for our families. We absolutely do. This is going to be a significant investment by the government. We know there is also a second facility going in the Grand Falls area as well that is also going to facilitate the needs of youth in Newfoundland and Labrador. These are very important investments by this government.

In this year's Budget, specific to my district, we know there was $6.9 million announced of new funding for major infrastructure projects, including the planning for potential new schools in Portugal Cove – St. Philips, Paradise, CBS, and Torbay, which includes Flatrock, Pouch Cove, and the Bauline area. Think about that for a minute. That is foresight by the government. It is a significant plan and a significant investment by government to look at the needs moving forward. These are all those areas that are experiencing significant growth. We need to try to get ahead and plan ahead so that we can have what we require for our students and our children in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I have talked for a few minutes about my own district. I know that my time is running short; I have a few minutes left. I want to talk about some other things regarding my own department, if I can, for a few minutes. We know that the Opposition parties were quite critical government and encouraging the House to open and critical of government in many things we do – and that is quite often their job: to ask questions of government, to criticize us, to make us work to find new and better ways of doing things. Over the last few months – I keep a close eye on press releases that are issued by the Opposition parties and, of course, quite often pertaining to my own department in particular. I picked out a couple of them that I want to talk about tonight, because I wanted the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to know how easy it is for an Opposition MHA to take a little piece of information and draft a whole release about it containing information that is not always the way things are. Now, I am trying to be nice about how I word that. They paint a picture that does not paint the real picture. It does not paint the way things really are.

So, I want to take a couple of minutes just to speak about a couple of those. One of them came back by the Member for Torngat Mountains I want to refer to, that was issued early this year. Its headline is: Charities Shortchanged by Failure in Provincial Lottery System. It says that the charities were shortchanged. Now, this is a Member of the House of Assembly who puts out a press release saying that charities somehow are being shortchanged by our failures in the provincial lottery system. He said, and I am going to quote right from it, it says: Minister Davis needs to get serious – well, I can tell you we are pretty serious over here – about cleaning up lottery management systems to ensure that charities in the Province receive every cent they are owed. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am going to tell you, there is nowhere, anywhere, the Auditor General's Report or anywhere, that I can see any concerns that charities were not receiving what they were supposed to receive. This is a circumstance, where as far as I can find –

AN HON. MEMBER: It is foolish.

MR. DAVIS: It is foolish – where an MHA can take a little piece of information, put a twist on it, and send that out as if, as I said the last time I spoke, the sky is falling, things are in a mess, things are very terrible.

Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that the Consumer and Commercial Affairs Branch of Service NL received over 3,000 applications for licensing every year – over 3,000 applications. The far majority of them are turned around within a couple of days. Some of them that are more complex take a little bit more time to turn them around. Now you think about what that means – 3,000 licensing applications. You look at all the small communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, where we all come from, where dedicated, hard-working, community-based, and oriented people are carrying out charitable events for the best interest of their own communities, and for the best interest of people in their own communities – volunteers, doing volunteer work for their own communities. We do not manage charities. We are not in the business of running charities, or running games, or running lotteries. Communities do that. For the hon. member opposite to suggest that they are some how being shortchanged on what they deserve, I think it is terrible. I think it is absolutely terrible. It is terrible and it is amazing what they can do.

That is just one example. Let me take another one, Mr. Speaker, if I may. Let me take another one. This is one from another MHA across the way: Government slashes funding at the expense of injured workers. That is what the Member for St. Barbe said, that we are slashing salaries, slashing funding, at the expense of injured workers. This was February 14. The Dunderdale government is trying to save money on the backs on injured workers. It is absolutely terrible what was released here. I just cannot believe it. I went to work because this is concerning to me as a minister. What is going on in my department? What is happening if we are slashing salaries at the expense of injured workers?

Mr. Speaker, this government, and people on this side of the House, care very much about injured workers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: I know my time is coming to an end and they are quite rightly not going to give me leave to continue, but what I figure is they looked up a Summary of Expenditures and Related Revenue and on an audited statement they found a couple of numbers and equated that to be we are slashing salaries. What happened, Mr. Speaker, is that we did an organizational review in the workers' comp review division. We carried out an organizational review. We decided to add new positions to the workers' comp review division, three new positions that are very important to them: a manager of operations, which has been filled, by the way, at this point in time; we identified the need for a new solicitor and as well an appeals officer. All three positions have now been filled.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the minister that his time has expired.

MR. DAVIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker, to clue up?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the minister have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The minister, by leave.

MR. DAVIS: Thank you.

What happened, Mr. Speaker, is that in that release he suggested we cut salaries from $564,000 down to about $409,000, but what actually happened was during the reorganization that we did on the review division we needed to try to make improvements, which we want to do on a regular basis. That is what we do in government. We try to make things better for the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: In doing so, Mr. Speaker, we added three new positions, and one of those I want to touch on real quickly is the appeals officer. That appeals officer, who is now in place, is a person at the review division so that when a person files an appeal against a decision of workers' compensation, which is a process available to people who feel that workers' compensation has not given them the proper adjudication to their claim as they should have, one of the options is you can go to the review division. There are a number of steps, and one of them is the review division.

The appeals officer will now be there to assist those injured workers, to work with them to say, well, let us have a look at what you have, because I think maybe you need to also include some information about this; maybe you should consider providing some of this information, as an example. The appeals officer is going to be there to assist them through the process, a very important position.

Those positions have now been filled. What happened with the salaries was we had not filled the positions yet; we were still working towards it. The member opposite puts it out and says we have slashed salaries; he had no idea what he was talking about and he did not care to ask. That is irresponsible, I say about the member opposite from St. Barbe who issued such a release.

I would encourage people, when you are reading releases from the Opposition in cases like this – because it paints a poor picture for all of them and it really should not. It is really unfair to do that. They really should be more responsible in what they are doing when they are providing information to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to my third opportunity to speak on the Budget. I look forward to that opportunity and I thank you for the opportunity tonight.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me just say what a privilege it is to be able to speak to the Budget again and specifically to this amendment, Mr. Speaker – that I will not be supporting, by the way. We have already heard time and time again, and most recently, I think, from my colleagues from Lewisporte and Terra Nova, about all the people we have in the back row here. I would just like to say that we have a fine group back here. We do have thirty-seven because of the overwhelming mandate from the people back in October, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: It is a privilege to get up here and speak about what this Budget means to us and about what it means to our districts as well, Mr. Speaker. In speaking of the districts, the people of Lake Melville have in me and they certainly have in all of the people in this hon. House, they have made an investment in us and that is for us to come in here, to learn the ropes, to learn how governance works, and to become more effective as a representative for them. I think we all do our best to do that.

I would just like to say that basically the people here, we have so many people from so many different regions, so many different areas, so many different walks of life. I think it is probably said best by my colleague from Baie Verte – Springdale about how we have people who speak with intelligence back here and all across the front desk as well. We have people who speak with passion, with fire – passion and respect for the people of Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker.

Basically, we can add a bit of humour into that too, Mr. Speaker. We are proud of what we have accomplished thus far and we are very eager to get up here and share it with everybody, especially everybody out in TV land as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: I think back personally over the last couple of days, Mr. Speaker, and I think of the speeches from my colleague from Bellevue. I will just say in Lake Melville, we do not have much a commercial fishery. We do have a certain measure of a recreational fishery. I certainly did not know where we came from in terms of a Province and how we have arrived at where we are today in terms of the fishery. I would just like to say that was one of those speeches where I actually went up to one of my colleagues and I said: thank you for the education on a certain topic. I would like to give my colleague from Bellevue a little bit of props there.

Our fishery, again, is a couple of salmon and a couple of trout a year, and the odd seal when you get the chance, Mr. Speaker. It is certainly not to the degree that we see in some of the parts on the Island portion of the Province where they absolutely need the fishery in order to sustain themselves.

Mr. Speaker, let me say that time and time again we have heard how financially prudent and how responsible we are as a government. We have already heard from the Member for Terra Nova about the fact that we are doing all of this and we are going to manage our small deficit, even though we do not have that $1.1 billion in the Atlantic Accord offset payments. We are going to have a little bit of a shortfall because the Terra Nova and White Rose projects are going offline for a little while. We are still going to manage.

I think we have done an excellent job of staying the course, maintaining our momentum, and keeping prosperous. The Minister of Finance should certainly be commended for how we have arrived here as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: We have already talked and spent enough time, Mr. Speaker, on the fear that was out there about the slash-and-burn mentality that may have been coming for the Budget. We certainly know that did not arrive. We do have two years of manageable deficits coming. Then by 2014-2015, we will be right back where we should be, Mr. Speaker, which is into the black.

We have already spent plenty of time on our surpluses, Mr. Speaker, the $5.5 billion we have accumulated in six of the last seven years. We have already talked enough about how we have managed to put $4 billion down on our debt. In terms of the amount of money we have to use as a government in order to service that debt, we have come from basically 23 per cent of the gross revenue in 2004 to around 11 per cent, 10.8 per cent if you will, where we are here today. That is certainly awesome. I tell you what, it does make a difference when that money can then be used for programs and services for people who truly need it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: These are exciting times and I could go on and on, as everybody else could certainly do as well. Everybody knows we only have twenty minutes and you are pretty much going to use up all of that doing half of the topics you have. I am just going to move along.

I just want to talk a little bit about Muskrat Falls. Mr. Speaker, I was certainly pleased to hear the Minister of Natural Resources talk about Muskrat Falls today and give us that education on the relationship with Quebec and how – yes, I will say it again, as I have said it the last time I spoke to this Budget – we have been held hostage thus far, and that we certainly cannot grow by even considering trying to re-negotiate and continuously trying to fight our way back to get our power spread across here. We have to do it on our own. We have to be responsible, Mr. Speaker, and I am glad to hear it.

Again, I would like to restate some of the benefits that are going to happen in my district when it comes to the Lower Churchill, Muskrat Falls, Mr. Speaker: $450 million in income, 5,400 person years of employment, and at peak, during construction of Muskrat, 2,700 jobs. It has already been confirmed we are going to need that power. We have already had many people analyzing this project and it is out there. We have had all of the obvious ones. We have had Nalcor, Navigant, Manitoba Hydro, the Consumer Advocate, Wade Locke; we have had everybody, and we are still going to commission the reports, as noted by the minister today, to make sure that this definitely is the lowest-cost option for us. That this is definitely going to be something that is in the best interest to all of the residents of the Province, Mr. Speaker.

I have talked before, as have many other colleagues around the table here, Mr. Speaker – basically, everybody needs jobs. You need to have those jobs accessible to the people in order to give that boost to the economy, to have people spending money, to have people shopping, traveling, buying, going out, touring around our Province, putting their kids in sports, doing all of the things that families do. We certainly need the employment in Lake Melville, Mr. Speaker, with the recent downturn with 5 Wing Goose Bay in the last couple of years.

I will tell you this as a side note, Mr. Speaker: the Germans are coming back to 5 Wing to do a little bit of low-level flying. I know that is probably not –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RUSSELL: No, no. They are coming to do some flying, Mr. Speaker. There is a little bit of levity over here, but no, we are certainly welcoming them to come spend some money in my district, that is for sure.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I cannot, I guess, reiterate the points of the minister about the need for other projects and the power they require in order to have all of those people employed. We have talked about some uranium in Labrador. We have talked about the Grand River, the Ironsands project. We have talked about numerous others. We talked about Lab West and the expansion, Mr. Speaker, and about how we are going to need power for our own industrial developments, let alone trying to worry about having to ship that power out only for the sole purpose of selling it; that is not the case. We have talked about the stabilization of rates and how we have to get away from oil, oil pricing, those markets, in order to keep the Newfoundland and Labrador consumer safe, Mr. Speaker.

We have also heard the Leader of the Third Party, Mr. Speaker, talk about the need for diversification, wondering, and questioning our government on how we are going to do that. Well, I would just like to ask her: What do you think this is if this is not diversification? We cannot have all those eggs, like I said in my previous speech, Mr. Speaker, in one basket. We know we need alternate revenue sources. That is a fact. That is the safe and prudent way to be looking into our future and to be developing our economies, Mr. Speaker.

So, this is, in a word, visionary. We look at 2041 as our rights revert to us from the Upper Churchill agreement, we will get our 65 per cent back. We look forward into the future with Muskrat, Mr. Speaker, and with Gull Island. 2041, if the reserves we currently have dry up, we are in a position of power, Mr. Speaker. That is visionary leadership. That will allow us to transform our economy, as I have said before, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: I will move on now, Mr. Speaker, from that topic, seeing I have used up half my time already. I am only one topic in.

Basically, we have to come back here to the House. We are certainly going to debate this project. We are going to see the reports that are to be commissioned and are in the process of being commissioned by the minister, Mr. Speaker. Well, get your big-boy boots on and get a helmet, because it is going be fun. This is going to be an excellent debate that is going to lead us – hopefully it is going to lead us to the sanctioning of this project, I would say, Mr. Speaker.

Anyway, in my last speech up here talking about this Budget, Mr. Speaker, I talked about the buzz from the youths –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RUSSELL: I talked about the buzz from the kids in my communities, Mr. Speaker, about this project. I can tell you, the kids in school are excited about this. They know it is coming. Even my own daughter, Mr. Speaker, used this as a topic for the heritage fair last year. I tell you, she got an excellent, excellent mark, Mr. Speaker. Basically, she had a twenty-page report outlining all the pros and cons, she had the pictures, the conceptualizations of the site, Mr. Speaker. I will tell you what, and I will pat myself on the back here, the scale model made of wood, Mr. Speaker, was absolutely exceptional. We worked long and hard on that. It came out beautiful, and I have the pictures to prove it if anybody wants to see that I am a little bit handy when it comes to putting a few nails and a little bit of glue into things.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the bottom line here is that everybody is interested in it. The kids are talking about it, Mr. Speaker. They are excited that they can actually have the prospect of attending school here in our Province, and going to work in our Province, and building their homes in our Province, making a lot of money and enjoying life here in our Province without having to go out West.

Basically, my daughter, also this very week, Mr. Speaker, used Muskrat Falls as a topic for public speaking in school. I have to say, we had a long-drawn-out discussion about this. What it came down to was, she talked about those pros, those cons, she talked about how megaprojects can address the social needs that we have in our society. She had no problem talking about burning 18,000 barrels of oil a day, putting millions of tons of pollutants into our atmosphere and how it is necessary, Mr. Speaker, to make that transformation into green energy and to do what is right for future generations. That is what we are doing here, is being responsible.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: In her own words, Mr. Speaker, she still has those concerns. She has to be worried about the environment. I will even go out there on a limb and say she is a little bit of a tree hugger, and I like that in her too, Mr. Speaker. She is concerned about our environment, as are everybody on this side of the House. She said you have to break a few eggs in order to make an omelette. She understands, Mr. Speaker, there is a price of development.

Whether you are building a bridge, whether you are building a building, whether you are doing a hydroelectric development or whether you are going for a mine, Mr. Speaker, there is always going to be some disturbance of the environment. It is about mitigation, it is about making sure there are baseline studies done and that it is basically minimized as best that can be done, Mr. Speaker. She also understands and was able to effectively communicate that to other people who have seen or heard of this fair project and have heard her public speak as well, Mr. Speaker. She even had a box, Mr. Speaker, out there for people to vote in, and it was overwhelmingly in favour of the project. I just wanted to say that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: I will move on quickly, Mr. Speaker. I do have to mention my son, though; he also did public speaking this week in Our Lady Queen of Peace Middle School. He chose healthy living and wellness, Mr. Speaker. When you have two children, you certainly cannot put one in there and give them mention and not give the other one mention.

I would just like to say we had no problem working in the $750,000 for the Labrador Travel Subsidy, Mr. Speaker, that comes in this Budget, too. My son's main point in his speech was that he finds, as a youth, the easiest way for people to be well and to get healthy is to invest in spending time with your friends and with organized sports and teams that travel to other parts of the Province and to other provinces in order to get healthy and to have support while you do that, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the Minister of Recreation for that as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: I am going to talk a little bit, Mr. Speaker – I can see my time is running out. I will briefly mention housing, poverty reduction. You look at our Budget, Mr. Speaker, and I just have to laugh because we sit here everyday and we listen to the Third Party get up here and talk about our $2 billion in cash. They say, well pretty much, just spend it all right now. Spend it all right now. There is a money tree in the backyard somewhere around Confederation Building, I assume, Mr. Speaker, hidden in a giant sock as they say. Basically, you just cannot spend that –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RUSSELL: You have to have money in order to make choices, Mr. Speaker, choices that are going to benefit the Province overall.

Take housing, Mr. Speaker, basically what you see is, we are the biggest landlord in the Province. We have over 5,500 units. We have done a lot of renovations. I believe 3,500 of those have been renovated. I am happy to say that we have another fourteen social housing units coming to the Lake Melville area as well, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: I would just like to say that you can sit there all day long and you can ask, and you can ask, and you can demand this, we want more and more and more and more, but you have to realize that we have to deliver on other things. We have to run a government. We have to run a Province. You simply cannot eliminate all housing issues and all poverty issues in the Province just because you think it is the best thing to do right at this time. We have to be responsible, Mr. Speaker. There are things like health care, there is education. There are other things we have to worry about. We also have to engage in successful economic development in order to make this Province better and stronger for the future as well, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to say that in terms of poverty reduction, Mr. Speaker, we are at this Budget, and we have an investment of $150.8 million this fiscal year, and that is up $11.3 million from last year. We do have a social conscience and we can engage in activities that are going to address those social needs while being fiscally responsible and prudent, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to mention a few more items in here, Mr. Speaker. I want to talk a little bit about the elimination of the requirement for Income Support recipients to have to apply for CPP at the age of sixty. This means $500,000 in the hands of seniors, Mr. Speaker. We have $195,000 to expand the Earned Income Supplement project, Mr. Speaker, which is certainly welcome, and we have an additional $5.1 million to continue to index income support rates as well; all very useful.

I would just like to say that we have many other investments as well, Mr. Speaker, in terms of housing and poverty. Just to get into the housing, Mr. Speaker. In terms of our long-term social housing plan, we have an investment of another $30 million to improve housing options. That is no small amount, and that affects people of course with low incomes. So it is certainly a welcome thing to see.

We have $1 million in additional funding to expand the Rent Supplement Program, Mr. Speaker, bringing that total to $8 million in this Budget now, 2012. We have $1.8 million for Rent-Geared-to-Income Adjustment Program, Mr. Speaker. We have $892,000 in eight Newfoundland and Labrador housing community centres, and neighbourhood centres. Mr. Speaker, $1 million in the provincial Homelessness Fund and $4 million for the Residential Energy Efficiency Program. Basically, we are addressing those needs of the people.

I suppose we could change our way of thinking and go with the strategy of the Third Party, which would be to break all of your oil agreements, end up in litigation for years and years, and spend a gazillion dollars on that. We could take our $2 billion, Mr. Speaker, and we could certainly throw that at initiatives one after another and end up in situation similar to that of Greece. I guess we could use whatever money we have and go to the most remote, rural areas that we have and set up full-blown public transit systems. I suppose we could do that. Then I suppose we could spend the rest of our lives tweeting about it and see how good we are. I do not think we are going to do that, Mr. Speaker. I do not think we are going to do that at all.

As I move on, Mr. Speaker, I can see my time is running out. I would just like to say that I would like to give a little mention to the caribou. Courtesy of working with Nunatsiavut Government, Mr. Speaker, we have community freezer programs that give caribou, a staple food of the Inuit, to elders. I would like to thank the minister for erring on the side of caution and doing all we can to make sure that herd is sustainable and that we can see that herd rebound, Mr. Speaker. That is very important to us up in Labrador.

Of course, now I am running out of time. I want to give special mention to the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, Mr. Speaker, and the $500,000 commitment to the Labrador Winter Games in 2013. I would just like to say that if anybody has a chance to come up to Labrador and be part of the Winter Games, please do. You will see representation from over thirty communities. You will see traditional Aboriginal games, Mr. Speaker, and you will see a great time. You will see great people and great food, and you will enjoy great company. I would like to thank the minister for that.

I would also like to give special mention to the operating grant for the Combined Councils of Labrador, Mr. Speaker. It gives Labrador's more isolated communities a combined voice, a unique voice if you will, to pass resolutions and to have the unified voice to address issues that affect Labrador as a whole.

Although, I will say very briefly, a few months ago I was at the AGM of the Combined Councils of Labrador and it was very disheartening to me, Mr. Speaker. I was part of a round-table discussion with our federal MP, Minister Penashue, my colleague, the MHA for Labrador West, myself, and the Member for Torngat Mountains, Mr. Speaker. I can say during the round table we had one question that was a bit disturbing. We had somebody come up to us very upset. What they questioned was: why are we not separating as Labradorians from Newfoundland? I took true exception to that, Mr. Speaker. I would just like to say that I was a bit disgusted, but to each his own.

As a Labradorian, Mr. Speaker, who is half Inuk and who is half Newfoundlander, I am proud of my roots and I am proud of being part of this government that represents people no matter where they live. We had the Member for Torngat Mountains, in response to that question about separatism, actually say: maybe that is something we should look at. Well, I tell you what, Mr. Speaker, I have been called a lot of things in my life; I have been called a PC and I have been called a die-hard Leafs fan, and I am proud of those, but I tell you, one thing, as a Labradorian, I have never been called is a separatist.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I spoke a couple of days ago, Mr. Speaker, and I did not quite finish the comments that I was making –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE: – in comparing the most recent Budget that we have put out, which is this year, with the most recent Budget of the former Liberal Administration in 2003. The reason I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, to draw these comparisons is because of the number of times we get requests from the Opposition for more money here, or saying that we are not doing a good enough job on this particular issue.

The real proof is in the pudding, when you compare what we are putting into spending in certain areas with what the former Administration did in their most recent Budget. I do think it is important to compare. I did not quite finish my comments, and that is why I am going to go back to that.

We all remember when we took government in 2003, Mr. Speaker, the numbers of times that the schools had to be closed temporarily because of mould.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know that the Member for Bay of Islands, I am hitting a nerve here, but I appreciate your protection.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands, on a point of order.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

He mentioned about hitting a nerve. The reason why he hit a nerve is because he made a commitment to build the stable unit up in his district.

MR. SPEAKER: I would ask the member to make his point of order quickly.

MR. JOYCE: I am asking: is the building built as you promised the people in your district?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Member for Bay of Islands may get an opportunity at some point again to ask me questions, but this is not Question Period.

Mr. Speaker, talking again about when we first formed government in 2003, I recall the number of times that schools had to be closed temporarily because of mould issues. You do not see that very often today, but from 2003 to 2007, there were quite a number of schools in this Province that had to be closed temporarily to look after mould issues. Mr. Speaker, there is a reason for that. There is a reason that they had to be closed: it is because there was a lack of money put into upgrading and maintaining those buildings. We all know that, Mr. Speaker. We all know that. There were schools in almost every district in this Province that had to be shut down temporarily, the students moved from one school to an alternate location, or parts of the school shut down because of the lack of upkeep on those schools through the number of years that the Liberal Government was in power.

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that in the last four or five years we have not seen very much of that, if at all. The reason that had taken place – you look at educational facilities, the amount of money that was spent on educational facilities in the 2003 Budget: $12,138,000. What have we committed to spending on educational facilities in the most recent Budget in 2012, Mr. Speaker: $166 million.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, $166 million, compared to $12 million that the former administration had committed to educational facilities. You wonder why we spent the first three or four years focusing on cleaning out mould, replacing windows, replacing roofs, shutting some of the schools down because they were too far gone, Mr. Speaker, to keep them open. The number of new schools that this government had committed to building since we have come to government is incredible. We are doing the right things for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: We will have members on the other side of the House stand and say: you need to spend more money on schools. Mr. Speaker, if you compare $12 million in 2003 to $166 million in 2012, I think that speaks for itself. That speaks for itself.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I can tell you, the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor – Green Bay South sat with us in Opposition. He came to government when we came to government. He does not want to go back to spending $12 million on educational facilities a year, Mr. Speaker, I can guarantee you.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Harbour Main sat in Opposition with us. He recalls the days of us getting phone calls, people complaining that the schools were falling down in disrepair, wind blowing through. The curtains were moving in the dead of winter because the wind was blowing through the windows that were shut; leaks, buckets in classrooms. Do we want to return to that? Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker. How can members on the other side stand and say we are not doing enough in education when they spent $12 million in their last Budget compared to $166 million that we are spending today.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Conception Bay South, he sat with us in Opposition. I remember him standing in the House and complaining about schools in his district and having buckets on the floor collecting raindrops. That is not happening today, Mr. Speaker – that is not happening today. Mr. Speaker, I am going to tell you the commitment that we have made to maintaining school buildings compared to the commitment that was made in 2003, there is a striking difference – a striking difference.

AN HON. MEMBER: Talk about a leadership difference.

MR. OSBORNE: Yes, well there is a leadership difference as well, I can say. Mr. Speaker, there are a number of members on this side of the House – I know the Member for Gander came into this government new in 2003. I say the Member for Gander does not want to go back to spending $12 million on educational facilities. I can assure you, I remember sitting around the Cabinet table with that member when he was fighting for more money to maintain the schools in his district.

Mr. Speaker, there are schools in this Province that have been shut down because they were so far gone – a lack of repair. The west end high school is another prime example. I remember in Opposition fighting to get a new high school for the west end. We have committed to it; there is money in it again in this year's Budget for site preparation and other work on that high school.

Mr. Speaker, the high school should never have been taken out of the west end. I say thank you to the Member for Harbour Main for reminding me of that. I remember going and fighting that issue when we were in Opposition. I could not believe they were shutting a high school down in the west end of St. John's – could not believe it. You talk about the right decisions being made, Mr. Speaker. The high school should never have been shut down in the west end of St. John's. We are the people who have put it back, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, you look at transportation projects and the money that is being spent on transportation projects in this Province. The Minister of Transportation this year put in a budget for $189.7 million – that is in this year's Budget. You look at the last Budget under the Liberal Administration and it was $86 million. Now, you wonder why, when we came to government, almost every major trunk road and access road in this Province was in disrepair. That is not the case today, Mr. Speaker. Now, I can tell you, you cannot build Rome in a day, either. We are fixing them. We have been in government for just over eight years. We have been in government for just over eight years and we have come a long way. You ask anybody who travels the highways in this Province on a regular basis, the conditions of the highways today compared to 2003.

Mr. Speaker, we have come a long way, because we have made the investment, Mr. Speaker – we have made the investment. We have put the money into upgrading our roads, into maintaining the roads, and the proper construction of the roads. I remember travelling around the Province when we were in Opposition, building the foundation for a strong and solid government, Mr. Speaker, going into every nook and cranny in the Province, building our party. Mr. Speaker, we had to take our own vehicles, because we did not have budgets to fly or to rent vehicles – but there was often a time when I drove my own vehicle down some of the trunk roads in the Province, campaigning and building this party, that I wondered whether our vehicle was going to come back out of it unscathed. Some of the roads were absolutely deplorable, Mr. Speaker – absolutely deplorable.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. OSBORNE: That is right, the Northern Peninsula. Out in Corner Brook, Mr. Speaker, the Placentia Access Road – I remember the Placentia Access Road, the Bonavista Highway. Some of those roads, Mr. Speaker, it was unbelievable the condition that they were in.

Now, you look at good governance, you look at solid governance, you look at the right decisions being made, Mr. Speaker. I would not want to go back to the commitments that were being made in 2003 in that Budget, I can assure you. You need to have solid government with sustainable spending, at the same time ensuring that we are not putting a shackle around the next generation. We need to balance what we are doing and ensure that we are paying down the debt so that our children and their children are not shackled with the type of debt that was left by the former Administration.

When we came to government, Mr. Speaker, the Province had a debt of approximately $12 billion.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, that debt is now down to less than $8 billion. Not only have we put sustainable spending in place, not only has our government ensured that the spending we put in place is sustainable, but we have also made a commitment to future generations that we will reduce the overall debt burden that the people of this Province, that future generations will have to pay. We have a commitment in this year's Budget that we will lower our provincial debt, the per capita debt, to less than the national provincial average.

What was the date, I ask the Finance Minister?

AN HON. MEMBER: Ten years.

MR. OSBORNE: Within the next ten years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: We have put a commitment, Mr. Speaker, in place to ensure that future generations are not left paying for today's decisions. That is something that the former Administration did not do. I remember sitting in the House – this is my seventeenth Budget that I am debating, Mr. Speaker – between 1996 and 2003 debating Budgets and seeing the deficit balloon year after year after year, looking at the provincial debt going up year after year after year.

Mr. Speaker, you look at good governance, you look at wise decisions, you look at the right decisions being made for the people of this Province and it is this government that has been doing that since we took office in late 2003, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: Not only have we been repairing roads, not only have we been repairing schools and ensuring that the infrastructure debt – because as I mentioned the last time I spoke a couple of days ago in the House, there are two types of debt. There is the debt that shows on the books and there is an infrastructure debt. The debt that the former Administration left a noose hanging around the people of this Province, Mr. Speaker, the $12 billion debt that they left, did not even include the infrastructure debt. There is no way of really, truly measuring the infrastructure debt, but when you look at schools that had to be closed because of mould, schools that had to be shut down and replaced with new schools, highways that were in such terrible shape, Mr. Speaker, that they had to be replaced, that is an infrastructure debt and that is the debt that was not counted in the $12 billion that the former Administration left this Province hanging with.

Mr. Speaker, you look at health facilities; now this one is startling. The contrast here, Mr. Speaker, is startling. I know; I served my time as Health Minister; in 2003, the former Administration was spending $20 million a year on health facilities, maintaining our hospitals and other health facilities. Twenty million dollars a year they were spending on health facilities. Now, Mr. Speaker, I know you are sitting down, and it is a good thing; it is a good thing you are sitting down, because in 2003 it was $20 million.

MR. SPEAKER: I could get up, I should say to the hon. member.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much is it now?

MR. OSBORNE: It is $159 million this year, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: A hundred and twenty-nine million dollars; Mr. Speaker, that is eight times the amount the former Administration was spending on maintaining our health facilities that we are spending. There is eight times the amount of money the former Administration spent on our health facilities.

Mr. Speaker, make no wonder, make no wonder some of the hospitals had to be replaced. Make no wonder some of the hospitals were falling down. Make no wonder the hospitals were falling down. Twenty million dollars a year – that is shameful. Mr. Speaker, that is shameful. They spent more money flying to Australia and Fiji and Taiwan on their trinket trips than they spent maintaining the hospitals. That is a fact. That is a fact, Mr. Speaker. It is unbelievable. When you look at the amount of money they spent maintaining our health care facilities, it is absolutely shameful.

How they can stand, how they can stand, Mr. Speaker, and say that we are not spending enough, when they spent $20 million a year on maintaining our health facilities, and we are spending $159.7 million? What a difference – but that is what you call good governance, Mr. Speaker. That is what you call good governance.

Not only have we put the money into maintaining our infrastructure, not only have we put the money into health care programming, educational programming, and educational facilities, but we are paying down the debt. Now, some of the members of the Opposition, Mr. Speaker, will stand in the House and say: you should not put so much money on the debt; you need to put more money into programming. Well, I spoke a couple of days ago about the difference that they put into programming and what we are putting into programming. It is quite a contradiction. It is quite a contradiction, Mr. Speaker, that they can stand and condemn us for not putting the money into programming when we are spending several times more than what they spent on programming.

Mr. Speaker, I will ask the Member for Conception Bay South: would you want to go back to spending $20 million a year on health, on upgrading our health facilities, versus the $159 million? Absolutely not, no, but yet they will condemn us and complain that we are not doing enough. It is unbelievable – unbelievable.

Mr. Speaker, you look at what is being spent on public buildings such as the Confederation Building. Anybody who drives by here will see the wrap around the building; it is because we are upgrading this building. There are several other public buildings that needed to be upgraded since we have taken government. You look at the amount of money that they spent on upgrading and maintaining public buildings compared to what we are spending today, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Transportation and Works knows; he knows because he is the minister responsible for this part of the Budget, maintaining government buildings.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. OSBORNE: There is a maintenance deficit, he said, of about $500 million; that is the amount of work still on the books that needs to be done. It is incredible, Mr. Speaker, when you look at the amount of work that needed to be done compared to the work that we are doing today. We are spending more than four times the amount they spent just ten years ago on maintaining buildings.

Mr. Speaker, that is an investment. It is an investment in the future, because if you do not properly maintain your buildings, it will cost considerably more to fix them than it does to maintain them. We are not only maintaining the buildings, Mr. Speaker, but we are fixing the damages that were left behind by years of neglect on those buildings.

There are two types of debt, as I said it: there is the debt that shows on the books and the infrastructure debt.

Mr. Speaker, I see that the clock has run out. I am still not finished talking, Mr. Speaker –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the member his time has expired.

MR. OSBORNE: I appreciate my time.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. LITTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to be able to once again rise in this House amongst these great leaders and my colleagues. The twenty minutes I spoke on the Budget just last week was not nearly enough time to highlight all of the positive things in this Budget. Today I would like to walk us through a few more items if I may.

First of all, Mr. Speaker, the wisdom and the expertise of the Dunderdale government is certainly evident in the contents of Budget 2012.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: It is all about people and prosperity. The negative remarks from the Third Party over and over will only hurt a growing and prosperous tourism industry. My district is full of prosperity when it comes to tourism. I would like for the Third Party to simmer down a little bit in the media in relation to some of the things they are saying in regard to our infrastructure and some items related to the tourism industry.

I will speak against the amendment, but I will support the Budget, Mr. Speaker. The continued construction of new schools, hospitals, repairs and maintenance of redevelopment of existing buildings, nursing homes, universities, colleges – I can go on and on and on, Mr. Speaker, about what good-news stories come out of this Budget 2012.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: This government of today is about a balanced approach, being fiscally responsible. I am confident we will stay on track, pay off the debt, continue to spend on infrastructure, and continue to invest in renewable resources, invest to give all residents of Newfoundland and Labrador a great future, Mr. Speaker. I firmly believe we will leave a legacy for our children and their children.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Why do so many tourists visit this Province? I can give you a number of reasons: the hospitality that our great Newfoundlanders and Labradorians give to the tourists; the uniqueness of our coastal communities; the beauty of our coastlines; the abundance of wildlife on land and sea. Nowhere else in the world will you have such a wonderful, relieving holiday of relaxation with a great group of people, our own Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Every time I get up and speak in this House, I feel that I have an obligation to speak on the fishery and fishery related issues, based on the fact that I am from one of the largest fishing districts in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Today, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture actually spoke about the future fishery and what this government is undertaking in relation to some of the communities around the coasts of Newfoundland and Labrador. The Fisheries Cabinet committee is formed and will be meeting with representatives of plant workers and community leaders where plant closures have occurred.

This government, and in particular the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, is very open and transparent when it comes to communicating and consulting with the people in the communities of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Since the closure of the OCI plant in Port Union, as the MHA for Bonavista South, I had numerous meetings with the Minister of Fisheries, with the Minister of Municipal Affairs, with the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, and with the Minister of Innovation, Business and Rural Development. I felt obligated to contact those ministers and have a discussion in relation to what is happening in the rural parts of this Province in relation to what we should be doing for the future of the fishery in this Province. I can tell you, every minister I talked to is certainly committed to rural Newfoundland and Labrador, the communities, and the people of this Province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: I listened so many times to the Minister of Fisheries since he took the portfolio. I can tell you he is very eloquent in the position. He is after speaking on a number of open line shows, the VOCM Open Line shows, the CBC Fisheries Broadcast, and Questions and Answers on NTV most recently. I believe we are all ready to move ahead in a co-operative approach to help assist those people and the communities they come from through this challenging time. I am impressed how this minister is consulting with all stakeholders in the industry. I must say this is the type of approach that this government is taking in relation to fishery issues and every other issue that comes forward in this Province, Mr. Speaker.

As I speak, in the District of Bonavista South, and other districts as well, the crab season is on the go. It seems to be a very positive season for the most part. There are all kinds of product being landed in my district on the Bonavista Peninsula. There are hundreds of fishing enterprises that are very successful in my District of Bonavista South, as well as Districts like Port de Grave, Bellevue, Cape St. Francis, Grand Bank, Trinity – Bay de Verde, Trinity North, Bonavista North, Ferryland, Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune, Terra Nova, Baie Verte, Springdale, Burin – Placentia West, Placentia – St. Mary's, the Isles of Notre Dame, and there are many more.

How could this government walk away from the challenges in the fishery when we have so many people here affected by what happens in their districts and communities in relation to the fishery, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: The Opposition – the Third Party I should say, I was actually going to bring this up in my Budget speech but I did not want to do it because the member was not present at the time, but the member is present here tonight. He actually came to my district, took time out of his so-called busy schedule -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind members to not refer to anybody who is not in the House or reference their absence at any time.

MR. LITTLE: I apologize, Mr. Speaker. I retract that statement.

The member attended a meeting in my district and took a photo op, a big photo op outside the Port Union plant, visited and actually met with a few people in my district. I was not impressed with that, to be honest with you. Since that time, there was nothing achieved by that visit to Bonavista South, absolutely nothing, Mr. Speaker. It is just a photo op and support from a few people in the district. If that is the kind of constructive support you are going to put forward for fishing communities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, I have a word of advice: you probably should pay more attention to your own district.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for The Straits – White Bay North, are you rising on a point of order?

MR. MITCHELMORE: A point of order, yes.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: Mr. Speaker, a letter was drafted following a visit to the Minister of Fisheries calling for a ministerial task force –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. LITTLE: Mr. Speaker, there have been a number of meetings with this government, with the leaders in the communities of the District of Bonavista South, with Cabinet ministers, and there will be more meetings in the near future. The support that I am getting from this government, on this side of the House, is overwhelming, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: It is certainly appreciated by all the people of the District of Bonavista South, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to clue up now, Mr. Speaker. Here is an interesting comparison that I would like to highlight, in 2004 debt expenses consumed over 23 per cent of gross revenues. In Budget 2012, debt expenses are budgeted to be at 10.8 per cent of gross revenues. This, Mr. Speaker, allows us to make more productive use of each revenue dollar that is generated, and I can tell you –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: - this government will take this Province into highlights that it has never seen before, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: There being no further speakers, I will call for a vote on the amendment to the Budget motion.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion defeated.

On motion, amendment defeated.

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

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It now being 9:36 p.m. on the clock, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, that the House do now adjourn.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that this House do now adjourn.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion carried.

Tomorrow being Wednesday, Private Members' Day, this House now stands adjourned until 2:00 o'clock tomorrow afternoon.

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