PDF Version

April 30, 2013                       HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS                 Vol. XLVII No. 12


The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Before we start today's proceedings, I want to welcome to our galleries seventeen students from Holy Heart of Mary who are involved in the International Club. The students are accompanied today by their teachers Boyd Perry and Mandy Penney.

Welcome to our Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I want to also welcome today our new Page, Marc Brouillette.

Welcome, Marc.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today we will have members' statements from the Member for the District of Humber West, the Member for the District of Lake Melville, the Member for the District of Bay of Islands, the Member for the District of Mount Pearl North, the Member for the District of Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi, and the Member for the District of Mount Pearl South.

The hon. the Member for the District of Humber West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRANTER: Mr. Speaker, on April 10 I had the opportunity to attend and present a Bronze Medal Duke of Edinburgh Awards to twenty-three deserving young women and men at the Corner Brook Duke of Edinburgh School Group.

To qualify for an award, participants must undertake a balanced program of leisure-time activities and meet the prescribed standards in four different areas of self-development, including community service, adventurous journeys, physical fitness and skill development.

Over the past year or so, members of the Corner Brook D of E School Group have been involved in many challenging and worthwhile activities under the direction of committed volunteer leaders. In speaking with participants individually, they tell stories of personal growth and commitment as they embarked on the various challenges and opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to congratulate Claire Andrews, Shaelynn Barry, Sam Brake, Rebecca Davis, Liam Dicks, Andrew Dollomount, Angela Earle, Matthew English, Alexander Fost, Hannah Flight, Kavita Gill, Corey Hepditch, Riley Hogan, Emily Hynes, Nicholas Hynes, Morgan Penney, Allison Pittman, Elizabeth Rowe, Whitney Shortall, Eliza Snelgrove, Julia Stagg, Kathryn White, and Claire Woolfrey on being presented the Duke of Edinburgh's Bronze Medals and wish them well in their silver and gold medal pursuit.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Lake Melville.

MR. RUSSELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize Goose Bay's Hotel North women's broomball team who won the Senior Women's Broomball Championships held in St. Anthony this past March.

During the provincial championships the team from Goose Bay had a perfect round robin record, winning all four of their games, shutting out the team from Corner Brook twice, and defeating St. John's twice in very tough games, one of which went into overtime.

In the semi-finals they defeated St. Anthony 2-0 in front of their hometown crowd before meeting Twin Towns in the finals, beating them 1-0 for the championship.

Several members of the team were recognized for their play. Janine Battcock was given the Top Defense award, Joanna Elliott won the Top Goalie award, Kayla Nolan won Top Scorer, and Adrienne Morris was the team's MVP.

The team consisted of Cathy Elson, Dana Webber, Stephanie Webb, Adrienne Morris, Toni Hamel, Tina Combden, Kelly Way, Janine Battcock, Candice Linstead, Kayla Nolan, and goalie Joanna Elliott. They were coached by Clarence Webber, Jordan Anthony and Ann Morris.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in recognizing the success of Goose Bay's women's broomball team.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, last Thursday evening I attended the volunteer appreciation night at the Town of Humber Arm South. This was a very special occasion as a former mayor and outstanding volunteer of the town, who made a major contribution to the whole south shore of the Bay of Islands, was honoured.

The family of the late Eric Humber wanted to recognize outstanding volunteers from the town. In Eric's memory, they established the Eric Humber Helping Hands Award. This annual award will recognize an individual from the Town of Humber Arm South for their exemplary volunteer service.

The first two recipients were Mr. Murdoch White for 2011, and Ms Marina Brothers for 2012. Both individuals are well deserving of this award for their continued commitment and dedication to their town.

It was a privilege and honour for me to be asked by the family to present the first awards in memory of my dear friend, Eric. Volunteering was a big part of Eric's life and his family wanted to ensure that his legacy lives on.

I ask all members to join me in congratulating the recipients and thanking the family, and above all, Eric, for his contribution to the Town of Humber Arm South.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize recent recipients of the Duke of Edinburgh's Awards at the bronze and silver levels.

Mr. Speaker, this success is a testament to the hard work and devotion of those individuals who participate in the Duke of Edinburgh's Awards program. As someone who speaks from experience, I know first-hand the commitment and dedication one has to have in order to achieve this award.

I would like to recognize all the recipients, in particular Mason Gulliver for receiving the bronze award; Khristian Fowler for receiving the silver award; Victoria Rose for receiving her silver award; Tyler Bennett for receiving his silver award; Colin Hunt for receiving the bronze award; and last but not least, Sarah Whelan for receiving the bronze award as well.

I wish them all the best in their future endeavours and hope that they continue to participate in those activities that are of great interest to them. They are role models for other youth who have a keen interest that they wish to explore. They demonstrate that hard work and perseverance will enable you to achieve what you put your mind to.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating these achievers of the Duke of Edinburgh's Awards program.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I rise in this House today to salute a unique club at Holy Heart of Mary High School. It is not surprising there is a vibrant International Club at Holy Heart – there are over 150 students from more than fifty countries, speaking over twenty different languages.

The International Club, or IC, as they call it, has a threefold mandate: to welcome new Canadian students to Holy Heart, to create an awareness and acceptance of the many cultures at Holy Heart, and to celebrate the school's diversity, which is a lot more diverse than when I graduated from that high school.

The largest project the group has undertaken was the diversity assembly on February 19, and what an event it was. They planned and organized a wonderful morning of dancing, music, guest speakers, and fifty-one Holy Heart students carried the flags of their countries.

Other popular events include international potlucks for all staff and students at the school, social activities for new, cultural awareness activities and, of course, continuing orientation and mentoring of new Canadian students to the school. Some of the students and their teachers are with us today.

I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating the Holy Heart of Mary International Club on their outstanding work.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANE: Thank you, 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 they have inducted sixty-six tremendous individuals.

Today I would like to acknowledge the achievements of five others: Brian Cranford and Andrew Moyst have been inducted into the athlete-builder category; Ralph Neil, in the builder category; and Terry Ryan Jr. and Julie Fiander in the athlete category. I would also like to acknowledge the 1992 to 1995 Mount Pearl senior boys basketball 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, and wish them all the best in their future sporting endeavours.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to inform members that I had the great privilege of attending the European Seafood Exposition last week. My officials and I joined over thirty representatives from the Newfoundland and Labrador seafood industry, including the Barry Group, Clearwater Seafoods, Icewater Seafoods, the Labrador Fishermen's Union Shrimp Company, Newfound Resources, Notre Dame Seafoods, Ocean Choice International, Whitecap Seafoods International, the Fish, Food and Allied Workers, and the Fisheries and Marine Institute of Memorial University.

The European Seafood Exposition is one of the many important opportunities to market fish globally. European countries, in particular, imported a total $23.7 billion worth of seafood in 2012. The European Union has over 500 million people with a high level of fish consumption – this offers tremendous opportunity for Newfoundland and Labrador. Given the potential benefits of the anticipated Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement being negotiated between Canada and the European Union, it is important for our Province to maintain a strong presence in this marketplace.

Mr. Speaker, approximately 25,000 buyers, suppliers, media, and other seafood industry professionals from over 140 countries attended the show to meet face-to-face to do business. I can tell you it was impressive to witness this first-hand.

Mr. Speaker, our government works very hard with the industry to promote Newfoundland and Labrador seafood at every available opportunity. In Budget 2013: A Sound Plan, A Secure Future, we once again demonstrated this commitment by allocating $2.6 million for seafood marketing. This is in addition to our participation at seafood shows throughout the world, including Europe, Boston, and China.

Other examples of our commitment to seafood marketing include: approximately $80 million has been offered in the form of inventory financing for seafood companies; $11.5 million has been offered in support of a seafood marketing council and seafood sales consortia; $2.8 million for processing and marketing services; and $1.6 million for market intelligence initiatives. An indicator of our success is that over 65 per cent of Newfoundland and Labrador's seafood has been, or will soon be, eco-certified by the Marine Stewardship Council. The MSC label represents the gold standard in the certification of sustainable fisheries.

Mr. Speaker, in partnership with our government, the seafood industry has made tremendous progress and there is much more opportunity ahead in the future. Our commitment to this vital industry is strong in every respect.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for an advance copy.

On reviewing his trip to Brussels, I would have to say I would give him a C plus. His heart is in the right place, but the money could have been better spent.

For example, 20,000 people, it is true, still earn a livelihood in the seafood industry in our Province, so it makes it the largest single sector in our Province. It is critically important to us. We catch fish very well and we can process fish when we are given a chance to, when others do not get it shipped out to them, but we do not market it very well. True to form, the marketing budget in 2011-2012 was $2 million. The Province spent $1.6 million. In 2012-2013, it was $5.5 million and the Province spent $1.7 million. We have not been using our marketing budget.

The biggest market we have for seafood is the United States and the Boston Seafood Show has been around for thirty years, not twenty years like DFA's Web site says. It has actually been around thirty years, so the minister might want to update his Web site in that respect. What I would say is that his heart is in the right place with his European frolic, but not to go to Boston is a huge mistake that he cannot undo.

To go on from Boston, I would recommend that he would go to our other emerging economies, the BRIC nations: Brazil is dynamic and growing, and it is in our hemisphere; Russia has a similar market as we do; India has more entrepreneurs than Canada has people; and China has an enormous market. I would say it is good to go to Brussels, but it would be much better to go to the other places. It is really unfortunate that he did not go to Boston.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. The indication of good marketing is more than just attendance at an international seafood show. It requires on-ground co-operation for a marketing plan.

When we hear the word lobster, many people think of Maine. When we hear about salmon, it is Alaskan salmon or Alaskan snow crab. These places have done phenomenal jobs. Eco labelling and certification should be a key part of this campaign.

CETA presents opportunities, but also significant threat, such as dropping minimum processing requirements, costing us jobs and the ability to maximize local benefits. The minister needs to be more open about these trade deals.

The minister has made many statements and thrown out a lot of numbers here today, but there is very little in tangible results when it comes to dollars actually spent on these initiatives.

Branding and co-operation for marketing with all stakeholders, that is certainly key, so let's see if 2013 will bring with it a generic seafood marketing campaign.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform this House and, through this House, the people of the Province that an agreement has been reached between the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and Fortis Properties Corporation on financial compensation that arises from the passage of the Abitibi-Consolidated Rights and Assets Act.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Through this agreement, Mr. Speaker, the government is protecting the assets that belong to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. This is a fair settlement for the people of the Province and is the appropriate course of action for us to take.

Under the terms of the agreement, final compensation of $18.4 million will be provided to Fortis in addition to payments previously made that total $22.4 million in all. This concludes all compensation arrangements related to the expropriation of hydroelectric assets formally owned by Abitibi.

A compensation arrangement has also been reached with a consortium of lenders represented by Sun Life Assurance of Canada for the outstanding loan payments and the balance related to the Exploits River Hydro Partnership assets. Nalcor will assume a loan obligation of approximately $54 million, which will be supported through the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the government took immediate, decisive action back in 2008 when it became apparent that Abitibi was abandoning its pulp and paper operations in Grand Falls-Windsor. Government was determined to ensure that the Province's valuable natural resources remained in the hands of its rightful owners, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the legislation was introduced to protect the people of Central Newfoundland and the Province's resources, and upon its passage, the hydro, the timber and the land assets became the legal property of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Upon the introduction of the Abitibi-Consolidated Rights and Assets Act, we indicated that the interests of businesses and people in the Central Region would not be adversely impacted by our decision to expropriate Abitibi assets.

The independent third parties that were involved, we told them that they would be protected and this settlement now reinforces this commitment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. Of course, this is something that we have been asking this government about now for quite some time. Just last week I stood in the House and asked the question about the updating of the negotiations with Fortis, as a commitment was made for this company to remain whole. Again, this morning in Estimates, the minister brought this up and said that this would be coming today in a Ministerial Statement, so I thank him for this.

Of course, the $8.4 million, as the minister said, is on top of the $5 million that has been paid out over the last five years, but really the story does not end there. This is part of one piece of what has been a total compensation package for a number of the assets. Really, we still have, I guess, some liability issues around the expropriation of the mill in Grand Falls-Windsor and the environmental cleanup that would be attached to that mill, so the story is not over.

From a Fortis point of view, I would say that back in 2003 when they were making a commitment to upgrade the facilities and the Exploits River hydro development that at that time they were not expecting that this project, this asset of theirs, would be expropriated. So, there is a message I would say that even though we end with the asset, I think from Fortis' point of view this was not their intent back in 2003, nevertheless it puts an end to this aspect of negotiation.

Mr. Speaker, we will look forward to the investments that we make in the environmental cleanup of the Abitibi expropriation.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

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

I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I have to note the positive language being used by the minister for the cost of expropriating Abitibi's assets. I think we need to reflect right now on the hasty expropriation that this government conducted several years ago. We were assured all was in hand and were asked for our support, which we gave, because we went on the information given to us by government. It turns out that was not the case and now we are saddled with the decrepit mill which will cost millions to clean up.

Government calls their 2008 decision immediate and decisive. My mother had an expression, Mr. Speaker, haste makes waste; and I suggest that this government reflect on that axiom.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the Member for St. John's South have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The federal Auditor General's report released today stated that the ongoing staffing and training challenges in the air and marine search and rescue are impacting the sustainability of search and rescue operations in the Province.

I ask the Premier: In light of this report, will you now ask the federal government to reinstate the maritime search and rescue sub-centre in St. John's?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we read with some concern the reflections of the Auditor General in his report, especially as it relates to search and rescue and the capacity of the federal government in our Province, where this is an extremely important issue. A significant number of our population still earn their living on the sea, Mr. Speaker, and their health and safety is of critical importance to every person in Newfoundland and Labrador, and we will continue to pursue this issue with the federal government.

We do not need this impetus to keep up our pressure on the federal government to restore the marine sub-centre here in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, and to keep search and rescue at the top of their priority list. It is extremely important to us as a government, as a people, Mr. Speaker, and we reinforce that every opportunity we have.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, my question was about, of course, the sub-centre that was recently closed and the valuable asset that was in the overall search and rescue assets in the Province. So, my question was: Will you speak to the federal government and get that centre reopened again so we can protect the people in the Province?

Mr. Speaker, this scathing report reveals that inefficiencies exist in search and rescue – inefficiencies that were present during failed searches in our Province. So, I ask the Premier: Is the Auditor General's report compelling enough evidence to finally call a public inquiry into search and rescue in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I answered the question posed to me by the Leader of the Opposition. Health and safety, search and rescue in our offshore is a high priority with this government, as it is with the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. We continue to press our concerns about changes that have been made to search and rescue in this Province at every opportunity with the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, we are not going to call a national inquiry in which we cannot bring the federal government to the table. We are going to continue to do what we are tasked to do by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to bring these matters to the attention of the federal government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would ask the Premier: Based on that response, have you even asked the federal government – and I would look forward to that response. Because our understanding is that you have not even asked the federal government to initiate or engage in a public inquiry, even if they need to be there.

Mr. Speaker, the report also states that the information management system used in search and rescue cases is not adequate and is nearing a breaking point. A replacement system is not expected until 2015-2016.

So I ask the Premier: What measures are you willing to implement to ensure the safety of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians between now and 2015-2016?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as I continue to say in this House of Assembly, and I say at every interaction we have with the federal government, health and safety and search and rescue are priorities of the people of this Province. We expect our people to have adequate services – more than adequate services – when they go about the means they have at their disposal to earn a living for themselves and for their family. We advocate for the highest calibre of service that is available in this country be available to the men and women in Newfoundland and Labrador who work in our offshore.

Mr. Speaker, we will be taking what we learned today from the Auditor General, the federal Auditor General, and we will be pursuing this argument again with the federal government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, I do not know who is watching what is going on there, but the AG's report clearly says there is not adequate information systems and not adequate maintenance being done.

So who is watching is this? How can you say they should be more than adequate? I ask the Premier: Who is monitoring this on behalf of the Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is playing games. He understands very clearly in this country certain responsibilities fall within the purview of the federal government; certain responsibilities lie within the purview of the provincial government. One of our responsibilities is ensuring the services that are made available to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are adequate or more than adequate to meet their needs.

Mr. Speaker, we do not have the means to audit a federal system. That is why we have an Auditor General. When they bring these kinds of examples to our attention, we launch a full-court press with the federal government at every opportunity, with the Prime Minister and with ministers, to make our points.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has finally confirmed that the new rightsized hospital in Corner Brook will have 15 per cent fewer acute care beds than at the current hospital.

I ask the Minister of Health: Is this how you plan for the future and take care of the residents on the West Coast, by reducing their access to acute care?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this is absolutely amazing to me. Time after time after time, the Member for the Bay of Islands stands up in this House of Assembly and basically says he does not want the $500 million to $600 million facility that we are proposing for the Western area of this Province. Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely amazed at that.

This will be a facility, Mr. Speaker, that we intend to use as a flagship. This will be a facility that will have within it opportunities to be able to look after all of the needs of Western Newfoundland and Labrador. It will be enhanced services. We are looking at 260 beds. We are looking at 100 long-term care beds, Mr. Speaker. I really and truly do not understand why it is that the Member for Bay of Islands does not want this facility.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, I do not want the same as what the Member for Humber East said, that we made a mistake with the long-term care facility by having fewer beds. Mr. Speaker, the new Corner Brook hospital will have twenty-two fewer acute care beds than Western Memorial has now.

I ask the minister: How many surgeries have been cancelled at Western Memorial over the last six months due to the shortage of acute care beds?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, that is precisely what we are trying to address through this new facility. That is precisely why we will have 100 long-term care beds as part of this complex. What we will see as a result of that, Mr. Speaker, will be an increase in the number of surgeries that are able to happen in that facility.

Now, once again he is arguing against it. We are here to tell the people of the Western portion of the Province, we are arguing for it and we are going to see to it that that is constructed for them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: I just want to let the people of Corner Brook and the West Coast know that the Minister of Health does not know how many surgeries have been cancelled in the last six months because of a lack of acute care beds.

I will ask another question, Mr. Speaker. The minister refused to acknowledge the existing shortage of acute care beds and the lack of community-based supports on the West Coast for post-surgery.

I ask the minister: What is the readmission rate for patients at Western Memorial? How does this rate compare to St. John's and the national rate?

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 have identified the needs for the Western region of the Province in terms of health care services. We then engaged a corporation that is vested in providing that kind of advice to the people who require the service. We have taken the best advice that we can find. We have spoken with members of the executive teams at Western Health, Mr. Speaker, and we are putting in place a facility that is going to meet all of the needs of the Western region of the Province.

Somehow or another that is not what the Member for the Bay of Islands wants. Somehow or another, he wants something different. I understand he wants the status quo. We want better, Mr. Speaker, we are going to see to it that we get it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, just for the minister, if it was status quo there would be twenty-two more acute care beds than before.

Mr. Speaker, I am astonished that the Minister of Health does not know. There is a report, you should get it. If you want a copy, ask me to tell you. It is 14 per cent. The national average is 10 per cent; St. John's is 10 per cent. You should get the report, both reports, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Health has made a crucial decision on the capacity of a new hospital when she cannot even tell us vital statistics like surgery cancellations and readmission rates.

How can you make such a crucial decision on a new hospital without the knowledge of these crucial facts, which obviously you just do not know? These reports do exist in your department, Minister. Please, do the people on the West Coast a favour, look for these reports and study them, please.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the last thing I need is advice from the member opposite. Whatever reports I need to read, I read, and I read them very, very carefully.

We are taking medical advice, we are taking engineering advice, and we are putting in place the best facility that we can possibly put in place for the people of Western Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker. I do not know what else to say to a member who does not want it. I really do not know what else to say to him, but, Mr. Speaker, here is what we are doing.

We are putting in place a facility that will see 260 beds, 100 of which will be for long-term care. We already know, Mr. Speaker, that a goodly number of beds, 25 per cent of them on a regular basis are used for persons who are alternate level of care. Mr. Speaker, we are going to see to it that they are put into…

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, in the ongoing comedy of errors inflicted on public education by this government, the Eastern School District just announced the new school under construction in Carbonear already needs four additional classrooms at a cost of $4 million.

I ask the minister: How can his planning be so deficient that he could not count all the children in that growing community?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me outline for the member opposite, who probably cannot handle it, Mr. Speaker, since 2003 thirty-nine major projects in the school system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Nine new schools completed, Mr. Speaker.

MS SULLIVAN: How many?

MR. JACKMAN: Nine new schools completed; ten more under construction in the development phase. Mr. Speaker, the rest of the thirty-nine projects are major, major renovations in schools. That speaks to our commitment to having facilities that are second to none, Mr. Speaker, anywhere in this country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, the minister missed not one, not two, not three, but four classrooms full of students for a school still under construction.

Given the minister's poor planning performance, will he now put a hold on collapsing four school boards to pay even bigger and costlier mistakes that we will have to pay for long after he is gone?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, not one school construction, not two, not three, thirty-nine major constructions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Burgeo – La Poile.

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

Dr. Wade Locke was recently hired by this government to advise the Finance Minister on Budget 2013. We have heard just how implicitly government trusts his work and his judgement. Dr. Locke also completed a 300-page report for the Council of Independent Community Pharmacy Owners and in it he clearly says that unless government makes changes to the business model, independent pharmacies will go out of business.

I ask the minister: Have you considered Dr. Lock's advice, and are you willing to make changes to ensure these independent pharmacies do not go out of business?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, like with all reports, I have read that report from Dr. Locke. In fact, I met with Dr. Locke and we had a discussion around this, and my officials met with Dr. Locke and they had some discussions around this.

Mr. Speaker, what we are doing is what we committed to doing right from the get-go. We are investing in pharmacies, particularly rural and remote pharmacies right around this Province. Mr. Speaker, $37 million over a four-year period, in fact. We are also investing $29 million, Mr. Speaker, to ensure that seniors in this Province will not, at least under the NLPDP, pay any more than $6 per prescription.

We are very, very much in tune with what is happening out there in our rural and remote pharmacies. We are very much involved in negotiations to ensure that we are meeting the needs of these pharmacies.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Burgeo – La Poile.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, Dr. Locke's report contains compelling evidence that shows how government can save money, protect pharmacies as health care providers, and demonstrate the real value independent pharmacies can play to ensure sustainable health care. This report was sent to government on February 4, but I am unsure as to whether there was a response to CICPO.

I ask the minister: In the face of compelling evidence from Dr. Locke, who we listened to on the Budget, will you now commit to setting a new funding model for independent pharmacies?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as I just started to outline we certainly are concerned about rural pharmacies, remote pharmacies, and we are investing in them. We have a new dispensing fee that is to the tune of $17.5 million that will be reinvested, or has been over the last year or so, and will continue to be reinvested into our pharmacies.

Apart from that, Mr. Speaker – and we had some discussions with Dr. Locke around this as well – we are aware that pharmacies want to be paid for additional cognitive services that they provide. In the first go around of this, we identified three areas of cognitive services for which we are, in fact, reimbursing our pharmacists and our pharmacies. We will continue to work with them to provide other services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, this year's Budget has declared open season on environment and conservation in our Province, and has left many to declare that the government has now created a poacher's paradise. Cutting sixty-one positions throughout the department is bad enough, but we continue to hear from groups and organizations that were not consulted prior to this Budget.

I ask the minister: Why did you not consult with the Outfitters Association, the Wildlife Federation, and your own standing committees before making these damaging cuts?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I was tasked to look at it in my department, and in looking at my department to make sure that I fully understood what our core mandate was, and to balance up the budget that I have been given with the personnel who are required to do the duties that they are required to do.

Mr. Speaker, that job has been done. I am more than satisfied that we are able to respond to whatever group comes forward in a very positive and very effective way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Torngat Mountains, for a quick question without any preamble.

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker: Will the minister strike a review committee with all stakeholders to review these senseless cuts, as was done with the Justice department?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation, for a quick response.

MR. HEDDERSON: No.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We learned this morning of more public money spent on this government's expropriation of the former Abitibi properties. We still have a mothballed mill which will need extensive environmental cleanup, for which the taxpayers of this Province will have to pick up the tab. There are also legal fees, operating, and maintenance costs involved.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Can she give this House a dollar figure for what her government's hasty expropriation will eventually cost the Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when we made the decision to expropriate Abitibi's assets, we did so because time was of the essence. We explained that very clearly to both Opposition Parties at the time. At the same time, Mr. Speaker, we told, because of the action needed to be done in a timely way, that we will be expropriating the assets of Fortis and Enel. It was clearly our intention to restore both those companies to their full status at the time of the expropriation.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the NDP was at that table. She asked those questions; we answered those questions. She ought to have known that what we have done today was in the plan from the beginning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

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

What the Premier should have said: I ought to have known how incompetent that government was that they made the mistake they made that gave us the mill that we now have around our necks.

I will now ask the Premier, who I am sure thinks this is a government investment, what are the people of the Province getting from that government investment?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, first of all what we got in the expropriation was hundreds of millions of dollars of assets that we clearly understood at the time will be able to take care of any liabilities that might occur as a result of the expropriation.

Let me say to the Leader of the NDP and the Leader of the Opposition as well that at the end of the day, once all the liabilities have dealt with, the people of this Province will still have a great number of assets at their disposal and at bargain-basement rates to drive the economy in the Central part of this Province, Mr. Speaker. We kept what the people asked us to keep, something to help them in the future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Government is backing the $54 million loan for Nalcor and they are giving Fortis compensation, but what are the direct benefits for the people of Central Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have a revenue-generating asset that we have in Central Newfoundland in Star Lake and in the Exploits River, the generation facilities in the Exploits River. That power is being generated, brought into the grid, used for ratepayers here in Newfoundland and Labrador, and to drive industry in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is creating revenue for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and in the long term will pay for itself.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would suggest the Premier tell that to the people of Central Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, as this government has clearly shown, it is easy to sit in a pool of oil, cutting cheques.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: What is less easy, but very important, is developing plans to diversify the economy of the Province in order to wean ourselves off undue dependence on the boom and bust oil and mineral economy.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Is she willing to embrace and apply community economic development principles to the economy of this Province, or is this government content to keep us all on the wild rollercoaster ride of the commodity markets?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this government is very proud of the oil revenue that comes into this Province and the benefits agreements that we have been able to negotiate. It makes up more than 30 per cent of our Budget.

Mr. Speaker, we are glad that we have $185 million business opportunity plan in this Province that people can come and drive small and medium enterprises right throughout this Province. We are proud of the aquaculture industry on the South Coast, we are proud of innovation, and we are proud of the money that we put into our cold climate expertise and market around the world, Mr. Speaker.

We are not interested, like the NDP, of not coming with any new ideas other than burning shrimp shells in Holyrood, Mr. Speaker, and blowing up the projects that now provide for (inaudible) –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The latest information available from Statistics Canada tells us that small and medium-sized businesses –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: (Inaudible) GDP and account for a larger proportion of the labour income part of GDP than do large businesses.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier why we do not see a more aggressive plan by this government to support more small and medium-sized businesses, especially in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when we came to this government in 2003 there was basically $2.6 million a year available for small and medium-sized businesses, and communities, in this Province to drive investment. Mr. Speaker, that fund is now over $185 million available on an annual basis to small and medium-sized business and not-for-profits in this Province, Mr. Speaker. That is the Progressive Conservative way. That is what this government has done for businesses in this Province, for free enterprise in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the NDP got up in this House yesterday and talked about universal daycare, universal pharmacare, and universal housing, Mr. Speaker. Just tell us: How are you going to pay for it all?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, tens of millions of dollars in cuts in the Department of Education this year will result in fewer specialist teachers in music and in arts. To make matters worse, cuts to cultural connections programs will further diminish students' exposure to Newfoundland and Labrador's unique art, music, culture, and history.

Who did this government consult before they decided that the promotion of Newfoundland and Labrador culture and heritage in schools was disposable?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I would encourage the member to go to some of our schools and see where things like theatre arts, where the music program has come since we came into government. Mr. Speaker, let him go and see. I believe there was a $20 million investment through the Cultural Connections Fund.

Our commitment, again, to the broader student of Newfoundland and Labrador, the academic side but also that artistic side, the physical education side, Mr. Speaker, we are educating a broad student.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education has said that he will expect even more now from volunteer school councils with the creation of the province-wide English school district that he plans to run from his office in St. John's. At the same time, the minister has cut funding to the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of School Councils by nearly 20 per cent.

Can the minister explain how he expects school councils to do more with less?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I wish he would stop shouting at me.

Mr. Speaker, I spoke at the Federation of School Councils on Friday night and I did not know who the new executive was then, but I assured them that I am more than willing to meet with them because in this Budget, Mr. Speaker, we said no changes to allocations to special education students. No changes to class caps. No changes to the allocations for guidance. Our investment was in front line services, Mr. Speaker, and they will remain there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Since 2011, this government has promised a home ownership assistance program to working families again and again and again, yet there is absolutely no money in this Budget for it. Are they going to wait and haul it out during the election year?

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Where is the home ownership assistance program he promised to working families?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker

Finally, I get a question on housing from the hon. member, the first one this session. I would like to point out that we had a good discussion on this in Estimates earlier this week. I pointed out to the hon. member at that point in time that the program to which she refers was a commitment we made in our Blue Book in 2011.

It is a commitment that we intend to uphold. It is one that we are working towards. When we are ready to roll out a plan, we will certainly be doing that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Obviously, Mr. Speaker, they are going to haul it out in the election year, and the people will not be fooled.

Mr. Speaker, the minister cut the Residential Energy Efficiency Program by 50 per cent in this Budget. This is backwards and against all current thinking. Worldwide, governments are doing whatever they can to help people make their housing as energy efficient as possible. Reducing this program actually takes money out of the pockets of homeowners.

Mr. Speaker, will the minister reinstate the funding back to the Residential Energy Efficiency Program?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Now that I mentioned Estimates, I would like to acknowledge the very kind words that the hon. member opposite had during Estimates for the great work that the employees at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing have been carrying out. She congratulated the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing executive and staff, and I would like to acknowledge that and thank her for that. They do excellent work over there, Mr. Speaker.

There are programs at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, a suite of programs that are there for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. They are good programs that are affecting the people in a positive way. This year, the REEP will provide services to 500 homeowners, Mr. Speaker, so that they can improve the energy efficiency of their own homes. The Home Modification Program –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre, for a quick question without preamble.

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, that program used to help 1,000 families.

MR. SPEAKER: No preamble please; a quick question.

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, will the minister put a freeze on the sale of all provincial-owned vacant land and buildings until he comes up with an actual real plan to use it for affordable housing?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to remind her that the Provincial Home Repair Program, as I was mentioning earlier, is a great program here in this Province. We tripled the funding for that. It is still at two-and-a-half times the traditional rate. We have reduced the wait list by 75 per cent, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to continue to provide programs to the people who need it most in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

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

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to section 5 of the Local Authority Guarantee Act, 2005, I wish to table the annual report of loan guarantees provided to local governments to enable them to arrange interim financing for capital projects. I am pleased to report that there were no new guarantees issued on behalf of local governments during the fiscal year.

Mr. Speaker, the last report under this act was tabled on March 22, 2012 and included guarantees issued up to and including March 16, 2012. This current report covers the period from March 17, 2012 to March 31, 2013.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 49(2) of the Financial Administration Act, I wish to table the attached list of temporary loans that were raised under section 48 of the act since my last report to the House on March 22, 2012.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 55(3) of the Financial Administration Act, I wish to report that there were no guaranteed loans paid out by the Province's last annual report, also on March 22, 2012.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 55.1(2) of the act, I wish to report that there has been no guaranteed debt of a Crown corporation or agency assumed by the Province since the March 22, 2012 report.

MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion.

Answers to Question for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MR. BENNETT: A 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 the offshore of the West Coast of the Island of Newfoundland is recognized as a region containing potentially billions of barrels of oil; and

WHEREAS hydraulic fracturing could be an accepted and effective method of petroleum discovery and exploration, and is compatible with the protection of the natural environment and water sources when executed within the context of a comprehensive regulatory framework; and

WHEREAS the petroleum exploration sector needs the certainty and confidence of a stable regulatory regime; and

WHEREAS with that regulatory regime oil discovery and industry development could provide unprecedented economic opportunity and bring people home to a currently economically challenged region; and

WHEREAS the undersigned support properly regulated exploration and development of oil and gas resource in the Province;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to introduce a regulatory framework immediately under which hydraulic fracturing could proceed safely, and move this industry forward in Western Newfoundland.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, one of the individuals who signed this petition is nearly eighty years of age, and he is in Hawke's Bay. He is a well-known individual in Hawke's Bay, a former mayor. One of the observations he has made is that Hawke's Bay has been very, very poorly served, maybe due to nobody's fault; the downturn in the forestry sector and the loss of the hardwoods business that was there. After the mine left in the 1990s, it was the shipping centre. They lost quite a bit of economic activity there.

His big concern, as he pointed out, is forty years ago he was one of a group of people and they were lobbying for Gros Morne National Park. Today, it is almost as if the shoe is on the other foot, in that back then he was one of a group of people who went to Ottawa to basically plead with the Government of Canada to continue with the national park.

It is unthinkable today that people in the area would not want the national park, but enough people did not want the national park back then because they did not want their lifestyle to be interfered with. Well, the park has come and has established. For some people, it has brought significant benefit; for others, it has not.

This individual, as well as others, are very concerned now that naysayers with respect to economic development, and in particular, oil exploration and hydraulic fracturing may have enough with small numbers, loud voices, and mistaken arguments that they may stop economic development. That is a big concern, and that is why this petition is being presented, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you very much, 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 process of slickwater hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, injects hazardous chemicals into rock formations to extract oil, and is polluting groundwater and air across North America; and

WHEREAS the Government of Canada has commissioned an assessment of the potential environmental impacts of shale oil and gas extraction in Canada, including fracking; and

WHEREAS Quebec, Nova Scotia, and a number of US states have halted fracking, and others are introducing regulations specific to fracking; and

WHEREAS it is incumbent upon the provincial government to ensure that our natural environment is protected from harmful industrial processes;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge government to impose a moratorium on slickwater fracking until it develops comprehensive regulations and ensures that each proposed project undergoes a conclusive environmental assessment to determine whether it is safe for the environment, the integrity of water supplies, and human health.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know how many times I have been up with this petition, but we are up with it again. This petition, again, comes from people in the concerned area of the West Coast of the Province. They are writing in all the time from St. George's, places all over the Port au Port Peninsula, Noels Pond, Stephenville Crossing. I can go on with the communities, Kippens included. They keep writing about the dangers of fracking. They keep asking government to slow down and take a look at development. The members across the floor, as well as on this side, should be directly concerned with a new process that comes in that has the potential to do as much damage as what it does.

Mr. Speaker, I also have to note that just earlier today the US Interior Secretary of State, I guess, Sally Jewell, says that down in the United States they are going to be bringing in new rules surrounding the fracking industry, and they are saying that these new rules are going to be coming within weeks – not months, weeks.

We know that the United States has been looking at it. We know that the Government of Quebec is looking at it again; they have already had several mistakes. They had thirty-one wells drilled when they called a stop to it; nineteen of these wells were leaking when they done their inspections, so there is a need here for the provincial government to address caution – address caution that these people are asking for when it comes to the development of an oil industry.

There is nobody here who is going to be against fracking, as long as the regulations are redeveloped and done right. We all know that we are all looking for a disclosure of the chemicals that will be used. We all want to see remediation in case there is any damage. We can go to Saskatchewan, Mr. Speaker, and we can see right now that they are talking about a problem that they have with what is called orphan wells. What they mean by orphan wells, these are wells that are drilled by companies; there was not enough money set aside for things like environmental cleanup.

There is a lot of things here for government to consider. We hope that they are going to do it. We have the signatures to support it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A 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 students of Adult Basic Education program at the College of the North Atlantic do not wish to attend privatized educational facilities; and

WHEREAS the College of the North Atlantic has the most accredited ABE program in Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS students are concerned as to the availability of private institutions and whether or not they can accommodate additional students;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to reverse this damaging decision to the students and reinstate the Adult Basic Education program at the College of the North Atlantic.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I am getting petitions from all over Labrador and my colleagues are getting petitions from all over the Island portion of our Province. This petition that I have submitted today, Mr. Speaker, comes from ABE students who are located Sheshatshiu and North West River. Their concerns are valid and they are timely.

Mr. Speaker, there are students now who have been accepted into Adult Basic Education programs. They have been accepted, but they are not getting sponsored. The reason they are not getting sponsored, Mr. Speaker, is because there is too much doubt created by the cancellation of ABE programs run by the College of the North Atlantic.

As you get into northern regions, Mr. Speaker, there is no plan from this government on infrastructure, on program delivery, on Aboriginal content. The concern right now is that you have students who are accepted but you do not have a sponsorship. The reason you do not have a sponsorship is because of confusion that has been created by the cancellation of ABE at the college.

Mr. Speaker, thank you.

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

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

I have a petition 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 students of the Adult Basic Education program at the College of the North Atlantic do not wish to attend privatized educational facilities; and

WHEREAS the College of the North Atlantic has the most accredited Adult Basic Education program in Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS students are concerned as to the availability of private institutions and whether or not they can accommodate additional students;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge government to reverse this damaging decision to students and reinstate the Adult Basic Education programming at the College of the North Atlantic.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

This is not the first time that I have entered this petition. We have heard a lot about this very short-sighted decision, one that was done without any planning. We do not even know what the results are going to net us. It is something we will probably get a chance to talk about tomorrow during government's private member's resolution when we talk about public programs and services designed and delivered in ways that are focused and effective. The fact is that there is no focus; we do not even know what the effect of this decision is going to be because there is no plan in place, certainly not to the people directly involved.

One thing I noticed since yesterday in the House, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Conception Bay East – Bell Island had some statements to make, and he was talking about this process. I am sure he was speaking from the heart when he said we have been a part of this process when we were laid off, and we were bumped by people. We have sympathy for the people; we try to lessen the burden on people.

It is funny because I got e-mails on that. What they are saying is if that is the case, why are we not getting redundancy packages when government is cutting jobs because of privatization when redundancy could possibly apply? That is the funny thing; we have these people who are getting their jobs cut. If redundancy is not factored in when you cut a public program to give the jobs to private colleges, then where are you going to put it?

It is one thing to say we are going to lessen the burden on people, and then it is another thing to actually know what you are talking about. Right now the people out there in the Province do not believe a word that is being said because we have no idea where this process is going to go.

I am worried about what is going to happen. I can only hope for the best, as are the people who are affected by this. We know that advanced education, workers are out – the first thing they are being told on their scripted sheets when they come out is do not worry, everything is going to be okay. How can you say that when your union has to file grievances because the redundancy package is not there, when your job is cut and the services kicked over to the private colleges? Duplication I could get into, but I only have a few minutes.

Thank you.

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

MS ROGERS: 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 humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS with the passage of Bill 29, the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy (Amendment) Act, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has weakened citizens' access to information and has reduced government transparency; and

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has moved towards greater secrecy and less openness; and

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is breaking its own commitment for greater transparency, accountability and freedom of information which it said at one time was the hallmark of its government;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to repeal the passage of Bill 29.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, we have seen time and again now over the past few weeks since this Budget came down, how important it is for the people of the Province to know exactly what these decisions were based on. We need to know what the results of core mandate reviews were. We need to know how decisions were made on programs that affect the people of the Province, affect their lives.

Also, on what basis were reversals of decisions made? We have no idea at all, Mr. Speaker, and we have been asking for that information. We have asked it innumerable times and the government is not forthcoming with it.

This petition is called, The Right to Know. Well, we do not know on what basis the plans were made. We do not know on what basis the cuts were made. We obviously do not have a right to know.

Mr. Speaker, again, this government was the one that prided itself and bellowed out to the people of the Province that they were going to be more accountable, more transparent, and there would be freedom of information. Well, they did exactly the opposite. The people of the Province have a right to know on what basis the decisions were made and how the money and the resources that belong to the people of the Province are being spent.

Mr. Speaker, it does not look like that is going to happen. We will continue to ask. They will continue to say no. They may say that is Cabinet secrecy, or they may say that is solicitor privilege. When we look at the huge cuts to the Justice department and then to see so many of those cuts reversed in a matter of a few days, it is almost like someone can get whiplash just trying to keep up with the changes that are happening.

Mr. Speaker, I think the people of the Province want Bill 29 revoked. It is not in the best interest of the people of the Province. It is not in the best interest of this House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, a petition to the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS there has been an agreement between the Federation of Newfoundland Indians and the Government of Canada to recognize the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band; and

WHEREAS persons submitted applications, with the required documents, for registration in the Band up to the application date of November 30, 2012; and

WHEREAS the reported number of applications received by the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band are in excess of 100,000; and

WHEREAS the reported number of applicants now registered as members are approximately 22,000; and

WHEREAS the agreement between the Federation of Newfoundland Indians and the Government of Canada for recognition of the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band is scheduled to end on March 31, 2013; and

WHEREAS the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band Chief has requested, but has not received, an extension to the agreement to process the remaining applications; and

WHEREAS to date there is no decision on how to deal with the remaining applications;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to work with the Newfoundland Federation of Indians and the Government of Canada to provide a fair and equal review of all our applications.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, when we came into our history of the way that we have dealt with native peoples – many of us in this House included who have some native ancestry – has been something that we have not been proud of. In fact, it has been shameful and we have buried it. We buried it from the early 1800s in dealing with the Beothuks.

When we came into Confederation there was no real consideration given to the fact that we may have large numbers of people who are of native ancestry in our Province. Proper provision was not made for the people who – what has now become the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band. Over the course of negotiations the federal government is responsible for, under the Indian Act, people of native ancestry.

The federal government has agreed that people who are eligible, who can demonstrate the appropriate genecology, can demonstrate they are of native ancestry, that they are eligible to be part of a landless band. That will entitle people who are residents of this Province, the citizens of Canada who were previously undeclared as people with native ancestry to claim certain federal government benefits that accrues to people of native ancestry.

Mr. Speaker, there is a significant benefit to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, to the population in general, that as many people who can claim native ancestry under this agreement, under what really amounts to a modern-day treaty, are acknowledged and approved because these individuals have a claim on certain federal resources by virtue of being part of this native band.

Mr. Speaker, the people who have made application, it may be that they will not all be approved. Certainly, all of them are entitled to the fairness of having their application reviewed on the same standing as all of the other individuals who were previously approved.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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 Western School District is considering a multi-year plan to close Bayview Regional Collegiate at St. Lunaire-Griquet in June 2013; and

WHEREAS it has been proven from students who have graduated from Bayview Regional Collegiate, they have excelled in their studies to prepare them to move ahead and achieve their career goals; and

WHEREAS teachers and staff at Bayview Regional Collegiate are qualified and continue to provide a strong academic program with a full curriculum of all students attending; and

WHEREAS Bayview Regional Collegiate has developed a playground, library, drama club, Kids Eat Smart lunch program, school council, and other activities with exceptional community support; and

WHEREAS Bayview Regional Collegiate housed a K-12 school in the past with 200-plus students who have had access to science lab, cafeteria, art room, computer lab, gymnasium, extra-curricular activities; and

WHEREAS the parents, business operators, social groups, concerned citizens, and students of the Municipality of St. Lunaire-Griquet request to rescind this proposal;

Since Bayview Regional Collegiate has met and exceeded all aspects set forth for a viable school, we the undersigned petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to ensure that the Western School District is provided with sufficient funding to keep Bayview Regional Collegiate at St. Lunaire-Griquet open.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I put forward this petition on several occasions. It is signed today by residents from Noddy Bay, Straitsview, Quirpon, L'Anse aux Meadows, Gunners Cove, and Hay Cove. It is very frustrating to hear talk about the new school developments that are happening when we look at the number of schools that are also closing in my district. We are building a wonderful facility in St. Anthony, and that is great, but it is collapsing three other facilities to provide that one school for the region.

What is the pressing issue is that the residents from St. Lunaire-Griquet to L'Anse aux Meadows and area feel they have not been adequately consulted. I, myself, as the representative for the area have asked the Western School District to be able to present, to be added to an agenda at a public meeting, and they outright refused. They refused the committee. They refused any representative to at least just be engaged and have their concerns heard in that forum. That is very frustrating, and I think that needs to be taken into consideration. Whether it changes the result or the decision, people need to be allowed to voice their concerns, to be able to make a compelling argument and put that forward.

I think that is one of the most upsetting things that has happened. It feels like people do not have the right to know; they do not have the right to contribute as to how these decisions came about.

So I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to put this petition forward.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment and Conservation, Motion 6, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that this House not adjourn 5:30 p.m. today, Tuesday, April 30, 2013.

Further, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment and Conservation, Motion 7, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that this House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. today, Tuesday, April 30, 2013.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that pursuant to Standing Order 11 that this House do not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. today, Tuesday, April 30; and further, that the House do not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Tuesday, April 30, 2013.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I call from the Order Paper, Motion 1, that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government, the Budget Speech.

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues.

It is certainly a privilege and an honour to stand in this House today to talk about the Budget, Budget 2013: A Sound Plan, A Secure Future.

The government of today is showing leadership and practicing the balanced approach of paying off the debt, dealing with the deficit, and investing in major projects such as infrastructure, building bridges, roads, hospital renovations, nursing home renovations, new schools, colleges, universities, and I can on and on and on. We do have a plan; we do have a vision – a sound plan for a secure future.

To reach this vision, our government must make decisions that are not always popular, but are the right decisions for the people of this Province and for our future generations to come. Our government does not just focus on the issues of today. Our government makes decisions that will meet the future needs of this Province and its people. Our government has prepared a 10-Year Sustainability Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador – a plan to ensure fiscal management over the long term, a plan to eliminate the deficit, and a plan to return to a surplus Budget, Mr. Speaker.

Our government will continue to invest in vital programs and services that are essential to the people of this Province. Our economy is and will remain strong. We have had to make difficult decisions due to the fact that the price of a barrel of oil was less than initially projected. Added to that, there were two offshore oil rigs shut down for refit over the past year. At the same time, the global economy was very volatile. Federal government transfer payments were reduced as well. To balance these unforeseen circumstances, each department underwent a necessary core mandate review to ensure that they offer effective and efficient programs and services.

It is unfortunate that some public sector employee jobs were eliminated, but these measures were necessary, Mr. Speaker. With human resource costs accounting for up to 55 per cent of the total provincial Budget, this was a logical area to look at in order to find savings. Once it was discovered that layoffs were necessary, we had to make some tough decisions as a government, tough decisions that will make a difference in the future of this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

This government found ways to lessen the impact of job loss by administering alternatives such as a voluntary retirement program, removing positions that were vacant in the system for years, and attrition management, Mr. Speaker. This government listened to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador during the recent pre-Budget consultation process that took place throughout the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We are protecting the priorities that were identified, namely in health care and community services, and education, Mr. Speaker. In fact, there were no job losses to front-line health care and education workers.

Let's look at our government's $2.9 billion commitment to the health and well-being of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. This Budget will allow an increase in access to health services and treatments. It will provide greater long-term care and community-support services. It will enhance support for seniors, and it will strengthen our infrastructure, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to highlight a great example of good fiscal management by our government. By introducing a new generic drug program, which by the way will see a further reduction by July 2013 resulting in residents paying 25 per cent of brand drug costs, our government has been able to generate savings, savings that contribute to the $9.5 million invested in Budget 2013 for new drug therapies.

As the Minister of Health and Community Services pointed out time after time, right now Newfoundland and Labrador is the second in Canada in relation to wait times for priority areas such as cardiac bypass and hip fracture repairs. We are certainly proud of the modern, high-quality health care system available to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, a system derived from the sound planning of this government, the government of today.

What about the $840 million being invested in childhood learning and K-12 education?

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. LITTLE: Eight hundred and forty million dollars, Mr. Speaker, what an investment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: This definitely shows our government's commitment to the education of our children and our youth. Yet again, we are investing in a sound plan for a secure future; our children and our youth are certainly worth every single dollar being allocated to education in Budget 2013. I should think that none of us would disagree with that, especially none of us on this side of the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Look at the $537 million approved for salaries within our education system.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. LITTLE: Five hundred and thirty-seven million dollars, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Our government is protecting priority services for student learning and is ensuring that our Province maintains the best pupil-teacher ratio of any province in Canada, a ratio that is the envy of this country. I can tell you I have talked to many people throughout the great Country of Canada and they certainly look at our Province and look at the improvements that we made in education in the last number of years and we are model to be looked at.

How did we earn these bragging rates, I wonder? Well, I tell you, it was through the sound, fiscal management of this government. That is how we did it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Our government is investing in early childhood learning through a strategy Learning from the Start, which is currently in its third year. Our government is investing almost $102 million for new and ongoing school infrastructure projects; $102 million, Mr. Speaker –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: - to meet the immediate and long-term demands in high growth areas while ensuring existing facilities meet the needs of students and teachers throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

In fact, there has been about $620 million allotted for K-12 infrastructure in Newfoundland and Labrador since 2004. What an accomplishment by this government, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Six hundred and twenty million dollars allotted since 2004.

We have seen twelve major extension and renovation projects completed, with a further eight underway in the planning stages, not to mention the more than 1,850 repairs and maintenance projects that have been completed. This is ongoing in the education system, a strong plan, a secure plan for the future of this Province throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, in many rural communities, in the major centres right throughout the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Our government realizes that education does not stop there. We are providing high quality, affordable education, programming and services to the people of this Province with $466 million allocated in Budget 2013 to enhance skills and training at the post-secondary level. Our commitment is certainly evident, Mr. Speaker, and we will continue on that road in the future I am sure.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Tuition freezes at Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic are continuing, keeping tuition rates in this Province about 50 per cent lower than the national average. Again, smart, fiscal management, the lowest in the country, Mr. Speaker, and we will continue on that road as well. This is something that I talked to a number of graduates this year from Memorial University and from the College of the North Atlantic and they are delighted that this government takes this issue serious and we will continue on into the future with such programs I am sure.

Our government realizes the importance of education and skills development. We understand this is key to maintaining a successful and prosperous economy for Newfoundland and Labrador, and we do need to meet the job market of tomorrow. We do need to look at where the jobs are and we do need to invest in the labour market as well, and we have been doing that. We have been paying attention, and we will continue to work on that road in the future I am sure.

With major projects such as Hebron and Muskrat Falls creating new job opportunities and sustainable growth for Newfoundland and Labrador, our future is brighter than ever before. Imagine $23 billion in returns estimated from the Hebron project with 3,500 jobs at peak.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. LITTLE: It is $23 billion in returns, Mr. Speaker, from the Hebron project alone.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: What investments; what money is coming back to the people of this Province and investments that we can make in relation to education, health care, and for our youth and for future generations.

Muskrat Falls and the transmission links will generate 3,100 direct jobs at peak employment, 1,500 direct jobs per year on average. I can tell you, there are people in my district who will be working on those big projects, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: People who will not have to leave the Province to go to Alberta but will actually work in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in the future. What accomplishments this government has made in the past and will continue to make in the future on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Through the Department of Advanced Education and Skills, Budget 2013 will continue to support apprenticeship and trades. The Journeyperson Mentorship Program will continue, as well as the Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy Program. It will also continue to provide grants for women and Aboriginals in apprenticeship. Through responsible fiscal management our government is working to ensure a strong labour force is available to meet all future demands, Mr. Speaker.

Communities will continue to see infrastructure development and ongoing support through the Department of Municipal Affairs. Budget 2013 provides $230 million in funding to meet these needs, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Two hundred and thirty million dollars to meet the needs.

We will continue to provide funding for Municipal Operating Grants as well as a new Capital Works Program for the seven largest municipalities in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

This government will continue to offer a voluntary relocation program in municipalities where at least 90 per cent of residents vote to relocate. We will continue to offer sport and recreational opportunities which will contribute to healthier and more prosperous communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

Our government also realizes the importance of safety in our communities. We will continue with the development and operation of a Province-wide basic 911 system. Furthermore, this government will provide $1 million to form a taskforce on child exploitation and drugs, Mr. Speaker.

Our government is committed to reducing poverty which is evident in our Poverty Reduction Strategy, a comprehensive and long-term approach to the prevention, reduction and alleviation of poverty. Right now, Newfoundland and Labrador's poverty is actually below the national average and our strategy is considered a model for others to follow; a model in this country of Canada.

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, $118 million; Budget 2013-2014 includes $46 million from our provincial government. This will allow the corporation to continue supports for the most vulnerable in our society.

Core programs such as the Supportive Living program and the Home Modification Program will continue, Mr. Speaker. In fact, no programs are to be eliminated. Newfoundland and Labrador's Housing Corporation portfolio will also continue to include such programs as the Provincial Home Repair Program and the Residential Energy Efficiency Program.

It is worthy to mention, that in 2007 a six-year commitment to increase spending for the Provincial Home Repair Program was made by our government, this government, Mr. Speaker. During the last six years the waitlist for this program has been very successful; successfully reduced from 4,300 people to 989 people, Mr. Speaker. That is quite an accomplishment in such a short time.

The number of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who have been able to avail of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation's many programs is quite impressive and it is wonderful that these services are available to those in need. I definitely talk to a number of people throughout the different communities in the District of Bonavista South and I have had some very good comments made to me commending the government to continue on with those very important programs from the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and the many programs that they provide. I am really proud to stand in this House today to be able to discuss the programs that are provided and bring the message to my colleagues in the House of Assembly how important those programs are to the people out in the districts of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Significant funding has been allocated to the Department of Transportation and Works from Budget 2013, as our government realizes the importance of maintaining and strengthening our transportation network. From provincial road construction projects, to several major Trans-Canada Highway and Trans-Labrador Highway projects, to various bridge projects, be it for construction or repairs, we are talking about nearly $250 million earmarked for these projects – $250 million, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Let's not forget the $76 million allocated for ferry vessel replacement refit work and improvements to marine terminals and wharves.

Economic growth is yet another area in which this government has committed to strengthening, as is evident in more than $200 million allocated in Budget 2013 towards investments – $200 million – to economic growth. What an amount. What this government is doing is evident in more than $200 million allocated.

This Province will see over $36 million to support growth and innovation in the business community through the Business Investment Fund, Mr. Speaker. We will see over $11 million to support community and regional economic development efforts through the Regional Development Fund.

Let us not forget the $100 million being invested in continuing tax credits and incentives for businesses. There is: the Small Business Tax Credit, the Manufacturing and Processing Profits Tax Credit, the Scientific Research and Experimental Development Tax Credit, the Economic Diversification and Growth Enterprise Program, and the Direct Equity Tax Credit.

I actually spoke to a person recently who owns a business in my own district. He has various businesses in other provinces throughout Canada. He said that of all the provinces where he has done business, Newfoundland and Labrador makes it the easiest, most attractive, and most cost-efficient to start and operate smaller businesses in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: What a statement coming from a businessperson who has businesses throughout this great country of Canada. Economic growth is most evident in my district through the tourism, culture, and recreation industries, and I do not have enough time to continue on, on this particular topic, but I am sure I will speak on this further.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make one final number that I want to highlight, that reflects sound planning, good fiscal management by our government. It is that this government has paid down $4 billion in the debt in the last ten years – $4 billion. Now, what other provinces or country, for that matter, can highlight this accomplishment?

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

I recognize the Member for St. John's North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to stand here and continue in the Budget debate. I will just quickly pick up where I left off. The last time, members will remember, when I was speaking in debate on the Budget I was talking about the planned school district consolidation. The plan to consolidate four school districts into one English school district headquartered here in St. John's – or it could be in the minister's office for that matter, from some of the things that have been said by members of his own Cabinet in the media.

That plan, which has caused such outcry across Newfoundland and Labrador – we have had entire boards of trustees speak out about this. We have had school district trustees resign from their elected positions over this. We have heard retired chief executive officers of school districts come out of retirement to speak out about this, and we have seen a lot of people speak out about this in the media. We are hearing more from parents, and more from students, and more concerns as we go on.

One of the primary concerns and complaints that people have offered up is that they were not consulted. They were not consulted. I have a theory about why they were not. I do not believe the minister is engaged. I just do not think he is engaged. We know the Premier is not engaged. She has already said, in the press, the Premier has already said she does not want to be engaged, and I am not sure if the minister wants to be engaged either.

I think this is really important. The last time I was speaking, I referenced this report that was published just this year by Dr. Bruce Sheppard, who is a former school board CEO himself, Dr. Gerald Galway, who is a former assistant deputy minister in this Province, Dr. Jean Brown, and another individual from the University of Manitoba. This was published in collaboration with the Canadian School Boards Association, and it is a report called School Boards Matter.

I just want to read this quote again because it says, "Our survey of the literature and the empirical data from this study support a position that school board consolidation and restructuring coupled with increased government control and oversight have compromised the ability of school boards to focus on authentic student learning and to meaningfully connect with their constituents."

I think this is an example of how this government is not engaged in the current thinking around school district governance. This decision, this wrong-headed decision, is a prime example of how government is not engaged in what people are saying.

Now, last fall, we know that the minister had no objections at all to closing down a number of Eastern School District schools. He had no objections to closing down Swift Current Academy. He had no objections to closing down Catalina Elementary. He had no objections to closing down Immaculate Conception in Colliers. He had no objections to closing down Epiphany Elementary in Heart's Delight. He had no objections, and he continues to have no objections, to closing down Whitbourne Elementary. Unfortunately, those individuals who wanted to see that done got their way and saw Epiphany Elementary and Whitbourne Elementary closed.

I think this new supersized school district headquartered here in St. John's overseen by the Minister of Education is going to create a situation where we see more schools close. What was failed to be achieved last fall in some of our rural communities is going to rear its ugly head again. There are great fears in rural and outport communities across Newfoundland and Labrador, in those communities that this government sees as no longer viable, that government's agenda to close down some of those schools through this school district consolidation is going to become reality.

I also want to take a little bit more time to say a few more words about $27 million in education cuts that we are seeing in this Budget, where they are coming from, the impact that they are going to have, and what stakeholders in the education community across Newfoundland and Labrador are saying.

The minister has said he strongly contends that there is going to be no impact. I heard a member of his Cabinet on Back Talk last Friday afternoon, no impact; in fact, that minister suggested that there was going to be positive outcomes on these cuts, which I disagree with, many stakeholders disagree with, and I would agree that the facts would suggest otherwise.

I was provided with a letter that the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association wrote recently to the Minister of Education about the cuts in the Budget. It talks about how many members of the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association are now beginning to see the folly of this Budget, beginning to see the potential negative impact of these cuts. The NLTA has heard from teachers, administrators and many stakeholders, and they say that the message is loud and clear, that these cuts will have a negative impact on students and their learning in classrooms and schools of this Province.

So, do not take it from me; teachers are saying that themselves. They are saying that the cuts are regressive. Number one, that these cuts to education are regressive; number two, they will have a direct negative effect on schools.

The letter goes on to talk about how the minister suggested that these will be minimal or negligible, not impacting classrooms or students. They certainly disagree because the Budget has removed teachers from the classroom – there is no question – it has cut administrative time, and it has amalgamated boards. That is the net impact of this Budget.

There is going to be a loss of specialist teachers in intermediate schools; there is no doubt about that. There is going to be a loss of numerous literacy support teachers, and there is going to be a loss of learning resource teachers. We know that.

A large number of the teaching units that were provided under the needs-based portion of the teacher allocation model – which was previously lauded by the government; they thought it was a grand thing – that is not going to be any longer available, a large portion of that. That is going to have a negative impact on services to students. That is what the NLTA is saying.

Cutting administrative time in schools is going to have a negative impact on schools at the same time as the board restructuring is occurring, and that is going to really mean the downloading of tasks to the school level and cause undue pressure.

Those are some of the things that the NLTA has to say. They say that their members are telling them without hesitation that the reductions to teacher allocations will have direct negative impacts on students and they will add to an already heavy workload that teachers and school administrators are forced to bear.

It goes on to that the NLTA School Administrators' Council has expressed serious concerns that the announced reductions in administrative allocations will have significant negative implications on their ability to carry out their responsibilities and meet the requirements for their jobs.

There was an ad in The Telegram newspaper on the weekend – it was about a half a page – that the NLTA had placed. It said what the cuts to education really mean. They talk about the fact that in September 2013, this coming school year, only one specialist teacher for every 150 students will be in schools, instead of one for every 125 students that there is now in subjects like music, fine arts, physical education, and skilled trades and technology. I challenge anyone on the other side of the House to get up and give a decent explanation as to why we would want to be making cuts to music, fine arts, physical education or skilled trades and technology.

It goes on to talk about a number of other things, but I think one of the important things that I want to highlight is that this ad – not from me, from the NLTA – talks about cuts to program specialists. It says that in September 2013 there will be a significant reduction in the number of program specialists, which means there will be less support for teachers in the implementation of curriculum in their classrooms. Do not take it from me; that is the NLTA.

As I mentioned briefly the last time, the School Administrators' Council of the NLTA, which is made up of school principals, assistant principals – so those who we used to call vice-principals – and program specialists themselves. There are 590-odd of these individuals, members of this special interest group of the NLTA across Newfoundland and Labrador.

They say in a brief that they prepared – I am not sure if it was actually ever provided to the minister, but I am sure he has seen it, provided directly by them, because it has been distributed widely through the media and otherwise – all of us see the reductions to school allocations as having direct and negative impacts on student achievement and adding to an already heavy workload. They are seriously concerned that recent reductions in personnel will have negative implications in their ability to do their job. The roles and responsibilities for school administrators have changed drastically over the years.

I think this is one of the important things that we have to recognize, that over time with reviews that have taken place really since the late-1960s, more and more responsibility. Those members of the government caucus across the way who have been in school administrative positions in the past, they will know the level of responsibility that has been handed down to school principals and other administrators over time, and it is very significant.

They talk about some of those in here. They talk about mandatory increases in the implementation of government and school board policies related to such things as school councils. Other things we hear – the Minister of Education lists when he gets up to give what passes for an answer in Question Period, things like healthy and active living, Safe and Caring Schools, inclusive education, LGBTQ initiatives, KinderStart, twenty-first century learning, instructional technology, integration, occupational health and safety, accounting and controls, electronic school report cards, school security, and building maintenance. Those are just to name a few of the responsibilities that have been levelled onto the shoulders of school administrators over time.

They make a very interesting point here, they say, "Resources that are scarce at the best of times get stretched until the band breaks."

"The recent decision to once again reduce administrative time at the school level has broken the band. It is regressive and will have direct negative effects on schools as safe, healthy, inclusive environments focused on student learning and achievement."

It will mean not having the resources available, and I think this is particularly concerning. It will mean not having the resources available to support students, not having the ability to support healthy and active living programs, which is something government should champion, such things as nutrition monitoring, breakfast and lunch programs. I know at the school breakfast program that I volunteer at in my district, there is always someone present from the school administration doing some form of supervision. They will not be able to carry that out in the same way because of these cuts.

It means not having personnel available to deal with student conflicts and fights – with violence, I say, Mr. Speaker, that is what we are talking about here. They will not have the resources they need to deal with violence that may occur within the boundaries of the school. It means not having the personnel available to secure a school and a child who may be under threat.

That is basically saying they will no longer be able to, 100 per cent, assure security. I think that is very problematic in this day and age with everything we are after hearing, everything we have heard about school violence and bullying, the dangers of that. To significantly curtail funding now for administrative tasks within the school is haphazard and, dare I say, a dangerous decision.

They also go on to talk about the fact that already, prior to the minister's cuts, many people, many teachers, many educators were already making the decision to stay away from administrative roles in schools because of the level of the responsibility, the weight of the responsibility that they have. This is creating a worse situation. It is taking a bad situation and making it worse for a lot of individuals, and it is not doing a lot for recruitment.

They talk about the reduction in time to learning resources, teachers, as a direct loss in services to students. I will have a lot more to say about cuts to literacy, school libraries, and learning resource teachers as time goes on.

They talk about the reduction in and loss of specialists' support at the junior high level. They say that is difficult to comprehend. I asked the minister in Question Period today who he consulted when the decision was made to cut back on those specialist teachers in the area such as arts and music.

There was a time not long ago when the former Premier was out there, and all the government caucus, talking about how proud we should be about our Newfoundland and Labrador heritage and how important it was to teach our children in schools about the importance of our heritage, to preserve our music, to preserve our history, to preserve our arts, to preserve our culture. In some way these decisions diminish that, and that is an important thing to point out. We have to acknowledge that here, and we have to acknowledge that now because it will have a detrimental effect.

I did mention this last time but I am not sure if everyone got it, so I want to especially reiterate what I said the last time regarding this brief because don't take it from me, you can take it from principals, assistant principals, and program specialists themselves. They say: Perhaps the most significant reduction in teacher allocations to schools is the loss of special education teacher support.

While government has publicly announced its reductions to teacher workforce in other areas, they have not admitted to a reduction in the numbers of teachers allocated to serve the needs of our most vulnerable students. Government has said that the allocation of special education teachers is done on the basis of need. It is difficult to comprehend, reductions in these allocations when the need of the population has not changed, yet the amount of time to serve the need has changed and is reduced.

So, don't take it from me. I know the minister likes to suggest somehow that I am the propagator of misinformation when it comes to – and I say it is coming and I am certainly going to be paying a lot of attention to this as we go into the next school year. That we are going to see cuts in services for children with special education needs in schools. We are going to see them, that is an absolute fact. Don't take it from me, take it from the NLTA, take it from principals who are making decisions right now about the numbers of teachers, what the makeup of teachers are going to be in their schools in September.

That is what they are saying. I am a messenger in this. This is what they are saying. The minister can like it or lump it, but these are the facts, Mr. Speaker. Those are facts.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, he is exactly right in one of his statements. I am going to correct him because he has done the same thing today as he did a little while ago and he continues to do. I am still expecting that at some point he is going to rise and say that he was wrong, and apologize to those parents who he upset.

I have said here on occasion one of the most bothersome e-mails I had after he made the statement that we were cutting service to children with autism was an e-mail from a parent of a three-year-old child who has been diagnosed with autism. That parent was very upset and concerned that we were cutting services to children with autism and wanted to know if it was true. Mr. Speaker, that is the ultimate of disrespect and disregard for parents who face challenges with students with special needs.

He said it here again today, that we are going to cut services to special needs. Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely wrong. He is Twittering and Tweeting over there now as I speak, and I imagine he will be Twittering and Tweeting for the next twenty minutes or so. I am going to correct him on some things, and he can Twit, he can Tweet, and he can Twitter all he wants, I can tell you that.

I make no apologies, Mr. Speaker, for our investment in education. Let me put one simple fact. He talked about cultural connections. Since 2005, we put $17.4 million into the education system as part of cultural connections. Now, let me point out to him why we might have some reductions in the programming. Part of that was the investment into such things as art supplies, musical instruments, and print around connecting students to their culture.

So, Mr. Speaker, if you go around today and if you look at programs such as music in our school system, it is prevalent probably more than it has ever been before because –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) apologize now.

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, he is telling me he wants to get up and apologize. So I will sit down if he wants to get up and apologize. If he wants to apologize, I would sit and I would allow him the next seventeen minutes of my speech to make his apology. I have absolutely no problem with that. If he wants to do that, I am willing to sit down and allow him to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I will give you a couple of more examples. Because of our needs-based formula that we introduced – and I would like for the member to listen to this. Because of our needs-based formula that we implemented in 2008, there are 265 more teachers in the system today than there would have been if we had continued with that model – 265 more teachers.

In 2007, despite a decline of 2,200 students, we added thirty-eight teachers to the system. In 2008, a reduction of 1,400 students; we put an additional sixty-five teachers in the system. That is 103 extra teachers, despite the fact that we had about a 3,600 student decline.

Mr. Speaker, he is talking about our investment in education – let me give you this example. Our class caps: Grade 1 up to Grade 6 students, twenty-five per class; Grade 7 to 9, twenty-seven. Mr. Speaker, let me speak to those who would have been in the education system, let's say, ten years ago. If, in Grade 4, there were thirty students, what would have happened? You would have had one teacher with thirty students.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we put in the caps. Once you go over twenty-five, you cannot have a teacher with thirty students in the class. What would happen, Mr. Speaker, those thirty students would be split into two classes of fifteen. That never happened before – never happened before. That is our commitment to education in this Province.

This time, I will tell you – and the Premier was the one who was front leader on this, and any of us who are in Cabinet will remember it. We started talking about what we were going to do to have some savings in our education system. The minute we started talking about well, we can save $50 million or $60 million if we change these caps, just by one or two students.

Mr. Speaker, I will tell you this – and either member of our Cabinet will tell you – the first person to speak up on that was the Premier. She said: We are not touching class caps. She was very clear on it. We said then that class caps would not be touched. I can guarantee you one thing, you can speak to anyone in the school system and they will tell you how appreciative they are that we have kept those caps in place, Mr. Speaker.

The member alluded to the NLTA – and I have said this before. I spoke after Ms Lily Cole spoke at the Federation of School Councils AGM the other night. I said it there and I will say it again. When we sat down with her on the day before Budget and she was looking at a 10 per cent cut, as other people were looking at in other departments – they were crunching the numbers, knowing where we were going to have to go, Mr. Speaker – she said she thought that where we were going to go to was to touch class caps, because she knew that is where we could have major savings. This government did not touch class caps.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I spoke at the Federation of School Councils, and the Member for St. John's North got up and left before I spoke. Now, I thought it was just the politics. I will say the Member for Bay of Islands, I looked at him, and he was intent on my speech. He was intently listening to my speech, and I looked down and the Member for St. John's North was gone. I thought, that shagger – that shagger, he left. Mr. Speaker, I have to give him credit because I did find out afterwards that he had a gastrointestinal problem, it seems, and he did leave, and I even went as far as to verify it –

AN HON. MEMBER: He was fracking.

MR. JACKMAN: Somebody said he was fracking.

Mr. Speaker, I did, and I certainly wish him the best in the recovery. He told me on Monday – he came over and he said: Look, I did not walk out on your speech because I did not want to listen to you. It is because I really did get sick. I respect that; I really do, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, you cannot deny the commitment of this government to education. I know I have gotten up here and said this stuff before, and I am going to say it again – I am going to say it again. All I have to do – and I mentioned it in Question Period today – is to go down through the list of infrastructure projects that we have done in this Province, Mr. Speaker. If I can find them here, I am going to read them out to him again.

Mr. Speaker, nine new schools built and open in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Torbay, Placentia, Port Saunders, L'Anse-au-Loup, Port Hope Simpson, and Baie Verte. Those seven are in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and two in Paradise. Ten more schools under construction and planning.

St. Anthony: Almost an $18 million school, in the Member for The Straits – White Bay North's district. The day that is finished, I am going to be there for the opening. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, I am going to be there for the opening of that.

Carbonear, Gander, St. John's, St. Theresa's – I went over the other day to take a look at what is being built in St. Theresa's. It is going to be, Mr. Speaker, a magnificent facility, state-of-the-art. West end high school – the folks who were taking me around over there told me that St. Theresa's, which is a huge school, is going to be dwarfed by the one in the west end.

We are not talking, Mr. Speaker, minor facilities here, these are major; Portugal Cove-St. Phillips, Torbay, Pouch Cove, Flatrock, Bauline, Conception Bay South and in Paradise, and then twelve other major extensions. Canon Richards Memorial Academy in Flowers Cove – two in the Member for The Straits – White Bay North's district. He gets up and criticizes it day in and day out. That man should sit down, Mr. Speaker, sit and listen to it more often.

Pearson Academy in Wesleyville; St. Bernard's Elementary, Witless Bay; St. Peter's Junior High in Mount Pearl; Beachy Cove Elementary; Upper Gullies Elementary; Roncalli Elementary, St. John's, and two phases completed to date. St. Edward's Elementary in CBS; New World Island Academy in Summerford; Riverside Elementary; St. Paul's Intermediate; and eight additional extension and renovations, Mr. Speaker.

These are not minor investments. I will not take a lecture, Mr. Speaker, from the Member for St. John's Centre. I will never sit and take a lecture from that member about our lack of commitment to education. I can stand up here, Mr. Speaker, for –

AN HON. MEMBER: St. John's North.

MR. JACKMAN: St. John's North, sorry. I could have lectured the one from St. John's Centre as well. Mr. Speaker, never question the commitment and continued commitment of this government to education.

I have to speak to his commentary on the school boards, Mr. Speaker. One point I hope that the member and the people of the Province will get is this. Mr. Speaker, if I talk of education I am going to put it in two contexts. One I will say is the corporate side of education and the second is the educational component.

What is the most important part of that educational component? It is student achievement. It is students in facilities. It is students knowing that when they are in these facilities they have good teachers, they are in a safe environment, that they are respected, that at the end of the day they are achieving and doing well, Mr. Speaker.

Let me say to the Member for St. John's North, we are going to move to one CEO in the English boards. One CEO and that being that corporate side of it. They are going to be responsible. There is going to be a person assigned to the corporate and the operational. Now, here is the most important piece in education, and that is student achievement and those types of things that I spoke about.

At the offices that are in Gander, at the office in Corner Brook, at the office in Happy Valley – Goose Bay, and at the office that will operate in St. John's are very much focus on education, exactly where the efforts in those regions should be. Mr. Speaker, the other seven regional offices, even though they will move out of the office – and I have one in my district in Burin. Even though they will move out of the office, they will be placed in schools where space is available, Mr. Speaker. The supports and the provisions of services will still be there.

Now, Mr. Speaker, my point is this. In those areas the people who are on the ground are going to be working towards what they should be working towards, and that is the betterment of students. That is the betterment of student achievement. That is the provision of safe and caring schools. That is the provision of the services that make life better for students.

Mr. Speaker, I have to point out to him, and I have to point out to anybody opposite who tries to dispute. We have 14,000 students less in this Province than we had in 2004, a 17 per cent reduction. We have thirty-seven fewer schools, a 12 per cent reduction. Yet, the operational costs of boards have gone up by 30 per cent.

Mr. Speaker, if they are saying that we keep those boards in place, what they are saying is that we invest there. Are they suggesting that we take it from some of the things that I have talked about? That being the focus on education, class caps, and so on and so forth, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, our transition team – some people have asked why we called it committee or transition team. You can label it transition board. Mr. Speaker, we have a very, respected educator in this Province leading that, Mr. Lorne Wheeler. He was the President of the NLTA, was Deputy Minister of Education, was a teacher, and was a principal. Anyone who knows Mr. Lorne Wheeler has the highest of respect for him. He is a very organized, calm, collective man. Mr. Speaker, with him we are going to put eight other individuals.

We are going to put the CEOs of existing boards – I see the member over there Tweeting again. Maybe I could slow down a little if he wants to get it into the Tweet, because I would love for him to send this out. I could talk a little slower to see if we can get it out to him.

Mr. Speaker, along with these four CEOs we are going to put four trustees. I will just use this example. We wanted to make sure we had regional representation, so in Nova Central we have a trustee from Gander, a very good trustee from Gander. Then we have another trustee who resides in Harbour Breton. In Labrador, we have a representative from Happy Valley – Goose Bay and then we have another representative from Lab West. That regional piece is there.

Mr. Speaker, we also wanted to make sure we had women represented on the board. We have two women who are representatives on the board. We have a good transition committee in place, Mr. Speaker.

I am aware that Mr. Lorne Wheeler, I am not sure if he has spoken to all of the trustees but I know that yesterday he made an effort, and I believe he has spoken to the majority of them. He is also looking at bringing them together in rather short order because there is much work to be done.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, we are going to hire one CEO. The advertisement is out on that. I believe it closes on May 10. Shortly after that, an individual will be hired who will be the CEO of this one English board. There is much work that has to be done between now and September.

Mr. Speaker, we are hearing from some people. I can tell you the outcry is certainly not what the Opposition and the NDP are putting out there. I can assure you there are people who have questions. There is no doubt about it. Any time we enter into a change there is going to be questions and uncertainty, and they exist here as well.

My plea, Mr. Speaker, to those trustees who have an issue, and those past CEOs and others, if you have questions I would suggest that they direct them to the members of this transition team, this transition committee. All of us, I truly do believe this, are about the betterment of education in the Province. Those with opposing views, their interests are the same. The best way for us to move forward with this is that people provide their collective opinions and views. I am certain the committee would more than welcome it.

Mr. Speaker, our commitment to education has been strong since 2003. We indicated through the fees and the textbooks that we removed, and the other things that I have mentioned. Our commitment to education is strong and it will continue to be strong as we put in the best educational system that we can for the students of this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I recognize the hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am proud to be able to stand and speak on the Budget. I just heard the minister talk about Lily Cole. I spoke to Lily Cole on that. Do you know what Lily Cole told me, Mr. Speaker? She said we were into a meeting with the minister and the minister said: Put down your pens, what is said here in this room now is going to be confidential and never to be spoken. When she made this statement, the minister forgets what she said after that.

I said, what did the minister say? Do you know what she said? Do you know what Lily Cole told me? I said, what did the minister say? She said: I gave the minister my word, what was said in that confidential few minutes that I would not speak about it and I stand by my word.

So when you are going to talk about what Lily Cole said, let's make sure we finish the statement of what she said after that. It was a confidential meeting where the minister himself said: put down the pens, do not write anything down, this will never be repeated. God knows what secrets were told then.

Mr. Speaker, let's get the full facts here when we are going to talk about education, when you are going to use a part of a statement made in a confidential meeting. I just wanted to make sure the people in the public know that. It is easy to stand here in this House and say something about Lily Cole. She cannot defend herself when she said: I will abide by my word and not say anything about it. The minister can continue with what Lily Cole said to him after, and I am sure it will not be what the minister is portraying here in the public, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to go back to something that was in the paper last Friday in The Western Star, it was Corner Brook Pulp and Paper. This is something that bothers me. I have to thank the Minister of Natural Resources, the Minister of Finance, and I know the Member for Humber West will confirm this also. Corner Brook Pulp and Paper has been an issue for all of us in this House.

I remember when the toing and froing was coming from the NDP to the government. I stood up in this House, Mr. Speaker, I am going back eight, nine months now, and I said guys let's stop the fighting here. Let's all work together on Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, because it is not us. It is the people out in Corner Brook who are going to lose their jobs. I have to give the government credit, Mr. Speaker. I have been in contact with the Member for Humber West, the Member for Humber East, and the Minister of Finance on this here and we have been working together very well.

To my shock, last week when I read The Western Star on Friday morning I actually got a call. I said look at The Western Star. The Minister of Health is trying to be the big hero out on the West Coast, and said: Some political parties do not support this $90 million and would like to see the mill collapse.

Mr. Speaker, I take offence to that. That is very offensive when you use the word, some, and you use the words, political parties. She was asked, do you mean Liberals? I said some political parties. There are only two, us and the NDP, Mr. Speaker. I can assure you that is absolutely false. It is absolutely incorrect.

Mr. Speaker, I refuse to let an incorrect statement made about me, who still has family and friends working at that mill out in Corner Brook, to try to get a few brownie points because you are speaking to some group out there to try to give me and the Leader of the Official Opposition – I actually refuse to let that go and not be contested to show how factually incorrect that statement is, how false it is.

It just shows me, Mr. Speaker, and I hope the people in Corner Brook are listening to this, especially the pensioners I met with and the union members, and all the people who call me who are workers at the mill. It shows me how much that minister is in the loop with what is going on with the negotiations.

I can assure you the Member for Humber West, the Member for Humber East, and the Minister of Finance, we have a good working relationship. We differ on some things in this political realm, and I understand that, but when it comes to this mill we stuck together. I had chances to get political opportunities and get political points, I refused to do it. Those individuals had opportunities to do it, they did not do it and I respect them for it. I abide by my word to them, that we will work together.

Mr. Speaker, I will not speak any more about that mill because I know negotiations are very tenuous. I know what is happening with the union, so I will not get into anything else. I just wanted to confirm that. If that Minister of Health, the Member for Grand Falls, if she was the lead negotiator for the Abitibi mill in Grand Falls, make no wonder, I say, Mr. Speaker, make no wonder.

Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to clarify that and get that straight for record and for the people in Corner Brook. I challenge the minister. Anything I said here on this, I challenge the minister to prove me wrong. It cannot be done. If you want to make statements, make sure they are factual. Check with your colleagues to make sure that we are working together to save jobs for Newfoundland and Labrador, not little political brownie points, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I am going to speak about something now, I am sure a lot of people don't expect me to; it is about the new hospital in Corner Brook.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, again, I hear the members opposite chirping already, but when the Minister of Education spoke, I sat down attentively like I did last Friday. I never said a word. I listened attentively because there may be some points that I could pick up, some things I may learn.

If you do not agree with this government, they have to try to interrupt. Let's try to interrupt him. Let's try to make – it is not going to happen. It is just not going to happen, so do not waste your breath. Save it for your death bed. You may need your last breath. You are not going to waste it on me, trying to get me to stop talking about the hospital. It is just not going to happen, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Health said it again today: I do not want the hospital in Corner Brook. Mr. Speaker, that is such an idiotic statement. It is factually incorrect. I will tell you what I want. I want a hospital that is going to service Western Newfoundland, not a downgrade. I refuse to accept the downgrade. I said it when the long-term care facility was being built that it is a downgrade.

The Minister of Natural Resources is quoted in The Western Star saying: We can't make the same mistake as we did with the long-term care facility – his own words, because the beds were reduced. I say to the minister, and the Minister of Natural Resources said it himself: If we make that same mistake it is going to cost us millions upon millions to correct it.

I am saying to the Minister of Health and I am saying to the Minister of Natural Resources, you are making the same mistakes. You are making the same mistakes. Math does not lie. What the Premier put out in a press release, what I received when I called the hospital myself, what we received in Estimates and what the minister said last week.

I know the Member for Humber West, and I am not sure if he is getting all the details. I respect the individual. I know he is from Corner Brook. I know that one of these days he has a lot of friends who are going to need this hospital. Maybe we will. Maybe we are going to need it, too.

Check the numbers. I plead to the Member for Humber West, the Member for Humber East, and the Minister of Natural Resources, check the numbers because the minister herself – when there is a brand new state-of-the-art hospital built for all Western Newfoundland there is going to be twenty-two less acute care beds. That is the numbers. Now, unless the Premier is wrong, unless the Minister of Health is wrong, unless the hospital that give out the numbers are wrong, we are going to have twenty-two less beds.

Mr. Speaker, I tell you what bothered me today, and we asked this in Estimates. This was five or six days ago. Guess what? A decision was made on this $400 million hospital. Guess what? The Minister of Health did not know the number of surgeries that have been cancelled at Western Memorial Regional Hospital in the last six months due to a lack of acute care beds. It is amazing. I was astonished.

Mr. Speaker, I was going to ask that question last Thursday but the minister said she was not feeling well and she would be out of the House, so I would not do it. She was out in Corner Brook giving a speech to the Rotary. I would not ask that question because I said: no, we asked the question Wednesday. I will give her time now to get her facts together. I would not ask it when she is not here.

I asked today and the Minister of Health does not know; did not know, do not know. To me it is flabbergasting. I say to the Member for Humber West who is over there listening attentively, and the Member for Humber East: Do you know that these decisions are being made about this hospital and she do not have the facts? If you do not believe me, ask people out in Western Newfoundland whose surgeries have been cancelled. They have been cancelled. This is not propaganda by me.

Mr. Speaker, it is astonishing that the Minister of Health made this and does not know this. It is really amazing. She is going to decrease the number of acute care beds. There are surgeries already cancelled out there because there are not enough acute care beds to handle the surgeries. Can you imagine that?

Mr. Speaker, the other thing I was astonished by about the Minister of Health, there is a report in her department for readmission rates. People in Western are pushed out with a lack of services in their communities. Some may go down the coast; some may go out in some of the outlying rural areas. The Minister of Health – and I put this on the record because it is public record – I asked her today and she did not know what the readmission rates were for residents who had surgery who were admitted to Western Memorial Hospital. It is astonishing; it is absolutely astonishing.

Yet we are going to sit down here, agree that you have to take what you are given, and the minister does not have the proper facts. Mr. Speaker, I just let the minister know because obviously you do not know. In your department, there is a report on readmission rates. Western Newfoundland is 14 per cent. The rest of the Province is 10 per cent, maybe getting up to 11 per cent. It is well above the provincial and national average.

So when the minister wants to make a decision on the hospital and wants to say publicly the Member for Bay of Islands does not want the hospital, I want something that is going to be sustainable and something that is going to be in Western Newfoundland so we do not have to cancel operations. I want something that people do not be rushed out the door, but the readmission rates are going to be back in through the door quicker. That is part of the reason there are beds in Western Newfoundland and you are saying: Oh, well, we cannot get it.

The readmission rates are higher. Those are facts. They are in her department, Mr. Speaker. Those are the kinds of things that people want to think I am fighting for. You better believe I am fighting for the hospital, but you better believe that I am going to fight for the right hospital, the right number of beds, and the right number of facilities we need in Corner Brook.

The long-term care should have been bigger. They are putting in another hundred beds. I congratulate that because we need it. The long-term care facility was cut back. This is not me. This hospital, please God, a lot of us will never be able to use it, but there are a lot of people out there now as we speak in Western Newfoundland who cannot get surgery because of the lack of acute care beds.

MR. DAVIS: We are going to fix that.

MR. JOYCE: The Minister of Transportation and Works said: "We are going to fix that." How are you going to fix that, put in twenty-two or less acute care beds? If you do not know what you are talking about, please – and, Mr. Speaker, do you know how they are going to fix it? This was told to us in the Estimates. If the Minister of Transportation and Works does not believe me, I will get it in Hansard. Do you know how they are going to fix it?

MR. DAVIS: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: I will get to that, I say to the Minister of Transportation and Works. I will get to that.

Do you know how they are going to fix it? The time in hospital, they are going to decrease it by 25 per cent. That was in the Estimates. If someone has surgery right now – I am just telling the people of Western Newfoundland, I am telling you now, I am looking you straight in the face right here and now and saying – it was said in the Estimates; it is in Hansard during Estimates – how they are going to make up for the lack of acute care beds is that they are going to take people 25 per cent faster, get them out of the hospital. That is in Hansard.

The people in Western Newfoundland now who feel that they do not spend enough time after surgery to get recovered – guess what? You are going to have to spend 25 per cent less time in the hospital. It is in Hansard. When Hansard is typed up from the Estimates for Health, I will show anybody who wants to see it, what we were told, and I nearly fell off my chair when I was told that. That is how they are going to decrease the number of beds in Western Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker. We have Estimates again Thursday night; I will follow up on it again.

The Minister of Transportation and Works is saying: Who is in the beds? He was over there saying: Who is in the beds? Tell us who is in the beds. I can tell you now. The Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of Health have been here saying that 25 per cent of the beds are for long-term care patients. People of Western Newfoundland heard that. Now, Mr. Speaker, you do not have to believe me. We were told in Estimates – I asked that question to the minister. Do you know what we were told in Estimates? There are thirty-four long-term care patients in acute care beds for all of Western Newfoundland.

The Member for Burgeo – La Poile was at the Estimates. It is on the record. This is no me. It is on the record. When I hear these statements that 25 per cent of the 200, which is 50 of long-term care patients, it is absolutely not true. In Estimates, when I asked the question, the officials told me it is thirty-four for the Western Region. I said: Are you sure now because the Minister of Natural Resources – and do you know what? The Minister of Health tried to defend it. Oh, it fluctuates. Sometimes it goes up.

I said: Minister, for the last four months it has been the same. The Premier made the statement. Here is the number. So is the Premier giving out false information? Are your officials giving out false information? You cannot have three, four – everybody cannot be right on this.

So when I asked officials, that is what was said. So when the Minister of Transportation and Works wants to know who is in the bed, do not rely on the propaganda that is being put out, ask the officials, read Hansard. Hansard is the official record of what was said. I can assure you what is being put out on the West Coast is absolutely false – absolutely false, Mr. Speaker. So, I hope the people on the West Coast are listening to this, and whoever is listening to this, I can assure you, you are getting less acute care beds, confirmed by the minister – less acute care beds. Your post-surgery and if you are admitted to the hospital, it is going to be decreased by 25 per cent. That is guaranteed.

The people right now who have cancelled surgeries, it is going to continue; that is the fact. When we get this so-called new, super hospital out in Corner Brook, your surgery is going to be delayed because it will have less acute-care beds. That is bar none.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: I hear the Minister of Environment – I have to give him credit. Last year, he was the only one who told me the proper information that I ever asked for in this House. He was the only one. Mr. Speaker, do you know what the Minister of Environment and Conservation told us last year? Exactly what is happening this year. I have no problem with it; give us the facts.

Mr. Speaker, I just want the people of Western Newfoundland to do me a little favour, just do me a little favour – you want to talk about propaganda – read the Premier's press release. In her press release, she said we were going to have the Request for Proposals in by July. That is the Premier's own press release. That is your boss. She said that out in Corner Brook. Everybody said: Oh, perfect, we will see what is going to happen the summer. Guess what we were told in Estimates? They are hoping to have the Request for Proposals sent out now by the end of July, later the summer. That is what we were told in Estimates.

The Minister of Transportation and Works, I have to give him credit. When I asked for a copy of the Hatch Mott MacDonald, he said: Yes, you will get a copy. I am still waiting, but I am sure we will – and a copy of the Stantec report. I thank the minister for that because I am sure we will get that very soon. That is going to show what Hatch Mott MacDonald put in for Corner Brook, and what Stantec said we do not need. I thank the minister, and I am sure I will have that before I go back Friday. When I have a few meetings in Corner Brook on Friday, I can show people that. Of course, once again, as I always said, that is in Hansard. The Minister of Transportation and Works – thank you very much for that commitment. I know you are a man of your word and you will live up and follow up with that, and I am sure I will have that. Thank you very much.

The stuff on housing – I have to say to the Minister of Transportation and Works. Yesterday at the housing Estimates, we asked for information on housing and I got it today. I thank the minister for that, and that is the kind of stuff – we work together.

Mr. Speaker, I will conclude on that –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: I hear the Minister of ATIPP, we call him. I tell you the strange part about you. You are trying to get your little few words in, Mr. Speaker, instead of standing up. Let me tell you, do you know how I got the money for Hatch Mott MacDonald? The freedom of information, because the department would not release it – that is how I had to get it; that is open. People in Western Newfoundland could not even get a copy, Mr. Speaker, of what was being reported. I had to go under ATIPP to get it. That is really open. Yes, everybody can see.

Mr. Speaker, I see my time is up. I look forward from the minister and I hope I will get it before Friday – I hope I hear by Friday to get two copies of the Stantec report and Hatch Mott MacDonald that was committed to in Estimates.

MR. SPEAKER (Littlejohn): I remind the member his time has expired.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS PERRY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly a pleasure for me to rise in the House here today and speak to the Budget debate on the amendment and, hopefully, we will be able to get up again during the actual Budget itself.

I am going to sort of change the course of the discussion here a little bit. Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about the Budget and how shocked I am – there is a lot of shock, I guess, goes around in this House – totally shocked I am at the complete lack of understanding that the Third Party has around economics and taxation.

I was driving home to my wonderful District of Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune just a few weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, and I was listening to Open Line, a wonderful show, and the Leader of the Third Party came on and I could feel my blood pressure rise as I was driving. I could not believe my ears. Mr. Speaker, again last Thursday, the Member for St. John's East got up and spoke again about the very same line items in the Budget relating to the taxation. I just could not believe it because these are some very basic principles of economics that everyone should be able to understand.

Let me elaborate, Mr. Speaker, on what they spoke about. They talked about concerns they had with two line items in the Budget that said people are paying more in personal income tax and we are accruing less in corporate income tax. Now, we have had the Minister of Finance try to explain it to them. We had the Minister of Natural Resources stand up and speak to try to explain it to them. Many of my other colleagues have tried to explain it to them. I, Mr. Speaker, will attempt to do so again today. Wish me luck.

Anyone who understands good governance understands that it is a good thing to earn our revenue from taxation of businesses. That is pretty basic. We do not want to tax, of course, individuals any more than what we have to. Personal income tax rates in this Province, even though the line item was higher, had not gone up. In fact, Mr. Speaker, under our leadership tax rates have decreased, putting over $500 million back into the hands of our citizens, money that they can choose to spend to best suit their own needs and their own specific interests.

That is what is happening here, Mr. Speaker. It is the result of growth, growth in people's annual incomes. It is not because we are charging higher taxes. It is because we are making more money, and that is a great thing. In fact, we are second in the country only to Alberta for the highest average weekly earnings. Who ever would have thought we could achieve such a milestone in Newfoundland and Labrador? We achieved it in ten short years.

We have more people working, Mr. Speaker, than ever before in our history. It is a good thing; it is a great thing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS PERRY: It enabled the government to increase revenues from taxing. We are increasing our revenues from taxes, yes, Mr. Speaker, but without increasing the taxation rates. That is the way, I say, it should be, unlike the members opposite who want to raise the tax rates, hurt the working public, deter business attraction, stifle economic growth, and stifle job creation.

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about corporate taxes. Again, the Minister of Natural Resources did a great job of explaining it yesterday and I will endeavour to cover some of that ground again in as layman terms as I can possibly put it.

Yes, corporate taxes have decreased, but why? We are in an economy in Newfoundland and Labrador primarily reliant on commodity exports, like minerals, fish, lumber, paper, and oil. It is a fact of life over which governments, any government, have no control, which is all the more reason why it is crucial to have a competitive tax regime to attract the investors who create the jobs and who create the sustainable wealth, particularly in rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador.

To be honest, Mr. Speaker, in my personal opinion it really, really scares me that the NDP have no understanding of good governance, no understanding of economics and no vision for how to achieve sustainable prosperity.

In my opinion, an NDP government would be terrifying for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. They would – and I will say it again – increase taxes, deter private sector investment, where the majority of jobs should and need to be created if we are going to have wealth that is real and sustainable. Government alone cannot be the sole provider of jobs. Where in God's name would all the money come from if we have a weak private sector? We have to raise revenues. Government cannot be the only job creator.

Just this weekend – and in terms of taxes again, another tax issue I have to say really bothers me. Back in 1996 when I had just started my job in economic development, I was invited to participate in the National Round Table on the federal Budget consultations. At that time – and that was well over fifteen years ago – I was really horrified that, of course, Canada's debt being in the hundreds of billions of dollars, we were paying $90,000 a minute at the federal level in interest. Ever since that time, I have been extremely concerned about governments running deficits and the amount of money that is lost in interest payments.

Just this weekend in reading my Twitter feed, I picked up a link to an article that talked about what the average Canadian pays, what we lose from our paycheques. Each and every average Canadian loses on average 42 per cent of their paycheque towards taxes through the combined federal, provincial and municipal level of taxation, and they want us to pay even more – absolutely astounding.

The fact is, Mr. Speaker, they do not understand the economic side of the picture. With a poor economy, as wonderful and grandiose as it would be to have all of these great social programs, without an economic base there would be no money for social programs, Mr. Speaker. So, unless you solve the economic side of the puzzle, you are not going to be able to do much with the social piece.

To further illustrate my point, Mr. Speaker, let's just take a look at some other jurisdictions that have an NDP government. Manitoba, presently, has an NDP government – highest tax rate it has seen in the last twenty-five years. In another province, Mr. Speaker, led by an NDP government, they have seen their taxes increase 25 per cent in four short years. This is not what I, for one, and my colleagues on this side of the House want to see for Newfoundland and Labrador. We want to stimulate the economy, we want to attract the private sector, we want to create the jobs that are sustainable, and we are well on our way, Mr. Speaker.

When you listen to the Budget here in the House sometimes, it is really frustrating, especially when things get theatrical, because you really want to focus on what is important to the people. This is an opportunity here in the House to educate people on the facts. I would like to get the facts out.

Sometimes members opposite will get up and they will spend their whole twenty minutes harping on a Budget cut to a single organization. There is no mention whatsoever of the hundreds of other organizations that do receive funding, Mr. Speaker, often to provide a similar service for a similar demographic. We are not about pet projects. We are about trying to do what is best for the greater good as a whole. The fact is these are public dollars we are spending and it must be spent wisely.

Governments, especially in this day and age, must reduce duplication, must increase efficiency, and must eliminate excess layers. The days of going to the manager of the manager of the manager are quickly becoming history.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of Opposition, one of the things I have marvelled at in here – and I certainly have had the benefit of being a part of government since I came to office. I sometimes sit down and ponder and say, my gosh, the luxuries of being in Opposition. You can promise the world, but you do not have to deliver on a single thing.

In government, Mr. Speaker, we do not have the luxury of dramatizing single issues in isolation of the whole picture. We are responsible for the people's money, and we must consider everything in the context of the larger picture and understand all possible implications.

Let's take another look again, Mr. Speaker, at some of the things they want to do across the way, the Third Party. They call for all-day Kindergarten; they call for child care programs. I do not know if they know what such programs would cost, but we are told it is in the range of at least $500 million. Where is that money going to come from? We certainly are not in a fiscal position to be able to do that within a balanced Budget, so they would have to borrow.

Already, Mr. Speaker, we as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are spending $800 million per year in interest on the debt. That is nearly $2.2 million every day in interest payments alone. Imagine the social programs that we could fund, the roads we could pave and the hospitals we could build if we had that kind of money, Mr. Speaker, instead of it being lost to interest payments. In my district alone, in just thirty days we would have enough to pave the entire Coast of Bays highway on the Connaigre Peninsula. That is the place we want to get to, Mr. Speaker. Again, with the fiscal tax policies and the governance that we have in place, we will get there and in short order.

To take a look at how our investments work and how our fiscal policies work, you need look no further than my wonderful District of Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune. Here is an exemplary example of how our policies and our investment strategies are working. If the Coast of Bays is not an exemplary model of success, Mr. Speaker, I do not know what is. I have to say though, that it baffles me as well that the Liberals want to shut it down. That is very depressing.

In any case, I will certainly be an advocate that the industry continues to stay, continues to grow and reach our goal of 2,000 jobs. We are now at the 1,000 level and we expect to double that in the next few years. I certainly want to assure my people that I will advocate for that until we achieve that goal.

I am going to talk a little bit – anyone who is really, genuinely interested in the Budget, in how your taxes are being spent, in what is happening to your money, read the book that accompanies our Budget document: Securing the Future, A 10-Year Sustainability Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador. It outlines the material, Mr. Speaker. It outlines where we are today very well, and it certainly outlines where we are going.

By reducing the net debt – remember when we came into government the debt was $12 billion. We were paying twenty-three cents on every dollar in interest. Today, Mr. Speaker, that figure is down to 10.9 cents, and that is quite a significant amount of progress. That money is going back into the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and back into the infrastructure of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

We could have, I guess over the last few years, been spending money because one of the things we are being criticized about now is: Oh, you were spending so frivolously and now you have to roll it back. We spent because the money needed to be spent. There were infrastructure deficits. Why not create jobs when you had the money to do it?

If we had not done it, Mr. Speaker, and we had taken all the revenue that we were earning from the oil in the glory days, we would have been criticized for that. We would have been criticized because we are putting it all on the debt and there is so much that needs to be done and so much we could be doing. So we took a balanced approach, Mr. Speaker, and we are achieving both goals steadily and surely.

Now, in terms of taxation, let's look at where we have reduced some of those taxes, Mr. Speaker. Personal income tax is down by $403 million, and $21 million has gone back into the pockets of seniors through the Low Income Seniors' Benefits. That benefits seniors all across the board, each and every senior we have in our Province.

The people, Mr. Speaker, called for a reduction of retail sales tax on insurance, and we delivered, $75 million. Now, what would the NDP do with that? Would they bring that tax back? Would they take that money out of the people's pockets once again? HST and the Residential Energy Rebate, $38 million back into the hands of the people of this Province to spend as they so desire.

Corporate income tax and payroll tax down is by $15 million, but what is that doing, Mr. Speaker? That is enabling the employers, especially in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, to maintain and increase the workforce and keep the jobs going. They are using the money to create jobs instead of giving it to government. Of course, it is yielding great results in terms of sustainable job creation.

So, Mr. Speaker, I know I have probably taken a harsher stance than I usually do when I get up here and speak in the House, and I have not elaborated a whole lot on my district, which is fabulous and I would really love the opportunity to brag about what is happening in the Coast of Bays district. The Budget this year, in particular some other things that it does that are great for us pertain to Municipal Operating Grants and how we are seeing an increase in MOGs. Each and every one of my communities will see an increase. Of course, that will be very valuable money to use in improving their infrastructure and programs as they see fit.

I really do not intend to discredit the importance of anything that is said here. I recognize the importance of the Opposition views and the concerns of the people they represent. We would love nothing more than to continue with the surplus funding that we had.

At this point in time, Mr. Speaker, to continue spending at those rates would mean spending beyond our means because we are not earning that level of money any more, which would only increase the debt, reverse the progress we have made toward self-reliance, and pass the burden on to our children. That is not our course, Mr. Speaker. That is not our leadership.

The waters may be rough for a while, but our destination is clear and straight ahead. This crew and its captain are well on the way to leading ourselves towards wealth, prosperity, and self-reliance, not just for us but for future generations to come.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I take pleasure in rising to talk about the Budget, but I would like to touch off on a few things that the hon. Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune talked about. If we were to practice the type of reaganomics that this particular government has been practicing in the last couple of years, I think that we would be in trouble for a long time. The degree of investment we have seen in some regard has been positive on the part of government, but in other ways it has been completely wrong and misguided. I guess I will stand and correct a few facts again this time.

I have to talk about, I guess, the first thing to start off is about the degree of investment in small business. One can look at an NDP government merely across the Straits and they can see an NDP government that this government has been dealing with, an NDP government in Nova Scotia that saw a strategic investment. They saw a strategic investment in small businesses by dropping small business tax from 4.5 per cent to 3.5 per cent.

At the same time as that, they also created 2,900 jobs. It was one of the provinces here in the Atlantic Canada region that showed the strongest economic growth in the last little while. So, hats off to the Dexter government, to the NDP government in Nova Scotia, for doing that.

What did this government do? When we presented a motion having to do with the dropping of small business tax, 1 per cent as a strategic investment to small businesses – what did they do? They voted completely against it, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: Shameful.

MR. MURPHY: A shameful move. That was a $3 million investment for small businesses. How many times have we heard from the government across the floor that the economy that is being created by small business is white-hot, and it is certainly worthy of a degree of investment on part of government, even if it was just 1 per cent.

Compared to $560 million in the hole, Mr. Speaker, $3 million is not very much on top of that to see what kind of a return small business is giving to us. It happens to be responsible for about 40 per cent of revenues coming into the Province – about 40 per cent of the employment, sorry, that is right now in the Province. That is what we are looking at as to how important small business is. Whether you are a taxi driver or whether you are a fisherman, every single one of them is contributing to a white-hot economy, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to point that out to the hon. member and, as well, in case the other side does not know. Perhaps they will consider dropping small business tax as a strategic investment into the Newfoundland and Labrador economy. One is no more important than the other.

Mr. Speaker, as well, she talked about dropping personal income taxes. One of the things that were in our platform the last election was raising the basic personal exemption. It is an easy way of saving people money as well. We would have gone from $7,989 right now on the tax return to a $9,000 basic personal exemption for people. What is the matter with that? That is another way of keeping money in people's pockets, yet we get criticized for it.

I would like to know what government considers a stronger investment than keeping about $1,100 in people's pockets. It is a very good investment, Mr. Speaker. How fast would that be turned over into the economy? It would stimulate the economy, and it would attract jobs as the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune would say.

It would stimulate the economy and attract jobs; it kind of rings true when you are talking about that shipbuilding project that happened on the Burin Peninsula isn't it? We are talking about the JSS contracts that government failed to make any kind of a move on when it came to that. We lost $30 billion in projected shipbuilding work on the Burin Peninsula. When was that, about a year-and-a-half ago, two years ago?

It is only about two years ago we saw $30 billion up in smoke, and where did the work go? The work went to an NDP province, Mr. Speaker, the Province of Nova Scotia. It was the Premier Darrell Dexter of the day who stood up in his own House of Assembly, in his own Nova Scotia Legislature and said, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to this project it is like winning the Olympics for thirty years. That is exactly what it was like.

He sees the strategic investment in the shipbuilding; he sees being able to retain a strong, co-ordinated workforce that would pull together on the same rope for this one massive project – $30 billion, Mr. Speaker. Where is that going to bring them in the future when it comes to future shipbuilding, I wonder? Do you know what it means? If I was twenty-five years old and I worked thirty years in those particular shipyards, I would probably be able to retire and have a family in Nova Scotia.

What are they doing right now on the Burin Peninsula, Mr. Speaker? We are dealing with a transient workforce. Half the people down there, I think, are flying off to Fort Mac, and the government is making higher taxes as a result of Fort Mac money. That is exactly what it is. That is why revenues are up. Yes, there are some good jobs up in Labrador.

MR. S. COLLINS: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: Yes, there are some good jobs in Labrador, I would say to the hon. Member for Terra Nova. Absolutely, Mr. Speaker, sure there is an improved job situation when it comes to Labrador. It comes at a risk too when it comes to the volatility in commodities.

We have to look at something that is going to be more steady. That is why we should be looking at small businesses because small businesses are anchoring the Newfoundland and Labrador economy. That is why we should be looking at personal income taxes for the people who are going to be here. If we want them to participate in a small economy and at the same time return money to the people out there who are running businesses, that is where we need to go, but we have not. We are missing that particular fact.

I would like to talk as well about – she brought up the cost of all-day kindergarten. That is the problem with this government on the other side of the House. That is the problem with the blue document. It talks about spending; it does not talk about strategic investments like all-day kindergarten or full daycare. With those things, while you are investing, there is an immediate payoff.

If you are talking about the possibility of being able to free up more people to go into a workforce or to pick up the welding torch or have more women out there in the workforce, Mr. Speaker, that is right where you go. That is how you would also put money back into the economy as well. We all know how much it costs to pay for daycare. I have been there – been there several times. I think that a lot of us here know how much it costs for daycare and how much small businesses like daycares, for example, would like to see money poured back in to the economy. You have to look at the end payoff as a result if you are talking about freeing up people.

I do not know what the stats are when it comes to births, for example, last year, but let's pick a number out of the hat; maybe it is about 1,200 births last year. In five years from now if we had all that money gone into the economy because the investment in child care and then further on then into kindergarten, that is five years of people working out there. Maybe they will be working on a future shipbuilding strategy. Maybe they will be iron workers in Labrador. Maybe they will be driving the big trucks hauling the ore out to keep the Labrador economy going and to help the Province grow.

Maybe they will be doing that. Maybe they will be picking up the welding torches and putting offshore oil rigs together or whatever. Whatever they do is just as important a contribution. It is just as important a contribution. Every one of these people deserve to have a roof over their heads, Mr. Speaker, and at the same time are saying yes, we are waiting for that homeownership program that we do not think is going to happen in our lifetime from this government. It is not going to happen. Everybody wants to be able to live in a Bailey Park.

That is what I am saying. When it comes to that, everybody wants something that they can afford and they all deserve to have a chance to have a roof over their heads. We need to see more money into Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. We need to see that particular department grow and, at the same time, to develop into something that is going to mean something to everybody, rather than the select few that we are looking at right now.

Let's expand the boundaries; let's make the investment for people. It is not in the Budget. I say to the hon. Member for Mount Pearl South, it is not in your blue document. You need to be pressing your fellow Cabinet ministers for that if you want to see growth in Mount Pearl when it comes to that.

We are dealing with an awful lot here when it comes to debt and economics and, at the same time, they are managing decline, Mr. Speaker. What the NDP are about are some ideas that come to be expressed in one word, growth. We are not managing decline, we are managing the Province's future is what this government should be saying, but they are all protracted within a shell about themselves now. They cannot come out with an idea.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, that is what I wanted to say to the hon. members across the hallway. Perhaps if they had a little bit more proactive thinking when it comes to budgetary constraints and maybe take that chance and invest in all-day kindergarten and invest in daycare. Take that chance.

Try out an experiment for yourselves, for example, in Lab West right where you need the workforce. Try it on the population up there. Do some sampling. Hold some surveys up there and ask the people: If this was brought forward, would you use it? Would you avail of it? Would you be working in the local economy? We would not be worried about taking in people from the outside, Mr. Speaker, because we would be so busy having our own people working we would have all dates filled.

MR. MCGRATH: Lab West is growing.

MR. MURPHY: It is growing, I would say to the Member for Lab West, but perhaps it could be grown a whole lot more than what it is. Newfoundland and Labrador for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, I say, first.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about a few things in my district that I would like to see or things that I am hearing at the doors when I am out there or at events. I am hearing an awful lot about EAS workers. I know I talked about them the other day. I have talked about the investment of time and effort that these people have made, the Brother T.I. Murphy Centre or the Association of New Canadians.

The degree of work these people do in filling a role, not only as people who are trying to get them to enrol in educational programs, but also the jobs they were doing as regards to taking people off the streets. These people were almost – well, Mr. Speaker, you could call them social workers at times for taking people out of trouble, getting them back into the educational system, and turning into something. Maybe they did not think they were worth anything, but other people saw fit that they were.

We lost funding for EAS workers. We lost funding for various groups like the Brother T.I. Murphy Centre and for the Association of New Canadians in my district. There were twenty-one jobs all in total, and I have not even included groups like the Y that were out there doing the same thing.

All of these people were all pulling on the same rope. What did we do? We have forsaken them. This government has forsaken them. They have cut the line and said you are on your own. That is exactly what they have done. That is just in St. John's East.

Let's talk about municipal funding, because I get a real kick out of this one. One day government comes out and they announce $25 million for seven towns and cities that are strategic in the Province, and yes, it might be a good investment but what did they do on the other hand? They took out the grants that the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation were paying for their stores in various cities. It cost the City of St. John's about $100,000. So they give with one hand and they take with the other.

What did it cost the City of Corner Brook? Two liquor stores there, I think it was. The hon. Minister of Natural Resources would probably know. I think it meant something in the area of $20,000 out of the City of Corner Brook. They had to rejig their budget and come up with another $20,000, just when they thought they had it all figured out.

How much in Mount Pearl, I wonder, Mr. Speaker? Did I hear the hon. Member for Mount Pearl South complain to this government about the loss of funding for the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation to his city? I did not hear a word, Mr. Speaker. How many liquor stores are in Mount Pearl? I think there are two out there in Mount Pearl, so they lost $20,000. It is roughly about $20,000 they lost.

Mr. Speaker, something else about municipal funding I keep hearing about is the simple fact that it is the provincial government chasing down small cities and towns, the larger cities and towns. When it comes to municipal funding you keep hearing about the talk that they are doing as regards to a new operating formula, municipal formula. That is great that they are going to enter into talks.

What turns off a lot of people is that sometimes they get caught in the middle, and my constituents are being caught in the middle, Mr. Speaker, I say to you. Here is how. You get a provincial government that is not paying municipal taxes, for example, on its facilities. Right now in St. John's East there are several government facilities that are not paying taxes.

We have the old Baine Johnston centre. The Baine Johnston Building on Portugal Cove Road does not pay any municipal taxes. We have the Baine Johnston Building on Elizabeth Avenue that now houses Child, Youth and Family Services, that does not pay any taxes for the services it receives. It does not even receive a grant. What does that do?

Well, for the lost taxation from where the businesses were before, now the City of St. John's has a shortfall. Because they have a shortfall on taxes, they have to go somewhere and get it. Where do they go? They end up possibly putting up mill rates. Because they end up putting up mill rates, what does that do? That raises municipal taxes on the taxpayer out there. It leaves them on the hook, sometimes with a say, sometimes without.

Sometimes the City of St. John's manages to fill the gap and sometimes they do not. In this particular case, I think this year they are dealing with something in the order of $3 million, I believe, that they are short when it came to the new municipal funding formula, the $25 million share.

Every time we bring up the gas tax issue, of giving a small contribution of the provincial gas tax, we get criticized for it. Why? I have no idea why. It just seems to be responsible that if you are driving on a road perhaps you would be able to take some of that municipal gas tax formula and possibly sink it back into municipal roads again. It is a brilliant idea.

I would suggest that the government would look at it this time around. Sixteen-and-a-half cents a litre, if you were to take two cents a litre off that and contribute it back to municipalities. I say to the minister, avail of it. It is there. It is constantly growing.

The provincial government right now is projecting it to go from $171 million that was collected last year to $176 million. There is an extra $5 million that the government is projecting that it is going to be collecting in the next year. I think that is a great place to start for municipalities. It is fair, it is transparent. If every municipality knew about it, would they complain? I do not think so. Certainly they should enter that into the discussion when it comes to Municipal Operating Grants.

When it comes to other things, let's talk about REEP. Let's talk about the government's conservation efforts over the last little while. How do you help somebody out on a lower income? Government's own projections on January 6, 2012, in their own news release talked about putting $900 into every household. What would that have done?

The overall REEP that is what it was doing. It was putting about $900 into every low-income household in this Province, the people who availed of the project. What did they do? They cut the program in half it was such a success. Yes, there is an impetus for growth.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, there is an impetus for small businesses out there to be making money, the guys and girls who are out there swinging the hammers and nails putting in the new vinyl windows and putting in the insulation. That is self-defeating, not to mention it is probably a little bit less than gratuitous when it comes to a message to small business, to carpenters and everything like that out there, anybody who is working in the trades.

What kind of a message is that? It is not a message, Mr. Speaker, other than to say you are on your own. That is exactly what it told a lot of people too, who are out there trying to avail of this program, who are struggling with high heating costs in spite of a positive government move.

May I add, it was an NDP motion that was pressed for in some of your election programming in some of the books. It was one of the things that was pressed as well by the Consumer Group for Fair Gas Prices, which I was a member of and only too proud to have found that one coming in on the Budget. It was great. Still, there are people out there who are paying high energy prices as a result and we should be recognizing that they needed a hand. They did not get it with this Budget with the REEP cut in half.

I guess last but not least in the time that I have left over is the contribution that RED Boards were making. It was such a small amount on government's behalf, but showed such big promise and showed such big results at the same time. The people who I have been talking to were all over this Province – how much of an investment was being made by this government into RED Boards, but abruptly I think it was July 16 last year the funding was cancelled. No real reason behind it, other than it had to be cost savings. We did not see a degree of investment back into RED Boards again. We did not see that impetus on the part of municipalities, and these were important boards for smaller municipalities who could not afford economic development offices on their own, a very important wing.

Again, Mr. Speaker, we had an impetus for decline, the management of decline rather than an impetus for growth. That is just the way it is. That is the way I see this Budget. This Budget will not get my support. As a matter of fact, I think that they should be taking this Budget in itself and going back to the drawing board with it. This Budget is an absurd failure. It has meant destruction to a lot of lives. We have already started to see the decline in housing starts – I think it was last month – down by about 450 units compared to what it was this time last year.

We also saw an increase in the unemployment rate up to I think is 12.6 per cent. Do you know something? I think a lot of people were saying to themselves before all of this happened, I think something is starting to go right in this Province. Then, abruptly, came the layoffs and the talk about the $1.6 billion deficit, and all of a sudden the Province was in trouble, and so is the economy now as it is.

We will see in the next month stats, Mr. Speaker, how this government has been doing. We will see if a couple of tenths of a percentage point up or down is going to mean anything to a lot of people. I think it is going to be the other way around. I think that this government has to go back and has to rethink its strategy behind this Budget and get back to the drawing board again with everybody in this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to get up in this House and speak and speak to the issues for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I tell you something; I hope and pray that each and every taxpayer in Newfoundland and Labrador was just tuned in to the hon. member's speech.

Do you know the reason why? Because they will finally see exactly how the NDP is governing themselves in regard to talking out of two sides of their mouth. As a matter of fact, I heard the hon. member just spend $7 billion on a bunch of worthwhile initiatives, but not one cent in education, not one cent in health care, not one cent in transportation, not one cent in fisheries, not one cent anywhere else. That is exactly what he did just that time.

He talks about all of these things in the perfect world – I heard the Leader of the Third Party, in regard to her speech the other day, talk about people. He talked about the white-hot economy and some of the things that are out there in regard to people needing a place to live and stay and that kind of stuff. That is the reason why we created this economy over the last eight, nine years, to give the people of Newfoundland and Labrador an opportunity to have jobs and have good paying jobs, to afford good housing, to afford things that they want. We are not all about – in regard to social programs, social programs are not the answer to the Province, absolutely not. A white-hot economy is what the answer is to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, giving them that opportunity.

I think back to the United States and a lot of people moved to the United States. The reason why they moved to the United States is because it is the land of opportunity. They see the absolute opportunity that is at their fingertips, if they want to grasp it. I encourage each and every Newfoundlander and Labradorian to grasp the opportunity, because it is here.

The hon. member gets up in his place in the House – and he was not here in 2003. I will give him that. He was not here in 2003 when we found, really, a bankrupt Province. That is what we found – absolutely. Then, he talks about small business and how we should invest in small business. Well, if you got tuned into our past Budgets, you will see that we made significant investments in small business, not only here in the City of St. John's but mainly in rural Newfoundland and Labrador to the tune of $2 billion to $185 million in Innovation, Business and Rural Development, I say to the hon. member.

He comes and he gets up in his place in the House with a simplistic, and I mean a simplistic, view of financing in the Province. As a matter of fact, a simplistic view that gets some families in grave trouble in regard to where they find themselves in debt and find themselves not able to make their payments. He comes with a simplistic view on all of it. That is what he does.

He talks about moving million and millions of dollars in regard to the provincial share on the purchase of gas over to municipalities. That is fine, dandy. That is great; that is absolutely great. We will move it over there tomorrow morning, but what do we do with education and what do we do with health care the next day? You have to have revenue streams. You have to replace them.

There is only one taxpayer in Newfoundland and Labrador, and that is the people who work here and that is the people who live here. You cannot just take one tax, move it to one area, and then expect the other programs to keep on running without any money. You do not understand the Budget. You do not have two clues. If you are going to get up in this House, and I do not mind saying it, and say the things you are saying that might resonate in some of the people who are out there, for whatever reason it might – you do not have any idea of how you budget of a huge corporation such as the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

You get up there and you talk about daycare. You talk about kindergarten. You talk about all those kinds of good things. Yes, absolutely, I would be the first one to agree that we would want all of those, too, but you have to be able to afford them.

As a matter of fact, I was in Labrador just a couple of weeks ago and the hon. member was there, and so was the Leader of the Third Party. There was another person in the room.

MR. SPEAKER: I remind the hon. minister to address the Chair.

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will. If you want to hear me, I will speak to you directly.

There was another person in the room, a prominent politician in Canada, but that politician used to be a Premier of a province. He was a Premier of a province when they had probably the strongest economy in Canada of that day. He came in as the Premier of the Province of Ontario as an NDP. He implemented foolhardily the policies and principles of the NDP in its entirety. What happened? They tanked the economy of Ontario and they are still digging their way out of it because of poor fiscal management. That is exactly what happened in Ontario.

I will say to the hon. Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi, you can shake your head. It is a fact, I say to the hon. member.

I hear this day and day, but this is starting to work. This is starting to resonate on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. You cannot promise everything nor can you promise your children everything. You cannot give it to them. You have to be responsible in regard to your plans and your strategies to bring your province forward. Bob Rae did not do that.

The other thing that hit me about Bob Rae when I was watching him was that he was back in politics, which I have known and you guys have known for a long time. He had every opportunity to come back with the federal ND Party of Canada – every opportunity to do so - but he did not. He came back, I say, as a Liberal. He could have picked us. That would have been better, but in the meantime he came back. My point is he did not come back as an NDP. Why didn't he come back? Because he found out the hard way that you cannot implement the principles and the policies of the NDP in its entirety or you will tank Canada, you will tank the Province; you will tank whatever you are doing.

You can compare apples to apples. It is like comparing Liberals in Quebec compared to Conservatives. You know yourself that a Liberal in Quebec is a Conservative in Canada, in the rest of the Province. You are not comparing apples to apples, I say to the Leader of the Third Party.

You take Dexter up there in Nova Scotia; I tell you, you should take a lesson from him. You do not even speak to him, I would not say. You would not have sense enough to speak to him, I say to the hon. member, because you would learn something from him.

I am telling you the reason why he did not come back as an NDP. It is exactly what I said. He did not come back because he found out the hard way. I am not saying here that the Official Opposition does not come forward with good ideas, absolutely they do, or anybody does. They do, absolutely, but you have to be able to afford them.

I hear especially the NDP talking about fiscal management. What do you equate to fiscal management? It is the ability to predict a deficit or predict a surplus. That is called fiscal management. That is what they equate it to. That is what they equate fiscal management to, being able to predict.

God love the people in New York in regard to the price of oil. I do not know how they can come that close, to be honest with you, with the strife in the world, the global economy, and changes that happen there. That is what they equate.

Go tell the hon. members. I will tell the hon. members what fiscal management is. It is how you spend the money you have and not overspend it, and how you pay down your deficit, which you guys have no idea of paying down a deficit. You stood up there a few minutes ago, you spent $7 billion. No money in education, no money in health care, no money in fisheries, no money for the services that are provided by Service Newfoundland and Labrador, nothing in education at all. You are going to give it all away and not replace it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Gas tax.

MR. O'BRIEN: As a matter of fact, in regard to that, I say to the hon. member that was my next point. I say to the hon. member it is all about tax because they do not – and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, the people in the City of St. John's have to wise up because that is exactly what it is all about in regard to providing the services. The services they will implement you have to pay for it.

Where is that going to come from? I will show you where it is going to come from. It is going to come from the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in $20 bills, I say to the hon. members. That is shameful, because we worked hard in the last ten years, to the point that we came from the highest personal income tax in Canada, now down to about the third in Canada, for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, putting more money in their pockets.

The hon. member talked about what we have done for individuals in Newfoundland and Labrador. Well, we put $530 million-odd back in the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in tax concessions over the last eight, ten years, I say to the hon. member. Wise up and do some reading. Get your facts before you start to speak.

We removed the tax on auto insurance and home insurance, I say to the hon. speaker. That is exactly what we did. We put money straight back in every Newfoundlander's pocket, I say to the hon. member.

Usually when you have a party they get up and they have a philosophy or whatever it may be, but it really disturbs me when the Leader of the Third Party, with no principle whatsoever, will tell you what you want to hear, not what you need to hear.

We have a Premier who is built on principle, a person who drafted, who penned the energy file and the energy strategy in Newfoundland and Labrador. Now it is all coming to fruition. She led that file right from the beginning, right to the point of getting a loan guarantee from the federal government, putting money straight into the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: That is called leadership, I say, Mr. Speaker, and we are so lucky to have it in Newfoundland and Labrador. Do you know something? We have put out six surpluses now over the last number of years. Yes, we have a deficit this year for three reasons, and three reasons only: the loss of the Atlantic Accord, $536 million. The price of oil is down due to the global economy and world strife. Also, production was down because of maintenance in regard to the platforms. We knew that, absolutely, but we have a plan. We came with that plan of sustainability over the next ten years which will see us in surplus within the next couple of years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Absolutely!

The hon. members, as well - and I heard one of my colleagues speak that they are ignoring what is in the Budget. They only want to talk about what is not in the Budget. They do not want to talk about the $7 billion that is being spent in Newfoundland and Labrador today and everyday forward.

That is exactly what Newfoundlanders want to talk about. They want to have a future, absolutely, and we have given it to them. Our Premier has given it to them, and it is a white hot economy, absolutely it is. Where did that come from? Did that just happen by chance? That came from sound planning, stimulating the big industries, stimulating the mining industries, stimulating the oil industry, stimulating those. That is the reason why people are buying cars, people are building houses, and people are investing in Newfoundland and Labrador. They are having the things that they deserve.

I was talking not that long ago with a travel agent. You know their business has never been better in Newfoundland and Labrador as it is today, because people are going down south. They are taking some time with their families, things that they deserve, absolutely deserve.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to deny that there are people out who need more. That is the reason why we have the Poverty Reduction Strategy, $130 million a year investing in those people and giving them an opportunity to avail of the white hot economy; giving them an opportunity to better themselves in this Province. Absolutely, it is $130 million a year. A strategy hailed by anybody across this land, across North America, as the best Poverty Reduction Strategy ever tabled in any province or any State in the United States. That is the reason why we do it.

My message here to the NDP especially, is that you cannot be everything to everybody. That just does not work, absolutely do not work. We are investing in people. We are investing in their health care. We invested $2.9 billion. That is up from $1.9 billion, I think.

MS SULLIVAN: Yes, $1.3 billion.

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, $1.3 billion up to $2.9 billion; $700 million was being spent in education only a few years ago. Now it is up to $1.3 billion. Just because we try to save on the operational side to make sure we did not violate what we have achieved in our classrooms and the teacher allocation and also the pupil-teacher ratio in this Province, they want to get up there and criticize it.

With a declining enrolment in pupils across this Province, a declining number of schools in this Province, what did we do? We took the operational side. We maximized that and put it right straight into the classrooms, right straight into the pupils of Newfoundland and Labrador, the moms and dads in this Province, and the future of this Province. That is exactly what we did.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: That is good fiscal management. That is what it is all about is fiscal management, making the hard decisions. I swear in this House – and God forbid I am gone – if the Third Party ever were to be the governing party in this Province, I am out of here. Absolutely, I make that promise in this House of Assembly today.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, you will be gone, absolutely. No doubt about that because your days are numbered.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. O'BRIEN: No, the one behind you, ‘Kirbus', I tell you that right now. I will be gone, I will guarantee you that.

I tell you the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are in for an awful shock. It is fine enough to be out there – and I ask the people of the Province to have a close eye in regard to the management of this Province, of where you are going. Your white-hot economy did not happen by chance. Then the other side of the coin is that they are up there criticizing in regard to some of the restraints that we had to implement in regard to this Budget. Each and every day they are up there, spend, spend, spend, spend, spend, and then they turn around and tax, tax, tax, tax, tax.

Do you know one of the other things that they put out there in regard to paying for their policies? Do you know what our economy in regard to our revenues streams is made up of? Did you know that only 17 per cent of our total revenue in this Province is made up of personal taxes? A very small amount, nearly 40 per cent is made up from oil revenues, which we negotiated super royalties and got more money.

What is the NDP going to do? I will tell you what they are going to do; they are going to tear them up. That is what they are going to do. They are going to tear them up and they are going to drive them out of this Province. That is exactly what they are going to do, drive them out of the Province.

I have heard it loud and clear from the oil companies. Then you might be sitting in St. John's wondering what a cold economy is all about.

AN HON. MEMBER: Then they will know.

MR. O'BRIEN: Then you will know, absolutely. Then you will know. When you cannot sell your house, you cannot do this and you cannot do that, and you have a lot of people out there who do not have jobs.

I often said, in Newfoundland and Labrador, to be honest with you, if you wanted a job you would find a job now. You would absolutely find it. I do not mind saying that, absolutely not. There are jobs out there for each and every Newfoundlander and Labradorian if they wanted it. Go for it, absolutely, and we will try our best to help you get it.

AN HON. MEMBER: We are helping.

MR. O'BRIEN: Absolutely, we do. Through all the programs, the suites of programs, we have within this government and created over the last eight or ten years.

Do you know in Municipal Affairs, just thinking to myself, under the leadership of our Premier, $230 million into municipal capital works projects across this Province over the last couple of years?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: That is just about 50 per cent of what we spent in five years. You listen to the hon. member talk about our support for municipalities, or lack of it. The man should have a look. He was here at Estimates. I answered every single question, absolutely every question.

As a matter of fact, there is lots of support out there from mayors of various sizes of municipalities in this Province in regard to this Budget. You should do a bit of research before you get up there and promise the world to municipalities and promise the world to all of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and then you cannot deliver on it, absolutely cannot, and you never will. You never will be able to deliver on it because you have to govern, everything changes, the economy changes, and you move it.

That is called fiscal management. That is what we are doing. That is what our Premier is doing, and that is called leadership.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to rise and speak to Budget 2013. Mr. Speaker, with all the changes that have come forward from this government on release of the Budget, sometimes I am still wondering if I am waiting for the Budget or not. My colleagues have done a wonderful job of addressing this Budget, from the opening remarks from our leader and from my colleagues throughout the debate. It certainly makes my job a little easier.

I would like to bring a different perspective, Mr. Speaker. This time I would like to speak a little bit about Justice. Certainly it was a very controversial Budget in that respect, to the point where the minister had said he would revisit it.

Justice delayed is justice denied, I think, is a quote we all live with. We all take it to be very true. Mr. Speaker, in many regions of our Province, we are actually living with that condition, where justice is actually delayed. So in fact, justice is actually denied.

Mr. Speaker, I have been in the courtroom on many occasions and I have heard judges say on many, many occasions that there are delays in sentencing, delays in trials, delays in appearances, all in the interest of the court's time. Mr. Speaker, I am sure sometimes that certain judges would like to tell the truth and that the reality of it is that all these delays are in the interest of the court's lack of resources, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, these concerns came down before Budget 2013 – this is before Budget 2013. We have seen many delays in sentencing, we have seen delays in court appearances, and we have seen delays in trials all in the interest of the court's time, Mr. Speaker. I find that very ironic that the interest of the court's time should say due to lack of resources. It should say due to lack of resources because that is the cold, hard reality, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to share a couple of actual cases that have gone on in the courtroom, Mr. Speaker. We had a guy who appeared in court on assault charges and he was released on his own recognizance. Twenty-three breaches of undertaking later – twenty-three breaches of undertaking – he was brought back before the judge. The judge told this accused person that it is obvious that breaches of undertaking or conditions on good behaviour were not working. So he sent the guy home and told him to come back the next day.

Do you know what happened, Mr. Speaker? He committed another assault and was brought back in front of the judge the same day. This is the delay and this is what they call in the interest of the court's time. Mr. Speaker, this is due to lack of resources, and this was before Budget 2013.

Mr. Speaker, we have had cases where there are thirty-plus breaches of undertaking, over thirty breaches of undertaking. Do you know what happens, Mr. Speaker, in the wake of new crimes committed by an individual? The breaches of undertaking and the initial charges are dropped in the interest of the court's time. They do not have the time.

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the Member for Topsail a few days ago. This person, I know, has been very involved in law enforcement and in the judicial system. He had some good advice and he shared it with us. I take this from Hansard, "If a crime has been committed, your job is to look after the person who has been victimized…". That is your job, to collect evidence and to protect people. That is your job, to prevent crime. Mr. Speaker, he shared that he was told not to forget that.

Mr. Speaker, I have spoken out many times on the victims of crime. When you have thirty breaches of undertakings and initial charges being dropped, this is protection of victims? I beg to differ; I really do. This is prior to Budget 2013; this is before the Budget came out.

I have listened to my hon. colleague the Member for St. Barbe talk about some of the cuts earlier in the debate. Mr. Speaker, he talks about the cuts to the prosecution office, legal aid office, sheriff's, and court circuits. Court circuits saved this government in their Budget a whopping $50,000 in the interest of the court's time – $50,000, Mr. Speaker, major savings at the expense of the victims. It is not acceptable. I never accepted it before the Budget; I certainly do not accept it after this Budget.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to go on a little further. I would like to talk about the victims of serious crimes in small rural areas. There are victims of assault who live in close proximity to the person who did the assault. They live beside the person who did the assault. The cases are delayed over and over and over in the interest of the court's time. When I hear the minister talk about a job to look after victims of crime, it makes me wonder because we see it every day.

Mr. Speaker, let's talk about the court circuits. In some areas they saved $600. Hats off to you; you saved $600. You are cutting back the circuits in Nain, and this was before the Budget. In the communities of Makkovik, Postville, and Rigolet, do you know what they are going to do now, Mr. Speaker? They are not going to go in there until enough crime has been committed. I take it that crime is low, but there is always a victim.

How long does that victim have to wait for protection? How many crimes have to be committed, Mr. Speaker, how many breaches of undertaking does a victim have to endure? Because it is not the person who is doing the crime who suffers; it is the victim of the crime.

When I hear the minister comment that it is their job to look after people who are victimized, I am at a loss for words. Because he was given good advice and what we are seeing in this Budget, Mr. Speaker, is that this government is not practicing that good advice; as a matter of fact, they are making it harder for victims of crime.

If you are going to delay court circuits, if you are going to cancel court circuits, that means a person has to live beside a criminal who committed an offence on that person, Mr. Speaker, until the next court circuit arrives. Do you know what the confusing thing is, Mr. Speaker? Those victims do not know when that date is. They do not know.

I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that there are cases where criminals are flown out to court or they do court through other mediums, telephones or video court processes. At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, they are not all being done.

I spoke about breaches of undertaking, Mr. Speaker, and I read up on it in the Criminal Code of Canada. I went through the section. It states that a breach of undertaking is a serious offence punishable by incarceration. Do you know what is happening in our court system, Mr. Speaker? Those charges of breach of undertaking, like I said, some of them are over thirty, and the initial charges are thrown out of court in the interest of the court's time. They are thrown out. Under the Criminal Code, they are defined as a serious offence punishable by jail, but they are thrown out.

It makes me wonder if the court circuits around this Province are going to save you $50,000 at the expense of the people who are, as the hon. member across the way said it, victimized by crime – your job is to protect people. Mr. Speaker, I will ask this government one simple question: Where is the protection? Where is the protection for individuals that are victimized by crime? Mr. Speaker, what I am stating here in the cases and the examples are the facts. I find it very hard to question facts, because they speak for themselves.

I would like to speak about the Budget and the impacts of Justice on the Budget. Mr. Speaker, cutbacks in the RCMP, cutbacks in court representatives, cutbacks in the sheriff's office, cutbacks in legal aid, and cutbacks in prosecution. Add that on to the problems that already exist and then you get a reality check.

Sometimes, as the critic for Aboriginal Affairs, I find myself wondering what the government knows about it. I have made our position on crime – I brought the facts out and the issues with crime, court, and the impacts on victims, quite clear in the past.

I fully realize that the judge has to take into account Aboriginal status and Aboriginal culture in sentencing, Mr. Speaker. There is a time and a place for that, yes, I understand; but the court is not obligated to take the abuse and the impact on Aboriginal victims, Mr. Speaker. That is not in there. These are the people – according to the Member for Topsail, it is our job to protect them. Are we failing miserably? The short answer, Mr. Speaker: Yes, we are.

Mr. Speaker, I have seen sentences that were handed out for cruelty to animals that were stiffer than those handed out to some of the criminals who have impacted victims that we are supposed to be there to protect. That puzzles me.

Mr. Speaker, we have had very serious crimes where twenty years was the maximum sentence. Twenty to life, two life sentences, Mr. Speaker, and seen individuals get out in three years and carry on a livelihood with the family who was impacted by the very same crime. I find that appalling.

I could be standing up here, Mr. Speaker, and speaking out for prisoner's rights, Aboriginal prisoners, but I am not, not today. I am speaking out for people that this government does not speak out for, the victims of crime. I have heard them preach it and I quoted it, but when you come out with what is going on in our justice system and what is going to continue with the Budget cuts, I do not see any of them practicing the fact that they are mandated to look after those who have been victimized by crime. That is their job.

Mr. Speaker, the provincial government is mandated to look after provincial justice in our Province. We do have federal justice alternatives as well. The problem I see now, Mr. Speaker, is that it is going to get worse. It is going to get a lot worse, Mr. Speaker, in the interest of the courts time. I have heard that so many times that I want to jump up and scream in the interest of the courts lack of resources, which is the reality of it all. I will continue to say that, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, before I sit down I would just like to say that I was glad to hear the Minister of Justice stand up and say they are going to review policy. I do remain hopeful, but I would like to see reviews done in other areas as well, because as I said earlier, we saw the Budget. We are starting to see so many twists and turns in this Budget, in terms of revision, that I find myself wondering when the Budget is going to actually come out.

With that, I will take my seat. I will be monitoring the review of the justice initiatives by this government. I am hopeful they will live up to the statement that was brought forward by the Member for Topsail – and words to live by, I might add. It is very good advice the minister gave, that we are there to protect the people from crime and that is our job.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Seeing as how we are sitting this evening, I think by agreement we will move now to take a recess and come back at 7:00 o'clock.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that this House now recess until 7:00 p.m.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Carried.

This House is in recess until 7:00 o'clock this evening.

PDF Version


April 30, 2013                    HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS                 Vol. XLVII No. 12A


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

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

I recognize the Member for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, it is nice to be here. I think this is our first night session. I think we have a few more coming. It is a great time in the evening to come and let the people out there listen to what us fellows have to say.

I hope everybody enjoyed their supper. I beat it to Flatrock as fast as I could go. My son had supper cooked and I had to have a look at my daughter's house because she just started painting today. It is only another couple of weeks and she will be moved out. So, I had a great supper and I hope you all did too.

First of all, it is a great pleasure to get up here to represent the district that I represent, the beautiful District of Cape St. Francis. Mr. Speaker, we get here on a regular basis and we listen to the Opposition. We give our spin and they give their spin on what is happening with the Budget. Today, yesterday, and the last couple of days we have listened to everyone in this House speak. Everybody has a different perspective, but we are all – on this side I think we are all on the one page and they are on the page they want to be on, on the other side.

I listened to the Member for the District of Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune today, and I thought she gave a fantastic speech. The gist of her speech was a little bit interesting for me because she talked about taxes and I guess, again, it is how you want to spin things. She talked about how she heard members of the opposite over there talk about how taxes have increased. The example she gave is a real good one. It is really easy to understand. Yes, taxes have increased but so have the wages, and that is the reason why taxes did increase.

She talked about corporate tax going down. It is an example of the economy that we have today, that if we do not have the money coming in, they do not pay the taxes. It is very simple what she had to say but it struck home. She did a fantastic job at that today.

Yesterday I listened to the Minister of Natural Resources, the former Finance Minister, and he gave a great speech, too. You learn a lot in here. He talked about how we are spending our money, why we spend our money like we do, and what is happening. Basically, what he talked about was the economy.

I know in this area, the Northeast Avalon which I travel on, I have not been outside the Avalon much except when I go to Millertown on my moose hunting trips or my trouting trip in the summertime. I look around the Northeast Avalon – I was downtown the other night and I was just amazed by what is happening down there when you look at the old Woolworth's building that is now up in the air, and there is a parking garage underneath and office space underneath. The TD building is getting revamped and new office space. All over the city there are things happening everywhere.

Our economy is booming. As much as you guys want to say over there that it is not booming, our economy is booming. People are doing better today than they ever did before.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: The economy is booming because of the investments that we made, and it is the investments that we are continuing to make.

I have a lot of friends of mine who work, some go to Alberta, but I have a lot of friends now who go out to Long Harbour and work. I have friends who go to Bull Arm and work. I am sure that a lot of the tradespeople in my area are looking at opportunities in Muskrat Falls. These are opportunities that this government made. This government did investments, and we did smart investments, and it is paying off. People are working. People are working like never before.

It is a little bit different with government, and government is a –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. K. PARSONS: No, we are not really. We create a lot of jobs ourselves but you know at times we have to watch our household. It is like at home, and it is something I always say. My father always used to say you cannot spend $500 if you are only making $400.

Our economy and what government has here is a lot of times – we are versatile on what is happening in the world markets. We have to look at what is happening with oil prices and what is happening with mineral prices. Sometimes there are things that will happen which will affect our bottom line, so we have to be very responsible. It a responsibility we have to our children and our grandchildren, making sure that things are run the way it is so that in the future we are not doing what we were doing years ago, just concentrating on paying the interest off on the debt.

Mr. Speaker, just look at what is happening in our economy. I know one of the members mentioned here today about wages. It is unbelievable when you think about it because everybody for years and years had to go somewhere else to make good money. I have to go somewhere else. I have to go to Ontario. I can go to Nova Scotia, go anywhere else, or go to BC. Do you know what, Mr. Speaker? Today our wages are the second highest in all of Canada. People are making money here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Those are the results of the investments we are making.

I look in my own district and I look at the housing starts that are down there. It is unbelievable to watch what is happening. I just told you about how I was down to my daughter's house tonight looking at the first coat of paint that went on. Young people are building houses all over the place, and they are building beautiful homes, because they are doing well.

There are lots of engineers. There are lots of social workers, what she is. There are lots of people working in the trades and today they can afford things because they are making the money here in Newfoundland and Labrador. It makes a big difference what is happening in this economy, and that is where they are spending the money, right here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I have a friend of mine who is a car salesman and works in at Avalon Ford. My friend from Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune bought a rig off him and the Member for Bellevue bought a rig off him also. Do you know what? He is telling me that sales were never like it before. He never saw it. The car sales are flying out the door. Cars are going out the door. That is because people have money to spend on this stuff. That is part of the economy. The economy is booming. It is booming and it is doing great. People who want work, there is lots of work there.

Mr. Speaker, I just drive down Stavanger Drive on a regular basis and have a look at what is going down there. We have new stores. Golf Town is coming down there now. I cannot wait because I hear they have good deals that are going to probably improve my golf game. I do not know. I doubt it very much.

Mr. Speaker, I look at what is happening in the city. There is a hotel going up down there. I think right now in the City of St. John's there are five new hotels going up. That is huge. People are investing money. There are people working. There are all kinds of tradespeople to build these hotels, huge. They need plumbers, pipefitters, and you name it; fellows doing steel and whatever is there. There are lots of people and there is lots of work available.

I think it was also said today that never before in our history is there so many people working, never before. The opportunities are there. Like I said, it is not because government is hiring people. It is because the economy is booming. People are needed out there. If you are building a house today, try to get an electrician or try to get a plumber. It is a job to do it because people are working. It is not like it was years ago when you could have had five or six fellows come down to bid to do the electrical work on your house. You almost have to beg someone to come down today. That is what is happening.

Mr. Speaker, this time our government, this Budget, and I have been here for five years and up until this year I think all of them were surpluses. We had great budgets where we had money to spend. Last year, there were a lot of things that affected us. There were a couple of offshore rigs that were in for refit. We lost money that came from the Atlantic Accord. So, our money was not what it was – now, according to Finance Ministers and people in the know, they say we will probably run another deficit next year and then following that we should be okay, in surpluses.

Mr. Speaker, do you know that in all of the provinces in Canada this year there is only one province that is going to run a surplus, and that is Saskatchewan. All the other provinces – mighty Alberta is going to run a $4 billion deficit this year. Why? Because of the volatility in oil prices.

Mr. Speaker, we are not in this alone. I think that our Finance Minister did a fantastic job in his Budget this year and I applaud him for it. I know he is a hard-working man and I know that he put his heart and soul into making sure that all of the figures and facts were in this Budget for us people.

When I look at the Budget, and there were cuts – I said this earlier when I was up on a motion I am sure that there is not anybody on this side of the House that was not affected by this Budget, that did not know somebody, did not have a friend, a relative or somebody who was laid off. One person laid off is too much. Sometimes, you have to make responsible decisions and they are hard decisions, but they are the right decisions to make because you have to think about what is happening today and you have to think about the future.

We have a Premier who has a plan and we have a Cabinet that has a plan and this government has a plan, we have to stay the course. We have to make sure that we stay the course in doing what we do. We have reduced taxes to the people. We reduced it so that people have $500 million, a half a billion dollars more than what they had in their pockets to spend. That is a part of this plan. Our plan as a government is to make sure that our people get the best bang for their buck and make sure that they have money to spend like I said on the new homes and the cars and everything else. We are putting money back in people's pockets while also being responsible with our debt.

When we came in here we had a $12 billion debt. I think the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune spoke about it. She said that twenty-three cents for every dollar that we had just went towards the interest on the debt. Now today, it is down to 10.9 cents, but we are still paying way too much because $800 million a year is going towards our debt, paying down our debt. That is still too high; we have to bring it down. We have work hard and we have to bring it down.

Now, the next couple of years we are going to have difficulty dropping it down a bit, but in the years after that we have to continue with our plan. We have to continue to reduce our debt. When we reduced that $800 million, Mr. Speaker, that means we are going to have money to invest in our health care, money to invest in our education, money to invest in social spending, but we have to be smart. We have to be smart about our money. We have to make sure that we are investing it well.

Mr. Speaker, I just look at what happened when we came here, when our government came here – and I do not blame the Liberal government; I do not blame anybody. Times were different. They did not have the money that we have today. We have money to invest. I do not blame anybody. I just take responsibility for what we are doing and what we have done since 2003 is we are making smart investments.

Since 2003, just to give you a little example – the money was not there; I agree with him – we had $78 million invest in construction and acquisition of new buildings. This year, we have $509 million. On maintenance – our schools and our hospital facilities in 2003 were falling down. When this government took over, the maintenance in the buildings, in schools, were unbelievable. There was mould; there was everything that you could imagine in schools. Hospital facilities were just falling apart.

In 2003, we only had $11 million to invest in that stuff. This year we are investing $117 million, just on maintenance in our buildings alone. That is huge investments because that is what we have to do; we have to maintain what we have because, if not, it will fall down around your ears.

Mr. Speaker, I listen to the Minister of Education get up here day after day and talk about what is happening in education. I am so proud of what this government is doing with education. I applaud the minister, too, because I think he is doing a fantastic job. He stated here today that we have thirty-nine major projects that we have done since we became government – thirty-nine, that is huge investments.

I do not know if a major investment that he is talking about is what is happening in a couple of the schools that I am going to mention now in my district. We invested $1 million in the school in Logy Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove called St. Francis of Assisi, a beautiful school. I think they have about 270 children in the school. The parents are so happy with the facility down there and they are happy with the teaching. They realize their kids are getting the best technologies and everything is there.

We invested in that school. That school was an old school and we invested $1 million in it. We put on a new roof, siding, we put new windows in it, and we did major upgrades to the inside of it. To walk in that school now makes me proud. It makes me proud to be part of this government.

I spoke the other day about a teacher twenty-eight years teaching and she was one of the teachers there at the school that told me to thank our government for the job they are doing, thank our government for the facilities that she has to teach her children. She called them her children.

Mr. Speaker, in my district where it is growing so fast, I look at a school like Cape St. Francis, when it was designed in the early 1980s, later built in the 1990s I think, it was designed for a declining population. Now, I do not know how that came up because the place is absolutely booming.

Right now, there are 300 children in the school. This year we had to put a new module on the school. It is not a portable classroom; it is a module and it is absolutely beautiful. It has its own air conditioning system; it is larger than the regular classrooms. The school, the parents, and the children are tickled to death with it, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Education talked about the nine schools that we just built and we built one in Torbay, Holy Trinity Elementary. Granted, it is full now, but every time I walk in that school I am proud of this government. I am proud of the investment that we made. Do you know what? It is a state-of-the-art school, the children have the best technology, there are whiteboards in every classroom – I think that is what they are called, whiteboards.

AN HON. MEMBER: SMART Boards.

MR. K. PARSONS: SMART Boards.

The technology is there, technology like we never had before, laptops in all of the labs. These are investments that we are making to make sure our children have the best possible technology to make everything available to them. That is what this government is all about.

Like I said, this year he talked about ten new schools. Again, there is another one in my district which I am very proud of. We are looking at building a new school and it is going to be from Grades 5 to 7. What that is going to do is it is going to help three schools. Like I said, Cape St. Francis is at capacity, and Holy Trinity is at capacity, so both of those schools are going to go K to 4. The new school then will be Grades 5 to 7. It will take Grade 7's out of the high school and put them in this school and it will take care of the capacity levels we have in high school.

I really believe that is going to answer the education needs in my district. I thank the Minister of Education for listening to the needs of the people in my district.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, other things that you look at what we are doing for education – again, we are so proud of the things we are doing like the classroom size, like you mentioned, free schoolbooks. Never before have we seen the investments that we are doing in our children.

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to get through all of what I have to say because I talk too much probably, so I am going to get rid of a couple of sheets. I want to talk about what we are doing for our communities. I am going to talk about Municipal Affairs a little bit here now and I want to thank the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I think he was up here today; he was pretty hot when he was up, I tell you.

He mentioned that he thinks he is after being to every municipality in this Province. I know every time that one of the municipal leaders, towns, or anyone in my district has asked him for a meeting, can I meet with the minister, can we meet with the minister – all it is, is a phone call and he is there for us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: I really have to thank him for the job that he is doing.

Mr. Speaker, we are investing this year $230 million in municipal infrastructure around the Province. Our towns are growing and the infrastructure over the years has fallen to the side, but we are making investments in our communities, and that is where we have to invest. We have to invest in our towns; it is very important.

We have municipal leaders, who I know in my district most of them are volunteers. They are great volunteers. They go in and make decisions. I was on council myself. Sometimes you have to make awfully hard decisions as a municipal leader.

The very first decision I had to make was against one of my buddies. Mr. Speaker, I am telling you right now, that is hard. It is hard to get up and make a decision that you know your friends and people in the community – but these people volunteer all the time. I am very proud of the investments that we are doing for these towns because we are showing that we support them. That is huge.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, this year too, the minister came up with a new formula for Municipal Operating Grants. I believe there is no town in this Province that is going to receive less money than they received last year. No town is going to receive less money than what they have had. Like I said earlier, the Minister of Municipal Affairs understands the towns.

In my district alone, I am just going to give you ballpark figures now, I think they are right. A town like Bauline is going to receive $17,000 more; a town like Flatrock will receive $36,000 more; a town like Logy Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove is going to receive $56,000 more; a town like Pouch Cove is going to receive $70,000 more; a town like Torbay is going to receive $85,000 more.

Mr. Speaker, those are investments that help those towns do things they need to do to make it better for the residents in their towns. We are supporting the towns in this Province. I applaud the job that the Minister of Municipal Affairs is doing here.

Mr. Speaker, the other day the Member for The Straits – White Bay North had his private member's thing. I was hoping to get up and speak a little bit. I was next on the list but they called an amendment and I did not get a chance to speak. We were talking about transportation, and what is happening with transportation.

On the Northeast Avalon, Mr. Speaker, we are making huge investments. I listened to all the members get up and I know there are huge investments made in every district in this Province. We have improved the road network like you would not believe.

In the Northeast Avalon, Mr. Speaker, I have to thank this government for what they have done with the Torbay Bypass Road. It is unbelievable the change it has made on people's lives getting back and forth to work. It is unbelievable what it has done to the communities, for growth in the communities. We have communities down there with 20 per cent growth. The least amount of growth in any of the communities in my district right now in the last four years is 15 per cent.

The Torbay Bypass Road was an investment that this government made. It is a $23 million road. The federal government threw in I think it was $5 million or $6 million and we threw in the rest. Mr. Speaker, that was a huge investment. We had 17,000 cars a day go across the school zone in Torbay where the children were getting dropped off to school. Fifty per cent of that is gone now.

Our roads are a lot safer down there. People can commute back and forth to work. If there was an accident or it was slippery on Piperstock Hill, people were late getting to work. It is unbelievable. The people in the area, when I talk to them, they really appreciate it. I appreciate the investment that this government has made.

Mr. Speaker, I only have a few seconds left. I just want to end by saying we had some hard decisions to make and these decisions were the right decisions for this Province. Like I said, I applaud our Premier for making hard and tough decisions. I think the Minister of Finance did a great job in bringing down our Budget. I think this is a good Budget at the time for our people, and we will be in good shape in the future.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I recognize the Member for The Straits – White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is my second opportunity to speak to the Budget. I will put on record that I certainly have no confidence in Budget 2013.

Earlier today, to be given an economics lecture from the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune, which targeted the New Democratic Party with twists and misinformation, it really detracted from this government's bad news Budget. There are a lot of real issues that we need to debate and that need to take focus.

One thing I would like to inform the member opposite, Mr. Speaker, is that when New Democratic Parties form government, when they are in power –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: – they produce balanced budgets more than any other governing party on a percentage basis. That is more than the Conservatives or the Liberals, and that is a fact.

People are really tired of government's continuous rhetoric and spin, and I said that in the Interim Supply speech. We really need to look at that. One thing that people are really tired about with this government is the late Friday evening news releases selling the bad news as good.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: I remember we were in this House debating the Muskrat Falls bills and the Minister of Fisheries decides to call a press conference late at night on December 21, Friday evening, and announced the OCI deal. That was a massive giveaway of our public resources, and it was a precedent-setting measure.

On another Friday news release in the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture they announced their seafood year in review. It was really filled with bad news but sold as good. There were drops in the value and volume of all levels of product. Even including the aquaculture industry, that has been touted.

The Adult Dental Program, the changes and caps to that –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: – leaving people who need it getting one denture at a time. Then again, there was another one, Mr. Speaker –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for The Straits – White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Then there was another case in the Department of Advanced Education and Skills when they were making cuts to the EAS, the employment service offices. This led to 200-plus jobs and dozens of offices closing across the Province; yet, $14 million was going to be reinvested and somehow less staff and less regionally available to people is going to provide a better overall service. That is quite questionable. I want to say that people are really tired of that.

Mr. Speaker, I ran a business. I have a commerce degree and I served as an investor and a lender for community business and provided that advice on economic development. As well, I served as a compliance auditor and as a credit controller for an international marine and engineering consultancy in Europe. With that, we were dealing with large sums of money that we were pulling in, and the importance of understanding collecting the revenues and looking at revenue and cash flow management, how important that really is. This budget, Mr. Speaker, is really bankrupt of ideas. It is bankrupt on showing how we are going to collect new revenue streams.

The 10-Year Sustainability Plan lacks detail on saying how it is going to have something innovative that is going to provide new revenue. All we see really is government going on the volatility roller coaster ride of oil. We saw that in the Budget last year with the drastic drop in oil prices, what it was estimated at. We lost hundreds of millions of dollars.

The mining industry with the commodity market lost over $100 million to the Treasury. It is quite significant. When we are rolling the dice on these megaprojects and on oil, it creates a high level of uncertainty as to where we are going. That was one of my first reactions.

If you are going to build an economy and a budget it really needs to built from the grassroots, from the community and it has to be inclusive and have ideas to really increase your revenue streams. Just weeks before the Budget, the Minister of Finance went out and did pre-Budget consultations. It was a very narrow timeline and the ability to really put some of these ideas and suggestions from the community into play.

I really hope that next year we will see the pre-Budget consultations happen earlier and be on a more regular basis. Maybe there will be a role for the Office of Public Engagement to play, because we have not really seen a whole lot as to what they are doing to date. It really needs to be inclusive. We saw St. Anthony, the largest administrative centre on the Great Northern Peninsula, left out of consultation. There is a way to allow these people to be involved.

The member opposite had talked about looking at how we have reduced interest payments. Well, you have also increased revenues and you still have a high level of debt that you are servicing. Last year the debt was at – that the interest payment was $800 million. This year it is $848 million. So even with no new borrowing, you are paying more. That is almost $50 million that cannot be spent into new programs and services.

Now, looking at the Budget and seeing it really lacks a commitment to our renewable resource industries, especially in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and we are not seeing the vision of any type of plan. There is no focus on the fishery and how we grow those revenues, that before this government came to power was $1 billion in export revenues coming from the fishery. Now it is at $740 million. That is a $260 million drop.

We are not seeing where we can look at enlarging our Treasury. I have said time and time again in this House that there are opportunities of looking at things like biomass. It is really a legitimate energy alternative and the world is embracing it, but government is not willing to be innovative. I do not know why they are not moving on some of these initiatives.

We have valued resources that this government would just rather throw away, dump at sea versus create any economic value. Thousands of pounds of shrimp shells are dumped at sea, they are, versus being used as nutriceuticals, fertilizers, medicinal products, and the chitin from it. There should be investment in research and development.

We look at crab. The crab shell has high-value proteins. We look at taking and extracting chitin and things like that from it. We may be able to realize a higher value then to the harvester, to the processor, and to all involved in the industry, rather than having these annual bidder disputes.

There is a role for government to look at: Do we use this in a form that can create some value? If we do the research and development, then we can use the Business Attraction Fund to go out and attract somebody and cut red tape to make sure that these types of things can be put into action. I do not believe necessarily that it is government's role to be involved in establishing the business side of doing this. It can be facilitated through the Department of Innovation, Business and Rural Development in partnership with Fisheries and Aquaculture.

Rather than dumping the shrimp shells, we could be using anaerobic digestion and powering greenhouses for nurseries and for helping out with food security. The dump sites, how we are going from 2020 and trying to create these regional dump sites. There is an ability to use the waste, the actual compost there to create energy and to do a similar type of thing on a small scale. These are where some types of investments need to be made.

The Minister of Natural Resources is really bankrupting the Treasury when it comes to collecting revenues from our forestry resources. Instead, what we see from government when it tries to do business deals or expropriations, we see that we amass hundreds of millions of dollars worth of liabilities and environmental liabilities. That comes at a great cost and depletes the Treasury.

We have a real ability to be looking at things like biomass and wood pellets. One of the things that government had invested in was the Wood Pellet Appliance Rebate Program. I have releases from it here from February 2011, April 2010, October 2009, and February 2009.

The PC Blue Book promised to expand and enhance this plan, but they did not. They cut it. When the rest of the world is adapting biomass and using it as energy, and taking what would be low value in our forest industry, they are creating a high value and passing that on to sawmill operators, passing that on to harvesters and really creating value in the economy.

Government made an investment in a pellet plant in terms of lending in Roddickton. The Newfoundland Forest Sector Strategy Final Report was submitted to the Department of Natural Resources back in November of 2008. This report was done by Halifax Global.

The Minister of IBRD and Natural Resources should have paid a little more attention to what was stated here. It says, "We must add a cautionary note here, however. While there may well be potential to manufacture wood pellets profitably in Newfoundland, a pellet plant will need to be of sufficient scale to be economically viable and, such a plant must almost certainly be located adjacent to a year-round, bulk shipping port facility."

Where is the plant? Not near a year-round bulk shipping port facility. What does it need? It needs that. Well, it may not actually need that year-round bulk shipping facility if it took the approach of creating its own demand of converting public buildings into pellets.

I said many times in this House, and questioned the minister on why we are not converting public buildings to biomass in Newfoundland and Labrador. Maybe then this government would not have to bring down such an austerity budget and actually cut –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MITCHELMORE: Okay, well let's look. On April 27, in the Morning Sentinel – Do you know what? We have missed the boat on many opportunities. The Minister of Fisheries knows it when it comes to certifying lobster. Maine has certified their lobster as eco-friendly. It is going to open up all kinds of opportunities in the European market. We are missing that boat and we are missing it when it comes to converting public buildings.

The Morning Sentinel on April 27 says, "…an $11.4 million federal effort to boost Maine's wood pellet industry, early returns seem to indicate that the investment was a sound one." The investment was a sound one, investing in the wood pellet industry, but we do not see that here in A Sound Plan, A Secure Future in this Budget.

Let's look at what they are doing here. They put wood pellet boilers in schools. They are going to "…drive Maine toward a stronger sustainable forestry economy and reduced dependence on foreign oil…" because it is going to save them money.

The Department of Forestry is providing funds to convert "…24 biomass conversion projects to fruition in schools, hospitals and public buildings across the state." We heard the Minister of Education talk about all the new schools that are being built, but none of them are being built with pellet boilers to be heated. That is much more cost effective than electricity.

We know about all of the health facilities that are being built. There is one being built in my district, The Strait of Belle Isle Health Centre. We talk about the Corner Brook hospital that is being built. All of these could be heated using biomass.

In the last project that they are doing is in municipal buildings. The Minister of Municipal Affairs in looking at municipal buildings, they are running them on pellets as well. It is really stimulating the creation of biomass boilers in the States and it is something that the College of the North Atlantic was seeking to do: to create a demonstration (inaudible) –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: – to add that skill set and labour where we could be building pellet boilers here.

We could be doing the same thing with wind mills and adding that capacity. Reports that I have here on my desk are saying that Labrador alone could have 1,500 megawatts of wind power, done by energy consultants and presented to the Department of Natural Resources. Yet it seems that we can only have 80 megawatts of wind power. I really do not feel that information is accurate.

Anyway, they hired an economist here, Bill Strauss, to do an audit on the projects and they said there is a real good payoff to the bottom line. It is giving the forest industry a boost. It has a huge multiplier effect for the public and the obvious one is to the supply chain.

We hear the Minister of Natural Resources and the Parliamentary Secretary get up and talk about how we need to develop this supply chain. Well, you can do it with pellets. It is creating jobs for people who are harvesting and transporting the wood. The construction phase with these twenty-four projects is going to create 335 full-time jobs, created and retained. That is nearly three times after Muskrat Falls gets built just in twenty-four projects. It is quite significant.

Do you know what this is going to be doing? This is going to be lowering the energy costs for operation. We have been seeing the administration costs go up for the school boards, the heating costs for schools, and the heating costs for all of these old government buildings. The cost of conversion simply pays for itself within two to four years. What this is doing is creating small-scale manufacturing. It is really stimulating the market value for low-value wood.

When we looked at an analysis, which was done as well for the department, it said that a third of all the forests that are cut down is potential for the biomass, the rest for pulpwood, and the other for sawlogs. It is a third split. It is quite significant.

The view by the people in the industry say that these low-value markets, as they rise, there is going to be a more sustainable fuel source they could tap for energy. They will be better off, the forest owners, woods workers, and all the foresters of Maine. It seems like the US is getting this right, but we are simply getting it wrong.

There is huge potential for pellet industry in Newfoundland and Labrador. If we do the analysis of what it costs, natural gas ranks what? Yet that is not affordable apparently here in Newfoundland and Labrador, but that costs about an average of $10 a gigajoule and in wood pellets at $19.29, at a cost of $270 a ton. Electricity averages $34 a gigajoule, quite high, and then heating oil is even higher at over $40 a gigajoule, so quite significant.

We are not doing these things to increase revenue streams – cut operating costs so that we are cutting government waste when it comes to operation because we all know if we build a big house and we have a certain amount of income and we have to spend $5 or $1,000 a month heating it that is money that cannot really be put back into the economy and recirculated at the local restaurant or buying cars and other things like that.

It is the same way with government. We cannot have really adequate programs and services if we do not look at cutting the operational costs like reducing heating costs in all of these public buildings and facilities. We could have had additional people working and a better delivery of programs and services if we looked at alternative measures to enhance revenue in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Forestry is one option, the fishery is another, there are so many other sectors, but this government keeps getting it wrong. Looking forward, we need to see new ideas because there is so much especially in the rural economy.

The Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune got up and talked about reducing taxes, but the thing that is not mentioned is that this government had so many hidden fees that they put forward when it comes to looking at aquaculture. The licences are going up, the buying licences are going up, the fish processing licences are going up, and forester licences are going up. These are all a direct attack on the business owners and then that gets passed on to consumers. It is a way where people are getting taxed and it is taking more money out of people's pockets.

We understand that we need to grow revenues in Newfoundland and Labrador and this government is certainly not doing that. Bankrupt of ideas, not willing to be innovative –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: – willing to continue with corporate giveaways, and not adding value or getting best value for public money.

We see these strategic plans come forward and be abandoned, Air Access Strategy, the Northern Strategic Plan now becomes a living document, and we see all sorts of things that have been promised –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: – but we do not really know if we are getting the best value for public money.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to spend a few minutes discussing the Budget. I am going to choose a couple of different areas tonight because there is a lot to cover, but I want to start my comments, Mr. Speaker, with a reference to how the Budget process unfolds.

It begins in the fall – it was ongoing all year, this year, with the Core Mandate Review – and this year, it was a tough Budget year. We had ministers who were tasked to find efficiencies in their departments and they had to come forward with ways to save money, not only to save money, Mr. Speaker, but to ensure that we could maintain the same level of service. That is what we went through.

It is a grueling process that, I can tell you, at times tempers flared because the ministers on this side of the House believe in what they are doing; the ministers and the members, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: We had a committee in place and what we put the Minister of Health through, I would suggest, was very tough in terms of a department where everyone wants so much and health care is so important to people.

Then we had the Minister of Education come in, and the questions he has been asked in the House are indicative of the kinds of questions that we asked him; but he was firm, as was the Premier, in their resolve to protect health care and to protect education.

As the next number of weeks goes on, we will hear more from the ministers as to the good things that are in the Budget because there are a lot of good things in the Budget, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: The Budget has resulted in a number of criticisms and the first one that I will deal with today is we have been criticized of mismanaging the money. Well if rebuilding the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and resulting in some of the achievements that we have made over the last number of years is mismanaging, I would say we have done a good job at managing the mismanagement which has resulted in good management, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Let's talk about mismanagement. The health care budget in 2000 was $1.2 billion. In 2012, it was $2.9 billion. At that point, it was 38.7 per cent of provincial spending; 142 per cent growth in one area of the Budget along, Mr. Speaker.

Education grew by 71 per cent; $700 million spent in 2000, up to $1.2 billion in 2012, and now I think $1.3 billion this year; 11 per cent of the spending.

Between education and health, almost half of the money coming into our government goes to those two key areas, Mr. Speaker.

Part of the difficulty, and I do not say this in a judgemental way, it is just the way it is when you govern in a Province as diverse as ours, as large as ours, with a relatively small population spread out, that people want these vital services near them. They want to have their hospitals near; they want to have their schools near. Look what happens when the school boards try to close down a school, and we have seen a number before Christmas. People demand the services be kept open.

What we have to do as a government is respond to the requests of the people, respond to their needs, but in a responsible way. One statistic, Mr. Speaker, that puts it in perspective, is that in our Province I think we have between fifteen to twenty-two hospitals and health care centres. We then have more than 100 types of different clinics. We have more than twenty long-term care facilities. In the City of Hamilton, a city with the population of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, there are three hospitals.

Managing this Province is tough. We have had some good times, Mr. Speaker, but we had a lot of years of bad times, especially the fourteen years preceding us coming into government. We have had to rebuild the Province. Is that mismanaging the economy when you build schools, you build hospitals?

I am hoping over the next number of weeks, or if we are here until the end of June, or whenever we are here, that member after member will get up and talk about the schools built in their districts. They will get up and talk about the hospitals. It is too bad that the former Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair is not here; she can stand up and tell us about the schools that we have built in her district. We will hear from the Minister of Labrador Affairs on the hundreds of millions of dollars that we have spent building the Trans-Labrador Highway. What have we done with the money? We have spent it to rebuild.

In 2003-2004, there was $154 million invested in infrastructure. In 2012-2013, there is $744 million, an increase of 383 per cent, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: From 2003-2004, we, at the time, spent $78 million on construction or acquisition of new buildings, roads and equipment up to $509 million in 2012-2013. Maintenance has gone from $11 million in 2003-2004 to $177 million in 2012-2013. Municipal infrastructure has grown from $37 million in 2003-2004 to $102 million in 2012-2013. Since 2003-2004, there has been $5.1 billion invested in infrastructure, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Since 2003-2004, we have spent $968 million on municipal infrastructure and $195 million on MOGs. These are the kinds of numbers, Mr. Speaker, that speak for themselves. So what are we guilty of as a government? It is doing the best we can for the people of this Province to ensure that they have the facilities nearby and the services they deserve? That is what we have done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: We have taken it further, though. We have reduced the debt by 28 per cent, from $11.9 billion in 2004-2005 to $8.6 billion in 2012-2013. Just listen to this statistic: In 2003-2004, twenty-three cents of every dollar that came in to government was used for debt servicing; one-quarter of the money coming into our government was used to pay debt. In 2012-2013, it is down to 10.9 cents, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: The annual cost of debt servicing is $800 million a year. So, why do we take debt so seriously? Why are we trying to ensure a return to a balanced budget and to reduce debt over a ten-year period? Debt costs money, money that can be used to pave roads, to build hospitals, to build rinks, to build schools, Mr. Speaker, for all of the people of this Province.

We have reduced taxes by a half billion dollars since 2007, Mr. Speaker, and those taxes have gone into the Low Income Seniors' Benefit, for example, $21 million. We have lifted the RST on insurance at $75 million, the HST on the Residential Energy Rebate of $38 million. We have reduced personal income taxes by $403 million, thereby sheltering, as I talked about last week, a great many of the lower income people in our Province from paying taxes, or paying as little taxes as possible.

So that is what we have done with money, Mr. Speaker. That is the financial mismanagement that we hear about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: We have rebuilt the Province. Unfortunately, we got into a situation where we had to look at creating efficiencies and ensuring that we have the right people doing the right jobs in government.

In 1990s in this Province, Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that government was a main employer. Today, we still employ, in one form or another, 45,000 people. I think there are approximately 238,000 people employed in our Province. We have Eastern Health alone with 13,000 employees. We have approximately 6,000 nurses, 6,000 teachers; we have the other health authorities. So then we have the core government service with 8,900 people in the sixteen departments and agencies.

When we engaged in our review – because, quite frankly, the way things were done twenty years ago is not the way that they need to be done today, with the use of computers and other types of electronic equipment. The review encompassed all aspects of the department. The ministers each did it themselves. They went through their departments with their officials, came through the Budget process, and there were no decisions lightly made.

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that any time a minister has to give something up, he or she will not necessarily do it willingly because they believe in their programs. They believe that what they are doing is right. The example I am going to use, Mr. Speaker – we are going to deal with the tourism marketing. My good friend and colleague, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, is not here, but we felt this year with the choices we had to make we had to reduce the marketing budget from $15 million to $11 million.

Four million dollars was taken away from that budget, Mr. Speaker. I can tell you the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation was not very happy with us. Particularly, with me because the way we looked at it – and the Premier saved the day for him. I do not even know if he knows that, but I was looking at, as the Minister of Finance: How can we get more? Do we layoff people or do we perhaps not run some of these ads for a year?

We were ready to go deeper but the Premier came in and said no, these ads are important to tourism in this Province and we can withstand a year or two of lower payment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, I can tell you, it was not a nice picture because the Minister of Tourism believes strongly in those ads and how they increase the tourism in our Province to a billion dollar industry. He fought hard to keep those and he is still fighting to this day over them, Mr. Speaker. It is hard to have a conversation without him reminding us of what we did. That goes for every minister in government.

We then got into a situation: Where are we today? This is where we are today – I will get to GDP in a second, but just listen to this. These statistics are absolutely startling. Personal income in Newfoundland and Labrador for a five-year period between 2007 and 2012 grew by 6.3 per cent. The rest of Canada was 3.1 per cent – double the rest of Canada in personal income.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Labour income grew by 7.6 per cent. The rest of Canada, 3.2 per cent – more than double the rest of Canada in labour income, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Our employment grew by 1.3 per cent. The rest of Canada grew by 0.8 per cent, the Maritimes by 0.1 per cent. Again, almost double the rest of Canada, Mr. Speaker.

Retail sales in our Province in the five-year period from 2007-2012 grew by 4.7 per cent, the rest of Canada by 2.5 per cent. Again, almost double the rest of the country, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: This is a statistic that is most startling of all. Capital investment in this Province grew by 18.9 per cent over a five-year period compared to 3.6 per cent in the rest of Canada, and 0.1 per cent in the Maritimes. I cannot even calculate –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: I will need the minister's calculator to figure that one out, Mr. Speaker. That is the kind of growth that we are seeing in this Province.

As I outlined the other day, Mr. Speaker, we have lowered taxes by a half billion dollars. We have the most competitive tax regime in Atlantic Canada. We have the lowest tuition fees in the country, while tripling the budget of Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador. We are second in the country in weekly earnings, only behind Alberta. Who would have ever thought that could happen a few short years ago? There are more people working now than ever in our history, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Our unemployment rates have declined by 3.9 percentage points, the lowest in thirty-seven years, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: These are the kinds of things that are happening in this Province. Look at Vale Inco, look at Hebron, and look at Muskrat Falls. The biggest dilemma we have is finding enough workers.

Who in this House of Assembly, five or six years ago, who in the public of Newfoundland and Labrador five or six years ago would have thought we would need workers? We do not have enough workers. Whoever saw that day coming? It did not come by accident, Mr. Speaker. It came because, as a government, we built the economy.

We built infrastructure, which is important to the economy. We paved roads, Mr. Speaker. We built schools, we built hospitals, and we have built towns. What we have is a situation where there is somewhat of a paradox or a dichotomy in that we have a booming economy but government revenues are down. That is not that complicated.

Being a have Province is a source of pride. It means we can pay our own way, but it means we have less money. It means we do not get equalization. Back in the early 2000s, more than 30 per cent of the money that came to government coffers came from equalization.

We have reduced taxes by a half billion. We have increased wages by more than $500 million annually, Mr. Speaker. That is what we have done with the money.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: So, we find ourselves in a situation where we had to take steps. Last year our oil production was down, and I will talk about that a little later because it is quite an interesting chart I have in terms of oil production.

The Leader of the NDP the other day talked about GDP. She asked me a question about GDP and how our GDP forecast was lower. We had predicted a decline of 0.1 per cent for 2012, and it appears the decline is 5 per cent. This is based on two very simple facts. The assumption of oil production, oil production went down. We had our rigs off-site.

Then there was an assumption of iron ore production. What we are seeing in the iron ore industry, and again it is quite fascinating, but as the Chinese economy goes, so does the demand for iron ore. We have gone from $160 a ton to $80 a ton.

Over the last five years, our GDP fluctuates. There is the real nominal GDP and I am not going to get into that. We had between 2008 and 2012 an average increase of 1.5 per cent a year in our GDP, greater than Canada's 1.2 per cent. So our GDP has increased, but it is in an economy like ours, a notoriously unreliable statistic because of the ups and downs with exports, Mr. Speaker, of iron ore and oil.

In 2013, our GDP is expected to increase by 6.8 per cent. In one year we have a decline of 4.8 per cent. We are going to increase by 6.8 per cent; 6.8 per cent is equivalent to what is happening in China. The Chinese economy is estimated this year, it could be 7 per cent or it could be 7.5 per cent.

What we have to look at are the kinds of other economic indicators that I have talked about here. We have to look at retail sales. We have to look at car sales. We have to look at disposable income. We have to look at labour income and capital investment. What we have is a situation where the economy is very good, Mr. Speaker.

Now, I am hoping I will get a couple more opportunities, but what have we done in this year's Budget? We knew, Mr. Speaker. I want to say this and I have said it before, but I think it is important to realize how good a job the Premier has done. She has said publicly that we do not govern by polls. The Premier knew what these polls were coming into this Budget cycle. What was the easiest thing to do? The Premier could have said: Let's not rock the boat; let's leave it to someone else to solve the problem. It will be someone else's problem. That was the easiest thing to do.

What did we do? What did the Premier do? She said: No, I cannot take that approach for the future generations of Newfoundland and Labrador. The Premier is looking to the future, as our government has done since taking office. She chose the tougher and harder route, Mr. Speaker, and I have nothing but admiration for her in doing that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: The Premier decided, Mr. Speaker – and make no mistake in a government it is somewhat like a hockey team or any kind of team, there can only be one boss. That boss is the Premier. Now, Mr. Speaker, I might think that I want to be on the power play but I might have to kill penalties. If I have to kill penalties, that is what I have to do. It has to be a team effort, but it is the Premier who leads the way.

I am going to give you now a couple of good things that we have done in this year's Budget. We have invested $2.9 billion in health care in Budget 2013 –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: – and hopefully you will hear more about that; $1.3 billion to meet the educational needs of children and youth in our Province –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: – $230 million to help rebuild municipal facilities, Mr. Speaker –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: – to deliver new regional projects, and continue the fight against poverty. We have new Municipal Operating Grants; over $200 million in strategic investments to help spur economic growth; and over $866 million in infrastructure investments.

Do you know something, Mr. Speaker? The NDP will often stand up and say: You do not care about the poor. You do not care about the uneducated. You do not care about those who are not as well off as yourself. Well, Mr. Speaker, 60 per cent of our Budget is spent in the social sector in this Province. That is what we have done with our money.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I recognize the hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

It was only a few short weeks ago that we all sat and saw the Budget for the first time. I remember looking through it in our lock-up and saying: Oh, my God, there is $10 million cut to Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. Then I looked at the Justice budget and I thought again: Oh, my God, what will this mean? What will these deep cuts to the Justice budget mean for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador? I am happy, Mr. Speaker, to stand again and to talk about this Budget.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Monday, April 15, the Premier said – she actually said this and I mentioned this in the House the other day. She said: We cannot continue to have waste, spending, extravagance, and poor management. This is what the Premier said, so she must have been referring to the reign of this government, who has been at the helm, who has had the reign of power for the past ten years, and who have been managing the resources that belong to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador in the time in our history as a Province of the most lucrative years, of the most profitable years.

She said: We cannot continue to have waste, spending, extravagance, and poor management. Mr. Speaker, she can only have been talking about what her government has done in the past ten years because this government knows they have been stewards of the most profitable, prosperous years in our history. So who is she looking to blame?

This government has been the only one at the helm. For ten years they have been running the show during the highest revenues this Province has ever experienced. Yes, they have done some good things and they have done some good spending –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS ROGERS: – but, Mr. Speaker, there has been no sustainable plan. They are talking about a ten-year plan for sustainability now, but that is ten years after they had the most prosperous years in the history of this Province. For ten years, they have been doing this project, they have been doing that project, and they have been starting this and starting that, but there has been no plan. There has been no identifiable economic policy and no sustainability plan.

Now, even in their cuts, Mr. Speaker, there is no plan because some of the cuts we have seen have affected so deeply and so negatively a lot of the people of this Province. In the ten years they have given much, but by this Budget they have taken so much away. This is not a Budget of hope; this is not a Budget of prosperity. They call themselves Progressive Conservatives; this is a regressive Budget. Mr. Speaker, it is a regressive Budget; it is regressive Conservatives.

This has been a pawn job. These cuts were done in panic because we see the roll out; we see the effects on people's lives. I would like to talk about this. They said that these cuts were based on core mandate reviews. We have been asking for the core mandate reviews. We have been asking for the plan on which these cuts were based. We have not seen anything yet. Do you know what, Mr. Speaker? I do not think it exists.

I do not think that they had a solid, identifiable plan for these cuts and what the ramifications and the roll out would be on the lives of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I do not believe that it exists. I believe that they were in a panic. Only a few months ago the deficit was going to be $1.5 billion, and then within a few weeks the deficit was going to be $500 million. That is not planning and so they had to scramble.

They had to scramble because they had no plan, they had no vision, and they were not good stewards of all this prosperity. That should have been spent in a way that was sustainable, that would make sure that we have social justice and a solid foundation in our social plan, in our social projects, so that they did not have to turn around and cancel them, so that they did not have to turn around and take it back from the people of the Province.

The Minister of Finance said that they had a good foundation. I argue, Mr. Speaker, and say that there are huge cracks in that foundation. That foundation is crumbling. This is a government that cannot do it any more. They simply cannot do it any more; they have ground to a halt.

I am happy to speak about the Budget again because I have been elected like all of us by our constituents. I have been elected by the good people of St. John's Centre. I asked them: How has this Budget affected them? How is the Budget affecting their lives? How is the Budget affecting the lives of their families?

I met with folks, I spoke with folks on the phone, and I had a town hall – there were a lot of people at the town hall. There was a wonderful crowd. It was a crowd who was really, really concerned, and there was a crowd who had a lot to say. I have been engaged with them, Mr. Speaker, because that is what we are all elected for. We are all elected to be engaged. We are all elected to listen to our constituents. We are all elected to bring messages to our constituents. We are all elected to have that dialogue –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In my engagement, yes, I even heard from many of them on social media and we had conversations back and forth, and there was great engagement. They wanted to know what has gone wrong, what happened to all these promises, all the promises that this government made saying that we were flush – the former Minister of Finance only last year said we are flush with cash. Those are his exact words and now all of a sudden we have this crisis deficit, with a crisis Budget. It is nothing more than a crisis. It has thrown the lives of many of our people into crisis.

I was amazed, Mr. Speaker, when the Budget was delivered, that government members across from me pounded on their desks. They celebrated this Budget. They celebrated the cuts to ABE. They celebrated the cuts to the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS ROGERS: They celebrated the cuts to seniors. They celebrated the cuts to so many things that people in our Province rely on. They rely on it to get through their daily lives. They rely on it for the health and the well-being of their families. So many programs that they relied on, and this government congratulated one another, they patted each other on the back, they shook hands, and they pounded their desks and they said what a great Budget. Well, Mr. Speaker, I would like to argue with that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, the good people in St. John's Centre, they are not any different than the people across the Province. Like the people in all of our districts, they all want their families to be healthy. They all want their families to be secure. They want their families to have a roof over their head. They want their families to be well educated. They want their families to have good food on the table. They want their families to have good recreation. They want to make sure that their senior parents are well taken care of and they have the help that they need to live in dignity and safety in their senior years. They want to make sure that their kids have access to good education. They want what we all want for the people that we love and care for in our families.

Mr. Speaker, that is not what this Budget is doing. This Budget is taking away – and I want to talk a little bit about how this Budget is taking away from the families of Newfoundland and Labrador, from the working families of Newfoundland and Labrador, and from some of the seniors.

I would like to talk about housing because I often, Mr. Speaker, get up and talk about housing in this House. Housing is such a crucial issue. We have a housing crisis Province wide. When the mayors from across the Province got together here in St. John's a few months ago for their municipal conference, without exception they all talked about the housing crisis that is facing the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, the housing crisis that is caused by some of our prosperity and by some of the great projects that are being undertaken. That is one of the ramifications, but with the proper planning –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With the proper planning, we would not have been in a housing crisis because it was so clear and evident that this was coming. We all knew. This government for ten years knew what major resource projects were coming down the pipe. They had a hand in that, but they did not plan.

No, again, there is no sustainable plan. There is no unified plan. There is a project here, a project there, and a project there. Some of them great; absolutely, some of them are great and they will bring prosperity to the Province, but it is not an integrated plan.

Here we are almost in most major parts of the Province where we have zero vacancy rates and unbridled, skyrocketing rent increases. We know that people cannot get on with their lives. Without a safe place to live and without a roof over your head, you cannot go to school, you cannot go to work, and you cannot get on with your life. We all know that.

Many of us here in this House have family members where their adult children cannot move out because they cannot find an apartment that they can afford. We all know that. There are people in this House, Mr. Speaker, whose children cannot afford a house because they are paying high costs for child care.

That is another thing. There is nothing in this Budget to help young working families with child care. We all know that child care is a minimum of $800 to $1,000 a month. That is what young working families have to pay for child care. We know how expensive that is and what a burden that is. We know there is a better way. We know we can invest our money so that together we can afford a publicly administered and publicly funded child care program that is good for the people of the Province, that is good for the children of the Province.

Anyway, we have these young working families, they are paying child care costs, they are paying their student loans, and on top of that they are trying to get good housing. It is expensive. The housing costs have risen far more, have increased far faster than the income of the people of the Province, and we know that. We all know that. It is undeniable. We talk about it around our kitchen tables.

This government, in 2011, said that they cared about these housing issues. This government said that they cared about our young working families. This government promised in 2011 that they care and that they would help young working families own homes. They said that they were going to establish a home ownership assistance program. We know what that means. We all know that when we buy a house, we start paying off that house that we are building up family equity. What has this government done?

At Estimates yesterday, I asked: Where is that home ownership assistance program? Where is that one that you promised? Do you know what they told me, Mr. Speaker? I said: Where is the money in the Budget for this? Do you know what? There is not a penny, not one penny in this Budget to help working families, the hard-working families of Newfoundland and Labrador to help them buy –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS ROGERS: This was a promise they made so clearly. They made it in the House last year. They keep saying it again and again. There is no help.

This government is saying: Do you know what? It is not our problem. We are washing our hands.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Speaker has recognized the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I bet you there is not a single person who can stand up in this House and say that they do not know a single person who has been affected by this housing crisis. I bet you there is not one single person here who can stand up and say that.

Do you know what else, Mr. Speaker, they did in housing? During this housing crisis when so many people are affected, when seniors are living in fear, when they are spending over 50 per cent of their income on housing, seniors who have worked hard all of their lives, do you know what this government did? They cut the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation by $10 million. Instead of helping the people who are facing the housing crisis, they have cut and they have reneged on their promises. That is what this government has done.

These are the people, Mr. Speaker, who congratulated one another and patted each other on their backs after this Budget came down. Do you know what else they did? They cut the Residential Energy Efficiency Program in half. This was another program that they promised, that used to help 1,000 people retrofit their houses so that they could save on their energy costs. Do you know what they did with this Budget? They cut that down; they can only help 500 people now. It is very low-income people; people who have a hard time making ends meet. That is what this government has done; it has turned its back on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Do you know what? This government is not elected by corporations; this government is elected by the people of the Province. That is who they should be serving.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The corporations that have come in here and set up business, it is a good thing. It is a good thing because there are jobs and we are going to get royalties from resource extraction, but the government is to serve the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and facilitate the work of those corporations. They are not there to serve the work of those corporations.

This government is not doing a good job of sharing the wealth. They are not doing a good job of making sure that everybody is taken care of. They are not doing a good job of making sure that people are not left behind. They are the stewards of our resources. We all know that and they know that, but they have been reckless. They have been reckless with this Budget. They have been reckless in the area of housing because we know that so many people are affected by this crisis.

Small businesses are affected by this housing crisis because they cannot find workers. Workers cannot afford to live in certain communities because they cannot find housing. Up in St. Anthony they are having a hard time getting nurses because of the housing crisis. They cannot afford housing. In Happy Valley-Goose Bay, the prison guards, the corrections officers, are working on call every second weekend. Do you know why that is? They cannot get substitute workers to come up to Happy Valley-Goose Bay because they cannot afford to work.

Our prison guards are overworked, they are on call every second weekend, they have young families, they are worn out, and they are not happy. That is a direct effect of the housing crisis that this government has done absolutely nothing about. They have turned their back on the people of Newfoundland around the issue of housing. They have broken their promise.

AN HON. MEMBER: I wonder how many people came to your open house in Goose Bay the last time you were up there.

MS ROGERS: There were people, and they spoke to us.

There is no plan. Mr. Speaker, this government has absolutely no plan whatsoever and no strategy on housing. They have been at the helm for ten years. They had ten years to get this right. They had ten years to do some of the most creative, the most innovative strategies around housing because they had the resources and because they had the power.

They have been a majority government. Nobody could stop them from doing whatever they wanted to do. They could have done it. They were in the perfect position to do the right thing, to address this housing crisis. Instead, what they did is they stood back and they watched it grow. They watched the housing crisis grow. That is how this government has treated the people of Newfoundland and Labrador in this Budget.

I am amazed, to cut back the Residential Energy Efficiency Program when governments worldwide are helping their people to make their homes more energy efficient. This is archaic thinking. This is absolute backwards thinking. It goes against common sense. It makes no sense whatsoever.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am sorry; the member's time has expired.

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to stand here and have an opportunity to speak about this year's Budget and certainly have an opportunity to talk about some of the Fisheries aspects in my department. I have to say, Mr. Speaker, to stand after such a brilliant performance, because I can only allude to it as a brilliant performance on stage and the audacity to point the finger at this government, to stand and point the finger at this government about what we are doing for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

It is an unbelievable performance, Mr. Speaker, when the Minister of Finance just stood and told the people of the Province that 60 per cent of our funding goes into social aspects of our society. Yet, we stand here and a tirade on the other side to talk about what we should be doing. I did not hear once, not once, and the people of the Province did not hear once where the money is going to come from to do all that you want to do, not once. The only idea they have brought forward in this House, Mr. Speaker, is taxes.

Do you know what? This government has helped save money for the people of this Province. One focus we have had, Mr. Speaker, is on the working class in this Province. We are supporting the people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, we are doing all we can to support the people who are challenged from day to day to meet the means to live, whether it is for housing, food, or whether it is to heat their homes. We understand that. We have put money in investments and built programs around to support those who are challenged with income issues.

Mr. Speaker, we have also supported those people who are working and struggling day to day, struggling to pay their bills, but they work. They pay their taxes, Mr. Speaker. They build their homes. They help run our economies. They volunteer in our societies. We recognize those people, and that is the people as well that this government has been very firm on our investments.

Mr. Speaker, we have heard talk of 70,000 jobs coming up in the future. We hear talk about some of the things that we have done to help support those working families. We can go back to free textbooks. We can go back to tuition fees, Mr. Speaker, and we can talk about investments in our apprenticeship programs to help provide people with work.

The member opposite stands and says this government has ignored the people of the Province. Mr. Speaker, let me tell you, I have two young children. I have one right now in university and one about to go in a year or so, and I could never be more proud, Mr. Speaker, that with the investments this government has made there is a great chance that they will live and work right here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, we do not need to lecture about what we are doing. We understand there are challenges. We understand the difficulties when we have to trim our budgets, and everybody in this Province understands it because they do it at home every day.

Mr. Speaker, we have made the right decisions for the future of Newfoundland and Labrador. We will make some new reinvestments when the time comes and we are in a position to, but right now, Mr. Speaker, to rein in our spending to make the right decisions and the right focus. I can tell you we are on the right track here in Newfoundland and Labrador. I could not be more proud to be a part of a government, to be supportive of the Premier of this Province, to be supported by a party that truly does understand the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and what their needs are. We do not need a lecture.

Mr. Speaker, I want to speak a little bit about my department in the fishery and certainly get an opportunity to speak about what this year's Budget has brought to the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador. One indication I want to raise: we recently, unfortunately, had a number of plant closures in this Province. I have said it in the House before, we do not own plants, we do not operate plants, and I can assure you and the people of this Province, we do not close them down.

Mr. Speaker, we recently had four plant closures in this Province because of a multitude of challenges in the fishing industry unlike we have seen in our history. We have a fish plant worker adjustment program where we can go into a community and help these people transition. I did not hear the member opposite mention this, but we go in with a program to help these people transition from losing their jobs, give them a year to work, not only work and have some income but help them as well to make some future plans.

Mr. Speaker, of the four plants that recently closed we have not had a call for a program in these communities. Do you know why? Because people are working; people have found work, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Now, of the four communities, we know three of them where many, many people are gone to work in other plants, in other sectors of our economy. That is very positive news. We do anticipate there will be some challenges, Mr. Speaker, and we will be there to support them so that the people watching can certainly know we will do all we can.

It is positive in that, even though we have seen a downturn and some challenges and we have seen some of our long-term industries closing down, they are finding new opportunities. This is what this government has been about, diversifying the economy, finding new opportunities, and I think it speaks very well.

Mr. Speaker, we have a billion dollar industry in our fishery. Now, the member opposite likes to stand and talk about the $740 million export that he pulled out of a book. No question, the book indicates $740 million, but it is based on eleven months because we like to get the book out before the Boston Seafood Show. It also did not include our domestic sales, as well as transportation to Halifax, just a brief explanation.

The reality is, Mr. Speaker, we have a billion dollar industry despite multiple challenges in our fishery. Just to give you a few challenges that we do not control. It could very well be the rising Canadian dollar that is on par, since we export so much of our fish products.

What about the increasing fuel costs, Mr. Speaker? International competitiveness; I just came back from the International Seafood Show, Mr. Speaker, where 140 countries are involved in the seafood industries and looking at marketing and buying and selling of fish. We have low-cost producers in Asia that is a challenge for our industry. We have (inaudible) market prices. We have high tariffs and market challenges in the EU. We have increasing aquaculture supply to add to the challenge of our competitiveness.

Mr. Speaker, despite all of that, and add to that a declining resource which we are all very much aware of, we still have a billion dollar fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that fishing industry is valuable. We have some 10,000 harvesters who work in the fishing industry and get a living from the industry. We have over 9,000 plant workers.

Mr. Speaker, that is almost 20,000 people who are still directly involved in the fishing industry in this Province. I can tell you that is not lost on our government; it is not lost on our Premier, who grew up in a fishing family. We understand the challenges; we know what they are. We are there to support the industry and do all we can. Make no mistake, Mr. Speaker, the value of our fishing industry has never been better.

You can go to Gander, you can go to Corner Brook, you can go to Grand Falls, you can come into St. John's and I can assure you, you can look around and you will see the true value of what is helping to drive the economy. When the rural economy is supported by the fishery, I can tell you that is taken and brought into some of these mainstream centres, Mr. Speaker, and you can see it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, we talk about our fishery. A few facts about the fishery – because we hear some comparisons on the other side sometimes about Norway – Norway has almost 4 million tons of seafood. Globally there is 150 million tons of seafood. In all of Canada, all of the Atlantic Provinces, Western Canada, all of our fish supply, we only have 1 million tons. Of 150 million tons globally, Newfoundland and Labrador has 260,000 tons that we are trying to compete against.

Mr. Speaker, when you stand in this House and you want to make comparisons to what we should be doing or should not be doing, it is a far cry when you are working with 260,000 tons and you are working with 4 million tons. Just to put that into some perspective, we have 0.15 per cent of the global seafood supply here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, let me tell you, and I have seen it on the floor over in Brussels, our companies are to be given credit, our harvesters are to be given credit for the quality seafood and what we are doing to compete out there in the markets because we are competing. Be rest assured, Mr. Speaker, it is a real challenge of what we are up against.

Mr. Speaker, I have had my fisheries critic stand and talk about us, our government, not doing enough for marketing. He stands and talks about the Norwegian model. I had an opportunity to meet with the leader of the Norwegian Seafood Export Council and talk about what they do about marketing and how it is going.

It is an industry-supported, industry-driven, industry-operated marketing council where industry pays up to $80 million a year to run the marketing council. It is not nationalized. Government does not run it, government does not operate it. Government does not market the seafood industry, but they do support it. Mr. Speaker, that is the model that our government, in working with industry through the MOU process, brought forward to offer up to the industry.

So, Mr. Speaker, when you stand and say government is not doing anything for marketing, you really do not know what you are talking about. I have to say it. We have the model put forward that is working in Norway. Added to that, if you look at the history, I can say there is no government in the history of our Province that has done more for marketing and offered more to the marketing efforts of our seafood industry in our history, no government other than this one right here.

I see some people nodding on the other side. I see a few smiles. Let me give you a few examples. Mr. Speaker, when FPI was sold, this government with the vision offered to the industry $100 million to buy the FPI marketing arm and industry refused. Through the MOU process and looking at the new model, our government listened to industry. We talked about a way in which we could perhaps enhance the value of our seafood in this Province. We offered $11 million for sales consortia and a new marketing council.

We offered $80 million to help with inventory financing, so we would not have to dump our products on a market, to help industry be able to manage it and spread it out so that we would not drive down prices in the markets, Mr. Speaker. What a significant investment it would have been for the people of this Province and our fishing industry, but be rest assured our Premier and our government supported those initiatives in marketing.

Add to that, Mr. Speaker, $2.8 million in the last ten years to support processing and marketing services. Another $1.58 million for market intelligence initiatives to help support year after year what is happening in the global markets, so we can inform industry and help them make decisions to get the best price for harvesters and get the best price for our processors out there in the markets. We have also offered $2.6 million in marketing in this year's Budget.

So you see, Mr. Speaker, when you stand and say we should be nationalizing and taking it over, no, we need to do exactly what we are doing as a government. Stand and support the fishing industry, provide the funding, and help out in any way we can. Be rest assured, it has to be industry driven, and I can tell you we are there to support the industry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: So much so, Mr. Speaker, our export of fish, we export in fifty countries. Even though we are 0.15 per cent of seafood in the global economy, we export to fifty countries, with US and some of the Asian countries, and Europe being the lead.

I have heard the member speak tonight as well to talk about government has missed the boat, the minister has missed the boat. Mr. Speaker, we are on the boat. We are driving the boat. Let me tell you about MSC certification.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: The member mentions lobsters; it is ironic today he mentioned it in this House. Well, Mr. Speaker, I say to him, stay tuned on lobster because this government, like it has done with almost 65 per cent of the seafood products in this Province, will support MSC certification in lobster. I tell him to stand by and you will see what is going to happen with it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, we recently had an announcement on crab of MSC certification, our shrimp has MSC certification; 65 per cent of our industry. I can tell you on the floor over in Brussels I heard all about quality and the importance of MSC and the fact that Newfoundland products are getting MSC certification. Mr. Speaker, that does not happen overnight. It is expensive. It is a long process. I can tell you it considers key factors, such as sustainability and traceability, things that consumers are looking for in a market.

Well, Mr. Speaker, we got it together in this Province. Our fish processors are engaged in MSC. Our harvesters are supporting quality fishing methods, and our government is standing by and providing the support the industry needs to get that MSC certification.

Mr. Speaker, another thing we are doing in this Province to help support the fishing industry, that has come again out of this year's Budget, and that is the whole issue of the Fisheries Loan Guarantee Program. You heard me mention some of the challenges in our fishery. We have challenges here at home as well, significant challenges.

We have declining resources. We have harvesters who want to make investments but they are not sure if they can because of the unpredictability of the resource. We have some who want to get out of the industry. We have others who want to put more money in, who want to invest, but, Mr. Speaker, added to that we heard from industry through the MOU process, one of the challenges is, for the lack of a better term, company owned. Meaning they were invested with companies, companies dictated when they fished, where they sold their fish and so on.

Mr. Speaker, we heard that cry from industry. They wanted the opportunity to get out of that. So, Mr. Speaker, our Premier, our government, our fisheries minister and through IBRD we offered up a program, the Fisheries Loan Guarantee Program with some $100 million to help support the fishing industry in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Now, Mr. Speaker, there is a bank process. There is a financial process, and we help provide a 100 per cent guaranteed loan for vessels and licences to help the industry, to help the harvester make that decision, but more importantly, to make them independent, to make their own choices and to sell their products where they need to sell it.

Mr. Speaker, it was significant. The take up has been really good. We are getting positive feedback, but what this does is it gives the industry a chance. It is another way for government to work with industry and help support the fishing exercises in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I heard the member opposite, my critic, mention the Fisheries Loan Board one day this week. He wants us to put the money back into the Fisheries Loan Board. I suggest he do his research on the loan board. The reality was that did help a lot of people in this Province, there is no question. What happened is that people started to take advantage of it. What we had was some people were paying back their loans and many more decided they were not going to pay. That became a mess.

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance has alluded to many times, as the Premier has alluded to many times, we are a responsible government, responsible for decisions we make, responsible for taxpayers' money. The Loan Guarantee Program is our solution, our initiative to work with industry to help support them and make the right investments.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at this industry and the value of the industry to our communities – you can go on a wharf this week. I was home this weekend in Twillingate, and I can tell you the activity on the wharf was absolutely phenomenal. From trucks to boats, and activity, the supply sector, I can tell you it is positive out there. The feedback from around the Province with the start up of the crab fishery has certainly been positive. It is really encouraging.

I have to say as minister, when we go through the Budget exercise our goal was to make sure that we offered a suite of programs in the fishery that can help support all aspects of the industry. Let me give you a short list, Mr. Speaker, of some of the initiatives, some of the places where we felt was a priority for our government. Not only our government, as I have often said, it is not our fishery. Government does not own the fishery of this Province. We are in this together collectively, all of industry, whether it is the FFAW, the processing sector, or government.

Mr. Speaker, we are putting money in marketing. We are putting $2.2 million in fishery technology and new opportunities, technology, innovation, some over 400 projects that we have supported to make the industry safer, better, and more valuable. Mr. Speaker, we are making investments in the Centre for Fisheries Ecosystem Research in the cod recovery initiative, science, research, help fuelling some of the decisions we need to make. More importantly, a vision about where we are going in this Province and investing to make sure we have the right information to support the DFO science, to support the industry.

Mr. Speaker, we are also putting money in sealing initiatives. I received word today that almost 84,000 seals were taken this year. That is a significant increase from last year and at $30, $35 a belt. That is money in the hands of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Our government stood up again this year to support the sealing industry.

Mr. Speaker, we have money going into a seafood development program. We have Coastal and Ocean Management initiatives educating the people of the Province on the importance of our oceans. We have millions of dollars going into aquaculture, and that is a whole other speech.

When members opposite talk about rural economies and what is happening in rural Newfoundland, surely you need to take another trip to the South Coast where there are 1,000 people working, Mr. Speaker. The economy is booming. They cannot find enough workers in the fishery. You cannot stand and say government is ignoring the Province and ignoring what is happening.

Mr. Speaker, our government and our Premier, we understand the fishery. We support it. There are challenges, but we will continue to work with industry to make it viable in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to talk a little bit about the Budget tonight.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE: Government has done some good things, I say, Mr. Speaker. I started speaking about this the last time I spoke about the Budget a couple of days ago, the Poverty Reduction Strategy. Government has done a number of very good initiatives through the Poverty Reduction Strategy, and we have seen some very good spending and some good measures within the Poverty Reduction Strategy; there is absolutely no doubt about that. We have seen the elimination of sales tax on utility bills and on insurance. We have seen a number of other initiatives.

We know the Poverty Reduction Strategy has been recognized by other provinces and recognized as one of the strategies for other provinces to follow and to model their strategies after. I will say that I commend government on some of the initiatives they have carried out, but I also have to say, Mr. Speaker, because I agree with giving credit where credit is due. We also have to point out some of the shortcomings.

I apologize about my voice. I have a touch of laryngitis, so I am not sure if I am going to get the full twenty minutes out of the speaking time that I have tonight.

Mr. Speaker, we have to point out some of the shortcomings. While St. John's has a very vibrant economy now, not everybody is benefiting from that vibrant economy. We have seen a number of very strong indicators within the City of St. John's and the metro region because of the oil industry and other resource industries, but there is a housing shortage, an affordable housing shortage within the City of St. John's.

There are a number of people, Mr. Speaker, who are couch surfing. I represent a district that takes in a large portion of the downtown area, and in that area, in particular, there are individuals who are couch surfing. There are individuals who would be considered homeless.

Mr. Speaker, we have seen an increase in the use of food banks, not only in the St. John's area but throughout the Province. Not everybody is benefiting from a stronger economy.

We have seen an increase of usage at soup kitchens. I spoke a little bit about that a couple of days ago as well. About the fact that at a soup kitchen that I have been involved with there are individuals who use that soup kitchen, and about four years ago, five years ago, the first time I volunteered at that soup kitchen I think they had an average of about sixty people coming in for their brunch. Mr. Speaker, that is up now to about 200 people using that soup kitchen frequently.

There are people who are falling between the cracks, Mr. Speaker. We look at a reduction for the individuals who are slightly above the poverty line, for individuals who are struggling to make ends meet. You look at things like the Residential Energy Efficiency Program that used to help 1,000 homeowners a year to create repairs to those homes and to make them more energy efficient. That has been reduced now to 500. Mr. Speaker, I would not say that is a highlight of this year's Budget.

We look at a reduction in the housing budget, Mr. Speaker. One of the areas I have been very vocal on for a number of years, the fact that we need affordable housing, especially in areas like St. John's where rental rates have increased. Because of a more vibrant economy rental rates have increased, and people cannot afford to pay rent. Prior to what I would say is the vibrant economy, while we were struggling to get there as a Province, as an economy, there were people even then who were struggling, trying to decide whether they would keep the heat on, put food in the fridge, or pay their rent.

Mr. Speaker, when you see things like a reduction in the housing budget, a reduction in the rental supplement budget, you realize that the very people who are struggling the hardest to stay up, to make it, to enjoy what some people are enjoying as a vibrant economy, they are the ones who are falling through the cracks.

We have to point out that, yes, there are good things that government has done, but there are areas – when the government has been in power for ten years and the issue of homelessness has increased, the issue of couch surfing has increased, there has been an increase in the use of food banks, an increase in the use of soup kitchens, then something is missing. Something is missing, Mr. Speaker.

When you look at the fact that because of a more vibrant economy in St. John's, that while most people are enjoying that, there are some people who have fallen behind because of that, the question is: How do we help those individuals? How are we able to assist those individuals? Where do we come up with the ability or the programs to help those individuals, the individuals who are falling behind because the Province is prospering?

We have to find ways of helping those individuals. We have to find ways of ensuring, Mr. Speaker, that every person in this Province who should benefit from oil resources, and revenues from oil resources and other natural resources, see the benefits, because not everybody is seeing those benefits.

Mr. Speaker, another issue that has come to the forefront lately that I wish to talk about and it will have an impact on the Province's economy. We all want to see the Province prosper. We all want to see an increase in employment. We want to see an increase in the Province's wealth. We want to see the Province's debt paid down. We are a resource rich Province and we want to see the development of resources that we can development.

I want to talk a little bit about fracking, or slickwater fracking as some people call it. When you use fracking to extract natural gas from shale rock, you are using a mixture of chemicals and literally tens of thousands of litres of water per well hole drilled. I am not speaking against the use of fracking, but what I am saying is if we are going to employ the use of fracking in this Province we need industry specific regulations, industry specific legislation to ensure that we protect our groundwater, we protect our environment and the health of the people who are supposed to be benefiting from any royalties that we see from fracking.

Mr. Speaker, yes, we all want to see the proper development of our natural resources. That is what I would advocate here, is that we have industry specific regulations. What are we going to do with the waste water that is extracted from the drill holes? Is it going to be stored? Is it going to be shipped somewhere for treatment? What are we going to do with that waste water?

Have emergency response units been properly trained in the event there is an accident and some of this waste water happens to be in play as a result of an accident? Are they properly trained to deal with that? Are we properly able to recover the chemicals that are used in the water in drilling those wells? Are we going to ensure that our groundwater supplies in this Province are properly protected? These are the things that I would like to see answered as we progress with fracking, with the extraction or recovery of gas from our wells.

Mr. Speaker, there are a number of other topics that I would like to speak to as well. My voice is not holding up very well here, so I am going to conclude my comments for tonight. I will have other opportunities to speak on the Budget as well, Mr. Speaker, and I look forward to doing that.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: There being no further speakers to the amendment, you have all heard the motion.

All those in favour of the amendment?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against the amendment?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: The amendment is defeated.

On motion, amendment defeated.

MR. SPEAKER: We are now finished with the amendment. We are now moving back to the main motion. The floor is open for debate on the main motion.

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure for me to speak for my final twenty minute block. The clock actually says 9:40 something. I think somebody will rectify that situation, but it is a pleasure for me to get up and speak a final time on the Budget.

A Sound Plan, A Secure Future is the title of the Budget. Of course, we have heard varying degrees of opinion throughout the debate on how sound and how secure this Budget plan actually is. It is very clear that there is a difference of opinion on the government side compared to this side.

I thought it was very fitting that the Member of the House of Assembly for the District of Burgeo – La Poile, in his opening comments, quoted from Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities. He said, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness".

I just wanted to continue that on a bit because I went and looked up the quote afterwards. Dickens continues, "…it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us…" and so on and so forth, Mr. Speaker.

It really points out I guess the dichotomy, the difference in thinking, and the difference in thinking in this Chamber in such a short time, in my brief, elected, political life. Because it was just a few brief – it seems to me it was just a short time ago that I was elected and I am sure it will be just a short time before we all have to face re-election.

MR. GRANTER: (Inaudible).

MR. KIRBY: Well, we hope that will not happen, I say to the Member for Humber West. We all have to have some optimism.

His colleague, the Member for Humber East, the former Minister of Finance, was out just a short time ago it seems to me saying we are flush with cash. When we were going into the Muskrat Falls debate – we will all remember this, every Newfoundlander and Labradorian will remember this. I think people across the country might remember this because it was said so often. We were flush with cash and we were forging ahead and spending several billions of dollars, this birth right of our children, the savings that we had on Muskrat Falls.

It just seems that Muskrat Falls was slammed through here in the dying days of the fall sitting. Then we came back after Christmas and all of a sudden we are in a huge, difficult, deficit situation to the point where we have to make, what I would argue in some cases, dangerous and reckless changes and cuts to the Budget. I wanted to pick up where I dropped off because we are clearly not flush with cash.

I was reading a story from the CBC, it said: Politicians promote literacy in school amid cuts. A number of politicians, including I believe the Leader of the NDP, the Leader of the Official Opposition, the Minister of Education, and perhaps others were out at Goulds Elementary reading to school children on a day to celebrate literacy, at the same time it was pointed out that the school is losing money from its learning resource budget. It is not funny, because it is shocking. The contradiction is stark; it is absolutely stark.

They go on to say the learning resource teacher at that school currently works 75 per cent as a learning resource teacher and now it is going to go down to 50 per cent. Anybody who has been in the school administration, in a position of leadership in the school, knows that principals piece together bits through the school allocation formula. It might say in the formula – it used to say we had one learning resource teacher for 750, now the government is changing it, cutting it so that there is one for 1,000. The school might not have 1,000 students, so principals have to piece things together.

This is interesting what the minister says. I work with learning resource people who are very creative. If there is something there that they need to have done, I can guarantee you they will find a way to have it done. I just thought that was a bit shocking in a way.

It reminded me – anyone who is of a certain age, do you remember that show MacGyver that used to be on? I believe it was in the late 1980s, in the early 1990s, agent MacGyver. He could get himself out of any situation with a roll of duct tape, a Swiss Army knife and some chewing gum, or something like that. That seems to be the approach the minister has to our learning resources teachers. That some way, by hook or by crook they will cobble together something with a bit of duct tape and everything will happen. That is shocking.

In a way, we are fortunate that he is a former principal as Minister of Education, instead of say a former emergency room doctor who is Minister of Health. Can you imagine the same attitude in a different situation? It is harrowing danger, I would say. Not every problem can be solved by some combination of a Swiss Army knife, chewing gum and duct tape. I would argue that no problem in education can be solved like agent MacGyver would solve a problem.

The learning resources teacher, in this instance, said the cuts will mean she will have to squeeze more work into less time. Students will have less access to up-to-date reading material and the newest technology. That is a fact.

I want to draw this connection to other cuts the Department of Education are making to public libraries in general in Newfoundland and Labrador. People who are involved in literacy in Newfoundland and Labrador have, for some time, been calling for renewed investment, a renewed focus on literacy in the Province and new investments in libraries.

They do acknowledge there was work done on the Corner Brook library, for example. They built a beautiful new facility and relocated the library there, but now we have cut back on resources to staff it. The Province is laying off five of fourteen professional librarians in the public library system in the Province. Now we will have nine full-time librarians for ninety-six libraries. That is almost the ratio of one librarian for ten libraries. It is an awful lot to expect of people.

Librarians who were consulted about this, who attended the town hall meeting that was very well attended, I would like to add, in the City of Corner Brook, said they were baffled by the lack of planning and consultation that went into that decision. It is a perfect example of short-sightedness and a complete lack of understand that went into making this decision to cut libraries.

This person says the analogy that I would use would be if you took a hospital and then laid off all of the doctors, then you said to the remaining staff: Well, we are just going to divide up the rest of the work amongst all the rest of you guys. We are going to fire some of you as well. I know the public is not going to be affected at all.

It is like if you had a hospital and you went in and laid off some of the doctors, fired some of the other people and said: Now, straighten it all out, everything will be okay here. It does not work like that. You cannot cut $1.2 million from the public library system, about 10 per cent of the overall budget, lay off that many staff in an already understaffed environment and expect things to operate as they were.

This person said in Corner Brook with our beautiful new library building, where we have had a librarian for thirty-five years, we will no longer have a librarian. It is terrible. What consultation and long-term planning went into a decision like that, they asked? You are leaving the City of Corner Brook without a librarian. That is a sad story.

The provincial library association spoke out about this. In fact, the Canadian, the national library association has spoken out, as decried these cuts, because the last survey of adult literacy we had in Newfoundland and Labrador was a decade ago. The International Adult Literacy Survey that was conducted show that we had literacy surveys that lag far behind the rest of the country.

Now, that is not because we are any less than the rest of the country. That is because of the structure of our economy over the years, the reliance on the fishery and the lack of necessity for people to have to continue through school to conclusion, to graduate and so on. It was not like that in my father's generation but it has changed now. We cannot continue on this path. We have to do more to invest in and improve literacy.

One of the things I wanted to do here – I know the Minister of Education has somewhere in the order of 200 e-mails on this, maybe more than that, from individuals in the Province who are concerned. I hope the minister has accessed these e-mails. The library association said, in this note they say they have sent 196 e-mails to the Minister of Education. I have those e-mails and I want to bring some of that in here because I believe those people need to be heard.

Here are some of the things that some of the people said over those 200-or-so e-mails, and maybe the minister has even more now, I do not know. One person said, we need to keep our librarians and we also need the services they provide to our communities. Another person said: Is the beautiful, new, long sought after library in Corner Brook now going to be turned into a place with just books on shelves? I can hardly believe this government does not see the value in a proper library, and that is a library under the direction of a professional librarian. I think that is a profound and correct statement.

Somebody else goes on to say, the absence of a qualified librarian for Corner Brook is such a tragedy. These are people who understand the situation. These are the people who borrow books, who borrow other materials from libraries; who use library facilities; who use libraries to access Internet; who use libraries to access the Internet for job search; who use libraries for learning programs and literacy programs for their children.

Most people do not have access to Chapters to be able to buy hundreds of dollars of books for their children. Many people use libraries to educate their children. They get literacy materials that they cannot access in schools, to have regular access.

This other person says, I am completely disappointed with our Premier and all those in government who are willing to carry out her slash-and-burn form of governing this Province. Another person goes on to say: I am extremely disappointed by these cuts and I do not believe it speaks well of this government's priorities. Public libraries and their staff provide an important service to all communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, but in rural communities that service is vital to residents. Cutbacks to these libraries will have a major impact on programs for pre-school children, school age students, adults, and seniors.

Many rural libraries operate with a minimum number of hours. That is true, with a minimum number of hours. They are not open all the time. They do not have full-time hours. They do not have full-time staff. Any reduction in hours will be detrimental to the services and programs that can be offered.

Somebody else went on to say: Newfoundland public libraries were already severely understaffed and underfunded prior to this Budget. The fact that they are being targeted for further cuts is extremely disappointing.

I could go on and on because, like I said, the minister has received, or at least I hope he has received, a good number of these. There are a good number about Corner Brook. Maybe I should read another one from Corner Brook that says: because libraries are the cornerstone of knowledge as well as building a strong community, I am really appalled at the Newfoundland and Labrador government for cutting them.

I am also appalled at the Newfoundland and Labrador district office being closed. The result is that Western Newfoundland, as well as Labrador, will not have district representation, thus proving that – I will not say his name, but it is the Minister of Education's name – has a grudge against them. That is why I believe that the Newfoundland and Labrador government should stop all cuts to libraries, especially against Corner Brook, and on and on and on. I do not even have the words to describe how ridiculously appalled and stunned I am by the decision to cut so many professional positions at the public libraries.

There are a number of other things but I am running out of time. I do not want to pick particularly on the Minister of Education because he deserves some of the blame, but so does the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, who I am also responsible for critiquing.

I wanted to say that I heard a backbench member of the government, I will not say who it is because I do not want to embarrass them, but I heard a backbench MHA on one of the Open Line programs one day talking about: Adult Basic Education is really not something that you should have in the community college system anyways.

Well, I would say go and read anything that has been written by academics, theorists, educators, anyone who knows anything about the history of community colleges in Canada and North America, or Newfoundland and Labrador, or St. John's or Burin, and they will tell you that Adult Basic Education is fundamental. It is a distinguishing feature of community colleges in –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Littlejohn): Order, please!

MR. KIRBY: - this Province and in Canada, and removing Adult Basic Education removes something very vital and important because it is fundamental. It is a defining feature of the community college system.

Adult Basic Education programs are vital, not just to individuals but to community and collective economic success. They are an investment. This is the way that people make their way back into the labour market.

Employment opportunities for people with post-secondary credentials are growing. In a lot of instances now high school education is not a precursor to enter into the labour market. We know for certain the wages that are offered for individuals who have post-secondary credentials are far higher than individuals who have high school graduation.

For those who have not had the opportunity to complete senior high school or its equivalent, the outcomes in the labour market are far worse. They spend far more time out of the labour market. They spend far more time looking for employment. They spend far more time drawing Employment Insurance. They spend far more time on Income Support. Those are government's own statistics, we know that. That is the way that it works. Educational attainment is a hierarchy in the labour market.

I just wanted to point out something else. I was down in Burin and we had quite a well-attended meeting down there. I would say somewhere in the range of fifty to sixty individuals came out. There were quite a number of people from the community college down there from the Burin campus, which has been hit hardest perhaps by these cuts.

There was a woman who came over at the end. She was not comfortable speaking in the group because she is originally from St. Pierre and Miquelon. Down where I am from on the Burin Peninsula, I am originally from Lord's Cove. You can look out through my parents' window and see St. Pierre and Miquelon just right there. They are just right there but they are sort of a world away, really.

This woman has moved to Newfoundland and Labrador to get a job. What she has heard is a white hot or red hot or blue hot or whatever it is economy, but her English language skills are not that great and she has not completed the equivalent of senior high school here in Newfoundland and Labrador. Doing the ABE program in Burin was her opportunity to have a chance. That was what she said to me, this was my chance and now it is all going away.

I thought it was sort of a heartbreaking situation really, because we attracted somebody to Newfoundland and Labrador from another country, somebody who is fluent in French, the other language in our country, somebody who could certainly be an asset to our economy, and now this person feels like they are left high and dry because they are not finished their ABE program. They have to go somewhere, they are not sure where, to complete it if indeed there is a place for them to do it.

I had a lot more to say about that and a lot more about the cuts. A member stood up - I am not sure if it was yesterday; I guess it was yesterday - and talked about how people were spoiled in the Province. I do not think those staff and those students at the College of the North Atlantic campuses that have been cut were in any way spoiled. I think government was very much on the right track. Unfortunately, these cuts have put us on the wrong track. That is why I cannot support this Budget, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say what a privilege and honour it is to get up here today and speak on behalf of the great people of the District of Lake Melville. They certainly have put their faith in me time and time again and I answer the call as best I can whenever I can. It is truly my honour to represent them in this hon. House.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to step back in time to last week just a little bit here and recognize the volunteers, as so many of my colleagues in this hon. House have done, being National Volunteer Week last week. Specifically, I want to talk about the Labrador Winter Games really quickly here, Mr. Speaker.

We had about 500 volunteers come out in aid of the games, support of the games, which represents probably around 6 per cent, 6.5 per cent of the total population of Happy Valley-Goose Bay. So that speaks to the backbone of our community where people are willing to go over and above and step outside their normal lives in order to support a worthwhile cause, to support athletes, and to support the games in Labrador, Mr. Speaker. It is a wonderful thing indeed.

Mr. Speaker, in talking about the Budget here, I would like to first start off with a few things about Labrador. I would like to say when it comes to the completion of the Trans-Labrador Highway we have the additional $39 million allocated to complete Phase I of the Trans-Labrador Highway, an absolutely wonderful, wonderful initiative.

I will just say this much. Mr. Speaker, as a young boy out hunting on the land with my father, both in the winter and in the summer, in the wintertime we would go out on that road. It was inaccessible by vehicle all winter long. We had a long brutal winter in Labrador, as many of the people in the House know. Well, everybody in Labrador certainly knows. We used to go by Ski-Doo up caribou hunting, partridge hunting, and do a little bit of trapping, Mr. Speaker. It was simply inaccessible.

I remember riding on the back of the snowmobile with my father looking down over the sides at these ravines, really steep drops. A beautiful country nonetheless, but it gives you an idea. We are stepping back twenty-five years or so, Mr. Speaker. It is just unimaginable how far we have come since that time.

I would also like to talk about the summertime as well. As a young boy I remember going up the Trans-Labrador Highway, but we used to refer to it as Churchill Road at the time. Mr. Speaker, it was a wood path at that time. We used to go towards the culverts which we see nowadays, those were wooden bridges, some of them quite rickety. We would have to take great caution and great care to go over some parts of those crossings of the streams, the brooks and what have you, Mr. Speaker. Even then it took such a long time to get anywhere and it was pretty perilous.

When I came home around 2003, when I moved back from Ontario, I remember showing back up in Labrador and of course we engaged in the same hunting, the same traditional use of the land. There was not much difference at that time, Mr. Speaker, but since I returned home in 2003, I have gotten to see major, major improvements in our road. At that time, it was unimaginable that we would even have a south coast road going down connecting Cartwright to the Lake Melville area.

We can see through this Budget as well, and through that joint federal commitment with our government and the federal government of the $85 million, we are going to begin to widen and prepare that southern road as well, Mr. Speaker. It is a wonderful opportunity to connect communities. It is good for tourism, good for business, and good for people connecting with their loved ones who happen to be on the Island portion of the Province as well. As I have said many times in this House, my father-in-law lives on the Northern Peninsula. We have driven that road many times. It is going to be quite a spectacle when it is done.

I am certainly proud, Mr. Speaker, a very proud Labradorian, proud of where we have come from, proud of where we are today under the leadership of our Premier and this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: I am absolutely stoked, if you will, Mr. Speaker, about where we are heading in terms of Labrador.

As a young kid who grew up in Goose Bay, we had at that time nothing more than a base town, if you will, or a military town. Everybody who worked in the town was employed on the base, my father included. Interesting enough, my son just did a heritage fair project about the base and it dawned on him that my existence was dependent on that base. It was the main employer.

My grandparents came down from the North. My other grandparents on my father's side came from the Island. They met up there and that resulted in me; then having me there. My son then realizes that his mom, from the Northern Peninsula as well, came to Goose Bay to work on that very same base and resulted in his existence. So it was great for him to have the realization of the importance of the base, where it came from, where we are headed with that base, and what it means to people in terms of having jobs and being able to sustain themselves, and have a disposable income for their families and make their lives there, Mr. Speaker.

If you look at Happy Valley-Goose Bay and Lake Melville today, because of the leadership, the determination of this government to do right by the people of Labrador – not merely have sessions of lip service to the people of Labrador. In Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Mr. Speaker, we have fibre op running through our community. We have a brand new high school. We have a brand new hospital. We have a brand new long-term care facility. We have a sewage treatment plant about to come on stream.

These are things that we could not have dreamed of back in Happy Valley-Goose Bay as we were growing up. To come to that realization of where we are heading and to see what the potential of Labrador is, and especially in Central Labrador, it is simply amazing.

If I could step back to one of those hunting trips, Mr. Speaker, I will tell you something really important that happened to me. As my father and I were out hunting in the woods we came across an abandoned core shack. It dawned on me, and I asked my father, what is in that core shack? We went in and saw the old abandoned core samples. Back in that day, it was just unfathomable to realize how they got a drill rig even in there. It must have been slung in by a helicopter.

For a young man to see what people were doing, how they were drilling into the earth, taking samples, and measuring that up against stake claims. Then eventually to where we are headed today in that same region with companies like Labrador Iron Mines, Mr. Speaker.

We have the ability to start looking forward at Muskrat Falls and the employment that brings and the power it is going to push out in order to facilitate further mining developments. The future is limitless for us in Labrador, Mr. Speaker. I am proud to walk the path with this government that is going to see us realize our hopes and our dreams of having a lot of industry, a lot of opportunity for jobs, and a lot of the affluence that comes with those opportunities.

Just to talk a little bit more about Labrador. We have a total investment in the road, which has been the centre of my first few minutes here, Mr. Speaker, a total commitment up to this point of $450 million on that piece of infrastructure. I think one of the largest in our Province's history. It is something to really be proud of.

As somebody who has driven it as a youth, who has driven it as a hockey coach and a father when I came back to the Province in 2003, and to see it now everyday when we cross over to Lab West, and to visit my colleague in Lab West, the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador and Labrador Affairs, and to go to those hockey tournaments, to bring the kids over a safe road in time. It does not take eleven or twelve hours any more. You can do it in six hours or seven hours. It is phenomenal, Mr. Speaker.

This government has also shown a commitment over and above these blue PC districts, Mr. Speaker. I will talk a little bit about what is going on in some of the rural districts, and I hope the Third Party is listening. This is a government, through our Premier and our Cabinet and our team of dedicated colleagues over here; we do what is right by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. We are not rewarding those districts that have chosen us on this side of the House to represent them, but we do what is right.

I just want to list some of those, Mr. Speaker. We have $4 million committed to continue the work of the construction of a new arena in Makkovik, a place where I have blood ties as well. That is in the district of our friend across the way from Torngat Mountains. We have $1.5 million allocated to continue the work towards a multi-purpose facility in Hopedale. I have been in that community a lot and I can tell you it is certainly needed. That comes down to this government, it is about service to the people, and it is about addressing the needs.

It is not about political patronage and rewarding those, like I said, loyal districts. It is about doing what is right. It is about putting the money where it is needed, where it is going to do the most good for the kids, for the elders and for the people in those communities. I am certainly proud to be a part of that.

I have just a couple more from Labrador, if you will, Mr. Speaker. There is $3.9 million to rebuild the classroom and administrative spaces in Charlottetown. A wonderful initiative as well, sorely needed. There is $3 million to support the ongoing environmental remediation of the former US military site in Hopedale. That builds up to our third year now, which is a total of $6.3 million in that commitment. I have walked that hill. I have witnessed that site with my very own eyes. We are to be commended for reaching out and making sure that we deal with that particular situation.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to go on and address some of the concerns about some of the comments we have heard from across the way from the Third Party. I will quote one the members over there from across the way saying that Budget 2013 is bankrupt of ideas that lends to diversification of the revenue streams coming into the government and into this great Province, Mr. Speaker. That just blows my mind.

We have the oil revenue, yes we do. We are talking about aquaculture. We are talking about hydroelectric developments, fabrication, Mr. Speaker, and we are talking about facilitating a new way of life for Labrador. This is how I am going to put it. If I had to look into the future and if someone had to ask me: well, Mr. Russell, what would you like to see in Labrador?

I will tell you what I would like to see. I would like to see all communities connected by roads, therefore alleviating the pressure on marine services and the isolation that comes with that, which means cheaper goods and services. It means people being able to open up their communities to further tourism efforts.

You talk about that in conjunction with the fact that this government, we put forward legislation to make sure that when power is available and we are ready to move on new mining developments – imagine a scenario, Mr. Speaker, where we have six or seven new mining developments, the jobs that come with that under new royalty regimes that are more beneficial to the people of this Province and to our general revenue funds. Together with all of that, we look at the ability for us to begin to train our people for these long-term jobs, these mining efforts that are going to last decades and decades and decades.

If you were to look at all of those things together, Mr. Speaker, and then our new pricing that we can have on industrial power with the two major developments right now in Lab West. The antiquated formula for power there is going to change. We have to come on stream with the competitive pricing within Quebec because let's face it, when you are talking about the central mineral belt it extends right through Labrador into Quebec.

When it comes to diversification, this leads to a point that our Minister of Finance talked about several times, every time he has gotten up to speak. It talks about fiscal flexibility, not only in the form of having to deal with unanticipated fluctuations and the volatility of oil pricing or, God forbid, disasters, but also flexibility to deal with new opportunities, such as new oil and gas developments, new mines.

We have to put our eggs in several different baskets, if you will, Mr. Speaker, in order for us to be able to capitalize on opportunities as they emerge. That is responsible governance. That is visionary governance, and under the leadership of our Premier, this team over here, we are going to make sure we are ready to capitalize on all these opportunities in the best interest of the people of the Province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: It comes down to, I guess – we have heard it many times in this House about living within our means and when expenditures surpass our revenues we have to adjust. Of course, a lot of us in this House have felt the sting of cuts, of layoffs and things like that. Nobody is happy to make those decisions, but we walk a path on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, where we are prepared to make the tough call, the hard decisions in the best interest of the people of the Province.

We could have taken the easy way out. We could have simply gone and spent spent, borrowed a little more and then went for the political favour that comes with that. I am sure that would have been reflected in the polls but, personally, I do not take too much stock in them anyway.

When it comes to living within our means and addressing our debt situation, Mr. Speaker, we have heard the Minister of Finance and many of our other hon. colleagues in this House get up and talk about the servicing cost of that debt, between $800 million and $880 million, almost a billion dollars to service the debt. There is a significant opportunity cost associated with that. It is as simple as this it is money that is not available for programs and services. This is something that has been addressed. I am proud to say we have addressed the debt to the tune of over $4 billion since we have taken office, Mr. Speaker, and that is no small feat indeed.

If you look at it very briefly, and I will just say if you had a credit card in your own personal household – to the people out home who are watching – if you rack that up, you max that out, you get to a point where you are paying on the interest. You do not hit the principle any more. You are simply not going to be able to do all the things in life that you want to do. You are going to have to make some sacrifices.

Those sacrifices either come in recreation, it either comes in entertainment. It comes in support of your children, their extracurricular activities. God forbid, it gets to a point where it comes down to the running of your household and you have to make decisions, which come down to things like the basic necessities, such as food and utilities.

We have to be responsible. This Province has to be run like a corporation that is responsible to its shareholders. In essence, we have to be responsible to the people, the taxpayers and the voters, those who we are servicing. This is their money. We have to make sure we do our very best in order to service the people who are all part of this.

When I talk about the debt, we have heard the NDP say many times they are not interested in taking surpluses and putting it on the debt. Mr. Speaker, we have done that time and time again. Yes, when it comes to all of the money we spent on the debt and the money we have spent in the past on infrastructure, those were necessary. You have to strike while the iron is hot. We had the money at that time.

We have all heard mention of the crumbling infrastructure we inherited as a government when we came in, in 2003. We have made gigantic strides in upping the quality of life for the people of this Province by our dedication to doing right by them and addressing the infrastructure needs, Mr. Speaker. I am certainly proud to be a part of that.

We have also heard of, I guess, the people from across the way and their methodology of how we would do all of those wonderful social things that they seem to want to have, such as the universal health care, the dental, housing for everybody. We have heard of chicken in every pot and thirteen in every dozen. Tax, tax, tax and spend, tax and spend. That would put us into a vicious cycle, Mr. Speaker, which basically, I do not think we would be able to recover from.

In getting up and saying that time and time again, they send a very dangerous message to the people out there in terms of having a sense of entitlement. In terms of everybody deserves all of this stuff. I say to the people of the Province, we are here as a government to foster development, industry, to get jobs for people, Mr. Speaker, to have megaprojects and smaller projects that are necessary in order to provide for the people of the Province. They have to meet us halfway.

If you want to get out there, if you want to become educated, if you want to get a job, if you want to buy a house, if you want to do those things, come see us. Come see your MHA. We will help meet you halfway. We will get out there and beat the grass with you, and we will get it done.

Mr. Speaker, I will just finish off, with the last few minutes I have, talking about Muskrat Falls specifically. We have heard mention from the Official Opposition about we have all of these people coming from away, coming to Newfoundland to take our jobs and all of that, Mr. Speaker. I say to the people at home, we are in the very preliminary stages of this project. We have a long way to go.

By summer, we are going to see the number of people onsite doubled. There are going to be a lot of jobs for a lot of people who are interested, but again, meet us halfway. Come see us. Come help us meet those contractors. Come help us connect with the unions.

By the way, a good point too, because everybody who is a member of the union or wants to be in order to get one of those jobs, you should know the people from across the way did not want you there, neither one of them. They did not want you there. They did not vote for this project. When you think about that as you are connecting with the unions and connecting with the contractors, you just remember this government stood tall, we stood firm, we pushed for this project. They voted against it. It is as simple as that.

Mr. Speaker, I only have a couple of seconds left. I will use this time to close and just draw a little bit of comparison about the difference between us over here on the governing side and the Third Party. When you talk about us and what we want to do, we want to make sure that we have the money to spend on infrastructure, to spend on people's education, to make sure that we keep the classroom sizes up there, and we keep the teachers there, and we want to make sure people's quality of life is enhanced. We want to build industry and we want people to benefit from that and become a part of it.

We talk about aquaculture research, mega developments, hydroelectric development, mining, fabrication, Mr. Speaker, and what do you get when you look at the Third Party? Well, let's talk shrimp shells, wood pellet fired electrical generation, and simply, I will say it, the double crossing of all of those who have went into business with us in good faith in the oil business. We are not prepared to that; we are here for the people, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to spend the next segment talking about something that has not been discussed much: the Budget. We seemed to have talked about everything but the Budget.

We were all supplied with these four books. One says Budget 2013: A Sound Plan, A Secure Future. One says Securing the Future: A 10-Year Sustainability Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador. One says The Economy 2013: A Sound Plan, A Secure Future. This one says Estimates 2013 – the one that says Estimates might have some relationship to reality; the others certainly do not.

Mr. Speaker, just by way of an aside, last Thursday evening I attended a fundraising function – the Member for Terra Nova was there representing the minister as well – and the theme was Alice in Newfoundland. I was speaking to somebody and they said: How did you arrive at Alice in Newfoundland? They said: Actually, we wanted to go with Disneyland. We wanted to get a bunch of Mickey Mouse outfits and when we went to the store to get the Mickey Mouse outfits, the person said someone claiming to be the Premier came in and took all the Mickey Mouse outfits. They took a Mickey Mouse outfit for the Minister of Finance, took a Mickey Mouse outfit for the Minister of Education, took a Mickey Mouse outfit for the Minister of Health, and a Mickey Mouse outfit for the guy they say is supposed to run the ferries. That is because she already had the Minister for Advanced Education in a Mickey Mouse outfit and Fisheries as well.

Mr. Speaker, part of this that I want to go through in one of these books, I would like to refer to nine graphs that we are shown. Ordinarily when you look at graphs, you look for similar periods. If it is a ten-year period and then it is a ten-year period, it is the same number of years, so you can compare before and after.

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that none of these graphs line up with each other. Not many of them make much sense. Some are relevant and some are not. One is for three years. Another one is for six years. One is for nine years. Two are for ten years. One is for sixteen years. One claims that it is for twenty years and actually twenty-one years are shown. It seems that whenever the government wants to support what it thinks is an argument that makes sense it puts in a graph for a particular number of years to cover that argument without actually relating to reality.

Before going to those graphs – in looking at financial statements, often, if you look at the annual report the beginning part is the management, discussion, and analysis. They will say management explains away all the bad fortune that they had to try to convince the shareholders that things are not really as bad as they look, this is our side of the story, do not bother to look at the numbers.

I looked in this book that was supplied, called Budget 2013: A Sound Plan, A Secure Future, and it says on page 5, "It is our government's goal to reduce net debt per capita to the all-province average within 10 years, while protecting vital services, especially in health and education. Year 1 will be a deficit reduction process." Presumably, Mr. Speaker, that is this year, but in fact we may –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We have individual conversations going on and the Speaker is having a hard time hearing the speaker. Can we take our individual conversations down just a little, please?

Thank you.

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If year one is a deficit reduction process, we still have a half a billion dollar deficit, so it may well be reduced but it was reduced from the fictional $1.6 billion that we were introduced to a few months ago.

"Year 2" – which is very concerning – "will involve reviews of Memorial University, College of the North Atlantic, Regional Health Authorities and Unfunded Pension Liabilities." We saw how education was reviewed. Education was reviewed with a chainsaw. Not much was left and what was left was a pretty big mess.

Then this document pretends, in year three, we will return to surplus. Year three is an election year so obviously from here on in they are going to predict a surplus in year three. From years four to ten we have a continued focus on – and this is not really accurate because it says innovation, economic diversification, and debt reduction. A continued focus would imply that we actually had a focus in the first place, which we have had no such focus from this government.

It is troublesome that the government goes on to say – because this is foreshadowing what they likely will do for us next year, "To address the fiscal challenges associated with delivery of health care services, one of the focus areas of the 10-Year Sustainability Plan is our government's commitment to complete an operational review of the four Regional Health Authorities." A review for sure, but having watched them in education, that is very concerning.

They also say, "The pension and post retirement review will be a key focus area for our government…". Doubtful – they have not performed to this point. Then after you read the verbiage it that goes through, it comes to the end, "And there it is, Mr. Speaker – the plan that will lead us forward, this year, next year and throughout the coming decade, building on our strengths, harnessing our opportunities, securing a bright future."

When you look to the back in the appendix and all of this upside that government talks about, if you look at their main economic indicators, in 2012 they said housing starts: 3,885. In 2013 we are down by 365 houses, which is a 10 per cent reduction in 2013. In 2014 they are predicting housing starts to drop another 400, down to 3,102. In 2015 they are predicting that housing starts will drop again to 2,995.

Mr. Speaker, over a three-year period, that is a drop of approximately 900 houses or 25 per cent of the home construction in this Province. How can we be returning to surplus when the economy is headed straight down? Housing starts are a key indicator of the economic well-being of an economy and it certainly is not here.

Mr. Speaker, if you look at the charts that they have in this book which says a 10-Year Sustainability Plan, I can agree that a 10-Year Sustainability Plan will be a great thing for this government to have. In fact, they ought to be starting on the second 10-Year Sustainability Plan, had they had a sustainability plan ten years ago when they took office.

There is a chart which shows Revenue by Source, on page 8, it is ten years. Then you look at the next page, which is page 9 of this document produced by the Minister of Finance, this is for a sixteen-year period. Heaven knows why you would pick sixteen years as opposed to ten, but the sixteen-year period ends next year. It goes back to 1998-1999. It is produced by Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board and the Department of Finance. It is millions of barrels of oil that we have had the production of for the past sixteen years and the next year.

Well clearly, this is not any kind of an economic indicator. This is historical. Anybody can look behind and see what has happened, something that this government had very little to do with. This is a sixteen-year graph and if we continue on with these same documents from Finance – Mr. Speaker, if you look at Figure 10, this now is for six years. The last one on oil production forecast was for sixteen years, but it was not a forecast; it was a forecast for one year and hindsight of fifteen years. This one is a six-year forecast, but the six-year forecast starts in 2010, from 2010 to 2016. Here we have a six-year comparison to a sixteen-year comparison previously.

Mr. Speaker, if you go over to the next page you will look at total offshore oil production. The Budget forecast versus actual. It starts in 2004. It runs for nine years to 2012-2013. Of what value is it to tell us what oil cost over the last nine years when we know we cannot predict the value of oil in any event?

More telling of the sloppy job of how this was thrown together is if you look at the bottom of this page 15, figure 12, it says in the description twenty years and in fact twenty-one years are illustrated. This is an offshore oil production forecast from 2012-2013 for the next twenty-one years to 2033. Mr. Speaker, this government cannot possibly forecast oil production for the next twenty-one years. Yet, we are told this is part of our 10-Year Sustainability Plan. Heaven help us.

If you look at the actual performance of this government in spending and being able to control, or better put, not control its spending, Mr. Speaker, a very telling area is health care spending. Health care spending of this government in 2004 was slightly more than the Canadian average, by about 12 per cent. The Canadian average was $2,657 per capita, and we were slightly ahead of the national average or higher than the national average.

Now we have shot forward. Today we are 34 per cent higher than the national average for health care spending. Even though health care spending nationally has gone up by approximately 40 per cent, we are 34 per cent higher.

Mr. Speaker, our health care system is nowhere near performing as it should. Wait times are still far too long. An example of wait times is if an elderly person goes for hip replacement surgery, it is a six-month wait period. They wait six months and get one hip replaced, then they cripple around for a year and they get the second hip replaced. That means it is a twelve-month period.

They have completely, completely underperformed in the health care sector, downsizing or rightsizing on hospitals that are promised. We have all sorts of security breaches in hospitals. We had the issue just this week with C. difficile in the hospital. The problem with C. difficile, which is a very difficult illness to cure because it tends to attack people who are already compromised –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, then government launches into other areas and says we are talking about our unfunded pension liability. If you look at page 19 of this document, called A 10-Year Sustainability Plan, this is actually for ten years. Now, the ten years started in 2007 and goes through to 2016. So you can see again, they simply take a snapshot of a ten-year period, or whatever period and it does not apply. It does not actually relate to anything else.

The explosion in hiring in this Province in the public sector has had an enormous escalating effect on our unfunded pension liabilities. We cannot say when this government took office. You cannot look that far back because the graph only goes to 2007. However, the unfunded pension liability is not sustainable.

There are five defined benefit pension plans. The Public Service Pension Plan, the Teachers' Pension Plan, the Uniformed Services Pension Plan, Members of the House of Assembly Pension Plan, and the Provincial Court Judges Pension Plan. After somebody retires there is a fifty-fifty cost share for all health benefits from the date of retirement to death.

The current unfunded liability associated with post retirement benefit, the health benefit is $2 billion. Two billion dollars to pay for the extended health care or major medical in group insurance plans for people who are retirees. The total shortfall for pensions and group insurance benefits, we are looking at $5 billion, which is 64 per cent of the provincial debt as of March 31, 2012. How can this government possibly say they have a 10-year sustainability plan? There is no 10-year sustainability plan.

In its 2011 report, the Auditor General noted the unfunded pension liability is a significant portion of the Province's debt, and if no corrective action is taken the Teachers' Pension Plan will be 21 per cent funded by 2029. Mr. Speaker, we will have twenty-one cents of every dollar that we owe to teachers by 2029 at the rate we are going, and the Public Service Pension Plan will be 48 per cent funded in 2029. Not only are we not recovering with this particular problem, we are falling further and further behind. So I would invite anybody who is watching to get these books and look at the severe financial circumstances we find ourselves in.

Mr. Speaker, we find ourselves in this situation ten years after this party took power. Ten years after forming government and having had the biggest surpluses and the most revenue available, we still find ourselves in this situation. Yet, they will stand up and say: we cut taxes, we did this, and we did that. The numbers are clear. The numbers are quite apparent that we are looking at a very major, serious financial problem with this Province. It is not going to go away any time soon.

Mr. Speaker, there are probably three ways to deal with a deficit: you can raise taxes, you can cut expenses, or you can grow the economy. This government is not growing the economy. This government is collecting oil revenue on efforts of prior governments and taking that oil revenue. It is not being reinvested back into renewable energy sources, Muskrat Falls aside.

Many people have criticized it. I expect we will pay for that one for a long, long time. It will probably be the death knell of this government. You can see since Muskrat was finalized that the government is circling the drain in ever rapidly and smaller circles, so it is gradually going down the drain. You can see what public opinion is doing there.

If this government is serious about a sustainability plan, then it needs to get into economic development on a serious basis. It needs to become more attractive for the corporate sector. It needs to do things like make sure that Workers' Comp gets under control so employers can afford to set up here. It needs to reduce the red tape, not the Red Tape Reduction Strategy, which resulted in no benefit practically for anybody. It needs to get back into rural economic development.

In the book, which says The Economy 2013, A Sound Plan, A Secure Future, it is just words. You can go through it, Mr. Speaker, and you can see there are all sorts of projects referenced that government, I suppose, have a right to take credit for, although they had little to nothing to do with these developments whatsoever. Hibernia; what did this government have to do with Hibernia? White Rose; what did this government have to do with White Rose? Terra Nova; what did this government have to do with Terra Nova? You can see Voisey's Bay; what did this government have to do with Voisey's Bay?

Mr. Speaker, one of the most telling items in this document, the government's failure to commit to meaningful economic development throughout the Province, is found near the end of the book. In fact, on page 53 right at the end, there is a map. The map says not to scale, so you have to look and see. There are two maps on one page. One is a scale of 100 and one is a scale of 160. In fact, Labrador is shown smaller than actual in comparison to Newfoundland.

This is divided up into twenty economic zones. The twenty economic zones used to have twenty rural economic development boards. Mr. Speaker, we still have the map; it shows where we should have twenty rural economic development zones and we do not have any rural economic development boards.

We have 200 volunteers fully plugged in on an ongoing basis to help generate rural economic development for this Province and they are gone. They are gone because when the federal government withdrew from the field a year ago, the provincial government decided to save a little over $1 million, probably less money than those ten or twelve appointments that they made just a few days before the Budget. The same cost for those ten or twelve individuals would be the Province's contribution to the rural economic development boards.

The Opposition pleaded with the government and the boards looked for their continued survival. The Government of Nova Scotia was enlightened enough that the very day after the federal government withdrew from the field, they struck a task force to be able to reconfigure, revitalize, restore, and maintain their rural economic development boards.

Mr. Speaker, if this government wants to get us back on the right track, it needs to get into very serious conservation of resources, stop wasting so much money. The amount of waste in government, generally – in this government in particular – is absolutely staggering. The amount of waste is completely staggering. Cut the waste, stop hiring so many people on the thirteen weeks, beefing up with friends and family who are hired in different departments, so other people have a chance to have proper, competitive job hiring practices, shrink the size of the public service, and grow the size of the economy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak tonight on Budget 2013: A Sound Plan, A Secure Future. It is a Budget that provides responsible management. I emphasize the word responsible. It is a word I will be using repeatedly during my presentation, because this is a government that will take its responsibility very seriously and a government who makes responsible decisions.

Mr. Speaker, this Budget was a much anticipated one. People were given due notice sometime before the Budget that we were going to have difficulties, that we would have a deficit, and following so many years of surpluses, that was a different place for us in this Province – a completely different place for us. I do not know how many years of surplus we had – five or six, seven years of surpluses – and now suddenly we are in a place where we are going to have a deficit. So that sort of took people by surprise. When you have so many years of prosperity, you get used to a certain standard of life and I guess it makes it a little more difficult and a bit of a challenge to accept reversal of that.

So we were in a different place, Mr. Speaker, with this Budget, and as a result this Budget is a very contentious one. It has gotten a lot of publicity, it has gotten a lot of hype, it has gotten a lot of discussion, it has gotten a lot of negative reaction, and that is to be expected when you change horses, like we did after six or seven years.

Mr. Speaker, a lot has been said in these discussions about the way we spent money over the last number of years, how we squandered money, how we spent it recklessly. I know, Mr. Speaker, this has been said several times by members on this side of the House, and it bears repeating. When we took over this Province in 2003, we took over a Province that was virtually bankrupt – certainly our infrastructure was bankrupt. I can remember, Mr. Speaker, out in one of the main communities in my district, Placentia, the infrastructure crumbling. Water and sewer not being operable, roads not fit to drive on. I noticed the atmosphere that had developed in that community in the previous ten years.

Mr. Speaker, as a result of this government's shrewd and prudent fiscal investments – mostly in the oil industry, but also as a result of the Atlantic Accord benefits – we have turned this Province around. We are able to invest billions of dollars into rebuilding this Province. Mr. Speaker, can you imagine what this Province would be like today if we continued with the policies that were in effect in 2003? Can you imagine where we would be? All we have to do is ask ourselves to make the comparison: Where were we in 2003, and where are we today? It is a very simple comparison to make, and the difference is significant.

We were able to have some prosperous years, and we had a lot of money to spend. Mr. Speaker, we are told that we squandered that money; we squandered it. Well, where did we squander it? We squandered it on roads. We squandered it on water and sewer. We squandered it on schools. We squandered it on dialysis units, social housing initiatives, drug therapies, child protection, education, and freezing tuition. We squandered it in a lot of ways, Mr. Speaker, in a lot of places, if that is what you call squandering.

In my own district, Mr. Speaker, we squandered it on a new high school in Placentia and we squandered it on $16 million worth of roads. We squandered it on water and sewer. Now we are going to squander $40 million on a new bridge. We squandered $250,000 on a sewer outlet we just put in St. Mary's. We squandered $500,000 on a water system we just started in St. Bride's. We squandered $2 million on water improvements we made in Long Harbour; $3 million worth of infrastructure developments in Whitbourne. We squandered money all over the place, Mr. Speaker.

We also paid down our debt. According to the bonding agencies and the banks, the Bank of Canada, we did everything right. Can you imagine what our Province would be like today if we had continued the policies we had in 2003? Can you imagine what our health care services would have been like, what shapes our schools would be in, what shape our municipal infrastructure would be in, our roads would be in?

Mr. Speaker, we had money and we spent it. We spent it to rebuild this Province. It has been said several times over here that it is not rocket science. We spent it to rebuild this Province, and we had to.

It was interesting, yesterday I heard the Member for St. Barbe saying ten years of reckless spending, spending the Province into ruins. He said we are spending into ruins. My God, we took it out of ruins in 2003. As a result, Mr. Speaker, we have today an economy in this Province that is driven by private capital investment: $11 billion this year alone. Eleven billion dollars of capital investment, that is what is driving the economy in this Province. That came about because of the investments that we made. We rebuilt this Province so that companies could come in and make that private investment.

I do not have to go beyond my district, the Placentia, Argentia, Long Harbour area, where we invested millions and millions and millions of dollars in roads and schools and bridges. As a result of that, we have a thriving economy in that area today, with billions of dollars being invested into the economy. Members have already spoken here tonight about the high employment rates in this Province, highest ever, second highest in the country in wages. People are buying houses; people are buying cars. Mr. Speaker, the economy is thriving; it is white-hot.

Compared to 2003, this is the economy, this is the Province that we now have. This is the situation we set up for ourselves. Where were we in 2003? All we have to do is look back ten years. We are the envy of the rest of the country.

We keep hearing from the other side the gloom and doom of the day in this Province. It is unreal. The future was never brighter. We rebuilt this Province. I cannot overemphasize it; we rebuilt it. As a result of rebuilding it, companies are in and investing monies in this Province, $11 billion this year. That is what is driving our economy. That did not happen accidentally.

Mr. Speaker, we came to a point where we did not have the revenue to spend any more. The different sides of the ledgers were not in balance. We had more expenditures than we took in revenues because of what happened in the global economy with the oil production business and whatnot last year.

We had to cut back; we could not afford it any more. That is not rocket science. That is the reasonable thing to do. Isn't that what any reasonable person would do in their household? Isn't that what you would do in your households? Is there anybody in this House who would not do the same thing in their household budgets?

Let me ask you this: What do the people of this Province expect from their government? Do they want to carry on and spend, spend, spend and get ourselves deeper into debt? Is that what they want? They elected this party to govern. They elected us to be good stewards of their dollar. That is what they elected us for and it is their money. The Minister of Natural Resources says all the time it is not our money; it is the people's money. They elected us to be good stewards of that money.

Do they want us to put up taxes? I doubt it. Do they want us to borrow? I doubt it. Do they want us to run up the deficit? I doubt it. They want us to govern responsibly – and I will use that word again; the electorate wants us to govern responsibly. They want us, if we have to make tough decisions, to make them. That is why they elect us. They tell us we are electing you; do what you have to do to keep this Province sound. They want us to protect and secure the future of our children and our grandchildren. They put that responsibility on this government. That is what they want, and that is what we are doing.

Now, there are always those who say yes, you can cut. Go ahead and cut, as long as you do not me. If you do not cut my program, cutting is fine. You are always going to have those people out there. Reduce the spending, as long as it does not affect me. You are always going to have those.

When you make cuts, you are going to get negative reaction. Job cuts are painful. They are painful for families. So you are going to get a negative reaction. Cuts to a program at CNA, you are going to get a reaction from instructors and students. You have to expect reactions.

Mr. Speaker, compare us to 2003 or back in the 1990s when there were significant cuts made, thousands of cuts being made in the public service, we are talking a different economic climate today considerably than what we were talking then. I know people who were laid off in this Budget cut one week and had a job in the private sector the next week because the jobs are out there. We are talking a different economic climate now altogether.

Yes, no one likes cuts. No one wants to lose their jobs. No family wants to be affected that way, but we are working in a different economic climate altogether today than we were in 2003 and than we were in the middle of the 1990s. Mr. Speaker, this is a different economic climate. The cuts are always painful and you expect reaction.

The Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair before she left in her farewell speech said, "politics is not for the faint of heart." If you have a responsible government, you have to make tough decisions and you take the reaction. You have to expect the reaction. Well, Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate and regrettable sometimes the tone that the reaction takes.

The Minister of Transportation in his presentation last week or earlier this week mentioned when the Premier put up her hand and said this is what I am putting my hand up for in politics, she did not put her hand up for some the reaction she got as a result of this Budget. This is unfortunate; that is regrettable that people do that. Nobody gets into this business to look for death threats or threats on your property, your home or your family. That is not what you sign up for, so it is unfortunate and regrettable that it happened.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, we know when we get into this business that you have to make tough decisions. People expect you to make tough decisions. They do not want you to take the position to make the decisions that are politically sound. They do not want you to do that. They want you to be responsible. They do not want you to compromise the future of the children and grandchildren in this Province; they do not want you to do that. They want you to make responsible decisions to make sure that does not happen.

Mr. Speaker, that is one of the things that I admire about this Premier. I know other people on the other side are nodding their heads, bobbing their heads over there, here they go praising up their Premier again. One of the things I admire about this Premier is that she governs by principle, not by political polls. She is prepared to take the political hit to do what is right. Because when you govern that way, you will govern responsibly – and I use that word again.

If you govern by political polls, it helps with popularity, sure; but is it in the best interests of the Province? This Premier is willing to take the negative impact, willing to take the drop in the polls to do the right thing. One thing this Premier will never do, she will never compromise the future of our children and grandchildren in the Province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: I am telling you, Mr. Speaker, this is the kind of honesty, integrity, and leadership that people in this Province expect. At the end of the day, that is what they will demand. They may get caught up in the moment now, in the negative reaction now, but at the end of the day what people want is honesty, integrity and leadership, and that is what this government is doing.

Mr. Speaker, when I hear the members opposite, especially the Third Party, you would think we were living in an era of poverty and rats, gloom and doom, a Third World country. That is all we ever hear from the side over there. They decried a lack of housing, they decried a lack of day care, they decried a lack of home care, and they decried a lack of pharmacare, the desperate state of our health care, the desperate state of our educational system. That is all they come up with all the time.

They do not have a monopoly, Mr. Speaker, on caring for the vulnerable and the needy in our society. They do not have a monopoly on that. Yes, we have the vulnerable with us. We have the poor with us. The Bible says we will always have them. We will never reach that Utopian level where we can address all the needs of these people. We will never get there. We will try. We will strive to alleviate the situation as much as we can. Will never get to that Utopia where the needs of all the poor are addressed. We will never get to there.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance said tonight 60 per cent of our Budget is spent on social programs, 60 per cent. Sixty percent of our Budget is spent on social programs. We could very well be called a socialist government over here, 60 per cent spent on social programs, because of the way we invest in our seniors and in our poor, and in our needy and in our vulnerable. So when they preach about the needy, when they preach about the vulnerable, when they preach about the underprivileged, they do not have a monopoly on that. They do not have a monopoly on that, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, you get tired sometimes hearing about the same – everybody should have daycare. Everybody should have home care. There should be full-time kindergarten. They have no idea how to pay for it, no suggestions of how to pay for it. Spend, spend, spend out of one side of their mouths, spend, spend, spend and on the other side criticize the government for wasting money.

Spend, spend, and spend. Yet, at the same time, no way to pay for their programs; yet, at the same time, they are against development. They are against Muskrat Falls. They are against Hebron. Hebron will return us $23 billion because of the way we invested. Muskrat Falls will return $20 billion in terms of the contract.

Mr. Speaker, if you are going to have all of these programs, and we need them, then we have to have revenues to pay for them. So we have to invest. It is not rocket science to know we have to invest in the future. How they can be against that is beyond me.

They are against development. They are against investment. They are against jobs. They are against all the ways and means of diversifying the economy. They want to diversify the economy all right, through wood pellets, crab shells and shrimp shells. That is how they want to diversify the economy. They are against development. They are against investment. They are against jobs.

Socialist governments, Mr. Speaker, have a record of spending taxpayers' money. You have taxpayers' money until it runs out. Then they have nothing to replace it with and they are tanked out. That is what happens in socialist governments.

Mr. Speaker, I know my time is up. There are a lot of other things I wanted to talk about. Maybe I will get another chance.

This government is – I will come back to the word – responsible. People elected this government to be responsible. That is what we have been, Mr. Speaker, responsible. Responsible management is what we are about. At the end of the day, that is what people want. After all this hype is gone and the negative reaction is gone from the other side, people will say thank God this government acted in a responsible fashion.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member opposite is fear mongering again. We are seeing lots of spin from the members on the government side here.

One thing, Mr. Speaker, that is not rocket science, it is accounting. If we look at Budget 2013, and we look at the fiscal forecast as to where we are going, we look at revenue from last year and this estimated upcoming year, it is supposed to be around $7 billion, on par with (inaudible). If we look at where expenditures are, expenditures are going to rise slightly.

The Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs said you do not want a government that is going to be borrowing. No, you do not want a government that is going to be increasing the debt. If you look at the debt-servicing expenditures, what they were last year at $808 million and where they are going to be this year at $847.6 million estimated, that is an increase in debt-servicing expenses. You are going to have to spend more to service your debt.

If we go forward and look at the Budget outlook of where we are going to be in 2013-2014, the revenue is $7 billion. Next year revenue is supposed to drop about $60 million. In 2015-2016, I do not know what is going to happen there. There are no details on it. Government is hoping revenue is going to jump up over $870 million in the election year coming.

Net expenditures; let's look at where program expenses are going to be. Well, they are anticipating that in 2013-2014, $6.7 billion; again, in 2014-2015, $6.7 billion. Then it is going to drop off to $6.6 billion in 2015- 2016; so less money, despite almost $1 billion in revenue in 2015-2016. They are going to be spending a whole lot less in government programs and services.

If we look at where the debt is going, the debt is going from $850 million, to $880 million, to $931 million in the debt-servicing ratio. This government has a lot of plans for borrowing and to service their debt. That is not something you can hide from when you are looking at the outlook and the accounting process. We cannot practice creative accounting. The numbers speak for themselves.

If we look at the main economic indicators there and we look at employment of where they were in 2012. It was anticipated it was going to increase, 2013 it going to go up. In 2014, when peak employment should be happening with the Muskrat Falls Project of about – what was it the government is always saying, about 3,000-plus jobs? Do you know what employment is going to do in this Province? It is supposed to go down by 0.9 per cent. That is quite a bit.

Then, in 2015 as well, only jump up 0.6. There would still be a net loss in those two years when this project is supposed to be at its peak, when we are supposed to have employment. This sends a clear indication. Is government looking at doing further and further layoffs that is going to impact the employment situation, or is the economy starting to really bottom out here that the jobs are just not going to be available?

Right now we have a high number of people who are unemployed. For every job vacancy that is out there, there are sixteen people who are unemployed in Newfoundland and Labrador. Not everything is rosy when it comes to looking at where we are in Newfoundland and Labrador, and government certainly cannot paint it that way. That, to me, says a lot.

I will remind everyone in this House that I am the youngest member in the House of Assembly at twenty-seven years old. I took part in the Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy. In 2008, the recession hit and there were no jobs for me when I graduated –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: - with a Bachelor of Commerce degree. I had to move away like many others and go out West. I worked in Alberta for the Association of Professional Engineers out there. That was something I had to do, like so many others.

Now, many members across the floor are saying that we have the second-highest income at $929 next to Alberta. Well, I would like to see the statistic of how much of that is actually earned from Alberta or as part of the commuter economy because that is what is sustaining the Straits region of my district and many other parts. So many are part of the commuter economy. They are doing this fly-in, fly-out where they are earning high wages. There has been more income than ever before in my district.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: We need to look at how this money is being distributed into the economy and if we are getting best productive value when it comes to how government is investing money in areas. You can have a high level of income on average by a small percentage of people, but is this money being spent in the local economy if people are actually living away for the bulk of that year and if they are keeping dual properties going? It would be much better in the economy if that money was actually earned here, and not all of it is. So that is something that needs to be looked at.

One of the things I see that in this Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy of 2009, in November, it had a lot of promises. I had forty-one initiatives. Since that time, a number of initiatives have not materialized and some of them have been cut. That was a three-year plan. In November 2012, that would have looked at concluding. It said that in this whole plan and in the whole document that was there they were going to post public reports on the progress. The minister's committee, and interdepartmental committee, would be meeting and discussing on how it would move forward. These things are not made public. They are not available.

So that sends a lot of questions around youth, but government really set this expectation that there would be jobs and that there would be opportunity for young people in Newfoundland and Labrador. Now, with a number of people who are going to be new graduates with hiring freezes placed in the public sector, what is that going to mean when we do the review on the regional health authorities and when we look at Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic? What is that going to mean for these people who are studying to be a health professional?

We saw that the Minister of Health and Community Services cut a number of specialists in health prevention. There are people who have come forward and they have been graduated in things like being a dietician and cannot get jobs. They have to leave the Province.

We are losing some of our best and brightest. That has a big impact because the government wants to have a population growth strategy and actually attract young people to have families in that climate here. Yet the job opportunities are far more limited and housing prices are extremely high. Not all the programs and services that are available in other provinces are available here. Things like affordable daycare or child care is not available here in Newfoundland and Labrador for the working families who are at a higher level of income. They do not qualify for any type of subsidy, and then people are paying hundreds of dollars a month for child care. That can be quite an expensive task. These are types of things that need to be considered when we are looking at trying to build an economy and trying to build a future for younger people, looking forward.

Instead of the Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy, we are more looking at SOYA – Sending Our Youth Away. That is quite disheartening that we are going to lose maybe a generation, because we lost a generation with the collapse of our cod fishery, where we created a commuter economy, where we sent so many people away, and we have lost nearly 80,000 people since that time. We do need younger people; it has a significant impact on how our economy is going to move forward.

I think we see some of this contraction by a Budget that creates a lot of instability, that really, without appropriate consultation, without looking at the impacts of some of these cuts, it is going to have far-reaching implication on how we move forward. It is up to all of us, as elected officials, to bring forward these viewpoints and try to make sure that what we do as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are in the best interests of the people of this Province, so that future generations like myself – I am a young person, hope to have a young family –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: – hope to stay in Newfoundland and Labrador, but with regressive policies that are put forward in a Budget like 2013, it is certainly going to direct more people to leave.

I have not had the full opportunity to question the Estimates of the Department of Innovation, Business and Rural Development, but with the cutbacks to the Regional Economic Development Boards and what they actually meant on the ground, the grassroots, and what they were looking at doing, in terms of advancing community, advancing an economy. I said in my own district the Nordic Economic Development Board completely administered in their office $13.5 million, besides everything else that they had done in projects and proposals, but that is a net benefit directly of almost $10 million into the local economy. That certainly has to count for something.

Now, there is money in this year's Budget for regional economic development services of about $1.1 million, and for community economic development of $12.5 million. That is $13.6 million, but we do not know what this is going to mean to the organizations, how it is going to be administered. There are not very many details on this. If we look at that we do not have the key organizations on the ground, and many of the small towns cannot afford to hire economic development officers, we have lost capacity.

Last year, there was $2.7 million spent when we look at regional economic development in the Estimates of a $9.1 million budget. Even though there is a lot of money budgeted for regional and community economic development in the Estimates, there is no indication that money is going to be spent.

Like last year, the Department of IBRD had $84 million in its budget and it spent $58 million. This year, it has increased its budget to $93 million. Yet, it has cut at the core what it really means to many rural communities across Newfoundland and Labrador when they lost their RED Boards.

I have not had the opportunity yet to question the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. I will have that opportunity, but there was a 33 per cent cut to his department. That is quite significant when you are cutting 33 per cent of the budget from an industry that employs 20,000 people in every nook and cranny basically of the Province. Somebody is impacted.

We saw that the government decided this year that they would look at taking from the processors, from the buyers, and from the operators who require the licences. Some of the increases are 150 per cent or higher. They are planning on generating $450,000 in revenue from these licences. That is up from $260,000 last year. That whole section of Estimates is planning on making a profit of $18,600, whereas last year it cost nearly $400,000.

There are less fish plants this year to process, there are less buyers, and there is less competition. How is this going to be achieved? It is on the backs of a few. That cost of increase to operation ultimately needs to be passed on or will be passed on indirectly to the harvester or to the consumer of the fish product. That makes us less and less and less competitive. That is something that we need to really look at.

How can we see how accurate Estimates and these numbers are being? There are great variances. There were great variances in the Budget, and not too much has changed. It almost seems like we have come up with a number of $1.6 billion deficit out of nowhere, and then that evaporated.

So, I really would like to see if there was a similar investment made this year as last year when we are looking at moving forward on the overall economy for our fishery and how we are going to achieve the things that we need to do for small communities. We do not see funding directly listed for co-operatives and for co-operative funding.

I have one of the oldest co-ops in Newfoundland and Labrador, and even in the country, through the Grenfell Memorial Co-op. What Grenfell did in the process of creating sawmill co-operatives, of creating a fishery co-operatives, agricultural co-operatives, craft co-operatives, it certainly means a lot as to how that developed into an administrative hub, an incredible economy, and they developed it as a health care administrative centre.

Unfortunately, right now, the hospital is being cut back, the investment is not being made that should be made to provide the services to the people of that region, and the region has been greatly downgraded with the harsh decision of removing the air ambulance from that area. When it comes to looking at equipment sitting on the shelf at the hospital and not being put into use, we see how government has pulled back on health care in my region, how they have pulled back on education, post-secondary education.

We look at cuts to the College of the North Atlantic – quite significant when it comes to looking at the ABE program and how it was the only one offered on the Great Northern Peninsula, and how the transition program of CAS and what that meant, and how people would transition then into other programs. It was quite the feeder program. To cut the first year Engineering Technology program, when this year there was quite a number of applicants applying. There is potential to make small campuses work and adapt and use technology, but we are not seeing that.

The Minister of Environment and Conservation cut interpretation at Burnt Cape as an ecological reserve. At that centre there is one of the rarest plants – it is only found on the Great Northern Peninsula – there are 300 rare species, and it was one of the only ecological reserves that was fast-tracked because it had the approval of all stakeholders. The Nature Conservancy of Canada put in money for a gift to help with this process when it comes to developing ecological reserves, protecting the environment, and education. That was a commitment provided on behalf of the people and on behalf of the government, and how the act states.

Yet pulling back on education and cutting things like the Nature's Classroom has an impact and it certainly does not say much for the way this government feels about protecting the environment and some of our most precious species. It cut fish and wildlife enforcement officers –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: – opening up the gate for poaching on the Great Northern Peninsula, leaving one active position right now. Hopefully there will be more positions filled because it is such a vast area. You have a number of entities. You have a big snowmobile trail there and ATVs. They deal with salmon fishing recovery.

When you look at the outfitters and making sure it is a multi-million dollar industry in my district. It is certainly recognized that they have faced challenges. Out of the 1,500 cuts to moose licences, 1,250 of them happened on the Great Northern Peninsula. That is quite significant when it comes to what we need to do to look at conserving and protecting our environment, and still being able to sustain the economy.

Seniors in my district and a number of low-income families were looking at the Residential Energy Efficiency Program. That was announced in January of every year, but no, it was held back until April this year. Now the program has been cut by half so only half the people are going to be able to use it. Because of that, it slows down and it delays the process. When people need to get work done outside or get the contracting work done, it may not match up to when they are going to be able to get the skilled labour to pair with the construction season. Was that a good decision?

You talk about the investment in infrastructure. I have a road in my district, Route 434, that had stumps growing out, and several of them, after the road was graded by the Department of Transportation and Works. Do you know what? They went back and they covered it up. They covered it over. They did not take it out.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: We can actually see how we are looking after people, and looking after people in small rural communities, who need services as well. They deserve to have a road that is accessible and should not have to drive over tree stumps. It is quite unacceptable in today's society. There have been so many things the Budget has impacted when it comes to transportation and not having an advanced transportation strategy.

The cutbacks are quite significant to tourism and the tourism marketing. There are so many things in this Budget as to why I cannot support it. We have not really seen the new ideas that are going to bring forward the revenues so that we can advance our economy in Newfoundland and Labrador so our future generations will be able to thrive and prosper here. I really fear that our rural economies are really set for a backward approach with Budget 2013.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On that note, I move, seconded by the Minister of Innovation, Business and Rural Development, that the House do now adjourn.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that the House do now adjourn.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

Tomorrow being Wednesday, Private Members' Day, this House stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m.

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