March
24, 2014
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. XLVII No. 6
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman):
Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Before we start regular
proceedings today, I want to share with you a result of a review that I had
completed, as a result of some issues that have arisen in the House in recent
past. This is not long but a little
bit lengthier than normal, so I would ask you to bear with me because it is
providing some direction to the House.
I am rising today to speak
on an issue of concern in this House with respect to the tabling of documents
during debate and Question Period.
The frequency with which such tabling has been requested has caused me to review
the text and precedents on such tabling of documents and I wish to indicate the
manner in which I intend to proceed in dealing with the issue.
First, there is no
distinction made in the parliamentary precedents between a document referred to
or quoted – the distinction between debate and Question Period, there is no
distinction.
Also private members do not
table documents from which they have read.
O'Brien and Bosc, on page 434, states, “There has been a long-standing
practice in the House that private Members may not table documents, official or
otherwise.”
O'Brien and Bosc
states on page 609, “Any document quoted by a Minister in debate or in
response to a question during Question Period must be tabled upon request…”.
That same paragraph, a little further on, goes on to say, “….a Minister
is not at liberty to read or quote from a despatch (an official written message
on government affairs) or other state papers without being prepared to table it
if this can be done without prejudice to the public interest.”
O'Brien and Bosc, on that
same page, quotes a 1941 ruling of Speaker Glen which addresses the reasons for
requiring tabling of documents read by ministers.
“The principle upon which this is based is that where information is
given to the House, the House itself is entitled to the same information as the
honourable member who may quote the document.”
This explanation is
similarly stated in Bourinot on page 347 of his volume on
Parliamentary Procedure and Practice in the Dominion of Canada.
Sometimes a document is
clearly an official report or stated government policy, and sometimes it is not.
Documents issued by the government as a policy document fall within the
category of a “state paper”. They
can, however, be excluded if it is found to be in the public interest to do so.
If a minister wishes to
invoke this exception, he or she must stand in his place on a point of order and
make the argument before the House.
Personal correspondence has
also been quoted and in doing so, the minister makes that letter a document that
must be tabled. O'Brien and Bosc
states on page 610, “If a Minister quotes a private letter in debate, the letter
becomes a public document and must be tabled upon request.”
Briefing notes, however,
being excluded from tabling where “referred to” – and this is an important
distinction. O'Brien and Bosc on
page 610 states, “A public document referred to but not quoted by a Minister
need not be tabled.” It continues in
that same paragraph and goes on to say, “However, a minister is not obliged to
table personal or briefing notes referred to during debate or Question Period.”
Any confusion that has
arisen with respect to these seemingly clear principles appears to be related to
one's interpretation of the terms “quote”, “cite”, or “refer”.
Ministers, as you all know,
come prepared with their own department prepared notes, which allow them to give
accurate responses to questions in Question Period and to clearly and accurately
debate bills, resolutions, and other motions before this House.
Ministers frequently speak
with papers in their hands and will glance down at those papers or their tablets
or smart phones to ensure the accuracy of their statements and to refresh their
minds as to the points they wish to make.
It is not the nature of the document, nor referring to it that requires
the tabling, it is the actual quoting from the text of the document that
triggers the need for tabling.
Members must use their own
words, as that is the purpose of debate.
Documents used to drive home an argument or a point is the exception,
hence the requirement to table such documents.
The third edition
translation of Parliamentary Procedure in Quebec best states the quoting
principle on Chapter 13, page 369, and it goes on to say, “Quoting from a
document implies that the speaker has communicated an excerpt from it.
Consequently, a minister is not required to table a document he or she
referred to without quoting from it.”
The Speaker of this House,
on December 5, 1990, page 17 of Hansard, “A Minister who summarizes a
correspondence, but does not actually quote from it, is not bound to lay it upon
the Table.”
An Acting Speaker of the
House of Commons, Speaker McClelland, as written in the House of Commons
debates, April 29, 1988, ruled, “The Minister is not required to table the
document unless he has quoted directly from the document.”
The House of Commons debated
the terms “cite” and “quote” in 1988 and in a ruling on April 25, 1988, from
selected decisions of Speaker Fraser, the Speaker determined that despite the
member's arguments on the use of “cite” and “quote” by Erskine May, he goes on
to say, “…For there to be an obligation on the Minister to table a document, it
has to have been actually quoted from.”
It appears from my review
that the word “cite” is often used when in fact the appropriate word would be
“quote”. A minister may “cite” the
source of material, the author, or even the page of a document, but unless there
is an actual “quote” of the text, the tabling requirement would not apply.
All ministers glance down at
and refer to their briefing notes from time to time; however, the rule is when
an actual quotation of words occurs, the document must be tabled upon demand.
Erskine May, twenty-fourth
edition, page 446, states that the Speaker ruled “…that summarizing or
confirming the accuracy of other summaries did not bring the rule into
operation…”.
Use of thoughts, data and
information in a briefing note, interpreted into a minister's own words, does
not make it a quote. A restatement
of a cost, a percentage or other number, usually at the request of another
member, does not make it a quotation either, unless it is in the context of a
larger sentence or paragraph that is read aloud in the House.
It would be very difficult for any member or the Speaker to absolutely
infer that glancing at and using one's briefing or personal notes in this sense
is the use of a quote to advance the debate.
If it is obvious to the
Speaker that a minister is reading or quoting the text of material in his or her
hand, the minister will be compelled to have it tabled.
In this regard I wish to add
that Parliamentary Secretaries will be required to table a document that he or
she has quoted from where the document relates to his or her assigned portfolio
but otherwise will be treated as a private member.
Also, the Speaker is
compelled, as in all cases, to accept the word of the minister as to the truth
of his statement that a document has not been read from.
I would like to quote from
Beauchesne's sixth edition at paragraph 494, which states, “It has been formally
ruled by Speakers that statements by Members respecting themselves and
particularly within their own knowledge must be accepted…”.
It goes on to say, “On rare occasions this may result in the House having
to accept two contradictory accounts of the same incident.”
As was ruled by Speaker
Fraser in the House of Commons with respect to his previously mentioned ruling
on April 25, 1988, “…As to whether the Minister actually quoted from a document,
the minister's statement on March 29 that he has no such study, that he did not
quote from any such study and that he has nothing that he could table, stands on
its own and, according to our tradition, the House must accept his word.”
We must take an hon. member
at his or her word that a document has not been quoted or read from.
By extension of this, if the
Speaker, however, directs a minister to table a document, unless the document
can clearly be argued as exempt for the reasons of public good, the minister
must table the document without delay.
The entire document must be tabled and not just a severed page or pages.
As stated by Erskine May in
the twenty-fourth edition on page 447, “…it is the responsibility of the
Government and not of the chair to see that documents that may be relevant to
debates are laid before the House…in a timely manner…”.
If the document is in an
electronic format, a paper copy of the document quoted from must be obtained by
the minister and laid upon the Table.
A document that a minister
volunteers to table, which can be presented at the minister's convenience, need
not be tabled. In our own House on
November 9, 1983 the Speaker had said the “…Minister might have indicated that
he would table some information but it was not at the instruction of the
Chair…and the chair would not enforce…”.
On November 10, in our own Hansard, page 6287, “…if the Minister
undertook to table a document, no time limit is set…”.
As we go forward, the manner
in which this Speaker will deal with issues with respect to tabling of
documents, what I have shared with you today is how it will be treated in this
House on a go-forward basis.
Thank you for your
attention.
Statements by Members.
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER:
Today we have statements from the Member for the
District of Bay of Islands; the Member for the District of St. John's North; the
Member for the District of Mount Pearl South; the Member for the District of
Bonavista South; the Member for the District of Port de Grave; and the Member
for the District of Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi.
The hon. the Member for the
District of Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE:
Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to
recognize and extend congratulations to a group of young athletes from Sacred
Heart Elementary school in Curling.
On Saturday, this group of
athletes won the 2014 West Coast Grade 6 Girls Basketball Championship.
This is the third championship for the team, having already won the Tiny
Titans and the RNC Grade 6 Tournaments.
Hard work, dedication, and commitment to the team are the trademarks of
these young players.
Mr. Speaker, members of the
team include Laura Green, Kristen Buckle, Morgan Young, Madison Hackett, Emma
Welshman, Jenna King, Taylor Butt, Abigail Power Petten, Olivia Porter, Maddy
Mollon, Emily Butt, Adrianna Sheppard, Holly Mackey, Maggie Hunt, and Megan
Allan.
I am very proud to have had
the opportunity to work with this group of young athletes.
Despite their coach and with the help of Lisa Young, April Butt, and
Samantha Bennett, these players demonstrated what true sportsmanship and team
spirit is all about. They are true
representatives of Sacred Heart school, and I am confident they will continue
with their basketball careers.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all
members to join with me in congratulating the Sacred Heart Grade 6 Sabres, and
yes ladies, I am impressed.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY:
Mr. Speaker, on February 22, fifty-nine students
took part in the annual Spelling Bee sponsored by
The Telegram newspaper.
Students from across
Newfoundland and Labrador took part in the local spelling bees to qualify for
the main event held at Holy Heart Theatre in St. John's.
In addition to improving students' spelling skills and increasing their
knowledge, the annual Spelling Bee provides valuable experience in developing
students' self-confidence – a necessary skill for success in public speaking,
athletics, the arts, and other areas.
The Telegram
Spelling Bee provided two students who attend St. Andrew's Elementary School in
St. John's North, Aaron Sarkar and Luesma Fully, with an opportunity to showcase
their talents at the highest level.
Special thanks goes to
English as a Second Language teacher Ms Tina Rowe for organizing this year's
Spelling Bee at St. Andrew's.
Special congratulations go to Emily Hynes of Holy Trinity Elementary in Torbay,
champion of The Telegram Spelling Bee,
who will represent Newfoundland and Labrador in the 2014 Scripps National
Spelling Bee to be held in Washington, D.C.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all
hon. members join me in congratulating all of the participants of the 2014
Telegram Spelling Bee.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.
MR. LANE:
Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand in this
hon. House to offer congratulations to a group of individuals who have made a
significant contribution to sport in my community.
The Mount Pearl Sports Hall
of Fame was founded in 1995 by the Mount Pearl Sport Alliance and since that
time has inducted seventy-one tremendous individuals.
Today, I would like to acknowledge the achievements of five others.
Gerry O'Brien has been
inducted in the athlete category for his tremendous accomplishments in the sport
of soccer. Inducted into the builder
category are: Mary Holloway for her contribution to Special Olympics, Dan Maher
for his dedication and commitment to both soccer and Special Olympics, Michael
Mooney for his significant impact on the soccer community, and Paul Boland for
his tremendous contribution to youth bowling.
These individuals are a credit to their respective sports and to their
community.
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:
The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. LITTLE:
Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues, I rise in this
House today to pay tribute to Clarence Coles of Elliston.
Although he is no longer with us, Mr. Coles deserves to be recognized as
a man who served this country with honour.
Clarence was born in
Elliston, Newfoundland and Labrador in March 1930.
He fished with his father at the age of eight and moved to Ontario to
work in the 1940s.
Mr. Coles enlisted in the
Navy in 1953 and went on to serve the HMCS
Magnificent, Athabasca, Bonaventure, and the
Fraser military ships.
While on the HMCS Magnificent,
Clarence took part in the Canadian Honour Guard in England for the Coronation of
Queen Elizabeth II in 1953. He
received the Canadian Forces Declaration and received three Good Conduct badges
in 1964, then was promoted to Corporal in 1965.
Clarence married in 1956 and
fathered five children. He retired
from the Canadian Navy in 1971 and returned back to Elliston in 1992.
Mr. Coles received a Special Service Medal and NATO Bar in 2006.
Clarence was an avid hunter
and sports fishermen. On January 6,
2014 Mr. Coles passed away.
Mr. Speaker, hon.
colleagues, please join me in honouring Mr. Clarence Coles for his lifetime of
dedication to this country, Canada.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
MR. LITTLEJOHN:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today in this hon.
House to remember and pay tribute to Mr. George Mercer of Coley's Point.
Mr. Mercer passed away recently at the age of ninety-four, with his
family by his side.
Mr. Mercer was a former
World War II naval veteran who, like many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians,
joined the Royal Navy. He was
honoured to serve his country and defend the many freedoms we have today.
He was a proud member of the Royal Canadian Legion serving as District
Governor and President of Branch 32, Bay Roberts throughout his years.
Mr. Mercer became Mayor of
Bay Roberts in 1973 and served his community and served his community for eight
years in that position. During his
time as mayor, the town saw the paving of Coley's Point and the beginning of
water and sewer infrastructure in the town.
He was a successful businessman, running his own business for many years,
with a reputation for quality service.
I ask all hon. members to
join me today in paying tribute to Mr. Mercer, who unselfishly served his
country and community, for which we all are thankful.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in the House today to
call attention to the fact that one of Canada's most Outstanding Principals
works in my district at Holy Heart High School.
Sheldon Barry, along with Roger Gillingham of Baccalieu Collegiate in Old
Perlican, was presented with his award on February 25 by registered charity, The
Learning Partnership.
If the feedback I get from
students and families is anything to go by, Sheldon is more than deserving of
this reward. He told
The Globe and Mail one of his biggest
challenges is helping his students understand why they should want to be in
school at all, especially when they can see unfilled, well-paying jobs that may
not always ask for post-secondary education.
He does it, though, in many
ways, not least of which is his personal interaction with the students.
Sheldon is in the corridors talking to them, leading a team that develops
innovative programs to encourage staying in school, and generally being the
inspiration every parent would like his or her kids to have.
I ask all members of the
House to join me in congratulating Sheldon Barry, one of Canada's Outstanding
Principals for 2014.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Labrador and Aboriginal
Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH:
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to
acknowledge and congratulate Jason Watkins and Kevin Willmott of Labrador West,
winners of the 2014 Cain's Quest Snowmobile Endurance Race.
I also take this opportunity to recognize all those who participated in
this year's competition.
Cain's Quest is touted as
the world's longest and toughest snowmobile endurance race, and this year was
the toughest yet for racers.
Twenty-nine motivated teams started the race in Labrador West on March 1, and
frigid temperatures and treacherous conditions tested them for most of the 3,600
kilometre route throughout Labrador.
Eight teams of two crossed the finish line on Saturday, March 8, and it was my
pleasure to celebrate with them and more than 1,100 participants, friends, and
supporters at the closing ceremonies in Labrador City.
Mr. Speaker, this
world-class event brings economic benefits to the entire region and provides an
opportunity to showcase Labrador's rugged natural beauty to the world.
The provincial government is proud to support this unique sporting
challenge with an investment of $95,000 this year.
Labradorians continue to
embrace this race, bringing communities and cultures together in the spirit of
achievement. Checkpoint communities
were more engaged this year than ever before, bursting with excitement as teams
came through. The excitement online
also reached record levels this year, with over 57,000 visitors from more than
seventy countries around the world following online during race week.
Cain's Quest began in 2006,
and this year marks the seventh race challenge.
Participation has more than doubled over the years and we look forward to
continued success. This one of a
kind extreme event is planned and managed by a volunteer-run, non-profit
organization. As Minister
Responsible for Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, I would like to take this
opportunity to recognize and to thank all of the volunteers and sponsors of the
biggest and best Cain's Quest to date.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon.
members to join me in applauding and celebrating all of the racers who dared to
take the challenge of Cain's Quest across the Big Land; and recognizing all of
those volunteers, sponsors, and friends who helped support racers in their
journey.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. EDMUNDS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an
advance copy of his statement. Mr.
Speaker, we on this side as well would like to congratulate Jason Watkins and
Kevin Willmott from Labrador West on winning Cain's Quest.
We would also like to congratulate all the participants.
There are no losers participating in such a grueling snowmobile race.
I would like to especially congratulate the teams from Natuashish, Nain,
and Makkovik. Mr. Speaker, we would
also like to congratulate Todd Kent and all the volunteers throughout all of the
communities in Labrador who made it all possible.
What is it like to
participate in Cain's Quest? Imagine
a situation where adrenaline replaces most of your body's requirements.
Imagine frostbite creeping up on you without your knowledge.
Imagine travelling through unfamiliar terrain at night at high speed.
Imagine trying to focus on a small screen that is continuously changing
and blurry from vibration and impact.
Imagine your whole body
screaming for sleep and entering short periods of total exhaustion to wide
awake. Imagine your mind playing
tricks on you and strange visions appearing before you then changing back to
reality. Imagine all of your energy
reserves used up from fighting cold, tension, fatigue, and body-jarring
continuous impact. Imagine doing all
of this while trying to control an 800 pound piece of machinery that is capable
of reaching speeds of 200 kilometres an hour.
Mr. Speaker, you are in Cain's Quest.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an
advance copy of his statement.
Cain's Quest is a shining example of what can be done when creative and
imaginative people put their hearts and minds to a task.
This magnificent event has
become world famous in less than a decade since it was created.
People all over our Province can see from its success what imagination,
dedication and good old hard work can accomplish.
What a race!
Bravo to Jason Watkins and
Kevin Willmott, this year's winners.
Bravo to every team, and bravo to the people who organized the event.
We look forward to next year's Cain's Quest.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. DALLEY:
Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to
outline our government's work in facilitating robust oversight of the Muskrat
Falls Project on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Many senior departmental
officials throughout government have been involved in oversight from initial
planning, to early engineering, to our agreements with Emera, and most
importantly to sanction and financing.
Our government has also
ensured that there has been more information made public about this project than
any other project in the Province's history, providing the opportunity for
review by the public, government, and independent experts including Manitoba
Hydro International, Navigant Consulting, the Board of Commissioners of Public
Utilities, Dr. Wade Locke, and Ziff Energy Group of Calgary.
In addition to our
government's oversight, the level of external due diligence undertaken by the
Government of Canada gave them the confidence and satisfaction in the Muskrat
Falls Project prior to issuing a federal loan guarantee to back the $5 billion
financing for this development. This
effort by Canada was supported by experienced external legal advisors,
independent financial advisors, an independent engineer, and an independent
insurance consultant, all engaged directly by the Government of Canada.
Furthermore, Nalcor's board
of directors and internal audit department also provide oversight.
The provincial government requires Nalcor to report regularly through
annual transparency and accountability reports and Nalcor regularly prepares
financial statements which are audited by the external independent auditor and
integrated into Nalcor's annual business and financial annual reports.
Nalcor holds public annual general meetings where the previous year's
performance is discussed.
Prudent oversight of the
Muskrat Falls Project is a priority for our government and it will continue
through the construction and operation stages of the project.
To strengthen and formalize
the existing oversight for the construction phase of the Muskrat Falls Project,
a departmental committee of Finance, Natural Resources, and Justice, chaired by
the Clerk of the Executive Council, will focus on project costs, scheduling, and
overall project performance.
The committee will review
information provided by external auditors, the independent engineer, and Nalcor;
provide updates and discuss issues with relevant departments; meet regularly
with Nalcor officials; report to Cabinet, which will provide direction to
appropriate ministers as required; and provide quarterly updates to the public
starting in July on project costs, scheduling, and project performance.
Also to be initiated and
made public by Nalcor this year will be a report specific to the Muskrat Falls
Project prepared by Nalcor's external auditors as part of their annual audit.
Nalcor will also issue quarterly consolidated financial statements
starting later this year.
This complements Nalcor's
monthly benefit reports currently released publicly which include details on
employment, construction and procurement activities; construction costs; safety
and environmental activities; stakeholder and community consultation; and
engagement initiatives.
It is a priority for our
government to ensure information on the Muskrat Falls Project will continue to
be made available to the public, while still protecting the commercial interests
of the project.
Mr. Speaker, strong
oversight of the Muskrat Falls Project continues to be undertaken by the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Government of Canada, Nalcor
Energy, project lenders, and independent experts.
This project will provide the least-cost source of electricity for the
future and will benefit Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for generations to
come.
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 thank the minister for his
brief notice today. It was actually
just over five minutes before we received a copy of this statement, nevertheless
providing the opportunity to review the project and providing this oversight.
The minister went on to
mention the PUB. As we know, the PUB
were never given the full opportunity and actually said there was not enough
information then to make a conclusive decision on the project.
What was not mentioned, I
thought, in this release today was about the Joint Review Panel.
Of course, that panel said they could not really justify the project.
That was not mentioned.
It goes on to say about
sanctioning the project and about the oversight and the level of due diligence
that has already been done on this project.
We will say, then, as we have said many times as we have stood in this
House, sanctioning the project without Emera on side, I believe, has
disadvantaged the future of this project in giving Emera the first right of
refusal.
The title of the statement
says, “Provincial Government Facilitates Robust Oversight of the Muskrat Falls
Project”. I actually question the
use of the word robust. A robust
review would have started at the beginning, not when you are $5 billion in
commitments made on this project.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the
announcement by the minister today about quarterly reports by Nalcor as part of
the due diligence is something, as you know, I have mentioned in this House many
times. That is part of the regular
routine for many companies the size of Nalcor.
We actually accept that. We
actually believe that is a good initiative, and we look forward to those
financial reports from Nalcor.
Mr. Speaker, I will conclude
today. The oversight, in our
opinion, is something that should have started earlier, $5 billion into this
project; nevertheless, the committee itself, a committee of bureaucrats should
have been a little more independent in my mind.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. Leader of the Third Party.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for at
least getting it just before going into the House, so we had some idea of what
we were going to be facing.
The oversight being touted
by the minister is still missing the truly independent oversight of an
independent body, such as the Public Utilities Board.
We have an internal committee, yes reporting to Cabinet, internal all the
way through. The decision to release
any information is still in the hands of Cabinet.
They have yet to prove to us that they are going to be more than a
secretive government because that is what we have had up to now.
They have a lot to prove to us and to the people of this Province.
The PUB should have been the
overseeing agency right from the very beginning.
This government missed the opportunity to undo what a Liberal government
did in 1999 when they removed the PUB from overseeing the Lower Churchill
Project.
Mr. Speaker, this is the
biggest investment in our history and we in this House are not going to get a
truly independent oversight. I
really regret to have to say this and I look forward to seeing what this
government is going to do in being open in what they reveal.
Even now we have to wait for July to get an update.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Time for Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
With over $5 billion already
committed to the Muskrat Falls Project, government has finally announced an
oversight committee. Proper
management includes a provision of oversight from the beginning, from the start,
even on small projects, let alone a multi-billion dollar initiative like Muskrat
Falls.
I ask the Premier: With so
much taxpayer money on the line, why did you wait until there was almost $5
billion committed before you added this oversight that was announced today?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
PREMIER MARSHALL:
Mr. Speaker, of course, the premise to the question of the Leader of the
Opposition is incorrect. Oversight
started a long time ago. It started
before sanction. We had people like
Navigant, independent people, look at this: Navigant, MHI, did different reports
in the DG2 numbers and the DG3 numbers.
We also had Dr. Locke do a report; we had Ziff Energy do a report.
We looked at the constitutional issues.
We looked at the Upper Churchill.
There was lots of oversight
before the sanction decision was made.
Then, of course, we were looking at financing.
With financing, the federal government were involved and their lenders
were involved. Nalcor's lenders were
involved; the banks were involved.
They have hired an independent engineer to do oversight.
They had their internal and external counsel.
There was lots of oversight going on.
Now we are into a new phase.
We are now into the construction phase and we feel it was necessary to
enhance – because the people of Newfoundland are telling us they wanted to see
enhanced oversight to this project, the minister has announced that today.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL:
I thank the Premier for his answer, but the
people of this Province also said that they wanted the PUB in there; they said
that in many, many numbers. So a
committee of bureaucrats reporting to Cabinet is merely just window dressing,
Mr. Speaker. What is needed is
accountability, and one option was calling in the Auditor General to review the
operations of Nalcor.
Since you claim to be open,
why didn't you ask the Auditor General to review a project spending section
under section 16 of the AG's act?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
PREMIER MARSHALL:
Mr. Speaker, let me make this very clear to the people of Newfoundland
and Labrador. The Auditor General
can go into Nalcor any time he or she wishes.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
PREMIER MARSHALL:
Mr. Speaker, we brought the Auditor General into this House after he was
kept out by the previous government.
We invited the Auditor General into this House.
The Auditor General can go into Nalcor any time he wishes.
The independent engineer can go into Nalcor and look at what is going on
any time they wish. Whenever it is
appropriate that they want to do it, then please go ahead.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL:
We understand the AG can go in any time he wants,
so the answer to that question right now is that this government, this Premier,
is not interested in sending the AG in.
Under section 16, the Premier can do that.
If the Premier is not
prepared to ask the AG to review it, the other option would be, of course, to
send the PUB in to provide oversight into what is happening.
That is exactly what was done with their partners in Nova Scotia.
I ask the Premier: Why
didn't you ask the PUB to provide this oversight?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
PREMIER MARSHALL:
Mr. Speaker, right now there is oversight going on with respect to the
outages and we welcome that oversight by the PUB.
Nalcor is co-operating. Hydro
is co-operating. They are doing an
independent review. They have had
three independent people do reports.
They filed that with the PUB. We
welcome oversight by the PUB, Mr. Speaker.
In addition, let's look at
other things that are going on, when you want to talk about the Auditor General.
The Auditor General does not work for the government.
The Auditor General is an independent Officer of this House of Assembly
and has the full freedom to go and look at any part of the government's
operation, any Crown corporation, and report back to the people of this House,
and through the House, to the people of the Province.
We welcome that, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Premier mentioned
welcoming the PUB and the work that they are doing on the ongoing DarkNL and
what happened in January. Well, they
were not so welcome back in March, just two years now, when they actually said
they would not be given the extension that they requested.
Mr. Speaker, the Attorney
General released a good review of the Sherriff's Office earlier today; however,
the government has had this report in its possession since December 2, 2013.
If we remember the old Tory Blue Book commitment to release every report
in thirty days, we are not sure if that is a platform or if that was indeed an
actual commitment or promise.
I ask the Premier: Since you
are now claiming to be open and you have the commitment in the Tory Blue Book,
why did your government sit on a report for over three-and-a-half months without
making it public?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. KING:
Mr. Speaker, we had the pleasure to release two
reports this morning that will make a significant difference to the justice
system in Newfoundland and Labrador to the tune of $3.5 million investment in
this year's Budget. Twenty-nine
recommendations were submitted, and government announced today that we are
acknowledging, accepting, and implementing every single recommendation in that
report.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. KING:
Part and parcel of receiving those reports, Mr.
Speaker, requires due diligence on behalf of government to understand what is in
the report, to assess the budgetary implications.
In one particular report, the Legal Aid report, there was not a direct
spelling out of the number of positions and a dollar figure associated with it.
It takes time to do that and that is what took the time between the time
we received the reports and today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Last year the Minister of
Justice made harmful cuts throughout the justice system saying that the cuts
were made because of the Province's financial situation.
This morning he accepted all twenty-nine recommendations of the two
reviews, but when questioned on how government could afford the additional
millions of dollars he said: This is a good question for the Minister of
Finance.
I ask the Minister of
Finance: Since the Budget projections from last year looked very similar to this
year – as a matter of fact this year we are told you will be borrowing – do you
accept these recommendations? If so,
where will you find the dollars?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
PREMIER MARSHALL:
Mr. Speaker, there are times when the revenue comes in it is wonderful
for government. Government can
provide programs and services for the people of the Province.
There are other times when the times are a lot tougher and you just
cannot continue to do that and you have to come back.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to
be able to say that this government is now on track to be back to surplus next
year and will stay in surplus the year after.
We are in a position to do things to help distribute wealth and look to
the people of Newfoundland (inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That is not news today
because you said you were going to be on track to be in surplus next year, last
year, yet you still made the cuts.
The Minister of Justice says that they are putting more funding into the
Sheriff's Office and Legal Aid because they took the time to review those
services after the initial cuts were made.
It seems a bit strange, but that is what was said; however, similar
reviews were not conducted on other services that were cut last year including
the Family Violence Intervention Court, and the Employment Assistance Services
offices.
I ask the Premier: Why have
you allowed some cuts to stand without review?
What are the criteria for using when you order a review?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. KING:
Mr. Speaker, what we did today was follow through
on a commitment. If you want to go
back to the member's question, the origination of this challenge was last year's
Budget. We announced a number of
decisions at that point in time. We
were in a particular position where I had to make decisions as Justice Minister.
We received feedback and we
listened to what people had to say.
As a result of that, we struck a committee.
We listened to what the committee had to say and we changed some of the
decisions. We struck two reviews
because we were asked to do so.
Today, Mr. Speaker, I say to
the member opposite, we are listening to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador
and we are implementing the recommendations that have been brought forward for
the Department of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Well, that really means you
were not listening to them last year, from what I just heard.
Mr. Speaker, it has been a
very difficult winter on everyone, to say the least, and thousands of fish
harvesters are now facing a delayed spring fishery due to severe ice conditions,
some people are saying the worst in twenty-five years.
I ask the minister: Has your
government called upon Ottawa to ensure fish harvesters and plant workers have
access to a timely, appropriate compensation program to address this looming
critical situation?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and
Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, where our ice
conditions this year are a little bit heavier than they have been in the past,
we have certainly been in touch with industry and from the federal government
just recently. I was in Port de
Grave on Saturday morning with my colleague and met with a number of fishers
there. There were over 100 fishermen
there and people involved with the industry at a breakfast.
At that time, I also met with the harbour authority.
They actually had some ice mapping and went through that.
While there is concern at
this point in time, we are not sure where the industry is going to go in terms
of starting. Let there be no doubt
if there is something we have to do to facilitate or to help it along we will
certainly do that, but we are hopeful the industry will start on time.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL:
Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind the minister
that the special compensation provided by the federal government is nothing new.
In previous years, as a matter of fact in 2007 and 2009, we were in a
very similar situation.
In the meantime, employment
insurance benefits will soon be running out.
We all know that will leave families in a very critical situation.
I ask the minister: Why have
you not started the discussions with the federal government?
This is an urgent problem.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and
Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Mr. Speaker, this is a standard issue every year,
in terms of ice conditions, the starting of the industry, the various species,
setting prices, and so forth. The
ice conditions, as I mentioned, are concerns in some parts of the Province.
As we move forward in the days and weeks ahead, if there are initiatives
we need to take with the federal government, us alone or with the federal
government, we will take those initiatives, we will have those discussions, and
we will move the industry along like we have always done.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. EDMUNDS:
Mr. Speaker, this government continues to assume
there are no discrepancies in the justice system in Labrador, yet we have
serious crimes like sexual and physical assault that have been on the docket for
up to three years. Mr. Speaker, they
are still on the docket.
I ask the Attorney General:
You claim to be happy with the workload in Labrador, as you stated in this
House, why do we have such long delays in cases being heard?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. F. COLLINS:
Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge there are challenges with delivery of
services in Labrador, and in fact, in several places of the Province, not
necessarily peculiar to Labrador.
There are challenges involved in the delivery of services in Labrador, and this
government is committed, Mr. Speaker, to reasonable access to justice for
everybody. We have put a significant
investment into Labrador to make sure that principle is met in Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, having said
that, we are also prepared to sit down and work with the communities, with the
different stakeholders in the justice system up there, always to try to improve
the situation with regard to delivering services in Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. EDMUNDS:
Mr. Speaker, the Attorney General may be happy,
but I can assure you that the victims impacted by serious crimes are not happy.
In one upcoming court circuit the court will have to deal with ninety
offences, forty of which are breaches of undertaking or failure to comply.
Some of these initial charges include sixteen assault charges, three of
which are sexual assault charges.
I ask the Attorney General:
How can you be happy with the justice system in Labrador while the victims of
serious crimes live in fear and stress?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. F. COLLINS:
Mr. Speaker, I do not think anybody can be happy when the situations do
not get resolved in time. I do not
know where the hon. member is coming to when he makes that premise.
As I mentioned the other day
in response to his question with regard to the backlog of cases in the Happy
Valley-Goose Bay, Happy Valley system, we looked through the data and found that
the cases are being – dispositions have been met in the Happy Valley-Goose Bay
program, Mr. Speaker, on the same level in comparison with the rest of the
Province.
Mr. Speaker, the key figures
are cases that are initiated and cases that are completed.
We find there are more cases completed than are initiated, and that is on
a favourable comparison, Mr. Speaker, with the rest of the Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE:
Mr. Speaker, the Humber Valley land-use draft
plan was in the hands of government for three years.
Over $650,000 was invested in the plan by municipalities in the region
and the provincial government.
I ask the minister: After
sending comments back to a defunct committee, a resigned chairperson, will the
minister now admit that this department mishandled this file and wasted $650,000
of taxpayers' money?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Intergovernmental Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. KENT:
Mr. Speaker, as members of this House of
Assembly, we all have an obligation to tell the truth.
We all have an obligation to make statements that we know to be true.
I know to be true, Mr. Speaker, that Dr. Downer has not resigned.
I knew it to be true last week, and I know it to be true now.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE:
Mr. Speaker, I read from
The Western Star, “Since vacating the
position, he has not had much involvement...”.
Mr. Speaker, I say to the
minister, do you want me to do your research?
You should do the research where Dr. Downer admitted himself that he
resigned.
Mr. Speaker, even your own
appointed chair, Dr. Downer –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
MR. JOYCE:
– after his resignation from the committee
expressed concern over the government's inaction on the draft plan.
Then you appointed him as Chair of Western Region Waste Management
Authority.
I ask the minister again
today: How much did you pay Premier Marshall's co-campaign manager and defeated
PC candidate as chair of the defunct land use committee, and how much is he
being paid as Chair of the Western Region Waste Management Authority?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Intergovernmental Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. KENT:
Mr. Speaker, as I said last week in this hon.
House during Question Period, work is ongoing on the Humber Valley regional
plan. A comprehensive response was
sent from my department based on feedback compiled in consultation with various
government departments just several weeks ago.
It was sent to Dr. Downer as chair of that committee, and work continues,
and we hope to bring that process to a conclusion as quickly as possible.
Considerable dollars have
been invested in that work because it is important work.
It is so unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that the member opposite is out of
touch with what is going on in his very own region of the Province.
I have the detailed cost breakdown.
I will be happy to provide it later today in this hon. House.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, I will table all documents related to those costs
in their entirety.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au
Clair.
MS DEMPSTER:
Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Advanced
Education and Skills announced department restructuring, stating that staff
complement will not decrease. We
know for a fact that the regional director position for Goose Bay has been cut
and we know there are job losses in St. John's.
I ask the minister: Will he
give the people a straight answer, how many jobs or job equivalents are being
cut?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and
Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN:
Mr. Speaker, as I said in this House last week
and also said on the talk shows on Friday, there will be no layoffs in regard to
the restructuring of Advanced Education and Skills.
As a matter of fact, this will actually enable my staff to deliver the
services within my department, which is so important to the people of the
Province, more effectively.
There are no layoffs.
As a matter of fact, NAPE has been involved in regard to this process
right straight through. I thank NAPE
for all their advice through the process.
I look forward to delivering those services more effectively in the
future, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au
Clair.
MS DEMPSTER:
I guess you are not referring to all of the
community third party groups being cut.
Mr. Speaker, the Department
of Advanced Education and Skills cut many Employment Assistance Service agencies
last year, putting 226 employment counsellors out of work.
We have just learned that women in successful employment are also closing
their doors.
I ask the minister: Will EAS
agencies serving women, as well as persons with disabilities, be cut?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and
Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN:
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to provide those
services through the great staff at Advanced Education and Skills.
As a matter of fact, I think there were over 5,000 people serviced
through that branch in regard to last year, in September, somewhere around that
area. They will continue to move
those programs forward. These
programs actually will be delivered more effectively now on a go-forward basis
once this restructure is complete.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY:
Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up on a
question from last week about the Minister of Education's lack of clarity on
school board savings.
I ask the minister: Now that
your government has seen the openness and accountability light, can you finally
enlighten us on how much money was saved by cutting three school boards last
year?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN:
Mr. Speaker, we are about the seventh month into
the new board taking over, the new restructuring of these boards.
As I have said from the beginning, I can tell the hon. member that there
is $5 million in savings by removing the upper echelon, if I could put it that
way, of the school boards.
We are still working our way
through that process, Mr. Speaker. I
cannot give him an exact dollar but we are looking at probably in the tune of
around $12 million.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY:
Mr. Speaker, while the minister still struggles
to provide a sufficient level of detail on those purported school board savings,
the 2013 education budget cuts are still impacting our schools.
Last week, we heard that the Learning Through the Arts in Western
Newfoundland program may be cancelled now due to 2013 Cultural Connections
budget cuts.
I ask the minister: Will you
reverse this decision, together with the other poorly thought-out cuts to
classroom and student supports you made last year?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN:
Mr. Speaker, the program that he is referring to
was a federal program. When it was
cut, we did pick it up for a bit.
Mr. Speaker, we still have the School Touring Program that is on the go, the
ArtsSmarts, and the Visiting Artist Program.
Mr. Speaker, I will have the
hon. member know, and I am very proud to announce to the people of the Province,
that through this program, the Cultural Connections program, we have put in
place $17.4 million.
Go to any of the schools,
take a look at the music rooms that are in the schools, take a look at the
theatre arts rooms in the school, we have made a $17.4 million investment
towards those programs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Minister of
Transportation has stated publicly that the cost to lease the
Norcon Galatea is $5,800 a month.
I ask the minister: Is this
the total monthly cost or are there other costs associated with this lease?
Will you table a breakdown of all associated costs for the lease of the
Norcon Galatea?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Transportation and
Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, when this
government made the decision to lease the
Norcon Galatea we did it under the advice that it was cheaper to lease than
to purchase and run it on our own.
We still stand by that decision, that it is cheaper to lease the ferry, because
we did not need the ferry on an annual basis or an everyday basis.
When we went and purchased
that lease, or entered into that lease with the Norcon group of companies, we
did it on short-term basis because we are in the process, as I stated in this
House on several occasions, of a marine vessel replacement strategy.
As long as we are doing that, we may have to enter into leases.
I have no problem tabling
all expenses with the lease of the Norcon
Galatea.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the minister
also stated that the Norcon Galatea
lease expires on March 31, 2014.
I ask the minister: Will he
confirm today that the lease for that vessel will be extended beyond March 31;
and why did you lease the vessel as opposed to going to public tender, knowing
that March 31 would not be long enough for the lease on that vessel?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Transportation and
Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH:
Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, when we entered
into the short-term lease, as I said earlier, and it is a short-term lease that
we entered into, we entered into the lease on the premise that we would need the
lease to extend until March 31, 2014.
On March 31, 2014 that lease will be up and we will not be extending the
lease on the ship.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Regarding oversight of
Muskrat Falls, I ask the Premier: Why will this government not allow independent
oversight of the biggest investment this Province has ever made?
What is he afraid of?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
PREMIER MARSHALL:
Mr. Speaker, there is a plethora of independent oversight over that
project right now and there is even going to be more in the future.
There is the report of an independent engineer.
There could be the report of the Auditor General, should he choose to go
in there. There will be the report
of the independent financial auditor that is made available to the public.
The public have a meeting
where they can go and question Nalcor and the executive.
That is oversight as well, oversight directly by the public.
Now, Nalcor are going to provide those reports on a quarterly basis and
not just an annual basis.
There is going to be this
internal oversight committee. They
are going to do a public report.
Mr. Speaker, we come into
this House when the House is in session and we are available to questions from
the Opposition. That is probably the
greatest independent oversight you can have.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, why won't this
government reverse the 1999 legislation and allow the PUB to have oversight of
the Lower Churchill, which it once had?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
PREMIER MARSHALL:
Mr. Speaker, as I said, there have been lots of independent oversight
before sanction. There was
independent oversight during the financing.
We have now announced additional oversight that is going to take place
within government.
Nalcor themselves are
looking at their governance structure.
The people who serve on the board and provide oversight of Nalcor are
appointed by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador because, after all,
Nalcor is owned by the people. It
has been given instructions in the Energy Plan to carry out a plan in order to
provide wealth and prosperity to the people of the Province.
Mr. Speaker, I have every confidence they are going to do that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS MICHAEL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I guess the proof of the
pudding is going to be in the eating, whenever that time comes.
Mr. Speaker, people applying
to the Department of Advanced Education and Skills for Income Support are
waiting for hours on the phone and weeks for applications to be processed.
Now we hear of departmental changes that will lump all direct client
services into one branch.
I ask the Premier: How will
these changes improve this already badly functioning system?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and
Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN:
Mr. Speaker, because it simply streamlines the
services and that particular intake centre will be a centre of excellence.
As well, she gives out some wrong information; 73 per cent of our clients
who phone into Income Support for various reasons get answered by a real person.
Yes, there is about 25 per cent who do not, but then there are also
numerous repeat calls as well. We
have had spikes with regard to the number of calls in certain months, and that
is expected in the system; but we do service our clients.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Sometimes people are on the
phone for hours waiting for that live voice, Mr. Speaker.
I really ask the minister to
tell us how these changes are designed to better serve people or are they just
designed to serve the department's bottom line.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and
Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN:
Mr. Speaker, I have been in this House since 2003
and it is clear to me that any kind of change to the Third Party is certainly
reviewed as not being effective, any kind of change – the are against change is
what I am trying to say, Mr. Speaker.
What we try to do are two
things. Number one, provide the
services that is within Advanced Education and Skills to the people of the
Province who require that service, and also we have to enable my employees, the
employees of Advanced Education and Skills, to deliver those services.
That will be done through this reorganization.
We have been great in regard to that in the past.
Yes, we might have had spikes in regard to the number of calls and that
happens from time to time, but we will continue to deliver that service, Mr.
Speaker
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In his report lawyer John
Roil wrote: There are concerns that due to the low eligibility threshold for
qualifying for Legal Aid, many working people cannot afford access to justice.
I ask the minister: What
will he do to fix these requirements to better reflect the economic reality that
working people face today?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. F. COLLINS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As I mentioned earlier,
access to justice is one of the prime principles of any democratic society, and
certainly one of the strong principles of the Department of Justice and this
government.
We have, at the Legal Aid, a
team of dedicated, strong professionals who are doing a great service for the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador to the vulnerable of those who cannot afford
services.
Mr. Speaker, we recognize
the threshold that the hon. member speaks about.
There are recommendations in Mr. Roil's report that we have to consider
and look at. We are only actioning a
number of them today, there are others that have to be discussed with Legal Aid
and with the Law Society, and we will be moving on these in the next few months.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS:
Mr. Speaker, today at the minister's press
conference, he said about the cuts he made last year: I was given a fiscal
situation to deal with, and some decisions were made not in the best interest of
the courts.
I ask the minister: Will he
now correct all the mistakes he made last year and reinstate the Family Violence
Intervention Court?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. KING:
First of all, Mr. Speaker, I did not say what the
member opposite alleges I said, for the record.
The comment I made this morning was that in the Budget last year I was
given a fiscal situation where I had to make some tough decisions.
I never once said anything along the lines that she repeated here today,
that they are irresponsible or not in the best interest of the court.
I said it was a snapshot in time.
Today, we are making
decisions because we are in a different spot with the Budget.
Last year, I had tough decisions to make and I made them and I stand by
them. That is what we do.
When you are in government you make tough decisions.
Sometimes you have to change those decisions.
Sometimes you recognize
there are positions you take and people want you to move away from them.
You have to be big enough to admit that you need to do that.
I did that with legal aid and with the Sheriff's Office.
Today, we have produced two documents that are going to have tremendous
benefits to the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre has
time for a quick question without preamble.
MS ROGERS:
Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister again: Will he
listen then to the people of the Province and reinstate the Family Violence
Intervention Court?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Justice for a quick
response.
MR. KING:
Mr. Speaker, we are always listening to the
people of the Province. I always
acknowledge that we cannot do everything.
No matter how much you invest into programs and services in this
Province, you can never do enough for some people.
That is very unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, but we are sticking to the core
services in Justice.
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
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 Municipal and
Intergovernmental Affairs.
MR. KENT:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As alluded to in Question
Period, there are a number of documents I would like to table today.
I am very pleased with the movement on the Humber Valley regional plan
that we have seen over the last number of months.
Since November, when I took office, I have been working with Dr. Downer
to advance this work, and, Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the work being
completed.
There are some vacancies on
the Committee. That is –
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
Is the member going to table
the report?
MR. KENT:
Gladly, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Please.
MR. KENT:
The first thing I would like to table is the
terms of reference for the regional planning authority because clearly, the
member opposite fails to understand the process.
The next thing I would like to table is the letter that the member
referred to last week addressed to Dr. Downer correctly, despite the member's
false statements in this House today and last week as well, Mr. Speaker.
The third thing I would like to table is an e-mail from Dr. Downer
himself.
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
I ask the minister to table
his reports.
MR. KENT:
I am doing so, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Without commentary, please.
MR. KENT:
Can I indicate what the documents are?
MR. SPEAKER:
Just indicate what they are but let's not have a
long speech.
MR. KENT:
That was not my intention, Mr. Speaker.
An e-mail from Dr. Downer
confirming his status and involvement in the process, and finally, a detailed
breakdown of the costs, including consultant costs, remuneration of travel
expenses for Dr. Downer, administrative costs and operational costs for the
Humber Valley Regional Planning Advisory Authority in full detail, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
MR. JOYCE:
Mr. Speaker, I just heard the minister say that I
made a –
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
Are you standing on a point
of order?
MR. JOYCE:
Yes, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Please indicate it.
MR. JOYCE:
Mr. Speaker, I just heard the minister say that I
made false statements in the House last week.
I ask the minister to withdraw the remarks because at no time did I make
any false statements in this House of Assembly.
I ask the minister just to withdraw it.
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of
Municipal and Intergovernmental Affairs to the point of order?
MR. KENT:
To the point of order, Mr. Speaker.
I cannot withdraw the
statement because it is absolutely true.
The member made false statements today; he made false statements last
week.
MR. SPEAKER:
Is the minister suggesting that the hon. Member
for Bay of Islands has made a false statement to the House?
MR. KENT:
I withdraw the statement, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further tabling of documents?
Notices of Motion.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Humber West.
MR. GRANTER:
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave
to introduce the following private member's motion:
WHEREAS senior officials of
our government have been involved in oversight of the Muskrat Falls
Project at every stage; and
WHEREAS our government has
just announced further mechanisms to provide oversight of the Muskrat Falls
Project; and
WHEREAS the Government of
Canada provides oversight of the project through its role as guarantor of the $5
billion in project financing; and
WHEREAS our government has
subjected this project to a greater level of scrutiny than has been brought to
bear on any other project in our history; and
WHEREAS the Board of
Directors provides oversight of Nalcor, and Nalcor is also required to account,
through its internal audit department, its regular reports to the government,
its regular audited financial statements and its public annual general meetings,
and
WHEREAS these oversight
mechanisms reflect our government's commitment to ensure the public is provided
with as much information on the Muskrat Falls Project as possible without
jeopardizing commercial interest;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that this hon. House supports the government's actions to provide greater
oversight of the Muskrat Falls Project.
That is seconded by the
Member for Lake Melville, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House Leader, notices of
motion?
MR. KING:
Yes, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that the
motion just entered by the Member for Humber West will be the private member's
motion that we intend to debate this coming Wednesday, Private Members' Day.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further notices of motion?
Answers to Questions for
which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for The Straits – White Bay
North.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We, the citizens serviced by
Curtis Hospital located in St. Anthony, Newfoundland and Labrador, petition the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and Labrador-Grenfell Health to retain
the midwives at Curtis Hospital.
Our midwives offer services
that cannot be duplicated and which cannot be replaced.
The level of care they offer and the knowledge and training they have in
the area of obstetrics is immense.
It will be a great disservice to the people of this area if our midwives are no
longer available to care for the people here.
We implore upon the House of
Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and
Labrador-Grenfell Health to preserve our midwifery services at Curtis Hospital.
Mr. Speaker, this petition
is signed by over 600 individuals from the region, from my district, but also
Southern Labrador. There are
signatories from Quebec as well, who are not residents of Newfoundland and
Labrador but they are served by the hospital.
They really feel that government's movement on the issue of midwifery has
been an utter failure, given that in 2010 the Health Professions Act was passed
and it required regulations. There
are three nurses who are employed at Curtis Memorial Hospital who had midwifery
qualifications.
There are midwives who are
practicing in the North, northern Territories, who are regulated.
They would work in the system in Newfoundland and Labrador should
regulations be in play.
Now, the minister has
outlined that midwifery can happen in the private sector, likely within a year,
but when it comes to publicly funded midwifery in Newfoundland and Labrador, we
could be five to seven years out.
This certainly does not send a very positive message to those who have utilized
midwives. Maybe many in this room
have been born by midwives.
On the Northern Peninsula,
the majority of people have had prenatal, postnatal, and have even been
delivered by midwives. They have
done the majority of deliveries, especially for low risk.
It is the safest and most cost-effective way when we are looking at
utilizing professionals in a health care team.
Removing midwives from the
delivery process will also create additional strain in obstetrics and put on
call, in many cases, general practitioners and nurses who are not trained in
that particular field right now who require that training, so that pregnant
mothers to be make sure they are getting the services they deserve.
Cutting out midwifery in a publicly funded setting is the wrong step, and
it is that relationship that has been built up with these people from prenatal
to delivery, to post-natal care. It
has been in the Grenfell system for over ninety years, Mr. Speaker.
So I will put forward this
petition, and I know I have others.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY:
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 the Newfoundland and Labrador
humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS in 2006, the
provincial government created a commission to review the Individualized Student
Support Plan/Pathways Model and make recommendations to improve the delivery of
special education programming in the K-12 education system; and
WHEREAS in 2007, the
ISSP/Pathways Commission delivered a final report to government outlining
seventy-five recommendations for creating a better system for the delivery of
special education programming; and
WHEREAS to date, many
important recommendations of the ISSP/Pathways Commission have not been acted
upon, including those related to public disclosure of assessment and wait-list
information; guidelines for comprehensive and ethical assessment practices;
procedures to address the needs of all at-risk students; creating an effective
appeals process for families; meeting the needs of exceptionally able or gifted
learners; expanding the role of student assistants in the teacher assistant
roles; introducing special education department heads in schools; and improving
on special education teacher qualifications and certification;
WHEREUPON the undersigned,
your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge
government to fully implement the recommendations of the ISSP/Pathways
Commission in order to improve the delivery of special education programming for
all students, parents, teachers, and schools.
As in duty bound, your
petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, as the petition
notes, a significant number of the recommendations of this report remain not
acted upon, and it really is a part of a pattern of this government to
commission reviews and not act on the recommendations, to allow those reports to
accrue dust on a shelf somewhere.
I took the time to ask what
it costs to carry out the ISSP/Pathways review, and it was a total of $167,293,
a significant amount of taxpayers' dollars used to carry out this review with a
significant amount of recommendations, a number of the recommendations, not
acted upon. Now with the
government's newfound openness to, well, openness and accountability, there are
things in here like public disclosure of assessment and wait-list information
that is fully in line now with this new purported, newfound attachment to
openness, Mr. Speaker. I encourage
the members to think about that because they may actually benefit from acting on
their own review.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Burgeo – La Poile.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today for 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 residents of the
Southwest Coast must travel the TCH between Channel-Port aux Basques and Corner
Brook for work, medical, educational, and social reasons; and
WHEREAS Marine Atlantic
ferries dock at Channel-Port aux Basques at various hours on a daily basis
resulting in extremely high volume of commercial and residential travellers
using this section of the TCH; and
WHEREAS the world-renowned
Wreckhouse area is situate along this section of the TCH; and
WHEREAS the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador initiated a twenty-four hour snow clearing pilot
project in 2008 that excluded the section of the TCH from Channel-Port aux
Basques to Stephenville;
WHEREUPON the undersigned,
your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to include the section of the TCH from
Channel-Port aux Basques to Stephenville in the twenty-four hour snow clearing
project.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
MR. A. PARSONS:
Mr. Speaker, I know the members opposite do not want to hear this
petition again because it is something that makes a lot of sense, but that is
something that is contrary to what goes on in the other side in some cases.
What I want to concentrate
on today is I have actually looked into the review of the twenty-four hour snow
clearing pilot project. I have
reviewed it; I have gone through it.
I have come up with a number of questions and I put them to the Minister of
Transportation and Works. The
problem is, though, that contrary to the Open Government Initiative, I am not
getting any answers back. Therein
lies the problem again. It is a lot
of hype, but not a lot of substance.
One of the things that I did
ask about was we are the main entry for rubber tire traffic in this Province
through Marine Atlantic. We have
thousands upon thousands of vehicles coming in.
What I asked for was: When did you do a study to see how many vehicles
are coming in and comparing it to the other parts of the Province?
I was expecting maybe over a month-long period or maybe during seven
days. They took one day in the month
of February and said this is recognition of the average.
That in itself is absolutely ludicrous; that does not make any sense
whatsoever.
I have gone back to them on
that but lo and behold, surprise, they have not come back to me with anything on
this again. That is just one thing.
Their methodology to do this is flawed.
I would think that one of the main reasons is because of politics.
Maybe they do not want to do the right thing because of where this
section of the roadway is. I am just
putting that out there. I can only
make assumptions.
That is the problem; we make
assumptions based on the lack of information that is forthcoming, especially on
something that is of a life-saving nature.
Everybody knows that we need it.
The operators that this government hires to pay to do this job say you
should have it, yet they continue not to do it.
I am not going to stop; I
will keep going. Like I said I have
a suitcase full of these petitions not just from my district, but from the
members opposite districts. I am
going to keep putting them in until they come to their senses and make the
decision before something tragic happens.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL:
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 as a result of a
recommendation in the Green report about wrongdoing in the House of Assembly,
there is now legislation that protects anyone who speaks up with evidence of
financial abuse or other impropriety in the Legislative Branch; and
WHEREAS it is unfair for one
group of civil servants to be protected by whistle-blower legislation when
another group is not; and
WHEREAS Justice Green stated
that the financial wrongdoing in the House of Assembly might have been
discovered sooner if whistle-blower legislation had been in place; and
WHEREAS the Cameron inquiry
into ER-PR testing found that problems with tests would have come to light
sooner, therefore lessening the impacts on patients, if whistle-blower
legislation had been in place; and
WHEREAS the task force on
adverse events recommended an amendment to the Regional Health Authorities Act
to provide legal protection for employees reporting occurrences or adverse
events; and
WHEREAS whistle-blower
legislation is in place elsewhere in Canada and the provincial government
promised similar legislation in the 2007 election but has not kept that promise;
We, the undersigned,
petition the House of Assembly to urge government to enact whistle-blower
legislation to protect public sector employees in provincial departments and
agencies, including public corporations, regional health authorities, and school
boards.
As in duty bound, your
petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, I am very happy
to stand and speak to this petition.
I know government has said and it was said for them by the Lieutenant-Governor
in the Speech from the Throne that they are bringing in whistle-blower
legislation. We already have
experienced in this House that many times a first reading may happen and we wait
for a piece of legislation and it does not occur.
I am bringing forward this
petition, one, because it has been put in our hands and I am very happy to bring
it forward; but to also impress upon the Premier and the government, since they
say they listen to the people of the Province, that now that they have said they
are going to do the whistle-blower legislation and the people of the Province
are letting them know how much they want it, I really encourage this government
to speed up the process of bringing that legislation in to this House.
As I told the then Premier
in a leader's debate in 2007, I continue to have people calling anonymously,
coming to my house when it is dark, and speaking to me and also to members of
our caucus about concerns in the health care system, in the educational system,
and in different arms of government because they are not free to speak out.
They are not free to raise the concerns they have as public servants, so
I really encourage the government to speed up the whistle-blower legislation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.
MR. LANE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
To the hon. House of
Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of
the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS there is a waste
recovery facility being proposed by Eastern Waste Management in the Peak
Pond-Reids Pond area; and
WHEREAS such a site will
drastically impact the pond and general area in a negative way from an
environmental perspective; and
WHEREAS there are many
species of wildlife that will be negatively impacted by such a site, such as
moose, rabbits, loons, ducks, Canada geese, et cetera; and
WHEREAS such a site will
result in litter and strong odours in the general area; and
WHEREAS there are a
significant number of cabins and permanent homes in the Peak Pond and Reids Pond
area which will be negatively impacted by this site; and
WHEREAS Eastern Waste
Management has many sites available to them for such a facility, including
former dump sites in the area;
WHEREUPON the undersigned,
your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to intercede in the matter and advise
Eastern Waste Management to withdraw this proposal and find a more suitable
location for this waste recovery facility.
As in duty bound, your
petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, as indicated
here in this petition, Eastern Waste Management is proposing to place a waste
transfer facility in the Peak Pond area.
There are already eight other sites throughout the Province.
This is the ninth and final one, as I understand.
I am also of the understanding that the other eight sites, or at least
the majority of the other eight sites, have been set up in former landfill
sites, which certainly makes a lot of sense.
Mr. Speaker, I have been up
to that area and spoken to some of the permanent residents.
I have also spoken to a number of people who have cabins in the area,
people from the District of Mount Pearl South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
MR. LANE:
Mr. Speaker, it makes no sense to me whatsoever,
when you view that site, why you would want to place it in that particular
location, particularly given there are former landfill sites in that area.
To destroy another piece of pristine wilderness, to place a waste
transfer site and destroy that environment when there are already existing
sites, makes no sense.
Certainly, the residents and
the cabin owners are very upset by this.
I understand there is an environmental assessment process going ahead,
but from the perspective of those cabin owners and residents, they just want it
stopped immediately. Therefore, I am
bringing this to the House on their behalf and I will continue to do so.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au
Clair.
MS DEMPSTER:
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 humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS Route 510 from
L'Anse au Clair to Red Bay is in deplorable condition and requires immediate
upgrading; and
WHEREAS the condition of the
highway is causing undue damage to vehicles using the highway and has now become
a safety hazard for the travelling public; and
WHEREAS both residential and
commercial traffic has increased dramatically with the opening of the
Trans-Labrador Highway and increased development in Labrador; and
WHEREAS cold patching is no
longer adequate as a means of repair;
WHEREUPON the undersigned,
your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to immediately allocate resources to
Route 510 from L'Anse au Clair to Red Bay that allows for permanent resurfacing
of the highway.
As in duty bound, your
petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, they say a
picture is worth a thousand words.
Well, I can guarantee you when you are going to drive that road it is
worth more than a thousand words, and I do it most weekends.
Many people have heard me
complaining about the gravel roads in Southeast, but during the wintertime
Mother Nature intervenes and that road – when we have an ice road it is good to
travel on, but when you hit that pavement, and I drove it yesterday.
I was driving along and bang, bang, bang; I thought the bottom was gone
out of my vehicle. Every day I
receive dozens of e-mails from people in that area saying it is only a miracle
that someone has not been killed.
A few people here in the
House last week had a chuckle, but it was not funny, when I referenced the
highway as the Dalmatian highway because there are far more blocks of cold patch
in it right now than there is actually pavement.
It is thirty-five year old pavement.
The time has come and gone for it to be resurfaced.
It is a seventy-six kilometre stretch on Route 510.
I put a piece in
The Telegram last week and I could not
believe it when a spokesperson from Nalcor said, no, their equipment is not
going over the road. It is going
directly to the Muskrat Falls site via Goose Bay; yet, for months now every
single time I am on the road there is a convoy of heavy equipment that is really
pounding that road to death. So I am
not sure where they are all going if they are not going to Muskrat Falls.
That is certainly worsening what was already a very, very bad road.
I call upon the minister to
have a serious look at that. We had
four accidents last week. We have
people losing tires and beating rims.
It is a very, very serious issue and I will continue to raise it here in
the House.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
At this time, I move that
the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to look at resolution and
Bill 2, respecting the granting of Interim Supply to Her Majesty.
MR. SPEAKER:
It has been moved and seconded that this House do
now resolve into Committee of the Whole to deal with Bill 2 respecting the
granting of Interim Supply to Her Majesty, and that I do now leave the Chair.
All those in favour, ‘aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, ‘nay'.
Motion carried.
On motion, that the House
resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.
Committee of the Whole
CHAIR (Verge):
Order, please!
The Committee will continue
hearing debate on Interim Supply, An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain
Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public Service For The
Financial Year Ending March 31, 2015 And For Other Purposes Relating To The
Public Service.
The hon. the Member for St.
John's South.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, I am going to
talk a little bit about ministers, and ministers going to very important
functions on behalf of the people of this Province, and showing up at different
events for the people of this Province and doing the business of the people of
this Province. I think it is
important. I think that work is
important, Mr. Chair. I think it is
important that the Province is represented.
I think the voice of government being represented at these events is very
important. I know, I served in
Cabinet, Mr. Chair, and I can tell you it is important that the people have a
representative at many of these events.
Mr. Chair, I am just going
to point out some examples of the important work that is done by ministers when
they go to these events. For
example, March 14 of this year, Mr. Chair, the Minister of Advanced Education
and Skills went to Ottawa. I commend
the minister for doing that because I think it was important.
I think it was important that the Province was represented there.
The news release said the
hon. – and I will not say the name because I know we are not supposed to.
The “Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, will join fellow
Federal-Provincial-Territorial Ministers of Immigration at meetings March 18 at
the John G. Diefenbaker Building on Sussex Drive in Ottawa.
“During these meetings, the
Expression of Interest (EOI) model for economic immigration, a design intended
to be more responsive to labour market demand, will be among the items
discussed. Ministers will also
consider employer and provincial and territorial roles in the EOI, scheduled for
launch in 2015.”
I commend the minister for
going up there. I think that is
important work, Mr. Chair. As I have
said, I believe that it is important work that the Province is represented at
these events.
I am going to give another
example; May 13, 2013 the Premier attends an Offshore Technology Conference in
Houston. I think that is important,
and I think considering the Province's role in the offshore industry it is
important that the Premier attended that event.
Mr. Chair, it was a
Ministerial Statement and it reads, “…I rise in this Honourable House today to
highlight the tremendous work that took place at the Offshore Technology
Conference, which I attended in Houston, Texas last week.
This was a valuable opportunity…” – and I agree with that – for this
Province “to not only discuss offshore technology with other leaders in the
industry but also support our Newfoundland and Labrador delegation of 180
offshore service and supply sector companies who were there to market their
products, skills and services.” I
think that is important. Many people
would argue that it is not, but I think it was money well spent.
I think that we need to be at these events.
Mr. Chair, I am going to
give a couple of more examples; April 16, 2013 the Minister of Intergovernmental
and Aboriginal Affairs attended a meeting in Winnipeg, Manitoba.
The news release read, the hon. “Minister of Intergovernmental and
Aboriginal Affairs, will attend the annual meeting of the Aboriginal Affairs
Working Group, April 16-17, at the Fort Garry Hotel in Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Topics on this year's agenda include Aboriginal education, Aboriginal
economic development and violence
against Aboriginal women and girls.”
We know that that was very timely just recently.
Again, I commend the hon. gentleman for attending those meetings on
behalf of the people of this Province.
I am going to get to the
point that I am making now in a couple of minutes, Mr. Chair.
November 15 of 2013, the Minister Responsible for Labrador and Aboriginal
Affairs again attended a meeting in Winnipeg, Manitoba.
It was November 18 and 19 at the Delta Hotel in Winnipeg and the topics
on the agenda were Aboriginal education, Aboriginal economic development,
addressing violence against Aboriginal women and girls, national disaster
mitigation strategy on reserve, and Aboriginal housing.
Mr. Chair, in April of 2012,
the Premier attended a meeting in Houston at the Reliant Center and there were
over 200 delegates there representing approximately seventy local companies and
organizations. Again, I will say
that it is important.
Mr. Chair, there were other
meetings; I will not go through the entire list, but I will say meetings in
Meech Lake, Quebec. It sounds like a
nice place to be for a meeting. The
Meech Lake one was by the Minister of Finance.
There was a meeting in Boston by the Minister of Fisheries and
Aquaculture. That sounds like a nice
place to visit.
Mr. Chair, in November of
2013 the Minister of Fisheries went to China on the government's business.
Again, I think it is important that we be represented at these events.
The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture attended a meeting in Brussels;
another Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture attended a meeting in Boston.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
CHAIR:
Order, please!
MR. OSBORNE:
Mr. Chair, I am not condemning any of them
because I think they are all important meetings, and I think they are a valuable
investment for the people of this Province to have this Province represented at
meetings. I am not saying there is
anything wrong with it, Mr. Chair.
The Minister of Justice
attends a meeting in Ottawa; the Minister of Justice attends a meeting in the
Yukon; the Natural Resources Minister goes to Toronto; Tourism, meeting in
Ottawa; the Minister of Environment, Cape Town, South Africa.
Mr. Chair, Tourism, going to the Northwest Territories; the Minister of
Education in Cape Town, South Africa.
Mr. Chair, the reason I am
outlining these – and they all sound like very nice places to be – I am
wondering: What is wrong with Gander?
What is wrong with going to Gander?
Is Gander not sexy enough, not exciting enough, not enough Air Mile
points, Mr. Chair? It is a lot
cheaper to go to Gander than it is to Cape Town, South Africa.
While I say that the meeting
in Cape Town, South Africa, this Province was served well, it was a good
meeting, and I think that it is important to be at these meetings; but I know
that the issue being discussed in Gander regarding water in this Province – and
I am going to say that of all of these meetings, because there are many, many,
many more meetings that ministers go to, but all of those meetings that I
pointed out, Mr. Chair, were while this House was in session, while this House
was open and while we were sitting.
Mr. Chair, the Minister of
Environment stood last week and said I cannot go to Gander for a meeting on
water because the House is open. All
of those meetings that I pointed out, Mr. Chair, were while the House was open.
I am not sure, Mr. Chair, if
Gander is not far enough away, not exciting enough, or if the issue is not
important enough. I am not sure if
the meeting was not important enough, but all of these issues are important to
the people of the Province and there are communities in this Province right now
– I am getting e-mails on a regular basis from somebody complaining that they
are dealing with frozen water. We
hear from people who have water issues around the Province.
We have concerns with water, water quality, chlorination issues, Mr.
Chair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
CHAIR:
Order, please!
MR. OSBORNE:
We have issues with chlorination, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
Order, please!
I remind the member that his
speaking time has expired.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for Exploits.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. FORSEY:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks for the opportunity
again to speak on Interim Supply, Bill 2.
What we are talking about here, in case people do not know what it is, is
the approval of money we need to continue on the good business and the good
investments this government is doing and the investments we are making.
As a matter of fact, the
member opposite just a little while ago mentioned about the Minister of AES
going away on meetings. It is
ironic, because it is just today, Mr. Chair, that I received an e-mail that a
constituent in a municipality wanted me to share with the minister on the good
work and the changes they made to the student employment applications this year.
He wanted to applaud government for doing that and for making it more
efficient.
That is what these meetings
are all about. When our ministers
travel to different places, they convene and they exchange ideas.
Of course, it always makes it better for the people participating, I say,
Mr. Chair.
Anyway, getting back to the
Supply bill, right now we are looking at approving $2,829,892,500, Mr. Chair.
That includes money that is going out to Transportation and Works,
Advanced Education and Skills, and Child, Youth and Family Services.
Just today, Mr. Chair, I had
the privilege to join the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services on an
investment for the Continuum of Care regarding the services of the adoptions and
the level four they introduced today with regard to adoptions and the children
who are having it very difficult in their areas.
They need to be looked after by Child, Youth and Family Services and the
proper people skill sets to be able to look after them in a residential setting.
That in itself was quite an announcement this morning, and we need money
to do that.
Health and Community
Services and Justice; to go back to Health and Community Services, I know my
colleague from Terra Nova was up talking on Health and Community Services last
week, Mr. Chair, and he was talking about dialysis.
Of course, dialysis is near and dear to me, and has been for some time.
I probably talk about it too much at times, Mr. Chair.
However, with the investments we have made in diagnostic equipment,
especially dialysis, we have gone from seven sites up to fourteen.
With the opening of the one
in Harbour Breton this year, I think it is in the fall, it will certainly
relieve a lot of pressure on sites like Gander and Grand Falls-Windsor.
This is significant because a lot of us can recall when we only had a
couple of options; either go to Corner Brook or St. John's.
So this money, when it is passed, will go out for services like that, I
say, Mr. Chair.
Also, I wanted to get into
Innovation, Business and Rural Development.
There is money here for this as well.
Mr. Chair, a big part of this government's focus is on economic
responsibility. When we allocate
business attraction funds or research and development grants, we subject
applications to analysis to make sure the people's money is well invested.
We have invested strategically, Mr. Chair, to help build vibrant and
sustainable communities.
Creating opportunities for
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to contribute their ideas, insights, and
expertise in this process will be essential to the development of the Open
Government Initiative. A big part of
this government's focus is on economic responsibility.
Mr. Chair, from April 1 – I
just wanted to share a couple of stats.
I always like to share some stats when I am up speaking.
MR. S. COLLINS:
Stats are good.
MR. FORSEY:
Stats are always good, I say to the Member for
Terra Nova.
From April 1, 2006 to March
31, 2013, IBRD spent $17.3 million on 276 projects through the Innovation
Strategy program. Since 2011, over
$964,000 toward twenty-one projects through its technology program, and $1.83
million for youth innovation, supporting 103 projects, Mr. Chair.
The Youth Innovation Program
provides non-repayable contributions up to 80 per cent of eligible project costs
to a maximum of $20,000. Since 2009,
the provincial government has invested close to $1.8 million in eighty projects
that support youth innovation.
In May of 2013, the
provincial government announced $422,000 in funding to twenty-four schools
throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.
That is the importance of this particular project and that is why we need
to keep it going. It is good for the
rural areas. It is good for youth.
It is good for innovation, Mr. Chair.
Of course, the broadband
initiative; I know it has been brought up here many times and I have always
lobbied for my own district, as other members in this House have done.
Mr. Chair, our government's investment of $29.6 million has leveraged
more than $115 million from other sources to improve broadband access in
Newfoundland and Labrador. This year
we are on target to reach approximately 95 per cent coverage for the Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. FORSEY:
Some notes I have written down, Mr. Chair.
If the Member for The Straits – White Bay North wants that he can
certainly have it. It is not
electronic. I think it is from BIC,
but that is the BIC pen. I think
that is where it came from.
Mr. Chair, talking about the
broadband initiative; in 2007, an RFP was issued to bring broadband access to
200 communities. The RFP was
precipitated by the provincial government's $15 million investment in the
Province's second trans-gulf fibre option connection to mainland, Canada.
In 2009, the provincial
government announced the intention to connect more than 1,000 of its facilities,
including health care institutions, libraries, schools and other offices in the
communities throughout the Province.
The network also sought to enhance the ability of communication companies to
offer similar services to local residents and business customers, Mr. Chair.
The RBI was introduced.
We had the RBI I, where there was a $7 million investment; RBI II, a $2
million investment. This past year,
2013-2014, RBI III; a further $6.3 million was announced for the RBI III
initiative, Mr. Chair.
In an effort to focus this
funding towards remaining unserved and congested areas, an extensive mapping
exercise was undertaken. The mapping
exercise showed that approximately 95 per cent of the population has access to
high-speed Internet. That is a major
improvement since this program was brought in, I say, Mr. Chair.
This is very important to the people of the Province, very important,
especially to people in rural areas.
When they need to operate their business from small rural areas, they can have
contact with the rest of the Province or the rest of the world; therefore, it is
very important.
That is why when we are
talking about the Interim Supply bill and the money that we need, this is what
we need it for: to continue the good work that this government is doing and to
continue on with the initiatives that the people are looking for.
I am sure I have mentioned
this before – but just in case because it is another figure, another stat – this
year alone more than $20 million has been approved under IBRD programs for
regional and business initiatives. A
lot of this is for rural areas, Mr. Chair.
I am sure I will get the opportunity to discuss some of those areas and
those investments later on.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I just want to pick up on
something that my colleague, the Member for St. John's South, had referenced in
his comments about the statement that was made by the Minister of Environment
and Conservation in the House of Assembly last week.
The Minister of Environment
and Conservation pointed out that there is going to be a conference in Gander to
look at the issue of water. It is
the 2014 Clean and Safe Drinking Water Workshop.
We just recognized World Water Day and the issue of safe drinking water
is important all around the world, but especially here in our Province.
We know for a fact, Mr.
Chair, at any given time there is something upwards of 150 boil water advisories
in effect in this Province. We know
oftentimes that – fortunately not that frequently, but we know there are
instances where communities in the wintertime do not have an adequate supply of
water. Oftentimes there are
outbreaks of one thing or another where communities do not have water.
There are communities that have boil water advisories in effect all the
time.
We know communities such as
Lawn, down in the Member for Grand Bank's district, where people have to go to a
central point to collect water; often like you did back in the pod auger days,
in order to get safe drinking water.
So it is a significant issue and a lot of those boil water advisories have been
in place for about twenty-five years.
I mean, it is a long period of time for communities in Newfoundland and
Labrador, this day and age, twenty-five years with boil water advisories.
The Member for St. John's
South pointed out that ministers do attend conferences while the House of
Assembly is sitting. I know the
Minister of Environment and Conservation said that she would not be able to
attend because she will be here in the House of Assembly, but of course we know
that the rules are structured very graciously so as to allow Ministers of the
Crown to do the important work on behalf of the people of the Province to go out
and attend those meetings.
Of course, politicians, we
even have a would-be leader of the governing party, would-be leader of the PC
Party down live-tweeting from Cuba wearing a fedora and smoking cigars and
making commentary of all sorts, Mr. Chair, travelling around making comments
about the direction of politics – not necessarily water; I did see some comment
about a firing squad, but I will leave that to the members opposite to sort out.
Mr. Chair, I did go back
through press releases. I know there
was the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills recently attended the
Federal/Provincial/Territorial Ministers of Immigration meeting.
We had the Premier who, while the House of Assembly was sitting, went and
attended the Offshore Technology Conference in Houston.
That was in May of last year.
Of course, the weather in Houston is a bit different than the weather here in
May. Then we had the hon. the
Minister of Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Affairs, while the House of
Assembly was sitting, went to attend the Aboriginal Affairs Working Group
meetings in Winnipeg; that was in April of last year.
We also had the Minister
Responsible for Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs who, while the House of Assembly
was sitting last fall, went to attend an Aboriginal Affairs Working Group
meeting in Winnipeg, Mr. Chair. We
also had the Premier, while the House of Assembly was sitting, went down to
attend the Offshore Technology Conference in Houston, Texas again.
That was another trip to Houston, Mr. Chair, down to represent the
Province down there. That was while
the House of Assembly was sitting.
We also had the minister who
is now the Minister of Finance, the Minister Responsible for the Status of
Women, while the House of Assembly was sitting, attending an important
federal-provincial-territorial meeting of Ministers Responsible for the Status
of Women in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Of
course, that is a little bit further than Gander, because Gander is really not
that far away. I know some members
take air travel out that way, and certainly they are allowed to do that if that
is their chosen mode of travel.
Also, this time of the year
I know the weather is a bit touch and go.
It could be a morning like this morning, but I suppose if you went in the
evening in advance you could have no problem getting out to Gander.
In any case, as I said, it
is really not unusual for ministers to vacate their seat in the House of
Assembly for a day or two, or even three days.
Sometimes they are gone for the whole week, Mr. Chair, to go to important
meetings to do the important work of representing their departments and the
Cabinet, the government caucus, of course, the provincial government, and the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador's interests at a variety of different
meetings.
Back in December 2012, when
the House of Assembly was sitting, the Minister of Finance and President of
Treasury Board he was at the time, the now Acting Premier, went to attend the
federal-provincial-territorial Finance Ministers' meeting in Meech Lake, Quebec.
Of course, Meech Lake is nice that time of the year.
We also had, in March, the
minister attending – oh, this was this year.
Yes, this was not very long ago the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture
went down to Boston to attend the annual Seafood Expo.
We also had the Minister of Fisheries who travelled last year to China,
all the way to China while the House of Assembly was sitting to attend China
Fisheries & Seafood Expo, so that was a long way to go.
I wanted to check and see what the distance was in comparison to Gander
than to go to China to go to a meeting while the House of Assembly was sitting
as well.
Then, we also had the former
Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture who went to Brussels.
It is a nice place; I have been to Brussels myself on my own private
business, but a really, really nice city and a good distance away, a further
distance than Gander I will say. It
is a lot further to go Brussels, obviously, than it is to go out to Gander to
represent the Cabinet, the government, and your particular portfolio to a
European Seafood Exposition.
We also had the previous,
now the Minister of Justice when he was Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture –
and we have had an awful lot of Ministers of Fisheries and Aquaculture over the
past number of years. It almost
seems like we have a different one every six months or so.
That Minister of Fisheries,
while the House of Assembly was sitting, also went down to the International
Boston Seafood Show to represent the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and
the interests of the people of the Province at that meeting.
Last year, the same minister – he was Minister of Justice though at the
time – also went to Ottawa to attend the federal-provincial-territorial
Ministers of Justice and public safety meeting.
The former Member for
Carbonear – Harbour Grace, he is no longer in the House of Assembly now,
everybody will know he had a fairly notable dust up with the former Premier in
China and subsequently vacated his post.
He went to Toronto in March of 2012 to go to an international mineral
convention and trade show to represent the Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador in the interests of the people of the Province while the House of
Assembly was sitting.
It is also interesting, Mr.
Chair, to point out that the Minister of Environment and Conservation is unable
to travel to Gander to go to the drinking water conference.
Back in December, 2006, when she was Minister of Education she had no
problem, while the House of Assembly was sitting, going down to Cape Town, South
Africa to attend a meeting. Of
course, it was an important meeting.
She was leading a Canadian delegation of Ministers of Education at an
international conference.
There is no reason for a
minister to not attend a conference, whether it is Gander, or Brussels, or
Halifax, or anywhere else, Mr. Chair, while the House of Assembly is sitting.
We well know that we make allowances for ministers to travel while the
House is sitting, and I encourage the minister to change her mind on this.
CHAIR:
Order, please!
I remind the member his time
for speaking has expired.
MR. KIRBY:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.
MR. RUSSELL:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to thank you
for the opportunity to rise here and speak to Interim Supply.
As many of us here on both sides of the House, even us in the backbench
who have a fire and a passion for the people of our district and a passion for
the people of the Province, we love to stand up and speak at every opportunity.
I will get down to it right away.
I would like to commend the
Minister of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs today on his minister's statement
for Cain's Quest. I would also like
to commend the member across the way for Torngat Mountains on his response to
that Ministerial Statement which talked about the qualities of the people who
had the guts, Mr. Chair, to engage in that race; twenty-nine teams getting into
the action, only eight finishing.
I would just like to say we
were positively glued to our computer monitors, following the race at every turn
and checking out the local pictures.
People were coming out in droves, Mr. Chair, to get out and see the racers at
every opportunity at the rest stops.
The member across the way
from Torngat Mountains talked about the fatigue.
He talked about the long hours, the high speeds, the unbelievable
conditions that these riders and these racers had to face, braving the elements,
braving the trail, the natural terrain.
It is just fantastic, Mr. Chair.
He made one comment that I
would like to reiterate here. He
said there were no losers, and I believe that absolutely to be the case.
Anybody who had the will, the fortitude and the backing to get into this
race certainly needs to be commended.
Although only eight crossed the finish line, Mr. Chair, I would just like
to say that anybody who was willing to brave not only the majesty but also the
ruggedness, the terrain of Labrador, should be commended for that.
Some of the things we have
missed in all of this that were not mentioned by either the minister or the
member across the way were the support that these teams needed to get the job
done. They had their own support
teams that were there for the break-and-fix scenarios.
They had sponsors that were there not only putting up just the machines
in some cases but there to help them with the clothing, to make sure they had
the gear necessary to give a good showing, if you would, Mr. Chair, but to also
be safe out there as well.
I would like to commend Fire
and Emergency Services, people who were on standby making sure that in the event
people did have trouble and there were injuries, they were there and in some
cases had to engage with the people and help out and make sure they were brought
home safe and sound as well.
We have heard stories of the
camaraderie that developed between teams.
Although they were in competition, in the spirit of safety, in the spirit
of seeing people make it home alive from the rugged wilderness of Labrador, Mr.
Chair, we have seen people come together.
I guess at their own expense, the time they lost, they took it upon
themselves to stick together, help each other and see each other through.
I would like to give special
mention, Mr. Chair, to Team 5 from Goose Bay, George Rodgers and Mark Simms, and
also Team 77, the Backcountry Ravens, Jason King and Ronald Barth, who had a
great showing and placed second; friends of mine, Mr. Chair, local heroes,
celebrities if you will, who did all they could to have a good showing.
The community came out in droves just to get a glimpse of them along the
trail. I would like to say thank you
to each of those guys for their effort representing our communities and
congratulations on a race well run.
Mr. Chair, next I would like
to take a few moments and just talk about some of my activities in Labrador in
the last little while. I am so
pleased to hear people from across the way spend a lot of time today during
Interim Supply talk about how our members and how our ministers are just
everywhere around the Province. It
is very true.
They are so busy in fact,
Mr. Chair, that when the Minister of Municipal Affairs could not make it down to
Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair for a special announcement, he asked a Labradorian
to go down and represent him and this government, and I certainly was absolutely
pleased to do so. I talk about my
little trip to Cartwright. It was
good to see the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair down there as well where
we contributed around $65,000 to the Cartwright outdoor rink project, a
wonderful allocation of funds, I must say.
It all came about when the
recreation committee from Cartwright got a response from the Royal Bank about a
request for some funding. They then
engaged us. With a combination of
federal funds and our funds, Mr. Chair, we got to see an absolutely beautiful
outdoor rink for the youth and for the athletes in Cartwright set up right
alongside the 50 Plus Club, which was a wonderful initiative as well.
We got to see them setting
up and putting the final touches on the rink.
We got to see their ingenuity in their little homemade Zamboni, which was
put together with a couple of slides, a tow-behind, a forty-five-gallon drum, if
you will, to make sure the ice had a good surface.
We also got to see the
community supports in place when the RCMP came out for their third donation to
the community in terms of, I believe at that time, $15,000 in hockey equipment,
Mr. Chair. I would like to thank
Constable Ed Power and the RCMP boys for coming out in full force, pardon the
pun. They showed how the community
comes together for things like this.
If you are over twenty years
old and you are in Cartwright, you would know they had a rink in previous years.
Now the little ones will be able to get out there and they will also be
able to go over to the 50 Plus Club, Mr. Chair, and have a warm-up on those
colder days as well. Not only do we
see a community that steps up to the plate and goes for those recreation
dollars, I think even though it is not a PC district, it shows the willingness
of this government to put money where it is needed and to support those
communities that are ready to step up to the plate and fight for what those
communities want and those communities need.
I would like to thank the
people of Cartwright, truly wonderful people, for taking care of us when we were
in the district. A special thanks go out
to Rich Lewis for taking care of logistics for myself and my CA Shannon Tobin.
We had a wonderful time. My
only regret of the whole trip was that as I was doing my little speech there in
front of the 50 Plus Club, people were pointing to the plane that was coming to
get us there. I did not get to have
the fish and brewis from the 50 Plus Club, so that is my only regret leaving the
community of Cartwright. I would
like to thank them for their hospitality, wish them well, and congratulate them
on their rink.
Next up, Mr. Chair, I would
like to give mention to the community of Sheshatshiu.
This past weekend they had the Penote Ben Michel Memorial Tournament.
Although I was under the weather and did not get to make it, with that
note I will say I am sorry to my lovely wife and daughter who had to take care
of me. I became ill with the flu and
a giant baby emerged if you will.
They had to take care of me. I
missed the hockey tournament down there.
I would just like to say
that what a tournament they put off.
I was following online, getting the updates from my friends there.
It was great to see all the leaders come out: Chief Penashue and Chief
Andrew from Innu Nation. Local
leaders like Peter Penashue get into it.
We had teams from all over.
We had a lot of input from Goose Bay.
I would like to say, Mr.
Chair, nobody hosts a hockey tournament like the community of Sheshatshiu.
This one may have been the most successful ever.
I would like to say, though, on a more somber note also that at that time
they dedicated the arena to the late Chief Joseph Riche, our friend Shushep, who
is greatly missed. It was a
tear-filled event. They played his
song. When the curtain unveiled the
name in the arena, the house was brought to tears and rightfully so.
He is missed to this very day.
The community, I tell you,
does one thing and one thing above all else: They remember those who have led
the way, those who have shown the kids how to be Innu, how to be proud of their
heritage, and proud of their culture.
They certainly like to put that spirit, the spirit of their elders and
their people into every event they host.
With that I would also like
to give my heartfelt condolences to the communities of Natuashish and
Sheshatshiu for the loss of Innu elder Dominic Pokue who was renowned for his
storytelling, his way to make people visualize the past practices of the Innu
people, and how to teach the young people to carry those practices forward into
this new day for them.
Mr. Chair, I would like to
say that Gervais Penashue must be commended for keeping the memorial tournament
going year after year. He certainly
does a wonderful job.
Since I am running out of
time, I would also like to say that since we are talking about some of the great
Innu people we have lost over the last while, I would also like to remind the
people of Happy Valley-Goose Bay to come out Thursday evening at 8:00 at the
E.J. Broomfield Memorial Arena for a vigil for the late Loretta Saunders, in
remembrance of her, and in remembrance of all the murdered and missing
Aboriginal women in our country, to give pressure to the Harper government to
call an inquiry.
CHAIR:
Order, please!
MR. RUSSELL:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for St. John's East.
MR. MURPHY:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I rise again in my place to
talk about Interim Supply. I have to
note that yes, the memorial service is on the twenty-seventh and we will be
there and we will keep the various families in mind.
Mr. Chair, I would like to
have a few comments today about Interim Supply particularly when it comes around
water issues, around issues that municipalities are facing, the challenges that
they are facing as well, the challenges that have been faced in this country,
and the lessons, of course, that have been presented over recent history that
this Province should, hopefully, be learning by.
Of course, whenever you are
talking about a lesson in the mishandling of water issues, one need only to look
as far as Walkerton, Ontario to see what can happen when you do not have a
proper municipal handling of water, let alone a proper government handling of
water. I certainly hope that, with
this Interim Supply bill, there is going to be a huge amount of funding here for
municipalities that they can direct to their various water issues and the water
challenges that they are facing.
Mr. Chair, the whole issue
of water is not an easy one.
Sometimes you will find that besides people who have an issue with a well that
may be in their own yard, or they may be on a municipal water system, sometimes
you need to be shown real leadership when it comes to water issues; you need to
hear from the provincial government as well as the federal government on various
issues when it comes to water.
We have had several
governmental branches, if you will, that have taken up the charge on this.
We have the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment who meet on
a regular basis and discuss these issues.
In 2004, they defined what I guess they would call a multi-barrier
approach to water issues and they came up with three chief ingredients when it
came to the governance of water.
They say in their report that the goal of the MBA “in drinking water management
is to reduce the risk of drinking water contamination through the presence of
system redundancies, or barriers, built into the water system.”
What do we mean by this?
What they are talking about is the whole issue of the governance of water
by the various branches of government connected with water.
It does not only start in the home, but that person in the home needs the
assurance that the provincial government or their municipal governments are
going to be looking after their needs when it comes to water.
They involved various stakeholders to develop short- and long-term plans
to prevent, minimize, or control potential sources of pollution.
Mr. Chair, the other day
when I asked questions in the House of the minister on this particular issue,
because it happened to be World Water Day – it was on March 22 – I figured,
well, it is time to get back to the water issues again now, start talking about
these issues, and find out where government stands when it comes to water.
It is not easy sometimes getting answers to that.
It is not easy sometimes when you are sending out inquiries, for example,
on water or you are asking questions on water to find out where government
actually stands on an issue.
In other provinces we do
know where they stand on particular issues, and one of those issues happens to
be about source water protection.
Source water protection issues are dealing with the protection of water that is
outside your normal purview as a person, as a business, or as a municipality.
It deals with the protection of water that would be outside of there, but
it still has a direct influence on your water supply.
When I say source water
protection, if I am talking about a project, for example, like fracking,
fracking may not be happening in your own neighbourhood, it could be happening
down the road, but the influence of that particular resource could have an
effect on you eventually or because you are downstream.
Of course, the reason I get up and talk about fracking is exactly that
people are looking for protection of their rights, particularly when it comes to
not only their immediately air environment but particularly when it comes to
their water environment. Whatever
happens upstream of you eventually hits you downstream.
That is the reason why I get up and talk about fracking.
The second reason why we get
up and talk about water all the time over here, as a party, is relatively
simple. Because a lot of times we
get up here, we stand up and talk about municipal funding issues when it comes
to water here all the time. We talk
about the funding arrangement that the Province does not have, as yet, with the
various municipalities.
We know there is some hope
eventually down the road that this issue is going to be rectified, but so far –
and, Mr. Chair, let the record show – most of the presentations that I saw of
either Municipalities NL or from my own research shows that this new funding
arrangement has been fought for by municipalities as far back as the mid-1980s.
This is an ongoing issue, and still does not have any redress on the part
of municipalities. The provincial
government here still ends up fighting with municipalities over that funding
arrangement. We keep hearing
arguments back and forth when it comes to water.
Let me tell you, the people
of Walkerton, Ontario know water. In
May of 2000, of course, we had several deaths due to, in some cases, the lack of
training when it came to the regulatory changes at the provincial level.
We also had deaths that were caused due to the lack of training on the
part of water operators, people who were out there looking after chlorination
systems and everything. That is how
important water is. You cannot live
without it. It is okay for an
industry to move in and reap profit, but as one person told me already on this
particular issue, you cannot drink money.
You need water to live. So
the focus should always be on water and people's rights around it.
Mr. Chair, in the Dennis
O'Connor report of May, 2000 – the second part of the Walkerton inquiry report
came out in 2002. In his report he
stated among the ninety-three recommendations in the Walkerton report, Justice
Dennis O'Connor recommended – well, actually, instead of recommending, of those
ninety-three recommendations, thirteen of those actually dealt with source water
protection. It talked about the
problems upstream from where the individual had their water supply being drawn
for. So, there is a vulnerability
that we know about that is there.
We have the private
landowner, in this particular case, had a well that ended up getting damaged by
farm by-product, let's say, and then you had a municipal downfall as well as a
provincial problem when it came to handling of water samples, that sort of
thing. It is almost like while the
barriers have been talked about by the Canadian Council of the Ministers of
Environment, at the same time some of these barriers can end up themselves
causing problems, and nobody wants to take responsibility.
That is the feeling that I get from this.
Just to give everybody an
example of what I am talking about; for example, the same day I was asking
questions around water, I asked about the Big Triangle Pond project.
One of the concerns here, of course, is while there is an environmental
preview report being done and submitted to government, we keep asking for a full
environmental assessment to be done on this project.
Again, I am going to come back to the source water issue here and I am
going to connect it right up to a municipality.
The Town of Holyrood has its
backup water supply as the North Arm River.
The North Arm River runs right up through the countryside along the
Salmonier Line, up to Little Triangle Pond that is right there on one side of
the highway. That little pond gets
its water from Big Triangle Pond.
Mr. Chair, when you are
talking about the lack of source water protection here, we are talking about the
construction of a road that is going to go in here and probably forever change
the environment of that particular area.
There is going to be the storage of chemicals in here too, not to mention
fuel supplies for heavy equipment that is going to be running in there.
That is what we are talking about when we are talking about the need, not
only, number one, for an environmental assessment of this project, even though
it is in the environmental preview report stage, but we are also talking about
the need for this government to spend some wise money and invest it into source
water protection so that we know we are going to have full control over our
water and what happens to it.
I see that my time is up,
Mr. Chair. I will relinquish the
floor to somebody else and get up in a little while and talk about water again.
CHAIR:
I recognize the hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor – Green Bay South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. HUNTER:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, it gives me
somewhat pleasure today to have a few words to say on Bill 2, An Act for
Granting to Her Majesty Certain Sums of Money for Defraying Certain Expenses of
the Public Service for the Financial Year Ending March 31, 2015 and for Other
Purposes Relating to the Public Service.
It is not a small amount of
money, Mr. Chair. Money that we are
voting on is over $2 billion.
Actually, it is $2,829,892,500. It
is a lot of money to spend in a short period of time.
In that, Mr. Chair, this
Province is responsible for the well-being and the social programs for the
people of our Province. This
government is responsible for that.
This government has put forward so many budgets now to take care of the
interests of the people of the Province.
By having an Interim budget,
it takes care of the interests until our Budget is passed.
It might take a few months for us to get to the main Budget, but in the
meantime the bills have to be paid.
That gives us an opportunity, each member of this House, to get up and have a
few words and speak about anything we want to talk about because it is a money
bill. It is a time for us to get up
and have a few words about, basically, anything.
We do recognize a lot of
things in our own districts. It
gives up an opportunity to praise up the things in our districts and praise up
what government is doing in our districts.
Of course, if we were in the Opposition, it gives us an opportunity to
criticize the government for things they see that we are not doing in the
districts.
From my period of time in
this Legislature, over fifteen years now, and after being around for fifteen
Budgets and fifteen Interim budgets, I can look around the Province and see that
we are a lot better off since I have been here.
Not because I am here but because –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. HUNTER:
Even when I was in Opposition, and I give credit to the government of the day
back then. Even though we criticized
a lot, we still give credit for the good things that governments have always
done and governments will always do, no matter what party is here, because that
is our responsibility as a government, as a party, as an elected official in
this Legislature. It is our
responsibility to make sure that the people of our Province come first in our
budgets, in our delivering of services.
We have to consider all of these things.
Before I go any further, Mr.
Chair, I would like to welcome the Member for Carbonear – Harbour Grace.
I did not have a chance to do that before.
It is nice to have him, and I am sure it is a great experience for him to
be here. After one or two terms he
will probably wonder why he is here and wonder if he wants to come back here.
There is something about it that always draws you back.
After my seven times running and always wanting to be here, it is getting
close to the time when I do not want to be here and need to move on.
Hopefully, that will be within the short future.
Mr. Chair, you can look
around and see what government is doing.
You can look at every department.
The Department of Health is a very, very big budget.
I think there is over $1 billion in the Interim budget just to keep us
going for a couple of months, to deliver health care services; $1,020,483,700
just to keep us over for a couple of months until we get into the main budget of
probably another $2 billion.
Because of the Province and
the way it is spread out, health care is not an easy thing to deliver.
People are all over the Province, we have health care facilities, and we
have people wanting more. I am
surprised it does not take up a bigger part of the Budget.
We do have to deliver the best health care that we can for the money that
we have allocated in our budgets for that.
In the last number of years
I have been here, I have seen a big increase in the amount of money spent in
health care. We are always going to
have people complaining. Do we do
the best for everybody? It is hard
to do that. You do your best, you
try to get the best health care that you can get, and of course we have to try
to improve on it continuously.
You cannot just sit back and
say here is what we did last year and the year before; this is what we are going
to do this year. We have to try to
get better and do more with the amount of money that we have.
The financial pie that we have to work with is only so big.
You can only cut that pie so many ways to fit into our departments and
our delivering of goods and services in the Province.
With our transportation
needs – and nobody knows it better than me in transportation.
I have a lot of roads in rural Newfoundland that I am responsible for.
I have a ferry in my district.
It just takes so much money to deliver a good road system and
maintenance. The wintertime is a big
challenge, especially with the ferry system, and with the rural roads that we
have. It is a real big challenge,
but we still have to budget X number of dollars to do this work now in the
interim and then for the rest of the year with our main Budget.
The responsibility comes
back to the ministers to make the decisions on what they are going to spend in
the departments. Then, Cabinet, as a
whole, has to decide at the end of the day when the Minister of Finance says
here is the Budget that we have prepared and then everybody has to agree with it
– even though some ministers are challenged because they have to go back over
their figures time and time again to see where they can cut, make a few cuts
here and there to try to get within a sustainable Budget, a Budget that is fair
not only to the people but is fair in the delivery of services.
We have to make sure that
everything is sustainable. We have
to make sure we live within our means.
Does that mean a deficit?
Maybe, it might mean a deficit.
Maybe it could be a short term, sometimes a long term, but we all have to do
that in our daily lives. We all have
to decide how much money we are going to spend on our groceries, when we are
going to buy a new car if we buy a new car, and our cost of living.
We all know where that goes.
The cost of living goes up for everybody.
It goes up for government.
When the price of fuel goes up and the price of service goes up and labour goes
up, then the cost goes up for government.
Government has to pass it on to the taxpayers of the Province.
How do you do that? You do
that in the form of a budget where we have to live by it.
When the interim Budget is
finished and we go into our main Budget then we get a book called the Estimates.
The Estimates book shows the Budget for the previous year, the amendments
– the actual money that we spent – and then what we propose to spend in the
coming year. Sometimes there is very
little difference because there are things you have to do and you cannot cut.
So Budgets some years are the same year after year after year, with
modest increase. In some areas where
government has to look to find savings, you can see a difference in, well, maybe
they budgeted for $20 million in last year's Budget, but they only spent $10
million.
Now there is a reason for
that. I mean, the Cabinet and the
ministers have to go back sometimes and look at their budget and say: Well, we
are not going to do this project this year or that project.
Then, the Minister of Finance says to another department: We need to save
$20 million; we need to save $5 million.
So, constantly they are
going back and forth over the budgets and the Estimates for the coming year to
see if we can deliver that service or see if we can save some money in not
delivering that service.
Unfortunately, for us, over here we are responsible for the chequebook; we are
responsible to make sure that we live within our means.
When I was on that side,
when I was in Opposition we did the same thing that the Opposition does today.
It is the job they have to do; they have to keep our feet to the fire.
They have to keep us accountable, and that is a hard job to do sometimes.
I have sat on that side over there when we blasted the government day
after day after day; but when the Liberal government was over here, at the end
of the day we put thoughts in their mind where they did make changes, and it was
for the betterment of the people of the Province.
That is your job, and our job here is to do what we think we have to do
with the taxpayers' money. It is not
our money; it is the taxpayers' money.
MR. F. COLLINS:
(Inaudible) eventually saw the light.
MR. HUNTER:
The people of the Province eventually saw the
light and elected us in 2003. It was
no bed of roses when we changed from that side to this side, I tell you, in
2003. When the Premier of the day
came to me and said we are cancelling the cancer clinic in Grand Falls-Windsor,
of course, my blood pressure went up here, and I grew about six feet taller, I
think, but it was not an easy thing to do.
It was not an easy thing to go back into your district and tell them that
you are cancelling a cancer clinic.
We worked that out over a period of time, and it all had to do with how
government decided they are going to spend the taxpayers' money – and it worked
out. It worked out in our favour; we
got our cancer clinic.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. HUNTER:
There are lots of examples where I can back over
the last fifteen years and look at the negative side of things that we thought
would happen but did not happen and something positive happened.
We got a new ferry in Long Tickle and in Long Island – a brand new ferry.
A couple of years ago the minister went out and we unveiled it, a service
to the people. Are the people 100
per cent happy with the service? No,
they are not, because you cannot do everything 100 per cent to the satisfaction
of the people when you have a budget to go by and dollars to look at.
CHAIR:
Order, please!
MR. HUNTER:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
Order, please!
I recognize the hon. the
Member for The Straits – White Bay North.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It is not often that I get
to listen to the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor – Green Bay South, in listening
to his remarks about budgeting and how important it is to budget and the whole
process of looking at making decisions when it comes to a budget.
Well, we have seen this government here show very poor vision when it
comes to a budget. One of the things
you need to look at when you are budgeting and, as in your budgeting with life,
you look at the long term, you look at taking a long-term approach, but
government consistently budgets from year to year to year and then it comes up
with shortfalls or there is a real push for a department to try to get money out
the door at the very last minute, rather than looking at multi-year planning,
multi-year budgeting. That is where
you are going to get greater value when it comes to looking at utilizing the
taxpayers' dollar.
Multi-year planning –
Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador talks about how we should look at
multi-year planning for capital projects because it provides a more consistent
approach to how they can prepare.
The same thing, in any of our households, we need to look at multi-year
planning. If we look at trying to
build the knowledge-based economy – and that is something that is very important
in Newfoundland and Labrador. I
heard the Parliamentary Secretary for Innovation, Business and Rural Development
get up and read his notes and talk about utilizing old technology, the BIC pen
and paper, but there is nothing wrong with that.
It is really important to know where we are at, where is that roadmap in
Newfoundland and Labrador when it comes to our knowledge-based economy.
I have been asking for the
last two years for a list of government buildings that are served by high-speed
Internet, high broadband, and those that are not.
The Department of IBRD has said in this very House that they could
provide it. They could provide two
years ago. They still have not
provided that documentation. I do
not know what they have to hide there, Mr. Chair, when it comes to telling us
that.
As well, I asked in this
particular House for a list of communities that have high-speed Internet and
those that do not. The department
has confirmed that they have mapped the entire Province, yet claim that a list
is commercially sensitive. I think
if the Parliamentary Secretary has that information, then he should make it
available in this House so we can get better value.
Under RBI I, RBI II, and RBI III, I guess, the businesses and the service
providers that are out there can utilize our tax dollars and pair it with
private-sector dollars so we can cover off as many households with this type of
technology.
There are varying forms of
technology. We could use fixed wire
line. We could use wireless.
We could also use satellite technologies.
These are very important because a community, whether it is for
education, whether is for social activities, whether it is for business, whether
it is for safety, we need to have high-speed Internet.
We need to have wireless coverage in our communities.
We should be leaders, yet we
are laggards. Marconi sent the first
trans-Atlantic cable here in Newfoundland and Labrador on Signal Hill more than
111 years ago, yet we are behind many other provinces.
We are behind in so many areas when it comes to the upload and download
speeds and the fees that people pay.
There are people who are
using satellite who have an upload speed – to try to get two megabytes per
second, they have to pay $175 plus tax a month; then there are caps and there
are time delays. This is
unacceptable when in jurisdictions in the United States you have the ability to
get a similar service for $30 to $45 a month.
People who are using it in
many rural communities, the minimum of 1.5 megabit uploads per second, if they
are using major providers, they pay about that fee.
They pay about $40 to $50 a month for high-speed Internet at their homes.
Why are we being gouged as consumers, and those who do not have that
option having to pay almost $200 a month through satellite service?
It is unacceptable.
We are not seeing that
information being released by the Department of IBRD, but they should be sharing
because an open government would be sharing that information.
They say they are going to be putting things about municipalities up
there, so why are we not putting up the municipalities that have high-speed
Internet and those that do not?
My district in particular
has nine communities out of thirty-five that do not have access to high-speed
Internet. Some of them are heavily
underserviced and some of them are capped.
Some that do have the service basically are at capacity, and that is a
real hindrance when we come to economic development and when we come to
diversifying our economy.
I think there is a better
way. There are certainly options.
I would hope the Department of IBRD and the minister has the vision to
make sure we are not at just 95 per cent, that we are much higher.
If we look at where the CRTC says that 99 per cent of Canadian households
are either covered by wireless or they have a home telephone line.
If we are only at 95 per cent after this year's funding announcement –
because last year's funding announcement for many high-speed Internet areas such
as the Bird Cove area, Plum Point area, they are not fully covered right now and
it is a year later. They have just a
few days to meet their deadline.
Will that provider come through?
It is one thing about saying
you are going to do something, but having the capacity to do it is another
thing. That is what we have seen in
the transportation sector. The
member opposite talked about transportation.
It is okay to have a $60 million road repair program, but if you are
going to come out with your tenders really late and 20 per cent of the work
never gets done, well that is a huge issue.
I certainly think that
announcing tenders early and in a multi-year process is important because it
allows for consistent planning.
Businesses are forward looking, and that is where we need to be.
We need to be looking at those types of things.
It is not rocket science.
We will see the Budget come
down on Thursday and it will be a one year Budget.
It will not have that approach for multi-year budgeting.
Looking at that there will be some projections for the future, when we
see where funds are committed for future years.
Are they really committed when we are not in that multi-year budgeting
approach? That is a concern for me.
One of the other things we
see in many of our rural communities that is hindering our economic development
are the transportation links that we have, whether they are ferry services,
whether we are seeing increases to fees at Marine Atlantic.
What is the provincial government doing to really bat that home to Ottawa
that it is our provincial highway, that is where our goods and services are
going right now?
Are we seeing the provincial
government move forward from a pre-feasibility study on a fixed link to move
forward to looking at a fixed link on the Northern Peninsula to Labrador through
Quebec, through Route 138? As soon
as we see Route 138 complete, transportation is going to flow north.
I have said that in this House before.
In my maiden speech I pointed that out, but we are not seeing it.
We are not seeing the visionary approach from government.
When we have boil water
advisories in the Province that are older and have been in existence longer than
I have been here on this earth that is frustrating.
I have municipalities in my district that have boil advisories that are
over a decade long. There have been
times when over 50 per cent of the public water supplies in my district are on
boil advisory. That is a concern.
We have to come up with a better, safe and clean drinking water strategy
so that we can encourage people for the health outcomes of the Province.
We see health care costs are
ballooning. Well, maybe we need to
put more emphasis and investment on safe and clean drinking water.
These portable water dispensing units are a good approach, but they are
not the solution. There needs to be
a much broader way to tackle this.
Maybe we need to reach out to our universities and our colleges and our research
and development corporation to look at finding those solutions.
We have a lot of talent in
Newfoundland and Labrador. We have
it right here. Sometimes we are not
tapping in. We are not using that
co-operative approach that we need to, to find a better result so we can allow
our economy to grow, so we can ensure that our young people are staying.
We are just seeing the same
old, same old from this government across the way.
They are not using a visionary approach.
They are certainly just backing up, backing up, backing up and that is
not the way of dealing with the people of the Province.
We need to have a progressive approach to dealing with people.
We need to make sure we are listening, and this government certainly is
not listening, unfortunately.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR (Littlejohn):
The hon. the Member for Baie Verte – Springdale.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. POLLARD:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It is pleasure to stand in
this hon. House today. First of all,
I would like to thank the people of the District of Baie Verte – Springdale for
their ongoing support. It is a
privilege and an honour to represent them, not only in this hon. House but
wherever I go.
Also, I would like to
congratulate the Carbonear – Harbour Grace member for winning his seat in the
by-election. I wish him well in his
new duties. In addition, I would
like to acknowledge and thank the former Premier for her hard work and
dedication in serving the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I would like to wish her well in the next chapter in her life.
Finally, I would like to applaud and thank the present Premier for
assuming the role of interim Premier.
He is doing an outstanding job.
I thank him so much, Mr. Chair.
As other colleagues
mentioned earlier, this is Interim Supply.
So we have a lot of flexibility in what we can talk about this afternoon.
Mr. Chair, in my goings and comings throughout the district, I talked to
a lot of people. One issue that
keeps percolating to the top over and over again is roadwork.
It is always a priority in my district, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, before I get into
it, I just want to give you a brief description of my district.
It is really divided into the Green Bay side, which is composed of
fourteen communities, then we have a White Bay side, which we take care of about
twenty-two communities, approximately, and a one-hour drive in between.
As a district, we are geographically dispersed and, as you can
understand, there are challenges posed by that geographically dispersion in
meeting the needs of thirty-six communities.
Mr. Chair, I would like to
give a recap of the roadwork that has been done in my district over the past
five or six years or so. First of
all, let us start with the Green Bay side.
I have calculated that we have done approximately twenty-four kilometres
on the Green Bay side. For example,
we have done a significant amount of roadwork on Route 390; that is the route
going into Springdale, which is the service centre for Green Bay.
We have done a lot of work
on the Beachside, St. Patricks, Little Bay road, Route 392, and there will be
some more going there as well later on down the road.
On Route 391, we have done a significant amount of roadwork to the road
leading to Harry's Harbour, Silverdale, Langdon's Cove, and
Nicky's Nose Cove.
Furthermore, Mr. Chair, on
Route 391, we have done a significant amount of work on King's Point road, an
area known as Devil's Drop. We
appreciate that as the people talked to the mayors, councillors and people in
that region, they are certainly grateful of the roadwork done in that area.
On the White Bay side, Mr.
Chair, we have a significant amount of roadwork with respect to towns such as
Wild Cove, Westport, Brent's Cove, and Harbour Round; we have put $1 million on
Nippers Harbour road. That is still
gravel road, by the way, Mr. Chair.
We have put a significant amount of investment on Route 414, the highway going
into La Scie, and we have put a significant amount of investment in Route 410,
which goes into Fleur de Lys, for a total of approximately twenty-six kilometres
in the past five or six years.
Mr. Chair, as a people and
as an MHA, I am certainly grateful and thankful for that investment, but as you
know, the Baie Verte – Springdale district is stitched together with ribbons of
shoulderless roads filled with potholes and exposed bedrock.
Many residents throughout my district, through the social media, phone
calls to my home and to my office have informed me, like they have done over the
years, Mr. Chair, like other districts as well, that there is a bit of damage
done to their vehicles, tie rod ends, front ends, lost tires; that is the nature
of bad roads.
Mr. Chair, we have come a
long way. There is still a lot of
work to do, but I would like to acknowledge the fact that my district is a needy
district when it comes to roadwork.
On the positive side, I was
very, very delighted about three weeks ago – I think it was March 4 – to join
the Premier in Fleur de Lys to announce a significant amount of roadwork in my
district for this year and the year beyond.
More specifically, Route 410, which goes into Fleur de Lys, we announced
11.75 kilometres; Route 414, which is the highway going into La Scie, about 9.8
kilometres; and Route 392 which leads into Beachside, Little Bay, St. Patricks,
Shoal Arm, and Coffee Cove area.
Mr. Chair, on behalf of the
people of my district, and as an MHA, I would like to thank the minister, the
Premier and the Cabinet, all of the government officials for listening and
acting upon such a needy district as mine.
They have listened and I certainly appreciate that today.
Mr. Chair, I would like to
zero in a couple more points – the people of the district brought up a couple
points or suggestions to us as a government.
Number one, they made a suggestion for us to increase the scope of work.
They suggested we should concentrate on trunk roads, and they suggested
that we get the tenders out earlier.
Mr. Chair, I am proud to say that on every suggestion, we delivered.
We increased the scope of work, we concentrated on trunk roads, and we
got the tenders out earlier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
CHAIR:
Order, please!
MR. POLLARD:
As of April 1, Mr. Chair, these tenders will
close. That is good news for the
people of my district and the people are indeed pleased.
I have talked to mayors, I have talked to councillors, I have talked to
people around in the Green Bay side and the White Bay side in the Baie Verte
area and the La Scie area and they are pleased that our government is making
that commitment in the next year or two.
The early tenders will
enable us as a government and as an industry, of course, to take advantage of
the short construction season, which increases the chance of getting more work
done and less carryover for the following year.
Now, Mr. Chair, why these
routes, you might ask? Why Route
410? Why Route 414?
Well, like the people suggested, why not do major work on trunk roads.
Mr. Chair, these trunk roads are essential.
Why? They are essential not
only for safety reasons, they are essential not only for the enhancement of the
travelling public, for the traveling experience, but also these trunk roads are
essential to generate economic activity.
For those people who do not
know, I would like to say, Mr. Chair, that Route 414, which leads into La Scie,
there are two mines operating in that area, employing over 200 people.
Also, there is a fish plant in Fleur de Lys, but unfortunately right now
it needs to be reactivated. We are
hoping that a miracle will happen and we will get somebody to come down there to
invest in that fish plant and it will be reactivated, thus employing more
people. We also have an offload
facility in the La Scie area as well, of which a lot of product will come over
that Route 414. That indeed is a
trunk road. I am grateful for the
work we will be doing in the next year or two.
With respect to Route 410,
Mr. Chair, which leads into Fleur de Lys, Fleur de Lys boasts a Dorset Soapstone
Quarry, which is a tourist attraction centre there.
Talking to the mayor and the town clerk there, over the past few years we
have had a decrease in tourists because of the road conditions.
I am happy to say and I am happy to report that these people are really
happy. The mayor is really happy and
the residents are really happy in Fleur de Lys because they know the roadwork
will be forthcoming. They certainly
appreciate the investment we will make as a government.
Furthermore, Fleur de Lys
also has a fish plant/seal plant there that within the last little while, back
on December 6, I believe, we announced over $200,000 to go toward the Northeast
Coast Sealer's Co-op there to do some work with new products when it comes to
the sealing industry, which is very important to the people in that area and to
the people of the region to provide supplemental income to these coastal
communities, Mr. Chair.
I would like to commend the
Premier and I would like to commend the Minister of Transportation.
My district this year was first off the mark in getting early tenders
out. That is what the people cried
for. That is what the people in the
Province want, to have early tenders so we can get a lot more work done in a
short construction season.
I just want to again extoll
the virtues of the minister and the Premier, and I thank you so much for
listening.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I am so happy to have this
opportunity to stand and to speak again on this bill.
I would like to speak about the Family Violence Intervention Court again
because it is such an important issue, Mr. Chair, and one that somewhat baffles
me. It baffles not only me, but I
believe it baffles a lot of people in the Province because nobody can really
quite understand why it was cancelled.
The Premier, since he was
appointed Premier, has said time and time and time again that he is listening to
the people of the Province. Today in
a press conference the Minister of Justice said the same thing: he is listening
to the people of the Province.
In his press conference
today, what he did was he released the independent report done on legal aid and
he released the independent report done on the Sheriff's Office.
He explained that after the very rash, rash Budget cuts that were done
last year, some of the decisions that were made had to be reversed almost
immediately because they were decisions that were not well thought out.
He said he was given a fiscal situation to deal with.
He said the reports that
were tabled today had a number of recommendations and the government was going
to – there were thirteen recommendations in the legal aid review and all
thirteen recommendations were going to be fulfilled by this government.
That is a good thing. We have
an independent assessment and review directing the government how to best handle
the shortfalls and the challenges that legal aid faces.
Mr. Chair, nobody has done
an external review on the Family Violence Intervention Court.
We do know there was an internal review done.
The sources I have heard from have actually told me that the review was
very positive. Since that review
came out I have spoken to police officers, I have spoken to defence lawyers, I
have spoken to prosecuting lawyers, I have spoken to women's groups, and I have
spoken to the organization that provided the therapy for the men who freely
entered into the Family Violence Intervention Court.
I have spoken to groups who are providing the support and therapy for the
women and children who are victims of violence and all of them talked about how
effective the court was.
As a matter of fact, the
Justice Minister himself talked about how effective the court was.
He said that the court was fulfilling its mandate.
It was doing what it was supposed to do.
However, he was stuck with a fiscal situation that he had to deal with.
That is why the court was cut, he said.
It was $500,000, 0.2 per cent of the entire Budget.
I was speaking with women
who are working in the area of violence against women in different parts of
Labrador who said they in fact wanted to see the Family Violence Intervention
Court expanded to Labrador to help keep the women and children of Labrador
safer. Mr. Chair, there was nothing
wrong with this court.
When the minister talked
about the fact that he was concerned about the numbers of people going through
the court, the numbers he had stated in his rationale for closing the court were
actually – at the time when he looked, the number who had finished the court
program, because the program goes over a period of about six months, was the
number who had finished up to that point when he had made his decision.
He did not take into account the fact that there were already, as well,
numbers of families who were in the process of using the court and all of the
services. They were in the process
of treatment and they were in the process of support groups.
The numbers he gave were not
an accurate reflection of how well the court was being used.
As a matter of fact, it was the year when the court had the most uptake
in the whole history of the court.
It has been on the go for five years.
It was a jewel in the crown of the justice system.
Our current Premier, who was
Minister of Justice when this court was instituted, was so very proud of this
court and looked forward to having it instituted, not simply as a pilot project,
but as something that was a permanent program in the Department of Justice.
The Department of Justice said they were looking forward to making it a
permanent program. Women's groups
were saying that. The police were
saying that.
The funny thing is even
today the Minister of Justice talked about how they are looking at streamlining
and efficiency within our justice department.
This was a court whose whole mandate was about streamlining.
It was about taking cases that could be handled in a very specific
manner, in an efficient manner, and quickly.
If a woman, for instance, contacts the police because of a violent
incident, a domestic violence issue, by the time the case actually gets to court
it is often a year down the road, whereas with the Family Violence Court it was
within a few weeks and then it is dealt with immediately.
In other situations it could be up to over a year before the case is
actually handled and closed.
The other thing, in terms of
looking at efficiencies and streamlining, the research that was done on the
court shows in fact there was a much, much lower recidivism rate.
What that means, Mr. Chair, is that fewer and fewer of the men were
reoffending, that in fact the court was working.
They were getting treatment.
We are not talking about
life-threatening cases of violence; we are talking about violence where
families, in some cases, want to stay together, often young families.
There was a risk assessor who would meet with – again, I am using
shorthand here and saying most of the offenders were men – the man and assess
whether or not he was a candidate for therapy, where there was a possibility
that he could change his ways.
Again, what he had to do was take responsibility for what he did; he had to own
up to it. Then, also, what happened
is we know the women and children were safer because the court was so involved
because the treatment program for men was very specific and the treatment
program for women and children was very specific, and everybody knew what was
going on.
So this was a fabulous,
fabulous program. I do not know why
we still have not heard a reasonable explanation, except for money; but if it is
money, in fact, this court was saving money.
It was saving money in the general court system.
Also, it was only $500,000.
Now, we know, Mr. Chair, there is over $1 million dollars a day – over $1
million dollars a day – spent on Muskrat Falls.
This was $500,000 for the whole year, and it was an effective program.
Now, Mr. Chair, I speak
about it not looking for political points.
I beg – I am begging the government – on behalf of the women and children
in this Province. I am begging the
Minister of Justice, if the Minister of Justice could only listen, I am begging
him, I am imploring him, and I am pleading with him on behalf of women's groups
who are working in this area, on behalf of families who have been affected by
family violence. I am begging him to
meet with these groups. These groups
are writing him saying they want the court reinstated.
I have hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of petitioners saying they want
the court reinstated.
These are not people who do
not know what they are talking about.
These are people who have years and years of expertise in the area of
family violence. I am imploring, if
the Minister of Justice is truly, truly serious and honours his word that he is
listening, he would meet with these people.
I am begging him to do that.
I am begging him to give them the chance to talk about why this court was so
important and why this court must be reinstated.
To reinstate it is not a big
deal. The court is there, the
trained judge is there, the trained legal aid counsel is there, and the groups
that gave the therapy and the support sessions, they are all there.
It would just take a matter of the decision and $500,000 a year, 0.2 per
cent of the Justice budget – not 2 per cent, 0.2 per cent of the budget.
The Premier himself has so
often said since he was appointed that he is listening to the people.
This is the opportunity for them to truly stand by their word and to
listen to the people. They do not
have to listen to me, if they could listen to the people who are the experts in
this area, because they are experts in this area.
These are people who have been working in this area for over twenty
years. Mr. Chair, they know what
they are doing, they know how effective the court was and they are willing –
maybe the court needed some changes, but the court did not need to close and all
of the members on the other side –
CHAIR:
I remind the hon. member her time has expired.
MS ROGERS:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I look forward to speaking
about this again.
CHAIR:
The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.
I am sorry; the hon. the
Attorney General.
MR. F. COLLINS:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have been called worse.
Mr. Chair, I am glad to have
the opportunity today to stand in this hon. House and have a few comments on the
resolution for Interim Supply. This
is a very important piece of business and it is usually the first order of
business in the spring session of the House because government has to have the
jurisdiction, the authority, to pay its bills in the interim period between the
end of the fiscal year, which is the end of this month, and the time when the
Budget gets approved. The business
of government goes on, but the Budget is not approved until sometime later.
So, the only way the government can get the authority to spend the money
during that period of time is through this Interim Supply bill.
Mr. Chair, the figure on
that is quite a staggering figure for such a short length of time:
$2,829,892,500 – I did not think I was going to be able to do that.
During that short period of time in that Interim Supply period after the
fiscal year ends and the new Budget is approved, for example, in the Department
of Transportation and Works, in that length of time $539,232,000 is needed.
In the Department of Health and Community Services, there is over a
billion dollars needed in that length of time.
So, the business of government goes on and government has to pay its
bills and pay its salaries, and pay its contracts and all that sort of thing,
but that has to be done and authorized through this discussion.
Mr. Chair, before I get into
Interim Supply, I just want to digress a few moments if I could.
I sat today with interest and listened while the Member for St. John's
South followed by the Member for St. John's North took us on a fantastic odyssey
around the world to various exotic places, and I sat here and fantasized about
all of those beautiful places and legendary cities that they took us to.
First the Member for St. John's South and then the Member for St. John's
North.
Mr. Chair, as a young boy I
had a great interest in geography.
One of my favorite books in Grade 7 was an atlas that somebody gave me.
It might have been part of the program from what I know, but it was an
atlas that I enjoyed looking at. I
used to play games with my brothers and sisters with respect to naming countries
of the world and their capital cities, and we got good at it, to the point where
we could name the capital city of practically any country in the world.
We had that atlas worn to the point where the corners of it were worn
down, and I had it for years after.
As a matter of fact, I believe I still have it somewhere in the basement of my
house.
Today, Mr. Chair, as I
listened to the hon. members, I sat back, I closed my eyes, and I went to China,
then I went to Brussels, then I went to Houston –
AN HON. MEMBER:
Gander.
MR. F. COLLINS:
No, I never got to Gander. I
went to Africa, to Cape Town, legendary cities of the world, and I thought I was
back in Grade 7 with my atlas. I
thank the hon. member for giving me that opportunity, that experience today, to
enjoy the odyssey around the world.
Mr. Chair, I would also like
today, while I have the opportunity – I have not done it so far and I do not
know if anybody over here has – to welcome the newest member to the House, the
hon. the Member for Carbonear – Harbour Grace.
I am sure as his first experience here in the House, as indeed for all of
us over here when we had our first experiences in the House, it is an
eye-opener. We are used to doing our
business around various tables, but nothing like the way business is conducted
in the House of Assembly.
The hon. member was a mayor,
as were several people on this side of the House, and we know what business is
like conducting your municipal politics and municipal business around the table
in a municipal office, but that is not the way business is done in this House,
Mr. Chair. Certainly, when we come
here for the first time it is a real eye-opener to us to see how business is
conducted in this hon. place, and it is an hon. House – it is a very hon. House.
It is the place where the laws of the land are made.
Now, sometimes the debate in making those laws of the land can get very
tedious, sometimes they get very testy, and we benefit from the cut and thrust
of the debate.
They say there are two
things you should never watch being made, Mr. Chair, and one of them laws, and
after experiencing debate in this House of Assembly, it is easy to understand
that; and the other is sausages. I
do not why you would compare the two, but you should never look at either one of
them being made. I guess that
reflects sometimes on the debate we have.
I have been involved in some of the laws that have been made that have
been very interesting, I might add, but some of them very tedious as well.
Mr. Chair, this is an hon.
place and the members here are hon. members.
They are called hon. members and rightly so.
Unfortunately, we do not get a very good rap in the public and on the
Open Lines. The media takes
advantage of that every now and then to sensationalize their stories.
We are in that unfortunate group that nobody gives us very much credit.
Not that we look for any, but we never get very much credit in the public
eye as a politician.
Those of us on this side of
the House, there are a couple, and a couple on the other side of the House who
happen to be lawyers as well. We
have a double whammy because the lawyers are not held in very high esteem
either. When we go from practicing
law into politics, then it is difficult to know which direction we went, whether
it is up or down in terms of social esteem.
The members that I know on this side of the House are all dedicated,
passionate, committed individuals whose only purpose in life is to make sure
that they do good things for their constituency.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. F. COLLINS:
They want to address the needs of their constituents, do what they can
for their constituents, and do what they can to further the initiatives of their
communities and in general to make improvements in their constituency.
Improve their communities; improve the quality of life, that is what we
are all about. I rather suspect, as
a matter of fact I know the people on the other side of the House have the same
focus. Everybody in this House has
the same focus. We are here for that
reason: to do what we can to better the conditions in our districts and in the
Province in general.
I think we may have to give
ourselves a pat on the back. We are
certainly not going to get it from the outside. Maybe
it is time every now and then that we do it ourselves, because we are all here
for the same purpose. Sometimes we
get political, and in the cut and thrust of debate we criticize each other and
that is part of it all. We all know
at the end of the day that we are all in it for the same purpose.
Having said that, Mr. Chair,
I want to welcome the new member to his new position in this House of Assembly.
Now that he has the benefit of my wisdom, I am sure he is better off.
Mr. Chair, with regard to
the Interim Supply, did I mention this is a very important piece of business and
always the first issue of business in the House this time of year?
It is necessary so that government can carry on with the work of
governing this Province. As I
mentioned it outlines some of the spending that will occur in that interim
period.
Mr. Chair, just briefly I
want to say that everywhere you go in this Province, no matter who you talk to
or where you go, people are saying the same thing: We were never in such better
shape before. We have never before
reached such a place where we are today.
That is everywhere you go.
Everybody says that and everybody talks about that.
We are the envy of every province in the country.
We lead the country in so many ways.
Mr. Chair, that has
developed in our people a sense of pride, a sense of accomplishment, a sense of
achievement. We are no longer the
weak sisters. We are no longer going
to Ottawa with cap in hand. We are
no longer apologizing for our poor position.
Business is booming.
More people are working.
There are better wages. All you have
to do is it look at the houses that are going up and the sizes of them.
I look at some of the houses that are being built, Mr. Chair, and I
wonder if there are some rooms in those houses people never even get to.
I have a modest home, and
there are rooms in my house I do not spend much time in, but some of these big
mansions that are being build, Mr. Chair, is a sign of the times and people feel
good about it. There is a sense of
pride in our Province that never existed before.
Mr. Chair, perhaps indicative of that is the fact that we are having
problems supplying our own labour needs.
Who would have thought that we would ever get to that position in this
Province?
One of the things I find
about speaking at high school graduations, I mentioned this before.
I enjoy speaking at high school graduations.
I spoke at dozens of them when I was in Education.
They became a bit tedious after a while, but now I enjoy them because it
is such a great time in the Province to be graduating from high school because
the opportunities are limitless, the future is so bright.
We are already in a place we have never been before and it is going to be
better and it is going to be brighter.
CHAIR:
I remind the hon. member his time has expired.
MR. F. COLLINS:
Mr. Chair, I am out of time.
There is so much I want to say about that.
I am sorry for digressing so long, but I am sure I will have the
opportunity to get back to this topic again.
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for Burgeo – La Poile.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Certainly, it is always an
honour to follow the illustrious Attorney General after hearing his commentary.
I am not going to get into any commentary on the sausages versus law, but
anyway, I will just continue on.
I did notice that sometimes
he said nobody gives you a pat on the back, and he gave himself one today and
said that things are so great.
Actually, I think the quote was: Everywhere you go people talk about how great
it is; everywhere you go.
Do you know what?
Certainly, there are some good things happening, but – and that is the
key word there – I am going to talk about some issues that I think this
government needs to address in the field of health care.
Some people around this Province said do not think that everywhere you go
things are so peachy.
The first place I am going
to start and this is affecting many people all over this Province, especially in
the Eastern Region, that is autism, whether it is the diagnosis or the
treatment. I can guarantee you there
are at least 379 sets of parents out there who do not think everything is so
great right now when their children are waiting years to be diagnosed and
waiting years to be given treatment.
Now, I am going to go back.
I spoke last time on Interim Supply and I mentioned the Open Government
Initiative. Well, this theory,
because it is certainly not in practice.
It is a theory right now. I
am going to give the Department of Health credit.
I asked some questions that day on autism and they came back that
evening, e-mailed me and said here are the responses to your questions.
Do you know what? Good for
them. They did a good job and I
appreciate them getting back to me.
Now the Member for St. John's North is probably not so congratulatory since he
asked the same questions three months previous and could not get any answers to
them. It is a start though, it is
start.
You do not have to look far,
you can look in The Telegram, or you
can look in any newspaper in this Province and we look at wait-lists for
children. When it is taking you
twenty months to see a developmental physician, that is an issue, because we all
know with autism early intervention is the key.
That is something the Official Opposition, we have really been pressing,
and I know a lot – especially the Member for St. John's North, we get a lot of
e-mails. We get a lot of calls from
constituents, not just in our own districts but from all over the Province.
They are having a tough
time, these parents of young children who are having these issues.
In fact, they have even taken it upon themselves now to go outside of the
Province to get a diagnosis. Now you
would think that would help, but the problem is when they get back they are
still no further ahead in treatment – not any further ahead in treatment.
God help them if they do not have any coverage under their insurance for
things like OTs.
That is one area, and we are
going to be discussing – that is going to come up.
We brought it up in this House last week.
We brought it up this week and it is going to keep coming up because as
the minister even knows and stated, the numbers are going up, one in
eighty-eight children. The word
epidemic is starting to be used now, so we had better start looking into this
and figuring out how we are going to stop this and how we are going to, I guess,
handle this issue rather than stand up and throw your arms up, which is the
equivalent of the answers I am getting so far.
I want to continue on with
health care. One thing I have been
hearing a lot about, actually it has come up in my own district just recently.
This is when it comes to emergency medical response, EMR, especially in
terms of ambulance service, paramedics, PCPs, first responders.
The Province today, ambulance review some time back, I guess it was last
year – the review came out before the new year, and I will note that
negotiations are ongoing. What I
have seen so far, what I have been told so far is not encouraging.
The first thing to remember
is that ambulance operators, private ambulance operators were asked by
government to wait before you come out.
Let's get the review back first.
Let's get this review before we start negotiating because obviously there
are flaws in the system. We need to
look at these and work together. The
ambulance operators did that. They
negotiated in good faith. They
waited. Now what has come out of
that is basically ambulance operators are being told you have to provide the
same level of coverage with less money.
I will just use the service
out in Port aux Basques for instance, Mackenzie's Ambulance.
It has been out there for years.
We all rely on it. Out there,
there are four emergency ambulances in Port aux Basques staffed around the clock
using government formula. However,
with the new proposal government has put forward, the new proposal will go down
to one emergency vehicle.
Now you do not have to go
far; you only have to go see one nurse in the Dr. Charles L. Legrow Health
Centre to know there is more than one emergency that comes in sometimes in an
hour; therein lies the problem. We
are going to have a reduced quality of service.
When I hear members on the other side talk about the golden age and how
great things are, when we are getting cuts to emergency medical care, it is not
a golden age, I can tell you that now.
It is not a golden age.
I say to the minister, I
hope you will get up and respond to the points I am putting forward because I am
going to stick to health care.
Again, that is 40 per cent of our budget.
This is an issue I have put
forward a lot – we know the Budget is coming down on Thursday – and that is
cystic fibrosis. I have made clear
in this House numerous times now how basically we have a lower standard of care
in this Province than we do in virtually the rest of the Western World when it
comes to cystic fibrosis. We are
already there. That has been
established.
Not we, I am just advocating
with this group. They are asking for
newborn screening, something that is done in so many other places, but not
there. I am hoping in this Budget, I
am hoping there is something there.
That would be a great start, and if they do, I will be the first one to clap my
hands and say it was the right move.
I hope that is somewhere in this Budget that is coming on Thursday.
I am going to move on.
I have touched on a number of different issues, and one thing I want to
talk about is pharmacists and pharmacies.
I think the pharmacists in this Province – we all know how important they
are, but do you know what? I think
they have done a really good job in the last year of explaining just how
important they are. Maybe in some
cases – and I do not know if this is the right word – how we underestimate them
and how we do not sometimes appreciate the work they do.
They are front-line workers.
I will just use myself for
an example. If I had to go to the
pharmacy and I had to get something for my child, some over-the-counter
medication; I do not wait to go make an appointment with my family physician.
That could take too long. Why
not ask a pharmacist? They have all
the answers. They know everything
there is to know about it. It can be
done and it is the right move. It is
the smart move.
We hear the term expanded
scope of practice, but in this case we are not talking about an expanded scope
of practice. We are talking about
practicing to the extent of the scope that could already be done.
It should be there. I know
they have called for talking about injections.
We had an issue this year. We
talk about flu immunizations. The
problem we have – and I see the minister is shaking her head – is we are the
lowest in Atlantic Canada. We are at
the lowest level. We need to do
something to get that across.
Wouldn't making it accessible to pharmacists be a step in the right direction of
increasing the number of immunizations, increasing the population who is getting
immunized? It would seem to be a
smart thing to do.
Pharmacists are not asking
for much. They are asking for –
again I will use the term – the increased scope of practice.
They are asking when it comes to minor diagnosis, when they are talking
about being able to do the injections, and little things like that.
I know the minister is in touch with them and I know the minister wants
to do the right thing. I am just
hoping we will see the right thing.
I do not know if that is a budgetary decision or not.
We will see what comes out of that on Thursday.
I have covered off a number
of topics here. I want to move
forward. I do not have much time
left. I see the clock is running
down.
I want to talk about medical
transportation. We have a program
here in medical transportation. We
do have a lot to be thankful for. No
doubt we have a lot to be thankful for that there is a program there in the
first place. There are limitations
in the program. They have been
identified, they have been expressed to government, yet we have not seen the
change.
It is a burden on people in
many cases, people who have to travel long distances for health care, in many
cases over roads that are not so great.
It is a significant cost on people.
The amount of time they have to wait for reimbursement has a huge impact.
In many cases they cannot do it and they are waiting this time.
That is an issue we are going to bring forward as the Official
Opposition. We are going to commit
to bringing these issues forward in this House when it comes to health care and
the well-being of the people in this Province.
In closing, I would say I
would be silly not to recognize there are good things in this Province; however,
let us not put our blinders on, and recognize there are issues in this Province
that need to be dealt with.
Sometimes patting yourself on the back is not the right thing to do.
It is time to listen to the people.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. LITTLE:
Thank you, Mr. Chair and hon. colleagues.
I want to express my
appreciation to all the constituents in the beautiful, historic District of
Bonavista South. I am very
passionate about that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. LITTLE:
I actually come from the health care sector.
I worked there twenty-six years.
I can say without a doubt there are major improvements in the health care
sector and I will, too, speak on health care over the next few minutes.
The Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador is committed to supporting important social programs,
strong communities, and the health and well-being of our children, families, and
seniors, Mr. Chair. It is very
important that we listen to what the people are saying, and we are listening as
a government. We are listening and
we are acting on what the people are saying in the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador.
Responsible infrastructure
investments strengthen communities and support families, and we are all about
supporting families and health care issues that are important to people of the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
This government will continue to support health care initiatives in all
parts of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Ensuring access to modern
and new health care facilities and equipment continues to be a priority for this
provincial government. This is
demonstrated by more than thirty health care infrastructure projects that have
been completed or are under development in all regions of the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador over the past ten years, Mr. Chair.
Since 2004, this government has invested more than $1.2 billion to
enhance health care infrastructure through new facilities – $1.2 billion.
We are not talking a small amount of money here.
We are committed to the
people, the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and currently
there are twenty projects ongoing throughout the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador with, like I said, twelve of these existing projects to be completed in
2014. The investments we have made
in health care infrastructure will ensure that families in rural and urban
communities continue to have access to top-quality health care, and that is very
important. We are committed as a
government to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and we know how important
health care services are on a regular, daily basis, Mr. Chair.
In a Province with just over
520,000 people, it is important that we continue to invest in health care
services. We have fifteen hospitals,
twenty-two community health care centres, 114 community clinics, and twenty
long-term care facilities. We have a
large geographical area in this Province, and health care is important out in
the rural parts. The numbers I have
just shown in relation to where our facilities are and where we continue to be
cognizant of listening to the people and actually keeping those facilities up to
date, continually investing in infrastructure in health care as a government, we
are definitely committed to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
In my district, as I speak,
there is a new protective care bungalow-style building being built, close to
completion. I would like to commend
the Minister of Health and Community Services, the people who work in the
Department of Health, and the good people who are working in Eastern Health
because they are doing such an outstanding job, and we listen.
We listen to what workers are saying, we listen to what the people are
saying out in the communities, and we listen to the seniors.
We are going to continue to listen to the people of the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador and we will continue to invest in health care in the
future.
Today in Newfoundland and
Labrador we have more physicians than ever – more physicians than ever in this
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador – and right now, 54 per cent more
registered nurses per capita than the Canadian average.
That is a number that I can stand on my feet and be proud of here in this
House and talk about the positives of what is happening in the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
I listened to the previous
speaker, I listened to some of the comments, and we are all listening as a
government. Can we do everything for
everyone? To be honest, the honest
answer is no; but we will evaluate it, we will review, we will continue to work
with people in the health care sector and we listen.
We are going to continue to listen to the people of this great Province.
We have moved forward with
thirty-five major health care infrastructure projects in this Province.
That is a large number of infrastructure projects in health care to be
worked on. I have not seen such
projects being done in the past with regard to previous governments.
This government is spending large amounts of investments in the health
care industry. We are listening to
the people and we will continue to listen to the people; we will listen to the
needs.
I intended to speak on the
fishery, but I actually shifted, based on the previous speaker, and I would
definitely like to have another opportunity to speak on the fishery because the
fishery is very important to my district.
I have a large number of plant workers, fisherpersons who are actually
getting ready now to go out, whether it is during the seal hunt that we are
about to see or the crab fishery, the shrimp fishery.
I am very close to the fishing industry.
Actually, I have people related to me who fish, my friends, my neighbors,
and I kind of find it hard to get up and not talk about the fishery in my
district.
Based on the investments
that are being put into the fishing industry and some of the announcements
recently under comprehensive European Union, Canadian agreement, CETA, the $400
million announcement that was made – this is what this government has done, the
government of today. I cannot recall
in the history of any government where such a substantial amount of funding will
be invested into such a great industry.
We have companies like Ocean
Choice International which is a big company in Bonavista, where I live, and they
have invested millions of dollars into phase one of the facility there.
There are over 300 workers working there and continue to work.
Everybody in the district is ready to go back to work in the fishing
industry and when you come out and look at the fishing industry around the
communities in my district, you will see the vibrancy that is there.
I do not have enough time to
speak on the tourism industry, which I wanted to touch on as well.
I definitely will speak on the tourism industry in the future because my
district is so unique. It has
fishery, tourism industry, public sector, and health care.
You can go on up to the upper part of my district and agriculture is a
big industry in that part of my district.
The forest industry is big in my district.
Some people look at
Bonavista South and say it is all about fishery.
It used to be all about fishery; it is quite different now.
This government is working together with the different departments of
government and people are investing in the future of rural Newfoundland and
Labrador. This government, I can
say, definitely supports rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you very much, Mr.
Chair.
CHAIR:
I remind the hon. member his time has expired.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Leader of the Third Party and Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I am very happy to get up
again and speak as part of the Interim Supply discussion that is going on here
in the House. Being a money issue
and being Committee of the Whole, we are able to bring up many concerns we might
have and speak about many issues we may want to raise.
When I have stood in the
House before earlier in our session talking under Interim Supply, I made
reference to the fact of the travel I did around the Province for about five
weeks earlier in the winter. It was
an extremely interesting time for me.
What I found interesting, as I reflect on the many town halls I had and
the many places where I stopped and met with people, was that the people who
came to the town halls, even though they were raising issues of concern in the
community, they were not raising issues that necessarily hit them.
They were raising issues they saw in the community, things impacting
other people in the community, and they came out of concern for the community.
They came because they do
not want to see a society in this Province where people are hungry and because
they do not want to see in their community people having to couch surf because
they cannot afford to pay rent. They
came out because they do not want to see in their community children in schools
whose needs are not being taken care of.
What people in this Province
want, Mr. Chair – and I think it is a hallmark of this Province – is to see
everybody being taken care of. They
want to see programs in our Province.
Programs run by government whereby people's needs are being met.
When they look around them and they see during a time when everything is
supposed to be going so well in our Province – when they look around them and
they see people in need, they get very concerned.
Many people who came out to
the town halls, Mr. Chair, not everybody but a good number of them were people
who were engaged in the community themselves, though they themselves were doing
okay. They were not wealthy; they
were not rich. They were ordinary
members of the community but engaged in many ways in the community.
Some, for example, volunteers at the food bank in their community,
volunteers at the clothing bank in their community, and volunteers in the
hospital in their community. People
who were engaged in the community and because of that engagement, because they
were outside of themselves, outside of their own reality engaged in the
community, seeing the needs in the community.
What they were asking was:
Why can't we do a better job of making sure that people are not in need?
Why is it that in our community we have people who are lined up in food
banks? Why is it that in our
community there are people who cannot afford to pay the rent?
Why is it in our community that we have elderly people in a hospital –
and as one person put it to me, she said: Ms Michael, they get medically
discharged from the hospital, there is no long-term care bed for them, and they
are put up on that floor. She said:
We have about twenty-five of them and they are dying in the beds.
They look at that as people
in the community and they ask why.
Why is this happening? Why when we
have so much coming in can't government plan, can't government make sure that
programs are in place whereby we are taking care of people in need?
This is the question that kept being asked, Mr. Chair.
Sometimes I had people who
were there not for themselves but for a family member.
On a number of occasions there were people at the town halls who were
there speaking for their parents, for example.
I remember one woman in particular, and she had come home from outside of
the Province because she knew her parents were getting older and she had been
outside of the Province for a number of years.
She came home because she felt they were going to need her.
She herself is probably around sixty, and she came home to make sure that
– and her father is a veteran – she would be there in their need.
Since coming home, her
mother has died and her father is on his own.
He himself is now very much in need because he had a heart attack.
She is low income. She was
not low income before she came back, but she has not been able to get a job
where she lives that is paying her adequate income.
She is there taking care of her father who is trying to live on his own
and who cannot get home care. She
cares enough about the community that she is a volunteer in the food bank, yet
she herself is just making ends meet.
She was there not for herself.
She was not talking about herself.
She was talking about the community and others, her father and the people
she sees in the food bank.
That is the kind of spirit
that is out there, Mr. Chair. It is
not people who are coming to town halls because they want to be negative.
It is not people coming and speaking because they just want to point out
what is wrong. It is people coming
and talking about what they are seeing in their community –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
CHAIR:
Order, please!
MS MICHAEL:
– and the lack of care and concern they see in the community, not because of the
people in the community, but because we do not have adequate resources in place
to help take care of the people in our communities.
This is what people were
saying to me when I was going around the Province, and I promised them I would
publicly say what I heard them say.
So I stand here in this House sharing those stories.
What they are saying is: What is government's plan?
We are getting older. I heard
this one over and over. We are
getting older as a community, and there are going to be more of us needing help.
What is government's plan as we age as a community?
Many people who came were
people who had children outside of the Province, and their grandchildren are
outside of the Province, and they have no hope of their children or
grandchildren being here when they are in need.
What was being said to me was: What is government's plan for the future?
What is government's plan with regard to our revenues in the future?
What is government's plan for our social programs in the future?
They ask me what are the plans and all I can say is I do not know because
I keep asking to see the plans and I do not see them.
I keep asking to see a real
plan, for example, for home care.
Right now, what we have is a bandage.
The new Home Support Program that government has come out with is just a
band-aid. Instead of putting in
place a real plan where we really see home care fitting into our health care
system and a real plan where government has a program that is government
administered and government regulated, where we have people being paid adequate
salaries and where people do not have to wonder where home care workers are
going to come from, government is going to give 250 families some money to pay a
family member without any analysis of what that means, without any analysis if
the family caregivers are going to be able to give the care that is needed, and
without any analysis of the implication of family members being paid to do the
work without any benefits and without any protection if they get injured or hurt
by taking care of their family members.
There is no plan.
This government just keeps putting in place things without any analysis
of how the things they are going to do fit into a whole picture and what the
implications are. That is the
message. That is one of the messages
I am bringing to the government today from the people I met with.
People want to know what your plan is.
People want to know what your long-term vision is because they have no
idea. All they get is knee-jerk
reactions and responses to individual situations without doing a complete plan
for what health care, for example, in this Province should look like.
Mr. Chair, I will continue
as we do Interim Supply to bring up other messages that I heard at the town
halls I attended.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. K. PARSONS:
Yes, Mr. Chair, I am glad I got ahead of the Member for Bay of Islands.
I just jumped up ahead of him just in time.
Mr. Chair, it is a privilege
to get up here today and to say a few words on Interim Supply.
First of all, it is my first time up now in this session and I really
want to thank the people from my district for the continued support they show
me.
I live in, as far as I am
concerned, one of the most beautiful districts in the Province, Cape St.
Francis. Everywhere I go I get a
great reception from the people, no matter what event it is at.
It is a really nice feeling to be their representative.
I want to make sure that I ensure them I will represent them to the best
of my ability and I do so as I can.
Mr. Chair, first of all, I
would like to welcome the newest hon. member here from Carbonear – Harbour
Grace. He along with myself have a
lot of similarities. We were mayors
beforehand and this is quite a difference in what it was as you were major, and
it was different for me. As you get
used to it, it is a great honour to be able to serve your people in a different
aspect than what it is to be the mayor for their towns.
Another challenge he has,
also, and the same thing when I came in; I had big shoes to fill.
I came after the late Jack Byrne who did a lot for the District of Cape
St. Francis and the same thing with the hon. member.
He had a great member out there, too, in Mr. Kennedy.
I was out doing a little bit of campaigning and I saw the work that Mr.
Kennedy did out in that area. It is
amazing because it is a great part of Newfoundland and Labrador when you see
long-term care facilities, the roads, and the different things in your district.
I am sure the people appreciate the work Mr. Kennedy did in that district
and I am sure you will do your best to continue.
I wish you all the best here.
Mr. Chair, politics are an
interesting time. People in
Newfoundland breathe politics and we love it.
We just look at the changes and how things just turn around from day to
day. It is just unbelievable.
I will be here, hopefully, please God, in August; it will be six years.
In six years I will be after going through probably four leaders of our
party, each with different aspects of what they brought to the table.
It is very interesting.
I look at the first Premier
I was here with, Premier Williams. I
will always remember going to a function in Torbay one night.
Great Big Sea was playing down there and we were down there.
I can remember all of the people lined up to get their picture taken with
him. He was like a rock star.
He did so much for this Province.
Earlier one of the members
here talked about where we have come since 2003, how we are not the poor sister
anymore of Canada, and how people look at us in a different way.
I attribute a lot to him because of the work he did that got us to where
we are.
The next Premier I had was
Premier Dunderdale. I will always
think of Premier Dunderdale as a great negotiator.
I think of some of the deals she did while she was Premier and while she
held the portfolios that she did, agreements like Hebron, agreements like CETA,
and White Rose Extension. If you
look at what she carried to this place with Muskrat Falls, I think history will
prove her to be one of the great negotiators in this Province.
I want to thank her for what she has done for this Province.
I know a lot of people in my
district ask me how she is doing and whatnot.
I tell them I spoke to her a few weeks ago and I know she is really
enjoying her grandchildren. I wish
her all the best in the future. I
want to thank her on behalf of all the people of Newfoundland, and especially
the people in my district, for the great job she has done for the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. K. PARSONS:
Mr. Chair, I just look at our new Premier now, Premier Marshall.
It would have been so easy for him just to come in, sit down, and say:
Listen, I am only the interim Premier here; I am just going to be here for a
short period of time and I will just carry her through until we get to the phase
where somebody else comes in and replaces me.
No, he did not do that at all.
I have to tell him this.
I am telling you right know, we all know in this House and we all know in
Newfoundland how much Marjorie loves him.
Well, I will tell you right now I have been talking to a lot of people
down in my district, and they are starting to love him just as much as Marjorie.
I will tell you right now there are a lot of Marjories around this
Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. K. PARSONS:
Mr. Chair, his first speech when he went down to Government House was a
speech I will always remember. He
talked about openness and what he was going to bring in the next couple of
months, how he was going to listen to people, how we were going to be a more
open government, and how everybody's opinion mattered.
As you look as we sit in
this House and the different things he has brought in the past couple of months,
that is exactly – I do not know how long he is going to be here for, but what he
has carried to this House will be something that will be done in Newfoundland
politics for years and years to come because his mark is going to be left on it.
Again, I would like to thank him for the great job he is doing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. K. PARSONS:
Mr. Chair, today I want to talk about a very important part of my
district, and I am sure it is an important part of everybody's district:
education. Education, to me, is
ultimate. It is our children, it is
our future, and it is what we want to see our children and grandchildren
everything – we want them to succeed.
In order to succeed in
society, as far as I am concerned, you have to have a great education.
The better we can get our children educated, the better they will succeed
in the future and the better off they will be for everything.
Whether it is their income will be higher and they can afford more
things, or whatever, they will be better people because of a better education.
Now, I listened to the
minister the other day just talking about the increase in what we spend in
education over the last number of years.
We have increased education by 61 per cent since 2003.
I just look in what we are doing for new schools.
We built thirteen new schools in this Province.
As far as I am concerned, that is amazing.
That is unbelievable, and I attribute it to the extra money we got and
the better financial situation we are in.
I am not going back to years gone by and how many schools were built or
anything like that, but we are in a position today to spend money on education
and we are.
This year, I look right now,
and we have eight schools under construction or in the planning stage.
I have one in my district. My
district is down in Torbay and I am in a part of the Province where growth is
unbelievable. We have grown down
there, I think, in the last four years by 20 per cent and there is a big demand
for a school. We have answered the
needs to Holy Trinity Elementary by adding a module classroom on one year and
then this year we had to add on another one.
We did it in Cape St. Francis where we had to add another module.
It costs a lot of money to do these things, but we are doing it because
we know the need is there to do it.
Education is all over the
place. I listen to other members in
different parts of the Province where there is a declining population and they
are fighting to keep their schools.
There is a lot of balance you have to do with different parts of the Province.
I am fortunate to be from an area where we have growth, but some areas
are declining and they are fighting to keep their schools because we all realize
how important education is.
Mr. Chair, I just look at
some of the investments we are doing.
I spoke to a teacher and she told me she was teaching for twenty-eight
years. What she told me basically
was that she has never seen the investments in the schools – I know when we went
to school we had the overhead projectors and everything else, but today they
have the latest technology: the IPads that they do fundraising for.
I go to all kinds of different fundraisers at the schools and we raise
money so our children have the best technologies.
There are whiteboards – and I do not know how they work or anything like
this.
AN HON. MEMBER:
SMART Boards.
MR. K. PARSONS:
They are called SMART Boards rather than whiteboards.
This technology today is
what our children deserve and this is what our government is doing.
We are investing big time in our education.
I am very proud of the investments we are making in our education.
Mr. Chair, we look at
post-secondary education. I just
look at the new building over at MUN that is going to house a lot of the people
coming in from different parts of the Province.
There are 500 different units over there to take care of our
post-secondary education.
Since 2005, we spent
$230,000 on just maintaining the freeze on tuition.
I think it is a fantastic thing, because our priority has to be giving
our people the best education there can be.
I look at young people down in my district right now and I look at them
with the new homes they are building and stuff like this.
It is because they can afford it.
They are well educated; they have great jobs.
I know the hon. Member for Placentia was talking about these big homes
they can afford. Sometimes I look at
them and say: How do they afford it, but do you know what?
We have good, educated people today.
We have engineers, we have doctors, we have lawyers, and we have nurses.
Our incomes in this Province
has gone up since 2003 like nowhere before.
We have the second highest income in all of Canada.
So, what does that tell you?
Our kids are educated, our people are educated, and we have good paying jobs
here. That is what we want, and it
is all based on the education that you get.
It is very important that we continue to invest in our children and
invest in our education system.
Mr. Chair, I do not have
much time left, but I just want to talk a little bit about my district.
I am very proud of the people who are in my district, especially the
volunteers. Most of the people in my
district are on small councils and they volunteer their work.
I have to say I am so proud of these people.
I, one time myself, was one of these volunteers, but the time and effort
that you put into your community – I just want today to thank all the people who
volunteer in our communities, because I think you are heart and soul of
Newfoundland and Labrador and you are the reason why we are what we are today.
A big thank you to all the volunteers, not only in my communities but in
all of the communities in the Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. K. PARSONS:
Especially our municipal leaders – sometimes they have to make decisions
that may affect their neighbours and may affect people down the street, but I
know the majority of them make the decisions for the right reasons, so a big
thank you to all the town councils and councillors out there.
CHAIR:
I remind the hon. member his time has expired.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for the Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I just want to rise and
stand here for a few minutes to speak about something that was in the House of
Assembly here today, Mr. Chair.
First of all, I do welcome everybody back into the House of Assembly.
I always said it and I said it in this House: No matter who puts their
name forward to run in politics, no matter who it is, you are trying to do your
best.
I know the former Premier
has moved on, but we as a group are all thankful for anybody who puts their name
forth. I just wish everybody who
resigns here, and the Premier, all the best in the future.
It is a daunting task to be a Member of the House of Assembly, to be
facing the public on a regular basis.
Premier, thank you for your
service and all the best in the future.
I know some day when we all move on we hope that we all pass on our best
wishes with grace and with class to everybody who moves on from this House of
Assembly. I just wanted to express
that view also.
Mr. Chair, I also want to
talk about how now I feel it is becoming the oops party – not the PC Party, the
oops party. We have stood here in
this House for about a year, year-and-a-half with Bill 29 talking about how open
and accountable this government is.
Now we see oops, we made a mistake; we have to go and change Bill 29.
Mr. Chair, we saw the Steve
Jobs show the other day down in the lobby of the House of Assembly talking about
openness and accountability. Oops,
we have to prove now how open and accountable we are.
Everything that has happened in the last five or six years now is all
being changed, a new direction.
Yet for a year-and-a-half,
two years we have been in this House of Assembly, we have been trying to pass on
the concerns. We were even accused of
wasting time in the House of Assembly over Bill 29.
We were wasting time, Mr. Chair.
Now they all have to stand up there and turn around and say oops, we made
a mistake; we are hoping now that people are going to forgive us.
Hopefully now what is going to happen is that people are going to be a
bit kinder, a bit gentler to us.
We saw another oops today
when it came to the justice system, Mr. Chair, where the minister today – and I
welcome the decisions by the way that were made today.
Hopefully we are going to follow up on the recommendations.
It is all right, but you cannot just criticize every time someone asks a
question and turn around a year later and stand up and apologize.
Oops, we made a mistake; we have to reverse it now.
Sometimes you have to take
criticism, Mr. Chair, you have to take criticism.
Mr. Chair, I am just going
to say there are some issues in the Bay of Islands, like roads.
I know the minister is well aware of them, some of the bad roads out in
Lark Harbour, that way, and John's Beach.
Mr. Chair, there is very little money being spent in the Bay of Islands –
even the four years prior when the former member was there, very, very little,
the deterioration of the roads.
Summerside, up on the Plant Hill area, and beyond to the extension where meeting
into Meadows, they have been trying now for years, six, seven years to get money
for water and sewer, to do the sewer up there.
There has been no major work spent.
Every time you hear all
these funds that are going to be announced, Mr. Chair, all these funds that are
going to come out and we find out later, $272 million was not spent last year.
So that is why you cannot jump for joy just because you say it.
Saying it is one thing, action is another thing.
Mr. Chair, I know, and I am
working on behalf of residents in Summerside who are desperately in need of this
sewer. Like I tried to explain to
them, this government says we are going to spend an X number of dollars and just
does not spend it, Mr. Chair. If
this money was ever spent and there were major improvements, I would be the
first to stand on my feet and acknowledge it.
I have always done that, Mr. Chair, I have always done that.
Now, Mr. Chair, I want to
speak on an issue today in Question Period about the regional land management
out on the West Coast. I want to
read what was in The Western Star, and
I just spoke to the reporter from The
Western Star who stands by it.
From my understanding, he just listened to the tape.
I will read it, Mr. Chair,
and you tell me what you would conclude from this.
“Don Downer, who independently chaired the committee, said he is
surprised government has taken so long to move on the plan.
Since vacating the position, he admitted he has not had much involvement
with it. He said he heard about
disagreements within certain government departments…”.
Mr. Chair, that is just one
part, the information that the minister acknowledged today.
The last payment for rent, for salaries, for expenses, for anything with
the regional land development committee was July 18, 2012.
This is what was tabled by the minister.
Then he stands up and says, oh, I am not getting the information correct.
Mr. Chair, I just spoke to
the reporter. The reporter stands by
his statements. The freedom of
information shows that there was absolutely no money spent in two years, over
two years on this committee, absolutely no expenses, not one even for a
telephone, not one even for any type of a meeting.
There has not been a meeting held in almost three years in this committee
– three years. If I say something in
this House of Assembly, Mr. Chair, and I have the documentation like this, I
sincerely believe in what I am saying.
The town councils out there
want this to move ahead but they do not want a $650,000 boondoggle.
Mr. Chair, I will just add before I sit down.
Some of the people who were on the committee are not even on the town
councils any more, and here they are, sent out letters, going to go on the
committee. They have not been on the
town council, Mr. Chair, yet the committee is active.
Mr. Downer is still the chair but he never had a meeting in almost three
years. You can ask him.
That is his word. You could
ask him. I ask the minister –
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible).
MR. JOYCE:
I will have a few words with you about McIver's
and the commitment you made to McIvers and the kids in McIvers.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
CHAIR:
Order, please!
MR. JOYCE:
The Minister of Tourism wants to stand up, talk
about the kids in McIvers. You
promised them $15,000. You stand up
and you promise that. Where is the
$15,000 per district, Mr. Chair? Ask
the Minister of Tourism.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
CHAIR:
Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Bay
of Islands.
MR. JOYCE:
Ask the Minister of Tourism where he committed in
Hansard $15,000 per district? Where
is that, Mr. Chair?
Mr. Chair, I see it is time.
I will sit and we will report rising.
Thank you, and I will be
back again.
CHAIR:
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I move that the Committee
rise, report progress to the Speaker and ask leave to sit again.
CHAIR:
The motion is that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit
again.
All those in favour, ‘aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against, ‘nay'.
Carried.
On motion, that the
Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, Mr. Speaker returned
to the Chair.
MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman):
The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. LITTLEJOHN:
Mr. Speaker, the Chair of Committee of Supply reports that the Committee
have considered the matters to them referred and has asked leave to sit again.
MR. SPEAKER:
The Chair of Committee has reported progress and
has requested leave to sit again.
When shall the Committee
have leave to sit again?
MR. KING:
Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER:
On tomorrow.
On motion, report received
and adopted. Committee ordered to sit again on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move, seconded by the
Minister of Education, that the House do now adjourn.
MR. SPEAKER:
It has been moved and seconded that this House do
now adjourn.
All those in favour, ‘aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, ‘nay'.
Motion carried.
This House stands adjourned
until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow.
On motion, the House at its
rising adjourned until tomorrow, Tuesday, at 1:30 p.m.