November 7, 2017
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. XLVIII No. 30
The
House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):
Order, please!
Admit
strangers.
Before
we begin today, I'd like to make a couple of announcements, one regarding some
technical issues we're having in the House of Assembly broadcast. Yesterday, we
became aware of some technical difficulties with the broadcast in areas where
cable service providers are using a satellite downlink for distribution. So, in
fact, some folks out there in TV land may not be watching us, as I'm sure they
like to do on each session.
So, I
wanted them to know that customers of cable service providers that carry the
broadcast using fibre distribution are not affected. The House of Assembly is
working with our satellite service provider to find a resolution. Residents in
affected areas can view the House proceedings on, of course, the House of
Assembly website.
I'd also
like to speak next on a point of order that was raised yesterday by the Member
for St. John's Centre. That point of order was raised in accordance with
Standing Order 49. The Member for St. John's Centre indicated that in the course
of delivering a petition she heard another Member of this House use
unparliamentary language towards her. The matter was taken under advisement at
that time. I have had an opportunity to review
Hansard and to also review the video record of the debate leading up
to the point of order.
Our
Standing Orders are the rules agreed on by this House. They are the orders which
allow us to conduct order and decorum in the House. Primary among these is
Standing Order 7(1), which states in part as follows: “The Speaker shall
preserve order and decorum and shall decide questions of order.”
Standing
Order 49 states: No Member shall “use offensive words against any Member of this
House.”
In
addition, the Members of this hon. House have endorsed and are therefore bound
by their Code of Conduct. A second paragraph of the Members' Code of Conduct
states: “Members of this House of Assembly respect the law and the institution
of the Legislature and acknowledge our need to maintain the public trust placed
in us by performing our duties with accessibility, accountability, courtesy,
honesty and integrity.”
These
are serious matters and Members must be aware of their obligation to behave
appropriately in this Chamber. In this House, a word, phrase or behaviour must
be seen within the context of how and what was said and done. Some actions are
unparliamentary in some contexts and not in others. The essential root of
supporting or not supporting this point of order is however whether or not the
challenged actions are seen to be disruptive and therefore unparliamentary.
Having
reviewed Hansard and the video record
of debate at that time, the unparliamentary language in question cannot be
discerned; therefore, there is no point of order. However, I would like to take
this opportunity to remind all Members of their duty to preserve dignity and
decorum in this hon. House and that I expect them to govern themselves
accordingly.
Statements by
Members
MR. SPEAKER:
For Members' statements
today, we will hear statements from the hon. Members for the Districts of Fogo
Island – Cape Freels, Conception Bay East – Bell Island, St. George's – Humber,
Virginia Waters – Pleasantville and Topsail – Paradise.
The hon.
the Member for Fogo Island – Cape Freels.
MR. BRAGG:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Today, I
rise in this hon. House to inform my colleagues of the success we have had in my
district with regional co-operation.
Some
time ago, the Towns of Lumsden, Newtown, Wesleyville, Greenspond and
Valleyfield, along with the local service district of Cape Freels, met to
discuss the idea of building an arena. A joint committee was struck and the work
began.
This
year marks the 25th season for Beothic Arena. We have had challenges, but have
succeeded in providing recreation for local residents for a quarter of a
century.
It is
with great pride the volunteer committee continues to govern. We started out
thinking of only hockey, but soon added the Crystal Gliders Figure Skating Club.
Later, our icemakers perfected the art of making curling ice, thus adding more
interest into the building. The inside walls are lined with banners from
successful competitions. In the off-season, the ice surface gets transformed to
accommodate weddings and other special events.
While
many people have contributed to the success of Beothic Arena, it is the
co-operation of the town councils that has led to this success. Please join me
in thanking the towns and committees responsible for running Beothic Arena.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay East – Bell Island.
MR. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand
today to recognize a constituent of mine who, once again, will be recognized for
his exceptional athletic achievements. I speak of Portugal Cove-St. Philip's
athlete Colin Abbott who will be inducted into the Canadian Softball Hall of
Fame this month.
Colin
may very well go down in history as Newfoundland and Labrador's most
accomplished softball player. He has won 29 medals at the national and
international levels, not to mention the dozens of provincial and Atlantic
competition medals.
In
international play, he captured three MVP awards, one top batter award and was
an all-world selection as an outfielder 15 times. Nationally, he received two
top batter awards and six all-tournament team selections as an outfielder and
two MVP awards. He has been a great ambassador for the game through his
leadership, success and competition diversity and has paved the way for the
future softball players in this province.
Colin's
accomplishments have been recognized by other sports-governing organizations
with his induction into the Newfoundland and Labrador Softball Hall of Fame, the
Newfoundland and Labrador Sports Hall of Fame and, in 2015, the International
Softball Hall of Fame. These are all testaments to the impact Colin has had on
softball in Newfoundland, Canada and the world.
I ask
all Members to join me in congratulating Colin Abbott on his induction into the
Canadian Softball Hall of Fame.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
George's – Humber.
MR. REID:
Mr. Speaker, entrepreneurs
take an idea and turn it into reality. Through their hard work, investments and
persistence they create something where nothing existed before. I rise today to
pay tribute to a group of entrepreneurs on the West Coast of our province.
The
company, Growing for Life, plans to provide fresh vegetables to market
year-round. They have already proven that tomatoes can be commercially grown
year-round in this province and plan to expand to other crops such as peppers,
lettuce and cucumbers.
The
operation is a private venture and the greenhouse growing method focuses on
using local resources to supply local needs. For example, a wood furnace is
being used to heat the operation. Plans are also in place for a farmers' market
and a restaurant on site, which will sell produce from other farmers in the area
as well.
Growing
for Life has accomplished much in a short time and is well on its way to be a
major supplier of fresh produce for the province.
I would
like all Members to join me in recognizing the work being done by Blaine Hussey,
Louis MacDonald, David Hobbs and Scott Madore, the entrepreneurs behind this
innovative company: Growing for Life.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
I recognize the Member for
Virginia Waters – Pleasantville.
MR. B. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise
in this hon. House to recognize the Royal Canadian Legion, Branch 56, in
Pleasantville. With November 11 coming this weekend, it is an important
opportunity to recognize the valuable role that the Legion plays for veterans.
Ever
since its establishment in 1964, the Legion's primary goal is to provide
representation, advocacy and financial assistance to serving and retired
veterans and their families. As well, they work to ensure the sacrifice of those
who served is never forgotten. They do this by organizing the annual poppy
campaign each year, which starts on the last Friday in October and runs until
Remembrance Day.
Unfortunately, some of us know all too well the importance of honouring those
who have given the ultimate sacrifice. I personally lost a close friend of mine
on Easter Sunday in 2007 in Afghanistan to a roadside bomb, which forever
changed Remembrance Day for those close to him and myself.
I
encourage everyone to visit a service of remembrance in your community, and I
ask all hon. Members to join me in thanking Branch 56 of the Royal Canadian
Legion and all Legions across our province for the fantastic work they do to
support our veterans, their families and friends.
Lest we
forget.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Topsail – Paradise.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I wish,
today, to recognize Heather Healey, a resident of Paradise and Team Canada
pitcher.
Mr.
Speaker, Heather's love of baseball started at a very young age. Heather was
first introduced to the sport of baseball at the age of five and came up through
the Paradise Minor Baseball system. Last year, she was the starring pitcher for
Team Canada on the under 20 national team in the women's international cup held
in the Dominican Republic and helped Canada win gold.
In 2014,
Heather was the first female to be drafted into the St. John's Amateur Baseball
league for the intermediate division and, in 2016, to the senior men's division.
She also played with the Capitals in the men's junior A provincials – another
first for a female baseball player in our province. Quite the accomplishment,
Mr. Speaker, and it doesn't stop there.
Last
September, Heather travelled to South Korea with the Canadian women's national
baseball team to play in the world cup and there helped Team Canada win a silver
medal. It's not surprising that she was this year's Town of Paradise 2017 Female
Athlete of the Year and provincial 2017 Senior Female Athlete of the Year.
Mr.
Speaker, I feel it would be very appropriate for Members of this hon. House to
join me in congratulating Heather Healey and all of her accomplishments so far.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Statements by Ministers.
Statements by
Ministers
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Municipal Affairs and Environment.
MR. JOYCE:
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in
this hon. House to highlight the great work of municipal councils, councillors,
community administrators and volunteers in our province. Last week, I was
fortunate to join the Premier in Corner Brook and take part in the
Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador convention and AGM.
The
event was a great success as so many of the people working hard to address local
governance issues came together to exchange ideas about how we can work
collaboratively to improve the quality of life for residents throughout the
province.
Mr.
Speaker, I should note that those who attended acknowledged the excellent work
of outgoing Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador president, Karen Oldford,
who presided over the events.
On
November 1, we held the second annual Premier's Forum on Local Government with
52 delegates representing all areas of the province. We continued the process of
consultations on regional government and noted the ideas and concerns from the
delegates that we will strongly consider as we address this very important
issue.
On
November 4, I announced that the department will amend its municipal
infrastructure policies to eliminate the requirement for municipalities to enter
into a Limit of Service Agreement, which were previously required in order for
municipalities to be eligible for cost-shared ratio funding. This will allow us
to make quicker decisions related to infrastructure funding.
We
anticipate that Phase II – the Investing in Canada Infrastructure fund, should
be in place by March 31, 2018. We have also begun a review of the
Municipalities Act and other municipal
legislation, both of which Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador has
indicated are very important to them.
I'm very
pleased to also highlight our strong relationship with the Professional
Municipal Administrators who are undertaking excellent work for our
municipalities.
I extend
thanks to the executive and all the attendees of the convention and annual
general meeting for sharing their knowledge and expertise and for working with
our government. We look forward to working alongside them again this year and I
know we can accomplish a great deal together as we continue towards our
collective goals of achieving greater efficiency, strengthening the province's
economic foundation, enhancing services and improving outcomes for
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Cape
St. Francis.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I want
to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Mr. Speaker, I'm
pleased to stand here today and recognize many hard-working individuals involved
in municipal government across the province. As a former mayor, I have attended
MNL conferences and I have always found them very useful and informative.
Networking among municipal leaders is very important and always gathers lots of
information that you can bring back to your towns.
I have
been speaking to mayors and councillors in my area, some of who are first time
councillors, and they all told me they found the conference very helpful. I
would like to take the opportunity to thank all councils, staff and
municipalities across the province. I know most of them are volunteers, and what
they do for our towns is so important for the life of many residents of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
MS. MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I, too,
thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I was delighted to be
able to attend the Municipalities NL AGM convention this year and, as always,
congratulations to them for another very successful event.
It was
wonderful to see new faces – there were quite a number around – and interesting
to listen to mayors and councillors speaking in the sessions but, as well, to
meet them face to face and hear what their concerns are. I am always impressed
by their knowledge and insight.
Government must listen closely to these people who are on the ground if we are
going to work together to achieve greater efficiency, enhanced services and
better outcomes for the people of the province.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Further statements by
ministers?
The hon.
the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. DEMPSTER:
Thank you.
Mr.
Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians for embracing Carrot Rewards and taking steps to becoming
healthier.
In June
2016, we launched this free innovative app that engages and rewards users for
physical activity and completing healthy, active living quizzes with points from
loyalty programs, like Scene and Aeroplan. In
The Way Forward, our goal was to increase to 10,000 new users by the
March 31st, 2018. At that time, there were 18,000 users.
Recently, Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to join Premier Ball to announce that we
have achieved and well surpassed our goal. We now have over 32,000 Carrot Reward
users in Newfoundland and Labrador. This represents 6 per cent of our residents,
which is the highest percentage of users amongst other provinces using Carrot
Rewards.
Our
government is committed to supporting healthy, active living and surpassing this
milestone is placing us on the path to achieve our goals.
Mr.
Speaker, the benefits of using Carrot Rewards are great. We know that by
becoming healthier, we will reduce the demands on our health care system. We
also know that physical activity and healthier eating improves our mental
well-being. I fully encourage anyone who does not currently use Carrot Rewards
to download the app today.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank
the minister for an advance copy of her statement. Any programs and initiatives
that encourage Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to increase knowledge of healthy
choices, increase their physical activity and lead healthier lifestyles will be
supported by this side of the House. I'm pleased to hear there's an uptake in
this app and I hope that more people will continue to avail of these types of
programs.
It
should not be lost on anyone, though, that the Liberal minister congratulates
her government, yet she ignores the fact that it's the same Liberal government
that cut health care services in our province, most notably in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador.
In
concluding, Mr. Speaker, I certainly commend the people of this province for
showing the initiative to lead healthier lifestyles, and I congratulate them on
taking these footsteps.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I, too,
thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement. Bravo to
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for doing what they can to be more active and
healthy.
If this
government were really committed to improving the overall health of the people
of this province, they would invest more directly into community recreation and
poverty reduction and reinstate the funding they recklessly cut from the Boys
and Girls Clubs and the Jumpstart program. People and programs cannot survive on
virtual carrots.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Further statements by
ministers?
The hon.
the Minister of Health and Community Services.
MR. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise
today to congratulate Dr. David Allison on receiving the Public Service Award of
Excellence and also thank him for his contributions to Newfoundland and Labrador
as he prepares for his retirement next February.
The
Public Service Award of Excellence is the highest honour that can be received by
public service employees. The award recognizes individuals who display
exceptional work performance and achievements in innovation, leadership,
relationship building and excellence in service delivery.
As
Newfoundland and Labrador's Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Allison is a
respected voice in the medical community. During the ceremony last week at
Confederation Building, some of Dr. Allison's work was highlighted including
expansion of the provincial vaccination program to include the HPV vaccine for
boys and his work on the effects of opioid misuse.
Dr.
Allison is also a member of the Emergency Response Unit with the Canadian Red
Cross and has completed short deployments in Haiti and Sierra Leone. Dr. Allison
has participated in the development of a Nepal-based training program for
general practitioners. Recent visits to Nepal have shown the continued strength
of this program in preparing physicians to meet the rural health demands of a
developing country.
Dr.
Allison also chooses to dedicate his time as a mentor to medical students. He
sees the value in nurturing strong relationships, providing insight and support
as students prepare to enter their field of study.
Dr.
Allison is a leader and a valued colleague. Upon his retirement in February, he
will be missed in my department. I wish him all the best in his future
endeavours.
I invite
all Members to join me today in acknowledging the work of Dr. David Allison.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay East – Bell Island.
MR. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank
the minister for an advance copy of his statement. This side of the House would
also like to commend Newfoundland and Labrador's chief medical officer of
health, Dr. David Allison, on an exemplary career in the practice of medicine
and congratulate him on receiving the Public Service Award of Excellence.
Dr.
Allison is deserving of the highest praise, not just for his professional role
he has played in our provincial health care, but also for his humanitarian
contributions he has made in the global community.
Dr.
Allison's contributions locally and internationally are what have made him a
respected leader and valuable mentor to the young men and women who avail of his
guidance. I wish Dr. Allison the very best for his upcoming retirement in
February and his presence will indeed be missed by many.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's East – Quidi Vidi.
MS. MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I thank
the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I, too, on behalf of our
party want to congratulate Dr. David Allison on winning this prestigious award.
Indeed, we all know that he has performed a great service to the people of the
province during his term.
He also
is giving a wonderful example to the men and women in his profession by working
with people in less fortunate countries develop their health care, working with
the Red Cross and mentoring medical students. He will, when he retires in
February, leave big shoes to fill. Good luck to Dr. Allison in his future.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Further statements by
ministers?
The hon.
the Minister of Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday, I made a commitment to make available to the House the purchase
orders and contracts of Nalcor since the time that I became minister on January
1, 2016 to June 30, 2017. I'd like to make them available. They are publicly
available and online every month.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Outside
of the normal protocol, I know usually Tabling of Documents comes a little bit
later, but the minister just tabled a number of documents.
Minister, yesterday when you were asked by Members of the Opposition and of the
Third Party here in the House of Assembly about these particular documents, you
weren't aware if the documents were even on your desk.
What
have you done in the last 24 hours to make sure that legislation has been
complied with in relation to these documents?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The act
is the Energy Corporation Act. It's
been enacted since late 2007, early 2008. Mr. Speaker, it does, under section 17
in the Procurement Act section of the act, require the tabling of all purchases
and contracts of Nalcor to this House, and that has not been done since the
conception of the act, unfortunately. They have been online. So I'll remind the
Member opposite that, of course, his government wasn't any more compliant.
Mr.
Speaker, we have made them available now at this point and we will continue to
put them into the House of Assembly on a regular basis. I will remind this hon.
House they are available monthly online.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I
appreciate the fact that they're available online, but under the act it does
clearly indicate the minister's responsibility to not only receive the reports
from Nalcor and its subsidiaries, but also to table and present them here in the
House of Assembly.
So I'll
ask the minister if the reports that she's tabled in the House today, and the
information that she is going to provide – are the reports complete as laid out
in the legislation and does it include the subsidiaries: the Muskrat Falls
Project, Hydro, oil and gas, Bull Arm, energy marketing and Churchill Falls? Do
the reports completely include procurement-embedded contractors for all of those
branches of Nalcor?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
What I
did lay before the House today based on the question yesterday was all the
subsidiaries of Nalcor that are included under the act. I'll remind the Member
opposite – because it is his former government's piece of legislation – that
does not include Hydro. Hydro is separate under the definitions of the
Energy Corporation Act. Theirs are
online and made available as well, Mr. Speaker, so they are available.
He did
ask about embedded contractors. As he well knows, this government has been clear
to Nalcor and to the people of this province that we believe that embedded
contractors' information should be made available. The Premier has been very
vocal on this, including writing several letters to the Nalcor board on this
very issue.
Under
this particular piece of legislation –
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I
appreciate the information from the minister. We are going to ask more, Mr.
Speaker, because let's not forget this is the government who did promise
openness and transparency. This is the minister who didn't know the contents of
the former CEO's contract, Mr. Ed Martin, when it was talked about last year.
This is the same minister who hid Oversight Committee reports for 18 months, Mr.
Speaker. This is the same minister who, yesterday, on this very significant
project, didn't even know if the reports were on her desk.
We have
to ask more questions about it, Mr. Speaker. The act clearly says that the
summary of contracts, the procurement principles adopted and the reports
required in the act, which includes a summary of contracts entered into and
identities of suppliers, are to be made public.
Minister, is all that information made public in what you've tabled today?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Mr. Speaker, I'll remind the
Member opposite, it is his former administration that sanctioned the project to
begin with.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. COADY:
Mr. Speaker, I have spent the
last 24 months cleaning up a mess that is unbelievable.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. COADY:
Mr. Speaker, I will remind
the Member opposite – I will remind him again – that this legislation is the
former administration's legislation and in that legislation it deals with the
Procurement Act. As the people of this province know, the Procurement Act
has been changed because there were so many problems with it.
Mr. Speaker, they exempted Nalcor under that Procurement
Act.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
I ask the hon. Members to respect who I have addressed and
identified, who I have recognized. I will not tolerate any more abuses of that.
Thank you.
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I'm glad the minister points out that she has been in the
office for 24 months, Mr. Speaker – 24 months. Under her watch, the project has
grown, when they promised it wouldn't, by another $1.5 billion. That's what
happened under her watch.
Here we have a history under her watch of no Oversight
Committee reports being tabled or shared. She stood and defended it in every
way, shape or form without answering it, Mr. Speaker. I'm not going to apologize
for asking questions about these reports that they didn't table.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. P. DAVIS:
Mr. Speaker, it's important what was raised here in the House yesterday because
it's an important piece of legislation.
I'll ask the minister again: I appreciate the history
lesson on the project, but does what you tabled here today conform to all the
requirements of the legislation? It's a very simple question, Minister.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Everything that I put forward to this House today contains the information that
is required under the Energy Corporation
Act. As I specified to the Member opposite, Hydro, under his definitions,
under his legislation, is not required as part of that information.
I will
remind the Member opposite that when they developed the legislation,
specifically around the Procurement Act, it had to do more, Mr. Speaker, with
the procurement processes, around the competitive bidding process, and therefore
not sole-source individual contractors; therefore, the embedded contractors are
not covered. They didn't want the information put out there, Mr. Speaker. This
government is working hard to make sure it is.
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There
are six different entities over at Nalcor, which includes Hydro, she mentions.
She said they're excluded. So that's one of them. One of the other six is the
Muskrat Falls Project. Under the Muskrat Falls Project, there are embedded
contractors, which are suppliers. The act clearly indicates that the identities
of suppliers to whom the contracts have been awarded is to be reported every six
months.
Minister, does your report include the identities of suppliers and reported
every six months?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Mr. Speaker, the Member opposite should be familiar with legislation that his
administration brought forward. There are limitations under that section of the
act that specify the Public Procurement Act.
The
Public Procurement Act requires that
any of the procurement processes, any competitive bidding processes, are
included in the information. Unfortunately, it does not require sole-sourced
contractors or consultants.
I have
said to the Member opposite, I'll say to this House, I'll say to the people of
the province: the Premier has been very vocal on this issue. It does not pass
the smell test, as he said, embedded contractors –
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm
going to quote right from the Corporation Act. This is the
Energy Corporation Act: “The corporation and its subsidiaries
shall report to the minister on their procurement activities and shall include a
summary of contracts entered into and the identities of suppliers to whom the
contracts have been awarded every 6 months.” It goes on to say the minister will
table that in the House.
Minister, is that what you've tabled in the House here
today?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
MS. COADY: Mr.
Speaker, perhaps the Member opposite needs me to say it very clearly. Yes,
everything that is required under the legislation is included in the information
that I laid before this House.
Unfortunately, and I say that with sincerity because this
government has been working very hard to uncloak the secrecy around embedded
contractors that the former administration put in place. Mr. Speaker, embedded
contractors are not covered by this section of the act, unfortunately.
We are working very hard. As the Member opposite knows,
it's before the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner right now. We
believe the information should be public and we hope it will be in the very near
future or we're going to work harder.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
What I
read from was the Energy Corporation Act.
I'll ask
the minister: Where in the act does it excuse identifying embedded contractors
or suppliers under the Energy Corporation
Act?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Mr. Speaker, a legal
interpretation of the act – if you have a legal interpretation of the act and
the requirements under that particular section, a legal interpretation says that
it is procurement processes and a competitive bidding process that's included in
that. That's not from my definition, Mr. Speaker; that's a legal definition.
We would
be very pleased to have the information on embedded contractors. As the people
of this province know, the Member opposite knows, the Premier has been very
vocal on this issue. He has been public on this issue. He has written to the
board of Nalcor as well and now it's before the Office of the Privacy
Commissioner.
Mr.
Speaker, if we need to go further, if there are things that need to be changed,
we will certainly do that because we are continuing to clean up the mess that
they left.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday, the minister didn't even recall seeing them on her desk and she
didn't even know. She said she'll have to check, and now today she talks about a
legal interpretation.
Will you
table that interpretation, Minister?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Mr. Speaker, all the
information has been online, just as it was online when they were in government.
This government, the new Liberal government, has made every effort, has worked
diligently and methodically to bring the project in a better place, and EY has
said it is. Mr. Speaker, we're unveiling the cloak of secrecy that's always been
around Nalcor. We are working very diligently.
It's
unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that under his watch he didn't unveil the Procurement
Act. It was his Bill 1 when he was Premier and he didn't even get to the
Procurement Act. That would have helped change things for Nalcor.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's the
Energy Corporation Act that we're
speaking –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
The
Member for Bonavista need not stand for the remainder of the day because I will
not recognize him.
Please
proceed, Sir.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Again,
I'm reading from the Energy Corporation
Act, is what we're reading from. It actually references that the
Public Tender Act does not apply to the corporation. Then it goes on
with its own parameters, its own legislation. The minister seems to keep going
back to the Public Tender Act, which
is not at play here. It's the Energy
Corporation Act.
My
question to you minister was: Will you table that legal interpretation that you
spoke about?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is
very clear that it does specifically relate to the Procurement Act. It is really
unfortunate, really unfortunate in my opinion, Mr. Speaker, the opinions of most
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, that the former administration decided to
exempt Nalcor from the Procurement Act and give it other requirements, summary
requirements, instead of using the Public
Procurement Act.
That is
what we have done now, Mr. Speaker. This government is very sincere and
dedicated to opening up and making more transparent all the processes around
Nalcor. That's why we have put through a Procurement Act that will include
Nalcor, Mr. Speaker.
The
legal interpretation of that particular section, what the former administration
put in place, is saying that it does not include embedded contractors. It is
only about processes.
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe
the minister is not listening to the question. I just listened to what she said,
and she's right. Under the Energy
Corporation Act it lays out that the minister will table a document that
identifies suppliers – every six months will identify suppliers. Embedded
contractors are suppliers.
I've
asked the minister several times if the information is included. She's walking
all around it without giving an answer by saying if it is or is not. I'm sure
it's not intended, included there, but she has also said she has a legal
interpretation.
All I'm
asking you, Minister, will you table the legal interpretation? This is the third
time I've asked. Will you table that interpretation?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Mr. Speaker, I'm sure he is
using all the powers that he learned as a constable in the RNC for many years of
repeating the questions. As I have said quite clearly, under this particular
section of the Energy Corporation Act,
it deals with the procurement processes, it deals with tenders. It does not deal
with sole-source consultants or contracts. He can get his own legal
interpretation; that's what it says.
Now,
this government is really working hard to ensure we have the information on
embedded contractors. The Premier has been very public about this, Mr. Speaker.
We wait what is happening with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner. When we
have that information, whatever we need to do to change acts, to make changes,
we will do, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm not
sure what the minister is trying to get at when she refers to my powers as a
police officer – were the words, I believe, she used. I'm not sure what she is
trying to assert or trying to say about my background, my own personal
background, professional background.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
MR. P. DAVIS:
The question here – well, she
brought it up, I say to the Members opposite. She raised it. She is the one who
raised it, Mr. Speaker.
The
question was very, very simple, Mr. Speaker: Will she table the legal
interpretation? And she won't answer the question, so I'll give her one more
chance. Will you table the legal interpretation?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
I am a bit surprised that he
is sensitive about his skill level as a constable, Mr. Speaker. I was referring
to the fact that he had skills in this area, and he is again repeating a
question – that's a skill. I was referring to his skill level.
Mr.
Speaker, I will again reiterate, as I have said, if you look at the
Energy Corporation Act, in that
particular section it talks about the Procurement Act and the procurement
processes. It deals with tendering processes. It deals with the information that
must be contained in those tendering processes. It does not deal with
sole-sourced consultants and contractors.
Mr.
Speaker, I didn't write that legislation. I didn't vote for that legislation.
That was the former administration.
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Mr. Speaker, the minister has
made it clear she will not table the legal interpretation.
A press
release in July claimed that the Liberal government's business innovation agenda
would be launched in September. It is now November. Minister, where is this
innovation agenda?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for
the question.
The
province has undertaken a thorough consultation process with the community, with
stakeholders. We've engaged over 250 people in surveys, all the stakeholders, to
engage and find out how we reset the innovation here in the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
And
that's so important when we look at diversifying the economy, and when we look
at how we enhance productivity and how we create new opportunities here in
Newfoundland and Labrador. It was a key pillar of
The Way Forward and I can assure the Member opposite that the
innovation agenda will be launched in due course, very soon.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Seems to be a common pattern
that there's still no plan, Mr. Speaker.
Mr.
Speaker, the minister said there'd be no changes to program funding allocations
when they shut down the Research & Development Corporation, but made no mention
of the projects that were currently being worked on at the time.
Can the
minister state if any projects have been cancelled since the dismantlement of
the RDC?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
One of
the things we've been doing as we've been listening to the people of the
province, engaging with the business and the innovation community, and all
industry stakeholders, one of the things that was very clear is that they wanted
one-stop shopping. They wanted to look at the consultation and the financial
supports, all from idea generation to looking at how we get to market and how we
export.
That's
why in July we created InnovateNL. That is a very thorough process. It's been
working well. That's why when we look at our contracts and we look at the
review, things have been running very smoothly when it comes to how we've been
working with business and entities in Newfoundland and Labrador through that
process. InnovateNL is certainly working.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Mr. Speaker, the minister
claimed that the change to shut down the RDC was made to promote the business
agenda.
Can the
minister tell us how many ongoing projects were impacted by his decision to shut
down the RDC?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There
was a very smooth transition as we created InnovateNL. Things have been working
very well within our department; there's been a very collaborative relationship.
We've
seen where contracts have been continuing. We've been continuing to work with
our clients, the programs that had been in existence. The envelope of funding
has been maintained. Now what we're seeing is greater collaboration where
somebody can come in with an idea, somebody who's looking at an R & D activity,
but also looking at export potential or looking at things that are not
pre-commercial.
The
former RDC only looked at things that were in that pre-commercial space. So this
is a way of which the former administration created redundancy and created
inefficiencies.
We're
changing that, Mr. Speaker. We're making sure we have a more innovative
environment –
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The RDC
was key to accessing applied research, in particular, for the oil and gas and
mining sectors.
Are we
still leveraging funds from the offshore? What amount was leveraged for this
fiscal year?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This
gives me a great opportunity to talk about one of the initiatives that our
department has been working very closely with other departments, like the
Natural Resources and the Minister of Fisheries and Land Resources, as we look
at pursuing ocean supercluster initiatives with the federal government and our
Atlantic counterparts. We are one of the entities that are shortlisted in that
field.
When we
look at trying to secure $950 million, dollar-for-dollar match funding, we've
been working with PRNL, we've been working with all the entities that are out
there to make sure that they're working together and collaborating and being
competitive, so that we can continue to bring as much research and development
dollars here in this province. We're certainly focused on applied research.
With the
Minister of Health and Community Services, we make –
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
During
Estimates, the minister was asked specifically about the RDC and refused to
inform that it would be shut down. Why did the minister fail to tell the House
about the closure of RDC during Estimates?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Mr. Speaker, I want to go
back to talk about more investments that we've made in research and development
that's happening such as Janssen research that's been taking place right now
when it comes to the health sector, as well as one of the first investments that
we made was in aquaculture R & D that's taking place.
I don't
know if the Member opposite is opposed to the half million dollars that we put
forward in InnovateNL that leveraged $3.9 million to look at enhancing the
strains and the vaccines to make sure that we're doing the right R & D, that we
have a stronger aquaculture sector – one that benefits her district quite
significantly.
The
investments that are being made are continuing to be made, yet these are being
made through InnovateNL and she's opposed to that; that's ridiculous.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Another typical non-answer.
He refuses to tell us why he would not disclose to this House their plan to shut
down the RDC.
Moving
on, according to the year-end financial report the RDC had outstanding
contractual obligations in the amount of almost $32 million.
Can the
minister tell us if government will meet these obligations?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Mr. Speaker, we've been very
clear from the beginning that we would honour all contracts that exist. The RDC
had a revolving fund as they would roll out contracts. Sometimes things would
take one year or two years to complete with milestones and projections, and that
all the funds that are committed as contracts, all the funding is accounted for
and is available through that process. So there is no outstanding allocation
financially and all contracts will clearly be honoured when it comes to RDC.
Another
particular initiative that we've invested in since we created InnovateNL is
through an industrial research chair for Ocean Choice International with the
Marine Institute to look at stock assessment in the offshore with our
groundfish. These are good things that's happening and this is all happening
under our –
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune for a quick question; no preamble, please.
MS. PERRY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Can the
minister state for this House which projects were promised the $32 million in
funding, and will he table that list in this hon. House?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation for a quick response.
MR. MITCHELMORE:
Mr. Speaker, there's public
disclosure on all of these projects. They are available on the website. We've
made them available when it came to Estimates, when I was questioned by the
former Member for Mount Pearl North in the House of Assembly on this. Clearly,
all projects and all funding that's committed we can certainly make available
and it is publicly available.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
MS. MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
Yesterday, the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development in response
to a petition on the educational needs of deaf and hard of hearing children said
that his promised education action plan will be based on recommendations of the
Premier's task force report. However, this report inexplicably, knowing evidence
that was presented to them, does not mention deaf children once and includes
only a passing reference on page 19 to students with significant hearing loss.
I ask
the minister: On which of the 16 recommendations dealing with inclusive
education that do not mention the education of deaf and hard of hearing children
is he depending to give him direction?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Education and Early Childhood Development.
MR. KIRBY:
Mr. Speaker, it's
unfortunate, this line of questioning. The Premier appointed four distinguished
academics to review the education system in Newfoundland and Labrador and gave
them a specific mandate, and that the Member would stand on the floor of the
House of Assembly here in this province and bash those individuals to try and
discredit their work is absolutely shameful behaviour, Mr. Speaker, and I won't
stand for it.
Mr.
Speaker, there are 16 recommendations in the report of the task force and we are
going to implement them – 16 recommendations on inclusive education and we are
going to implement them.
We have
been following up with various interest groups on their concerns. There have
been many meetings. I can go on –
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Last
week, we heard of Newfoundland Power pressuring landlords to disclose tenant's
personal information to them, resulting in tenants having their power cut off.
BC and
Alberta have provincial privacy legislation that prohibits landlords from
disclosing tenant information to debt collectors without the tenant's consent,
except for collecting back rent on behalf of the landlord.
I ask
the Minister of Justice: Will he introduce provincial privacy legislation that
would prohibit Newfoundland Power from collecting and landlords from disclosing
tenants' private information?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I
certainly appreciate the question from the Member opposite. I am the minister
responsible for ATIPPA. This is not a concern that has been brought to my
attention prior to this, but as with any valid concern that's brought to my
attention and to our attention, we're always open to considering legislative
reform and to ensuring that our laws are there in the best interest of all
people of this province.
What I
would suggest to the Member is I'm certainly open to looking at it and making
sure an analysis is done so that we can consider it and make sure that, like any
legislation we pass, it is in the best interest and considering the
jurisdictional scans and everything else across the country. I'm happy to look
at it.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I'm very
happy to hear that response. We know there is a gap in our privacy legislation
around this issue.
The
price of power is escalating. Last February, Ontario passed legislation making
it illegal for utilities to disconnect power in the winter for non-payment of
bills. Other provinces have done the same.
I ask
the Premier: Will he direct the Public Utilities Board to look at similar
provisions to protect our people from power cut-offs during the winter?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm
certainly happy to stand here. As it stands, the Public Utilities Board also
falls under the Department of Justice and Public Safety. When we talk about
issues like this, when we talk about something so important as power and people
having access and being disconnected, it is something that we take concern with.
What I
would suggest, Mr. Speaker, is I'm always happy to ensure that the Public
Utilities Board has a look at issues like this. It's unfortunate that the
previous administration didn't let them look at other issues that they might
have, but certainly we'll make sure they look at this.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Again, Mr. Speaker, I look
forward to another solution on behalf of the people of the province.
The
Ontario government has also promised to improve programs to help people who are
struggling to keep up payments on their power bills. Last year, this government
cut the Home Heating Rebate, leaving people stranded.
Will the
minister look at what they are doing in other provinces to help people with the
cost of heat and bring those programs to our province, to the people of our
province?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
What I
can say is that I always avail of the opportunity, especially at
federal-provincial-territorial meetings, to look at other jurisdictions and see
what the best practices are and see what they are doing elsewhere. In some
cases, programs and opportunities that exist elsewhere can be applied here; in
some cases, they cannot. There are certainly differences between every
jurisdiction.
What I
can say is with every good suggestion that's passed to us as a government, we're
always willing to consider all options to improve the situations and lives of
all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre for a very quick question, please.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I ask
the minister of Housing: Will she change Newfoundland and Labrador Housing
policy to make rent supps portable so people can live closer to their family and
their community supports?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
What I
will say in response to the question, as a part of 50 initiatives outlined by
this government in The Way Forward, we
are currently undergoing a thorough review of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing
Corporation's programs and services. We certainly want to look at, going
forward, where the needs are, identifying those needs and how we can best meet
them.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The time for Oral Questions
has ended.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Presenting Reports
by Standing and Select Committees
MR. SPEAKER:
Under Section 37 of the House
of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act, the Commissioner
for Legislative Standards conducted an inquiry into the conduct of the Member
for Terra Nova for the alleged contraventions of the Members of the House of
Assembly Code of Conduct.
Under
Section 38 of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration
Act, the Commissioner for Legislative Standards delivered his report resulting
from the inquiry to former Speaker Osborne in his capacity as chairperson of the
Management Commission of the House of Assembly. This report was distributed by
the Speaker as the chairperson of the Management Commission of the House of
Assembly to Members of the Management Commission on May 30, 2017.
In
accordance with section 38(1) of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity
and Administration Act, I am hereby tabling the report of the Commissioner for
Legislative Standards into the conduct of the Member for Terra Nova.
Further
tabling of documents?
The hon.
the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Pursuant
to section 26(5)(a) of the Financial Administration Act, I am tabling three
Orders in Council relating to funding pre-commitments beginning in the fiscal
year 2018-19.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further tabling of documents?
Notices
of Motion.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you.
Mr.
Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow move the following resolution:
WHEREAS
in accordance with section 39 of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity
and Administration Act, the Commissioner for Legislative Standards has
recommended to this hon. House that the Member for Terra Nova be reprimanded for
violating principles 2 and 11 of the Members' Code of Conduct.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly concurs with the findings
and recommendations of the Commissioner for Legislative Standards and asks that
the Member for Terra Nova stand in his place in this House and apologize to this
Assembly for his failure and violation as cited by the report of the
Commissioner for Legislative Standards.
Thank
you.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further notices of notion?
Answers
to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
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 humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS
deaf and hard of hearing children in the public education system of Newfoundland
and Labrador are not receiving full and equivalent access to a quality education
because of the lack of appropriate full-time resources; and
WHEREAS
from 1964 to 2010, deaf and hard of hearing children were provided with a
full-time quality education in the Newfoundland School for the Deaf, but deaf
and hard of hearing children currently placed in mainstream schools receive only
a fraction of a school day –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
I ask
that we respect the recognition of the hon. Member who's speaking to a petition.
Thank
you very much.
Please
continue.
MS. MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I thank
you for recognizing the people who singed this petition and the concern they're
expressing for children in our province.
WHEREAS
from 1964 to 2010, deaf and hard of hearing children were provided with a
full-time quality education in the Newfoundland School for the Deaf, but deaf
and hard of hearing children currently placed in mainstream schools receive only
a fraction of a school day with a teacher qualified to instruct deaf and hard of
hearing children;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House
of Assembly to urge government to undertake an immediate, complete and thorough
assessment of the supports in place for deaf and hard of hearing children by a
committee of at least two independent and recognized experts in the field of
deaf and hard of hearing education and to accept the recommendations of these
experts; and in the interim, take measures to honour the support commitments
made to all current and future students upon closure of the Newfoundland School
for the Deaf in 2010, to ensure that all deaf and hard of hearing children are
provided with access to a quality education equivalent to hearing classmates as
well as access to sign language.
And as
in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr.
Speaker, I'm very happy to stand and speak once again to this concern that is
being raised by petitioners throughout the province. Right now, I understand
thousands are signing petitions that I will be happy to bring here to the House.
The
School for the Deaf was one of the most successful things we had in our
educational system in this province and we have closed it. Throughout this
country, that had been done by some governments who have retraced their steps.
In places like Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec, they have retraced their
steps. Actually, they've increased having schools for the deaf in these
provinces.
A
province like Saskatchewan is looking at the fact that they closed. They haven't
reversed their decision yet, but they are looking at it because it's being
proven that it's a very special need that deaf people have and these deaf
children have, and the inclusion model we have in this province is like a
cookie-cutter model. It's being shown at this moment that it cannot work. If
this government can't put the resources in place to make inclusion work for deaf
and hard of hearing children, then they have to change that for these children.
They have to either make sure that all the resources are there or reopen the
School for the Deaf.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further petitions?
The hon.
the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
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 humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS
government has removed the provincial point-of-sale tax rebate on books, which
will raise the tax on books from 5 per cent to 15 per cent; and
WHEREAS
an increase in the tax on books will reduce book sales to the detriment of local
bookstores, publishers and authors, and the amount collected by government must
be weighed against the loss in economic activity caused by higher book prices;
and
WHEREAS
Newfoundland and Labrador has one of the lowest literacy rates in Canada and the
other provinces do not tax books because they recognize the need to encourage
reading and literacy; and
WHEREAS
this province has many nationally and internationally known storytellers, but we
will be the only people in Canada who will have to pay our provincial government
a tax to read the books of our own writers;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House
of Assembly to urge government not to impose a provincial sales tax on books.
And as
in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr.
Speaker, this tax on books will have been in effect for a year or perhaps over a
year. I can't quite remember when it was imposed, when it came into effect. It's
clear that this government, when making this decision, had not clearly analyzed
what the rollout would be, what the effect would be. This was done without
consultation from the people of the province.
Again,
it's so interesting that we have the highest illiteracy rates in the country and
that the only solution to illiteracy rates is to help people learn to read and
to teach people to read. For the most part, people do that by reading books.
Adult literacy programs use books to help people learn how to read.
I
believe that it's still valid to continue to present this petition because
people who have signed it want their names recorded as having been opposed to
this tax on books. We have to continue to look at: How are decisions made by
this government without fully analyzing the rollout effects? They couldn't have.
They couldn't have fully analyzed what the effects of this would be. Probably
the majority of taxes that were collected on books were on the backs of
students, on the backs of post-secondary students, some of the people in the
province who could least afford it.
When we
look at the situation we're in right now, one of the things we must do is make
post-secondary education accessible to our young people.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further petitions?
The hon.
the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
To the
hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in
Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland
and Labrador humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS
the Adult Dental Program coverage for clients of the Newfoundland and Labrador
Provincial Drug Program under the Access and 65Plus Plans were eliminated in
Budget 2016; and
WHEREAS
many low-income individuals and families can no longer access basic dental care;
and
WHEREAS
those same individuals can now no longer access dentures;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House
of Assembly to urge government to reinstate the Adult Dental Program to cover
low-income individuals and families to better ensure oral health, quality of
life and dignity.
And as
in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr.
Speaker, there's a lot of emphasis today on trying to reduce health care costs
and, along those lines, trying to encourage people to live healthier lives. We
talked about the Carrot program here today, the whole idea of the healthier we
are as citizens, the less expensive our health care system will be.
Along
those lines, teeth really affect a person's heart health in particular. They
affect a person's dignity, a person's ability to socialize. So we feel that it
is shameful that the people most disadvantaged in our society, the people with
the least amount of money to afford these dentures, are the ones who've been
penalized with the cuts in the budget. We certainly hope government reconsiders
this decision and helps those who truly need it the most.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further petitions?
The hon.
the Member for Conception Bay East – Bell Island.
MR. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
To the
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
government recently cut vital funding to many of the province's youth
organizations; and
WHEREAS
the cuts to Grants to Youth Organizations will have a devastating impact on the
communities, as well as its youth and families; and
WHEREAS
many of these organizations deeply rely on what was rightfully considered core
funding for their day-to-day operations;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon our House
of Assembly to urge government to immediately reinstate funding to province's
youth organizations.
And as
in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr.
Speaker, I've spoken to this a number of times and now we're into the second
year of these youth organizations who provide vital services. These are services
that go from the range of inclusion, to mental health, to physical activity, to
anti-bullying, to everyday services around education and others – the whole
gamut of what we would expect the type of services necessary or the type of
mentoring and engagement for a young person to become a holistic citizen, an
engaged citizen, a productive citizen and have a quality of life that's
acceptable. We've done a detrimental, negative effect to these organizations.
I've
talked to a number of board members who are frustrated because they're spending
more time having to worry about fundraising than about talking about policy and
developing programs and services, and developing partnerships with existing
partnering organizations or government entities, or educators or health
professionals or police forces that would be better used and develop a system
that engages more people to ensure that young people have proper opportunities,
that we have an even playing field, regardless of your geographic location, your
economic background, your cultural background, that young people would have
access to basic services that would enhance their ability to be productive
citizens.
The
minor amount of money, and I keep going back to it. When I added it up, what was
actually taken away from the youth organizations in comparison to – not the
overall budget line, but just the budget line in one of those divisions – it was
insignificant. It was nickel and dime from a department point of view, but it
was detrimental from an organizational point of view and from an operational
point of view.
When you
weigh into it, that small amount of money invested guarantees somewhere from 10
to 20 to, in some organizations, 40 times on return. Some organizations, the few
pittance they get from government, it comes back 40 times. That's money going
into programs and services. It is programs and services that we don't have to
pay for, but we reap the benefits as taxpayers in Newfoundland and Labrador.
To cut
these organizations – three issues here – without any consultation, without
understanding the investment here and without understanding the need for the
young people here.
Mr.
Speaker, I'll have an opportunity to present this again in the future.
Thank
you very much.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further petitions?
The hon.
the Member for Ferryland.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm
happy to present a petition today related to an issue that I brought up several
times here in this House in regard to education and the building of a middle
school in the Mobile-Witless Bay-Bay Bulls response to this.
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
construction for the planned extension was to be tendered and begin in the
spring of 2017 is now several months delayed; and
WHEREAS
issues with septic and water capacity on site have not been resolved, nor have
the concerns of the proximity to the artesian well to Mobile cemetery and the
potential unearthing of unmarked burial sites during construction; and
WHEREAS
safety concerns related to traffic, emergency access and parking during and
after construction have not been addressed; and
WHEREAS
the original budget of $7 million is now estimated at $10 million due to
complications identified on site; and
WHEREAS
actual student enrolment has exceeded all projections and the extension is a
short-term, two-year solution to a capacity issue; and
WHEREAS
the elected members of the board of trustees of the Newfoundland and Labrador
English School District have formally and publicly endorsed the need for a new
middle school for the region;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House
of Assembly to urge government to halt the planned extension to Mobile Central
High School announced in Budget 2016
and move forward with a new middle school that was recommended in the
BAE-Newplan in 2014, subsequently announced in
Budget 2015. The new middle school is the long-term fiscally
responsible solution to capacity issues in our school system.
Mr.
Speaker, this has been something I've spoken of a couple of times. It's an issue
that is important to the region and important to the parents of the region.
We've had a number of discussions about it here in the House. We've asked for a
meeting with the Minister of Finance; that wasn't available.
The
parents wanted to put forward, from their perspective, what they talked about in
terms of the use of the financial resources for this and how a better solution
could be found. That's something the parent group always wanted to do. They
wanted to work with government to find a solution on
The Way Forward issue.
An
initial tender has been put out. Some work has been done in regard to the water
and electrical transfers. I read the environmental report with regard to water
and availability. That is still unable to confirm if the water flow is there, or
actually the content, and the water is appropriate to use. There needs to be
further reviews done based on recommendations. That's an issue in regard to the
extension. When we look at the full capacity, what they're adding to that
facility and whether the water quality is going to be there to be able to do
this.
The
other interesting point is the English School District; their position on this,
they're the elected board trustees. They very clearly indicated they are in
favour of the middle school. There's certainly lobbying done to change their
mind on this and do what's right, both fiscally and from a long-term delivery of
service to build that new middle school.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further petitions?
The hon.
the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. KIRBY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I just
rise on a point of order regarding the petition; Standing Order 49 regarding the
petition presented by the Member for St. John's East – Quidi Vidi.
I want
to draw your attention, Mr. Speaker, to a ruling made by Speaker Wiseman on June
6, 2012. I quote from the ruling in
Hansard.
He said:
“I would not want members – or the public – to think it is possible to separate
pages of signatures such that one petition can be presented to this House many
times. A citizen signing a petition which, for example, may have 1,000
signatures, there is an expectation that that petition be presented in its
entirety. If a member were to separate signature pages in this fashion so that
one petition miraculously becomes twenty or thirty petitions, I want members to
fully understand and to know that I would consider such a practice to be
dishonourable and unworthy of members of this House.”
Now, Mr.
Speaker, yesterday it was clear, the Member had been presented a petition that
had, one media outlet said, 4,000 signatures and there was a tweet that said
2,700. The Member is not permitted, according to the ruling of Speaker Wiseman,
June 6, 2012 – and I remember this well because the ruling was directed at me,
Mr. Speaker. The Member is not permitted to submit a petition in this sort of
piecemeal fashion. Under this ruling, as the Member said, “such a practice would
be dishonourable and unworthy of members of this House.”
I
encourage, Mr. Speaker, for you to consider enforcing this ruling because we
have all abided by it since June 6, 2012.
Thank
you.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further commentary?
I thank
the hon. minister for bringing this matter to my attention. We will take it
under advisement and report back to the House.
Thank
you.
The hon.
the Government House Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Orders of the Day, Mr.
Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. A. PARSONS:
Mr. Speaker, I would call
Order 2, third reading of Bill 15.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded
by the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, that Bill 15, An Act
To Amend The Securities Act, be now read a third time.
MR. SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
Bill 15 be now read a third time.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
Carried.
CLERK (Barnes):
A bill, An Act To Amend The
Securities Act. (Bill 15)
MR. SPEAKER:
This bill is now read a third
time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the Order
Paper.
On
motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Securities Act,” read a third time, ordered
passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 15)
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Mr. Speaker, I call Order 3,
third reading of Bill 16.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move,
seconded by the hon. Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Labour, that
Bill 16, An Act To Amend The Labour Relations Act, be now read a third time.
MR. SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
the said bill be now read a third time.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
The
motion is carried.
CLERK:
A bill, An Act To Amend The
Labour Relations Act. (Bill 16)
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Mr. Speaker, I call Order 4,
third reading of Bill 18.
MR. SPEAKER:
I'm sorry, if I could
retract, I missed a sentence. Could I just go back to it?
MR. A. PARSONS:
No problem, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
My apologies.
I wanted
to go back and insert: This bill is now read a third time and it is ordered that
the bill do pass and its title be as on the Order Paper. My apologies.
On
motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Labour Relations Act,” read a third time,
ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 16)
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Sometimes I wish I could retract.
Mr.
Speaker, I call Order 4, third reading of Bill 18.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move,
seconded by the hon. Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Labour that Bill
18, An Act To Amend The Prepaid Funeral Services Act, be now read a third time.
MR. SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
the said bill be now read a third time.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
This
motion is carried.
CLERK:
A bill, An Act To Amend The
Prepaid Funeral Services Act. (Bill 18)
MR. SPEAKER:
This bill is now read a third
time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the Order
Paper.
On
motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Prepaid Funeral Services Act,” read a third
time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 18)
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded
by the hon. Minister of Health and Community Services, for leave to introduce a
bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Vital Statistics Act, 2009, Bill 20, and I
further move that the said bill be now read a first time.
MR. SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
the hon. Minister of Justice and Public Safety shall have leave to introduce a
bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Vital Statistics Act, 2009, Bill 20, and that
the said bill be now read a first time.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
This
motion is carried.
Motion,
the hon. the Minister of Service NL to introduce a bill, “An Act To Amend The
Vital Statistics Act, 2009,” carried. (Bill 20)
CLERK:
A bill, An Act To Amend The
Vital Statistics Act, 2009. (Bill 20)
MR. SPEAKER:
This bill has now been read a
first time.
When
shall the said bill be read a second time?
MR. A. PARSONS:
Tomorrow.
On
motion, Bill 20 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker,
I move,
seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Labour, that the
House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 17.
MR. SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the
Whole to consider the said bill.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
This
motion is carried.
On
motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, the Speaker
left the Chair.
Committee of the
Whole
CHAIR (Warr):
Order, please!
We are
now considering Bill 17, An Act To Amend The Labour Relations Act No. 2.
A bill,
“An Act To Amend The Labour Relations Act No. 2.” (Bill 17)
CLERK:
Clause 1.
CHAIR:
Shall clause 1 carry?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
All those against, 'nay.'
Carried.
On
motion, clause 1 carried.
CLERK: Be it
enacted by the Lieutenant Governor and House of Assembly in Legislative Session
convened, as follows.
CHAIR: Shall the
enacting clause carry?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME
HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those
against, 'nay.'
Carried.
On
motion, enacting clause carried.
CLERK:
An Act To Amend The Labour
Relations Act No. 2.
CHAIR: Shall the
title carry?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME
HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those
against, 'nay.'
Carried.
On
motion, title carried.
CHAIR: Shall I
report Bill 17 carried without amendment?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME
HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those
against, 'nay.'
Carried.
Motion,
that the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment, carried.
CHAIR: The hon.
the Government House Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
I move, Mr. Chair, that the Committee rise and report Bill 17.
CHAIR:
The motion is that the
Committee rise and report Bill 17.
Shall
the motion carry?
All
those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
CHAIR:
Those against?
Carried.
On
motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, the
Speaker returned to the Chair.
MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):
The hon. the Chair of
Committees.
MR. WARR:
Mr. Speaker, the Committee of
the Whole have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to
report Bill 17 carried without amendment.
MR. SPEAKER:
The Chair of the Committee of
the Whole reports that the Committee have considered the matters to them
referred and have directed him to report Bill 17 without amendment.
When
shall the report be received?
MR. A. PARSONS:
Now.
MR. SPEAKER:
Now.
When
shall the said bill be read a third time?
MR. A. PARSONS:
Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER:
Tomorrow.
On
motion, report received and adopted. Bill ordered read a third time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER:
The Government House Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Motion 2.
MR. SPEAKER:
The Government House Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move,
seconded by the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development, the
following resolution:
WHEREAS
section 4 of the Seniors' Advocate Act
provides that on resolution of the House of Assembly, the Lieutenant Governor in
Council in shall appoint a Seniors' Advocate;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Dr. Suzanne Brake be appointed as the Seniors'
Advocate.
Mr.
Speaker, I'm very happy to stand here today and speak to this resolution that's
being introduced by our government. It's something that, again, I had the
pleasure of being in this House of Assembly on the Opposition side when our
party, when our Opposition, moved that this was a necessary creation for the
people of this province. It's something that we advocated for.
I'm very
proud to say that it was led by our Premier who was then the Leader of the
Official Opposition. It was something that he felt very passionate about, spoke
about it going back as far as 2014. This is something that our Premier and our
party have advocated for, was the creation of a Seniors' Advocate office.
We stand
here now today having passed this legislation in the House, the
Seniors' Advocate Act, and today we're
here with the resolution to appoint the first Seniors' Advocate in the history
of our province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. A. PARSONS:
I know that everybody that
wants to will have an opportunity to speak to this today, Members of the
Opposition and I know the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development,
someone who is fairly new to Cabinet, but you wouldn't know it. She certainly
carries herself like a veteran and has a passion for these issues, whether it's
children, whether it's seniors, just people in general; she's going to have an
opportunity to speak to this. I look forward to her speaking to this resolution,
which will appoint Dr. Suzanne Brake, someone she's had an opportunity to work
with since her elevation, since her promotion to this position.
I have
an opportunity now to speak about the selection of Dr. Suzanne Brake, someone we
are proposing would make an admirable and very strong Seniors' Advocate for not
just the seniors of this province, for all the people of this province because a
senior is something we all aspire to be. Everybody wants to – if you're not a
senior now, the fact is you want to be able to live and become a senior. This is
someone that carries a background of public service, of academia; someone that I
think will do a fantastic job.
I'm
going to speak a little bit about the process itself. We've had an opportunity
on multiple occasions in this House to stand and speak to the legislation which
led to the creation of this office. We've had an opportunity to speak to what
this office will comprise. Again, the minister may take the time to talk about
that, but I want to speak to the process so that people understand how this
works.
The
Seniors' Advocate, similar to other positions that are independent offices of
this House, whether it's the Child and Youth Advocate, whether it's the Chief
Electoral Officer, these are not political appointments. These are independent
offices of the House, not answerable to government per se, answerable to the
people and answerable to the House of Assembly. We're familiar with a number of
these positions. They all come through the House, and the selection of these
individuals is debated here in the House.
In this
case, I guess contrary to what has happened in the past where a selection was
made, in this case all the selections that we've made have gone through the
Independent Appointments Commission, a commission that is led by the hon. Clyde
K. Wells and his very steady team of volunteers who are taking on the job of
ensuring we have the best people put in positions of trust to the people of this
province. In this case, this is one that has also gone through that process.
What I
can say is I have a letter here from the summer where the Independent
Appointments Commission actually wrote to the Clerk of the Executive Council and
said that at the request of the chairperson of the Independent Appointments
Commission and response to the Clerk of the House's request from 2017, there is
an IAC recommendation and observations for the appointment of this. The names
that are put forward for selection are put forward by the Independent
Appointments Commission.
What I
can say is I do believe there was a significant amount of interest in this
position. People from not just this province but across Canada, I believe,
expressed interest in this process. It's something I think is quite important.
The
tackling of systemic issues that affect the seniors of this province, that
affect all of our loved ones, is something I think we all hold dear. The
individual that has been selected here is someone who, through her past work,
through her career, through her study, and, from what I can gather, her passion
is for seniors in this province.
The
person that is being selected is Dr. Suzanne Brake. I have here in front of me,
Mr. Speaker, and this I believe is information that has been forwarded to
Members of the Opposition who have requested it so that they have an opportunity
to look at the resume, the curriculum vitae of the individual who is seeking
this. What I'm going to do, I'm just going to take an opportunity to go through
this so people out there that are watching and that are listening have an
opportunity to see the skill set of the individual that's being proposed here
today to be our first Seniors' Advocate.
Suzanne
Brake's career began in the areas of clinical, supervisory and management as a
social worker and long-term care where she developed a strong background and
knowledge in the challenges of growing old. Ms. Brake's interest was rooted in
the intergenerational extended family in which she was raised and her curiosity
to learn more about the aged. Her early work with the aged, their families,
volunteers and those employed in the provision of services to the aged gave her
a new perspective on the aging population. She also assisted in establishing one
of the first protective care units in this province.
After
working at the Grace General Hospital, the Miller Centre and the Hoyles-Escasoni
Complex, Ms. Brake worked for the School of Social Work at Memorial University.
She developed and implemented an evaluation of the research internship
components of the masters of social work program. She also coordinated and
facilitated community consultation and developed the course social work in
gerontology, which she taught along with other courses.
For the
past 12 years, Ms. Brake has been the director of Seniors and Aging with the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. This position includes providing
direction in the areas of development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation
of legislation, policy, programs and services related to seniors.
While in
this role, Ms. Brake leads the direction and development of the evaluation of
legislation, policies and programs related to the
Adult Protection Act and is the provincial director of Adult
Protection. She holds a master's of social work and social policy and
administration, as well as a Ph.D. in social work and gerontology. She was also
awarded the Canadian Association of Social Workers Distinguished Service Award
in 2015.
Obviously, Ms. Brake would have gone through an extensive interview process, and
in this process she demonstrated knowledge of seniors' issues both provincially
and nationally. Her working career has been focused on the many areas dealing
with the needs of the aging community. She has managed to establish excellent
working relationships with stakeholders, public sector groups, and she
demonstrated in-depth experience in navigating the experiences working within
government and with external partners and groups focused on the needs of
seniors.
Mr.
Brake is a leader in identifying, directing, implementing the interrelated and
often complex work of many organizations who are focused on seniors' issues. Dr.
Brake also took an opportunity to write a submission herself.
What I
want to do is I just want to go through her background, her actual CV here. When
you look at it, it is absolutely amazing, just the different positions she has
held and the work she has done. I think it is worth recording for the record
here, for Hansard, the skill set and
experiences this individual will bring to this very important position.
In terms
of education, as I just said, we have a Ph.D. in social work, a master's degree
in social work and a bachelor's degree in social work right here from Memorial
University. I would note that the Ph.D. is from the University of Calgary.
Since
2005, she has been the director of the Seniors and Aging Division of the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. In June 2010 until now, she served as
the provincial director of Adult Protection. She was an assistant professor at
the School of Social Work at Memorial University; an accreditation coordinator
for the School of Social Work at Memorial University; an assistant professor of
research at the School of Social Work, Memorial University; a social work
manager at Hoyles-Escasoni – and not just a manager. She also started as a
social worker III and she worked her way up through that level since the '80s.
She
worked in the juvenile divergent program; she has worked at, as stated before,
the Grace, the Miller Centre; she has taught in the School of Social Work for
years now at Memorial University. She has field instruction, and it is listed
out here: working with social work students from MUN, dealing with undergraduate
students at the CINB, Health Care Corporation, John Howard House, St. Francis
Foundation group home for adolescents, and Hoyles-Escasoni.
When you
look at the publications she has here: publications in the
Smith College studies in social work, the
Gazette of Memorial University,
The Canadian journal of continuing medical
education, family making project from Memorial University, and the
gerontological social work undergraduate curriculum content. She has done a
tremendous amount of work. She has done some consulting; she's worked as a
research assistant.
Let me
see, her professional memberships and other related activities. She is a
registered member of the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Social
Workers, recipient of the Canadian Association of Social Workers Distinguished
Service Award, member of the Ph.D. committee at Memorial University, chair of
the Disciplinary Panel at the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Social
Workers, a board member at the Seniors Resource Centre of Newfoundland and
Labrador and a program planning subcommittee member with the Conference Planning
Committee for The Faces of Elder Abuse.
The fact
is, Mr. Speaker, the resume speaks for itself.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. A. PARSONS:
She absolutely has the
education, the work experience that will allow her to do, I think, a tremendous
job in tackling some of the systemic issues that we face in this province.
I'm not
going to belabour the point too long. I'm going to leave it to my colleague
who's quite versed in this to talk about some of the challenges that seniors
face in this province right now. We all know it.
The
other thing that we all know and we've known for some time is that our seniors'
population is growing. It is growing quite rapidly; in fact, I think I may be
correct in saying faster than anywhere else in Canada. So I think this could be
as timely a juncture for the establishment of this office. I couldn't think of a
better time for us to be able to do this.
I'd like
to point out I think it's important that this was something that was talked
about in 2014, it was promised in 2015 and it's being delivered right now.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. A. PARSONS:
I think that's worth noting.
This is something that our Premier has talked about when he was on that side and
has made it now a reality. The Premier deserves a tremendous amount of credit
for making this happen, but certainly there's been a lot of credit that goes
around to the people behind the scenes that have helped come up with the
establishment of this office.
As with
the creation of any independent or Statutory Offices of this House of Assembly,
it's a very important role and there's a lot of work goes into that. I also have
to thank staff that are sitting here now that have been a part of this.
Mr.
Speaker, I'm going to get an opportunity, I think, again, later during this
debate to speak to this. What I'd like to do at this point is I'd like to take
my seat, I'd like to turn it over to my colleagues across the way as well as my
colleagues on this side of the House to debate this resolution, which I
certainly think is important.
What I
can guarantee you is that everybody on this side of the House will certainly be
supporting Dr. Suzanne Brake as the first Seniors' Advocate for Newfoundland and
Labrador.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Further speakers?
The hon.
Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Thank you so much, Mr.
Speaker.
We,
Members of the Opposition here of the Official Opposition, would certainly like
to commend Dr. Suzanne Brake for stepping up to advocate for seniors in our
province. Like Members of the government opposite, we certainly highly respect
Dr. Brake for her credentials and her abilities.
She's a
very highly regarded individual, exceptionally competent, exceptionally
qualified. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador are indeed fortunate to have
an individual of her calibre step forward to serve.
But, Mr.
Speaker, there is a problem. She's being appointed to a role that will tie her
hands behind her back. If only the Liberals had given her a piece of legislation
similar to the Child and Youth Advocate
Act or the Citizens' Representative
Act with real investigative powers, but unfortunately they didn't. They set
aside a budget of $500,000 for a person who can advise but who really has no
real investigative powers.
Instead,
they have given her a little more authority than to refer a matter to the
Citizens' Representative for follow-up. She will not have investigative powers
like the kind the other Officers of this hon. House have. We certainly feel that
it's a wasted opportunity for an individual of this calibre. We certainly
believe that Dr. Brake could do a lot in terms of advocacy for seniors in this
province, if she were provided with the proper legislation that would enable her
to do so.
Why did
the Liberals disempower the office before making the appointment? We can only
assume it's because they don't want seniors' issues thoroughly investigated.
Maybe they don't want to be embarrassed by what an advocate might find when she
digs into their actions, but the whole purpose of putting a Seniors' Advocate in
place is so they can investigate serious issues and can make recommendations for
improvements based on their thorough investigations, in-depth investigations,
and their recommendations should have to be honoured and implemented by
government.
She will
be referring matters to an office that is already quite stretched to the limit
and whose mandate is not concerned specifically with only seniors' issues but
with a broad range of issues across all interest and all persons in the
province. So the seniors' issues will be one of many that the Citizens'
Representative has to deal with.
That's
of major, major concern for us on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, because
$500,000 is a significant amount of money and seniors in this province, as we
all know, are hurting. An office that requires such a significant investment of
public dollars, but has absolutely no powers that such a statutory office should
have, is really just window dressing. It's lip service, Mr. Speaker.
The
Seniors' Advocate bill is similar in my mind to the Appointments Commission.
It's a lot of promises, but I don't see where the action is really going to
improve the situation for the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador.
It is
set up to let the Liberals say we've kept a promise without them actually having
to keep that promise, because this position will effectively have no impact.
It's not about this position. It's not about the effect the individual is going
to have on changing an outcome of the person in distress. It's not about the
best interest of the seniors. It's certainly not about the wisest expenditure of
public funds. It's adding yet another layer for people to have to navigate, a
position that can only advocate at a cost of $500,000, Mr. Speaker, and this
from a government – the very same government – that cut seniors subsidies for
diabetic strips and dentures.
You go
to any senior in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador today, Mr. Speaker,
and their main concerns are: How are they going to pay their light bill; how are
they going to afford their medications; how are they going to protect themselves
from financial abuse, from physical abuse? These are the concerns of seniors in
this province. It's all well and good that there's yet another person that they
can now pick up the phone to call, but it's yet another person whose is not
going to be able to do anything to help them, because they have no legislative
power to be able to do so, Mr. Speaker.
So we
strongly feel, in the Official Opposition, that this is smoke and mirrors; it's
all about appearances. We can only imagine what the Advocate would uncover and
bring to light if she were to be given the powers of the Child and Youth
Advocate.
We
clearly over here on this side of the House applaud Dr. Brake, without
reservation, and at the same time we fault the Liberal government for wasting an
opportunity to let Dr. Brake hold this government's feet to the fire, and all
future governments feet to the fire, with the power she truly needs to advocate
for seniors in our province. From that point of view, we certainly feel it's
shameful that the government is playing politics with the seniors of our
province.
I'm
going to recap, Mr. Speaker, what the Red Book promise was for establishing a
seniors' advocate. Section 3.5.1 of the Red Book promise states that the Liberal
government would: Establish a Seniors' Advocate Office: “To ensure seniors have
the strong voice they deserve, a New Liberal Government will introduce
legislation to create a Seniors' Advocate Office, which will be the third of its
kind in Canada. The Seniors' Advocate will be independent of government, and
will report to the House of Assembly instead of a Minister.
“The
Seniors' Advocate Office will improve the health and well-being of seniors by:”
– now, we're supposed to see tangible results from these bullets – “Advocating
on behalf of seniors and their families, investigating individual complaints.”
Now, as we see in the legislation, there are no real legislative powers for this
Seniors' Advocate to actually do investigations in a similar manner to the Child
and Youth Advocate, so there are certainly going to be shortcomings there.
The
other thing they tout: “Working collaboratively with other seniors'
organizations and service delivery groups to identify and address issues
impacting the health and well-being of Newfoundland and Labrador's seniors.” Mr.
Speaker, certainly, we like the sound of that.
The next
bullet as well: “Advising on policy and program changes to improve services and
support for seniors, thereby improving health outcomes amongst this population.”
Again, Mr. Speaker, we like the sound of that, but we also know that's being
done. It's been done by the 50-plus organizations. It's being done by MHAs, I
would like to think, on all sides of the House who bring the concerns of seniors
that are brought to their attention to the minister. I would like to think
everybody on all sides of the House does that. Certainly, the Seniors Resource
Centre does that.
So here
we are at $500,000. We have another layer to do just the same thing, but they
won't be able to deliver any results, Mr. Speaker, and they won't be able to
make any changes. It sounds to me, in fact, in terms of working collaboratively
with seniors' organizations and service delivery groups, that sounds to me like
something any good minister would do himself or herself on a regular basis,
through regular consultation and meetings with the organizations they represent
and that they are responsible to the Crown for ensuring they serve in the best
interest they possibly can.
To me,
it's a whole lot of duplication with existing roles and existing mandates of
entities in place to support seniors. I see a whole lot of duplication in the
last promise of the Liberal red book: “Serving as a navigator, providing seniors
and their families with the information they need to access government programs
and services in a timely manner.”
Certainly, a lot of duplication there with the Seniors Resource Centre role as
well. When I look at $500,000 and when I consider the fact that the Liberals say
day after day after day we're in a hard place, we have to find a way to save
money, and you see them adding another layer. Imagine what the Seniors Resource
Centre could do with $500,000. Imagine what effect they could really make in the
day-to-day lives of seniors with an extra $500,000. Imagine how much healthier a
senior would be if they could afford to buy their diabetic test strips that the
Liberals cut out, that they can no longer afford to buy.
So we're
going to see an increase in health care problems. We're going to see an increase
in diabetes. We're going to see an increase in kidney issues because people can
no longer afford to buy diabetic strips, but we have $500,000 to put a person in
place that can advise, Mr. Speaker, and advocate. I truly hope that they advise
and advocate strongly. I know that this individual certainly will.
The
Liberal government has said they plan to listen to what the advocate has to say.
I hope they listen to what the Seniors Resource Centre has to say, what all MHAs
have to say, what the 50-plus clubs have to say and what all seniors who
approach them themselves have to say as well.
I would
really like to see one of the very first recommendations coming from the
Seniors' Advocate to be for a change to this legislation to actually give her
the legislative authority she needs to do a thorough and proper investigations
that will actually result in making changes for the better in the lives of
seniors by identifying the true cause of some serious problems some of them are
facing, Mr. Speaker.
Again,
certainly I will say that we, on this side of the House, are very proud of the
appointment of Dr. Suzanne Brake, a very, very well-respected individual who
will do the best she possibly can within the limits of the legislation, the very
poor legislation, I think, drafted by the Liberals.
Five
hundred thousand dollars to advocate when we need a doer; we need a person who
can hold government's feet to the fire. We need a person who can hold government
accountable. I truly believe that we are going to see great work from Dr.
Suzanne Brake, but the Liberal legislation falls short of where it needs to be.
Thank
you so much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I'm very
happy to stand and speak to this motion. I can recall when the legislation was
first passed I thought who could best be our new Seniors' Advocate. The name of
Suzanne Brake was the one that I thought would just be an absolute brilliant
appointment for this position.
I would
like to speak to that issue that Dr. Suzanne Brake comes with such an incredible
resume of experience, of concrete experience in the field working with seniors,
working with our health care system with seniors, working in the area of policy
as well and in academia. She has such a broad scope of experience and expertise.
I am so excited about her appointment. I believe that it is one that will serve
us well as a province.
Mr.
Speaker, many people talk about the tsunami, the tsunami of seniors that we are
facing and going to be facing. But really, a tsunami is something that comes on
unexpectedly; this is not unexpected. We have all kinds of information about the
demographics of our province and we have for years and years and years.
Academics have been telling us, activists have been telling us for years that
the demographics of our province was shifting and that we were going to be the
province in Canada with the fastest growing percentage shift in our demographics
to seniors.
We also
have the highest percentage of seniors in receipt of OAS and GIS which means, if
you translate that, we have the highest percentage of seniors living either in
poverty or right on the edge of poverty, particularly if seniors do not own
their own homes and are having to rent. We know that in a lot of areas in our
province that rent has skyrocketed, for a number of reasons, for some of the big
boom and bust projects that we've had, which have affected the rental rates in a
number of areas in our province. So we have seniors whose income would be
somewhere around $1,100 to $1,200 a month.
I've
presented this scenario in this House a number of times for the past six years.
If we look at that scenario, so the average income would be if you're on GIS and
OAS – and a number of people who are in receipt of OAS and GIS, seniors, are a
majority of women; women who've raised families, who volunteered in their
communities who may not have had a lot of formalized jobs, salaried jobs outside
of the home.
They are
women who have dedicated their lives to their families and to their communities.
Now when these are supposed to be their golden age, their golden years, they're
living really in poverty again, particularly if they have to pay rent. Again, in
a lot of areas in our communities we know that to get a decent one-bedroom
apartment – nothing lavish, there are no swimming pools, there's not a lot of
space, these are very basic units that may be secure – that it's at least $800 a
month on average. You would see that in St. John's, in Clarenville – well,
Clarenville it's probably even more than that. Certainly, Happy Valley-Goose Bay
is way more than that.
So we
have, again, a lot of women on OAS and GIS who are paying a minimum of $800 a
month, then their heat and light, maybe around $200 a month and their phone and
their cable about $100 a month. Already that's $1,000. What do you do? That's
$1,100 actually, Mr. Speaker.
What do
you do when your income is $1,100 to $1,200 a month and your basic expenses,
even before food, are already $1,100? That may leave you with about $100 a month
to feed yourself, clothe yourself, dental care – because this government
cancelled the dental program – and over-the-counter drugs.
We're
hearing stories again and again and again of seniors – again, particularly women
– who may need iron supplements, iron pills. Then, if you use those, you often
also need stool softeners. Those are no longer paid for so people can't afford
them. We hear stories of seniors who are not filling all of their prescriptions
because they just don't have the money to do it. We know that the seniors in our
province are facing a real tough time right now; the price of power is going up.
I'm
really excited about the appointment of Dr. Suzanne Brake as the new Seniors'
Advocate because her role – although some people are concerned that she's not
going to be addressing individual issues and advocate on behalf of individuals,
but we do have those kinds of services in place.
Mr.
Speaker, what we don't have is anybody whose sole responsibility is to look at
the systemic issues. The shortfalls, the abuses, the lack of resources are the
systemic issues for seniors in our province and that's what I find exciting. We
can no longer tolerate just tinkering around the edges of our social programs as
it relates to the needs of the seniors of our province.
We can't
always just speak about seniors as victims or as vulnerable or who have to be
taken care of. Where we are right now today in our province the seniors have
built the economy, have raised children, have been part of subsidizing our
health care system, have been part of subsidizing our university system, our
whole education system. They have been part of building our communities. They
have a lifetime of experience.
We no
longer need to speak for seniors but at times we have to highlight what seniors
are saying. They know what they need. They know what changes need to happen.
They know how the system is not supporting or not delivering what is necessary
so that every senior can live in a healthy and a secure manner and still be a
contributing member to society.
Because
you've reached the magic age of 80 years old doesn't mean that what you have
provided to society is now finished. We know that seniors, again, have a
lifetime of experience and we have to be listening. We have to be listening with
the real intention to hear. Hopefully, that's what our Seniors' Advocate will
do. Not tinkering around the edges, but addressing systemic shortfalls. Also,
not simply addressing complaints, but that she will have a proactive duty and
that's set out in the legislation as well.
In
section 16 it says: “In carrying out the powers and duties of his or her office
the advocate may (a) receive and review matters related to seniors; (b) initiate
and participate in reviews related to seniors.” So she may initiate, she's not
just reactive to complaints. She now has the power to initiate work. That's
what's exciting, Mr. Speaker, and that's what we need.
We need
an Advocate who is able to be proactive and to initiate. She'll be able to –
MR. LETTO:
(Inaudible.)
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The hon.
Member for Labrador West, I'm sure he's going to have the opportunity to stand
and speak rather than speaking over me. He'll probably be heard much more
clearly when he speaks when he has the opportunity. I promise I will not be
speaking over him.
In
carrying out her powers she will also be able to “conduct research related to
seniors, including interviews and surveys.” So she will be able to speak to
individual seniors. She may not do advocacy on specific individual issues.
Again, the Citizens' Rep may be able to do that, the Human Rights Commission may
be able to do that, the Consumer Advocate may be able to look at some issues and
then we have the Seniors Resource Centre. But she will be involved in that
because she will be able to look at trends, at particular areas of weakness in
legislation and in service delivery.
She'll
also be able to consult with seniors, with service providers and with the
public. She will be able to request information and she will be able to make
recommendations to government, to government agencies, to service providers and
community groups respecting legislation, policies, programs and services
impacting seniors.
Where
the Advocate does become aware of a matter relating to an individual senior, the
Advocate may refer that senior to the Citizens' Representative for investigation
of that matter. I suspect what will happen, that many of us will refer issues or
people to the Seniors' Advocate. Although she may not be able to address those
issues, she may be able to at least get a handle. By getting those kinds of
referrals to her, she may be able to get a handle on something that's happening
sort of in an aggregate.
There is
no tsunami of seniors. We've known the information; we've known the demographic
shift that has been building up. It's not a surprise, but government has acted
as if it was a tsunami, as if they are surprised that: Oh my goodness, this is
coming upon us now, what are we going to do?
Again,
it's so important to no longer tinker around the edges, but some of the issues –
and I've had the pleasure and the honour of working with Suzanne Brake, as an
MHA, in her former job where she served the people well, where I was able to
bring specific issues, particularly very serious issues that seniors in my
district have faced. She has been so responsive and very proactive. I'm really
excited about her doing this job.
Some of
the issues I think that are glaring and are huge issues that affect the
well-being of seniors in our province is the issue of housing. Newfoundland and
Labrador Housing has not prepared for the housing needs of seniors across the
province.
There
are several seniors who live in units that belong to Newfoundland and Labrador
Housing that are three-stories high; that are too big. Their partners may have
passed on, their children have grown and left, and they're now rattling around
in houses that are three-stories high and many of them can't negotiate the
stairs.
I have a
few constituents in my district, one woman who is a senior. She has been begging
for a unit that's all on one floor, on the main floor. She fell not so long ago
and broke her hip, and she can no longer negotiate the stairs in her unit. The
reason she broke her hip was because she couldn't negotiate the stairs in her
unit.
I have
another woman who had both her knees, a senior, on both knees she's had surgery
and now she has to have surgery on her hip. She has been begging as well for a
unit that's on one floor or in a building that has an elevator, but where all
her unit is on one floor.
We have
many, many seniors in this situation, who've been on the wait-list for years,
either for rent supps or for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing that would be
appropriate for their needs; but Newfoundland and Labrador Housing has not had
the money or government has not tended to the needs of seniors who are living
independently in rental units. There is a backlog of years of seniors, and also
other people who have mobility issues, waiting for homes that are appropriate
and conducive to their particular needs.
Affordable housing; we have a number of seniors in my district alone who've been
put on the list for affordable housing, for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.
They're on the list for a year. They drop off the list. They have to reapply.
They're on that list for another year. Again, what happens, their rent may be
$800 and they end up, once heat and light and phone and cable is paid for, with
maybe $100 or $200 a month to feed and clothe themselves, transportation and
their over-the-counter drugs. The whole issue of poverty, housing affects
poverty for our seniors.
Their
health care needs; I have a senior who came to my office this week and she
brought her broken dentures, and they've been broken for almost a year. She's
not eligible to get new dentures. She can't eat properly, and she's a diabetic.
She also doesn't have the money she needs in order to be able to feed herself
properly. Her doctor tells her and her dietician tells her what she must do to
stay healthy, but she simply can't do it. She doesn't have the money to do it.
This
government cut the Home Heating Rebate; I wonder with the Seniors' Advocate,
will she look at policy decisions like that, that this government has made in
the last two budgets and how they impact on seniors. Again, we have so many
seniors living in poverty.
Our
health care; cancelling of the dental program has had such devastating effects
on many seniors. Cancelling of the over-the-counter drug program, again, has had
many devastating effects on seniors.
Isolation; when we look at the issue of mental health and addictions. When some
seniors who can get rent supps, when they're offered an apartment that's miles
and miles and miles away from their family and their community supports, then
they turn of down because they know they will be so isolated and so alone.
We know
the whole issue of loneliness among seniors is a huge mental health issue. I
believe these are issues that we can solve. I know these are issues we can
solve, and for the very reason that we have a Seniors' Advocate and a Seniors'
Advocate in the person of Dr. Suzanne Brake, I am really excited about this
because she gets it, because she's worked in the field. She knows the impact of
poverty on seniors. She knows how important it is to listen to seniors with a
real intent of hearing, because they also have solutions.
The
solutions aren't necessarily ones that cost us a lot of money, but they are
about shifting money around. They are about making sure that seniors have a safe
place to live, the health supports they need, and access to transportation so
they can continue to be fully participating in our communities. Transportation
is a huge issue.
The
issue of addictions among seniors is something we haven't really paid attention
to, and seniors are talking to use about that. We have to be able to use the
wisdom and the life experience of seniors to tackle some of the problems. I
believe Dr. Suzanne Brake has the skills and the commitment, the passion and the
compassion to do that.
I'm
looking forward to her leadership because her role is not just about tinkering
around the edges. Her role is about leadership and leading our province and
looking at better social policy, at better legislation as it relates to our
citizens who are in their senior years.
I am
really looking forward to the work she will do. I'm really looking forward to
being able to work with her. I have lots of confidence that we can do better by
our seniors, that we can improve our social services, we can improve our
legislation, we can make it more possible for our seniors to live in ways that
allow them to continue to fully participate in our communities. I know she will
be speaking out about issues like cutting back home care when we have a policy
about keeping seniors in their homes as long as possible and then yet cutting
back a few hours of home care – homemaking home care. That makes it next to
impossible for seniors to keep in their homes.
This is
going to be about dignity. It's going to be about justice. It's going to be
about human rights. It's going to be about doing the right thing. The budget
that's been set out for this office certainly doesn't seem like enough, but it
is my hope that should that be the case, that we will actually hear from Dr.
Suzanne Brake if in fact the budget is not suitable and does not allow her to do
the very intensive work that is needed at this time.
It is my
hope that government will support her in every way that she will identify so
that she can do the work that has been set out for her.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It
really is a tremendous privilege today, Mr. Speaker, to stand in this hon. House
and to speak to the resolution to appoint a Seniors' Advocate.
As a
part of our plan to support seniors, the Premier mandated the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development to lead the development of legislation
to create a Seniors' Advocate including the appointment of Newfoundland and
Labrador's first Seniors' Advocate.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. DEMPSTER:
Only the third province in
this country to have an Office of the Seniors' Advocate.
Mr.
Speaker, time is going to fly I know, I only have 20 minutes, but I'm going to
use it to identify a couple of things. I'm going to talk about the role of the
Seniors' Advocate and I'm also going to talk about a number of things that our
government and my department is doing for seniors today.
Mr.
Speaker, before I start, I have to say, I wish the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape
La Hune had done a little bit of research into the role of the Seniors' Advocate
and her homework before she stood to speak. I really wasn't surprised to hear
her the way she spoke because this is something that we have been advocating for
the last three years.
In 2014,
the Liberal Party advocated for the creation of the Seniors' Advocate. Mr.
Speaker, to understand the challenges that our province faced due to a rapidly
aging population – 19 per cent over the age of 65 right now in Newfoundland and
Labrador and going to go up to 27 per cent within the next 10 years.
Mr.
Speaker, our then leader at the time announced that a Liberal government would
commit to pass legislation to create the Office of the Seniors' Advocate. We
went on, in April '15, to introduce a PMR in the House to urge the then
government of the day to establish a Seniors' Advocate office. At that time,
every sitting MHA voted against.
Here we
are, Mr. Speaker, with the most rapidly aging population in the country, we have
all kinds of issues, and the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune said it is a
luxury as luxuries go. And she said: In a time of fiscal restraint is it a
luxury or is it necessary?
I want
to say, Mr. Speaker, that in my district of Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair – we
have a rapidly aging population all across the province and I think sometimes
that's pronounced in rural parts – I have many, many seniors and I love them
dearly. I really do. When I pop in, there are many seniors that are lonely;
they're waiting for someone to visit. There are many seniors that could avail of
programs and they may not be aware of what programs are out there for them.
I'm
pretty pleased, Mr. Speaker, that I am part of a government and we have
enshrined in legislation the independent power of a Seniors' Advocate to
represent the rights and the interests of seniors here in Newfoundland and
Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. DEMPSTER:
Mr. Speaker, I do have notes
on some things I wanted to say, but I felt compelled to respond a little bit to
the hon. Member across the way. She referenced many times how the Office of the
Seniors' Advocate is different than the Child and Youth Advocate.
Mr.
Speaker, the distinction is the Child and Youth Advocate has legislative
authority to address individual and systemic issues that impact children and
youth in our province. The Seniors' Advocate has the authority to address
systemic issues because we already have a number of mechanisms in place. I'm
surprised the Member didn't know where a senior can direct their individual
complaints concerning impacts to adults. The Citizens' Representative would be
one such area.
The
Member for St. John's Centre referenced the good work of SeniorsNL. Actually,
SeniorsNL is in my district this week, Mr. Speaker, travelling and doing some
important work. They do great work. They are a partner that we value greatly in
this government. I'm really pleased to say that we continue to support them in
my department.
It is
unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that someone could stand and totally discount. We have
a stellar candidate that's going to become an Officer of this House, a
statutory, independent Officer of this House and she is going to represent the
rights and interests of seniors in this province. I'm pretty excited about it.
I'm going to talk about that for a little bit.
Back in
2014, my colleagues and I, a number of us that are here today on this side of
the House, undertook a Let's Connect seniors tour. We held town hall meetings
with seniors throughout the province. What this tour did for us, Mr. Speaker,
was it gave us very important perspective on the needs of seniors throughout the
province and how those needs could be better met.
Who
better to talk to, when we were looking for what direction we were going to go
in determining what the needs of seniors are, than to get out and about in our
province and to listen to what the seniors themselves had to say. I know in my
district we had a number of town hall meetings and we had some luncheons and
brunches. It was really well received and we gained valuable feedback. I know
the same was true for all of my colleagues at that time.
Mr.
Speaker, from that tour it became clear to us the need for an independent voice
for seniors in this province. We needed an Advocate. The need to establish the
office, Mr. Speaker, this office today, while it's not supported by Members
across the way it was supported by seniors.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. DEMPSTER:
That's who it's for and
that's who we're most concerned about. Seniors organizations, major stakeholders
all supported this office, Mr. Speaker.
In 2016,
our government launched The Way Forward: A
vision for sustainability and growth in Newfoundland and Labrador. That, Mr.
Speaker, is our road map. There's much that I could say when we look back at
when we formed government and the necessary steps that we had to take to secure
our footing on some pretty unstable ground at that time, if we want to talk
about the safety of seniors and what's in their best interests and the things
that we were left to deal with.
Mr.
Speaker, we have done that. We have done a number of things so that we now have
money to free up for an Office of The Seniors' Advocate. Things like put in
place a more efficient public sector, a stronger economic foundation, better
services and better outcomes: all things that I was pleased to be part of a
government that implemented those things. When it came to seniors, our focus is
on better services and better outcomes. That's why we're here today talking
about this office that we're going to set up.
Mr.
Speaker, the numbers were too staggering to ignore. We couldn't continue. I read
a quote: Do what you always done and you get what you always got. We have to
look at what's happening all around us and we have to adjust the dial
accordingly.
We have
a rapidly aging population. The Member for St. John's Centre talked about
housing and housing needs. We understand that too, Mr. Speaker. In my department
in the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, we have a team of people that's doing
some very important work right now.
Our
government committed to a new provincial housing plan. I have been working
closely with my federal counterparts on a new National Housing Strategy because
we are not the only province in the country that has aging demographics
happening. We have to prepare.
I'd say
to the Member for St. John's Centre: There is a lot of work happening right now
as we move forward. Something will be coming on that in the coming weeks, Mr.
Speaker.
Sometimes I have to say, Mr. Speaker, when we reference the seniors, we talk
about the challenges that are coming with the seniors, but I'd be remiss if I
didn't stand and mention the opportunities as well. In September, I had the
opportunity, with my federal Minister Duclos, to co-chair the 18th annual
federal-provincial-territorial meeting for seniors.
There
are three different things coming out of that, Mr. Speaker, that we're going to
work on across the country with my colleagues and our federal colleagues and
that was ageism and the systemic things that come with that, aging in place,
putting supports in to help people grow older in their community with their
families and also labour force participation. We know people are living longer
and healthier lives, especially the age category of between 55 and 64 years old.
So these are things we're going to work on over the next year collectively with
other provincial and territorial provinces.
I
mention that because sometimes we talk about our seniors like they're a burden,
when the fact is we have seniors that are contributing greatly to our
communities and to our province. We're very proud of the work they do.
I just
spent a day on the West Coast last weekend. I attended some of Municipalities
Newfoundland and Labrador. A big shout out to the organizers, they did a great
job. When you look around that room, a room full of hundreds of people, many of
them with no hair or grey hair – no offence, Mr. Speaker – and well along the
road of life and they're still very actively engaged in their community. They're
in leadership roles; they're doing a great job. We appreciate them.
Mr. Speaker, here right now today we are talking about the Seniors'
Advocate. I guess we felt we needed to listen to those that required those
services. We needed to listen with an aim to finding relevant solutions to our
rapidly aging population. That was why we decided and we committed, led by our
Premier, to the establishment of a Seniors' Advocate office.
Presently, Mr. Speaker, we have the Office of the Citizens' Representative,
which accepts complaints from individual adults of all ages, including seniors.
We have SeniorsNL, which I mentioned already, and they provide very valuable
information and service referrals.
But, Mr.
Speaker, when we spoke to seniors' groups and when we conducted our reviews, it
was clear to us that we had no mechanism in place to address the systemic
issues. It has been mentioned today some of the things that our seniors are
dealing with, like seniors are often vulnerable to poverty, to isolation,
loneliness, health issues, neglect and abuse.
The
really, really important thing that a Seniors' Advocate will do for the seniors
in our province is they will work to identify shortcomings around policy,
programs and services, to ensure that we are meeting the needs of our seniors,
and to make recommendations to us going forward. Mr. Speaker, those needs will
include things like health care, transportation, housing and the navigation
between programs and services.
Mr.
Speaker, all the things we heard from the lived experiences of seniors. I was
just recently driving into – no offence to anybody that is smoking, but in my
department we are doing a lot to reduce the rates in
The Way Forward initiative of smoking in our province because we
know all the negative health impacts of that. When we think about seniors that
are lonely, and there is lots of research about the impacts of loneliness on
your health – as I was driving into work one day, just recently, they were
sharing some results from a research project, where the results of loneliness
equated to 15 cigarettes a day.
Now, I
can't speak as my colleague, Minister Haggie, could speak more intellectually to
the impacts of 15 cigarettes a day on your health, but I imagine it is not very
good. So these are the things that our Seniors' Advocate will do. She will look
at these different systemic things and try to identify ways that we can combat
some of that.
As a
part of our government's plan to support seniors, we committed to the
establishment of an office that is independent of government and reports to the
House of Assembly. I am very pleased, Mr. Speaker, that we made the commitment.
It is something we have been advocating for since 2014 and 2015 and we are well
on our way. My colleague, the Minister of Justice and Public Safety, did a great
job outlining the bio of the candidate that has been chosen through the
Independent Appointments Commission's merit-based process.
This
lady, when I joined the department on July 31st – there's a great team working
hard in the Department of Children, Seniors and Social Development, often
dealing with heavy issues, Mr. Speaker. I was quite impressed with Dr. Suzanne
Brake, down in Seniors, and the passion that she had to want to make life better
for these people was clearly evident to me from the very first time I met her.
So I think we're very, very fortunate, Mr. Speaker, to have been able to retain
a woman of that calibre and a resume at that level to work now with the seniors
of Newfoundland and Labrador, to make recommendations to government respecting
changes, to improve services to and for the seniors.
The
third office, we're only the third – and we had BC and Alberta in 2014 and here
we are. Mr. Speaker, I think that we are demonstrating just how committed we are
as a government to focusing on the needs of seniors in our province.
Mr.
Speaker, I want to mention some of the initiatives – I've only got five minutes
left – some of the things we have been doing to demonstrate that we are
listening. We understand that meeting the transportation and housing needs of
older adults, it encourages participation in communities, promotes social
inclusion and supports healthy, independent living.
One of
the things identified was transportation issues. We were pleased again this year
in my department to support individuals to more fully participate in their
communities and promote social inclusion through the implementation of an
age-friendly transportation program. Under the age-friendly transportation
program, we have six organizations that have been funded to implement projects
that are age-friendly and to improve accessibility.
A
wonderful example of this initiative would be the community transportation
service provided by the Canadian Red Cross Society some would be familiar with,
happening right here in metro. We're evaluating this program this year to allow
for implementation and monitoring of best practices, which will only serve, Mr.
Speaker, as we go forward to strengthen this initiative.
I
mentioned earlier when I was speaking seniors are living longer; they're staying
heathier and they're actively participating in their communities longer than
ever before. One of the things that we committed to in
The Way Forward is that healthy living assessments would be carried
out. This is voluntary for seniors age 70 and over. And myself and my colleague,
Minister Haggie, have been working on some of this where officials will go into
a senior's house, look around and identify things. Maybe they have a staircase
that needs some adjustment. And if we can work with them to make that
modification in their home that may save that senior a fall, save them a
six-week stay in the hospital, which we know is not only the monetary expense to
the government and the taxpayers, but it's also a cost to that individual to go
through that in their twilight years.
So those
are some of the wonderful things, Mr. Speaker, that we're working on that I'm
really pleased about, and that's the healthy living assessments will focus on
potentially preventable or amenable interventions for those people.
Mr.
Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Seniors' Benefit, a refundable tax credit
for low-income seniors and the Newfoundland and Labrador Income Supplement,
despite us forming government in the worse fiscal climate that this province has
ever seen, when things were pretty shaky, we were still able to put money aside
for a Newfoundland and Labrador Seniors' Benefit, a refundable tax credit for
low-income seniors.
I'm sure
my colleagues will confirm, just like in my district – when I move about my
district, I hear from seniors all the time – that cheque that they get four
times a year, $500 or $600, Mr. Speaker, it varies a little based on your
individual financial circumstances, but it is well received and it is going a
long way to help meet the needs of seniors every day.
I'm
running out of time here, Mr. Speaker, and I had lots more that I wanted to say
on this: the Aging in Place, through accessible and affordable housing and
community supports, we are committed to working collaboratively on a number of
those issues that came out of the FPT meetings that we had here in September.
So I
guess I'll just clue up by saying the Advocate will be an Officer of the House
of Assembly and will work with the Citizens' Representative, but will not
duplicate or impede their mandate. It will focus solely on systemic issues
affecting seniors and making recommendations.
My
colleague talked about, when he stood up, my passion for seniors and I guess it
shines through, but it's true. I was raised by my grandparents, Mr. Speaker,
something that I'm very proud of. I only realized when I was sitting at the
50-plus club – and some of my colleagues here as well – that in a family of 12,
when they actually took me in and raised me, they were already in their senior
years. As my grandfather would say, they worked hard to blaze the trail for
those of us coming behind. Some of our seniors have worked really hard. They've
sacrificed; they know hardship that those of us younger will never know anything
about.
Now we
have spread out over a large landmass, 526,000 people, almost 20 per cent that
are seniors, I am really pleased, Mr. Speaker, to be a part of a government led
by our Premier. He saw that we need an individual office to address some of the
issues of seniors as we go forward to make life better for these people that we
owe so much for.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER (Warr):
The hon. the Member for
Cape St. Francis.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. K. PARSONS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
It's
indeed an absolute privilege to get up here today and, like I always say,
represent the District of Cape St. Francis. The one thing I enjoy most about my
District of Cape St. Francis and being an MHA for that district is the
opportunity that I do have to spend with the seniors in my district.
We spoke
on this before when it came into legislation. The previous government brought it
in about the Seniors' Advocate and we got the chance to get up and speak. At
that time, I did have the opportunity. I think I spoke on behalf of everybody in
this House of Assembly that we all respect what seniors have done for us, to put
us in the place we are today. I only look at the opportunity I get whenever I go
to – this time of year coming up – most of the seniors' dinners and to be able
to sit around with them and be with communities.
The
communities in my district – it's called seniors appreciation night. They'll
have a dinner for the seniors in their district. The minister just alluded to it
minute ago. She said that sometimes people consider seniors a burden but she
doesn't. I don't think there are very many people in this province who will ever
consider seniors in this province a burden. I know I don't. I know Members on
this side of the House don't. I'm sure Members on the other of the House don't
consider seniors a burden, I guarantee you that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. K. PARSONS:
Now, Mr. Speaker, Dr. Brake –
as the Member for St. John's Centre spoke earlier today and told all her
credentials and so did the minister – is a person who is ideal for this type of
job. She's the perfect candidate for this type of job, perfect to advocate.
But what
we're saying and the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune said, we'd like to
give her more teeth. We'd like to give her investigation powers. The same as
what the Child and Youth Advocate would be able to do. To come with a report and
say this is what's happening to seniors today, this is what government has to
change. Come with a series of reports and show incidents where seniors – and
there are lots of them, we all do have them in our districts, where seniors
really do need change in legislation, need change in what's happening in society
today.
We only
have to look at our seniors and look at that – we understand that our
demographics in this province have changed so much over the last number of
years. I've noticed in my own communities. My communities are growing. There are
a lot more seniors.
Go
outside in rural Newfoundland, in rural areas of this province and just look at
what's in a lot of the communities today, a lot of communities with seniors and
a lot of communities that have different needs.
When you
look at what we did in Budget 2016 –
and I always go back to this – when we needed an advocate, we needed someone to
tell government that the 300 taxes and fees you brought in, what an effect it
has on seniors in this province. We needed an advocate because they weren't
listening to the seniors in this province. They wouldn't listen to what they did
to seniors in this province.
I spoke
to a gentleman the other day, an 82-year-old man. He explained to me about how
he does his finance and the effect the 15 per cent on car insurance has on what
he can do and what he had to take away, because most of it – and as Members here
already got up and said, we understand that seniors are on fixed incomes and
every dollar counts. Well, 15 per cent on the car insurance counted to this man.
It counted because it meant he could – what food he was putting on, whether he
could turn on his lights, worrying about his light bill and how he was going to
pay his bills.
That's
what we have to do. As people in this House of Assembly, we have to realize we
represent all people in this province and we represent seniors. I'm sure Dr.
Brake is going to do a great job in advocating. Like I said, she's a perfect
candidate for this position. It's too bad the legislation is not giving her the
same power as it does for the Child and Youth Advocate because seniors need to
have that voice there also, someone to investigate what's happening to them.
When you
look at some of the hardships we put on with the 300 taxes and fees and, not
only that, with the diabetic strips, now having to pay for diabetic strips.
Over-the-counter drugs were mentioned earlier. I spoke to a senior in my
district that told me it costs him an extra $28 a month now for over-the-counter
drugs. This person was on a fixed income, and $28 a month was a lot for that
person to be able to have to spend. It meant something else. Did it mean what
they bought for their food? Did it mean cutting down their lights for a little
bit? I don't know, but that's what we need to do.
As MHAs,
I'm sure we all get up here, get up here at budget time and every time, and we
do advocate for seniors in our district because they're so important. They're
not a burden. I guarantee you, they're not a burden.
Again, I
just have a few things here to say today. When it comes to Dr. Suzanne Brake,
I'm sure she'll do a great job and I'm sure we will support her appointment. As
the minister just alluded to that time, she just said she didn't think we were
going to support her. Yes, we will. I'm sure we will, because she is a great
candidate for this position.
It's too
bad the legislation doesn't give her the powers to be able to do things for
seniors, to make sure we're not cutting diabetic strips, to make sure we're not
causing hardships for seniors in our province. They paid the price. They've done
everything they could.
There
are a lot of times – as the minister said, the hardest times ever in this
province. She got up and said the hardest times ever. I'm sure there are seniors
in your district and seniors in my district who can remember a lot harder times
in this province, and I know that for a fact. They can remember times when it
was a job to put food on the table and everything else, but we all advocate in
here for seniors. I really hope Dr. Brake does a great job and brings something
to this legislation.
Again, I
hope she brings in a part where she says I'm the one who has to advocate. I'm
the one who has to investigate these things and not give it to the Citizens'
Representative, but give it to her. Give it to her to stand up for seniors in
this province, an independent person, an independent act to be able to take care
of seniors in our province. It's important.
As we
know, the seniors' representative does a lot of great work in this province. I'm
wondering also, is anything going to be added to the seniors' representative to
the new things that are going to be coming to him from the Seniors' Advocate? Is
he going to get more resources? Is there going to be more money, more people put
in his department because of this? I hope so, because he's definitely going to
need it.
Mr.
Speaker, we will definitely be supporting the appointment of Dr. Suzanne Brake,
but we'd like to see the legislation and this government put a serious job on
this position because seniors deserve it. They're not a burden on us or anybody
in our society.
Thank
you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Placentia West – Bellevue.
MR. BROWNE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm glad
to see the Deputy Speaker getting accustomed with the new seating chart and
doing well with it. It's always nice to see, but it's certainly my pleasure to
stand in this House and speak to this resolution before us as it relates to the
appointment of a Seniors' Advocate.
It's my
first time speaking here in debate since resuming the fall sitting of the House.
So, as always, I want to thank my constituents for the opportunity to serve
them, many of whom are seniors. In fact, just last Saturday evening I spent an
evening with the seniors of the Chance Cove area. In fact, they have a yearly
senior's banquet where they invite all of the seniors from Chapel Arm, Norman's
Cove, Long Cove, Thornlea, Bellevue, Bellevue Beach, Chance Cove, Fair Haven and
Little Harbour East. They all come together. Instead of having a small gathering
in each community, they come together for – I think there were almost 300 there.
We had a wonderful evening together, I must say, Mr. Speaker.
I want
to come back to a point that the Member opposite for Cape St. Francis had
mentioned with respect to a comment the minister made in her opening remarks
about some people consider seniors a burden. I agree with the Member opposite; I
don't think anyone here and few out there think of any senior citizens as a
burden. They're a gift to us as a society. As family members, we cherish every
moment we have with them.
I think
what the minister was referencing there was when you look at challenges as it
relates to long-term care and people who are aging, there are often challenges
associated with that. I think she was trying to say – and I felt she did it
quite clearly but, obviously, others did not – that this position will be able
to address some of those systemic issues within the health care system and other
departments, Mr. Speaker, that I think government can address.
You
know, it's important. I think the most important piece of all of this is the
follow-through. What happens after the appointment of the Seniors' Advocate? The
Auditor General long warned of massive overspending by the former administration
that went on deaf ears. Today, we're in a situation where we're billions of
dollars into debt; there's no money for nothing. The former administration had
all these pleas from an Officer of the Legislature, the Auditor General, a
warning of the massive overspending, Mr. Speaker, and it just didn't come to
fruition.
I think
it's important to see the follow-through of what happens. You look at the
Independent Appointments Commission which the Seniors' Advocate went through.
That's a process that now has been tested; it's gone through a number of
appointments to agency, boards and commissions. It's following through on the
commitment for independent appointments, a merit-based process.
I think
it really matters with the follow-through, Mr. Speaker. I know this government
is going to take issues that pertain to seniors very seriously because seniors
are a very important part of our society.
I also
wanted to congratulate the minister on this appointment today and, of course,
the former minister, now Minister of Service NL, for bringing through this
legislation earlier in the spring. When I look at it, I'm the youngest one here,
Mr. Speaker, but I have just such a profound respect for seniors. I have such a
profound respect for them.
I look
at how they've survived and how they've thrived over the years, and lived with
dignity and grace and raising large families, often with little resources. My
grandmother had 13 children on my mother's side and eight on my father's side;
two passed away. When you look at that, years and years ago, before there was
running water and electricity – my father grew up on an island – and you look at
the challenges that they faced and overcame, it really gives you inspiration,
Mr. Speaker. It makes me as an MHA want to work hard for them because I know
they worked hard to build this place that we are so proud to call home.
It is
difficult, Mr. Speaker, to listen to some of the rhetoric coming from the
opposite side. We have the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune calling this a
luxury. Mr. Speaker, this is not a luxury, this is a focused approach for
seniors to have systemic issues addressed.
Just
like we heard in Question Period with respect to questions related to RDC, they
favour duplication. They don't want efficiency; they want duplication. They want
multiple people fulfilling the same role.
What's
missing from the conversation today, Mr. Speaker – yes, the Seniors' Advocate,
as we have established it, has a focused approach in terms of dealing with and
addressing the systemic issues facing senior citizens and the senior population
in the province. The Citizens' Representative, SeniorsNL – all these resources
which are also funded through government, through the House of Assembly, have
the capacity to deal with the other issues that have been suggested.
The
Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune gets up today and calls it a wasted
opportunity, Mr. Speaker – a wasted opportunity. All smoke and mirrors, no
teeth, trying to hide everything they have done. I have to remind the Member:
Bill 29 has been repealed long.
As the
Minister of Natural Resources said today, we're trying to peel back the cone of
secrecy that lived for so long under the former administration. Whether it was
Nalcor, whether it was health care, the cone of silence was alive and well in
this province for a long time under the former administration. They tried to
harden it with Bill 29, but the people of the province spoke up, Mr. Speaker.
The Opposition, the Liberals of the day, led the longest filibuster in history
at that point and Bill 29 is no more.
I can
tell you one thing today: It is the Seniors' Advocate, a commitment that was
made in the previous election, Mr. Speaker, one that I am proud to say was made
by our Premier, one championed by him. I'm proud to say we have followed through
on that because of our commitment to seniors.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. BROWNE:
It is very important. It is extremely important that we give back to those who
have given to us. Not only give back what they deserve but give back what they
are entitled to. They're entitled to an Advocate that is independent of this
Chamber; that will examine and study the systemic issues within the government
framework that affects senior citizens and report back.
Dr.
Suzanne Brake, as has been mentioned by many speakers, including – the Member
for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune has even said that her credentials are
impeccable. It has passed through the Independent Appointments Commission; in
fact, I remember this when it came to the Management Commission. She is an
impeccable representative of the senior population. Her post-doctoral work has
represented much of the issues which she will be addressing over the course of
her term in this role.
Mr.
Speaker, I'm very proud to stand here. I'm very proud to say that this
government has followed through on this commitment, a position that the
Opposition voted against for whatever reason we shall never know, just like they
voted against the private Member's resolution relating to the increase in the
Seniors' Benefit. We put more money into the Seniors' Benefit. We created the
Income Supplement, Mr. Speaker. We're helping senior citizens and I won't have
anyone tell me otherwise.
I talk
to the senior citizens of my district; I speak to them every single day. When
the quarterly cheques come out with the Seniors Benefit, they understand that we
know the challenges they face. We're trying to do the best we can to help
address it, despite the flagrant mess left behind by the former administration.
People
say sometimes: You have to stop blaming. Mr. Speaker, I'm not blaming; I'm just
laying out the facts. If we could give every senior a thousand-dollar increase
in the benefit, I know we would. If the capacity allows in the future, I'm sure
that's something we'll consider. But we are taking steps, despite deep fiscal
restraint, to help seniors as best we can. When we look at the Seniors'
Advocate, this is another step that was committed to in
Budget 2016, just shortly after the election, to bring forward this
mandate into legislation and to the appointment that we're seeing today.
Mr.
Speaker, I will say that I concur with the Member for Cape St. Francis. I never
see senior citizens as a burden. They are a true gift to Newfoundland and
Labrador for all they have done. I want to again thank the minister and the
former minister for bringing this forward, and the Premier for his leadership in
recognizing this is a sector of society that requires and deserves this extra
level of oversight, independent of government. Mr. Speaker, it's important to
have that.
All I
hope is that whatever comes of this position does not fall on deaf ears, like
the many pleas from the Auditor General to curtail and curb spending to the
former administration. It didn't happen and here we are today getting questions
from the other side, yesterday in Question Period, about the state of the
economy. It's because of the mess that was left behind and the constant ignoring
of warnings by an Officer of this House, the Auditor General.
I hope
and I certainly will do my part in holding my colleagues accountable on our side
of the House to listen to what the Seniors' Advocate says in representing the
senior citizens of our province; and making sure that we can prove to the
critics that call this a luxury, Mr. Speaker – we will show to the critics and
everyone out there that this is a necessity, not a luxury.
It is
not a wasted opportunity, Mr. Speaker, which is so sad that would be the
commentary on such a happy day, such a good day. It's not a wasted opportunity;
it's an opportunity. Now it's up to us as legislators to make what we want of it
once we begin getting recommendations from the Advocate when she's in her role.
Mr.
Speaker, with that, I believe I've made my points. I'm very happy to support
this.
I know
many of us in our rural districts will be heading in to the Christmas seniors
social circuit. Mr. Speaker, I've been trying to cut back a little bit, so I
might not eat the whole plate, but I can tell you I appreciate every opportunity
to spend with seniors. They are special in our rural communities. They are
extremely important to the vitality of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, so any
opportunity that I can spend with them and hear their issues and concerns, I go.
I attend
these functions, just as I did with the Chance Cove seniors function this past
weekend, because it's an opportunity for them to approach me as MHA with issues
of concern. A number of people did, and I've been working on them now ever since
Saturday night. I'm very proud to do that and have that opportunity, Mr.
Speaker.
It's
important to show up to functions in your district. It's important to be
present. It's important to represent those who have elected you. It's important
to recognize opportunities such as voting in favour of and celebrating the
appointment of a Seniors' Advocate in this province. It is not a luxury; it is a
necessity.
Thank
you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Mount
Pearl – Southlands.
MR. LANE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm not
going to take too long to speak to this resolution. I guess just for the
information if anyone is watching, what we're actually debating here is the
appointment of Dr. Suzanne Brake as the new Seniors' Advocate.
Now,
we're after going off on many tangents and I understand why. I guess some
Members on this side want to remind government of cuts that were made in the
budget and Members over there want to say what a wonderful job they're doing.
That's all good; it's all part of it.
I will
say for the record that we all love seniors no matter what side of the House
we're on. We all have grandparents, or had them, and parents. Many of our
parents would be seniors if they're still with us. We have seniors groups in our
communities. I'm sure every one of us loves seniors and we respect all they've
done. I guess we'll just get that part out there as well.
But,
really, what we're supposed to be debating is the fact that we've appointed – or
it's being proposed that Dr. Suzanne Brake would be appointed as the new
Seniors' Advocate. Personally, I don't know Dr. Brake; I don't think I've ever
met her. Looking at the credentials that were presented, and from what I've
heard through other circles in the past, certainly, it would seem to me that Dr.
Brake is a very good choice, someone who has the credentials, the experience and
the education to do the job. With that said, I will be, obviously, supporting
the appointment of Dr. Suzanne Brake. I certainly congratulate her on the actual
appointment.
I guess
without rehashing the debate that we had in the House of Assembly on the Office
of the Seniors' Advocate and of the establishment of that position, I guess I
would just say that I support having an Office of the Seniors' Advocate. I think
it's good that we would have somebody that would be putting a seniors' lens, if
you will, on all issues affecting us as a province and as a society. I think
that's a good thing.
I think
it's great that we have an independent person who can look at issues that are
impacting seniors and make recommendations to the government to improve services
and improve programs that would benefit seniors in our province. I can't see how
anybody would possibly be against that.
I do
understand, you know, for certain issues we do have a Citizens' Rep. I can
understand that every time a senior comes forward with an issue that could be
handled by the Citizens' Rep, you wouldn't necessarily say: Well, you happen to
be a certain age, we're going to refer the issue to the Citizens' Rep, or you
happen to be above a certain age, we're going to refer to the seniors' rep,
depending on what the issue is.
If it's
an issue which is sort of a systemic issue, an issue that impacts seniors in
particular, then I would agree with the Official Opposition that I would like to
have that seniors' rep to be able to investigate a specific complaint if it was
a totally seniors issue. Right now, as I understand it, it would be referred to
the Citizens' Rep. It's too bad that's not in place. I would like to see that.
As I
said, the fact that we can have a seniors' rep that can focus on government
policy and how it applies to seniors and makes recommendations, I think that's a
positive thing. I'm sure Dr. Brake will do a good job. The only caveat I would
place there, and I guess it's no different than – because these are
recommendations, obviously, that Dr. Brake would be making. While, obviously,
I'm sure seniors' groups, the Opposition and so on would do their best to hold
government accountable on implementing many of these recommendations, they're
not binding recommendations.
I would
say that whether it be this position, no different than when you're hiring
consultants to do different reports, studies and everything else – and we hear
about how studies get done and they're placed on a shelf somewhere collecting
dust. I certainly would hope that Dr. Brake, in doing her work, if she puts in
the effort to really delve deep into government policy and make reasonable
recommendations to improve the lives of seniors in our province, I would
certainly encourage this administration and future administrations that they
would obviously take these recommendations very seriously and would, if at all
possible, implement them and implement them in a timely manner.
It would
simply be window dressing if all we did is said we had a seniors' representative
and that individual is going through the motions. Well, not going through the
motions, they're actually doing the work, doing the research, bringing forth
reasonable recommendations and then those recommendations are not acted upon.
That would be a real shame and that would be a total waste of money if that was
the case.
We can't
predict what's going to happen in the future, other than to say that hopefully
this improves things. Anything we can do to improve the lives of seniors in our
province, I think it is incumbent upon us to do just that.
With
that said, Mr. Speaker, as indicated, I will be supporting this resolution. I
congratulate Dr. Suzanne Brake on the appointment.
Thank
you.
MR. SPEAKER (Reid):
The hon. the Member for
Harbour Main.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. PARSLEY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's
quite an honour to stand in the House of Assembly and speak today on our
Seniors' Advocate. Thanks to the minister, our Justice Minister for the work
they've done, the work they've put in and the commitment of our government to
finally put something in place to protect our seniors.
Dr.
Suzanne Brake is one of the most extraordinary people in our province. I have
some background information; I've dealt with her on a few issues. I've been at
events for seniors actually in the town of Brigus. I don't know if she owns a
summer home out there or what, but when it comes to Canada Day and things like
that, she is the one that's out there working with the people, being a part of
it. I have no doubt in my mind, when she takes this position over, that she will
be here for the seniors of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Speaking
about seniors, I have an awful lot of seniors in my district, as most of us do
here. When we live in small rural towns, the seniors are the backbone of our
communities. When you go to a fundraising event, it's the seniors that are
behind. They're the ones that are selling the tickets, trying to make funds,
trying to plan dinners for the next event. Let me tell you, there's nothing that
goes undone when it's done by a senior.
To speak
a little more, I attended a senior's event on Sunday afternoon in Turk's Gut in
Marysvale. It was held at the Heritage House. To just see the seniors come in,
get their tickets on something, have a cold-plate dinner, get up and dance, have
a band there, it was just unbelievable.
I
encountered a lady there that I knew on something our province is now doing. She
was on dialysis and she was getting her treatments at home. She was so thrilled
that she didn't have to make that trip into St. John's. I spoke to her quite
lengthily about it because her husband had been trained.
By the
time the afternoon was over, let me tell you, I had a broader explanation about
our seniors. Most of them are happy with what they're getting. We all know they
could use a little bit more. Us here in the House of Assembly, that's why we're
here, to advocate on their behalf. They are the backbone; they are what we have
today.
I was
raised in a family of nine, Mr. Speaker, and my father worked in Labrador. When
my father left for work, my mother was left with the duty of raising nine
children. Let me tell you, it wasn't an easy task, but she did it. We had to
respect her and the many other people in the community for doing what they did,
because in those days the father had to leave to go to work and the mothers were
the bread and butter of the family. They were the ones who had to support their
children and support other families when they had to.
You
know, you have to respect seniors. Seniors are entitled to everything they can
get. When a senior walks down the road and you see a young couple out, you stand
and you open doors for them, you respect them because if we don't respect our
seniors, we don't respect anything. Most of them in the last couple of years,
yes, they're finding it hard, but some of them are lucky enough to have their
children step in and help them out when times are rough.
We also
have seniors out there with disabilities. This summer, I spent a little bit of
time in hospital. Actually, I spent time in the rooms with seniors. I didn't let
on that I was an MHA, of course, at first, but I listened to their stories. I
took a few stories out of that hospital and I worked on them. They were
wonderful people and the stories that you heard were unbelievable.
Commitment from this government is everything. We have to stand by our people.
I'm sure Dr. Suzanne Brake is going to do that and is going to work for all
Members of the House of Assembly to make sure Newfoundland and Labrador is a
better place for our seniors.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for
giving me this opportunity to get up to speak this afternoon, which is the
approval of Dr. Suzanne Brake to be appointed as the Seniors' Advocate.
Mr.
Speaker, it has been said several times by Members on this side of the House,
and Members on both sides of the House this afternoon during this debate, that I
believe there will be unanimous agreement in the appointment of Dr. Brake. It
appears that the debate now, with the consent of the Speaker and Chair this
afternoon, has moved off of that specific debate and into more of a discussion
about the legislation. In fact, some Members have talked about the previous
administration and gone back and talked about the economy and so on.
When the
member for Placentia West – Bellevue spoke a few minutes ago, he talked about
the Seniors' Advocate and systemic issues. Then he talked about the overspending
of government. I'm not sure if he is saying the Seniors' Advocate should have –
if it's related to the Seniors' Advocate being responsible for looking at
systemic issues, but it's certainly one that, yes, the Auditor General has
talked about and has talked about in this year's report, actually.
The
Auditor General talked about it in this year's report, in some length, about
government having to reduce its spending. We know when we asked about it this
week in Question Period, the government asked us for our opinion and asked us to
help resolve it for them, but they're the government and it's their job to do
that.
The
Member also referred to the IAC, or Independent Appointments Commission, which
is probably wrongfully named in some regard because they have no power to make
appointments; similarly, that the Seniors' Advocate under legislation has no
power to advocate for seniors. When you look up what advocate means, there are
many definitions under various sources. Merriam-Webster talks about it being:
one who pleads the cause for another is an advocate. Yet, the Seniors' Advocate
as brought forward by the legislation, by Members opposite, has no authority to
advocate for seniors by that definition.
You'll
find definitions to say: one who defends or maintains a cause, proposal. It's
not really what the Seniors' Advocate is to do. As well: or one who supports or
promotes the interest of a cause or group. It's not that, and maybe advocate was
the wrong name. Maybe that was the problem, where things kind of went off the
rails for the government when they referred to it as a Seniors' Advocate.
We had a
lengthy discussion on this. The Member for Placentia West talked about they're
bringing in the longest filibuster in the history. Well, certainly that record
will never be beaten because the government has passed legislation that
essentially eliminates having filibusters in the House. So they've looked after
that part of it as well.
Mr.
Speaker, seniors are important – we all agree with that – and are very
significant in our province. There are aspects in government today that deal
with advocating, and for seniors. The Department of Children, Seniors and Social
Development has a responsibility. Even their own website refers to their mandate
and describes what their mandate is, which includes children, youth, families
and seniors as well.
There is
the Office of the Child and Youth Advocate. This is really what makes it, I
suppose, somewhat of a mask. It kind of presents it somewhat inconsistently. I
was going to say falsely, but that's probably a wrong word to use in the House.
So I won't say it represents it falsely, but I'll say it represents it
inconsistently from what other offices within government or within the House of
Assembly.
The
Office of the Child and Youth Advocate is an independent statutory office of the
House of Assembly. It has authority to represent the rights and interests and
viewpoints of children and youth who are entitled to receive services and
programs that are provided by the government.
The
Office of the Child and Youth Advocate also has the mandate to individually
advocate, something the Seniors' Advocate does not have. It also has the mandate
to look for systemic advocacy which the Seniors' Advocate does have. Education
and promotion, and it does reviews and investigations. The Seniors' Advocate has
no teeth, no legislative power, no regulated legislated law that allows the
Seniors' Advocate to review and investigate.
Now, Mr.
Speaker, Members opposite like to talk about the past. They like to talk a good
bit about the past. I sit here in my seat every day and listen to it, as we all
do. So let's talk about the past. Let's talk about what they got elected on,
because in their 2015 red book, yes, they did. I say to the Member opposite who
raised it: Our leader made a promise and made a commitment. Well, let's look at
what that promise was.
The
promise was, and I won't leave any of it out. I won't editorialize it. I'll go
through it all: “To ensure seniors have the strong voice they deserve.” Well,
does their legislation do that? No, it doesn't. It's simply for systemic issues.
It's not to be a strong voice for individual seniors.
“A New
Liberal Government will introduce legislation to create a Seniors' Advocate
Office ...” – yes, well they've done that, but let's pick through the meat of it
– “… which will be the third of its kind in Canada. The Seniors' Advocate will
be independent of government, and will report to the House of Assembly instead
of a Minister.”
Well, if
we look at the legislation, under section 3 of the
Seniors' Advocate Act, it says: “The Office of the Seniors' Advocate
is established to…” and it names some things, (c) “make recommendations to
government and government agencies respecting changes to improve seniors'…”
programs.
I may
have quoted one wrong word there, Mr. Speaker. So I think it's important to get
back and make sure it's right, “to improve seniors' services” – not programs.
As well,
the 2015 Liberal red book said: “The Seniors' Advocate Office will improve the
health and well-being of seniors by: Advocating on behalf of seniors.” Mr.
Speaker, the Liberal legislation goes far short of that commitment that the
Liberals made in 2015: “Advocating on behalf of seniors and their families.” And
there was no legislative authority for that to take place. Here's a big one, Mr.
Speaker, and I'll read the whole line: “Advocating on behalf of seniors and
their families, investigating individual complaints.”
The
Member for Bellevue and others talked about systemic issues repeatedly, because
that's what the legislation does, it's for systemic issues. It certainly gives
no ability, no intent and no authority for the Seniors' Advocate to investigate
individual complaints.
We just
saw one publicly this week in Holyrood. I saw it. The news media carried it, in
Holyrood, where a senior needed an ambulance service. There was a story about
some of the issues. To me, it would be an ideal circumstance for the Seniors'
Advocate to say: Let's see what happened here and let's have a look at it
because there's some confusion.
I'm sure
the Minister of Health and his department and the medical oversight are looking
at it. I hope they do. I look forward to hearing more on it because it's
certainly not clear exactly what happened, but it would be important to
understand exactly what happened, especially if the circumstances in some way
were unique to seniors. That's what the Liberal's promised; it's not what they
delivered.
It goes
on to say: “Working collaboratively with other seniors' organizations and
service delivery groups to identify and address issues impacting the health and
well-being of Newfoundland and Labrador's seniors.” Perfect.
“Advising on policy and program changes to improve services
and support for seniors, thereby improving health outcomes amongst this
population.” Perfect.
“Serving as a navigator, providing seniors and their
families with the information they need to access government programs and
services in a timely manner.” That's not a systemic issue. That's an individual
issue or individual assistance.
I'm not sure, Mr. Speaker, I was going to rise and say the
Seniors' Advocate has not been tasked with doing that, because Members opposite
have said we're going to duplicate the service. I'm sure the Office of the
Seniors' Representative has not been tasked with that, because the Office of the
Seniors' Representative is a province-wide ombudsman service. Their role, in a
very high level, is to accept complaints from citizens who feel they've been
treated unfairly with respect to their contacts with government offices and
agencies. Their role is to mediate complaints, and if they're unable to mediate,
if those mediation efforts are unsuccessful, then to undertake an impartial and
unbiased investigation.
Well,
Mr. Speaker, I don't see anywhere there where it says serving as a navigator,
providing seniors and their families with information they need to access
government programs and services in a timely manner. I don't recall anywhere in
debate hearing that would be a function of the Seniors' Advocate. I don't think
I've heard that anywhere.
It's
certainly what they promised in 2015 when they asked the people to vote for
them; certainly not that. We've heard about broken promises here today and the
last couple of days it's been a topic again. It's been a frequent topic
throughout the province, Mr. Speaker. I speak to lots of people in the province
and we quite often hear about those types of broken promises. The 2015 red book
promise is far beyond what they delivered in the legislation; far beyond what
they delivered. It's certainly not duplicated by the Citizens' Representative as
asserted by Members opposite.
Mr.
Speaker, I have a couple of thoughts on this. Maybe they named the Seniors'
Advocate wrongly. Maybe they should have called it something else. If the
Seniors' Advocate is going to be about systemic issues, which it primarily is,
to look at programs and systemic issues within government, which is primarily
what the legislation says, then they should have called it something else.
Under
section 3 of the Seniors' Advocate legislation, it says: “The Office of the
Seniors' Advocate is established to (a) identify, review and analyze systemic
issues related to seniors;” – so that is 3(a) – “(b) work collaboratively with
seniors' organizations, service providers and others to identify and address
systemic issues related to seniors; and (c) make recommendations to government
and government agencies respecting changes to improve seniors' services.”
It is
3(a), (b) and (c); in (a) and (b), which lays out why the office was
established, they both refer to systemic issues: “identify, review and analyze
systemic issues related to seniors; and work collaboratively with seniors'
organizations, service providers and others to identify and address systemic
issues ….”
So they
are about systemic issues. They are in no way about individual advocacy. It's in
no way about navigating for individuals. It's in no way advocating on behalf of
families. It's in no way about investigating individual complaints. It's in no
way about providing seniors and their families with information they need to
access government programs and services in a timely manner. It's none of that.
It's none of that, which is what we expected to see, Mr. Speaker.
Members
opposite referred to the IAC a little bit earlier, and I don't want to go back
on them too much – it wasn't my intention today – but I'd be remiss if I didn't
mention it because that's a similar kind of promise that never evolved into
reality. Members stand up all the time and say oh, we have the Independent
Appointments Commission. An Independent Appointments Commission that has no
authority to appoint. They have no authority to appoint. We have a Seniors'
Advocate who has no authority to advocate.
Maybe if
they had to change their title a little bit, maybe it would have took the wind
out of our sales in what we are saying here today somewhat if they had to call
it what it was, instead of trying to represent it as something that it's not.
The
Independent Appointments Commission can make recommendations to Cabinet and
Cabinet can pick from those or any other list of names, and we will never know.
That's the Independent Appointments Commission; we will never know, Mr. Speaker.
The Seniors' Advocate has a similar type of circumstance whereby they can't do
what was promised; they can't advocate.
There is
a lot of talk here today about seniors. We've seen changes in programs and
services being delivered by government and we know they have a spending problem.
The Finance Minister has finally said that they have a spending problem, and we
don't disagree with that. There is a spending problem in government and they
have to deal with that, so they changed programs for seniors.
Let's
use the example of the lady – I won't name her – on Fowler's Road in my district
who needed to go through a process for fairly significant dental work and
repairs and so on that she needed, and she actually protested out here on the
front steps. If there was a Seniors' Advocate, specifically for seniors that
could lobby on her behalf and advocate on her behalf, it would probably be a
really good example of how a Seniors' Advocate could have assisted her, could
have assisted a senior.
We have
seniors who have housing issues, transportation issues, regarding health issues.
We have seniors who are trying, as the government likes to talk about on a
regular basis – and I don't disagree – trying to stay in their own homes for a
longer period of time. But if those individual seniors can't make their issues
known and reach out for assistance and help, then they are really at a loss
because the Seniors' Advocate can do none of that.
Now,
Members opposite will say this is a duplication of services; there is no reason
why seniors can't go to the Office of the Citizens' Representative and will seek
out similar services. I will say to Members opposite, there is some merit in
what the Member referenced opposite. But why don't we have the Child and Youth
Advocate just send them to the Citizens' Representative as well? Because we
don't – we don't have children and youth who have concerns about programs and
services from government, we don't send them to the Office of the Citizens'
Representative, as has been suggested should happen, and what has been suggested
shall happen to seniors, because they are quite often specialized, very
difficult and complex matters, that children and youth sometimes experience that
need specialized handling.
Not only
specialized handling, but someone who understands the needs of children and
youth to advocate on their behalf, to do investigations and reviews of
government services and programs; because our children are very important as
well, Mr. Speaker, and our children and youth are very important, as well as our
seniors. So much so that we all believe in this House that an Office of the
Child and Youth Advocate is important enough to have in place to advocate for
children, independently of government, an Officer of the House, with the
authority to represent the rights of those children, and the authority to
represent the interest and viewpoints of children who are entitled to receive
service and programs from government.
Mr.
Speaker, what Members opposite want us to do is when seniors have a right to be
represented, when seniors need someone to look after their viewpoints, and
seniors who are entitled to receive programs and services by government and they
feel it's not being adequately received, should go to the Citizens'
Representative.
Well,
maybe Members opposite could have said the Seniors' Advocate will be part of the
Citizens' Representative. They could have taken the Seniors' Advocate office and
made it a branch of the Citizens' Representative; not work separately from, with
a completely different set of rules, a different playing field and a different
authority as the Citizens' Representative, and a completely different set of
rules from the Child and Youth Advocate.
Maybe
they could have considered taking the Seniors' Advocate and be part of the
Citizens' Representative office, to complement the Citizens' Representative, not
just to be a forwarding service because the government is well on the record –
when we've asked and we've talked about it and said, well, what happens if the
Seniors' Advocate receives inquiries for assistance and help from seniors, then
it becomes a forwarding service. Their role is just to forward it on to an
already overtaxed, overburdened Citizens' Representative office; a Citizens'
Representatives office who has tremendous amount of pressure, roles and
responsibilities in our province; a Citizens' Representative who does great work
under, sometimes, very difficult circumstances.
And I
say the same thing about the Child and Youth Advocate who does very, very good
work, very difficult work and challenging work, and results in good changes in
policy, or at least it should result in good changes in policy and program
delivery to benefit children and youth.
The same
thing should happen for seniors, Mr. Speaker. If the government feels that to
advocate for seniors would be a duplication of what's already done by the
Citizens' Representative, well, make them part and parcel of the same. Instead
of just being a forwarding service, add it as part of that office because the
Office of the Citizens' Representative and the Office of the Child and Youth
Advocate are offices of the House of Assembly, independent from government, with
special powers and rights to access government files, to get records and files
on individual people from government departments who can't turn them down. They
have special rights to say I want to see the file on this child. I want to see.
I want to talk to the social workers. I'm doing an investigation. They have
rights and authority to do so, and we all support that, but when it comes to
seniors, there is no such power.
When a
senior goes to the Seniors' Advocate and says I have a problem, here's what I've
been dealing with, can you look into it, the Seniors' Advocate says: No, I
can't, because even though I'm called an Advocate, I have no role to advocate.
When such a good appointment, as a strong person like Dr. Brake to a position
like this, which we fully support – and I don't need to get into her background
and credentials and so on, it's been talked about here in the House. It's such a
loss of an opportunity to benefit seniors.
I have
two seniors' retirement homes in my district, which I visit fairly regularly.
One more than the other, I have to admit, only because my mother lives in one of
them. So I'm there more often than the other one.
I also
attend functions from time to time with the Paradise 50-plus group in my
district as well. I find that when I walk through the hallways of one of these
homes – it just happened to me the other day – or if I attend an event at the
Paradise Adventure 50-plus group, it's not unusual for a senior to tap me on the
shoulder and say: Got a minute? I'd like to talk to you. One I always kind of
smile at, they say: Excuse me, I know you're really busy, but are you able to
talk to me – absolutely, because that's why we're here – I have a problem or I
have an issue, I don't know where to go.
Now, if
that was a child who came to me and said I have a problem, we can go to the
Child and Youth Advocate, or a teenager who's trying to find their way. We know
that lives of teenagers are more complex today than they ever were before, and
even beyond teenagers, to young adults. Their lives are more complex, more
difficult and more challenging than ever before. We have a place for them to go
where if they need individual advocacy, if they need assistance with programs or
services, or maybe they raise an issue that the Child and Youth Advocate has
heard so many times before, there's a method to go. For seniors, yes, they can
come to their MHA, but to have a centralized seniors' representative, a Seniors'
Advocate with a specialized, specific role of advocating for seniors, would be
beneficial to seniors in our province.
As I
stand here before you today, Mr. Speaker, I can think of numerous experiences
I've had where seniors needed help and assistance and it wasn't always readily
available through a department, or there were some obstacles and red tape in
departments that were slowing down what a senior needed and it was becoming
problematic. It could have been transportation for a health matter, which we
know in rural Newfoundland and Labrador is of utmost importance. It could be
assistance in trying to stay in their home, as I mentioned. Maybe their roof is
leaking and they're trying to find, through all the programs and services,
what's available for them. To have a centralized, specialized office to deal
with all those issues, the broad range of issues and concerns and challenges
that may face any senior in our province would certainly be beneficial for
seniors.
Mr.
Speaker, that's what was promised to people. When they went to the polls in
2015, that's what was promised to them by the Liberals. Everyone over there
campaigned on it and supported the red book, which they didn't release until
just a few days before the election, by the way. I remember when they released
it because it came under heavy criticism. People said, you can't do it, it's
impossible. What were some of the words they used? Pixie dust and all that kind
of stuff, but when it comes to seniors – which I want to try and stay to that
and not be swayed off by some of the things I've heard in previous debate. When
it comes to seniors, what they promised clearly wasn't in the legislation.
I hope,
Mr. Speaker, that one of the outcomes from the appointment of Dr. Brake, because
I believe in her role of reviewing systemic issues, in her role under section 3:
“(a) identify, review and analyze systemic issues related to seniors; (b) work
collaboratively with seniors' organizations, service providers and others to
identify and address systemic issues related to seniors; and (c) make
recommendations to government and government agencies respecting changes to
improve seniors' services.”
Mr.
Speaker, I honestly hope that one of Dr. Brake's recommendations will be to give
her office, the Office of Seniors' Advocate, authority to advocate because that
will become and is today a systemic issue on itself. It is a systemic issue
today that seniors do not have a specialized, specific office with specialized
investigative powers to review files and records and documents and programs and
services within government. It is a systemic issue today that that's not there.
I had
hoped that when the government brought the legislation it was going to be what
they promised. They were elected. When I looked at that I said: you know what,
if they're going to bring this forward, well, good for them. It's time to do
that, because we know we're an aging population. We know the population is
getting older, but they didn't do it. Just like the IAC I talked about a little
while ago, the Independent Appointments Commission, they didn't do what they
promised.
I really
hope that Dr. Brake, when she gets to work and she works collaboratively with
seniors' organizations and service providers and others to identify and address
systemic issues, that she will understand before too long, once she's in the
office and gets in place and she's working away and she gets settled in and she
starts to talk to seniors and groups and organizations around the province, I
suspect she's going to hear there's nowhere for seniors to turn, other than a
Member of the House of Assembly. When the chips are down, where else do we go
but the Office of the Citizens' Representative?
I hope
she identifies that as a systemic issue so this matter can change and be fixed,
because in a roundabout way that's her job now. Her job is to identify those
systemic issues and make recommendations to government and government agencies
respecting changes to improve senior services.
I trust
that we, as Members of the House, will have access to all of those reports and
recommendations that's provided to government and to government agencies and
then we can have some insight into the work that Dr. Brake is doing in her very
important role here in the province.
I hope
there will be a way to alleviate some of the pressures that we see on the Office
of the Citizens' Representative, but I believe that can only happen if Dr. Brake
makes a recommendation for change. Certainly, we made recommendations for change
to the Seniors' Advocate legislation – unsuccessfully, I'll add, Mr. Speaker,
but I hope that between Dr. Brake and the Citizens' Representative, maybe there
could be changes.
I've
talked to the past Child and Youth Advocate many times, have met with the
current Child and Youth Advocate as well, and I know how complicated, detailed,
sensitive and difficult some of the work they do can be as well. I'm sure that
seniors are getting lost in the loop. We don't want our seniors to be lost in a
shuffle here. We don't want our seniors to be the ones who are lost out of all
of that.
Mr.
Speaker, the motion today is to appoint Dr. Suzanne Brake as the Seniors'
Advocate. As my colleagues have said already, our intention is to support that
motion before the House today on the Seniors' Advocate.
I'm glad
we've had the opportunity today to talk about some of the shortcomings of the
legislation. Hopefully, down the road government will see the benefits of some
small changes to the legislation, but would be significant improvements to Dr.
Brake's authority.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Labrador West.
MR. LETTO:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's a
pleasure for me to rise today to speak on this very important motion. I don't
know Dr. Brake personally, but I've heard so much about her and I've read so
much about her. Certainly, the CV the Minister of Justice and Public Safety read
today on Dr. Brake leads me to believe that we could not have chosen a better
candidate for the position of the Seniors' Advocate.
I find
it very unfortunate that we are here today to the motion to appoint Dr. Brake as
the Seniors' Advocate and it is being overshadowed by the Opposition trying to
pick apart the office and legislation that was put forward back earlier this
year.
I just
want to go back to give a little history, so that leads me to where I want to go
with this today. Because the motion is not whether we should have a Seniors'
Advocate office; the motion is to appoint Dr. Suzanne Brake as the Seniors'
Advocate. Unfortunately, as I said, it is being overshadowed by the Opposition,
by information, by advocacy and by, I guess, issues that they had the
opportunity to bring up under Bill 64.
May I
remind the Opposition, they had the opportunity to vote against it then, but the
records will show that under second reading, there were no nays. Under the third
reading, there were no nays. And here they are today when we are about to
appoint probably the best candidate we could have chosen for the Seniors'
Advocate, they want to rehash the information and they are lobbying for things
they should have done under Bill 64.
If they
didn't agree with it, they should have had the gonads then to vote against it,
Mr. Speaker. But here they are today trying to overshadow this appointment. It's
shameful. When we hear things like a wasted opportunity, my God, mon Dieu, how
unfortunate. This is a very important office that we created here today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. LETTO:
It is one that we advocated
for back on April 22, 2015 when the Leader of the Opposition was then premier,
to establish a Seniors' Advocate office, and every one of them who sat on this
side of the House voted against that PMR. In fact, the Member for Fortune Bay –
Cape La Hune called the Seniors' Advocate a luxury as luxuries go. And asked: In
a time of fiscal constraint, is it a luxury or is it a necessity?
Well,
Mr. Speaker, I don't know how everybody else feels; I consider it a necessity.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. LETTO:
Then the premier of the day,
who is now the Leader of the Opposition, he deemed it redundant – redundant –
saying the government already has a minister with seniors as one of his primary
responsibilities, as well as a seniors' advisory council, an age-friendly plan
and more.
Mr.
Speaker, here they are today over there trying to say and tell us that the
Office of the Seniors' Advocate is not adequate. Well, I tend to differ. As I
said, this person that we are voting on today is probably – not probably, by her
credentials is one of the best people that we could have chosen for this
position.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. LETTO:
I'm sure that Dr. Brake will
address any issues if she feels that the office – if she doesn't have the power
in her office to do what needs to be done for the seniors of this province, I am
sure that Dr. Brake will let us know. If something needs to be done to correct
it, it will be done.
Mr.
Speaker, they keep saying that the mandate of the Seniors' Advocate does not go
far enough and it does not give her, in this situation, the authority to do what
needs to be done. Well, again, we tend to disagree. When you look at the mandate
– enough people have said it, but I'll repeat it again. The mandate of the
Seniors' Advocate is to identify, review and analyze systemic issues. That's the
core mandate of the office.
Mr.
Speaker, the office is to work collaboratively with seniors' organizations,
service delivery groups –
MR. SPEAKER:
Point of order.
The
Chair recognizes the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Thank you so much, Mr.
Speaker.
I rise
under section 49 of the Standing Orders with a point of order. In his speaking,
he referred to the Member and used terminology that I feel is unparliamentary
and offensive to both males and females in this Chamber. I think in the interest
of improving the decorum of this House of Assembly, the Member should apologize
to this hon. House for referring to Members and referring to the term “gonads.”
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Labrador West.
MR. LETTO:
I apologize.
MR. SPEAKER:
Thank you.
MR. LETTO:
Anyway, Mr. Speaker, to carry
on, I thank the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune for pointing that out. I
appreciate that. I tend to get carried away sometimes.
Anyway,
the Seniors' Advocate is to work collaboratively with seniors' organizations,
service delivery groups and others to identify and address systemic issues; and
then make recommendations to government respecting changes to improve services
to and for seniors.
I think,
Mr. Speaker, that part of the mandate really addresses the authority of the
Seniors' Advocate. If she feels that things aren't going the way they should,
certainly under that she can make recommendations to us, to government,
respecting changes that need to be made to improve that.
So I
think we've covered all the bases, Mr. Speaker. Even though Labrador City-Wabush
has been known as a young town, that's no longer the case; we do have quite a
few seniors in our towns and a lot of them, especially those in Wabush have
been, as I've stated in this House many times, they've suffered enough in the
past three years with the cutbacks in their pensions and whatnot. So seniors are
at the top of our list too.
We have
a great seniors' organization in Labrador West that addresses the needs of
seniors and certainly to help them get through their day. Mr. Speaker, so what
we're doing here today –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
I remind
all hon. Members that the Member for Labrador West is speaking. He's been
recognized and that should be the only person we hear here.
Thank
you very much.
MR. LETTO:
My God, I haven't been
interrupted so many times.
Thank
you again, Mr. Speaker.
I think
in the interest of time and safety within the House of Assembly, I will conclude
my remarks by saying that this appointment today is very important. It is very
important to the people of this province, to the seniors of this province. It's
very important that we have a person in place to –
AN HON. MEMBER:
Champion.
MR. LETTO:
– champion – that's a good
word – seniors' issues. I feel that we've chosen the right person, that the IAC
has chosen the right person, and that this office will be very beneficial going
forward, Mr. Speaker, to the seniors of this province.
But I
won't sit down without saying that we don't want to lose sight on what we're
voting on here today, Mr. Speaker. We are voting on the appointment of Dr.
Suzanne Brake.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. LETTO:
That's what we're voting on
today, Mr. Speaker. We are voting on the appointment of a very special person
for this province who will do great work. Unfortunately, it's been overshadowed
by information that should have come up and should have been discussed during
the debate on Bill 64.
I won't
say what I said before, but anyway, I stand by that. Today, let's do the right
thing and appoint this person to the Seniors' Advocate.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Yes, I was just looking at
the clock there, Mr. Speaker.
I'm
happy to stand up again and speak to this very important resolution and to
conclude debate on the appointment for the first ever Seniors' Advocate in this
province. I'd like to thank the Members from both sides for their speeches and
for their comments on this very important resolution that we're debating here.
This is
a resolution which will put this person in this position. It's a statutory
office of the House of Assembly. It's an independent House. This is not one that
is controlled by politics. It's not one that will be partisan. This is a person,
an office that will speak for the best interests of seniors in this province,
regardless of political stripe, regardless of who's in government. Their concern
is seniors.
Similar
to the Child and Youth Advocate, a position where it doesn't matter who is in
government, it doesn't matter who controls the House of Assembly, what matters
is the voice of children being heard. Well, Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that
Dr. Suzanne Brake will be a voice for seniors.
Again,
there were a lot of very good points brought up here. One thing I would like to
note – again, this is strictly from reviewing the
Hansard from the debate of Bill 64, which was the actual act that
established this office, so again that's different than today. Today is the
appointment of the person who will work in this office. Bill 64 was the
appointment of the office.
Now,
unfortunately – and I won't say a couple of Members because that would put
everybody in the same situation. I would like to thank the independent Member
for his support of this. I'd also like to thank the Member for St. John's Centre
for her very complimentary speech regarding Dr. Brake. The fact is we may have
differences but nobody has an issue with saying that obviously, (a), seniors are
important and, (b), this person will be a great addition to this position, as
someone that comes with the resume.
It's
unfortunate that a couple Members on the other side in the Official Opposition
who have made clear their disdain for this office since their time in
government, took today, instead of speaking positively about the person turned
it back into a rehashing of Bill 64, which again going back to the
Hansard I believe – I couldn't see any
nays there, so my understanding is that they supported this bill. But today,
what they did was they took a very quick yes, we support Dr. Brake, great job;
let's go back and criticize the piece of legislation that we voted for not that
long ago.
The
Member for Fortune Bay –Cape La Hune, in particular, took the opportunity to
complain about the necessity of this. Took the opportunity to speak about
basically, if you want it in layman's terms, there's no need of it. No need to
have this; this is going to serve no purpose.
That's
unfortunate that the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune feels that about an
independent voice for seniors. I think that's unfortunate. What I would suggest
is – again, I don't know why that perspective was put out there. We had a debate
on that where the Member opposite could have voted against it and chose not to.
So to stand up today during the speech where we are to talk about – and I took
most of the opportunity, when I first addressed this, to speak about the
individual that's going to do this, to which nobody I think can say anything
negative about.
This is
a person who has devoted their professional career to the advancement of seniors
in this province, to the advancement of the aging, to not just advocacy work but
academic work, but very little of that was noted. What the Member noted was that
they didn't think this was necessary.
I could
talk about their track record when they were in government and a lot of the
steps and policies that they put in place which, believe me, Mr. Speaker, will
have quite a negative effect on seniors, but I'm not going to get into that
right now. What I'd like to ask are three very simple questions. I think they're
simple. Is this appointment and is this act an improvement from what was there?
The answer is a resounding yes.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. A. PARSONS:
The second question is: Will
this appointment and will this act make things better for seniors than what it
was before? The answer is yes.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. A. PARSONS:
Finally, will this
appointment improve the situation and lives of seniors across Newfoundland and
Labrador – will it or won't it? The answer again for the third time, Mr. Speaker
– and if there's any contrary voice to this, I ask the Members to get up and put
it on the record. The answer again is a resounding yes.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. A. PARSONS:
I'm happy to stand here
today. I appreciate the fact that I do believe there will be support for this
appointment. I think this is a very important appointment. We have a very good
person that's being selected and we all look forward to working with Dr. Suzanne
Brake as she takes on this important role, which I assume will happen with the
support.
I can
guarantee you, I know the government is going to support it. I know the NDP
support it. I know the independent Member supports it. I sometimes question
where the Official Opposition stands, because what they say and what they do are
two different things.
Mr.
Speaker, we support Dr. Suzanne Brake. We support the Seniors' Advocate and we
support seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador. We look forward to voting for this
resolution.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):
Is the House ready for
the question?
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
Motion
carried.
AN HON. MEMBER:
Division.
MR. SPEAKER:
Division has been called.
Division
MR. SPEAKER:
Is it the pleasure of the
House to adopt the motion?
Those in
favour of the motion, please rise.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CLERK:
Mr. Andrew Parsons, Ms. Coady, Mr. Joyce, Mr. Byrne, Mr.
Haggie, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Crocker, Mr. Kirby, Mr. Warr, Mr. Bernard Davis, Ms.
Gambin-Walsh, Mr. Edmunds, Ms. Dempster, Mr. Letto, Mr. Browne, Mr. Bragg, Ms.
Cathy Bennett, Mr. Finn, Mr. Reid, Ms. Parsley, Mr. King, Mr. Dean, Ms. Pam
Parsons, Mr. Holloway, Mr. Hutchings, Mr. Brazil, Ms. Perry, Mr. Kevin Parsons,
Mr. Petten, Ms. Michael, Ms. Rogers, Mr. Lane.
MR. SPEAKER:
Those against the motion,
please rise.
I
recognize the Member for St. John's East – Quidi Vidi.
MS. MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
By
leave, and I think I have leave from all in the House, I would like to make a
correction to the notice of motion that I made yesterday, because it is for the
private Member's motion tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER:
Okay.
Does she
have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER:
Leave.
MS. MICHAEL:
The change will be two
changes in the very first WHEREAS, and after I read it I have copies of the new
one to give out. It's the first WHEREAS.
WHEREAS
the province's serious financial situation has caused government to predict a
decline in program expenses of 0.85 per cent per annum – that's the addition –
or $376 million over the next six years – and that's a correction – which could
result in tens of millions of dollars kept from health care each year.
That's
now in Hansard as corrected, and I
have copies here for everybody.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Now I ask for a report from
the Clerk.
CLERK:
Mr. Speaker, the ayes 32, the
nays zero.
MR. SPEAKER:
I declare the motion has been
carried.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Given
the hour of the day, I move, seconded by the Member for Harbour Main, that the
House do now adjourn.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
It has been moved and
seconded that this House do now adjourn until tomorrow, at 10 a.m.
On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, at 10 a.m.