The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

MR. SPEAKER: Today the House welcomes the following members' statements: the hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; the hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley; the hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave; the hon. the Member for the District of Port au Port; the hon. the Member for the District of Kilbride; and, the hon. the Member for the District of Placentia & St. Mary's.

The hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this House today to congratulate three Patrols of Junior Canadian Rangers and three individual Junior Canadian Rangers from my district who recently won awards at the first-ever JCR Provincial Air Rifle Marksmanship Competition.

This event took place at 5 Wing Goose Bay and participants travelled from all thirteen Newfoundland and Labrador JCR patrols. The competition was a great opportunity to demonstrate their skills and would qualify two patrols to attend the national competition to be held this month.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate all three groups and individuals as follows: the first place in rifle marksmanship went to the newest patrol in Mary's Harbour; the second place in rifle marksmanship went to the Labrador Straits, and the third place to Port Hope Simpson. The top shot for the competition was awarded to Brett Clarke of the Port Hope Simpson Patrol, the second shot to Derek O'Brien of the Labrador Straits Patrol, and the third shot was awarded to Dillon Layden also of the Labrador Straits Patrol.

The Mary's Harbour and Labrador Straits Patrols will now go on to represent the Province at the upcoming national meet, and I would like to wish them every success and look forward to their performance at that meet.

I ask my colleagues in the House to join with me in extending our congratulations to all of the participants from all regions of the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the MHA for the District of Humber Valley, I stand in this hon. House today to sincerely congratulate Ruth Legge, patron of Pasadena Winter Carnival 2009. Of all the decisions made by the committee planning the 2009 Pasadena Winter Carnival, the choice to appoint Ruth Legge as patron was unanimous.

Ruth moved to Pasadena when she was just three months old, and except for a short period after marrying her husband Edgar Legge, she has lived in Pasadena all her life. Legge and her husband have also raised their daughter Marilyn and son Jamie in Pasadena.

Legge worked in Pasadena starting at the Pasadena Co-op, moving onto Pike's Groceteria and lastly with Royal LePage, where she served the residents of Pasadena for over twenty years. She is heavily involved in the community and has served on the recreation committee, is a long-standing member of the Lions Club, and is an active member of both the seniors' club and the Humber Valley United Church. She was also actively involved with the Girl Guide movement in her community. Legge said that she was honoured to be chosen as the 2009 Pasadena Winter Carnival Patron.

Mr. Speaker, winter carnivals and festivals generally are a significant economic generator in communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. They also provide an opportunity for communities to formally recognize the dedicated efforts of volunteers through the selection of carnival patrons.

I would ask all members of this hon. House to join me in saluting Ruth Legge, Pasadena Winter Carnival Patron for 2009, an outstanding community volunteer.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, May 3, 2009, District 2 of The Royal Canadian Legion Newfoundland and Labrador Command, held the sixth annual Battle of the Atlantic Ceremonies. This year's event was hosted by the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 65 in Brigus.

Veterans, legionnaires, cadets, bands and the general public paraded through the winding streets in the picturesque Town of Brigus. A sombre wreath-laying ceremony was held at the Cenotaph while hundreds looked on. Royal Canadian Legions from Blaketown, Carbonear, Upper Island Cove, Spaniard's Bay, Bay Roberts and Brigus placed wreaths, in addition to federal and provincial representatives. The parade then proceeded to the peaceful harbour where a wreath was placed in the Atlantic Ocean and towed out to sea by a fishing boat.

It was a pleasure to take part in the service with the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and other dignitaries.

I ask all hon. members to join me in extending congratulations to District 2 of the Royal Canadian Legion and to encourage them to continue their act of remembrance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CORNECT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate the winners and nominees at the recently held Premier's Athletic Awards Ceremony in St. John's. These athletes were recognized for outstanding accomplishments.

Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud of the fact that four athletes from my District of Port au Port were honoured and recognized for the success and the achievement in their respective sport.

I would like to congratulate William Forsey for his dedication, hard work and endurance in athletics. I convey my sincerest accolades to Para Olympian Katarina Roxon, for her accomplishments in swimming. Also, Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate and applaud Emily Alexander and Gillian Forsey for their commitment and excellence in the sport of badminton.

As everyone knows, it takes a lot of professionalism and athleticism to excel in your sport, but it also demands enthusiasm, perseverance and stamina. They must also have the training opportunities to allow them to perform to the best of their abilities.

Mr. Speaker, these athletes and all athletes have certainly done us proud as a region and as a Province as they make their way to being the best athlete they can be.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members of this hon. House of Assembly to join me in congratulating all the award winners, and best of luck in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Kilbride.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I stand in this hon. House today to recognize and pay tribute to the Waterford Valley Softball Association.

Waterford Valley Softball Association was started in 1981 and has provided recreational programs to several thousand children over its twenty-eight year history. These programs are slow-pitch and fast-pitch softball for kids ages four to eighteen. Each summer, an eight-week program is offered that focuses on fun and training.

In 2008, 150 children were registered and approximately 250 games and 250 practices were held. The association participated in a number of slow-pitch and fast-pitch tournaments. The squirt teams in slow-pitch and fast-pitch won the provincial championships.

Recently, one of the graduates of the Waterford Valley softball program, Mike Noftall, was named the St. John's Athlete of the Year.

This summer, the association hopes to offer a basketball program on a new outdoor asphalt court.

Mr. Speaker, during this past winter, a new executive was elected to the Waterford Valley Softball Association. Executive members include: President, Paul Healey; Vice-President, Don King; Treasurer, Paul Heffernan; Secretary, Geoff Heffernan.

I ask all hon. members to join me in paying tribute to the Waterford Valley Softball Association, its participants and volunteers.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to congratulate Tacamor Inc. of Argentia. Tacamor provides a live, twenty-four-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week, phone, e-mail and Web chat support for clients.

One of its clients is Thumb Play Inc., a large and fast-growing mobile content provider in the United States. On February 9, Thumb Play was the winner of the Customer Service Leader of the Year Award at the Stevie Awards Gala at Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas, one of a number of awards for that company for its business model and customer service.

Mr. Speaker, the voices heard at the end of Thumb Play lines come from Argentia, through Tacamor, which has been the voice of Thumb Play for the last two-and-a-half years. Tacamor received high praise at the awards gala from the vice-president of Thumb Play for their outstanding service.

Mr. Speaker, this is a great boost for this new company, which is another Made Right Here In Newfoundland and Labrador product.

I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in congratulating Tacamor CEO, Ken Hann, an its sixty employees for the delivery of this outstanding service and in reaching this significant milestone in such a short period of time.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity today to highlight for my hon. colleagues an exciting event that students across the Province will be planning over the next several months.

Last Friday, I was joined by Olympic gold meal winner Mark Nichols. and the Olympic and Paralympic mascots, at Holy Cross Elementary in St. John's to announce special activities for Newfoundland and Labrador Day during the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver.

These activities will incorporate the annual Living Healthy Commotions which are part of the Healthy Students, Health Schools initiative. Commotions include events such as walks or hikes, healthy community breakfasts, skipping competitions, fruit and vegetable scavenger hunts, or healthy menu contests, to name a few. They are used to highlight for students the important of active living and healthy eating.

Next February 26, which is Newfoundland and Labrador Day at the Olympics, schools across the Province will hold Olympic-sized commotions focused on the values of the Olympic and Paralympic Games – friendship, fair play and the pursuit of excellence.

These commotions will be video-taped and one school from each district will be part of a warm-up show in Vancouver prior to the medal ceremonies. They will be featured on a jumbo screen, demonstrating for the world how our students celebrate the Olympic spirit.

Mr. Speaker, over the past several years, government has made significant investments designed to promote increased activity and healthy food choices for our children and our youth. For example, $3.2 million has been invested to provide new physical education equipment to every school in the Province. School food guidelines, introduced in 2006, have been updated and will be sent to schools in the near future.

Approximately $1.2 million has been invested to date for the purchase of new cafeteria equipment to allow for the healthier preparation of foods. And this year, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report that $1.5 million has been allocated for our Healthy Students, Healthy Schools initiative.

While we cannot force students to eat certain foods, Mr. Speaker, we can promote activities and help increase awareness of the benefits of making healthy choices. The Living Healthy Commotions of the past number of years have been a great success and indicate that all initiatives to promote healthy living are well worth the effort. I am confident that students and teachers will go the extra mile next year to produce some Olympic-sized commotions to highlight Newfoundland and Labrador Day in Vancouver.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I thank the minister for a copy of his statement, and to say that no doubt this is a wonderful initiative and I am sure the students right throughout this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador will be looking forward to this and to know that they will be taking part in the various competitions.

Only recently another type of games was announced in our area, the Baccalieu Games, which will take part from three or four provincial districts, so the young people become physically active. The only thing is, and I do not want the minister to get up and answer this, but when he said each district I did not know if he meant each provincial district or each school district.

It is good to know that this initiative is ongoing. Hopefully, with this active living and healthy eating, joined with the poverty strategy, that the day will come when we will see programs such as Kids Eat Smart programs and so on, may be eliminated from our schools.

Mr. Speaker, like I said, this is a good initiative and we want to extend to all students to take part in this program so that we can showcase our Province to the world.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

I, too, thank the minister for the advanced copy of his statement. It is always good to hear about initiatives of this type. What is particularly good about this is that we see something like the Olympics, which will be happening out in Vancouver, an international event having a direct impact on the lives of children here in Newfoundland and Labrador, and when the Olympics open they will have a sense of being part of the Olympics and that is good.

I certainly applaud our Province getting involved in this huge project that is on the go. It should be a time for us though to reflect on something that we all know, that we do have a serious child obesity problem in this Province and we need to continue to put resources into the kinds of things that the minister has spoken about. I look forward to his being minister and to giving leadership in making sure that we get a Province-wide school meal program for children and to really reinstate full physical education programs in every school in our Province. This will go even further in addressing the problems that we are dealing with.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS POTTLE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House to inform my colleagues about a Youth Justice Camp in which I participated. The Camp, held in Nain, May 2 and 3, was organized by the Public Legal Information Association of Newfoundland and Labrador, and designed to educate youth about the legal system in a style that is fun and innovative.

Mr. Speaker, the Public Legal Information Association of Newfoundland and Labrador is a non-profit group dedicated to educating people about the law. This was the first time in the twenty-five year history of the association that a Youth Justice Camp was held in a Coastal Labrador community. It was impressive to see several young people give up a beautiful weekend of Coastal Labrador spring weather to attend this important event.

Mr. Speaker, the Youth Justice Camp teaches valuable information about the legal system, fosters an environment to network, advances leadership skills and is an excellent opportunity for youth to explore new learning experiences. Some notable events that took place during the camp were a visit to the local RCMP detachment and a mock trial that showcased what young people learned over the course of the weekend. I was pleased to learn that organizers plan to hold more of these camps in isolated Aboriginal communities.

Mr. Speaker, I was honoured to address participants during my visit and I had the opportunity to note some important investments the Williams government is making as we work to enhance the administration of justice in Labrador. For example, in Budget 2009 we allocated $2 million for the construction of a new pre-trial detention centre for women and youth in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, $206,000 to pilot an Innu Healing Path Program, and $57,300 to make permanent the position of the Inuit court clerk in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

Mr. Speaker, the proper administration of justice is very important to the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and we have made great strides in improving our justice system for people throughout the Province. In Labrador, much has been done to address Aboriginal justice issues. This was a message I was pleased to deliver to the young people of Nain who attended the Youth Justice Camp.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I thank the minister for an advanced copy of her statement. It is indeed nice to see that these young people did gather in the District of Torngat, in Nain, on May 2 and 3.

This was a program, of course, that started some years ago, these youth justice camps, and it is great to see that it is continuing. The fact that it is the first time they went to Labrador and the Aboriginal community of Nain I think is even more important because we have had all kinds of interaction between youth in the Island piece of the Province, but to go to Torngat, because there is quite a substantial difference, of course, sometimes between the Aboriginal justice issues and non-Aboriginal issues and even sentencing patterns, for example, sentencing circles, restorative justice programs and so on.

So it is great to see that the kids throughout the Province have been exposed to both systems of justice and how it works for everyone here. Hopefully, of course, the ultimate aim is that these people would return to their communities and they would become young ambassadors and educators themselves because all of these people are typically members of other community groups. They are not just interested in justice. In my experience, I have found that they are in fact very involved kids in their communities and youth, and it is great to see that this took place and hopefully will continue in the future.

Thank you.

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

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

I thank the minister for the advance copy of her statement. I congratulate all the youth who participated in the camp and I congratulate, too, the Public Legal Information Association for their work. It is a worthy exercise and I am glad to see they finally have come to Labrador. It is a wonderful thing.

It is interesting that the minister notes the construction of new facilities in Labrador and new initiatives, because the other day in Estimates the Minister of Justice noted that Aboriginal people are over-represented in Labrador corrections, and we all know that. He noted that 90 per cent of the current population incarcerated there were Aboriginal. We know this is a statistic that we do not want to continue, we want to change, and this camp is a step in the right direction.

I look forward to the day, Mr. Speaker, when we are not talking about new money for investments in corrections for Aboriginal people but money for facilities to accommodate Innu, Inuit and Metis lawyers, judges and peace officers.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker we learned earlier today that one of four operating schedules for surgery at the Janeway has been cancelled because of the nursing shortage. This includes all of today's scheduled orthopaedic surgeries for children.

I ask the minister, if he can confirm that is indeed the case and if he can tell me how many children would have had their surgeries cancelled today as a result of this shortage.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: I would not know exactly how many patients would have been impacted as a result of scheduling changes but I will undertake to find out the exact number and report to the House tomorrow.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the minister knows that this is a serious issue that causes stress for families and for the children affected.

I ask him, if he can indicate to us today how long the orthopaedic surgeries at the Janeway will be cancelled and how long it will take to have the original surgeries rescheduled?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Periodically, in many of our hospitals throughout Newfoundland and Labrador unfortunately O.R. schedules are disrupted for a variety of reasons, sometimes because of emergencies that would have come through the emergency department that had to bump another scheduled surgery out, it is more elective potentially. So sometimes that changes the scheduling patterns. Sometimes the availability of a physician who is doing the surgery or the availability of an anaesthetist may impact that. Sometimes the availability of beds, to be able to accommodate the patient after the surgery is over, sometimes becomes an issue.

In terms of how that impacts this particular case today and when those individuals will be rescheduled, would be apart of the rescheduling process within that particular program area at the Janeway. Those individual patients as they have been contacted today, or their families would have been, in this case, contacted, they would have probably been advised when those surgeries would be rescheduled.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The information we received indicated to us that the cancellations today were directly due to the nursing shortage.

On April 8, 2008, minister, you stated here in - this was your statement: In recent days there has been some pressure in the emergency department of our hospitals because of increased activity. You also indicated at the time that this was an isolated incident and not the norm.

I ask you today: In light of the reports that are out there and the problems that are being reviewed in the St. John's emergency rooms, do you still feel that this is an isolated incident or is it more systemic in our system?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, it is interesting how the member opposite cherry picks certain words. If at any time in this House I would have said something that would have happened in an emergency department in this Province at any given day of the week was an isolated example that would have been a response to a very specific question.

One thing we all would recognize, Mr. Speaker, we all would recognize that emergency departments are very difficult to predict by their very nature. We have no control over what emergencies will happen. I cannot tell you today, I cannot tell you at this moment whether there is going to be a motor vehicle accident on the parkway in the next ten minutes or not, but if there is, there is going to be an emergency and there is going to be an ambulance arriving at the Health Sciences Centre in all likelihood and that the physicians and the nurses and other people will have to respond to it. So at no time, Mr. Speaker, would I have ever said, unless it was in response to a very specific question, that emergency workloads, emergency department workloads are always fluctuating, I say, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly would not expect this minister to make any kind of predictions. After all, he hardly knows what is going on at a minute in time in his own department.

Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that a year ago we raised in this House of Assembly issues regarding the ER departments in St. John's hospitals when there were up to fourteen patients on stretchers in the waiting rooms. At that time, the minister said that he did not think it was a serious problem.

I ask the minister today: Have you since investigated the problems around the ER in St. John's hospitals, and do you have a plan to address these concerns a year later?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, there is an organization called Siemens, global international, I think is their name or the title of the company; they are in Eastern Health as we speak. They started to do a piece of work on April 1. It is about a six-month exercise that they will have concluded some time in early September, and they are looking at total workflow, patient flows in the emergency department, in our ORs, and in our intensive care units.

Those areas tend to be linked together because they tend to be the source of some of the issues that we deal with in the OR, and they tend to be the source of issues we deal with in the emergency department, because they are interrelated. That piece of work is ongoing, Mr. Speaker.

What we hope to achieve from that is a better understanding of how we can actually improve the efficient flow of patients as they enter the emergency department, through that department, if necessary, into ICU, where many of the critical people will end up, as well as the operating room.

Those are the three areas that we need to better understand patient flows. Then, and only then, can we correct the problem.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, it was a year ago now, or longer, that the government allocated the $1 million to do the acute care study. We learn through the Estimates that this study is not even due to be completed until the end of this particular year.

I ask the minister: Why is it taking so long, when you know what the seriousness of this issue is? Why is it taking so long to get this study completed?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, we are not assessing the production of hamburgers at McDonald's. We are talking about acute care services in the City of St. John's, where we have the Health Sciences Centre, where we have all our provincial tertiary programs. We have the Waterford Hospital, our provincial mental health hospital. We have all of the programs and services at St. Clare's. We have all the programs and services at our rehab centre out on Forest Road, again a provincial program. It is a complex piece of work, Mr. Speaker.

We announced it in last year's Budget around this time. We immediately put together a working group to identify an appropriate consultant to do this, because this is a complicated piece of work. We need to understand how health care works. We need to understand the acute side of health care, and we need to understand the interrelationship between those three or four program areas we already have in the city.

The organization is in place now; the piece of work is under way. Agnew Peckham, I think, is the name of the company involved, and they have been given a direction to have this piece of work done by the end of this year.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information, the average wait time in an emergency room is approximately two hours in Canada. Reports from patients in St. John's hospitals indicate that waiting periods are double and triple, and even longer.

I ask the minister: Why are the people of our Province being forced to accept such excessive wait times, those that exceed the national average?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: I want to go back to the member's previous question, because when you talk about doing a massive study of acute care, an emergency department is a piece of that acute care evaluation. We want to make certain that the plans that we lay down today - this is a comprehensive piece of work - we are committed to doing the redevelopment of acute care in St. John's, but we want to do it right. We want to understand not only what is taking place today, but we need to understand what we need to do to prepare for tomorrow, next year, five years, ten years out. This is going to be a major investment in acute care services in the City of St. John's to service not just the Northeast Avalon but the entire Province in the case of our provincial programs, and we want to do it right.

We need to understand what has taken place, and that is what this review will do for us. It will include, as I said earlier, an evaluation of what has taken place in our emergency departments.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have to say to the minister, it gets really tiresome when you hear ministers stand up and commit to a program. This money has sat on the books of the government for over a year. There must be some reason why this study could not have started back a year ago when the commitment of funds was made.

I ask the minister today: What has been the delay? Is the delay in Eastern Health? Was the delay in getting a consultant, or was it just the fact that you guys dragged your feet on it in the Department of Health?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: This is a unique day; the member opposite and I agree. I am getting tired as well; tired of her questions, tired of her suggestions that we are not taking any action as a government, tired of her fear mongering when it comes to the health care of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, this is the third time I will attempt to answer the question, so I will ask her to pay attention this time so she will understand the answer.

Very clearly, last year around this time we passed the Budget in the House of Assembly. That Budget allocated some money to do an acute care study in the City of St. John's. We then engaged the process immediately to identify an appropriate consultant. We identified two or three groups of organizations who were capable of doing this piece of work, because not everybody can handle this. We need a certain amount of expertise, so we had to look outside the Province for that expertise. We had a committee in place, led by the chief of the emergency department at the Health Sciences, a process in place to identify an appropriate consultant. That piece of work has been done and now we are embarking on that evaluation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, I am getting a little tired of his condescending attitude too. If you don't want to answer questions on health care in this Province, I would suggest you take yourself right out of the portfolio, Minister, because there are a lot of questions to come, not just from me but from the public as well.

Mr. Speaker, there has been significant discussion regarding a woman's case in Clarenville who mistakenly received chemotherapy medication. This morning we heard from an oncologist, Dr. David Saltman, who stated he had previously sent a letter to the minister warning that these systemic errors could happen in smaller centres like Clarenville and that changes should be made.

I ask you today, Minister: Can you confirm whether you received and reviewed this letter and what action you took upon reading it?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Let me just clarify a point, Mr. Speaker.

The member opposite would suggest that an isolated incident in Clarenville is a reflection of a systemic issue. As I said to the reporters yesterday, Mr. Speaker, outside this House, the situation we had in Clarenville is an isolated case where an individual didn't follow appropriate protocols and we now know what ended up happening.

With respect to the letter she is referring to, yes, we did receive a letter from an individual who had some suggestions as to how – it was a two or three page letter – we might make some changes in the cancer care program in the Province. An official with my department met with that individual to further discuss some of the details. Follow-up discussions are planned. He has made some suggestions for improvements and I am always receptive to and look forward to hearing from and meeting with people who have suggestions for improvement. We will follow through with a second meeting with that individual to better understand the basis for his suggestions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Obviously, another situation where an important issue was raised, not just by an individual but by an oncologist who works in the system every day in this Province, raised with the minister and not acted on.

Mr. Speaker, now that the minister is aware of the problem, aware that it exists, which he has been for some time, I ask him: What are his plans to address the situation, and address the issues that have been raised by this oncologist?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: The member opposite may have a series of questions, and I am sure she has to follow the sequence, but then she ignores the answers.

Clearly, I indicated, Mr. Speaker, I have had some correspondence from an oncologist who provided some recommendations as to how we might improve cancer care in the Province, and I welcome those. I invite them, in fact.

Immediately then we had an official from the department meet with the individual to better understand the basis for the recommendation, and follow-up discussions will be held because he has made some significant recommendations as to how we may make some improvements.

I would like to be able to explore those with him personally, Mr. Speaker, because we, too, are anxious to make sure that we are aware of the kinds of things we need to do –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: - to improve the systems that we have in the Province and this individual has made some very tangible suggestions as to how we might make some suggestions to improve, and I welcome the opportunity to sit down with him and have that discussion.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is disappointing that the minister did not review the letter and act when he received it, but I ask him today if he would table a copy of the letter from the oncologist, Dr. Saltman –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: - in the House of Assembly and make it available to us?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask members for their co-operation. Did the hon. minister hear the question that was directed?

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I have acknowledged that I have received the letter. In all fairness and out of respect to the individual who wrote the letter, I have indicated that I had officials from my department meet with them to have this discussion. The intent is to have a follow-up discussion that will include myself, and until I have had an opportunity to have that discussion with him I will respect his interest in the system, and out of respect for him I am not prepared to table that letter until I have had a chance to meet with him so I better understand it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday we raised an issue in the House of Assembly of some crab processors refusing to buy product in the Province and issue bait and ice, Mr. Speaker, as of last evening.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister today –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Order, please!

MS JONES: - if he has now been briefed on this issue and if he can tell us the number of processors who are shutting down in the Province and for how long this shutdown will continue?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Five months as Minister of Fisheries; $70,000 -

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I just –

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. member for his co-operation.

I ask the hon. member for his co-operation.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, just in response to the question from the Leader of the Opposition.

We have done a phone-around as best we could under the circumstances and we certainly have at least 20 per cent that are still in business, still taking crab, and we fully expect that with the number of enterprises that are on the water right now - and we also found out that there was a lot of icing that took place yesterday. We fully expect that, certainly throughout this week and maybe even into next week before any, I guess, full shutdown would take place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder if the minister can tell me how the harvesters will be impacted. Are there enough plants going to remain open that they will be able to buy the amount of product that is going to be landed in the Province or will we have a shutdown of some of these enterprises as well?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I am just getting some prompting from my colleagues, and perhaps that answer is floating across because it does depend on who is out there, the number that is out there, how many pots are pulled. Really, it is very difficult, I say to the Leader of the Opposition, for me to quantify where they would be, except that we fully anticipate activity over the next week for sure.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

While the former RMS minister may think he has all of the answers, we have gotten a number of calls from harvesters in the Province –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I ask the hon. member to my left, for the final time, for his co-operation during Question Period.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Sorry, Mr. Speaker, I think I may have gotten his title wrong. The former Minister of RMS, I think it was, is prompting the new minister, trying to give him the answers over there.

Mr. Speaker, we have been contacted by harvesters that are concerned. They are concerned that they may not have somewhere to sell their product. Mr. Speaker, both the processors and the union have expressed some frustration over the current price setting panel and whether it is the best approach to deal with their interests.

I ask the minister: Has either side made representation to you to change the price setting mechanism and, if so, does government have any plans to entertain those proposals?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have had representation from one group, one group of stakeholders only at this point in time. That request is under consideration right now, but I stress again, it is only one group that has made representation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe the minister can tell me if that suggestion is being entertained, if there has been meetings organized around it? Maybe she already answered it and I missed the answer. If I did I do apologize.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I just announced in the former answer, we certainly are giving consideration to that request.

AN HON. MEMBER: You just said that.

MS SULLIVAN: I did.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The crab fishery in area 3K opened on April 1 but unfortunately, due to intense ice conditions around the Province many fishermen and their crews have been unable to fish. I think we have received something like 300 e-mails in our office already in response to a request to the federal government to extend the EI benefits for fishing enterprises in the Province.

I ask the minister today: Have you had any discussion with the federal government around this issue and can you expect there will be an EI extension for fishing people in this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, those e-mails have also came into myself and I have responded to them and basically, as well, written to the appropriate federal minister asking that their concerns be addressed and that action as quickly as possible be taken.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

The Minister of Tourism and the Minister of Government Services recently made an announcement about the Province's planned implementation of a new highway signage system known as Tourist-Orientated Directional Signage, TODS model.

I ask the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation: What groups did you consult with other than Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador in making the decision to adopt this particular signage model?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I cannot give the Opposition member an outlined list but there were thirteen consultations held across the Province. They were well attended and the stakeholders that came forward brought forward their suggestions, and as a result, we have decided to move ahead with this policy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

We understand that implementing the TODS model will require every highway sign in this Province to be removed and replaced with a standardized version.

I ask the minister: Were tourism operators given an explanation of this new signage policy prior to the government announcement of it? Was there any - besides taking their input as you say in a consultation session, were there any distributions, literature, explanations to the public before you announced your policy?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Certainly, Mr. Speaker, there were discussions. It is hard to ignore information when you go out and seek input. One of the top issues raised by the travelling public and the industry is signage being problematic. So discussions were held. People are familiar with the TODS system.

One thing that we do need to be clear on though, Mr. Speaker, is that at this particular point what we are addressing are the illegal signs, those that are not compliant, those that have been put up without permission this year. An advisory committee has been set up. They will be discussing further with the industry and stakeholders. As a result, then, the plan will be made to move forward with the full TODS implementation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

The minister informed the public that all signs that were not compliant with government policy, as I understand it, were to be removed by June 9 and the remainder would have to be removed within two years. I happened to read about this on the Web site.

I am wondering, has the department planned any concentrated media announcements around this June 9 date? Because I believe not everybody in the public who might be impacted by this are aware of it. I am just wondering if you have any planned media blitz on making that announcement widely known.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, as was indicated earlier, the Minister of Government Services and I did hold a news conference. Public notices have been already produced and they will be ongoing until June 8, I believe it is.

Mr. Speaker, our intent is to give the operators who have these signs up the opportunity to take them down and use them as they might see fit. This is in no way punitive measures; this is a system whereby we see more effective signage going along our highways and a better service for the travelling public, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

We know that some business owners, of course, have put considerable financial resources into their promotional signs.

I ask the minister: Will those persons who are design compliant at the present time under the current policy but they do not have a permit - so design wise they are okay but they do not have the actual permit - will they be permitted now, before June 9 or at any time, to purchase the permit so that they can at least get the two more years out of what they have already invested in? So, if they are design compliant, can they simply now get a permit so that they at least get the benefit of two years with those signs?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, as has been indicated, we want to deal with illegal and non-compliant signs. If there is someone in that situation, I would certainly hope that we would be able to work with them to arrive at a satisfactory solution around that.

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

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

Many municipalities, in addition to tourist operators and businesses, of course, have put signs on highways in a lot of cases to help divert tourists off the highways and into their communities to take advantage of their businesses and so on, and subsidize their businesses; one example being Stephenville.

I understand the Town of Stephenville invested some $60,000 or $70,000 to put highway signs on to try to attract people off the highway. What consultation has there been with municipalities, I am wondering, and will the municipalities who have that type of signage, what is in the works for them in terms of complying? Will they fit within this TODS program that will be the law here shortly?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, consultations would indicate that anybody who wants to attend could be attending. Throughout our consultations municipalities did attend; we sought their input. The welcoming signs will still be permitted, I indicate that.

Within the jurisdictions of municipalities, they have their own by-laws and such that they will abide by, but we would certainly hope, and we are getting indications from some municipalities that the direction that we are moving in is a very positive one. In fact, the Federation of Municipalities have come out and supported us in this initiative. Therefore, we would hope that other municipalities would fall in line with our proposal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

My questions today have to do with the adverse event that took place in Clarenville hospital last week. Yesterday, the Minister of Health and Community Services said, even before the results of an investigation by Eastern Health had been released, that the incorrect administering of treatment, quote: speaks to the individual performance of an individual and not a systemic issue.

Mr. Speaker, the best practices in adverse event management indicate that adverse events should not be blamed on human error. Human error is a result of flaws in the system that contributes to errors taking place.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Given all that has happened in the health care system, why does this government continue to refuse to see that we have systemic problems?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, we do have systemic issues, and I spoke to one of them earlier today. I indicated that we had an organization called Siemens - I forget the last part of their title – that have been in Eastern Health since April 1, looking at patient flow issues in our emergency department, in our ORs, and in our ICU in that facility because there is a systemic issue there. Within that area there are some systemic issues that we need to get to the root of.

When we find and understand that there are some systems issues that are not working well, we want to better understand, and that is what we have done here. So we acknowledge as a health system, Eastern Health acknowledges, and we are acknowledging as a government, that in that particular area there were some systemic issues that we do need to address. It is not a matter of not acknowledging that we have systemic issues. We do.

My answer the other day to your question was with respect to a particular incident that happened in Clarenville last week. There was a human error made, and that is not a systemic issue.

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

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, I have to ask the minister: If it was so definite that it was a human error made, why is Eastern Health bothering to do an investigation, since the minister is so sure about that?

Dr. David Saltman, an oncologist, has said, in reference to what happened in Clarenville, that the administration of the wrong chemo drug was an accident waiting to happen. Mr. Speaker, I have stood in this hon. House in the past and asked this government to commit to a full evaluation of our health care system; not just part of the health care system, as the minister has just referred to, but the full system.

In light of this most recent event, and concerns of people like Dr. Salzman, I will ask the minister again, Mr. Speaker: Will you put in place an external review of our entire system?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I will answer once again.

The member opposite has been asking this question for seven or eight months now and I have indicated to her, and I will indicate again - and if you keep asking for another six or eight months I will keep indicating the same thing - when we have systemic issues, when we have areas like I just described a moment ago, where we know we have a problem, then we want to examine what has taken place there. We will start looking at the systems issues that we need to improve upon, and when we find them we will make the necessary changes, but to engage in a wholesale evaluation of our entire health system, that is not appropriate at this time, Mr. Speaker. However, we are reaching a time, and I think all of us as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians need to start engaging in a discussion around the kind of health system that we need to have.

Clearly, we have some areas that we need to come to grips with in terms of how we deliver services, where we deliver them, the human resource challenges that we may have in the future. We need to have that kind of dialogue as members of this House, as members of society, people who are providing services to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, but to have a wholesale evaluation is not appropriate at this time, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Government Services Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me - and I might say they were absolutely delighted to be able to direct me - to report that they have passed, without amendment –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: - the Estimates of Expenditure of the following departments: the Department of Finance; the Public Service Commission; the Office of the Chief Information Officer; the Department of Government Services; the Government Purchasing Agency; the Department of Transportation and Works; the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation; the Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat; the Volunteer and Non-profit Secretariat –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is having great difficulty in hearing the hon. member who has been identified to have the floor, and I ask members on both sides of the House for their co-operation.

The hon. the Member for the District of Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I am going to have to bawl in order for you to hear me; that is all I can figure.

I think I will start off here: the Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat; the Volunteer and Non-Profit Secretariat; the Department of Labrador Affairs; and, the Department of Aboriginal Affairs.

I would also like to thank the Committee members: the Member for Port de Grave; the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; the Member for Topsail; the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi; the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile; the Member for Kilbride; the Member for Exploits; and, the Member for St. John's East.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Conception Bay South, Chair of the Government Services Committee, reports that the Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have approved certain Estimates, and recommend that the report be concurred.

When shall this report be received?

MS BURKE: Now, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, report received and adopted.

MR. SPEAKER: Further reports by standing and select committees.

Tabling of Documents.

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

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to section 26.(5)(a) of the Financial Administration Act, I am tabling one Order in Council relating to a funding pre-commitment for the 2010-2011 fiscal year.

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

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

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

I take this opportunity to present another petition with respect to the dialysis, or the lack of dialysis service provision in the Southwestern part of the Province. The communities impacted, of course, would be LaPoile, Grand Bruit, Rose Blanche, Burnt Islands, Isle aux Morts, Margaree-Fox Roost, Port aux Basques, Cape Ray, the Codroy Valley area. We have currently about nine, I believe it is, as I speak today, people who constantly need dialysis services.

They travel right now from that area to either Stephenville or Corner Brook for the service, and that involves three days a week. They leave home in the morning. They leave very early, sometimes well before sun-up, in order to get there in time to arrive at Corner Brook. They are hooked on to the machines, and they stay there for numbers of hours. Then they get returned to their home again, usually after dark again.

That is the process. We all know that it takes its physical toll on the individual. We know that there is an emotional toll, as well, on them and their families. We also know that there is a financial toll, because it is not just a case of slipping in and getting in to Corner Brook and hopping on the machine. Many of these people need someone to go with them for support and guidance, particularly if they are elderly people. Of course, anyone who is familiar with the geography and the weather here knows that they do this 365 a year. That involves some pretty nasty weather when it comes to the Wreckhouse area. It is nationally known for what happens.

These people cannot play around with the weather. If they are supposed to be in there on a Monday and a Wednesday, if they know that the forecast calls for Wednesday to be nasty they generally end up having to stay. It is unfortunate that they have to do that, and there is no need for them to do it.

Dialysis could be placed in the Charles LeGrow Centre. It involves an equipment purchase and it involves trained personnel. The people of that area have pledged to provide, at no cost to government, the equipment. The hospital, the new doctor who is there right now, I have a clipping that he has already made a proposal to the Nephrologist at Corner Brook. There is space available in the hospital there. The people are prepared to raise the funds for the equipment, and the nurses who are there are prepared to undergo the training to administer the treatment. Now, I don't know what else government needs in order to move.

There is a proposal currently on route to the minister, as we speak, whereby the Nephrologist at Corner Brook is saying, yes, this can be done. Once you have those three components, you have the equipment, you have the staff trained – it takes about six weeks, by the way. The people out there were a little bit perturbed when they found out. They thought training to do this kind of thing was some kind of university course that would have taken a couple to three years. We find out that apparently this training can be done in six weeks, so no big deal in terms of the training. We have the long-term nurses there who intend to stay in the community for years on end, finish their careers out there actually. They are married and raising their families there.

We have the staff prepared to go through the training and we have the pledge on the equipment. Nobody need question that, because over the years, in the last ten, fifteen, twenty years, that area has contributed thousands of dollars to the Western Health Care foundation. The people out there certainly do their part. That money doesn't go into just the Port aux Basques Facility. They money goes into the Corner Brook Western Regional Hospital, if they have a major initiative and drive on.

There is on question around the money issue and there is no question on the training issue. It just takes some good will and the minister to become aware and get tuned into this. Everybody else, even the crowd at Western Health, even though there is a proposal as we speak being put together by the Nephrologist and the Chief of Staff from Port aux Basques hospital –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

MR. SPEAKER: It being 3:00 p.m., and this being Private Members' Day, I now call on the hon. Member for the District of Exploits to deliver his private member's resolution.

The hon. the Member for the District of Exploits.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday of this week I introduced a private member's resolution to the House calling on the federal government of today, or any national party that may be elected in the future, to increase federal decision-making executive decisions in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this motion today, on the private member's resolution, however, I have to say that it is not a pleasure because when I look at the federal cuts that have been made in this Province it is not only disheartening, I think it is an injustice to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, just a reminder to the House and the people of the Province, I would like to touch on some of these cuts briefly today. In May, 2007 the provincial government calls on the reversal of federal decisions on student employment programs.

On May 18, 2007, Mr. Speaker: "Provincial Government Standing Up for Students and Affected Groups. The Williams government is taking immediate action to offer real support and find tangible solutions for students and groups adversely impacted by federal government cuts to student summer employment."

Mr. Speaker, we just witnessed today here in the lobby of the Confederation Building what this Province is doing for students. I commend the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and the Minister Responsible for Volunteer and Non-Profit Sectors, because today the youth were recognized for their contribution. I was really impressed to listen to them speak today and how they stated that they had the power of youth.

Mr. Speaker, I just mentioned what the federal government did and the cuts that they made to the student summer programs. Well, this government decided that that should stop, that we still had to invest in our youth. That is why that department was created by the Premier of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, in 2006 the federal government slashes funding to community access programs. In 2008, the provincial government will cover the impact of federal cuts to arts programming, which the federal government had cut again. In 2006, the provincial government released Creative Newfoundland and Labrador, the blueprint for development and investment in culture which included a commitment of $17.6 million over three years to preserve and promote the arts and culture sectors. We are at a point now where we evaluate the initiatives launched as part of our cultural strategy in determining how we can build on the success we have had to date, said Premier Williams, ensuring the artists can continue to bring our culture, our stories to the world, will certainly be a priority.

Every time there is a cut by the federal government, Mr. Speaker, the Premier and this government has had to react to it because we do not want to see our youth and other people suffer because of irrational decisions by the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, again in 2008, a release, continued disregard for 5 Wing Goose Bay. The release says: during and since the 2006 federal election the federal government has made and reaffirmed plans for 5 Wing Goose Bay in the context of new federal priorities to protect Canadian sovereignty and security. The federal government committed to a new rapid reaction army battalion and a new long range on staffed aerial vehicle squadron for 5 Wing Goose Bay. None of these commitments have been fulfilled by Prime Minister Harper's government.

Mr. Speaker, I guess it is all fine and dandy that right now Mr. Harper is able to do what he wants but back in the election of 2006, Mr. Jack Layton, Leader of Canada's New Democratic Party wrote a letter to our Premier and he spoke on equalization and Labrador fisheries and so on. One of his statements was federal presence. He said the disproportionate loss of federal employment, wages, salaries and spending in this Province over the past twenty-five years is unacceptable. As the Harris Centre report points out, the greatest loss is that of the senior staff who can make decisions and represent provincial interests in Ottawa.

He further went on to say, Mr. Speaker: the New Democratic Party is disturbed by the number of jobs and services that have been reduced in Newfoundland and Labrador. We are committed to reviewing federal government policies that have resulted in this situation with a view to ensuring fairness and full access to federal government program delivery and services in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, fairness and full access is what we have been looking for. If the federal government realize that we are a part of this federation of Canada I think fairness would come into play. Mr. Speaker, back in 2007, February actually of 2007, the Leader of the National Liberal Party of the day, Stephane Dion, spoke with one of the local papers here and talked about his vision for Newfoundland and Labrador. He says the Province will play a central role in what he calls a new industrial revolution building on a sustainable economy. He spoke on equalization, the Lower Churchill, Hibernia, the fishery and he ended by saying: if there are ways to be more effective in putting the headquarters and the decision-making process closer to where the resource is, I will be a strong Prime Minister for that, he said. This is what we are saying. It is the headquarters, the decision-making people, the executive people that can actually make the decisions, the decisions that are going to be beneficial to the people of this Province, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the Harris Report released in August, 2006 identified cuts in federal offices in Newfoundland and Labrador which led to the elimination of federal executive positions. These employees would have played an important role in decision-making for the benefit of Newfoundland and Labrador. In the Harris Report, Mr. Speaker, it certainly talks about the federal offices and the federal employees. It goes on to say: federal employees are of course associated with specific federal government departments, agencies and institutions. In some cases the downgrading of an office has been the cause of job losses. For instance, consider the Canadian Forestry Service: since 1995, Canadian Forest Service personnel in the Province has declined about 70 per cent. Prior to the federal government's program review initiative, that office was a regional one located in St. John's with a regional director-general and approximately eighty staff.

With the downsizing and the relocation to Corner Brook, which was completed in 1998, there were twenty-two permanent positions left, Mr. Speaker. The Corner Brook location does not have anyone as senior as a director general. The regional director general is in New Brunswick, where a much large Canadian Forest Service operation is based.

Mr. Speaker, in the report other offices are referenced in regard to the downsizing and one, of course, was the fate of the Statistics Canada office, and more recently the Public Service Commission office, each of which had its functions transferred to Nova Scotia.

One thing about it, Mr. Speaker, if the offices and the positions were moved or taken out, they were definitely put somewhere else; they were never put back in this Province, the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the report also went on to say the total annual payment of wages and salaries for federal government employees in Newfoundland and Labrador in real terms declined from 1992 until 1998. It increased, actually, but by 2005 it was still less than the year of 1995.

Wages and salaries as paid to federal government employees and to employees of federal government business enterprises have each declined as a proportion of the respective nationwide amounts. The average payment per employee in this Province is less than the national average.

Mr. Speaker, it is rather disturbing when you read the Harris report, because there is so much information in there about the cuts that the federal government has made in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Some of the main findings go on to state, Mr. Speaker, many federal offices in Newfoundland and Labrador were either downgraded or closed during the past ten years. Few, if any, existing federal government or federal Crown corporation offices in this Province have mandates that extend beyond its boundaries. Headquarters and major offices with national mandates are heavily concentrated in the National Capital Region, and none of those outside that area are in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, right here - that came out of the Harris Report - is a list and a total number of federal offices with national mandates. I totalled them up, Mr. Speaker, and there are a total of 118 offices for the federal offices with national mandates. How many are in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador? None, Mr. Speaker, zero.

I will just name a couple: Canadian Forces Personnel Support Agency, Ontario; Canadian Tourism Commission, British Columbia; Federal Labour Standards Review, Quebec; Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation, Manitoba; National Energy Board, Alberta; National Search and Rescue Secretariat, Ontario; Veterans Review and Appeal Board, Prince Edward Island.

That is a total of 118 federal offices with national mandates and not one located in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

When I started this today, in support of this motion, I said how disheartening it was, and certainly frustrating, when we start reviewing the cuts of the federal government, because there are so many of them there would not be time in fifteen minutes to do what you need to do just to show the cuts that the federal government is after making in this Province.

The final thing I will touch on in the report, Mr. Speaker, two outstanding facts of the employment picture beyond the magnitudes of the declines were the very low numbers of federal government executive positions and the extremely meagre military presence in Newfoundland and Labrador. The overall conclusion is that the most significant decline in federal presence has been the disproportionate reduction in jobs and the associated office downgrades and closures.

Mr. Speaker, my time is nearly up. I would have liked to have touched on a few more; however, Mr. Harper and the federal government would be well-advised to take just a page and not the book - just a page - of the fiscal framework developed by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

I will end by saying this: Did the Premier and our government cut jobs in Newfoundland and Labrador? No. Did we cut services? Of course we did not. Did this government invest across the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in services, offices and infrastructure? You had better believe we did, Mr. Speaker, and that is what this government is all about, spreading it across the Province and everybody being treated fairly across Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you very much Mr. Speaker.

I want to say it is a pleasure to stand today on the private member's motion put forward by my hon. colleague from the District of Exploits. I want to say to him right from the outset that I will be supporting your private member's motion; however, just one little correction, I guess, on the last couple of sentences.

He wanted to know, did this government cut any services? I have to say, I think there were twenty or twenty-two HRLE offices that were closed throughout the Province and it did make an impact on areas, yes. It did make an impact.

Like I said, I just wanted to make that correction but I do stand in support of this because I believe that there are many positions, many offices that are under the federal jurisdiction that should be here in our Province. To elaborate on that, I believe that many times when the federal government - regardless of who are the administrators in Ottawa, Canada ends, on many people's minds, right in North Sydney. We are here on the Island and many times we are not looked at, even though I know government has received funding for various programs and so on.

Mr. Speaker, all we have to do is look at the letter that the Premier received, dated January 4, 2006. There are many issues noted in that letter, but I am just going to touch on a couple of comments that were made. One was in relation to the federal presence here in the Province. The Premier asked them, would they look at changes to this way things were looked at? In general, one of the questions at that time was the Gander weather office. Now, we know that has been corrected. He went on to say that there is an over-concentration of certain federal government services in some areas of the country and an effort must be made to ensure that there is a fair distribution of federal government presence across the country.

That is what the Prime Minister said back in 2006. That was just prior, if I am not mistaken, to the federal election that this letter was received, and the people of this country put this gentleman and his Administration in power, and no doubt the Administration here in this Province totally supported him at that time; however, we all know things did not unfold the way they were outlined in that letter.

Also in my hon. colleague's private member's motion, he references the two other parties, the New Democratic Party and the Liberal Party. He states that the leader at the time, prior to the 2008 federal election, made comments as to what stand he would take here in the Province when it came to this issue. I cannot speak for the former Leader of the Liberal Party in Canada, neither can I speak for the new leader that was only recently acclaimed, I guess, by the party in Opposition in Ottawa now, one of the Opposition parties, but I can assure you from what we have heard, I believe that once he takes over as Prime Minister of this country, I believe that we will see a total change in the relationship between this Province and the federal government. I believe he is an individual that will listen to the concerns, regardless of what political party is in power in the other provinces. I know probably other parties who are in Opposition today will feel the same way because we know what they stated in their letters.

Another issue that came forward in that particular letter at the time, and I guess it plays a great deal to the way we feel about the relations that we have with the federal government, and that was several topics that surfaced with regards to the fishery: One of them was early retirement, where the Premier of the day asked them would they take part in an early retirement package for people involved in the fishery, both harvesters and processors on a 70-30 basis, seventy federal and thirty provincial? The reply came back, they felt that there should be retraining. That is all fine, but when certain people get to a certain age in the industry, retraining is not an option for them. Early retirement would be a part of that program. He stated very clearly that they would not have anything to do with an early retirement program. I know the provincial government said that they would, but this year in the Budget I do not think there is any funding there as well for an early retirement program.

The other issue that questions were asked on was custodial management. Custodial management is one of the key factors, I believe, to the recovery of our fish stocks. The Prime Minister at the time, and I think they were on the lines that they would put other offices – we know that DFO has an office here, but the governing powers who make the laws and the rules and the regulations in relation to the fishery are all sitting in large offices on Parliament Hill. He agreed that he would support extending the continental shelf beyond the 200-mile limit, to the Nose and Tail of the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap.

Mr. Speaker, we know that has not happened. We know there has been very little action and that is only one department where jobs, high paying jobs, and even extra offices could be open here in our Province. The comments that he made in the letter to the Premier, he felt that the problem with the fishery was twelve years of Liberal mismanagement. Well, I say, Mr. Speaker, today, we are looking at a situation where there is no management. There is very little being done to protect the fish stocks, to help with the recovery of them even. Those issues have been totally ignored. I have to say that I believe there has to be a better federal-provincial relationship. Regardless of who is at fault, there is too much at stake here in this Province that we do have to sit down, regardless of who is in power. The day may come when that office may change but at the present time I believe that we have to sit down and really size up the situation and see what is best for this Province.

Another issue that was mentioned in the letter from the Prime Minister at that time was 5 Wing Goose Bay, and we all know what expectations we had for what was going to happen in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, but that did not unfold either. Whatever reasons, I mean the federal government as far as I am concerned, that was another key issue that would see people come to this Province and create more jobs here, but this government has failed to do that as well.

Mr. Speaker, there are many issues that could be done to see that jobs are provided here in this Province, to see that new offices are opened up. Back in September, 2006, a Dr. James Feehan, a professor of economics through the Leslie Harris Centre, did a federal presence here in Newfoundland and Labrador and his findings and his presentation are worth noting. Now I know this was back in 2004, but it is stated that only seventy-six positions were here in this Province, two more than P.E.I. Then we go to New Brunswick who had 127 positions, Nova Scotia with 290 and our share of the executive positions that were laid out by the federal government was 0.8 per cent. This report examines federal presence in a physical sense, the employees, the offices and the spending. It did not deal with the policy presence at all and the policy decisions that affect this Province's social and economic well-being. There had been a substantial reduction in employment in the federal government directly but we saw a major change and a lack of positions here in our Province as versus others. The downgrading and closing of offices seem to play a major part in the Atlantic region but from the figures that I just announced, I think they are fairing far better than we are.

I guess it comes back to what I said a little while ago: Does Canada really end in North Sydney? I think when it comes to some of those issues, that is where it takes place. Two outstanding factors of the employment picture found at that time were very low numbers of federal government executive positions, and an extremely meagre military presence here in our Province. The overall conclusion at that time, the most significant decline in federal presence has been the disproportionate reduction in jobs and the associated office downgrading and closures.

Mr. Speaker, I guess I do not have too much more to say, only that I agree totally with the private member's motion. I believe that, regardless, I know they are referring to the Conservative Party during the 2006 federal election on the commitments that were made, and they are also calling upon the leaders of the other parties to keep their commitments that they made.

I know one of those individuals is still in his position, another one the hands have changed, but hopefully they will, and I believe they will, do what is right for this Province.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that I totally support this position put forward, and look forward to when the vote comes.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Baie Verte-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today, and certainly honoured as well, as the MHA for the District of Baie Verte-Springdale, to second the motion that was moved by my colleague, the Member from Exploits. Mr. Speaker, we call on the federal government to increase their presence in Newfoundland and Labrador.

According to the Harris report, which is an independent study, there has been a steady erosion of federal job loss, closure or downsizing of high-profile offices and senior executive positions. This is a very disturbing trend, Mr. Speaker. It is abundantly clear that the federal government has moved away from maintaining any presence in Newfoundland and Labrador, leaving us to sink or swim on our own - and we have been doing just fine, I might add, Mr. Speaker - an attitude of complete abandonment, absolutely no regard for us as a people or for us as a Province.

What prompts me to make such a statement about a government that was supposed to have a pan-Canadian view or approach when governing an entire country? When doing my research, Mr. Speaker, I discovered some startling trends.

One, the local office for ACOA in Plum Point was closed on April 1, 2009, after serving that area since 1995. This seriously jeopardized the successful development of business and job opportunities for that entire region.

Two, consider the downsizing at the Canadian Forest Service research lab in Corner Brook. Since 1950 it has been active on the forest scene of Newfoundland and Labrador and recognized as one of the leading authorities in many priority areas identified by the federal government. Created in 1996 to bring science and researchers closer to its partners in Corner Brook, and with thirty employees anticipated, this centre also experienced the axe of the federal government.

Since 2002, the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, a national union representing professionals employed by the federal government, has watched both science research and support positions decline at the centre. The level of foreseen staffing was never reached. Seasoned researchers who retired were not replaced, and the budget authority for the lab has been shifted from Corner Brook to Fredericton.

Just listen to this, Mr. Speaker, what the union has witnessed: two senior research positions retire, no replacements hired; two senior technical support positions retire, no replacements hired; one administrative support position transferred to another government department, no replacement hired; four vacant research positions eliminated; transfer of control for the budget allocation from the Corner Brook manager to the full control of the Fredericton office.

Mr. Speaker, what does this say about the commitment to Corner Brook and to research and science of the federal government? This blatant downsizing is an affront to science and to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, other offices have been closed entirely. That was the fate of the Statistics Canada office and the Public Service Commission office, all transferred to Nova Scotia. No national headquarters, head offices, specialized centres or unique government entities such as tribunals, penitentiaries or Bank of Canada offices are located in Newfoundland, according to the Harris report.

The Leslie Harris Centre of Regional Policy and Development, in their report of August 2006, reports the following, as indicated already by my colleague: many federal offices in Newfoundland and Labrador were either downgraded or closed during the past ten years. Few, if any, existing federal government or federal Crown corporation offices in this Province have mandates that extend beyond its boundaries. Yet, section 49 in the 1985 Atlantic Accord explicitly states that the Government of Canada shall establish in the Province, where possible, regional offices with appropriate levels of decision-making for all departments directly involved in activities related to the offshore area.

Let me continue on federal presence in the Province. The Harris Centre's final report also indicated that federal employment in the Province has decreased by almost 25 per cent since 1981 compared to a 5 per cent decrease nationwide. What a disturbing trend, Mr. Speaker.

In 2003, the Royal Commission on Our Place in Canada reported that federal employment in Newfoundland and Labrador was cut by 38 per cent, the highest proportion of cuts of any Province in Canada. Are we the forgotten Province, Mr. Speaker? No wonder the people of Newfoundland and Labrador feel a sense of abandonment. The Harris Report also shows that even while supplying Canada with about 8 per cent of its military personnel, Newfoundland and Labrador's number of military personnel or presence is disproportionately low.

Another key indicator of the federal government lack of interest is the limited presence of senior level employees in the Province. They have the power to make decisions and directly influence government policy on a national level which would impact our Province's well-being. Did you know, Mr. Speaker, that Newfoundland and Labrador has the lowest number of federal executive employees in the country? That is totally unacceptable. Also, Newfoundland and Labrador has almost the same number of executive positions as P.E.I., although we have four times the population. On the other hand, Nova Scotia, with just twice the population of Newfoundland and Labrador, has four times the number of senior federal staff.

It is interesting to note, Mr. Speaker, during the January, 2006 federal election, Prime Minister Stephen Harper spoke as if he was in support of increasing federal presence in Newfoundland and Labrador. This is what he stated: I think the secret will be to identify particular functions and operations that should be here as opposed to putting a few jobs here and a few jobs there. There should be some specific things that are headquartered here.

Empty words, Mr. Speaker. Increasing federal presence is just not about increasing jobs. It is also about increasing the level of federal decision making occurring in this Province to ensure our unique challenges and opportunities are duly considered in the development of federal policies. This would ensure commitments made by the federal government would be honoured and fulfilled, but right now that is not happening. This is not the way a national government should govern. There is no evidence of a Prime Minister who has a pan-Canadian approach or a pan-Canadian view. On the other hand, it is evidence of a narrow approach.

Despite the repeated efforts of our Premier and other government officials in the past, the federal government has not changed its course. Research bears out the fact that Newfoundland and Labrador has lost its disproportionate share of federal presence when considering job loss, office closures and senior executive positions. This trend is unacceptable, Mr. Speaker. This trend has to stop. It is time for the Government of Canada to re-evaluate its presence in Newfoundland and Labrador and begin, in the words of former Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion, to establish priorities for effectiveness on the ground. This mean-spirited, short-sighted, narrow approach by our federal government is in complete stark contrast to the approach of our provincial government.

MR. POLLARD: Such as, Mr. Speaker, $9.5 million for CONA campus in Labrador West; a $4.7 million health care facility; $19 million for a new francophone school in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and two K-12 schools in Port Hope Simpson and L'Anse-au-Loup.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD: That is what we mean by investing in all parts of our great Province, Mr. Speaker.

Let me carry on. In May, 2007, this government of ours opened, in Stephenville, the Provincial Drug Program which employs fifteen new permanent staff members. What a move, Mr. Speaker! I also applaud our government, in making these investments to rural Newfoundland, for creating economic opportunities for rural areas of our Province. This provides evidence that our government has a much broader approach to address issues in all areas of our Province, not just one particular region, unlike the federal government or the members opposite would like to think.

This government invests in the Avalon. This government invests in the Northern Peninsula. This government invests in the West Coast, the South Coast, Labrador, and all points in between, Mr. Speaker. Our approach is one of a whole picture approach. We believe, unlike the Opposition members and the federal government, that rural Newfoundland and Labrador has the expertise, has the supports, has the capacity, has the talent, and has the skilled work force, to complement any – and I repeat, any! – government initiatives or projects that may arise. That includes Grand Falls-Windsor. That includes the Springdale area. That includes the Baie Verte area. That includes Deer Lake. That includes Port aux Basques. That includes Gander. It includes any area of this great Province of ours: St. John's, of course, Mount Pearl, and we can go on, Mr. Speaker. To say or even suggest otherwise, to me would be an insult to rural Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

What is this all about, Mr. Speaker, when we invest in rural Newfoundland and Labrador? It is about building capacity, individual capacity and community capacity. What is this all about? It is all about empowering, not only individuals but empowering communities, empowering regions. Strong communities, strong regions, equals a strong Province. That is what our government is all about, Mr. Speaker, increasing capacity, empowering people and regions and communities to be self-sustainable.

Mr. Speaker, I wholeheartedly second this important resolution and call upon the federal government to increase its presence regarding senior executive positions, and also call upon the members opposite to support us in this important quest of ours.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, my time has run out.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I am pleased to stand today to speak to this motion that is on the floor on this Private Members' Day, "…that the House of Assembly calls on the current Government of Canada, and any other national party if it is elected to form the government, to increase the number of federal decision-making executive positions and/or national regional headquarters based in Newfoundland and Labrador."

May I say right from the beginning that I will be supporting this motion. I am pleased that the motion recognizes that all of the parties who are potential governments on the federal level should have this motion addressed to them, because I do not think that the situation we are in today with the current federal government pertains simply to this federal government that we are now dealing with, because a lot of the things that we are experiencing now, the loss of jobs in the executive positions, the loss of jobs in general - federal level jobs, I mean - goes back before this government. Closures of offices go back before this government, so it has been an ongoing problem in terms of the attitude of the federal government to our Province, to our provincial government, and I would like to say to others in the country as well. It is something that we do have to speak to, as a Province, and something that we have to be aware of.

Some of the things that have closed in this Province since 1995 were the Gander weather office, and people in this Province fought to get it back. What they got back was good, but it is reduced in numbers in terms of staff. There was a movement of a number of Department of Fisheries and Oceans positions outside the Province, the uncertainty surrounding the military base in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, the announcement of the closure of the Cool Climate Research Centre, just to name some of the things that have happened in this Province over the past years. So the attitude of federal governments in recent times, especially since the 1990s, towards us has not been great. The realization that they need to contribute to our role in the federal system seems to be diminishing; because, when we lose a voice from here, nobody else can replace that voice.

I remember some years ago – I forget what year, exactly it was - it was in the early 2000s when Status of Women Canada did a total restructuring of offices in Canada, and the restructuring included closing the Status of Women office here in St. John's and losing that position from here in St. John's. It was really felt strongly by women in the women's community who were activists and advocating on a federal level with regard to funding for women's projects, and that voice was lost forever. Yes, women in Newfoundland and Labrador can go to the people in the Maritimes who are in those positions still, but they do not have the same voice at the table, and that is exactly what has happened in other areas as well. So, having executive positions and having staff people representing key programs of the federal government here is extremely important.

You know, it is people in Ottawa in particular who divided this country up into regions. I do not think we see ourselves in Newfoundland and Labrador, while we know we are part of a group called the Atlantic Provinces, we do not have an Atlantic Province identity; we have an identity as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, but we have put in these categories by federal bureaucrats, so what we experience here is something that is not acceptable. It is not something that we have defined for ourselves. It is something that others have defined for us, so this really bothers me, I have to say.

Speaking today to the executive positions, and how the numbers have declined, is something that is important to do, but it is only – it is a symbol. It is a sign of the attitude of people in the federal government, for example, and it is not just politicians. It is part of, I think, the whole bureaucratic mindset that develops as well in Ottawa that we are dealing with.

I do recognize why this government, when the federal election was on in 2006, and the federal election prior to that, put out a questionnaire to the leaders of all three federal parties. I have no idea if the Premier sent one to the Green Party as well. I do know letters were sent to the leaders of the federal Liberal, Conservative and New Democratic Parties. It was good that happened because we now have, in writing, commitments from the leaders of these parties.

Now, I have to say that I am very proud that the leader of the federal New Democratic Party probably sent in the best response of all leaders, to this Province, because Mr. Layton was unequivocal in his understanding of the need for this Province to have, I am going to say, "special treatment." By special I mean a recognition that we in this Province, for all kinds of reasons – one of which is our history, one of which is our geography - have to have consideration of those factors when decisions are being made. Our high unemployment rate, for example, is another reason for having special consideration when decisions are made about chopping positions, whether they are positions on the executive level or whether they are positions on any other level.

I was looking at some statistics, and I am sad to say that the federal government has been contributing to a dynamic that is going on in our Province, and that is the high level of growth on the Northeast Avalon Peninsula in comparison to rural Newfoundland and other towns, larger towns in Newfoundland and Labrador.

While, overall, executive numbers have gone down, it is interesting to note that in the St. John's Census Metropolitan Area between 2004 and 2008, in actual fact, the number of jobs in the federal sector went up by almost 450. So the federal government, even in what it is doing, is concentrating more and more in the St. John's area, because I think it is fair to say that federal-level jobs have not gone up in other parts of the Province.

I do want to come back to what happened when federal leaders received the questionnaire from Mr. Williams. It was a questionnaire that Mr. Layton took very, very seriously. I remember well that he contacted the party here. He contacted Mr. Harris because Mr. Harris was the person who was the leader of our party at the time, and the local party was involved in giving the federal leader a sense of what our concerns were. He believed in those concerns and he showed his commitment both to us as a party, to the New Democratic Party of Newfoundland and Labrador, and his commitment to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. He was just here in St. John's not too long ago. Mr. Layton was in St. John's on Friday past, last week, when he spoke to the St. John's Board of Trade. He once again reiterated his commitment to Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr. Speaker, I am concentrating on the leader of the federal party because, actually, the resolution that is on the floor is a resolution aimed at the leaders of the federal parities. That is why I am speaking of Mr. Layton to the degree that I am.

Last week Mr. Layton said, unequivocally, as he stood in front of the St. John's Board of Trade: I will never turn my back on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. He means that. Not only if he becomes Prime Minister of the country but even in Opposition he will always be there to speak for Newfoundland and Labrador. He was so pleased to have an NDP MP in his caucus. He was just so, so excited about the fact that finally he has a Newfoundlander in is caucus.

Things that Mr. Layton has committed himself to, to show people here, both in the House as well as in the Province, the level of his commitment: he has committed to, and he will continue to fight for this, the 8.5 per cent Hibernia share that the federal government gets from Hibernia, that that share should come to the Province. He is shocked by the disparity between what the federal government gets from our resources in the offshore and what we get. He believes strongly that the 8.5 per cent Hibernia share should come to the Province, as of course we believe as the New Democratic Party of Newfoundland and Labrador.

He also supports a search and rescue base for St. John's with regard to the offshore, but in no way taking away from what exists in Gander. What exists in Gander has one role. Having a cormorant helicopter twenty-four seven here in St. John's would have a very specific role. While it would not just serve the oil and gas industry, it would be there in case of any other emergencies that we may have in that industry. This is something that he is very committed to.

He also is quite committed to an east-west power grid which would benefit not just this Province, but provinces across Canada. He certainly is open to having ongoing discussions with this Province around the benefits of the east-west grid. Now, of course that we have wheeling rights through Quebec this is something that is becoming even more possible, a dream that could really work for us.

Some more things that the federal NDP supports and would bring jobs to this Province is shipbuilding. Mr. Layton believes that we should have a national shipbuilding program and that that national shipbuilding program would take into consideration every part of the country where shipbuilding is important to the economy. One place where we have underscored in the economy here in Newfoundland and Labrador has been in shipbuilding, not because we do not have the facilities, we know we have the facilities, but because even we ourselves have not put enough into that. He really wants to develop a national shipbuilding program that would see us as equal partners with other parts of the country.

He also wants a national child care program that would bring jobs to our economy. He also wants a green-collar jobs fund that would stimulate innovation and train new and displaced workers. You see, having somebody like Mr. Layton as Prime Minister or as Leader of the Opposition means that ideas would be put in place that would also involve our having more jobs here, whether they are jobs in the actual federal government, but jobs in industries that would be created through the creative thinking of somebody like Mr. Layton.

I see the Minister of Justice smiling over there. I hope he likes everything that I am saying.

MR. T. MARSHALL: (Inaudible).

MS MICHAEL: You don't, don't you? Sorry about that.

Mr. Layton would be very pleased that I am stood here today, I think, praising him, but I think it is important that I do it because it is important for us that we have a strong voice - and when I say us, I mean the New Democratic Party - that we have a strong voice in Ottawa where I know what I believe in is being pushed on the federal level; the same issues that I am pushing here on a provincial level, Mr. Layton and the federal party would be pushing on a federal level. That is the cooperation I want to see in my party, working with the federal party pushing the same issues.

One of the things that Mr. Layton said in his letter of 2008, which I think is really important - and this will have to be my last comment, so I will close with a quote from him: "We recognize the need for greater fairness in the distribution of federal jobs throughout the country and also recognize the economic importance of such a presence. New Democrats continue to be concerned by the number of jobs and services that have been reduced in Newfoundland and Labrador. We are committed to reviewing policies that led to such result and we re-affirm our commitment to working with your Province to ensure fairness and full access to federal government program delivery and services in this Province."

That is what I work for, Mr. Speaker, that is what the New Democratic Party on the federal level works for, and that is why, yes, I can support the resolution that is put before us today.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to, for the people who are listening out there, go back over the motion which we are dealing with today that was put forward by the hon. the Member for the District of Exploits, which was a good one, and seconded by the hon. the Member for Baie Verte-Springdale.

It says: Be it resolved that the House of Assembly calls on the current Government of Canada, and any other national party if it is elected to form the government, to increase the number of federal decision-making executive positions and/or national or regional headquarters based in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now, Mr. Speaker, during the debate this afternoon, each and every member, both on this side of the House and on that side of the House, has brought a lot of statistics to be aired out here today. I am wondering, and I am saying: Does the federal government not know we are concerned about the number of jobs here in Newfoundland and Labrador? Do you not know that we have made representation to them many, many times? Many letters have gone back and forth?

Then I said: Do you know the problem? The problem, I think, is very simple. The problem is that when you look at the geography of Canada you break it up into sections. When you do the geography of Canada you look at it and say: Well what are the Maritime Provinces? Well, the Maritime Provinces are New Brunswick, PEI and Nova Scotia. Now someone says: What are the Atlantic Provinces? Well, the Atlantic Provinces are different because it includes Newfoundland and Labrador. You can draw a conclusion from that, Mr. Speaker. The problem is that they do not understand the definition between Maritime and Atlantic. They do not know their geography, because they said: Well, we give this to the Maritimes.

Let me give you an idea. In Nova Scotia, they have four times the amount of executive positions. Four times the amount of executive positions in Nova Scotia than we do have here in Newfoundland and Labrador. P.E.I. has almost the equivalent amount and only one quarter the size of the population of Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. FORSEY: Shame, shame!

MR. DENINE: Absolutely! Absolutely, to my hon. Member for Exploits. Thank you for the support. That is exactly what it – it is a shame, because we are not asking for any more than equal treatment within the confederation of Canada. We are not saying that we should have more than Nova Scotia. We are not saying that we should have more than P.E.I. We are not saying we should have more than Ontario, or whatever the case may be, because there are certain reasons for all of that, Mr. Speaker. There are certain reasons why things happen the way they happen, but what we are looking for is fair and honest treatment; fair and honest treatment for Newfoundland and Labrador.

All I have to say to the members of the federal government here, and anyone in Ottawa, is look at the definition of Maritime and Atlantic. From now on in, when they allocate money, allocate it to the Atlantic provinces - or jobs, allocate it to the Atlantic provinces.

Mr. Speaker, in 1993 there were 10,250 federal jobs. In 2004, there were 6,790. Now, if you do the math on that – and I hope it is correct, someone gave me the information – over 3,200 jobs lost. I mean, that is significant. Think about it. That in itself is more than four or five industries here in Newfoundland and Labrador; more than four or five industries. So why do we not ask for equal treatment? This is not new to the federal government in power now today. This is not new to them. Our government has written every other leader of every party up there and asked them for all this. They know that this is an issue.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to speak too long, but a couple of more points. 5 Wing Goose Bay was brought up by some of the hon. members across the way. I had the opportunity to visit 5 Wing Goose Bay when I first became Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. 5 Wing Goose Bay is an absolutely phenomenal facility. Absolutely, first-class facility; has a lot of amenities over there that a lot of air force bases – that bases would love to have. Totally, a complete unit.

If any country of this world wanted to go up in Goose Bay and do so some military activities, military exercises, everything is there for them: housing, food, target areas and everything there. Now they made a commitment to put forces up in that base, 5 Wing Goose Bay, a Rapid Reaction Battalion, 650. Can you imagine what 650 people in Goose Bay, living, operating out of Goose Bay, 5 Wing, what that impact would have on the economy? It would have a significant impact on the economy and the spin-offs would be significant to everyone else in Newfoundland and Labrador. So, when we are talking about losing jobs, we are talking about being treated equally. Again, I say Newfoundland and Labrador needs to be treated equally. We need to have the equal thing, and I think if they only look at the definition that I talked about in the beginning of my speech, the difference between Atlantic and Maritime, that is the problem. Canada does not stop at Halifax. Look at things.

Now, Prime Minister Harper said: we cannot just go willy-nilly and give out a job here, a job there, a job there. Look at a resource. Look at a whole picture. What can we put here in Newfoundland and Labrador? Well, Mr. Speaker, there is a heck of a lot you can put here in Newfoundland and Labrador. Look at our natural resources. Why not open a big, huge facility and move all the Department of Natural Resources here? Armed forces. We are the closest link to Europe, a very strategic location in the world, global issues, global geography. Why not move that down? We are in the offshore oil business, significantly, why not move something down here from that? The fisheries – my God, we are surrounded by water, at least the Island portion is.

AN HON. MEMBER: Thank God we're surrounded by water.

MR. DENINE: Thank God we're surrounded by water. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

Mr. Speaker, the fisheries, a centre for excellence in the oceanography. Why not that? So, if the will is there, the wanting is there, the power is there, why don't they just do it? Why don't they just make sure that Newfoundland and Labrador gets its fair share, not only jobs but executive jobs, people who are here on the ground that are ready to make a decision, not that the decision has to go from here to Halifax so someone can phone back here and say: yes, go ahead and do it. Newfoundland and Labradorians are well-trained, a very skilful force, intelligent individuals that can make things happen in Newfoundland and Labrador and are ready, willing and able to make decisions.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I am going to wrap up because everything has been said. Very seldom do I leave time on the clock but I will do that today because a lot of things have been said. I agree with everyone that has been putting forward, but we as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are looking - one, look at the definition of Atlantic provinces, Mr. Prime Minister, let's not refer to the Maritime Provinces. Let's give Newfoundland and Labrador its fair share, not only of jobs but executive jobs.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would certainly like to have a few words this afternoon because this is a topic that I think is particularly important for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador from a number of different fronts. I know we have heard from the previous speakers this afternoon that we have had commitments from various federal leaders. Whether it is the Leader of the NDP, Mr. Jack Layton, or whether it is the former Leader of the Liberal Party Stéphane Dion, or other federal leaders. When we look at the commitments there seems to be some vagueness within the commitments, but it does lay the groundwork that there is an acknowledgement that there are issues in Newfoundland and Labrador regarding the presence of federal positions and things that we need to be able to address.

I also want to address the fact that when I talk about jobs from the federal government in Newfoundland and Labrador, I am not necessarily speaking about service delivery positions because I think that if services that are provided to all the people of Canada are available to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, whether it is being able to have access to the EI program or CPP or the Old Age Assistance or whatever the particular programs are, that I think we need to have universal access in the most efficient and effective way.

What I am speaking about, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that we need positions in Newfoundland and Labrador that acknowledge that we have the intelligence or the intellect and the ability to think and to analyze and to contribute to Canada as a country. That means being able to have research positions or policy and development positions in Newfoundland and Labrador, and that is exactly what we are lacking in this Province.

A number of speakers, as well, this afternoon, have acknowledged the Harris report, and how the Harris report has outlined that we have a disproportionate number of federal government jobs in this Province, and the fact that we have also had the jobs that we did have here, how they had eroded over the years.

Mr. Speaker, it is also interesting to note that where we do have our federal presence now - and they speak of the jobs being on a regional basis - the region is defined by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, but when you look beyond the boundaries of Newfoundland and Labrador and you have a regional office for the federal government, the boundaries, particularly in Atlantic Canada, include the four Atlantic Provinces. It is like, if we have a mandate of a region they will call it the province, but if you look elsewhere they feel that they have the ability to make decisions or contribute to decision-making that would affect all of the Atlantic Region. We certainly feel we need our share of positions here in the Province as well.

It is noted as well in the Harris report that the federal entities that have the most presence in this Province would be Canada Post or the RCMP. What is interesting to note is, with the Canada Post, that is paid for by the consumers or the customers of Canada Post, and the RCMP primarily are funded by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We may have a stronger presence from those two entities but we certainly pay for it ourselves.

We also have a number of entities of the federal government that have absolutely no presence in Newfoundland and Labrador, and that would be: Justice Canada, Industry Canada, Statistics Canada, Defence R&D, and other entities as well where we have no presence whatsoever.

Certainly in Stephenville, from my own district perspective, we have lost the presence of the Coast Guard base and the operations that were in Stephenville. We also have lost the Border Services, or the customs agents that were posted or working from Stephenville as well. We have lost them over the years. Again, we want to make sure, as we are recognized and certainly have a place of prominence within Canada, that we are also recognized that we can do the work that will contribute to the country as a whole.

Of 183 federal agencies, Mr. Speaker, we have thirty-eight being represented or having a presence in Newfoundland and Labrador, which means there are 145 not in Newfoundland and Labrador. Another one of our major employers, certainly, as a federal entity would be Marine Atlantic. We often have heard the debate that the headquarters should not be in Port aux Basques because they would not be able to maintain the headquarters there. There is always an argument that there is a better place to have the headquarters for Marine Atlantic, other than Port aux Basques, but that ferry system is set up for one reason only, and that is so that there is a transportation link between Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador, and the primary place where we provide that service is in Port aux Basques.

There is always the attitude that we can provide that general service delivery, but when we need that higher level that would contribute to the decision-making we just cannot have it outside some of the major centres which are located outside the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we have often been asking recently and saying that we would like to have a federal penitentiary in Newfoundland and Labrador. We have also advocated that if we build a new provincial facility that we would certainly like a significant portion of that to be paid for by the federal government. There is really inaction on that whole issue.

When we think of where the federal government has invested federal dollars, and then these provinces certainly benefit from the employment and the spin-offs from the employment in those areas, we can see how we are being treated very differently. We would like to have a federal penitentiary. When we compare our Province, say, to the Province of Ontario, I do not know if people realize but in one city alone, in the City of Kingston, I believe there are fourteen federal penitentiaries. We would like to have one. They have fourteen in Kingston alone.

Mr. Speaker, there are other federal penitentiaries. There is another one in Kingston, as well, and probably others in Ontario, but when we are here asking for one, and we are not talking about a province, we are talking about a city that has fourteen federal penitentiaries, there is something seriously wrong with this.

Mr. Speaker, we have been saying that we are a province of people who are very strong, very proud and very determined. We can contribute to Canada as a country, to the decision-making, to the policies, and we should be able to do it right here from Newfoundland and Labrador. There certainly was an argument at many times where a lot of these positions had to be located in Ottawa, in the National Capital Region, with very good reason, because you needed that base to be able to do the work, but as we have advanced and as we have developed what is increasingly important is that the transportation links have certainly improved.

Who would have ever heard tell of, ten years ago, that a person from Newfoundland and Labrador could work in Fort McMurray and commute back and forth on a regular basis? That was unheard of. When the mill closed in Stephenville in 2005, or early 2006, people laughed; people made fun of the fact that we were looking at a mobile workforce.

Certainly, as we have done that, we have realized that the transportation links have actually provided that opportunity for the people in this Province. The people in Newfoundland and Labrador work all over the world and commute. There are people actually from the Stephenville area who I know who work in Africa and commute back and forth as a mobile workforce.

The other thing that has also developed, which has been extremely important, is the whole communication system. Mr. Speaker, right now, through video conferencing, through teleconferencing, through e-mails, through the Internet, we are certainly able to communicate much faster and much more efficiently than we have before. Computer systems have certainly advanced how we deal with each other.

So, when we look at the transportation links and we look at the communication links and we also look at who we are as a people, and we look at the calibre and the quality of work that we can do in Newfoundland and Labrador, we certainly should be better represented with regard to federal positions.

Like I said, Mr. Speaker, I am not necessarily addressing what I would consider service delivery but I am talking about the decisions that contribute to the policy and to the decision-making of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, certainly there have been examples cited here today, as well, where this government has been instrumental in being able to move positions, or create positions or services that are not necessarily in the St. John's area, because there is a critical mass, as we all know, of government positions in the St. John's area; but, Mr. Speaker, we have certainly been able to demonstrate, through the Program Development Unit at the College of the North Atlantic that was created by this government and placed in Stephenville, that we have been able to attract very high-calibre individuals with skills that enable them to do their job and to be able to do it in Stephenville.

I remember, Mr. Speaker, one time I did a radio interview regarding the president's position at the College of the North Atlantic and the announcer asked me if I felt that the time, I guess, that it was taking to fill the position in any way had anything to do with the fact that the job was in Stephenville. Just that condescending attitude almost creates what I consider a self-fulfilling prophecy: that when we feel that we cannot do jobs outside St. John's, or because we feel that we are not good enough for Ottawa or we cannot contribute to what goes on in this country, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, that we feel that we are second-best in this country and we are not good enough to be able to contribute to the policy.

Mr. Speaker, we have some of the great minds. We have many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who have contributed to many economies around the world, who have left Newfoundland and Labrador because they probably never had the opportunities, when they were looking for them, to contribute.

Mr. Speaker, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have certainly contributed to many decisions and policies all over the world, and many different governments and businesses, and have become business leaders and government leaders. We cannot look at ourselves as second-best any more, to think that we cannot contribute. It is not that we need to understand that for ourselves but the people of Canada need to understand that as well, and certainly our federal government needs to understand that. Therefore, they need to be able to acknowledge that by giving us the positions here that we rightfully deserve. We have been in Confederation for sixty years now. I certainly think we have proven our place and where we need to be, and that we can take in these positions.

Mr. Speaker, what else is important with all of this is that sometimes we will feel ourselves that people will not work in different areas of this Province. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, when you go out to Newfoundland and Labrador, whether it is in Grand Falls-Windsor, Stephenville, Port aux Basques, St. Anthony, Goose Bay, Coastal Labrador, we have people out there who are very well trained professionals, who do their work very well and who can attest to the lifestyle that we offer in this Province.

When we look at it from a national perspective we are probably seen as the Province the farthest east and we probably would have a lifestyle that most people in some of the more urban centres would feel is not appropriate. Therefore, we would not have the critical mass of people that we need, but I think they need to look further. I think that we can contribute. We are probably, by far, the best province in this country where a person can live. We probably have the best people. I am sure the hospitality is second to none. The lifestyle, whether it is winter or summer, and what we are able to offer to people is also very important, but what also is important is the fact that we are sometimes known as homing pigeons. Despite the fact that people go away to study or to work they always want to come back home, and there is a good reason for that, it is because it is such a wonderful place to live, Mr. Speaker. If the federal government gave us more attention and put more positions here, it would also not just create positions for people who are here in Newfoundland and Labrador but for people who would like to return as well.

Mr. Speaker, I am really pleased that we are able to debate this motion today. I think it is extremely important, but I think it is our time to realize that we are not here to beg the federal government to look at us and to give us what we deserve. We are here to say that we have been here for sixty years, we are a Province that is very proud, that is very determined, very strong and we have a lot to offer Canada. What we are asking for is our rightful place to be able to take on the positions that we deserve within this country and that it is no longer acceptable for us to feel second best.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly feel that our younger generation will not feel second best to anyone, will not have to live with the stereo types that many generations have lived in Newfoundland and Labrador, and I hope that the federal government follows this debate today and gives us our due recognition.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Collins): The hon. the Member for Exploits to close the debate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just a couple of quick points in closing. We spoke about fiscal framework and we spoke about decision makers. I would just like to take a little page out of what this Province does right across, from Newfoundland and Labrador. I just want to go back to where I am the member for - back in Exploits, back in the Central part of the Province.

We talked about fiscal framework and decision making. We have a beautiful facility down there. It is called the Twomey Health Care Centre, named after a great person of course, Dr. Hugh Twomey. In that facility there is eighty beds. There is one wing that has thirty-nine. There is another one that has twenty-nine. It has palliative care. The other one has twelve beds for a veterans' wing.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the reason I say that, it is not just for services. The people in the – I guess in the health care boards and the four boards we have across the Province are decision makers. These people down there make decisions and that is why, when it was announced this year in the budget, that we are placing an addictions centre in Grand Falls–Windsor as well, in Central Newfoundland, it was for the reason that we feel these people have the knowledge and professionalism to operate such a facility and they will be executive, there will be executive and decision-making people there.

We are specifically talking about federal cuts. I would like to touch on probably the biggest cut since we have been here, and it was buried in the 2009 federal budget. It was a deep cut in funding to one province and one province alone, and that was to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The cut will cost us more than a billion dollars the Province ought to be receiving from offshore revenues from an agreement negotiated by a Progressive Conservative government a quarter of a century ago. So, Mr. Speaker, when you talk about cuts from the federal government there is no wonder we are here today talking about it.

Just to clue up, Mr. Speaker, our resolution states:

"THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly calls on the current Government of Canada, and any other national party if it is elected to form the government, to increase the number of federal decision-making executive positions and/or national or regional headquarters based in Newfoundland and Labrador."

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank the members of this House that contributed to and is supporting this motion today. Hopefully, we have made some moves towards the federal government that hopefully in the future we may be able to get something that we – not that we, it is our right as part of the federation.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion as put forward by the hon. Member for Exploits?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

The motion is carried.

On motion, resolution carried.

MR. SPEAKER: This being Wednesday, Private Members' Day, this House now stands adjourned until Thursday at 1:30 o'clock tomorrow in the afternoon.

This House now stands adjourned.