May 3, 2012                        HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS                    Vol. XLVII No. 26


The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today we have members' statements from the following members: the Member for the District of Port au Port; the Member for the District of Bonavista North; the Member for the District of St. John's West; the Member for the District of Kilbride; the Member for the District of Torngat Mountains; and the Member for the District of Exploits.

The Member for the District of Port au Port.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CORNECT: Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate the winners and nominees at the recently held Stephen Awards Banquet in Stephenville on April 21 as part of Volunteer Week 2012.

Susan Oates was honoured with the Citizen of the Year Award and Sonali Verma was honoured with the Youth of the Year Award, both for their outstanding volunteer service to the community. Jesse Byrne was the winner of the Junior Male Athlete of the Year Award; and Jillian Forsey was presented with the Junior Female Athlete of the Year Award.

Mr. Speaker, also that evening, nineteen Certificates of Merit for Outstanding Volunteer Work were presented. Congratulations are extended to: Randy Alexander, Carmie Bozec-Young, Rose Brown, Audrey Burden, Marina Cormier, Martina Cormier, Mary Dawson, Clyde Doucette, Wanda Griffin, Phyllis Hapgood, David Mills, Josie Noseworthy, Carter Powers, Kim Saunders, Bilal Sikandar, Evelyn Smith, Rosie Verma, Riley White, and Patricia Woodrow for their hard work, dedication, and contribution in making our area a better place to live and work.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members of this House to join with me in congratulating all award winners and nominees of the Stephen Awards on their invaluable contributions to the community, the region, and the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bonavista North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CROSS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Imagine, Mr. Speaker, the score is tied, it is overtime, the puck leaves your stick and tickles the twine. The familiar "He shoots, he scores!" makes you a hero. Well, this happened three times for three different teams that skate out of the Beothic Arena in 2012.

It is with great pleasure that I rise to do the dishonourable action of boasting in this hon. Chamber today. It was a fitting end to, arguably, the greatest championship series in the Central Newfoundland Recreational Hockey League three-year history. Troy Stratton, the league's regular-season top scorer, notched the Beothics' season-winning goal in overtime in game five of a best three-out-of-five series to beat the Gander Flyers.

The Beothics are comprised of players who grew up in the Straight Shore region of Bonavista North. Many of them commute home on weekends for games from all over the Province and were dedicated to their hometown team. This Beothics win provides me with bragging rights over teams in the league which represents the Districts of Gander, Lewisporte, and the Isles of Notre Dame.

This team also motivated the Easter Tournament teams in our minor hockey league, because the PeeWee team scored in overtime in the championship game at home in New-Wes-Valley, and the Atom team did it in double overtime in Bishop's Falls.

I invite all members to join me in congratulating these teams, their coaches, and the fans – the Kings of Overtime.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the St. John's Elks Lodge, which hosted the Eighteenth Annual Provincial Elks Convention this past weekend.

Mr. Speaker, the convention included a number of workshops, as well as a banquet and dance, which I had the pleasure of attending. The National President of the Elks of Canada, Mr. Jerry Wernicke, was a special guest. He travelled from British Columbia. In speaking with him, I can assure you he was very impressed with the convention, and he was equally impressed with our beautiful city.

Mr. Speaker, I have been involved with the Elks for many years, and I know first-hand that it is a wonderful service organization with a long history. This year marks the one hundredth anniversary of the Elks of Canada, and next year will mark the eightieth anniversary of the Elks in our Province. They are a fantastic group of men and women who promote and support community needs across our Province and our country.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating the St. John's Elks Lodge and, indeed, all participants in this year's provincial convention for making it a very successful event.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Kilbride.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, students from St. Kevin's High School, Goulds, recently competed in Skills Canada Province-wide Trades and Technology Competitions held in St. John's. This is an annual competition sponsored by the Newfoundland branch of Skills Canada, with first place finishers moving on to compete nationally.

St. Kevin's sent seven students to this year's competition: Hilary Williams, Kerra Howlett, Stephen Connors, Megan Gosse, Devin Sooley, Raylene Mackey and Julia Buckley. These students had the option of competing in several categories including hairdressing, plumbing, carpentry, cooking, video productions, computer animation, graphic design, and workplace safety. The team won three medals.

Devin Sooley and Raylene Mackey won a silver medal in video productions, Stephen Connors won a silver for his performance in a job interview competition, and Julia Buckley won a silver medal in the workplace safety category.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in congratulating the St. Kevin's High School students and their teacher, John Goldsworthy, on their success in this competition.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize a most remarkable elder from the community of Natuashish.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize Mr. Joachim Nui Sr., an inspiration to us all and a role model for both Innu and Inuit alike. Joachim Nui was born in Northern Quebec back when the Innu were still a nomadic people, travelling the interior of Labrador and Northern Quebec.

Mr. Nui raised a large family as well as taking in and fostering many young people in the community. Mr. Nui has been employed as a trapper, fisherman, and a community leader in both Davis Inlet and Natuashish.

Mr. Nui retired as an employee of the provincial government a number of years ago, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Nui continues to practice his ancestral lifestyle, while passing on his knowledge and experience to many young people in Natuashish.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members in this hon. House to join me in recognizing the leadership and accomplishments of Mr. Joachim Nui Sr.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Mr. Speaker, on Monday, April 16, during Volunteer Week, I and the Minister Responsible for Volunteer and Non-Profit were fortunate to attend a volunteer recognition banquet at the Royal Canadian Legion in Botwood. The event was sponsored by the Towns of Botwood, Peterview, and Northern Arm.

Mr. Speaker, what was so special about this event was the number of groups and individuals recognized for their dedication to volunteerism.

Mr. Speaker, the population of these three towns is less than 5,000 people, however, there were 105 groups and individuals recognized during the event; and furthermore, there was a volunteer of the year named for each community. For the Town of Northern Arm, Allan Cranford, for the Town of Peterview, Marion Hibbs, and the Town of Botwood was shared by Frank Dominie and Graham Hayter.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in recognizing the contributions of this group of volunteers, and all the volunteers in our fair Province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, the provincial government recognizes the lifelong contribution of seniors to their communities and to the Province. Budget 2012: People and Prosperity includes $3.7 million to provide seniors aged sixty-five and over with a 35 per cent reduction on driver's licence and vehicle registration fees, and other licences and fees for such things as hunting, fishing, cutting wood, and camping.

Our seniors have spent a lifetime contributing to this Province. They are drivers, they own snowmobiles, they hunt and fish, and they visit our numerous provincial parks and enjoy all that Newfoundland and Labrador Has to offer. It is important that seniors are supported in their ability to remain independent and that efforts are made to improve their financial well-being and overall quality of life. The provision of fee reductions as announced in Budget 2012: People and Prosperity, will support our seniors in this way. This is especially significant, as Newfoundland and Labrador has a growing population of seniors who are continuing to be active long into their retirement years.

Seniors' discounts for hunting, fishing, and camping fees are effective immediately. The reductions on non-commercial motor vehicle and driver's licence fees are effective June 1, and will apply to all that are eligible for renewal from that day forward.

This program, Mr. Speaker, complements the goals of the Provincial Healthy Aging Policy Framework which aims to recognize older persons, celebrate diversity, support communities, encourage health and financial well-being, and support employment, education, and research. The Healthy Aging Policy Framework was developed in close consultation with seniors in this Province and outlines the key issues and strategic directions which will prepare Newfoundland and Labrador to respond to the needs of seniors now and into the future.

I am pleased that government is able to deliver on this initiative, and to promote healthy living and enjoyment of our natural environment for seniors of this Province. A full schedule of fee reductions will be released to the media and will be available shortly on the Web site of the Department of Environment and Conservation and also Service NL.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Speaker, we are pleased to see the government invest this money into reduction of fees for seniors. This Province, Mr. Speaker, was built on the backs of seniors. Many seniors find themselves in situations where they do not have a lot of money for things other than necessities. It is great to see the government recognize this.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EDMUNDS: There are some larger issues, Mr. Speaker, that the government needs to address. By 2025, 25 per cent of our population will be seniors. We have the fastest-aging population in Canada. This is going to pose huge challenges for the government of this Province, our health care system, and for our families. We need to ensure that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have the supports and the care that they require as they age.

Action, Mr. Speaker, must be taken now. It is better to plan now and act now to manage and mitigate the effects of change rather than to stand by and do nothing.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

These are nice measures, but they are crumbs. Seniors face too many challenges these days: housing, home care, health care. These challenges are growing.

If you really wanted to help, you would offer true universal drug coverage for all seniors, you would ensure there is affordable housing with supports for all seniors in need to keep seniors in the community as long as possible, and you would provide real universal home care. This is what would really help our seniors.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to highlight the sixtieth anniversary of the Arts and Letters Awards Program. The creative process in Newfoundland and Labrador is fostered through this program, which is open to both amateur and professional artists.

Since 1952, many of the Province's most successful artists first experienced the thrill of exhibition through winning the Arts and Letters Awards, including David Blackwood, Scott Goudie, and Christopher Pratt in the visual arts; Kevin Major, Helen Porter, and Michael Winter in the literary arts; and John Herriott, Michael Parker, and Brian Sexton in the musical category.

When seventeen-year-old David Blackwood won the competition in 1958, an admirer saw the winning piece and inquired if it was for sale. Blackwood replied, "Yes, for sale for $20. If Ms Roche thinks that's too high, I may consider reducing the price."

The program acknowledges the creative talent of established writers, composers, and visual artists, as well as the Province's young up-and-coming talent. Over the last sixty years, thousands of artists throughout the Province have participated in this program.

Mr. Speaker, with $135,000 received annually from the provincial government, the Arts and Letters Awards Program is a shining example of the arts initiatives being supported by this government. I encourage everyone to visit the Rooms to see the Arts and Letters exhibition, featuring artists who were part of the program this year. The exhibit runs until May 13.

Since the launch of the cultural strategy in 2006, the provincial government has made significant investment in arts and culture in Newfoundland and Labrador. Support for arts and culture continues to be one of our priorities.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

The names that he listed there were almost like the names from the Hall of Fame in their particular categories. I understand that these appointments are administered through a committee of the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

We know that Newfoundland and Labrador has one of the most vibrant cultural communities in the country, with a wealth of talented artists who have made their mark locally, nationally, and internationally. Many of these artists have gained their first recognition through this program, so we congratulate them for this. We also recognize the fact that it is very important that we get those young writers and those young artists off to a good start. This is what this program does; it provides some of that necessary encouragement. I commend all the people that participate. If there is an area of investment that this government can make where they get significant return, it is certainly in this community.

I thank the minister for the statement today and thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, I too thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.

The sixtieth anniversary of the Arts and Letters Awards is truly worth celebrating. Almost without exception, the success of many of our artists is because of initial government funding in the very initial stage of the creative process. Although the arts in our Province are our pride and joy, our Province has the third-lowest per capita investment in the creative process in the arts in the country. Our artists earn among the lowest average incomes for artists. Every dollar invested, we know, in the arts, generates $2.86 in economic benefits to the Province. In this time of prosperity, Mr. Speaker, we cannot afford to – it is not a time to cut funding to the creative artistic process, to the arts.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This afternoon, SNC-Lavalin will hold its AGM in Toronto. It has been reported that there is a possibility that some of the major investors will attempt to vote out the Board of Directors.

I ask the minister: Will you now direct Nalcor to stop spending with SNC-Lavalin until the company and the police have sorted out this ongoing scandal?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I indicated a couple of days ago, SNC-Lavalin is the biggest construction company in Canada with more than 28,000 employees worldwide. They have offices in forty countries and operate in 100 countries.

Mr. Speaker, we have an incident that occurred that was investigated internally and the board concluded that there was no impact on other aspects of their operations. As I indicated, the Nalcor President and CEO, Ed Martin, have spoken with the individuals at SNC-Lavalin. Again, there is no indication of any sort that there is an impact on what is going on with Muskrat Falls.

Mr. Speaker, what we have here in Muskrat Falls is SNC-Lavalin is not a construction bid, but they are doing the engineering, the procurement, and the construction management with an owner team for Nalcor.

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I remind the minister that back in February we heard that the CEO of Nalcor had been talking to one of the executives at SNC-Lavalin, and that person is no longer there. So, some of that confidence that we have in this company might be shaken a bit.

On Tuesday, I asked the Minister of Natural Resources a direct question, if Nalcor had required a performance bond from SNC-Lavalin. The question was not answered.

Since then, I am sure you have had the time to speak with Nalcor. Can you confirm that performance bonds have been posted?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of the Opposition is accurate; I have had the opportunity to review this and to obtain the details.

Mr. Speaker, the performance bonds, it is my understanding, are a fairly common feature for construction contracts, but because the contract with SNC-Lavalin, at present, is not for construction but for engineering procurement and construction management, a performance bond is not appropriate. Mr. Speaker, when we advance to construction on the project, if we advance at that stage, we will have performance bonds in place with the contractors engaged in the construction work.

By the way, Mr. Speaker, I understand that SNC-Lavalin was awarded a contract in Alberta the other day, I think, for $1.8 billion. Obviously, in Alberta they are continuing to do business. Something that happens in another part of the world cannot obviously, or arguably, be transposed into what is going on in our Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister seems very confident in SNC-Lavalin. The Minister of Natural Resources has stated that this is a $60 million contract that was awarded to SNC-Lavalin. This was done through a Request for Proposals.

Now that this Request for Proposals has been completed, your government has claimed that all of the information on Muskrat Falls can be available. So, with this in mind, will you actually table the RFP – not the contract, the RFP – but as well, a signed contract with Nalcor and SNC-Lavalin?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think the member opposite misinterprets my confidence. My confidence is not in SNC-Lavalin. I know nothing more than what I read in the papers, what I am told. My confidence is in Ed Martin, the President and CEO of Nalcor, who, as the Premier has indicated on numerous occasions, has been involved in high-level projects and has the best interests of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador at heart.

Mr. Speaker, in relation to the tabling of documents, there are commercial sensitivity clauses that Nalcor has to adhere to; we will certainly have those discussions. If the contract and the RFP can be – the RFP would be a public document, but again I want to make sure there are no commercial sensitivity clauses. What documents can be provided, will be.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of the PC Party in Nova Scotia has introduced a bill to protect ratepayers in that province from higher power rates. The bill would ensure that Muskrat Falls is reviewed by the Utilities Board after all the information is available.

I ask the minister: Will you allow our Public Utilities Board the opportunity to review the Muskrat Falls Project once all the information is available, just as your PC colleagues did in Nova Scotia?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

These are not our PC colleagues in Nova Scotia. We are not one big, happy family in the PC Party in this country, Mr. Speaker. In fact, we are probably more closely aligned with Premier Dexter's vision of the future as an NDP Premier than we are with anything with the PCs.

Mr. Speaker, what we are doing here in terms of Muskrat Falls is we are looking at all of the options. We will provide those documents when we receive them. In relation to the PUB, it came to my attention today that the $2 million that we thought had been spent on that wasted process, Mr. Speaker, was actually a lot more. In fact, we know that as of today MHI's bill was a very significant one. It makes sense to use MHI. I have also asked for the PUB to give me a break down of their consultants they utilize including the (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Opposition House Leader.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Fisheries. Recently, two crab processing plants have just closed in my district in St. Lewis and in Black Tickle. One hundred and twenty workers have been displaced from their seasonal jobs and these communities are devastated. Mr. Speaker, they are reaching out to the government to help them through this period and through this devastation.

I would like to ask the minister today if he can outline what response mechanisms you have in place and how soon we can get some of this moving for those communities.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is indeed a great opportunity to stand and speak to the very sensitive issue. I want to say to the member opposite that all of us in the House are very concerned and we offer our empathy towards anyone who loses employment.

We do have a fish plant closure program, and I am going to be very pleased to sit with the member opposite and members of the community to work through the process, but we will have a Cabinet committee put together in very short order. We will offer wage subsidies. We will have an opportunity for retraining; we have employment programs, an opportunity to do some economic development. Any other opportunities that exist as we partner with the community, I say to the member opposite, we will certainly be there to support the people. Above all else, we recognize this is hard on the people and their families, and we will be there to work with you and your constituents.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

For more than ten years now, the Province has had a policy in place through the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture that says that crab caught in 2J must be landed and processed in 2J. This policy has helped maintain the crab processing industry and hundreds of jobs throughout the coastal Labrador region.

I ask the minister today: In light of the fact that there are some plant closures, will his government continue to commit to maintaining this policy in the 2J region in order to protect the plants and the jobs of the people who are still employed in the industry?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, as the member has said in the preamble to the question, the policy we are referring to has been in place for quite some time and it was put there for a very specific purpose, to protect the processing sector and the resource around Labrador. I have been contacted by a number of different groups asking to reconsider the policy, Mr. Speaker, but let me be very clear for the House and for the constituents. We have no intention to change that policy at this point in time. What we will do, though, given the changing in the processing sector in Labrador, is we will take some time this season to assess how it works for the harvesters and the processors there and we will re-evaluate at the end of the season, which will also give us an opportunity to consult with the stakeholders and see how they feel about any potential changes and how it might impact the area.

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, we have just learned that High Liner Foods is pulling out of Burin at the end of the year, costing 121 full-time jobs.

I ask the minister: Were you aware of this, and can you confirm that it is in fact the case?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the decision. We met with Mr. Demone of High Liner Foods slightly before lunch today, and it is terrible news. There are more than 120 people affected, it is a tough decision. We had a good chat with the company about the circumstances. What they are telling us is that they are more than pleased with the quality of the workforce in Burin. They are more than pleased with the commitment of the municipal council to the company, working in partnership. The challenge that they face, Mr. Speaker, is one that we have talked about many times in this House. It is the proximity of doing the processing and getting it to market, where they are located, the exchange rate, and the cost of fuel.

It is purely a business decision, Mr. Speaker, but I want to be very clear, as I was a few moments ago, this government will stand with the people of Burin on the Burin Peninsula. We will be there to step up and to assist them in an adjustment package.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: I ask the minister: In your brief discussions with the owner-operator, have you had an opportunity to determine if the Province will look for another operator for the Burin plant?

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

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, the discussions we have had today focused very much around the company's decision, the rationale for the decision, the implications for the community, how that is going to be communicated out today, and where we go in the very short term. We are less than two hours into the process, so with all due respect, I say to the member opposite, I think those kinds of things will come. At this point in time we are trying to figure out how the process will unfold for the company in reaching out to the workers, and more importantly, for government in responding to reach out to those workers and those families who are going to be devastated by this news and wondering what their future holds.

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, after fighting valiantly for months for the jobs and their futures, the workers at Marystown have had to admit defeat and give up.

I ask the minister: Is it true that he refused to even discuss a financial package with them as long as they kept fighting with his friends at OCI?

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

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I am not even going to stoop to the level of the question. The fact of the matter, first of all, is it shameful that anybody would refer to the actions of the Marystown workers as admitting defeat and giving up. Nobody in Marystown is giving up. What the people in Marystown are saying is they accept there is a plant closure, they need to move on with their lives, and they need some assistance. Mr. Speaker, I assure you, and I assure everybody in this House, that this government will be here for the people of Marystown and the people of Port Union, as we will for the people of Black Tickle and Burin, and any other community that needs assistance.

Our Cabinet committee will be formed within a number of days, Mr. Speaker. We will be engaged with the local constituents. We will do what it takes to help those workers adjust and move forward.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, this morning the minister finally agreed to help the beaten down and starved out workers from Marystown with some money.

I ask the minister: Is he going to force the taxpayers of the Province to pay the bill, or is he going to enforce the contract negotiated by the former Premier and the former Minister of Fisheries and make OCI pay?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, the company contract has been reviewed many times by many worthy legal opinions and it has been confirmed that they have honoured their contract. What we will do is, in fact, yes, we will use money belonging to the taxpayers of this Province, which is all we have to use as a government. That is what we do; we spend taxpayers' money. We will use that, and we will provide supports to the community in Marystown, as we will do for the workers in Black Tickle, Burin, St. Lewis, Port Union, and any other plant that closes.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very, very unfortunate circumstance, but one that we all knew was going to occur, and it will continue as the industry changes and rationalizes, but this government will not walk away from the workers who are affected by this closure.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the deadline for Requests for Proposals on shipping service to the North Coast of Labrador has passed. Mr. Speaker, we understand that there are a total of five proposals for the minister's consideration.

I ask the minister: When can we see the RFPs and when will the decision be made on freight service to the North Coast and to Black Tickle?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, the due process would unfold; we have accepted those five proposals and are now in the process of going down through each of them and making a determination, first of all, if they are compliant, and also obviously getting to the point where we could choose the best one to serve the needs of the people for freight on the North Coast.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when the vessel replacement strategy was announced, it was stated on several occasions by the Premier and the ministers that construction of the vessels will take place in the Province. Today we hear Expressions of Interest for the Captain Earl Winsor replacement to go worldwide and the minister had already been speaking to a company in Norway.

I ask the minister: Why has the government changed its position on constructing vessels in this Province and providing much-needed employment to the Marystown area?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, in response to the question from across the House: obviously we are moving forward with our vessel replacement strategy. A call has gone out from all corridors to make sure that we do it in a timely fashion. Again, we are currently into negotiations with Peter Kiewit for the third boat, and also we are covering off on our options for the fourth boat, which is the replacement for the Fogo Island-Change Islands boat. Of course, we are in a position now where we are coming to the end of the design process, we are moving forward to procurement eventually, and we want to make sure that we have explored all options so that when the time comes, we can choose the right alternative.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Very little comfort to the people of the Burin Peninsula, Minister, I say.

Mr. Speaker, the government is presently in dispute with Peter Kiewit in Marystown over the construction of the last two vessels. The construction of the third vessel is dependent on a resolution of this conflict. The people of Marystown and the Burin Peninsula suffered another blow today.

I ask the minister: How long is this government prepared to wait to resolve the issue? Is this just a pressure tactic, and the people of Marystown and the Burin Peninsula are used as pawns to get this resolved?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, we have great respect for the people of the Burin Peninsula, so much respect.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: So much respect, Mr. Speaker, that we are doing everything as a government in our power to ensure that the third boat is built. They have built two boats already. We are absolutely delighted with those two boats; it is just that we have to make sure that we protect the interest of all of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. In our negotiations we will go forward only when those interests are protected.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, the demand for improved freight service and passenger service to the North Coast and Black Tickle has far surpassed the vessel capacity of existing vessels such as the Astron and Northern Ranger normally required in that region.

I ask the minister: Will he guarantee that this year's service will not be as bad as service provided in past years by the Dutch Runner, Northern Ranger, and the Astron? I must add, Mr. Speaker, that the time for shipping is coming quickly upon us; I ask the minister how fast he can give us back an answer.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, this government makes sure it works in the interest of people of all of Newfoundland and Labrador. We fully appreciate the concerns of the people on the North Coast to make sure that we have in place an adequate freight service.

With that in mind, we did change how we went out about our business this year; we just had reference in the question before about an RFP to ensure that the boat that goes in to that particular service is the boat that is applicable for the needs of that particular service.

With regard to time, this is not something that we can rush, but we also realize that June 1 or thereabouts is when we need a boat. We are certainly making provision that there will be a boat available for that particular time.

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

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

Today we know that the Nova Scotia government will leave no stone unturned to make sure that there is a hearing before their Utility and Review Board concerning their part of the Muskrat Falls project. They will make regulatory changes if they have to, to make it happen. The Nova Scotia Government are going to ensure that their public utilities board conducts a full review of their part of the Muskrat Falls Project.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Natural Resources: Why is this government continuing to resist allowing the PUB to look at the final Decision Gate numbers when they come?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The answer is quite simple, we have no confidence in the Public Utilities Board in this Province to perform the task that they would be asked. They were asked, Mr. Speaker, given nine months and millions of dollars to provide an answer to a question. They abdicated their responsibility and refused to answer that question, Mr. Speaker. I cannot speak for the regulatory process or the regulatory board in Nova Scotia, Mr. Speaker. Maybe they have that confidence.

What we are going to do and what we have done is hire Manitoba Hydro International, real experts in the area, Mr. Speaker, who were hired by the PUB to review the Decision Gate 3 numbers. We are going to file the other reports, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to give the Opposition what they requested, the opportunity for full debate in this House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

That answer speaks for itself. I hope the PUB is hearing what the minister is saying.

During the provincial election, the City of St. John's asked government to refund the provincial portion of the Harmonized Sales Tax. Monday night at the St. John's City Council meeting, we learned that the city and Newfoundland and Labrador Housing could build four more homes for needy families if the Province rebated the HST paid by the city on the new housing project in Pleasantville.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Finance: Will he rebate the provincial portion of the HST to the City of St. John's for this housing project to help deal with the housing crisis in this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the City of St. John's is asking the government to turn over many of its taxes to the city –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I am advised by my colleague here that Newfoundland and Labrador Housing brought $4.4 million to the City of St. John's for the twenty-nine units that were constructed in Pleasantville. Mr. Speaker, we cannot raise the revenue, then give the revenue to the City of St. John's, then raise the revenue again, and give it to them again. We either give it through offering tax concessions or we do it in direct contributions, which $4.4 million has been done in this case.

Mr. Speaker, I am advised by my colleague there is $29.8 million being spent on affordable housing this year, $8 million for the Provincial Home Repair Program, and money for the rent to income rent sups, and rent geared to income. So there is lots of investment that the City of St. John's and all the municipalities can take advantage of –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Another question for the minister - no, this time it is for the Minister of Natural Resources. Last year the Department of Natural Resources energy policy division, according to the Budget and the Estimates booklet, overspent their grants and subsidies budget by $42 million, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Minister of Natural Resources: What was the $42 million spent on?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of the Third Party is quite correct, you will see there was a $2 million for grants and subsidies and we overspent by $42 million I think, Mr. Speaker. What it related to was the Innu settlement under the Lower Churchill. The agreement had been to pay $2 million per year. We happened to have $40 million in the Budget so it was thought the best way to deal with it was to provide the money to Nalcor who will provide to the Innu over a period of time. So essentially, the question you would have asked me on Monday morning, that is the answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Forty more million to Nalcor; thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In response to my question in the House last Tuesday -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: In response to my question in the House last Tuesday requesting salary details which government had decided not to make available this year, the Minister of Finance said he would make the information available in due time. It seems due time has not yet arrived, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Minister of Finance: When will he release the information?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, after the question was asked in the House, I instructed officials of the Department of Finance to engage with officials in other departments to gather the information and I undertook to provide the information as soon as we have it. When we have it, I will be happy to provide it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, last week Canada's budget watchdog noted government cutbacks have a negative effect on the economy. The reverse of this is also true, program spending boosts economic performance.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Finance: Why doesn't this government look at programs like child care and home care as an opportunity for economic growth?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, this government is spending in program expenses this year $6.6 billion. That is the highest that we have ever spent in any one year. In addition to that, we have engaged in an infrastructure investment of another $900 million. Mr. Speaker, unlike dictatorships in some countries of the world, that take their revenues and keep it and divide that up amongst their family and their friends, every dime that comes into the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, we give it back to the people and we will continue to do so.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday in the fisheries Estimates meeting, the minister stated possibly there could be 20 per cent less fish plants in five years and that there was only $2.375 million for the fisheries workers' adjustment program in this Budget year.

Mr. Speaker, we have seen closures in Port Union, Marystown, St. Lewis, yesterday in Black Tickle, and today an announcement that the High Liner plant in Burin will close by the end of the year. Over 600 workers could be out of a job and that equates to less than $4,000 per person under this program.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: What are the short and long-term plans that he has in place to adequately take care of the people, some of whom committed more than forty years to these plants?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, as I said a few moments ago, we are certainly all very concerned with plant closures. The number that I quoted in Estimates was a ‘guesstimate' based on the trend we have seen over the last ten years. I was very clear to members when I said that; it was not a hard and fast concrete number.

We are very concerned with the news that we are hearing, all of us are; all of us, or most of us, recognize that there are factors that are outside the control of government when it comes to fish processors and plants that they operate. The Budget line that we provided for is an estimate based on our best guess of what fish plants may close and who may need our assistance.

I do not have a crystal ball to predict what is going to happen into the future, but I will say to the member opposite, Mr. Speaker, that the amount in the Budget will be increased as we need, to implement our program of support.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in July of 2011, this government instituted a ban on five pesticides used for cosmetic purposes. Such chemicals as 2,4-D, mecoprop, and dicamba were supposed to be removed off store shelves before the next growing season. In spite of the weather, we are there.

Mr. Speaker, any product that contained any of these five chemicals was also supposed to fall under this ban.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I went chemical shopping and found these pesticides still on the store shelves.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, is the minister enforcing the ban on these chemicals, and what is his department going to do to make (inaudible)?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we banned what I call the big five last year. We had numerous meetings with the landscaping industry as well as concerned environmental groups here in the Province. That was the five we committed to and we did ban the five. The hon. member is right that they should be banned. They are banned. They are not allowed to be used as of May 1 this year.

I just want to remind the hon. member, he seems to have bought them recently. I hope they were not on the black market, Mr. Speaker. I also hope he does not use them, because if he uses them, he will be facing a significant fine.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, government has wisely spent money on expanding the tourism season in the Province, but yesterday we saw from a memo that their friends in the federal government pulled the rug out from under the Province by surprising us with cuts to Parks Canada sites in the Province. The minister has said no one in government saw the cuts coming. Mr. Speaker, we all know these cuts will impact tourism operators near the affected sites. While the apex of the tourism season is fast approaching, the minister says they will be refocusing their efforts in light of these cuts.

So, I ask the minister: When can the people involved in the tourism industry expect a response from this government?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, the national parks and our national sites in Newfoundland and Labrador are obviously a very important part of our tourism appeal. These cuts are concerns to us, obviously. We have invested; we have worked with industry, the leadership in the industry, our tourism board, Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador, our destination management organizations, and all of the non-profit and private investors out there that help support this industry. We have worked very closely with them to build a very solid and strong tourism industry in this Province. Despite the cuts, we are open for business, we have a lot of tourist attractions in this Province, and we will continue to grow our tourism industry and continue to be able to deal with whatever challenges we face.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, the tourism industry is lucky to have programs such as SWASP and JCP, but the funding announcements arrive too late, leaving businesses and organizations in a state of uncertainty while the tourist season fast approaches. Mr. Speaker, I left the Estimates meeting today with the impression that there is a lack of coordination between departments on these programs.

So, I ask the minister: What will the minister do to help make these programs more responsive to the tourism and cultural industry's needs?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify for the member that the employment programs, whether it be SWASP or whether it be a job creation project, are funded through the Department of Advanced Education and Skills, because the aim for these jobs that are created from this government money is to be able to provide work experience to help people attach to the labour market, and provide meaningful work experience.

That means that it is not directed solely at tourism or the arts or anything like that. It can go to those areas; it can go to other areas as well, Mr. Speaker. I just want to clarify: the program is not there to solely support tourism and the arts.

Thank you

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. Barbe.

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

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

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

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

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

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

WHEREAS no high-speed Internet service exists in the communities of Bellburns, Portland Creek, St. Pauls, or Sally's Cove; and

WHEREAS there are no plans to offer high-speed Internet to residents of those communities;

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

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, the people in these small communities would really like to get into this part of the twenty-first century. Clearly, in the twentieth century we saw a great explosion in information technology, distance education, Internet, and the World Wide Web. These people who are in the District of St. Barbe would really like the opportunity to catch up with other people who have had high-speed Internet now for maybe a decade, maybe more.

There have been commitments made for high-speed Internet in the government's broadband strategy, but these communities have been left out and they really would like to be able to participate. These communities are contributing communities in the Province, they feel that they are being left behind, and I am bringing this petition on their behalf.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

WHEREAS Route 434, Conche Road, is 17.4 kilometres of unpaved road; and

WHEREAS the current road conditions are deplorable; and

WHEREAS the provincial government in the 2011 Budget set aside five kilometres of paving that was not started; and

WHEREAS it is the government's obligation to provide basic infrastructure to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians; and

WHEREAS improved paved road would enhance local business – especially tourism, which is vital to the health of the communities affected.

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to allocate funds in the 2012 provincial Budget to pave Route 434.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the community of Conche is really a tourism town. It is at the heart of the French Shore, which has the Interpretation Centre there. It has the only of its kind in North America, a 222-foot tapestry on Jacobean linen designed by Jean-Claude Roy and done by the women of Conche in the embroidery. It is there, it is on display, and it is a major anchor site on the northeastern side of the Peninsula.

They have a writers' retreat there. There are certainly a number of other trails and attractions, a B&B, and they have a cafι. They have so much potential, but when you have to travel over a gravel road with significant potholes that was ranked the seventh-worst road in Atlantic Canada by the CAA – and I know that the Minister of Transportation and Works said that he is not doing any of the roadwork based on polling, but this certainly is a road that is quite deplorable based on the petitions and images and work that I have seen.

We need to look at how we can advance and create tourism in the region so that we can foster and grow economies. The fish plant in the area as well is facing hardship with transportation because they have to travel over such a deplorable road that is gravel. It is a basic right today to have better transportation networks in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I table a petition to the hon. House of Assembly in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the Premier has the authority under the Public Inquiries Act to establish a public inquiry into matters of public concern; and

WHEREAS there have been several tragedies in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador where search and rescue responses have been called into question; and

WHEREAS the Burton Winters tragedy has increased awareness for search and rescue capacity in Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS the Maritime Search and Rescue Sub-Centre in St. John's is scheduled to close on May 8, 2012;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to establish a public inquiry into the search and rescue in Newfoundland and Labrador.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I must point out that this latest copy of this petition did not come from my district; rather, my hon. colleague from Lake Melville, the people in Upper Lake Melville, as well as the people on the North Coast, the South Coast, in Labrador West, and throughout the Province.

Mr. Speaker, these people are calling upon this government to have a public inquiry into what went wrong with search and rescue with respect to the Burton Winters tragedy. Mr. Speaker, we all know that something went wrong because of the lack of response times with respect to the seven hours lost with Fire and Emergency Services, as well as the lateness in search and rescue coming from Gander and Goose Bay.

Mr. Speaker, the only reason the family has pushed this matter in amongst their grieving is that they do not want to see what happened with young Burton happen to another family in this Province or in this country.

Mr. Speaker, beneath it all, what happened with the Burton Winters tragedy did show one thing very clearly, is the system that is in place now did not work. It also identified the many problems within search and rescue protocols, both on a provincial and a federal level.

Mr. Speaker, I urge every member in this House to –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EDMUNDS: – urge this government to act upon this petition and to initiate a public inquiry into the tragedies that have happened, most recently being the Burton Winters tragedy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

I have a petition to the hon. House of Assembly for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS home care allows the elderly and people with disabilities to remain within the comfort and security of their own homes, home care also allows people to be discharged from hospital earlier; and

WHEREAS many families find it very difficult to recruit and retain home care workers for their loved ones; and

WHEREAS the PC Blue Book 2011 as well as the 2012 Speech from the Throne committed that government would develop a new model of home care and give people the option of receiving that care from family members; and

WHEREAS government has given no time commitment for when government plans to implement paying family caregivers;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to implement a new home care model to cover family caregivers in this year's Budget.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, one of the pleasures of doing your job as an MHA is being able to speak out about the concerns that face your constituents on a daily basis, and this is one of the ones that I get e-mails and calls from on virtually a daily basis. It is a huge issue across this entire Province, and it is something that was promised, but we have not seen that promise kept yet.

In this case, this petition actually has signatures from the people of Ramea. Ramea is in kind of an even harder position than normal in that the people of Ramea do not have the nurse practitioners that are supposed to be covering that area. Right now, they are only serviced by one nurse. Again, the department is working on that issue, Western Health is working on that issue, but when you combine that with the lack of home care, it really creates a very tough situation.

These people, not only do they have to move, but in some case they cannot just go to Burgeo, they have to go all the way to Corner Brook. Just to see their loved ones they have to travel by ferry, which is hard enough in times of good weather, but especially in times of bad weather, and when there is a disruption it creates a huge negative factor on the well-being of these people.

The fact is one of the factors in someone's well-being is their comfort level. We should be making sure people can find comfort in their own homes. It is certainly something that would be easier on our budget as well, knowing we can keep people in their homes as long as possible. So, again, I call upon the government to do this, I will continue to raise this issue at every opportunity that I get.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today I rise again with a petition for cameras on the Burin Peninsula Highway. I will just read the prayer:

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

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

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

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

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

We the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to install cameras on the Burin Peninsula Highway that will allow travellers to check on the condition of roads.

Mr. Speaker, I spoke to this item before, and I think that these people have a valid point, the people that are signing this. This is a way for them to get their message to government that they are dealing with such conditions on the highway. This petition is signed by any number of people in the Fortune, Marystown, Grand Bank, Lamaline area, but in other areas too, as far away as Clarenville, and some over on the West Coast of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot reiterate how important this road is. It is probably, I guess, well up there when it comes to road use. Next to the Trans Canada Highway, I would think that the Burin Peninsula is probably one of the main roads that are used in this Province in order for the transport of goods and carrying on of commerce.

I would also like to reiterate that, Mr. Speaker, the use of cameras is something that everybody is getting used to now. We tend to turn on our TVs and our television stations are going on with the conditions of the roads right around the Province and it would be so nice and inclusive to see the Burin Peninsula Highway, approximately 300 kilometres of roadway from top to bottom, covered on this. It is a vast expanse of highway, very lonely in a lot of areas and, of course, the residents down there have to deal with bad weather.

Again, Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to present this petition on behalf of people of the Burin Peninsula.

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

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present an anti-replacement worker petition.

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

WHEREAS strikes and lockouts are rare and on average 97 per cent of collective agreements are negotiated without a work disruption; and

WHEREAS anti-temporary replacement workers laws have existed in Quebec since 1978; in British Columbia since 1993; and successive government in those provinces have never repealed those laws; and

WHEREAS anti-temporary replacement workers legislation has reduced the length and divisiveness of labour disputes; and

WHEREAS the use of temporary replacement workers during a strike or lockout is damaging to the social fabric of a community, the local economy, and the well-being of its residents, as evident in the recent use of temporary replacement workers by Ocean Choice International and Vale in Voisey's Bay;

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to enact legislation banning the use of temporary replacement workers during a strike or lockout.

As in duty bound, your petitions will ever pray.

I know, Mr. Speaker, yesterday there was some dispute on the other side of the Legislature about the appropriateness of rising on these petitions here in the Legislature. I just wanted to point out that this particular petition came to me yesterday; it was faxed from the Canada Post outlet in Deer Lake at 2:34 while the House was in Session, after I took my seat here in the Legislature yesterday afternoon.

These petitions are coming into our offices, our constituency offices, on a daily basis, and we continue to present them on behalf of the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador who see fit to present these and send these in.

I just wanted to say, as I present these petitions on behalf of my constituents I try to always explain a little bit further about why we would want to have such anti-scab legislation in Newfoundland and Labrador. I will have a lot more to say about child care once I have an opportunity to get in the Budget debate, and I hope that will be today, Mr. Speaker.

If somebody has child care and they are off work because of a labour dispute and they cannot get back to work, Mr. Speaker, they could very well lose that child care space and not be able to get it back. Child care is so hard to find in Newfoundland and Labrador right now. That is another one of the reasons why we would want to have the –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Order 1, the Budgetary Policy of the Government.

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask leave of the House. Normally, the Member for the Bay of Islands would finish up his time from the previous day. I would like to ask leave that he be deferred until later in the afternoon and that the Member for Torngat Mountains would speak first to the motion.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The member has leave.

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I unfortunately could not be here yesterday because I had the flu bug, but I did hear many presentations, Mr. Speaker. What I hope to do today is to gear my statements more towards the district of which I represent. I have heard many, many references to many, many districts throughout our great Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Speaker has recognized the Member for Torngat Mountains. I would ask members if they would keep their conversations to a minimum so we can hear the member speak.

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I would like to commend the minister for some of the announcements throughout the Budget delivery. I was glad to hear the Minister of Transportation and Works make comments on some infrastructure in the District of Torngat Mountains, Mr. Speaker, namely to the need for increased landing assistance at the airstrips. I was especially glad to hear him make reference to the need for changes to the airstrip in the community of Nain.

Mr. Speaker, I was also glad to hear housing being announced for the much-needed caregiving workers that we hope to go into the communities of Hopedale and in Nain. I was also glad to hear the minister commit to continued mediation of the damage done by the air force in the community of Hopedale.

Mr. Speaker, I grew up in Hopedale; it is part of my life. If I could only have my time back now to note the things I have seen: tractors being driven into ponds with no drivers aboard; trucks being driven into ponds; and roads being doused with waste oil to keep the dust down. These are some of the things I saw as a kid growing up, and I am sure we are just getting at the problem in Hopedale. The community of Hopedale, especially the new subdivision, lies directly in the drainage of where all of this activity took place in the 1960s and 1970s. So I am glad to see the government is making steps in looking out for the health of the people in Hopedale.

Mr. Speaker, there are a few things I would like to address with respect to the Budget. A lot of these I have outlined in my maiden speech and a lot of them were presented to me as I ran for the election back in October. This, I think, is as good a time to bring them forward as any. One of the things that was brought to my attention, and is still brought to my attention – I have mentioned this to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs as well as the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr. Speaker, that is the high cost of living in the District of Torngat Mountains.

Mr. Speaker, the best two examples I could probably bring to the table, one is the sale of a 200 gram bottle of asparagus tips in the community of Hopedale, which retails for close to $7. Mr. Speaker, I checked the prices in St. John's. I think it was just over $1. So there is a 500 per cent difference in prices. Another thing, Mr. Speaker, is a one-half inch sheet of aspenite, which retails in my district for as high as $45 and is nearly twice the cost of a piece of plywood on the Island portion of Province. This cost of $45 compares to $13.99 to $15 in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. These, Mr. Speaker, are just two examples of the cost of living in my district.

Mr. Speaker, I also understand that the further north you go, we are bound to see an increase in the price of goods. Mr. Speaker, the prices that are in place now are nothing short of ridiculous. Mr. Speaker, we have some prices that reflect the cost of shipping in some stores, and we have stores that reflect the true cost of shipping. Mr. Speaker, as a business operator, I can assure you that the costs of shipping, especially in the summer months, are not as high to warrant a 500 per cent to 600 per cent markup on commodity items. Mr. Speaker, we wish that all stores in my district would follow suit.

Mr. Speaker, just to say again that I brought this to the attention to the Minister of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, and I have also brought it to the attention of the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador. It amazes me to see the government regulate the cost of alcohol. For example, the price of a case of beer in St. John's is the same as a case of beer in Nain, and you cannot charge any higher costs. The cost of baby formula, fresh produce, and other basic necessities go from 150 per cent to 300 per cent higher. This confuses me, Mr. Speaker, because both ministers said that they could to do anything. I see the regulation on alcohol is forced upon every one of us, yet we see the basic necessities with price increases that do not reflect the cost of shipping. Mr. Speaker, wholesalers and some retailers are making a lot of money and are allowed to make a lot of money in my district without any control.

So, again, I will stress the fact that the only thing that the government controls is the price of alcohol, yet we must pay extremely high prices for the necessities of life. As I said in my maiden speech, Mr. Speaker, we are part of this Province, we are the northern part of this Province; however, we do not live in the High Arctic.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk a little bit about the comments by the Minister of Transportation and Works earlier this week on commitments to the airstrips on the North Coast of Labrador and, specifically, to the airstrip in Nain. Mr. Speaker, I was privy to a conversation between a past Minister of Transportation and Works and the past vice-president of the Labrador Inuit Association at the time, and this was approximately six years ago when the minister at the time, a member of the government across, indicated to the vice-president of LIA at the time that in two years they would have a new airstrip in Nain. Mr. Speaker, this was four years ago. Again, I am glad to hear the Minister of Transportation make reference to it.

Mr. Speaker, the airstrip in Nain that I will talk about very quickly has had, I think, somewhere between eight and eleven accidents over the last twenty years. I have witnessed at least three of them. Where the airstrip is located in Nain, we were only lucky that some of these aircraft did not involve people in the community and, more importantly, housing in the community, which runs adjacent to the airstrip.

The airstrip in Nain, Mr. Speaker, is at the end of the community and underneath one of the larger hills surrounding. It is only through the experience and the skill of the commercial pilots that fly with Innu Mikun and Air Labrador that there have not been more accidents.

Mr. Speaker, Nain is very famous for wind shears and more than one airplane has gone off the runway in the process of landing. Some have gone off the runway in the process of taking off.

Mr. Speaker, the need for this airport to be moved is now. As a matter of fact, I think it was yesterday that this airstrip needs to be moved, before there are more accidents and more deaths that will come with the dangers involved here.

There is an increase in movement of people in Labrador. We are seeing it every year. Most times airlines are filled, making two trips a day up and down the coast. Mr. Speaker, this involves utility companies, exploration companies, government employees, and regular day-to-day traffic.

Mr. Speaker, it was just last week, while I was en route back to St. John's from my constituents, that I watched two airplanes approach the same runway, one at either end. It was not a very comforting thing to watch, but what it pointed out is the need for more landing equipment to make aircraft landing safe.

Pilots are sometimes caught in compromising situations through no fault of their own, Mr. Speaker. As on the Avalon Peninsula, the North Coast of Labrador is subject to weather changes without any warning. Many, many times, airplanes have had to cancel their approach and go on to other alternates. This just slows down and creates havoc for backlogs in passenger service.

Mr. Speaker, we need extra landing information. Many, many pilots have pointed out to me, actually, the specific type of equipment that is needed. This would ensure increased traffic, as well as, more importantly, an increase in the ability to land the aircraft safely.

Mr. Speaker, during Question Period I brought up some questions on transportation to the North Coast. Over the last ten years, we have seen a major, major increase in the need for increased and additional marine services for the District of Torngat Mountains. Mr. Speaker, we have had many, many, many cases where there have been long waits. What I mean by long waits is at least a month for freight to get from Goose Bay to the community of Rigolet, which is a six-hour steam and ninety-eight mile distance.

I had the unfortunate opportunity of talking to one gentleman who shipped a truck from Goose Bay to Rigolet, Mr. Speaker. The truck was found in a container in Lewisporte. This example alone warrants the need for better services, for increased services to the North Coast.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, the increasing demand for accessibility and for stores to get freight shipped to them should not mean having to compete with contract companies to get basic necessities in. We have had basic food groups, vegetables – we could not identify which vegetable it was by the time it got to some of the communities, while two shipments before, we saw roof trusses arrive for buildings with no equipment to make the foundation. Mr. Speaker, these are the kinds of things that we are dealing with. I am not a carpenter, Mr. Speaker, but I know you have to build a foundation before you can put a roof truss on it. That much I do know.

Mr. Speaker, the shipping – yes, I have to say that the shipping on the North Coast is a mess; it is ridiculous. In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, the Nunatsiavut Government has just lifted the mining moratorium. So we are going to see increased demand for shipping from exploration companies, as we seen just prior to the moratorium where we had drill rigs and drill rods and exploration equipment also competing with stores that were trying to get necessities in for foods and along with general construction that happens on the North Coast.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk a little bit about the infrastructure with regard to marine shipping in Northern Labrador. Each community in Labrador has a shed approximately twenty by twenty with the office portion, the infrastructure of the office being approximately four feet by six feet. Mr. Speaker, this would not be acceptable in any other place in Labrador or any other place on the Island portion of our Province. We question why should it be good enough for us? It is something I will address in my closing remarks, Mr. Speaker.

These little sheds that we have in our communities, Mr. Speaker, the garage doors are broken and in some cases missing. It was a bit comical a few years ago, Mr. Speaker, upon hearing the announcement of a visit by the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, to see some workers scrambling to try and make the buildings look presentable and to stick up the signage that was supposed to be there. Mr. Speaker, it was quite funny to watch, I assure you.

The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, with regard to the infrastructure for marine support on the North Coast of Labrador is that it is not practical and they do not address the needs that arise on a daily basis. Mr. Speaker, one of the questions that I ask: Is there a reason why we do not have freezer storage space in our communities? In many, many cases we have seen store owners, and myself being one of them, Mr. Speaker, ship back ice cream and send back frozen products because it had thawed through refrigeration units breaking down.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Or it had been sitting on the dock without any notification to the store owners that the freight was in fact there. These are some of the things, Mr. Speaker, that we would like to see addressed, we would certainly like to see addressed in this coming year.

Mr. Speaker, before I close I would just like to talk a little bit about the caribou herd, the George River caribou herd especially. I did discuss this with the minister and we did talk a little bit about it during Estimates. The George River caribou herd once numbered 850,000 in the early 1990s. This herd fluctuates on the natural life cycle, and some of the elders inform me that it is a forty to seventy year life cycle.

Mr. Speaker, in the 1950s this herd went down to approximately 6,000 animals. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, this herd was used as target practice by the aircraft that landed and practiced on the air force base in Goose Bay during its heyday. Some of the numbers that were killed on a daily basis by the air force personnel was staggering.

This herd is now at the bottom of the cycle while the predator list, Mr. Speaker, is at the top. This is natural. The only thing in this day and age is the concern for over harvesting. With the number of user groups, and it is almost common knowledge now with the technology in both caribou location, GPS, snowmobiles, everybody is now a hunter, Mr. Speaker. This is going to have a damaging effect on the caribou herd.

Mr. Speaker, there is a concern here on what needs to be done in terms of making sure this caribou herd follows its decline and restoration on a natural basis. I pointed out to the Minister of Environment and Conservation, and I think to some part he has agreed that there needs to be a co-management board or an advisory committee of all the user groups in the Province, as well as in Quebec, Mr. Speaker, and there are many.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would just like to say that I have travelled throughout the Island portion of this Province and to Western Labrador, and I have seen a lot of beautiful infrastructure in communities that are very, very much smaller than the smallest community in my district, and what they have and what they take for granted, Mr. Speaker, we can only wish for.

I will close off with this message to the government across: Why should we, on the North Coast of Labrador, have to wish for what the rest of the Province takes for granted?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

It is certainly a delight for me to stand up this year and speak to the Budget, as I do every year, and probably get a couple of opportunities throughout the year to highlight some of the things that our government does. I am certainly delighted to have the opportunity, I know it is a pretty interesting process, and it is a daunting process, actually.

One would think when you are dealing with a $7 billion or $8 billion Budget, Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of money, but let me tell you – and I say to the people watching on TV – it certainly disappears in a hurry. When you can sit around the table and debate and discuss some of the tough choices you have to make, it is very difficult. Obviously, it is no secret that our government has had a significant input into the health care of the Province. Just this year again, there are significant investments that I hope to get to talk about in a minute – and again, significant investment in education.

That has always been our one-two priority, and obviously, that is where the biggest majority of our resources – I believe about 50 per cent of our Budget goes into that area. It is endless, because anytime either one of us get a call, whether you are on this side of the House or that side of the House, and it is health related, or especially as it relates to our kids, we take it to heart and we take it home with us. That is why this government has had the social conscience it has had. Much to the chagrin of some of the people on the opposite side, and the Third Party might not think so, but I can attest to it, Mr. Speaker, that we certainly do have a social conscience.

I will just quickly tell you a little story. I was at a conference, and I actually ran into an artist; she was a writer. She started with me by having discussion of how socially responsible our government was. She went on and on and on and we bantered back and forth; so much so, I had to ask her political stripe. You know me, being a political guy. She reminded me that she was in the west part of the country and she was an NDP, but if she lived in Newfoundland and Labrador, she would have to be a PC because of our social responsibility. She told me that she actually worked with this group. She worked with a group who are nationally known, and she used to go around the country giving speeches to different groups and different people about being socially responsible, about doing the right things, about reducing poverty, Mr. Speaker. Lo and behold, she told me that she used to use the Progressive Conservative Government of Newfoundland and Labrador as one of her examples in speaking about social responsibility and poverty reduction in this country, Mr. Speaker. There was no secret, she was not of a political stripe – I was, of course, here in this Province – however, she did see the good things we were doing here in this Province and used us as an example. I joked with her that she should come and run for us as a candidate. Of course, we both had a joke about that.

I just wanted to point that out, Mr. Speaker. Although people would believe that a Progressive Conservative government has a very right-wing agenda, Mr. Speaker, I would think that if you went back in the history of time, you would probably never find a more left-leaning Progressive Conservative government than you have today in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, there are certainly a number of things I would like to touch on. The hon. member just mentioned the George River caribou herd, so I cannot not speak about the Budget but to speak about the $1.9 million investment that we have had with the George River caribou herd. We are one of the contributors, along with our partners in the Nunatsiavut Government and so on.

The hon. member is right; this was a herd of 800,000 animals in the 1990s. We are down to about 55,000 now and some people project that we will be down into 30,000 by the end of this season, Mr. Speaker. Although the member spoke about it, we have certainly been working with all of the stakeholders in the area. I wanted to point out some of the things we have done because I did not want the hon. member to leave people with the impression, especially the people of Labrador and up the North Coast, that we have done nothing. Nothing could be further from the truth. Like I said, it is a $1.9 million investment.

In 2010-2011, we took a number of drastic measures for the people there, for the outfitting industry, and for people who hunt caribou on a regular basis as a food staple, as a source of fresh meat. Mr. Speaker, I have to point out – I would not want anyone to think that we have been doing nothing. Last year, we went to one caribou per one resident. At one time, you could buy a licence and have more than that; you could have two, actually. We have no transfer of licences. One time, I could go hunting in Labrador and if my whole family wanted to buy a licence, give it to me, and if I had five people in my family, I could go a day of hunting and shoot ten caribou. Mr. Speaker, that is no more. There is no more transfer of licences.

Mr. Speaker, as I just mentioned, we have no more commercial hunt. That was a difficult thing to do. We saw outfitters in the area with significant income and employing people, Mr. Speaker. We had a commercial harvest as well for a butcher shop. I had actually been at the store, Mr. Speaker, bought filets from him, and bought a number of products from him that were fabulous and really had the potential to probably be marketed a lot further than Labrador. Because of conservation and because we believed in the resource, we were forced to do no other initiative but to shut that down. I tell you, Mr. Speaker, that did not come without any soul searching on behalf of all the members on this side of the House. It was a tough, tough decision.

Then, of course, this year we had a reduction of the resident harvest. Right now there is a reduction of the resident harvest. We have restrictions, I should say, on the harvest; right now you have to buy a licence from one of our offices in Labrador.

We are trying hard to keep an eye on what is happening in Labrador and commit the money to it as well. We have a voluntary herd health monitoring program, because we do need science, Mr. Speaker, to find out what is actually happening with the caribou in Labrador. There are all kinds of theories, and some very good people, by the way, some very experienced people with theories; that means a lot to us, and is something that we listen to on a regular basis.

Mr. Speaker, we have been doing a number of things to monitor George River and it can be a little frustrating at times. There are an awful lot of naysayers out there, but we are erring on the side of conservation at this point and we will continue to do.

Mr. Speaker, as well, the hon. member talked about coming together with different groups and so on. Well, let me just say that we are having a significant amount of stakeholder consultation. We have met with the Nunatsiavut government on a number of occasions. Just last week, I believe, we met with the Innu, and we have met with the Inuit as well. We have met with the NunatuKavut Community Council, Mr. Speaker. We have also started consultations with Aboriginal groups in Quebec. We have been headed down this way for quite some time; this consultation started a year-and-a-half ago, or two years ago, I should say, and continues to today.

Mr. Speaker, we could be looking at a total allowable harvest next year. Let me say, quite frankly, that will have a massive impact on all groups concerned, because we are dealing with land claims agreements; we are dealing with rights that people have to hunt caribou. If we go in with a total allowable harvest, which is no doubt where we are headed, we could be in for some big reductions in the availability of caribou to the residents of our Province.

Mr. Speaker, that is something to keep in mind. It is not something that we enjoy doing. Obviously, the easy thing as a government to do would be open season – go flatten what you want, fill up your freezer, get as much of it as you can, make as much sausage as you can – but that is not something we are willing to do, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to again assure the hon. member that we have been meeting with groups. We do have an advisory committee struck, Mr. Speaker, and we will continue to work with our stakeholders.

The other thing that we did, I forgot to mention, was we reduced the season significantly. We have a much shorter season now than we had in the past, Mr. Speaker, again, all in the name of conservation. I just had to touch on that.

Just before I sit down, I should lay out the number of people who are involved in the advisory board, just for our listening audience and for the hon. member, just to let him know who is involved. It is the Nunatsiavut Government, the Torngat Wildlife and Plants Co-Management Board, the NunatuKavut Community Council, the Newfoundland and Labrador Outfitters Association, TCR, IGAAS, DNR, and the Newfoundland hunting and fishing group. Mr. Speaker, like I said, we have a significant group of stakeholders involved here, one we are delighted to work with.

Mr. Speaker, I have digressed quite a bit there. I am halfway through and I have not stopped talking about caribou. I have not even started talking about the caribou on the Island portion of the Province yet. I always like to point out a couple of things that we have done in our district this year, Mr. Speaker. Before I have a few comments to my friends opposite on some of the things that they would like to see in the Budget versus some of the things that we would like to see, I have to reflect on a couple of things that we have seen happen in my district of Conception Bay South in the last while.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank particularly now the Minister of Municipal Affairs and the Premier of the Province, Premier Dunderdale, who last year and the year before, I brought many issues to both of them and both of them saw what I was saying and agreed to the infrastructure commitment to our town – long before our recent release of the numbers, I might add. Now Conception Bay South is the second-biggest community in the Province, surpassing everybody else. St. John's is number one, obviously, and second is – although we are not a city, we are a town; we are certainly the biggest town in the Province and we are actually bigger in population than two of our other cities, bigger than Mount Pearl, bigger than Corner Brook.

Mr. Speaker, it is a significant thing that is happening in Conception Bay South. We see an awful lot of young families, and I always felt that we were playing catch-up when it came to our infrastructure; that continues today, but we have made great strides.

Just in this Budget, Mr. Speaker, there is the final commitment of $10.5 million for the CBS bypass. That is something that started – that was announced back in the late 80s as a road to be done under Roads for Rails. It was my friends in the opposite, the Official Opposition, Mr. Speaker; when they were in government, they decided to make some adjustments to the Roads for Rails agreement.

It was unfortunate, at the time; I guess the people of Conception Bay South were in Opposition then, but they were in government for two terms with the Liberal Administration. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately the transportation minister of the day – and I have done quite a bit of investigation on this, by the way; the transportation minister of the day pulled the money from the CBS bypass, reduced the size of the lanes, and moved it to other places, so much so, it was early 2000 before we got it back on track again. I thank the former Administration who started the ball rolling, and then it was the current Administration that put the final touches on it with this $10.8 million, Mr. Speaker, and I believe it was more money in the previous contract.

So, now, Mr. Speaker, we are finally going to see the road completed. Although it is a two-lane, it was supposed to be a four-lane, but at least we are going to get it finished, Mr. Speaker. That $10.8 million is there to complete it, and I want to thank, like I said, the Premier in particular, and the Minister of Transportation, and my colleague who represents the West End of Conception Bay South, and my colleague who works with me on the East End of Conception Bay South, for bringing this together.

As well, Mr. Speaker, we have had a significant amount of water and sewer work that I could get into. Another thing I mentioned was the young families, Mr. Speaker. The young families demand and need infrastructure and, in particular, young families are looking for recreation infrastructure.

Mr. Speaker, we had an arena in our place that was built for, I guess, probably 10,000 or 12,000 people at the time in the 1970s. We now see our community at about 25,000 or 26,000 people; like I said, the second biggest community in the Province. It has now been approved, and will be built; I think construction has started. They have started some clearing of land and so on, Mr. Speaker. It is going to be a beautiful facility, a $22 million facility, Mr. Speaker.

My colleagues from Paradise will see the same, and my colleague from Carbonear – Harbour Grace will also see the same, Mr. Speaker.

Again, it was about Premier Dunderdale believing in the importance of young people and recreation in our Province and making that commitment; as she made the commitment to the people of Marystown when it came to recreation infrastructure, Pasadena, and many, many more. I just want to acknowledge that, Mr. Speaker.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I stand in the House and sit in the House everyday and listen to my colleagues opposite. There is a difference, there is a real difference starting to develop on the Opposition, Mr. Speaker. We have the Liberal Opposition, then we have the Third Party, and it is a real interesting dynamic. I have never enjoyed the House, I do not think, any more than I do now, Mr. Speaker. It is because of this dynamic, and it is not always agreeing and agreeing sometimes. They even vote against each other now.

I remember when the current Leader of the Third Party was here by herself, and she would always vote with the Official Opposition, Mr. Speaker. I thought she was a Liberal. Most days I thought she was part of the Liberal Party because she always voted with them. In the last couple of days I have seen the whole party vote differently. So, it is a really fun dynamic that I enjoy watching. It brings a different flavour to the House, a different mix of questions, Mr. Speaker, but it is enjoyable. It is enjoyable to see that divide; it is a lot of fun.

Mr. Speaker, I have to point out one thing - and obviously I am no Liberal, and obviously I will never be a Liberal, but I will say one thing for the Official Opposition, they do think about money. You notice when they ask questions, the Leader of the Official Opposition, he talks money, he understands business, he gets that the dollar can only go so far. You can sense that in him. He knows that someday, I am not sure when but someday, they have made decisions in the past based on the amount of money that is before them. Like I said, that is a tough decision and a daunting task to do a budget for the whole Province when you only have X amount of money.

Mr. Speaker, my friends in the Third Party have absolutely no concept, none. I referred to it a couple of years ago as the NDP calculator, and we should get one. We should get one in this House and somebody somewhere in the confines of this beautiful building – there is the calculator I am looking for, Mr. Speaker. There is the one I am looking for. I would love to have that prop. Can you hand that over to me? I know I am not allowed to have props, but, Mr. Speaker, we need a calculator in this House. I am suggesting one like this, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: One like this. I am sorry –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. minister that he is not allowed to use props of any kind in the House.

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

MR. FRENCH: I hope that our audience at home get the meaning of that little, small calculator that I have. Mr. Speaker, what we would (inaudible) need with a calculator like that would be a safe full of $100 bills. There are not enough trees in Newfoundland to grow the hundreds and thousands of dollars we would need to keep up with these guys.

Mr. Speaker, it just goes to show. Look at what happened in Ontario way, way, back. The NDP government came into power and got elected. They committed and promised everything to everybody. Mr. Speaker, within three short years they fired them through the door, because they just about bankrupt, at the time, the richest province in the country. They just about flattened them in three years. Mr. Speaker, you cannot be everything to everybody.

You stand here today and you hear a member talk about housing and how we should take the money from the HST, give it back to them and let them do it. If we do that – okay, we can do that, sure we can. Now remember, there is only so much money to go around. If we do that, then we have to stop a number of things. Then we have to stop funding the arts community in St. John's, Mr. Speaker, which is a vibrant, healthy community. We would have to shut that down. We would have to shut down giving grants to the artists in our Province, Mr. Speaker, and that would be unfortunate. We would have to stop doing a number of initiatives; stop expanding the St. John's Convention Centre, shut that down; stop doing water and sewer; stop doing paving; stop doing our Municipal Operating Grants.

There are a lot of things to consider, and you cannot be everything to everybody. That is one thing, I think, the NDP in this Province forget. They constantly are up, standing on their feet, demanding money for this, demanding for that, and that is fine, but, Mr. Speaker, once you spend it somewhere, you have to take it from somewhere else.

Mr. Speaker, it is all about choices. You can stand in this House and be a member of this House, but you should always realize – and the general public out there realize this. The people in Newfoundland and Labrador know what it is about. They have managed their own households and they have paid bills; like us all. We all do the same thing, Mr. Speaker. As a friend of mine once said, you cannot buy your groceries on the Visa forever. Mr. Speaker, I fear that if they ever got their hands on the public Treasury of this Province, we would be in sad, sad shape.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to point that out. It is quite common. They want a big child care plan. Well, we have just announced tens of millions of dollars for child care in this Province, tens of millions of dollars for foster families and so on over the next ten years – massive. They would do more than that. We have a significant amount of money spent on drug plans, but they would do more than that.

It is all right to do more than all that. They can stand up every day and talk about education. As my colleague the Minister of Education has explained on numerous occasions, we have spent more money on education and roads than any other government since time here in this Province. So, Mr. Speaker, they are looking for all of this. That is fine. We understand there are needs in the Province. We do; we deal with it every day. Again, Mr. Speaker, you can only squat the nickel so far and we have to be responsible.

One of the things we have done as a government is we have been very responsible, Mr. Speaker. Here we are going through an exercise now where all of our departments look for 3 per cent of extra frills. We try to cut down all frills, and we will continue to do that. We will continue to spend wisely. Mr. Speaker, we will continue to invest in the people of the Province, but not ridiculously. We have to be rational about this. I remind my colleagues opposite that when they are up standing and asking for that, I think they should always have a tagline on what they are going to take away.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, if there is any lesson in holding up a big calculator like that, it is to crunch the big numbers that this government is dealing with. Now we know the secret of why we need the Lower Churchill developed: It is to power up a calculator like that.

The simple fact of the matter is –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. MURPHY: That got them going, Mr. Speaker, but I will also tell my friend the Environment and Conservation Minister that he should have gotten a smaller calculator and conserved a little bit more energy than what he did when brought out something as big as that. This is a story he can tell his grandchildren, Mr. Speaker. He will be bouncing his grandchildren on his knee, and his grandchildren are going to be awfully bored with the Budget of 2012.

I will carry on from that. Mr. Speaker, the one thing that I noticed about this Budget, you look for a lot of things in Budgets, and the one thing that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador expect to see can be pretty much summed up in one word, which would be expectations. Instead, what I have seen and what I have been hearing over the last couple of weeks since this Budget has been announced can be summed up in one word as well, and that is frustration. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador have been waiting long enough to see the proper investments made. I will be guaranteed that this government has made some – and I will repeat it, some – investments, but they have not gone the right way with everything.

The first thing that was readily apparent to every single consumer and taxpayer in this Province, Mr. Speaker, when it came to the project that we know as the development of the Lower Churchill is that the Nalcor highway, the Nalcor seaway, and the Nalcor road got the money first. This government chose to carry a deficit this year by putting as much money into Nalcor as what they did and to let the rest of the people of this Province wait for the most basic of necessities, like ferries or proper roads to drive on.

Let's call it $664 million that they put directly into Nalcor in the cash assets. They put more money in the cash assets, but they chose to carry a debt when they did not have to and they put it all on the backs of the people. That part of the Budget, let me give you a percentage now; what was it – a $6.2 billion Budget, I believe; $6.2 billion project as well - 11 per cent of the Budget, as far as we know and as far as the numbers I crunched, about 11 per cent of that Budget is gone to Nalcor. It is really hard to believe.

I will tackle a couple of the issues that I found in this Budget. The Environment and Conservation Minister talked a little bit about conservation, but one of the numbers I found really disturbing when he talks about conservation, and I will say it, for one job loss that I did hear about, particularly a biologist position over on the West Coast – and I think that the West Coast of the Province is at a point right now where it is going to be facing some pretty heavy development pressures. If that is under Old Harry or if that is under oil exploration that is in the Parsons Pond area, but the West Coast is almost pristine and I think that the loss of a biologist position over there is pretty important. The loss of one job position – we are talking forty-five jobs this year – is pretty important, and it is just as important as the next job losses that are going to be coming when government chooses the mainstream and discovers core mandate over the next ten years.

Let me get back to it. The defining definition of this Budget, the key word there was prosperity. Prosperity is defined as "having or characterized by financial success or good fortune; flourishing; successful… well-to-do or well-off…" and includes other such factors, such as happiness or wealth.

Mr. Speaker, I will say it, I do not think a lot of people are going to be happy with this Budget. They are not, and we are hearing it. It comes from any one side. Like I said, people's expectations are high, but we have gone from expectation to frustration in just the few things that I have mentioned, if it is ferries or if it is roads. There are some letdowns.

In the Minister of Finance's speech, he mentioned the Real Gross Domestic Product. According to the Minister, it was going to be only measuring 0.1 per cent. It makes you wonder, outside of oil, how much did we really diversify our economy? If oil collapsed tomorrow, what else would we be falling back on?

We have an unemployment rate that ranks around 13 per cent. We cannot do better than this with the money that we have in this Province? Mr. Speaker, we are so flush with cash, and we keep hearing it, that we are flush with cash. We have $2 billion in cash assets. The government does not know what to do with it, but it is pretty much determined now on the part of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that money is going to go towards Muskrat – if not all of it, then at least half of it. That is $2 billion that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador need, to know right now they do not have to be waiting on a new ferry system, they do not have to be waiting on new roads. They should not have to wait for universal child care to happen because the money is there to pull off a project like that now.

Again, we are talking about an unemployment rate that ranks around 13 per cent. If your definition of prosperity includes having all of this money and everything, why is food bank use so far up? Why do we see an extended use of food banks when we are talking about the money that this Province has? It is a pretty good question, isn't it? I do not see government addressing food bank usage.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: Food bank usage is a pretty good sign on how people are doing. I do not know anybody who is happy requiring the use of a food bank. It is a pretty good indicator of how your economy is doing.

The Budget theme is People and Prosperity, and this Budget is all about having the money but not letting any of that money out to address your own people's needs. I cannot sum it up any better than that. I think it was Caroline Kennedy who came out and said some time ago – and everybody knows who Caroline Kennedy is, the daughter of John F. Kennedy – to sum it up, that besides having prosperity and the fact of having money in your hands, you also need a prosperity of kindness and decency; a prosperity of kindness and decency. In some cases, I do not see it in this Budget.

I am going to take this for the next several minutes, and for the other two speaking times that I am going to have, I am going to take it and in general shove out a couple of thoughts about what I have in the Budget. I am going to take it case by case, and the first department that I am going to take is Environment and Conservation, because I think there are a couple of things there. I already touched on one, as regards to what I did not see in the Budget and what I did see in the Budget. The loss of a biologist position, I think, is pretty important.

I am going to throw it out to them now, as regards to the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board. I know I asked you a question in Estimates the other day, but as regards to the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board, I would like to have a little chat with everybody about the recycling that we are doing with tires, for example. This is just a small picture, because I am talking about the creation of green jobs in this Province, or the potential for green jobs in this Province. Like I said, we are dealing with about a 13 per cent or 14 per cent unemployment rate, and these tires right now are down in Placentia, Argentia area, they are being stored. At the same time, on the other side of the bay, pretty much, we are talking about the collapse of some of the basic industries that are connected to the fishery right now. We are talking about a heavy increase in the unemployment rate there that happened pretty much today.

AN HON. MEMBER: What are you going to do, burn them in Corner Brook?

MR. MURPHY: I am not talking about burning them in Corner Brook, because that is just the fault with the recycling program as we have it now. You are shipping it off for an end use of a product that people are paying $3 a tire for now, and here we have, as a people, the worst roads in the country.

The other day, I think it was the Canadian Automobile Association that had a survey on Atlantic Canada roads and five of those roads are in Newfoundland and Labrador. I think the government should be ashamed to see it, and here we are with a viable aggregate that can be mixed in with road asphalt – because road asphalt is very expensive – to extend the life of the roads in this Province. We could be talking about the creation of green jobs, extending the life of roads so that government would not have to address the repaving of roads in twenty years' time. They could come back and actually save the consumer some money in the long run and, at the same time, the road itself becomes recyclable.

I think it is time for government to actually sit back some time and look at some of the initiatives that it is doing and what it can be doing in the future to keep money here, and to create green jobs and keep dollars in this Province. As well as that, you would probably save that $6 million a year in shipping costs to Quebec. Again, I will touch on it. When you burn tires, something is going to go up into the atmosphere, and what does that do for the environment department? What does that do with the final burning of a product? Again, it is not very good on the environment.

I will give you an idea of what to be doing with the conservation end of things, now. In this Budget I did not see anything that would call for a grant or a subsidy program, for example, for the installation of heat pumps, that sort of thing, in houses. We know that we are talking about the energy conservation things; let's talk about a grant or a subsidy so that we do not have to pursue things like Muskrat Falls.

This government has always been asking the question: Do we need the power? Well, then, I will turn it around for them when it comes to that. When it comes to the conservation end of things, we should have been asking the question, how much power do we need, because by the time the numbers come out, we are going to find out that there is really not going to be that much power that we are going to need anyway.

I will go and I will talk about, for the next little bit, the park reservation system. This one absolutely astounds me, because here I am; I am coming out of my pup tent and I am going to tell you the way it has been over the last couple of days from the people I have been talking to.

We have a contract that is centered in Ontario, an Ontario call centre. Again, I will say, the 13 per cent or 14 per cent unemployment rate –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: - that is right, the people I talk to are ending up talking to people in India, so this company that you have contracted, that government has contracted, Mr. Speaker, to run the reservation system –

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation, on a point of order.

MR. FRENCH: Mr Speaker, we do not have a call centre. The call centre went out to public call, public tender. It was awarded to a person in Ontario. Mr. Speaker, who is at the other end answering the phone I have no idea, but it is in Ontario; that I can assure the hon. member, not in India as he refers to.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The proof is in the pudding there, that they did put out a call for tenders, if you will, and somebody else answered that tender. Somebody outside of the Province answered that tender, Mr. Speaker. We do not have anybody that is running a reservation system here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Minister of Environment and Conservation, on a point of order.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, what he is suggesting is that we shut down the call centres here and stop taking calls from Texas. I guess that is what he is suggesting, and we not share our resources.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, I will say it again, in case the Minister of Environment and Conservation wants to come into this pup tent and we will have a little chat about it, I am talking about job creation in Newfoundland and Labrador.

It is fairly simple to me that when you are talking about a 14 per cent unemployment rate –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again I will say it, and I will finish off my comments with regard to the park reservation system with something as simple as this: with a 14 per cent unemployment rate in this Province, and with people looking for work, we can do much better than farming it outside the Province than what we have done as regards to the park reservation system here.

Mr. Speaker, all I can say is that –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: I will carry on with it anyway.

As regards to government's ten-year austerity programming that is coming up now, that the Finance Minister deals with, he is talking about examining the core mandate over the next nine, ten years. So far this year we have heard that forty-five jobs are gone. I have to question the need as regards to that kind of austerity programming, where he is actually going to be going in, slashing and cutting, in the future when we are going to have all these people who are going to be retiring anyway. Why don't we just wait for the people to retire? That is austerity programming in itself.

If we are going to be losing about 25 per cent of the workforce due to future retirements, we do not have to get in there and slash and burn and express doubt amongst the rest of the people who are working for government, who are keeping this Province going. All we have to do is sit and wait for them to retire. I think it is over the next nine years we are going to be seeing that 25 per cent reduction in the workforce anyway. Having government departments waste money on looking at their core mandate itself is going to be self-defeating. Again, I will say it: it is not doing a lot for the morale of government workers.

I will carry on. It is a little bit frustrating, like I say, when I see that government is going to be wasting – the Finance Minister can stand up later on and he can probably say it as it is, but I think it is $500,000 of government money that is going to be looked at, is going to be tossed toward something that is going to be happening anyway. I can think of better uses for $500,000, Mr. Speaker.

We are looking at something else, too, as regards to the workers in this Province and the negotiations that are ongoing. There are not going to be any wage increases, which means things get harder, not only for the people who are working for government or the people who are carrying on government business. Whenever you tighten the belt of the government worker, and if you are not going to be granting them any kind of an increase – and this is going to be a fair argument for the Finance Minister to get up and ask - there are a lot of people in this Province who expect government to lead, and they set a standard by which everybody else follows. They do. A business will go ahead and look and see what government issued as regards to the wage increases that they have given to their own workers, and they will go ahead, they will turn around and they will do the same thing. If government workers do not end up with a little bit of a wage increase – and I do not think that they are going to be asking for anything too out of line this time around, as regards to what they are going to be looking for. They deserve an increase; they deserve an increase far beyond what Nalcor's budget got. It is remarkable in some aspects of that.

I would like to say, whenever you do not consider an increase to government workers, that reflects on everything else that happens within the Province. It reflects on business; it reflects on somebody else who is going to be the beneficiary of that government dollar that is going to be spent out there in the economy. So I ask government to reconsider that and put some deeper thought into that.

Let's talk about the small business tax. We did not see a cut from 4 per cent to 3 per cent to support small business. I think that small businesses were relatively disappointed in this Budget. I think that a small move like that to save small business, about $4 million overall that it would have contributed to the Newfoundland and Labrador economy, would have gone a long way to helping businesses in this Province and to help keep the economy going when we are supposedly in troubled times. I do not think troubled times are what we are in right now. This troubled time has been chosen by this government, and I think the number with regard to what we are giving to Nalcor and the debt number at the end of the day both dictate that.

I want to touch on Intergovernmental Affairs and their role, because I really have not seen or heard anything concrete happening out of this department in quite some time. I would like to know: Has the provincial government been meeting the feds, for example, when it comes to the budget of Marine Atlantic and how Marine Atlantic has been increasing its costs, as of late? What kind of representation has the Province been making to the feds with regard to the final outcome of Marine Atlantic, what it has been doing to the consumer here in Newfoundland and Labrador? I think that Intergovernmental Affairs has an important role in the consumer pocketbook here and should be given stronger representation here.

I would also like to touch on the marine rescue sub-centre. Knowing that this centre is now closed, it has been pretty hard on everybody. The final outcome of what happens to somebody is only going to be determined, I think, the effect of the closure, when we see the next boat sink, or see somebody else get lost out there in the waters. I think there should have been a little bit stronger representation when it comes to there.

This Budget forgot a little bit about their social responsibility. For example, let's talk about generic test strips. Generic test strips is something that I had down here to talk about. When we introduced a private member's motion last year, it was not because it was just going to be a savings of a couple of million dollars because we were going to give free test strips to everybody. It was the simple fact that giving out these test strips would save government a lot of money in the long run. Because if people were able to monitor their conditions a little bit more closely, perhaps they would be spending less on conditions on people that would result from organ failure, that sort of thing, like kidney failure and heart disease. There is a purpose to putting some thought and so much research into some of that. We were told last year by this government that we would consider it, to be looking for it in the next Budget, and it never happened. That was not there. Again, we were told that it was going to be there and it was not.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to sum up my remarks with a final thought again from Caroline Kennedy. There is an awful lot to be talking about when it comes to this Budget, but I am going to be touching a lot more when it comes to kindness and decency. Caroline Kennedy, like I said, she said, "As much as we need a prosperous economy, we also need prosperity of kindness and decency." Whether that is reflected in a road or more money for housing, for the lifting of HST off affordable housing initiatives that are being paid off so that somebody can have a roof over their heads, or whether it is going to be for the replacement of new ferries, we have waited long enough, Mr. Speaker, and a lot of people are telling us so.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to use my twenty minutes today to talk about the Muskrat Falls Project. This project was announced in November 2010. Since the announcement, there has been much ongoing debate and criticism about the project and opponents of the project have been very vocal. The debate has been sustained, it has been extensive, and I can say it is something that we welcome. What we want to do as a government is make the decision that is in the best interests of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I can say that a lot of the criticism is unfounded and simply confuses the issues.

Mr. Speaker, over the next few weeks in the House of Assembly, I am going to have the opportunity to speak on three separate occasions. I am going to use those opportunities in twenty-minute segments to talk about various aspects of the Muskrat Falls Project. I will outline the facts and figures as we know them, Mr. Speaker, recognizing that the figures could change as we get the Decision Gate 3 numbers which are expected around the middle of July. They will be the final numbers that Nalcor will provide.

Decision Gate 3 numbers, Mr. Speaker, will be reviewed by Manitoba Hydro International and they will be released to the public and available for debate in this hon. House. I am going to review issues such as the demand for power, the options or alternatives that are available, projected electricity rates, economic benefits, environmental benefits, and potential use of the power. I will attempt to answer some of the Muskrat Falls critics.

One of the things I am going to try to do, Mr. Speaker, is keep it simple because, as a lawyer, one of the tricks I would use – and I am not going to say I would use it in trying to create reasonable doubt, but one of the tricks I would use to confuse the issues, sometimes you can argue there is a doubt inherent in the confusion. So I am going to try to simplify, Mr. Speaker, and try to ensure that the people of this Province understand that this project will only be sanctioned if it is in their best interests.

In making a decision on sanction, Mr. Speaker, we are going to be guided by one basic principle: Is Muskrat Falls in the best interest of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador? On numerous occasions, I have stated that the decision whether or not to sanction or to proceed with the development of Muskrat Falls can really be boiled down to two simple questions: Do we need the power, and if so, what is the least-cost alternative? What is the lowest-cost way to get that power, Mr. Speaker?

Nalcor's position that we need the power has been supported, Mr. Speaker, by Manitoba Hydro International when they were hired by the Public Utilities Board. Manitoba Hydro International is an independent consultant. They were hired, as I have indicated, by the PUB, and they now have been retained by our government to review the Decision Gate 3 numbers when they come in from Nalcor. They concluded that not only did we need the power, but Nalcor underestimated the need for power. They did not take into account at all the potential $10 billion to $15 billion worth of mining developments in Labrador, all of which need substantial amounts of power.

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, I have three segments. Today I am going to talk about the need for power. Next week I will talk about the options or alternatives. In the third week, Mr. Speaker, I will talk about such issues as the electricity rates. Really, that is what the average person is most concerned about: How will Muskrat Falls impact my rates? Part of what I have to do, or what we have to do as a government, is demonstrate that Muskrat Falls will stabilize then reduce rates because of, as I will get to in second, the rising price of oil.

Mr. Speaker, the Island generating system has a total capacity of 1,958 megawatts of power, with Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro providing 1,518 megawatts of that power. The important point is that Holyrood has the capacity to generate 466 megawatts, or 31 per cent of the power needs for the Province. Mr. Speaker, critics have argued that, with the mill closures in Stephenville and Grand Falls and with the decline in population, the power is not needed, because we have more power into the grid as a result of the mill closures.

Mr. Speaker, a couple of interesting statistics on that actually run contrary to that argument. We currently have 230,000 ratepayers in the Province, people who use electricity and pay bills for their electricity. That is 17,000 new ratepayers since 2005. If you think about it, Mr. Speaker, the answer is fairly simple. Again, it is common sense proposition. We no longer have, or generally we do not have, eight and ten people living in a house. We have smaller families. We have young people moving into homes at a younger age, because that is one of the first things that people want to do. That is their goal in life, as they get married and have a family, or they go to work – to own their home. We actually have more ratepayers because there are more people in their own homes with less numbers in the family, and also – and again, it is quite interesting – a lot of people in the age bracket of twenty-five to thirty-five, for the reasons that I talked about earlier.

So, we have more ratepayers, 17,000 new ratepayers since 2005. What we have to do, Mr. Speaker, as a government, and Nalcor, is plan for future electricity needs. We have to look into a crystal ball, and with that looking into the crystal ball, there are always risks and uncertainties. Any time you are trying to predict what happens in the future, Mr. Speaker, there will be inherent risks, just as there are inherent risks with Muskrat Falls and uncertainties. There are inherent risks and uncertainties with refurbishing Holyrood, with natural gas, and these are issues that I will touch on as I move along.

What we are trying to do as a government is to develop and to ensure that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have access to reliable, affordable electricity.

I have not looked at these statistics in a while, a couple of months, but I will update them before I speak to this next week or the week after. Residents of Newfoundland and Labrador are currently at the fourth or fifth lowest in the country in terms of electricity rates, with Labrador being the cheapest rates in Canada. Mr. Speaker, part of the reason for that is the provinces who have cheaper rates are Manitoba, Quebec, and BC, all of which have large hydro.

Mr. Speaker, what we are trying to do is ensure how we deal with the issues that we have before us. Growth is projected again. It is common sense. Growth is projected in the domestic, commercial, and industrial use of electricity on the Island, and I have not even talked about Labrador yet. Domestic use, Mr. Speaker, mainly due to electric heat, is the principal driver of new demand. I talked about those 17,000 new ratepayers and I will talk in a second about the increase in homes, but 86 per cent of new homes use electric heat. Again, we have that domestic use and the need for residential power.

Also, as you look especially in our growth centres you will see that there are significant commercial developments.

There is currently, Mr. Speaker, as you drive towards my district in Carbonear – Harbour Grace a development in the Town of Spaniard's Bay which is taking place. I understand there are developments in Conception Bay South; we have Stavanger, we have Kelsey Drive. I think I just read yesterday there is a new Kent going to Central Newfoundland and Labrador.

AN HON. MEMBER: Grand Falls-Windsor.

MR. KENNEDY: Grand Falls was it? Yes.

What we are seeing, Mr. Speaker, is continued commercial growth. Mr. Speaker, this is actually a very good statistic. I remember when I was in Finance, we did not really talk much about the gross domestic product. The GDP, when you have an export-based economy, can go up and down so much in a small economy that we looked at economic indicators such as housing starts. That is what gives you a picture, Mr. Speaker. You look at population increases, you look at car sales.

We are averaging in this Province, Mr. Speaker, 3,200 housing starts each year, over the past five years; 81 per cent of which were single-detached homes and 86 per cent of them using electric heat. Mr. Speaker, we have seen an increase in our population. Last year, I think the last census showed 1.8 per cent but there were some startling statistics in there, Mr. Speaker. Paradise was something like 40 per cent. I think Conception Bay South was 20 per cent; Gander I think was 11 per cent. What we saw were good, steady increases in our population with a lot of our other communities, Mr. Speaker, remaining stable.

That growth increase in the population of 1.8 per cent shows that our population is increasing, Mr. Speaker, and I expect that we will continue to see it increase. If you think of why our population declined, it is quite simple, people moved away and also we had smaller families. Mr. Speaker, the largest family among my friends today is four or five. Two or three children is usually a handful. We are not seeing the nine children like there were in my family growing up, and that was a small family on my road, in London Road in Carbonear, Mr. Speaker. So we are seeing smaller families.

We have the economic growth; we have the commercial and industrial growth. Mr. Speaker, the power that went into the grid with the closure of the mills has been used up. That explains why Holyrood was only functioning at 15 per cent to 25 per cent over the last number of years. When Holyrood gets to its full rate of capacity, Mr. Speaker, it burns 18,000 barrels of oil a day. Holyrood is used at its full rate of capacity in the wintertime. That is when we need the energy in this Province.

In Toronto, for example, and in Boston, they not only need energy in the wintertime, but they need it in the summer because of the air conditioners. Now, Mr. Speaker, air conditioning, I put it on in my car, there are a couple of times a year you are guaranteed to use it, but I think you can be safe to buy a car in our Province without air conditioning. These big apartment buildings, the big buildings need a lot of energy, Mr. Speaker.

Now, let's talk about Holyrood. We know that as we increase in our residential, commercial and industrial use, Holyrood will have to be used more; 18,000 barrels of oil a day, Mr. Speaker. My colleague and friend, the Minister of Finance watches the price of that barrel of oil every day. Both myself and the minister, and myself and the Premier, met with a group out of New York called PIRA, a leading international forecaster in oil, Mr. Speaker. I can remember us saying to Dr. Mark Schwartz: Explain to us in simple terms why you think the price of oil will continue to rise? It is very simple. It is so simple, Mr. Speaker, that I will go through it. Again, it is common sense.

First and foremost, Mr. Speaker, there is not enough oil to meet the world's demand. So it is a question of supply and demand. The Arabs guard very closely their reserves and how much they have, but the world currently burns about 90 million barrels of oil a day – 89 million, I think it is. The Americans currently lead the way, Mr. Speaker, but what Dr. Schwartz told us is that in the next number of years, with the growth in China, they will lead the way in terms of the use of oil. That continued growth in China is going to go from the 9 per cent or 10 per cent down to 5 per cent, perhaps, but 5 per cent growth is absolutely phenomenal in a country that size.

Recently, some of my officials had a map put on the wall of China because there is a lot of mining in China. The demand for steel is what is making the iron ore industry run in Labrador right now. Mr. Speaker, they have cities – and I forget how many cities – in China that have a bigger population than our country as a whole. I think there are three or four of them now with 20 million people in a city. China continues to grow.

Again, Dr. Schwartz was very practical; he talked about the geopolitical element of the pricing of oil. The activities in the Middle East, the Arab spring affects the price of oil. He indicated, Mr. Speaker, and they are doing this based on something they have been doing for a lot years, that every two or three years there will be an activity in the Middle East, whether it be the Iraq War, the activities in Iran, or whether it be the Arab spring that will result in the price of oil going up because the supply is affected.

Mr. Speaker, he also told us that the global middle class is growing by 80 million people a year; again, mostly in India and China. So what we are seeing, Mr. Speaker, is a world economy in the BRIC countries that is absolutely amazing. The price of oil, based on what they are telling us, will go up.

For those who are interested, Mr. Speaker, for any of our viewers who are interested, PIRA was retained by the government, by our department, to file a report before the PUB, and that report can be accessed on-line. Dr. Schwartz also addressed, in that report, the issue of shale oil. I think he predicted that shale oil could go up to producing a million barrels of oil a day, but that is not enough to offset the demand. So, Mr. Speaker, what Nalcor has said is that by 2015 we will start to experience blackouts; by 2020, we will have an energy deficit. Quite simply, we will not have enough energy unless we do something.

Mr. Speaker, to put things in perspective, one of these iron ore mines in Labrador could use – not IOC, because they are bigger – 100 megawatts of energy. If Vale Inco were to go underground in Voisey's Bay, they would need 50 megawatts of energy. The same thing if there was uranium mining, I understand. An aluminum smelter could require anywhere from 400 to 800 megawatts of energy. Vale Inco, Mr. Speaker, in Long Harbour, will require 80 megawatts of energy and will be the single largest consumer of electricity from Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, and will rival the other three existing island industrials combined: Teck, North Atlantic, and Corner Brook Pulp and Paper.

Mr. Speaker, two-thirds of the firm capacity of Muskrat Falls, after transmission losses, will be required to replace Holyrood. I will talk a little later on, perhaps in part three, about the environmental impacts; but, for those who live in Holyrood, this is a huge issue. If you talk to my colleague, the Minister of Transportation, we are talking about our children's future, Mr. Speaker, not only in providing a secure financial future but providing a secure environmental future. Holyrood serves –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Replacing Holyrood gets us off the dependence of oil and volatility of oil. To tell you how simple Dr. Schwartz's outline is; it was actually accepted by Randy Simms in the Evening Telegram – or whatever they call that paper these days – this weekend. Do you know what? He read it in Maclean's. Now, we can go to our experts. We can go to Wood Mackenzie and we can go to PIRA; but, when Randy Simms read it in Maclean's, it has to be right. So, he wrote an article the weekend saying that he accepted it. Mr. Speaker, MHI's report confirmed Nalcor's position that we need the power.

Now, we have not even talked about Labrador. Some of the comments made by the Opposition House Leader, I will save for another time. I want to address some of the comments she made the other day about Labrador because this government, at least since I have been the Minister of Natural Resources, we have maintained that – and I have Hansard from last spring where the Premier said we will have 40 per cent to satisfy the Island needs, 20 per cent for the link, which we will own after thirty-five years, which gives us access and removes our dependence on Quebec. It breaks that geographical stranglehold of Quebec. I do not have time today to address Ed Hollett's theory that we can send all our power through Quebec and get it back through Quebec, because that is just wrong.

Mr. Speaker, we have $10 billion to $15 billion in mine developments. I have met with IOC, Tata Steel, Alderon Resources, Labrador Iron Sands, Labrador Iron Mines, and Vale Inco; they all need power. They are saying to us: Where can we get the power? They want the power at industrial rates because industrial rates in Quebec and in Manitoba, you have to be competitive. So, we are still in the process of determining what those rates will be.

Mr. Speaker, we have indicated and we have maintained that 40 per cent of that power will be put on the spot markets. The spot markets, Mr. Speaker, as I indicated yesterday and I think the way it was explained to us they can change by the hour. I do not know all the technicalities, but it goes in through New York and basically it is a distributing centre. The price can change from $40 at one point in the day to $100 per megawatt hour later in the day. We are not going to sign firm contracts. We do not want firm contracts. Again, Mr. Speaker, there is one place in this country that wants firm contracts, and that is Ontario. Hopefully, the day will come when we move Gull Island power through Quebec to Ontario. They are relying on nuclear generators right now in Ontario. So, there is a market. That power then can be recalled.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear, and most people agree – I have heard the Leader of the Official Opposition agree. I still do not know what the NDP position is, so all I can say is I have heard the Leader of the Official Opposition agree that we need the power.

Mr. Speaker, if we need the power the next question is: Well, what are we going to do about it? If we need power by 2020, it takes five to six years whether you are going to build Muskrat Falls – I do not know how long it takes to build a liquefied natural gas terminal; we will find that out in the very near future, Mr. Speaker. What are we going to do? Are we going to sit here and do nothing? Mr. Speaker, sometimes the easiest thing for a government to do is to do nothing. It is too much pressure on us, let's back away, and leave the problem for someone else. Mr. Speaker, that is not the way this Premier operates, and that is not the way this government operates.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: We have a vision for the future of our children and the future of our Province, Mr. Speaker. That is what this government is committed to; having said that, we are not committed to it at all costs. That is why we will provide all of the numbers, we will provide a report on natural gas, we will provide a report on wind, and we look forward to debate in this hon. House, Mr. Speaker, where the people who are elected by the people have their say.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for the Bay of Islands, to conclude his remarks.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand to have a few comments on the Budget and other issues. I say to the Minister of Natural Resources, there will be time to debate some of the pros and cons of Muskrat Falls. We look forward to debate, when all the information is put on the table, the power purchase agreement and every bit of information that we are going to need for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We all look forward to that, minister.

Mr. Speaker, before I go any further, I just want to – and everybody in the House and who has been watching the House of Assembly know I have been up many times with petitions on the Animal Protection Act. I just want to say to the government, it is great that the act is proclaimed; now we can start enforcing and protecting animals.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Also, from my understanding from the scrum, the minister had – there is $50,000 there for the SPCA for education. I think that is a great move also, Minister; that is good for all of it. I am glad that it is done. Now we can move forward and do with the protection of animals that we all in the House of Assembly were elected to do, to help the ones that cannot speak, which are animals. Kudos to the government for having that done. It took awhile, but I am glad that it is done. Let's move forward.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to speak on something again, now, that I have been on. It is the hospital in Corner Brook. People know that if I happen to get an issue and I feel strongly about it, I am going to continue on it. I know I have asked a lot of questions on it in the House. I know the Member for Humber West cannot wait for a bit of steel. Once the steel is done, the Member for Humber West said he is going to resign, as soon as he sees the first bit of steel. I know the Member for Humber West was out looking; he cannot wait.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: The Member for Humber East is going to resign, yes, as soon as the first bit of steel.

I cannot wait for the steel, but it is incumbent on me as a member of the Opposition party to bring issues up that are brought to my attention from the people in Corner Brook. This issue of the hospital has been ongoing; it was announced five years ago. Five years, Mr. Speaker, is a long while. As I mentioned before, there is groundwork done, there are connector roads built, there is a lot of preparation done.

Everybody – and this was done during an election, just before the election. Tractors rolling, they could not get enough tractors rolling on the property just before the election. Everybody in Corner Brook and the West Coast – and I bar nobody; I am sure even the members, if you go back and look at their brochures, in their own political brochures: a new hospital for Corner Brook. Everybody expected construction to begin on the new hospital. Everybody expected it, Mr. Speaker, when the minister came out with $1 million in the Budget for extra design and said: It is going to be done; it is going to be done.

I think the hospital is going to be done. There is no doubt in mind it is going to be done, but when? What type of structure are we going to have, and facility?

People say, why do you keep on asking questions? Why are you still bringing it up to the government's attention? I will just read something. I know the Minister of Finance sometimes may get tired of listening to me, but it is my role to do this. I will just read this here: "Our government has also appointed the consultant that will design a fourth new large-size provincial ferry to replace the Captain Earl W. Winsor on the Fogo Island and Change Island run. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to announce that our government will proceed with the construction of six new ferries – five for the South Coast of the Island and one for the South Coast of Labrador – and they will be constructed right here in Newfoundland and Labrador", the Minister of Finance, in 2010.

Today, it was announced that we are going outside the Province, minister. This is why I am saying – just because it is in the Budget, and just because you say it in your Throne Speech, that is why we have to continue to keep the government's feet to the fire to ensure that what is said in the Budget, in the Budget Speech, is done. We have to do it.

I look at the autonomy for Grenfell College. In the same Budget, you committed autonomy for Grenfell College. When I hear –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member to direct his comments to the Speaker.

MR. JOYCE: I am sorry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when I hear the comments, there is $1 million, oh, we are doing it, it is incumbent upon me, the people who elected me, to ensure that I get the commitments that were made by the government fulfilled. That is just two things in the 2010 Budget, and I am looking up other ministers that said what about the ferries and other issues, Mr. Speaker.

I just wanted the people of Corner Brook and the West Coast – when I asked the questions in the House of Assembly on the hospital, Mr. Speaker, about the $1 million – will it complete the design? – there was no commitment. Why can't the government say, here is the money we are going to need? Whoever is doing the design work - I asked the question, who is doing the design work? There was absolutely no name given. They will not even give the residents of Corner Brook, the people who elected them, the name of the design company that is doing this. They will not even do it, Mr. Speaker.

The third thing I asked in Question Period, they will not even give to me and the residents of Corner Brook, when did the design work start? If you are wondering why I am asking questions about the new hospital in Corner Brook, that is just three or four reasons. Forget what we are going to have once the actual construction starts. Are we going to have public consultations? That is another thing. Is the general public going to be able to go in and look at what we are going to have, the size of the hospital, the scope of the hospital? We cannot get any commitments.

Mr. Speaker, when you hear me asking questions on a regular basis and speaking on the issues in Corner Brook, like the hospital, these are the reasons why. I am elected by the people to get answers, I will get answers. If I don't get answers I will continuously bring it up until I do get answers. Like I said before, I know every member in this House of Assembly is trying to do their best for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I do not try to discredit anybody for trying to do their best for the people of their area but when you are in the position that I am, you must make sure that the government is accountable. That is why we have a democracy. That is the type of government we have.

I hear sometimes people saying here we go again about the hospital, here we go again. It is my responsibility and I will do it, Mr. Speaker, and I am not too concerned about who criticizes me for bringing it up on a regular basis and if I happen to bore them. I can tell you, the people who are going to need the hospital, the people who are going to need the services are not going to be too bored, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Even the Minister of Finance, Mr. Speaker, his good buddy Leo Bruce is out criticizing him and the government; his good buddy that he is very good friends with, Mr. Speaker.

MR. MARSHALL: He used to be your good friend, too.

MR. JOYCE: He used to be my good friend too, is right. That is right, he used to be my good – but he is a city councillor now and the City of Corner Brook is all upset. That is why I bring up his name, because he is the one who spoke on behalf of the city council. They are all upset that the hospital only received $1 million. Israel Hann is a seniors' advocate over on the West Coast, he is all upset. His words, I am trying to quote - he said: it is just as well to keep the million dollars; they are not going to do anything anyway. That was his quote, the seniors' advocate. Everybody really expected that this hospital was going to be built, Mr. Speaker, or some type of construction to move forward this year on it. I am going to keep asking questions until I find out when construction is going to start, how long more for the design, who is doing the design, will there be public consultations? That is the kind of information that people are asking me to bring up, Mr. Speaker.

I will just go on to another little issue, Mr. Speaker, out my way, and it is all throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. It is home care, family caregivers. I am sure every person in this House of Assembly is aware of somebody who needs family caregivers. I am sure of it. Mr. Speaker, rightly or wrongly, and I say this with all honesty and with no political overtone whatsoever, that when the commitment was made in the Blue Book for the last election, people in this Province really felt that family members could get paid to take care of their loved ones. Rightly or wrongly, that is the impression that is left in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. All the members, also – I spoke to some of them before and after the election – and the majority of people in this House were under that same impression.

Now, I am not sure when the Premier made that announcement, but the announcement that she made and the commitment that she made – and I use people like Minnie Vallis over in Meadows, who was so happy when that announcement was made. She is a seniors' advocate. She has been on this family caregiver for a number of years. She was so happy that she is finally going to be able to get family care giving all throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we have to work through that because that is an important issue. I know of families personally, who cannot get home care workers and they cannot have a family member do it. There are one or two options, someone has to quit their job and put them through financial hardship, Mr. Speaker; or the person has to go into an institution.

By leave, just to clue up for a minute, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the member his time for speaking has elapsed.

Does the member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave, the Member for the Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you.

We have to work through that somehow because I can assure every member in this House, and I am a firm believer that there is no member in this House who wants anybody to go through that torture of having to put a loved into a home because they cannot get it. I am sure of it. I would not politicize that one bit. I am 100 per cent sure that no one would want to see it.

So we, as the elected representatives, and the government, have to work through that somehow because people are under the assumption that family caregiving is, and it was, committed to the people that a family can go in and get paid to take care of their loved one, so that you will not have to go to an institution.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the members opposite for your permission to have leave to clue up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to rise and speak this afternoon and have a few moments today to speak to the Budget.

Before I go into my comments this afternoon, I have to take an opportunity to assure the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that despite the negative tones and negative comments that frequently come from the opposite side over here, I have to say the sky is not falling – I can tell you the sky is not falling on Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, over on this side of the House we have a very hard-working team, and I can tell you it is a team that I am quite proud to be a member of. We have a hard-working group of MHAs and Cabinet ministers that are very dedicated to the needs of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. We are dedicated to the quality of life for people of Newfoundland and Labrador. We are dedicated to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. We are going to continue to work hard for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

There are good things going on in this Province today, Mr. Speaker, despite what the members opposite would have you believe. Despite what the members opposite would have you believe, I can tell you there are good things going on in Newfoundland and Labrador, and there are good things going to continue to happen under this government. The economy today, Mr. Speaker, is as strong as it ever has been in the history of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, there are more people working in Newfoundland and Labrador today than ever before.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Capital investments that are occurring in this Province today are unprecedented. There is more happening in capital investment and it is stronger today than ever before. I can tell you as well, Mr. Speaker, with our hard-working team over here, the Premier, the person who is steering this ship is steering this ship through a strong economy. We have steered through difficult times; we are going to steer into the future, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: I listened to the member opposite, the Member for Bay of Islands, and his comments. I can tell you that through my life I always had an interest in what was going on in politics, but I remember back in the days, back in the 2003-2007 days – and I know there are members on this side of the House who were here back in those days – you remember when we had a really negative tone going on from the other side of the House, a really strong, negative tone that the sky was falling and things were going bad. It seems to have crept back into the House now that the member is back in the House – the Member for Bay of Islands. It seems that tone has come back. So, we have really taken a step back in time, and it is unfortunate. It is unfortunate and I ask the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that you should look at the good things that are happening; do not focus on the negatives.

There is a lot more work to be done. We will say that, and we know that over on this side of the House. There is a lot more work to be done. That is why we are continuing to work, and we will do that work. We will continue to keep the economy in the shape that it is in today, and we will continue to work for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what we will do on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker.

I can tell you earlier today I had the opportunity to rise in the House here and to bring forward a Ministerial Statement regarding an announcement that was in the recent Budget. That was a recent announcement for 35 per cent discounts for seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: A 35 per cent discount on their registration fees, on their driver's licence fees, Motor Registration fees, and also fees associated with the Department of Environment – very important fees to people in Newfoundland and Labrador. I listened to the response from the comments that I made. I know that the Opposition were warm and seemed to be supportive of it.

I also listened to the Member for St. John's Centre who rose. I noticed her comment. She said: It is nice, but crumbs. Now, what a comment to make: nice, but crumbs. I do not know, Mr. Speaker, what seniors the Member for St. John's Centre has been talking to, but I tell you that is not the response that I have received from the seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that is not the response that I have received from the very important people who have given a lifelong commitment to this Province. Those are not the comments they have made.

I will tell you how significant some of these reductions in fees are going to make to the lives of seniors. We know, when it comes to Motor Registration, we will talk about vehicle registration and driver's licences for a few moments. We know that is a regulatory burden that is required in our society to ensure the safety of the people of the Province. That is really what that is about. We require the registering of vehicles, we require having access to who owns and who is operating vehicles and who is responsible for the vehicles, the condition of vehicles in certain circumstances, and also to ensure that the people who are operating those vehicles properly understand the rules of the road and are capable of operating them through driver's licensing. That is what we do. It is a regulatory burden that exists in our society and exists in all societies.

What we have done or tried to do here is while we have that regulatory burden, we have tried to reduce the financial burden on the seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador. If I can take registration of a passenger vehicle for a moment as an example, if a person has to renew their vehicle registration and they go into a Motor Registration centre or a Government Service Centre located in one of our centres throughout the Province, and walk into the counter to renew their registration, they are going to pay a fee of $140; $140 is what it is today. Effective June 1 this year, for registrations expiring June 1 and onwards, a senior will now only have to pay $91 at the counter. That is a savings of $49 for that senior. I would say to you, Mr. Speaker, that is a significant savings for a senior there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Now, if that senior, as well, would like to renew their registration online – we allow that to happen now; it is very convenient. There are more people than ever before, more owners of motor vehicles in Newfoundland and Labrador than ever before that are registering online. It has been proven to be a very effective system and people find it very convenient. If you register online, you only have to pay $126. We automatically give you a discount for registering online; when you include the discount for seniors, that price now comes to $82. What we have is, at the counter, for a senior to register a vehicle, a cost of $140; now for a senior after June 1, it is going to be down to $82 – $58 savings for seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador. I suggest to the Member for St. John's Centre, that is a significant savings for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: The seniors that I have spoken to and the seniors who have taken the time to contact me about this have been very favourable and very appreciative of it, because that amount of money is very important to them.

MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible).

MR. DAVIS: I hear the negative Member for Bay of Islands opposite now, and he is expressing his viewpoint once again. I guess the ten minutes he had left over in his time today was not enough and he has more to say, but he will have more time to get up and to talk about the hospital in the future, because that is what he likes to talk about. He will have more time to get up, I say to him, and talk about that in the future. That is your right to do, and that is what you want to do in the House; you certainly can, but I am going to talk about some of the good things we are doing for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and some of the good things that are going on in my department in Service NL.

One of the really good things that happened in this past year is we made significant improvements to the mining safety regulations in Newfoundland and Labrador. Mining safety regulations that had existed in Newfoundland and Labrador had existed for a long, long time. They have been around for decades and decades and decades. These new regulations came into effect in March 20, 2012. What we have done is we have dovetailed them, as they call it; we have made them part of our occupational health and safety regulations. We have created one set of regulations now, a one-stop-shop if you like, for occupational and safety regulations for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, that now includes sections that pertain to the mining industry. It includes such requirements as ventilation in mining, the mining design, and emergency procedures for mine rescue. Those types of matters that are specific to the mining industry in Newfoundland and Labrador have now been added.

What is really important about this whole process – and I am quite pleased with it, I have to say, Mr. Speaker – is that these regulations were developed after considerable consultation with the industry. We are at a point where the industry was saying: Yes, we need to work together with the government. It came from the industry itself. Labour was involved as well. It resulted in this new package of regulations we now have that came into force on March 20 of this year, which are the new 2012 Occupational Health and Safety Regulations that include significant, modern, progressive, and up-to-date mining regulations as well. This has been welcomed by the mining industry and it is going to go a long ways to help the mining industry ensure the safety of the workers.

That is very important to this government, Mr. Speaker. The safety of workers in Newfoundland and Labrador is a very important piece of business. It surely is, and we can never be complacent, Mr. Speaker, on the safety of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who go to work every day to earn a living for their families and for their children. We can never be complacent.

There is a considerable amount of work, Mr. Speaker, that is happening in regard to safety in this Province. We have our Occupational Health and Safety branch in Service NL, which is an enforcement branch of our department who enforces to ensure that workplaces and workers are working in a safe manner. We have the Workplace Health and Safety Compensation Commission, who works very hard to bring forward safety initiatives, safety training, and safety programs, to bring forth safety.

Quite often we will hear messages from Rod Stickman. If anybody has been watching any of the local hockey lately, the playoffs, on our local channels, you will see advertisements for safety messages from Rod Stickman.

As well, one of the really good programs – I had the opportunity yesterday, at the cinemas in the Avalon Mall, to attend a really good project, a really exciting project that is coordinated by the Commission, called Who Wants to Save a Life? I know, Mr. Speaker, you yourself had an interest and attended there yesterday, as did the Member for Burgeo – La Poile. The Member for Bonavista South also attended there. I had the opportunity to attend yesterday. Schools from around the Province came to St. John's for the finals of Who Wants to Save a Life?

Some of you will say: What is that about? What is Who Wants to Save a Life? I am going to tell you. It is a really innovative, creative, and I call it a really cool thing that is happening for young people in Newfoundland and Labrador. Who Wants to Save a Life? is essentially a game show. It is kind of a mixture of a number of the styles of game shows that you would see on television today. They took it on the road and they went around the Province. The commission took this on the road and went around the Province, and they had schools compete. The game show is based on your knowledge of safety, on safety regulations in Newfoundland and Labrador, and safety policies. They have two teams, it has similarities to the old Reach for the Top – some of us will remember years ago when Reach for the Top used to be on TV in Newfoundland and Labrador.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, yes.

MR. DAVIS: You remember it. Maybe some do; most do but some do not. The hon. Member for Kilbride may have competed on it at one point in time, did you?

We have four members of a team; they are given tie-dye shirts, very cool, colourful tie-dye shirts to wear. They have these colourful sticks with lighting and flashing lights and music and all that kind of stuff that happens. So it is really upbeat, and holding it in the theatres at the Avalon Mall allowed for the co-ordination through local schools to have hundreds of students attend and watch these finals take place yesterday.

The junior high school finals took place yesterday morning. The two teams that squared off in the finals for the junior high school was St. James from Port aux Basques, in the member opposite's district, and St. Peter's from the City of Mount Pearl. They squared off in what was a very close score. I do not remember the final score, but I remember it going down to the buzzer. The score was pretty tight, and congratulations to the students from St. James who won the junior high school championships.

The high school championships were held yesterday afternoon at one o'clock, when Discovery Collegiate from Bonavista South squared off with Gros Morne Academy from Rocky Harbour. The team of Discovery Collegiate from Bonavista South were successful in winning the high school championships. I am going to tell you, the questions they asked them, some of these questions they put to these students on occupational health and safety were pretty technical. They had to do a lot work to learn some of this safety. They had to haul out the books, they really did. They had to haul out the books and they had to study. They had to work at it in order to be successful. What happens when they are doing that is they are learning about safety, Mr. Speaker. That was the whole idea of it, they learn about safety as they study and they educate themselves on safe work practices in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I say to the Member for Bay of Islands, I do not need to apologize for what took place yesterday, I certainly do not. I was there yesterday and I thoroughly enjoyed it, and the students did really well. Not only did they learn from it, but the hundreds of students who sat as audience members as Who Wants to Save a Life? travelled throughout Newfoundland and Labrador over the last several months, also learned about safety. The results of that are so important to us. Making our young people safe in a workplace and encouraging them to practice safe practices, to be knowledgeable in the needs of what they need to do to ensure their own safety in the workplace and at home on their own time as well is so important.

This past year in 2011, the rate of injuries – and we carefully track the rate of workplace injuries in Newfoundland and Labrador. The injury rate in Newfoundland and Labrador right now is at 1.8 incidents per 100 workers. I can tell you, if you look at the long-term numbers over the last several years you will see those numbers are coming down, and coming down, and coming down. That is the goal. We do not want people to get injured in the workplace. We do not want people to be injured in the workplace and we do not want people to be displaced or to be given undue hardship because of workplace injuries. We need to prevent them. It is so important to try and prevent them in the first place.

For young workers, now you think about a young worker who goes out, they are in a workplace, they are energetic and they are eager to do their job. You would think that the injury rate for young workers fifteen to twenty-four would be higher, I would. I would think the numbers would be higher. There would be a higher number of injuries for young workers than it would be for seasoned workers. In actual fact, the number is lower.

Young people of Newfoundland and Labrador, the numbers are actually slightly lower than the provincial overall number for workplace accidents. That is attributed to many of the activities, the crumbs if you like the little things that are happening. Those little things or crumbs, those little things that are happening in safety in Newfoundland and Labrador make a difference.

It is really, really difficult, Mr. Speaker, to pinpoint a significant incident or a significant time, or a significant place where any of these actions have prevented an injury. It is impossible to try and quantify that. How do you quantify how many injuries did not take place? What we can do is we can look at the injury rates and see that if they are dropping we are doing something right and we need to continue to do that. We need to continue to work hard to reduce the injuries to make the place safer for all our workers.

Mr. Speaker, I want to touch on another matter for a few minutes. I see on the clock on the wall, I only have a few minutes left. I want to talk about another matter for a few minutes that was talked about quite extensively recently after we made an announcement of changing and strengthening some regulations. That is as it pertains to blue zone parking and building accessibility for people who require accessibility assistance to enter buildings.

The blue zone parking regulations were brought forward earlier this year. One of the things that we did with the blue zone parking is that we have increased the fine. I suppose the member opposite might say it is a negative, but it is a deterrent. It is a big difference, but it is a deterrent. The fine range used to be from $45 to $180. The new range now is $100 to $400. We have increased these fines significantly because we believe that the offence of someone using a blue zone parking space when they should not be using it can be a significant offence, and also can create a significant challenge for a person who actually needs that space. So, we have increased the fines on that from $100 to $400.

Our intention is not to catch people for parking there, but to stop people from irresponsibly using these spaces. Sometimes it could be for a few minutes, a short period of time, a long period of time, it really does not matter. The spaces are reserved for a specific purpose for those people who need them, who have mobility limitations, and the use of these blue zones can create a greater convenience for the people so they can conduct their business. If they had to park a long way from a building, maybe they are not able to travel that long a distance or travel that distance in a safe manner in order to access the building they are trying to attend.

The other thing we have done on the Buildings Accessibility Regulations is strengthened the regulations on signage. What we saw happening on a frequent basis was a circumstance existed where people would mount a sign on a cement block or other portable device. When it was snow clearing time, quite often it would be moved aside or a plow would take it and pull it off to the side. All too often, it was not replaced, or a sign was not maintained properly on a building. What we have done now is required that all new buildings have permanently installed signs so that they cannot be easily moved; they cannot be removed for such things as snow clearing. As well, for existing buildings, we have asked that these new signs be upgraded by September 30. So, this is a reminder to building owners that you need to upgrade your signage to make sure they are permanently installed.

Mr. Speaker, my time has run out, so I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak this afternoon. I know I will have a further opportunity to speak on the Budget as the debate continues, and I look forward to that opportunity.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an honour and a privilege to stand here and to participate in the Budget debate. One of the first issues that I would like to address in speaking to the Budget is the issue of child care, something we hear a lot about in the House of Assembly of course, because it is an issue that is on the minds of many working families across Newfoundland and Labrador. It is one of the issues that I hear the most about from my constituents when I am talking to them.

As I have said here in the House before, I believe that Newfoundland and Labrador is facing a veritable crisis in the provision of early learning and care. It is common for child care centres in this Province to charge $60 and $70, perhaps more, for one child, a single child, in a regulated space for a child under two years old. We have many young working families out there who are paying $1,200, even as much as $1,500 per month for a single space in a regulated child care centre.

Parents in my district tell me that finding child care in the City of St. John's is their single greatest concern. They tell me that finding child care spaces near their home are virtually impossible, nearly impossible for them. On top of that, on a weekly basis, and sometimes it seems like on a daily basis, I am getting telephone calls or e-mails from people who are telling me the difficulty they are having finding transportation, finding some co-operation with school busing from school districts to have their children bused, to find transportation for them to go to child care to school, to child care and so on.

These are serious problems that this Budget continues to not deal with in any sort of serious way. What is in the Budget? What is in Budget 2012 when it comes to child care? Well, it continues to be a piecemeal approach to the problem, the crisis that we have in child care. Basically it says to families in Newfoundland and Labrador, to working families in Newfoundland and Labrador: Do not worry at all because we will have something in place by 2022 – 2022, Mr. Speaker. If you have a child right now and you need affordable daycare, child care, right now because you have to go back to work to support your family, this government is saying do not worry because we will have something in place for your child or children by 2022. They will finally have something in place by 2022. That is when your child right now is ten years old, or eleven years old, or twelve years old. That is what the Budget is basically saying to families who need affordable child care. That is this government's plan, its vision for affordable child care.

We are living in the most prosperous period. We have heard the members opposite talk about how great everything is and how the economy is booming – the most prosperous period in our history, and this is the best that this government can come up with: a proposal to have something in place for your child when they are almost ready to enter junior high school. That is the child care plan.

Is this the best the government can come up with? That is not good enough, I think.

In the last election, voters in Newfoundland and Labrador supported the New Democratic Party because we offered a vision for child care – a vision for universal and comprehensive child care, a vision that included –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind hon. members that the Member for St. John's North has the floor at the moment.

Once again, I recognize the hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you for your patience, Mr. Speaker.

That vision included seeing that early childhood educators are paid for the work that they do. The vision includes a seamless transition between preschool and kindergarten. These are not new ideas. These are not unusual ideas. This is sound policy that governments of all political stripes have put in place in other provinces than our own. Unfortunately, the current government continues to be misguided on the issue of early learning and care, so misguided that early learning policy and funding and child care policy and funding continue to be placed in two separate, disparate departments.

The current Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services has said twice in this House now that the NDP plan for early learning and care would prevent private child care centres from operating in Newfoundland and Labrador. Well, she clearly made that up for pure political reasons, because no one over here has ever said anything like that. No one has said that. That is not the case. The New Democratic Party has said that we will build a universal, public system like the public school system, like the kindergarten to Grade 12 system. That is what we said. That is our plan.

Now, we believe that all parents should be able to participate in the workforce should they choose to and if they are able to. That is what we believe. That is why we want a comprehensive early learning and care system. Nothing in our plan would prevent parents from providing their own child care for their own children should they choose. That happens sometimes with the kindergarten to Grade 12 system. Parents sometimes choose to home-school their children. That is absolutely fine. We do not have a problem with that. That is a personal choice that families make. If parents choose not to participate in a universal public early learning and care system, that would be their personal choice. We do not have a problem with that over here.

Also, nothing in our plan prevents parents from sending their children to for-profit, private child care centres. They could send them to more expensive for-profit child care centres. That happens sometimes right now with the kindergarten to Grade 12 school system. People choose not to send their children to the public system, so they send them to private schools. We do not have a problem with that over here, Mr. Speaker. That is a personal choice. If parents choose not to participate in a universal public system of early learning and care, that would be their personal choice. We do not have a problem with that, as I said.

I hope the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services is finally clear on our plan. If she has any further questions, I hope she just will not jump to conclusions and state those conclusions here in the House. The minister also stood there the other day and talked about the things she heard, as she went around the Province, about the NDP plan, what people are saying. I will tell the minister what people say when they talk to me, when they talk to our party about this government's grand child care plan, we will call it.

I have been told – and the minister is probably aware of this, because she gets a lot of these e-mails, the same ones I get. I have been told by early childhood educators that this government does not recognize or treat early childhood educators as professionals, that this government's treatment of early learning and child care is demoralizing for early childhood educators. I have been told that this government treats early childhood educators as if they are overqualified babysitters. I have been told that this government does not understand that training beyond entry-level is needed for children in home-based care, that this government does not recognize that early childhood educators need professional development the same way that other teachers in the kindergarten to Grade 12 system do. Those are some of the comments that have been made to me in the past few days since the Budget.

Having said that, in fact, I do applaud the government for promising to make some new investments in child care. These investments are necessary; there is no question about that. They are long overdue, but they are also insufficient. I believe this government's overall funding of early childhood education still only amounts to about 1 per cent, or maybe it is just slightly under 1 per cent now, of overall provincial spending – slightly less than 1 per cent.

We will need to see far more substantive investments in early learning and care. Right now, as we know, as we learned last fall, we are currently last in the country when it comes to the provision of early learning and care. That is a fact. The amount of money that is being proposed now is going to be phased in over a ten-year period and it is a paltry sum of money for a budget that is over $8 billion.

Local, national, and international experts continue to tell us that in order to have a decently funded early learning and care system, the ballpark figure is about 3 per cent of jurisdictional spending. So, we need to see more like three times the amount of spending that we are seeing right now on early childhood education to have anything that resembles the decent systems that we see in other provinces. That is what is considered to be the minimum to have an accessible, developed, family-friendly system of early childhood education.

Beyond the very basic issue of funding, there are many other areas that we need to improve on and a good many of these remain unaddressed in the Budget, or we do not hear anything about them in the Budget Speech. I have said a number of times that early childhood education needs to be put in one department. They need to be co-located so we can have a more co-ordinated approach to early learning and care. That would be a basic first step, and that is the direction that most Canadian provinces, most Canadian jurisdictions are moving in right now, combined oversight for school-age children and preschool children in one department. If we had more of a co-ordinated effort, both early learning and child care in one department, we would have an opportunity to introduce a high-level consistent and comprehensive policy direction. That is really what is needed, Mr. Speaker.

We also need to have a more integrated system of early childhood education. We need to have a single authority, a common authority for early childhood education management and for early childhood education administration. We need to make sure that we have a framework that is a clear vision and clear goals for early learning and care because they are not right now.

We need a system of funding that mandates that at least two-thirds of any public funding for child care goes towards the operations of child care and early learning facilities. That is the basic minimum, at least two thirds of what is being provided.

We also need to see far better salaries for early childhood educators in this Province. Right now, there is a very serious wage gap between teachers, let's say in kindergarten at the elementary school, the primary level, the elementary school level and early child hood educators. They tell us all the time, the wage gap is about $40,000. There is about a $40,000 difference between the wages for early childhood educators and somebody who is teaching the child who is just a year older, maybe just a few months older.

Teachers in Newfoundland and Labrador make an average of $67,000 to $68,000 a year right now, and that is a good thing. That is a great thing that we have managed to accomplish that, but the salaries of early childhood educators are far behind. They lag way far behind, at an average of $25,000 to $26,000 a year. That is how much we value early childhood educators in this Province right now. There is a serious inequity here between the salaries that are made by teachers and, I would say, teachers of pre-school children. This inequity continues to be ignored completely in this year's Budget.

As I said, there was a report that came out last fall that showed that child care in Newfoundland and Labrador is at the very bottom of the ratings of jurisdictions across Canada. That report suggests that the salaries of early childhood educators should be at least two-thirds of the salaries of primary school teachers. Newfoundland and Labrador's early childhood educators unfortunately have a very long distance to travel to reach that level. There is nothing in the Budget that will in any way deal with that; nothing to ensure that salaries and recognition of early childhood educators actually reflect the importance of the work that they do, nothing.

We also need to see a mandated fee scale for any early childhood education program or space that receives public funding from taxpayers. So, we need to see a scale for fees for early childhood education, any space that receives taxpayers' funding. I think the minister mentioned something about the plan is to have $30 at one point, a maximum of $30 for publicly-funded spaces. I think that is what she said. That actually be more than four times as expensive as the publicly-funded program that they have in Quebec. You have to ask the question, why is it that Quebec can do this? Here in Newfoundland and Labrador we are a have Province, why can't we have a system that is more affordable? Quebec can offer a program that is more than four times cheaper. Think about it, Quebec still receives equalization from the Government of Canada. We do not because Newfoundland and Labrador's fiscal position has improved.

AN HON. MEMBER: How did we achieve that?

MR. KIRBY: Well, we certainly did not achieve it by investing in early learning and care, I can tell you that much. It certainly was not because of that. I do not understand it; it is hard to understand –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is reluctant to interrupt the hon. member while he is speaking, but I am once again having difficulty hearing the hon. member's remarks. I would ask all members for their co-operation.

Once again, I recognize the hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I believe the member opposite was just giving me an opportunity to have a drink of water, so I thank him for the brief reprieve.

As I was saying, I do not understand why this government believes that an ideal child care program in this day and age is one that is over four times as expensive as the affordable program that they offer parents in the Province of Quebec.

As I said before, one of the biggest problems that we have with the cost of early learning and care right now in Newfoundland and Labrador is they largely have a market-determined fee structure. It is a market-determined fee structure that causes working parents to have to pay $600, or $700, or $800, or $900, or $1,000 even per month for one space for a child in a child care centre. It is all made worse because the Child Care Services Subsidy Program is really insufficient. The amount of funding that is provided for that is simply insufficient and the program criteria that are used are too narrow. As a result, it sort of limits the access for parents. There are too few working parents who can access the care that they need to see that their pre-school age children are looked to when they are working.

If this Province had the child care program that the New Democratic Party proposed in the last election, we would have far greater stability in the system and we would have a program that would be more affordable to working parents. Parents just do not understand why this program is so opposed to having a publicly funded system. They do not understand why this government is so opposed to having publicly managed early childhood education programs because we do the same thing for kindergarten, which is, as I said, one year or a few months away for a lot of pre-school children.

They do not understand why this government has no problem spending billions of dollars, spending billions of dollars on a publicly funded and publicly managed hydroelectricity project like Muskrat Falls, billions of dollars for Muskrat Falls, an unproven project, an uncertain investment of taxpayers' money and only scraps, or crumbs as the member said, left over for early learning and care for pre-school aged children. That is not a vision and that is not responsible investing. We know, Mr. Speaker, that there is plenty of evidence for every dollar that goes into early learning and care, there is more than a dollar that comes back. Some studies show that $2 comes back, but we know it is a proven investment.

Muskrat Falls, it could be a sinkhole for all we know right now, but we know early learning and care has a payoff. We have spent millions of dollars so far chasing after a project that could prove to be another Conservative Party boondoggle, we do not know. Meanwhile, we are falling fast, falling behind the rest of Canada when it comes to early childhood education.

I see my time is getting close to done here for this segment. I assure the House that I have a lot more to say about the importance of early learning and care, about the importance of all-day kindergarten. I have to tell the members, Mr. Speaker, I have been canvassing my district this past month and when I knock on people's doors they say to me we are going to get a child care program, or I want my all-day kindergarten. These are very simple things. They pay for themselves; there is plenty of evidence that they pay for themselves. People tell me – I say to the Minister of Education – I want my all-day kindergarten.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KIRBY: I hope the minister will see to it – maybe he will change this Budget, Mr. Speaker, and put something in there that people really want around early learning and care. I will leave it at that. I thank everyone. I thank my constituents for the opportunity to stand here and respond to the Budget.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I have been itching in my seat now for about twenty minutes. I listened to the hon. member across the House in regard to his remarks. I sit in my seat in the House as much as I possibly can and I listen to each and every member as they talk about the Budget, talk about their districts, talk about their politics, and talk about everything else. The hon. member just mentioned the word vision, in regard to vision. I will tell you something now to the hon. member: I see no vision, Mr. Speaker. I see a person who is blinded by the Twitter box; that is what I see. He has no idea of anything to do with a budget and what it means to run a Province.

What I see is a money tree, sitting in the backyard, pick it off and we will fund it all. He does not even know anything about balance; he does not know absolutely anything.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I say to the hon. member, we have seen past governments in Canada that ran their provinces straight into bankruptcy – just about bankruptcy. That is exactly what you will see. It is fine enough to talk about child care. One of the most important items in regard to the cornerstones of this Budget is child care, Mr. Speaker. That is exactly what it is, but you cannot put your full $8 billion into child care. You have to have the balance. You have to be able to take care of other parts of society. You have to take care in regard to the economy. You have to grow the economy to get the revenue streams to come in to fund the thing that you are talking about.

You stay tuned, I say to the hon. member, because I am absolutely glad in regard to you being the Third Party. You will always be the Third Party, because the people of Newfoundland see your plan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: It is unaffordable. It is unsustainable. It talked about increasing taxes and decreasing the revenues coming from our oil fields. You cannot do that and fund the programs you are talking about.

I have seen member after member get up in this House, and all they talk about is what is not in the Budget. They talk about: What does Quebec do? What does Ontario do? What does Alberta do? Well, what do they not do? That is what you have to ask. Compare the apples to the apples and compare the oranges to the oranges, not the apples to oranges. In this country, in this land, this government has been hailed as one of the best governments Canada has ever seen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: He talked about everything from salaries, everything and anything he could think about in regard to the provision of the service he was talking about. He talked about it all – give it all. Well, what are you going to do with education? New schools are needed right across this Province. What about that in the K-12? You have no idea. You do have not an idea of anything in regard to being able to balance the Budget. That is exactly it. They are not even close. They are not even in the game. That is what it is and that is exactly what you are missing: the whole point of running a Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. O'BRIEN: You have no idea in regard to fiscal management and being fiscally responsible and taking this Province to where it needs to go.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the hon. member to direct his comments toward the Speaker.

The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

MR. O'BRIEN: Sorry, Mr. Speaker. I forgot that you were interested, too.

I had the hon. member's attention and finally I thought it was going to sink in. Absolutely, that is what I was thinking. Now, Mr. Speaker, he has lost it and now he is back to square one again. He is probably going to go on the Twitter box and he is lost to society again. That is exactly what is going to happen here this afternoon. I thought I was doing a great thing –

AN HON. MEMBER: You were.

MR. O'BRIEN: I was. I was making progress, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I will advise the hon. member, I am not the oldest member here; I might be the oldest in regard to age, in regard to time in this House of Assembly, but I will give you a little bit of wisdom. You cannot keep coming in here each and every day centering on one item and one item only, twelve petitions in regard to the same thing, from the same people. You cannot just do that, because the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are looking for a broader vision. They are looking for a future for Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Then you get up and you talk about Muskrat Falls. I heard the hon. Minister of Natural Resources talking about Muskrat Falls and how important it is, and yes, that project has to stand alone in regard to being viable and affordable to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. It is absolutely our future; that is exactly what it is, because it turns the corner in regard to the dependability on a non-renewable economy to a renewable economy forevermore. That is exactly what it does for us in the long-term. That is what it does. Guess what, I say to the honourable – Mr. Speaker, I forgot; I was not talking to you again, Mr. Speaker. I know you are hanging on every word that I am saying and I know you are interested in exactly what I am saying. I will say to the hon. member: when it comes to growing that economy, it means that we can fund exactly the things that that hon. member is talking about, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I listened carefully; I will speak to other people's remarks, too. I listened to the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair and she talked passionately; she always does about Labrador. This time around, when she was talking about the Budget, she talked mostly about the federal Budget, Mr. Speaker, all about the federal Budget. You know something? It confirmed in my mind in regard to her direction and the direction that she has taken, and that is – I think she is setting herself up for federal politics, is exactly what I see. That is all she was talking about, absolutely.

She was talking about the Gateway, the Northern Gateway, just like you are going to jump in there and you are going to create it overnight. They talk about something that is going to happen over a weekend; you go on the long weekend, May 24, and you come back and you have the Northern Gateway all developed and all going and all the infrastructure in and it is all done. That is the way they talk about it, just like it is going to happen tomorrow morning, Mr. Speaker. It amazes me. It absolutely amazes me in regard to the lack of vision.

We have looked forward not only for three and four and five years down the road; this government has a history of looking forward for twenty years down the road, for thirty years down the road, to make this Province sustainable, vibrant, afford anything that it is affordable from a government point of view. That is the vision that we have for Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I remember just before the Budget came down, I was listening to them on their Open Lines and that kind of stuff, their media interviews and that kind of stuff, from a perspective as the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I was listening carefully. I listen all the time, each and every time that I can get an ear to the radio or whatever it is. They were biting at the bit, thinking that municipalities were going to fall apart in Newfoundland and Labrador. Lo and behold, who was out in regard to this Budget and saying it was a very good Budget, taking into account the deficit position that we are facing, the investments that we are making in municipalities in Newfoundland and Labrador? It was MNL. It was the very municipalities that they thought were going to be out there criticizing this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: There was no criticism at all. The wind went right out of their sails. As a matter of fact, the wind went out of their sails so much I am nearly so bored in here in this House at this given time I am nearly falling asleep in the House, Mr. Speaker. That is a fact, for the simple reason is they have been talking about opening up the House, we have to open up the House. We had a fellow out on the lawn; he sat there for months on end. They shaved his head. They shaved his head for the poor old fellow. They opened the House and they let him down. They hardly opened their mouth.

AN HON. MEMBER: They had the same petition (inaudible).

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, absolutely. He had a petition and the whole shebang going. They shaved him off, I watched it all. The poor old bugger lost his hair to get the House opened, and what happened? You came in and you went flat on your face. You had nothing to say.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: We have had only about two or three questions on Muskrat Falls. Everything was going to fall apart. Muskrat Falls was this, we have to have a debate, we have to have this, and we have to have that. I would not say we had ten fingers worth of questions on Muskrat Falls so far in this session. Where are we with all of this?

I can tell you something right now in regard to the voting process, and they said the people of Newfoundland and Labrador voted for the NDP. I am going to tell you something right now, you will remain the Third Party for the rest of your born days; I can guarantee you that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Because you fell flat. The NDP fell flat on their face and that is a fact, I can guarantee you that. There is no doubt about it, I do not mind saying it and it is a fact of life, I can guarantee you that.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is called belly flop.

MR. O'BRIEN: Belly flop? I am telling you that is exactly what it was, a belly flop, I say to the hon. member. There is no doubt about it.

Mr. Speaker, this government has a history of investment and making wise decisions. You talked about us becoming a have Province, I say to the hon. member. That is significant. It was a significant time in our history. That is exactly what it was. What got us there? Prudent, fiscal management is what got us there. That is exactly what got us there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: When we were up at that table making decisions at Cabinet and making decision in caucus, we made decisions that were wise for the Province, wise for the future of this Province. We did not go in there helter-skelter, be driven by politics, be driven by the media, be driven by the Open Lines, or be driven by whatever it may be. We resisted all of that, and you have seen that in the past. Absolutely, you have seen that type of politics in the past. That has never, ever affected this Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. It started in 2003, yes, it did, and we have a history but I tell you right now, there have been significant investments and significant decisions made since one year ago, I say to the hon. members.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I tell you right now, that we will go through the process again and again. I have no problem saying here today that I have no fears of staying in this field of politics if I want to in regard to this government and my colleagues for a long, long time to go. I guarantee you that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I will get back to my department, and I would not mind saying a few words in regard to my district. My district, to me anyway, is one of the nicest districts in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is a very tidy district with four particular communities in it. I also want to say here, and I will not go into all of the investments that have been made in my district since 2003, but they are quite significant. I can guarantee you that, absolutely.

That community, as the hon. Minister of Natural Resources said, has grown by 11 per cent or 12 per cent this year alone in regard to population base. I remember back in 1999, the attitude in Gander was: Boys, the last person left turn the lights out, because she was gone. The whole bottom was right out of her. I would like to say the word that I was going to say, Mr. Speaker, but I do not think it will make it to Hansard. Anyway, the bottom was out of it, I can guarantee you that, and there was no bright light in the future.

I will tell you something right now. There is not only a bright light in regard to my district and the Province as a whole. It is just a total glow because people are looking to the future and they are confident in the economy, they are confident in their community, and they are confident in this government. We will continue to lead this Province and lead this country in economic growth for a long time to come, I say to the hon. members.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I had the hon. Minister of Health and Community Services in my district last Friday making a very important announcement in regard to the extending of the breast screening program in the Province, in three particular areas. One of them happened to my district along with a new MRI or CAT scan – no, a mammography unit. I have so much - I tell the honest truth to the hon. member - I get confused in regard to the number of investments that have been made in the James Paton Memorial Hospital over the last number of years.

Actually, I am being very truthful in regard to all the equipment and everything else that is being invested there. There is another state-of-the-art digital mammography unit being invested in the James Paton Memorial Hospital, which will enable our radiologists to screen more people. I was surprised at the number that they are actually pushing through the system right now. I think it is eighteen a day, but that now enables them to see more and do more for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. It is a significant investment, not only for the people in my district but also the region.

We are going to see some good planning in regard to a new school in my district and possibly seeing a fourth new school being built there, which would be a K to three and then we would have four to six as well. Why are we doing that? We are not only doing it because of the age of the school in regard to Gander Academy, but we are doing that because of the growth in the population and the young people who are choosing to live in Newfoundland and Labrador.

You listen to the people across the House and they talk about and great enough – and listen, I come from a field of pharmacy and I served them for thirty years in regard to people of senior age and that kind of stuff. To listen to the hon. members, you would not think that a young person lived in Newfoundland and Labrador any more. Nobody works here any more. Only senior people live here. That is the way you talk. It is unbelievable to me actually when you have vibrant communities such as Gander, Grand Falls-Windsor, you have Clarenville, and you have those kind small towns. There is actual growth in certain small communities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

AN HON. MEMBER: Glovertown.

MR. O'BRIEN: In Glovertown and all those kinds of areas. There are some places on the Northern Peninsula that has seen population growth as well. Why is that? It is because of the way we fiscally manage our economy, Mr. Speaker, and it provides jobs. You might not have a job in your backyard, but you will and if you want, you will have a job in Newfoundland and Labrador if you go and look for one, absolutely.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact, I would go so far that if you want two, you could get two.

AN HON. MEMBER: Two jobs?

MR. O'BRIEN: Absolutely. If you want to work in two different positions, you can actually work in two different positions. That is not an issue in Newfoundland and Labrador. I have a good many in my district who actually holds down two jobs, and that is commendable. That is a fact.

AN HON. MEMBER: We have them here.

MR. O'BRIEN: Absolutely, we have them here too, Mr. Speaker. That opportunity is there, I say to the hon. member and I say to Mr. Speaker, I guarantee you that.

We are making a significant investment in our airport, in my airport in Gander – it is the people's airport.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Being the Member for Gander, and knowing the very nature of –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

MR. O'BRIEN: – our airport and how important it is to the cornerstone of Gander to see $3.5 million go into the airport, on top of the $3 million that we put in last year, leveraging $10 million, is a significant investment, Mr. Speaker.

I could not resist going down the path of aircraft, Mr. Speaker, I can guarantee you that. Anyway, I clarified that issue today with the particular media source, so I do not think that is going to be an issue any more when it comes to me, as the MHA and a Minister of the Crown, and how prudent I am over my expenses. That will be what it is, and it will die its day, and it might have been a bit of bad reporting, but we see all those kind of things in politics and that kind of stuff, and each and every one of us might experience it at any given time.

Anyway, at least, Mr. Speaker, I see a vibrant district. I have Glenwood that is doing very, very well in the mining industry, the forestry industry; Appleton, being what it is, a very absolutely fabulous little community; and Benton, really into the mining industry as well in regard to prospecting.

I have to say, as well, Mr. Speaker, that over the last number of days and over the last number of weeks, everything has not been doom and gloom from the opposite side of the House. I have heard a few members get up there and say some positive things and give some credit and that kind of stuff. Now, I can criticize whatever they say – they have their role to play, and it is not all doom and gloom. In certain areas, though, I tell you the God's honest truth, when the door opens up and we are at about 1:30 p.m., it is just like a low pressure coming in through the doors, because all they talk about is doom and gloom, what we do not have, not what we have. Then they start comparing themselves to whatever they compare themselves to, and they are not even onside to their counterparts in Nova Scotia, Mr. Speaker. I really do not understand the politics of the NDP. They talk about everything from funding this to funding that, and whatever. They do not talk about how they are going to create the revenue stream to fund it. I do not understand; I really do not understand.

Hopefully, after this session, two things will happen. Two things will happen, Mr. Speaker, and I will end on this. Two things will happen. I will hopefully help the hon. member – and I know we do not mention any names – that he will actually start to communicate by the mouth instead of the Twitter box and then we can get some substantial things done here in the House of Assembly, and he will understand the balance between being fiscally responsible and having everything paid for and not having any revenue streams coming in.

To me, Mr. Speaker, understanding –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time is up.

Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: The member has leave.

MR. O'BRIEN: Me understanding, Mr. Speaker, that why – why do they not understand that you actually have to pay for what you get?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

It is certainly an honour to stand here and speak, but I have to say, Mr. Speaker, that is a tough act to follow right there. That is a tough act to follow. I thought for a second I was not in the House; I thought I was in church, because there was a sermon here today.

Just a quick remark, I must say; there was vote in here yesterday and it was about keeping the House open, and this is one of the reasons right here. When we hear talk like this, this is one of the reasons the House should be open, Mr. Speaker; it is because we can hear someone so passionate – so passionate –talking about all the good things in their district. I am looking forward to some good things in my district. Again, it is an honour.

What I would say, Mr. Speaker, this is my first opportunity to speak to the Budget. It is obviously a very important thing, the opportunity to allocate the funds that the Province needs to carry out their programs every year. I think what I am going to do is I am probably going to lead off by talking mostly about –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. PARSONS: – the areas that I have covered the Estimates in. Before I get there, I do have to comment on the comments made by the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

When I came in this House I said that it was my job as an Opposition to criticize or oppose; we have to hold the government accountable, but at the same time, we have to applaud things when they are done well. Yesterday the minister mentioned the event that was held at Empire Theatres; I was there and it was a fantastic event. The kids from my district that came into town, many of them had never been to St. John's – many of them had never been on an airplane. They had an opportunity to come here to the capital city and they had an opportunity to take in the House of Assembly and see the sights and take part in a contest which, at the end of the day, was educating them, especially as they are getting ready now to move into the workplace. So, again, I give the member a commendation there for doing a great job. That was a great thing. That is the purpose here; it is not just to criticise for the sake of criticizing, but to compliment when things are done well.

AN HON. MEMBER: But. But.

MR. A. PARSONS: But – no; what I wanted to do, Mr. Speaker, is I wanted to just discuss the departments for which I am the critic. I have gone through two Estimates Committees; again, they are definitely a learning experience, to sit down, and somewhat – it can be seen as monotonous if you are not actually involved, but to sit there and learn how these things are going, and as a first-timer to have the opportunity for the minister, as well as the staff who are responsible for the day-to-day running and the yearly budget of a department, to see how our money is taken in and our money is allocated, and how it is actually spent.

So, again, I had the opportunity; we had Estimates the other night with the Justice Department. It was good, the minister was here, all the senior staff were here, and we went down through the entire department again. The Department of Justice is a huge department. It has a high complement of actual employees, whether it be in the department or whether it be in the judicial system, whether it be in the institutions that we have in this Province. There is a wide range of employees – or whether it be the RNC. So, there is a lot of money that goes to that department every year.

I sort of made a top ten list; there are ten things that I took out of the Justice Department Estimates that I wanted to chat about. The first one is, again, I talked about the travelling monies that were spent by this department. Now, one thing – and I will paraphrase the minister here; he said: I am not a traveling man. The fact is his budget was not even fully used, because he did not actually need it. I did have some concerns, which I expressed, and was answered by his staff.

Some of the travel budgets in the other aspects of the department were being cut, and my main concern there is to make sure that some of these justice services were not being cut, in the sense that the people, employees, in the major centres of the Province, in a lot of cases they are responsible to go out to the rural areas to provide these services, whether it be family justice services, victim impact services. So, my main thing was to make sure we are not sacrificing that service to rural areas just to make ends meet. I was told that this not the case; if there is any sacrifice in funds here, it is not going to be cutting back of services under this department to the rural areas of the Province. So, certainly I appreciate that. It is a big budget and we have a very large Province to cover.

This is number nine and number eight on my list, and one of them is the fact that as it stands right now we collect roughly $11 million per year in fines. That is a pretty big number. The unfortunate part is that there is roughly $34 million in uncollected fines.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. A. PARSONS: Thirty-four million dollars in uncollected fines. I said very clearly on the record when I talked to the minister, this is not something that just built up overnight; this has been building up for a long period of time. As we all know it has been in the media lately. It is something that has become a bit of an issue. We are pulling over drivers and they do not have insurance. They have $30,000 in unpaid fines just sitting there and they are still on our roads driving around – really, menaces to society. The question is: How do we fix this situation? What are we going to do? It has been tossed around a whole number of ideas. Do we make people work their fines off? Do we just put people in jail? Again, there are provisions now to incarcerate people. If they are not going to pay their monies, well maybe we will just put them in jail. Maybe there is some merit to that. People have to have a consequence to their actions. That is something that really is a huge issue.

The question is: What do we do here? That is why it is my opinion that maybe there is a possibility at some point that there could be an allocation of funds down the road for a study or some kind of report on what we can do. I think the cost of doing that may be far outweighed by the cost we may get from finding new ways to collect on these outstanding monies that are there. We go out and we pay our insurance and if we get in trouble, if you get a parking ticket or a speeding ticket, you are supposed to pay that. We have to find ways to collect this money. Thirty-four million dollars is a huge amount of money. I know it is a troublesome area, we are trying to get in the ways of collection and getting these people, but maybe we have to look into an actual study and think outside the box on new ways we can achieve this. That is just one thing that I took out of it.

Another thing that I was completely surprised about and I think the Member for Port de Grave might have been as well being the Chair of the Committee, was that we actually receive money from the Republic of Doyle. I was actually shocked when I heard that, we actually received monies this year from the Republic of Doyle because they use some of our provincial RNC people in the filming of their show. They had to pay back – there is money that came back to the Province. That is a two-way street there; money has gone to that program. I do not hold anything – that program does more for tourism for this Province. Anybody who watches it gets homesick for this Province when they see the beautiful cinematography. We are actually getting money there. That is just an aside there that was a bit of a surprise when that came up and a bit of a shock.

Another thing I noticed was Justice invested a fair bit of money into mandatory media training. I guess there are workshops and we have to go out to pay consultants to instruct us on how to speak and represent the department. Sometimes I wonder if that is a great allocation of our funds, but maybe it is a necessary evil. It is what it is.

This is something that has come up and has been in the news once in awhile. I believe the legislation is ongoing and it is probably going to be coming to this House at some point. We discussed during the Estimates the ATIPPA review, which is a long and complicated process. You have a lot of other departments that are jumping in on this, making changes and making suggestions. It is a piece of legislation that this Province is – we are waiting for this. We all know it is something that is necessary. We all know that it is a good thing for society to have access to information. It is huge. It is fundamental when you think about it.

The next point on my list is we talked about two trial projects that have been tossed about. One of them is the Family Violence Court and one of them is the Drug Treatment Court. These are two different ideas to deal with two areas of our society, which unfortunately we see a bit too much of each and we see it every day. When it comes to the Drug Treatment Court, this was something that was promised in the Blue Book. The book is a four-year mandate, so as it stands it does not appear that we are going to see this until the end of the mandate.

In this Province, the fact is that it is no trouble to see when you look at the news the amount of crime. With big money come big problems sometimes, especially here in the capital city area when you watch the news. It is hard sometimes. You see a lot of crime going on, minor and major, which deals with drugs. To have a special court to deal with this issue would be a good thing. It is being looked into from what I understand; however, it is on the back burner when it comes to the other one, which is the Family Violence Court, which is a pilot project.

Right now, as I understand it, it is in year three to four. Family violence, as we all know, is an issue that is still out there. Many times it is not reported as much – you hate to hear it, but we need to report it and people need to be prosecuted for this. Again, to have a special court to deal with this one area would be a great thing and I am looking forward to seeing where this project, this pilot, goes. Again, we are in year three to four; I am looking to seeing the positive changes that it brings about.

Another thing on my list – I am down to point three of my top ten – is the new RCMP contract which, again, is a twenty-year contract in five-year intervals.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. PARSONS: I know this contract actually went through; there was a bit of a tough negotiation here, but again, we are very happy to have it signed off. I believe there is a new superintendent in this Province now, which is great. I guess it has mechanisms for better accountability, basically a management committee; that is never a bad thing, to have a management committee making sure – we are talking a lot of money in a big department here, so it has to be managed and looked after. When we are all employees of the public, we all have to be held accountable for what it is we do and how we are spending taxpayer money.

I guess the second part here, number two on my list – and this is something that I have spoken about on numerous occasions – is the lovely facility down by the lake, and that is Her Majesty's Penitentiary, which right now, I believe, is 153 years old.

As we all know, Kingston Penitentiary is getting shut down after 177 years. In this case, we have Her Majesty's 153 years. Again, we have not seen the full effect, the trickle down of what is going to happen under Bill C-10, which was just implemented. We all know that it looks like it is going to mean more incarceration, more people going to jail, more mandatory minimums. With the closure of two institutions on the mainland, we might see a trickle down there. I do not know if any of those prisoners are going to go there, but those prisoners have to go somewhere. Then, there are prisoners at that place that might end up coming here. We have a federal-provincial institution. They may have to take people, but the problem is there is no room for them. There is absolutely no room for these people. When you go down on any given day the place is at its maximum, absolute capacity.

We can get into the physical structure of the place. It is just absolutely draconian. It was built in a completely different era. Again, I use the words of Minister Vic Toews; he said a nineteenth-century intuition should not be used to manage a twenty-first century population. That is exactly what we have here in this Province. My issue with that is that the federal government, at the same time, has also said that they have not build any new prisons since 2006 and they are certainly not going to start any time soon.

Twofold here, Mr. Speaker: one, is the federal government responsible? You had better believe they are, and hopefully we are going to work out some kind of deal there. We have to hold their feet to the fire, too, as a Province. They have responsibilities to us which, in this case, I believe they are shirking. They are not handling what they are supposed to be handling. At the same time, we must address the inevitable. The problem is – the minister mentioned we have X amount of dollars in this Province and we have to figure out what is the best way to spend those dollars. How are we going to spend it? We cannot cover off everything. The fact is, when you compare something like prisoners versus health care, it is a seemingly easy choice.

What I would say is: we cannot stick our head in the sand. We cannot pretend that the issue is not there. We cannot just hope that it is going to go away. The fact is, at some day that institution has to be replaced. It is what it is. There are negative aspects of society; even though we do not want to talk about them and we certainly do not want to spend money on them, we must do that; we have to think about it.

The problem I have is that – I do not know; I believe there have been studies done on this. I am sure this has been talked about and tossed around in the department.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. PARSONS: It has been tossed around and talked about in the department for a number of years, but I do not know if those studies are current, and certainly I know there was no money this year in this Budget to handle that. There was absolutely not a dollar put there that I am aware of to cover off this issue. It looks like it is going to be the status quo for a while and that is an issue, because the safety of both the employees there and the inmates could be compromised.

I asked one question. When I did my visit, one of the things that I noticed is that all of the prisoners in the institution actually wear their own clothes; they wear their own street clothes. I asked about the possibility of: why are we not going with a general outfitter uniform?

The reason is cost. The issue with that is, with prisoners coming inside with their own clothes, that does present an issue when it comes to the influx of drugs into that prison, which was identified clearly as the major issue in that prison, the drug problem. That drug problem does not just stay behind those walls. It goes outside those walls too, so it is something that we have to look at here.

We have to make the jobs of the people working in here – and again, a lot of times, these prison guards, these officials within the Department of Justice, they are really the unrecognized part. I mean we all recognize what our RNC and our RCMP do, our law enforcement people do, but these people – an officer deals with a case, but these people on a day-to-day basis, twenty-four seven, they are there making sure that inmates are there, they are looked after, and at the same time really protecting our safety as well. I believe that is an issue.

The number one on my list here is that it seems universal, that everyone likes the idea of sealskin hats back for the RNC. Hopefully we are going to see a change there again. I know it comes down to functionality. I do not know if there is a cost difference, but I see that as a win-win for the seal industry and I see it as a win-win for going back to our roots here. I end that part on a lighter note, Mr. Speaker.

That is just one area that I covered in Estimates. We sat down for the full three hours, asked a lot of questions, and the minister took his time to answer those questions, I appreciate that. There are some undertakings that had to be provided but those will come in a timely fashion, I believe is the term that is used. We will get them in a timely fashion. I guess it is the same timely fashion as Dr. Craig's report. I am hoping that comes in a timely fashion as well.

Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to move on very quickly. I do not have much time so I may have to carry this over into my next – I believe we get two to three opportunities to speak to the Budget and I plan on using them, as does, I would assume, most members. In the Opposition we get lots of time to speak. That is one of the perks of being in the Opposition is we get to speak and stand up here and speak for the people in our district.

I also had to do the Education Estimates as well with the minister. He took his time, sat down for a full three hours actually, asked a pile of questions. We have more time to go. The minister and his staff were kind enough to give us more time and we are coming back again in a couple of weeks to ask more questions.

I have to beg forgiveness. I am new so I am trying to figure out some of the things that are standard questions that I will not have to ask next year; but, at the end of the day, we need to take all the time we have to, to make sure that what is done is right. That is our job, to pour over these things line by line and get these questions answered. The good news is that, as it stands, the questions that I have put out there are being answered and we are given lots of opportunity, and I appreciate that. Especially as I go on to the next round of Estimates next week.

One thing I would point out – the education budget is another huge budget, another huge important issue in this Province. One area of concern to me, and it is a bit of a personal issue for me because I have friends who have children with autism. I am just seeing what they are going through. What I would note is that there are no additional teachers or student assistants, there is no training or professional development provided for the delivery of student support services, and that is to deal with issues such as these. This is despite increases in diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder.

It is troubling news, Mr. Speaker. We hear the reports coming out; they are actually starting to use the word epidemic when we talk about an issue like autism. When we talk about autism in the schools, one of the things is that there are student assistants provided but they are mainly for hygiene and portering and taking care of students, but they are not being put there to actually help students when it comes to understanding concepts and the education side of it. I do not know, I think this is happening in a lot of other provinces and it is something that I am hoping this government is going to consider as we move forward. We have to look at the numbers. It was one in 132. I think it has gone lower than that now. I will discuss that on my next session, Mr. Speaker.

Certainly, I appreciate the time to talk to this Budget and I look forward again.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Monday, May 7, the Resource Committee will meet in the House at 9:00 a.m. to review the Estimates of the Department of Natural Resources; Forestry and Agrifoods.

Mr. Speaker, it being 5:28 p.m., I move, seconded by the Minister of Transportation and Works, that this House do now adjourn.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that this House do now adjourn.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

This House now stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. on Monday.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Monday, at 1:30 p.m.