MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

This afternoon we are pleased to welcome six Level III students from Basque Memorial School in Red Bay, Labrador, in the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair. These students are accompanied by their teacher, Ms Amanda Anthony.

Welcome to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: the hon. the Member for the District of Conception Bay South; the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Buchans; the hon. the Member for the District of Terra Nova; the hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley; the hon. the Member for the District of Topsail; and, the hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Conception Bay South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize and congratulate Dr. Adrian Power for his contribution to the sporting community in Conception Bay South.

From May 4 to May 6, Dr. Power organized a curling extravaganza, starting with a day of training on May 4 and ending with a two-day fun spiel. This event saw over 450 people receive a basis lesson in curling on Friday; most notable was the participation of 300 students from the various schools in our town.

The event continued Friday night with demonstration games between our Province's most celebrated curlers. In attendance there was the 2006 Senior Men's and Male Champions, the 2007 Senior Ladies and Ladies Champions, the Newfoundland Junior Men's Champions, the Newfoundland Under-17 Female and Male Champions and, of course, the 2006 Olympic Gold Medalists.

On Saturday and Sunday over twenty teams competed in the fun spiel, bringing the total participation in the weekend event to 1,700 people.

I would also like to congratulate the recreation staff and, in particular, the staff and management at the CBS Stadium. This exceptional group of people transformed an ice hockey rink into a curling rink, and you can only imagine the time and dedication needed for this to happen successfully. To quote one of the many kids in attendance, "The ice looked wicked."

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join with me in congratulating Dr. Adrian Power and all those who contributed to brining the great sport of curling to Conception Bay South.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Fall-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, during my almost twelve years as MHA I have been to many official openings, but last Wednesday I experienced a first. I rise in this House today to extend congratulations to Aur Resources on the official opening of their Duck Pond mine. The mining industry is not revitalized in the Millertown-Buchans area.

Mr. Speaker, "we are ready". Those are the words that were spoken by each departmental supervisor as part of the official opening ceremonies last Wednesday when mine manager Guy Belleau questioned them to determine whether the employees and the mine were prepared to produce concentrate.

Aur Resources is blasting its way into the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador with their investment of over $100 million into their Duck Pond mine.

Mr. Speaker, the project started in 1973 when a significant body of copper and zinc was discovered by prospector Allan Keats of Gambo. In fact, he was in attendance last week. The property changed hands several times until Aur purchased the rights in March 2002 and construction began in the first quarter of 2005.

Mr. Speaker, one of the most significant benefits noted during the opening ceremonies by all speakers was the fact that out of the 200 permanent jobs at Duck Pond mine, 95 per cent of the employees are Newfoundlanders and Labradorians - many of those returning home from mainland Canada to work at the mine site.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS THISTLE: In April of this year, the first shipments of concentrate left the mine site bound for St. George's on the West Coast and from there it is transported to smelters. Presently, ten tractor-trailer loads of concentrate are being hauled out of the mine every day, each one containing forty tonnes of ore, and this is expected to increase to fourteen tractor-trailers by early summer.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in extending congratulations to Aur Resources on the official opening of their Duck Pond mine in Millertown. Best wishes to Aur Resources management and staff for a long and prosperous future in our region.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ORAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Glovertown Gymnastics Club on an outstanding performance at the Flight Invitational 2007, held at Gander. The club may only have sent five members to the competition, but the small squad showed they could compete with the larger clubs. As a unit, the Glovertown gymnasts claimed nine individual medals, and two overall accolades, including one gold at the two-day event.

Mr. Speaker, Jake Marshall led the Glovertown Charge by capturing overall honours in the boys under ten Level I division by placing first in all five of his individual events. Rebecca Smith captured Glovertown's second overall medal by finishing third in the provincial Level II tyro competition. Victoria Pollard was just a few positions back of Smith in the same category. Katlyn Hawkins was twelfth in provincial Level I argo, and Taylor Blackwood came seventeenth in provincial Level I tyro to round out Glovertown's results.

Mr. Speaker, the success of this smaller gymnastic team shows that smaller teams from rural areas can certainly compete with clubs from larger areas in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all members of this House join with me today in congratulating the Glovertown Gymnastic Club on their impressive achievements.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to recognize a constituent from my district, Jessica Rowe of Deer Lake. She recently took part in the district's annual Royal Canadian Legion Branch 3 Remembrance Day senior essay competition, and went on to win the provincial title.

Due to her win at the provincial level, Jessica became the second constituent in consecutive years from my district to be awarded the honour of representing the region's youth at Beaumont Hamel. She will be travelling with the Canadian contingent to France on June 28 and spend six days exploring our history. She will stand proud and present her winning speech to those in attendance at the Canada Day Ceremony.

Mr. Speaker, seventeen-year-old Jessica, who is the daughter of Denise and Israel Rowe, will become one of the Province's high school graduates this year, finishing off her high school career a straight "A" student. She hopes to further her education at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College in September and has her goal set on becoming a member of our prestigious Royal Newfoundland Constabulary.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join with me in extending congratulations to Jessica Rowe on winning the first place senior essay competition and representing the region's youth at Beaumont Hamel.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS E. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This past Friday, the Town of Paradise held its annual Municipal Awards Banquet to recognize several residents who have made a significant contribution to their community. The town also presented a number of awards during the evening.

Mr. Bob Bennett received the Volunteer of the Year Award. Mr. Bennett is a devoted member of the Topsail United Church and is involved with all activities of the church.

The Kin Club of Paradise received the Volunteer Group of the Year Award. The Kin Club is actively involved with the youth in our community, as well as a number of events to help the less fortunate.

Ms April Stapleton received the Youth of the Year Award. She participates in numerous school and other activities. April volunteers with the SPCA and is a member of the Girl Guide movement.

Ms Jennifer Neville received the Coach of the Year Award. Jennifer coaches soccer in Paradise and also at the provincial and national level.

Ms Sarah Davis received the Female Athlete of the Year award for her involvement in women's hockey. She is also captain of the Boys Bantam A Hockey Team.

Mr. Michael Pittman received the Male Athlete of the Year for his involvement in a number of sports including: rugby, hockey, baseball, volleyball and soccer.

Ms Ruth Anne Burnell was selected as Citizen of the Year. Ruth Ann helps out in many areas including church, Sunday school, assisting neighbours who are in ill health and other activities too numerous to mention.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members of the House of Assembly to join me in congratulating all of the award winners, as well as those who were nominated for their individual achievements in their community, the Town of Paradise.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to extend congratulations on the tenth Annual Regional Historical Heritage Fair held at the Bay Arena, Bay Roberts on May 11-12, 2007. I was honoured to be a part of the opening and closing ceremonies.

Forty-two schools, nearly 200 students and approximately 145 exhibits were on display representing the Avalon region. The Fair's program supports school curricula and helps bring history alive for students.

I am sure that the hon. members for Mount Pearl and Harbour Main-Whitbourne would agree that it brought history alive for each and everyone who was in attendance.

Mr. Speaker, this year's themes is: Where Once They Stood, and I can assure you that the general public and judges were entertained and informed through music, dance, drama, art, video and costume.

This year's winners, who will represent the Avalon region at the national fair in Lethbridge, Alberta on July 9-16 were: Matthew Morry, from St. Peter's Junior High, Mount Pearl and Andrew Bonnell from I.J. Samson Junior High, St. John's. Those awards were presented by His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, Edward Roberts.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in saying thank you to the organizers, the sponsors and all those who participated. A special congratulations and best wishes to those who will participate at the nationals.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform Members of the House of Assembly that my department is seeking proposals from those interested in pursuing the development of the forest products industry in Central Labrador.

The formal call for Expressions of Interest will allow us to assess the level and type of interest in the harvesting, sawmilling and secondary processing sectors in this region.

Mr. Speaker, we released in November the Strategic Plan to Develop Labrador Secondary Manufacturing and Value Added Wood Products Industry. The independent study identified potential forestry operations based on the constraints and opportunities in the Labrador forest sector.

The study recommends the establishment of a sawmill and manufacturing plant in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, to produce construction lumber and packaged homes both for local and northern markets.

At the time the study was released, we established a senior management team with representation from a number of government departments to work through the issues identified in the study. This included the viability of the recommendations, identification of investors and proponents.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform members today that as a result of this work, we are now ready to explore the capacity of local interests to develop this sector. The proposals we received through this process will be evaluated against their linkage to the recommendations in the study.

The forest sector in Labrador holds opportunities for development and we are now attempting to determine the interest in pursuing projects that hold the most promise. We look forward to receiving the proposals and to see work start on the creation of a new diversified industry in Labrador for the benefit of the people of Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we have consulted with interest holders in Labrador at every step in this process and we believe that with the right strategic approach, the forest industry in Labrador has a very, very bright future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for an advanced copy of her statement. I agree with one thing she says in the statement, and that is that the forest sector has a great future in Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, this government continues to fail miserably in putting their money where their mouth is, and I say that because they talk about development of industry in small communities and revitalizing rural economies in this Province, but yet we have the government again calling for the creation of a sawmilling and secondary wood processing facility in Central Labrador and not on the South Coast of Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, this development alone will create almost 100 new jobs and it would increase the long-term viability of communities adjacent to heavy forest resources like Port Hope Simpson, Charlottetown, Cartwright, St. Lewis, Mary's Harbour, all rural remote communities in our Province.

I am going to say to the minister, she knows that these areas of our Province are dependent upon only two resources, that being the forestry and the fishery. I have met with her officials -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MS JONES: May I have leave to conclude, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MS JONES: I say to the minister, I had met with her officials. I have attended the brief selective and limited consultation that they have held regarding this issue, which I might add was excluded from any presence or major presence of the Labrador Metis Nation, and I am appalled that the only solution that the minister and her department could find for the nearly 100 cubic metres of wood that lies in my district is to have it trucked to Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

Mr. Speaker, that does not lay promise or economic opportunity for the people of Southern Labrador, and I have nothing against Central Labrador or against Happy Valley-Goose Bay. I have stood in my place in this House and I have been a strong proponent for things like 5 Wing Goose Bay, for the Lower Churchill Development, for the future mining industry in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and the potential promise that it has, Mr. Speaker. What disappoints me is that this forestry concept that the minister talks about is a perfect fit for the South Coast of Labrador and I am appalled that she and her government is not seeing the real benefit that this industry can create for Labradorians in the South Coast of Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of her statement.

Obviously, I am always glad to see secondary processing happening and, on the surface, I was quite pleased to see this message from the minister; however, when I did take a quick glance at the report, I looked to see if, in the appendices, there was a list of those who were consulted. I was disappointed to see there was not, although I think the report mentions eighty people. I do not know if it is people or groups.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has lapsed.

MS MICHAEL: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

The one thing I would like to say is that I hope the consultation was broad enough so that in doing this project the minister in the ministry will be meeting the needs of all the communities in Labrador - and I am hearing from my colleague that perhaps that has not been the case - meet the needs of the communities, that the housing that is being built is going to meet the needs of the different size families in Labrador and in northern regions, because you have quite a variety of family sizes. I also hope that they are going to be looking at issues like energy efficiency in putting these units together.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements of ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in the House today to recognize Police Week and to pay tribute to our two outstanding police forces in the Province.

Police Week began in 1970 with collaboration between the Government of Canada's Office of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada and its provincial counterparts. It starts on the Sunday in the week that contains May 14, ending on that Saturday, the following Saturday. Today, May 14, is recognized internationally as Peace Officer Memorial Day.

During Police Week, community groups will join with police services in arranging special activities and displays that promote the concept of police and community working together to enhance public safety and security. At this time, police take the opportunity to highlight the services and technology that they provide within their communities.

Earlier today, I joined the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to celebrate with some of our Province's young people to help them understand the important role that police officers play within our communities, and later today I will participate in honouring long-term RNC members - and it is certainly a wonderful part of my ministerial duties.

I believe that our government has proven that we, too, value the role of both police forces by the investments that we have put into policing.

In Budget 2007, this Administration responded to the recommendations of the Lamer report by investing more than $2 million this fiscal year. That is following two previous years, Mr. Speaker, of investments in both police forces in the Province. Many of those resources are dedicated to policing.

We provided funding this year for both the RCMP and the RNC for new positions. Mr. Speaker, we have also extended the recruitment program for the RNC for an additional three years, this year.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his Ministerial Statement.

We also, in the Opposition, would like to extend our congratulations and best wishes to all police officers in our Province during this National Police Week. Indeed, best wishes and thank you to all peace officers, which would, of course, include all police officers in our Province.

The release refers to police and community working together to enhance public safety and security; but, of course, anyone who lives in this Province knows full well that the police officers in our Province do more than just provide safety, enhance safety and protection and security issues. They play a major role in our communities, whether it be social but particularly recreational, so their contribution to our communities in our Province have been well recognized for many years and it has been pleasing to see that there is indeed such a thing as National Police Recognition Week.

With regard to the investments, I can certainly appreciate the situation that any minister or Attorney General finds himself in, in this Province. The need for investments, of course, is ever changing, given attrition and given changing technologies and the professional standards that change over time. Just about every one of them has a major price tag attached to it. You need to keep making -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

In order to keep abreast, even, with these major changes that are occurring in our police forces, and to keep them truly profession and up to date, we have to continue making these investments in our forces.

I would also like to take this opportunity to pay our respects and remembrance to all of those police officers who have passed on. This being May 14, of course, Peace Officer Memorial Day.

Thank you.

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for his advance copy of the statement and I, too, pass on my congratulations and best wishes to all those involved in policing in this Province.

The NDP has been calling for awhile now for foot patrols as a way of dealing with rising crime in this Province. I know that there are sixteen new positions in the Budget. Whether or not these in any way can deal with foot patrols, I do not know.

In a note from the Chief of Police dated October 13, 2006 -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's allotted time has expired.

MS MICHAEL: By leave, please, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave is granted.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

A note from the Chief of Police dated October 13, 2006, to my predecessor indicates that he does believe that foot patrols can be effective policing strategy; however, the current budget that he has to work with does not allow the level of staff that would be required, except for special occasions.

I would hope that if the sixteen new positions that are there this year cannot meet putting in more foot patrols at more times than just special occasions, that the minister will think about the need for that in the next budget.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Fisheries has stated publicly that both he and the Premier have made it absolutely and abundantly clear that if the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is to approve the sale of FPI's assets then the quotas and licences of that company must rest with the Province. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the minister confirmed that in the House last Monday.

Mr. Speaker, media reports today suggest that the Province is backing away from this position. I ask the minister where he and his government stand with regard to FPI quotas today.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the government's stand with respect to FPI quotas and licences as it relates to its groundfish quotas are the same today as they were yesterday, as they were when the Leader of the Opposition asked a question, I believe it was on Thursday, as it was the day before that, and as it has been many, many days and many, many weeks previous.

I have made it abundantly clear, the Premier has made it abundantly clear, that we sought the position and took the position that the ownership and control of those quotas ought to rest with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, or some entity thereof. The federal minister has a different view.

When we last met in Ottawa, a week ago Sunday past, the federal minister indicated that he would look at some regulatory possibilities of beefing up the condition of licence scenario that they wished to pursue. We did not accept that, we did not reject that, we said we would be open-minded and look at that. That is exactly where we are as of this moment, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I do not know how the minister can have it both ways. He is saying, first and foremost, that they will not allow the deal to go through unless we gain control of the quotas - the Province, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. Now you are talking about assurances, or rules and regulations that the federal minister might change in order to make this happen. That still does not mean that you will own the quotas.

It is my understanding that the federal government says that they will not be transferring the quotas directly to the Province, and he is giving some assurances that they may be able to do something.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I say to the Minister of Fisheries and all those opposite that we have had assurances in writing from Stephen Harper and his gang on non-renewable natural resources. Where did that get us?

I ask the minister: What assurances has the federal minister given you that he, in fact, will transfer the quotas to this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, unless the Leader of the Opposition is not cognizant of what is happening around him, the federal minister has given no assurances. In fact, the federal minister has taken the position that he is not prepared to transfer quotas to the Province, and he has made that abundantly clear.

That question I cannot answer; it is for somebody else to answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister said in response to my first question, that the deal will not go forward unless we gain control of FPI's quotas. Then we hear in the media that there are talks going on, and even though that might not be the case, there might be a deal reached. Well, you cannot have it both ways, we either are or we are not getting the quotas. Then, again, maybe the minister is not in the loop. Maybe it is the Premier's Chief of Staff who has been in negotiations with the companies and the federal government, as the media said this morning.

Mr. Speaker, my final question to the Minister of Fisheries is: The Minister of Fisheries confirmed on Friday that he has asked the Securities Commissioner to investigate insider trading with regard to the sale of FPI shares by a Mr. George Armoyan, who is formally of that company. I ask the minister if this investigation will in any way affect the negotiations that are going on between FPI and the proponents wishing to purchase that company?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, let me assure the Leader of the Opposition that this minister is very much in the loop.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Let me assure anybody who wants to speak on FPI that there is only Tom Rideout who is concerned about trading of shares or insider trading. Let me assure everybody out there, Mr. Speaker, who wants to listen, that when I speak on those matters, I speak on behalf of the government and I speak with the full knowledge -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: - and understanding and support of the Premier as leader of this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Let me say as well, Mr. Speaker, I cannot stop media speculation. I cannot stop feel-good stories coming from FPI shareholders or from people who want to buy assets of FPI. I cannot stop any of that, but, Mr. Speaker, let me assure you that meaningless weasel words will not cut it when it comes to ensuring that those quotas accrue to the benefit of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what we will try to ensure as a government, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, we learned last week that the provincial government has indeed written to the Securities Commission to investigate Mr. George Armoyan, whether he was involved in insider trading activities that propped up the share price of FPI. While there is another similar circumstance that this government has not discussed, and that is whether Mr. Dean MacDonald was negotiating the sale of Persona while negotiating with the provincial government for the $15 million for the fibre optic cable.

I ask the Premier: Will government confirm or investigate in order to confirm, whether negotiations were ongoing between Bragg and Persona while a deal was being negotiated to get $15 million of taxpayers' money to subsidize the fibre optic project?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, the fibre optic deal, I say first, as being referenced - in regards to business, the boards of trades, Memorial University and CONA - is an absolutely fabulous deal. This deal started back beyond when I was a minister, but certainly I see it as a great initiative as well.

Also, I will say that Dean MacDonald, the Persona deal, they entered into a negotiating stage with the provincial government in regards to this particular project. I will also say that it is not a deal that we actually invested in an issue as a grant or a loan. It was the buying of fibre optic, that is what it was. That is exactly what it was and it certainly puts this Province in a good position when it comes to business attraction.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I will also say that to my knowledge, and I will defer the actual question to the hon. Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, certainly I do not see any conflict whatsoever.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is quite obvious this minister knows nothing whatsoever about this. Maybe you just should have said from day one, when you stood on your feet here, I will take it under advisement and get the minister to handle it, instead of trying to bluff your way through it as if you knew something about it.

I will just say again to the minister, maybe you can take the question back to the real minister, that is the duct tape minister who knows all about the fibre: Will government confirm - a pretty simple question - or agree to investigate in order to confirm, whether negotiations were ongoing or not between Bragg and Persona while a deal was being negotiated, which we know is still being negotiated and not finalized between Persona and this Province, whereby this Province was going to inject $15 million of taxpayers' money?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Certainly I will say one thing, I was not expecting any questions on this matter today because the hon. member, the Opposition House Leader, confirmed that it was an absolutely good deal over the weekend.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Also, as a minister, I have no problem in regards to researching that aspect and that question; no doubt about it. I am certainly sure that during the process the Auditor General will confirm the results as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister and all of the group opposite, seeing some merit in a deal and asking whether a deal was done properly are two different things.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: This deal was not done properly. This deal stank from day one and it will be proven to be such. You cannot look after your buddies with taxpayers' monies and expect it to wash with the people. Now, Mr. Speaker, once again we see a double standard between the treatment received by the Premier's friends and that of everyone else.

I ask the Premier: How much did the $15 million of our taxpayers' monies increase the value of Persona? Are you willing to launch an investigation into whether Dean MacDonald was using taxpayers' dollars to increase the value of Persona?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Well, they certainly keep asking the same questions over and over again. They have been asking that now since November, various aspects of it.

As I said before in my last answer, the Auditor General is going through a process, as we speak, in regards to the Persona deal. That lies with the Auditor General. It will show clearly if Dean MacDonald was negotiating a deal prior to the government entering into a deal and the buying of fibre optic from this particular company. There is a consortium of companies, and each and everyone of the consortium of companies are at the table. As a matter of fact, I would say probably just about anybody who could actually do a deal in Newfoundland and Labrador in regards to the laying of fibre optic across the Gulf were part of that deal. The Auditor General's review will certainly show all of the questions that they are asking.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

I say to the minister, the Auditor General has a job to do and so does the Opposition have a job to do. In fact, the Auditor General is on record in writing, in public, saying that this deal is a moving target. There have been significant and substantial changes to the fibre optic deal since it was first made public last November. Now the minister knows that and everybody in this Province knows that. What we are trying to do, contrary to hiding anything, is ferret out some information that might be of assistance to the Auditor General because, God knows, you have only ever given him anything that he had to force out of you.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in a June 16, 2006 e-mail from an Assistant Deputy Minister of Finance, an economic analysis note is referenced outlining financial discrepancies between Finance's projections for this projection and ITRD's projections for the fibre project.

I ask the minister: Why was that analysis not - and to our knowledge still not - part of the documentation tabled in this House? Would you now be willing to table that economic analysis so that we can ensure it does indeed find its way to the Auditor General, because it is our understanding he does not have it either?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: The e-mail, actually, that the hon. member references - and I followed the questions last week and the week previous in regard to, when they reference e-mails, they never give the actual information prior or after the e-mail, which gives a whole different context to the actual e-mail itself. That is exactly what they do.

Certainly, government was trying to compare what the cost would be without the project, or they might have after the full competition was over, and that is what that e-mail is referencing. I do not have the whole information because I am not the Minister of the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, but I will speak to my hon. colleague and he will get back to you on that one.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

I have one final question for the minister who obviously knows very little about the deal. Maybe you can pass the question, at least, on to your minister.

My question for the Premier and government: During the fibre process again, when it was being negotiated, a civil servant in the Department of ITRD prepared statements for use by a political assistant. I want to make it quite clear, it was a political assistant that he prepared the notes for.

Now, I am asking the Premier: Is that acceptable, when we have civil servants who are employed by the people of this Province - not by any politician - preparing notes which are passed on for use by political assistants in ministers' offices? Is that acceptable, and do you condone such behaviour?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: First off, I would like to reference that the communications people within the departments are public servants, and that is a fact.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, they are. They are public servants. The communications directors within the departments are public servants.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. O'BRIEN: Constituency (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, different than they have.

I have no knowledge of such an item that you just referenced, but I will definitely look into it and get back to the House.

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

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, on the front page of The Telegram today there is a story about an individual and her family's struggle to pay for drugs she needs to regain her vision. Her doctors sent her to St. John's to be treated with an experimental drug, Avastin, but the drug is not covered by the provincial drug plan.

I ask the minister: Given the high cost of this drug, and the fact that it is being recommended by some doctors, will he consider speeding up the approval of this drug for people with eye disease?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the member opposite would very well know, when he talks about speeding up a process, he would be fully aware that there are three steps to a process like that. The first one, though, rests with Health Canada. The manufacturer of the product has to make an application to Health Canada to have the drug approved for use in Canada. Secondly, there is a committee that reviews the common use of drugs across the country; that is the second step. The third step is where the Province reviews it to determine whether or not it includes it in our provincial formulary. It is that third step, and that third step only, that we have full control over.

Where the process sits right now, and the member knows this - as a practicing pharmacist he would understand this perfectly, and it is misleading to pose the question the way he did - the manufacturer of that product has not made application to Health Canada yet for the approval of its use in Canada for that purpose. It has made an application for its use for treatment of cancer, but not for macular degenerative disease.

I say to the member opposite, and the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, that we have no control over what the manufacturer nor what Health Canada would do with such an application. It is not yet in our hands at all, I say to the member opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: I take from the comments of the minister that he is not willing to help speed up the process, which is what I asked.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, the person mentioned in the news story had to pay $4,500 for three treatments, as well as the cost of travel to St. John's to see a specialist, plus three tests that cost $100 each.

I ask the minister: Does he think it is reasonable that people have to risk financial ruin and pay such high sums of money to get the treatment they need?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: I say, Mr. Speaker, and I say to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, as a government we are very much aware of the cost of sometimes accessing health treatment. That is why we have a provincial transportation program to assist people who travel, that is why we just recently introduced a new enhancement to our provincial drug program, all because we are very much aware.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: We are very much aware, I say, Mr. Speaker.

One of the things we need to be very careful of - and the member would know this very well - is how we support programs, whether it is medication or treatment regimes, that are very much in the experimental stage. We are putting individuals at some degree of risk if we support, embrace, fund and support those kinds of treatments that are very much experimental.

When they go beyond that experimental process and they go through the approval mechanism that I outlined in my previous answer, then government will be in a position to include it in our provincial formulary, will be in a position to cover it within our provincial program, and will be in a position then to cover some of the costs associated with delivering those programs. It is a matter of process, some of which we have no control over, I say, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

My question today is for the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

In its response to last week's skills task force report the government said it will establish a process to require diversity plans for large scale development projects. Mr. Speaker, a process already exists where employment equity is tied to the approval of development plans under the provincial Environmental Assessment Act, and this process has resulted in hiring more women and other under-represented groups in projects such as Voisey's Bay, Terra Nova and White Rose.

My question for the minister is: When will government apply diversity requirements to all significant government contracts and to industry engaged in large scale development projects in the Province, whether or not an environmental assessment is involved?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, there is one thing about this government, we are certainly committed to advancing the Status of Women in Newfoundland and Labrador. We understand there is work that needs to be done and we have undertaken a number of initiatives. Last year we had $200,000. We had a contract with the IBEW to be able to promote women as electricians.

Mr. Speaker, we also have the future and skilled trades program. We are about to embark on a campaign to make sure that 50 per cent enrolment in the future of skilled trades are females.

Mr. Speaker, we also know from our task force report, which was released last week, that we need to do more to encourage women. We do have certain processes in place and we will continue to work with it.

Mr. Speaker, it was just today that I received correspondence from the Women in Resource Development Committee, and they write: We commend the department for its vision and support for creating employment for women. With continued support of the Province for working women, we have a wonderful opportunity to tap into the full labour pool that is available in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, that is the road we are on and we will continue in that direction.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that the minister just cannot acknowledge that the government is not using the rule for other people inside their own house. That is all I am asking, why isn't it happening with government projects.

In the response to the report, government also said that it plans to expand scholarships and mentorships for women in trades programs. This is a positive step and I am happy with that, but I do have another question for the minister: When will the Province adopt a universal legislated employment equity plan, including procedures for monitoring and reporting to government and penalties for non-compliance, in order to actually get more women long-term jobs, not just in skilled trades but in other male dominated careers and occupations?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education, and Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, as Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, I am fully committed to advancing the status of women in Newfoundland and Labrador. I am also committed to working with my fellow ministers to make sure that every time we develop policies and procedures that we do effective gender based analysis and make sure that women are advanced and we have equality and equity in the programs that we promote in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we do have a shortage of female workers in the skilled trades area and we are certainly doing what we can to advance that. Not only are we going to be addressing the young people in high schools and the future of skilled trades, but, Mr. Speaker, last year the Government of Alberta offered us twenty-five scholarships, each valued at $2,005 for their centennial. We put all of those scholarships into the skilled trades and put two-thirds of those scholarships for females who are entering skilled trades.

Mr. Speaker, we are engaging in partnerships with the unions in Newfoundland and Labrador. We made sure we had representation on our Skills Task Force and we will continue to work in that direction, both within government and where we can in Newfoundland and Labrador, to advance the employment equity for women in this Province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, earlier in the House, the minister made an announcement that she would call for proposals to pursue the development of the forest industry, such as the sawmilling and secondary processing industry in Labrador, but she restricted her Call for Proposals to Central Labrador.

I ask the minister today: Have you considered the idea of establishing this operation in Southern Labrador, and what analysis of this concept did your department do after they received the study?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As my colleague referred, there was a study done on the forestry sector in Labrador. It was a substantive piece of work that did a broad consultation in Labrador, and all Labradorians were invited to participate and given the opportunity to do so. There were a number of recommendations that came out of that report. That report was released some months ago. Immediately, we put together an interdepartmental committee to look at those recommendations and the viability of those recommendations. They were found to be sound. Work was done in terms of substantiating information around markets for products coming out of Labrador. This recommendation around this facility in Central Labrador will work for all of Labrador, in a central location, bringing in fibre from all over the area and it is a good thing for all of Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sorry to inform the minister but shipping wood fibre out of my district is not good for employment or stability in my district, despite the fact the Member for Lake Melville thumps on his desk, knowing it will be shipped out.

I ask the minister today: How many cubic metres of wood will be required to be transported from the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, in the southeast coast region, in order to make this concept viable in Happy Valley-Goose Bay?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

One hundred-and-twenty-thousand cubic metres of wood is going to be required to make this a viable operation. I cannot speak specifically, right off the top of my head, as to what percentage of that will come out of Southern Labrador. That wood will come from all over Labrador. It is going to be a significant investment by private industry into this enterprise. If there is a capacity to have such a facility and people are prepared to make the investment in Southern Labrador, Mr. Speaker, that will surely be considered.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the minister already stated that the senior management committee of her department have identified investors and proponents for this project. So I have to ask the minister today two questions. One, is there any provincial government money being invested here? Two, who are the proponents and investors you have identified, how many are there, or is there just one select group?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, what the interdepartmental committee have identified is that there are potential investors and there are potential markets. There is a need for those products in this country and outside of this country. What we have asked for is an Expression of Interest so anybody in this Province or beyond, who is prepared to invest in this kind of a facility, we are now asking them to come forward and present a proposal to the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Education.

I ask the minister: By now she should have received a review of teacher allocations in this Province -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: I will repeat it, Mr. Speaker, I do not think the minister could hear my question.

My question is for the Minister of Education. I am wondering if the minister has received a copy of the review of teacher allocations in this Province, and if she has received those recommendations, when will they be made available to the public?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank the hon. member for the question, because obviously the teacher allocation review is something that has been ongoing for quite some time and there are many people in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador very interested in that.

Mr. Speaker, I do anticipate to receive the final report within the next couple of weeks. Once we receive the report we will certainly be doing a full analysis within government to determine how we can proceed on this.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly noted that there was difficulty in the previous formula, which was numerical based only, the Sparkes-Williams formula, and we have been committed as a government that we will develop a new formula as we move forward to make sure that our classrooms are properly resourced.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, knowing that the minister will receive the recommendations within the next couple of weeks, I ask her: Will those recommendations be implemented for the new school year beginning in September?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I guess it is necessary to inform the hon. member that, based on the school year and how we allocate resources, that we made announcements in the Budget that we are dealing with now in the House of Assembly. We have made a public announcement regarding how many teachers will be in the system for September. Mr. Speaker, that is how we do business here within government, and it comes out in the Budget.

We will take the report, we will do the analysis, but it will take some time. The allocation and the actual assignment of teachers for the classrooms will be made this month as opposed to something that we will do during the summer months leading into September.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

There is time for a brief supplementary.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, I was under the impression that the minister had received the report.

I am wondering if she also has received the report with regard to the ISSP/Pathways Model with regard to special needs for students, and when will those recommendations be made public?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is wrong. I have not received the final report regarding the teacher allocation formula.

Mr. Speaker, it is also my understanding that I will receive the report that is being done on the ISSP review possibly by the end of the month or certainly by mid-June.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allocated for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDGLEY: Mr. Speaker, the Social Services Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have passed, without amendment, the Estimates of Expenditure for: the Department of Education; the Department of Health and Community Services; the Department of Justice; the Department of Municipal Affairs; the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment; and, the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Tabling of Documents.

MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with the Public Tender Act, I am tabling the Report of Public Tender Act Exceptions for the months of November and December 2006 and for the months of January and February 2007.

Further tabling of documents?

Notices of Motion.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I give notice of the following private member's motion:

WHEREAS this government is committed to protecting the resources and the future of Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS our Province has been betrayed by the Prime Minister - I repeat, betrayed by the Prime Minister - and the Government of Canada; and

WHEREAS this breach of trust will result in our Province and our people being seriously disadvantaged; and

WHEREAS the Province's non-renewable resource revenues represent a meaningful and long-term opportunity for our Province to attain true self-reliance and economic prosperity;

BE IT RESOLVED that all members of this hon. House support the Premier and this government in calling upon the Government of Canada to honour its commitment respecting the removal of non-renewable resource revenues from the equalization formula.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Orders of the Day.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Order 3 - I think it is 3.(b) - the adjourned concurrence debate on the report of the Government Services Committee.

I believe that debate was adjourned by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, but I believe there is an understanding that the few minutes he had left will be used by the Leader of the third party.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair wishes to note that there is twelve minutes left in this part of the concurrence debate.

The Chair recognizes, by agreement, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

I would like to thank the Leader of the Opposition for giving me the last twelve minutes from his time that he did not use on Thursday.

I am very happy to get an opportunity to speak to the concurrence debate on the general government sector. I am particularly pleased to speak during the concurrence debate because, being the only person representing my party in the House, I was not able to attend all of the Estimates Committee meetings, obviously; it just would have been impossible.

I served on the Social Services sector Committee and attended all of those meetings, and I did get to attend one of the meetings under the Resource sector, but it was impossible for me to be able to attend more meetings than that. There just was not enough time in the day for me to do so, so I am glad to get this opportunity today to speak during this concurrence debate.

Obviously, I will seek other opportunities as we continue the concurrence debates under the other sectors, so I have had to choose carefully what I will talk to today. The first thing I decided I would like to speak to is the work of the Rural Secretariat, which is covered under this sector.

There is no doubt that we need to be looking at the development of rural Newfoundland, and when I read what the role of the Rural Secretariat is, and what the Budget says it is giving the Secretariat money for, it says that the money that is allotted is given: "...to promote sustainable economic and social development, ensure that rural issues are considered throughout the Provincial Government, and promote collaboration in policy and program development."

Now, that is quite a laudable task that has been given to the Rural Secretariat, and I personally think it definitely is what we want the Rural Secretariat to do. We do want it to promote sustainable economic and social development. That means economic and social development that will be good for rural communities in the present and will also last well into the future so that people who live in the communities now can say: Oh, I can be in this community in twenty years time if I want to be, and have a job and be able to live here. I can raise my children here. I can have grandchildren here. That is what sustainable economic and social development is about.

Well, right now in our Province in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, people are not able to say: I can raise my children here; I can have grandchildren here. There are not even sure that they can raise their children. Young couples who have children in elementary school, for example, primary and elementary, these couples are having to decide to leave communities where they lose jobs that they have had in the fishing industry, or in other sectors, and they cannot go on and get further work. These people are having to leave. The hope of thinking down the road that they are going to be able to be in that community with their grandchildren is just not there for them. It is not a reality. It is not something that they can even think about.

The Rural Secretariat has quite a job set out for itself if it is going to promote sustainable, economic and social development. First of all, they have to have the ability to do more than promote. They have to have the ability to come up with plans that can put in place some real programs in communities.

This Budget gives $1.8 million to the Rural Secretariat. With $1.8 million, the Rural Secretariat cannot really do much more than what it is doing. What it is doing is talking. The committees that have been put together, the regional boards that have been put together, so far have not done much more than talk. I understand that right now they are in what is called the visioning phase. I have to ask: How much more visioning has to go on in this Province?

We had a Strategic Social Plan under the last government. It actually did start getting somewhere. At least one thing that has continued from that Strategic Social Plan is the fact that we are now getting good statistics that tell us what the situation is here in our Province, both from the perspective of the economic reality as well as the social reality. At least something concrete came out of the Strategic Social Plan, but that plan did do a lot of visioning. There were all kinds of meetings under that project, that program, the Strategic Social Plan. All kinds of things came out with regard to the vision for Newfoundland and Labrador.

Then there was a royal commission that also had meetings all around this Province. That, too, came out with all kinds of visioning and all kinds of wonderful ideas about what is needed in Newfoundland and Labrador. Then we get a change of government and we have to start all over again with a whole new structure, with a new name, but really not doing anything differently than what had been done before.

I followed, almost two years now, the Rural Secretariat, and I cannot see anything coming from it. I get very discouraged when I see $1.8 million that is going into supposedly strengthening the future of rural Newfoundland but I do not see anything going into a process that will help with that. Rural development does not happen magically. My colleagues have heard me say this before. It takes real effort to make communities work. It takes real effort to develop them economically and socially. If we are going to have development that is rooted in the life of the communities; if we are going to have businesses that are rooted in the resources, both the human and the natural resources in a community; if communities are going to be able to come up with their own ideas for where to go as a community; if they are going to be able to come up with their own ideas around business; if they are going to be able to come up with their own ideas around generating employment in their communities well into the future, then communities need help in doing that. They need people who are trained, who can work with them. This cannot be done purely on a volunteer basis. This cannot be done by women and men volunteering their time only. There have to be resources given to the communities so that people can be hired, so that people can be hired to make sure that the organizing of people happens, that the research that has to be done in a community can be done, because there are so many things out there that people need to consider. We cannot expect the communities totally, through their volunteer labour, to do that.

I would really like to see the government realize that if we are really going to help rural Newfoundland and Labrador develop, then we have to put money into rural development from the ground, not putting money into a higher bureaucracy, more people in here in St. John's, in the Confederation Building talking and planning and visioning. Meetings of regional boards, as good as the people on these boards may be - I have nothing to say against the people on the regional boards - but as good as they may be, we are not going to get anywhere just putting money into people sitting around and talking. We have a lot of knowledge out in this Province about what can be done, tremendous knowledge out there about what can be done. I think we need to identify the people who historically in this Province have done some of this work and get those people involved in communities. Give the communities the ability to hire people in their own communities who have the skills so that they can start doing community development work. If we just go on talk, talk, talking, we are not going to get anywhere. Real money has to go into this.

The answer for rural Newfoundland and Labrador is not large scale. The answer for rural Newfoundland and Labrador is community based economic development tied in with the social needs of the community. That means creativity, that means diversity. That means helping people do their visioning in their communities, on the ground in their communities. I know from my own personal experience where that kind of visioning in a community goes. I know the businesses that come from those visioning exercises. I know that work can be created. It is amazing the ideas that people come up with, but they have to have the resources to continue. They can have all the ideas they want but they have to have resources to do that work.

It would be wonderful if the government had as much understanding of the role of rural communities and the ability of people to come up with their own futures as they have hope in large scale developments, as they have hope in companies that they are going to invite from the outside to come in and do large scale developments. Take some of that $25 million and give it to communities so that they can hire people to work with them, so that they can get their own projects going in their own communities. The large scale development should be small scale development in all of our rural communities, whether that is secondary processing in the fishing industry or whether it is year-round tourism. The people will come up with the ideas. We have to start changing that idea, that the only way we get employment is through large scale developments. As a matter of fact, an awful lot of large scale developments have small amounts of employment attached to them. A lot of money goes in, and a lot of money goes to the shareholders, but the number of jobs, very often, is a small number.

Even a rig out in the North Atlantic does not employ a tremendous number of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. The more you get into production, the smaller the number of people becomes who work on a rig. We have to start putting our faith in the communities, in the people, but we have to put the resources there. The faith in them is not sufficient. We have to put the resources there so that people can develop themselves.

I do not know how much I can say that, how often I can say it, to get this government to understand where I am coming from, because they do not seem to be hearing it. They say they believe in the people, they say they want a future for rural Newfoundland. I have not seen yet, for the four years -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's allotted time has expired.

MS MICHAEL: May I just have one sentence, please, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) just to clue up.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted to make some concluding comments.

MS MICHAEL: Just to clue up, thank you very much.

I would just hope that what I have had to say will give some thought to those in the bureaucracy who are working with the Rural Secretariat.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The motion made by the hon. the Member for Terra Nova is that the House concurs in the approval of the report of the Government Services Committee on Supply.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

AN HON. MEMBER: It wasn't unanimous.

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, it was.

MR. RIDEOUT: I don't know if we can count a voice vote when a member is not in his seat, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Order 3.(a), the concurrence report, and follow debate on the Estimates and the report of the Resource Committee.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the House concurs in the approval of the report of the Resource Committee.

The Chair recognizes the hon. Member for Bonavista North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess we are ready today to begin the concurrence debate on the Estimates for the six departments that were considered under the Resource Committee.

First of all, before I do that, I would like to acknowledge the members who participated in the meetings that were held. These members were: the Member for Labrador West; Windsor-Springdale; Trinity-Bay de Verde; Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; and the Bay of Islands. We also had substitute members for some of the regular members who could not attend. These members were: the Members for St. Barbe; Ferryland; Torngat Mountains; Bellevue; Fogo & Twillingate; and also the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi. I would like to thank all of these members for their attendance and for their participation. I would also like to thank the six ministers and their officials from their respective departments, as well as the staff with the House of Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, the Resource Committee considered the Estimates for the Department of Business; the Department of Environment and Conservation; the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture and Aboriginal Affairs; the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development; the Department of Natural Resources; the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, as well as the Rural Secretariat.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that the Estimates for these six departments, this year, has increased by $145 million. Last year, the actual expenditures for these six departments amounted to $191 million. This year, it has increased to more than $336 million.

Many of the questions and answers centered around the increased spending of the six departments, so it is in that context that I would like to make a few comments today with respect to the increased spending.

First of all, the Department of Business: As you know, Mr. Speaker, the Department of Business is relatively a new department with government. The last couple of years it just had a few staff members, and the expenditures for last year amounted to a little over $3 million. This year, that department's estimates have been increased to $38 million, an increase of almost $35 million over last year.

Included in the increase are expenditures of $25 million for a Business Attraction Fund, and that fund is to provide for large-scale strategic investment in business ventures and infrastructure for the purpose of attracting new business to the Province.

There is also an additional $7 million for a business grants fund. This fund is to assist with start-up costs for large-scale companies setting up business in the Province. These increased funds will certainly give the Department of Business the resources that it needs to promote new economic growth in our Province.

The Department of Environment and Conservation: Mr. Speaker, last year's revised expenditures amounted to $28 million. This year, that has increased by almost another $15 million, bringing their estimates for 2007-2008 up to $42.7 million. These increases, Mr. Speaker, will affect the Eco-Trust with issues related to clean air and climate change, sustainable development of our strategic science, extra monies for pollution prevention, additional monies for water resources management, continued support the Voisey's Bay Environmental Management Board, increased monies for land management and development, and there is also going to be production of new maps in the digital format for all of the Province. There are going to be improvements made to our provincial parks. Also, there is extra funding in that department for the Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystems Science.

The Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture and Aboriginal Affairs: Mr. Speaker, last year the revised expenditures amounted to $10.8 million, and this year the estimates for that department have increased by $19.5 million, bringing it up to total estimates of $30.3 million.

Of those increases, Mr. Speaker, $5 million will be used for programs and services to assist the Newfoundland and Labrador fishing industry to become more economically sustainable and competitive. There is additional monies for seafood diversification, for marketing and development of new species, new products, and new techniques in harvesting, in processing, as well as in handling. There is further development of the Quality Assurance Program that we have been using for a number of years, Mr. Speaker, and this puts greater emphasis on compliance and enforcement programs in support of the Fish Inspection Act.

With respect to that, I know this past winter, Mr. Speaker, that a number of the field inspectors with the department have been doing very intensive training courses with respect to that program.

There are also major increases in funding in aquaculture development.

In addition to these extra expenditures, Mr. Speaker, the government is also funding 40 per cent of the new capital gains tax exemption that was announced some time ago by the federal government. With respect to that, Mr. Speaker, our government could be asked to contribute approximately $25 million for that program.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, the federal changes to the harvesting policy for our fishermen - that is the policy with respect to the changes in vessel length and combining of licences - this change could mean that our government will be probably liable for up to $100 million in loans that will be going out to the fishermen in this Province. That is a significant commitment in itself, Mr. Speaker.

Next, the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development. That department, last year, had spendings of $25.6 million. This year, it has increased by $32.9 million. That will bring its estimates for 2007-2008 up to $58.5 million. Increases for that department, Mr. Speaker, will be going towards strategic partnership programs and the Ireland Business Partnership Initiative, which has turned out to be quite successful, and increases in the export and investment program, which encourages the increased export of goods and services by local industries and businesses in the Province. That is business that will be exporting both nationally and internationally. As well, it will also be used to increase investment generally within the business sectors in our Province.

There are major increases in the Strategic Enterprise Development Fund. This fund, Mr. Speaker, provides financing for support of businesses throughout the Province with emphasis on small and medium-sized business, especially in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Just a couple of weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, if anyone attended the home builders' show at the Mile One stadium, they would certainly see the positive results of some of the funding from that special fund.

There is increased funding towards industry and business advisory and counselling services, and the provision of community economic development services throughout our Province.

There are increased grants and subsidies for regional and sectoral economic development and diversification initiatives and projects throughout the Province; particularly, Mr. Speaker, projects that leverage funding from other sources, especially the federal government.

There are increases for advancement of knowledge-based industries and the application of advanced technologies within the Province.

There is an additional $4 million in that department this year to assist companies in developing innovative products and services.

Also, as everyone in the Province is aware, there is $10 million this year on the Trans-Gulf fibre optics telecommunications link.

We also considered the Estimates for the Department of Natural Resources. That department, last year, had spendings of $79 million. This year, it has increased by another $37 million, bringing it up to $116 million. That department, Mr. Speaker, as you are aware, has a number of different divisions within it.

First of all, the Forestry Management Sector of the Department of Natural Resources, there are increased expenditures in the budget this year for the future of the forestry in the Province, and that is in silviculture development.

There is increased funding for resource road construction, and there is greater emphasis on the overall administration and program management systems already within the department.

There are increases in insect control management, increased funding to improve our Province's water boomer fleet, and also additional monies in the agriculture and agrifoods division of that department. There is going to be additional money for construction of agricultural roads and the acquisition of farmland throughout the Province, to be passed back to local business people at a later date.

There is almost a $9 million increase for incentives to stimulate and attract large-scale investments in agriculture and agrifoods products; particularly, Mr. Speaker, in secondary processing and value added sections.

Also, with the minerals resources division with the Department of Natural Resources, there is increased funding in geological mapping and surveying programs.

An extra $3.5 million is in that department this year for the management and implementation of incentive programs for further exploration and development within the Province.

In the Energy sector of that department, there is extra funding for the development and implementation of the new energy policy. With respect to that one, there is an additional $12 million in grants and subsidies that will be provided towards initiatives under the new energy plan.

The final department that our committee reviewed was Tourism, Culture and Recreation. That department had expenditures last year of $44 million. This year it has been increased by $6.4 million, to $50.5 million for 2007-2008. Increased expenditures in that department, Mr. Speaker, there is an extra $1 million for Tourism Marketing, an extra $1 million for our Culture and Heritage sectors. There are increased grants to the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council, increased funding for historic sites throughout the Province, and there are also increased grants in support services towards recreation and sports facilities in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, and in accordance with Standing Order 76, I move that the report of the Resource Committee be concurred in by the House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to participate in the concurrence debate as it relates to the Estimates of the Natural Resource Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I was a part of that committee, and as the previous speaker already noted, we looked at the Estimates of a number of departments of government, including those of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development; the Department of Business; the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation; the Department of Natural Resources itself, and the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture. During looking at these estimates, of course, as you can appreciate, there are a lot of questions that arises out of those estimates as it pertains to those particular departments and what has been happening in those departments in particular.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to get into a couple of those issues. I am not going to have an opportunity in the next twenty minutes to cover off each and every one of the departmental estimates that we did review, but I think my colleague has already outlined what the government expenditure has been and is voted to be for this year in the Estimates for each of those departments. What we do is we evaluate, as a committee, where that money is going to be spent and what it is going to be used for in the course of the next twelve months within that particular department.

Now, Mr. Speaker, a couple of things arose out of the estimates that really caused me some concern. One of the issues that I want to talk about is the money that was to be invested for small and medium-sized businesses in the Province under the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development. The department last year and the government had voted $8 million for investment in the small and medium-sized businesses in our Province. The take-up on that $8 million was like $50,000. It is very small when you look at it in terms of the amount of money that was available that did not get let to businesses in this Province for use and investment in their communities. Obviously, being a new program, I can certainly understand that it does take some time to get the message out, to make people aware of the program that is there and how they can access the money.

Also, I think the real problem with that program is the fact that their business community is not coming forward looking for the investment because they do not necessarily have a great deal of confidence in the progress of the rural areas of the Province where they are. That is a very sad statement to have to make but when you look at it in the context of this, if government is not prepared to invest in a very substantial way in rural communities around the Province, what makes you think the business community is going to be wanting to do so? They need to feel that the government has confidence in rural areas and the opportunity for rural communities to progress. Once they do, they too will continue to invest at a rate that is equivalent to what government is doing.

So, Mr. Speaker, when you look around rural Newfoundland and Labrador today, the real economic opportunities are being created by small and medium-sized businesses. You are not going into small communities in Newfoundland and Labrador - I do not care what bay, cove or inlet that you represent or belong to - and finding massive scale industry. What you are finding is businesses that are creating two, three, four, five, up to twenty or twenty-five jobs at a time. You are seeing that kind of new industry coming on stream and that is the kind of jobs that are securing long-term sustainability for many of these communities.

When you have a program out there for those businesses where they can access this money and invest it into their region by investing it into their business and they are not taking up the government on those kinds of programs, I have some serious concerns about that. One of two things needs to happen, or both. One, there has to be more investment by the government into these communities to show that government is confident, to show that you see there is a future in those particular regions and that you are prepared to put your money up to make it happen. The other thing they might want to do in order to encourage investment in the program is to offer up a better arrangement financially. The program now works on a fifty-fifty percent investment on capital investment. Maybe they could look at how certain sectors work well in rural areas of the Province and could probably access more money, maybe on a seventy-thirty arrangement in terms of investment, depending on the number of jobs that you are going to create. So, if you are creating more than twenty jobs in a small business in a rural area, you probably could become eligible for a greater level of investment from the government in terms of borrowing. I think even doing that would certainly help small and medium-sized businesses look at the program in a little different light and be able to access that money.

Mr. Speaker, I raise that today only because the government continues to talk about their plan for rural Newfoundland and Labrador, a plan that we failed to see in the last four years. In fact, when they put out their Blue Book in the election campaign of 2003, they stated in the Blue Book that they would have a rural plan for Newfoundland and Labrador. We have yet to see it. In fact, if you listen very closely to where government is investing some of its money and some of its policies that they are making these days around industry in our Province, you will note one thing, that it omits any real investment or real consideration being given to rural areas of our Province.

I can say that with great certainty because even today, as I came to the House of Assembly, I got a statement from the minister telling me that they are going out to call for proposals for a forestry operation in Labrador that will include everything from harvesting to sawmilling, to secondary processing, to small scale manufacturing. They are going out to call for proposals, but they have to put the operation in Central Labrador. Now I have a huge problem with that and I will tell you why. How can you have an open process if you are going to tell people, first of all, where it has to go? I think the district that I represent in Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair has one of the finest areas in this Province for sawmilling, harvesting and secondary production in the forest industry. In fact, Mr. Speaker, part of the district that I represent has nearly 100,000 cubic metres of wood available today for processing, and they are all small communities. If you look at the whole regions, right from Lodge Bay to Mary's Harbour, right up through to Cartwright and all of those communities in between, they really have only two resource sectors that they can hang their hat on in terms of creating jobs in those regions. That is the fishery and the forestry.

Mr. Speaker, I was appalled and, to say the least, very disappointed today to learn that government is not even going to give them consideration in terms of developing a forest industry in that area. In fact, what the government believes - what they believe, Mr. Speaker, and what they are going to move forward with - is a concept of putting an operation in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and trucking all of the wood off the Coast of Labrador, from the southern region, up to Lake Melville, some 600 kilometres, Mr. Speaker, for processing.

What does that do for the people in my area? The one good thing it does, if you want to hear the one good thing that it can do, it will give those people who now have a licence to cut wood in that area a market to sell what used to be pulpwood that they used to sell to Stephenville; they will now have an opportunity to off-load that pulpwood or that by-product wood, hopefully, into a market place. That would be the one good thing that might come out of it.

Let's look at all of the negative things that come out of it, Mr. Speaker. You are asking the people in this part of the Province to give up a resource that is on their doorstep, to have it transported to another part of Labrador to create jobs in that region. Do you think the people in my district are going to be well receptive to that concept? I don't think so. I have lived there all of my life; I know these people. I know how hard they have struggled over the years to try and build the forest industry, just like they have struggled to build the fishery.

Mr. Speaker, they do not ask for a lot, but do you know what they do expect from their government? They expect to at least be given consideration. In looking at this particular concept, the Department of Natural Resources, through its forestry division, did not entertain that as a possible or potential development opportunity for that area of the Province.

This is a government who claims they are going to be the saviours for rural Newfoundland and Labrador, that they have a plan, they have a strategy. I am going to tell you something: You are going to have to start proving it, because doing things like this prove the very opposite: that you do not have confidence in a lot of those rural areas, that you are not prepared to invest or work with proponents and investors to create industry there.

So, Mr. Speaker, the people in my district can now look forward to, over the next three years, the highway opening between Cartwright and Happy Valley-Goose Bay and having nearly 100,000 cubic metres of wood transported off the doorsteps of their communities to Goose Bay to create jobs in the Upper Lake Melville area.

Now, do you think I am going to support that? Absolutely not. In fact, Mr. Speaker, no member should be supporting that when they know that they can invest the money right where the resource is and create the jobs for the people in that area. A hundred jobs in that area would maintain the viability, long term, of five to six communities in that one region. Anyone over there who is familiar with the South Coast of Labrador know what I speak to be factual.

Mr. Speaker, I will give you another example. There is one shrimp processing plant in Labrador, and we fought hard to get it. We fought hard to get a licence when government at the time, that I was a part of, did not want to give out licences. We fought hard to get investors to invest, because it was up in Labrador. It was far away, it was easier to put it on the Island, but at the end of the day government came to the table, not only with a licence but they also came as a partner in terms of investing in the infrastructure that was required to support that operation. They put a new water system into the community so they could provide for a shrimp plant. They upgraded the diesel generated power to a Phase III power source, investing more than $2 million at the time to provide power for this company who was prepared to invest there. They partnered with the federal government to put in new docking facilities so that the boats could land their catch right at the plant.

Do you know what, Mr. Speaker? At the end of the day, the private sector still invested $10 million into this plant. Well, let me tell you, it created over 100 jobs. Over 100 jobs in that small area. One hundred jobs today that sustains that community and some of the communities around it with good, well-paid jobs. Although they are seasonal, they usually work five to six months out of the year, but they are good jobs and they pay well.

Mr. Speaker, all I am saying is, that was a model concept for what should have happened in the forest industry on the South Coast of Labrador as well.

Three years ago when the study was called for, to look at long-term sustainable development in the forest industry there, I never dreamed that study would become the catalyst for government to move all the wood out of my district to Goose Bay.

Let's talk about Goose Bay for a minute, because I have nothing against Goose Bay. I have spent half of my life there, back and forth there. Every job I have ever had, in my working career, has taken me to Happy Valley-Goose Bay. In fact, I have lived there for a number of years as well.

Let me say this to you, Mr. Speaker, I have stood on many platforms supporting the people of Goose Bay, and industry for that community. I have stood with the people there on many occasions to support them with 5 Wing Goose Bay, to help them secure more benefits from developments on the Lower Churchill project, which I will continue to do, to help them lobby for roadwork and upgrading, for schools, for hospitals, for every single thing that they came forward with.

I look at a town like Happy Valley-Goose Bay with a tremendous amount of potential. Not only are they going to get 600 troops, as has been promised by the federal government, although we have not seen them yet, but they have been committed to, 600 new troops being added to the base in Goose Bay, not only are they moving forward with their new hotel concept of operating the base along for expanded and new business, but they sit as the bedroom community for the Voisey's Bay project, they are in the heartland of the new developments of the Lower Churchill project, and they are surrounded by four new potential mining operations, some of which may be as big as Voisey's Bay or as the iron ore mine in Labrador City, I say to hon. members.

The potential and the opportunity for that community in Central Labrador is beyond what many can even believe or are capable of looking to in the future. That is how great the opportunity is in that region and, believe me, I celebrate it. I want to participate in it. I want my district to be a part of it, but I am not prepared to stand and to give away the wood resources of the Coast of Labrador that belong to the small communities, the families who have tried to build this industry over the years, to some collaborative company in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. I will not do it, and I wish that the government would reconsider their decision. I wish they would, knowing what the real opportunities are for Goose Bay, and knowing what the limited opportunities are for Coastal Labrador and those rural areas and rural communities, and that they would at least make an effort to invest in that region.

They went out and they talked about how they have investors and proponents lined up to bid on this project. Well, I am aware of some of that, Mr. Speaker. I am aware that there are a couple of people in Goose Bay who have been really eager to bid on this project; a couple of people who are very eager to invest in forestry development in Labrador. I do not know if anybody has even talked to them about investing in Southern Labrador in a similar type operation. I certainly can safely say they were never encouraging them to but I do not know if they have even asked them to.

So, Mr. Speaker, when you talk about providing for industry or for economic benefits in rural communities in the Province, you just cannot talk about it, you have to start doing it. That means leaving the resources where the people are and working with them to try and bring about those kinds of changes.

Mr. Speaker, I sat in on the consultation, the one that was held, and I asked the officials in the Department of Natural Resources: Why isn't my district being considered for this operation? Why is government not working with proponents in the area to try and make this work and create 100 jobs here on the coast of Labrador, like we did with the shrimp processing plant? A very successful operation today, I might add. Do you know what I was told, Mr. Speaker? I was told because the price of electricity was so high in my district they could not probably look at that concept. Actually, do you know something? They are probably right. They are probably right in that the price of electricity is very high for industry or commercial users in that area, but government can do something about that. Government has complete control to do something about that. I am going to tell you a little bit about it because in Labrador right now, in the last three years government has jacked up the hydro rates in Labrador City and Wabush by about 150 per cent. Every year the people in those communities have seen their light bills increase year over year, year over year, until they came to a level where they were paying the same amount for electricity as the people in Happy Valley-Goose Bay were. Then they called themselves the Labrador integrated grid rate. That is the rate they are now on which is determined by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro standards.

Mr. Speaker, we have been lobbying for the last three to four years, lobbying through the Public Utilities Board, through the government, through the Department of Natural Resources, through Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, to anyone who will listen, that we want to be part of that Labrador interconnected rates as well; which means that we would pay the same as people in Goose Bay and Labrador West would pay. Government in the last Budget decided they would do that for domestic customers in Labrador. Let me tell you why they would do it, Mr. Speaker - not that the reasons why are relevant to me. I am glad it is being done. I am absolutely pleased as punch it is going to be done. I could hardly keep the smile off my face the day it was announced, I was so happy and excited to have it, but just let me tell you the real facts about it.

The ratepayers in Labrador West have paid enough over the last three years through their increases of nearly 150 per cent, that they, in fact, are subsidizing the power in the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair. That is why we became a part of the integrated grid rate, not because the government was prepared to reach into its pocket and haul out $2 million in subsidization. It was because the ratepayers in Western Labrador were forced to reach into their pockets and haul out more money, and as a result of it -

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

I remind the hon. Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair that her speaking time has lapsed.

MS JONES: May I have leave to clue up my statements, please?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have?

MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible) to clue up.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member by leave.

MS JONES: I thank the Government House Leader, and I will not be very long. Thank you.

The real story is this, the $1.6 million that it will cost to subsidize domestic users of electricity in Southern Labrador will be paid for by the ratepayers in other regions of Labrador and not necessarily out of the coffers of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro or the provincial government. So, Mr. Speaker, why did they not take it a step further and include commercial rate users? That is where I have the problem.

If I own a business today in Happy Valley-Goose Bay or in Labrador City, I will pay less than five cents a kilowatt hour for power. In fact, if I have any scale of industry at all, I will pay less than two cents per kilowatt hour for power. But, if you live in my district or live in my colleague's district in Northern Labrador, you are going to pay up to nineteen cents a kilowatt hour for that same power. So, you tell me, how can businesses on the southern and northern Coast of Labrador compete with those kinds of rates? They cannot, and until government is prepared to offer up the Labrador grid rate on commercial and industrial users on the Southern Coast of Labrador and Northern Labrador, the same as they have for Happy Valley-Goose Bay and Labrador West, then they are always going to be able to hide behind the excuse that the cost of power is too high to have industry development in the southern region. If the ball was in their court, they have the money to be able to subsidize it and they have the power to be able to change it. So if they are serious about investing in rural communities and making industry work for rural communities, they could have started by putting a full scale operation for processing of wood in the Port Hope Simpson area, or in the Cartwright area in my district, Mr. Speaker, and it would have contributed to the long-term viability of those communities.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted today to rise and speak to the Estimates Resource sector. It is the first opportunity I have had since being a member of the House to speak to a Budget and or Estimates.

Mr. Speaker, these are areas and departments that are very important to my district. Overall, some of the initiatives of the Budget, obviously, are quite important to the Province. If we look at the Business department, Environment and Conservation, Fisheries and Aquaculture, ITRD, Natural Resources, and Tourism, Culture and Recreation, all very important drivers for the economy and important drivers of rural Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, we have to look back and say, how did we get here today, in terms of what this Budget is offering all of Newfoundland and Labrador? How did we get here? This government came to power in 2003 in the process of getting our financial house in order. Obviously, to get our house in order we had to determine our full liabilities and develop a long-term financial plan. We had to look at and consolidate our liabilities, both direct and indirect. It was only then that we could move forward and strategically identify where we needed to go.

This government had to make tough decisions to set the stage for where we are today and to be able to make the investments that we see today being made in this Budget. Obviously, the Atlantic Accord was a tremendous accomplishment of this government, an infusion of new money into the financial plan as we move forward.

Mr. Speaker, there is, indeed - over the past number of years, and especially today in terms of the Budget - a feeling of positive change in our Province and a renewed confidence of where we are going and confidence of where this government is going to take us.

Mr. Speaker, interestingly enough, watching this government over the past couple of years in terms of the efforts they made and choices they made had a large part to do, for me, in terms of getting involved in politics. Two reasons I got involved in politics, the first was that I always wanted the opportunity to represent the District of Ferryland, and the people, and as well because of the leadership of this government, and the Premier, in terms of having a vision, having a plan, putting our financial house in order and moving forward.

Mr. Speaker, when we look how we have done over the last couple of years, especially in 2006, we look at economic indicators, how we have done, we have seen GDP growth in 2006 at 1.9 per cent, participation and employment rates at a near record high in 2006. We see retail sales expanding at 3 per cent to $6.1 billion. This is significant, retail sales, because obviously that indicates there is more money in people's pockets and they are able to spend, and obviously that drives the economy.

We saw, in 2006, residential construction continue to grow 3.1 per cent, in excess of over $1 billion. In 2006, we saw our non-resident tourists visiting the Province increase by 5.6 per cent to almost 497,000 people from all over the world visiting all parts of the Province, as well as many parts of my district which relies so heavily on the tourism industry, expenditures of $366 million, which is an increase of 8.8 per cent from the prior year. Other areas we saw growth in, exploration, totalling almost $98 million, the highest ever.

So, as we move into 2007, Mr. Speaker, and this government continues to invest in various areas like some of the ones I mentioned that have been discussed in the Estimates - ITRD; Natural Resources; Tourism, Culture and Recreation - they are very important. If we look to 2007, what is expected in terms of moving forward? Our GDP is still expected to grow, employment is expected to increase, real personal income and real disposable income are both expected to grow, retail sales, again, is expected to increase to $6.2 billion in 2007, up 2.5 per cent from 2006. Again, Mr. Speaker, good signs of a stable and growing economy, good signs for our people, good signs overall.

Offshore oil production is expected to grow significantly in 2007. Again, Mr. Speaker, a good sign of a flourishing economy.

Mr. Speaker, specifically now I would like to speak to some of these particular Estimates and my district, in particular, in terms of the benefits - Tourism, Culture and Recreation. In the District of Ferryland, Mr. Speaker, tourism is a tremendous part of the economy. It is flourishing, it is growing, it is doing quite well. I will just cite a few examples of investments made by this government, and opportunities that lie ahead for us and which this government is committed to.

Just a couple of weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to attend the grand opening of the new visitor centre in Portugal Cove South. It officially opened its doors on the Southern Avalon. This site is going to promote the natural historic attractions that include a world-renowned fossil site and the wireless station that received the Titanic's last distress call.

Mr. Speaker, this venture was a partnership between the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Service Canada, and saw Innovation, Trade and Rural Development invest $150,000, as well as the Department of Municipal Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, it has major tourist attractions, as I said, the Cape Race Light Station National Historic Site, the Marconi Wireless Station, and the Mistaken Point Ecological Reserve. It is interesting, Mr. Speaker, the Mistaken Point Ecological Reserve has been short-listed for UNESCO World Heritage Designation, and is seen as one of the most significant fossil sites in the world. A tremendous opportunity for this region, Mr. Speaker. Portugal Cove South area, Trepassey, Biscay Bay, that area, a tremendous investment here for tourism, culture, and the overall Irish Loop.

Mr. Speaker, in speaking to a geologist who has worked on this project with community groups and with the community for the past number of years in terms of: What are the possibilities of a UNESCO designation? What is it going to mean? What could the return be? It was indicated to me that such a process, if it gets UNESCO designation, could mean as many as seventy-five to 100 people could visit that site every day. Mr. Speaker, that is phenomena - a phenomenal number of people in that rural community - and this government has invested in it and is proud to do so. Mr. Speaker, it is just one more example of how this government is investing in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and that there are significant returns for that investment.

As part of the UNESCO designation for that site in Portugal Cove South, this government, in the Budget, through ITRD, Industry, Trade and Rural Development, has recommended it be approved that a three-year budget be set so that a biologist could be hired to prepare the nomination papers and be submitted to have this designation obtained. Once again, a commitment by this government in rural Newfoundland in terms of promoting jobs and the economies of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, much needed.

Mr. Speaker, as well in my district, this government continues the commitments to the provincial parks program. In my district we have La Manche Provincial Park. Normally during the summer months it is 100 per cent occupancy, a great site, a great facility used very much by people from all over. Again, in this Budget this year, I am pleased to recognize that it has continued the renewal strategy, and even gone from a three-year commitment to a four-year $4 million initiative. So, once again this year, we will see upgrades to La Manche Park and they will continue next year as well, another growing part of the tourism industry along the Southern Shore. Tremendous, Mr. Speaker.

As well, we know that any tourism industry in general, business, small, medium and large, the fishing industry in my district, in terms of transportation back and forth, resource back and forth, if it is not landed there, an important issue. This government, again this year, will be investing in roads infrastructure in my district, $2.3 million, a tremendous amount of funding to improve various sections of the highway from Bay Bulls to Trepassey, and as well some side roads, community roads. Once again, to build that infrastructure is so vital to economic development and to rural Newfoundland.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, this Budget is looking at investing in the historic sites throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, which is very important.

Mr. Speaker, as well, in the last couple of weeks I had the opportunity to meet with the Irish Loop - I attended the Irish Loop annual general meeting. I had the privilege of having the Minister of Business up to speak. It was very interesting to sit with those businesses in my community, small and medium; very positive, a very bright outlook. We heard people stand and talk about how they are starting new businesses or they are expanding existing businesses. Very positive, Mr. Speaker, very positive.

My district has twenty-seven small, rural communities. Many of the businesses that are in those small communities are doing quite well, expanding, and people are stepping forward with the entrepreneurial spirit and getting involved in creating jobs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: It is very good to see, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as well, just recently on Saturday, I spoke to the Irish Loop Tourism Association. Once again, in the district alone - in the past number of years we have seen the growth of twenty-five new small and medium-sized businesses. Once again, Mr. Speaker, very good initiatives; very positive. A very good outlook from those people in terms of what is happening in the communities and how things are going. Tremendous!

Mr. Speaker, overall, in terms of some of the initiatives we see in the Budget, very positive. I have mentioned some as I have gone through. I guess the biggest highlight is fiscal performance, where we were and where we are today. A review of 2006-2007, a surplus of $76 million versus a surplus estimated at $6.2 million; a reduction in net debt by $70 million. Once again, Mr. Speaker, getting our financial house in order so we have the ability to invest in rural Newfoundland and make the investments to support the economic climate we need to have successful business.

The forecast for 2007-2008. Mr. Speaker, we are forecasting a $261 million surplus. A reduction in net debt of $66 million, a reduced debt servicing cost of $51 million. Once again, Mr. Speaker, this is about getting our financial house in order, as I mentioned. You have to look at your debt and look at the interest you are paying on your debt; just like running a household, in terms of your mortgage and all of the other expenses of average families. You have to get your cost under control so you can pay for day to day and then to pay for things in the future that you require. That is what this government is all about, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at senior's benefits, this is a Budget about all sectors of our economy, all peoples, all people of our Province; everybody getting a return on the good fiscal management of this government and the decisions they are making.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, I talked about some of the small and medium-sized businesses in my district and how they are doing. This government is recognizing this as well and is helping to promote economic growth by investing in a healthy business climate, which is so important. We are seeing $8 million for small and medium enterprise funds from the Regional Sectoral Diversification Funds and $1 million for business and marketing programs. Tremendous, Mr. Speaker, well directed and strategic investment. Again, we are seeing $1 million for tourism marketing, bringing the total budget to $11 million; $11 million for this Province. It continues to grow. The budget for Tourism has approximately doubled since this government took office; a tremendous investment.

As I mentioned before, investing in infrastructure; the second year of government's investment in infrastructure was $2 billion over a six-year period. This year the investment is about $67 million. Once again, reinvesting in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. That is where most of that funding is going. As well, our incorporated communities and towns are seeing an investment of $51 million there. Once again, to put in place the appropriate infrastructure.

We are seeing investing in skills, Mr. Speaker, which is so important. This government has recognized that for some years the skills development which was required by our young and old alike, that is needed in the economy, we may have fallen behind. This government recognizes that and has provided the appropriate investment to make sure we are ready today and ready in the future for those skills that we require in our workplace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Young people, Mr. Speaker, we see increased funding for community youth network to expand in six new areas of the Province. Mr. Speaker, youth, obviously we know, we always say are the foundation for our future. Once again, we look at education and our youth. Where do we go? Where is our future? Our future is with our youth. They are the leaders of tomorrow. I have two small children. Obviously, we look to ensure that the Newfoundland and Labrador of tomorrow will be theirs. We want to make sure the appropriate environment is in place for them where they can flourish, certainly like all parents, the children of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, this year, unprecedented, a $1 billion investment in education. The first time in the history of this Province that we have seen that amount invested. A further investment of $41 million in the K to 12 system. We have seen unprecedented expenditures in school infrastructure, in maintenance and repair of high schools, as well as construction of high schools. Much needed, Mr. Speaker. It was the ability of this government to put their financial house in order, beginning in 2003, and be able to invest right now and do what is required to do as we move forward.

Again, with our school system and education; we see the retention of 137 teaching positions in the system to ensure we can meet the needs of all our classrooms, not only in the urban setting, but in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Again, Mr. Speaker, in education, we have seen a tremendous investment of $13 million of free textbooks in courses for all children from Kindergarten to Grade 12. Another tremendous investment.

As we move forward, as children move through their primary and high school and they look to the future, where do they need to go? Post-secondary. I had the opportunity to attend Baltimore High School in my district for their graduation last Thursday night. There were a lot of students there. Obviously, a lot of students with wonderment and expectations of what the future holds. What will they do? Where will they go? What does the future hold? A lot of concern for parents and, obviously, students: What is the cost going to be? What is my government going to do? Are they going to step up and assist me? Once again, this year government has frozen tuition and is looking to the future. This fall it is beginning a grant program, as well as looking at interest relief. So this government is meeting the call and is helping our students and young people again.

Mr. Speaker, we have investment in personal health in this Budget again, amendments to the provincial drug program to make drugs more affordable. When I went door to door in February, I met a number of families who spoke to me in regard to the troubles in terms of, unfortunately, a member of the family had a particular disease, or needed particular drugs, quite expensive, quite high. Obviously, it ate into their disposable income - middle-class family, all the requirements and aspirations of any of the rest of us in terms of children and moving through life, big concerns in terms of, how would they pay for those drugs?

Once again, Mr. Speaker, this government has stepped up and looked at enhancing the provincial drug program, and no doubt will help those families and help all families, and that is so important.

In terms of children under eighteen -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. HUTCHINGS: With leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member, by leave.

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, there are many initiatives here in terms of what this Budget holds, very important to the people of Ferryland District and to all of the Province, and I am certainly delighted to speak to it. The future looks bright, and I am certainly delighted to be on this side of the House and to be able to speak on these Estimates and on the overall Budget.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand here to speak on the Resource Committee on the Estimates that we had. This is an opportunity where we sit down and discuss the Budget with the ministers. We go through item-by-item, and some of the highlights and the deficiencies that we see in the Budget, as an Opposition, we express it. Some of the departments that we have seen there are: Fisheries and Aquaculture; Environment and Conservation; Tourism and Culture; Business; Innovation, Trade and Rural Development; and Natural Resources. We sit down and usually go for two or three hours and go through different parts of it and we highlight some of the things that we see in the Budget.

Before I get into some of the Budget items, Mr. Speaker, there was a question raised today by my colleague for Humber Valley on behalf of Ms Wheeler about trying to get some treatment. The minister here was asked today would he intervene and try to speed up the process? Of course, the minister gave his answer, that he is not going to get involved, they have to wait for the application to be made.

The other question that was asked by my colleague, the Member for Humber Valley, who is the health critic, was: Would he help with the transportation to and from St. John's to help this lady? Again, the minister said no, that he did not want to get involved with any transportation because he is not sure what effects it will have. He is not sure what the outcome would be.

Well, I can tell the minister, I spoke to the family personally on Saturday night. Ms Wheeler has gone through two treatments. Her vision now has come back a fair amount. First when she went to the eye doctor, probably about three or four months ago, she could pick out one or two letters on the top line of the eye chart. After her second treatment only, she went back and she could read the third line on the chart. She has another treatment to come in for. I know personally the effects this has on the people in this Province. I urge the government to try to do what they can to help out. I urge the government - even if it is not medically, because it is experimental - that they try to help in some way in the travel cost to and from, because people on the West Coast do have to travel in here, and that is over and above the actual medical cost of having the eye treatment itself.

Mr. Speaker, I have to commend the people on the North Shore of the Bay of Islands. I know in one case the family had a fundraiser for Ms Wheeler and they raised a substantial amount of money. I spoke to the family and they were overwhelmed by the support. They were overwhelmed by the generosity that was given to them by all the people of the North Shore. I just want to express their gratitude to the people on the North Shore for the assistance they gave Ms Wheeler and the family.

Make no mistake about it, Ms Wheeler was going to get this treatment by the family one way or the other. They tried every way possible to get some assistance, even if it was just to travel back and forth in the Province. It was not forthcoming, but the Wheeler family was determined that Ms Wheeler was going to see again. I have spoken to Ms Wheeler personally and I am glad that this procedure is working. She has one more treatment to go, and I thank my colleague, the Member for Humber Valley, for raising this issue and urging the government to do what they can to help out in whatever fashion they can, even if it is in travel for this family.

Mr. Speaker, we just heard the Member for Ferryland give a speech about the great Budget, and the great prospects in the future. Well, someone should tell him that next year, the GDP in Newfoundland, we are going to be last in Canada. Someone should tell him that. Of course, that was not written in his script, so I guess he did not know that, that this year looks good, but next year, with no major development on the horizon, I guess someone forgot to tell him that we are going to be last in GDP.

As for the member talking about the oil doing so well this year, someone else should have told him that one of the major reasons why the oil revenues are so great this year is because the government sped up the production of the oil, allowed the companies to speed up the production. So, if you are going to speed up production now, it is going to have a lower life of the field. It is easy to ramp it up, because it looks good right now, but in the longer term - so the Member for Ferryland, you gave a great speech, whoever wrote it for you, but they should put in all of the facts so that you could pass it all on.

The question that I have asked before is that, with this major increase in the Budget, how are you going to sustain this over the long run? That is the question I ask. How are you going to sustain it?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) we. (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: We. How are we, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, going to sustain it? That is the question I ask. How are we going to sustain it, with no major development on the horizon? The fishery is dropping. There is no major offshore revenue. There is not even a chance to get anything on the move if you do not chat.

Whatever happened to fallow field for future developments? That is off the table. You cannot even sit down with your federal counterparts to discuss it. This is the problem. It is great now. It looks good now. Fine, the revenues are high now - projected revenues, of course, it depends on the price of the oil - but how are you going to sustain it in the long run? There is one thing that I have always said. It is easy in this case to bring in a great Budget, and there are some good points in the Budget, there is absolutely no doubt.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: There are good points in the Budget, Mr. Speaker, and I will be the first to say it. Any time there is anything positive that affects Newfoundland and Labrador and the Bay of Islands, I am always the first to stand up and say, yes, it was great job, and whoever the minister was, I would point that out.

Mr. Speaker, last week when I was speaking - it was not in these Estimates, it was the Department of Transportation and Works - of course, they say I am too confrontational, so I am not going to be confrontational any more. I am just going to read the facts.

All the facts that are coming out from the Auditor General - I know the minister would know it for certain because his department gave all these figures to the Auditor General. We always hear the minister and the people across, when their speeches are written for them by someone on the eighth floor, or whoever, when they write the speeches, they come out and they talk about: $6 million in 2002 was spent, $20 million -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: - $20 million in 2003. Well, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to read - and this is right from the Auditor General's report. If anybody opposite wants to see it, they can go right to the Auditor General's report and they can get it for themselves. Anybody in the general public can also go to the Auditor General's report and get it themselves.

In 2001, road construction was $79.4 million; road maintenance was $19.2 million; the total was $98.6 million. In 2002, road construction $80.4 million; road maintenance $20.9 million, for a total of $101.3 million. In 2003, $55 million in road construction; $21 million in road maintenance. Total construction and maintenance, $76.1 million.

Then we had the new government coming in, in 2004, Mr. Speaker, and this is where we all see the big hullabaloo about all the money they spent. These are the figures, and I asked the Auditor General and the Public Accounts, I said: How strong are you on these figures? He said: Absolutely! They are right from the department's own records, right from their own file. He said: I stand by these numbers.

In 2004, road construction was $43.8 million; down prior to the three years previous, down. Road maintenance, $21.8 million, right on par with the three years previous, for a total of $65.6 million. In 2005, road construction, $36 million. We all heard this, we spent $60 million back in 2005; $60 million. We hear it from the members opposite. Road maintenance in 2005, $20.6 million for a total of $56.6 million. The lowest in the six years that the Auditor General has here. In 2006, $58.0 million in road construction; $21.3 million, $79.3 million. That is on par with the years of 2001, 2002 and 2003. For the average of the years, $79.6 million.

So, when members opposite want to get up and say the condition of our roads in Newfoundland and Labrador are deteriorated because we never put any money into it - whoever is writing up your speech, ask them to get the facts straight. Now, if you want to say we did not put enough money into it, that is fine. That is fair ball, but when you go off with: Oh, you only spent $6 million in 2001; $20 million in 2002 - absolutely, categorically false.

It is just like the Member for Ferryland saying: Oh, in oil next year, we are going to be leading the country. He does not know what he is talking about. He just does not know what he is talking about. Next year we are going to be the lowest in GDP in Canada.

MR. DENINE: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Mount Pearl, the crackie from Mount Pearl always has his mouth going but he does not have guts to stand up and criticize these numbers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: If you want to stand up and say these numbers are wrong -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

He always has his mouth flapping over there but he does not have guts to stand up and say what is right or wrong. Stand up and criticize these figures. Do it if you are going to, if not stay quiet.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member if he would be a little bit sensitive to some of the language that he is using here in the House to refer to hon. members. I will just ask him if he would be kind enough to refer to hon. members as hon. members and not use some of the adjectives that he is presently using.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I withdraw the crackie remark. I will do that. If I made that remark -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. JOYCE: But, Mr. Speaker, I do ask for a bit of protection over there because once the truth does come out they have a habit of not liking the truth.

I can go through the figures again, the amounts requested by departments, what was spent, consistent with what the Auditor General has been saying. When you want to stand up and give the details about the money that was spent on the roads in the Province over the last five, six or seven years, I got no problem when you say we never spent this certain amount, but at least have the facts correct. If you say it was not enough, that is fine, but it is more on the average from 2001 to 2004 than what you spent 2004 to 2005.

To just show how idiotic the statements that are made, here we have a Minister of Transportation and Works out saying that they spent, in 2005, $60 million on roads. Here in his own booklet that he sent out from the department, Annual Report 2005-2006 - everybody over there was delivered a copy - $33 million, including carryover. That is from his own - what he wrote himself. He signed off. His signature is at the bottom.

When members opposite want to stand up and give out facts and figures because you are trying to make yourself look good, why don't you just give the proper facts and let the people decide for themselves? I have no problem once again, I say, Mr. Speaker, if you want to say, well, you should have done more. That is fine, I have no problem. When I see a minister come out to Corner Brook or down to the Bay of Islands and say they only spent $6 million, when you know it is not true, you absolutely know it is not true, I have to correct it and I will correct it.

Mr. Speaker, another point that I must make - and this is no fault of the government, this is just the facts - in 2003, when we checked with the engineers, and I asked up in Estimates, the cost of asphalt in 2003 was about $50,000 to $60,000 a kilometre. Now it is up to about $150,000, they say, $160,000, almost triple, at least double. When you say you spent $60 million now, and we only spent $50,000, of course, with the cost of oil and the cost of making - it is not a fault on anybody, it is just nature that the cost of building roads and asphalt has gone up. To sustain what we have the cost should be substantial or in line with a cost for the asphalt. If you don't do that, the roads will deteriorate. That is just human nature. That is just the facts; if you don't keep up with that cost.

When you go around the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and you see the roads deteriorating, and you say, well, we are putting more money into it, you may be putting more money into it but you are doing less work. There is a lot less work! A lot less work!

MR. ORAM: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: I say to the Member for Terra Nova, that is a fact. Just the cost of the asphalt alone - it is just the way it happens. You need to increase it, and if you can't afford it, fine. I mean, I understand the restraints on government.

The other thing, Mr. Speaker: I have to stand up here for the District of the Bay of Islands and I know when the Budget was brought down in 2003 there was a $40 increase on vehicles. I know, the minister at the time for Transportation and Works, the Member for Lewisporte, said, the money is going to be used to put back into the roads. It may have been, it just may have been, but for the last three years it hasn't been put in the Bay of Islands.

MR. FORSEY: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: If the Member for Exploits wants to stand up again and shoot off his face, let him do it. He is sitting in his chair yapping away, he can't stand up and speak on his own. Why don't you go down to the Minister of Transportation and Works and get your port in Botwood straightened up, if you want something to do or say. Why don't you do it? Why don't you stand up for your people out in Botwood? Why didn't you stand up when they shut down the maintenance depot? You never said a word when they shut down the maintenance depot out in your area, did you? When they took the social services office out of Botwood, you never said a word, did you? You are not allowed to say a word, that is why. You can stand back there in the peanut gallery and shoot your face off, but when it is time to stand up for the people out in Exploits and in the Botwood area, what do you say? I tried for the government. I tried.

If the member wants to keep on talking, let him keep talking. When it counts, I can assure you, the people of Botwood will not forget when you cannot even get a letter from the minister and this government so they can start the development of their port. They cannot even do it.

Mr. Speaker, they brought up super weekend, about candidates. I can tell the members opposite, if we were in government and giving people like Joan Cleary a $100,000-a-year job and $40,000 for severance, we would have no problem getting candidates either. We would have no problems getting candidates, I can tell you that, absolutely none.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. JOYCE: The Minister of Natural Resources out phoning candidates before the nomination and asking them would they put their name forward. The Minister of Natural Resources out phoning candidates - didn't want Joan Cleary. They knew she had a bit of baggage, didn't want Joan Cleary. She is out making a few calls out around, behind Joan Cleary's back -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: - giving her the big $40,000 a year severance, patting her on the back, saying what a good friend we are, and out making phone calls two weeks ago trying to get someone to run against her.

Stand up and say you never made the phone calls. I say to the Minister of Natural Resources, stand up and say you never made the phone calls, trying to get someone to run against Joan Cleary out there. Stand up and say you never made those phone calls. You cannot do it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair hates to interrupt, but I ask the member, when he is speaking here in the House, if he would direct his comments to the Chair. There is far too much, on both sides of the House, by the way, but presently happening now where members stand and point at other members as they present their remarks.

I ask the member to speak to the Chair and direct his remarks through the Chair.

MR. JOYCE: Sorry, Mr. Speaker, I am trying to defend myself.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask you to ask the Minister of Natural Resources if she would stand in her place today and deny that she never made calls, two weeks ago, to try to get people to run against Joan Cleary for the nomination out there. So, that is her good friend to whom she just gave $40,000.

After speaking to Wayne Ruth, Wayne Ruth may be seeking somewhere else after the Member for Stephenville East put the knife in his back, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I will go on now. One of the departments in the Estimates that we did was the Department of Business. I know the minister is here. I know he will be flabbergasted with what I have to say, because he said to me, when I asked him here in the Estimates, I said: Name for me one job the Department of Business created last year with your Budget, and the Premier's own baby four years ago. I was shocked, Mr. Speaker, when he said: Not one. That is what the Minister of Business said to me, and it is in Hansard: Not one. That is what he said to me. Then, I said to him: Name for me one company that your department helped out in a grant, some kind of subsidy, some kind of loan. I was shocked again: Not one. Absolutely, not one.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Member for the Bay of Islands that his speaking time has expired.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will not ask the privilege of having leave because I will have lots of opportunity to get back.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. JOYCE: By leave to clue up, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, usually I stick to the points and the issues here but I just cannot resist here today, after hearing the hon. member opposite and his talking about our nomination race we had in Bellevue, I cannot help but refer him to super weekend.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Super weekend, Mr. Speaker. I guess it was the equivalent of super Tuesday in the U.S. elections, Mr. Speaker. What a splash it made. They called twelve districts, I believe, in January, to close on May 11, only to find out today, Mr. Speaker, they got seven out of the twelve people, seven people to run for them out of twelve districts. They cannot even convince people to run for them opposite, Mr. Speaker.

It reminds me of the song, call me, operator. The hon. Member for Bay of Islands said we were making calls, but we were making calls because we had five or six who wanted to run. We were not making calls because we needed to get someone to run, Mr. Speaker. I have to remind the hon. member of that stuff. Then he refers to the fact, well, when we were handing out $100,000 jobs we had no trouble to get candidates either.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER (S. Osborne): Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: I refer back to his previous leadership, previous Premier Grimes, Premier Tobin. In order to get a candidate, Madam Speaker, the first thing they had to do was give them a $100,000 job for a year or two first and then they would consider it.

I remember even poor old Carl Cooper, they paid him $100,000 or $120,000 and they could not get him to run for them. So, Madam Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: George Saunders in Grand Falls, well, he ran in a by-election. It took them a while to convince him. It took him a while.

Madam Speaker, that is very interesting, that they had to do this, that they had to come up with twelve names in four months, Madam Speaker, and could only come up with seven. It is certainly amazing, Madam Speaker, certainly amazing.

Just to let it be known to the people who are out there watching us in TV land that we have a great candidate in Bellevue, a man by the name of Calvin Peach, a very reputable gentleman, a man who is well known, well respected, well liked, fought for his nomination against four or five other people and was successful.

MR. O'BRIEN: In a democratic process.

MR. FRENCH: In a democratic process in our party where anybody can run; it does not matter who you are or what you have in the bank, or where you came from, or how big a job you had before. It does not matter, Madam Speaker, anyone is welcome to run for a nomination in our party, and I am proud to say that Mr. Calvin Peach is going to be the next candidate for Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Madam Speaker, the member opposite also talked about big oil, and he said about big oil that we should be out negotiating with them. Madam Speaker, I just want to say to the hon. member, he should have been to the rally last Friday because what we had there were over 3,000 people who were more than adamant, by the signs that I have seen around, no more giveaways. If it has to stay in the ground, Madam Speaker, it will certainly stay in the ground before we will give away any more of our resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Just on Hebron and that whole negotiation, Madam Speaker, the Chairman of Hebron, last year, I think his bonus was somewhere in the range of $500 million, the equivalent of what they were looking for from this Province. So, we were supposed to sign that deal, again, as the methodology and the thought process of members' opposite, you sign on to a deal like that for the sake of 100 or 150 jobs, which we would love to have, but it is at a cost of $500 million, so someone's corporate executive can get a bonus of that amount of money. That is not a road that this government is going down ever, ever again, and the people of this Province (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Madam Speaker, the Member for the Bay of Islands then started talking about roads and how, you know, the Auditor General said that we spent tens of millions of dollars in roads. Well, Madam Speaker, it is interesting to note that one year they spent $6 million on roads.

It was only recently I was driving home one night, from here actually, and I heard a gentleman on from Corner Brook who didn't live on the Northern Peninsula. He drives the Northern Peninsula regularly for his job, and he had to stop on the side of the road to phone in to compliment the current government on the road work done on the Northern Peninsula. He said it was a brand new highway from what he was used to driving over, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Madam Speaker, he referred to the cost of asphalt, and yes the cost of asphalt is quite a bit higher today than it was some time ago. With this amount of money that was supposed to have been spent in asphalt across this Province, sure we would have had nothing to pave. The cost of asphalt when they were in government was a quarter of what it is today, and we are investing $60 and $70 million a year to try to clean up the mess that this crowd left behind.

I use my own District of Conception Bay South. I haven't seen an asphalt spreader on Route 60 for as long as I can remember. We formed the government, Madam Speaker, and now we have Route 60 just about totally recapped, from one end of CBS to the other. Again this year there will be another commitment from this government to recap some of the bad sections. Madam Speaker, I can assure you that by the end of this summer we should have the worse parts of Route 60 looked after, I am proud to say.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Madam Speaker, I have to get back to the course at hand. I wanted to talk a little bit about the Budget today.

Of course, I have to talk about what I believe is our biggest single investment this year as a government, and it certainly comes out in the Budget, and that is the largest tax cut in the history of the Province. I know many speakers here on other days have referred to it, and the members opposite even admit that this is not a bad Budget, there are a lot of good things in this Budget.

Madam Speaker, the one thing I have noticed is that this is the first time - this is my fifth year here and I have had a number of sessions in the House, and this is the longest time I have ever seen an Opposition not ask a question on the Budget of this Province. I have never been in this House where a Budget has been given by a Finance Minister - and for weeks after there have been questions relating to the Budget. To date, Madam Speaker - and I have been in this House every day - with the exception of one day I have not heard one Budget related question since I have been here. That speaks to the Budget itself. Obviously, if the Budget is good they have nothing to ask, Madam Speaker. They feel it is a good presentation, it is a good Budget, it is an honest Budget, it covers a lot of bases; what we have done in poverty reduction; what we have done with our tax cuts and so on. I just want to outline a little bit on the tax cuts.

First of all, the tax cuts in 2007 amount to $111.3 million and it will be $160.5 million once annualized over time. I just want to give you an example of how that is going to pan out. First of all, if you are in the first income tax bracket, you will go from 10.5 per cent in income tax down to 8.7 per cent. If you are in the second bracket, you will go from 16.16 per cent to 13.8 per cent. If you are in the third bracket, you will go from 18 per cent to 16.5 per cent and, of course, the 9 per cent surtax that was on middle and high income earners will be wiped out altogether. That is significant because that -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: - was basically a tax on a tax. It is certainly good to see that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: Madam Speaker, in order for me to explain this right, I would like to give an example, a clean cut example of how this is going to benefit and put money in people's pockets. For example, for single-parent families with an income threshold, it has been adjusted from $19,000 to $21,000. Now, instead of not having to pay taxes at $19,000, you do not have to pay on that $21,000. Madam Speaker, that is certainly significant. Still, if you are a single person, your minimum threshold will go from $12,000 to $13,000. Again, a significant improvement and something that will put more money back into the hands of the general public and certainly help stimulate the economy.

Another thing I want to talk about is the government elimination and reduction of fees. Government is eliminating and reducing a total of 160 fees. Sixty fees will be eliminated altogether and 100 fees and admissions for historic sites will be reduced to one day a week, for a total of $3.4 million. That is something else that will be put back into the taxpayers of this Province and they will have the ability to go out and stimulate our economy.

Just to touch on these fees, an area that is very close to my heart - and I know a number of people in my district work at this facility, and I have an awful lot of people from my area, schools and so on, who visit this facility - and that is the Salmonier Nature Park. I remember a few years back actually getting a call from a constituent of mine who had taken his family up there and was totally disappointed with what he had to pay to see the animals and so on. I remember the conversation at the time - with my assistance, this is something we have to do. We have to open this up to the general public. Because of the financial mess that we were in first when we took government, obviously, that was an impossible task. Today, Madam Speaker, I am proud to say that, for example, admission to the Salmonier Nature Park is now non-existent. You pay nothing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: You show up with your family, regardless of how many children you have, you go in and you enjoy the day. They have a beautiful facility there. There is a great staff there as well, I might add. You can talk to them, they will show you around the park. I have had the opportunity of doing it a couple of times with my own children. So, it was certainly good to see. As well, of course, there is the season pass. One time there was a $12 season pass. That is no longer in existence, Madam Speaker. For my area, I am certainly delighted to hear that those fees are wiped out.

Madam Speaker, being a person who enjoys salmon fishing and a person who enjoys moose hunting - and, of course, I have quite a few friends who enjoy the same outdoor, wonderful activities. The resident salmon licence has been cut by $5, from $22 to $17. Of course, the resident family licence, which is very important because I have a number of groups in my area, families, they all go salmon fishing. They go camping in their trailers, they stop at the various rivers and they go salmon fishing. Now that fee is cut in half, from $35 down to $17. Again, putting more money into the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Of course, Madam Speaker, moose hunting and caribou hunting. Again, that has been cut by $12. Another significant drop for the people who enjoy the outdoors. It is great exercise and it is great to get out and enjoy what we so often take for granted.

As well, Madam Speaker, my colleague, I am sure, will be up behind me talking about business. I am sure he will expand on it quite a bit more than me, but I just want to highlight a couple of things, and that is the investment of $32 million this year in the Business department of this Province to help attract business and diversify our economy. We talk about our riches with oil certainly, and our minerals in the ground, but again, they are non-renewable natural resources. I am proud to say that the Member for Gander, the Minister of Business, has lobbied government, lobbied our group and now has $32 million to attract business to this Province; $25 million, certainly, will be for large scale business for loans and equity investments and $7 million will be for non-repayable grants to assist in start up costs and attract viable business prospects. That is certainly good to see and it is obviously our beginning steps in diversifying our economy.

Madam Speaker, I am speaking today on the Budget, and I will be very, very shocked and surprised if some members on the opposite side do not support it. In particular, the Leader of the NDP Party. We have a Poverty Reduction Strategy that started a couple of years back now, many of the social issues that she talks about in this House of Assembly are not lost on us. As a matter of fact, many of us on this side speak on them as well. If there was ever a Conservative government, ever in the history of politics, this has to be the most left leaning Conservative government since the beginning of time. I like to always say I am a red Tory. I certainly believe that as a group, we are collectively red Tories.

We have done more for poverty reduction - and our Poverty Reduction Strategy has been heralded not only across the Province, but across the country. We are one of only two provinces that has a Poverty Reduction Strategy in place. Madam Speaker, it does not matter where you go or what social groups you talk to, you will quickly find out and hear things about our Poverty Reduction Strategy. This year we are going to increase it by $28.9 million. Its current annual investment was $62 million, so we are now up to the $91 million commitment on poverty reduction in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Madam Speaker, I have to say, of this government, that is probably the proudest piece that I can speak on in this House. We have all knocked on a lot of doors in getting elected. For me, it is twice, and many on this side of the House, it has happened over and over again. You see people in need and the less fortunate in our society. It is one of, like I said, the proudest pieces of this government's policy that I am glad to see.

Just before I go on, I was fortunate enough to attend - again, in the piece on the poverty reduction and some of the thing we have been doing. I had a fortunate opportunity to attend a launch - or the roads to end violence. These are the kinds of things that are lost in a massive Budget of some almost $5 billion. This is a campaign, the roads to end violence, $1.25 million annually over six years to increase government and community capacity to dramatically reduce violence against women, children, persons with disabilities, seniors and others who are victims of violence because of race, ethnic background, sexual orientation, or economic status. These are the kinds of things that we probably do not talk enough about as a government. These are the kinds of initiatives that we are laying out.

Three hundred-and-ninety-eight thousand in violence prevention initiative in Budget 2007; $200,000 in increased funding for eight women's centres across this Province; $15,000 in funding to increase awareness of poverty reduction. It is a significant piece of work, like I said, in such a massive Budget, very often than not, we lose sight of these initiatives.

One of the other things I would like to talk about that the Minister of Health so eloquently announced just before the Budget, and again part of our poverty reduction strategy, Madam Speaker, is our prescription drug program. Again, I thought that was one of the most significant pieces of our poverty reduction strategy. Certainly, something that we have had for years; we have had various groups lobbying government for different types of prescription drugs to be covered. Madam Speaker, what we are going to see now is that regardless of your illness, based on your income your drugs will be looked after by the people in this Province, in spite, I might add, of no national program. That is something that the federal government has fallen short on again. I am certainly disappointed in it. However, Madam Speaker, this Province and this government has now come to the plate with a prescription drug program.

Madam Speaker, if your household income is below $40,000 you will now only have to absorb the cost of 5 per cent of your drugs. It doesn't matter how high or low they are, 5 per cent is your cap. If your income is $75,000, 7.5 per cent of your income will be spent on drugs. If you make $150,000, 10 per cent of your drug costs will be capped. As I said, I really believe that regardless of what disease or what medical problem you have you are now going to be looked after under the provincial drug program, again another great piece in the poverty reduction strategy.

Another piece, Madam Speaker, is $8 million to provide comparable board and lodging rates to people in this Province who are less fortunate than us and who have disabilities. Before, Madam Speaker, people who were on income support with a disability were not treated the same if they lived with a relative as if they lived with a non-relative. Obviously, people with disabilities in this Province, it is unfortunate but they have certainly incurred costs that other people wouldn't have obviously, whether it is equipment, medical issues, proper beds, or that sort of thing. These people were being kept down somewhat if they lived with a family member or relative. Madam Speaker, we have removed that barrier and regardless of who you live with or where you live you will receive the same as those living with non-relatives.

Madam Speaker, that is significant to people in this financial bracket. They will see an increase of $362 a month for them to survive on and life on, an increase of almost $4,500 a year to help them get through the rough times.

As well, Madam Speaker, $1.5 million increased labour market participation for people with disabilities, a very significant piece as well; $300,000 for the Opening Doors Program. I do not know if many of you are familiar with the Opening Doors Program. The Opening Doors Program is a program within the provincial government and it hires people with disabilities and helps them find jobs in the public service. Many of them I know personally. I actually have family members who have worked under the Opening Doors Program and came here, I might add, long before I ever arrived in this building, and are making great careers. They have a lot to offer. They are very talented, they are educated, and certainly very successful at their jobs. I have a number of people, like I said, who have come from my district on a daily basis and worked here in the public service -

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. FRENCH: Just a couple of minutes to clue up, Madam Speaker?

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave to clue up?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: Madam Speaker, there are a lot of good things that I could talk about in this Budget, and certainly I hope to get up and have a few words on a few things later as we pan out.

Again, I just want to say that our poverty reduction issues were big to us in this Province. They were big when we came here, whether it was paying for school books - now school books are free from Grade 12 down to Kindergarten. Poverty reduction is a big issue for this government. I am proud to say that I am a part of it, and I am proud to say that everyone across the nation realizes that the Poverty Reduction Strategy in this Province is a model for everyone to operate under.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I am very pleased to stand this afternoon and speak in this part of the concurrence debate on the Budget. Speaking on the Budget means speaking on the issues that are covered by the Budget. So, in one's comments one is not always making reference to the dollar sign. One has to talk about the issues that are covered by those dollar signs, and I hope that is what I am going to be doing and therefore will be speaking directly to the Budget.

When I look at this section, the resource section of the Estimates discussions that we have had over the last two weeks, I was rather discouraged to discover that the Department of Environment and Conservation had a very, very small increase in the budget for the whole department, and that is why most of my comments this afternoon are going to be related to environment and conservation.

There are other comments that I would like to make in response to my colleague from Conception Bay South, but I think I will reserve them for my comments tomorrow, or on Thursday, I presume, when we probably will be discussing the social sector. I will speak to some of those comments when I am under the social sector but for today, I think, it would be very good for me to use all of my time on environment and conservation issues.

When I look at the Budget, I see that the budget for the department has gone up by only $3 million, from $21.7 million from last year's estimated budget up to $24.5 million for this year's estimated budget. I have to say, that concerns me. Sitting in on the Estimates Committees, I mean, I look at some other departments - for example, Justice, which we had this morning - where some of the line items, just one single line item, went up by $1 million: in salaries, for example, and rightly so. The things that were being covered in that line item needed that money, but it just is rather discouraging when I see that something as important as environment and conservation has had so little new money put into it in this Budget.

We do not have a good track record in this Province on environmental issues. I think we all know that, if we acknowledge it. You know, we look at our fishery, what can I say? Environment and conservation, and we hardly have a fishery left. We can blame that on the federal government, as we sometimes do, but we also know that we had a role to play in that as well, as a people. We look at our mining industry, and it was part of where thing were at that time, I know - it is not just something that happened here in Newfoundland and Labrador - but we have all kinds of mine sites around this Province that were mine sites that were toxic for people who worked in them, toxic for people who lived around them, and were left in a toxic state after the mines closed. We can go to all of our mine sites, whether it is St. Lawrence or Bell Island or Hope Brook or Rambler or Baie Verte, uranium up in Labrador, the list goes on and on, and we have had a terrible track record in this Province. One of the dangers is that, as we continue to pursue our natural resource and to develop our natural resources, that we will continue doing it without adequate concern for the environment.

Now, on one level you would think that is impossible; you would think that we have to have learned from the past and we could not possibly do things wrong again, but unfortunately that is not the case because sometimes the desire to get jobs for an area, the desire to have more income in an area, can perhaps lead us down a path of making decisions that on the surface look like they are okay. On the surface they say: Oh, we can take care of that. There is going to be a little bit of damage but we can take care of that. The urgency of the moment can make us make decisions that could be bad decisions down the road. I think some of the mines that I just talked about are examples of that.

A really recent example of that, for me to mention at the moment, is the mine at Duck Pond, the Aur Resources mine, the mine that opened today, I think. I think it was today that my colleague from Grand Falls-Buchans mentioned that it was opening. Wonderful that we have another gold mine, wonderful that we have people employed again in that area, but look at what we did in order to have that mine. Our government asked permission from the federal government, because Aur Resources asked for it, to dump mine waste tailings from the Duck Pond mine project into Trout Pond and another pond that are living ponds with fish in them and are part of a whole area that is - I would consider it - a sacred area, because these two ponds feed into the Exploits River. It is the largest river system on the Island part of the Province, and a major tourism resource. What has happened is that the federal government has given permission for that pond to now have cyanide and acids put into Trout Pond.

There is no way - and I mean this from a scientific perspective - that we can assure, without any doubt, that decision is not going to end up causing problems in the future. There is no way we can assure that. It would be lovely if we could, and we would like to think with our human know-how and with the skills that we have, that we can control everything, but the reality is that we cannot control everything. It may not be next year, it may not be six years time when the mine closes, and it may not even be in ten years time, but it is quite possible that in twenty years time the children of people who are working in this mine now are going to have to deal with a degradation of their environment because of decisions that were made in the present.

That is not acceptable, especially when there were alternatives that could have been used for the tailings disposal, alternatives that could have lessened the uncertainty with regard to possible damage that would be done in that very delicate area. Why do we do something like that? Why do we make a decision to do something that can potentially cause damage down the road? As I said earlier, I think we do it out of a sense of urgency. We want jobs and we do not stop to make wiser decisions.

I do not know why we could not have demanded of Aur Resources to use another technology that they already used in another province in this country for their tailings disposal. I do not know why we could not have done that. Would Aur Resources have said: Well, I am sorry we are going to go because we are just not going to make enough money? Do you know what? We may sometimes have to say, well, you go, and then look for somebody else who is willing to do it, if it looks like there is a site there that can be mined.

I am not saying, and I would never say, that we do not do development. There are people I know who sometimes look at the New Democratic Party and they think that we are totally against development. We are not. I am not totally against mining, I am certainly not against fishing, I am not against the oil and gas industry, however, I am against development that isn't done with a concern for the environment, the physical environment, the ecology. I am against development that isn't done in a way that will maximize things for the good of the people who live in an area and for the future of those people.

There is a basic principle that has been around for a long time now when talking about sustainable development, and it is called the precautionary principle. It can be a boring thing to talk about, because the way in which the principle is worded is very academic and it can be hard to get at. Really, what it is saying is, if somebody - I am going to use Aur Resources as my example because I think it is perfect. The person who wants to dump the tailings there is saying to me, who does not want to dump the tailings there: You cannot prove to me that this is going to damage the environment in twenty years time. So, because you cannot prove to me, without a doubt, that it is not going to damage the environment, then I should be allowed to go ahead.

The precautionary principle says back - and this is what I would say back then to that person: But there is a possibility that there could be damage to the environment, and because there is a possibility there could be damage to the environment, even though I cannot absolutely 100 per cent prove it to you, the possibility means we should not do it. That is what the precautionary principle is all about. I think here in Newfoundland and Labrador we have to become more aware of that precautionary principle and make decisions based on the precautionary principle.

It was very interesting that at the very same time that the discussion was going on about AUR Resources and the gold mine at Duck Pond, while all of that was happening, at the same time the Department of Environment and Conservation released, or was at least in the process of having discussions around it, it's discussion paper on sustainable development. This happened at the time that I first came into the House. I was elected and first began my work on the political sphere. I was really shocked when I read the sustainable development document from my own government, in my own Province, a sustainable development document which turned, deliberately turned, by the way, the precautionary principle on it's head.

What our sustainable development discussion document said, from the government of this Province last year in 2006, was that, well, you who think we should not put the tailings in the pond, if you cannot prove to me that it is really going to do damage in twenty years time, I go ahead. That is the precaution. Well, that blew my mind away when I read that in our own sustainable development document for this Province the precautionary principle had been turned on it's head; a principle that is accepted around the world; a principle that is accepted internationally by scientists; a principle that was thought through with great care. When I look at the statements on sustainable development from governments around Canada, I just find everybody saying the opposite of what our own sustainable development discussion document had said.

Now, the Budget tells me that the sustainable development legislation is going to come out before this House breaks. That is what I am hoping. I am hoping that the sustainable development legislation that gets placed in front of us and that is part of this budget, I am hoping that document is going to undue what was in the discussion paper. I hope that the document that comes to us for discussion and approval as legislation for this Province is going to be based more on an understanding that we cannot trade everything off in order to get jobs. We cannot trade everything off in order to get a company to come. We cannot do that. The tradeoffs - we have to think about what we are giving away when we do this. We can't mitigate everything. There is a real problem with mitigation, because what mitigation very often does is: I am allowed to do something bad here if I make up for it on this other side. To me, that is not always acceptable, because it is very possible that while there were fish in Duck Pond that were removed and placed somewhere else, the big damage around Duck Pond may not be the killing of the fish that were in it; and therefore mitigating by moving those fish somewhere else may not take care of the other damage that is going to be done. Mitigating doesn't always work. Mitigating looks like it is taking care of a problem, but it is not always taking care of the problem.

What is our document going to have in it? What is the legislation going to have in it? We don't know. We don't have a clue, actually. I remember meeting a couple of times with the Minister of Environment and Conservation. We have had a couple of discussions but I have not gotten any sense that the notion of the precautionary principle is going to be in our legislation. If we don't have the notion of the precautionary principle in our legislation, then we potentially, down the road, have a lot of problems.

Let's look at what we are dealing with in Baie Verte. We have not only men - and it was men only who worked in the mines - now dealing with major health problems, we have people living in the community concerned that they are dealing with health problems as well. Members of the families of men who worked in the mines who did not work in the mines themselves, but just living in the town, may have health problems. This is a legacy that gets left to the future. This is a legacy that gets left to the children of the workers, to the grandchildren of the workers. We can't do things that leave legacies like that to the youth. We can't do that. If we are doing that, then we don't have sustainable development.

Right now we are in this terrible situation with our fishery where there is almost no industry left for the children of people who worked in the fishery for generation after generation after generation. I mean, what is it that we have done? Just look at how horrible that is, just look at how actually immoral it is, that the industry went in such a direction and was allowed to go in that direction without anybody saying: Good heavens, we could we wiping out the whole resource, when this resources doesn't have to be wiped out because it is a renewable resource. That is where everything that we are talking about in natural resources, whether we are talking about the fishery or whether we are talking about the non-renewable areas such as mining and oil and gas - so, whether we are talking about fishery and forestry, or whether we are talking about the non-renewables, or we are talking about agriculture - no matter what it is that we are talking about, we have to bring the environmental concerns into all of the areas. I am afraid, my colleagues, that I do not see that in this Budget. I do not see the environmental concerns in all of those areas, and that is what concerns me. If we took that approach then the budget line for environment and conservation would go up much more than by $3 million.

I do note, and it is a good thing, and I am glad to see it, that increase of $3 million is probably related to the Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem, which will be part of the Centre of Excellence for Environmental Science, Research and Technology in Corner Brook, and that is really good, and I am really delighted that this institute is being set up, but I do not want the institute starting from scratch, or the government to have an expectation that there isn't already a lot of scientific learning that is in place, a lot of scientific learning that we build on, we localize our research, we need to look at these issues in the context of Newfoundland and Labrador, and the localizing might be new but the basic principles and the learnings that are going on internationally are not new. The learnings around climate change, we do not have to invent a lot of that. We have to look at green gas emissions in the context of Newfoundland and Labrador, but there is a whole lot we do not have to prove about it. We know what the sources are. Maybe there are new sources that we have to learn about in our own context, or learn how those sources are operating in our context, but I really hope that this new institute at the Center of Excellence is going to speed up a process for us where we will take much more seriously in this Province the environment degradation that is going on.

I think that we have an awful lot to learn, and this would take money, and I think this money should come not just from government but also from industry. I do not think for a minute that we are doing enough research about what is happening, the environmental damage that can be done by oil and gas exploration and production out in the Atlantic, or out in any ocean, but for us out in the North Atlantic.

When you talk to scientists, and there are a number of scientists who speak out on this, whether we are talking about the effect on seabirds, whether we are talking about the effect on the ocean bed, no matter what we are talking about, there is a lot of research not being done; or, if the research is being done, it is not being paid attention to. I really do not think that those two things are coming together yet in this Province, and it really does concern me.

That does not mean that we stop oil and gas exploration. It means we really seriously look at, this could be having negative effects, that fifty years down the road can be very, very serious. Do we say we do not care about it now because it is going to happen in fifty years? Precautionary principle says we have to care about it now. Sustainable development says we have care about it now.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that her speaking time has expired.

MS MICHAEL: One final sentence, please?

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave to clue up?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MADAM SPEAKER: By leave.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much.

Just to say, Madam Chairperson - or Madam Speaker, you are in the Speaker's Chair at the moment - this Budget is done. I would urge government, as it continues its work, as we go through the sustainable development legislation, as we work towards next year's Budget, that all of us together would understand that we have to make environmental and conservation issues and concerns integral to all aspects, especially, of the natural resource development sector of our Budget.

Thank you very much.

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Business.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to get up today and speak on the Budget and the Estimates, particularly for my department, the Department of Business.

I will just reflect on the hon. member's comments that the previous speaker made when she was just cluing up, that she was hoping that government would follow a course of fiscal responsibility and fiscal response to the needs of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Certainly, that ties very well with where I was going to go in regards to my speech this afternoon on the Budget. I always like to get up and reflect on where we were, where we are now, and where we see the future.

I will go back to 2003 when we took government. We must reflect on that because we certainly had indications that the fiscal position of the Province was not good, by any means, but certainly when we took government we found out that it was in much worse condition that we had previously thought. The Premier showed wisdom and showed leadership in regards to choosing his first Cabinet and then mapping out a fiscal responsibility to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador in regards to getting our fiscal house in order. That was reflected and seen in the 2004-2005 Budget and, I said before in this House, I have no problem getting up and saying that Budget certainly touched every Newfoundlander and Labradorian, be it an adult, be it a child, be it whoever walked the streets of Newfoundland and Labrador. It certainly did; but, in saying that, I think most of the people of the Province bought into that particular Budget even though it put restraints in their household income. It put restraints in regards to what they had to pay for things and fees, et cetera. It did all of that. I have no problem in getting up here and reflecting on that. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador see the wisdom and knew full well that a government should be responsible and the first thing should be first, and that is getting their fiscal house in order. The Cabinet of the day and the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador did that in 2004-2005.

Then we went on to 2005-2006, and when we moved into 2005-2006 a number of things happened. Actually, at the end of 2005-2006 we showed a surplus - not a large one, but we showed a surplus - but we came down with the 2005-2006 Budget and we showed fiscal responsibility again.

Fiscal responsibility is about foundation building, and you have to build a foundation for the future of Newfoundland and Labrador before you start making investments, before you try to create jobs for the sake of creating jobs. As seen in the past, when you make investments when it is not a very well thought out process, these jobs cease to exist three, four or five years down the road when the monies run out. So, this government set a path in regards to developing strategies and programs that would reflect the prosperity and future prosperity of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I have heard hon. members from the other side of the House jesting in regards to the strategies and the various strategies that this government has come forward with. Any corporation or any business develops a strategy. If they do not have a strategy, nine chances out of ten, that company will cease to exist as they move forward in the business world and the times, because you just cannot go on a whim and a prayer. As shown - and I will reflect back again - in the 2003 election, the Opposition likes to believe that we were put in government because we see an opportunity in regard to the oil and gas and the mining, et cetera, and the cost of minerals and that kind of stuff. Certainly, that is not the reason at all. We gained government in 2003 because the people of Newfoundland and Labrador knew full well that we would take the fiscal finances of this Province and we would get our house in order and grow the foundation for a future in Newfoundland and Labrador for our children's children. I will go as far as saying our children's children, not only my children but my children's children. That is exactly what happened in 2003-2004, and again we went on to 2005-2006 with a small surplus.

We invested in various things, we invested in the right things, and that budget was a well thought out budget. We did not take all the money that we had received and start investing it unwisely. The Cabinet of the day certainly spent a lot of time in regards to making sure that money, the extra money that we had at that particular time, was spent in the right way.

Then we moved into 2006-2007 budget. Again we showed a surplus and again we made very, very, very wise investments in Newfoundland and Labrador. One of the biggest investments that we made was in our Provincial Roads Program, one of the largest investments ever made in the Provincial Roads Program in Newfoundland and Labrador since 1949, discounting the Trans-Canada Highway.

It is so important for me, as the Department of Business, to see that foundation being built, to see that investment being made, because most people, and rightfully so, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, would reflect on the investment in provincial roads as being something for them because they drive the streets and they drive the provincial roads back and forth to wherever they may very well go to get a certain service, be it in Grand Falls or Clarenville, or even just to visit someone next door. They certainly want good roads to drive on.

From my point of view, and more important to me as the Minister of Business, is that it is a foundation to build a future in Newfoundland and Labrador. Because one of the first things that you have to have in regards to attracting a business to any part of Newfoundland and Labrador is a good transportation system. That is optimum, it is a no-brainer, and the Premier saw that right off the bat and started to invest in transportation and provincial roads right from the get go.

The second one was in health care . As a matter of fact, it was reflected on by a member from the NDP at the time that it was the largest investment in health care in Newfoundland and Labrador to his knowledge. That was since he has been elected, and also his knowledge of provincial politics from the beginning. Again, it is very important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador in regards to how and where they receive their services and the services that they receive.

From my point of view it is very important to the business attraction file as well. Certainly, a corporation or a business that would seek to invest and to locate in Newfoundland and Labrador, they first want to know the services that are going to be provided to their workers. Health care is one of the most important, along with education which is close behind or probably side by side to that. We have seen investments over the last number of years in education as well, new schools and programs, and in this Budget the elimination of the cost of books to the families. That is all reflected on in regards to the business opportunity that we may have, and they will certainly need that. I have seen a very carefully laid out plan starting right from the beginning, in 2003-2004, right up to now to the present Budget of 2007-2008.

I have to reflect, before I get into the 2007 Budget - because I certainly want to talk about that Budget if I have time - in regards to the surpluses and the various aspects that I see as very, very important to the Department of Business and to my district of Gander. I have to reflect on the comments of the hon. member for the Bay of Islands. He was on my Resource Committee, he was there for about forty-five minutes and he had a number of questions.

Yes, Madam Speaker, he did ask me about how many jobs I, as the minister now responsible, and the Department of Business have created in Newfoundland and Labrador in the past year. On reflection of that, before I give you my answer to the hon. gentleman, it certainly shows me why he never made it to Cabinet in the previous government. The simple reason is, he does not understand the difference between operational budget and programming budget. That is exactly what he did not understand.

I told him, upfront, that prior to this Budget we had no business attraction funds in the Department of Business so we had to rely on partnering with other departments and supporting them on the files that they may have, be it in the Department of Fisheries, be it in Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, be it in Natural Resources, or be it in Tourism, or either one of the departments that has an economic piece to it. That is the kind of stuff we did in 2006-2007. We interacted with those departments on that aspect. Whatever we could provide to a file on the business analysis side, that is exactly what we did.

More importantly, in 2006-2007 we have been very active in the Department of Business in regards to creating a very business friendly environment in Newfoundland and Labrador. One of the items that we engaged in was Red Tape Reduction. Over the last while - we have been only taking out regulations out of the regulatory environment now over the last year and we have extracted over 21,000 requirements out of that. I must reflect also, that the Federation of Independent Business gave government an award in regard to their actions on Red Tape Reduction.

The next item that we were certainly involved in and very important to the business climate, and also to Newfoundland and Labrador in regards to marketing this Province as a good place to set up business and to live and work, and that is our branding. Our new brand was launched in October of 2006 with great reviews from the Chambers of Commerce, from the Boards of Trades and all the various stakeholders in the Province. Recently, and I heard the Opposition a good many times mock the brand and all that kind of stuff, and talk about how the brand would never, never attract anybody to the Province, but it is so important for us to have an identity. I reflect again on the forty-three versions of the government logo that was out there at the time and how important it is to be consistent; consistency spells prosperity.

It was only last week, or the week previous, that the New Brunswick Government, the Liberal government has stuck a task force and has signified the branding of the province as one of the most important tools for the future prosperity of that province. As seen in other regions and jurisdictions, be it Nova Scotia, Manitoba, the City of Montreal, or now, New Brunswick, it certainly shows the very, very importance of branding your province and making sure that you market your province correctly.

Also, we are involved in the fees review. In the previous Budget thirty-four fees were reduced or eliminated and this was $1.4 million annualized into the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. This time it was 170 fees either reduced or eliminated and an annualized investment of $3.4 million into the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Again, this reflects on the business climate, not just on the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. It certainly reflects well when I am talking to various corporations and businesses that may set up to do business in this Province, that these are the kinds of things they can expect from this government in regards to the everyday lives of their employees.

This year we have shown a record surplus of $261 million, which is again a true testimony to the fiscal responsibility of the Williams' government that is seen on a go-forward basis from 2003-2004 until this present day. I say to the hon. Member for Quidi Vidi, you will see that in the future because this is what makes up this government. It is fiscal responsibility, firm leadership and an eye to the future and a vision. To realize and achieve that vision, you have to build a foundation to get there. We have made tremendous progress, even more quickly than we had realized. Sure, that is because of the rising oil prices, the mineral prices, et cetera, and the enhancements to the Atlantic Accord. If you realize that on the marketplace, you have to know how to spend it in a fiscally responsible manner as well. It has shown in other governments, not only in Newfoundland and Labrador but across Canada and elsewhere, that once they actually got into a surplus position, they did not know how to spend it and how wise it is to continue to show fiscal restraint and fiscal responsibility on a move forward basis in Newfoundland and Labrador because if not, you will defeat your vision that you started with in the first place.

The hon. Member for Conception Bay South mentioned how important it is for the Department of Business to have a Business Attraction Fund. The Business Attraction Fund is consisting of two aspects, a $25 million strategic investment for business ventures in infrastructure. It is there for the attraction of businesses to Newfoundland and Labrador. We will be able to provide loans and equity investments to companies interested in conducting business in Newfoundland and Labrador. In addition to that, there is a $7 million grant fund. It is a non-repayable fund. It will be used to supplement start up and initial operational costs for large scale companies moving into the Province to do business. They will have, and businesses will have, if they are going to move from elsewhere in Canada or elsewhere within the globe, initial relocation and start-up costs that are new to the operation in moving to the Province. Certainly, we see this as an absolute need. We compete on a daily basis with jurisdictions from all over the world, not only in Canada. A lot of reflection is given to Nova Scotia in regard to competing with Nova Scotia, but certainly on the global aspect as well. Because you must remember that Ireland has a growing economy, Belgium has a growing economy, Germany has a growing economy, and each and every one of them are out there in the global atmosphere in the foreign markets looking for business opportunities.

When it comes to business, it is a small world. It is a small world in Newfoundland and Labrador, it is a small world in Canada, and it is certainly a small world on the international stage, because, simply put, there is only so much business and so many emerging markets and sectors, and there are many out there trying to grab that opportunity for their respective jurisdictions. So, that business attraction fund is very, very important to the Department of Business on a go forward basis where we can compete with other jurisdictions around the world.

Certainly, again I will reflect back to the personal income reduction, the largest such reduction ever seen in the Province. It makes this Province having the lowest tax rates in Atlantic Canada. Certainly, yes, it will be reflected across the various levels, and, yes, the lowest rate will certainly be -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. O'BRIEN: Time?

AN HON. MEMBER: No, no.

MR. O'BRIEN: I am sorry. I thought my time had been eliminated.

If we reflect, there are tax rates for tax brackets, and certainly that will be reflected. We all know that somebody in a higher tax bracket will get more from this particular initiative by government. That is not lost on people. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador know that, if they make $50,000 a year they are going to get back a certain amount that is going to realize more into their pockets, but they also realize that somebody making $90,000 is probably going to get a little bit more. That is not lost on us or anybody, to be honest with you.

Certainly, from a business attraction point of view, it puts us in a great position with regard to this Province attracting business to Newfoundland and Labrador. When they see that we have the lowest personal income tax rate in Atlantic Canada, they will be more inclined to have a look at our market and certainly move to Newfoundland and Labrador.

Also, we have seen the small business threshold under corporate income tax will be adjusted from $300,000 to $400,000. It was only recently that I spoke at a Chamber of Commerce AGM and this was one of the best items that they liked within the Budget of 2007-2008. It makes a lot of sense, and they reflect on that in regards to it being very, very beneficial to small business in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I already reflected on the 170 fees and $3.4 million. We had $440 million -

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

The hon. member's time has lapsed.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. O'BRIEN: I will just finish up. I did not get near -

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

Leave is granted.

MR. O'BRIEN: My district itself was very fortunate over the last couple of years as well. We have our Trans-Canada being upgraded between Gander and Glenwood, $6 million being invested in that. We have another $3.1 million going into the James Peyton Memorial Hospital; that is a $15.9 million commitment over five years.

There are various other things, such as the water treatment plant in Gander that has been now completed, up and running. We also have our sewer treatment plant in Appleton and Glenwood that is now up and running, and we will see the benefits of that in the future forever more.

I can go on and on, on how fortunate my district has been under this government, and it has been a pleasure to work with all the councils in my district. I have three, and a service district as well in Benton, and all the stakeholders such as the Chamber of Commerce in Gander. It has been a pleasure being their MHA, and certainly I will see them in the near future on the campaign trail.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will spend a few minutes talking about the Budget. We are doing the Resource Committee and I might get around to that later on, but first of all I want to answer some of the questions that were asked of me over across the floor this afternoon. The first one came from the Member for Terra Nova. He asked me why I would not be voting for the tax decrease in the Budget. Well, I will tell him, Mr. Speaker, I will tell him, and the documentation came out with their press releases when they announced the Budget back two or three weeks ago.

The reason I am not voting for that tax reduction - he asked me why I would not vote for a tax reduction for myself. I will tell him now, Mr. Speaker, because if you look at the chart that came out with the Budget you will certainly see that the tax deductions in this Budget certainly favour the rich. While I am not rich myself, I do not know about the Member for Terra Nova, but the reason I am not voting for that tax reduction is because it is skewed in favour of those who are the high income earners. That is the reason I will be voting against it, I say to the minister. I will give you a couple of examples.

It is my understanding that the average annual earned income in this Province is somewhere around $22,000. The group in that category will receive a tax deduction next year, or in 2008 - not next year, but in 2008 - of approximately $233. The Member for Terra Nova -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: How much will I receive?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. REID: I am going to tell you that now, if you just stop and listen. I listened attentively to the last couple of speakers. I am going to tell you that.

I say, Mr. Speaker, that is the average annual earned income in the Province, somewhere around $22,000. In fact, those who work for the minimum wage in this Province, and that is most of those who work in the service sector, if they work fifty-two weeks a year, I think that their total earned income, before taxes, is $14,560. If you want to do it, you can do the math over there. Seven times forty hours a week, because the minimum wage is $7 times fifty-two weeks, it comes out to be around $14,500. That individual would get a $238 or a $233 tax deduction, or up to $20,000-odd you would get a $233 tax deduction.

I say, for those who sit in the House of Assembly, and that includes all of us, the minimum tax deduction that any Member in the House of Assembly will get next year will be roughly $1,700. The ministers, I say to the member opposite, and the Leader of the Opposition, will get somewhere between a $3,000 and $4,000 reduction in income tax, and that is the reason I am not voting for that tax reduction. Because right now in this Budget what you see - and it was hidden. You do not hear the minister talk about it, actually, unless he goes and he appears before a Board of Trade or a Chamber of Commerce, where those in attendance are making more than $60,000 a year. To those who earn the average annual income of $20,000, or those who work for the minimum wage, an individual making $60,000, to these folks, is considered rich, I say to those opposite. Even though most of you here do not think that $60,000 entitles you to the title of being rich, you are rich. We are rich in the eyes of many, many, many people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

What the minister did in the Budget, he talked about a reduction across the board for every group, every income group, but what he did for those who make over $60,000 a year, he also eliminated what is called a surtax - a surtax, I think, that a Liberal government put there before and they called it a tax on the rich. I think it was 9 percent. So, any income over $60,000, they would charge 9 per cent additional money on that income over $60,000; they called it a surtax on the rich. Well, this Minister of Finance just eliminated that in the Budget.

MR. HICKEY: What a minister!

MR. REID: What a minister! The Minister of Transportation just talked about, what a minister! Because he eliminated a surtax that the rich people in this Province paid and they will no longer have to pay it. The Minister of Transportation, the Member for Lake Melville, says: What a minister!

I say to the Minister of Transportation, and I say to the Minister of Finance, rather than having eliminated that surtax, you should have left it on there and kept the tax on the rich and given it to the poor. What you should have been is Robin Hood. Instead, you got the opposite. Instead of taking from the rich and giving to the poor, you are giving to the rich and giving little to the poor, I say to members opposite.

That is the reason, I say to the Member for Terra Nova, that I will not be voting for that decrease in taxes that I will receive and the Members of this House of Assembly and those who make over $60,000 a year. That is the reason why I will not be voting for that, I say to the member.

It is not surprising, I say to the members opposite, that you see this government giving money to the rich. All you have to do is pick through the bones of the Budget Speech, pick through the documentation and see where the money goes. They pat themselves on the back and they talk about what they are doing for the poor. The Member for Terra Nova is continuing to nod his head, I say. Yes, the poor in his district will get $230 back this year that they did not receive last year, but he will get back, this year, somewhere in the area of a $2,400 to $3,000 tax reduction, I say to those from the member's district in Terra Nova, that he will get at least ten times a tax reduction than the people in his district who make $20,000 or less. I say to the Member for Terra Nova, there are many, many, many -

MR. ORAM: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: And so you should, is that what you are saying? So you should? Well, that is your opinion, I say to the Member for Terra Nova. If he thinks he should receive a tax break of ten times that of the poorer people in his district, that is up to him to deal with that, I say.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A point of order has been called by the Member for Terra Nova.

MR. ORAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the hon. Leader of the Opposition wants to make statements, let's make sure he makes the statements correctly.

First of all, he does not exactly know what my tax bracket is, number one, and what I said to him was very simple. I said, not only will the lower income people get that tax reduction, and not only will the people on this side of the House get that tax reduction, so will the Leader of the Opposition get that tax reduction and, in fact, he gets a higher salary than MHAs who are in the back benches here. He is getting the high-end tax rate, so for him to make statements like that is completely wrong.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order. Members should remember that points of order relate to the Standing Orders and to the Orders of the House.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know there is no point of order. The Member for Terra Nova, now that he brought it up - he says I do not know what his income is. That is true. I do not know what income you get from your businesses, but I do know what your income is -

MR. ORAM: A point of order, Mr. Speaker, a point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order has been called by the hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR. ORAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, just to correct the member who is normally always wrong and wrong again this time, I get no income from my businesses, Mr. Speaker. So I would appreciate it if he would stop putting falsehoods out as usual and I would ask him for an apology, because I do not get money from my businesses.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes that there may be a disagreement between hon. members, but there is no point of order.

The Chair recognizes the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish the member opposite would listen. I said I do not know what income you get from your business. You just said that you do not get anything from your business. I can see now why you complained last week about the government in 1996 not giving you any money towards your business -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: - because obviously you are not making any. You are not making any money off the homes, the funeral homes and the senior homes that you own, but I will tell you, I do know how much you are making in the House of Assembly, I say to the member opposite. You are making $72,000 a year in your salary and you are making an additional $25,000 for being Parliamentary Assistant to the Premier. That is what he is making so he is making somewhere between $95,000 and $100,000 a year, and as a result he will be getting a tax deduction of $2,441, which is more than ten times those who make less than $22,000 in his district. I would say there are quite a few of those, Mr. Speaker.

MR. ORAM: How much are you getting?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: He is asking, why am I voting against this. I am voting against this for that very reason. I do not think that we, sitting in the House of Assembly, should be taking a tax deduction from this government that is ten times larger than the poor people that we represent in our districts, I say to the member opposite.

It is not uncommon for this group opposite to give money to their rich friends. It is not uncommon, Mr. Speaker. If you look into the Budget this year you will find examples of where they have done exactly that. They certainly did not watch Robin Hood where they talk about taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: That concept is totally foreign to the members opposite. Besides giving themselves the tax break, ten times that of the average income earner in the Province, that was also coupled with the raises that they gave to the Premier's staff.

Mr. Speaker, the public service in this Province got zero, zero, three and three for the past four years. In the last four years they have gotten an increase in pay of 6 per cent. Members in the Premier's office got increases anywhere from 8 per cent to 16.9 per cent this year. Then the Premier says, yes they work hard and that they work twenty-four, seven.

I noticed the other day in an e-mail that someone out there actually believed that. Someone actually believe that they work twenty-four hours a day, seven days a weeks, 365 days a year because they did the calculation and said that the individuals in the Premier office are making eleven-something an hour. Now, just think about that. Just think about it. The Chief of Staff in the Premier's office gets $131,000 and he is making $11 an hour. Boy, he is some man, I must say, he has not closed his eyes in the last year. He works twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, fifty-two weeks a year. Boy, I am telling you, we do not need too many individuals like him in this Province. If we had four or five of them, sure the rest of us could all go home.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, that is another example -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair asks hon. members to my left if we could have some co-operation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair asks all hon. members to respect each other.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair's attention is drawn to a member to my right who is interfering with the Speaker giving instructions to the House and I ask him for his co-operation.

The Chair recognizes the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker

I sat there this afternoon, and I can honestly say I never heckled one of their speakers, but the minute that I stood up, they started.

Mr. Speaker, besides giving a tax deduction to the rich and besides giving an increase in pay to all of the staff in the Premier's office, which tripled that of every other civil servant there, what else do we have here? You have to remember that this Premier campaigned on a leaner, meaner Cabinet in 2003 and that he was going to reduce the number of individuals that he had in the Cabinet. Well, today he has fifteen members in his Cabinet who are making somewhere around $50,000, in addition to their MHAs salaries.

On top of that, besides the fifteen Cabinet ministers, we also have a number, over there, of parliamentary secretaries to ministers. I see the Member for Mount Pearl, he is one of them, and the Member for Terra Nova is another one and the Member for Bonavista North is another one, and I do not know there might be seven or eight more over there.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: Yes and the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde, she just put up her hand and said she is proud to be a parliamentary secretary.

The point I am making is, in addition to their MHA salaries these individuals are also getting $25,000 a year on top of their MHA's salaries for being the parliamentary secretaries to the ministers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: If they can explain to me what they do on a daily basis to earn that income I would be glad to sit down and let them talk about that. Besides carrying the minister's briefing books into the House of Assembly, I would like to know what they do to say that they deserve an additional $25,000 over an above their MHA's salaries.

Mr. Speaker, we have tax breaks for the rich. We have increases in pay of up to 16 per cent for the staff in the Premier's office. We have a whole bunch of parliamentary secretaries to ministers over there who collect an additional $25,000 a year over and above their salary. All of that was in the Budget, I say, Mr. Speaker. All of that was in this Budget, along with $15 million for fibre optic cable so that the Premier could reward his past friends or his current friends and business associates in terms of Mr. MacDonald and all the boys who work for him. Mr. Speaker, that is in there.

Paul Reynolds, another Tory faithful individual who is getting roughly one hundred and twenty thousand dollars a year this year that he is going to pick up. He is out there working getting his $120,000 or $130,000, and his only claim to fame is that he was the past President of the Tory Party of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, when they get up and talk about all they do for the poor it sort of disturbs me when you think about what else they do not talk about in the budget. You have not heard of any of those opposite saying: Wow, we are really happy because we got this large tax break, that we are getting ten times the tax break that the poor people of the Province are getting, those who earn minimum wage and those with incomes of less than twenty-odd thousand dollars.

The Member for Terra Nova cannot handle it. He asked me the question earlier this afternoon across the floor: Why aren't you voting in favour of a tax deduction for yourself? I told you that, I say to the Member for Terra Nova. I think that you should leave the surtax on there and the money that we are going to save should have gone for those in this Province who are less fortunate than we are, who are making incomes less than poverty level in this country, I say to the Member for Terra Nova..

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: Now, Mr. Speaker, the $15 million for his friends and associates, the fibre optics -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Order, please!

MR. REID: Rather noisy here, Mr. Speaker, isn't it?

There is something wrong when every time you get up and you start to tell them something they do not really want to hear or they would prefer that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador not hear, they get sort of boisterous. They just cannot swallow the pill. They would like for the general population to believe that they are only interested in one thing, and that is the well-being of the poor and the underprivileged in this Province, Mr. Speaker.

The Member for Lake Melville, he yells and screams, and bawls and shouts but he does not say much -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is having difficulty hearing the hon. member. In addition, there is a great deal of noise. The Chair recognizes that members do have things they wish to talk about while the House is in session, but if members have conversations that they have to carry on and they cannot carry them on without shouting or having their voices raised, the Chair asks members to take their conversations outside the Chamber.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the members opposite, I guess I have to stop speaking in eight minutes, at 5:30, but I get an hour. I have ten minutes uninterrupted gone in there so far. So what I do not do today I will do tomorrow.

Besides giving money to the rich, besides giving tax breaks to the rich and giving $15 million to their corporate friends in the cable industry, and besides giving high raises to the people in the Premier's office and giving all kinds of increases and all kinds of money to the parliamentary secretaries who sit behind the ministers and carry their books around for them - the Member for Conception Bay South, I think that is the name of his district, mentioned today, he was talking about political patronage I think. He started to list off some of the individuals that the Liberals had hired when they were in government. Well, Mr. Speaker, it just so happens that I have a -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: They are not props, Mr. Speaker. Let's talk about some of the friends of the Tory Party -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair's attention, again, is drawn to the level of noise in the House and the lack of decorum. The Chair asks all members for their co-operation.

The Chair again recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have a list of individuals who are closely connected with the Tory Party and who received appointments by this government in the last year. Mr. Speaker, I will take a few minutes to go through some of them. I do not have them all here today. I will start with the top one. In no particular order, but Bruce Peckford. Prior to this government coming to power in 2003, Bruce Peckford was a paid political assistant up on the fifth floor in the Opposition office with today's Premier when he was in Opposition. Mr. Bruce Peckford is head of the Workers' Compensation Review Committee. He is also on the Eastern School Board and he is also on the school board interim transitional committee. That is one. He worked upstairs with the Premier.

The second one I have here is Mr. Dean MacDonald. I don't think we need to go into a lot of detail over who Dean MacDonald is, Mr. Speaker. We know that he is a close friend of the Premier's, a previous business associate. In fact, he worked for the Premier when he owned Cable Atlantic. He is the Chair of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, along with a host of other committees that he is appointed to.

Mr. Ralph Tucker, he is now the Chair of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission. Mr. Tucker is a long time supporter of the Tory Party. Actually, he replaced Joan Cleary as the Chair of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, and we all know who Ms Cleary is. In fact, today there is a report that was tabled by the government entitled, Public Tender Act Exemptions. That is when you are supposed to go out to public tender but you do not do it.

There are three instances here where Ms Cleary put out contracts without public tender. The last one I saw today is that she approved the purchase of a car in Clarenville. The reason she could not go to public tender - because you have to go to public tender on any purchase over $10,000, the car was $30,000-odd. She did not go to public tender. She had someone go in and pick it up in Clarenville. Do you know what the excuse was that the government wrote in the book for her? She had to do it immediately - Just imagine! - because the car was not fit to put on the road. Now, Mr. Speaker, think about that. She could not go to public tender because the car had to be replaced immediately. Somebody is driving around in a car and all of a sudden she stops: We have to get a car immediately.

There were two other contracts that she let. One, I might add, was to her campaign chair in the last election. This is an individual that we gave $140,000 to last year; $100,000 in income and a $40,000 goodbye package when she was fired from her job, but the Minister of Natural Resources had to put down that she tendered her resignation so that she could give her a gift as she was leaving.

Husband and wife team here, Fred Stagg, Chief Adjudicator, Human Rights Commission, former MHA, husband and wife. Cheryl Stagg, board member, Newfoundland and Labrador Liquor Commission.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: Husband and wife team appointed to the Liquor Commission and the Human Rights Commission.

Now, Cynthia Downey, anyone ever hear of her name before? If you turn on an Open Line show, you are sure to hear her. People wonder why she phones in and she supports the Premier and this government. Well, if you look at it, she is the Chair of the Income and Employment Support Appeals Board, defeated PC candidate now appointed to a board. She phones in and talks about what a great government this government is. You can see now why she does it, because there is a financial gain, I guess, for her for doing it. She sits on a board appointed by the Premier.

Darin King, he is the Director of Education, defeated Tory candidate down in Grand Bank district, I am not going to say much about him today. Craig Tucker, son of Ralph, I suppose, another well-known Tory in St. John's. What about Bob Aylward, Dairy Farmers of Newfoundland and Labrador Board of Directors? Now, we all know Bob. Bob was a previous Cabinet minister in the Tory government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: Nada Borden, Chair of the Newfoundland and Labrador School Boards Association, Chair of the Western School Board Transition Committee. Who is Nada Borden?

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A point of order has been called by the hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR. ORAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When we see that the Opposition House Leader is becoming political, and I see that we are at 5:28 in the day, I was hoping that he would give us an update on the super Friday nomination day, and how they did. We were kind of hoping for that, seeing that the time has almost gone. I just want to know if it is true that they only got seven nominations out of twelve.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

Again, the Chair cautions members about using points of order to engage in debate.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Wayne Wheeler, Bull Arm Site Corporation Board of Directors, defeated PC candidate. Bruce Borden, I guess that is the husband of Nada Borden, the Premier's Chief Financial Officer in the last election, Municipal Assessment Agency.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. REID: Okay, it is twenty-nine minutes after, Mr. Speaker. I hear that we have to adjourn debate for today, but I will get my time tomorrow. Is that all right with you?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair notes that the Leader of the Opposition has adjourned debate and he will have some time left. I do believe there is about twelve minutes left in this concurrence debate.

With that said, the Chair recognizes the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, I think that is correct, there is ten or eleven minutes left in the concurrence debate on this head.

I want to advise the House that, once we finish that tomorrow, then we will call the remaining head - I believe it is Social Services - for concurrence tomorrow.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do adjourn until tomorrow at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that this House do now adjourn until tomorrow, Tuesday, at 1:30 in the afternoon.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

The motion is carried.

This House now stands adjourned until tomorrow at 1:30 in the afternoon.

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