The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, I rose in the House of Assembly on a point of order related to the need of the Government House Leader to give notice of which private member's motion we would be debating today. When doing this, I stated that we would not want to disrupt the proceedings of the House in the spirit of co-operation, and we were willing to offer the Government House Leader leave in order to make right his omission to give notice on Monday.

Instead of taking this opportunity and accepting our offer, the House Leader became testy, Mr. Speaker, and he stated twice –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: - not once, Mr. Speaker, but stated twice that he had stood and indicated which motion would be debated. Mr. Speaker, I did not challenge him on it at the time because I did not have a certified copy of Hansard. I waited until I had received a certified copy of Hansard and I did get an opportunity to check it.

Mr. Speaker, I have a certified copy here, it is actually signed and certified on the bottom. It indicates, Mr. Speaker, the two times that the Government House Leader stood. The first time he stood he said: "I stood up, I indicated that there would be a Private Member's motion; the Member for St. John's West just read that motion into the record." He went on, Mr. Speaker, to talk about how I was raising a foolish and stupid point of order in the House of Assembly. Then he went on to say again: "Well, Mr. Speaker, I stood up, I said we are going to call the private member's motion; it was then read by the Member for St. John's West."

Mr. Speaker, I have had an opportunity now to get a certified copy from Monday to be able to review that copy, and the only people who gave any notice of motion was the Minister of Finance on that day of a bill. Mr. Speaker, the MHA for St. John's West did read his private member's resolution into the record for the House of Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, it is now clear that there was no notice given on Monday as per section 63.(3) of our act, which I will read, it says, "On the Monday before the Wednesday of the week in which a Private Member's motion is to be debated, the Government House Leader or the Opposition House Leader, as the case may be, shall announce to the House the Private Member's motion to be debated on that Wednesday."

Mr. Speaker, I have also had an opportunity to not just review Hansard but we also had an opportunity to review the tapes of the House of Assembly and at no point did the Government House Leader stand in his place and give the proper motion. Mr. Speaker, this is not to embarrass the Government House Leader but to ensure that we have proper process, and that process is followed and proper notice is given.

Mr. Speaker, section 63.(3) is a mandatory piece of our Standing Orders. It is not optional. It is a substantive requirement of the House of Assembly and notice shall be given is what is stated in our Standing Orders. It does not say that it may be given or that it could be given, it says it shall be given.

Mr. Speaker, when the MHA for St. John's West stood, he moved the motion and he read the motion for the record, but he did not give any notice either. It was not appropriate for him to give notice because that is not what our Standing Orders request. Mr. Speaker, I would like to have that on record, that no notice was given, although it would not have been expected at that time from the Member for St. John's West.

Mr. Speaker, in the ruling on Monday it was questioned as to whether I raised this point at the earliest possible time. As I indicated, I could not verify until I received an official, certified transcript of Hansard. Although I had reviewed the Hansard on-line, it is late in the afternoon before the transcripts are delivered to the House of Assembly and that is the only certified transcript which we can follow.

So, Mr. Speaker, I did raise the point of order yesterday at the earliest convenience that I could. I took the minister's word when he stood and said that he had stood and gave notice of the motion. I then took the opportunity, after receiving the official, certified copy of Hansard, to review that, and I noted that proper notice was not given. Then I had someone review the tapes just to ensure, Mr. Speaker, that we did not miss anything. That was done this morning. It was the earliest possible time that we had to be able to do that. Again, there was no notice given, and that is the reason I am rising again on this point of order.

Mr. Speaker, this is obviously a point of order because it is in violation of the Standing Orders of the House of Assembly. If proper notice is not given, then we cannot debate the motion today, which clearly, Mr. Speaker, we know now that proper notice was not given. Therefore, there is no motion to debate today. The motion that was put by the Member for St. John's West is no different than the motion that sits on the Order Paper that was put last week by the Member for Burgeo – La Poile. Without section 63.(3), we would never know in this House what motion is to be debated on Private Members' Day, and that was the purpose of that Standing Order: to give notice. In the absence of that Standing Order being substantive, each side will be able to call the motion that they chose at 3 p.m. on Wednesdays, without any notice to the House of Assembly or to the other members who are here.

So, Mr. Speaker, the Government House Leader, as I see it, he can get up, he can just ask for leave – which we would happily give him – to give the proper notice, but when we offered that to him on Monday he clearly refused. He stood up, he insisted that he had already done that practice, which he clearly did not, and the transcripts and the video proves that. So, Mr. Speaker, if the House Leader wants to get up and ask for leave to give his notice today, we would certainly grant him that leave and allow him to do it. If not, I would to ask for your guidance on how we would proceed if we are not going to follow the Standing Orders of the House of Assembly.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, to the point of order.

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So, if I understand correctly, the argument on behalf of the Opposition House Leader is that this hon. Assembly should be guided by form over substance. Now, my understanding of a point of order, Mr. Speaker, it should be raised at the earliest possible opportunity. On Monday, the Member for St. John's West read the motion into the record. At that point in time, the motion is before this Assembly. If you look at the section and what the rules are, they guide us. There is no question that the mandatory shall is used here. What does it say, "On the Monday before the Wednesday of the week in which a Private Member's motion is to be debated, the Government House Leader or the Opposition House Leader, as the case may be, shall announce to the House…" – shall announce to the House.

Mr. Speaker, I have not seen Hansard and, obviously, Hansard, I have no reason to doubt the veracity or what is in Hansard, but let us look at what took place. The member gets up and says this is the motion we are going to debate. We debate the motion, it is put there, and it is on the Order Paper. It is not raised on Monday. Mr. Speaker, we come before this Assembly yesterday, the argument was put forward. Again, I do not remember if there was a ruling on it yesterday, if there was a point of order that was ruled on but if –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, I do not remember if there was a ruling yesterday but if there was, you cannot revisit the ruling of the Speaker. Once the Speaker makes a ruling that is it, that ruling is done. That is the way this House operates.

Mr. Speaker, in my submission, notice has been given to this Chair in accordance with the spirit and intent – I am not going to repeat everything I said yesterday. This is just another attempt to circumvent procedure. I indicated yesterday: If this is the way they want to play, we will play.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader, to the point of order.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member has no argument, and he knows that. There are Standing Orders of the House of Assembly that must be followed. The Standing Orders says that notice shall be given, not maybe or could be but they shall be. In the absence of meeting the substantive clause that is outlined in the Standing Orders of the House, there is no proper notice given of a motion and therefore it cannot be called for debate. It is clearly very simple to anyone who wants to read it, look at it, and make a judgement on it.

In terms of raising this at the earliest possible point, I did raise it at the earliest possible point I say to the Government House Leader; I raised it yesterday. When I raised it, it was the Government House Leader who stood in his place twice and insisted that he had given proper notice. I did not think it was incumbent upon me to dispute what the gentleman was saying but, Mr. Speaker, since that time I have had an opportunity to look at the tapes, to look at a certified copy of Hansard, and I now know that what he had spoken yesterday was certainly not transcribed into any documentation of the House of Assembly and was not visible on the tapes. This is now the earliest possible time to raise that point of order again. I can only ask, if we are not going to use the Standing Orders of the House of Assembly in giving proper motions for debate here, what does it mean in terms of section 63(3) of our Standing Orders? Does this now mean that we will no longer be considering that a substantive part of the Standing Orders of this House? In doing so, what direction do we take and will there be another process for calling motions? Or will we just do it Wednesdays at 3:00 o'clock, and that is when we will all be notified of the motion that we will be debating on that day?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, to the point of order.

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Advanced Education and Skills has indicated to me – she was House Leader for, I think it was, a number of years here during the last sessions. She indicated that the standard procedure at that time – if you want to go to Hansard, go back and look – is that the member would announce the motion. If you are going to use Hansard one way, you can use Hansard the other way.

When you really cut through the –

MS JONES: There is a ruling in this House, when notice is not given, that (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader, to the point of order.

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Obviously, the notice has been given; that is the spirit and intent. I come back to, Mr. Speaker, if we are going to deal with the rules, well, let's deal with the rules. One of the issues is that there is not to be any reflection or appeal of an order by the Speaker.

Yesterday, Mr. Speaker – I am looking at Hansard – you stated, "Points of order on a procedural issue [technically] need to be raised at the time of the breach. So, in terms of its pure technical interpretation, the appropriate time…"would have been on the day it happened, on Monday. "It appears, though, that there is a motion on the floor, and I think the Opposition House Leader has indicated that it is not the party's intent to disrupt the activity of tomorrow and…the government member introduce the private motion as already read into the record...So, there being no point of order, we will proceed with today's…" motion. There was a ruling yesterday, Mr. Speaker.

If you are going to get technical, as you have indicated yesterday, the point of order should be raised on Monday, but you made a ruling on this yesterday, Mr. Speaker. There is no revisiting or appealing a ruling of the Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not challenging any ruling of the Speaker; I am raising a point of order with regard to the Standing Orders of the House of Assembly not being followed appropriately. I am asking for direction, or I am asking the Government House Leader to follow those rules and to give proper motion of which we are more than co-operative to give him leave to do so.

Why he chooses not to, Mr. Speaker, I cannot answer that question. Yesterday, he thought our Standing Orders were foolish, Mr. Speaker, and indicated as much in the House of Assembly. He stood in his place and indicated to me that he had given notice twice when clearly he did not. Now today he is trying to stand in his place and say that, Mr. Speaker, we do not need rules in the House; we can do whatever we like.

It does not happen that way. This is very substantial; it is the Standing Orders of this House of Assembly and if we are not going to follow them, what is the point to have them – what is the point to have them.

Mr. Speaker, we need to get some direction on where we are going with this.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, to the point of order.

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I have no dispute with what the hon. member is saying in terms of the need for Standing Orders to apply. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, as we did yesterday afternoon, when the member opposite stood up and did not realize he had gone over his time – the Member for the Bay of Islands went over his time and did not realize he had done it – we made sure the rules were applied, Mr. Speaker; at 5:30 and we came back that night.

Mr. Speaker, what happens is that the rules have to be applied. They are there for a reason and I can assure you that I will be ensuring, the best I can, that the rules are applied. You will see that as we move throughout the day, Mr. Speaker; I will have motions on orders, points of order, next week in relation to the way things have been conducted during the first couple of weeks.

Mr. Speaker, we all want this House to work. We want to get on with the business of the day. The member opposite is the one who raised the points of order yesterday. She went on and on and on about the points of order. There was a ruling made on this same issue. The same issue was raised yesterday. You ruled on that, Mr. Speaker. That issue, as far as I am concerned, is finished. I would suggest to the Speaker that you have ruled on this particular point, that it is over, and it cannot be revisited.

As for discussion on the Standing Orders, the rules, and how we are going to apply those, Mr. Speaker, I have no problem with that. We can discuss certainly at any time. We can certainly talk about – we are going to be talking about petitions, Mr. Speaker, we are going to be talking about Question Period as we move along. We are going to be asking that the Standing Orders be strictly interpreted.

I am very glad to hear the Opposition House Leader say that the Standing Orders have to be strictly applied, interpreted, because that is what we are going to be asking for, Mr. Speaker, in terms of moving this House along, in terms of ensuring our fair-handedness and evenness, Mr. Speaker; there will be no problem with that. But, when we get to, Mr. Speaker, the issue that was raised yesterday –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member is speaking to the point of order?

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, when we get to the issue that was raised yesterday, it is the same issue. You ruled yesterday, Mr. Speaker, there was no point of order. You cannot come back the next day – if you are going to apply the Standing Orders, one of the most basic principles of sitting in the House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker, is that we have to respect the rulings of the Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it is not a question of rightness or wrongness when it comes to the rulings. There is no appeal. That is the way it is set out, that is a basic parliamentary rule of procedure, and it is perhaps one of the most basic. Essentially, what the Opposition House Leader is coming back to you and saying: I have discovered new evidence; there is fresh evidence here. I want to have another go at this. I want to have another appeal. I want to appeal to you to overrule yourself.

That is essentially what is being asked here, Mr. Speaker. There is nowhere that I am aware of where it says we have new evidence or new information. The bottom line is you ruled yesterday, Mr. Speaker, again, I quote – technically, if you are going to be technical about this, it should have been raised at the time. It was not raised at the time. That is it, Mr. Speaker. You ruled that there is no point of order. Now she is asking you again today. As for the wider discussion of the Standing Orders, Mr. Speaker, I have no problem with discussing the Standing Orders. We are going to be discussing them in detail as we move along; so no problem with that.

Also, Mr. Speaker, let's look at what the House Leader, who is now the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, what she said. She indicated that for the last four years or three years that she has been the House Leader this is the way things were done. So, Mr. Speaker, what takes place in this House is a combination of rule, tradition, and there has to be a flexibility to ensure that the House proceeds, because there has to be common sense, Mr. Speaker. That is what it is all about. We are here to do the people's business, we are here to get legislation through, and we are here to make sure that things take place. Mr. Speaker, I have no problem, I will argue points of order and Beauchesne and O'Brien and Bosc until the cows come home. No problem, it is what I have been doing all my life, but what we have to do here is to ensure that time is not wasted.

She cannot go getting sooky because you ruled against her yesterday, Mr. Speaker. That is what is going on. She is not doing very well; she is 0 for 3 or 4 yesterday. One of these days she will win a point of order if she keeps it up, but good luck to her. Mr. Speaker, at the end of this, you made a ruling yesterday, that ruling still applies. There is no recourse to appeal, Mr. Speaker. There is no avenue for you to review your own ruling.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader, to the point of order?

MS JONES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to stand and speak to this point of order again because the articulation and the language that is used by the House Leader, Mr. Speaker, is absolutely appalling. Yesterday, the man's vocabulary could only speak to foolishness and ‘stupidness', and today, Mr. Speaker, he likes to look across the House and call me sooky because I want to raise the Standing Orders of the House of Assembly. Well, Mr. Speaker, the only thing here is the stubbornness of the hon. Member; the stubbornness in knowing that he is wrong, in knowing that he stood in his place yesterday and provided information to this House that took us in a direction that was not appropriate.

MR. SPEAKER: I ask hon. members, if you are speaking to the point of order have your comments speak to the merits of the point being raised and let's not let the debate and discussion be reduced to some personal attacks on each. Stick to the points that have been raised in the point of order and let's have the further discussion and debate, if necessary.

MS JONES: By all means, Mr. Speaker, I am more than happy to do so.

Mr. Speaker, I want to just add a couple of points. First of all, the Government House Leader likes to indicate that this is an appeal of a ruling. It is not, indeed. It is asking for direction in terms of the Standing Orders of this House. The Standing Orders of this House has always been what has governed the parliamentary sessions here, I say to the House Leader, and if you want to throw those out or cast those out, well you do not have the option to do that. That is the decision of the House of Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, we did give accurate notice. We did raise it at the first opportunity, and we firmly believe the Standing Orders of this House are what should govern the procedures. I beg to differ that proper notice is never given on Private Members' Day. I have been in this House more than sixteen years and I can tell you if there were opportunities when that was done it was not challenged or ruled upon, that I am aware of. The times that it was challenged and ruled upon - I remember on one particular occasion where the motion did not even get debated because government had not been given proper notice, Mr. Speaker.

That was the reason we had raised it, because we knew there was precedent for it and we were doing the courteous thing, the co-operative thing, Mr. Speaker, even against the stubbornness of the Government House Leader in insisting that he had given notice, we gave him the benefit of the doubt. We went back and checked Hansard to see if he was giving us the proper information, and Hansard did not indicate that. Then we went and checked the videos, because why would the member stand and insist that he had given notice when in fact he had never done so? We went back, Mr. Speaker, and we checked that. Out of respect for the House of Assembly I might want to add, that the hon. Government House Leader might want to withdraw the comments that he made yesterday knowing factually, Mr. Speaker, that they were not so.

MR. KENNEDY: I have no problem, Mr. Speaker, if I made a comment that was not accurate, I certainly did not do that intentionally. I have no problem withdrawing that. My understanding of what took place the day before was I, in fact, introduced the motion by passing it over to the Member for St. John's West. If I did not use those words, certainly I will correct that at any time.

MR. SPEAKER: The member in her point of order I think has raised three separate issues. Firstly, the Opposition House Leader made a reference to the fact that there was a statement made in this House yesterday by the Government House Leader that he in fact made a comment on the day before and you are pointing out the fact that it was not recorded in Hansard as he described it having been, and I just heard the member apologize and withdraw that comment if that is the case.

The second point I heard is with respect to whether or not today there has been appropriate notice given to debate the private member's motion that is in Hansard today. I ruled on that yesterday, and the ruling was clear. There was not a point of order, and today we will be debating the motion as put forward by the Member for St. John's West.

The third issue that I believe you raised in your point of order is what guidance should the House be using to actually deal with private members' motions. After yesterday's point that was raised by the member, I reviewed Hansards from last year, so all of 2011 Private Members' Days, and very clearly all but two cases, notice of motion was not given. The House appears to have acquiesced and is not being guided by the Standing Orders as outlined, as you pointed out, appropriately so, that the Standing Order 63.(3) is pretty clear: notice has to be given.

If you reflect on Hansard for the last year, you will find not only has notice not been given, but the matter in which the notices are read into the record, they are read as if the motion is being dealt with that day, notice of motion is not even being filed. There are a number of things with respect to the guidance questions you posed.

I think we will all agree that the Standing Orders were intended and we use them to guide the proceedings in the House. With respect to your question about how should we be guided, I think we should all be guided by the Standing Orders, and discontinue the practice we had all of last year and maybe the year before, because obviously the House has ignored the Standing Orders and it has gone unchallenged. There may have been previous challenges to the issue, but as my review of Hansard of last year at least, the House seems to have acquiesced.

My direction to the House is that Standing Order 63.(3) needs to be used. Appropriate notice has to be given on the Monday of the motion to be called on Wednesday. Then the member entering that motion needs to enter it as a notice of motion and not read it as a motion if it is to be debated that day.

We have, for example in 63.(3), the people who wrote the Standing Orders, have never envisaged having a Third Party in this House. In fact, if you read the Standing Order literally the Official Opposition's House Leader would need to introduce and serve notice of a motion to be introduced by the Third Party. There is no provision for the Third Party to introduce a private member's motion, but this House in the past has allowed the Leader of the Third Party to stand and introduce their own motions for Private Members' Day.

I think the House has used 63.(3), in fact all of 63, all eight articles in 63, to guide the proceedings of the House and have been very content in knowing that as long as forty-eight hours notice was given, the House was accepting of the motion entered on Monday. In my review of Hansard, it appears that is what the House has accepted, at least for all of 2011.

I want to repeat, with respect to guidance for the House, we will be guided by 63.(3), which will require the House Leaders to stand on Monday and give notice of the motion to be introduced on Wednesday and to be debated on Wednesday. Then the member who is introducing that motion introduces it as a notice of motion and not moving it and indicating who is going to second it – you deal with that on the day you deal with the motion. I would ask also – and the Speaker will take some liberty here – the Speaker will also take a liberal interpretation of 63.(3) so as to allow the Leader of the Third Party to stand and introduce the motions to be introduced by the Third Party, which 63.(3), in a very literal sense, does not now permit, but it will be my interpretation that we will permit the Leader of the Third Party to introduce the motions for that party and expand the definition of 63.(3) to that extent.

Now, today we will move to the proceedings.

MR. SPEAKER: Today, we have members' statements from the Member for the District of Lewisporte; the Member for the District of Humber Valley; the Member for the District of St. Barbe; the Member for the District of Bellevue; the Member for the District of Terra Nova; and the Member for the District of Port au Port.

The hon. the Member for the District of Lewisporte.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to pay tribute to a recently deceased veteran of World War II, Mr. Frederick Thoms of Boyd's Cove.

Mr. Thoms was born on August 27, 1921. At the age of nineteen he was serving as a leading seaman in the British Royal Navy. He served this Province and our country from August 1940 to January 1946 in the World War II conflict. Upon his return to civilian life in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Thoms worked in the fishery, the logging industry, and also in the construction industry.

Mr. Thoms was known in his hometown as a very hardworking, unassuming man with a great sense of humour. I visited Mr. Thoms in his Boyd's Cove home in July of last year. In his failing health, he still managed to tell me several stories about his life overseas and to also crack a few jokes.

Mr. Speaker, Frederick Thoms passed peacefully away on February 6, 2012 at the age of ninety years. He left to mourn his wife Shirley, six children, and a wide circle of relatives and friends.

Members of this House of Assembly, would you please join with me in recognizing and in thanking Mr. Frederick Thoms for his life and for his years of service to our country.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this House today to recognize the Pasadena Lions Club and their successful Snowarama they held on March 3 in aid of Easter Seals. This fundraiser was the twenty-seventh annual event that they have sponsored.

In particular, I would like to congratulate the Chairperson Mr. Wayne Smith, and his committee for raising nearly $23,000 for the Easter Seals program. I was fortunate to attend the full-day event, which saw eighty-four pledgers and 100 riders take part in the 140 kilometre snowmobile adventure.

Mr. Speaker, the unselfish contribution by organizations like the Pasadena Lions Club makes a tremendous difference in many of our lives. I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in congratulating the members of the Pasadena Lions Club for their successful Easter Seals fundraising campaign.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: This being Wednesday and Private Members' Day and the private members' debate is supposed to start at 3:00 o'clock, we have a half-hour Question Period. So, we will have to start Question Period and forego the other members' statements and ministerial statements for today.

Oral Questions.

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, the Premier stated that she was seeking to lay off up to one third of all temporary government employees. Outside the House, the Premier said she was pursuing two streams of cuts: the 3 per cent to government programs and a two-year attrition program. That brings the number of stories to five. Every day the Province hears a new and different answer.

I ask the Premier: Will you finally provide a clear and consistent answer and tell the people of the Province what austerity measures will be included in this year's Budget.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am quite used to having to repeat over and over and over again the simplest of messages to the Opposition. I cannot be held responsible for their inability to understand. As in times past, I will try once more.

Mr. Speaker, we have asked all departments within government to review their core mandates, to enter into a reduction exercise in spending where we will try to achieve up to 3 per cent in savings in government. As part of that exercise, I have clearly stated that some temporary and contractual positions may be affected. Mr. Speaker, I also stated quite clearly that by the time we bring down the Budget we will be able to give a definitive answer to the number of positions affected. I have never talked about the number other than to say there was a cap and we certainly do not expect the number to be large.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, that is the problem. I do not have any problem with the repeating; that is what we want to hear, a repetitive message so that we can clarify indeed what the answer is.

Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Natural Resources stated the Province would provide $2 billion in equity to the Muskrat Falls development, and that Nalcor would take a $3 billion loan for the project.

I ask the minister: If the project goes over budget, where will the extra cash come from and is there a cap on how much Newfoundland and Labrador would be on the hook for?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I indicated to the Leader of the Opposition last week, Nalcor is in the middle right now of finalizing its Decision Gate 3 numbers. The Decision Gate 3 numbers will give us a better idea of the capital cost of the project and also, Mr. Speaker, the federal loan guarantees; once that is finalized, we will be out in the markets looking for the money. What is going to happen, Mr. Speaker, we will have the final numbers and we need to have those final numbers before we will know the full cost.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the question, last night I indicated that the $1 billion of interest during construction that was referred to last week is built into the $232 per month that I have been referring to, which includes capital cost, operating expenses, debt servicing charges and other costs.

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The truth is, once the money gets transferred from government to Nalcor there is very little accountability from Nalcor.

I ask the minister: How can the people of the Province see where the money is being spent even if the Auditor General cannot report on the financial records of Nalcor?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my understanding that the Auditor General does report to the Lieutenant-Governor in Council if there are aberrations. Mr. Speaker, I want to repeat one of the points that was raised by the Premier yesterday when she spoke about this. This questioning of Nalcor and Nalcor's expertise is really quite unfortunate. We have a budget of our native Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are giving their heart and soul to this project, Mr. Speaker, people like Mr. Ed Martin, who are working on this, who have nothing but the best interests of the people of our Province at heart, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: To make them out then as if they are going to do something reckless or negligent is not appropriate, Mr. Speaker. What we should be doing here is debating the merits of the project, not debating the personalities of the people involved. Ed Martin, Mr. Speaker, is a very capable and competent individual who can get a job anywhere in this world.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: With all due respect to the minister, we are not talking about the individuals at Nalcor. What we are talking about is the accountability for the money that is spent in this Province. We see that every year, so let's include Nalcor.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Premier spent considerable time talking about the great arrangement and the great relationship with Emera and Nalcor. She did not say that there is an indefinite delay in finalizing the term sheet, as well as Emera is delayed in providing the federal government with project information.

I ask the Premier: Would this project go ahead without Emera?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think I can safely say to the Opposition House Leader there is no indefinite delay. Things are moving along quite nicely. I have met with the Minister of Natural Resources in Ottawa to talk about the federal loan guarantee. The Premier has met with the minister to talk about the federal loan guarantee. We are moving ahead, Mr. Speaker, prudently and cautiously, towards our decision on sanction. Mr. Speaker, we see the Maritime Link as a great opportunity to gain a billion-dollar asset for our children and grandchildren, Mr. Speaker, an asset that will continue to produce revenue, which opens up the ability to move power when needed, Mr. Speaker, to the Maritime Provinces, but also it allows us to bring power back; that is something you can never forget here, when you talk about the integrity and reliability of a system, is that certainly helps us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, yesterday we asked the Premier if she was prepared to immediately table a contract and the terms of reference related to the employment contract with Mr. John Noseworthy. The question was not answered.

I ask the Premier one more time, I ask again today: Will you table those documents in the House? If not, why not?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Advanced Education and Skills is at a point where we are reviewing and updating the core mandate of a new department that came together as a result of the former Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment and a division of the Department of Education. Mr. Speaker, it is our intention to make sure that we review every program and service that we deliver through that department to ensure that they are updated and provide the most updated services, so that the people in Newfoundland and Labrador have every opportunity to participate in the emerging labour market in this Province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the provincial government, through the Labour Market Development Agreement, contracts out various employability services to seventy-one community organizations around the Province. These contracts are due to expire at the end of this month, yet our information is that no formal or informal negotiations have taken place.

I ask the minister: Can you explain why the department has not renewed or extended these contracts at this date?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, we are certainly looking at all the services that we deliver through the Department of Advanced Education and Skills to ensure, as I had just said, that they are up-to-date and they meet the demands of our present labour market, so that people who use the services get the best results.

We have significant funding under the Labour Market Development Agreement. We have $153 million from the federal government to assist the people of Newfoundland and Labrador in skills development. We want to make sure, Mr. Speaker, as we move ahead, that the money is used to ensure that the people of this Province have the opportunity to avail of skills development and training to ensure that they are able to take advantage of the opportunities that lie ahead in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, seventy-one community organizations providing employability services are left in limbo over the total lack of communication from government on these contracts, which expire March 31. To comply with labour laws, these organizations will need to issue layoff notices this coming Monday.

I ask the minister: Can you advise whether these seventy-one organizations should be issuing layoff notices on Monday?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we are looking at all the services that we deliver through the Department of Advanced Education and Skills, whether they are delivered under the LMDA or through the core functions of the department. As we move through, we will make sure that the programs and the services that we provide meet the needs of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour are condemning government's recent dismissal of their nominee for the Labour Relations Board. Instead, government has appointed Grant Barnes, a former member of the executive board of the PC Party of Newfoundland and Labrador – this, just days after a failed Tory candidate received a six-figure job without competition or tender.

I ask the Minister Responsible for Labour Relations: How can the public feel confident in government appointing a member of the PC Party executive in representing the interests of union members and workers?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Labour Relations Agency.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, it is a little odd that this is coming up today. The last round of appointments were months ago, actually. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman he refers to brings a great deal of knowledge to the board and my role as minister is to bring a balance, to represent both sides, labour and employers.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I think it is just important that we talk a little bit about the qualifications of the member. He has worked on many grievances and arbitrations. He has been a union member for thirty years. He was president of the local union for ten years, Mr. Speaker, plus he has held other positions. He was the vice-president of the Atlantic Provinces union association, Mr. Speaker. He has been the Newfoundland rep on the international union association. Last but not least, he has been a member of the Federation of Labour for fifteen years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, at 5:00 a.m. there was a fire in the community of Black Tickle which the hydro plant burned out inside. The people in this community are currently without power. I know that Hydro has sent staff in there today to try to deal with the situation.

I would like to ask the minister – because prior coming to the House of Assembly I could get no new update to tell my constituents as to what was happening there. I would like to ask if there are going to be portable generators moved in there today to try to restore power to the community, or if at some point they are going to be able to do some repairs on the system to ensure that people will get some electricity.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Obviously, this causes us concern. The information – I understand that the member opposite was speaking to Nalcor. Mr. Speaker, there is a Hydro group from Happy Valley-Goose Bay currently on-site to assess the situation. Also, Mr. Speaker, in the event that the diesels cannot be restarted, Hydro is working on relocating other generation to the site. As the community is on an island and there is no road condition, there will have to be transportation by air.

We are waiting to see what will happen; hopefully, it can be fixed up. We are currently assessing the current diesels, Mr. Speaker, to determine if they are operable. As of this point in time, just before me coming into the House and giving an update, we do not know that yet.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I asked the question because it is getting late in the day to be able to mobilize equipment.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education reported to the House yesterday that the Western School Board had independent consultants carrying out tests for mould on the Charlottetown school.

My question today is: If he can tell us what the results of those tests are and if he is prepared to release those results to the parents and the students in this community who have been asking for it?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Indeed, the tests have been conducted. They are presently being analyzed. I can assure everyone in this House, and I will assure the parents there, that once these results are finalized we will indeed report them to the parents.

We have nothing to hide in this, Mr. Speaker. We want to do what is best here. I am asking that the parents and the students to co-operate with us and we will find our best way forward here. We will provide a safe, learning environment for these students, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

No one is insinuating to the minister or his government that there is no interest with regard to this issue. Mr. Speaker, we are going into week four now where students in this community have not had a suitable arrangement for classroom space. I ask the government today: As a short-term measure, are you prepared to move mobile classroom units into this community so that we can get these children back in school in a proper, safe environment?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, my understanding was that arrangements had been made and the students were in fact being accommodated in some of the buildings and facilities that were in the community. If we were to move with portable classrooms, that is not something you can do at the snap of a finger; getting portable classrooms in there and this kind of stuff could take weeks or months. Now I do not know if that is where we will go, but one thing is for sure, Mr. Speaker; we have to have cooperation from the community and get students back into a learning environment. That is what I am asking for the cooperation of, and we will move towards finding a permanent, safe solution here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, we are seeing skilled trades people in the news every day unable to find work and talking about moving to Alberta. Meanwhile, Exxon Mobil and Vale are currently looking outside the Province for workers.

I ask the Minister for Advanced Education and Skills: When is government going to get its act together and intervene to ensure that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador get the work on these massive projects?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, the most unfortunate part about this question is I only have a few seconds to answer it. I could speak all afternoon about what we are doing and where we need to go as a Province. This government, Mr. Speaker, started the new Department of Advanced Education and Skills and it is primarily set up so that we can look at the labour market gaps that we are going to experience in this Province and make sure that we train Newfoundlanders and Labradorians so that they are prepared for these opportunities as they arise. Mr. Speaker, it is just today we have a symposium on down at the Sheraton Hotel, which is for pre-apprentices, apprentices, journey persons, union people and employers, as well as the Department of Advanced Education and Skills, to ensure that we work together to find solutions to the answers.

Mr. Speaker, this government – thank you, Mr. Speaker, hopefully I will get another question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, the Premier reassured workers at Marystown that she believed their plant had a future; in fact, she promised that she would help keep the plant open.

I ask the Premier: Has she found a way to enforce the 2007 agreement that was intended to keep that plant operating?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture for a quick answer, please.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Marystown fish plant was always very important to this government, Mr. Speaker. That is why, first of all, when we negotiated the transfer from FPI to OCI, that this government ensured we had the only agreement in the country that provided for a nine-year agreement with a landing requirement that fish must be landed in this Province, Mr. Speaker. It does not exist anywhere in the country. It was because of this government that was negotiated.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, after many attempts by Ocean Choice International to work with the workforce in Marystown, it was this government, and a number of members of part of this government, who worked hard to ensure that there was an offer of an eighteen-week, three-year offer on the table, Mr. Speaker. This government pushed the ball as far as it could. It was the leadership of the FFAW that advised workers to reject that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, another day, another program introduced by the Premier through the media. Yesterday, the Premier mentioned, in addition to 3 per cent cuts, mandate reviews and the review of the role of temporary and contract employees, a two-year program to manage growth through attrition – the first time we heard there was an actual program, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Premier: Does she have any more plans or programs regarding cuts up her sleeve that she has not told us about yet?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I will continue my practice with the Third Party as I have with the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, it would be interesting one of these days if the Leader of the Third Party would share with us where she was going to get the 1 per cent cut that she announced in her platform – $80 million. She was not going to cut programs; she was not going to cut jobs. It would be really interesting to see where she would have found that money.

Mr. Speaker, what we are doing is reviewing core mandates. We are looking for a 3 per cent savings in government, Mr. Speaker. We have ring fenced important services provided to the people who will not be affected. I was asked in that process, would some jobs be affected. We have clearly said permanent positions will not be affected. There may be some effect on temporary jobs and contractual jobs. We expect that effect to be minor.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

What I am pointing out to the Premier, Mr. Speaker, is that she talked about an actual two-year attrition plan.

I am asking her: Did she tell the public service sector about this latest plan before announcing it to the media yesterday? If not, when was she planning to let the public service sector know they have a two-year plan for attrition?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, she obviously has the same issue with hearing as other members on the other side of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I talked about attrition from the very first day, and the fact that we would try to manage growth in the public service through attrition. You have to manage it some way, Mr. Speaker. Our public service has grown by 2,100 people in the last eight years. We have over 9,000 people now working in the public service. Good people. Very good people, I might say, particularly to our friends in the Opposition, very good people who work hard on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Whatever we do in government, it has to be sustainable, and that kind of growth in the public service is not sustainable. We have to manage it. How are we going to manage it? Not by throwing people out the door, we are going to try to manage it through attrition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, an attrition process, such as the one the Premier is suggesting and suggested yesterday in the media, will be particularly harmful to services delivered in rural areas where there are fewer people providing government services, and where I would like to suggest there are positions gone because of attrition in the past.

Mr. Speaker: What is government going to do to protect these services in rural Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I did an On Point interview, which was the very first time we discussed this issue publicly, and I was very clear. I was asked the question, are we just going to go, when one position goes - when somebody leaves are we going to take that position away? I said absolutely not. That is not the approach of government, because the person going may have a key role within government and may need to be replaced, Mr. Speaker. What we are going to do, as we review core mandates, is have a look at attrition and to have an ongoing lens on that part of the public service to see if we cannot manage growth in the public service. That is much better than doing a large-scale layoff down the road because we have allowed growth to go unrestrained.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

As I have said before, a job cut or a job lost by attrition is all the same.

Mr. Speaker, it has come to our attention today that government has appointed to the Labour Board someone who was not a nominee of the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour. The practice has been in the past that government accepts federation nominees to the board. This time it appears they have appointed someone who was a member of their provincial Progressive Conservative Party executive board and ignored recommendations from the Federation of Labour, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Premier, heading into negotiations with the two largest public sector unions: Why is government deliberately trying to antagonize working people of this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Labour Relations Agency.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, again I refer that this is something that happened months ago. I am glad they brought it up, Mr. Speaker, because it gives me a chance to explain to them the way this works. The way it works is I openly ask for nominations, of which –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: - the Federation of Labour were good enough to provide two names for members and two for alternates, Mr. Speaker, of which we did take one of the names they gave us and are very active members on the board. Mr. Speaker, it is all about balance on the board and we try to have turnover. The two names she had provided for us had over ten years of experience on the board.

Mr. Speaker, it is nice to have a little bit of turnover. The person, I listed their credentials earlier, has lots of it. When it comes to the political piece of this, Mr. Speaker, I believe there was someone very heavily involved with the labour movement who stood up holding hands with the hon. member shouting, open up the House, there a little while ago. Obviously, when it comes to politics they sit on both sides of this House…

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much. I cannot answer, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Speaker recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like the hon. member who just spoke to tell this House what is the same? I am sorry; an appointment to an official board of this government by this party and appointing somebody from their provincial body from their executive board is quite different than a union person –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: - showing that they are a member of another party. It is totally different.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Why would you use that as an example?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Labour Relations Agency.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, let's talk a little bit about credentials. The hon. member refers to different things that the new appointee has been in. Mr. Speaker, he might bake cookies for his church bake sale as well. I do not know if I should hold that against the man, as well. There are a number of things that man is involved with in his lifetime. He has been an active volunteer and obviously very involved in the labour movement.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say this slowly and get it right for the hon. members opposite because maybe one of them sitting next to her might want to Tweet it later on. I would like to go through this very slow, Mr. Speaker. This man has been involved with grievances and arbitrations for years. He has been a union member for thirty years. He has been president of his local and other things for ten years, Mr. Speaker. He has represented us nationally and internationally on unions and, Mr. Speaker, he has been a member of the Federation of Labour for fifteen years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MITCHELMORE: Mr. Speaker, in 2010, government relocated the air ambulance service from St. Anthony. Mr. Speaker, the same report that recommended the relocation also recommended government provide a second medical flight specialist team to be stationed in Happy Valley-Goose Bay to accompany air ambulance aircraft to be located there, in order to provide sufficient staff for a 24-7 level care of service. Mr. Speaker, two years after this recommendation, Eastern Health is advertising eleven vacancies in this area open until filled.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Health: Why was a properly working service removed from St. Anthony before any planning regarding human resources – evident from eleven unfilled positions since the relocation – and other associated costs in its new location were placed?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in this Province, I am proud to say, we have a very robust air ambulance service. We have three King Airs; we have access to six helicopters. We are, in fact, at this point in time, retrofitting one of those helicopters so that we can provide even better service. We have a wonderful medical flight team, and we are hoping to enhance that by having a second medical flight team, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, when we moved the air ambulance, we moved it because it was the right thing to do. We moved it because the people of Labrador deserved to have had that King Air in Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MITCHELMORE: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Health: Why has government not hired this medical flight team, as promised in the budget of 2010?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, we have enhanced the service that we are offering. We are better serving the people of Labrador. We are still recruiting for a medical flight team, Mr. Speaker, and we hope to be able to have that medical flight team, but in the meantime, our service is better than it ever was in Newfoundland and in Labrador as a result of what we are doing. We always had only one medical flight team. We are attempting to have two medical flight teams, Mr. Speaker, and we will. We will continue to enhance that service so that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are very, very well served.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: This being Wednesday, Private Members' Day, and it is now 3:00 o'clock, we will now move to Standing Orders.

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the Member for St. John's West if he would –

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, by leave under Notice of Motion, I give notice that under Standing Order 11, I shall move that this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, March 15, 2012 and further, I give notice, Mr. Speaker, that under Standing Order 11, I shall move that this House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m., Thursday, March 15, 2012.

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's West; I ask him to introduce his motion that is standing on the Order Paper in his name.

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.

I did not think the Government House Leader could introduce the motion without leave of the House and I just need to get clarification.

MR. SPEAKER: The Government House Leader does need leave of the House to introduce the motion.

When the member spoke, he asked ‘with leave'; is there an objection to the leave?

MS JONES: No, no objection. I just know he asked for leave and (inaudible).

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my privilege and honour to introduce this private member's resolution, seconded by the Member for Mount Pearl North.

WHEREAS the provincial government laid out its long-term vision for social housing in 2009 in Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation's ten-year Social Housing Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador entitled "Secure Foundations" and supported this strategy with a significant investment in 2011; and

WHEREAS key investments by the provincial government to provide housing assistance to those with the greatest needs include: 5,573 rental units province-wide through the NLHC; rent subsidies for people living in 1,732 rental units; capital funding for approximately 1,100 new affordable housing properties in the private and supportive living sector in dozens of communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador; financial and training support to 1,026 partnered-managed units; over $16 million annually to help close to 3,500 people with low incomes stay in their own homes through the various programs for homeowners such as the Provincial Home Repair Program, the Residential Energy Efficiency Program, and Home Modification Program; and an investment of $4.8 million per year through the Supportive Living Community Partnership Program to provide operational funding for community-based organizations that create housing supports for people with complex service needs;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this House expresses its support for the Provincial Government's ten-year Social Housing Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador entitled "Secure Foundations" and the investments it is continuing to make to provide assistance to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians with the greatest housing needs.

Mr. Speaker, as the newly elected Member for St. John's West, I made a commitment to work hard on behalf of all my constituents. As I went door to door during the campaign I listened to each and every concern. As I continued to speak and meet with people I heard over and over again that programs and actions of our government, when it comes to affordable housing, was improving the lives of many. Our government's 2009 document, a Social Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador, Secure Foundations, is truly inspiring in the quality of the analysis and recommendations.

Mr. Speaker, I want to remind everyone that a tremendous amount of work has already been done by this government. A tremendous amount of invest has already been made. Mr. Speaker, this did not start in 2009. It started much, much earlier. Our initiatives and programs are further enhanced –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. CRUMMELL: - with the introduction of our 2009 plan. Let me also remind everyone that this is only the third year of our ten-year social housing plan.

Mr. Speaker, once again, it is my privilege and honour to introduce this private member's resolution expressing support for the provincial government's social housing plan and the investments it is continuing to make to provide assistance to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians with the greatest housing needs.

Mr. Speaker, I will be asking all members of this House to join me in support of this plan. More than once I have heard members opposite criticizing this government's efforts with regard to housing. Our government has a long-term vision and a comprehensive plan, and in fact, it has been executing a host of initiatives since the introduction of our Secure Foundations in 2009.

Mr. Speaker, our government has spent tens of millions of dollars in a wide variety of programs to help alleviate the problems low and moderate-income families have been experiencing in recent years when it comes to affordable housing.

Mr. Speaker, before I outline some of these initiatives I would first like to provide some background to the 2009 Social Housing Plan, Secure Foundations. Government recognizes that housing is a basic necessity of life and works to provide safe and affordable housing. Reducing poverty, accessing education and employment opportunities, and improving the overall health of individuals and families are intricately tied to adequate housing. By assisting low and moderate-income households, these goals can be achieved.

Mr. Speaker, in 2009 following a very extensive process, our government introduced our ten-year Social Housing Plan. Eighty-seven organizations participated in meetings held right across this Province. These included: tenant associations, community centres, non-profit community-based housing providers, government departments, municipalities, housing developers, private sector landlords, community-based social service delivery organizations, and social advocacy groups.

Mr. Speaker, the Social Housing Plan has strong linkages to many key social initiatives. It includes: a mix of housing policies and programs from investments in new and existing housing stock, to promote housing sustainability, and to help prevent homelessness. The extensive consultation resulted in the initiatives and investments outlined in the plan. Mr. Speaker, this ten-year plan will be updated regularly to respond to changing needs.

Mr. Speaker, the development of our Social Housing Plan also involved a ministerial committee which included at the time: the Minister Responsible for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation; the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment and the lead minister for the Poverty Reduction Strategy; the Minister of Health and Community Services and lead minister for Provincial Healthy Aging Policy Framework and Provincial Policy Framework for Mental Health and Addiction; and the Minister of Justice.

Mr. Speaker, stakeholders' comments during these extensive consultations focused on four broad themes: one, renewing social housing policy and programs and the existing social housing stock; two, the role of the private rental market in delivery of social housing assistance; three, the housing needs of specific populations; and finally, the need for supportive living options that mix housing and supported services.

Mr. Speaker, issues and challenges were identified through the consultation process including: significant housing needed; demographic change, particularly in rural areas; increasing demand for housing with integrated support services; the capacity of the private rental market to meet the needs of low and moderate-income households; and finally, an aging social housing profile.

Mr. Speaker, there are challenges to providing secure and affordable housing. Key stakeholders, individuals and government departments all agree that there is work to be done to help alleviate this very complex issue. Mr. Speaker, our social housing identifies a vision, a mission and a strategic direction to do so. Mr. Speaker, the overriding vision is, "That Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have access to secure and affordable housing." The mission statement is, "To provide housing solutions for low and moderate-income households with the greatest need." The strategic directions are, "Working with partners to ensure housing assistance is part of an integrated approach to well-being and community building; allocating resources to assist those with the greatest housing need; providing housing assistance that is responsive to client needs".

Mr. Speaker, these initiatives are reflective of the direction from stakeholders during the consultation process. Goals and objectives that have been set for the next ten years are the basis for this government's decision making and resource allocation when it comes to our Social Housing Plan.

Mr. Speaker, the priorities from the Social Housing Plan include: "preserving privately owned homes by assisting with the cost of essential repairs; providing quality, affordable rental accommodations through direct delivery programs and partnerships with non-profit and private sector housing providers; promoting the development of more new affordable housing; supporting home modifications to address the accessibility needs of seniors and persons with disabilities; promoting renovations by lower-income homeowners to improve energy efficiency and conservation; preserving NL Housing homes to ensure they meet current and future needs while improving overall energy efficiency during renovations; and working with government and community partners in the development of a range of housing options which prevent homelessness by integrating housing with other services to promote housing stability."

Mr. Speaker, this is just a summary of the content found in our government Social Housing Plan and I would encourage all members and any interested individuals to go on-line and download this document for more details.

Mr. Speaker, our government has worked hard and invested millions prior to and since this plan being introduced. Despite changing demographics and the task of maintaining an aging housing portfolio of over 5,000 units province-wide, our government through Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation is achieving many of the goals of our provincial Social Housing Plan.

Mr. Speaker, here are just some of the highlights in following through on the initiatives. With regard to modernization and improvement, since 2009, $68.5 million has been spent on renovation, modernization and improvements of NLHC units. Approximately 3,500 of our 5,500 affordable rental units have been upgraded; this is quite a feat when you consider the many years of neglect by previous governments. In Budget 2011, $22 million was committed for modernization and improvement, an increase of $1.4 million from the previous year.

Mr. Speaker, there is no denying our government's commitment to providing safe and affordable social housing. Affordable housing – next on the list – since 2005, a total of $65 million has been invested under the Affordable Housing Program resulting in the creation of approximately 1,100 new units, and including nearly 150 supportive living units.

In August 2011, the Governments of Canada and Newfoundland and Labrador announced a combined investment of $52 million under a new Affordable Housing Agreement; 245 new affordable housing units are constructed throughout the Province. Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing requires one in every ten units built on the Affordable Housing Program to be fully accessible. The goal is to make access more convenient to as many people at as many stages of life as possible.

Let's talk a little bit about the Provincial Home Repair Program. In 2011-2014, the Affordable Housing Agreement also provided $24 million in equal cost-shared funding to extend the longstanding Provincial Home Repair Program. Our government, through the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, is investing another $12 million in the Provincial Home Repair Program for another three years, doubling its contribution of $4 million a year, and increasing the total PHRP budget programs for 2011-2014 to $36 million. In 2011-2012, PHRP provided 2,500 homeowners with low incomes $9.8 million to upgrade their homes, and PHRP primarily serves mostly seniors with low income living in rural areas of the Province.

Rent Supplement Program: Currently, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation has 1,732 rent supplement units in the private sector to assist people with low incomes to find rental housing in the private market. This includes 130 special rent supplements through the Stella Burry Community Centre and the Canadian Mental Health Association to help persons with complex needs.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, there are many other initiatives that this government has undertaken to provide assistance to those with the greatest housing needs. I wish I had the time to talk about the Residential Energy Efficiency Program, which is REEP; the Home Modernization Program, HMP; the Provincial Homelessness Fund, PHF; the Heat Subsidy Program; the Research and Development Program; and the new constructions that are happening. Hopefully, some of our members will get up and talk about that a little later on.

This government recognizes both the need and complexity of providing safe and affordable housing to people on low incomes, and Mr. Speaker, it is clear from these initiatives outlined, this government is also doing something about it. There has been an unprecedented level of investment and growth in social housing in this Province in recent years. Key housing programs have been expanded, new ones have been created. There have been major renovations and improvements to thousands of housing units. There is now more affordable housing for seniors, individuals, persons with disabilities, and persons with complex needs. There is more coordinated support housing and support services, a key recommendation of the social housing stakeholders.

I could go on, Mr. Speaker, but I want to say that while we recognize that there are still challenges before us, we must also acknowledge the tremendous amount of investment and good work that has been done, is being done, and that will continue to be done by this government, providing safe and affordable housing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: We will continue to provide real assistance to those Newfoundlanders and Labradorians with the greatest housing needs.

I look forward to the discussion.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): I recognize the hon. the Member for the Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank my good friend for the amendment and for bringing forth this very important issue. I thank the House for the opportunity to speak on it.

First and foremost, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank all of the workers who work with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. Out in Corner Brook, out my way, I deal with them on a regular basis. I know a lot of them personally. I would just like to acknowledge their commitment to the social housing problem and the people who work at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing that do a great job. They are very much connected to the community. They take a lot of their work personally because they know a lot of the people that they are helping are very much in need. I just wanted to recognize the workers. I respect and admire them.

Mr. Speaker, it is one thing that the last two elections – of course, I spoke about it and I had to bring it up – Len Simms, the leader of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. I am not talking about his qualifications, but I am talking about how Newfoundland and Labrador Housing could take this man aside for six months, then Newfoundland and Labrador Housing can go ahead and let him run an election. Somewhere along the line it does not make – it just does not fit, that if you are committed to Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, you take the CEO, put him aside so he can run an election, and then put him back in. I am not attacking his qualifications, or I am not attacking him as a person, but I am talking that if you are going to have a commitment to Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, you have to have 100 per cent commitment – keep the CEO in place to follow it through. That is all I am saying. This is not an attack on his personally, it is not one bit. I think it is just a political decision that I totally disagree with. I said it publicly before and here is the first opportunity for me to say it in the House of Assembly. I just want to express that, Mr. Speaker.

I feel confident, Mr. Speaker, that every Member of this House, every member from all parties, has a vested interest in ensuring that anybody who needs social housing will get it. I mean, we may have different opinions on how to go about it, we have different opinions on some of the things that are happening, some of the policies, some of the procedures, but I am willing to state in this House that every member in this House, from all sides, from all parties, would like to see every person who needs social housing to have it, every person who needs any needs in a residential assistance program have it. I am very confident in saying that, and I can just assure the people that we may differ sometimes in how to go about it, but I feel confident that we are all trying to work for the same goal – to end it all in Newfoundland and Labrador and do our best in doing that, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, one of the big concerns – and I know the minister is well aware of this and what to do with it – one of the big concerns, especially out our way, and I am sure it is all throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, is the three-bedroom apartments. That is a major issue, Mr. Speaker. Probably in the past, the three-bedroom apartments for the larger families, that was the need at the time; the need at the time was the three-bedroom units. What we find now is 70 per cent – I am not sure, I think it is 70 per cent – are three bedrooms. The majority of requests that are in for units, are for one to two bedrooms. That is the concern, because what is happening, Mr. Speaker, is that people then have to take the three bedrooms if they are single or only have one sibling, and then they have to pay for the heat and light for the bigger units, which is another burden on them. So that is a major concern, and from my understanding, come 2015, 50 per cent of those three bedrooms are going to be sold off, from my understanding. Is that the plan, that by 2015 a lot of those three bedrooms are going to be sold off?

MR. HEDDERSON: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: It is not? Oh, well that is good. I hope they are going to be modified somehow, minister. I hope that they are going to be modified some way to suit the needs of the people that will need it. I know with the federal-provincial agreement that is in place, is that every province and territory does their own design of the delivery of the program. So, you can suit what you need; I am sure there are some specifications from the federal government how the money has to be spent, but the design for each province and territory is up to the province. So I urge the Province to look at this here, because it is a major concern out on the West Coast, and I am sure it is for all Newfoundland and Labrador. The major concern about the design of the whole program itself, within that program is the design for the one to two-bedroom apartments and if there is some way that we can use those three bedrooms much more efficiently.

Another concern, Mr. Minister, out on the West Coast, and I am sure it is all throughout the Province in Newfoundland and Labrador. I understand some of the issues that surround this, Mr. Minister, is that when a unit becomes available - for example, if it is available today, the time that it takes for that unit to be available and the time for it to be ready to occupy again is an extended period of time, up to six, seven months at times. I understand the concern that you have through unions; I understand the concern you have where sometimes there is a backlog of units that need some repairs or some unit that needs some maintenance. If you find especially, and I am speaking on behalf – out on the West Coast you can see units up to four, five and six months vacant, waiting to get ready for someone else to come in and occupy it, Mr. Speaker. That is a major concern. To a lot of the residents around that is a major frustration when they drive by and see a unit that is vacant, but yet they know someone should be in it. They have their application in and they are looking to see: well, why can't I get in there? There is no one living there, I should be able to move in that unit. That is a major concern for a lot of people who are seeking units.

We also need, somehow, Mr. Minister, more units for the disabled. I know there have been major steps made. I know there have, and I will acknowledge that. I can go back fifteen, twenty years when we were involved with some units for people with disabilities. I know it, but the demand has increased over the last number of years also. Somewhere along the way the demand has increased, but yet the housing itself that is needed has not increased with it. That is a major concern all throughout Newfoundland and Labrador I am sure. It is through proper planning, having the funds of course – proper planning to ensure that people with disabilities have units where they can live in comfort, they can live in dignity and they can become contributing people in society. I know a lot of units around have changed and have been adapted for that. Again, I just bring it up to the government and to the minister, if there is any way that you can look at additional units for people with disabilities – I am sure it is not just the West Coast, I am sure it is all around the Province, and I am sure it is a concern for a lot of us.

Also, Mr. Minister, as we hear, there are a lot of women who are in abusive situations who just cannot find housing somehow. Again, it is a major concern. I am not trying to point a finger at anybody; I am just raising this concern because it has been raised to me. We all hear about it. I know the Member for Humber East, and I know the Member for Humber West have dealt with this also. I know they have expressed concerns also. This is another big concern, that the demand has increased but yet the units for that demand - we have to find some way to follow suit because it a major concern of all of us. This is in no way trying to put the government on notice. This is just raising some major concerns that have been brought to my attention, Minister, that I am sure you are aware of, I am sure you are aware of them. I am sure all members here are aware of them but I think the more we talk about it, the more discussion that we have, the better educated we can become and the better educated we all will be, and that is going to help in the long run for all of us.

Mr. Minister, I read the motion that was put forth by the member. There are two things I would bring to the minister's attention. One of the things is that you are looking at a ten-year strategy plan, 2011. It is a great idea but the funding is only good until 2014. We have to find some way beyond 2014, so if we make a strategy beyond 2014 there is funding in place.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. JOYCE: The federal-provincial funding for housing, 2014.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) every three years.

MR. JOYCE: Three years, but we have to make a plan that is sustainable. The minister mentioned every three years. I understand, Minister, but if we make a plan for 2021, a ten-year plan, we have to ensure that the funds are in that, because it is no good to set up a plan for Newfoundland and Labrador for housing if we cannot attain that plan. That is the second part of this, Mr. Minister, and it is not in the motion. How can we become accountable - that if we reached our goals? That is the issue that we need. What level do we have that we can say yes, we have reached our goals or we attained those goals? There is no outcomes within the motion itself to say that okay, here are the goals that we are trying to attain, but here are the goals that we did attain. I will say to the minister, every two or three years, or three or four years, I am sure this plan is revisited, and how can we set the goals a bit higher or change the goals for whatever the needs are. We need to put outcomes so that we can find some way that we have the outcomes. That is one thing I would like to see put in, Mr. Speaker.

Another thing, Mr. Speaker, is the, as we call it, the RRAP, Residential Assistance Program. I think it is a great program. Then again, I just want to put forward to the government that if there is any way that you can increase this program somehow, enhance this program – I think it is a great program, minister. I notice that the member had it included in the statements and I just want to say personally that I know of many people who have benefited from this program. I know it kept a lot of seniors, a lot of people with disabilities, and a lot of other people in their own homes. I think it is a great program; we need to find some way to enhance this program.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would just like to make an amendment to the motion that was put forward. I will read the motion, and it was seconded by the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair:

That the motion be amended by adding the following words at the end of the motion: "while recognizing that further action on this issue is necessary"; and

That the motion be further amended by also adding: "Be it further resolved that this House of Assembly urges government to seek input from concerned citizens and groups in relation to the serious housing crisis in this Province."

Mr. Speaker, I have a copy of the motion for the Chair and the Government House Leader that they can read over. All this motion is saying is that there are a lot of people out there with expertise in the social housing in Newfoundland and Labrador, that there are a lot of people who are willing to help out, to start a plan. There are a lot of people out there, a lot of concerned groups who will have a lot of positive input on how we can develop a housing strategy for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and my motion here – we are supporting the motion, Mr. Speaker. We will be supporting, but my motion is just to try to get as many people as we can that have the expertise in social housing across Newfoundland and Labrador –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: Somebody just mentioned that I had to read it. I already read it. I already read it into Hansard.

Just that we bring as many people as we can into the mix, that every person that has the expertise may be able to add – and I am sure they will add – some small thing that we may have missed or something that we can enhance the program because –

Once again, in closing, Mr. Speaker, I feel confident that all members of this House would love to see a program that will improve all lives of people who need social housing or anybody who needs the Residential Assistance Program.

Mr. Speaker, I table the amendment.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We have an amendment put forward by the Member for the Bay of Islands, seconded by the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair, and the House will now take a brief recess to consider whether or not the amendment is in order.

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

I have considered the amendment as put forward by the Member for the Bay Islands, and I have ruled that the amendment is indeed in order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I recognize the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to rise and speak in the House today on the important issue of housing and, in particular, social housing in Newfoundland and Labrador. So, I am pleased to second the private member's motion today. I certainly want to commend my colleague, the Member for St. John's West, for his comments today and for bringing forward this important issue for debate in the House of Assembly.

I would like to begin my remarks by addressing some of the comments by the previous speaker, the Member for the Bay of Islands. I was pleased to hear him recognize the efforts of the staff of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. I echo that sentiment because the amount of progress that has been made in the last number of years in this Province, in terms of improvements to social housing, has been remarkable. The team at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing are definitely to be commended. It is unfortunate that then he went on to question the credibility and the commitment of one of the senior executives at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing who has provided –

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

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the Bay of Islands, on a point of order.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I did not question his credibility or his competence. I did not do that. I said it right from day one, this is not an attack on him. I did not attack him personally. I did not attack his credibility. I did not say it. I was just saying that they would remove him for six months at the helm at the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing –

MR. SPEAKER: I would ask the member to state his point of order.

MR. JOYCE: My point of order is that the member should read Hansard or get a copy. I did not attack him. I did not attack his credibility. I said he was a competent person.

MR. SPEAKER: Okay, thank you, Sir.

There is no point of order.

I recognize the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That is indeed unfortunate.

I want to address a couple of other comments made by the hon. member. He talked about units with multiple bedrooms that are in need of renovations, and I would like to tell the member that in Corner Brook, very near his district I believe, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing remodelled a duplex recently on Wheelers Road into three one and two bedroom apartments. These reconfiguration projects were undertaken in low-density neighbourhoods with consideration for suitable parking and access.

That is not the only example, Mr. Speaker. I can think of another one. On Mundy Pond Road, in St. John's Centre I believe, a six bedroom duplex was remodelled into four one bedroom apartments for single adults who are living on low incomes. This was done through provincial-federal funding, about $500,000 and it helps address the changing demographics of social housing tenants.

We are well aware of the changing demographics, and Newfoundland and Labrador Housing has been working hard to address those trends. In fact, our government has invested $1 million to research and develop options to address changing demographic needs for social housing. The goal is to restructure underused units into homes that meet the demographic need for smaller homes. This is real progress in the area that the member referenced.

The member raised a couple of other noteworthy issues, one related to delays and the wait for people to get into Newfoundland and Labrador Housing units. He also talked about those in abusive relationships and the urgent need to provide adequate housing for those individuals. Mr. Speaker, I thought I would provide a couple of examples from my own district in recent years where these issues have emerged. I know of one lady – it is about two years ago now – who left an abusive relationship. She was living in another province at the time. She decided to come home to the safety of her family. Through Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, she was able to find housing in Mount Pearl; she still resides in my district. She contacted Newfoundland and Labrador Housing in February of 2010 and she was placed within two months, Mr. Speaker, which I think is good news that we were able to respond so quickly.

Another resident, just this past fall, she moved back to Newfoundland and Labrador from Alberta. She, too, was fleeing an abusive relationship, a single mother with two children. She applied for housing just before last summer – I believe it was around May or June – and she was accepted and moved into a unit in August of last year. Again, we are responding quickly and we are moving quickly to meet the needs of those who are in the greatest need of finding adequate housing, based on their individual circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Bay of Islands also talked about addressing outcomes, and I hope, in the few minutes I have left, to talk about some of the work that has been done over the last few years since we have initiated our social housing plan. We are certainly measuring the outcomes, and I am sure the minister will have an opportunity today to speak to some of those as well.

We hear from members opposite, both from the Third Party and the Official Opposition, time and time again about the need for social housing in this Province. Affordable housing for low-income families, seniors, and other individuals is definitely a priority for this government, and it has been a priority for this government for the last eight and a half years. We have invested millions of dollars over the past number of years into upgrades of the aging infrastructure that was desperately in need of upgrading, and into new housing developments as well. It is good to see that the Liberals are now concerned about it, and finally talking about it in the House, and following the Third Party in at least bringing this issue to the attention of members. I hope today we can focus on some of the things that we are doing in this area, because we have made major progress.

The investment that we have made in recent years has been absolutely necessary due to the lack of investment and attention by previous governments, and we are forced to clean up the mess that has been left behind from past governments, including the one that the Member for the Bay of Islands was part of. Simply throwing money around is –

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. KENT: I am, and hopefully the Opposition House Leader will allow me to continue, Mr. Speaker. It is a little hard to hear when she continues to banter as I am making my comments.

So, we have had a plan. We have made major progress over the last eight years; in fact, then in 2009 we built on that by laying out a new long-term vision for social housing, a comprehensive ten-year social plan, Secure Foundations. Numerous investments supporting this plan have already been implemented. We are already seeing outcomes, and we are seeing the benefits in this Province.

The Member for the Bay of Islands talked about the need to provide housing for people with disabilities. Well, just a few short weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, the Minister Responsible for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing announced $1.5 million in funding toward the construction of six new affordable housing projects for seniors, for persons with disabilities, and for other families and individuals living in Newfoundland and Labrador. This is in line with our plan; it is in line with the mandate of our government. We are investing in new affordable homes for our residents, especially our aging population, and especially persons with disabilities.

Mr. Speaker, the Official Opposition members and those of the Third Party would have people in this Province believe that there is nothing happening. In fact, that is one of the reasons I cannot support this amendment that has been brought forward. The hon. member suggests that there is a major crisis and we are not paying attention. Mr. Speaker, I do not feel that is accurate at all.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the Bay of Islands, on a point of order.

MR. JOYCE: I just want to let the member know – obviously, he never read the amendment. My amendment does not refer to any crisis in Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. You should read the amendment. If you are going to say the amendment I put forth –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: – say what the amendment was.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Thank you.

I would like for you to state your point of order, I say to the Member for the Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: My point of order is that the member just said that he cannot support my amendment because in the amendment it says we have a crisis. My amendment does not state that. It does not. All I asked in my amendment, Mr. Speaker, is that we bring all interested bodies, all of the people who have expertise in the housing in Newfoundland and Labrador, bring them together to see how they can help. That is what my amendment said, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

I go back to the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is disappointing to see that the members opposite do not take this issue seriously. The Member for the Bay of Islands has risen twice on frivolous points to simply chew up my limited speaking time this afternoon, Mr. Speaker. It is shameful and I hope that other members in this House will take this issue far more seriously than he is.

The amendment, Mr. Speaker, reads: "Be it further resolved that this House of Assembly urges government to seek input from concerned citizens and groups in relation to the serious housing crisis…", so I would suggest that the hon. Member for the Bay of Islands read his own amendment, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. KENT: If I can get back to a few more points I would like to make on this important issue. Mr. Speaker, it is not just the Liberals that would like to suggest that the sky is falling. We have seen fear mongering as well from the Third Party. In fact, I saw a news release from the Third Party on February 21 that talked about the fact that we need a strategy, even though we have had a strategy; we have had strategic plans for many years and we have released a very comprehensive, progressive ten-year plan as of 2009, which I would like to talk a bit more about today.

I know some members are new to the House, Mr. Speaker, but I would remind all hon. members that we have had strategic plans for years and we have implemented them. Now this ten-year Social Housing Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador is already making a remarkable difference in communities throughout this great Province.

In the motion today, Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for St. John's West noted all kinds of things that this government is doing to address the greatest needs: 5,573 rental units Province-wide; rent subsidies for people living in over 1,700 rental units; capital funding for over 1,100 new affordable housing properties, partnerships with private sector and with the supportive living sector in dozens of communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador; over 1,000 partner-managed units with financial and training support; over $16 million annually to help over 3,500 people with low incomes stay in their own homes through various programs that this government has initiated, Mr. Speaker.

While there are challenges and while there are still needs out there that need to be addressed, I am pleased to say that we have a plan, we are making real progress and we are making a considerable difference in the lives of those in need in Newfoundland and Labrador. Let me give you a few examples. Mr. Speaker, the Third Party would say that we are not addressing the needs of the aging population or people on low incomes. In our Budget just last year our government invested an additional $12 million to extend the Residential Energy Efficiency Program for three years. This program provides energy upgrades to homeowners specifically with low incomes. Like the Provincial Home Repair Program, this program is also a vital service to seniors living in rural areas, Mr. Speaker. The Member for St. John's West referenced this program.

When the NDP say that we are not dealing with the needs of seniors and people on low incomes, I wonder if they are aware of the Provincial Home Repair Program, the Residential Energy Efficiency Program and other initiatives that we have undertaken that are making a real difference in people's lives. The NDP would also tell you that we are not concerned about accessible housing. Just last year we announced $1 million for a new Home Accessibility Modification Program that assists seniors and persons with disabilities with low to moderate-incomes to make changes to their home so that they will better suit their needs. The initial provincial government $1 million Budget investment was further enhanced with another $2 million, Mr. Speaker, from the Provincial Home Repair Program, bringing the total of home modernization program funding to $3 million annually.

The members of the parties opposite would also tell you that we do not understand homelessness and we are not doing enough about it. Mr. Speaker, the Provincial Homelessness Fund was created in response to requests for more wraparound housing services for groups helping persons with complex needs.

Another reason I cannot support the amendment that has been put forward, Mr. Speaker, it suggests that we are not taking action; it suggests that we are not seeking input from concerned citizens and groups. Where the reality is, Mr. Speaker, many stakeholders have been a part of building the social housing plan that our government is now implementing.

In 2011-2012 we invested close to $1 million to help fifteen non-profit groups address homelessness in their communities. This brings the three-year provincial homelessness funding to thirty-three grants, totalling nearly $3 million, to twenty-three non-profit organizations throughout the Province. I get the sense, Mr. Speaker, that the Opposition parties either do not understand or do not value the work of these community partners that are really making a difference in the lives of those in need in communities all across Newfoundland and Labrador.

The news release I saw on February 21 from the Third Party also implied that apartments have not been constructed in decades. Well, Mr. Speaker, since 2009 the provincial government has provided $2.4 million for construction of new affordable homes in Nain and Hopedale, Labrador, for instance. Newfoundland and Labrador Housing also provided a total of $5.2 million to the City of St. John's for the construction of thirty-five new affordable housing units in the city's Pleasantville project. Mr. Speaker, I could go on all day about the initiatives of this government, the heat subsidy program, the research and development we are doing to address changing demographics.

I realize my time is about to expire. I am grateful for the opportunity to participate in this debate today on an important issue, despite the fact that the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair and the Member for the Bay of Islands continue to talk over me and not pay attention to this important issue in this House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have looked at the amendment, and I feel agreeable to the amendment. I would like to commend the team at the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation for the work they do to assist folks with housing needs. The Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation has created some very good, some very concrete programs to provide affordable rentals and to assist low-income earners to stay in their homes, and I would like to commend them for that. I have had the pleasure of meeting with staff at the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. I also, in my work with my constituents, have interacted a lot with the staff there, and I am impressed with their commitment, with their dedication, and with their expertise in this area of affordable housing and social housing.

We all know that housing is a basic human need, and we all need a place to call home. Good housing supports healthy, vibrant communities, and it is a cornerstone to health. Poverty, housing and homelessness is a complex issue and it requires a comprehensive plan that includes social housing, but much more than social housing. The issue of affordable housing and housing affordability is beyond the existing breadth and scope of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation's Social Housing Plan. The Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation is concerned with social housing and only social housing.

The face of homelessness in our Province is changing and the needs of housing in our Province is changing because of this time of prosperity, which is so positive in so many ways, it also brings great challenges in the area of housing, particularly for our youth. I invite all members to imagine if they were twenty two years old making minimum wage and just got evicted from their current place of residence, where would you go? Mr. Speaker, I would wonder where they would go to get housing.

Seniors: We know that there have been advances in housing for seniors; however, we also know that with every new housing development for seniors that there is a waiting list of sixty for a housing development that would provide fourteen units and the ground, in some cases, has not even been broken on these new developments.

Families with children: I encourage people to use their imagination and their empathy to imagine what it is like for a family on a moderate income with two children who have just been evicted because their landlord is going to renovate and boost the rent maybe by twice the amount, where will this family go to get affordable housing? The working poor: People who cannot afford to buy and are at the mercy of the rental market are very negatively impacted. People with physical disability, people with complex needs, and single, able-bodied people on Income Support make only $800 a month, there is not affordable housing available for them.

In our time of prosperity, the price of housing has skyrocketed, both in the rental markets but also in the area of homeownership. For many who lose their current housing there is nowhere for them to go. The vulnerable people who are vulnerable to the skyrocketing housing markets have nowhere to go. What happens, Mr. Speaker, if some of our own family, if there is a family breakup and one of the spouses or the ex-spouses have to find a place to live. It is very difficult in this current housing market. Aside from the rental units mentioned in the private member's motion, aside from the affordable units that have been built through the Federal-Provincial Affordable Housing Initiative, there have been virtually no development of rental units in the Province in twenty years; yet, the demand for affordable housing has been growing exponentially.

The Social Housing Plan that has been mentioned here is a good first step, but there are no timelines and no deliverables. Government has not committed to yearly action plans. The Social Housing Plan is more like a policy framework rather than a plan with teeth and concrete steps. Even if they did have those concrete steps, the problem is growing. The problem is not getting mitigated. The problem is not being solved. The problem is growing. There is no doubt that the government has played a role in assisting those in greatest need. Our social housing has been given an injection of funds to provide badly needed repair and maintenance, but there have only been twenty-four new units created in the past decade through Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, under their management, with a waiting list of over 900. The problem is growing.

It is good that the government has raised the rent supplement budget – that is very good – and that there are now over 1,700 supplements; however, the demand far outweighs and outstrips the resources that have been allocated. We already know that the supplements for this year were gone ages ago. We are the fasting growing aging population in Canada. Over 65 per cent of our seniors, their only income is the Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement. Our seniors are so negatively impacted by the housing crisis. There is no solution in sight. Again, it is such a difficult, costly, complex problem – we all know that – and it is a problem that affects us all, whether or not as individuals, certainly our mothers, our brothers, our nieces, our nephews, our grandchildren, it affects us all. We know that seniors rental units are booked up far before they are built. Seniors in many places all over the Province cannot downsize because there is nowhere for them to go. For our seniors who desperately need to downsize, there is nowhere for them to go.

The federal-provincial Affordable Housing Initiative has provided 1,100 new units since it was first signed in Newfoundland. I commend the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and its staff for doing such a fantastic job in the uptake of those programs. Newfoundland and Labrador was one of the provinces that had the greatest uptake in the programs that were provided; it is absolutely wonderful. The Newfoundland and Labrador Housing and Homelessness Network and all the community groups who worked so hard to create the wonderful projects like Marguerite's Place, Stella Burry, and Choices for Youth – these are absolutely fantastic and very needed programs.

However, we know that in the last call for proposal, over half of the proposals were turned down; all the federal money has been used. I am hoping, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Transportation and Works will consider a unilateral program from the Province for this fiscal year to assist these community groups in moving forward with the fantastic, well-thought-out, well-worked proposals that they had presented in the last round of funding, but were not funded because there was not enough federal monies. We know we will not get any more federal money until 2014, so I would ask the minister to support and push the government to provide funding to address the outstanding proposals from the last call for proposals.

2011 was a year of deepening housing crisis and growing need for housing in our Province. There are well over 13,000 tenants and the same number of owners of houses who are paying more than 30 per cent of their income on shelter, more than what is advisable through CMHC. That leaves people house poor.

We are in a growing housing crisis; there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. We need to be responsive and innovative in meeting the growing need for housing. There is no reason why we as a society, as the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, can not make sure that our 500,000 people have a safe, affordable place to live. In this time of prosperity there is no reason why we cannot come up with innovative, creative solutions to ensure that all of our people are adequately housed.

I would also ask the government and encourage the government to strike the Social Services Committee so that we can discuss the issue of housing, so that we can bring once again – that we can discuss the issue of housing, that we can investigate the issue of housing, so that we can come up with concrete, working solutions that work, again, beyond the scope of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, whose mandate is social housing.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS ROGERS: There are housing needs that the government needs to address beyond the scope of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. It is time that the provincial government stepped forward to take a collaborative approach and continue to work with the community to find innovative, cost-effective approaches that save all of us money in the long run. Poverty and homelessness are too expensive. If we can lift people out of poverty and ensure that people are well housed, it will save us money in the long run.

Some of the very concrete things that we can do, that the government can do, is to invest in affordable home ownership for moderate to low-income people. Many individuals and families can afford a mortgage, but they cannot afford the down payment or the closing costs. There are many successful examples of governments providing assistance to families with down payments and closing costs so that they can buy homes and in often cases their mortgage payment is far less than a rent payment.

This adds to family wealth through equity, through homeownership, which means that we are helping to lift people out of poverty. We have to look at – I urge the government to look at - providing provincially owned land and provincially owned buildings in a creative and innovative way that we can work with community groups, that we can work with the private sector and with developers to repurpose buildings, to repurpose land.

In this, our prosperous economy, this is not the time for cuts in social programming, nor is it the time to maintain the status quo. We must be responsive to the housing needs of those who elected us to office. We need a much larger scale response to fit the large scale of the housing crisis that we have. We need an actual plan with teeth, with targets that extends beyond the concept of social housing. Because of this, I will not be able to support the initial motion by the Member for St. John's West, but I would encourage us once again, and encourage the government once again, to look at striking the Social Services Committee to have a collaborative, comprehensive discussion and investigation on how we as a Province will go forth to address the entire state of housing for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, not just the scope of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and social housing.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I recognize the hon. the Minister Responsible for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I am very appreciative of the motion brought forth by the member with regard to the social housing plan that has been put in place now since 2009. I am very, very encouraged by some of the responses of the members who have spoken so far; put back by some of the comments. As well, the member who just spoke, to talk about a collaborative approach and everything, and here we as a government brought forth - a private member brought forth a comprehensive plan today, put it in front of all members of this House asking for a collaborative approach, and the last words out of the member's mouth: I cannot support that. I cannot do it. I cannot do it.

We just had three speakers up who talked very positively about the progress that has been made in the housing file since this government took over, and basically looking for support as we go forward with our plan, which is Secure Foundations. Again, I say to the hon. members, Secure Foundations is a solid plan. It is a plan that is in place that will have a time frame associated with it. A member, again, indicates that it is not a concrete plan. I do not know about housing but I do know about bricks and mortar. There are significant investments that are being put into making sure that there is available housing for the people who need it. As well, this plan is about people who find themselves in very, very vulnerable situations. This is what our prime priority is, to make sure we have in place the programs, the investments that are needed in order to take care of that particular situation.

The Member for Bay of Islands talked about people who find themselves in violent situations. When we look at our wait-list, we make sure that that is number one. If a situation arises where we have to place someone out of that vulnerable situation and into a house, they go immediately to the top of the wait-list. When we talk about an increasing number, again, the facts are there. Two years ago we had 1,200 people on our wait-list. This year we are down to under 1,000. That, to me, is a decrease, not an increase. The wait-list of 1,000, as we look at going through that particular wait-list, we know there is at least an 80 per cent turnover rate of that wait-list in any given year. People who find themselves in vulnerable situations, whether it is medical, whether it is accessibility or whatever, for whatever reasons, we will find ways in which we can make sure they are given priority and they are placed where they should be.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I look at the work that has gone into this plan. I would have to, as one of the members over there talked about, both members, and our members on this side as well, talked about the wonderful work that has been done in Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. I take my hat off to the chair, to the executive, and to the 400-plus who basically are doing the work that is required in order to go forward in this particular plan.

Secure Foundations came about as a result – now, we take ownership of it in a sense because we were the government that would put it forward, but this plan did not fall out of the sky. This plan was brought about by consultations with at least eighty-seven organizations, people who are very much involved in the housing services throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, very much involved with making sure that all of the issues were brought forth as we put together that particular plan. That is the consultation.

I say to the Member for Bay of Islands, I cannot support the motion that you put forward – not the motion, the amendment, simply because it does not require further action because built into the plan is that consultation with groups and with individuals who have the expertise that we need to tap in to and that is done on an annual basis. Every year, that same group will be consulted with and they bring it forward. Of course, when we look at what has been brought forward, the key issues – now there was mention of what we are doing with our stock and the availability of, I suppose, the one and two bedroom apartments that are necessary to take care of a lot of the needs on it. A key issue that was brought forward from this consultation was again to provide more investment in existing social housing infrastructure. The response that we put in place – and again the concrete response, I say to the member opposite – was to triple the annual investment in housing renovations to $12 million in 2008. That, to me, is money, it is providing concrete evidence that we are investing.

We have over 5,500 units throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. In our consultations the people said to us, who are in the know, take care of your own stock first. You cannot go out and start building all over the Province when you have units that need renovations that need to be upgraded, so this is where we have invested and continue to invest. Our investments now have brought us to a point where we are well past the halfway point of making sure that we have those units that are in our stock up to a level that is absolutely necessary.

The second thing is the need for additional private sector partnership. The partnerships in this file, I mean I talked about eighty-seven, these are throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, these organizations. These are organizations, I tell you, that are doing yeomen service and they are the type of partnerships that we are involved in to make sure, again, that we know the issue, we know the action that is required.

The need for additional private sector partnership and involvement for the Rent Supplement Program; this gets back to an original point that was made by the Member for the Bay of Islands in the sense that we find that our stock does not always suit our wait-list. We do have probably three, four bedroom apartments that are not conducive to single – a parent and a child perhaps. What we are looking at is to make sure that we are partnering with the private sector and providing to individuals, not to the private sector, to individuals, the opportunity for them to go out and find an apartment that suits their needs, and that we will subsidize then their rent so that they can take over that.

It is a good program because it allows us to react to the needs of individuals and to match up the need with the type of apartments. These supplements are portable; they can be used anywhere in any part of Newfoundland and Labrador. We have continued to invest so that we have now up to a point of something like 1,700 by April of this year. That is a tremendous number, so you can add that into our stock if you want to put it that way. I say to the member opposite: Concrete. How much more concrete can you get than to be providing the money necessary for rent supplements?

The need for coordinated, supportive services – and I think I have heard from all members in saying that the people who are involved in social housing, for the most part, are basically people who find themselves needing some type of support. The support that we can look at through Supportive Living Community Partnership Programs, these are people with complex needs. That came out of the consultations, making sure that we understood that we needed to adjust our programs to take care of that particular one.

This Supportive Living Community Partnership Program, we are looking at investing something to the fact of $4.8 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: The member opposite there is getting me laughing, I guess, or trying to get me to laugh.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: No.

With regard to the homelessness, of course, we recognize the difficulty some people have in finding housing for any number of different reasons, and sometimes by the grace of God, ourselves, when we look at some of the things that could happen in anyone's life at any given time. I would say to you again that the homeless fund which we have invested in, $1 million a year, is to try and help individuals to find the accommodations that you need at any particular time.

With regard to our federal-provincial – again, this would be affordable housing for seniors and people with complex needs. There was a call for us to invest, and we have invested. These are three-year programs that have continued for the last number of years and will hopefully continue into the future. We always try to negotiate with the federal government to make sure that we are getting the maximum benefits for this particular Province. In this particular case, we know that the support with regard to these affordable housing units for seniors and people with complex needs, these have been very, very successful. The key point is that for every ten that are built, there is one that is fully accessible. These have started to add up.

As well, we are in partnerships – I go back to the partnerships that this plan allows us to do – with not only the private sector, but also the non-profit sector. Again, I say that we are moving along. It is a plan that we believe is right for this particular time. It is a plan that is a work in progress as it moves through. We do have set as a ten-year plan and that plan certainly will move us to where we need to go.

I am still looking at some of my notes to try to make sure that I have addressed all that was brought here today for me to address.

With some of our programs, again – the Provincial Home Repair Program, that has been probably one of the most successful programs in any government, and that is one of the programs that we use in keeping people in their homes. The REEP program, which is refit program, both of these – and again, the uptake on these, I must say, is mostly from our senior citizens. These are people who find themselves in a home which needs some repair. It could be a roof, for the most part; it could be under the REEP program, more insulation, but it does allow us – again, the uptake on it is absolutely tremendous and it does allow people to continue to live in their homes and live in a manner which is most appropriate to their circumstances.

Secure Foundations is a plan that we are very, very proud to have put forward. It calls for a tremendous investment, not only of money, but it also calls for a tremendous investment of input from the stakeholders that are out there, because it is absolutely necessary that we keep in tune with what is happening out in the Province. Again, we hear from others as they go out that there is a difference that you want to look at between affordable housing and housing affordability. I think one of the members brought that forward.

With affordable housing, that is what this plan is all about – making sure that we are taking care of the most vulnerable in our society, but when it comes to housing affordability it is more about the mid-range of about $40-60,000. We have, as a government, made a commitment in our Blue Book that we will pursue looking at perhaps a mortgage assistance program, and other ways.

We will do the jurisdictional review; we will make sure that we are following up. That is a commitment that we have made that is apart from our social housing aspect; because again what we are dealing with today is that which is our highest priority, which is to look after those with an income below $32,500. I stand here very, very proud to be part of a government, to be part of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, who have put forth a plan that is going to put us in a place where we can respond to the needs of the people out there and to move forward in making sure that the people in Newfoundland and Labrador can get what they need in supportive housing, in affordable housing, as we go forward.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am certainly pleased to rise today and speak to the motion that was put forward by the Member for St. John's North.

Mr. Speaker, housing and homelessness is a huge issue in this Province, and one would think that it should not be when you hear the government talk some days about our have status, and how far advanced we have become, and all the surplus budgets that they have flowed through their fingers, Mr. Speaker, over the last five years; you would think that there would be no one in Newfoundland and Labrador today that is homeless or in need of housing. Unfortunately, that is not the case; Mr. Speaker, that is the reason the Member for St. John's North brought the motion – North?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: West.

MS JONES: West – St. John's West. I am sorry, I keep getting the districts mixed up; there are so many of you here. St. John's has so many members, Mr. Speaker, I cannot keep track of them all.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the Member for St. John's West brought it forward, no doubt, because he is feeling the pressure and the crunch in his own district when it comes to housing issues. Housing is as big of an issue in the urban centre of St. John's and right in the City of St. John's as it is anywhere else throughout the Province, and I think we all recognize and acknowledge that.

I listened today to the Member for Mount Pearl North, Mr. Speaker, up talking and I would suggest that the Member for Mount Pearl North get outside of Mount Pearl North every now and then if he thinks there are no housing problems in this Province, and he thinks they are all fixed and his government has done everything, Mr. Speaker, and there is no room for improvement. Then you need to step outside of that little box in Mount Pearl North, I say to the hon. member, and you need to start talking to people, some of your colleagues in St. John's, because I can guarantee you they are getting the calls. They are getting the calls with regard to social housing and nowhere to live and nowhere to sleep. I can guarantee you that there are lots of calls coming in from their offices, Mr. Speaker, and they know that the job is not all done.

Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity in the last little while to travel to a number of districts in this Province and one of the key areas that we discussed was housing; one of the key areas. I know what housing needs are, I have dealt with it every year that I have been elected as an MHA and I have to say, Mr. Speaker, that Newfoundland and Labrador Housing is one of the best initiatives that governments have invested in today and in successive years in my opinion, because it not only reaches out to many who need it and at their greatest times - because I have seen it, and I have seen it transpire into real good housing initiatives for people - but, Mr. Speaker, in addition to that, it is a program that we have to continue to support and continue to identify the kinds of supports that are necessary to meet the needs as the needs continue to change. We just cannot have a housing program in this Province and lie back and say that is fine, we have a program. Well, the needs continue to change. The diversity that is required today to address the housing issues in this Province is much different than they were eight years ago when you came into power; however, Mr. Speaker, we have not changed and adjusted with the times, and that is part of the problem that we are seeing today.

I live in a district, Mr. Speaker, where I have had communities - in fact, the community I mentioned today in Black Tickle where the hydro plant caught fire last night and the community is out of power today, well in that community I would think that every single homeowner who was eligible is after getting a grant from Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. Why, because they are low income. Why, because they live below the poverty level in most cases. Two, they needed it. It was based on need and therefore they should have gotten it. I have a number of communities like that, and I have many constituents like that, and many more on my list who are in need of housing programs in this Province.

My colleague, the Member for Torngat Mountains, do you know today I asked him how many housing files he is dealing with today through his constituency office. Listen to this, I say to the Member for Mount Pearl North, perk your ears up now. The Member for Torngat Mountains told me today he is dealing with forty-seven housing files in his constituency of people who need to have housing right now, today; emergency, who need to have housing today; cases where there are ten and twelve people living in one house.

In the community of Natuashish, I have heard the chief there speak of it many times, the need for housing in that community and additional housing to be built to meet the needs in the community. It is existing everywhere, Mr. Speaker. It is not just a repair program, it is not just upgrading, there are people out there today who have nowhere to put their head down, who have nowhere to drop their bags. As impossible as that may sound when you live in Newfoundland and Labrador, I cannot even believe I am saying it and hearing it in my own ears, but it is true. It is happening and it is true.

Housing is not just restricted to one group of people. It is not just restricted to those who live on low income or need supports. Housing applies to students who go to school and do not have housing. I have had students in my district who went into Labrador West, I am surprised the Member for Labrador West has not stood up today. One of the biggest housing problems in this Province is in his district. Mr. Speaker, he may think that his government is doing enough, that everything is okay, but they do not think so.

If you look, Mr. Speaker, in Labrador West alone, it is not only people on low income who do not have housing, it is people on high incomes who do not have housing. There is no housing available. There are people going to school at the college who had to quit and go home because they had no residence there. Housing is in student residence too, and there is no residence there, Mr. Speaker, for these students.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: I had an e-mail a couple of nights ago from a young girl in Labrador City. Her husband works with Wabush Mines. He makes a good income, the best income they have ever made in their lives. He is a labourer, he is not a tradesperson. She has two children, Mr. Speaker. She does not have a job, she is a stay-at-home mother. Guess what? They were evicted from their apartment. They have nowhere to live, I say to the Member for Labrador West. They are your constituents, they have nowhere to live.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: Now, Mr. Speaker, she and her children are going to have to leave and go to Goose Bay where they are hoping they can find an apartment or live with a family member, and her husband is going to have to stay in Lab West and work. The family has to separate. Do you know what she said to me: That is only temporary because he is applying for a job in Alberta, and we are hoping we will get out there so we can stay together as a family. That is the reality of what you are dealing with, Mr. Speaker. Now, she is talking about going to Goose Bay where it is just as hard to find a house to live.

I just came out of Goose Bay, Mr. Speaker; I had two key groups who approached me on housing. Maybe the Member for Lake Melville should stand up and speak to it, because it is a serious issue in his district. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I met with people at the women's centre who are dealing with women every day who are in violent situations, who cannot escape the situation that they are into with their children because they have nowhere to go. We are dealing with situations in your community and in your district today where people do not and cannot afford to rent a house and the housing is not available to them.

In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, we are dealing with elderly people, seniors who do not have long-term care. I have an e-mail, Mr. Speaker, right here, an e-mail that I received today with regard to Lake Melville when they knew this motion was on the table, from one of their constituents in Lake Melville. Do you know what this person says to me? They are talking about the Paddon Home.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would like to ask all members for their co-operation, please.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I really appreciate that.

Mr. Speaker, what they are telling me is that they are trying to redevelop the Paddon Home. We know the government spent $840,000 last year to do the roof and put a sprinkler system in the Paddon Home. Long-term care beds are needed in Lake Melville. Seniors need to have housing in that community, Mr. Speaker. Today, they are occupying one-third of the beds in the hospital in Goose Bay, and your government cannot make a decision on what you are going to do with the Paddon Home.

Do you know what they tell me? They tell me that the Minister for Labrador has been lukewarm to their response and their MHA is fence sitting and has not been able to give them a decent response on where they are going with the Paddon Home development. Mr. Speaker, that is ridiculous.

You bring a motion in here today and you want to talk about housing. When you get home on the weekend take a walk through your districts and see what is going on. Because do you know something? I was not on the ground very long in your districts when I got those issues brought to my table. In fact, in Labrador West, in every meeting I walked into, the main issue in the community was housing – the main issue. Mr. Speaker, what about Corner Brook – the members who are here from Corner Brook. You know the issues in Corner Brook when it comes to housing, Mr. Speaker. It is a huge problem out there. I get e-mails from the district from people who are living in apartments that they cannot afford to live in because the rent is going up and they are being evicted, from people who cannot find a house out there to be able to rent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

MS JONES: So, Mr. Speaker, there are significant issues with regard to housing. Is the government doing anything to address those problems? Of course you are – you are the government – of course you are. We recognize the fact that there is a plan in place, Mr. Speaker. We recognize the fact that there is a plan in place for housing in this Province. I listened to what the minister said today when he stood in his place about money that they have spent, and I acknowledge that. I acknowledge that there has been money spent to address housing needs in this Province, Mr. Speaker, and my constituents have been some of the beneficiaries of that money. So have the Member for St. Barbe gotten money for his constituents. So have other members in this House, the member for Port aux Basques, who has a huge issue out there, especially with women who are living in violent situations. We heard the stories when we were in his district only a week ago, because they have nowhere to live to escape the situations that they are into.

It is a problem, it is not confined to one area, it is not confined to one group, and Mr. Speaker, the solutions are not confined to one program. What needs to happen is that the ten-year strategy, which we support, needs to be redeveloped. It needs to be expanded. It needs to recognize the different scope and the different needs that exist in this Province today around housing. It is not one standard that fits everyone. I know the federal government has been somewhat, Mr. Speaker, creative in their housing program, in partnering with the private sector to build new houses and develop houses in different parts of the Province. We support that kind of initiative, because that is providing some low-income housing and some other affordable housing in areas of the Province where it would ordinarily not happen, in partnership with the private sector.

We support that, but the Province has to take it beyond just the money that you are getting from the federal government. Right now, your agreement is expired. It is going to be 2014 before you go back for another agreement. So, you need to make sure that we are always continuing to change to meet the needs and the demands that are out there. Mr. Speaker, we recognize the government is putting money into housing in this Province. We have sat here every day. We have watched every Budget. We know there is money going in. The problem is the face of the problem is changing; it is more demands being placed on the system, and those demands are not being met.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, that in addition to the motion that was put today by the Member for St. John's West, we have also proposed some motions to strengthen this. We hope that you will support the amendments that we propose, because basically, what our amendments are saying is that we want you to recognize that further action is necessary. We are not telling you that we do not support your plan. We are not telling you we do not support the money you are spending; we are telling you that further action is necessary.

We are also asking you to add an amendment that says, be it further resolved that the House of Assembly urge government to seek input from concerned citizens and groups in relation to the serious housing crisis in this Province. What is wrong with that? What is wrong with asking the government to seek input from its people? Absolutely nothing, I see no reason why the government members would not support those two friendly amendments that are in the legislation, Mr. Speaker, so that you carry on with the initiatives, you enhance it –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: – to where there needs to be further action taken, and you consult with the people out there in the Province who have an opinion.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair has the floor. I would ask people for their cooperation as she concludes her remarks.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that.

Mr. Speaker, we will be calling upon all the government members and the members of the Third Party today to support the amendments that we have put forward on housing, to strengthen the programs that the government has in place, and to be able to diversify that to meet the growing needs, the changing needs that are occurring in the Province. Mr. Speaker, that would fall in line with the motion that was proposed by the Member for St. John's West.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRANTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know I do not have a lot of time – I have about seven or eight minutes – but I hope to address some of the issues that have been brought to the floor this afternoon. First, I would like to say thanks, as other hon. members have done today, for the incredible work that takes place in Newfoundland and Labrador Housing with its management and its workers.

Over the last eight, ten, or twelve months, I have spoken on numerous occasions with management at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, in Corner Brook in particular, as well as workers, plumbers, electricians, and office workers. I know that they are very proud of the work that they do. They are very proud when you are able to go into a Newfoundland and Labrador Housing unit and do the kind of work that this government has been committed to over the last number of years, and will remain committed to over the coming years.

I also want to say thank you to the local groups in Corner Brook and surrounding area, and I was looking forward this coming Friday to participating in a forum that was to take place on housing in Corner Brook, but unfortunately in the last day or so I heard that the forum has been postponed. I do look forward, whenever that forum is rescheduled, to participate in that forum over the next couple of weeks or months – whenever it takes place.

Someone referenced earlier on the floor with regard to leadership and when leaders leave an organization, and I think it is testament to the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation that a leader can leave for six or seven or eight months and that the organization can carry on; that is a form of what I would consider transformational leadership, Mr. Speaker, where people are trained as a team and they work together as a team. Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation are known as a team and they are able to carry on for four or five or six months in leadership roles. That is testament to the good people that we have working for us, for the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair just referenced, she brought up Corner Brook, talking about the issues of housing. Yes, there are issues in housing in every region of our Province and every town and every city in our Province, but I just want to remind the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair that I deal on a daily basis with people that call my office and I often get a lot of thank-yous that are expressed to me in my office for the great work that Newfoundland and Labrador Housing is doing and the work that they are doing in particular in Corner Brook.

I want to remind the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair that there has been a $27 million investment into a new residence at Grenfell Campus that will free up – there are 200 units that will free up units within Corner Brook such that, that will relieve the stress on housing units for other people in Corner Brook. That is a great investment; that is something that this government has done and will continue to do, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRANTER: I also want to make clear for the record that our program and our plan, our housing plan, we make adjustments each and every year; it is built into the plan. Adjustments are made on an annual basis, and that was a point that was brought to the floor and we consult; we do a consult each and every year, Mr. Speaker.

Housing is vital. It is vital to all of us, to our economy, to our environment, to every individual and family for whom represents so much more than just a place to live. Mr. Speaker, this government has a long-standing ambition and commitment to housing in Newfoundland and Labrador and we are one of the largest tenants in the Province.

I know, Mr. Speaker, that housing is an issue for all of us. It is not a simple issue. It is indeed a very complex one, one which this government takes very, very seriously. Speaker after speaker here this afternoon have outlined in many forums the positive attempts being made throughout every region of this Province, Mr. Speaker, in relation to housing.

Housing initiatives under this government show a caring government, one that has stepped up to the plate to address issues and one that has put forth a long-term plan, Mr. Speaker. Out record speaks for itself, it is a positive one, one that the provincial Social Housing Plan is addressing. On a personal note, I have committed many, many hours to housing issues, and questions and assistance for single parents, seniors, assisted living individuals – to name a few – for people who find themselves, as the minister spoke earlier, in very vulnerable situations.

For many years, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing has offered families and individuals, Mr. Speaker, the home they need. In the past few years, we have done much to raise the quality of existing inventory, and we are committed to continuing that trend. Every member of this House, on this side of the House, and I know on the other side of the House, are proud of the work the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has done over the last number of years, and they should be congratulated.

The twenty-first century, Mr. Speaker, we face a range of new challenges with regard to housing. Housing itself has changed, tenants expectations have changed, the world around us has changed dramatically. The demographics have changed, aging profiles have changed, the cost of housing has changed, and the family units have changed. I know the minister, in his fifteen minutes, spoke about the change in family units and the need to work with the public sector and the public housing and private housing such that we have a partnership, and we built that partnership over the last number of years and we are continuing that partnership, Mr. Speaker.

It is important to always take a step back and consider the role housing should play now and in the future. How can it help people get on in life? How can it underpin social cohesion and opportunity for all? How can it contribute to fine communities? We are doing that, Mr. Speaker. Newfoundland and Labrador Housing and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador are committed to just that, Mr. Speaker. Despite what are sometimes claims to the contrary, overall housing conditions in Newfoundland and Labrador, housing units throughout Newfoundland and Labrador have improved markedly over the last number of years. This government sees the need for the complexity of providing safe and affordable housing to provide for low-income residents as well.

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, in over 5,000 units province-wide, is achieving its goals, Mr. Speaker. I have seen this first hand in my district in Humber West. I know the Minister of Finance has seen it in Humber East with new modifications, new exterior siding, new windows, and new paint. I talk of Crestview and Pratt Street, Wheelers Road, Elizabeth Street, and other parts of Humber West, Mr. Speaker.

I know my time has run out, I thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: It being 4:45, the floor returns to the Member for St. John's West to conclude his comments.

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will conclude with some comments now. I do appreciate and thank the Member for the Bay of Islands for his input, as well as the Member for Mount Pearl North, thank you very much. The Member for St. John's Centre, thank you very much for your comments as well. The Member for Humber West and certainly the Minister Responsible for Housing, thank you very, very much.

Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair. I have only been in this government for a very short time, but I did follow politics for many, many years. I remember the Liberal efforts to address housing issues, or I should say the lack of. Nothing for renovations, nothing for rent subsidies, nothing for new home repairs, nothing for the homelessness. I remember that, Mr. Speaker, because I followed politics very, very closely over these years. I am saddened by her comments, considering where she has come from.

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, I love what everybody has said here today. They deserve recognition, you are doing a wonderful job and fair enough for everybody to recognize that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: One other thing I might mention, that has not been mentioned today when we talk about housing affordability, there are students out there in Western Newfoundland, in Labrador and here in St. John's, Mr. Speaker. There is a new residence being built on campus. There is a big tower there; you can see it going up every day. There are going to be 500 new spots for students in that residence ready next year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: This will help alleviate the problem in the centre of the city for rental units. So, Mr. Speaker, there is much work being done that we have not even talked about yet. Grenfell College I believe is constructing a residence out there as well. Our government is being very proactive when it comes to housing all over this Province.

Just a couple of more comments, it is unfortunate that the Third Party and perhaps the Opposition Party I guess, we will see what happens there, will not be supporting this resolution. This plan is a blueprint for the future. This blueprint was designed by hundreds of individuals and dozens of groups. It was designed to be a living, breathing document that is meant to flex and bend as time goes on, that is what that document is meant for.

It has been mandated to have a yearly progress report. I heard a couple of members on the opposite side; it is too bad that we do not have updates on the progress. There is a yearly progress report, I have one here actually that I cannot show, but you can go to the housing site and you can find that progress report.

This progress report – any gaps in executing the plan need to be identified and acted on. This is what we do in ongoing consulting with our partners and the private sector. So that process is ongoing, so when we talk about the amendment that the Member for –

AN HON. MEMBER: Bay of Islands.

MR. CRUMMELL: There you go, the Member for Bay of Islands suggested, we are already doing that. We are already consulting these people, so I do not think that amendment is necessary. We have already got that indoctrinated into our plan.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear this government recognizes both the need and complexity of providing safe and affordable social housing. This is evident in the unprecedented level of investment and growth in social housing in this Province in recent years, and especially the past three years. Our government has a long-term vision and a comprehensive plan. Our ten-year social housing Secure Foundations is that plan. We are proud of the work we have done, and we are looking toward the work we are going to do in the future. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all members to support this resolution as it stands.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Contra-minded?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Amendment defeated.

On motion, amendment defeated.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

Motion carried.

AN HON. MEMBER: Division.

MR. SPEAKER: Division has been called.

Call in the members.

MR. SPEAKER: Are the House Leaders ready for the vote?

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

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

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Third Party was not – Division was called, the bar was up, the door was locked, and she forced herself in, Mr. Speaker. You cannot do that. So I would ask that the Leader of the Third Party be asked to leave the House.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party, to the point of order.

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

To the point of order, Mr. Speaker, I thought that as long as the bells were ringing I was allowed in. I did not realize that the doors were locked. I apologize. Whatever you rule, Mr. Speaker – the bells were still ringing.

MR. SPEAKER: If the bells are ringing, we are calling members into the House. When the bells cease, the doors are locked and closed, and members are not allowed in. The bells had not ceased when the member entered the House. She is entitled to vote.

All those in favour of the motion?

CLERK: Mr. Kennedy, Ms Burke, Mr. King, Ms Sullivan, Mr. O'Brien, Mr. Jackman, Mr. French, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Hedderson, Mr. Felix Collins, Mr. Verge, Mr. Kent, Mr. Forsey, Mr. Granter, Ms Johnson, Mr. Hutchings, Mr. Davis, Mr. McGrath, Mr. Sandy Collins, Mr. Brazil, Mr. Kevin Parsons, Mr. Little, Mr. Hunter, Mr. Osborne, Ms Perry, Mr. Dinn, Mr. Cornect, Mr. Littlejohn, Mr. Crummell, Mr. Pollard, Mr. Cross, Mr. Peach, Mr. Lane, Mr. Russell.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against the motion?

CLERK: Mr. Ball, Ms Jones, Mr. Andrew Parsons, Mr. Joyce, Mr. Edmunds, Mr. Bennett, Ms Michael, Mr. Kirby, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Mitchelmore, Ms Rogers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

CLERK: Mr. Speaker, the ayes: thirty-four; the nays: eleven.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried.

Motion carried.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: This being Wednesday, according to Standing Order 9, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, at 1:30 p.m.