PDF Version

March 21, 2013                         HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS             Vol. XLVII No. 80


The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Today, before we start, I want to welcome some special guests to our galleries. Today we have the 2013 Purple Day Ambassador Joey Callanan, and his father Laus Callanan, Pam Anstey of Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador, Gail Dempsey of Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador, and the President of the Canadian Epilepsy Alliance.

Welcome to our gallery.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I am also very pleased to have Mr. Todd Churchill, who has been recently recognized for his efforts to support Easter Seals, Rainbow Riders and Mazol Shriners. Todd is accompanied today by his wife, Kimberly, and his sons, Hunter and Carter.

Welcome, too, to our galleries.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today we have members' statements for the Member for the District of Conception Bay East – Bell Island, the Member for the District of Bay of Islands, the Member for the District of Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair, the Member for the District of St. John's North, the Member for the District of Humber West, and the Member for the District of Bonavista South.

The hon. the Member for the District of Conception Bay East – Bell Island.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand in this House to acknowledge a special citizen of my district and the impact he and his family has had on the community and a number of worthwhile charities. I speak of Mr. Todd Churchill from Portugal Cove – St. Phillips who has constructed a large backyard rink to raise money for three charities whose support and resources are invaluable to families like his, Easter Seals, Rainbow Riders and Mazol Shriners.

The Churchill's two-year-old son Carter, who was diagnosed with cerebral palsy and acute hearing impairment, is the motivation for this family's commitment to helping improve the lives of children who benefit from the services offered by these not-for-profit organizations.

Todd, a professional engineer, has spent several months designing, building and maintaining the rink as a means of both raising awareness of these charities and soliciting corporate donations in the form of rink sponsorships to help fund these vital community services offered by these charities.

To date, the Churchill's have raised over $45,000 for these charities with this and other projects such as the Easter Seals' Drop Zone in the past two years. The Churchill's feel they are proactively supporting Carter through these charities.

I ask all members to join me in congratulating the Churchill's.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to extend congratulations to the Sacred Heart Elementary Grade 5 girls' basketball team.

On Saturday, March 9, this group of fine young players won the 2013 West Coast Provincial Grade 5 Girls' Basketball Tournament. These players worked hard all year, and the dedication and commitment to the team was always paramount.

Mr. Speaker, the Grade 5 team includes: Laura Greene, Emma Welshman, Megan Allen, Olivia Porter, Madison Hackett, Morgan Young, Kristen Buckle, Abigail Power-Petten, Jenna King, Holly Mackey, Emily Butt, and Arianna Sheppard.

Mr. Speaker, despite their coach, and with the guidance of the assistant coach, Lisa Young, these young players exemplified true sportsmanship and are great representatives of Sacred Heart Elementary School. I am very proud to have had the opportunity to work with these young athletes, and I am confident they will continue with their basketball careers.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join me in congratulating these young girls with all the best in the future. Go Sabres, Go!

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to pay tribute to a company that amidst the strife and challenges within the fishing industry in our Province. The Labrador Fishermen's Union Shrimp Company has been successful in meeting the challenges of the industry and continues to provide economic opportunities for the Labrador region.

Led by a competent board of directors and management team, the shrimp company has been able to live up to its objectives since its inception. With Mr. Frank Flynn as President, Mr. Gilbert Linstead as General Manager, and Mr. Ken Fowler as Assistant General Manager at the helm, the company continues to grow its business and seek opportunities to expand its network. Together, with their board of directors, they have taken the shrimp company into the twenty-first century as the ideal fisheries model for our Province.

The shrimp company operates plants in L'Anse-au-Loup, Cartwright, Charlottetown, and Pinsent's Arm, and is constructing a state-of-the-art crab plant in Mary's Harbour. They employ over 500 people on a seasonal basis and services 600 fishers throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

I ask members to join me in offering congratulations to all of their volunteers and the staff of the company, and also to congratulate Mr. Frank Flynn, Mr. Gilbert Linstead, and Mr. Ken Fowler on their thirty years of progressive leadership in this company.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate a teacher at St. Andrew's Elementary for receiving the NLTA Bancroft Award recognizing outstanding service at the branch level from the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association.

Today, Brenda Beresford teaches Grade 3 at St. Andrew's, but she attended her first NLTA meetings when she had just started her teaching career in St. Mary's Bay. She moved to St. John's and continued her involvement with the NLTA. Shortly after moving here, she became the association's rep for her school and then ran to be a delegate to the NLTA's Annual General Meeting, now a biennial meeting.

She has been an active member of the Marconi Branch executive and has, at various times, been the branch's secretary, vice-president and president. This year, she will be serving as the executive's past president.

Outside her school and local branch, Brenda has been a member of the NLTA Ad Hoc Committee for Teacher Allocation, presenting valuable input from the perspective of primary and elementary teachers.

I ask all hon. members to join me in commending Brenda Beresford for her long and valuable service both to her students and to the NLTA.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Humber West.

MR. GRANTER: Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, February 23, I had the opportunity to attend the Silver Medal Duke of Edinburgh's Awards of Achievement presentation in Stephenville. Awards were presented by the hon. John C. Crosbie, former Lieutenant Governor of Newfoundland and Labrador.

To qualify for an award, participants must undertake a balanced program of leisure-time activities and meet the prescribed standards in four different areas of self-development, including community service, adventurous journeys, physical fitness, and skill development. Over the past few years, members of the Corner Brook D of E School Group have been involved in many challenging and worthwhile activities under the direction of committed volunteer leaders.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to congratulate Laura Allen, Ryan Antle, Michael Fost, Blake Gillespie, Adolf Hamann, Ashley Higgins, Zachary Hiscock, Kelsey Hogan, Andrea Hollett, Roshni Kollipari, Taylor Lidstone, Christian Sharpe, Heather Simmons, Danika Snelgove, Danny Staples, Dylan Thomas, Maike van Niekerk, and Evan Wheeler on being presented Duke of Edinburgh's silver medals and wish all of them well in their gold medal pursuit.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bonavista South.

MR. LITTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Honourable colleagues, I rise in this House today to congratulate the members of Heritage Huskies female volleyball team, who are students at Heritage Collegiate High School, located in Lethbridge, in the District of Bonavista South.

During a tournament over the weekend of March 2 and 3, the team took home the banner, beating Holy Spirit High School in the final of the 18 Under Provincial Female C-Tier Championships in St. John's. This is the second banner the team has won this season.

These ladies could attribute their success to hard work and many hours of practice, plus the great leadership of Coach Carol Blundon.

Special mention goes to Haley Gould and Laura Blundon, who were named as all-stars, and Lindsay Ralph, who was named Most Valuable Player of the tournament. The other members of the team include: Alicia Holloway, Macailyn Pitt, Amy Chatman, Jenna Blagdon, Shania Butt, and Chelsea Holloway.

Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues, please join me in congratulating each of these young ladies on a job well done. Their success was well earned and well deserved. Thanks to Coach Blundon for her time and dedication that helped make the team's success possible.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, each of us has a responsibility for the sustainability of our planet and every action, big or small, collectively helps to make a difference. I rise in this hon. House today to draw attention to Earth Hour 2013 taking place this Saturday at 8:30 p.m., when every resident in our Province is asked to join together in solidarity for our earth and turn off their lights for one hour.

Since Earth Hour began as a single-city event in Sydney, Australia in 2007, it has grown to a global phenomenon involving more than 7,000 cities and towns in 152 countries and territories with hundreds of millions of participants across seven continents. It has quickly grown to be the largest ever voluntary action whereby people, businesses, and governments comes together to celebrate a commitment to a common cause – the earth.

While Earth House has helped raise the profile of sustainability issues, Mr. Speaker, it is important that we pledge to do more than switch off our lights for one hour each year. The 2013 I Will If You Will concept invites individuals and organizations to challenge others to an ongoing environmental commitment beyond the hour.

Mr. Speaker, there are many sustainable practices we can adopt beyond observing Earth Hour. We can ensure we turn off our lights when not in use, recycle wherever possible and whenever possible, ensure vehicle tires are inflated properly, compost, and install water-saving devices, just to name a few.

To assist the people of our Province to take action, our government launched the Turn Back the Tide public awareness campaign last fall on climate change and energy efficiency. At the heart of the campaign is a Web site, www.turnbackthetide.ca, which is designed to be a user-friendly one-stop shop for information and advice targeted at individuals, businesses, and communities. From a global perspective, Mr. Speaker, actions taken by individuals around the world can positively affect the future of our planet. Our Turn Back the Tide initiative can help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians extend our commitment to the planet long after we turn the lights back on this Saturday evening.

I encourage every household throughout Newfoundland and Labrador to join the worldwide movement at 8:30 p.m. local time on March 23 and share in one hour of darkness for the Earth. Together, our actions really do make a difference for our environment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. Mr. Speaker, I, too, would encourage residents of our Province to participate in Earth Hour this Saturday at 8:30 o'clock. In all likelihood, some of the communities across this Province will probably have power failures anyway, so it probably will not be an issue.

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt our world is facing some of the most critical environmental challenges in its history. It is important that we all work together to tackle these challenges, and events like Earth Hour are very important in educating people on climate change. It is key that we encourage residents of our Province not only to participate in Earth Hour, but to find ways to reduce, reuse, and recycle in their everyday lives.

Mr. Speaker, society must remember and be guided by an Aboriginal proverb: We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would also like to thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement today. The one thing that Earth Hour reminds everybody of is that we have to pay more attention to our environment and the things that are happening, and this Province is no different. I say to all hon. members of this House, this Province is under a lot of pressure these days due to possible future economic developments, so we have to make sure we are ever vigilant in protecting our resources, particularly like water, which we talked about yesterday. We know we are under pressures from the oil industry and from such things as fracking, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to also remind the people of the Province to get out there and help us increase awareness about the environment and participate in Earth Hour.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for St. John's South have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform this hon. House that March 26 is Purple Day for Epilepsy in Newfoundland and Labrador.

On the twenty-sixth day of March, people are encouraged to wear the color purple to show their support for people with epilepsy and to increase public awareness of this disorder.

Mr. Speaker, nine-year-old Cassidy Megan of Nova Scotia was motivated by her own experience with epilepsy to create Purple Day in 2008. She chose the color purple after the international color for epilepsy, lavender. The lavender flower is often associated with solitude, which is representative of the feelings of isolation many people affected by epilepsy and seizure disorders can feel.

Cassidy's goal in creating Purple Day was to get people talking about epilepsy in an effort to dispel myths and inform those with seizures that they are not alone. Purple Day has quickly gained grassroots support and is now an international effort dedicated to increasing awareness around epilepsy worldwide.

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological conditions and approximately one in twenty-six people will develop this disorder at some point in their lifetime. More than 10,000 people in Newfoundland and Labrador are affected by epilepsy.

Mr. Speaker, Purple Day is intended to help raise the awareness of epilepsy and reduce any stigma that exists around the disorder. I encourage people to visit the Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador Web site to learn about epilepsy, the different types of seizures, and to become familiar with the correct methods of first aid.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to offer congratulations on behalf of the provincial government to Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador on its thirtieth anniversary. This organization continues to provide vital support and education to individuals with epilepsy and their families.

I invite the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador to participate in Purple Day activities in their communities and to wear purple next Tuesday as a show of support for people living with epilepsy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

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

I also would like to say welcome to our special guests who are watching today. I am very proud to wear my purple wristband here today and I will make sure to have my purple on, on Tuesday as well.

Epilepsy is not a disease, as we know, but a disorder of the central nervous system. It is touching to read about the choice of the lavender flower, as it represents solitude. This would relate to the stigma around epilepsy stemming from not understanding the condition.

Epilepsy throughout history has typically been misunderstood and regarded with superstition, and in history it has also been mistreated in very strange ways. Purpleday.org provides very helpful information on helping someone who is having a seizure, and I would encourage everyone to read this.

I would also like to congratulate nine-year-old Cassidy; a fantastic idea from someone so young. She is obviously very wise beyond her years. Awareness is key, and with this and knowledge we can better equip people with an understanding that we need, and we can all do our part to raise awareness of epilepsy in this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I too thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement, and I will proudly wear purple next Tuesday to help raise awareness.

There is still stigma around epilepsy, and because of that often people are afraid to say if they or someone close to them has this condition. The fact is that people living with epilepsy can have full lives. With 10,000 people in the Province living with epilepsy, we need to do everything possible to combat this stigma.

I, too, congratulate Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador on their thirtieth anniversary. It is imperative that government support their effort to help both adults and children better understand epilepsy. I am sure everyone in this House would like to join me in saying: Bravo, Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador for the work you continue to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday the government had to admit they had spent $16,000 on the sanction party for Muskrat Falls, but this is really a drop in the bucket compared to the $408,000 they spent on the Muskrat Falls PR campaign.

I ask the Premier: How can you justify laying off hardworking Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, cutting services to our Province, and still choosing to spend over $400,000 on a PR campaign?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Muskrat Falls is an important project to the people of this Province and it was important that they understand the facts; facts that were not forthcoming from Opposition parties, Mr. Speaker. When we announced the fact that we will provide a householder to the people of the Province describing what we were going to do in Muskrat Falls, the only question we got from the other side, Mr. Speaker, was could they have some money too?

Now, Mr. Speaker, it is important to communicate with the people of the Province on important issues. That is what we did on Muskrat Falls, Mr. Speaker, and we make no apologies for that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, with a campaign of over $400,000 and making no apology to that, maybe we need to tell some people, like the coalitions of people with disabilities who are looking for a lot less than that for what they need.

The Premier knew last year that significant deficits were looming, but yet decided to proceed with this glitzy, taxpayer-funded PR campaign on Muskrat Falls. We know that the Department of Natural Resources spent over $400,000. We also know that Nalcor spent another $17,000 on the Muskrat Falls Web site.

Aside from the $425,000, how much was actually spent on the PR campaign for Muskrat Falls?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, let me address the Leader of the Opposition's preamble first, when he talks about cuts to community organizations by this government. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, that we contribute over $80 million annually to community organizations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: What we were doing in the EAS program is making sure that funding was focused to the client, Mr. Speaker. There has been no cut in EAS –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: – funding, Mr. Speaker. Some of the people who lost funding under EAS not to deliver that program any more, Mr. Speaker, received hundreds of thousands of dollars of support in grants from this government. We are glad that they do it, Mr. Speaker, because they are great givers to our community, they are great doers in our community.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is no question that these are great organizations and great people, but yet in polling you went ahead and said: You bet, we stacked those polls. It was not the right thing to do Premier. Last year the Premier spent $37,000 to send flyers of very selective Budget highlights to every householder in this Province.

How much are you planning to spend this year on your Budget PR campaign?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, only the Leader of the Liberal Opposition would have the face to get up here and talk about somebody calling in to a radio poll, when they in their time in government had two full-time people in the Premier's office whose only job – Tom Hann and Sue Kelland-Dyer, let me remind people of the Province – was to call in to Open Line to carry the party line, Mr. Speaker, and to influence people of the Province. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is the truth.

Mr. Speaker, we were quite open about what our agenda was when we decided that we would make available Decision Gate 3 numbers, that we would hold a special debate here in the House of Assembly if the Opposition parties were willing. We would ensure that the people of the Province had the facts in their hands, Mr. Speaker, not the spin that they are famous for.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am just wondering when the Premier is going to accept the responsibilities for the decisions that she is making. She wants to continually go back to before 2003. I was not around in the day. I am not sure if those people actually did that polling or not. You were there. You know. You know it was your members who were padding the polls.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, the deadline for public employees to opt into the government's voluntary retirement incentive was yesterday. When launched earlier this month, the Minister of Finance said there would be 400 eligible employees.

I ask the Premier: How many employees took you up on the offer of the voluntary retirement?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you.

When I checked earlier today, Mr. Speaker, there were more than 200 people who had made applications, but not all people who make applications will be eligible, for various reasons. I expect to have a final number later on today, but I do expect it to be around 200 people. Of course, this will fit nicely with what we are trying to do here, Mr. Speaker, in terms of not laying off as many people as possible and hopefully and-or reducing positions.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, in early March government made a unilateral decision without talking to doctors and other medical experts to stop paying for skin disorder treatments. This oversight and complete disregard left patients with complex medical issues such as lupus affected by government's decision.

I ask the minister: Will you now admit that by rushing through such a crucial decision, patients were left out in the cold by your careless actions?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have committed to, have always committed to, and will continue to commit to any service that is medically necessary in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, facial telangiectasia is not covered anywhere else in Canada. It is not covered, I want to repeat that. It is not insured anywhere else in Canada.

Governments have to govern, Mr. Speaker. We have to make some tough decisions sometimes, there is no question about that, but in this case the decision that we made is to continue to support people who need medical attention. If their condition is medically necessary to be treated, it will be treated, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the NLMA asked for a meeting in January on this issue and they ignored the request. Yet the minute they found out that the media was involved, there was a mad scramble to meet with them. We have been warned of cuts to health care in this Budget, but you are obviously not consulting with medical experts.

I ask the minister: What kind of mess will you leave the Province's health care system in before it is all over?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, 40 per cent of this Province's budget is spent on health care – 40 per cent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, that is a fine bit better than it was when we took control of health care or of any other department in this government. To say that health care in this Province is in a mess is absolutely irresponsible and absolutely shocking.

The people of Newfoundland and Labrador who contact me on a regular basis, Mr. Speaker, have something quite different to say. Anybody in this House who has had need of the medical services that are offered in this Province have told me differently as well. I take that as the insult it was meant to be. That is totally, totally irresponsible and unacceptable.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, what is irresponsible is not meeting with medical experts, then making decisions, and then having to go back on them after, admitting their mistakes after they have been made. Many patients have been affected by government's unilateral decision to cut treatment for skin disorders.

Given the fact that this decision was rushed through without proper consultation with medical experts, I ask the Minister: Will you now admit your mistake and immediately reverse the decision until proper consultation has occurred?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I met with the NLMA this morning. They have just put out a news release – which I would be happy to table as well – in which they said they were happy to continue to collaborate with me as the minister and with the department in general. I will table that if they would like to see it. They are happy to continue their consultations and collaboration with us.

Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate, because he wants to ignore the fact every single time and spin it out differently: the fact is, if the condition needs to be treated medically, it will be.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: They might be happy to collaborate, but they are certainly not happy when they are not consulted and then decisions are made without their input.

Mr. Speaker, there are about four to five children with cancer in this Province at any given time who do not have insurance to cover anti-nausea drugs in the months following chemo. The C17, the council of seventeen pediatric heads across the country, say our Province is the only one having this struggle.

So I ask the minister: With only four to five kids needing this coverage, can you not find the $100 a day total to keep them from feeling sick all the time?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Any drugs that are on our drug formulary are there as a result of expert review. There are three review processes that we engage in, Mr. Speaker, in order to put drugs on the formulary. In particular, when we talk about cancer drugs, then we look at the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review. That drug review, based on evidence, will tell us which drugs ought to be on the formulary and which drugs they suggest we would not include on the formulary. We rely on evidence-based information to make our decisions as to the drugs that are used.

Admittedly, there are doctors who prefer other drugs, but the drug reviews that are recognized right across this country advise us as to what it is that we ought to include.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: I would say: Why are we the only Province that is not doing this?

Instead of covering the anti-nausea drug that oncologists across the country recommended, our Pharmaceutical Services Division has suggested using steroids; oncologists advise against this.

I ask the minister: Given your Pharmaceutical Services Division is suggesting drugs that are not advisable for children with cancer, why aren't you listening to oncologists for what is best for children?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Pharmaceutical Division of my department does not make the recommendations. As I just outlined, we rely on experts in the field. We do go to the drug review committees. There is an Atlantic drug review committee that we use, but in particular, when it is related to cancer drugs, Mr. Speaker, we consult the experts who are the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review.

Mr. Speaker, they review drugs not just for us but right throughout this country. Mr. Speaker, we rely on their evidence and on their expertise. I am not about to take direction from parties opposite over there when we have experts out there who advise us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: I say again, Mr. Speaker: only Province in Canada not doing this.

Adam is a twenty-two-year-old with cystic fibrosis. With no family support, Adam works and goes to school full-time. The medication government covers takes too long to prepare each day. If Adam had access to the Podhaler, it would take just ten minutes; meaning he would be less likely to be hospitalized.

I ask the minister: Why are patients like Adam not receiving the same standard of care as higher income patients?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, once again, he is referring to two particular types of medication. I think it is TOBI and the TOBI Podhaler are the two that you would be referring to, but you can clarify that when you stand up and ask your next question on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, both of those particular drugs has been reviewed, again by the expert committees, and both have recommended that evidence does not show them to be superior to the other drugs which we do cover.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, there are fifteen CF patients under the Prescription Drug Plan who need access to the TOBI Podhaler. This would cost government about $100,000 extra per year. This investment would reduce hospitalizations, which cost about $15,000 each, and would prolong time to first lung transplants, saving millions.

I ask the minister: Will you cover the inhaler in this year's Budget?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I think I just answered the question when I said that what we do is we review the drugs through the professional experts who are out there. They have reviewed both of these. They have concluded that these two drugs, according to evidence, are not any better than the drugs that we are already covering, Mr. Speaker.

We are covering a drug that very much suits the needs of people with this particular disorder, with cystic fibrosis, Mr. Speaker. We are covering it with a drug that has been recommended, and we will continue to do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, government will cover Tobramycin, an IV drug not designed for inhalation. It is not PH balanced for the lungs and it is toxic to the kidneys, causing hearing loss and loss of equilibrium. Only when a patient's lungs begin to fail on that drug will government cover a better one.

I ask the minister: Will you listen to CF Canada and local experts and cover the inhaler in this year's Budget? Or do you think it is responsible health care to only cover better medication when the patient's lungs are failing?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, once again, I take exception to that. Mr. Speaker, we intend in this Province to provide the best medical service that we can.

Mr. Speaker, again, I am not sure where he gets his advice. He talks about local experts. If you have experts who are any different from the expert review committees that we engage, then I would like to meet with them. I would like to hear about what it is that they have.

Mr. Speaker, we have had these two drugs that he is referring to reviewed. They have been reviewed on a number of different occasions. On each occasion, they have come back to us and said the same thing: We do not recommend these two drugs. They are not any more effective than the drugs we are covering, Mr. Speaker. That is what the experts tell us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bay of Islands.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, yesterday in Corner Brook we heard the third announcement for the new hospital in Corner Brook. It is finally confirmed the project is still –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: It is finally confirmed that the project is still in the design stage. The new complex, as it is now being called, will have 260 beds and will include an acute care centre, a separate long-term care facility with in-patient mental health services, and a hostel. The Minister of Finance said 100 of these beds will be for long-term care.

I ask the Minister of Health: What is the breakdown of the 260 beds into acute care, long-term care, mental health, and the hostel?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, what a great day we had in Corner Brook yesterday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, what great response we had from the people of Western Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, they were absolutely overwhelmed when we told them that the number of beds would increase from 200 to 260.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, they were really interested when we explained to them that a large part of the problem that we were having and a large part of the problem that was experienced had to do with the fact that at any given time, 25 per cent of the 200 beds that are in the acute care centre were in use by long-term care patients. Mr. Speaker, that is 50 beds out of the 199 that were over there.

Mr. Speaker, when we heard that we made the right choices to give the right care –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS SULLIVAN: – at the right time, and there is also now a long-term –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Time for a quick question without preamble.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: How is reducing the number of acute care beds in a hospital bursting at the seams rightsizing for the people? Tell the people who are out there in the hallways there are fewer acute care beds in the hospital.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services, for a quick response.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I think I am hearing that the member opposite does not want this facility built over on the West Coast. That is what I think I am hearing over there. Mr. Speaker, again, this is the mixture between fact and spin that he likes to put on it every single time.

The facts of the matter are there will be sixty more beds. Now, Mr. Speaker, I need to tell him again: fifty of the beds that were acute care can now be freed up (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

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

Mr. Speaker, Memorial University's Rural Internship Program has provided funding to enable teachers in training to gain experience in the rural schools and communities that need them. Yesterday the university announced that rural internships scheduled to begin next month have been cancelled and the entire program is suspended because of cuts made by the Department of Advanced Education and Skills.

So, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Can she tell us why her government is balancing its books at the expense of teacher trainees and rural education?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, in a time when we have to look at the Budget, unfortunately there are some programs that cannot proceed. Let me assure the Leader of the Third Party what this government is doing for post-secondary students, and in particular post-secondary students from rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we have the best student-aid package in all of Canada, we eliminated interest on the provincial portion of the student loan, and we have the lowest tuition rate anywhere in Canada right here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, for the students from Newfoundland, from our rural parts, who have to come to St. John's or into Corner Brook to study, we have 700 new residence beds for the students of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As usual, no direct answer to the question.

Mr. Speaker, the federal loan guarantee for Muskrat Falls clearly stipulates the federally-appointed independent engineer has access to all information related to the projects and access to management and employees of the proponents and borrowers as required, far more access to information than the people of this Province who are actually paying for the project get.

So I ask the Premier: Does the federal government allow her access to the independent engineer's reports?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the loan guarantee does call for the provision of an independent engineer. The independent engineer will be paid for by Nalcor. The independent engineer will make sure on behalf of the people of the Province and on behalf of the government of the Province that this project proceeds in a robust, fair, economically feasible, and fiscally feasible manner.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I asked a very direct question. I want to know: Does the Premier have access to the information that the independent engineer is giving to Nalcor in its reports?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Absolutely, Mr. Speaker, all of the information that is made available to the independent engineer will come from Nalcor. We have been completely open and transparent about this project. We will continue to do so because it is right for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. It creates the lowest rates for ratepayers. It creates thousands of jobs for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, something the NDP clearly does not support.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

So if the Premier is going to get these reports, yes or no – will she make those reports public?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, whatever information that can be made available to the people of the Province without interfering with proprietary commercial contracts, we will make that information available. We are proud of Muskrat Falls. We are proud of the fact that we are bringing energy to this Province, not only for ratepayers, but as an enabler for industrial development. We are proud of the thousands of jobs we are creating. We are for development, unlike the NDP, who does not want any of those things for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Government continues to insist the $8 billion-plus Muskrat Falls Project has no bearing on the Province's current fiscal crisis. The Federal Loan Guarantee term sheet –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: – says the Province bears responsibility for 100 per cent of the financing until financial close at the end of this year.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Will she explain to this House and to the public how she plans to meet this responsibility without affecting our fiscal situation?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, as I said to the Leader of the Third Party last week, she should really read @TelegramJames' blog. He explains it very concisely and very neatly, Mr. Speaker.

The money that we are investing in Muskrat Falls is an equity investment. We will, this year, provide, until financial close, a certain amount of money, but we will get that money back, Mr. Speaker. All of the money will be paid back, because we are investing in a project that is a sustainable project for the future of this Province, Mr. Speaker.

Also, and need I remind the Leader of the Third Party, it is creating high-paying union jobs which she does not support.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, last night Bill C-279, An Act To Amend The Canadian Human Rights Act And The Criminal Code (gender identity and gender expression) was passed, explicitly protecting the rights of trans people, joining the Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Manitoba, Ontario, and soon Quebec.

I ask the minister: Why is he not willing to amend our Human Rights Act to include gender identity? What is the problem?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, it is certainly no problem, and I have never said that I am unwilling to do that.

I am very familiar that the federal government has made a decision to change their act. As I have said many times in this House to the member opposite, our current legislation around the provision of human rights for people in Newfoundland and Labrador provides for that same security and protection that the member is advocating for.

I have talked to the member on many occasions, just several days ago in this House as a matter of fact, and I am quite prepared to do that again as we need to. Currently, our legislation does not prohibit the protection of the individuals that the federal government referenced in their legislation last night, and I will continue to monitor that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, his own Human Rights Commission is strongly recommending, in fact, that we do change our Human Rights Act. He is not listening.

Mr. Speaker, today my office was informed that we can longer contact the Newfoundland and Labrador Prescription Drug Program on behalf of our constituents.

I ask the minister: Why has she instituted this new policy to interfere with the work that I must do as an elected MHA on behalf of my constituents?

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, I do not know if anything happened when I was away yesterday, but there is no new policy up in my office that I am aware of. The same process that we always used for having your questions answered is the process that is in place today. If you have a question that needs to be answered, then there are two people in my office, an executive assistant and a liaison, and they were both there. They were not with me. You can contact them at any time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, we were able to contact the drug program before directly, and as of today we can no longer do that.

Mr. Speaker, fifty-one-year-old Rosemarie Tulk has lost both legs to diabetes, and now risks going blind from diabetic macular edema. Her only hope is a series of expensive injections recommended by her doctors. These treatments are not covered by the Prescription Drug Program, so Rosemarie is forced to sit at home and go blind. She is afraid. These treatments are covered in other provinces and by 97 per cent of private user insurers and recommended by the Common Drug Review.

I ask the minister: Why can't this government help Rosemarie Tulk?

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, we spend over $150 million every single year through the NLPDP and we are very proud of that. Obviously, we can continue to put money into the NLPDP on a daily basis. We will never have all of the drugs covered, but all the drugs that are important to the people of this Province we have included on the NLPDP whenever and wherever we can. It is a commitment we have made; it is a commitment we have stayed with.

Mr. Speaker, we are proud of that $159 million investment. We will continue to invest in the people of the Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, Rosemarie Tulk is forced to sit at home and go blind. She is afraid.

Mr. Speaker, Eddie Gillard is a thirty-six-year-old construction foreman from Badger who desperately needs a liver transplant. He needs significant dental work done: $6,239 worth. The Province will cover only $1,400 worth of extractions. He cannot have this life-saving transplant without it. Eddie's Canada disability will be $826 a month. He has two children and his wife must stay home to care for him.

I ask the minister: Why is this required dental work –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS ROGERS: – not part of the transplant program?

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, we have $6.7 million in an adult dental program, one of the only provinces in Canada to do that. Mr. Speaker, if it was so important to the two parties on the other side, I have no idea why it was not even part of your election campaign, was not part of your platform even to do anything around adult dental. It was not considered to do anything around adult dental.

Now, Mr. Speaker, they get up and they criticize the $6.7 million that we are spending. We continue to invest in adult dental, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to continue to spend that (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

One quick question without preamble.

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, I ask this minister: What is the point of reversing and undoing the gains that were made by the new Adult Dental Program by creating yet another generation of people desperately in need of dental care?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, we brought in this program in response to the fact that absolutely nothing had been done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: That is the reason that we brought in the program, Mr. Speaker. We put into place something that can help thousands of people in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, and it has helped them. It will continue to help them, Mr. Speaker. That is more than I can say for people on that side of the House who did not even bother to include it in a platform when they were…

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

When the Speaker stands, the House should be silent. If it reoccurs, I will name the members who did not obey.

For the rest of the day we will deal with Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

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

WHEREAS there has been an agreement between the Federation of Newfoundland Indians and the Government of Canada to recognize the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band; and

WHEREAS persons submitted applications, with required documents, for registration in the Band up to the application deadline of November 30, 2012; and

WHEREAS the reported number of applications received by the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band is in excess of 100,000; and

WHEREAS the number of applicants now registered as members is approximately 22,000; and

WHEREAS the agreement between the Federation of Newfoundland Indians and the Government of Canada for recognition of the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band is scheduled to end on March 31, 2013; and

WHEREAS the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Band Chief has requested, but has not received, an extension to the agreement to process the remaining applications; and

WHEREAS to date there is no decision on how to deal with the remaining applications;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to work with the Newfoundland Federation of Indians and the Government of Canada to provide a fair and equal review of all our applications.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, the deadline is fast approaching and the number of petitions is accelerating. They are coming in on a daily basis. People are absolutely really, really concerned that their application is not going to be processed. They have set up a Web site for the people. More than 5,000 people have already signed up on a Facebook Web site in the last couple of weeks.

Mr. Speaker, this is an issue of fairness. It is an issue of fairness. If similarly situated people who have applied for a potential government benefit within the required deadline, for them to receive fairness their application must be processed. This is not saying these people are absolutely entitled but clearly many of them are, maybe the vast majority of them are, but until their applications are processed they will have no way of knowing if they are entitled to recognition as part of this band.

Mr. Speaker, as you can see if only 22,000 have been registered and there are in excess of 100,000, that means there are nearly 80,000 more people who need to have their applications processed. It would be a simple matter for the House of Assembly to impress on the provincial government to insist that the federal government – and this would be a good time with a federal by-election for the only seat held in the House of Commons by the governing party. It would be a good time, Mr. Speaker, for our House of Assembly to impress on our government of the importance and urgency to deal with this matter.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

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

WHEREAS the process of slickwater hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, injects hazardous chemicals into rock formations to extract oil, and is polluting groundwater and air across North America; and

WHEREAS the Government of Canada has commissioned an assessment of the potential environmental impacts of shale oil and gas extraction in Canada, including fracking; and

WHEREAS Quebec, Nova Scotia, and a number of US states have halted fracking, and others are introducing regulations specific to fracking; and

WHEREAS it is incumbent upon the provincial government to ensure that our natural environment is protected from harmful industrial processes.

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge government to impose a moratorium on slickwater fracking until it develops comprehensive regulations and ensures that each proposed project undergoes a conclusive environmental assessment to determine whether it is safe for the environment and the integrity of water supplies and to human health.

As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, again today we are talking about an environmental issue. We were talking earlier about Earth Day and we were talking about the Earth Hour, and the whole idea behind Earth Hour was about conservation and about our environmental awareness. Well, Mr. Speaker, these people who signed this petition are using their voices to talk about that, talk about their environment, because they are inherently worried about it – and so they should be, under a process such as fracking, until proper regulations are developed.

That is all they are asking for, proper regulations, and the guards and the protections that this government can give at its best initiative and its best ability so that these people are going to have that insurance of good, clean water, that they are going to have the security of knowing that their environment is 100 per cent safe, and that there are not going to be any repercussions to industrial development on the shores of their Province.

Mr. Speaker, this petition comes from little places that some of us have not visited, probably pristine areas when it comes to tourism, which is another good reason why we should be guarding this: Stephenville, Port au Port, Fox Island River, Aguathuna, Campbells River, Boswarlos, Port au Port again – this is coming from all over the place – Stephenville Crossing, and Kippens. We have a number of communities here.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: (Inaudible) Mr. Speaker, I will state –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: – for the Official Opposition that we are not against fracking, only a dangerous form of fracking that is known as slickwater. We need to see an in-depth study done of this, and until these people see that the proper studies have been done, Mr. Speaker, there is no reason why we should rush into it with undue care and attention.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

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

WHEREAS transgendered people face high risk of discrimination, violence, underemployment, and lack of access to housing and other services; and

WHEREAS a recent EGALE Canada survey found that 90 per cent of transgender youth hear transphobic comments regularly from other students and one-quarter hear such comments from teachers; and

WHEREAS the Public Health Agency of Canada reports that nearly half of trans youth seriously considered suicide and one-fifth attempted it in the previous year; and

WHEREAS all individuals should have equal opportunity to live their lives and meet their needs without being hindered or prevented by discriminatory practices based on gender identity or gender expression;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge government to amend the Human Rights Act to include gender identity and gender expression in the list of prohibitive grounds of discrimination.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to state once again that last night we saw a wonderful amendment to the Human Rights Code in Canada. The amendment was supported by all three parties. It was not a partisan ploy. In fact, there is a growing realization not only in Canada but around the world that this is the right thing to do. It is the right thing to do to explicitly state gender identity in human rights legislation.

Our own Human Rights Commission, the Human Rights Commission of Newfoundland and Labrador, has asked this government to amend our Human Rights Code to include gender expression and gender identity. I am not sure why this government is dragging its feet. There is no need to. It costs no money. It does not take rights away from anyone else. As a matter of fact, it updates our Human Rights Code and makes it in-line with what is happening around the world, Mr. Speaker – not even just in Canada, but around the world.

It is time to do it, and I have every confidence that this Minister of Justice will want to do the right thing. Let us just get it done. There is no valid reason now not to proceed. I would happily join you. Our party would happily join you. I am sure the Liberals will happily join you in supporting such an amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

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

WHEREAS Newfoundland and Labrador currently has the highest unemployment rate in Canada; and

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador anticipate a labour shortage of 70,000 people by 2020; and

WHEREAS eliminating the career practitioner knowledge base is contrary to attaching people to the labour market; and –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. PARSONS: WHEREAS Employment Assistance Services agencies are grassroots hubs in communities, providing services like skills development, resume development, interview skills, facilitating attachment to the labour market and the community; and

WHEREAS EAS agencies help individuals with complex needs find and maintain employment in communities throughout the Province; and

WHEREAS EAS agencies have been serving thousands of people for years, building expertise and rapport; and

WHEREAS loading the workload of 226 employees onto 139 Advanced Education and Skills employees would be an overwhelming expectation, increasing staff turnover and thus decreasing rapport with clients; and

WHEREAS EAS spending comes from the EI fund, built by workers to help them when and where they need it most; and

WHEREAS moving services away from people who lack the means to travel long distances is not in line with the Labour Market Development Agreement's principle of citizen-centred service;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to reverse the decision to cut funding to EAS agencies in the Province.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, this is one I have entered on a number of occasions. I am going to continue entering it at every opportunity I get.

This one just happens to be signed by people from Mount Pearl, Paradise, Portugal Cove, but I am pretty sure I have some on the way from the District of Bonavista South. I know the Member for Bonavista South was in the newspaper talking about how great this was that we were going to be making this move and how it is a good move. I am just wondering if he has communicated that to the people who are losing their jobs and to the people who will not have access to these services in the future. I put that there.

I hope he is aware of that when he does that, or the Premier who stood up today and applauded the move basically and said it was a great thing, which sounded something like the press release that was put out spinning this off as if it was rainbows and a great move. When the fact is we have over 200 jobs being cut here with these people providing services for a labour shortage in this Province that is here right now.

I have this one today. I am going to have another one hopefully next week. I appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

WHEREAS the Western School District is considering a multi-year plan to close Bayview Regional Collegiate at St. Lunaire – Griquet in June 2013; and

WHEREAS it has been proven from students who have graduated from Bayview Regional Collegiate, they have excelled in their studies to prepare them for the move ahead and achieve their career choices; and

WHEREAS teachers and staff at Bayview Regional Collegiate are qualified and continue to provide a strong academic program with a full curriculum to the students attending; and

WHEREAS Bayview Regional Collegiate has developed a playground, library, drama club, Kids Eat Smart Lunch Program, school council and other activities with exceptional community support; and

WHEREAS Bayview Regional Collegiate housed a K to 12 school in the past with 200-plus students who have access to science lab, cafeteria, art room, computer lab, gymnasium and extracurricular activities; and

WHEREAS the parents, business operators, social groups, concerned citizens and students of the municipality of St. Lunaire – Griquet request to rescind this proposal;

Since Bayview Regional Collegiate has met and exceeded all aspects set forth for a viable school, we the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to ensure that the Western School District is provided sufficient funding to keep Bayview Regional Collegiate at St. Lunaire – Griquet open.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that this decision was made back in 2008 without a plan and without fully analyzing and looking at the overall situation of what the impact would be on the community, on the children and their education. Their education is going to be compromised now, and I say that to all hon. members in the House, because the situation now is looking at in lieu of the eight communities and the distance, it is adding two buses for about fifty to sixty students.

It has a stable population. That area has experienced a population growth, overall. Looking at doing that, it is going to be more costly to the taxpayers by adding multiple buses and sending all these students to St. Anthony versus keeping a K to 9 school at Truman Edison Memorial.

It is really these types of decisions when they are made so far out without any flexibility of looking at revisiting these decisions that are having an overall impact on a community, on a region, on our future leaders, our children and our students. It is very disappointing when the school district is making such statements in the media that the population is declining because that is simply not the case.

This is a stable population here, a student population as well, and this is something that is very, very important to the people in the region of my district, and it is very upsetting to see how districts operate such autocratic practices.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, in this petition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Order 2, Committee of Supply. I move, seconded by the Minister of Transportation and Works, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 62, Respecting the Granting of Interim Supply to Her Majesty.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Littlejohn): Order, please!

We are ready to resume debate on resolution and Bill 62 Respecting the Granting of Interim Supply to Her Majesty.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

It is indeed a pleasure to get up here today, as I always say when I get up, to represent the District of Cape St. Francis – the beautiful District of Cape St. Francis.

Mr. Chair, as most people know, Interim Supply gives you an opportunity to get up and, because it is a money bill, we can speak on whatever we feel we want to speak on in this House. I am going to take a little bit of time in the first of my speech today and then I am going to get into Interim Supply.

First of all, I would like to send my condolences to the Member for Lewisporte. I would just like to say to him that I had the opportunity to go to Lewisporte for the service. You are to be commended, and your family members, on the great service and the tribute that you paid to Maxine. It really showed what her life was all about, and it really shows – I know your hearts and everything will be there for the rest of your lives also. My condolences go to you and your family.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Mr. Chair, the last number of months has been pretty difficult in my household also. I was going to do a member's statement, but today is an opportunity that I can get up, and I really want to say thank you. It is not one side of the House or the other side of the House; I have to thank everybody in this House for the support they have shown me in the last number of months. No matter if it was a handshake, an e-mail, a visit to the funeral home, or to come down to the service, I really appreciate everyone's support in this House. It really means a lot. It meant a lot to my family, and it meant a lot to me. I really appreciate it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: One of my brothers joked with me. He said: Kev, you must be a whole lot nicer in the House of Assembly than you were on the ice. I don't know what he was talking about. Anyway, like I said, I really appreciate it.

In particular, I really have to mention someone today, and it is the Premier. A little while ago, when she realized that my mother was sick, and stuff like that, she really gave me the leeway to do what I wanted to do to support her. She said to me: Kevin, family is so important.

It is a testament of her, and I think a lot of people in this Province do not see our Premier like we see her every day. She is a wonderful lady, a wonderful person, and she realizes the importance of family.

We are a family in here – I consider it a family, anyway – and I really have to say the support that she gave me over the last number of months has been unbelievable. Again, I want to thank her for the wonderful statement that she did on my father here in the House of Assembly. I have had a chance to read it, and I have to say she touched all the bases that I would have touched in a member's statement.

Again, I really want to tell the people of the Province what a wonderful lady she is, and family comes first. That is really so important, to know the way a person acts. I had the opportunity to see her one day with her grandchildren, and you could just see the gleam in her eyes, as any grandmother or any person would have for their grandchildren.

Again, thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Mr. Chair, I take a lot from my father. He was a true gentleman and he respected everyone. I think that is the reason why people respected him. I had a gentleman tell me one day – and I took it as a compliment; most of you might take it as an insult or whatever. He said to me: You are only half the man your father was.

I looked at him and I said: That is not too bad. If I can be half the man that my father was, I think I will be in good shape, and I think the people of Cape St. Francis will be in good shape, because I will do my best, as he did his best, to represent them, and I will continue to do the same.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Mr. Chair, having all of that said, and having all of that over with, I want to speak a little bit about Interim Supply. In the last week or so I have listened in this House, to both sides of the House. On this side of the House, we spoke about all the good things in our districts, all the positive things in our districts. I mean, not everything is positive all the time; we all have issues in our districts.

I listened to the Liberals over across the way talk about their districts, and things that they needed too. I know the Member for Bay of Islands was a very happy man yesterday, a big smile on his face with the announcement of monies going out to the hospital, but we have been spending money in all the districts. I know the former member there – I was looking at some of the announcements, just going and doing the Google thing, like the Strait of Belle Isle, different announcements in their district - I know he thanked the hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs for the new fire truck they recently got out there.

There are a lot of good things that are happening in all of our districts. The Member for Cartwright – I think there were two new schools built in your district and also another one on the way. The Member for Burgeo – La Poile – your father was here in the House and he was talking about that dialysis machine every single day, and I am sure that he is very happy that we did the investment that we did.

We have made investments all over this Province. We can say that you want money for this and money for that, but there is only so much money out there. We are delivering. Since 2003 – and I know that before 2003 the financial situation of this Province probably was not what it is today, but we have done our best and we have spread it out. I have a thing there from the schools. If you look, there is a new school in St. Anthony, three in the hon. members that I just mentioned, dialysis machines, fire trucks, you name it; we spent it all over the Province.

I look at the Third Party and sometimes I just shake my head, because the wishes and what they are looking for are unbelievable. Give us a cost of half the stuff you are going to be – my father always had a saying. He used to say: Kev, you cannot spend $500 if you only make $400.

Well, we cannot spend $15 billion if we only have $6 billion coming in. We have to be realistic with the things we are doing.

When it comes to the Third Party, really, really – I mean, we all want to see - I would like to see every senior in this Province live in a beautiful home. I would love to see every person who is sick in hospital have a beautiful bed, have the best care that we could possibly give. We are doing our best with what we have. We have to be realistic with our wishes.

The Third Party – the oil companies. They are down on oil companies all the time. Do you know something? Thirty per cent of our revenue is coming from the oil industry to do what we want to do, to help the people of this Province for education, for health care, you name it. That is where our money is coming from. I really do not think you guys see that at all. It is so important. It is almost like an anti-development-type party.

Mr. Chair, I have to say, the Member for Kilbride stood up the other day and he talked a little bit about Muskrat Falls. We all talked about Muskrat Falls in the last debate. He just basically stood up and gave us a common sense thing: Listen, we are burning oil out in Holyrood and we are spending for that oil out in Holyrood. Why not stop burning that oil and use our money to build a clean, clean, clean, environmentally friendly thing that we can produce energy for our Province? What common sense. That is all.

I do not understand why they cannot get the common sense part of it. Here is a party that was environmentally friendly; everything is about the environment. They are willing to burn oil out in Holyrood. Where is it? I really do not understand what they are into.

Mr. Chair, like I said, we have all spoken in this House about positive things that are happening in the House. I listened to the Minister of Tourism the other day, and it is an investment. What this government is about is making smart investments. We have invested in the tourism industry through our ads and through different things, to now, that it has gone to a $1 billion industry.

Just a few stats that he gave the other day, he said about 15,000 employees, 300 new businesses, businesses involved in tourism in this Province. It is a huge industry. He also said by 2020 he is hoping to see this industry grow to $1.6 billion. That is huge.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. K. PARSONS: One billion and six hundred million dollars is huge. What an investment this government is making.

I also listened the other day to my friend and colleague from Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune. She talked about our investments in aquaculture. Everybody knows the fishery was big time in my family. I know when the moratorium came in there were a lot of things happening. She had fish plants close down in her area. People did not know what to do.

Today, there are 1,000 people working just in that alone, the aquaculture industry. The spin-offs; she talked about all the new homes being built in her area. Those are investments that this government has made that are paying off, and we are going to continue to make these investments.

Just yesterday it amazed me because it was only on the fourth page of The Telegram; if one word had been changed it would have been on the front page: our wait times in our hospitals and investments that we are making. Our wait times are among the best in Canada – the best in Canada.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Those are investments we are making as a government. We have to be realistic. We would love to be in the bubble that some people think they should be in. Let me tell you something: the investments this government is making over the last number of years are paying off, and they are paying off big time for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I only have a few seconds left. Ten minutes go way too fast. There are huge investments made in my district over the last number of years: new school, new road, and new arena. These investments are paying off, too, because people are moving to my district. People are enjoying the new road. I talked to a lady who is twenty-eight years in education; she said she never saw anything like the investments this government is making in education.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the Member for Cape St. Francis for the tribute to his dad, and to the member for his wife also. We are all here and we are all a little brotherhood when it comes to it. We all get affected. Great job. It is a great tribute to your dad and it is well deserved.

Mr. Chair, I am just going to stand here and have a few words today about the hospital in Corner Brook.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: I know the crowd over there, Sir, and I remember when Pete Soucy did a little skit on someone on one of his shows, like someone hauling up his shoulder. That is what it sounds like over there when someone stands up. They are almost like puppets: they have to be told when to put their hands up and when to clap, Mr. Chair, because there is an announcement made.

Let us look at behind the hospital announcement in Corner Brook, Mr. Chair. Let us go back at it. In 2007, the announcement was first made about the hospital, the size of the hospital, the cost that it was going to be, and the number of people who were going to be able to be in the acute care beds at the hospital – back in 2007.

Then it was re-announced back in 2011 during the provincial election that the construction would start in 2012, which obviously never happened. That was during the election time of 2011 when the Minister of Natural Resources, the Member for Humber East, and the Member for Humber West were out there touting that the construction of the new hospital would start in 2012. Everybody was happy. So was I, but obviously that did not happen.

Here we are now and we have another announcement. Guess what the announcement is? Construction may begin in 2015 – may begin in 2015, Mr. Chair.

Once again, here I am as a person in the Corner Brook area, a person of the Bay of Islands, after the announcement was made in 2007, which did not follow through, the announcement was made in 2011 that construction was starting in 2012, it did not come through. They made another announcement yesterday saying they may start in 2015. So I am supposed to be happy? I am supposed to be happy that there is another commitment made without any guarantees that the hospital is going to start?

Just the start of it alone, Mr. Chair, the amount of times that it was announced and the amount of times they said what work was already done on the facility would make someone skeptical, would make anybody skeptical. When the Minister of Health goes: Oh, what a great announcement. What is the announcement? That it is delayed now going on eight or nine years before we are going to start the construction. Now all of a sudden I am supposed to be jumping up with glee about the hospital?

Mr. Chair, I was in here in the Estimates. The only person on the government side, the only person who was upfront with me about the hospital in Corner Brook was the Minister of Environment and Conservation, who is the Minister of Transportation and Works. When everybody was saying how the design was done back in 2011, how the construction was going to start in 2012, I sat here in the Estimates with the Minister of Transportation and Works at the time, the Minister of Environment and Conservation now, and I asked him straight up. He went and said straight up that it is in the pre-design stage. There is no design done.

A lot of other members opposite were telling me I did not know what I was talking about. The only minister at the time who was upfront was the Minister of Environment and Conservation. Yesterday I thanked him because he was the only one who was being forthright on the hospital in Corner Brook. I recognized that yesterday and I want to recognize that publicly.

When I was out saying the design was not done, when I was told I did not know what I was talking about, when I was told: oh, you are foolish, you do not know what you are talking about, the Minister of Transportation and Works at the time confirmed it and stood up and said no, the design work was not done. That was back in 2011.

Guess what, Mr. Chair? The big announcement made in Corner Brook yesterday, guess what? To continue on with the design work which I was told two years ago was done, a year-and-a-half ago. They were up saying how the design work is already done. Construction was supposed to have started in 2012 and all the design work was done.

Now I have to jump up with glee because all of a sudden they are making an announcement. They told the people on the West Coast it was done for the longest time. That was never done. That was not done. The only one who was upfront was the Minister of Transportation and Works at the time who told me it is in the pre-design stage. I just want to recognize that for the minister.

Mr. Chair, there is another part about this hospital now that has to come through. We can take it all aside; we just have to look at the facts. You are always wondering why I am asking questions about, is the hospital being cut?

I challenge anybody to look at The Western Star where the Minister of Natural Resources made a comment yesterday. If anybody in this House or anybody in this Province wants to know why I am raising this issue, look at his comment. When the long-term care facility was being built in Corner Brook, the original design was 279. They scaled it back to 215. The last wing is still not open. So we are down to 200 beds.

What did the minister say yesterday? We made a mistake with the long-term care facility. We made a mistake, let's not make the same mistake. I have been saying that for the longest while. If the Minister of Natural Resources misquoted in The Western Star, correct it, because I am just going on the quote that they quoted you in The Western Star. That is what I am going on.

I have been saying it for the longest while, is that when the big announcement with the long-term care facility was 279 beds and you brought it down, there is going to be a need in the long-term care facility right away before it is even cut back. Before it is even built it is going to be filled. There is going to be a waitlist; but, no, I did not know what I was talking about. Going back years ago, I did not know what I was talking about.

Once again, I had the wrong information, but I am glad the Minister of Natural Resources confirmed everything I have been saying for a long while, that when it was cut back it was a mistake. It was a mistake. The mistake said there were not enough long-term care beds. That is why I am saying on this hospital, that when the hospital is built for a certain size, when the hospital is built for a certain region, Mr. Chair, when it is built for a certain region it should be adequate. We should not have to go back and look at this.

When I asked a question today in the House about the number of acute care beds, it could not be answered. If you look at the press release that was sent out yesterday, look at the press release that was sent out, there are 260 beds, 100 long-term care –

MS SULLIVAN: A point of order, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: A point of order, the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Chair, he just referenced the fact that he, the Member for Bay of Islands, asked a question around the number of acute care beds and that could not be answered. I very clearly answered in terms of the number of acute care beds.

CHAIR: There is no point of order. Thank you.

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: I know it is not a point of order. I was hoping the minister was going to be wrong, because what she said today, there is a decrease in acute care beds. If this proposal goes ahead there will be a decrease in acute care beds.

Now, Mr. Chair, I will tell you something now. With the decrease of acute care beds in Corner Brook, I want the minister or the Minister of Natural Resources to go out and tell the people who I have been speaking to today – they have people out in the hallways for the last two or three days, people down in emergency who cannot get a bed – that: by the way, when we build your new hospital, we are going to have a decrease in acute care beds.


If I am wrong, I challenge anybody to stand up, because the math is there. If there are 260 beds and you are taking 100, as the Minister of Finance said yesterday and the Minister of Health said today, for long-term – it should have been built with the facility – we are down right now to 160 beds; there is a decrease of fifteen acute care beds. There should be an increase. There should be an increase of acute care beds.

I am just saying what the facts are and people can stand up – and I even called the hospital today. I called and got the numbers. I called today out to Western Health before I came into this House. I called over and got the numbers. I actually made the call; I said, give me a breakdown of the number of the beds.

I can tell the people of Corner Brook that if the facts are coming through here that the ministers themselves and the Premier and the people opposite are saying, there is a decrease of acute care beds. Those are just the facts.

Instead of decreasing the acute care beds, we should increase it. We need the increase because there are people out there now – even with the 199 beds – in the hallways. I am sure I will be speaking again about the hospital. I just want to thank you for the opportunity.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would just like to say, Mr. Chair, that it is certainly an honour to rise today and speak to Interim Supply. I would like to welcome everybody back to the House. I am glad to be here, obviously.

Mr. Chair, I will start off by reading out a few notes that I have made over across some of the debate here. We listened to our hon. Minister of Finance – who has done a great job up to this point – talk about some facts about where we have come from. When you look at 2001 versus 2012, Mr. Chair, we went from $1.2 billion to $2.9 billion in health care investments, a 142 per cent increase.

In terms of education alone between those two dates, Mr. Chair, we have had a 71 per cent increase from $700 million to $1.2 billion. That is certainly a government that looks at the priorities for the people and does what is needed in order to foster education and good health care in this Province and make sure that people are looked after, Mr. Chair.

We have seen our investment in MUN, Mr. Chair, tripled up to $380 million. That is a focus on our youth: the next generation, the next leaders of our Province. Infrastructure – roads, our hospitals, our schools – we have seen increase 270 per cent while this government has been here.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. RUSSELL: Two hundred and seventy per cent. That is no small feat. That talks about a commitment to the Province, it talks about the commitment to the crumbling infrastructure that we inherited when we took over government, Mr. Chair. It has not been easy.

We have all heard the Minister of Finance get up here in this hon. House. He has talked about the $500 million in raises that we gave to the public servants. We have talked about the money that we did not get through equalization and through the Atlantic Accord, another $500 million. We have talked about Terra Nova and White Rose going down for long-term maintenance. It cost us another $500 million. Mr. Chair, all that time we still managed to reduce our debt by 25 per cent with the knowledge of that $1.5 billion of issues that we are going to have with our revenue streams.

I would like to talk about these efficiencies that we are all talking about that we need to find. We look out to consultants; we look to our own officials who are experts in their own fields. We recognize – and the people from across the way have added their comments there; they recognize we do have duplication of services, yet they still out of one side of their mouth talk about us spending, overspending; sometimes we have heard words such as mismanagement. We have even heard the word fraudulent put in here, Mr. Chair. This is what it takes in order for good governance to occur. We have to be stewards of the people and stewards for the Province, Mr. Chair.

We heard our Minister of Finance get up and mention housing starts. We have had 3,880 new houses put up, Mr. Chair, simply because there is a reason to be here. We have prosperity. We have megaprojects. We have a reason for people to come home, raise their families here, build their houses here, and enjoy their own prosperity – getting to a place in life, Mr. Chair, if you will, where they are going to have a higher level of disposable income to increase the quality of life for themselves and their families, and at the same time be able to shoot for the stars, dream a little, and make something more of their lives. It is a wonderful time here, Mr. Chair.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RUSSELL: Absolutely.

We have also heard our Minister of Finance talk about our relationship with the federal government in terms of those transfers that have taken place. We have seen a decrease from 34 per cent down to 10 per cent. We have had acknowledgement of our Province as the have Province, Mr. Chair. We do not need to rely on the feds. We have our own revenue streams; we have our own prosperity right here at home.

We have also heard our Minister of Finance get up and talk about the Third Party in terms of how they just do not see the use of surpluses as a good expenditure towards paying down our debt. How can you not look at the debt situation in our Province and say that when times are good, when revenues are coming in, and when we have that money available to us? We should absolutely be putting that down on our debt, Mr. Chair. It is the responsible thing to do.

During my getting the heads-up that you are going to have your ability to get up here and contribute to the House, contribute to the debate, and give your ten minutes, Mr. Chair, I tasked my office with just putting together a few numbers in relation to what is happening in Labrador in regard to how this government treats Labrador and how government treats the people of the Province when it comes to infrastructure and our investments.

In Budget 2012, I will get into some details about the Trans-Labrador Highway here. It is fabulous if you have driven that road, Mr. Chair; $65.8 million last year just for the Trans-Labrador for Phase I, bringing it to over $250 million since we started. It makes it one of the largest infrastructure projects in the Province's history, no small feat indeed.

Just recently, back in January, we had our minister stand side by side with federal ministers and talk about an additional $85 million for Phases II and III of the Trans-Labrador Highway and talk about the widening and the surfacing of that road. It is a link to the Island for the people of Labrador, connecting us, providing everything from vacationing opportunities, tourism opportunities, and economic development opportunities, and we are certainly going to see a lot more of that in relation to Muskrat Falls.

Mr. Chair, we have continued to put money into our health care. We have had $25.7 million into Lab West for the new health centre there. I could go on and on. I am going to read out a few really quickly. I see my time is running out here. I only have a couple of minutes left.

We have put in over $250,000 to enhance the dialysis services at the Labrador Health Centre in my district, which is a wonderful thing; over $250,000, $275,000 to be exact, for the ambulance road base in Cartwright; and over $100,000 for a pharmacist position for the Captain William Jackman Memorial Hospital in Labrador City. We have put over $400,000 into the Co-Management Board for Torngat Wildlife and Plants and the Joint Fisheries Secretariat.

To go on and on, we put $150,000 into Destination Labrador to support tourism product development in Labrador, Mr. Chair. Anybody who has been up to Labrador can say that it is an untapped resource right now. It is unlimited in terms of what we have to offer people. With the completion of the Trans-Labrador Highway, Mr. Chair, you are going to see a lot more people coming in to see what Labrador has to offer, spending their money, generating some economic stimulus in our communities, a truly wonderful thing.

Also, in tourism, while I am on that topic, we have also put in another $7,500 just in my district alone, into the Lake Melville Tourism Association, to allow them to work towards bettering our product in terms of our local district as well, Mr. Chair.

In terms of providing support to local organizations, Mr. Chair, for the last three years we have put in $50,000 a year to Them Days Magazine. This is an organization that works tirelessly to preserve the culture, the heritage, and the traditions in Labrador through storytelling and through preserving the personalities, if you will, that come from Labrador that have added to the richness of our culture in Labrador.

We have supported individual businesses, Mr. Chair. We have put playgrounds in communities such as in Northwest River, which is also in my district. Mr. Chair, there are just too many here. I have about twenty pages of things I could talk about – about what we have done in terms of supporting the things in my district, Mr. Chair, in terms of Municipal Operating Grants, in terms of working with both Northwest River, with Goose Bay, special assistance grants we have had for Safe Drinking Water Workshops and to do with the fire that we had in Lake Melville, which was a wonderful support as well, Mr. Chair.

We have had improvements to our town hall totalling $1,669,000 also added to that, Mr. Chair, to get things up to par there. We have had help within Goose Bay with the construction of our access road and parking facility of $800,000 and $530,000 respectively, Mr. Chair.

We have certainly also looked out towards the community of Mud Lake by providing $19,000, Mr. Chair, for the incinerator over there because they are geographically challenged in terms of where they are, in terms of having to go by ski-doo in winter and boat in summer, Mr. Chair.

I will just close, seeing that I only have a minute here, Mr. Chair. I want to talk about what we are doing as a government for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. What we are doing is we are prepared. We are ready to take the hard road. We are going to be good stewards of the people and of the Province, Mr. Chair.

We are not going to tell them what they want to hear; we are going to tell them what they need to hear, Mr. Chair. We know that looking for efficiencies and acting on the advice of our consultants and our officials is not going to be popular, but it is the right call and it is the right thing to do. We have to make sure, Mr. Chair, that we are constantly looking out for the people and being responsible as a government.

I would say to the NDP – we hear them talking about spend, spend, spend. They always want us to involve them in all-party committees, Mr. Chair. I would say the NDP should change their name to the NRP, the New Rumpelstiltskin Party, because they simply must have some secret about spinning straw into gold. They talk out of one side of their mouth, calling us fraudulent at times, and out of the other, saying: Do you know what? We just want you to spend, spend, spend, Mr. Chair.

With that, I will end my remarks. Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Burgeo – La Poile.

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

It is a pleasure to stand today to speak to Interim Supply. I have had plenty of opportunity –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Burgeo – La Poile.

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

I am very happy to stand and speak to Interim Supply today. This is a very important bill, something we have been talking about for a number of days now. Hopefully this will not be my last time, but again, I just wanted to talk about something that I had an opportunity to ask questions about in this House today, and that is health care in this Province.

One of the things I just wanted to bring up – because we keep hearing about the money spent on health care: we have put this much money and we have put that much money in. The problem is that none of the members, Mr. Chair, are standing up and speaking about outcomes. The investment is worth nothing if you are not getting the outcomes for the spending that is taking place. We can put all this money in, but if we are not getting results, then it is not worth talking about.

The other thing that really scares me, Mr. Chair, is that this government talks about high investments, but the fact is we know the cheque book is cut. We know that these cheques are going to get smaller now. We know that the amount of investment is getting smaller. If we are getting the worst bang for our buck in terms of health care spending in this country with such a high investment, what kind of investment or what kind of service are we going to get when that money starts to reduce?

I put that question out there. I asked a number of questions today; of course, I did not get very many suitable answers to those very serious questions, so I am going to speak a little bit about that today, some very important issues in this Province. One of them is cystic fibrosis; one of them is the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association, the NLMA, and the press conference that they had today; and one of them is something that fortunately does not affect a large number of people in this Province: that is children dealing with cancer in the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. A. PARSONS: I am going to continue to speak about these issues. I will start off; we hear this terms consultation – consultation. I believe the minister in her response to a question today said that the NLMA released a press release saying that they were happy to collaborate, and I would say, of course they are; they want to collaborate, but they have also been speaking to the media saying that they were not consulted when it came to this latest round of cuts. They were not consulted and now government is going to have to go back and fix the mistake that they made because they were short sighted. They did not listen to the experts.

It is not just with the NLMA; they did not consult the Dental Association, they did not consult the oncologists, they have not consulted CF experts in this Province, and I do not know if they are consulting the patients. I put that out there. It is one thing to talk about consultation; it is another thing to do it. It is not happening and we are seeing some serious results here.

I am going to go to a topic that I asked about today. I think it is very serious, and like I said, thank God we do not have many patients of this nature. I want to talk about youth with cancer. There are only about ten or so in this Province at any given time – maybe a bit higher – thankfully. I think the numbers I have, about half of these children, their parents have insurance coverage, but there are about half whose parents do not have health insurance.

The problem we have is that a lot of these children as they are going through the chemotherapy are starting to get sick; they are suffering nausea. There is a pill out there that could help these children and that pill costs about $20 a day – $20 a day – that would take their nausea away and would allow them to go to school. Right now they are not allowed to have it. Government will not pay for it. Government is not doing what is being done in every other province in this country. They are not listening to the actual experts, the pediatric oncologists of this country.

We have children who cannot go to school because they are too sick to go, because the government will not spend $20 a day on a pill – will not spend $20 a day. We have $400,000 for Muskrat ads and we have $16,000 for the Muskrat party, but we do not have $100 a day for children who have nausea and cannot go to school because they are sick from the chemotherapy. That is shameful, Mr. Chair. I would put that there.

In fact, one of the recommendations coming from the NLPDP is saying: take these steroids, that will do it – but that is not advisable. Many of these parents are resorting to making their children – these children who have been afflicted with this horrible condition – take Gravol. The fact is not only are they sick, then, but they are too drowsy to go to school. It is bad enough suffering from this illness and now they cannot go to school. They want to go to school; they want to be with their friends. Their education is suffering as well.

There is a group out there that government – the minister will not meet with them. I put that out there. I am hoping that we can stop looking at – I have all the names here for the different groups, the ACDR, and there is CADTH and all these different groups. The fact is, it is being done in every single other Province, but we do not do it here.

I would say let us get past the foolishness and let us make sure that we help these children. Let us make sure these children get help. I know we talk about spending and we talk about sustainability, but do you know what? I think we can sustain $100 a day for these children. We seemingly are able to sustain a number of other things that I would think would be cut before that.

I am going to continue on. Again, there are experts in this Province. They are paediatric oncologists, and they are making these recommendations, but we are the only Province that will not listen to them.

I want to just move forward to another health issue I asked questions about today, and that is the NLMA. Now, contrary to what the minister said, contrary to that, the NLMA is actually saying – these doctors are saying - we were not consulted. We are concerned about the cuts. We need to work together here to make sure we are getting proper coverage, but we are not doing that. We are making these cuts without going to the people.

It is the same thing we did with the dentists. We put in a great dental plan and then after a year we cannot sustain it, because they did not talk to the people doing the work. They did not talk to the people. A year after that, these people cannot get the work.

There was a very serious question asked today about a gentleman out in Badger. This person cannot get the treatment he wants. It is absolutely amazing, and I know people – this is not a political thing. This is a life and death thing. This is somebody who cannot get treatment because they are too short-sighted to make the right decisions.

I get frustrated at this, Mr. Chair. I get frustrated because we have to do the right thing. It is not about politics. It is about talking to the people who do the work. Consult with them. Let's work together with the amount of money we have and the issues we have and do the right thing; but, no, we go ahead.

I will just go back to the NLMA. We made this cut today. Then it turns out that the department is actually acknowledging, yes, because we rushed this through we missed stuff. Now, this is a group who asked to meet in January. They asked to meet in January but they were turned down. They were going to have a press conference yesterday. They were going to have that conference.

Once the government heard about that, once the department heard about that, they said, okay, we are going to meet with you, and they met today. They could have had this meeting in January and made the right decision, but no, we are going to go ahead and do what we have to do. Again, the wrong decision was made here. We are talking about fee code cuts. Let's talk to the doctors, let's talk to the experts and make sure we are making the right decisions here.

This is what they call – and this is coming from the doctors – a unilateral decision. Now, I am hoping we can avoid this. I know the NLMA will collaborate with government because they want to collaborate with government. They have to collaborate with government. They want to make sure that the right thing is done here. Again, there are a lot of people out there – people who have lupus are going to have issues because of this decision.

We will go back to the dental plan talking about people who have emergency situations, they have to get authorizations filled out now for emergency situations. There is no common sense applied here, none. It is not applied. We are not doing the right thing.

My time is starting to run out. I want to get this in, in case this is my last opportunity to speak to it. Cystic fibrosis, CF, this is something we hear quite a bit about. I have done my own research and met with some people. It is truly hard to understand the routine that CF patients and families have to go through with this life-altering affliction. The fact is they have to go through a two-hour routine just about every day to make sure that they can function.

Take the young gentleman I met with, someone who is working, going to school, and trying to contribute. He is doing it in spite of this affliction. He cannot get the proper medication because the NLPDP is too stubborn and inflexible, and will not listen to the CF experts.

I will just put this out there. It is the most common, fatal, genetic disease affecting Canadians. I think I have a number there. We only have about seventy people in this Province with CF, about seventy people. Now, the fact is they will cover tobramycin, which if you ask anybody with CF it is inconvenient. It is not the right decision. It is not the right treatment. They will not cover the TOBI Podhaler, which is more expensive, but it gives them a greater quality of life.

They will only cover Cayston, which is just the same amount of convenience but is actually more expensive. They will do that when their lungs start to fail and they have been in the hospital and cost us $15,000 in hospital stays. They do not want to be in a hospital. They want to have a quality of life but are not getting it because of inflexibility and rigidness in the drug program. We need to work with these groups and make it happen.

I am going to take my seat now. I am hoping somebody can enlighten me as to if I am wrong here. If not, maybe I will get another opportunity to speak to it again after.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, after yesterday in Corner Brook, it is obviously very exciting for me to stand in my place as the Member of the House of Assembly for Humber East, which takes in the eastern part of Corner Brook, and to say how pleased I am and express my gratitude to Premier Dunderdale and to my colleagues on this side of the House for the decision to proceed with not only a new hospital in Corner Brook, but four other buildings as well that will make up a hospital campus. That will consist of an acute care bed facility. It will also consist of a long-term care facility. The third building is going to be a shared administration and out-patient clinic building. There is also going to be a shared central service building for food services, laundry supply, and management.

There is also going to be, and I heard a lot of very good things about this, a forty-eight bed hostel so that people from outside Corner Brook, patients and their families, can have a place to stay when they come in, which recognizes the fact that this is a regional hospital. People from the whole West Coast and people from other parts of the Province, of course, will come into the city and some will have difficulty finding a place to stay. This will certainly help there. Also, there are a lot of medical residents, medical people, who come and need a place to stay as well while they get their training and while they serve.

Mr. Chair, the Minister of Health also was present and announced that this project was now back on track and that the project would have an estimated cost of between $500 million and $600 million. Of course, this is a large and expensive project, but it is a regional hospital, it is greatly needed, and the long-term care beds are very much needed as well, which was a bit of a surprise.

It might be helpful to go back and I guess, with all of us, our political history starts with the day we entered public life. I remember when I decided to enter public life. I remember going on a tour of the long-term care homes that were in the City of Corner Brook at the time with then Premier Wells, and then Premier Williams. I remember it was at that point that there was an announcement that it would be a commitment of our party to build a new long-term care home in the City of Corner Brook.

At the time, there were a number of issues that were being discussed. There was a need for the redevelopment of what was then known as the Herdman High School. There was a need for an MRI machine. There was a need for a long-term care facility. I remember the demand and the people wanted these; the people wanted the best health care. So, we went to work after we got elected.

The MRI machine was the first thing done; that was put in. Of course, before the MRI could go in, there had been no planning for any space for that machine so we had to first fix up some additional space at the hospital so that machine could go there. The machine was finally put there and then they doubled the number of hours. First of all, you could only go during the day and then they doubled it so you could then go at night as well.

The school was redeveloped and it was redeveloped with the double gym, the name was changed, and everything has worked out very well there. We are now proceeding with the next step, which is the new junior high school. The former Regina building will be redeveloped into the new junior high school and then after that, there will be other schools in accordance with the plan that the western school board has come up with for the Corner Brook area.

The long-term care facility, this very, very important facility – and I asked the question at the time. I said: Why do people want a long-term care facility, why not a new hospital? This was back in 2003. I was told it was because acute care beds in a hospital were being taken up by people who had been medically discharged. They did not need acute care services any more, but they needed a place to go. They needed a long-term care bed to go. They needed support in the community such as home care, or they would go to a personal care home, if that level of care were available.

It was important to build the long-term care facility and it was built. As it was designed and as it was being built, there were four protective care units which were very, very successful. If there is one thing that there has been nothing but good news about is the protective care units because of the family atmosphere it still provides.

I have heard nothing but good things of people who have gone into these protective care units. I have heard people say things like we have mom back, because living in that residential thing with friends had people who formerly may have sat in a hospital room somewhere and did nothing but sit. This type of care that is made available in the protective care units I think is much more suitable for people in long-term care.

Then you needed a nursing home for those who have severe mental incapacity. While it was being designed and while it was built, there was a letter to the editor written I think by someone who worked in Western Health. It said: You are not putting enough beds there. We looked at it and we said: With the money for planning, we hire all these experts and we hire on these consultants, surely, we got it right in terms of the numbers that were needed.

The government took a look at it, and based on that it was decided that there was need for another floor. Then there had to be a redesign done and that cost more money. That cost the taxpayers more money to make sure that we had enough.

We learned a valuable lesson from that. The total cost of that building I think was around $70 million – $65 million to $70 million, and we had to make that change. The hon. Member for Bay of Islands talks about the mistake we made, but then he puts a spin on it. The reality was it was because of the letter to the editor written I think by a young woman who worked with the health care system and said that there were not enough beds there.

Thank God, we looked at it and we rectified the mistake and redesigned the building to put in an additional floor, which turns out to be well needed. If a mistake like that was made with a $500 million, $600 million hospital, which can also cost much more than that, can you imagine the cost of rectifying that.

We had to be very, very careful with this system. That is why it was necessary to have a second set of eyes look on this. That is why it was necessary to get Stantec to come in and say: Are we doing this right? This is a huge project; it is the biggest project that we have undertaken as a government. We had to make sure we are getting it right.

What we found out as a result of this report, much to my surprise, was that 25 per cent of the acute care beds in Western Memorial Hospital in Corner Brook were again being taken up by people who did not need acute care. They were taking up the acute care beds, but they needed to go to long-term care facilities; the long-term care facilities are full, in spite of the fact that in the Corner Brook facility there were forty beds available in the protective care units – there was four of those with ten each – and then I think there were 236 in the nursing home itself.

Now there are fourteen extra beds; there was some space in the building that had been allocated to Memorial University of Corner Brook and they wanted to do research on aging. There was an agreement to allow them to have one wing or part of one wing, but it was always subject to: if we needed the beds we would get it back.

The beds have been returned from Memorial and money was put in the Budget this year to enable that wing to be developed so there are fourteen beds. The contract was let a couple of months ago and we expect that the work will be done for those fourteen beds in June. I know they are doing the work right now.

That is 200 and what, 290-odd beds; 236, plus forty, plus fourteen. That is a lot of beds. In spite of all that, we have now found, as a result of having Stantec come in – they said, hey, you still need more. I am grateful that the government has recognized that. The government has now agreed to build a facility on the site of the new hospital in Corner Brook that will contain an extra 100 beds for long-term care. They are very, very well needed. Thank God we had the second look; thank God we got these consultants to come in and to make sure we are doing it right.

Mr. Chair, I see I am now running out of time. I hope to have an opportunity in the debates that are going to follow this debate on Interim Supply; maybe in the Budget debate I will get to talk again and then we can continue this discussion. I certainly want to address some more of the misinformation that the hon. Member for Bay of Islands has been putting out.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

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

I am very pleased to have the opportunity to stand again during the discussion of Bill 62, our Interim Supply legislation that will allow government to continue before the new Budget is in place and we have new money to approve for spending.

It is an interesting time here in this Province, Mr. Chair, a time when – after years of making money from the oil industry, after years of a government that has taken in billions of dollars because of the production of oil – we have a government telling us we have a fiscal crisis, that we have to lay off people, that programs have to be affected, that we have to tighten the belt, and that we have to be scared.

Mr. Chair, it really causes us to look at this government and wonder: how did they get us to where we are? How could they after these years of being in government, since 2003? Within a very short time after that, the money from the production of oil started pouring into this government and here they are now, ten years later, telling us we are in a crisis.

I have looked at this, Mr. Chair, and have tried to figure out what is at the bottom of all this. The thing that strikes me, the thing that I have been talking about, the thing that I have been mentioning and that I do not stop talking about, is what I think is at the bottom of all of it: that this government does not do long-term planning. This government does not have a vision, or its vision is such a tunnel vision that they have managed to get us to where we are.

It seems to me, Mr. Chair, that this government has had one thing in their head and one thing only: to depend on huge, natural resource development projects to earn money for them and that they could sit back, rake in the money, and not have to do planning for the future. They are finding out now that is not the way it works, that if that is the way they are going, then we are in trouble.

This government, Mr. Chair, has a boom-and-bust mentality. Everything about them is boom and bust. For example, we look at the Muskrat Falls Project. They love to talk about the employment that is going to be produced by the Muskrat Falls Project. What they continually refuse to say, and this is their spin – they talk about us having spin. Boy, I am telling you, if there is anybody who can teach spin, it is this government. Their spin is to talk about the employment and not point out that is only during the construction period that we have those jobs. When Muskrat Falls is in place, there will be only eighty-seven permanent jobs. They forget about that. They talk about the construction period only.

It is the same thing with the oil and gas field, Mr. Chair, the oil and gas industry. We have a good moment coming right now where there is going to be work out at Bull Arm, where there is work out at Bull Arm, where we will have jobs from that industry as well during a construction period.

It is proven, Mr. Chair, and the proof is out there, the work has been done – it is part of the work of the federal government, if you look up federal statistics under federal government – that the industry in Newfoundland that creates the least number of permanent jobs is the oil and gas industry. The least number of permanent jobs is the oil and gas industry, but this government will talk about employment during a construction phase, Mr. Chair.

It is the same way with Long Harbour. We have lots of jobs happening out in Long Harbour, but once the construction – and this is not, of course, just like all of the other stuff. It is not stuff that has happened because of this government planning. It has happened because of industry doing what they are doing.

The jobs out in Long Harbour, while those jobs are happening during the construction phase, lots of jobs, but then when it comes down to the construction phase being over, a small number of jobs. This is what they fail to say. They do not want to point out, Mr. Chair, they do not want to point out to the people –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, I appreciate it.

They do not want to point out to the people of this Province that we still have over 13 per cent unemployment. The people of the Province do not need to be told that. They do not need to be told it because they know the people who are unemployed.

If you live in the Northeastern section of the Avalon Peninsula it is not over 13 per cent, but you live in other parts of Newfoundland and Labrador and that average of over 13 per cent, Mr. Chair, becomes concentrated in some areas where it can be up to 60 per cent. Our average is over 13 per cent. They do not want to talk about that.

They do not want to talk about the fact that they as a government do not understand that one of their primary jobs is job creation; to facilitate job creation, permanent jobs. They are concentrating on the industry. The industry does their work. The corporations do their work. Their main job is to –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Chair, I really appreciate that.

Their main job is to make money. The oil industry is out in our offshore, Mr. Chair, in order to make money. They are not there because they want to create jobs for Newfoundland and Labrador. We benefit from the money, we benefit from the jobs that we have, but it is not their job. It is the job of government to look at job creation. It is the job of government to help create the groundwork that will allow for more employment in this Province.

That is the vision they do not have, Mr. Chair, when it comes to permanent employment. They do not understand how basing the economy in the community using the income we get from the natural resource sector, using the income we get from oil and gas, using the income we get from the exploitation of our mining resources, that by using that money to help build an economy on the ground is what their responsibility is, Mr. Chair. Not putting money into another huge development that will have just eighty-seven jobs when it is all over.

Their job is to work with the communities and to come up with incentives that will create economy on the ground; that will create employment on the ground. That will create more employment in our renewable resources, create more employment in our fishery, create more employment in our agriculture, create more employment in our forestry, become creative in looking at the ways in which that could happen. That is real diversification of the economy.

What this government does not understand, Mr. Chair, is an integrated approach to planning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I really appreciate your help.

They do not understand how one integrates economic concerns and economic needs with social concerns and with environment. An integrated approach is something this government does not understand. If they used an integrated approach that was based in the community, and if they had a plan for that integrated approach, if they understood what that integrated approach was, then we would be headed on a road that would lead to greater employment in this Province, that would lead to more than eighty-seven jobs in Muskrat Falls in 2017, Mr. Chair. That is what they will not acknowledge. They will not acknowledge that they have no vision, that they are not doing their work.

The other thing, Mr. Chair, that government is responsible for besides the job creation, they are responsible for helping build our economy by creating a greater community of consumers, people who will use the services that will make our economy grow. Mr. Chair, I am fatigued by listening to this crowd on the other side of the room here. I am fatigued by hearing their spin. I am fatigued by them not really standing up and acknowledging that they do not have a vision. I am certainly going to be looking forward to next Tuesday, to see what is going to be in the Budget this time. I am telling you, Mr. Chair, I will be ready throughout the spring to continue dealing with the issues that I have just opened up here today and that I will want to continue to speak to after the Budget.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I say to the Leader of the Third Party: you better not be fatigued yet; you have ten minutes to listen to me, and you have more here who are going to teach you a few things about the economy today and this government, and the way things are in the Province, and the way they should be in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Chair, nothing happens by chance. The oil is not going to be developed offshore Newfoundland and Labrador, or anywhere else in this Province, and electricity is not going to be produced by chance. It is through the careful planning of this government that is going to happen, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS SHEA: I challenge the Leader of the Third Party, the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi, to stand up here right now –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: – and tell us how she would develop the resources in Newfoundland and Labrador, because to tax, tax, tax, and tax more the people who are paying taxes in this Province is not the answer.

Mr. Chair, that is the answer that the Leader of the Third Party feels is how we are going to develop the resources in this Province, how we are going to maintain programs and services, and how we will diversify the economy: by having the taxpayers of this Province pay more and more and more. Mr. Chair, we saw a report that came out yesterday commissioned by Lana Payne that came out with that result.

Right now, we have 17 per cent of the people in this Province paying 70 per cent of the taxes, so we can now, based on the NDP plan, tell the taxpayers of this Province – and as anybody who is in the middle class, Mr. Chair – that the NDP feels they need to pay more, more, more, and that is the solution to the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador.

It is the plan they put forward and I challenge the Leader of the Third Party to stand in her place right this second and tell us; I will sit down if she wants to stand up and tell us what the plan is, if it is not to tax people. If she has something more to say right now, she can take her place, and I will gladly sit down and let her say it.

The NDP plan can be summed up in one word, and that is tax; more, more, more we are going to pay in taxes, because that is the only foresight, the only vision, and the only plan they have for this Province.

You hear the Leader of the Third Party talk about developments like Muskrat Falls and make comments that it is not going to diversify the economy and there are only going to be eighty-seven jobs – she just said that – when the project is all said and done. I can tell the Leader of the Third Party: when Muskrat Falls is completed, that is a valuable resource for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that will generate revenue for years and years to come. Not only that, it will provide us with clean, green energy in this Province, Mr. Chair. It is taking care of the next generation, and the generation after that, and after that again.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Chair, the Leader of the Third Party, what she would do is take the contracts we have in place right now with the companies that are developing the resources in this Province and she would tear them up. She would not honour those contracts; she would tear them up. Do you know what? As a result of her fiscal management – paying more taxes and wanting people to pay more – she will cripple the economy in this Province; not only that, she will make sure the people of this Province who are paying taxes will pay more, and that is the mantra of the NDP: more, more, and more tax.

One word sums up their plan for the economy, and that is to make sure that people pay more taxes. I have not heard one bit of policy, information, suggestion, or anything else that suggests any more, Mr. Chair. It is nothing but spin, spin, and spin. They are stuck on the spin cycle over there, Mr. Chair. That is exactly where they are.

Talking about an integrated approach, how we should come together, and how we should build our economy – well, this government more than any other government in the history of Newfoundland and Labrador consults with people in the Province. We have consultations all the time to the point that the Leader of the Third Party has actually complained about the amount of consultation. When we strike out to go across the Province to talk about policy or legislative changes, they actually complain that there is too much consultation, Mr. Chair.

One thing they talk about day in, day out over there is full-day kindergarten. What they fail to mention is when we consulted on our Child Care Strategy – and this is important; I was at the consultation in Stephenville as was the Member for Port au Port, and the only person who actually complained and spoke out against full-day kindergarten was the NDP candidate who ran in the last election.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MS SHEA: Absolutely. The only person who stood in the consultation and felt full-day kindergarten was not an option for this Province was one of the NDP candidates.

AN HON. MEMBER: Forgot to read the platform.

MS SHEA: Forgot to read the platform or has no clue what the party is all about over there; but, needless to say, Mr. Chair, their own candidate was the only person in that room who spoke out on full-day kindergarten.

Mr. Chair, the other point I want to make, too, as we talk about the spending and the spending and wanting more and more: some of the solutions that they come up with are values we all think are great, but they never attach the price tag or how we would deliver on the service.

One thing they also talk about is universal child care, similar to what is in Quebec. If we developed the Quebec model for child care in Newfoundland and Labrador, it would cost this Province $350 million a year. That would be wonderful, but as long as we have a party that feels that programs that will cost us $350 million a year can be achieved by no economic development and not supporting the resource development in this Province but to tax people more – how much more do they think the people of this Province can pay in order to deliver the services that they get up day in and day out and advocate for? It is absolutely irresponsible the way they do it, Mr. Chair – absolutely irresponsible.

To talk about the developments that we have and the fact that they do not understand Muskrat Falls and what the development of Muskrat Falls is going to mean for employment in this Province, and the unions of this Province are going to benefit because they are going to do the work that is available, and to think that they do not understand that when some of the leaders, some of the great leaders of the NDP, in particular Jack Layton, supported Muskrat Falls and the development of Muskrat Falls –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: He was a very respected individual across Canada, and they do not even follow what he said when it comes to Muskrat Falls. The present leader, Thomas Mulcair, as well supports the development of Muskrat Falls.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Chair, people with vision get it. People with vision understand the resource development, why we are doing Muskrat Falls, the benefits to this Province in how we are going to supply the energy, plus the revenue that we can generate from that development as well.

When you hear the Leader of the Third Party day after day after day with no plan, and like I said stuck in the spin cycle, and not supporting the fact that there is going to be employment for the unionized labour in Newfoundland and Labrador through the development of that project, Mr. Chair, it makes you wonder what the plan is.

Now, the Leader of the Third Party said she is suffering from fatigue here in the House of Assembly. Well, she better get her energy up, Mr. Chair, because we are not finished yet. We will continue to debate for the afternoon. We will deliver our Budget here on Tuesday. We will sit in this House of Assembly as long as it takes; we will not be complaining about sitting in the House of Assembly.

We have heard it from the Third Party over and over: Let's get in the House. The first thing we did when we were getting in the House: We do not need to get in the House; it is not important. They did not want to come to the House of Assembly. They did not think Interim Supply was worth debating.

Mr. Chair, I can tell you this Interim Supply is very important and what is happening in this Province is important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. The NDP should take note that the people want us in the House of Assembly and we should be here having these debates, Mr. Chair.

In closing, I want to say if the Leader of the Third Party thinks she is fatigued today, she better hold on because we have a lot more to say and lot more to do in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Certainly, I can turn the spin dryer off for a second. Mr. Chair, I heard the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills talk about unions. What I am seeing in our Province is a problem with the workforce trying to get into the unions. We are seeing it in Muskrat Falls right now. We have over 500 people who are ready to enter the workforce. They are having trouble getting into the unions, Mr. Chair.

This does not just extend to Muskrat Falls; this problem is all over our Province. Time and time again, we talk about an aging workforce and the need for skills programs for skilled workers to get into our workforce. We have the unions saying that we cannot hire people because they do not have experience. We have our front-line workers saying we cannot get experience because we cannot get work. We have a Catch-22.

I just wanted to bring that up because it is a big problem. If the unions are not letting our people into the workforce, then we are going to have a serious problem. We have the people trained; they are ready to go to work. I think every ability should be made for them to go to work.

Mr. Chair, getting away from that, over the last week I have heard members opposite stand up and speak to Interim Supply. I have heard more comments leading up to 2003 than I have heard about the last ten years. Mr. Chair, what that tells me is rather than try and go on their track record, this government is looking to what happened ten years ago as an excuse to cover up the mess that our Province is in.

One of our biggest revenues over the last ten years is offshore oil revenue. I would just like to remind the government opposite, Mr. Chair, that ten years ago the price of a barrel of oil was $40. We had some good yields in terms of quantity, almost 123 million barrels of oil at $40 a barrel. Mr. Chair, last year, the price went up to $124 a barrel. I would just like to share, or reintroduce, some of the revenues. I think the offshore oil revenue accounted for 37 per cent of the Province's revenue, Mr. Chair, somewhere in the tune of $7.5 billion last year.

Mr. Chair, I have heard this government go on what happened up to 2003, but, Mr. Chair, this government has had ten years and the numbers are for everyone to see in terms of projected revenues and in terms of actual revenues. The government, in the last ten years – after 2003, I might remind them – the revenue was staggering; unbelievable.

I heard a past Premier stand up and say that we have gone from a have Province to a have not. Mr. Chair, the Premier was quoted as saying that if there is a $1 drop in the price of oil, we lose $20 million off our bottom line. Mr. Chair, the price of oil is dropping, and it is unfortunate. We have production wells that were off-line for repairs with White Rose.

I tried it on my calculator, Mr. Chair, and the calculator did not have the capacity to add up the oil revenue over the last ten years, after 2003. It just made an error. Maybe I will have to ask the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation if I could use his.

Mr. Chair, I guess the party is over. I think this government, rather than condemn a previous government that ended in 2003 – ten years is a long time. I guess you are grasping at straws if your best focus of attack is to attack an Administration that was in power ten years ago, when they have had ten years and I am told billions of dollars in revenue.

To bring us to ten years later, Mr. Chair, we are looking at the cuts across the Province, the cuts to frontline workers, the cuts to programs, and we have not seen the Budget yet. So it is hard times, Mr. Chair. This government has had ten years and billions of dollars to deliver this Province from debt. What has happened is that in ten years we have gone back to the situation we are in now. All indications are, it is about to get worse.

Mr. Chair, one example I have heard members opposite make reference to the Nonia. That is relevant to the ferry system in our Province. In my own district in Nunatsiavut, Natuashish, and Black Tickle, we have seen our service go from bad to worse to deplorable and finally last fall to totally non-existent. There was a time when we had two ferries and three freight boats. Mr. Chair, what we had last year was no ferry.

To run a freight boat in Northern Labrador on December 16, I am a mariner by trade, is dangerous. I have been on offshore trawlers, Mr. Chair, beating ice, and we had to run the boat into ice to get out of the sea. It is dangerous. I would not recommend it. I say to the government, last year you were lucky. The Astron did a wonderful job but it is risky. You do not send boats up in Northern Labrador in mid-December. It is too much of a risk, but it was an improvement from the Dutch Runner.

Certainly, if this government had come forward with a proposal two years ago to improve the service, there is much more work for improvement, but I was glad to hear the minister stand up and make an announcement that there would be a ferry by 2016. We all look forward with anticipation to that date.

That is just one area, Mr. Chair: Rencontre East, St. Brendan's, South East Bight, Little Bay Islands, Long Island, the Straits, the Southwest Coast, and Bell Island. I have seen the Beaumont Hamel. That is an old ship, not past the date of the actual Battle of Beaumont Hamel, I might say.

In closing, I would just like to say that it is too bad that the party is over, the revenues are spent, and we are in a predicament. We realize this by the cutbacks that are coming from the government side, Mr. Chair, that have come, and certainly entering into negotiations with the public service, with the nurses, with the teachers. This government has had ten years – and, Mr. Chair, I will remind this government again - ten years after 2003 to work with the problem. It is no good to hold the past against us when you have had the present to work with, you worked with it, you had a party, it is over, and there is nothing left.

Mr. Chair, certainly we are not looking forward to the people of this Province facing cutbacks. Mr. Chair, I will just make a reference one more time to my district, very quickly; this government has a perfect opportunity of investment, because most often, infrastructure in my district is bilateral or trilateral agreements. So, the government of this Province does not have to fund the full cost of projects or infrastructure. The federal government puts in, Mr. Chair, and the Nunatsiavut Government puts in.

Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am delighted to stand in the House today to talk to Bill 62, Interim Supply legislation. It has been an interesting few days. We are coming to the end of it now. I am looking forward to the Budget announcements next week because I know there is going to be some good news there. We also know that there are going to be some challenges as well, and we are prepared to face that, Mr. Chair.

It is an interesting time, Mr. Chair, as the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi said earlier, a very interesting time. The economic metrics in our Province have never been better. We are living in a time of prosperity, we are living in a time of opportunity, and we are building for the future. So, to stand on our feet and say that the rain is coming down in buckets of whatever, it is just not true – it is just not true, Mr. Chair. Things are getting better every day, there are more opportunities every day, and as we move forward we will see the benefits of our long-term planning.

In a time of prosperity and in a time of austerity – these two things are not mutually exclusive. You look at other provinces. You look at Alberta and you look at the Government of Canada; both are heavily reliant on natural resources and commodity prices in the world. How the global economy does is how we do as a Province and as a country. So, affecting our budget and our bottom line and our revenues generated to our Treasury – certainly, it is impacted by what happens globally and commodity prices. Mr. Chair, this is one of the main reasons why we see ourselves in a deficit situation.

We have been planning for the future. Again, you need to do the long-term planning to make sure that prosperity is there at the end of the day. This is only a short-term austerity measure that we are into, a certain time of austerity, Mr. Chair. We have made announcements around the funding of the Corner Brook hospital, the Placentia lift bridge, and the Trans- Labrador Highway, just to name a few, in the last number of months, number of weeks. We are moving ahead; we know we have to plan for the future and we know we need to do these things, these infrastructure projects, to make things happen for our economy in the future.

When I hear the member opposite talk about Muskrat Falls and that there are no long-term benefits –

AN HON. MEMBER: Which member?

MR. CRUMMELL: I think it was the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi and the Leader of the Third Party.

It just baffles me when I hear that kind of statement. When we think about the environmental impacts that are happening with Holyrood and what a positive impact Muskrat Falls is going to have on that equation, it just astounds me that we have a party of the left wing talking about a development like Muskrat Falls in a way that there is no positive environmental impact.

When we look at the billions in revenue that we are going to be generating from Muskrat Falls over the next fifty years – that we can reinvest into our Province, reinvest into our education, reinvest into our services, and reinvest into creating jobs and better opportunities for our youth and our young people going forward – I believe the number is $20 billion over fifty years; I can stand corrected on that one, but $20 billion is what we are looking at, of generated revenue. There are some long-term benefits from Muskrat Falls and it will diversify our economy.

When the Member for Signal Hill – Quid Vidi talked about the oil and gas industry, and she talked about the least number of permanent jobs are associated with the oil and gas industry, what is she suggesting? That we not pursue our revenue, we not go there and build an oil and gas industry in this Province? Is that what she is suggesting? That does not make any sense to me.

We see the infrastructure and the investments around us every single day. I look at the University, for example, Mr. Chair, and there is a tower going up there. It is going to be opening up this September; 500 students will no longer be looking for apartments come the fall when this residence opens up and that is going to create a huge impact, generate a huge impact on the housing market here in this city, especially in the middle of the city.

You will see a little depression, I believe, just for the fact, this investment – not only to our students and to our youth, but to the city as a whole and to housing generally – will definitely have a positive impact on housing costs for other people outside of the university and post-secondary institutions.

Again, when we look at other things that oil and gas is producing for us, these jobs are good jobs. They are high-paying jobs. When you look at Long Harbour, we heard the Leader of the Third Party talk about the construction jobs are the only value she sees in this project. Well excuse me, there are going to be 600 long-term, high-paying jobs at the end of this project.

The construction industry by its very nature, resource-based industries where you have megaprojects, we know that our skilled trades workers move from project to project. That is a fact of life. You talk to any skilled tradesperson out there; they know that they have a life of mobility. They go where the work is and that is just the way it goes in the skilled trades.

These projects are built and there are benefits received. We know that for sure. As we move forward, we will see more projects happen in Newfoundland and Labrador. There will be more companies and smaller companies that will be employing some of these workers who come home and stay and maybe live in our Province for longer periods of time instead of having to move away and go to work and come back home again. That is a reality of the skilled trades and in natural resource development.

The mining in Labrador – when we get the mines up and running in Labrador that we are talking about over the next ten years, $10 billion in investment, they are going to be permanent jobs, highly trained, high-skill jobs, high paying. Again, there are huge benefits for this Province not only from our Treasury point of view but for the people themselves.

When I travelled the Island recently on the Journeyperson Mentorship Program consultation process information sessions, every part of this Province that I went to there were employers looking for workers. Not only skilled workers but looking for people who are entry-level workers. The jobs are out there in this Province to be had.

We know the opportunities going forward are going to become greater and greater. Our investments that we are making into this Province are doing the right things for our Province and they will continue to doing the right things for our people moving forward.

When the Leader of the Third Party again talks about unemployment, well it is actually 11.5 per cent, not 13.5 per cent. Right now, we have more people working in this Province than any time in our history. Mr. Chair, that is a good measure, but it is still not good enough. We need to get that employment rate down lower and we recognize that as a government. That is why we are restructuring our employment opportunities and our career work centres. We know that we need to put our people to work. We know that the opportunities are out there, and we know that will happen.

Mr. Chair, when the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi talks about job creation, I throw it out there: What are her solutions? There is no easy answer to that. Government can do good things to help create the environment to create jobs –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

Thank you.

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Chair, government can do good things around creating the right conditions to create jobs, but it is private industry that drives the economy. It is small business that drives the economy. Government does not drive the economy. That is where the NDP gets it wrong.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CRUMMELL: There is a role for government, but not to drive the economy. We can help drive the economy, Mr. Chair. You talk to business people out there and I have talked to many of them – I come from a business background – and they will tell you, every single person that I ever spoke to, is that we are the ones that are supplying the resources to make things happen to our Province.

Mr. Chair, we have been using the income responsibly from oil. We have been reducing our debt. We are providing more services to our people. We are building the infrastructure that we need and all of these things need to be done in order for us to take advantage of our economic opportunities in moving forward.

I question the Third Party when they stand on their feet and they say: What is government doing? I question the Third Party when they stand on their feet and say that we have no plan. We know what we are doing. We have a plan. What we see around us today and the benefits that the people of this Province see today is evident for all. This short-term austerity is exactly that: short-term austerity. We have a bright future. Our children have a bright future. We are going to see so many amazing things happen in this Province over the next number of years that it is just going to astound everybody in this Province.

Do you know what? People in this country right now are pretty much amazed at how far we have come in such a short period of time. I have many friends from business life who are from the mainland Canada and they have told me: Wow, what is going on in Newfoundland and Labrador? How are you guys making this happen? We are leading the country in all economic indicators. If you talk to the banks and you talk to the bond rating agencies, we are leading the country in all metrics.

Mr. Chair, my time has run out. I just want to call out that things are not all doom and gloom. The spin that is coming from the other side is exactly that: spin. There is a reality out there and we have to understand what that reality is. The reality is that we have moved this Province further ahead than any other government in the past and will continue to do that into the future.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I am very happy to have the opportunity to stand in this House and speak to the issue of the Interim Supply. Here we are, 2013, after years of the greatest prosperity we have experienced in our history. We all know that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS ROGERS: Undeniable. The Province has done well on many levels. The people of the Province have done well on many levels, but prosperity is not like winning the lottery. It is not like winning the lottery at all. As a matter of fact, prosperity is a result of people, of our people, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, working hard, whether it is working in the fishery, whether it is working in forestry, whether it is working in construction, building new homes or new retail spaces, whether it is the people who have dedicated their lives to working in the public service, whether it is people who work in the field of medicine and health, or whether it is people who work in retail, people who start small businesses, who work so darn hard when they start small businesses.

Mr. Chair, it is also all about the people who work in tourism and, yes, it is also about the people, our people, who work in mining and who work in the oil industry. It is about the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who are working so hard to build prosperity for our Province and to build prosperity for their families. That is where prosperity comes from. It is not simply a windfall. It is about the hard work of everyone that has created this prosperity. It just does not happen by luck.

Mr. Chair, as the people who have been elected by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, we all know that in this House, our role is about what we do with that prosperity that has come about on the backs of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. How do we redistribute the wealth that belongs to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador? What do we do with that prosperity? What do we do with that revenue?

AN HON. MEMBER: Taxes.

MS ROGERS: I keep hearing the people from the other side constantly talking about taxes and just throwing out the word taxes. Mr. Chair, in fact, who gets the biggest tax breaks in our Province? Does anybody know who gets the biggest tax breaks in our Province? It is certainly not the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is not who gets the biggest tax breaks.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Chair, we all know – and it is public knowledge – that we have great resources, an abundance of natural resources in our great Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Some of those resources are the fishery, forestry, and agriculture, but we also know about mining and oil. We have among the lowest royalty rates for resource extraction in all of North America.

Exactly who is getting the biggest tax breaks here? It is certainly not the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, but the multinational oil companies who are happy to come here and do work with us. We are happy about that. We are happy. We are very happy that the oil companies are coming here and they want to do business with us, because we know, as the opposite side have said, that we are open for business.

Yes, Newfoundland and Labrador is open for business, but we are not open to do a fire sale, Mr. Chair, and that is what this government has done. We have among the lowest royalty rates for oil companies and for mining companies in North America.

Now, I would like to look at, also, Muskrat Falls. Mr. Chair, without a doubt, Muskrat Falls is the single largest tax subsidy to the international mining companies. That is what Muskrat Falls is; it is a tax subsidy and it is on the backs of all these people of Newfoundland and Labrador who I have been talking about, who have worked so hard for our prosperity.

I remember when I was first elected, Mr. Chair, that the message, the spin about Muskrat Falls was that it was going to generate all kinds of revenue for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, because power was going to be sold all over North America. Everybody was going to want our power; that is what the message was.

Well, if I were a betting person, Mr. Chair, I would bet that the final bill for Muskrat Falls maybe is going to be about $10 billion, maybe, at least, or possibly more, as we see more and more problems come to light; absolutely $10 billion, probably more, so that is going to be – who is going to pay for that $10 billion?

Well, we say that any overruns – when we look at the loan guarantee – will be paid by the ratepayers. Now, we are only 500,000 people in this Province – not that many ratepayers, though, because not everybody is a ratepayer. So, it is the people again, the people of the Province who have worked so hard to create this prosperity who are going to be responsible for cost overruns for Muskrat Falls. I keep wondering, Mr. Chair; I do not have the answer, but I keep wondering why this government would want to lay that great big debt on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who have worked so hard to create the prosperity that we are experiencing right now.

So again, it is: what do we do with our revenues? That is what we are concerned about. It is about our social programs. Now, social programs are not simply for people who are on Income Support. Our social programs are about education, and health, and justice. All kinds of people use our social programs. Our social programs are about how we live our lives in our Province. It is about how we can ensure that people are productive, that people are well, that people are healthy –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR (Verge): Order, please!

MS ROGERS: - whether we live in rural areas or in larger towns.

Just before I had the opportunity to get up and speak, a hon. member across the floor was boasting about prosperity, that we are in such a period of prosperity. Yet, Mr. Chair, they are talking about austerity; that we are in a period of austerity. I am thinking prosperity, austerity, prosperity, austerity. Really, what is it? What is it? My head is going round and round from the spin that we are getting from the other side. Prosperity does not equal austerity, and for sure, Mr. Chair, austerity does not equal prosperity.

A few weeks ago this government slammed on the brakes and started laying off people, started closing down on positions. That is what happens when something is out of control. When we see someone driving and they are out of control, they slam on the brakes.

The same member who spoke just before me, talked about, well this government is not driving the economy. Well, you know, Mr. Chair, I do not know what to do about that. They certainly are trying to drive the economy and they have had to slam on their brakes. It is indiscriminate layoffs, helter-skelter everywhere. What they have done is they have created a complete atmosphere of instability. They have destabilized the workforce, the public service workforce. People are afraid for their jobs. People do not know what is happening.

Then this government, who had to slam on their brakes because things were spinning out of control, brought in Dr. Wade Locke who told them: hang on now, hang on, grab your breath, take a pause, you cannot be doing it this way. Now they have slammed on the brakes again.

What they have done is they have destabilized the workforce, and we are looking at cutbacks in the area of health. They have destabilized also the health care system. What we have seen is that for two weeks now the people in our Province, the people who have dedicated their lives, the public servants of this Province who have worked so hard, they are partners in this prosperity, they do not know when the shoe is going to drop for them. They do not know after this Budget whether they will have work. That is not what prosperity looks like.

I would like to say, Mr. Chair, that I think we are in a time of prosperity, and I do not think the answer to continuing our prosperity is to undermine and destabilize our workforce. Our workforce is made up of the people who have worked so hard, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who have worked so hard to build the prosperity that we feel.

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS ROGERS: I would like to finish with just one quote, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS ROGERS: Leave, Mr. Chair, to finish with one quote.

CHAIR: Does the member have leave to finish?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

CHAIR: I remind the member her speaking time is done.

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I look forward to continuing this discussion another time.

Thank you very much.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to start off by addressing a few things the hon. member opposite said and talk a little bit about her party and what they believe in, Mr. Chair. Every now and then it is good to talk about history in the House of Assembly.

I remember a couple of elections ago the NDP had in their policy platform, they had a great plan. They had a really big plan that they were going to sell it to the people of the Province. Mr. Chair, I remember one district that was close and it was in play. I remember it very, very well. At the time it was the seat of Labrador West, Mr. Chair, a big union area, a big union town, a beautiful place in our Province in Wabush.

It was a big, big move there because of their labour background. They had a lot of left-leaning ideology and they were leaning toward the NDP. Then all of a sudden, Mr. Chair, somebody decided, let's read their platform. Let's read the NDP platform and find out what they stand for and what they are really about.

Mr. Chair, Labrador City and Wabush is a very affluent area of our Province. Good paying jobs, Mr. Chair, hard-working men and women, I take my hat off to them. Mr. Chair, a lot of the people in that area of the Province are very well paid individuals. Mr. Chair, they cannot make enough, for me, personally. They cannot make enough money because I encourage them to work and make as much as they can, like everybody should, Mr. Chair.

Somebody decided, let's go back now. Let's go back and read the plan of the NDP who are looking like a pretty good option for this part of the Province. They have a lot of the ideology, the same as we do. They are a little left leaning. It is traditional that a lot of the labour movement has backed the NDP.

Mr. Chair, someone went to page, I believe it was 18 or 19 in the platform at the time. It was quickly discovered that the NDP would balance the books of this Province by doing one thing. They were increasing the taxes on people like the people in Labrador City and Wabush, Mr. Chair.

So, Mr. Chair, this is the plan: You balance the books of your Province by putting up taxes. Mr. Chair, that is just the way it is. I am not creating that. That is exactly what happened. Mr. Chair, swiftly, the people of Labrador City and Wabush said hey, hey, come on; like the people of the Province will do the very same thing. The more they talk, the more we see what they stand for.

They like to say that they talk for social programs. The social programs that this government has brought in are heralded across the country. I recently, at an FPT meeting, ran into somebody from BC. They are part of a think-tank, a very left-leaning think-tank, and they go throughout the country – do you know what? They use the Progressive Conservative government of this Province as an example, when lecturing around the country, on the way governments should respond in a social forum and social policy for the people that they represent.

Mr. Chair, now that I have laid out what the NDP stand for. They stand for taxing people. I will give credit to the Official Opposition, the Liberals – I do not agree with them, Mr. Chair. To tell you the truth, I very rarely agree with them. I tell you, Mr. Chair, they always cost things out. You will see in their platform, they cost out. If we are going to do this, this is how much money it is going to cost. The NDP, Mr. Chair, there is no dollar figures attached – none whatsoever.

In the last election, for example, we saw the Leader of the NDP coming out in the eve of the election saying we want full-day kindergarten. That is what we stand for and that is what we want – fair enough. A sharp reporter said to the leader: How much is it going to cost? Ah, we are not sure about that yet. We are not sure about that.

Mr. Chair, it is very easy to be the good guys. When they talk to the Liberal Party – I did not agree with them, but at least they knew how much it cost. I will give them that much credit. At least they could tell you well, boy, that is going to cost this much on the bottom line. I hazard to say the same for the NDP.

Mr. Chair, this comes to an article that was in The Telegram today that I thoroughly enjoyed reading. First, I have to connect the dots. It was done by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Fair enough, a non-partisan group, do not care what side of the fence you are on. They will do a study for you any time. Let us know, let's plug in the numbers, we will tell you what we think and you can run with it.

Mr. Chair, they got involved and their goal on this was to find out another way that we could do business here in the Province. One of the quotes from the person who asked was: Let's have a real different kind of look at what is happening in the economy – meaning the economy in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Chair, this was commissioned by a friend of mine actually, a good friend of mine by the name of Lana Payne. Lana Payne, I say with all sincerity, is a friend of mine. Now, our political views are at total different ends of the spectrum. She is a nice lady and very involved with the Federation of Labour. She is a very, very nice lady and I know her heart is in the right place.

Mr. Chair, she was on the stand, she was on stage with the Leader of the NDP, and it was public, it was all over the news and the media, holding up the hand of the current Leader of the NDP. They were one. They were of the same mind and the same philosophy. That is what they believed in. So you have to believe that this report is done for the NDP, their philosophy, and their thinking. It is a left-leaning group. Mr. Chair, this is a no-development party. They do not believe in development. They believe in increasing taxes. NDP: no-development party. It is quite simple.

So you have to understand some of the things this report pointed out. This was done for Lana Payne, who is the leader of the Federation of Labour, who is a good friend of mine, but who is also an NDP supporter, who was standing on stage with the current NDP leader, holding up her hand, hurrahing her, cheering her up, open up the House, and all that old foolishness. Mr. Chair, let us really have a look at what this says.

The first thing it says is put up taxes. So if you are making any money in Newfoundland and Labrador, God forbid, put it into the till, Mr. Chair. This is a party that since we got elected have actually put $500 million back into the taxpayers of this Province; $500 million annually goes back into the pockets of the people in this Province, the people who work in Newfoundland and Labrador and deserve to keep as much money as they possibly can to spend, invest in their families, and so on. That is what this party stands for.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: That party stands for taxing. I guess we only have to go back a couple of years, a few years back, Mr. Chair, when they saw what happened in Ontario when the NDP took the government in Ontario, landed one term, fast, out the door – people saw what they stood for, and that was increasing taxes in a province at the time where the economy was bubbling, much like our economy now. We are hitting all the tops in Atlantic Canada when it comes to job creation, people working, growth, housing starts, truck sales, and the list goes on and on. Our economy is peaking right now. If this crowd were to get their hands on the public trough, they would grow it simply by increasing taxes.

Mr. Chair, there are a couple of points I would like to make. This is an NDP report, done for an NDP supporter, and done for the NDP across the way. This is what they believe in. Mr. Chair, however, the report could not resist, and a couple of things it did point out – and I think is important we know.

Mr. Chair, this report said, and I quote: the provincial government's debt reduction in recent years has put it in a stronger position to weather global economic turmoil than ever before, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Now, Mr. Chair, this is an NDP-created platform to tear the crap out of us, to flatten us, to bring us to our knees, and that is what it is saying about how we handle the economy of this Province. It is clear, Mr. Chair.

Now, Mr. Chair, here is where we get back to the tax part. This is what they are saying – this is how good we are – but this is what they say we should do: Newfoundland and Labrador should consider implementing a fourth income tax bracket on higher income earners. Okay, Mr. Chair? So now, God forbid you make money in Newfoundland and Labrador, if they were in government. God forbid, because these are the crowd that would make Newfoundlanders and Labradorians pay more out of their own pockets. That is what they stand for. The middle class in this Province would pay more. We would sell fewer trucks and we would build fewer houses, and that is what they stand for. Now, fair enough; everybody has to stand for something, but, Mr. Chair, that is not what this side of the House stands for.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY: A point of order, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's North, on a point of order.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just wanted to be clear that this report had nothing to do with the New Democratic Party. It was not commissioned by the New Democratic Party. I just wanted to be clear about that, Mr. Chair.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

I recognize the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This debate on Interim Supply seems to have become a debate on the most recent hospital announcement in Western Newfoundland, the regional hospital proposed for –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. BENNETT: – the Corner Brook area.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Chair, to put this properly into context it is important to understand the background of hospitals in Western Newfoundland and the size of the area that is to be served, because in fact, it is not a large size; it is a very small size. Corner Brook is a small town and this is not a very big hospital. It is a big deal for this party and for this government because they have no experience in building hospitals. They certainly have no experience in building hospitals in Western Newfoundland.

If you look at the hospitals in Western Newfoundland, the first hospitals were the cottage hospitals, and immediately into Confederation, the first hospital that was built in Corner Brook was Western Memorial Regional Hospital. That was named Western Memorial Regional Hospital because it was built and named in memory of the people who served in the two wars. That is why it was called Western Memorial. That was built by Smallwood. That was in the early 1950s that was built by Smallwood.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. BENNETT: Smallwood, the greatest Premier.

The next hospital built in Corner Brook was the hospital that we are now talking about replacing. I am sure the Member for Humber East will remember its construction well. I remember going to high school in Corner Brook and walking past the site. That was called the Christopher Fisher Division of the Western Memorial Hospital. That makes that hospital around forty-or-so years old now. That hospital was also built by Smallwood. That is the hospital that we are talking about replacing, the one that has served us well for the last forty years.

Then if we start in Port aux Basques and we run all the way to Port Saunders, which is the area that is to be served, it is approximately 60,000 or 70,000 people and Corner Brook has around 20,000 people. This is like a small town anywhere else in Canada – basically a county; that is the size it is.

The one in Port Saunders was built by the last Liberal government. The last Liberal Member for St. Barbe delivered that one for Port Saunders. The next one coming further south is in Norris Point. That one was also built by the last Liberal government, and also delivered by the last Liberal Member for St. Barbe.

The one in Stephenville is the one that they complain about because when the government changed, they say there were no handles on the doors when it was opened. However, the hospital was built and all this government had to do was put handles on the doors and take credit for a hospital. I do not think that is too noteworthy.

The hospital in Port aux Basques, I checked with the Member for Burgeo – La Poile and he says it was built in the 1980s, so it must have been the Tories. We have to give them credit for one of the five hospitals that serve Western Newfoundland right now. That serves a community of around 4,500 people. That one was built in the 1980s. In fact this Administration has no experience whatsoever in building hospitals in Western Newfoundland. I am not sure if they built one in Goose Bay or not but I know in December when I was there, they could not find enough staff to run it. If they built it, they cannot staff it.

This particular hospital has already served the governing party well because they have managed to run it through two elections. I think the right question would be: how many more elections do you think you can squeeze out of this hospital?

The first announcement was made in October 2007, when the government committed, as an election promise, to building a new hospital in Corner Brook. The new hospital was expected to be completed in 2016. Three years from that it was supposed to be finished.

We roll forward to January 2008; government announced plans to start the hospital. This is what the Member for Bay of Islands keeps asking about. You announced plans to start it in 2008. They were moving forward with planning and site selection.

In 2009, government made a splashy announcement when they announced the site for the hospital. They bragged about the fact that this is the beginning of what is undoubtedly one of the largest, single infrastructure projects this Province has seen in many years. Well, under this Administration, yes.

If I am asked to table this document I will not pretend it is like a minister's briefing note and not table it, because it was created by one of our researchers. I would be happy to provide the government with the benefits of our research department so they know the facts behind this hospital announcement.

In the spring of 2010, the government announced $11.8 million for continued construction of the hospital. It is continued construction, but it has not started yet. You cannot continue something that you did not start.

In October, 2011 – oh, that was an election month. The Member for Humber East and the Member for Humber West said the construction of the hospital would begin in 2012. That was last year. That was last year, Mr. Chair.

In Budget 2012 they announced $1 million to continue planning for a new acute care facility in Corner Brook. That is after announcing $11.8 million in 2010 to begin construction. Now they announce $1 million for planning, two years after they announced the spending for construction.

During the Estimates, one minister said that it is in the design stage. In fact, the Member for Bay of Islands gave full credit to these ministers when he referenced last year's Estimates because he said at least they were upfront with him when he asked the question.

The Minister of Transportation and Works said it was in a pre-design stage. That was last year. The minister said in Question Period the pre-design stage is a four-step process and they are halfway through and ready to move to the design stage once they get the functional program from Health and Community Services. The functional committee had not met for fourteen months up to that point.

On April 25, 2012, the Member for Humber East told the Greater Corner Brook Board of Trade: I am not retiring until I steel up the hospital, and I want to retire soon. I heard the minister give his speech. I think that may have been a swan song because the announcement – if that was his swan song then he is entitled. He has earned it for the new Corner Brook clinic, because it looks like it is getting smaller all the time. It is smaller than the one that Smallwood built, which was the second one that he built in Corner Brook.

He also said we are flush with cash. Our financial position is as strong as it has ever been. At the time he said the hospital is expected to be completed in 2018. That was a six-year run, but we are not getting there yet.

The summer of 2012, months before the Minister of Finance told the people of Corner Brook the initial cost estimates for the hospital was $750 million to a billion. The Premier met with council in the summer of 2012 and expressed concerns over the cost of the project. A certain councillor, who is referenced regularly, was quoted in The Western Star as saying: She said point blank, as long as the new hospital numbers are coming in at $600 million or $700 million we are not going to build it. So that was last summer.

Question Period of the fall 2012, it is back to the drawing board with the proposed Corner Brook hospital. In Question Period, the Minister of Health said: This exercise is not downsizing; it is rightsizing.

Does rightsizing have a $600 million limit? On December 4, 2012, a letter from the Minister of Health in the City of Corner Brook said they are "currently working to review and refine the master program to reflect best practices…" by hiring "…a second engineering firm to refine the pre-design work that was already completed."

No one knows exactly what is going on or when it is going to start. The dilemma the government has is they have not built a hospital. They do not know how to build a hospital. They do not know how much it is going to cost.

On December 5, the Minister of Health is quoted in The Western Star as saying, "We want to make sure that it is the right size and the right fit… This is a mammoth undertaking…" This is not a mammoth undertaking. This is a town of 20,000 people with a region of 50,000 people.

You should be able to go to any one of fifty municipalities throughout Canada and say: What did you do for your hospital? What is the approximate cost? Hire a contractor and get it done. Either this government does not know how to build a hospital or they do not want to build a hospital, or they could run it out for two or three more elections. This is an absolute sham, the way this is going forward.

The minister goes on to say "… while a timeline for completion won't be known until Stantec's report is finished, she wouldn't characterize the current re-evaluation as evidence the hospital is being downsized." Clearly, it is. She said, "It's not downsizing, it's right-sizing… noting the design phase is a complex, technical process." It is a complex, technical process for a city of 20,000 people with five little feeder hospitals that have been already built by previous Administrations.

This is not a big deal, but it is a big deal for this government. It certainly underlines the fact that they are unable to build, they are unable to develop, and they are unable to deliver. If they had another two or three terms, they might learn how to govern effectively, but I do not think the people will give them another two or three terms. I do not think they will give them another term after 2015.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CROSS: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would also like to thank the residents of Bonavista North for the opportunity to speak today. I will be speaking to them through the media while I address some of the concerns we have here. Talking on Bill 62 regarding Interim Supply, I do have a moment to digress from my topic to recognize something. Today when we saw Todd Churchill with his son Carter in his lap in the gallery, it only drew me back, that twenty-five years ago, that could have been me. Twenty-five years ago I could have sat in the gallery with a two-year old child with cerebral palsy with many challenges in his life. Well, yesterday, that child, Jeremy, spent his last day at Academy Canada, and in May he will be rolling across the stage with a certificate in therapeutic recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CROSS: Much of his post-secondary education is thanks to the inclusive programs that have been offered by this government.

In talking about Bill 62, granting Interim Supply, this last weekend I was visiting with a gentleman and he asked me: what is Interim Supply? Now, I know our Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation passed a few comments about this recently. So did the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape la Hune, but I promised Beaton I would tell him my explanation in his terms.

Interim Supply is like permission granted to the government to spend money before the new Budget comes into effect. The previous year is concluding and if we want the government to proceed as normal then we need a few weeks whereby we get special permission to be able to keep current with all of our obligations, to meet our payroll, and to meet our contractual obligations. When I spoke to him he said it is sort of like an advance to an employee. That was pretty close.

In conversations similar to this throughout my district, in the corner stores and the coffee stops, in the kitchen and the living rooms, the post office and the grocery store, you meet individually or in groups with people who are probably hurting a little from the decisions that we need to make in austerity. There is a little pain, but there is much hope, and we are going to promote and advance this message to this government. The ministers are eager to listen, intent on improving a lot of people in their everyday lives.

Another question floating around: if we are a have Province – and this is a question I have been asked – why does it seem we are still challenged? Well, last week the Member for Kilbride gave a very astute and poignant example of how Muskrat Falls is viable. His explanation was simple. I have a simple analogy to put forward to the residents who have asked me that question.

Imagine Newfoundland and Labrador, this great Province of ours that we are so proud of; we have been in this family of Confederation for some time, but we have always been on Income Support. We have always been, as my grandfather would say, sucking at the hinder. We have always received equalization, accord payments, and things that would come forward, meaning we could not stand alone.

When you get the opportunity to move your economy forward, you stand a chance to be able to stand alone and have pride, but when you get off Income Support as an individual person – an analogy – where you had your drug card, your transportation costs and your loans were covered, and you received loans for housing, then it is very difficult to meet all of your personal obligations. What happens is a struggle to get ahead. You hear many people say: sure, why would I want that?

As a Province right now, we are at that decision time. We are at a time where we are implementing decisions with a hope for a brighter future. We have made many, many transitions. We either go back to the ways of the past or look to the future. I see this Administration as looking to the future with pride, with the ability to stand up on our own.

AN HON. MEMBER: We seize the opportunity.

MR. CROSS: We seize that opportunity, as my friend here so aptly says.

We are suffering through, now, a perfect storm of sorts. Our equalization has ended, there are no Atlantic Accord payments, and the rigs have been down, so we have lower revenue. We have a drastic effect just knowing how small and minute we are on this world stage, whereby the effects of world prices have on us. We also know about the position of our loonie.

Like all storms, like all perfect storms, they never last. We will weather the storm based on the sound advice and prudent decisions that this Administration is taking. We recognize and have been recognized with our AAA+ credit rating. We are envied by the rest of the country. We are also recognized as a model of development by the economists and the banking leaders in our country and around the world. We are not suffering as many other areas are.

I have some figures I would like to get into in a moment or two about Bonavista North and how that is possible. I also want to look at how we have been stewards in the last twelve months since Budget 2012, and now we are leading to Budget 2013.

We looked at the responsible investments for a secure future, a sustainable future. We continue to support apprentices and foster a thriving skilled labour force. We put over $100 million in new and continued funding to increase apprenticeship training. Journeyperson Mentorship Program – I attended sessions for MHAs before we opened and learned quite a bit in these sessions. We have Apprenticeship Wage Subsidy programs. We continue our tuition freeze, non-repayable grants for post-secondary students, no interest on portions of their student loans.

Secondly, we fuel business and economic growth through innovation with over $200 million to support the innovation and development of traditional and emerging industries. Continuation of tax initiatives such as personal income tax reductions – and as the member ahead of me, the Cabinet Minister for Tourism, Culture and Recreation so aptly said, in this last year we have kept over $500 million in the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians based on good decisions of this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CROSS: We are continuing to improve access to vital health care services. Nearly $3 billion to improve health care for all residents.

What do the people of Harbour Breton, St. Anthony, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Carbonear, and Corner Brook say about dialysis services? We have over $500,000 to expand the breast cancer screening, existing for women aged forty to forty-nine. Investing in education: in the K-12 system, over $866 million, an increase last year of $18 million.

I would like to get back – because my time is winding down. I am normally not a person to be very aggressive, but I do have to remind people that a few moments ago we heard the Leader of the Third Party. She stood and she told us she was fatigued. She may be fatigued, but I think she would leave the rest of the Province breathless if she took over.

There are no price tags on the NDP platforms that they have. If they took power, there would be no price tags able to be put on the doors of Newfoundland and Labrador, because we would be worthless after such time.

Mr. Chair, I would just to conclude with a little short message, I suppose. It is a few words from a song Daniel O'Donnell sang the last time I heard him in concert. He said: Yesterday is history. Tomorrow is a mystery. This moment is ours.

This government is trying to make the most of the moment we are living in. We are learning from the history, we are connecting the history to our present, and the present we are going to try unravel the mystery. So, pay attention to the Throne Speech and the Budget next week, we will unravel the mystery. We can move forward with hope and, of course, with sustainability.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It is indeed a privilege, as it is with everyone here in the Chamber, for me to rise and speak the last time – it will be my last opportunity to speak to the Interim Supply bill. There is quite a lot I wanted to say, and of course, you cannot always cover everything you want to say, and I will cover as much as I can.

I just wanted to start off by saying that I started my morning at Larkhall Academy in my district and though the Minister of Education and I may have our disagreements about the teacher allocation formula, we would all agree that we do have excellent schools, we have excellent teachers, and we have a good education system in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY: So, we have great people working for us, and they oftentimes get by with whatever resources they have. We would like for them to have more, and we will certainly work to do that in the coming days and weeks, and months and years.

Now, I wanted to go back to what I had discussed earlier about how this government –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. KIRBY: – has taken us from a so-called have Province to what appears now to be a had Province. Where we were in a position where we had historic levels of prosperity, but now government is laying off people, cutting funding, and so on. The cuts are really starting to add up.

The government has put a hiring freeze in place for public servants. People are being laid off from permanent positions. There is certainly the untold numbers of people who are in contractual and temporary positions across government and its agencies who are losing their positions that we really do not have any knowledge of.

Then, of course, in the Department of Advanced Education and Skills there was that unfortunate decision to cut funding to the Employment Assistance Service providers across Newfoundland and Labrador, and that resulted in more than 200 jobs going away. That is very unfortunate because a lot of those services that we are losing are not going to be easily replaced.

We had a situation earlier, I say to the Member for Mount Pearl South, this year where the Coalition of Persons with Disabilities lost their funding and they are struggling to continue to maintain their operations. We learned yesterday, the university announced that the Rural Internship Program is going to be cut, is going to be discontinued. We do not know when that will start again.

It is really ironic, because I know the Member for Mount Pearl North was talking about Google and I googled the Rural Internship Program, and I encourage everybody on the other side to do it because the first piece you get is a picture of the hon. the Minister of Education, the Member for Burin – Placentia West, down at the university just last summer praising up the Rural Internship Program. What a great program it was and the value.

I talked to a gentleman last night whose daughter did that program a couple of years ago. She grew up in St. John's. She did not spend time at all in rural Newfoundland. She used the Rural Internship Program; it gave her a subsidy she used for her tuition. This program paid for accommodations and transportation for her. She went to Swift Current Academy and taught there in her rural internship. That helped her get a position on Fogo where she spent two years teaching out there, and got great experience teaching in rural Newfoundland, in schools and communities where we need young, accomplished up-and-coming teachers. So, it is unfortunate.

I received a letter the other day. I thank the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills; I received a letter from her telling me that government may not be able to continue its level of support for co-operative education work term placements that it has provided in the past. Here we have important, experiential learning experiences for young college and university students.

Of course, these programs are important because they put a little bit of cash in students' pockets when they are out there working in co-op. We know co-operative education programs are most successful in helping students connect with employers to get long-term, permanent employment. Now we are looking at cutting that back.

Then, of course, we learned from one of the trustees who broke the story earlier this week from the Eastern School District that now we are going to see all kinds of cuts in the Eastern School District, cuts there, cuts to jobs in Marystown, cuts to jobs in Clarenville, cuts to jobs in Bay Roberts. In all the school district offices, clerical, payroll, maintenance and operation jobs, all going to be cut now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. KIRBY: Do you know what I would cut, Mr. Chair? Do you know what I would cut? I hear some people say, well, what would you cut? Here are a few ideas. I will just throw it out to you. I would cut having tea parties –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

I would ask members for their co-operation.

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

MR. KIRBY: I would cut, Mr. Chair, having tea parties that cost over $16,000; sandwich and tea parties like we had to celebrate whatever is going to go on with Muskrat Falls, because none of us know. I certainly hope I live long enough to see what is going to happen and to see what the final dollar figure is going to be.

Another thing I will tell you, I do not think it was well advised, in the dying days of the election campaign in 2011, it was in October of the year, I believe, the government trots out over $1 million for this moose detection system. You know where you drive out there – I do not know if it has ever worked. It is blinking all the time out there. People are telling me it does not work, and over $1 million for that. We do not know how much money –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. KIRBY: - how many thousands and tens of thousands of dollars has been spent trying to get that to work, because we do not know if it has ever worked out there.

Then we had the Nonia. We found out recently with the Nonia, that government has been dumping money into the Nonia. It dumped $3 million into it recently until it finally decided it was a fool's errand and now they are going to spend the best part of a million dollars trying to get rid of it. We are still spending money on a ferry that we cannot use. These are some things; to say nothing of the secret $5 billion infrastructure strategy. Do you remember that? Last year, the poor old Auditor General went out looking for the infrastructure strategy and he could not find anything. I think he had to go down and get the cash register receipts; there was no evidence –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

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

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Another thing; I just left one thing out. Speaking of the Auditor General, it sort of jogged my memory. This really speaks to the poor, public administration practices of this government because this government is very quickly becoming the poster child for poor fiscal mismanagement in this country, across all the provinces.

The Auditor General, in this year's Auditor General's report, said that in the Department of Advanced Education and Skills, when it comes to the Income Assistance Program – and income support is an important program. Always remember that. We all know it is an important program. It helps those people who are down on their luck. They are struggling; they are in all kinds of difficult situations. There are people out there who are most deserving of government's assistance.

I quote; the Auditor General said because of "inefficiencies caused by the incompatibility of systems used" tens of millions of dollars – now these are my words – that are intended to support income assistance clients are being paid out to individuals who are ineligible because the system does not work.

I say to the minister and I say to the government members opposite, you have had ten years – ten years to fix this sort of problem and you have not done it. We still have tens of millions of dollars of taxpayers' hard-earned dollars wasted and paid out to ineligible clients where you cannot possibly collect these funds now. There are other people out there who are most deserving, who need assistance, who cannot get it because you are wasting hard-earned taxpayers' dollars.

I could go on and on; I do not have the time. I wanted to talk about this government's failed record on economic diversification. I will certainly have a lot of time to speak about that when we get into the Budget debates. There is a lot to be told about how this government has continually fumbled the ball on economic diversification in Newfoundland and Labrador. It has nothing to do with taxation; it has everything to do with missing opportunities at every turn.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Chair, I sat here all afternoon. I just could not stand it any longer; I had to get on my feet. I had to get on my feet in this House of Assembly and speak my mind. When I hear an hon. member over there talking about being in government for ten years and have not fixed this or have not fixed that in his opinion or their opinion, it really goes to my soul to be honest with you.

In 2003, we took government and I will say to the hon. member, we fixed a lot of things. A lot of those things that we fixed you actually benefited from it. I do not see you giving back your taxes on your insurance that we eliminated. I do not see you saying no to school fees that we eliminated for your children and on and on and on I say to the hon. member.

It is so easy for you to get in your place in the House of Assembly and sort of like cherry-pick things right straight through and think that you are going to fix it all for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Do you know something that was coming to me over the last few weeks of that kind of stuff, regardless of polls or whatever they may be? What I am sensing across this Province is that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are starting to look at your platform. They are starting to look at what you talk about in regard to living in a perfect world.

That is what you try to do. You are going to fix everybody's problems. That is what you are promising – which is an impossibility in this world that we live in. We do not live in a perfect world. When one problem is fixed, we move on to another problem, to another problem, to another problem, whatever it may be. I tell you one thing that we have done in this Province since 2003, we have built a foundation, we have built an economy, we have rebuilt a Province, I say to this hon. House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I will tell you something else, too, and I hear it over there. All they talk about is give, give, give, in whatever they are going to do, but then they are going to spend, spend, spend. Then they are going to tax, and they are going to tax, tax, tax – but who are they taxing? Who are they taxing? They are taxing the middle class people in this Province that pay 70 per cent of the taxes. That is exactly what they are going to do, Mr. Chair, that is exactly what they are going to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Shame.

MR. O'BRIEN: It is a shame, I say to the hon. members in this House – it is a shame. Do you know what? People in Newfoundland and Labrador have to sit up and listen to what they are saying over there in regard to what they are going to do in the Province and their solution to everything. It is either tax the people of the Province, or tax corporations and tax the oil industry and drive them out of the Province, and we would have no economy left that we built.

I heard the Leader of the NDP this afternoon too, and I am sorry that you are fatigued that you are in the House. I actually feel for you that you are fatigued, but we were elected by the people to be in this House – a place that you did not want to come to.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: We are here for a reason: to do the people's work. So, I apologize for you being fatigued, and maybe you will get a couple of weeks off and get a little second breath or something and going out and promising the people of Newfoundland anything and everything that they want to hear. Not what they need to hear, I say to the hon. member.

As well, she was up there today and she was talking about diversifying the economy. I think she was talking about that. She referred to all the short-term jobs, and only short-term jobs, being connected to the oil industry and our mining industry, and they are worthless. They are worthless. Well, I will tell you something. There is a province in this great country of ours, Canada, that built a total economy on oil, and that is Alberta - long-term jobs. A number of Newfoundlanders, a lot of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, have built families and brought home a lot of money in regard to that economy. We are it, as well, I say to the hon. member from St. John's - wherever you are from. He was up there last week as well, Mr. Chair, and what was his solution to municipalities' wants and needs? Put another tax on gas. Now, does anybody in this House want to pay more for their gas? That is exactly what he was saying. That is absolutely what he was saying.

I ask the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who are tuned in to get on their Google boxes. They are always on their Google boxes, so you guys get on yours and ask the hon. member to stand in his place. I asked him: What are you for? I will ask the hon. Leader of the NDP: What are you for? Are you for taxing the people? Are you for spend, spend, spend, and taxing people? Stand in your place. Get on your feet and tell the people. What are you for?

No, they will not get up. No way on this earth will they get on their feet, because it is all a sham. It is all a sham, see; it is all spin. It is all spin and no facts. I will not have any problem sitting down in my seat here and having the hon. Leader of the NDP get up and say exactly what she means by spend, spend, spend, and tax, tax, tax, and where she is with that. Is she for it? Is she for Lana? What about Lana's –

AN HON. MEMBER: Is she supporting Lana?

MR. O'BRIEN: Absolutely. Is she supporting Lana? Here is the report. I can quote from it: Newfoundland and Labrador is in an enviable financial position with all of Canada. Compared to other provinces, Newfoundland and Labrador is not a big spender. Debt has been brought down to its current low of less than 25 per cent of GDP and we have done a remarkable job in regard to doing that.

I ask the hon. members across the House: do you remember 2003? Do you remember the financial position we found ourselves in and where we are today? Do you think that was all luck? That was not all luck. That is good fiscal management, spending in the right places, spending on infrastructure, and spending on absolutely important programs for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. We invested well, absolutely.

I know the Minister of Health and this government has been criticized in regard to the Corner Brook hospital. I have to remind her that I ran in 1999 and the James Paton Memorial Hospital was announced six years previous to that. As a matter of fact, the steel was up for so long that it got so rusty they nearly had to take it down because they could not go any further with it.

I ask this hon. House, who finished that hospital? Who finished that hospital? (Inaudible). That is what I say.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Absolutely, we finished Clarenville and we finished Stephenville. As a matter of fact, as I heard yesterday there was such a hurry to open up the doors in Stephenville hospital, they were trying to put the knobs on the doors and everything trying to get it all opened. Well, who put the knobs on the doors? We did.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Because it was the right thing to do for the people of the Province, that is why. We have built schools all over this Province. We invested heavily in education – the Minister of Education – in infrastructure and schools, and roads and bridges all over this Province.

Now you have the Leader of the NDP out there saying, no, no, no, this is mismanagement. This is fiscal chaos, is what they are saying. So get up on your feet and tell the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that they did not deserve the school, they did not deserve the hospital, they did not deserve the bridge, and they did not deserve the pavement. Get up on your feet, I say to the hon. member.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: I say to the hon. member, I will sit down; get up and tell them.

Do not go talking out of two sides of your mouth. Spin will catch up with you; you are only going to be able to spin so far then it is going to bite you. I will tell you something: you are guaranteed it will. You might be okay today and think you are, but you are not. You are living in a bubble. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador see through this, I guarantee you that – absolutely do, and they know the difference. You cannot go through life or any kind of life, not even in politics, promising everybody anything that they asked for. You cannot do it. You cannot do that to your family either.

Sometimes you have to say no. As a matter of fact, I will tell you something: a weak person always says yes; a strong person knows how to say no, absolutely.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: We have that in our Premier. She is not going to bankrupt this Province regardless of what it costs us in regards to elections; it does not matter, because we are here to do the right thing for this Province, the right thing for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. If that takes saying no at this point in time, absolutely, we will.

I have heard the hon. Members of the NDP also; they equate a good economy with having lots of public service. That is what they have in regard to a great economy; you build an economy on public service. Well, you build an economy on business, on resources, and creating revenue streams. That is what you do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: That is what you do. You do not have any idea whatsoever.

I will leave you with this thought: we have a strong Premier and we will do the right thing for this Province each and every day that we are in this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

Seeing there are no more speakers to the Interim Supply bill, we will conclude the voting.

Shall the resolution carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: Carried.

CLERK: Clause 1.

CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK: Clauses 2 through 4 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 2 through 4 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clauses 2 through 4 carried.

CLERK: The schedule.

CHAIR: Shall the schedule carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, schedule carried.

CLERK: Be it enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor and House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK: WHEREAS it appears that the sums mentioned are required to defray certain expenses of the public service of Newfoundland and Labrador for the financial year ending March 31, 2014 and for other purposes relating to the public service.

CHAIR: Shall the preamble carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, preamble carried.

CLERK: An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2014 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service. (Bill 62)

CHAIR: Shall the long title carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING: Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee rise and report the resolution and Bill 62 carried without amendment.

CHAIR: The motion is that the Committee rise and report Bill 62 carried without amendment.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): The hon. the Member for the District of Lewisporte.

MR. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to report that they have adopted a certain resolution and recommend that a bill be introduced to give effect to same.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair of Committee of Supply reports that the Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have directed him to report the Committee have adopted certain resolutions and recommend that a bill be introduced to give effect to same.

When shall the report be received?

MR. KING: Now.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that the resolution be now read the first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the resolution be now read a first time.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Carried.

CLERK: That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the granting to Her Majesty for defraying certain expense of the public service for the financial year ending March 31, 2014 the sum of $2,892,602,800.

On motion, resolution read a first time.

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

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Finance that the resolution be now read a second time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the resolution be now read a second time.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

CLERK: The resolution is read a second time.

On motion, resolution read a second time.

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Finance for leave to introduce the Interim Supply Bill 62, and I further move that the said bill be now read the first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of Finance shall have leave to introduce Bill 62, the Interim Supply bill, and that the said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Finance shall have leave to introduce the Interim Supply bill and that the bill now be read a first time?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill, "An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2014 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service", carried. (Bill 62)

CLERK: A bill, An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2014 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service. (Bill 62)

On motion, Bill 62 read a first time.

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Finance, that the Interim Supply bill be now read a second time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a second time.

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

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

CLERK: Bill 62 is read a second time.

On motion, Bill 62 read a second time.

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Finance, that the Interim Supply bill be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a third time.

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

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

AN HON. MEMBER: Division.

MR. SPEAKER: Division has been called.

Summon the members.

Division

MR. SPEAKER: Are the whips ready?

All those in favour of the motion, please rise.

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

MR. SPEAKER: All those against the motion, please rise.

CLERK: 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-six, the nays five.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion carried.

CLERK: Third reading.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

CLERK: A bill, An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2014 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service. (Bill 62)

MR. SPEAKER: The bill is now read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2014 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 62)

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given the hour of the day, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that the House now adjourn.

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

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Motion carried.

I remind members that the House now stands adjourned until Monday morning at 10:00 o'clock, when this session will prorogue. This session of the House will open again at 10:00 o'clock on Monday morning.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Monday, at 10:00 a.m.