PDF Version

March 26, 2015                   HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS                   Vol. XLVII No. 68


 

 The House met at 1:30 p.m.

 

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

 

Admit strangers.

 

I am pleased to welcome to the public gallery today Miss Gina Hartmann, Information Officer with Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador, and Gail Dempsey, the Executive Director. 

 

Welcome to the House of Assembly.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Today I would also like to recognize and to welcome four individuals in the Speaker's gallery: Shalyn Rousseau, Derrick Lepine, Damien Bolingbroke, and Krystal Lewis – thank you, Krystal, for having that easy name.

 

They are all visiting from the Saskatchewan Legislature Internship Program.  During their visit here they will be meeting with representatives from our Legislature, as well as select ministries, departments, and independent agencies related to their research topics.

 

Welcome to the Newfoundland and Labrador House of Assembly.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

Statements by Members

 

MR. SPEAKER: Today we will hear members' statements from the Members for the Districts of Humber East, Exploits, Port de Grave, Torngat Mountains, Labrador West, and Bay of Islands.

 

The hon. the Member for Humber East.

 

MR. FLYNN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the Corner Brook Rotary Music Festival, which recently ran from March 13-24.  This year marks the fifty-third edition of the festival and during the years since its inception in 1962, the Corner Brook Rotary Music Festival have been nurturing and promoting the musical talents of young people from Corner Brook and surrounding area.

 

This year, Mr. Speaker, the Corner Brook Rotary Music Festival awarded approximately $11,000 in cash and prizes, including a $2,000 scholarship awarded to a student who will pursue further study in a registered music program.

 

Congratulations to this year's winner, Stephen Eckert.  I would also like to extend congratulations to the winners in the Rose Bowl competition: Rebecca Davis in the senior category, and Gina Spencer in the junior category.

 

I ask all hon. members to join me in offering sincere congratulations to the Corner Brook Rotary Club, the Festival Committee (President, Mr. Bernd Steaben, his executive and other directors), all the volunteers and sponsors, and most importantly, the young participants, on another very successful Corner Brook Rotary Music Festival.

 

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. FORSEY: Mr. Speaker, Kirsten Dalley of Bishops Fall's is this year's recipient of the Lester B. Pearson Scholarship for Newfoundland and Labrador.  She is being recognized for her outstanding academic achievement and exceptional volunteer activities.

 

Kirsten is very passionate about volunteering, such as fundraising for the Ronald McDonald House.  She ran a campaign against bullying called Silence for Change, and is involved in the many other community activities.  She says being part of the community is very important – the stronger the people, the stronger the community.

 

Mr. Speaker, the Lester B. Pearson Scholarship is valued at $80,000 for two years of pre-university study at Pearson College, a United World College in Victoria, BC. 

 

I ask all members of this House to join me, along with Kirsten's family and community, in congratulating Kirsten Dalley on receiving this outstanding achievement award, the Lester B. Pearson Scholarship. 

 

Thank you.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

 

I would like to congratulate Anna Mercer of Coley's Point, a Grade 8 student of Amalgamated Academy and the 2015 Junior Rose Bowl winner at this year's Kiwanis Music Festival held in Carbonear. 

 

Through the guidance of her vocal teacher Sonya Gosse, Anna amazed audiences with her larger-than-life vocal performances singing songs in Latin, German, French and English by composers from Newfoundland's own Ged Blackmore to Leonard Bernstein. 

 

Anna Mercer is a wonderful example of Newfoundland and Labrador's rich tradition of music.  She comes from a musical family with her grandfather being a fiddler and traditional music champion, Rendell Mercer.  Like her pop, Anna is an active fiddle player and takes part in her school's award-winning traditional music program. 

 

Anna is also showing us how social media is the new stage on which our young musicians perform.  Her performances have received in excess of 15,000 views on her YouTube channel. 

 

Anna Mercer is a shining example of how our young people are taking ownership of our rich musical culture, building on strong family and community traditions and bringing our music into the twenty-first century. 

 

I ask all hon. members to rise with me and wish Anna all the best as she continues her musical journey. 

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize a very important day for the Inuit of Labrador. 

 

Today, March 26, marks the fortieth anniversary of the incorporation of the Labrador Inuit Association.  While the LIA was officially established in October 1973, it was not formally recognized until it was incorporated on March 26, 1975. 

 

The LIA transitioned into the Nunatsiavut Government on December 1, 2005 following the ratification of the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement. 

 

The Inuit owe a great deal of gratitude to the early founders of the Labrador Inuit Association – people like Sam Andersen, my father Bill Edmunds, Jerry Sillett, Martin Martin – who had a vision to promote the culture, health and well-being for their people. 

 

Many leaders have followed in their footsteps and much progress has been achieved in those forty years.  However, governments at all levels need to respect all agreements that have been implemented to ensure that Inuit people receive their rightful benefit from the lands they inhabit.

 

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating the Labrador Inuit on this momentous milestone.  There is still work left to be done and it will only be achieved by all governments working together.

 

Thank you.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

I stand in this hon. House today to recognize the Under 18 girls curling team from the Carol Curling Club in Labrador West.

 

Skip Kayleigh Casmey, third Rebecca Goulding, second Tessa Cole, and lead Kelsie Fry coached by Rick Casmey will be travelling to Montague, Prince Edward Island to represent our Province at the Atlantic Under 18 curling tournament from April 3 to April 5.  Teams from the four Atlantic Provinces will participate in this tournament.  The Stephenville team will represent the Under 18 boys.

 

Kayleigh and her team competed at the provincial Under 18 playoffs in Gander from March 5-8 where they took silver in the competition.

 

Labrador West is no stranger to competitive curlers as we boast being the home of Olympic curlers Mike Adam and Mark Nichols.

 

These girls work hard training in their sport and are another example of the dedication needed to aspire great things in their personal goals.

 

Youth such as the Girls Under 18 curling team from Labrador West will continue to represent our Province well for the decades to come.

 

I ask all hon. members to join me in wishing them well in the Atlantic Under 18s in April.

 

Thank you.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize a group of volunteers from the Town of Mount Moriah who came together to help a family.

 

Last Saturday, I attended a fundraising event for William Hussey of Mount Moriah, an eighteen-year-old man who was recently diagnosed with cancer.  William is currently in St. John's undergoing tests and will be returning in April for treatment.

 

Upon hearing the news about William, family friends, Robyn Butt and Anthony Basha, wanted to do something to help the family.  Joined by other volunteers, a fundraiser was organized which began with a card game and supper, and continued into the evening with a silent auction and a variety show featuring many local entertainers.

 

To say the community came together to help this young man would be an understatement as the event was an overwhelming success with over $7,000 raised and donations continuing to be received.

 

I ask all members to join me in extending a thank you to Robyn Butt and Anthony Basha, the many volunteers who came out to support this family, and wish William the very best as he deals with this medical issue.

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

 

Statements by Ministers

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

 

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to recognize Purple Day for Epilepsy in Newfoundland & Labrador.  Purple Day presents an important opportunity to raise awareness, and reduce social stigma experienced by individuals who are affected by this condition.

 

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders in the world.  It affects over 300,000 Canadians and more than 10,000 people here in Newfoundland and Labrador.  Approximately one in every twenty-six people is expected to develop epilepsy in their lifetime.

 

Mr. Speaker, recently I was fortunate to hear the story of one creative young man who is raising awareness and fundraising for this cause in his community.

 

Evan Newhook is an innovative and artistic nine-year-old boy living in Dildo.  When he learned that his mother was diagnosed with epilepsy, he wanted to take action.  Evan is an avid reader with a passion for art, which is how he came up with the idea to create his own bookmarks and sell them.  All of the money he collects will be donated Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador.  Evan has also motivated his school, Woodland Elementary, as well as employees of the TC Square Mall in Carbonear, to wear purple on this day.  Evan's passion for this cause is truly inspiring and it has earned him his title as official Purple Day Ambassador this year.

 

Mr. Speaker, Evan's dedication is also echoed by the members of Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador, some of whom are joining us in the gallery today.  For decades, their organization has provided support and information about epilepsy to individuals and families in our Province.  I encourage individuals to visit the Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador website at www.epilepsynl.com to learn more about the organization and about living with epilepsy. 

 

As part of the provincial government's continued commitment to the health and well-being for residents, in May of last year we added coverage of the drug Fycompa under the Newfoundland and Labrador Prescription Drug Program.  This drug helps some patients manage partial-onset seizures that are not satisfactorily controlled with conventional therapy.

 

Today, we will show our support by lighting Confederation Building purple in an effort to raise awareness for this deserving cause.  I ask all residents to join me in wearing the colour purple and participate in Purple Day activities taking place in their communities to support those living with epilepsy. 

 

Thank you.

 

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 an advance copy of his statement.  Members of the Official Opposition are pleased to wear purple today in order to raise awareness, show our support, and reduce stigma by those affected by epilepsy. 

 

Evan Newhook, our Purple Day Ambassador this year, we really want to acknowledge his efforts, us here in the Official Opposition; he truly is an inspiration to all of us.  He is to be commended for his work in raising awareness and for fundraising in his community. 

 

Each day in Canada, an average of forty-two people learns that they have epilepsy; 44 per cent are diagnosed before the age of five.  It is important to raise awareness because of how it affects those living with epilepsy, their family, and their friends.

 

We have about 10,000 people in this Province today with epilepsy which, when you think about our population, is a very huge portion of our population.  It is the fourth most common neurological disorder and there is no known cure yet.  Right now, the cost can often be managed through medication and through surgery, but medication is not a cure.

 

All the Opposition here, we hope that you will do what you can to bring awareness to epilepsy, to check out the website referenced by the minister and, hopefully, one day we will all better understand it and work towards a cure.

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

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

 

I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.  It is great to hear this story of someone living with epilepsy who has been able to reach his potential, as well as to raise awareness and money for Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador.  I am proud, along with the rest of us in the House today, and others, to stand wearing purple in support of Evan.

 

Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador has done great work over the years, helping and advocating for people with epilepsy.  One of the successes has certainly been the approval of the drug Fycompa, for which they advocated, because anything that helps with seizures is so important for managing this condition. 

 

We all join in celebrating the achievements of Evan and Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador.

 

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

I rise today to congratulate 756 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians from around our Province who achieved journeyperson certification this year.  The certificates received by these individuals symbolize a significant milestone, and are a testament to the hard work and dedicated effort that they have put into their trade programs.

 

Tonight, I will have the great pleasure of addressing a journeyperson awards and recognition ceremony being held here in St. John's.  This ceremony was organized by the provincial government in partnership with industry, and it is just one in a series of ceremonies that have been held in communities throughout the Province this month to acknowledge local apprentices and trade qualifiers who have achieved journeyperson certification.

 

Mr. Speaker, ceremonies have taken place in Wabush, Corner Brook, and Grand Falls-Windsor.  I look forward to joining industry employers, members of the Provincial Apprenticeship and Certification Board, and past and current graduates and their families tonight to mark an important step as they continue their careers and contribute to the labour force in Newfoundland and Labrador.

 

Increasing the availability of skilled trade workers has been a top priority for our government since the release of the Skills Task Force report in 2007.  Since that time, we have committed over $100 million to support initiatives outlined in the report.  We have invested heavily in programs that assist apprentices to advance to journeyperson status, and we will continue to invest in the most innovative of programming to ensure opportunities are available for the people of this Province. 

 

Apprentices are a fundamental component of the economic future in Newfoundland and Labrador, and we are currently training and advancing more apprentices to become journeypersons than ever before.  Since 2007, investments by this government have helped to more than double the number of journeypersons certified annually; 2014 was a record breaking year with 756 journeypersons becoming certified. 

 

The Province's resource industries hold the promise of long-term employment opportunities for many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, including opportunities in the skills trade sector.  Congratulations once again to those individuals who have achieved journeyperson certification this year and are pursuing a career in the skilled trades. 

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MS DEMPSTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.  On behalf of the Opposition, I want to say too, congratulations to those 756 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians on achieving journeyperson status.  This is a wonderful accomplishment; but, Mr. Speaker, there are many barriers still that face apprentices in this Province to achieving journeyperson status.  There is virtually no case management to help them along their path. 

 

Last year, at one job site alone, 150 apprentices had worked hundreds of hours only to have those hours denied because ratios were exceeded.  Many apprentices leave the Province in frustration and in search of work, many do not come back. 

 

The minister is touting their innovative programs.  How about the journeyperson mentorship program designed to help up to 200 apprentices per year?  They trained five in year one. 

 

Mr. Speaker, government has been promoting and funding the trades without up-to-date labour market information.  Training people without having any idea of our labour market needs is risking training Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to leave.  With a declining population, I say this is reckless and irresponsible.  There is no alignment between training and labour market needs. 

 

Mr. Speaker, every day as MHAs we hear from apprentices who were promised lucrative careers here in this Province, yet they cannot find work. 

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

The hon. member's time has expired. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

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

 

I too thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.  Yes, it is good to see so many more apprentices reaching journeyperson status and I hope the barriers will continue to be addressed, but there are still hundreds of youth who are having to leave the Province to find work. 

 

I urge government to follow the advice of the Federation of Labour in their pre-budget presentation and revisit the 2009 Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy to develop new policies and programs for youth retention that address the diversity of young worker's needs, including the need for affordable child care and housing to keep youth in our Province.

 

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the Minister Responsible for the Office of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency to encourage residents throughout the Province to participate in Earth Hour 2015. 

 

Earth Hour is an international event organized by the World Wildlife Fund to demonstrate the importance of taking action on climate change.  The event first took place in 2007 in Sydney, Australia, and has since grown to be one of the largest grassroots environmental initiatives in the world.  Each year, millions of people from more than 162 countries and territories participate in the event. 

 

Mr. Speaker, to participate in Earth Hour 2015, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians must turn off all non-essential lightening on March 28 for one hour between 8:30 and 9:30 p.m., local time.  By switching off our lights, we are raising awareness about climate change, which is one of the most significant challenges facing the world today.  Climate change is having a substantial effect on areas throughout the world and minimizing this impact requires taking global action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

 

The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador recognizes that climate change is a shared challenge and we have committed to being a part of the solution.  The Province came within 0.4 per cent of meeting its target to return provincial greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2010.  This was a significant achievement given that our economy grew by 65 per cent over the same period.  In September 2014, we released a mid-way progress report for our 2011 Climate Change Action Plan.  This report showed that sixty-four of the seventy-five commitments contained in the plan are completed or underway, including the award-winning Turn Back the Tide campaign. 

 

While these achievements demonstrate the provincial government's dedication to tackling climate change, as individuals, we all have a part to play as well.  Participating in Earth Hour is just one way to do so.  I encourage everyone to learn more about Earth Hour 2015 by visiting www.earthhour.org and for further information on taking action on climate change in Newfoundland and Labrador, please visit our website www.turnbackthetide.ca.

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. MITCHELMORE: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.  Our planet is our universal home and anything we can do to protect it is a step in the right direction.

 

Earth Hour is an international collective effort to tackle climate change.  We on this side of the House of Assembly certainly commend and support this event. 

 

The minister says that sixty-four of seventy-five commitments in the Climate Change Action Plan are completed or underway.  When we look at that, it is very vague, because we see with the energy audits that only a small portion of them are currently done.  It also means that eleven recommendations from the 2011 plan are not completed and we do not know where the commitment is on that. 

 

One that is very scathing is around the fishery and the fishing sector where an expert advisory committee was to be set up for the harvesting sector promoting fuel-efficient vessel designs and also for the processing sector.  We certainly see where the commitment is from this government on the fishery.

 

Also, the progress report there on the action plan highlighted around energy-efficient vehicles.  The Auditor General's report says that the normal fleet is not properly monitoring fuel consumption to reduce greenhouse gases. 

 

I look forward to the update from the large industrial sector for climate change in the minister's mandate letter.  In the meantime, I hope the public will shut off their lights because we are very used to doing this here in Newfoundland and Labrador with DarkNL.

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

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 here today.  Earth Hour is a grassroots movement and I encourage everyone to observe it, as well as what the minister is saying here. 

 

The minister is pretty much right.  We have seen adverse weather conditions happening not only here in Newfoundland and Labrador, but worldwide as well.  We have seen Atlantic Canada getting pounded with snow.  We saw a very powerful typhoon in the Pacific affecting little islands like Vanuatu. 

 

I will make a suggestion to government at the same time.  This is also recognition of the green economy, the role of the participation of the government in the green economy.  I would like to see government be more aggressive in promoting a green economy.  Why not create – like other provinces, have an arm's length agency to promote energy efficiency.  As well, an agency that could make home energy retrofits more affordable to people, particularly with low incomes, and make it more affordable to everybody so that we can all participate.

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

 

Oral Questions

 

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

 

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Health mentioned that he has still not brought in legislation needed to fully implement Cameron's recommendations.

 

I ask the minister: It has been six years and it is still not done, could you please explain what this legislation entails and why you have not brought it to the House yet?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

As I reported to the House once again yesterday, we are proud to say that fifty-five of sixty Cameron report recommendations have been fully or substantially completed.  There are five that still require work.  What I can assure members of this House is that the work is ongoing.  Some do require legislative change, and we are actively working on patient safety legislation that we intend to bring into this House later this year.

 

In addition to that, we are working on our electronic health record, which is another important component.  We have been working on it through the Centre for Health Information for several years now, progress is continuing, and I will continue to provide updates to the House.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

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

 

Well, the minister continues to get it wrong, even after I gave him the information to show that there are more than five recommendations not done.

 

Senior management is a key part of any functioning organization.  The latest information that we have shows at least six vacant positions within the program, including regional manager, a division chief, an operations manager – just to name a few.

 

So I ask the minister: Why, after your government continues to talk about the $43 million invested, are these positions vacant?  Why can't you fill them?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, during the recent review completed by the University Health Network, the staffing concerns in the lab has been addressed.  There is a laboratory HR plan that has been updated, and we are constantly trying to recruit for various positions, especially specialty positions within the health care system.

 

Addressing the vacancies in the lab is a high priority.  We have a new management structure in place in the laboratory, working with the University Health Network, and I am happy to continue to provide updates as progress continues.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, six years later and they still do not have the legislation, there are still issues going on in the lab, and there are still positions not filled.  I do not know what kind of leadership we need over there.  We have a lab program with a lack of leadership.  An external auditor says there is a critical need for a workplace satisfaction program.

 

Given the amount of money that has been invested and the number of problems that still exist six years later, I ask the minister: What is the real issue going on in these labs, and why are you not able to fix it?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, a major transformation has occurred in the health care system since the Cameron report.  It was a watershed moment for health care in Newfoundland and Labrador, and it inspired a lot of change in the health care system.

 

In fact, I have lots of evidence to share that suggests the roots of Cameron really have taken hold.  We have created a culture of safety.  We have made improvements in our laboratories.  All of our labs are now nationally accredited.  We have put in place, as well, other systems that are making a real difference in terms of ensuring patient safety on an ongoing basis.

 

I am pleased with the progress that has been made, and it is an ongoing process, Mr. Speaker, and the work continues.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, government announced its family caregiver program on March 24, 2014.  It was supposed to provide increased choice and flexibility for those in need of home support; $8.2 million was allocated and 250 subsidies were available.

 

One year has passed, so I ask the minister: What is the current status of the program?  Is it meetings its goals?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, the Paid Family Caregiving Option is a commitment this government made that I am quite proud of.  It was a commitment that was launched in 2014.  We initially started with about 250 funded spaces to get a sense of what the uptake would be like and see what the response to the program would be.

 

As of January, over 200 clients have been assessed.  There are approximately 100 families active in the program.  There is no wait-list of this program.  So if there are other families out there who are interested in the Paid Family Caregiving Option, the regional health authorities welcome hearing from them.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the minister's comment is telling.  He says there is no wait-list for it, and there is a reason for that.  There is less than a 50 per cent uptake on the subsidies.  There is less than 10 per cent of the budget – $755,000 used of the $8.2 million allotted.  There are only three clients eligible in all of Labrador, and only twenty clients eligible in the Western portion of the Province.  It sounds to me like a pilot project that was set up to fail because of the strict eligibility requirements.

 

I ask the minister: Is this what you consider increased choice and flexibility for those families in need of home support?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, it is important to remind members that the Paid Family Caregiving Option is leading edge, so we could not really benchmark against other jurisdictions.  This is something brand new.  We did not know what the uptake would be.

 

I have asked officials within my department to look at the criteria, to see if there are ways we can encourage more families to avail of this program.  It is a program that I would love to see expanded in the future, depending on demand. 

 

The demand has been manageable to date.  We are actively working with the regional health authorities.  I want to give credit to staff within the regional health authorities who have adopted this new approach.

 

We will keep monitoring the program.  If there are changes we can make in the future to expand and improve it, we certainly will.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

 

MR. LANE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

Mr. Speaker, food inspection reports on private restaurants are posted on the Service NL website to protect the interests of consumers, but inspection reports for public institutions like hospitals, schools, and Memorial University are not posted to protect the interests of taxpayers.

 

I ask the minister: Why the double standard? 

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service NL.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

Food safety is a very important issue to this government and we take that very seriously.  Mr. Speaker, we have our Environmental Health Officers out in the field all the time checking out and making sure that everybody is in compliance: institutions and restaurants. 

 

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is correct; we only have restaurants online right now.  I have asked my officials to look into the possibilities of institutions coming online as well.  We are looking into that, Mr. Speaker; we will advise the House in short order.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

 

MR. LANE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I certainly hope that does happen because I think that this is a very important public safety issue.

 

Mr. Speaker, there is a story in the media this week which highlights the concerns of students at Memorial University regarding undercooked food, mouldy food, and questionable food preparation practices. 

 

I ask the minister: Given that inspection reports for public institutions are not on the government website, will he table the inspection reports for MUN's dining hall from the last two years, including yesterday's inspection? 

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, we do at least two inspections a year in this institution.  The member opposite has contacted my staff looking for this information.  We are happy to provide it.  As soon as we get it in our hands, we will hand it over to him and you can have a look at it then.

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

 

MR. HILLIER: Mr. Speaker, local non-profit organizations which are dependent on government funding have trouble with planning when they are waiting from year to year to see to what degree they are funded. 

 

I ask the minister: Given that you are planning a Budget for the next five years, will government commit to multi-year funding for non-profit organizations so that they can do long-term planning? 

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

This government appreciates and really values the tremendous work that the non-profit sector continues to do and will do in the future on behalf of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.  We are very much aware that particularly those organizations that rely on core funding from government to continue their operations in providing those valuable services – we are very cognizant of that.  We hope, actually before the Budget comes down, to be able to provide some comment to those organizations so they can continue to plan, not only for next year but into the future.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. HILLIER: Mr. Speaker, the Seniors Resource Centre is a charitable organization depending on partnerships to support the well-being and independence of older adults throughout the Province.  Last year one of the partners, the provincial government, this government, cut its contribution by $73,000; that is 38 per cent.

 

I ask the minister: In the coming Budget, can the Seniors Resource Centre expect further cuts or will it just have to survive with the same reduced funding as last year?

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Seniors, Wellness and Social Development.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

We are very much aware of the work of the Seniors Resource Centre, Mr. Speaker.  It has been on the go in the Province for many, many years.  We do provide a grant to them of a little over $100,000 a year. 

 

As a matter of fact, it is only within the last week I sat down and met with the Seniors Resource Centre.  We are having discussions as to – they are taking a look at their organization.  We have provided them with some funds to do that.  We look forward to continued co-operation with that group.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

Many properties that are owned and operated by Newfoundland and Labrador Housing are boarded up for extended periods of time.  Many other units that are still occupied require extensive repairs and renovations to the exterior and interior. 

 

After more than a decade in government I ask: How come there are still so many housing units in such disrepair?

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing – if there is one thing that many of us as MHAs recognize across the Province is the work that Newfoundland and Labrador Housing does across the Province, rural and urban.  They manage and operate many facilities.

 

Mr. Speaker, I have to say the investment in many of those over the years – yes, over the past number of years, we have seen major, major improvements in it.  We as a government will continue to work with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing so that the facilities these people live in are right up to standard.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I did not ask the minister about the work they did do; I asked him about the work that they have not done. 

 

Roughly six years ago, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing began asbestos abatement in all of its housing units that predate 1985.  Over half of its portfolio, 2,700 units, predates 1985. 

 

What percentage of government's housing stock is still awaiting asbestos abatement?

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I do not have that stat in front of me, but I will certainly seek that information from officials.

 

I say to the hon. member, work is always ongoing with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, Mr. Speaker.  I think he probably knows that, but I will say it to him. 

 

I will say again, there has been much work done around the facilities that Newfoundland and Labrador Housing operate, much extensive work that have much improved those facilities, Mr. Speaker.  As I will say to him, the work is ongoing. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity – Bay de Verde.

 

MR. CROCKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

 

This is the third day in a row asking for a list of companies and the amounts that have been written off totalling over $40 million by government's Business Investment Corporation. 

 

I ask the minister once again: Where is the list? 

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. S. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

As I explained to the member from the first day he asked me the question, there were a number of these that were related to the past Administration, so we have to go back quite some years.  I have asked the officials in the department to compile that list and once I have that list compiled, I had said I would bring it forward to the House of Assembly and table it. 

 

Thank you. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. George's – Stephenville East. 

 

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills said that protocols were followed in the privacy breach of names, salaries, birthdates, nationalities, and employee numbers of 600 employees at the College of the North Atlantic in Qatar.  Protocol clearly states if there is a risk of criminal harm you should immediately contact the RNC or RCMP. 

 

I ask the minister: Did government or the college notify the law enforcement of this breach, and if so, will you table all documentation to demonstrate this correspondence with law enforcement? 

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday –

 

AN HON. MEMBER: Phone Crime Stoppers. 

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I expect no less. 

 

Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday in my response, the information I have, that has been reported to me, is that protocol was indeed followed.  If there are documents that I can table here, I certainly will, Mr. Speaker.  I will follow up with staff, and if that is indeed the case I will bring it forward here. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. George's – Stephenville East. 

 

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, it is our understanding from the reading of the report is that law enforcement officials were not contacted. 

 

Mr. Speaker, the college did not consider identify theft as a potential harm when they exposed names, salaries, birthdates, nationalities, and employee numbers of 600 people.  Clearly, there is a risk of identity theft and therefore criminal harm. 

 

I ask the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills: How can you allow the college to downplay a privacy breach that poses a threat, not only to the security of these employees but also to their families? 

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I take exception to the thing that he stated that the College of the North Atlantic is downplaying a breach. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, is he saying that the people who are working at the College of the North Atlantic, the people who are in the administration over there, are downplaying something?  Mr. Speaker, I have full faith in the people who administer the College of the North Atlantic, and from my inquiry and my discussion is that protocol was followed.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear – Harbour Grace.

 

MR. SLADE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

 

Mr. Speaker, part of the December 2012 agreement government reached with OCI on the Fortune plant was the employment of a minimum of 110 full-time positions year round for five years. 

 

I ask the minister: Have there been 110 people working full-time since the plant opened, and will he tell us how many are currently working there? 

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. GRANTER: Mr. Speaker, we have done a great deal of investment in the fisheries in the Province, including OCI and the people of Fortune. 

 

Mr. Speaker, I do not have the exact numbers in front of me, over the last year our current numbers that are there, but I have a meeting next week set up with officials.  I have a meeting set up, or had meetings set up and discussions with OCI in the last number of months.  We will hold them to their agreements and hold them to the contracts they had signed with the provincial government.  Further details on the numbers that I can get with regard to the current people and for the rest of this year, I will have to table it in the House.

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear – Harbour Grace.

 

MR. SLADE: Mr. Speaker, on January 28, 2015, I wrote the minister to ask a number of questions including what dates the Fortune plant had been opened and closed, and what fish were processed.  He refused to provide the answer.

 

I ask the minister: Will he disclose to the House the opening and closing dates of the Fortune plant, as well as the fish processed there in the past two years? 

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. GRANTER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member would know that any letter that has been sent to my office from him I have addressed and sent back to him.  Actually, I did so in a very speedy manner, Mr. Speaker. 

 

If the answer in the letter did not contain the information that he wanted to his satisfaction, I will speak to officials, Mr. Speaker, in the department and provide to the hon. member the details of which he requests. 

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday in this House the Premier stated, regarding the sixth amendment to the Voisey's Bay agreement, and Hansard will reflect this, “… there was no requirement to consult in that circumstance.”  Yet, under the Land Claims Agreement, which supersedes all agreements dealing with the Labrador Inuit lands including the Voisey's Bay agreement, there is a duty to consult. 

 

I ask the Premier: Why is your government failing to live up to its obligation to consult under the Inuit Land Claims Agreement? 

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

PREMIER DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

I have said this –

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

PREMIER DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, I have stated in this House before and I will reiterate again the importance in the relationships that we value with partners in Newfoundland and Labrador, especially members of the Nunatsiavut Government and also the Innu Nation.  We value their relationships very well. 

 

I have explained before our position on what the agreement requires, Mr. Speaker.  I have laid that out in this House before.  In the not-too-distant future I will look forward to having face-to-face meetings with leaders of both organizations so that we can have a very good discussion about our relationship and how we move forward together.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, that does not answer my question. 

 

Mr. Speaker, any amendments to the Voisey's Bay agreement, whether it concerns Voisey's Bay or Long Harbour, has a direct impact on the Nunatsiavut Government and the Innu Nation based on its royalty sharing agreements.  Both Nunatsiavut and the Innu Nation are losing millions of dollars under those agreements because of your decision on the sixth amendment.

 

I ask the Premier: With millions of dollars of lost revenue to both the Innu Nation and the Nunatsiavut Government, don't you think that is reason enough to consult?

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

PREMIER DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

By reaching agreement on Voisey's Bay and the shipping out of ore, what has happened is that we have a circumstance now where the mine can continue to operate. 

 

Mr. Speaker, 475 people continue to work at the site of Voisey's Bay.  The majority of them are Aboriginal people from Labrador who continue to receive good paying jobs that benefit not only them, but to use their words opposite – not only them but also it benefits their families. 

 

As well, as a result of that, the Nunatsiavut Government continues to receive their share of royalties because the ore is being shipped out, Mr. Speaker.  This is a win-win situation for the people of Labrador.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. MITCHELMORE: Mr. Speaker, expropriating an industrial site like the Abitibi mill in Grand Falls-Windsor is one of the most dangerous and costly liabilities a government can assume. 

 

Given the demolition contract's scope of practice is only to knock down, smooth over and walk away, I ask the minister: What is your remediation plan for removal of the existing chemical hazards, and what is the cost of this removal?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

We have entered into a very unique contract with a proponent here –

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

MR. BRAZIL: – for Grand Falls and the dismantling of the mill.  There are a number of things that we have to keep in mind here when we do this; one, is the historic significance out there.  It is the culture of that community.  We want to do it with dignity.  We have talked to the company to make sure that as we take down that part of history, that it is done in a character way so that the people of that community would have respect for what is being done, and particularly the proponent.

 

We are also going to be working with the municipalities in the region and with the citizens to identify what is the best use of that land once the facility itself is taken down.  The remediation then would be determined based on what the future use of that land would be for.

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. MITCHELMORE: Mr. Speaker, it is obvious they have not done their work on the cost or a remediation plan.

 

Government is trying to sell good news by getting rid of the physical structure, but the real cost of any environmental cleanup is below the surface.  No hazard assessment has been publicly available.

 

I ask the minister: Have you completed a report; and, if so, since you claim to be open, why are you withholding a public release of a report on these hazards?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

We take very seriously every piece of property we have and the remediation and the environmental concerns.  In this case, our first objective here is to take down the property.  We are working with the Department of Environment; we have consultants on site.  We have construction equipment now on site to first do the first part of our phase of remediating that site, of taking down the buildings.  Once that is complete and we have our stakeholders' roundtables, we will then determine exactly what that site's future use would be, and what type of remediation, and the costs associated with that.

 

Mr. Speaker, I also want to note, this is a bigger picture here.  This is a $100 million asset that the people of this Province have.  So we are going to build all of this so that part of this Province and the rest of this Province benefits from our investment here, Mr. Speaker.

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. FLYNN: Mr. Speaker, government released documents in January of this year stating that the new West Coast hospital would open in 2019.  We received an ATIPP application this week saying it will open in 2020.

 

So when will the minister finally nail down the date for the West Coast hospital to open?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

We have consistently said all along that it will take approximately five years to complete construction of the entire West Coast hospital campus.  There are multiple buildings to be constructed.  The very first portion of the campus that will commence construction is the long-term care facility.  We know in each region of the Province there is a great need for more long-term care beds, and I am pleased to say that we are very committed to delivering on the commitment to the people of the West Coast to create many new beds on the West Coast hospital site.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East has time for a very quick question.

 

MR. FLYNN: Eight years ago government promised to build a new hospital on the West Coast.  Government said it would be completed in 2014.  In 2010, it was 2016.  In 2011, it was 2017.

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member has time for a quick question.

 

MR. FLYNN: In 2015, you are now saying 2020.  Is there a pattern here?

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services, for a quick reply.

 

MR. KENT: No, Mr. Speaker.  We are very committed to making progress.  There has been millions of dollars now spent.

 

The dates will be really firm as the design of the new facility continues, but there will be construction later this year on the long-term care component.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

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

 

Yesterday, the Minister of Health and Community Services said that having nurses collect blood samples in St. Clare's ER is about reducing wait times.

 

I ask the minister: Where is the data showing by how much wait times will be reduced?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, reducing health care wait times for a number of services in our system has been a priority for this government for the past decade.  There are lots of reports and updates available.  I will be pleased to provide any of the research to the hon. member.

 

Eastern Health did change the process for blood collection in the emergency department only at St. Clare's to improve wait times and also to improve health outcomes.

 

We know this process works because it has been in place at the Health Sciences Centre for ten years, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

Obviously, there is no study that has been done of St. Clare's.  I point out to the Speaker that many ER departments in Canada and elsewhere, in other jurisdictions, have gone back to using lab technicians because the results were better and more cost effective.

 

I ask the minister: Why are reliability and quality being sacrificed in the name of efficiency?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, I take exception to those suggestions.  I can also assure you that if nurses express any concerns about workload, I have received assurance from folks at Eastern Health that they welcome the input from nurses.  They are happy to sit down with nurses and address those concerns.

 

The process that is being put in place at St. Clare's has been in place at the Health Sciences Centre for about a decade.  It has worked well.  It has improved efficiency.  It has improved wait times.  It has improved patient flow within our facilities.

 

It is the right thing to do.  I support Eastern Health's decision, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

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

 

I will be happy to show studies to the minister that says otherwise. 

 

I ask the minister, since he seems to know what nurses are thinking: Who, if anyone, was consulted before this decision was made?

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, there has been no compromise to quality here.  In fact, we are improving processes within our health care system constantly.  We had a consultant called X32 that has done a great deal of work in this area and there is information available, which I would be happy to provide to the member opposite. 

 

Consultation with nurses is ongoing.  In fact, this is an issue that has been discussed within the system for several years.  The changes were first made at the Health Sciences Centre a decade ago.  I recognize that Eastern Health has a different view and a different opinion than the unions involved, and I respect that, Mr. Speaker. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, a research group that includes public health professionals is going to be putting together a presentation for the fracking review panel on the impacts of fracking on public health. 

 

Who on the government appointed panel is qualified to interpret those findings for the final fracking review report? 

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's only interest in this Province being fracking or the lack of.  I want to be clear, we are not fracking.  We are not accepting any applications.  We are not fracking in Gros Morne.  We have an independent panel, independent of me as minister, that will do a piece of work for the entire Province.  There will be an opportunity for all of his friends to present.

 

Mr. Speaker, the independent panel will do an evaluation of what is presented, and what they do not know they will go out and reach out to some experts and get some information.  We want them to do a fair, independent, and partial piece of work on behalf of the entire Province, Mr. Speaker. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, the minister said they are not fracking in the Province.  Well, why bother to have a panel if that is the case?  Public health is a major concern to the people around the fracking issue.  The minister has to recognize that.

 

So I ask him: Why ignore public health? 

 

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

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, he does not need to raise his voice to indicate that we do not have a concern about public health in this Province.  The minister can stand here and talk about $3 billion we are spending year after year for public health in this Province.  The Minister of Environment can talk about regulation after regulation that supports the people of the Province.  So to suggest in any way that we do not care about public health is absolutely wrong and foolishness, Mr. Speaker. 

 

The panel will be well represented, Mr. Speaker, and the people he is talking about, I look forward to their report.  I am sure it will add greatly to the debate over fracking in this Province. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

The time for Question Period has expired.

 

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

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. J. BENNETT: 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 humbly sheweth:

 

WHEREAS there is no cellphone service in the Town of Trout River, which is an enclave community in Gros Morne National Park; and

 

WHEREAS visitors to Gros Morne National Park, more than 100,000 annually, expect to communicate by cellphone when they visit the park; and

 

WHEREAS cellphone service has become a very important aspect of everyday living for residents; and

 

WHEREAS cellphone service is an essential safety tool for residents and visitors; and

 

WHEREAS cellphone service is essential for business development;

 

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to partner with the private sector to extend cellphone coverage throughout Gros Morne National Park and the enclave community of Trout River.

 

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

MR. J. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, this is a petition that I have presented repeatedly.  Because I have so many people who have –

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

I ask members for their co-operation as the Member for St. Barbe delivers his petition.

 

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

 

MR. J. BENNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

It is timely to present this petition this week considering that Trout River Gulch was blocked with snow for two or three days over the past week, and a significant part of the Northern Peninsula highway, Route 430, was blocked for an entire day back when we had a storm on Monday.  The people who were trapped in snowdrifts were unable to receive cellphone coverage.  They had no way to notify friends, family, or relatives, or emergency services of where they were or what had happened to them. 

 

This has become a very serious public safety issue.  Mr. Speaker, I can also advise over the last two years I have had discussions with Bell Mobility.  They are more than willing to establish a cellphone tower in Cow Head which would provide substantial cellphone coverage, but no, they cannot get any co-operation from government. 

 

They thought they had this proposal approved.  In fact, government has not committed whatsoever to providing cellphone service to residents in this region.  This is critically important, if not for the residents, than at least for tourists who come on an annual basis to visit the, what we call the gem of the Great Northern Peninsula, Gros Morne National Park. 

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. KIRBY: 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 Eastern School District is considering a 1.5 year plan to bus Kindergarten to Grade 6 students to the Newfoundland School for the Deaf; and

 

WHEREAS parents have expressed concern that long bus rides to school involve dangers, such as congested streets and, busy intersections, especially during winter weather conditions; and

 

WHEREAS review of the Holy Family school system to recommend that the Department of Education consider an alternative to having children attend the Newfoundland School for the Deaf; and

 

WHEREAS some parents suggest having Grades 5-6 attend Villa Nova Junior High school to alleviate some congestion at Holy Family; and

 

WHEREAS parents are continuing to demand more flexible policies to meet the current needs of school children;

 

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge government to change the proposal of transferring children from Holy Family School to the former Newfoundland School for the Deaf building.

 

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

 

Mr. Speaker, I have presented this petition a number of times now.  There are about another 100 signatures on this collection here.  I have heard a lot from parents who have students at this school.  A lot of them are very concerned about the potential for having kids in Grades 2-6 travelling for forty-five minutes to St. John's to go to school. 

 

Similarly, there are parents who are very concerned about the possibility of another significant increase in the school population at Holy Family, when that school was not built to accommodate a population of students as high as perhaps 1,000 students.  This proposal to bring in some sort of portable toilet room or something like that to accommodate the need for additional washroom facilities just seems foolhardy to me. 

 

As I said before, Mr. Speaker, this is symptomatic of a larger problem that this government has created by not paying attention to population growth projections on the Northeast Avalon and basically letting everything get away from them when it comes to new school construction.

 

Parents in Torbay have been promised a new school for September 2016.  Parents in Portugal Cove-St. Phillips have been promised a new school for 2016.  Parents in Conception Bay South have been promised a new school for 2016, and the minister is hopefully optimistic that the work is going to get done. 

 

You cannot live on hopeful optimism.  We cannot achieve the educational outcomes that we need to be a world leader in education by being hopefully optimistic.  You have to do your job properly.  It has not been done.  That is the reason why we have signatures like these.

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

I remind the member that his time has expired.

 

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

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

 

MS DEMPSTER: 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 humbly sheweth:

 

WHEREAS most communities in the District of Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair do not have adequate broadband service; and

 

WHEREAS residents, businesses, students, nurses, and teachers rely heavily on the Internet to conduct their work and cannot afford to wait until 2016 to access a potential plan in partnership with the Muskrat Falls development; and

 

WHEREAS there are a number of world-class tourism sites in the region, including UNESCO site at Red Bay, Battle Harbour Historic Site, and the Mealy Mountains National Park;

 

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 appropriate agencies to provide adequate broadband service to communities along the Labrador Coast.

 

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

 

Mr. Speaker, since I first started submitting this petition, we had made some progress.  As of the end of March, we have seen most of the Labrador Straits upgraded.  I understand within the next two or three weeks we are going to be see Red Bay and Pinware brought on.  I am very happy about that.  Somehow Capstan Island got overlooked there in the middle of it all, and I understand that is being looked at.

 

Mr. Speaker, we still have a very, very serious situation.  We are absolutely crippled down in Southeast Labrador when it comes to broadband connection, Mr. Speaker, to the point that – I just said to my colleague – businesses cannot run a basic Interac machine in this digital age.  When I am back in my district, I am unable to do anything more than send or receive an email; that is basically it.  So I am crippled from doing my work.  I understand the frustration of the people in that area.

 

Again, I am calling on government to work with the service provider.  I mentioned here that last time I stood on a petition there are online petitions.  Active community groups are seeking legal opinion right now.  They are frustrated to see can a service provider actually charge us for a service that we are not getting.

 

I am asking the Province to work with Industry Canada's Connecting Canadians program, look at partnerships there, and work with the service provider to see what they can do in this digital age to improve the service in Southeast Labrador for those communities.

 

I will continue to petition for the residents in that area.

 

Thank you.

 

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

 

MS ROGERS: 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 Family Violence Intervention Court provided a comprehensive approach to domestic violence in a court setting that fully understood and dealt with the complex issues of domestic violence; and

 

WHEREAS domestic violence continues to be one of the most serious issues facing our Province today, and the cost of the impact of domestic violence is great both economically and in human suffering; and

 

WHEREAS the Family Violence Intervention Court was welcomed and endorsed by all aspects of the justice system, including the police, the courts, prosecutors, defence counsel, Child, Youth and Family Services, as well as victims, offenders, community agencies, and women's groups; and

 

WHEREAS the recidivism rate for offenders going through the court was 10 per cent, compared to 40 per cent for those who did not; and

 

WHEREAS the budget for the court was only 0.2 per cent of the entire budget of the Department of Justice;

 

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge government to reinstate the Family Violence Intervention Court.

 

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

 

Mr. Speaker, I am happy once again to stand in defence of this petition, a petition that has been signed by thousands of people in the Province.  In the mandate letters of the Premier that he issued to every one of his departments, he wrote to the Minister of Justice and instructed her on the Family Violence Intervention Court.  He said: “In consultation with stakeholders, I expect you to explore –

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

Again, the Premier had instructed that Minister of Justice, which I assume will also extend to the current Minister of Justice: “In consultation with stakeholders, I expect you to explore, and propose for consideration, possible models for providing Family Violence Intervention Court throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.”

 

Mr. Speaker, I have not heard anything from any of the stakeholders that, in fact, that consultation process has begun.  Perhaps it has, but here we are getting very close to the release of the Budget, and one would assume that if in fact there was an intention and a commitment from this Premier to seriously look at reinstating and expanding the Family Violence Intervention Court, then that consultation should be well underway.

 

As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, one would expect that consultation would be pretty well done by now, and that the recommendations would be done.  I have a document that proposes how to do the court with existing infrastructure.

 

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

The hon. the Member for Trinity – Bay de Verde.

 

MR. CROCKER: 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 humbly sheweth:

 

WHEREAS many communities in the District of Trinity – Bay de Verde do not have cellphone coverage; and

 

WHEREAS residents of the district require cellphone coverage to ensure their safety and communications abilities; and

 

WHEREAS cellphone coverage on many portions of the highway in the district is poor or non-existent;

 

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to work with the appropriate agencies to provide adequate cellphone coverage throughout the entire District of Trinity – Bay de Verde.

 

And as in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

 

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to stand here today and introduce this petition into the House on behalf of the residents of Trinity – Bay de Verde.  It is time for the government to realize they have a role to play in cellphone coverage for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. 

 

This government has often boasted about our new 911 system in the Province.  Do not get me wrong, Mr. Speaker, I support a 911 system, but unfortunately this system is not very effective for people in my district.  Unless you have access to a land line, 911 is no good to you.

 

Mr. Speaker, this is a major safety issue when you are travelling on our roads.  You look at Route 80, you look at the Heart's Content Barrens, and you look at Route 74 on the North Shore.  As the Member for Burgeo – La Poile has pointed out in petitions throughout the last few days about the people who were stranded on the highways, and the Member for St. Barbe again today pointing out the same issue in his district.

 

Mr. Speaker, it is time for government to step up, work with the service providers, look for new technologies, and look for ways to get it done so that the people of the District of Trinity – Bay de Verde and all regions of this Province have adequate cellphone coverage.

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. George's – Stephenville East.

 

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

I have a petition related to snow clearing on public roads.

 

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

 

WHEREAS the provincial government has changed policies related to snow clearing in rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador in an arbitrary way without proper consultation; and

 

WHEREAS this policy change did not establish procedures for determining when new roads could be added to those eligible for snow clearing in unincorporated rural areas; and

 

WHEREAS there is a significant problem created in relation to the provision of services such as garbage collection and emergency services;

 

WHEREUPON  the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call on the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to review and update policies related to snow clearing.

 

Mr. Speaker, this petition was started by a gentleman in St. David's who has a house which is just a little ways down from where the road is cleared.  When he built his house the road used to be cleared.  He moved away to get work for a while and when he came back he found out that the road in front of his house was not being cleared.  So, it is a circumstance that has happened in a number of places around this Province and it is an issue that I think government needs to look at.

 

I think the whole idea of the way we do snow clearing needs to be looked at in rural areas of this Province and a review is necessary.  I think a review might even save the Province money if we look at what roads are being plowed that maybe do not need to be plowed, and the ones that are not being plowed that should be plowed.  I think we need to have a look at that. 

 

There are no provisions for new roads to be added to the list and other roads to be taken away.  So I think we need to have a look at that.  This is especially interesting in cases of emergency service and collection of garbage and things like that. 

 

The local service district in the area has intervened on Mr. King's behalf and asked that the department clear this road because he is still expected to pay for those services.  Although, because the road is not cleared, the local service district is not able to do things like collect his garbage or respond to any emergency in his area.  This is something that needs to be looked at.  It is a serious issue for many people in rural areas of this Province. 

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. MURPHY: 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 Tordon 101 contains the chemicals 2,4-D and picloram; and

 

WHEREAS the chemical picloram is a known cancer causing carcinogen; and

 

WHEREAS the provincial government has banned the cosmetic use of the pesticide 2,4-D; and

 

WHEREAS safer alternatives are available to the provincial government for brush clearance such as manual labour, alternative competitive seeding methods, and/or the mechanical removal of brush; and

 

WHEREAS the provincial government is responsible for ensuring the safety and well-being of its citizens; 

 

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge government to cease the use of chemicals covered under its own cosmetic pesticide ban and begin using safer methods of brush clearance that will not place its citizens in harm's way. 

 

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray. 

 

Mr. Speaker, this is Earth Day.  We recognize the Minister of Service NL stood up and talked about climate change but, even more importantly, what we are doing to our own planet.  What we are coming to realize is the more chemicals we put into our own environment, the more challenges this world is facing; and, indeed, I guess for its own survival in some cases.

 

Mr. Speaker, this petition talks about the use of chemicals in such a way that they are meant for good intentions.  There are obviously good intentions behind it.  In actual fact, for the purposes of roadside brush clearing, but we do have other methods out there that are a little bit safer and less damaging to the environment, if you will.

 

The most important line in this petition, Mr. Speaker – and this petition today is signed by people in the minister's own district, by the way, from Bell Island, and from another area known in the Province for heavy traffic when it comes to roadside brush clearing, Long Harbour, as well.  These are people who are very concerned about what is going into our environment, otherwise they would not have signed it.  I consider that to be part of the public interest.  Government's responsibility, of course, is to look after the public interest.

 

The important line here in the petition: WHEREAS the provincial government is responsible for ensuring the safety and well-being of its citizens. 

 

Mr. Speaker, like I say, if these are cancer-causing chemicals that we are putting into the environment, we can use other methods so that we do not have to be putting cancer-causing chemicals into the environment and causing future, potential health problems.  What is the future bottom line for people's health when it comes to the use of these chemicals?  They always come back to us.  They end up building up in our own bodies and end up causing grief.

 

Mr. Speaker, I present this petition again.  Like I said, it is not going to be the last time I am going to be standing up on this, but it is a consideration that government has to make.  We know the Budget is going to be coming down shortly.  Exactly when that is going to happen we are not sure because even the federal government is talking about releasing the Budget now in the first week of May.  So we could be going extremely late on this. 

 

Mr. Speaker, I will bring this to the government's attention as regards to the use of chemicals.  Look at safer methods of doing this.

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

MR. MURPHY: Look at better ways of doing this.

 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

Before we proceed to Orders of the Day, I just want to make a ruling on a point of order that was raised yesterday.

 

A point of order was raised by the Minister of Health and Community Services, who stood after Question Period to state that he had found comments of the Opposition House Leader to be offensive and inappropriate. 

 

Yesterday's Hansard and video recording of the proceedings of this House for the relevant period have been reviewed.  Any comments which the Opposition House Leader may have made are not audible on the video clip and they are not recorded in Hansard, which is the official record of the House.  Consequently, I find there is no point of order.

 

Orders of the Day. 

 

Orders of the Day

 

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

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I want to move to Motions 5 and 6.  I move –

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

The hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services, Motion 5, pursuant to Standing Order 11, this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. today, Thursday, March 26, 2015.

 

Further, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services, Motion 6, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that this House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. today, Thursday, March 26, 2015. 

 

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that this House not adjourn at 5:30 o'clock today and, furthermore, the motion is that this House not adjourn at 10:00 this evening. 

 

All those in favour, 'aye.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye. 

 

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

 

Carried. 

 

The hon. Deputy Government House Leader. 

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to move again to the Orders of the Day to Motion 3. 

 

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Natural Resources, for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Provincial Court Act, 1991, Bill 43, and I further move the bill be now read a first time. 

 

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Provincial Court Act, 1991, Bill 43 and that the said bill be now read the first time –

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

 

Could members please take their conversations outside?  Important business is being conducted in the Chamber. 

 

Is it the pleasure of the House that the minister shall have leave to introduce Bill 43 and that the said bill be now read for the first time? 

 

All those in favour, 'aye.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

 

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

 

Carried. 

 

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety to introduce a bill, “An Act To Amend The Provincial Court Act, 1991,” carried.  (Bill 43)

 

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Provincial Court Act, 1991.  (Bill 43)

 

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. 

 

When shall the bill be read a second time? 

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Tomorrow. 

 

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow. 

 

On motion, Bill 43 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. 

 

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

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I refer to the Order Paper and go to Order 1, Committee of Supply. 

 

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that this House do now resolve itself into a Committee of Supply to further consider the Interim Supply bill. 

 

All those in favour, 'aye.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

 

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

 

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 continuing to consider the related resolution to Bill 44, 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, 2016 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service. 

 

The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. S. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

It is always a pleasure to rise in this House and this will be my third time speaking to Interim Supply, and I wanted to share a few thoughts first before I get into the crux of my talk with regard to something that I attended just this past weekend out in the district and it is something very important.  It is the Loyal Orange Lodge in Charlottetown.  Actually, they were celebrating their 119th anniversary and it was a great gathering for people not only from the community, but from people right across the Province. 

 

As many of you know, the Loyal Orange Lodge has been around for a number of years in Newfoundland and Labrador.  I think it started in 1863.  About thirty-four years after that, the lodge in Charlottetown formed.  At the turn of the century, Mr. Chair, an interesting fact is that Bonavista Lodge #4 actually had the largest membership in all of North America, with 475 members.

 

It has a rich history here in the Province, so it is nice to celebrate that.  Any time I have an opportunity to go out to my district, out into the communities, to celebrate such things it is always nice to do so. 

 

Mr. Chair, which brings me to my next point, while at the celebration of the Loyal Orange Lodge I also had the opportunity to wish two fine constituents Doug and May Simmonds a happy fiftieth anniversary.  There is a large gathering home now in Charlottetown, Bonavista Bay for a meet and greet for their fiftieth anniversary, and I would just like to say to Doug and May, happy fiftieth. 

 

Mr. Chair, if you went corner to corner of this Province, all four corners, you would not meet a better crowd, you would not meet a friendly couple, someone who are so sincere and giving, so I want to give them my heartfelt congratulations on fifty years of marriage.  Someone who has only been married for six years, I certainly appreciate fifty.  I look forward to my fiftieth someday as well.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. S. COLLINS: Mr. Chair, if I can get into the reason why I stood today, it was only a few short days ago the Member for CBS got up.  He said something that really struck home for me.  Actually he says a lot that strikes home with me.  There was one thing in particular he said that really kind of got my back up because I was thinking now what is he talking about? 

 

He had said over the past ten years there is nothing that has really changed.  There has not been really any change in the last decade in Newfoundland and Labrador.  I said – imagine, he said it.  What makes it even better he said it with a straight face. 

 

I kind of thought back.  Of course over the past decade there have been a number of things that have happened, a transformation in this Province unprecedented as any member here I thought, would be able to agree.  I went back to an article.  Actually I spoke about this one. 

 

One of the first times I rose in this House, I guess about six years ago, I spoke about this because it is very interesting when you read about – before we comment where we are, we should always look on where we came from and where we were. 

 

I go back to an article that Margaret Wente wrote in The Globe and Mail.  Many of you are probably aware of it.  It was January 2005, I believe.  It is an interesting point because of course 2005 is about a decade ago.  That is our rule that – the Member for CBS, that is the groundwork he laid out.  He said over the past decade there has been very little change.

 

I wanted to read a couple of quotes from Margaret Wente, and while I am not a big fan of her opinion, she is a fine writer.  She is renowned right across this country and probably throughout the world.  I want to read a few excerpts from that article.  Again this article was written in 2005, not that long ago.  It was a decade ago, so I think it is a good base point to where my conversation is going.

 

If you would indulge me I will read a few excerpts, “…the sensation on this side is of a deep and painful bite to the hand that feeds.  Mr. Williams” – referring to the Premier at the time – “reminds me of a deadbeat brother-in-law who's hit you up for money a few times too often.  He's been sleeping on your couch for years, and now he's got the nerve to complain that it's too lumpy.” 

 

Now imagine she is speaking about the Premier at the time talking about – of course he was looking for our fair share with regard to equalization payments in the Atlantic Accord and all those things that were going on at the time.  Let's put this in perspective; so he is a deadbeat person, sleeps on your couch, and complains it is too lumpy, handouts. 

 

She goes on to talk about, “Over the years, those of us not blessed to be born on the Rock have sent countless cakes its way in the form of equalization payments, pogey, and various hare-brained make-work schemes … In return, the surly islanders have blamed us for everything from the disappearance of the cod stocks to the destruction of the family unit, because if people had to work more than 10 weeks before they could collect EI, they might have to move away. 

 

“This hallowed policy of siphoning money from the haves to the have-nots” – and of course in 2005 we were the have-nots; others in Canada, middle Canada probably were the haves, that has changed – “so that everyone can be equal, has turned Canada into a permanently aggrieved nation, in which every region in the country is convinced that it's being brutally ripped off by every other region.  No one is better at this blame game than the Newfs, egged on by generations of politicians.”

 

“…so we send more money so that more people can stay in the scenic villages where they were born, even though” even though, Mr. Chair, “the fish are all gone and there's no more work and never will be,” – there never will be any work – “unless they can steal some telemarketing from Bangalore.” Bangalore is in India, for those who do not know.

 

“Rural Newfoundland” and Labrador “…is probably the most vast and scenic welfare ghetto in the world.”

 

“No one will ever buy a scenic postcard of a strip mall.  But Scarborough supports itself,” – Scarborough, Ontario, which the member from across the way is well familiar with, he travels there often – “and Newfoundland does not, and I wish Danny Williams would explain why it's a good idea to keep picking the pockets of Chinese drycleaners and Korean variety-store owners who work 90 hours a week in order to keep subsidizing the people who live in Carbonear, no matter how quaint and picturesque they are.”

 

Now, Mr. Chair, that was an article that was written in a national newspaper ten years ago, only ten years ago.  Do you know what the most shocking thing about all of this?  Now, the opinions were gross, and many things borderline racist, if you would, but the opinions were based on a logic, and of course that was a logic that we were a province that heavily depended on EI.  We heavily depended on transfer payments, and those types of things.  That is where she based her opinions.

 

Now, I would ask any members – I would specifically ask the Member for CBS – do you think anyone could or would write an article with such gibberish in it ten years later?  Of course, they would not.  Why wouldn't they?  Because they cannot.  Why can't they?  Because it is a changed Province.  Ten years, ten years – where we were, Mr. Chair, versus where we are, two very different places.  They pale in comparison to one another.

 

Why is that?  There are a number of reasons.  Some would say oil and gas – and of course that obviously was a large determinant of it, but it was all about governance as well, Mr. Chair.  You only have to look at who has been in these chairs, who sat on this side of the House over the past ten years – and it gives me more reason to get up here and be very proud of the work that this government has done over the past decade, and even a little bit more than that.

 

So, Mr. Chair, do challenges remain?  Absolutely.  I am from rural Newfoundland and Labrador.  I lived there; I spend every weekend home.  When I am not in this House, I am out in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.  I am very aware of it.  I started off by speaking about Charlottetown, Bonavista Bay.  That is the quintessential rural Newfoundland and Labrador community.  So I am very familiar with it.

 

So challenges do remain, but I can tell you and I can tell everyone in this House the great things that are happening in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.  It upsets me, and I take exception to it when I hear members such as the the one from CBS who was on council, who I believe was an educator in his previous life as well, someone who is informed, I would hope would be informed, can talk about such things and say such things, such fallacies. 

 

It also concerns me, particularly from the Member for CBS, he is from an area that has seen some of the most unprecedented growth in all of the Province.  A community, I guess it borderlines – it is almost a city it is going to become I am sure in a few short years with all of the communities coming together.  He has seen first-hand all the progressive work, the Progressive Conservative work, that has gone on in his district.  He was on council.  He was there taking the cheques when money was rolling into the community, as housing permits were going out, as industry was moving in and commercial areas were getting built up.

 

This is the member who has the gall to stand to his feet and say nothing has changed in the past ten years.  Mr. Chair, I do not know if he was saying it just to score political points and if he actually believes what he said.  I hope he does not believe what he said.  I do not believe what he says and I do not think any member on this side of the House does. 

 

People around the Province – people always say you have short memories.  I do not believe the folks of Newfoundland and Labrador have that short a memory.  I think people can realize where we have come in the last ten years.  I can stand here as a proud Progressive Conservative and someone who has been part of this government for the past six years and in various other forms since 2004, I am proud of the work that has happened.  I am proud of the investments we have made.

 

Many – and the vast majority I would argue – are in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.  The work that has gone on and the work that will continue to go on, again, is fantastic.  It adds so much to the life to those, particularly again, in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.  That is certainly not to leave out the metropolitan area and the Northeast Avalon because we all know the boom that they have seen is off the charts.  I go back to the Member for CBS.  He has seen it first-hand; he just must have forgotten it. 

 

We only get ten minutes to speak during this, but I just wanted a few moments just to lay that out and to remind people where we were ten short years ago versus where we are today, two very different spots, and it is for some very important reasons. 

 

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

 

MR. S. COLLINS: If the Member for St. John's Centre would allow me to finish, I have seventeen seconds left and I would like to take the last seventeen seconds to actually wish my colleague's colleague, the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi, a very happy birthday.  I understand that tomorrow the Leader of the Third Party will be having her birthday, and I would like to wish her a happy birthday as we will not be in the House tomorrow.  Happy birthday. 

 

Thank you.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I just want to rise – I heard the minister speak just then, talking about the Member for CBS.  Mr. Chair, everybody knows I have been passionate about the hospital in Corner Brook.  I will show you transcripts where this minister got on because he was ordered to get on Open Line and say there should be no radiation in Corner Brook.  There should be no PET scanner in Corner Brook.  Ordered to get on Open Line.  I say, tell your Premier right here and now that it should not be done.  Let's see if you have the guts, because you were ordered.  He was Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Health and ordered to get on and tell the people in Corner Brook they did not deserve radiation, they did not deserve a PET scanner.  Here he is talking about Margaret Wente, and you expect us to sit down and listen to him. 

 

Mr. Chair, do you know what the minister reminds me of?  A puppet, someone pulling his string: now go on Open Line and say this, say that.  Mr. Chair, if he really believed what he said, walk over and tell the Premier radiation should not be in Corner Brook, PET scanners should not be in Corner Brook.  Guess what?  He does not have the intestinal fortitude to do it.  He does not have it, he just do not have it. 

 

What is he going to do?  Stand up here and talk about Margaret Wente, but he will not go out and face Corner Brook, because I offered.  I was on Open Line, Mr. Chair, and I offered the Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Health: Come to Corner Brook, face the people.  Guess what?  He did not do it, but he can stand up here and criticize one of ours because of Margaret Wente and something she said. 

 

Mr. Chair, it is shameful, because there is nothing more important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador than their health and their health care system.  When I was fighting for the long-term care facility in Corner Brook, the extra 100 beds, when I was fighting for the hospital, when I was fighting for the radiation, this minister got on Open Line and said I was foolish, were his words.  It should not be done, it should not be done, Mr. Chair.  Guess what?  It is being done. 

 

Let him tell the Premier of this Province, let him tell the Minister of Health that they are foolish too, Mr. Chair.  Do not go criticizing members from our side when we are fighting for health care.  This member is like a little puppet.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. JOYCE: It upsets me, Mr. Chair, when you do not want to support the people in this Province.  You do not want support the people in Western Newfoundland health care because you are a Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Health.  Now you have to go on Open Line and criticize Eddie Joyce because Eddie Joyce does not know what he is talking about. 

 

Eddie Joyce did know what he was talking about and this caucus here stood up for people of Western Newfoundland.  I will still invite the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services to come out and have a public meeting with the people – be a man.  Be a man and tell them they do not deserve it. 

 

Anytime you want to stand up here and criticize someone, just remember, you did not stand up for the people of Western Newfoundland.  You did not stand up for radiation.  You did not stand up for a PET scanner when they needed you.  So do not go trying to lecture anyone over on this side of the House, because you are not the person to do it.  Mr. Chair, he is not the person to do it. 

 

Now, Mr. Chair, I will get back to what I was going to say originally. 

 

Mr. Chair, I heard the Minister of Health today talking about the hospital in Corner Brook.  Then again, I know the Member for Humber East asked questions today.  Do you want to know why people are skeptical?  We put in two freedoms of information.  One came back, and it was concerning the radiation.  In the report that was given, the information from the government, is that the hospital is going to open in 2019.  We have a second report that was done on the functional plan, it says 2020. 

 

Mr. Chair, I always said if I am ever going to say anything in this House, I am willing to back it up.  Look at Hansard, the minister said in this House that the hospital will start in 2016.  It is going to take five years to build.  That is 2021.  They just cannot be honest with the people in Corner Brook and Western Newfoundland.  I do not know why.  I honestly do not know why.  I do not know why they just cannot stand up and say look, it is delayed, but here is where we are now.  Stand up and be honest. 

 

I know the Minister of Health met with the action committee in November.  He promised to have floor plans to them in two weeks.  Guess what?  The members of the action committee have been trying to reach him ever since. 

 

Mr. Chair, there is a conference call tonight at 6:30.  I am not invited to it.  I am not allowed to it.  I ask the Member for Humber West, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, will you ask your minister if I can attend as an MHA, and the Member for Humber East, if they can attend a meeting tonight about this health care facility in Corner Brook. 

 

Here is a chance for the Member for Humber West now to stand up for his people out there also.  He is the same one, Mr. Chair.  The Member for Humber West in 2011 went out, sent tractors out – and the former Premier and the Member for Humber East.  Guess what?  He sent tractors out in 2011, plowed off some land, a nice big dog park out there, a nice big skidoo facility.  He got up at a public meeting in Corner Brook during the election in 2011 and said construction will start in 2012. 

 

AN HON. MEMBER: I never said that.

 

MR. JOYCE: No, you never, the Member for Humber East.  You were there, but you did not correct him.  You were part of the government. 

 

Do you know who the honest one was in all this, out of this whole group over here with this hospital?  It is the Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Health.  He was the Minister of Transportation and Works who came in here in Estimates.  I said to him show me – the Harbour Main – Whitbourne member.  I said show me where the money is spent on the functional plan.  He said Ed, we do not even have the predesign done yet.  I nearly fell off my chair.

 

AN HON. MEMBER: When was that?

 

MR. JOYCE: That was in 2012.  That was after the Member for Humber West and the Member for Humber East were in a public meeting, after sending tractors up, levelling it off so they have a nice dog park up there.  After they levelled it all off, Mr. Chair, saying the construction will start.  I walked in and the Member for Harbour Main – Whitbourne, who was the Minister of Transportation and Works, at least he was honest.  I have to give him credit, he was honest and all throughout the way.

 

I ask the Member for Humber West who is over there sitting in his seat, who is the Minster of Fisheries, can myself and the Member for Humber East attend that meeting tonight, or is it barred now and we are going to be told all this information, like they were told in November, they will have something in two months?  Like the minister just gave us on the freedom of information, the functional plan, he stood up in this House and said: oh, no, that is not the functional plan. 

 

I just want the Member for Humber West know, I sent a copy out to the health care committee.  I know the minister is supposed to do it but I guess it slipped his mind.  They are still waiting for it.  So I sent it out for him, Mr. Chair.  That is all I am going to say about that.

 

Mr. Chair, once again, I will ask the Member for Humber West, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, will you get permission so that we can attend the conference call tonight at 6:30 in Corner Brook about the health care committee?  I am asking him publicly if that can be done.  Even if it is just to sit in to listen.  Mr. Chair, like I always said, what this government says out in Corner Brook, it changes when they get back here in St. John's.  The two people who know what has been said in Corner Brook is myself and the Member for Humber East.  Here is an opportunity.  I beg you to do that, I ask the Member for Humber West.

 

Mr. Chair, I will stand up here on Monday or Tuesday or Wednesday and say if I got an invitation to that meeting, because I think I should be there as a member.  I think I should be there to ask questions.  I think the Member for Humber East should be there.  I am pretty confident the Member for Humber West, with such an important issue, will be there also.  I will be shocked if the Member for Humber East is not at the meeting tonight, that teleconference tonight.  I will be shocked.

 

Now, do not be surprised if I stand up here on Monday or Tuesday and says the Member for Humber West never attended that meeting.  Do not be shocked if I do that.  I am asking to be there. 

 

AN HON. MEMBER: We should all be allowed.

 

MR. JOYCE: Right, we have members here – the Member for St. Barbe should be there.  The Member for Burgeo – La Poile, the Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair, and the Member for The Straits should be there.  Why can't we all go on the teleconference to find out what is going on?  Why not?  Isn't this an open government now?  Isn't this the type of government now who wants to share all the information?

 

The Member for Humber West, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, is sitting in his seat.  He is the minister now for Western Newfoundland.  We are asking you on behalf of caucus: Will you get us permission to attend that teleconference tonight so we can tell our residents exactly where this hospital stands?  What is the functional plan?  When is it going to be ready?  When is all the construction going to start for the long-term care, for the acute care?  Let's give all the right information to the people of Western Newfoundland and Labrador.

 

I ask the minister once more.  Here is your opportunity to stand up for the people of Western Newfoundland.  I doubt very much if he is going to do it, but I will come back on Monday or Tuesday and say if I got it, Mr. Chair.  I am sure the minister is going to give us an update on it anyway.

 

Mr. Chair, I just have another fifty-five seconds here.  There is one thing that I want to speak about, the family caregiver program.  I was absolutely shocked when I received the information about how restrictive this program is – absolutely shocked.  When they stood up in election 2011 and promised the family care program for all people of Newfoundland and Labrador, it took them two-and-a-half or three years to come up with this restrictive program, knowing people could not get the funds out of it.  If you want to talk about a sham, they made it so restrictive that very few people can even get the funds out of it – very few.  The most vulnerable people in this Province cannot use it.

 

I urge the government to go back and look at your criteria and change it.  There are a lot of people suffering out in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador who would like to use it –

 

CHAIR: I remind the hon. member his speaking time is expired.

 

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. DINN: Mr. Chairman, when I walked in – I just came from the Department of Health with a constituent who had a meeting, and I thank the minister for the great staff you have.  Actually, we met with three representatives from your department, and very professional, very co-operative people, I must say.  We came away from the meeting feeling very good.  Thank you very much.

 

When I walk into the House of Assembly, a bit late, I was hearing things about Newfoundlanders, and I kind of thought back to how hard workers Newfoundlanders have always been.  Newfoundlanders have a reputation of being hard workers.  They have always had it.

 

AN HON. MEMBER: What about Labradorians?

 

MR. DINN: I am sorry – Newfoundlanders and Labradorians; you are right.  Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have always been hard workers.

 

I remember when I grew up, there were twelve of us in a family, we had a dog that starved to death because there were no scraps, as you can imagine.  There was not very much left.  When the pot was emptied out, there was nothing to throw out, very little.  I came from a family of hard workers.  My mom and dad worked like slaves to keep twelve children fed.  I can remember my grandparents worked very hard.  We, as Newfoundlanders, have a history of being hard workers –

 

AN HON. MEMBER: Labradorians.

 

MR. DINN: – and Labradorians, yes.  We have a history of that, and I hope we keep that history.

 

I have been sitting in the House of Assembly for the last couple of weeks hearing the back and forth about Interim Supply, especially about this $20 billion oil revenue we have had in the last ten years.  I wanted to talk a bit about that.  I am not going to negative.  I was tempted when I was getting up to be a bit negative.  If I could get some people's attention, it would be nice.

 

AN HON. MEMBER: Tell us about the Member for CBS.

 

MR. DINN: No, I am not going to say anything about the Member for CBS.  I was going to be –

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

MR. DINN: I had a temptation to be a bit negative, but I am not going to be that way.  I think I am going to focus on all the good things that came from this $20 billion and especially in my district. 

 

We took $2 billion of that $20 billion over the last five or six years and we gave wage increases to the people who work for the public service: teachers, nurses, doctors, police people, people who operate our plows, people who work here at the Confederation Building, people who work in all the government buildings throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.  We were able to give those people that decent wage after they waited so long and so many years of austerity. 

 

I am sure if I picked up the phone or any Member of the House of Assembly picked up the phone tomorrow and phoned the union leaders and asked them what do they think about us squandering or spending that money giving them wage increases – what do you think their answer would be?  I am sure they would not say that this was money wasted.

 

Then if I wanted to carry it a bit further and pick up the phone and call the nurses and doctors and teachers, social workers, NAPE employees who work from my district with the government, I am sure if I said to them we wasted money giving you wage increases, I can imagine what I would hear.  I am sure I would not be treated very well.  I do not think this was $2 million wasted; I think this was money well spent for people who deserve those raises. 

 

We spent $20 billion on infrastructure, building new schools, fixing roads, reconstructing roads that were bad, building new roads, building health care facilities, and treatment centres.  We built town halls, and public buildings were fixed all over the place.  We helped municipalities all over this Province with our new formulas to put in water and sewer projects and other capital works. 

 

I am sure the Member for St. John's South would agree because he worked with me on this project for a number of years.  I am sure that there would be very few people in the west end of St. John's and in Kilbride who would say that the new west end high school was a waste of money; that almost $40 million was something that the people wanted.  From 1999 to 2000 when Beaconsfield quit being a high school in the west end, people in that area always felt aggrieved; they felt that there should be a school in the west end of St. John's.  Guess what?  That new school is going to open in September of this year.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. DINN: People are very happy with that. 

 

Another project in my area that this money was spent on, or some of it, was building a new community centre for Southlands.  I have been at the opening of that place.  We worked on it for ten or twelve years trying to get that.  We had community groups in the area of Southlands trying to get a community centre because that was one of the features missing in that whole area. 

 

Southlands people are very appreciative.  They use this community centre to the maximum.  It is very much appreciated.  None of them would be against this going on.

 

We have contributed to Bay Bulls Big Pond water supply system being upgraded.  The Petty Harbour Long Pond water system was upgraded.  We have contributed to the Goulds Arena upgrades, the paving and the warm room in there.  We have helped with the sidewalks on the main road, and the upgrades on the main road in the Goulds and Kilbride.  We are cost sharing the Team Gushue Highway Extension, which will take people from the west end right down across town.

 

I heard in the last two weeks that this government did not put away any money for a rainy day.  I beg to differ.  I think that the west end high school and any other new schools that were built in this Province by this government are not built for the next two or three years, they are going to last nearly fifty years.  We have put money away in the way of infrastructure. 

 

Roads that are done will last ten-plus years.  Ferries and water bombers that we bought are not going to give out, we hope, in two or three years; they should be good for nearly twenty years.  Water and sewer projects should be good for fifty-plus years.  This is all investment into the future.

 

To carry on, that is $8 billion gone out of that $20 billion.  We put $3 billion on the public debt.  Now, how important was that?  I heard some people say the other day it does not make a difference; we are still going to owe $11 billion in the public debt.  If we had not put $3 billion on the public debt and bring it from $11 billion down to $8 billion then if we do have deficits for the next three years and it goes up to $11 billion – it will not be $14 billion; it will be $11 billion. 

 

Because of this paying down the debt –

 

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

 

MR. DINN: Can we listen over there now or do I have to go over? 

 

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

 

MR. DINN: I have done that too. 

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

MR. DINN: I am not very big but – anyway I am just joking now; do not take it seriously. 

 

By paying down the debt, by doing the fiscal stuff that we did over the last ten years, we did something that was very important for this Province.  We were able to get a high credit rating, probably one of the highest credit ratings this Province ever had.  Guess what that means?  That means you get lower interest rates on your debt payments which saves you millions of dollars in the future.  So that was a very wise move.  A move that was praised, not only by us bragging about ourselves, but banking institutions.  Financial people all over the world praised us for what we were doing. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. DINN: We came into a situation that was bleak.  We fixed it, and if the people elect us again this fall, we will do the same thing again. 

 

Now, that is $3 billion on the debt.  We also gave people in this Province a $3 billion tax break.  We cut income tax, provincial income tax rates, we eliminated taxes on all kinds of insurance and other things, and we did away with a lot of fees.  This put $3 billion-plus, over the last seven or eight or ten years, into people's pockets – a lot of money.

 

We put $2 billion into the public pension funds.  It is something that needed to be done.  We took about three-quarters of a billion and put it into the university so that we could keep –

 

CHAIR: I have to remind the hon. member his speaking time has expired.

 

MR. DINN: Already? 

 

Thank you.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

 

MR. J. BENNETT: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

I thank the members, but I have not spoken yet.

 

Mr. Chair, you can imagine my surprise when just a few minutes ago the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services was up and quoted Margaret Wente from ten years ago in order to launch an attack on the Member for Conception Bay South on a transportation issue, when he is the Minister Responsible for Child, Youth and Family Services.  That is a surprise to me.

 

I would like to, through the Chair, relate to the people of the Province another one of the tales from the crypt of Child, Youth and Family Services and child protection in this Province.  There was a report done by the Child and Youth Advocate and it's called: Turning a Blind Eye.  In Turning a Blind Eye, the Child and Youth Advocate related to the people of the Province and complained to the minister, to the department.  She looked at a case that lasted a span of thirteen years.  Not thirteen months – which is the one I spoke about the last day – thirteen years. 

 

She said in 2005, the Child and Youth Advocate undertook this investigation following the conviction of a mother for numerous offences against her children, namely her two girls, Jane and Mary.  The woman was subsequently sentences to several years in prison.  She said the events span a thirteen-year period, wherein multiple professionals and agencies had contact with the family on a continuous basis.

 

Why this is important, Mr. Chair, is because the same circumstances exist today because this government does not take child protection seriously enough.  The same circumstances exist today, where what happened in this case could again happen.  What happened in this case?  This was only the beginning where this mother was convicted. 

 

In the courts, comprehensive notes were logged from the early 1990s forward.  So if you go back from the 2005 conviction to the early 1990s – this closed in 1993.  Three of the children that mother had from her first relationship had been apprehended by child services.  So child services took three children into protective care in 1993.  Then following the notes and looking at what happened thereafter, that same mother went forward in a second relationship, had six more children who were neglected and abused to such an extent that the mother faced criminal charges. 

 

The Youth Advocate said three of the children, including the Jane and Mary, had been taken into care for the first time in 1995, and they were returned to their mother.  She went on to say that when extra vigilance, reviews and analysis should have happened over the next several years, file documentation did not mirror the safeguards that were reportedly in place – not were in place, were reportedly in place. 

 

The same issue that I discussed on Joey, The Child Upstairs, Recommendation No. 2 of this report is one of the recommendations not implemented by this government.  That recommendation is: The Department of Child, Youth and Family Services must develop policy to ensure all children in a family are physically and “ … critically observed during a referral and during every home visit.”

 

What does the department say?  The department said, well, we are not really going to do that.  We are really not interested in all the children.  We are going to have some visits.

 

The Child and Youth Advocate says you must see every child in every visit.  Doesn't that make sense to most people?  Doesn't it make sense to the people of this Province that if somebody has gone far enough to report an abuse situation, a neglect situation, an abandoned child, a beaten child, a starved child, a child who is in need of protection – that when the child worker attends at that home, shouldn't it be mandatory that the workers should see every single child? 

 

The law of averages does not work in child protection.  It must be the law of absolutes when it comes to seeing children.  This government refuses to put in place a recommendation of the Child and Youth Advocate which says that when a referral is made, every single child must be critically observed by the worker who attends at that family. 

 

Another recommendation that flowed from this report, and also flowed from the report that I discussed a few days ago, and after giving the minister a few days to settle down, I was encouraged, I could come back and speak about another case.  The Child and Youth Advocate said in one of the – not implemented response or inadequate or inappropriate.  So the Child and Youth Advocate said, a protocol must be developed with Child, Youth and Family Services and the Office of the Child and Youth Advocate “ … to ensure immediate reporting to the OCYA of any critical incidents or sentinel events occurring with children and youth throughout the Province.” 

 

We had a private member's resolution and it passed, but the government is doing nothing.  If we look at some of the legislation from other provinces and if the minister is looking for some guidance – he seems to need some guidance because he does not seem to be able to move the ball forward himself. 

 

Nothing seems to emanate from him except points of order which are never sustained; or he gets up and speaks on transportation issues when it is his job, Mr. Chair, to be responsible for child protection in this Province.  Yet, he wastes ten minutes so he can read Margaret Wente from ten years ago so he can criticize the Member for Conception Bay South.  What sense does that make?  Isn't this a minister who has completely abdicated his responsibility? 

 

This is the same minister who lamely stood up in the House a few weeks ago or a few months ago to explain that they were still looking for the children who had died under his watch.  If we look at the legislation that I am reviewing, it is legislation from the child and youth services of Manitoba. 

 

Manitoba says, if a department of government has provided services within the prior twelve months their legislation says, “After the death of a child who was in the care of, or received services from, an agency under this Act within one year before the death, or whose parent or guardian received services from an agency under this Act within one year before the death, the children's advocate (a) must review the standards and quality of care and services provided under this Act to the child or the child's parent or guardian and any circumstances surrounding the death that relate to the standards of quality of care and services.”

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

Thank you.

 

MR. J. BENNETT: So, Mr. Chair, in Manitoba if a child, or a caregiver, or the child's family has received services from any of these governmental agencies, not just CYFS – and that could include Health and it could also include Justice.  If services have been provided in the twelve-month period immediately prior to the child's death, then the Child and Youth Advocate must investigate. 

 

Well, Mr. Chair, in this Province we are still trying to get the government to agree to legislation to even tell the Child and Youth Advocate that the child is dead.  In this Province, this minister has not moved forward with legislation that would say if a child dies, having received services from any government department in the prior twelve months, we will tell the Child and Youth Advocate and then the Advocate can conduct a proper investigation to determine if there has been any inappropriate conduct.  They do not want to do this whatsoever. 

 

It is not entirely the responsibility of this minister prior to this date because we have had five ministers in the last half a dozen years.  To recount who those ministers are – the first two ministers are no longer in this House.  As a matter of fact, their political bones are bleaching white on the by-election sun in different districts.  One has been replaced by the Member for Trinity – Bay de Verde and the other one has been replaced by the Member for St. George's – Stephenville East.  That is where they are gone, so we do not need to worry about them anymore.

 

The next one was the current Premier, and he was around for the better part of a year.  Then the next one was the minister now who is looking after seniors, so he moved on from children to seniors.  Now we have the current minister who has been appointed and reappointed and he is here – and, Mr. Chair, he is a young guy.  He seems to be educated.  He seems to be able to get up and down.  He can operate Twitter exceptionally well.  We see him doing that all the time in the House because he is doing it right now.  He is Tweeting.  In the middle of the work that he is supposed to be doing, he spends his time on Twitter; that is fine as long as he does his job. 

 

Mr. Chair, his job is child protection in this Province and he is not doing that job.  Part of that job is to insist and put into place protocols that every child is seen when there is a visit made.  Whenever there is a critical incident or a death, it is reported to the Child and Youth Advocate so that the Advocate can properly investigate that child's death.

 

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. DINN: Mr. Chair, I will probably get a chance to finish this time if I (inaudible) of looking at that bloody clock up there.  I forget it sometimes.

 

I was talking about the $20 billion that we had from oil revenues so I got to saying we put $2 billion on wage increases, $6 billion on infrastructure, $3 billion for tax relief for people, $3 billion on the public debt, $2 billion in the pension funds.  I was finishing off – when the time ran out – talking about the three quarters of a billion that we gave to the schools, university, and colleges to keep a tuition freeze there for students. 

 

Over ten years you do not be long using up a half a billion or a quarter of a billion dollars, or three quarters of a billion with that stuff.  We put approximately $1 billion as equity into Muskrat Falls.  Some may not like that, but Muskrat Falls is going to be one of the ways that we can look back at the future and say this is how we diversified our economy. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. DINN: We did not put that money into a useless business or some economic idea.  We put it into something that will be saleable in the future.  People will always want electricity, especially renewable electricity in the future. 

 

I think the Premier met there a couple of weeks ago down in New England with some of the people down there and they are waiting for that to be hooked up and ready to go.  That is money, equity, and revenue that our future generations can use.  When I am under the sod and most of us here are under the sod, they will be getting some revenues that will help them balance their budgets in the future. 

 

That brings us up to about $18 billion, or a little bit over.  We put about $1 billion into poverty reduction over the last number of years.  If there is anything that we should spouting and talking about, are the programs that we brought in under this poverty reduction program and those already existed that we enhanced. 

 

If you want to get an example of how you help individuals, people personally, this is the area.  I can think about one area.  Last year, we had a rent subsidy program that we topped up to $8 million – $8 million yearly means that we are helping about approximately 1,500 people make things better for themselves.  We are helping them survive.

 

I can recall a number of cases where I personally was involved with helping people get a rent subsidy.  I recall one gentleman about a year-and-a-half ago who was getting an income from somewhere, he lost that income, or part of that income – he was left with having $850 a month to live on.  Eight hundred dollars was his rent.  He had $50 a month to buy groceries and all the other stuff.

 

This Province, under the rent subsidy program, was able to give him a subsidy for his rent, and now they are paying a lot of his rent.  He is not exactly buying caviar every day, but at least he is much better off than he was.

 

There was another woman, a young woman that I can remember, a single mom, who emailed me one time saying that she worked in an office making $14 an hour.  She was hardly living from pay cheque to pay cheque.  Because when she got paid, she owed a lot of her pay cheque to people that she borrowed money from two weeks before.  So she was always behind the eight ball.  We arranged to get her a rent subsidy.  Today, she is much better off than she was before.  There are a number of other people in the same boat.

 

We brought in a free textbook program for all grades.  One time it only went to Grade 8 or 9, now it goes from 1 to 12, up to Level III.  I taught school for years myself, and I can remember teaching children – I taught a Grade 9 class most of the time; that would be my homeroom.  I can remember families often had two and three students or youngsters in school at the same time.  Often, parents who were not well off could only afford to buy the textbooks in September for one.  It might be February before they got around to buying the textbooks for the rest of them.  So, this helped a lot of people.

 

We brought in prescription drug programs, dental programs, apprenticeship programs.  Now, I heard a bit of criticism about –

 

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

 

MR. DINN: Prescription drug programs – yes, I did mention that.

 

The apprenticeship program – now, some of us might give the impression that that is not working.  I can bring a dozen or more people into this place next week, if you want me to, people that it did help.  People who, with a wage subsidy in their first year apprentice, get 90 per cent of their wages paid, and it is only a matter of picking up the phone then and help them get a job.

 

AN HON. MEMBER: John, I cannot take credit for that one.  Talk about the dental program (inaudible).

 

MR. DINN: Well boy, I would say back in 1999 and 2000 there was no dental program.  We cannot do everything for everybody but we are helping the best we can.

 

This apprenticeship program has helped a lot of people.  I have been into the EAS office on Topsail Road more than once with people, for meetings with them, helping them get registered for apprenticeship programs.  Then after that, helping them get a job.  I think it is working.  It is not perfect, but we will get the bugs out of it and make it better.

 

The Provincial Home Repair Program, does anybody know how many that has helped over the last number of years?  I know lots of cases of seniors who were able to get their houses fixed up and stay in them by taking advantage of this home repair program.  We could go on and on.

 

I could go on to my own district again.  When I was on city council, fifteen years ago, one of the big issues was farm land that was frozen.  This government brought in a program where they would buy people's property if they were not using it for farming.  This program has helped people get rid of their land that they could not use – what is that program?  My mind is gone.

 

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

 

MR. DINN: No, it is not home repair. 

 

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

 

MR. DINN: Land Consolidation Program, that is the one, yes. 

 

I remember when I was on council this gallery was filled one time.  We brought a big pile of people in, landowners who could not use their land.  The whole place was filled.  We were almost arrested, actually. 

 

Today, a lot of those people have had an opportunity to have their land disposed of and got returns for it.  These people were able to get a fair dollar.  In the beginning it was very low, but today people are getting pretty decent amounts of money for their land.  In one case, I heard someone getting approximately $20,000 or $25,000 for an acre of their land.  That is better than holding it on for a century.  That program is working.

 

We have done a lot also in the way of programming for farmers in my area.  We have helped local businesses in my area.  We have helped local businesses all over the Province.  How many dollars have we put into tourism?

 

MR. MCGRATH: You only have a minute left.

 

MR. DINN: I have a minute left, yes.  I will finish up on that.  I will just say that $20 billion was well used.  It helped a lot of people.

 

Before I finish, I am going to wish happy birthday to the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi.

 

I just want to mention before I sit down, if you recall yesterday, not many listen but when I got up yesterday I did a member's statement on a Margie Stead of Kilbride.  To put things in perspective, Margie has set up a group called Matthew 25 Outreach Inc., I think it is called.  They help kids in Kenya, an orphanage.  The kids in that orphanage were children who had their parents die with AIDS.  Before Margie got involved, they only had forty youngsters they could help.  Today, there are hundreds they are helping because of the contributions that Margie is organizing and collecting. 

 

Schools are giving money.  Hazelwood School in my district, or the kids in my district go to it, actually.  It is in St. John's South, I think.  Kids there donate every year $3,000 or $4,000 to that orphanage.  It is very, very commendable. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. DINN: Today, like I said yesterday, we talk about people not being well off here, water not fit to drink –

 

CHAIR (Pollard): I am going to remind the hon. member his time has expired once again. 

 

MR. DINN: Thank you. 

 

I am not getting up anymore either. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

 

I must say, when we take a break from the House sometimes, or go up to our office, we are still listening to the House.  I have to say to my hon. friend from Kilbride, it was a classic line when he said there were that many of them in the house that the dog died of malnutrition, there was no scraps to give out.  I thought it was classic, Mr. Chair.  It is not like my house where, obviously by looking, you can tell where the scraps are going.  There are no scraps in my house either. 

 

Mr. Chair, sometimes there is a little bit of levity in this House, and I think this is one of the occasions.  I think everybody up in our office literally rolled over on the floor laughing when they heard that one.  It was classic.  I hope the reporters picked up on that one, Mr. Chair. 

 

I want to comment, too, on a couple of things my hon. friend said.  Hopefully government will turn its eyes towards it too in the Budget, because I think at this particular time government needs to do a couple of things.  Number one, they are going to have to kick-start the economy a little bit more, give it a little bit more spark.  We know it is busy out there, in some sectors of the economy anyway.

 

My hon. friend talked about the home repair program.  One of the things I want to suggest to government – our side is suggesting that this program, number one, should be expanded.  Perhaps they could be lowering the income level so that more people qualify. 

 

The second thing that it should be doing with this program at the same time – we all know the price of goods has gone up, goods and services has gone up.  I think my hon. friend from Kilbride would recognize the fact that things go up in price, obviously because of inflation.  One of those things, of course, is construction materials.  The grants obviously would have to be geared towards inflation to catch up to the cost of some of the construction materials that are out there so that people can do more with their homes as well.  I think my hon. friend from Kilbride and this government would agree too that simply gearing things to inflation can sometimes help a lot and help to spark an economy. 

 

The second thing that is going to do at the same time, is that if there is more money available to a homeowner who is going to want to be doing a retrofit – and the hon. Minister of Service NL was up earlier talking about Earth Day.  We all responded in our appropriate ways as regards to Earth Day.  One of the ways this government can respond as well is to throwing that little spark into the green economy in helping to kick-start some of these energy-saving programs, kick-start the conservation of energy so that we do not have as much of an impact on our climate as well.  At the same time, we can still have a positive impact on our economy. 

 

That is one of the reasons why we talked about, in our response to that Ministerial Statement, the possibility of government setting up a separate department to deal with such initiatives.  I think it is a good venture.  We know it is done in New Brunswick, for example, through their energy efficiency department, and as well through Nova Scotia.  So it is being done in other places.  We can expand on our climate change initiatives by lumping it into one department and considering all aspects of it. 

 

We know we have to change this world somehow.  We have to make an impact on climate change.  Government recognizes itself, with some of the statistics they released today, that indeed some of their programming is having an impact.  That is a good thing, but we can have a better impact if they take those things into consideration.  Mr. Chair, I would like for them to consider that too next time when the Budget comes around and keep that in their thoughts. 

 

Mr. Chair, I wanted to speak a little bit about municipalities in this particular section.  I think municipalities are right now wondering what is going to be happening in the next provincial Budget.  We are not getting any hints from this government as regards to where they are going.  At the same time, we have to recognize the challenges right now, the growth challenges particularly, that they have been experiencing not only, for example, in the last twenty years with the downturn in the fishery particularly, but with the challenges they are going to have because of the downturn in oil prices.  I think it is a big concern.

 

To this government, talk does not go by on any one particular day without talk revolving around the price of oil, supposing it is around Question Period.  Some of the challenges they are facing; of course, now they have a little bit larger towns with less people in them because they are dealing with the problem of out-migration and an eroding tax base.  We know that we have more seniors.  They have to deal with the simple fact of even being able to collect taxes in some cases from some of the residents. 

 

At the same time as that, whenever somebody moves out the infrastructure is still there, it is still in the ground, it still has to be updated.  Pipes rust.  Not everything is made out of plastic these days.  Long ago when these pipes and everything were put in the ground they were steel.  They rust and they break. 

 

Indeed, even climate change, Mr. Chair, has an effect on that, with the rapid increase in temperatures that we have been seeing and then the thaws that we are seeing.  We all know that whenever there is a water main break that is probably the cause of it.  We are seeing a lot more of it as a result, including here in this city, St. John's.  We all know that it is an everyday occurrence that you are going to see that leaky valve.  In some cases we are well behind in preserving that infrastructure. 

 

We are also looking at the problems that municipalities face when it comes to revenue generation.  We are looking at the loss of jobs from the closure of a resource or the non-availability of a resource.  We know what is happening now, for example, in Lab West.  We know that is cyclical.  Hopefully that will be picking up again. 

 

What about the fishery? Mr. Chair, we are still seeing that we cannot go after cod yet.  We heard from the Minister of Fisheries the other day that they can still go after it on experimental grounds, but still no sustainable fishery from the cod right now.  We are getting it from other sources. 

 

Of course the value of the fishery is gone up over the years except for this year, which is the first year of the decline.  The traditional fish plant as we know it used to be one of the main generators of revenue for some of these municipalities.  Where are they now? 

 

In 1992, at the point of the closure of the fishery, I believe there was something in the order of 200-plus fish plants in this Province fishing different species.  Mr. Chair, 205 I think was the actual number that I heard at one point in 1992 at the closure.  What do we have now?  The last number I heard I think was eighty-nine.  The Minister of Fisheries may be able to give us a proper number on exactly how many fish plants are left in the Province, but these are revenue generators that are lost.

 

This is tax revenue that is taken away from the provincial government because there are no jobs in the fishery.  There is no revenue being generated, income taxes being generated, to help support a government.  That is where we have gone wrong.  If you do not have the traditional labour base that is going to be supporting your own generation of revenue, if that is taken away, the one thing you have left is revenue generation from royalties.  That is where we get hit-

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

MR. MURPHY: That is what has been happening. 

 

Mr. Chair, if I can talk about the overall power of a dollar and what you are finding now with consumers out there, they are finding that if you go back to 1961 when the value of the Canadian dollar was the real true value of the Canadian dollar, you used to be able to buy the most for the least.  You could get value for money in 1961 if you go back through the records.

 

You will find now that compared to years ago, to talk to another issue – for example like child care.  Let's look at where we were in 1961, Mr. Chair.  Your mother probably stayed at home, traditionally.  Your father probably worked.  Everything was looked after, including the child care needs in the household because you stayed at home.  The mother, 90 per cent of the time stayed at home.  The car was paid for, the house was paid for, and the electricity was paid for.  You might have gotten fifty cents in your pocket for an allowance, but you were surviving.

 

Now you look at the pressures right now that are on the family unit where mom and dad both have to work.  They have to sustain two cars in the driveway because they live out in Paradise.  The house is costing them $300,000 to live, the kids are still going to school, and we are still having problems with health care. 

 

In spite of it sounding like we should be better off, the question is being asked by a lot of people out there in Newfoundland and Labrador, particularly over the last couple of weeks and certainly over the last couple of months and years.  They do not feel like they are better off.  Most of them tell me we are not there yet.  We are losing something here.  In some cases it costs the family unit with work.  Sometimes you do not see the kids in the run of a day because you are working.  Sometimes you have to work it a little bit harder just to catch up on the mortgage or the electricity bill. 

 

I tend to believe – I really do – that the economy of the old days is no longer the economy that we are seeing today.  The traditional rules of supply and demand are no longer there.  While we know that we need something, sometimes we are not told that the price we are paying is exactly fair.  Some people would argue that about fuel prices, even, heating oil, even the price of groceries.  If you do not buy something, the price still stays up.  It does not necessarily go down all the time.

 

So we would certainly like government to be addressing some of these issues in the Budget coming up.  How can we make it a little bit better than what we are right now?  Hopefully government will answer some of these challenges in the coming days and coming weeks.  Hopefully they will have some answers here for the person who is living and trying to make this Province strong like we want it to be.

 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Port de Grave and Deputy Speaker.

 

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

Mr. Chair, there has been some intense debate back and forth over the House the last two weeks.  Being in the Chair for a lot of that I have listened to a lot.  I have gotten some lessons, I have been educated, I have been informed, and I have been uninformed. 

 

Over the last two weeks there has been a lot of debate back and forth.  Some of it has been very good.  Some of it has been nonsensical.  Some of it has been very factual.  Some of it has been somewhat not factual, but once again listening to both sides of the debate, it has been very good.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

MR. LITTLEJOHN: I would be remiss if I never stood here and passed along my personal condolences to the Member for Bonavista North and my colleague, the Deputy Chair of Committees.  I know over the last couple of weeks he and his family have gone through a very difficult time.  I look forward to having him back sharing the Chair with me in the very near future.  To him and his family, I wish them and I send them my sincere sympathies.

 

Today, we had a statement in this House concerning epilepsy.  Today was Epilepsy day, wear purple.  Most members in the House today have some form of purple on recognizing today is Epilepsy day. 

 

I had a great opportunity this morning in my own district, Mr. Chair, before I came to St. John's to participate in an event in the district at Powell's Supermarket.  Powell's is a great community supporter and a great community sponsor. 

 

I joined two young children there, Noah and Holly, to celebrate Epilepsy day and raise funds for Epilepsy day.  As well, with me today was the mayor of Bay Roberts, the deputy mayor, and representatives from Powell's.  We had a wonderful time promoting epilepsy in our Province.

 

It is inspiring to talk to those two young children.  They are six and ten years old, Mr. Chair.  They are living their lives with epilepsy.  They never know when that seizure may occur.  If you saw their personality and you saw what they were today, I was proud today to be wearing purple and supporting epilepsy in this Province.  It was just a great, great occasion. 

 

It would not have been possible, Mr. Chair, without the support of community partners like Powell's Supermarket.  They went above and beyond.  The bakery donated muffins.  Actually I brought some in today.  If you are ever in the district and you want to go and get a good cake or good muffins, check out the bakery at Powell's Supermarket.  You will certainly get good cakes and muffins.

 

I know the hon. member over there is a little bit anxious and all the rest.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

MR. LITTLEJOHN: It is a great opportunity.  Being the Deputy Speaker of the House, sometimes I want to explain to the people in my district I do not get the chance sometimes to participate in debate as much as other members of the House because I spend time in the Chair and all the rest, so it is a great opportunity to be able to stand up today and have an opportunity to speak to Interim Supply. 

 

Mr. Chair, this is a very anxious time.  I guess it is a very busy time in our district, because this is the time of the year where the fishery is just starting in our district.  The crab fishermen are getting ready to go fishing.  In Port de Grave, Upper Island Cove, and all throughout the district there is great optimism.  As the year begins, Mr. Chair, we always begin with great optimism because the economy of our area in general and my district depend on the success of our crab and shrimp fisheries. 

 

Mr. Chair, they employ a lot of people.  Not only the harvesters and the people who work on the boats and the people who work in the plants, but it is the people who are also working in our grocery stores, the people who work in our car sales, and the people who work in our insurance industry.  All of these people depend on the success or failure of the fishery. 

 

When I think about our district, I think about the sixty-five or seventy harvesters who are in my district, and this is an anxious time for them.  As they say, you make hay while the sun shines; well, this is a very anxious time for them as they get ready.  Once again, they depend on the price.  Price is important, and they are anticipating a good year in terms of price.  The price should be up because the Canadian dollar is down, as I understand it.  Usually, when the Canadian dollar is down compared to our US dollar, we get a good price. 

 

Also, Mr. Chair, over the last number of weeks I have had the opportunity to sit on the all-party shrimp committee.  That is also important.  I, too, was in Gander, along with colleagues opposite and colleagues of mine, the Minister of Fisheries, the Premier, and others.  We went to Gander.  It is not lost on this House and the All-Party Committee the importance of the shrimp fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador. 

 

I know the Minister of Fisheries wants to get in the photo here, as he popped up that time.  Again, the shrimp industry and the crab industry are vital to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and the economy in Newfoundland and Labrador. 

 

We sometimes forget that these shrimp harvesters and these crab harvesters make significant investments.  These boats are not cheap, Mr. Chair.  The equipment that is on these boats is not cheap.  These are $1 million and $2 million enterprises, and they are not getting any cheaper.  Mr. Chair, these people in the industry have made significant investments, they believe in the fishery, they believe in Newfoundland and Labrador, and they believe in what they are doing. 

 

When we were in Gander to the meeting a little while ago, no doubt, it was very clear that the shrimp industry and the crab industry are vital to the economic life of this Province.  It does not only affect the people who are in the boats and working on the boats.  It affects the people in the plant, as I said earlier, Mr. Chair.  It affects fuel companies.  It affects people in the car industry.  All industry in this Province is affected by the success or failure of our fishing industry.  I think that is also important to remember.

 

Mr. Chair, as we go forward in this season we also know that the all-party shrimp committee led by the Minister of Fisheries – we need to end LIFO.  This Last In, First Out policy got to go.  Somewhere also the way the federal government and the federal Minister of Fisheries needs to listen because it is of vital importance, particularly to the people who have invested in the shrimp industry, that this LIFO policy go.  We need it to go.  We need it to move.

 

I have been talking to fishers and harvesters in my district with shrimp quotas.  They said this year if the quota did not stay status quo, it was not worth the time to go out and fish shrimp.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

MR. LITTLEJOHN: It was not worth the time to go out and fish shrimp.

 

Mr. Chair, the all-party shrimp committee has been doing some great work.  I am proud to be on the Committee.  Our voice is being heard, I believe.  We need to continue that.

 

Mr. Chair, the fishery is not the only thing in our districts.  I listened to my colleague for the District of Harbour Main.  He talked about infrastructure and he talked about the need for infrastructure the other day.  He talked about this building, this beautiful building we call Confederation Building.

 

I know the Opposition has talked about the cost overruns on this building, but this building was crumbling.  Being a former civil servant and being in it for nearly twenty-five years, I have seen the buckets in the hallways.  I have circumvented the buckets in the hallways.  I remember when I went to the government members' office on the fifth floor and it was like going through a tornado. 

 

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

 

MR. LITTLEJOHN: I remember the buckets very well coming in here, I say to the hon. member.

 

Once again, the investment in this iconic building, the building that sits our Legislature, that sits our public service, I believe that money was well invested because this building is an icon.  It is icon that people recognize all across this country as our provincial Legislature, where our government sits, and it needed to be repaired.  In fairness, it needed to be repaired for the safety of the public servants who worked in it.  Being one of those public servants, Mr. Chair, who worked in there for twenty-five years nearly, I believe that the money we invested, even with the cost overrun, was a good investment for the people of this Province and our public service. 

 

I know, Mr. Chair, my time is winding down – I know my hon. colleague the other day talked about a couple of good examples where we share our district, but the infrastructure investments in roads, in water and sewer, are good investments that we have made in the District of Port de Grave and I am proud to say that we will continue to make good investments as we go along.

 

Mr. Chair, seeing my time is up, I thank you for your time and I hope to have the opportunity to speak again.

 

Thank you very much.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

The Chair recognizes the hon. Member for Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MS DEMPSTER: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

It is always a pleasure any time I get a chance to stand and raise issues on behalf of the people who I work in the wonderful District of Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair. 

 

Before I start I want to chime in with a number of other voices here today and I want to mention Evan Newhook because, as you can see, I am sporting my purple as well.  I was rather impressed when I had a letter recently from that little guy, Mr. Chair.  In the letter he asked would all members of the House wear purple on March 26 and he talked about his mom living with epilepsy. 

 

I think that Evan, if you are listening or someone can tell you, I hope you can be an inspiration to other kids. If you have a dream and you want to make change happen that is how it starts: writing a letter, doing a bookmark.  It is nice to see so many members of the Legislature here today who are wearing purple in support of epilepsy. 

 

When you stand for a few minutes, it is always hard to know where to start or what topics to address when you live in a district that has a lot of issues.  I could not leave and let the House close this week without talking about the hiring at Muskrat Falls.  Every single day I receive multiple, multiple emails and calls on the hiring.  I know that Nalcor comes out and they were there as recent as this morning, and Gil Bennett was on talking about the hiring protocols. 

 

Well, Mr. Chair, the established hiring protocols are not being followed.  I say that with confidence; they are not being followed.  If they were being followed, myself, my colleague for Torngat, we simply would not be getting as many emails and calls and stories as we are from L'Anse au Clair all the way down through the Coast right to Nain.

 

I would say that I probably had twelve today.  I am going to allude to some of them because I think it is really important to talk about this.  When I started, like many other people, when I ran for public office, you do it because you are frustrated with things that are happening around you, and you hope that you can play some small role in effecting change. 

 

Now, this is the biggest project, I guess, that our Province has ever seen.  We are going to go down in history.  There is a lot of concern.  We have had lots of debate here in the House about it.  We have debated the debate.  The only two independent public reviews of the project, both of them failed to endorse it.  Then the minister yesterday wondered why we had some concern over it.  There are lots of reasons why we had concern from the beginning.

 

I am just going to allude to some of the stories.  I hope someone is listening.  Right after I was elected, Mr. Chair, in the summer of 2013, I met with Nalcor at that time.  I went with an armload of resumes.  As a member – I do not know if any other members are actually doing that, and we should not have to.  Because we have been so gutted with services in our community by this government, we have no employment offices, people were not doing their profiles right, I felt an obligation because I work for the people to step in and do that.

 

I went with a bundle of resumes and we did get a number of people in, but we still have an enormous amount of sad stories coming out, Mr. Chair.  One lady today said my husband got laid off on November 25.  He was told it was temporary and he would be called back in January or February.  Here we are at the end of March and that was nothing. 

 

Yet, Mr. Chair, this has nothing to do, and I will be clear, with dividing Labrador and the Island – nothing.  It is about established protocols of Labrador Innu first, Labradorians who are adjacent to the project next, the people from the Island third, and then the rest of Canada. 

 

Mr. Chair, we found out last week that there have been almost sixty labourers who have gone in since January 31 – sixty labourers gone in on site, and three from Labrador.  There is something wrong with that.  We keep asking the questions, we keep going back, but our people are being wronged.  They are being shafted.

 

I have a number of emails today all sharing the same theme, lack of employment and frustration around that, with a number of different companies I might add.  One couple said we actually moved to Goose Bay and our rent is $2,000 a month.  Now, I might add Goose Bay initially was told there would be minimal impacts because of this project.  They would receive minimal.  That is not the case. 

 

I will be in Goose Bay tonight.  Every time I fly in and out, people are telling me of the hardships, the high cost of rent and things that have happened because of that project.  Here was an email today from a couple who moved to Goose Bay because her husband got work at the project.  He got two turnarounds, was laid off before Christmas, and was told he would be back on the January 2.  Here we are again, as I said the end of March, and he still has not been called back.  It is very, very frustrating.

 

It was funny, but it was not funny, but somebody said to me today, getting a job at Muskrat Falls or any employment with that project is like winning the golden ticket in the story, like in the book of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.   I am just sharing the voices and the emails that I am getting, Mr. Chair, because a lot of people are very, very angry. 

 

Once again, they feel like it is even dividing parts of Labrador, what is happening there.  Because some people are in and they are hiring on a buddy-buddy system, they are hiring relatives; but it is very sad, Mr. Chair, myself and the MP for Labrador, I know she as well – we have called for an ombudsman, something to put some consistency to this.  So that if the jobs are there and if our people are qualified, the established protocols be followed, and the people who are adjacent to the project, that they would see some benefit for it.

 

Every day, Mr. Chair, I hear from people who received training under the Labrador Aboriginal Training Partnership – $30 million, I believe, was the funding.  The purpose of the Nalcor funding was that these people who were trained, educated, would get a chance to go in.  Many of them have not; many of them are disheartened.

 

Mr. Chair, the collective agreement that must be followed – clearly, it is not.  I will go back to Nalcor again next week on behalf of the people.  I have had numerous meetings talking about people from coastal Labrador.  In my district in particular, we have scores of people who did get in, who were laid off around Christmas – and I know that you will hear them on Open Line and they will say this projects moves through different phases and as it moves through the different phases, well, we require different skill sets.  The skills that we are looking for now are not necessarily the skills that we had in the fall.  When you see fifty, sixty labourers going in – I am sitting with them on the flight every weekend when I travel.  It is sad to say, too many from even out of the Province, Mr. Chair.

 

There is something wrong with the system; nobody has a handle on it, Mr. Chair.  Somebody made a suggestion to me today and said there should be a strong Labrador representative sitting at a table who would be overseeing the contractual hiring practices.  I believe a project of this magnitude – I mean, we are spending $3 million or $4 million; we are spending $80 million or $90 million a month.  It is an astronomical amount money.

 

Where I live in the District of Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair, I have to be honest, we are getting precious little from that.  We have DC power.  We have big towers going down through our land.  Because it is DC power, we cannot splice in.  So we are going to be left with dirty, unreliable diesel generators, and our qualified people cannot get to work in there.  That is wrong, Mr. Chair.  It is infuriating for the people there.

 

So I feel an obligation – one person said to me today, I worked there last year for nine months.  My job was escorting people from the gate to the camp site.  I drove a van.  I was required to have a Class 5.  I was laid off after nine months because I was told they hired someone more experienced.  He said I am in my forties and I have had my driver's licence since I was seventeen.  There is something wrong with that.  That was a Labrador Innu person who shared that story with me today. 

 

Just today, Mr. Chair, I heard of tradespeople who were being flown in from outside the Province.  The minister gave a statement today on tradespeople.  We hear every day from people who are out taking trades, then they are trying to get work, and they are trying to accumulate their hours. 

 

Mr. Chair, I had a lot of things I wanted to touch on here today and I see my time went fast.  I wanted to talk about LIFO and the importance of that, because I live in a community where we have the only shrimp processing facility in Labrador.  I know first-hand the importance of the inshore fishery to our community.  Hopefully, maybe next week, I will get a chance to talk about that. 

 

The family care program, Mr. Chair, it is very sad that $8.2 million was allotted and we see that less than 10 per cent had been spent and only three from Labrador.  I have some real serious, sad stories in my district of people who applied and had hoped to avail of that family care program. I believe, Mr. Chair, that to do justice to those people, we have to go back and we have to revisit the criteria there.  I would urge the government to do that. 

 

Next week, I hope I get a chance to talk about municipalities and the importance of support to local fire brigades. 

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

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

 

MS DEMPSTER: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

CHAIR: The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Fortune Bay – Cape La Hune. 

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MS PERRY: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

 

It is certainly a privilege for me to rise again today and speak to this important debate on Interim Supply.  Like many of my colleagues have done when they stood up in the House to speak to this debate, I would like to open today with a sincere thank you to my constituents who have stuck with me through the thick and thin.  Of course, it is certainly a privilege to be here and represent them and to bring their view, their priorities, and their concerns to the table where decisions are being made, Mr. Chair. 

 

In terms of some of those decisions, I thought I would talk today about how the policies of the Progressive Conservative Government of Newfoundland and Labrador have led us to a place that we have never, ever been in before in terms of our economy and our social well-being, Mr. Chair. 

 

I am going to start out by focusing in particular on municipalities. In my previous life prior to entering politics I did a lot of work with municipalities.  I worked in community economic development and finances were always a struggle and a challenge for us.  This government recognized the challenges municipalities were in.  We continue to work with Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador and individual municipalities today to work towards even better solutions as we go forward into the future.

 

But let's just look at some of the things our government has done.  The Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental Affairs spoke about this in his statement that he delivered here in this hon. House yesterday.  We now provide, in terms of municipal capital works, grants that permit communities the ability to purchase equipment or construct facilities that would otherwise not have been possible given their fiscal situations and their tax bases; for example, the 90-10 which applies to communities with a population base of under 3,000, the 80-10 for communities with populations between 3,000 and 7,000, and the 70-10 for those with populations over 7,000.  That has made such a difference, Mr. Chair.

 

Just to look again in terms of my own district, when I first was elected in 2007, when the Municipal Capital Works Program was announced every year it always disheartened me to see the demand for my region was always over $20 million.  There were demands for roadwork, demands for water and sewer, demands for recreation facilities, and for improved fire services, Mr. Chair.  We have come a long way. 

 

Through this program our municipalities have been able to catch up.  They have all engaged in strategic planning, and they follow a process in terms of the infrastructure they put in place in their towns. This year I was extremely pleased to see there were just two applications for municipal capital works because our communities are catching up, and they are coming up to speed in terms of what needs to be done in relation to what they can afford.  T

 

There is still much that can be done.  We have a lot of work done in terms of our water and sewer.  We are now focusing, Mr. Chair, on municipal roads within communities.  As councils can afford to apply to the 90-10, we are certainly in a position to be able to keep up with their demands.  That is something I am incredibly proud of.

 

The increase in Municipal Operating Grants has also made a phenomenal difference.  I have fourteen incorporated municipalities.  They now have the ability to have stabilized staffing levels, and even in some cases, increased staffing levels because of the MOGs. 

 

As the minister said, again, our debt-service ratios in this Province have decreased by 10 per cent.  As a result of the investments of over $1.3 billion, we now have improved drinking water, waste water, roads, and recreation facilities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.  There is much more to come, Mr. Chair.

 

When I look in terms of what the future holds for Newfoundland and Labrador and what I would like to see as a citizen living in Newfoundland and Labrador from my government, I think I want to see the type of Progressive Conservative policies that have been in place for the last ten or twelve years continue.  What have our policies done, Mr. Chair?  Let's point out a few more examples.

 

The road ambulance service; again, one of my very first meetings when I got elected in 2007 was with the ambulance committees who at that time were suffering immensely.  We have tripled their budgets, Mr. Chair, in the years hence.  They tell me they have never had it so good in the ambulance services.  Of course, many improvements are still needed to come, but we have brought them a long way by working with them and we will continue to do so. 

 

When I look at some of the policies that are in place and I think of governments and leaderships, I say to myself the policies we have put in place that are successful, will they be policies that are capped by successive governments or not?  I look to things like the generic drug pricing policy, which has made such a difference in the lives of average Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. 

 

Individuals from every walk of life in this Province are benefitting from the generic drug pricing policy.  Why, Mr. Chair?  Because we have lowered the cost of drugs and we have put the money back into the senior's hands, back into the citizen's hands, back into the people who need this medicine.  We have made medicine much more affordable for people.

 

That, for one, Mr. Chair, the generic drug pricing policy, is one of the ones that I am most proud of as a Progressive Conservative member, and one of the ones that I certainly hope continues well into the long-term future.  I know it will continue under a Progressive Conservative Government.

 

We talk about centralization and health care.  We read a lot about health care priorities in recent days, Mr. Chair.  We know that health care is one of the biggest priorities of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.  What did we as a government do?  We recognized the need for decentralization of services, particularly when it comes to things like dialysis sites. 

 

Again, I am extremely proud that we now have a dialysis facility in the Coast of Bays Region.  I know many of my colleagues are acquiring sites as well.  It enables our people, Mr. Chair, to continue living at home.  It is bad enough to have such a dramatic change to your lifestyle and such a decline in your health that you have to endure dialysis for three days a week.  To be able to do it closer to home greatly enhances the quality of life.  It is something I am so very proud of.  Diabetic pumps are another great example.

 

The Poverty Reduction Strategy, Mr. Chair, and the policies we have put in place there have enabled us to be a leader in the country in this regard.  We have doubled the roads budget.  When we started out, the provincial roads budget was only $30 million.  We are investing at a rate of $60 million.  There is still a lot to do, but we are catching up.  There are free textbooks for schools that fall under the school board act.  We have returned skilled trades to schools.  All of these initiatives are making a difference to people in Newfoundland and Labrador. 

 

Because of our Progressive Conservative policies, Mr. Chair, we saw an increase in consumer and business confidence in Newfoundland and Labrador.  For the very first time ever we have received have status.  We are a self-reliant Province not dependent on Ottawa, not dependent on anyone, only ourselves, to generate the wealth and income that we need for the future.  Boy is that something I am so very proud of.  It is something that I know has been achieved because of the progressive policies our government has put in place.

 

We use both social and economic policies, Mr. Chair, which has brought us to a place, as I said, that we have never been before in Newfoundland and Labrador.  The have status is something we never thought we would achieve, but here we are.  We have brought ourselves through a very tough recession in 2007-2008.  I truly believe that it is our policies and our leadership that will best navigate us through the rough storm that we are seeing today.  The future ahead, we do know, is still very bright. 

 

Certainly, looking not too far ahead, the reality is that the prospects of Newfoundland and Labrador are particularly bright.  In the five-year run up to 2020, there are a number of exciting prospects and projects that are due.  I would say, Mr. Chair, to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, with continued Progressive Conservative governance we will realize those prospects, and we will realize sustainable prosperity in Newfoundland and Labrador.

 

We have more people working in this Province today than we have ever had before.  We are earning higher wages than ever before in Newfoundland and Labrador.  The PC government has been very focused on ensuring our seniors, families, and students share in the success by investing heavily in health care, education, business, innovation, and infrastructure, as well as supports for communities and the most vulnerable in our society. 

 

I was extremely pleased, Mr. Chair, when Premier Davis dedicated a whole department to seniors and wellness, which certainly emphasizes his recognition and our recognition of the importance seniors play in our society, and how we want to ensure seniors have the best quality of life possible.  They have done a lot for us and we want to be able to give back to them. 

 

Mr. Chair, moving forward, and as people are looking to the future, I strongly encourage people to recognize how the Progressive Conservative policies have brought us to where we are.  It is Progressive Conservative policies that will enable us to reach the top.

 

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Signal Hill – Quidi Vidi.

 

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

 

MR. MURPHY: Happy birthday to you.

 

MS MICHAEL: Thanks.

 

I am happy to have another opportunity to stand during the discussion of Bill 44, the Supply bill, to continue something that I spoke about earlier in the debate, Mr. Chair.  That is some more points that I want to make with regard to home care and with regard to a national evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of home care that was done for Health Canada. 

 

It is based on figures in the early 2000-2002, but the overall analysis I know is still the same, Mr. Chair.  It is important I think for the government, for the Minister of Health and Community Services, for our Department of Health to look at studies like this one that was done for Health Canada and which, of course, was put out publicly by Health Canada. 

 

The study was done by two people, Marcus Hollander and Neena Chappell, both with their Ph.D.  Neena Chappell is with the Centre on Aging from the University of Victoria, and Marcus Hollander is with a private company, Hollander Analytical Services, a researcher.  They worked together as the co-directors of this national evaluation. 

 

I want to make some points I was just starting to make when I first referred to this study earlier in the week.  The bottom line of this study, and the study is quite comprehensive.  It looks at different parts of the country.  It had five sub-studies as part of the main study.  It is complex, and one really does need to read the whole report to get the full impact of what they are saying.  They are policy oriented, because they did this for Health Canada.  The study was done to help Health Canada with regard to the development of policies around home care. 

 

In spite of the complexity, in spite of the different parts that are part of the study, the bottom line comes down to – and I think this is what is really important – is that home care cost less than residential care.  I started speaking about that when my time was up the other day.  I want to go into a bit more depth about that.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

CHAIR (Littlejohn): Order, please!

 

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

 

The point I was making the last time I referred to this report was that – there are different levels of care, of course.  We have the level of care that is personal care.  People not requiring a lot of help in their homes, somewhat dependent.  Then you have a level of care which is slightly independent.  I am sorry, the first one was somewhat independent.  Then you have a level of care that is somewhat independent.  People probably can get their breakfast in the morning, but maybe they cannot make dinner for themselves; maybe they cannot do their own personal body care; maybe they cannot bathe themselves on their own. 

 

Then you get into a level which is slightly dependent, needing more help than that.  Then you get into the much more dependent.  People who need help getting in and out of bed, people who really do have to have somebody help them do ordinary things.  So there are various levels of care.

 

When you are talking about the lowest level of care, then it is only 40 per cent cheaper to be at home than in a residence.  Still, that's quite a difference, 40 per cent cheaper.  When you are talking about the still slightly independent, moving towards dependence, staying at home continues to be about 40 per cent cheaper.  When you start getting into the highest level of care, it is much more expensive to be at home, but it is still 75 per cent of what it would cost to be in a facility.  So no matter which way you cut it, being at home and being taken care of at home is cheaper than being in a facility. 

 

One of the reasons why it is more expensive being at home when you are more dependent, when you require more care, it is not so much the cost of more hours – that is part of it – but sometimes people who are at home when they are very dependent, still require hospital care as well.  Not long term, but maybe they have a fall and they have to go to hospital.  Maybe they have to have tests done.  If they were in a facility, they may have some of the services in the facility. 

 

So you have to add increased hospital cost to their care when they are at home, but it still comes down to that it is cheaper to be at home than it is to be in a facility.  I am not going to belabour this, but I do want to give a couple of examples to show the difference.

 

This sample was done in Victoria, BC.  They did different parts of the country in doing different parts of the study.  In Victoria, BC, when this study was done, people who were somewhat independent, sort of the lowest level of needing care, the average for them – and these are early, the 2002 figures.  The average for them at home was $19,800 approximately, whereas if they were in a facility it would be $39,300.  Quite a difference, Mr. Chair, quite a difference. 

 

Let's look at the next level – and I am going to do consistently Victoria, BC, keep it in the same city.  If you go up to the next level of care, slightly independent, $30,900 to be at home, $45,900 to be in a facility.  Let's go to the next level, starting to get more dependent, $31,800 to be at home, $53,800 to be in a facility.  That is a big difference when you get to that one.  Now when you get to the largely dependent, it becomes a bit different, where you get $35,100 for being at home and $50,560 for being in a facility; however, it is still less being at home than being in a facility. 

 

This study which was done has great implications.  It goes on to give real advice to Health Canada about how the information they have gathered can be worked into policy.  One of the things they talk about, which is really important, is that we cannot look at any one thing by itself.  So we should not be looking, actually, just at home care.  We should be looking at the broader system of continuing care.  That home care, long-term care, chronic care, case management should all be part of one whole package, and that package should be part of our health care system.

 

In most jurisdictions, they note that home care is already considered to be part of a broader system of continuing care.  It is not that way here in our Province.  I am going to take one example, and the example is palliative care. 

 

When somebody goes into palliative care in our Province, they actually get home care covered, but because our home care is not part of our whole continuing care package in the public system, while they may get their home care paid for, they still have to go to the different agencies and try to find a home care worker to come in and be part of the care of the person who is at home.  That home care person then is not really part of the palliative care team. 

 

We have palliative care teams, and we have an excellent palliative care team here in St. John's when it comes to home care, a wonderful doctor, great nurse, we have a social worker, but a home care worker is not part of that.  A home care worker is outside of that system. 

 

The doctor may know that the person has a home care worker.  The nurse may know the person has a home care worker.  The doctor, nurse, social worker, and other people on that team are not with the person who is in palliative care full time.  They are there to support the needs.  They are there to make sure that everything is going well. 

 

There is nobody that is part of the palliative care system inside of our public care who is designated to be there as needed as a home care person.  When somebody is in palliative care, that is a big need.  That is just one example of where we need to see home care as part of a whole broader system, a whole broader spectrum of what it means to be doing continuing care, whether they are talking about seniors, or people with disability, or people who are dying. 

 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte – Springdale.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. POLLARD: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

It is certainly a privilege and an honour for me to stand on Bill 44, Interim Supply, and have a few remarks representing the District of Baie Verte – Springdale.  It is an honour and a privilege to do so. 

 

I also had the honour and privilege, on behalf of the Minister of Health and Community Services, to sign the Purple Day proclamation in support of epilepsy.  I met Ambassador Evan Newhook and his family.  I would like to thank all members of this hon. House today for wearing purple in support of epilepsy and the 10,000 people who deal with this disease on a daily basis. 

 

Mr. Chair, this past weekend was not a good weekend as well.  Why, you might ask.  Well first of all I would like to offer my condolences and sympathies to the families of both gentlemen who lost their lives by way of the snowmobile accidents.  It is very unfortunate.  It is a tragedy. 

 

In addition, we think about the devastating loss of the Cottlesville crab plant which was a huge loss to the region.  Our hearts go out to all the people who now are displaced.  They do not know where their next job is going to come from.  There are about 150 or 200 people displaced.  These are seasonal workers, Mr. Chair.

 

I am sure all of us today, especially the MHA for the area, is gravely concerned and wants to be assured that today this government will, in working with the MHA of the area, whoever we can, whatever we can do to ease that burden, ease that pain, Mr. Chair.  Our Premier pointed out a couple of days ago we will work with the people in the area, which is very fortunate.

 

In the political world we hear phrases such as stimulate the economy, grow the economy or job creation, or even diversify the economy.  So the eight minutes I have left, I would like to zero in and confine my comments to a particular phrase: diversifying the economy. We hear it often, everywhere we go.  We hear it in the media.  We hear it in our daily conversations; but what does diversifying an economy actually mean?

 

Well, from my understanding, it provides different revenue streams in the event that one sector may take a sudden downturn, Mr. Chair.  A diversified economy enables and offers government, or it could be a town or a community or it could be a nation, to sustain essential services and programs when there is a downturn because of its people are not overly reliant on one particular sector or one particular industry.

 

For example, if a town is a one-industry town, such as fishing or mining, once that particular sector takes a sudden downturn the sustainability of that town is potentially threatened.  However, if that particular town enjoys various streams of revenue from different sectors, from different industries, then that town has the ability, the potential, to function effectively and carry on its essential programs and services that its people expect from one day to the next.  In other words, they would weather the storm without too much interruption.

 

I suppose, in ecological terms, you could liken a diversified economy to a food web.  What does a food web do, Mr. Chair?  Well, a food web adds more stability to an ecosystem because there are more alternatives.  They offer more feeding options for a particular species, should one species be obliterated or threatened because of over predation or over hunting, or disease or what have you.  The ecosystem will continue to provide food and food energy to a species and, therefore, stability would remain in that particular ecosystem, if there is a stable food web as opposed to a food chain.

 

Now, why did I say that, Mr. Chair?  Well, the same applies to a community or a town.  A multi-industry town is more apt to survive as opposed to a single-industry town because of its diversity.  Its different streams of revenue keep the town going; it keeps the town sustainable. 

 

I suppose we could say the same applies to any particular government who attempts to generate different streams of revenue so that we could have a sustainable economy.  Of course, Mr. Chair, we have certainly encouraged traditional industries over the years, or sectors, to grow and diversify; because we have invested strategically in traditional sectors, such as fishing, mining, and forestry, and agriculture.  Certainly in my District of Baie Verte – Springdale, fishing and mining and forestry – these traditional industries or sectors certainly contribute to the economy of the District of Baie Verte – Springdale and have reaped many, many benefits in our history.

 

You say how do we diversify the economy?  Well, we have invested in businesses; we have allowed businesses to expand, to grow.  We have reduced the red tape.  We have fostered a very positive climate for entrepreneurs to come into this Province to expand a business or to start a business.  I believe over $200 million since we have been in office has been invested in business alone so that they could expand and grow and develop, and stimulate the economy and diversify the economy.

 

Another way I suppose we could say we could diversify the economy is through growing particular sectors or industries whether it be a primary industry, or a secondary industry, or a tertiary industry, because all these are related – one is interdependent on the other.  In order to have a strong, diversified economy, you probably need all three working together.  In this Province we do have examples of primary, secondary, and tertiary industries or sectors working on all cylinders, Mr. Chair.

 

Another way I suppose we could say we have diversified the economy is through, what shall I say, taking our economy from a reliance on a non-renewable resource to a more renewable resource, or we could be a combination of both.  One good example of that, of course, would be Muskrat Falls.  We are using the funds that we get from non-renewable resources to have an economy that is based upon renewable resources so that we could have sustainable revenue until perpetuity, Mr. Chair.

 

We have come a long way.  Historically, we were dependent on fishery, mining, forestry, and of course, probably the government transfers – two or three different revenue streams.  Now, at 2015, Mr. Chair, I think we have come a long way.  There is room to grow.  Sure there is, Mr. Chair.  Now we probably have, what, a dozen revenue streams or more, such as we have grown our tourism industry to a billion-dollar industry employing many people.  We have ocean technology; we have developed that sector.  We have developed the aquaculture industry, agrifoods, and innovative technology. 

 

We have come a long way in providing or expanding from one or two revenue streams and bringing in a lot more revenue streams so that should one suddenly take a downturn or be threatened, we have an option.  We have alternatives so that we can carry on the essential services and programs the people deserve and expect across this Province, Mr. Chair.

 

I might add that should we have the good fortune in the next general election, the people will look at our record, they will see what we have done, and they see what we are going to do in the future because we are visionary.  When it comes to diversifying the economy you have to think five, ten, fifteen, twenty, fifty years out.  That is what we have done with Nalcor.  That is what we have done with Muskrat Falls, Mr. Chair.  To have a long-term vision so the sustainability of this Province and the people of this Province, the programs and services that they expect, we could carry on. 

 

Mr. Chair, it could be one bump as we have seen in oil and gas; 28 per cent, 30 per cent of our revenue based upon oil and gas.  We are endeavouring to take that revenue and diversify the economy so that down the road if one sector – we can take a bump in that sector, we can carry on and function efficiently just like a food web because we have different options. 

 

Another example, Mr. Chair, is that we have two mines operating in my district.  One way we have diversified there is we have invested in these two mines, Anaconda and Rambler.  Today, most likely that would have the potential to prolong the life of that mine probably eight or ten years more, so that 200 people who are employed today will continue their employment.  That is one way.  Investment in Corner Brook Pulp and Paper is another way we have invested so we keep jobs for the economy.

 

I could go on, Mr. Chair.  Every MHA in this hon. House can offer examples of ways we have diversified the economy.  Can we do more?  Sure we can, and we are going to strive for excellence.  I can say that I am proud of our record.  I think that down the road and visionary, there is more to come from this government when it comes to economic diversification.

 

Mr. Chair, thank you very much.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. LANE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

It certainly is a pleasure to have another opportunity to stand in this hon. House and speak to Interim Supply. 

 

Mr. Chair, I want to sort of change the course a little bit.  I know we have been listening today and we have heard some good debate back and forth.  Government members are standing and they are defending the decisions that government has made.  That is what they are there to do.  I am sure they are all very happy and pleased with investments they have seen in their districts.  I am certainly pleased with investments I have seen in Mount Pearl, nobody denies that.  We are all here to try to do the best we can for our districts.

 

Mr. Chair, we have a role on this side of course to point out areas where perhaps we thought that things could be done a little differently, and to bring that forward to the public.  At the end of the day it will be up to the people of the various districts to decide whether they agree with what government is saying in terms of defending their record and the things they have invested in, or whether they agree with the Opposition and the Third Party about concerns they have about the way things were done.  The people will decide.  That is all part of democracy.  That is what we are all here for. 

 

I can certainly talk about things that have happened in Mount Pearl.  I am very proud of my district and some of the great things happening.  I could also stand here and challenge some of the things that have been said by the other side in terms of some of the investments.  I can certainly challenge some of the commentary about the diversification of the economy and did that actually happen and so on, but that is not my intent here this afternoon to do that.

 

Mr. Chair, I want to take some time now, I have about eight minutes.  I want to speak about my critic role for Service NL.  This ties into a couple of questions that I asked in the House of Assembly today as it relates to the story which was in the media the last couple of days – I think it was the top story in a couple of the media outlets the last two days – and that of course is the food safety issue, the inspection issue at Memorial University. 

 

Mr. Chair, that should be concerning for all members, regardless of what side of the House we are on.  I would think that we would all be interested.  I am sure we are.  I know we are all interested in ensuring that we have food safety, whether that be in private restaurants or whether that be in public institutions such as Memorial University. 

 

I am sure that every member in this House, when they read the news stories the last couple of days of what happened at the dining hall in Memorial University, when they heard stories about the fact that there were claims – and it was backed up by pictures of food being severely undercooked, claims of food being mouldy, rotten, and all of these things.  I think there is one picture out there of a fly in the food and all these other things that we have seen.  Of course, there was a meeting, I think last night at Memorial University.  It was reported that there were a number of what were described as horror stories about the food at MUN. 

 

I was not there and I had not experienced that as I do not guess any of the other members were.  We can only go on what is being said, what is being reported, pictures that are out there, and comments that are out there.  It does lead us to ask the questions about how long has this been going on.  Is the food indeed safe for our students who are attending university?  Students I might add, according to what I have read, who are basically being forced into a particular meal plan and particular meals.  They do not even have a choice.  They are paying a fee and here is what you are getting, like it or not.  If you do not like it you can eat nothing.  Or I guess you can go get some take out or whatever if you have the money, which most students do not. 

 

I think it is concerning when you see this story.  We should all be concerned about that.  I understand the health inspectors with the Department of Service NL have been involved since the story broke.  I understand the university has been in contact with the service provider.  They said they are doing their due diligence.  I think there was a report there today – this afternoon – that came out saying that the health inspectors inspected the place today and it meets the standard.  I can only take it for granted.  Until I see the report – which the minister has said he will table in the House, he will provide it.  I am glad he has agreed to do that.  Until I actually see that report I suppose it remains to be seen, but we will go by the fact that is what is being reported. 

 

If that is the case, I am glad it is happening, but I have concern of how long has this been going on.  If it were not for this incident going to the media, the social media and so on, how long has this been going on?  How much student health has potentially been put at risk? 

 

That is why we need to understand how often the inspections have been occurring.  Have they been occurring regularly as they are supposed to be done?  When the inspection has been done, has there been follow-up?  Are things getting done the way they should be done?  That is why we have asked for the reports of that particular facility for the last two years to ensure that has indeed happened. 

 

The concerning thing though is that, really, if this incident had happened at a private restaurant, as of November 2012, I believe was the press release, and it is on the government site, that they started posting these health inspections for food facilities online for restaurants, but that only applies to private restaurants.

 

So if I wanted to take my family out to a particular restaurant or establishment, I can go into the government's website and I can view the inspections, when the inspections were done, what the issues were, if any, and what action was taken.  I can look at a history of it and determine if this is an ongoing problem, a systemic problem versus a minor issue, if it was a major issue and so on.  That is good.  We support that.  The problem is, though, it does not apply to public facilities.

 

When we are talking about places like the university, the College of the North Atlantic, or we are talking about hospitals – people go to hospitals to get well.  They go there because they have some sort of an ailment.  They are sick.  They are there to get better.  Now, we do not even know – it is not a priority for us to be able to go into the website, like we could for a private restaurant, and find out if that place that is serving food, if that is being done properly, if there were any issues, whether it be minor issues or major issues.  What action has been taken?  Is there anything we need to be concerned about? 

 

I am not suggesting that inspections are not being done, but I am going to be putting in a request to see that they are all being done.  I am not suggesting they are not.  I am not questioning the competency of anybody, the inspectors in the department at all.  I am sure they do a great job; they are professional, they are highly trained, all that good stuff.  I am questioning whether or not it is being done, and that fact that we cannot go in to check to make sure that it is being done and to make sure that there are no issues.

 

We cannot have a situation where we have vulnerable people, people who are sick in a hospital, and now they have food coming up that, in theory, is not being handled properly.  There could be germs and disease and God knows what else that could be passed on to those people. 

 

Similarly, we look at our schools.  I would like to know what is going on in the cafeteria in our schools.

 

AN HON. MEMBER: Gym classes.

 

MR. LANE: I am glad my colleague mentioned that.  We know gym class is going on.  One thing we know for sure is that in many schools, gym class is going on in the cafeteria.  We also know music class is going on in the cafeteria.  We know that a lot of kids are eating their lunch at their desk; but, what is going on in the actual food preparation area that our kids are ordering off that menu? 

 

Hopefully, it is all being done properly, following the standards, and I am sure most people try to do their very best when they are doing that; but things happen, sometimes beyond their control, sometimes it is management issues, sometimes it is resource issues, employee issues – it could be whatever – and things can go wrong.  That is why we need to have inspections to make sure that our kids, our seniors in our nursing homes, people in our hospitals, that if they are getting food in these public facilities, that the food is safe.

 

So, again, I am going to call upon the Minister of Service NL to ensure now – he mentioned it today about putting it online.  I think he should be directing it to be put online ASAP.

 

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

 

It is a great opportunity to speak today on Interim Supply.  The debate has been going on for several days in the House of Assembly, and it is an important part of the legislative process.  It is important to the operation of government.  It also gives members an opportunity to talk about whatever they want to talk about, because it is, as we say in the House, a money bill.  So, it is great to have members give some updates on different things they are working on, on behalf of their constituents, and it is an opportunity for ministers to talk about things going on within government as well.

 

I do want to begin by thanking members for wearing purple today.  Just about every member of the House is wearing purple in some form or another and if it is not blatantly visible, I do not want to see it, frankly, Mr. Chair.  I shared with a member opposite earlier today that even my socks are purple today.  It is for a really important cause.  It is about raising awareness of epilepsy and trying to reduce social stigma that is associated with this condition.

 

It is one of the most common neurological disorders anywhere on the planet, actually, Mr. Chair.  It affects more than 300,000 people in Canada, and I was surprised to learn that it actually affects more than 10,000 people right here in our own Province.  So, the likelihood is that all of us know somebody, either directly or indirectly, who has been affected by epilepsy.

 

Approximately one in twenty-six people will develop epilepsy in their lifetime.  So, it is a rather significant illness, and it is important to take opportunities like today to raise awareness.  So, I do want to thank all members of the House for participating in today's event.

 

I was really impressed with the story that I spoke of earlier about a young person who has taken it upon himself to raise money for this cause.  He is a nine-year-old boy.  He lives in Dildo, which I believe is in the District of Bellevue.  The MHA for Bellevue has told me a little bit about this story.  This young boy, whose name is Evan Newhook, when he learned that his mother was diagnosed with epilepsy, really wanted to do something about it.

 

He is passionate about art.  He is passionate about reading.  He decided to create bookmarks and sell them.  As my Parliamentary Secretary said earlier, he had the opportunity to meet with some folks from the epilepsy organization here in Newfoundland and Labrador just yesterday on my behalf while I was dealing with another matter.  He was able to purchase some of the bookmarks and share them with some people in our department and with me as well.

 

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

 

MR. KENT: Did you buy any bookmarks?

 

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

 

MR. KENT: We can get you some bookmarks.  In fact, you can have one of mine because I have several.

 

The funds are going to a great cause.  It is going to support Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador. 

 

Evan attends Woodland Elementary.  He is running a fundraising campaign there.  He has also reached out to employees at TC Square mall in Carbonear.  I know many people in many companies, in many organizations in our Province, are wearing purple today which is great to see. 

 

I also want to acknowledge that Evan is the official Purple Day Ambassador in Newfoundland and Labrador this year, which is a great honour.  I am sure his family is extremely proud.  I think I can speak for all members in this House in saying that we are very proud of him as well, Mr. Chair.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

MR. KENT: The folks at Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador do incredible work.  Some of them, I believe, are with us today.  We are going to be turning purple lights on the Confederation Building in honour of this special day.  As I said, there are many, many organizations and individuals taking part.

 

Social media has really allowed campaigns like this to take off.  I have been following on Twitter and Facebook, and I know that the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services has been following along on Twitter as well.  The surge of support is tremendous.

 

If anybody wants to learn more about Epilepsy Newfoundland & Labrador, I would encourage them to visit epilepsynl.com to learn more about the organization and to learn more about those who are affected by epilepsy.

 

We have, through our Newfoundland and Labrador Prescription Drug Program, made more support available for people who are living with epilepsy.  We added a new drug in May of last year, and that has been able to help people manage partial onset seizures that are not controlled with some of the conventional therapy that is available.  These are positive steps, Mr. Chair, and I want to congratulate everybody involved in promoting this important cause today. 

 

Mr. Chair, tomorrow I will have an opportunity to participate in the opening ceremonies of one of the Swim for Hope events that is taking place.  I know there are many Members of the House of Assembly who are taking part in Swim for Hope events around the Province in their districts, because raising funds for cancer care and for cancer research is something that I know is very, very important to many people living in Newfoundland and Labrador.  So, I encourage people to support the Swim for Hope that starts tomorrow and runs into the weekend as well.

 

There have been a number of questions in the House of Assembly over the last couple of weeks related to the West Coast hospital project.  I know there are a number of members on both sides of the House who have a keen interest in the project because it directly impacts their constituents.  So I thought I would also take a quick moment, while I have a couple of minutes left, to inform members of the House that I will be having another meeting with the action committee that is on the ground in Corner Brook. 

 

There are residents from outside of Corner Brook as well, but it is a Corner Brook based committee.  I will be having a meeting by conference call this evening, just to continue to keep members of that committee in the loop on our progress and to really ensure that they can see our commitment, that we can demonstrate our commitment to the West Coast hospital project.  We continue to make progress.  It has certainly taken longer than any of us would have liked.  There is no doubt about that, but millions of dollars have been invested and we are really looking forward to getting on to the next steps. 

 

The functional program for that hospital and for the campus is just about complete.  I will have an opportunity again this evening – it will be my second meeting with the action committee.  I have committed to them that on my very next visit to Corner Brook, which I hope is soon – winter is a wonderful time of year to visit the West Coast.  Any time is a wonderful time to visit the West Coast, but on my very next visit I will commit to sitting down with the action committee and having further discussions. 

 

In the last number of years we have learned a lot from dealing with this issue in particular.  We have to do a better job of engagement.  So moving forward, I can commit that we will focus more attention on an engagement strategy so people on the West Coast, and anywhere else for that matter, can ask questions, can immediately gain access to information and updates on what is happening with the project, so that people will have a greater level of confidence with where we are and where we are going. 

 

In fairness, people have reason to be skeptical.  This has taken a long time.  It has taken a long time to get to where we are, but I can assure you, Mr. Chair, that we are absolutely committed to continued progress.

 

Mr. Chair, there have been a number of questions this week also related to patient safety and the implementation of recommendations coming out of the Cameron report.  I can assure you that patient safety is an extremely high priority for people working in our department and also working in the regional health authorities in our health system.  I can also say with confidence that most of the recommendations coming out of that report have been implemented either fully or substantially. 

 

It is also important to note that we will never be finished.  Things are changing so fast, in terms of technology and our systems and processes, that working to achieve the best possible standards of patient safety and quality assurance in our system is going to be something that is ongoing.  That work will never be complete.  Even since Cameron, there are systems and processes that have changed. 

 

While some of the recommendations were extremely specific, things continue to evolve.  I can assure you this is something we are monitoring on an ongoing basis.  As I said in Question Period, there are legislative changes to be made that will address some of the few outstanding recommendations.  We are making progress in that regard as well.  I will very soon be able to share more information about that.  I look forward to introducing more legislation in this House later this year. 

 

I know my time is up, Mr. Chair.  I look forward to further opportunities to talk about issues related to health and hopefully related to my constituents at some point too.

 

Thank you.

 

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 stand again to speak to Bill 44 on Interim Supply.  Mr. Chair, there have been a number of pre-Budget consultations.  I have been able to read a number of the submissions on the pre-Budget consultations. 

 

The interesting thing is that the pre-Budget consultation submissions from community groups are doing incredible work already on really stretched budgets and doing the work of the state.  They are doing work, helping people to cope with daily life, helping people negotiate the system, helping people who have fallen through the cracks, but also helping people with some of the shortfalls in the system. 

 

What they are asking for – none of them really are asking for any kind of increase in funds, although they need it, because they are aware of what the Premier has been saying that everything is on the table.  They are not asking for any frills.  They are asking, simply, to stay the course because they know how important their work is.  Not only that, they are so dedicated to their work.  Many people working long hours, underpaid, very experienced and educated, but they are committed to their cause.  They are working with passion and they are working with compassion.

 

Mr. Chair, I would like to congratulate those many organizations that took the time to go to the pre-Budget consultations to present to government their own needs, not to take care of themselves, but so they can do the work to help take care of the people in our Province, and sometimes some of the most vulnerable people in our Province. 

 

What I would like to look at, Mr. Chair, is a what-if scenario.  Here we are 500,000 people in Newfoundland and Labrador with a number of years under our belts of absolute prosperity.  What if we did have a fully accessible, affordable, publicly administered and publicly delivered child care system?  What if with all those years of prosperity, and again with only 500,000 people, we had a fully administered and managed home care program?  What would that look for us? 

 

What if we had a social housing program that truly responded to the needs of our current demographics?  A lot of single people, a lot of seniors who are either living alone or in a couple who need smaller units, what if we had a social housing program that was really responsive to their needs?  Where we had portable subsidies for seniors, where we had a real rental assistance program for seniors. 

 

What if this government, because of its promise in its Blue Book over four years ago – that Blue Book was done over four years ago where it promised a home ownership assistance program to young working families, what if they had come through on that promise?  What would that look like for some families today who would have been able to buy their own homes with a little bit of help?  Not a handout, but a little bit of help in order to deal with the high market prices because of our prosperity, because of our resource industry.  What if all those programs were truly in place? 

 

What we have, Mr. Chair, is this sandwich generation.  Many of us here in this House are part of that sandwich generation.  We have seniors, our parents – unfortunately, both my parents have passed away.  My father had spent all of his working life as a soldier.  In 1949, when Newfoundland joined Confederation, my father was in a group of the first seven Newfoundland men to join the Canadian army.  He was a career soldier.  He died at a very early age, at sixty-one. 

 

My mother died when she was seventy-eight.  We always felt that because dad had been in the army she would be okay.  If dad died before she did, that she would have his pension.  Because we moved all our lives all over the country, they never were able to buy a house.  So we did not have that kind of equity.

 

There are, I am sure, a lot of people here in this House who have had parents who have not bought a house.  Or maybe they had a family house, but that house was too big for them, one of the parents died.  So, then you have a single parent who needs to rent a place. 

 

In a lot of cases, a lot of our mothers never worked outside the home so they may not have a pension.  Then perhaps when our fathers die, depending on what they were doing, maybe they do not have a great pension either.  Then our moms basically are on OAS and GIS. 

 

A lot of us in this House, if our moms were widowed and on OAS or GIS, we would help them out, but there are a lot of families in this Province who are not able to do that.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

 

CHAIR: Order, please!

 

MS ROGERS: What happens, Mr. Chair, is that we have this sandwich generation where we are trying to take care of our parents, or our one parent who is having a hard time making ends meet.  If they are on OAS or GIS, their income is $1,200 a month. 

 

If they have to rent an apartment or rent a house, they are looking at – in a lot of places here in our Province – $800 a month for rent, $200 average a month during the year for heat and light, and $100 for phone, cable, and internet.  They need that.  That is not a frill.  That is what they need.  So that is $1,100, leaving them – any of our widows or single senior citizens who are on OAS and GIS – with $100 a month for food, for transportation, for medication that is not covered by the provincial plan, for any co-pay they may have to do, for clothing, and to go to the doctor. 

 

If you are living in town, for instance, and you have a take a taxi – if you cannot take a bus and nobody can drive you during the day because your family is working, or else your family is up in Fort McMurray, or maybe in Labrador working on Muskrat Falls, you have to take a taxi.  That is at least $20 both ways.  That is a lot of money.  That is a big chunk of your $100 a month.

 

There are seniors who many families are trying to help out.  Then there are people's children who are young working families, who are scrambling for affordable child care – absolutely scrambling.  Young families who are saying: mom, dad, I cannot afford to have kids because child care is at least $1,000 a month per child.  I cannot afford to do it, I have my student loan.  Darn it, if the government had done that homeownership assistance plan that they promised to us young working families, we would not have such a high mortgage.  There would be all that. 

 

If government had delivered on those programs, then people could get on with their lives.  We are not talking about frills here.  We are talking about the basic essentials so people can participate fully in the economic well-being of our Province.

 

That is the potential we had, Mr. Chair.  We had that potential when we had those years and years and years of prosperity, of unprecedented income in our Province.  Those are some of the opportunities that have been missed.

 

What do we do now?  In these really challenging economic times what do we do to help our seniors?  They need portable rent sups so they can live, so they can survive.  Our young working families need help so they can have children, so they can participate fully in the workplace, especially child care – especially.  What is happening is that there is stress on young working families scrambling to ensure their children are well taken care of so they can get off to work, and so they can be part of making our economy stronger once again.

 

These programs are not about frills.  They are not about extravagance.  These programs are good for the economy.  They are good for working families.  They are good for seniors.  They are good for the people who are the sandwich generation.  It is all about what is good for our economy and good for our people, Mr. Chair.  I am hoping that these are going to be considered in this upcoming Budget.

 

Thank you very much.

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

 

CHAIR: Shall the resolution carry?

 

All those in favour, 'aye.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

 

On motion, resolution 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, 3, and 4.

 

CHAIR: Shall clauses 2, 3, and 4 carry?

 

All those in favour, 'aye.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

 

CHAIR: All those against, 'nay.'

 

Carried.

 

On motion, clauses 2, 3, and 4 carried.

 

CLERK: The schedule.

 

CHAIR: The schedule.

 

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, 2016 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, 2016 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service.

 

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: Shall I report the bill without amendment?

 

All those in favour, 'aye.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

 

CHAIR: All those against, 'nay.'

 

Carried.

 

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the resolution and a bill consequent thereto, carried.

 

CHAIR: The hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee rise and report Bill 44 without amendment.

 

CHAIR: The motion is that the Committee rise and report the resolution and Bill 44 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.

 

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the resolution and a bill consequent thereto, carried.

 

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

 

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

 

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Speaker, the motion is that the Committee report the resolution and Bill 44 carried without amendment.

 

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

 

When shall the report be received?

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Now, Mr. Speaker.

 

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

 

On motion, report received and adopted.

 

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

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services, that the resolution be now read for the first time.

 

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the resolution be now read the 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 expenses of the public service for the financial year ending March 31, 2016 the sum of $2,784,047,800.”

 

On motion, resolution read a first time.

 

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

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services, that the resolution be now read the 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.'

 

Carried.

 

CLERK: Second reading of the resolution.

 

On motion, resolution read a second time.

 

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

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services, for leave to introduce the Interim Supply bill, Bill 44, and I further move that that bill be now read for the first time.

 

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Deputy Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce 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 Deputy Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce the Interim Supply bill and that the said bill be now read a first time?

 

All those in favour, 'aye.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

 

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

 

Carried.

 

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board 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, 2016 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service”, carried.  (Bill 44)

 

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, 2016 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service.”  (Bill 44)

 

On motion, Bill 44 read a first time.

 

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

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Natural Resources, that the Interim Supply bill be now read the second time.

 

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

 

All those in favour, 'aye.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

 

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

 

Carried.

 

CLERK: Second reading of Bill 44.

 

On motion, Bill 44 read a second time.

 

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

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services, that the Interim Supply bill be now read the third time.

 

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

 

Carried.

 

CLERK: Third reading of Bill 44.

 

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been 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, 2016 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 44)

 

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

 

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I moved, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that the House do now adjourn.

 

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that this House do now adjourn.

 

All those in favour, 'aye.'

 

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

 

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

 

Carried.

 

This House now stands adjourned until Monday at 1:30 o'clock.

 

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