March 8, 2018
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. XLVIII No. 51
The
House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):
Order, please!
Admit
strangers.
In the
public gallery today I am very pleased to welcome members of the Provincial
Apprenticeship and Certification Board who will be referenced in a Ministerial
Statement.
With us
today we have the Chair, Mr. David Harris, Craig Randell, Joann Greeley,
Jennifer Hillier, Amanda Cull, Geordie Walsh, Tyson Hedge, Karen Rowe, Karen
Walsh and Mona Morrow.
They are
joined by staff members of the apprenticeship and certification division of
Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.
Welcome
to you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Also in the public gallery, I
would like to recognize Ms. Brenda O'Brien, who will be mentioned in a Member's
statement today. She is accompanied by her daughter, Alice O'Brien.
Welcome
to you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
I would like to send out a
special hello out in another gallery, to that of our television broadcast. I
would like to send special greetings to Labrador and Ms. Roxanne Rose's grade
three class at Peacock Primary. I was recently a guest reader at the school's
Project Read. It's a week-long activity focused on reading for pleasure at home
and in school. They are tuning in today as they wanted to learn a bit more about
our Legislature and what their elected officials are up to.
So,
greetings to the class.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
So behave.
Statements by
Members
MR. SPEAKER:
Today for Members'
statements, we will hear from the District of St. George's - Humber, St. John's
East - Quidi Vidi, Placentia West - Bellevue, Cape St. Francis and Windsor Lake.
The hon.
the Member for St. George's - Humber.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. REID:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Verena
Trask was born in the historic community of Sandy Point in Bay St. George, and
this coming Monday she will be celebrating her 100th birthday.
In 1952,
Verena and her husband, Isaac Trask of Elliston, moved their family to Indian
Head and later relocated to Seal Cove in Stephenville Crossing to be closer to
the school for their children and to become more involved in the community.
Verena
and her husband – who passed away in 1983 – had 11 children. Their family has
continued to grow and she now has 21 grandchildren, 17 great-grandchildren, and
two great-great grandchildren.
Verena
is known by many for her kindness and she's also known as a skilled seamstress
who has over the years made hundreds of dresses and suits for graduations,
weddings and other special occasions.
Verena
is still very active. She loves to knit, she loves to go shopping and she loves
to share stories with members of her family and her many friends. Her family is
very proud of her, and she is loved and respected in the community.
I ask
all Members of the House to join with me in wishing Verena Trask a happy 100th
birthday this coming Monday.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's East - Quidi Vidi.
MS. MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I'm so
pleased on International Women's Day to recognize a constituent who is the
essence of the unsung heroine, as are so many women.
Wife,
mother, activist Brenda O'Brien for the past 14 years has been an untiring
advocate for her own son and all children on the autism spectrum. Brenda has
devoted her life to working with teachers, principals and counsellors to ensure
that the schools her son and other children with special needs attend are
welcoming and truly inclusive.
She
researches intently what can be done and engages knowledgeably with
professionals in trying to attain solutions to problems, believing beyond a
doubt that there is always a solution.
She has
raised awareness in our educational system about the human rights of children
with autism and developmental disabilities. She was instrumental in getting
early intervention extended to children with autism beyond the age of six.
Brenda
continues to advocate for accommodation in the school system.
I ask
all Members of the House of Assembly to applaud this wonderful woman, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Placentia West - Bellevue.
MR. BROWNE:
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to
stand today to recognize two young people from Marystown who, in their own ways,
are shining a light on mental health.
Chloe
Walsh of Little Bay is pursuing graduate studies in psychology at the University
of Glasgow in Scotland. But, there, her pursuit has extended beyond purely an
academic quest. She is one of five students named by the university as a Future
World Changer. Chloe's ambition is to make more people mindful of their mental
health, as well as normalizing the language used to describe it.
Teenager
Jimmy Bonnell, of Marystown, is also making a difference. After struggling with
mental health, he has transformed himself into a power of good for others. He
has started the free Burin Peninsula Teen Mental Health Peer Support Group and
describes it as an opportunity for people to share their personal battles with
others to show them that there are brighter days ahead.
I ask
all Members to join me in congratulating and thanking them both and encourage
anyone out there struggling to check out one of Chloe's videos or drop by one of
Jimmy's sessions.
Mr.
Speaker, mental health challenges have become the issue of our time. But
thankfully advocates and leaders like Chloe and Jimmy are stepping forward to
help #endthestigma together.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for the
District of Cape St. Francis.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I rise
in this hon. House today to congratulate everyone involved in the 2018 Snowfest
celebrations in the Towns of Flatrock and Pouch Cove. Mr. Speaker, the energy
and the dedication of many volunteers made this event successful again this
year.
Snowfest
was filled with a variety of fun activities for all ages: family game night,
seniors' social and outing, an ice fishing derby, an afternoon tea and bake
sale, a hot roast beef and moose supper, bingo, general skate, a card game and
dances for both children and adults.
Many
local groups were involved including the recreation and heritage committees, the
school council, the Lions Club, the volunteer fire department and firettes, the
church and, of course, the local musicians and performers.
All
activities were well organized, well attended and I know a great time was had by
all. It was truly a community celebration.
I ask
all hon. Members to join me in congratulating and thanking the organizers and
volunteers for this year's Snowfest celebration. It was a fantastic time and a
job well done.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for the
District of Windsor Lake.
MS. C. BENNETT:
Since its inception in 2008,
Smiling Land Foundation strives to spread the warm and welcoming Newfoundland
and Labrador and East Coast culture and spirit to the rest of Canada. This group
of ex-pat Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have raised and donated in excess of
$1.4 million to deserving charities benefiting Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Daffodil
Place, Ronald McDonald House, The Gathering Place, Stella's Circle, Artistic
Fraud, the Vera Perlin Society, Boys & Girls Clubs of St. John's, young parents
association, Rainbow Riders, Special Olympics, Health Care Foundation, the Dr.
H. Bliss Murphy Centre, the Home from the Sea Sealers Memorial in Elliston, LSPU
Hall, Torngat Mountains Base Camp youth leadership program and Froude Avenue
Community Centre – all benefactors of the work of these passionate native sons
and daughters.
This
year marks Smiling Land Foundation's 10th anniversary and final fundraising
event for this remarkable group. Funds raised on May 12 will be used to
establish a scholarship fund for Newfoundland and Labrador youth.
We are
proud of your efforts and so grateful for your commitment to home. Thank you to
these amazing Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who, despite living away, found a
unique way to help their neighbour – giving back to the province they love.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Statements by Ministers.
Statements by
Ministers
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister
Responsible for the Status of Women.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It has
been a year of advancement for women. The role of the #metoo and #timesup
movements in that change is recognized, as is the leadership roles women have
taken.
Today
the #pressforprogress continues to ensure women's rights are respected and
equality assured, here and around the world.
On International Women's Day, we express our gratitude and
recognize the contributions of women and girls in our province, both past and
present. We acknowledge women's equality-seeking and anti-violence organizations
who work to advance true equality for women and girls.
In this province progress continues as our government
introduces and advances many programs and initiatives to empower, protect and
advance women. I am pleased to chair a ministerial committee across government
departments to oversee collective actions to address issues of violence in our
province and advance equality. This is in addition to the Justice Minister's
Committee to End Violence Against Women and Girls that engages community groups
on this issue, as well as the tremendous work being carried out throughout the
province through our violence prevention initiatives. Strengthened workplace
harassment policies in the public sector have also been introduced.
Government continues to work collaboratively with industry
and community organizations to advance economic opportunity. For example, we are
ensuring opportunities for women in the trades and technology sectors by
increasing the number of women in trades through women's employment plans and
gender equity and diversity plans for large projects in the province.
In the hon. House, today and every day, let us all work
together to advance true equality – social, legal, cultural, economic and
political – for all women and girls in Newfoundland and Labrador. We are all
part of the human race – 52 per cent of us just want to be treated equally and
respectfully. Let us all recommit today to doing just that.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune.
MS. PERRY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank
the minister for an advance copy of her statement. Our caucus wishes to join
with government, community leaders and society to celebrate International
Women's Day. Today is the day to recognize the accomplishments of women and
encourage all women to reach for the stars, stand strong in the face of
adversity and follow your dreams.
Mr.
Speaker, today is also a day to acknowledge the contributions of the
hard-working groups who advocate for women's equality and anti-violence. To
them, I give my sincere, heartfelt thanks and appreciation.
We all
have inspirational women in our lives including our mothers, our sisters, our
friends and female leaders the world over who have demonstrated the courage,
strength and resiliency to fight for equality. I'm so proud of each and every
one of you.
For
today, I would especially like to thank my hon. female colleagues. While we may
not always agree on policy, I respect and admire each and every one of you.
Thank you for stepping up to bring female voices to the government table.
If I may
modify the words of Helen Reddy: We are women, hear us roar.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I, too,
thank the minister. Mr. Speaker, on International Women's Day, I celebrate in
honour of the amazing work undertaken by all women across our province.
Racialized women, women with disabilities, women in the LGBTQ two-spirited
community, younger, older, rural women, immigrant women, women who helped
develop the fishery, who heal our sick, feed our hungry, who raise and teach our
children, keep our commerce going, who serve through elected office, feminists,
equality seekers, change makers: Thank you, my sisters.
Especially, I acknowledge our indigenous sisters who today are in Happy
Valley-Goose Bay telling their stories and demanding change at the inquiry for
murdered and missing indigenous women. We are with them in sisterhood and we
honour their courage.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Further statements by
ministers?
The hon.
the Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.
MR. HAWKINS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's my
pleasure today to stand and read this minister's statement.
I was
pleased to have the opportunity to join a meeting of the Provincial
Apprenticeship and Certification Board earlier this morning. The meeting marks a
significant milestone as it's the board's 100th meeting.
The
board plays an important role in the province's apprenticeship system. Its
mandate includes accrediting institutions to deliver apprenticeship programs,
designating occupations for apprenticeship and providing advice to the
provincial government on labour market matters related to training and
certification.
I am
pleased to inform my hon. colleagues of many new developments underway as we
continue to work with the Provincial Apprenticeship and Certification Board.
We
recently announced online training for apprentices. The first blocks of training
for five trades were selected for this pilot initiative, which will enable
apprentices to continue their training while working.
We are
partnering with the Maritime provinces and Manitoba on a shared IT system to
streamline the steps to completing an apprenticeship program. Work is also
continuing on the Atlantic Apprenticeship Harmonization Project, with 10 trades
already completed and six more in progress.
Mr.
Speaker, we will continue to collaborate with industry and our post-secondary
institutions to ensure that we are responsive and meeting emerging needs in the
province.
I ask my
hon. colleagues to join me in congratulating members of the Provincial
Apprenticeship and Certification Board on their 100th meeting and commending
them for their important work and their contributions.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for the
District of Conception Bay South.
MR. PETTEN:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank
the minister for an advance copy of his statement. This side of the House also
congratulates the Provincial Apprenticeship and Certification Board on its 100th
meeting. The board plays a vital role in this province, enables many women and
men the opportunity to progress and excel in their trades.
This is
a benefit, not just to these individuals but to the economy and the province as
a whole. The Provincial Apprenticeship and Certification Board was established
in 1953, and to now see the current members reach this milestone of 100th
meeting is certainly a milestone we recognize.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's East - Quidi Vidi.
MS. MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I, too,
thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement and join with him in
congratulating the members of the Apprenticeship and Certification Board for
their work in advancing apprentices through the system.
On this
International Women's Day, I also congratulate the women in Resource Development
Corporation and the Office to Advance Women Apprentices. Both organizations have
done outstanding work helping women apprentices get jobs and move on to
journeyperson status. They've done much to help employers appreciate the
excellent skills women bring to these jobs, and I'm sure the minister will also
collaborate with these organizations.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Further statements by
ministers?
Oral
Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr.
Speaker, yesterday we learned that NLC had terminated two more senior employees.
The chief information officer who was terminated had been named in February as
the project manager to help roll out the government's marijuana plan.
I ask
the Premier: With marijuana becoming legal in a few short months, was this
individual terminated with cause or without cause?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Finance and President of Treasury Board.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The
decision by the CEO at the NLC, Mr. Speaker, was just that, a decision of the
CEO of the NLC. I'm not exactly sure what the reasons for the dismissal were. I
was informed of the dismissal by the CEO. We have full confidence in the CEO to
run the operations of the NLC.
We do
have cannabis coming on stream, and that is a very important file for us, Mr.
Speaker, but I'm assured by her that this will not affect the rollout of the
cannabis file.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Leader of the Official
Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
When a
minister who has publicly stated he is very concerned about spending at
agencies, boards and commissions, it takes me by surprise that he hasn't even
inquired to find out if it's with cause or without cause. The implications and
cost to government are significantly different.
I ask
the Premier: Will he commit today to hold a public competition to fill this
position or is the plan just to fill this, as you've done so many times in the
last two-and-a-half years, to fill it with a Liberal friend?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Finance and President of Treasury Board.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's
unfortunate that sometimes deep politics enters a question in Question Period;
but, Mr. Speaker, what I can assure you here is that the CEO – we have asked for
efficiencies within our agencies, boards and commissions. We have done
restructuring of management within core government.
I
understand from the CEO that these positions will not be filled at the NLC. Part
of it, my understanding, is finding efficiencies at the NLC. Outside of that, if
there are any other reasons or any other causes, I cannot speak to that, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Leader of the Official
Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Mr. Speaker, the information
we have is the chief information officer is intended to be replaced.
Yesterday, while visiting Nova Scotia, federal Fisheries Minister LeBlanc
confirmed he was standing by his decision to give a surf clam quota to the Five
Nations Clam Company and he flat out has rejected calls to reverse the decision.
I ask
the Premier: What is his plan now?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Fisheries and Land Resources.
MR. BYRNE:
Mr. Speaker, we remain in close communication with not only the department but
the minister himself.
I had a
brief exchange yesterday with Minister LeBlanc where I reiterated our
expectation of a meeting and I reiterated our expectation that the decision be
rescinded. I'm looking forward to that meeting. We do know the minister has some
health issues which he's dealing with, but we do expect that meeting. I will
note for the benefit of the House, that the licence has not yet been issued.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Leader of the Official
Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Mr. Speaker, the minister
was, yesterday, in Nova Scotia visiting the industry and people involved with
the industry there. Last week he was questioned in Parliament about his decision
and Minister LeBlanc said he was very proud of the process. He also said that he
was convinced that the decision is good for the industry. He said it's good in
terms of benefits for indigenous communities and he said it will be good for the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I ask
the Premier: What is your understanding of how the minister sees this or can he
explain this, that it's good for Newfoundland and Labrador?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Fisheries and Land Resources.
MR. BYRNE:
Mr. Speaker, we disagree with the federal minister's characterization of this
particular process. We feel it was very, very flawed.
Specific
requirements were put in place through their own request for proposals process,
which clearly do not seem to be followed at all. There were placeholder elements
to the successful proposal.
As we
know, the proposal itself was led by a non-indigenous company, Premium Seafoods
out of Arichat, Cape Breton. There was one indigenous partner that was included
in the original award or the advancement of the proposal. To the best of our
knowledge, there were four placeholder positions for indigenous, including in
Newfoundland and Labrador.
We
categorically reject that as responsible behaviour within this process.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm glad
the minister has clarified that they're offside on this decision with the
federal government. When asked for his opinion on its government's decision on
surf clam quota, the regional minister, the minister from Newfoundland and
Labrador, Minister Seamus O'Regan said that he believes opening up the surf clam
fishery to competition is a good thing.
Clearly,
no one in the federal Liberal Cabinet understands the impact of this decision on
the people right here in our Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, not even our
own representative in the federal Cabinet.
Minister
O'Regan was in town this week. I ask the Premier: While he was here with other
visiting ministers and meeting with his MP colleagues from Newfoundland and
Labrador, was there an opportunity to meet with the minister and to express your
views on this issue?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Fisheries and Land Resources.
MR. BYRNE:
Mr. Speaker, part of the
strategy of this government, of the Members on this side of the House, has been
to reach out to everyone and anyone who can assist our province in advancing our
interests, and that included reaching out to Minister O'Regan.
Premier
Ball and I, we actually had a conversation with our regional minister where we
did indeed voice our concerns, where we expressed our concerns about the process
itself and the ultimate decision. We've reached out to indigenous communities;
we've reached out to industry players.
I'll
note also, Mr. Speaker, concern is not being raised just in this province, and
this is very important for the House to reflect on. It is being expressed in
other provinces as well. That's the partnerships, that's the allies we're
seeking here.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Cape
St. Francis.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
Minister, Grand Bank plant depends solely on processing surf clams. It doesn't
do any groundfish, scallops, shrimp or crab, just surf clams.
What
assurance can you give us that all Clearwater's remaining surf clam quota will
be processed in Grand Bank and not in the facility in Glace Bay, Nova Scotia?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Fisheries and Land Resources.
MR. BYRNE:
Mr. Speaker, we expect Grand
Bank Seafoods to adhere to all provincial requirements and laws. As we know,
Clearwater had taken the decision some time ago, when the hon. Member was in
government, to upgrade a plant in Glace Bay, Nova Scotia, and to offer that
plant for the purposes of processing surf clams.
We feel
very, very strongly that we have to work together on this to ensure a better
future for Grand Bank. That's why we're spending so much energy, on this side of
the House, making sure that our voice is heard in Ottawa.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Member for the District
of Cape St. Francis.
MR. K. PARSONS:
I'll remind the minister that
the Glace Bay plant was just for the overflow at the Grand Bank plant.
In Nova
Scotia yesterday, Minister LeBlanc said he understood there would be displeasure
in this decision. He said it's not about hurt feelings. Well, I tell you, it's
about hundreds of full-time jobs that are in jeopardy on the Burin Peninsula.
Minister, what are you doing about it?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Fisheries and Land Resources.
MR. BYRNE:
Mr. Speaker, if the Member
really wants to make this about commitment, the Members from this side of the
House, including the Member for Burin - Grand Bank – all the Members on this
side of the House – are very, very concerned about the situation in Grand Bank.
If the
Member really wants to make this about commitment, this decision was taken by
the federal minister on September 6. That Member did not ask any questions in
this House in October, in November or December.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
MR. BYRNE:
He did not ask any questions.
He did not approach me on this.
If the
Member really wants to make this about commitment, then I'd ask: Did the hon.
Member communicate to the federal government his own concerns? I'd suggest he
did not.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for the
District of Cape St. Francis.
MR. K. PARSONS:
I wish the minister would
understand that there was a question asked on this. Now, it did happen in
September. We don't open until the House until 1st of November, but it was asked
in the last session on December 5 if you want to go back and have a look at it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. K. PARSONS:
And before then, I also spoke
to the mayor of Grand Bank about the situation down there. He was very concerned
and he thought you were concerned too.
Mr.
Speaker, Clearwater stated it's pursuing legal options at a possible abuse by
the federal Minister LeBlanc. Minister LeBlanc stated yesterday that he was not
surprised and worried about that.
At one
point, Minister, you said you were going to seek a legal opinion also. Can you
give us an update on that?
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Fisheries and
Land Resources.
MR. BYRNE:
Mr. Speaker, what we've
gotten clarification on is the hon. Member actually acknowledges that there was
an additional plant that was built in Cape Breton for surf clams under his
watch. While the decision was rendered in September, there was no communication
by the hon. Member until the very dying days of the sitting of the House just
before Christmas on December 5. Now we ask about whether or not we're offering a
legal opinion.
Mr.
Speaker, what we are doing is we are working very, very hard for the people of
Grand Bank to solve the problem, as it stands with the minister and with the
department. Yes, I appreciate the fact that he did take an opportunity to call
the mayor of Grand Bank. The Premier and I, along with the Members of this
caucus, especially the Member for
Burin - Grand Bank, have been in communication
with the mayor of Grand Bank many, many times.
MR.
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR.
SPEAKER:
The
hon. the Member for the District of Cape St. Francis.
MR.
K. PARSONS:
Mr.
Speaker, I think the minister should worry about this own job, as Minister of
Fisheries representing Newfoundland and Labrador –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR.
K. PARSONS:
–
for the fisheries.
Minister, the winning applicant of the quota was in
Minister LeBlanc's own riding. The company that partnered with the owner is a
brother of federal MP.
Do you think this is part of the flawed process too?
MR.
SPEAKER:
The
hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Land Resources.
MR.
BYRNE:
Mr.
Speaker, the entire request for proposal process was not adhered to. When you
have a company which actually appears to be the leading driver to the proposal
itself, when the RFP process was supposed to be led by indigenous communities
and nations – yes, Premium Seafoods does appear to be the lead driver of this
particular proposal.
What we also know is that for such a valuable species,
surf clams, this has been offered now to indigenous communities for three weeks.
There's an offer but no buyers. I find that very, very strange and it does show
that not only do we find, as a government, that the process was flawed, but many
indigenous communities of Atlantic Canada and Quebec also find it flawed.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR.
SPEAKER:
The
hon. the Member for the District of Conception Bay East - Bell Island.
MR.
BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We've heard that many researchers have stopped
conducting clinical trials because it's frustrating working with the Health
Research Ethics Authority, denying patients of cutting-edge new medicine and
treatments, as well as stifling the economic impact of less research spending in
the province.
Can the minister give details of clinical trial
activity in this province?
MR.
SPEAKER:
The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
MR.
HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
It's unfortunate that the way the question is framed
leads or could lead people to think this province is not open for innovation and
business, when the facts plainly speak to the opposite. We have had innovation
summits. We have had technology summits. The Health Research Ethics Authority
and its board are arm's-length authorities put in place to protect the people of
this province under conditions of research to ensure it is safe and ethical.
I cannot, nor will I, interfere with that process. They
are committed to doing it in a safe and appropriate fashion, and I would support
them in that endeavour, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR.
SPEAKER:
The
hon. the Member for Conception Bay East - Bell Island.
MR.
BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
You may say that you're open for business here, but
you're doing very little to enhance business here, particularly when it comes
around medical research.
What are the time frames as it relates to the duration
from submission to approval? Surely, the government must encourage a standard by
which it can be judged.
MR.
SPEAKER:
The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
MR.
HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
The
requirement is that the application for ethics approval be considered within 30
days. That timeline has been a challenge owing to vacancies on the Health
Research Ethics Board, which were filled as recently as last fall.
The
nature of the current problem that the Member alluded to in his previous
question is simply the complexity and inherent difficulty in working through
such a complicated proposal to the point where expert advice was sought and
brought in and both parties have gone away to examine the results of that, Mr.
Speaker. It needs to be done properly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Member for Conception Bay
East - Bell Island.
MR. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Other
jurisdictions can answer the same complex questions in two to four weeks.
Why is
it we've accepted the authority here in this province to operate so far out of
what is accepted as the political norms?
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Health and
Community Services.
MR. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I would
dispute the comparison with other jurisdictions. The complexity of this request
and its inherent difficulties in working through it are not within the range of
normal; hence, the Health Research Ethics Board desire to seek outside
nationally-recognized expertise. They have advised both sides of the process,
and there are meetings going ahead as we speak to deal with this issue, Mr.
Speaker. It needs to be done properly for the benefit of the people of this
province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Member for Conception Bay
East - Bell Island.
MR. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Sequence
Bio has now been waiting over six months for something that would take less than
four weeks in another province; waiting to invest hundreds of millions of
dollars.
Can the
minister explain why this delay is still occurring?
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Health and
Community Services.
MR. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In the
absence of Hansard being that fast, Mr. Speaker, I will repeat again: this
process is complicated. The timeline was met with 30 days.
There
have been challenges with recruiting for the Health Research Ethics Board, which
were temporary and transient and have been remedied. The application is being
considered. It is complicated. Outside expertise has been brought in. Both
parties have taken that expertise's advice and are now working through the
process. It has to be done properly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Member for Conception Bay
East - Bell Island.
MR. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Our
regulator is so badly destroying research opportunities in this province that
something must be done. The Health
Research Ethics Authority Act allows the authority to recognize Central
Ethics and other certified non-profit regulators in this country.
Why
hasn't the government ensured the regulator, that it is responsible for, is
actually fulfilling its duties?
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Health and
Community Services.
MR. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
The role
of a politician in health research ethics decisions is zero, Mr. Speaker –
absolutely zero. This is an arm's-length body for a reason.
We have
seen in the past, prior to the Health Research Ethics Authority being
established by the Opposition when they were in power – prior to that, there
were misfortunes and unfortunate occurrences of an ethical nature which will not
be repeated on my watch, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Member for Conception Bay
East - Bell Island.
MR. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
At one
point the minister mentioned efforts to improve process at the Health Research
Ethics Authority. Apparently the department hired a lean management consultant
who looked at the body and then quit.
Can the
minister confirm this?
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Health and
Community Services.
MR. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
There
have been a variety of approaches by the Health Research Ethics Authority. I'm
sure they would be better placed to speak to the detail of those. They have made
attempts and instituted newer policies and approaches. They have brought in
outside expertise, Mr. Speaker.
In this
particular instance, it is a complicated case. It needs to be done properly for
the benefit and safety of the people in this province. I will not interfere with
the assessment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Opposition House
Leader.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr.
Speaker, under recent public service negotiations agreed to with NAPE, new
provisions related to severance and no-layoff clauses were introduced.
I ask
the Minister of Finance: What's the status of these provisions with negotiations
with ongoing collective bargaining with other unions?
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Finance and
President of Treasury Board.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank
the Member for his question. Mr. Speaker, we have instituted with our public
sector negotiations with NAPE, which is now ratified, a no-layoff clause. There
are protections within that that ensure the clause does not roll into future
agreements and we stand by that. That's one of the factors that we've ensured as
we've moved forward.
With
regard to severance, severance payments will be paid out, Mr. Speaker, to all
public servants based on what they've earned.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Opposition House Leader.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Precisely I'll ask the minister: What's the current status of negotiations with
those other unions outside of NAPE, which I understand collective bargaining is
continuing. What's the status of those negotiations?
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Finance and
President of Treasury Board.
MR. OSBORNE:
Mr. Speaker, they are
ongoing. We have one current set of negotiations right now that we're
temporarily paused on with CUPE. Outside of that, they are ongoing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Opposition House Leader.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
The minister indicated
there's a pause ongoing with CUPE in regard to negotiations.
Could he
explain what that pause is, or are there issues with negotiations at this time?
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Finance and
President of Treasury Board.
MR. OSBORNE:
Yes, Mr. Speaker.
The
primary reason for the pause with CUPE at this particular point as regarding the
no lay-off clause, we are seeking assurances from CUPE, Mr. Speaker, the same as
we've sought from NAPE on the no lay-off clause, we want to ensure that the no
lay-off clause does not extend into future contracts.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Opposition House Leader.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr.
Speaker, in previous statements the minister indicated that the severance to be
paid out under the NAPE collective agreement is approximately $250 million.
I wonder
if he has estimated what the total payout under severance will be with the
public service with those collective agreements confirmed with the other unions.
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Finance and
President of Treasury Board.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The
total severance payout, including all public servants throughout our agencies,
boards and commissions at core government, bargaining, non-bargaining,
management positions is less than $600 million. Of that, Mr. Speaker, we
anticipate about 35 per cent of that will come back to government through income
taxes and through sales taxes. We are booking out the full amount but we do
anticipate that we will receive a large portion of that back in taxes.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The Opposition House Leader.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr.
Speaker, on December 5, 2016, the Minister of Natural Resources admitted that
Vale had asked for changes to the development agreement. The minister stated
this is a change to what would be the project milestones.
Minister, it's now March 2018, has Vale informed you if the start of the mining
will occur on December 31, 2019, as per the agreed to development agreement?
MR. SPEAKER:
The Minister of Natural
Resources.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want
to say hello to Peacock Primary who are watching us today. I thank you for
joining us.
This is
a very important question that has just been asked of me and I will, for the
sake of the House, give a little bit of background. As we all know, Vale
International has done a review of its base metals business, Mr. Speaker, and
part of that review, of course, was the Voisey's Bay Project. We were hopeful,
and still are, that they will go underground to extend that project.
The
question, of course, speaks to whether or not Vale is continuing to think about
going underground. I understand from public information they are considering
streaming cobalt, Mr. Speaker, to help fund them to go underground. We are
continuing to encourage them to do so.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Opposition House
Leader.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Mr. Speaker, I certainly
respect the minister talking about they're thinking about doing something, but
the point here is there was an agreed-to amendment and process here agreed to,
to go underground by 2019.
In
August 2017, Vale announced a 60-day review of the Voisey's Bay operation. This
was six months ago. I've asked the minister several times if she has received an
update, but the status of the mine is still unknown.
Minister, what have been the findings of the 60-day review completed by Vale?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Vale
continues to consider whether or not it can go underground. Mr. Speaker. I just
advised the Member opposite, and, of course, the whole of Newfoundland and
Labrador, that Vale continues to assess that opportunity. We do know they are
considering streaming cobalt to help fund them go underground.
We're
continuing to meet with them. I've just met with them again recently to
encourage them to consider that. The impact on Vale's operations today at
Voisey's Bay are that Voisey's Bay continues. This is about going underground
for future opportunity.
We're
continuing to talk to Vale about this. They're continuing to assess it and we're
hopeful they are able to stream cobalt in order to fund it.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Opposition House
Leader.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Nickel
closed yesterday at $6.06 US per pound. This is an increase since Vale announced
their 60-day review, six months ago. This increase in price certainly looks at
the business case for the underground mine and continues to improve.
Minister, what was the last update you received from Vale? When did you obtain
it? Why isn't this moving forward?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I met
with Vale this week at PDAC. We are continuing to meet with them to encourage
them to go underground at Voisey's Bay. This is important to the Nunatsiavut
Government, to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and, of course, to the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Vale has
indicated, as I've said, they are looking to stream cobalt. Cobalt, as a
commodity, is very much in demand these days. They're looking to stream cobalt
to help fund them go underground. They're continuing to work that end.
We
understand and know that there's an incredible resource underground at Voisey's
Bay. We think that Vale will note that and will move forward.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank
government for its stated commitment to improving the status of women in this
province; however, it being International Women's Day, there are still some
outstanding issues.
Last
year on International Women's Day, I presented a private Member's motion asking
government to start the process to enact pay equity legislation. The motion
passed unanimously. The gender pay gap in Newfoundland and Labrador is still one
of the worst in Canada.
I ask
the Premier: Where is his pay equity legislation? The women of the province are
awaiting his promise.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister
Responsible for the Human Resource Secretariat.
MR. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Our
government values diversity in the workplace. We are an equal opportunity
employer. We ensure that throughout core government, Mr. Speaker. We brought in
a policy just a couple of weeks ago regarding harassment. We are looking at
legislation to ensure that all individuals in this province feel safe in the
workplace, safe and free of harassment.
Mr.
Speaker, 50 per cent of our core government right now is female, 50 per cent
male. Within the public service in its entirety, I believe 58 per cent are
female.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Mr. Speaker, I was asking
about pay equity. Women in Newfoundland and Labrador make 69 cents for every
dollar that a man makes.
Mr.
Speaker, last fall, following the In Her Name vigil for missing and murdered
women and girls in Newfoundland and Labrador, the Provincial Action Network on
the Status of Women, and a coalition of anti-violence groups, urgently called
for a provincial task force on gender-based violence.
This
week again I spoke to many of these groups around the province and they still
urgently call for this crucial task force. Women at the minister's own Committee
on Violence Against Women and Girls also urgently called for this task force.
I ask
the Premier: Will he commit to immediately striking a task force that is so
clearly needed to comprehensively address the issue of violence against women
and girls?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I
appreciate the question from the Member opposite. I'm very happy to be able to
stand and talk about the meeting that we had back in December with the
ministerial committee regarding violence against women and girls. It's a meeting
that was represented by groups from all over this province, and in fact, by
Members from all sides of this House. It was a very good opportunity for
everybody to come together – indigenous groups, law enforcement, social advocacy
groups, and for us to have a chat about some very frank and real issues that
women face in this province.
What I
would say is that it was a very honest and a very truthful meeting. Out of that,
there were roughly 2,000 thoughts and ideas that were put forward. Just
yesterday, we announced a steering committee that are going to take this and
move forward with some of the systemic issues, but I'm also happy to announce
that we have concrete action and legislation coming forward to combat these
issues.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Mr. Speaker, the women of the
province are calling for a task force because of the urgency of this problem.
Mr.
Speaker, affordable child care is a foundational piece in lifting and keeping
women out of poverty, keeping women in the workforce, improving the economy and
it is beneficial to our children. Despite some additional funding, the cost of
child care is still prohibitive in this province.
I ask
the Premier: On behalf of the working families of Newfoundland and Labrador, on
this International Women's Day, will he commit to advocating with this federal
counterparts in Ottawa for a national, universal, affordable, public, quality
child care system where no child is left behind?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Education and Early Childhood Development
MR. KIRBY:
Mr. Speaker, I just want to
point to some of the initiatives that we have had in the last year have been
well beyond what has been done in previous years for early childhood education.
In the last budget, we had an additional $3.3 million for two things: to
increase wages for early childhood educators through the supplement program. We
also changed the threshold for families qualifying for a child care subsidy.
That was the first change in 10 years.
We have
since changed it again with $22 million that we have gotten from the federal
government. So over a three-year period, we will see some $32 million of
additional funds for early childhood education. That is a massive investment in
comparison to what was done previously, Mr. Speaker.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre for a very quick question, please.
MS. ROGERS:
Mr. Speaker, I ask the
minister: Where is the Domestic Violence Court he promised to the people of
Labrador?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety, for a quick response.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We have,
within my mandate letter, a promise to take the family violence court and to
spread it all over this province, and that's something we're working on. So it
is something that's going to happen, but there are also many other positive
things that are happening including – and I'm looking forward to this. Our
Premier will be introducing Bill 1 in this House in the very near future and
that's regarding the Family Violence
Protection Act. We're going to take it and make it better.
Thank
you
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The time for Oral Question
has ended.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling
of Documents.
Notices
of Motion.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Pursuant
to Standing Order 11(1), I move that this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on
Monday, March 12.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further notices of motion?
Answers
to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Ferryland.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr.
Speaker, I'm glad to rise today to present a petition on behalf of residents of
my district. Mutton Bay Bridge, located in the Trepassey area, is approximately
50 years old. In 2015, an inspection identified significant structural issues
with both the substructure and superstructure portions of the bridge. This
inspection urgently recommended full replacement or significant maintenance and
repair.
Therefore, we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: To immediately
address this most serious issue that impacts the lives and safety of the
travelling public and make it a priority for the upcoming construction season.
Mr.
Speaker, I have, on occasion, presented similar petitions here in the House in
regard to this piece of infrastructure on Route 10 before the entrance to
Trepassey. Just to view it driving over causes concerns to many of the
travelling public related to the rails. The concrete rails off the structure
itself looks in disrepair. As I said, the 2015 report indicated immediate rehab
to that piece of infrastructure.
Last
fall, I do believe, when the Department of TW asked for feedback on their
ongoing five-year Roads Plan, I did write the minister and indicated this was of
concern to the region. I asked that an assessment be done and immediate repairs
be undertaken for this piece of infrastructure.
When the
new roads program was announced a little while ago, there was no reference to
it. I did ask the department again: Was there an error here? This was missed.
They checked into it.
I did
receive a letter just recently that this is not part of the roads program, which
is of grave concern to the region and the people in the area. As I said, it has
been indicated in 2015 that repair needed to be done. It's certainly unfortunate
that this wasn't recognized in the roads program.
One of
the challenges with that is there's no rating with it. In that roads program is
the infrastructure that's going to be done, but it's not rated with other work
that's not being done to see what truly is the most significant piece of
infrastructure in regard to rating that needs to be done. That's unfortunate.
I do
call on the minister and government to revisit this, get immediate maintenance
done on it and look at replacing this bridge in the upcoming construction
season.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Transportation and Works for a response, please.
MR. CROCKER:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I thank
the hon. Member for the petition. Mr. Speaker, last year this government, for
the first time, I think, in the history of governments, brought in a five-year
Roads Plan with rolling numbers. Back in early February we released this year's
plan, which 100 per cent of the work we're going to do this year and 75 per cent
we're going to do next year.
Mr.
Speaker, it's interesting because in the 2014 Auditor General's report it was
clearly pointed out that from 2003 to 2014 bridge rehabilitation or any projects
in this province were never ranked, they were done in a political nature. One of
the things with our new ranking system is we are able now to go out and look at
– and without a doubt we have major bridge issues in this province. Around 50
per cent of our bridges now are over 50 years old. The reality is, if we could
fix every one of the bridge problems that we have in the deficit of bridge
infrastructure in this province today, it would cost half a billion dollars.
The
bridge issues we're facing today were something that should have been addressed
much stronger when oil was at $150 a barrel. Mr. Speaker, we realize the
significant safety issues around bridges, our staff constantly are monitoring
bridges and it's a very important topic for us and I do assure the hon. Member
that bridges like the one he's referring to are certainly on our radar.
Thank
you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
Further petitions?
The hon.
the Member for Mount Pearl North.
MR. LESTER:
Mr. Speaker, I rise in this
hon. House to present this petition on behalf of the residents of my district.
In our
province, there are numerous encounters between bicycles and motor vehicles.
Some of these have been fatal. Bicycles are already protected on our roadways,
and are considered to have the same rights as motor vehicles according to the
Highway Traffic Act. However, there is
no clear definition of how a car should approach someone riding their bike. A
one-metre law would erase any confusion. This law would prohibit drivers from
passing anyone travelling on their bicycle in the same direction, unless there
is at least one metre of open space between the vehicle and the bicycle.
Therefore, we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows:
We, the
undersigned, urge the House of Assembly to urge the government to help save
lives of vulnerable bicyclists using the roadways in our province and implement
a one-metre law in our province.
Mr.
Speaker, this is a law that's already in existence in many jurisdictions across
our country such as Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince
Edward Island, as well as 27 states in the United States and in many other
countries as well.
One of
the big benefactors of a bicycle, of course, is it encourages people to get out
in our province and exercise, and it has a great, positive environmental effect
as well. Another thing that we would also like to point out is bicycling is a
great way to tour our province, so we would like our tourists to feel much safer
if they knew this law was in existence.
This is
an excellent and clear definition with the one-metre law as to how somebody
could approach a bicycle and safely pass them.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Service NL for a response.
MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank
the Member for Mount Pearl North for bringing that to the House of Assembly. I'd
just like to inform him that we're actively working on the one-metre law.
Thank
you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay East - Bell Island.
MR. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
To the
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 Bell Island ferry provides a vital transportation link; and
WHEREAS
the Bell Island ferry is only eight minutes from port at any given time; and
WHEREAS
government's recent implementation policy related to mandatory existing of
vehicles will put people at higher risk of injury than possibly of having to
evacuate the vehicle in case of an emergency; and
WHEREAS
Transport Canada regulations do not require individuals to exist their vehicles
during this commute;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House
of Assembly to urge government to conduct a full and thorough risk assessment to
clearly identify all risks and liabilities associated with such a policy
decision, after which will publicly release any and all results from the details
of review.
And in
duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr.
Speaker, I spoke to this yesterday and numerous times. No doubt, the minister
will respond as he did yesterday but I need to clarify a few things. This is not
about anybody saying that we're in favour of safety; it's the opposite. We're
talking about realistically doing due diligence, and not everything fits in a
cookie-cutter process here. There are large and small vessels. There are ones
that spend much longer periods of time at sea that are more vulnerable.
In this
case, what we're talking about, we have a vulnerable sector. We're not saying
everybody stays in their vehicles. Those who have serious medical issues that
have been diagnosed and doctors have already given notes – doctors don't give
notes flippantly, particularly specialists and surgeons when they say this
client or this patient must have the following treatments or supports to be able
to ensure that the procedures they had are in the best interests of them being
able to recover, or other people who are facing certain medical challenges.
We have
an ambulance that gets on the ferry. I'm just trying to bring people up – and
I'll do this for the next few weeks or so. An ambulance gets on, the ambulance
attendants can stay in and the person in the back of that may have gone over for
an X-ray. We have somebody who had surgery on a leg, had pins put in it, but
there's no ambulance available – because keeping in mind we have limited
abilities here with red alerts in the St. John's area for an ambulance to be
deployed to go to Bell Island, or an ambulance from Bell Island to be sent to
St. John's to pick up there.
In due
diligence, that person, once they're secure in their van or the car with an
attendant, could very easily then stay in that vehicle. If indeed an evacuation
had to take place, we're talking 10 to 12 steps to get upstairs. In most cases
with the vessels here, we don't have the capacity in the lounges to be able to
attend to their needs, keeping in mind in most cases the elevator takes them to
a lounge which they have to walk, or be moved a further distance to get to the
muster station.
So when
you talk about safety and use that as a big umbrella thing, you really have to
look at the safety of the individual who is being transported here. We're
talking about not the general public, not the David Brazils or anybody else of
the world who can get up and get to the muster station, the small percentage who
are at more risk by having to try to get up there in an environment that is not
conducive for their well-being. That has a real, detrimental effect on them.
There
are horror stories that I will share with this House over the next number of
weeks about how this new policy does not work in the best interest of the
people, particularly those with medical issues.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Transportation and Works for a response.
MR. CROCKER:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I thank
the hon. Member for the petition again.
Mr.
Speaker, I will reiterate some of the points I stated yesterday with reference
to – this policy is consistent with all interprovincial ferries as to what you
would find on the Fogo Island run, the Long Island run, any of the ferries in
the province that have a roll-on, roll-off service.
What I
can assure the hon. Member is the independent process is – we're doing the RFP
process now and we expect the results of this in the next few weeks. One of the
things this independent third party assessment will look at are the concerns
that the Member just raised with regard to medical and other issues.
I can
assure the hon. Member opposite that when we do this assessment there will be
vessel visits, interviews with passengers and staff. We will also consult with
Transport Canada, our classification societies and inclusionNL, Mr. Speaker. So
it's important to us, safety is important, but we'll await the results of the
independent assessment.
Thank
you.
MR. SPEAKER:
Further petitions?
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER:
The Deputy Government House
Leader.
MS. COADY:
Mr. Speaker, Order 3, third
reading of Bill 35.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
MS. COADY:
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded
by the Minister of Health and Community Services, that Bill 35, An Act To Amend
The Public Inquiries Act, 2006, be now read a third time.
MR. SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
the said bill be now read a third time.
The hon.
the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I was
happy to participate in the debate on Bill 35 –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
MS. ROGERS:
– An Act to Amend the Legal
Aid Act.
I would
like to stress once again my acknowledgement of the incredibly wonderful work,
the excellent work done by our Legal Aid lawyers across the province on behalf
of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I would
also, Mr. Speaker, like to stress once again that it was only last July that the
provincial director of Legal Aid stated emphatically, absolutely emphatically in
the media about the lack of resources in terms of the increase in cases that are
coming to the Newfoundland and Labrador Legal Aid system, and he is having to
turn away cases that they would normally accept but couldn't because of the high
volume of people across the province looking for help through Legal Aid.
So we
have people who cannot afford coverage in the private bar who will go to Legal
Aid to ensure they have justice, that they are covered by the Legal Aid –
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
CLERK (Barnes):
(Inaudible) on the Order
Paper.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible.)
MS. ROGERS:
This is 35.
MR. SPEAKER:
Please proceed.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
We have
folks in Newfoundland and Labrador who should be eligible for legal aid
assistance; however, because of the increased volume and the work and the cases
coming to Legal Aid for assistance, some people now –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MS. ROGERS:
Mr. Speaker, should I
continue or should I wait? Are we –?
MS. MICHAEL:
(Inaudible) public inquiries
act.
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
I may have to draw relevance.
MS. ROGERS:
Wrong bill.
MR. SPEAKER:
Okay.
MS. ROGERS:
Right Chamber, wrong bill.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
All right, we're good?
Is the
House ready for the question?
The hon.
the Leader of the Official Opposition regarding third reading of Bill 35.
MR. P. DAVIS:
Yes, Mr. Speaker, thank you.
Maybe if
a take a few moments to make some comments, maybe my hon. colleague might – I
think she probably does want to speak to Bill 35, but now she'll get a couple of
minutes to reorganize her thoughts. It's Thursday afternoon, Mr. Speaker.
Bill 35
is a bill to amend the Public Inquiries
Act. There has been a fair bit of discussion in second reading and there was
also discussion in Committee as well.
In
Committee I asked the minister a number of questions and it very quickly became
a discussion beyond what is actually contained in the act. We talked about the
mechanics of what's going to take place and how it's going to function after
it's implemented, and it pertains to privilege.
Just so
we're all on the same page, Mr. Speaker, the Explanatory Notes says the “Bill
would amend the Public Inquiries Act, 2006 to confirm that immunity or
privilege is not waived where the Crown or a person designated by the
Lieutenant-Governor in Council discloses information to a commission or
inquiry.”
The bill adds three sections. It's says, “Where
the Crown or a person designated … discloses to a commission or inquiry, either
voluntarily or in response to a request or summons,
any information over which immunity
or privilege, including solicitor-client privilege, is asserted, the immunity or
privilege is not waived or defeated for any purpose by the disclosure.”
Section
(2) goes on to say, the “commission
or inquiry determines that it is necessary to disclose information over which
the Crown or a person designated under subsection (3)” – which I just read –
“asserts immunity or privilege, including solicitor-client privilege, the
immunity or privilege is not waived or defeated ….”
So
the question became – and I
read this several times and did a fair bit of consulting with people in the
legal community and people who have knowledge on public inquiries and experience
with public inquiries. I said: What does this mean to you? What does this bill
actually do?
It
confirms that privilege. If it's Cabinet privilege, if it's solicitor-client
privilege, if there's some sort of privilege because a contractor, in the case
of the upcoming inquiry, has claimed some type of privilege, then what this says
is that it's not waived by giving it to the Commission. If the Commission wants
to use it, it's still not waived. The default returns to the Crown, to the
government, or the client to waive that privilege. The minister clarified that
it's the client who holds privilege and it's up to the client if they want to
waive privilege or not.
Mr.
Speaker, in discussing with the minister how that's going to take place, we
pointed out some comparisons. For example, I said to the minister under the
Access to Information and the Protection
of Privacy Act if a citizen of the province files an access to information
request, say, from a government department, and then the government responds as
required under access to information, but doesn't provide information, claims
privilege exists or some other reason for not providing it, then the applicant
can go to an independent third party and ask that it be reviewed. The office of
the Privacy Commissioner can actually ask for the documents, review the
documents and determine if government had acted appropriately or not.
What we
have in this bill is different from that type of independent process. What will
happen as a result of this bill is that deciding if they're going to release
privilege or not will fall back strictly to the government. One of the issues we
raised was about the ability – I'm not suggesting government is going to do
this, it's going to be in legislation, but a government could decide to treat
different documents differently depending on their origin or on the impact of
disclosure of those documents.
When I
asked the minister what the process will be, he said there will be a
determination later on what will be waived and what will not. When I asked him
what the process will be, he said: I can't say what process will be followed.
That was his words as I made note of them. During debate he said: I can't say
what process will be followed. Mr. Speaker, that's important for us to
understand exactly what the impact and effect of the bill will be. That's why we
asked a considerable amount of questions on it during Committee.
That
leaves us with a problem because as legislators we have a responsibility to vote
on all bills. We either vote for it, we vote against it and during the process
of debate here in this House, we also have an option to present or propose
amendments. We didn't feel it was appropriate to bring forward an amendment. We
didn't clearly understand exactly the outcomes and how much detail the
government knew or didn't know until we got to Committee and was able to engage
in a back and forth, as happens in the Committee process, with the minister. It
wasn't until we got later in that process that we actually learned that the
minister can't say, doesn't know what the process will be to be followed. So
that creates a problem because it doesn't allow for a third-party, independent
process.
If the
minister was to say we're going to make sure that the commissioner – the
commissioner is a highly respected, experienced lawyer and judge in this
province. We put a tremendous amount respect and trust in him, as we should. If
it was up to him to say well, you know a lot about solicitor-client privilege
and the laws surrounding it, if it was to be left to the commissioner to make
the determination, it would give us a higher level of comfort.
If it
was a process put in place whereby someone, a third party, for example the
Privacy Commissioner who is also a lawyer, well-respected lawyer in this
province and knowledgeable on matters of privilege and access to information and
protection of privacy and so on, maybe if we left it as is in the ATIPP
legislation, Access to Information and
Protect of Privacy Act that exists today, if that kind of process was added
to this, that would give us a level of comfort as well.
I did
attend the briefing. We actually had two briefings where Members of the
Opposition staff were in place. We requested a second briefing because we still
weren't clear of the potential implications of this bill. We had further
discussion and understanding. My understanding from those briefings is that the
government, while the intention is not for it to happen, they could essentially
cherry-pick aspects of a privileged document to waive privilege on but not the
entire document.
They
could look at a document from 2006 and evaluate that in a way that's
inconsistent with a document from 2017, as an example, but that's not the
intention of this and I respect that's not the intention of it. The thing is
there are no safeguards to judge that process, to evaluate that process on how
that should take place.
So
that's where we had some problems with this. I've expressed my appreciation and
thanks during debate a number of times now to staff and the minister for
allowing the briefings that took place. I appreciate the minister's efforts to
get up and provide answers to questions; even though they were answers he got up
and he couldn't say what the process was, which was a fundamental question for
us.
We
believe the bill, in the Committee phase of the bill, in discussion that took
place, it's clear that the bill is about waiving privilege which has an
implication to access to information and protection of privacy. Under the
Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, it has a
stipulation under section 112 where a minister and a department is supposed to
consult with the Privacy Commissioner.
The
minister has defended that strongly and doesn't accept our point of view on
that. Fair enough, that he doesn't, but I also refer to the most recent annual
report by the Privacy Commissioner where he acknowledges that departments can't
always anticipate the potential for impacts and that he encouraged them in his
annual report to say consult with me anyway.
I spoke
to the Privacy commissioner and understood that he very quickly could determine
if there was or was not a reason for the Privacy Commissioner to look at it more
in-depth. He could sometimes figure that out very, very quickly, but he
encouraged anyway that government should reach out. The Privacy Commissioner did
respond, his office did respond to us and confirm that they hadn't been
consulted on this particular act. We just felt that was something the government
could do, to consult with the Privacy Commissioner, especially when it's laid
out in the act. We would assert that it says that it's required to be done.
Mr.
Speaker, there were a number of issues on that. Again, that was a concern for
us. We've outlined those in Committee. I wanted to take the opportunity in third
reading to do that again and I expect that some colleagues may express some of
their views as well.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Mount
Pearl - Southlands.
MR. LANE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm just
going to take a moment but I do want to piggyback on the comments made by the
Leader of the Official Opposition. I asked some questions in Committee as well
and I had some concerns. The minister, there were some things he couldn't
answer. He did indicate to me that I would get the answers before we got into
third reading. As a matter of fact yesterday he said you should receive an email
from my department this afternoon. I never did get an email. I never did get any
answers to the questions that I had as well, so I just want to reiterate those
concerns.
I guess,
similar to what the Leader of the Official Opposition said – and I can
understand where he is coming from, and he makes some valid points I believe. My
concerns are perhaps less about the department because the departments are
guided by the minister. Given the fact that Muskrat Falls was sanctioned and so
on by the previous administration, given the comment from the minister in
discussion where he was saying: Oh, you have no worries; we're going to put all
the information out there – and he said it in a tone as if to say: Don't worry,
we're not covering up anything because we want to get it all out there,
particularly if you were the guys who sanctioned the project.
I have
less concern about information not coming from there, as I do from Nalcor. I
guess the points that the minister just made around the release of information
and when privilege is going to be claimed and so on, I have the same concerns
but my concerns are even more so when it comes to Nalcor. Who's going to be
saying to Nalcor we want to make sure you release all the information?
One
could argue we have a new CEO and we have a new board but, then again, this new
CEO and new board are the people that would not release the information on
embedded contractors, even though the Premier said it didn't pass his smell
test. Even though the Privacy Commissioner, when he looked at that issue, from
what I could read in his decision he basically said that he could see nothing
wrong with releasing the information on the embedded contractors. If the
embedded contractors had been employed by the Department of Natural Resources,
under ATIPPA he would say: Yes, go ahead, release it; there's no harm. Because
of the Energy Corporation Act, which
is an issue in itself, the CEO could basically say: No b'y, we're not releasing
any of it. Even though I would suggest there was no harm in releasing it. That's
the new CEO.
The new
CEO and the new board said we're not releasing information. Not the old board,
not the old CEO, the new one. If he's not releasing information, such as the
information on the embedded contractors, stuff that the Privacy Commissioner
seemed to have no problem with, stuff the Premier of the province had no problem
with, well then, how can we have assurances that when we get to the real good
stuff potentially and controversial stuff and everything else – how can we have
confidence that the CEO and board of Nalcor are going to take the same approach
as the Minister of Justice, as he's going to take and say: Let it all go. We
want to get it all out there.
Will
Nalcor have that same attitude about we want to get it all out there? Will they?
I don't know. I'm less confident that they're going to want to do it as I am for
the minister when he says he wants to do it. Under this process, as the Member
for the Official Opposition has said, it's going to be totally up to Nalcor.
Nalcor could cherry-pick and there's nothing there to say that the commissioner
has any say in it. There's no Privacy Commissioner involved here, nothing. They
could say, no, we're claiming privilege, and there's no independent party.
Nalcor
can say here are all the files, but when they get the files and the Commissioner
says I want this, this, this and this, Nalcor can say, no, you can't have this
piece. The same as the Department of Justice (inaudible) say, no, you can't have
this piece, that's detrimental to the overall good of the province. Well, Nalcor
can say the same thing and there's nobody to adjudicate that decision.
The
Commissioner can't say: no, b'y, that's foolishness, there's no reason why this
can't be part of the inquiry. They can say: no, privilege, and there's no
independent person or body to say no, b'y, that's ridiculous, there's no
privilege here, there's no harm in releasing this. That's a concern.
Now, I'm
not saying that's going to happen; I have no idea what's going to happen. I
suppose the problem is we all have to take it on blind faith that everybody is
going to want to release everything possible and there's going to be no
cherry-picking and it's all going to be done properly. We have to take it on
faith that that's going to happen. I guess that's the concern the Official
Opposition has, and I would share that concern.
At the
end of the day, I do understand the principle of what the Minister of Justice is
saying in this bill. I totally get that, that we can't just simply say take all
the files and waive all the privilege and then there's a piece of information in
there that has nothing to do with the inquiry but it's detrimental to the
province. We want to be able to protect that. I understand that, it makes total
sense. I get it, but the piece about stuff that is related and really shouldn't
be considered privilege, there's nobody to adjudicate those grey areas; nobody
adjudicates the grey areas.
We have
to take it for granted that the ministers are not going to claim privilege.
They're going to let everything go through as much as possible and only claim
privilege when it's absolutely detrimental and not related. I have confidence,
as I said, that they will do that, but we also have to have faith that Nalcor is
going to do the exact same thing, and there are no guarantees. There's no
process in place to ensure that's going to happen. At least not one that the
minister could tell us about, because he was asked about it and he said he
didn't know.
I will
be voting, as I said, for this because we need to get this inquiry moving. We
need to get this done. I understand and I agree in principle what the bill is
all about, but I do want to reiterate the point that I made in Committee, that
the Leader of the Official Opposition and other Members made, that there are
still potentials – not saying it's going to happen but potentials there, there
are little loopholes there and potential – that certain pieces of information
that probably should have come out, may not come out. That's a concern for me
but, as I said, I will be voting for the bill.
Thank
you.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I will
endeavour to speak to the appropriate bill this time.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible.)
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much.
Although
I was getting going there on the Legal Aid
Act, but since that's not the act we are debating right now – in fact, we
are debating Bill 35, An Act to Amend the Public Inquiries Act, 2006.
Mr.
Speaker, I think it was a very good debate that we did have on this act. I
believe more of us now in the House, as a result of that debate, really
understand what government was trying to achieve in this act in order to help
the Commissioner, Justice Richard LeBlanc and his team, to be able to do the
best work that they possibly can for the people of the province without
compromising any of our very foundational pieces; for instance, solicitor-client
privilege that part of our justice system is based on. I appreciate that.
The one
issue I did want to raise, Mr. Speaker, is that I find it unfortunate. Although
the minister a number of times said he was not required by law to take his bill
to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, I understand that.
There probably would have been, perhaps, some basis with section 112 of the
ATIPPA; however, it's not absolutely definitive.
I do
want to register that I think it's unfortunate that because of the serious
nature of this bill and because of the very serious nature of the inquiry on
Muskrat Falls, which people all over the province will be watching closely –
because of the environment in which we find ourselves, as I said in debate the
other day, the zeitgeist in which we find ourselves, because of the suspicion
that lays over the whole process of Muskrat Falls which has then spilled over to
many people's dissatisfaction with government and an increasing distrust,
mistrust in government and how decisions are made; that whole area of perceived,
rightfully or wrongfully, that sense of suspicion, lack of transparency and lack
of accountability – I do think it would have been wise for government, although
they are not specifically legislated to have brought this piece of legislation
to the Privacy Commissioner, I do believe it would have been a good faith
gesture to have formally presented it to the Commissioner to ask him and his
team to apply their particular expertise to this bill.
That's
basically what I wanted to say, Mr. Speaker. Again, not absolutely required by
law, but I do believe in this current environment and when Muskrat Falls really
is also about accountability, transparency, the inquiry, it's about transparency
and accountability and trying to re-establish the people's confidence in
government, in our democratic process, I think it would have been a wise thing
to do.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'll
just take a few moments to address the bill we're on right now, which is the
bill, An Act to Amend the Public Inquiries Act.
Mr.
Speaker, this bill was put before the House, and you've heard my hon. colleagues
in this House talk about the seriousness of this bill. This bill was brought
forward at the request of the commissioners who are commencing the work around
the public inquiry around Muskrat Falls. They wanted to ensure their work had
progressed as expeditiously as possible. They've asked for this amendment, which
is, by the way, supported by the Newfoundland and Labrador's Privacy
Commissioner, who actually agrees that it's appropriate for the Muskrat Falls
Inquiry to be exempt from the freedom of information act. He thought that was
appropriate. It's appropriate in two other provinces concerning inquiries. I
think it's BC and Ontario; they have this type of law as well, Mr. Speaker.
This
would allow the public inquiry into the Muskrat Falls Project to progress
efficiently and effectively. It will ensure that a maximum amount of
information, especially information around solicitor-client privilege is
provided. It's exceptionally important, Mr. Speaker, that the process for the
inquiry is allowed to move forward.
If
memory serves, I believe the Privacy Commissioner did indicate that this is
really a temporary measure, Mr. Speaker, because the inquiry records will be
subject to access to information following its conclusion.
I'm
going to say that again, Mr. Speaker. Following the conclusion of the inquiry,
all of this information is subject to the access to information law. That's what
we understand, Mr. Speaker. That's what's been made public even by the Privacy
Commissioner himself.
I will
take my seat to allow the process to continue.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER:
Is it the pleasure of the
House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
This
motion is carried.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER:
Order, please!
CLERK:
A bill, An Act To Amend The
Public Inquires Act, 2006. (Bill 35)
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 To Amend The Public Inquires Act, 2006,” read a third
time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 35)
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I call
from Orders of the Day, 2(a) resolution and Bill 36 respecting the granting of
Interim Supply to Her Majesty.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
MS. COADY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move,
seconded by the Minister of Health of Community Service, that the House do
resolve itself into a Committee of Supply to consider the resolution and Bill 36
respecting the granting of Interim Supply to Her Majesty.
Thank
you very much.
MR. SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of
Whole to consider the said bill.
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.'
The
motion is carried.
On
motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, the Speaker
left the Chair.
Committee of the
Whole
CHAIR (Warr):
Order, please!
We are
considering the related resolution and Bill 36.
Resolution
“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, 2019 the sum of $2,806,552,200.”
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for Cape
St. Francis.
MR. K. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's
indeed a pleased to get up again here today and represent the beautiful District
of Cape St. Francis; not only the beautiful District of Cape St. Francis but the
beautiful people who live in it.
Mr.
Chair, it's coming on 10 years now. It's been a long while here in the House of
Assembly and I've seen a lot of changes, seen a lot of different faces.
Actually, I was thinking this morning, I think it's five Premiers in only 10
years. To the new people who are here in the House of Assembly, there are
changes happening here all the time; five Premiers in 10 years.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible.)
MR. K. PARSONS:
Four by us, there's no doubt,
but there are a lot of changes. Do you know what? A day in politics is like a
life. It's a statement that people make all the time about politics.
Do you
know something? I'm very proud of the 10 years that I've been here. I'm very
proud and I'm very happy that the people in my district have given me the
support to be able to be here and give me the encouragement and stuff like that.
The job
we do sometimes – I laugh, people will always make this comment, and I'm sure
every Member in this House of Assembly will agree with me. Once the House opens,
you'll run into one of your constituents, they'll say: You're finally going to
work. It starts on Monday. Your House opens Monday, so you go back to work now
Monday, do you? I find it funny.
For the
people out listening to this today, I can assure you that not only the Members
on this side here, but everybody, we work a lot of hours and do lot of stuff. I
know everybody has the right mindset and have the concerns of their constituents
in their hearts. While we will argue and disagree sometimes, I think it's
important that we all respect each other and respect the job that people are
doing. Differences of opinions are what happen every day. It happens in our
families. It happens at home. It happens on the playground. It happens on the
ice. It'll happen everywhere. I know that in particular on the ice there, Mr.
Chair. It happened a good few times to me that a lot of people didn't agree with
what I was doing.
For the
people at home, just to let you know, this is an opportunity that every MHA has,
to get on their feet and – basically, this is a money bill. It's called Interim
Supply. Government needs to pass this bill because there will be a time between
when the year ends and when the actually budget comes in that government needs
money to pay the bills. So we need to make sure that this bill gets passed.
It's an
amount of money that will be passed and will be put back into the Treasury so
that everybody's salary is paid and all our public servants are paid. There will
be bills out there that, I guess, government – whether it's the light bill or
other bills – will have to pay. So Interim Supply gives you the time frame to
make sure that the money is there for the bills as part of a budget.
Now,
this is also a part of the total budget that we will use for 2018 to 2019 next
year. So that's the reason why we need to do Interim Supply.
I'm
going to just go back, and like I said first when I started, I've been here for
almost 10 years. There are a lot of things that are after being done in my
district. I'm going to talk about my district. I'm very fortunate that I do live
– and I really say this – close St. John's. My district is not something like
what you live in, Mr. Chair, where the district is vast. It takes you two or
three hours to get from end to the other end.
My
district is 25 kilometres long. I live right in the middle of it. I can go one
way, I can go to Pouch Cove and Bauline –
AN HON. MEMBER:
You're lucky.
MR. K. PARSONS:
I am very lucky.
I can go
to Torbay and Logy Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove, so I'm very fortunate. I really
do appreciate – but I also say to some of the Members that I probably attend a
lot more stuff because – no fault to any Member who is living in rural
Newfoundland, I don't know how you do it sometimes. I get to go to council
meetings on Monday night. I go to recreational meetings on Wednesday night. I go
down to the Jack Byrne Arena on another night and stuff like that. So it's
pretty busy, what I've been doing, but I've enjoyed every bit of it. I have to
say that.
I'm just
going to mention a few things that were done in my district because it's always
a comment, on both sides, how government spends its money. I know in the '80s
and '90s we always talk about a deficit. I think in the years of the '80s and
'90s and early 2000s, the deficit was more or less an infrastructure deficit.
When I look back and see what was done in my area, I'm going to start off with a
community in my district: Bauline.
When I
first got elected, I went down to a meeting in Bauline and we sat in the United
Church, in the pews, while they had a public meeting because there was nowhere
in the community to have that meeting. Also, the town council office was a small
apartment, was just a rental. It was in the kitchen of this small apartment
where the kitchen table was more or less the council chambers.
In
Bauline today, they have an absolutely beautiful community centre. The community
centre is booked solid. I talked to a guy yesterday and he said every weekend
this coming summer there's a wedding. It's huge for the community. I was down
just a couple of weeks ago to Bic & The Ballpoints. They played down there. What
a time it was. Everybody was out from the community. There were people there in
their late eighties to their early twenties. It was a real community spirit
thing.
I
believe that is such a great investment in our communities, being able to bring
people together. This was an investment that we made as a government. This is
where we spent some money in Bauline. In Bauline also we did some work down
there on the roads. Recreation – they never had a playground in Bauline and now
they have a small one. I think one of the local companies – I'm not sure which
one it is, so I'm not going to name it – gave a huge donation, plus we had
$15,000 grant and now they have a nice playground in that community. That's just
one community.
The next
community I'm going to talk about is in Pouch Cove. There were a lot of
different issues in Pouch Cove. I mean not everything can get done at once and
there are still issues down there with the water. And I'm going to thank the
government across the way because Pouch Cove right now in the next couple of
weeks, I think the tractors and that are on the way for a new water treatment
and what it is, it's going to a filtration system that they're going to be able
to put in the front of their plant. I don't know if anybody remembers some of
the things they saw in the news with the dirty water and all that.
It's a
huge investment by government, but there was a lot of preliminary stuff that was
done by our government to get all the engineering and all that. It was a huge
investment. It's almost $4 million, but it will bring clean, safe, drinking
water to that community. The community is about 2,100 people, so it's very
important to everyone in that community – great investment.
They had
a problem down there with a lift station. I remember the problem was for years.
We went down one day and had a look at it. The Department of Municipal Affairs,
I really have to give them credit on this. The guy went down and said: Kevin, we
got to put that in. They put it in as a priority in my district and we ended up
getting that done. It was like $300,000 just to get that fixed alone.
They had
upgrades in their recreation. They got a nice ball field down there now. There
are some really good upgrades. There's a women's league down there. There's a
senior men's league. I get the chance to go down every now and then hit the ball
– not very far like I used to be able to one time, but I get on base a few times
down there. It's a great place to play a game of ball. One time, I could get it
out over the fence. Now if I get it out over the infield, I'm very, very happy.
Anyway,
it's a good investment. Right now there's a kid's program. I know I listened to
the Health Minister and we talk about health care in our province, I think the
more active that our people are, the healthier our people will be. All these are
great investments in making sure that people are healthy and healthier.
I'm
going to move on now to the Town of Flatrock. In my community in Flatrock, we
had an old school down there that was going to be torn down. The former mayor
and real good friend of mine, Kevin Butt who has passed on since then and we
were great friends, two of us – when I was running for mayor of Flatrock, I went
to his house and said the only way I'm going to run is if you run, and he
decided to run. Then when I became an MHA, he had to move on for mayor and he
wasn't in for that at all. Anyway, he did a great job and he did a lot of work
on our new community centre that we have down there now. It's absolutely
beautiful that everybody comes in. Again, it's booked solid. There are young
people. There are karate classes down there. There's a 50-plus club down there.
There are exercise classes during the daytime for our seniors. There are all
kinds of different things, and that's a good investment. Those are all good
investments.
Mr.
Chair, while I really want to stay positive on all the stuff that's being done,
and I'm going to get up again a couple of more times because I have a couple
more communities to go through, and I want to talk about the investments that
were made because when these investments were made, I wasn't drunk. I wasn't
drunk.
AN HON. MEMBER:
No?
MR. K. PARSONS:
No, I wasn't. I wasn't a
drunken sailor like what was said beforehand: You're a drunken sailor. I believe
that these investments are huge for our people. I believe that our province had
a deficit but the deficit was more on infrastructure. I'm going to talk again,
when I get a chance to get up, about other investments that were done in
schools, in fire protection. I can talk about the Jack Byrne Arena, and I'm
going to the bypass road in Torbay. These are all good investments that were
made by sober people.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
The Chair recognizes the hon.
Member for Labrador West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. LETTO:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I
certainly don't think that the hon. Member for Cape St. Francis was drunk when
he made any of those investments. That's not what they're referring to. He was
very nice today actually, but I have to go back to yesterday when the Member for
Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune was up with the rhetoric that was spewing. I mean, I
got up here today and tried to change the dial because there are so many good
things happening in this province. There are so many good things happening in
this province and we have to stop the rhetoric, stop believing the doom and
gloom because we do have a bright future in Newfoundland and Labrador and,
hopefully, today I will tell you some of the reasons why.
Before I get into what I want to talk about,
specifically, I want to say yesterday – or today actually, was the end of the
race: Cain's Quest. The longest snowmobile race in the world and it was put off
by the people of Labrador West and the people of Labrador.
What we saw yesterday with Team 22, Team 00 and Team 88
crossing the finish line was the accumulation of so much hard work by the
organizing committee to make this race possible and to attract international,
national teams and people from around the province. Certainly, I want to
specifically point out the participation of the teams from Labrador, especially
the North Coast of Labrador, the Innu, the people from Southern Labrador that
partook in this event. Mr. Chair, it's a sign that
things – it's one of the good
things that is happening in this province.
MR. BROWNE:
It's growing.
MR. LETTO:
And it's growing.
Mr.
Chair, I want to talk about mining in Newfoundland and Labrador. When you talk
about a bright spot in this province, Mr. Chair, you are part of that just as
much as I am, and a lot of us in this province are, it's a bright spot. It's a
great future in mining.
Myself
and the minister just attended the PDAC Conference in Toronto where we had a
booth there. At our booth, for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, were
many prospectors showing off their finds. I can tell you, Mr. Chair, as a result
of this conference this past week there are prospectors in this province who
have auctioned off some very valuable projects that will develop into future
mines.
I just
want to point out, when you talk about mining, what we have to offer in this
province. IOC is no doubt the largest mining company in the province, which is
why Labrador West is the iron ore capital of the world, of Canada for sure.
While we're going through a little bump in the road with IOC and its workers –
and I'm confident the workforce and the company will reach an agreement in the
next couple of weeks, hopefully, that will see that operation continue the good
work it's doing.
Wabush
Mines; now when you talk about doom and gloom in this province, nobody took a
hit in 2014 like the people did in Wabush. They took a serious, serious hit with
the shutdown of Wabush Mines and the reduction in their pensions. They took a
serious hit, Mr. Chair, but I tell you things are looking much brighter for
Wabush Mines with the core resources on board. They're going through the process
right now, their permitting is in place and they're raising capital on the
market to be able to restart Wabush Mines and to put 250, 300 people back to
work. So if that's not a bright spot, I don't know what is.
We have
Alderon with the Kami Project, it's not a dead issue by any stretch of the
imagination. We are looking to see that, hopefully, be rebooted in the very near
future.
The
minister today talked about Vale. Yes, there are concerns, no doubt about it,
but we are confident and we are hopeful that Vale will find a way to be able to
proceed with their underground development which will mean many, many jobs for
the province, and of course will help in the Long Harbour situation as well.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. LETTO:
Search Minerals, a company
that very few people have heard about but in my friend, the Member for
Cartwright – L'Anse au Clair, it's in her district. They are now going through
an environmental assessment process for Search Minerals to develop rare earth,
which is today in big demand because of the evolution of electric cars and all
the other technology. It's a very valuable mineral that will be in demand, and
we are confident that's going to go.
Now, Mr. Chair, as you know in your district, Anaconda,
a very successful company that are looking to expand. Rambler Mines are very,
very prosperous as well. They're seeing some good years in their production. You
know how valuable gold is to the world.
There are many more prospects, by the way, in this
province for gold. We met with some of them at PDAC. Marathon Gold has a very,
very good possibility of developing into a mine, which are showing great results
in their exploratory work. When you look at that, there are all kinds of
opportunities. Of course, I can't forget the Burin Peninsula and the
reactivation of St. Lawrence and the fluorspar mine.
Mr. Chair, mining I tell you is a very, very important
part of our future, not only for Newfoundland and Labrador, it's for Canada.
That's why this past week our minister, the Minister of Natural Resources, was
part of an agreement with the federal minister, Minister Carr, to proceed with a
minerals and metals strategy and process that will see a program developed where
we put in place guidelines to develop the mining industry right across this
country because it's so an important part of our future.
Mr. Chair, when you look at things in this province,
and we hear it from the other side over and over again that we're on the edge of
the cliff; we're going to fall over. The sky is falling –
MR.
BROWNE:
Doom and gloom.
MR.
LETTO:
Doom and gloom, nothing is going right.
Mr. Chair, as long as we continue to say that, as long
as people from Toronto or whatever get on television with their green glasses
and their funny suits on and tell us how bad we are and how bad we're doing, as
long as we allow people to do that, people will start
believing it.
It's our
prerogative and it's our duty in this House of Assembly, no matter what side of
the House we're on, is to stop the rhetoric, is to be able to tell the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador there is a future, and I strongly believe there is.
There are many more sectors besides mining that are very important for the
future and very bright.
I'm
talking about agriculture, aquaculture, innovation. Look at the awards that
people are winning across this province, around this province at Memorial
University and the Marine Institute for their development of innovation. We see
innovation as a very important part of our future.
MR. BROWNE:
Technology.
MR. LETTO:
Technology; and we cannot
forget the oil and gas sector. It's all a part of our future, but it's not
something we can totally rely on, because there are other industries.
That's
why we as a government are developing the technology industry, the agriculture
industry, the aquaculture industry because we know we cannot put all our
laurels, all our eggs in one basket as people have done in the past. We cannot
go out and make all that money and spend, spend, spend, which was done in the
last 12, 14 years, which has gotten us in the mess we're in today. We continue
to say it because it's right.
We have
turned a corner, Mr. Chair. It's time for us on both sides of the House to start
believing that and to start telling the people in the province that we are
behind them and we're here to support them. We're here to lead them in the
development of important industries, no matter what they are, suppose they are
mining, the oil and gas, innovation or whatever, agriculture, aquaculture,
technology, forestry. We have so much potential, Mr. Chair. We have so much
potential.
MR. BROWNE:
And the fishery.
MR. LETTO:
We cannot forget the fishery,
of course. We cannot forget the fishery.
We have
so much potential in this province to ensure our sustainability for the future;
yet, we have people day after day trying to drag us down, trying to drag our
people down, but it's time, Mr. Chair, that we stopped this and started talking
about the future and be positive.
CHAIR:
Order, please.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The Chair recognizes the hon.
the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.
MR. LANE:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I look
forward to having an opportunity to say a few words. The first thing I want to
say is when I spoke to the last bill I talked about the fact that the minister
had promised me I would get some information from his department as it related
to the inquiry and some questions I had. I said they never responded. They were
a little bit too late, but I did get it. I do want to acknowledge that they
actually did send the email and I did get the information. I thank the minister
for that. I wish I had gotten it a little earlier so I would have had the
information prior to speaking to the last bill, but I did get it. So I do
acknowledge that.
Mr.
Chair, I listened to the Member opposite there and what he had to say and I
agree with him. There's a lot of –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
CHAIR:
Order, please!
MR. LANE:
We are very fortunate from a resource perspective. We are what I would say
resource rich but, at this point in time, we're cash poor. That's really what it
comes down to. There's absolutely no doubt that when you look at our potential
for oil and gas and so on, there is tremendous opportunity in the future when it
comes to our oil reserves. There is tremendous opportunity when we look at our
natural gas reserves. I heard the Member talk about minerals, talk about mining
and there's no doubt, the trough up in Labrador is rich with minerals.
I was
told of at least four or five different mines that are there to be developed at
some point in time. There is probably 10 times that, but for sure there are five
or six of them, I think, whether it be iron ore, uranium or different things
that are up there. We have gold mines here on the Island. We had the fluorspar
mine. Nobody here, I don't think, is denying the fact that we have these
resources, that we are blessed to have them.
We have
a fishery that despite the challenges that we continue to do through, and we can
talk about that and I could talk about the surf clam issue and other issues
around adjacency and so on, but it's still a billion-dollar resource. I think
it's over a billion dollars in terms of the fishery for Newfoundland and
Labrador.
We have
tremendous potential when it comes to the tourism. I heard the Member for
Bonavista the other day talking about this district. There is no doubt, when you
look at the Town of Bonavista, you look at Cape Bonavista, the Dungeon, the root
cellars in Elliston, the fishermen's museum and so on, absolutely beautiful area
and absolutely wonderful opportunities for tourism.
We have
lots of opportunities on the Northern Peninsula, whether it be up in the Gros
Morne area, in particular, comes to mind – lots of opportunities there. We have
lots of opportunities on the West Coast. That's actually a real gem because we
have opportunities not just in the summertime and in the fall, but the winter as
well.
I don't
think anybody here – I would hope not – would want to give the impression that
we don't have anything going for us or that we're not going to turn the corner
at some point in time. I really believe we are going to turn the corner at some
point in time, and the sooner the better.
Anything
this government can do to turn that corner, I'm with them 100 per cent. I'm sure
every Member in the House of Assembly is with them 100 per cent if there are
things that we can do to help turn the corner and to develop our industries,
develop things like our IT sector, develop other industries, our aquaculture – a
great opportunity for aquaculture.
I will
say, though, in terms of the aquaculture, providing all of the environmental
work is done and done properly and full processes, it's a wonderful – we've seen
the Connaigre Peninsula, which has been revitalized because of aquaculture. We
know there's going to be a tremendous opportunity on the Burin Peninsula with
the Grieg project.
I
really, sincerely hope that it can be done, it can be done properly and it can
be done in an environmentally sustainable way. I don't have all the answers. I'm
not an environmental scientist, I don't know, but it has to be done properly. We
have to follow all the environmental procedures. If that's done and it can be
done properly, I'm on board 100 per cent. It's going to bring a lot of jobs and
that's a good thing.
When I
hear this talk about preaching doom and gloom, I take a little bit of exception
to it. It's not about preaching doom and gloom; we have a lot of positive things
going for us, but it's also living in reality. It's one thing to say the glass
is half empty versus half full, it's another thing to talk about looking at
things through rose-coloured glasses as well or burying your head in the sand. I
think we just have to be realistic about not just where we're going to go in the
future, which is important, but where we are now.
I think
we have to be cognizant of the everyday citizen. If you are somebody who is
struggling to make ends meet, then the fact that we have a bunch of mines in
Labrador that are going to be developed at some point in time, or at some point
in time – if we discovered 10 new oil wells tomorrow, by the time that actually
brings in oil and then we actually start getting royalties from it, that could
be like 10 years out.
That's
wonderful and it bodes well for our future, our children, our grandchildren, but
the person who is trying to make ends meet today, that really is of little
consequence to them. That's of little consequence to them about what oil is
going to do or minerals are going to do 10 years from now; it means nothing to
them.
So I
think that there has to be a balance. There has to be a balance about planning
for the future, being optimistic for our future but, at the same time, we have
to be dealing with the here and the now and the people that are trying to live
and survive in the province right now.
There's
no doubt, I will say that the government talks about all the time we brought in
this new enhanced seniors' supplement program and they get their money four
times a year and that helps. It does help. I'm not denying it, but that's for
the lowest of the low from an income point of view. That's fine for the person
who's on the very, very lowest end of the scale. But what about the senior who
is just getting their Canada Pension, their OAS and maybe they're getting a
small work pension? Not somebody who's retiring on $70,000 or $80,000 a year but
someone who maybe they're getting an extra $10,000 a year and now they have a
house they have to maintain. They have a small car or whatever they got. That
senior supplement is not helping them because they don't qualify for it. They
don't qualify for that. They don't qualify for the drug cards. They don't
qualify for any of the programs through Newfoundland and Labrador Housing on
home repairs and stuff like that because they're just above that limit.
There
are an awful lot of people that are in that boat, Mr. Chair, an awful lot of
people. Those are the people who could least afford a lot of the measures that
were taken in 2016 budget and so on and a lot that have been maintained since
that time. I' m not going to rehash all that, that's not my intention and we
have to look at it on a go-forward basis but I would just say to government we
have to be cognizant – we cannot pretend that those things didn't happen. We
can't pretend that it's not impacting people because it is. It is impacting
people. It's impacting business.
If you
go downtown, even people who are at the higher end – I say the higher end or the
mid-scale salaries, who could suck it up, who could suck up the increases, so to
speak. You go downtown on George Street or down to the bars and restaurants and
places which are where people typically spend their – that's where the
expendable income goes. Go to those places, talk to the restaurant owners and
stuff like that, ask them how business has been. Business is down significantly
because people don't have that additional revenue, they don't have that
expendable income and it's impacting business and it's impacting the day-to-day
lives of people.
So there
are people who have been affected in different ways. I hope as time goes by and
things improve we can look at, over time, trying to rein back some of those
measures that were taken. I understand government, we're in a tough spot, I get
that and I hope that as time goes on we can make the improvements we need to for
the people of the province.
Thank
you.
CHAIR:
The Chair recognizes the hon.
the Member for Harbour Main.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. PARSLEY:
Mr. Chair, it's quite an
honour to rise in the hon. House to represent the great District of Harbour
Main. It's always an honour to rise in this hon. House and as far as me giving
it to anyone, no, I'm just a nice person.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. PARSLEY:
I have reputation to uphold.
We're
talking about the doom and gloom. I only can say good things in my district.
From the District of Harbour Main good things are happening right through to
Clarke's Beach, down to North River. Wherever I go, there are small businesses,
there's always a hand there; but I have an important topic to talk about today
and it's an honour, it's International Women's Day.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. PARSLEY:
I just left, with my
colleague for the great District of Harbour Grace, about an hour ago, an
empowering event with about 180 women in a room, and I got to sit with a lady
who celebrates her 100th birthday on Sunday, and I'm going to help her do that.
But most important of all, we talked about changes. We talked about 100 years
ago when women were not permitted to do the things they can do today.
When I
looked in that room today and saw mayors, business people, young women, it was
empowering because we all are strong. My colleagues here in the House on both
sides, our Clerks, we're all mothers, have families and at the end of the day
it's an important job here. You have to go home at night and you have the
families, but I'm going to talk on another thing that's very dear to my heart
today. Sometimes it covered under the rug but I can't cover anything under the
rug.
I've
been going through a great challenge in my life for the last three weeks. My
22-year old son had a severe accident and was on life support for nine days in a
burn unit. But do you know what? My son is important. I sat by his bed, but the
mental illness part – and I want everybody out there in any district of
Newfoundland and Labrador to realize that mental illness don't just come to any
family, it's in every family. If we keep pushing it under the rug, there's not
going to be anything done about it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. PARSLEY:
It's like what's coming with
the #MeToo movement. That's being exposed now and things are moving. They're
talking about it.
Going
back to mental illness, I'm hoping we're going to get the new Waterford because
until the day I close my eyes, I will always have that worry where my son is
going to be. It's every parent's worst nightmare when you get that call. It's a
call no one wants to get.
I had to
take that call on a Sunday afternoon to tell me my son was on fire in a field.
That wasn't a great call. I sat by his bed day and night and I'm here at the
House, too, to do a job for my constituents.
My
fellow colleague spoke yesterday with a group in the House about a young lady
who had lost her life. I don't want anyone else to lose their life. We want
people to be able to come to talk to people and before this really happens. It's
like mental health day, Let's Talk, if no one is talking, no one is listening.
We need to put the supports in place. We need to be there because it's an
illness today that's costing top dollars in the medical care system.
If my
son maybe had been listened to, it wouldn't have cost $5,000 today in an ICU to
keep him alive, but he's alive now. When I walk out of that room and he says I
love you, Mom, I know it's there. We all have to realize – I know we talk about
our province, the shape it's in and everything else, but there are other things
in our province, like I said, it's the mental health, it's our families.
We are
strong women. If we weren't strong women today, we would not be able to do the
jobs we do. We have to separate work sometimes from family, we have to come
here. But I must admit, my colleagues in this House have been the best that
anyone could ask for.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MS. PARSLEY:
When I go to our party Whip
every week and say: I have to be at the hospital to sit by his bed – go, no
problem. Each and every one of you on the other side of the House takes time to
ask and that's important.
Our
Government House Leader: Don't worry, do what you have to do. Like I said, after
attending that event today and seeing all those women from 17, 18, right up to
100, what does that tell you? That tells you that our province is doing
something right also because events like these and people moving, people
chatting is what causes these good things. We need good things in our province.
We need
a new Waterford and I'm going to advocate for that. As long as I'm standing
here, I will advocate. It's not only my son, it's someone else's daughter, it's
someone else's father, it's aunts, uncles; no one escapes mental illness. That's
what I want to talk about today. It's not under the rug anymore and we shouldn't
push it there because it's a stigma.
When my
husband was diagnosed with cancer, there was no stigma to that. He went in and
had his chemo treatments and walked away with me, but when it comes to mental
illness and you're seen going up those steps at the Waterford, it's a different
ballgame.
I've
been on all sides of the fence, but I'm also lucky enough to be standing here in
the House of Assembly today with my great colleagues on both sides of the House
to support – and that's what we're here for – one another. I know we throw
things back and forth at each other, but at the end of the day, when our
meetings are over, the House ends, we all go out there and we're civilized
people again, which we should be.
Anyway,
as far as my district, great things, like I said, are happening. I attended the
mental health for the dip Sunday morning which raised a lot of money. It's
great. It's great that things are happening. We're doing well in the district.
We just had a new distillery open in Clarke's Beach. We're going to honour him
soon in the House.
On a
Sunday morning, 10 minutes from my house in Holyrood, when I can go out and buy
vegetables off a local farmer and see the children probably 12, 13, 14 out
selling the vegetables, that's what you call agriculture. It's coming back and
it's going to come back. I don't have to a supermarket, I can say: No, Sunday
morning, we'll run out and get it fresh.
This is
what our Province of Newfoundland and Labrador needs. We need more of this and
it's coming. It just needs to take the time. We were in a bad position. We're
coming out slowly but surely. At the end of the day, it's going to come and I'm
hoping to be a part of it, like I just said.
I'm
going to take my seat now and I'm not going to use my minutes, I have to be at
the hospital shortly to see my son, but I thank each and every one of you. It
was an honour, like I said. I wish every woman today in the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador a happy International Women's Day because they deserve
it, they work for it and there are better things to come here.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR (Reid):
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay South.
AN HON. MEMBER:
Follow that, b'y.
MR. PETTEN:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Yeah,
that is kind of a bit of a hard act to follow, but I'll do my best. The Member
for Harbour Main, her district is a neighbour to mine. She serves a part of CBS
as well, actually, Upper Gullies and Seal Cove portion of Conception Bay South,
my hometown, the district I represent, obviously. So we attend a lot of events
together and we've gotten to know each other fairly well over the last few
years. It's been a pleasure to get to know her and I wish her all the best with
her son. That's a serious incident and I do wish her all the best, and her son.
I sincerely mean that.
Mr.
Chair, as I said, representing Conception Bay South – I am the MHA. We call it
CBS but it's neighbouring by
Topsail - Paradise and Harbour Main districts, but my
district takes up about 65 per cent, close to 70 per cent of all of CBS. Most
residents in CBS refer to me as the Member for Conception Bay South. I get calls
from all over CBS.
With a town of 27,000 people, it can be daunting
sometimes because you try to help everyone even if they're not in your district.
Some people would rather deal with you or they just assume they come your way,
especially a lot of seniors and whatnot. It has its moments, but it's a pleasure
to be able to help them wherever you can and that they come to you for help.
About CBS, I guess we get up and speak – and I know my
colleague always references about the beautiful, historic and everyone has
beautiful, historic districts but CBS is quite a beautiful town. More about it;
our population has increased by 30 per cent in the last 15 years and actually
takes up a land mass of 62 square kilometres. In that space we have 27,000
residents.
One of the challenges in Conception Bay South, a lot of
people with the population growth, the infrastructure is not caught up with the
growth and the demands and the needs of the residents. For a long time with our
geographic base, a 26 kilometre stretch runs right through it and my favourite
topic of Route 60, a lot of water and sewer services are required, roadwork,
networks and what have you. We've finally gotten to a point now with about 94
per cent service.
The town has been able to, in the last probably 10
years or more, start to address the infrastructure needs. It's something that
has been a work in progress. The former administration started that process and
it's a continuing process now in the town. With the growth and all these demands
– and the town is still looking at other areas of improvement, but in the
meantime you still have to have your basic infrastructure in place to meet with
the growth.
In the last 10 years, I'd like to point out a few
things because a lot of times it's referenced about a lot of expenditures and
whether they are good or bad. I know I can speak for Conception Bay South and
most residents can attest that a lot of the investments in some of the
infrastructure has been great investments and they've been a great asset to a
town.
When you're looking at, again, I'll say it's the second
largest municipality in the province, those things are needed. Outside of the
City of St. John's, you have the City of Mount Pearl. That's developed fairly
well. In addition, CBS is no doubt the big growth area now, that and Paradise.
We have
a new arena that's state of the art. It's a beautiful facility. It's one that
most residents are proud of. It's a very well used and well received piece of
infrastructure.
As well
as the new town hall, we have the Manuels River Interpretation Centre, which I
think most Members, or a lot of Members have had the opportunity to come out at
one time or another to visit, I'm sure. If you haven't you should, because it is
quite a beautiful facility and highlighting the geology of the Manuels River.
In
addition, we have an artificial turf field at Topsail. We have a new town hall.
We have all these investments but in that also, with all the growth
requirements, we have schools. There are nine schools in Conception Bay South
and seven of them are in my district.
The most
recent one was – I had the pleasure, with the Minister of Education, to attend
the grand opening there this past fall, which was a proud moment because it's a
beautiful facility. Any time you can stand in front of a lot of happy children
and parents, and attend the opening of something like that in your district, the
school is absolutely beautiful. It was a very proud moment for me, and I thank
the minister for giving me the opportunity to attend the opening with him.
Mr.
Chair, also, I mentioned about a new fire hall. Sometimes we wait until the
firemen's ball, at their night, that we'll pay credit to them. I've talked to
many police officers in Conception Bay South and first responders, they tell me
the Conception Bay South Fire Department is one of the fastest responding units
they deal with in all of the Northeast Avalon. There's nothing but praise for
them. They're very professional. They carry themselves – I mean they're proud.
The way they carry themselves makes you feel proud to know they're representing
Conception Bay South. They do a fantastic job.
They're
averaging anywhere from 1,000 to 1,500 calls a year. So it's not just a call
here and there. They are very busy, and a lot of serious calls too. A lot of
big, high-profile issues that has come in the media, our CBS fire department
were the first ones on the scene. They do a great job protecting our community
and protecting the residents, and I want to thank them for that.
I want
to speak on another couple of points. One in particular, in my district too,
it's a growth area and we're struggling right now. Business growth is not where
it needs to be. The tax base is low because of our lack of business which is
causing struggles for the town, and I guess to get to the demands of the
residents is a struggle. With our economy and where it is now, businesses are
expanding but they're not really expanding at the pace they were.
So we're
in a bit of a lull, but in that lull I encourage – every time I get an
opportunity to speak and especially at times like this, I like to mention about
some of the taxes. I don't hide behind the fact that I'm not a fan of taxes and
I'll speak openly on that. I think most people in general aren't fans of taxes.
As the saying goes, you don't tax yourself to prosperity. It does affect
business growth. It's affecting my community and I'm sure it affects a lot of
communities throughout the province.
A tax on
insurance; I'd like to refer to this one because I think we got consumed, I
guess, and rightfully so, with the levy. We talked about the levy. The public
talked about the levy. You don't hear as much talk about the levy now until
people go to do their taxes. It became the sounding board. It was the point.
People now, it angers them when you mention the word “levy.”
I said
back then – and Hansard can
show it – I always felt insurance tax was the hardest tax in comparison. If you
had to pick one over the other, you would pick the insurance tax. I think that
takes more money out of your pocket – I know it takes more out of my pocket –
than the levy does. The levy became that punchline. People just jumped on the
levy and it got a life of its own.
Every opportunity I like to remind people that tax is
hurting a lot of people, a lot of working families. You have your middle-income
people that are struggling on a day-to-day basis. That extra 15 per cent is very
hard on those people.
Mr. Chair, I have a couple of more minutes left. The hon.
Member for Harbour Main talked about mental health. That's something that is
near and dear to me. I did serve on the All-Party Committee on Mental Health.
The recommendations, I try to follow it and keep abreast. I know a lot of them
are being implemented.
As time goes on, I deal with constituents. I dealt with a
constituent; it was a very personal issue with her. She was really struggling.
It kind of caught my attention. As much as everything we do in mental health and
addictions and the recommendations being implemented – and there are a lot of
good things with access to services. There are a lot of good things happening
and will happen.
What jumped out at me was we still have so much more to do.
This one case – as time goes on I'd like to talk about it further and another
time when I get up. But just to start the conversation, this person – everything
was lined up. The system still needs a lot of work because there were a lot of
roadblocks for her. They didn't know where to go.
I said I'll call it the roadmap to getting better.
Everything was lined up for this person through the department and through my
contacts trying to help her; the family was in desperate need. They still spent
22 hours in emergency before she could get in and get her bed that was already
waiting for her before she went to emergency.
It's not like a broken foot. If I broke my foot today
someone here, hopefully at least – I hope someone would get me to the hospital
to get me an X-ray and get me a cast.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible.)
MR. PETTEN:
There you go.
But
mental health, unfortunately, Mr. Chair, is not like that. No one knows what to
do. That's the question I ask people: What do you do?
Everyone
knows how to deal with a first aid issue, a broken bone or some other ailment,
but if you're dealing with a mental health issue, my guess is the vast majority
of the population, and not only this House, do not know what to do.
I'm
going to carry on and talk about that further my next time up, Mr. Chair.
I thank
you for your time.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for
Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair.
MS. DEMPSTER:
(Inaudible) to get up and
speak in Interim Supply, not as a minister, there are lots of wonderful things I
can talk about that's happening in my Department of Children, Seniors and Social
Development, but I'll save that for another day because I don't often get the
opportunity anymore to stand up and talk about some of the wonderful things that
are happening in my district.
Everybody today, I think, has been trying to send a positive message that it's
not all doom and gloom, good things are happening. There are certainly lots of
good things happening in my district.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
CHAIR:
Order, please!
MS. DEMPSTER:
Before I do that, Mr. Chair,
I would be remiss if I too didn't mention, we're all wearing purple today in
celebration of International Women's Day. I also am an individual who has been
extremely blessed to come from generations of very strong women, women who have
shaped my life and that I owe so much to for who I am today. My mom, at five
foot and 99 pounds, is one of the feistiest people that I know. My grandmother,
lots of strong women, business women in my family, but I want to single out an
individual today, Mary Ann Snow.
She is a
young lady from my district and she was the first female in Newfoundland and
Labrador to become a journeyperson electrician. That was in 1986 and I will tell
you, Mr. Chair, she's seen a lot of changes over the last 30-plus year. She went
in this very male-dominated field. She's done extremely well.
Today,
she resides in the Harbour Grace area; they recently moved from home. She's
actually a certified planner with Nalcor working out in Soldiers Pond. I think
she deserves to be recognized as the first person in our province in the
male-nominated area, first female to become a certified electrician. We're all
quire proud of Mary Ann and I certainly know that her family is.
It's
amazing, Mr. Chair, I can spend the afternoon talking about strong women in my
district, in the province, across Canada and beyond. It's amazing when you think
about, this year made the 100th anniversary in the UK of women's right to vote.
When you think about the fact that – I don't have the numbers in front of me –
100 years ago women were not even considered persons under the law to have the
right to vote and they've gone on to do so many, many wonderful things.
Mr.
Chair, in my district since we formed government, we've seen tremendous progress
in our roadwork. I think it's $145 million total that have been announced;
significant commitment in what is a difficult fiscal climate that we still
operate in as a province and as a government here. I'm talking about an area
from the main trunk that runs through Labrador, the road that's been built, much
of it have been widened and upgraded and now we're working on the pavement, Mr.
Chair.
Last
year, we saw pavement start in Red Bay and go north to Mary's Harbour, which was
around 80 kilometres of pavement. We're going to see that continue this year,
Mr. Chair, from Mary's Harbour on down to Charlottetown branch. So it's
wonderful for me every weekend when I'm driving after four years of driving on
the gravel road, now I'm certainly appreciating the new pavement. From
Charlottetown branch to Cartwright branch, we have seen the widening and
upgrading and we're going to see a tender going out soon for pavement.
Mr.
Chair, in the Labrador Straits, which has been in the media a lot because the
pavement on Route 510 from L'Anse au Clair to Red Bay is almost 40 year old
pavement, in a very dilapidated condition. It was risk to the travelling public.
Our Premier came in and the Minister of Transportation and Works, in October,
and we made the announcement, and a tender will be going out very soon, to start
new pavement in that area.
This
year from the Quebec border going north 22 kilometres, we're going to see new
pavement and the people in the area are certainly pleased to see this progress
happening after a long, long time of waiting. The road has been absolutely
desperate, Mr. Chair. The Minister for Labrador Affairs, our Premier, holds the
portfolio and he's certainly shown with the announcements that we have had since
we formed government that his commitment is there to
Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair and to the other areas in Labrador.
Municipal capital works projects, Mr. Chair, we have
done extremely well with things like water and sewer projects; probably at least
10 projects in my district and we have some more applications in and more good
news coming.
Tourism, the numbers at Red Bay this year, World
Heritage UNESCO site, were up more than 40 per cent. I
do have some beautiful areas
that I love to talk about in my district. Our Department of Tourism, Culture,
Industry and Innovation continues to support places like Battle Harbour, Mr.
Chair. You can fly in to Blanc Sablon or take the ferry. You drive north as far
as Mary's Harbour and you get a boat to Battle Harbour. You're on an island in
the middle of the ocean with all the best amenities that you will find anywhere,
but you are taking a step back in time living like they might have lived in the
1800s to a time when cod was king and the capital of that region; a tremendous
history, an absolute beautiful place.
Mr.
Chair, as we continue to complete the infrastructure like getting the roads
paved, we're only going to see those numbers continue to grow in that area.
We've got Point Amour – so many places I could mention. We've got Cartwright
which is the gateway to the Mealy Mountains Park there on the north, so lots of
wonderful things.
One of
the things that there's a focus right now on is improving the accommodations in
the area. We have some great accommodations. As more and more people come, as we
get opened up to the outside world, we want to make sure that the experience for
the visitor, not just in what they're seeing as they're moving about, but when
they go to that hotel room to stay and things like that, that it is as
comfortable as they would see anywhere, Mr. Chair.
Given
what we had to work with when we formed government and thought we were facing a
$1.1 billion deficit and it turned out to be $2.7 billion, we had a rough year,
Mr. Chair. The Opposition gets up a lot and talks about the 300 taxes and fees.
The truth of it is, Mr. Chair, 240 of them already existed when we formed
government. We did not form government and all of a sudden there were 300 taxes
and fees. All of us on this side of the House ran for our various districts. We
wanted to do positive things in our district.
We had a
very difficult first year. When you form government, you're teetering on
bankruptcy and you're potentially facing to have the Government of Canada or
another province take over your affairs, that is not a good place to be, Mr.
Chair. The Member for Windsor Lake spoke very eloquently earlier this week on
the tough choices that had to be made around the budget.
Mr.
Chair, the reason we had to make tough choices on the budget was because of one
elephant that's in every room. Every room that we go to the elephant in the room
is Muskrat Falls. Five hundred and twenty-six thousand people in this province,
rapidly aging demographics and many people on a fixed income are seniors. We
have this project that was sold to the province, a bill of goods for just over
$5 billion. Now we're two years behind and it's $12.7 billion.
Mr.
Chair, sometimes they get up and talk about affordable housing and things like
that. If they want to talk about affordable housing their legacy around
affordable housing: Muskrat Falls, the doubling of electricity rates – and I
only have a minute left, but I have to mention it because day after day after
day we sit in this House and we get asked why did you do this; why did you do
that.
Well,
Mr. Chair, it's the position that we found ourselves in because this monstrosity
of a project happened that never should have happened. The decisions were not
informed decisions that we made. The joint review panel, the PUB that was put in
place to determine if this would be the least-cost option for the province, they
did not even to get to finish their work, and it is very unfortunate.
Still,
for me, when I move around the province, and I'm pretty well travelled and well
connected, the number one worry that people have now is how are we going to pay
for that; how are we ever going to get out of debt. My children, my
grandchildren are going to be paying for this project.
Mr.
Chair, we've been talking about the inquiry that's about to happen and sometimes
people will – I've heard on VOCM recently: Why are we doing an inquiry and
spending more money? One of the things, the paramount reason why we need to do
an inquiry is to find out what decisions was that made on, what information did
they have, and to ensure that something like that never happens again – never
happens again – so that people's children and grandchildren are paying for this
project that we really couldn't afford, when I believe in my heart of hearts
there was better way.
I thank
you for the opportunity and I look forward to another one.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Member for
Ferryland.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm
pleased today to rise and take a minute to speak to Interim Supply. It basically
deals with the procedural issue in regard to the financing of the province until
we get to the actual bringing down of the budget and setting of the Estimates
for the next fiscal year. This process takes place every year to get us through
the interim periods to when the next fiscal budget is approved for operations of
the province, all the operations and all the costs that are incurred by the
province.
Where
it's a money bill, it's a discussion that we can have on any topic by any
Members of the House, and that's what we've heard this afternoon and yesterday.
I do want to mention my colleague for Harbour Main and recognizing her
contribution in regard to sharing some of her experiences with mental illness,
first-hand experience in dealing with a loved one and the challenges with that.
I certainly thank her for sharing that with us.
For all
of us here in the Chamber none of us, I don't think, are remiss from having that
experience, dealing with a loved one, friends, family, or people we know, and
the challenges with that. A lot of the initiatives we've seen over the past
number of years in the public domain, in legislatures like this, and as well for
the private sector we see companies get involved, non-profit groups, in regard
to really looking at the word we use, is stigma, with mental illness and how we
pull that veil back and have an open and free discussion, which is the first
step. I think that's started to take place, continues to happen, and it's good
it is continuing to happen. I certainly appreciate the comments, as I said
earlier, from the Member for Harbour Main and sharing her experiences. I
certainly congratulate her for that.
Over the
last day, we've heard a lot of discussion on various aspects of the province and
where we're too; discussions on finances and where we've gone over the past two
years, where we're looking at going in the future. Certainly my colleague before
me talked about decisions and choices that are made, but that's what it's about.
Economic direction, budgets, forecasts, four-year mandates, it's all about
making choices.
Those
choices represents any government in the direction of where they want to take
the province, where they find it at the time they get elected, whether they're
re-elected or whether they're a new government coming in. It's about making
choices and trying to drive that agenda, generate revenues for the province and
ultimately, at the end of the day, the government's role is to provide those
public services that are needed by the residents of the province to make sure
it's a place that people want to move, people want to live, people want to raise
their family, which is all tied to economic growth in a region.
Certainly from my perspective in my District of Ferryland –
(Inaudible due to technical difficulties.)
CHAIR (Warr):
Order, please!
The
Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Ferryland.
MR. HUTCHINGS:
I thought my speech was
riveting, but I didn't think it was going to get that kind of response. So we'll
carry on.
Mr.
Chair, I was referencing my District of Ferryland which is geographically a
pretty large area taking in from the Ruby Line, the outskirts of the Goulds
south to St. Shott's, taking in the northern end of Petty Harbour-Maddox Cove as
well and a broad collection of the City of St. John's, as well as a number of
other rural communities.
As well,
from an economic point of view, it has certainly a lot of activity that supports
employment and other activities in the urban centre but also a lot of industry,
fabrication, fishery, tourism is a huge part of the area and many other small
companies and small businesses that support the economy.
Many
parts of that have continued to grow and have continued to move forward over the
past number of years while the latter end of the southern Avalon, dating back to
the cod moratorium and some of the challenges with that, have seen a significant
reduction. Yet, I certainly look at some of the activities that have gone over
the past number of years in terms of some of the entrepreneurs, community
leaders, non-profit groups and a lot of the work they're doing to maximize the
benefits that they have there. Whether it's small business supporting the local
economy or whether it's things like tourism that we're seeing, especially we
always talk about the amount of people that pour into a place like Ferryland.
Anywhere in a particular season, it could be up to almost 20,000 visitors to the
Colony. That's dispersed out through the region. The key to that is to bring
people in, get them to stay for an extended period of time and certainly see the
benefit of that.
When we
look at that and you look at two years, we were lucky enough to get the World
Heritage site UNESCO designation for Mistaken Point for the 560-million year old
fossils in recognition of that on an international stage. We've seen the benefit
of that last year and year before in regard to the amount of visitation and the
activity we've seen for that. What we continue and need to see is support from
government in regard to the administration of volunteer group. They are the
administrators of Portugal Cove South, Cape Race Heritage. They are volunteers
that manage the particular interpretation site there in Portugal Cove South. To
date, we haven't seen any new money invested for administration from this
administration, but it's something we're looking for in this particular budget
to allow that entity to continue to expand, to continue to grow and continue to
meet the needs of all those coming into the region.
Now,
recently, we've just seen some entrepreneurs, some business investments in
Portugal Cove South to provide those types of services to the area, which you
want to see. In Trepassey, as well, we've seen some great investment in the inn
in Trepassey. Done some tremendous work, Carol Ann and John Devereaux, with the
activities they've carried out in Trepassey in regard to reinvestment in the inn
there.
The
amount of visitors that are going through has done great success in promoting
the area, as other business owners have, and we're starting to see the returns
on that. That's positive for the Southern Avalon. It's a real jewel that we have
there that we need to continue to polish and make sure we can get the greatest
return from it. We'll certainly continue to see that.
Then we
talk about sustainability and community spirit. I was in St. Shott's just a few
weeks ago. It's probably a community of 60 or 70 people. They have a community
get together every year and a community dinner just to celebrate their
communities, to celebrate and say thank you to the volunteers they have there.
It's a
very small community but a sense of community, a sense of sustainability and a
sense of contribution. They have a municipal council. They provide services in
their community. It's a very small community but run very well, very committed
and has that, what you'd call Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, the will to
survive. I certainly congratulate them, the volunteers and all they do. It's
really indicative of small areas of Newfoundland and Labrador, continue to want
to survive and make a difference. It's a pleasure to represent all of the area
and the drive they have.
I look
at as I go through in this debate getting up again talking about other issues,
in a general sense, related to the upcoming budget and what we may see or what
we may need to see, some of the things that we talked about over the past couple
of years in regard to reaching out to the federal government to provide the
various programs and services and that they do their job in regard to providing
those services. We have to work collectively with the federal government as an
equal partner in the Federation and continue to receive our fair share.
At
times, we need to often be aggressive on issues that come up. Just recently
today in Question Period, we talked about the surf clam issue and what
devastation that could have for Newfoundland and Labrador. We need to continue
to work hard and hold the federal government accountable to make sure they
deliver on what they need to.
Thank
you, Mr. Chair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The Chair recognizes the hon.
the Member for
St.
George's - Humber.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR.
REID:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's great to get up and participate in this debate
today. As other
Members have said, this is a little bit of an unusual debate here in the House.
It's a debate on what we call the Interim Supply debate. Basically, that means
that while we're waiting for the budget to be approved, we approve a certain
amount of money to allow for the continuation and the operations of government
for the period while we're approving the budget.
It means
we have more time to look at the budget and to give it a good examination in
Committee and in the Estimate Committees before we actually approve it. So
that's the purpose of this debate here is to provide the money to allow the
operations of government to continue. To my understanding, there's sort of a
timeline in which we have to approve these funds.
As other
speakers have mentioned as well in this debate, in the US they've had several
situations where a similar sort of piece of legislation has been held up and the
operations of government have been ground to a halt.
It has
to be done before the end of the fiscal year, the end of March. It certainly has
to be done a certain period before the end of the month to allow for cheques to
be mailed out and things like that. So it's sort of a time sensitive debate that
we're having here. It has to conclude before the end of March, before that
period, and also allowing for that period for things to happen.
This
debate as well, because it's a finance bill, it's usually an opportunity for
Members to talk on any issue which they want. Some Members, as we've seen here
today, have chosen to talk about issues and items in their district. I was very
interested to listen to the Member for Lab West. He said it's important to talk
about some of the good things that are happening. That sort of got me thinking
about some of the good things that are happening in my own district. I want to
continue on in that theme and talk about tourism primarily, the good things that
are happening and the potential that exists there in the District of St.
George's - Humber.
The area
that I think has a lot of unrealized potential, and some of it is being realized
through the hard work of people in the area, is the Codroy Valley. I think
hiking has huge potential in that area. There's the Starlight Trail that's
already in place. The area development association is working with the
department to put in place the coastal trail that runs between St. Andrew's and
Searston along the coast. Wonderful views there.
As well,
there's another coastal trail that runs from the harbour in Codroy up along to
the lighthouse in Cape Anguille. Some of the best scenery you'll see anywhere in
the world. I think that's something we have to look at developing. That's a
potential that's there, and I'm pleased to see people within the department, the
minister, are looking at that potential. The minister was out to the area this
summer and had an opportunity to witness some of the beauty of the area
firsthand.
Also,
another thing he did while he was in the area was he visited the Codroy Valley
Folk Festival, which is a very interesting festival. Anyone who hasn't been
there, I would encourage you to look it up and attend.
The
Codroy Valley is one of the few areas in the province where we have a Scottish
population, where we have a Scottish culture. You'll hear fiddling, Scottish
fiddling, you'll hear bagpipes that maybe you don't hear so often in other parts
of the province. So that's an interesting aspect of the valley I think that has
potential for further development for tourism. I think there are other things in
the valley, but those are a few of the highlights.
If you
travel east in the district, northeast, the next place you'll come to in my
district is Bay St. George South. That's an area that is also steeped in history
and heritage. If you look at it's a farming area, primarily, farming logging and
that sort of area.
One of
the assets in the area that the heritage group is looking at is developing the
Legge farmhouse in Cartyville. That's a very interesting property there. I think
it has a lot of potential. The group is raising funds, doing some renovations
there and up-keeping the property and making it easier to access through the
roads. That facility has a lot of potential, in terms of things that can happen
there and the potential to attract visitors to the area.
Another
thing I mentioned in a Member's statement earlier this week was the
Arran stowaways and the story of the
young boys, really, who stowed away aboard a ship leaving Scotland. They were
set aside on the ice flows in Bay St. George and were rescued by some of the
fishermen in the area and brought ashore. Two of them died and four were
rescued. That's something part of the heritage of the area that people are
looking at commemorating this summer as well. I think that's a part of the
heritage of the area.
Another
story that's maybe little known outside of the area is the story of the Hulan
family and the lady who was probably one of the first women entrepreneurs in
Newfoundland and Labrador. She built up quite an empire there in the McKay's and
Robinsons area. The story is a very interesting story and it's something that I
think can be further developed as well.
Hiking
in that area has a lot of possibilities, but the T'Railway is an important
tourism asset in that area as well. One of the other areas that myself and the
minister visited this summer was the Pirate's Haven in Robinsons. They're right
on the Robinsons River; you can look down on beautiful views there. Also, they
offer some biking trails along the T'Railways and other areas in Bay St. George.
They're very interesting trails.
As you
continue to travel east, you'll come to Flat Bay, St. Teresa, that area. Of
course, the Powwow, which has become famous around the province for celebrating
Aboriginal Mi'kmaq culture, happens in that area every summer. About 10,000
people attend the event on the field. I think there's a lot of potential there
to sort of continue that type of cultural tourism and to expand on providing
services to people who visit the area for that event and other events throughout
the year.
As you
go further east, you come to St. George's. In St. George's, one of the tourism
assets of the whole area is the museum there. It tells the story of the area. It
tells the story of Mi'kmaq culture in the area. It tells the story of Sandy
Point, Mr. Chair, which is another part of our history that is not celebrated
enough. Sandy Point was a thriving community in 1700s and 1800s and people from
all over the world came to Sandy Point to trade. You would hear many different
languages spoken in Sandy Point, a very international community at that time.
It's a part of our history that we don't celebrate enough and I think has
potential.
As well,
if you look at Steady Brook, it's a community that is a multi-season community
that has tremendous potential for tourism year-round.
Those
are a few things and maybe, later in debate, I'll have an opportunity to talk
about some other good things that are happening in the District of St. George's
- Humber.
Thank
you, Mr. Chair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The Chair recognizes the hon.
the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS. ROGERS:
Thank you very much, Mr.
Chair.
I'm very
happy to stand once again to speak in Interim Supply. I am actually talking
about something that involved money, and it's child care. I raised the area of
child care in Question Period today and the minister responsible for Education
and Early Childhood Development said that they had done a lot, but the reality
is that the majority of working families cannot access affordable child care in
Newfoundland and Labrador. They simply cannot.
We have
the average of people spending, sometimes, certainly more than 25 per cent of
their income on child care. In countries like Sweden, the average amount that
families pay for, for instance, their first child in child care is 3 per cent of
their wage. For the second child, it's 2 per cent of their wage and for the
third child, they pay nothing. So that's an incredible difference.
I'm sure
that most of us here in the House have young working moms in their districts who
have said they simply cannot afford to go back to work because they can't afford
the high cost of child care. I think the average cost in Newfoundland and
Labrador for child care for an infant is over $1,200. The average cost for a
toddler in child care is a little bit over $1,000.
Now,
when you look at that the majority of minimum wage earners in our province are
women, it's not possible. They cannot afford that much on child care,
particularly, if you think of rent, which is at least $800 a month – at least –
for a very basic one, possibly, in some places, two-bedroom apartment; maybe a
basement apartment. The cost of heat has gone up. The cost of food has gone up.
Or if you own a home, the cost of a mortgage and household insurance.
What we
have, Mr. Chair, is a lot of women who want to be, need to be in the paid
workforce having to remove themselves from the paid workforce because of the
cost of child care. I'm sure there are a number of us here who have children
ourselves, who have had children and know how difficult it is for them to access
child care. We have grandparents taking on child care. We have children in child
care situations that are not highly regulated enough. It's a juggling game. It's
constantly a juggling game for many families trying to afford child care.
When
women have to exit the paid workforce because they can't afford child care, the
financial repercussions on them start to have a domino effect. Because not only
are they not earning for those years that they have to remove themselves from
the paid workforce because of child care, the other thing that happens is it
affects their pensions, it affects their seniority, it affects their ability to
apply for other jobs within wherever they were working. It has that whole domino
effect.
Now, the
domino effect as well is not only in terms of individual working families and
the economies within individual working families, it also affects the economy of
the province because that is those fewer people in the workforce generating
money to spend in our economy and also generating taxable income. So it has a
domino effect again on individual families and also on the economy of the
province.
Fifty
years ago, the Pearson government established the Royal Commission on the Status
of Women – 50 years ago – and after they did their inquiry, after they did their
commission, their report came out in 1970. It said that women in Canada will
only truly be equal if we have a universal, acceptable, affordable, accessible,
public child care system. Here we are, 50 years later, and we still don't have
that
Again,
that Royal Commission said that this is one of the foundations for women to
achieve true economic equality in our society.
What has
happened is that government has left the issue of child care to the private
market. We don't leave kindergarten or primary school or secondary school to the
private market. We don't leave our post-secondary education to the private
market, although there are parts of it in private colleges. That's another issue
that we could talk about another day, Mr. Chair.
We don't
leave our hospitals to the private market. We don't leave our schools to the
private market. We don't leave roads to the private market. So when research has
shown that quality early childhood education gives a heads-up, gives a leg-up to
our children, why would we leave that to the private marketplace? That's exactly
what government has done.
Government is giving a little bit more subsidy to early childhood care workers,
to those who work in child care centres. Government is giving them a little bit
of subsidy for their salary. Government is giving a little bit of subsidy to the
child care centres. Government is giving a little bit of subsidy to families who
are under a certain limit to help them pay for this very high-cost child care.
Basically, what has happened is that we see 160 recommendations from the Royal
Commission on the Status of Women. The only one where really nothing has been
done in terms of an affordable, accessible, public, universal, public child care
system – that's the only recommendation where government has totally failed in
that recommendation.
Again,
we see that government doesn't rely on the private market for a number of very
important social programs. Child care is a social program. It's not a privilege.
It's not a frill. It's good for our children, it's good for women and it's good
for our economy. It's good for family economy and it's good for the overall
economy of the province. There's lots of research out there to say that.
The
minister responsible for Education and Early Childhood Development knows that as
well. He has stood up in this House, whether he was on this side of the House or
whether he was on that side of the House, stating the information. Emphatically
stating the research that has been done to show that this is good for our
children, this is good for our economy. I understand he's in a position right
now and he's not as emphatically saying that right now but he is saying some of
the sort of tweaking that governments have done.
Government's counterpart in Ottawa promised this and they haven't done it. What
they're doing is they're putting a little bit of money here, a little bit of
money there, a little bit of money there, but leaving it to the private market.
We know that doesn't work.
We're
not leaving our health care to the private market. We're not leaving our
educational system to the private market. We're not leaving our hospitals or
roads to the private market, nor should we leave one of the most foundational
pieces in a stable economy – child care – to the private market. It's not
working. We all know that.
When we
look at what happens in other jurisdictions, for instance, Quebec. Quebec was
going through a very difficult time, economically, in the '70s. They had a
decline in population. They established the first publicly administered,
publicly supervised, publicly delivered child care system in the country. It was
$5 a day for families. Their economy grew from this. They had more people in the
workforce, predominately more women who re-entered the workforce after having a
child; therefore, boosting the whole economy. Their children were doing better,
and also their population numbers grew.
Now, we
know one of our greatest challenges is declining population. Many of us have
had, within even our own families, but certainly in our districts, where young
working families say: We can't afford to have another child – and we are
desperate for an increase in our population.
Mr.
Chair, this only makes sense on so many levels and we can do it. It does take an
injection of funds, but we can do it. I know this government can work with the
federal government to insist on behalf of the working families of Newfoundland
and Labrador.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR:
The Chair recognizes the hon.
the Member for Exploits.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. DEAN:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's a
pleasure to rise today to represent the people of the beautiful District of
Exploits, one of 40 beautiful districts to be found in our province.
Interim
Supply enables government to – without disruption – continue to bring forward
the many vital services needed by the people of our province.
Now just
to step back, before I get into some of the more positive aspects of what I have
to say, I'd like to go back for a moment to the early days of our government's
mandate and the $2.7 billion deficit left in the wake of the previous
government's departure. At the time, we found ourselves left with a sinking ship
peppered with a multitude of leaks. Undoubtedly, without some kind of a
response, we surely were headed the way of the Greeks and their financial woes
of several years ago.
AN HON. MEMBER:
We wouldn't want to go the
way of the Greeks.
MR. DEAN:
No, you wouldn't. Good
people.
We
responded, not in the way we wanted to, but in the way we had to; all the while
being criticized by the very ones who brought this calamity to our doorsteps and
the whole while, right up until today, not offering up any alternative proposals
to bring us back from the brink.
Since
being elected as MHA for Exploits, there have been a number of exciting things
that have happened in the district. The following is just a listing of some but
not all, and I hope to acknowledge some more in the upcoming days.
In
February of 2016 we had an announcement of funding for community-based
organizations. The announcement included a number of upgrades to my district
including a $4,500 upgrade to the stadium in Bishop's Falls and $2,000 for the
Peterview Recreation Board.
In
September of 2017 the Premier and various ministers visited Botwood. We had a
$38.8 million investment of municipal infrastructure across the province that
was announced from the Town of Botwood. For my district, this meant major
infrastructure upgrades for the Town of Grand Falls-Windsor, for the Town of
Botwood, major waterline repair for Phillips Head and major road upgrades
throughout the Town of Bishop's Falls. These funding initiatives were important
in ensuring our communities remain safe and sustainable for years to come.
November
2017 was also an exciting time for my district with two major funding
announcements which would go to the citizens in the District of Exploits. These
announcements included $120,000 to enhance and expand the arts and heritage
interpretation programs and overall experience at the Fox Moth Museum and
Heritage Centre. This funding was used to increase access to museum collections
and heritage displays at the museum which will enhance overall visitor
experience.
The
Norris Arm Heritage Society has been celebrating and preserving this region's
rich cultural history for many years. It's great to see how our government helps
to continue their efforts. That same month, we also saw the announcement of
improvements to the long-term care home in Central Newfoundland. The protective
care unit in Botwood received a 20-bed expansion as a result of these
improvements. This protective care unit has seen an increase in Alzheimer's and
dementia patients in recent years, and seeing an expansion in their capacity
will allow the centre to care for more individuals in the coming years.
I'd like
to say something about that issue. Going back several years ago, under my
signature when I was mayor, and the experts of the day – these long-term care
investments are long overdue and they were needed 20 years ago. Again, under my
signature at the time there was a merry-go-round of Health Ministers in the
previous government going through the revolving doors; but, each time one went,
we'd follow up with the same letter on our concern about expansion to the Twomey
centre, long-term care needs, and the dementia and Alzheimer's concerns not just
throughout the province but throughout the country.
So it's
nothing new. My point being is that at the time the government was flush with
cash and some of the right decisions weren't made. I'm not saying a lot of the
investments – I've heard it from the other side and they have made some good
investments, but they missed the boat. The health care of the people of the
province and everyone on the other side and this side agrees that it's the most
important thing for us to bring forward for our people.
I'm
proud to say that this government, even through trying fiscal times, in my
opinion, that's just another indicator of more wise spending on the part of the
government of the day.
More
recently we've seen a new addition of our Five-Year Provincial Roads Plan. This
addition includes a number of upgrades to the highway system in Exploits,
including coming upgrades to three of the major routes throughout the district:
the Botwood Highway, Route 350; the Fortune Harbour Road, Route 352; as well as
the Bay d'Espoir Highway, Route 360.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
AN HON. MEMBER:
Tell us about the Sir Robert
Bond Bridge.
MR. DEAN:
Yes, and the Sir Robert Bond Bridge. There are quite a few things, as I alluded
to earlier, that I'm going to bring up as we move forward in the coming days.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible.)
MR. DEAN:
Pardon me?
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible.)
MR. DEAN:
Yeah, that's right.
The
other thing I would like to say to everybody here in the Chamber is over the
last year and a half, I'd like to acknowledge the efforts on the part of the
Premier and numerous ministers in visiting the district. I know that pretty well
each and every minister were told by people from as far north as Leading Tickles
and Fortune Harbour, right back going down south, right out to Norris Arm and
Grand Falls-Windsor, that it was unheard of.
I know
that the presence and the time taken by the Premier and the ministers to come to
our district, again, unheard of before; that's what they all told me and the
Premier and ministers. It was much appreciated by the people in the district, as
well as myself.
That's
pretty well it. I still have a couple minutes left. I would like to, as some
people have earlier, acknowledge today as International Women's Day to my women
colleagues here in the House of Assembly, our staff here and around the
province.
MS. P. PARSONS:
The Member for Harbour Grace
- Port de Grave.
MR. DEAN:
Oh, yes – all women
throughout our province. Last but not least, my wife, my daughters and my mom.
Mom is currently a patient at the Hugh Twomey centre. She has Alzheimer's. Betty
alluded to mental illness and stuff earlier. Anyway, it's just good to know that
my mom and other people's moms and wives are in good hands in whatever facility
they find themselves in in our province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
MR. DEAN:
I want Mom to know that I
certainly do love her. She's not well. I know I'm not the only ship afloat on
the ocean and each and every one of us here go through these trials and
tribulations.
With
that being said, kudos to all the women in our lives. It's like the old saying
goes: The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. That's certainly a tribute
to moms and women everywhere.
Thanks
for your time, Mr. Chair, and fellow colleagues.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The Chair recognizes the hon.
the Member for Mount Pearl North.
MR. LESTER: Good
afternoon, Members and hon. House.
I would also like to reiterate my wishing of respect for
International Women's Day in this House and beyond. Not only today, but I think
we need to concentrate on giving women more respect throughout the whole entire
year.
This past fall, I had the opportunity of walking the full
District of Mount Pearl North. It spans the largest city and the second largest
city. My district takes in
both Mount Pearl and St. John's. We've got residents who have lived there for 70
years, 50 years, 30 years, 10 years and brand new residents. We're just about to
the end of our development potential and then we'll have to start re-developing.
Mount
Pearl itself started off as a cabin country and you'd hardly think that today by
looking at the variety of styles of homes but, in certain areas, you can still
pick out the original houses that were built there. A lot of them arrived, I
guess, in the early 1900s when they wanted to get out of town and set up in
Mount Pearl.
It's a
very supportive community. I grew up in Mount Pearl and went to school in Mount
Pearl. Maybe I'm being a little bit biased, but I've never seen community spirit
like I've seen in Mount Pearl.
AN HON. MEMBER:
Hear, hear!
MR. LESTER:
The Frosty Festival, which myself and the Member alongside had just participated
in – I can remember the first Frosty Festival; I was in grade three at the time.
Then when I graduated high school, my high school was out in the woods, and now
it's surrounded by houses. I went knocking on those very doors and they're all
empty nesters. The houses have been there for 30 years and their children have
moved away or moved to other communities in Newfoundland and Labrador. It's
interesting to meet a lot of my friends' parents, and walk the streets where I,
as a child, used to have boil ups and chase rabbits. It's a big difference for
sure.
One
thing I did hear over and over again, and not trying to take the light off
anybody on a fixed income because there are serious issues with people on fixed
incomes, but there's a segment in the middle of fixed incomes that is really,
really affected by the issues in our economy. They've kind of been ignored from
time immemorial, and that's the young families who are working for private
business. That spans right across our whole province and that's somewhere I
think we need to put more emphasis on. We need to keep that generation here in
our province.
Like the
other Member said there from the NDP, child care is a big thing. Without child
care, you can't go to work. Without work, you can't afford to have children. So
that's something that we really need to work on, providing affordable child
care, access to child care, giving those families who are working for private
business the help that they need so that they can stay here, live here, raise
families here, retire here and contribute to our economy.
Along
with those middle families, the ones in the middle section, I met some of the
oldest residents of Mount Pearl. I actually met one resident of Mount Pearl, he
had lived there, moved out when he was 19, built his house with his own hand
tools and now he's almost 100. He's fortunate enough; he has seven kids and
every one of the kids still live in Mount Pearl. Of course, now they have
grandchildren as well. He's actually a great, great-grandfather. That's
absolutely amazing that he's been able to keep his family there in Mount Pearl.
Hopefully, all of us will be able to have the same fortune.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible) Mr. Thistle.
MR. LESTER:
Mr. Thistle. No, it was not
actually Mr. Thistle. Actually, I had the opportunity – Mr. Thistle built the
first school in Mount Pearl. For his 92nd birthday I had the privilege to take
him on a sleigh ride on my farm. He was amazed at the size of my horses. He said
his horse was a lot smaller when he drove that in Mount Pearl.
Along
with the residential section of Mount Pearl we have a big booming industrial
park, known as Donovans Industrial Park, and that has done well over the years.
Largely, as of recent, it has picked up a lot of oil business. There are several
large supply areas and pipe yards. That's still a big contributor to the economy
of Mount Pearl and, of course, the surrounding areas providing employment and it
will provide employment in the foreseeable future.
I think
all of us in this House recognize that we need to change the perception of
people in the province and really point out, no matter what corner or what part
of the province you live in, there's opportunity everywhere and it's there for
us as a people to seize it. Sometimes it just takes someone to point it out or
to give a little bit of support and we'll see us rebound into a viable economy
powerhouse, pardon the pun, in this region and in North America.
Something that's been close to my heart, I guess my whole life, is the
agriculture industry. The potential for agriculture has always been here, and
the demand for agriculture products will always be here as long as there are
people here.
We need
to produce our own food. I guess in the food delivery system, we're the last
place in North America to actually get food. That puts us in a very precarious
situation, that if there's any sort of a supply glitch along the whole North
American continent we'll be the last ones to get fed and maybe we'll be the ones
with the empty shelves. That's something we need to work on, not only the
development of the agriculture industry. We need to encourage people to grow
more food at home, which is something that is growing.
We have
the Little Green Thumbs project which is province wide. That's sponsored by the
Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Agriculture and that teaches kids how to
grow food. That's an important step. When I take kids out on our farm for tours,
I'm so surprised on how much farming techniques they can actually talk to me
about. This is part of the curriculum advancement and the Little Green Thumbs
program.
Ten
years ago, we had kids come to our farm and they'd pull a carrot out of the
ground that would be covered in dirt and their parents would say to them: We're
going to bring that home and eat it. The kid would say: I'm not eating that that
came out of the ground. Well, I don't hear those kinds of comments anymore. Kids
are excited about pulling a carrot out of the ground. Sometimes they're covered
in mud and you might even see a scattered worm. Usually it's the parents who get
a little bit more squeamish than the kids. That's a good sign.
We can
learn a lot from watching our kids. I think that's the stage when everybody
learns, when you're a child. Sometimes as adults we're a little bit less
receptive to learning. If you watch kids long enough you'll realize, as an
adult, there are still tons of things to learn that we can use to make all our
lives better and more beneficial.
As far
as encouraging young people to get involved in agriculture as a career, a lot of
people don't consider agriculture as a career because you think you have to be a
farmer. Now while I'd recommend that employment, there are other opportunities
for people to get involved in the agriculture industry, whether it be in the
processing sector, the inspection sector, which is through the federal and
provincial governments. That's also very important.
Another
thing our climate particularly provides opportunity with is research. Nowhere
else, I don't think, in North America do we see the effects of climate change
happening as much as we do here in Newfoundland. We're out in the middle of the
Atlantic Ocean and the great changes that are happening. Great, not by being of
merit, but massive changes that are happening to our climate are definitely
evident with sea ice conditions, water conditions, the changing of fishery
stocks, the changing of vegetation. All those things are very important to look
at and consider when it comes to the security of our food supply.
Once
again, just before I clue up, I'd like to thank all of my constituents, all of
my campaign workers, my family especially for supporting me in getting elected
in my political efforts. I look forward to serving here in this House and
providing, not only a benefit to the people of my district, but the people of
the province.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The Chair recognizes the hon.
the Member for
Virginia Waters - Pleasantville.
MR.
B. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm glad to stand here today with my colleagues wearing
purple today in honour of International Women's Day and the great women that are
in all of our lives. I'd just like to say a big thank you to them, but also my
colleagues here in the House of Assembly on both sides of the aisle and at the
Table here in front of us and our Pages in the House for the great work they do
and thank them for this day about them. Thank you very much for everything you
do.
Mr. Chair, I'm also very happy to stand and talk about
Interim Supply for a lot of reasons because it gives us the opportunity to hear
about the many success stories that are happening in everybody's districts. For
me that's an important piece, because I get to hear about districts like St.
George's - Humber and the activity that's happening out in those districts. It's
great for us to hear those great stories and for the people who are listening at
home to hear those great stories.
I'm going to take some time to go through some of the
success stories this government has brought forward in the last year and what we
plan on bringing forward in the next several months while we're doing this
Interim Supply and interim budget.
As my colleague from St. George's - Humber had alluded
to, the Interim Supply debate allows us to grant certain monies through the
government to allow activity to continue on in government while we're passing
our budget, which sometimes takes a little longer than we would like but we have
to make sure we get it right and we have to make sure everyone has the
opportunity to ask questions during Estimates and ask questions of government to
ensure that the money is being spent wisely.
I'm just going to highlight a few initiatives that are
happening in St. John's in particular. Mr. Chair, we've committed to over $10
million to construct new electrical substations to service the Health Sciences
Centre and Memorial University; $7.5 million to advance the replacement of the
Waterford Hospital.
As my hon. colleague mentioned earlier, that's a very,
very old building. Queen Victoria was on the throne I think when it was built in
the middle 1800s and it's in dire need of replacement. I'm proud to be part of a
team and this government for not just talking about health care problems but
taking action to make sure they don't happen in the future; $3.1 million to
continue upgrades to the medical device reprocessing area at the Health Sciences
Centre; $700,000 for integrated operating rooms in St. John's alone; $2.4
million to complete East Point Elementary and replace the older Virginia Park
Elementary. That's a worthwhile. If anybody hasn't had the pleasure to visit
East Point Elementary School – I know my hon. colleague on the other side of the
House, or on the same side of the House as me can't wait for Coley's Point to be
done as well.
More importantly, we're very happy to have the
state-of-the-art facility. I would encourage anyone in this House to go down and
see how happy it's made the students and the faculty and staff and the community
as a whole for that
area.
One of
the things that's also neat that's happened in the last couple of weeks is the
Minister of Transportation and Works has brought forward the tenders to demolish
the old Virginia Park Elementary, which is on the site. It will allow the site
in the summer to progress with redesign for parking lots, safe places for kids
to play and redesign the whole landscape in the area, which will be a big thing.
It's a bittersweet moment for the people in the community because Virginia Park
Elementary had played a vital role in raising many of the kids and working with
the kids and community in that area. We're happy that it's going to be well
landscaped and good activity for the kids in that area.
$21.2
million to advance construction of the Team Gushue Highway extension; this is a
very, very important extension for the transportation network within our city.
It's been dragged on for entirely too long and we're trying to move that forward
as fast as we can. This will improve the traffic flow all around the City of St.
John's and relieve some of the congestion that we face in the city.
Mr.
Chair, a $500,000 investment to begin the construction of a new court complex in
St. John's; $450,000 in renovations to the Family Court division in St. John's;
$195,000 in renovations to the Supreme Court Trial Division in St. John's; and
$100,000 to continue the planning for a value-for-money analysis of a
replacement for HMP. Anybody who's had the ability or the opportunity to go see
HMP like I have, it definitely needs to be redone and we definitely need a new
penitentiary in this province.
We all
know the needs of the facilities and the huge benefit that improvements made to
these facilities have on the people that have to use them and the entire
judicial system. These four investments are very positive impacts for the
citizens in our province, not just in the city as well.
$1.6
million for accessibility improvements to the St. John's Arts and Culture
Centre; this is a great investment to ensure everyone in our community has equal
access to the very talented people who put performances on in the Arts and
Culture Centre during each and every year.
Mr.
Chair, it's hard not to touch on health and the well-being of people when you're
talking about our budget. The health spending is approximately $2.9 billion,
which accounts for the largest share of our spending in our budget. We must do
things differently. I'm proud to be part of a government that has been able to
virtually maintain that line stagnant, making sure that the last two budgets we
had virtually no increases to the budget.
This is
not the case under the previous administration where health spending went up 130
per cent since 2001 to 2015 and the outcomes were no better, if not worse. We
had some colleagues talk about mental health and addictions, which is a major
problem in our communities. Our government is committed to $5 million to advance
the All-Party Committee recommendations, which is also being supported by $1.4
million in federal funding. We have to do things different and find better ways
of doing things, Mr. Chair, and that's what we're trying to do.
On
January 19, 2017, the Psychiatric Assessment Unit was announced to be
re-developed. The Psychiatric Assessment Unit is a place in the Waterford in St.
John's which will be re-developed to improve patient experience and enhance the
care. We listened and we delivered.
The
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is investing $650,000 in a project that
will provide for renovating the space and increase staffing, which will include
an additional registered nurse position as well. The Psychiatric Assessment Unit
is the only dedicated emergency room for mental health issues in our province.
In
December of 2017, new long-term care beds and advancement to the mental health
care were among the 2017 successes that we've had. Advances in mental health and
addictions, acute care and long-term care facilities, infrastructure, home and
community care supports and forward-thinking legislation are just a few of those
initiatives that we made over the last year.
After
six months, 51 of the 54 recommendations in
Towards Recovery: The Mental Health and
Addictions Action Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador are either completed or
in progress of being completed. Construction on the new 164-bed hospital in
Corner Brook is underway and approximately 360 long-term care beds will be added
to the system and new construction announced for Corner Brook, Grand Falls and
Gander. These announcements were made multiple times in some cases by the
previous administration. They talked. We delivered.
A total
of 28 more long-term care beds will be opened in Carbonear in the new year. I
know the hon. colleague on our side of the House will love that. The Enhanced
Care in Personal Care Homes is now a permanent care option, allowing for results
to be successful.
Newfoundland and Labrador Opioid Action Plan has been implemented and is helping
to address the increased number of overdoses and deaths caused by opioids,
including fentanyl. I happen to sit on the fentanyl task force, which is working
in partnership with the City of St. John's trying to address some of those
concerns and find concrete examples on how we can help the problems that we're
having in the community. We've had multiple meetings and we're continuing to
meet and come up with solutions that we can both partner on and hopefully make
those changes here in this city that we can copy and replicate right across the
Island and then for other centres. Stay tuned for that and hopefully we'll be
able to move forward on those rather quickly.
I could
go on and on and on about the investments in mental health, and hopefully I'll
get some more time to do that as the debate develops, but I'd just like to say
thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Chair. I'll take my seat.
Thank
you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
CHAIR:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would
move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
CHAIR:
The motion is that the
Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Is it
the pleasure of the Committee to adopt the motion?
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, the
Speaker returned to the Chair.
MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):
The hon. the Member for
Baie Verte - Green Bay, Chair of the Committee of the Whole.
MR. WARR:
Mr. Speaker, the Committee of
Supply have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to
report progress and ask leave to sit again.
MR. SPEAKER:
The Chair of the Committee of
Supply have considered the matters to them referred and asked him to report
progress and ask leave to sit again.
When
shall the report be received?
MR. A. PARSONS:
Now.
MR. SPEAKER:
Now.
When
shall the Committee have leave to sit again?
MR. A. PARSONS:
Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER:
Tomorrow.
On
motion, report received and adopted. Committee ordered to sit again on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. A. PARSONS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Given
the hour of the day, I would move, seconded by the Member for Stephenville -
Port au Port, that the House do now adjourn.
MR. SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
the House do now adjourn.
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
MR. SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
This
House stands adjourned until tomorrow, Monday, at 1:30 o'clock.
On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow, Monday, at 1:30 p.m.