PDF Version

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

SPEAKER (Bennett): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

In the Speaker's gallery today, it's a great honour to welcome Chief Petty Officer Rod Deon and his daughter Jenn Deon who is joining us for a Member's statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: I would also like to recognize Glenn Roil, who is watching us through our broadcast from home. He's also the subject of a Member's statement this afternoon.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

SPEAKER: Today we will hear statements by the hon. Members for the Districts of Harbour Main, Humber - Bay of Islands, Labrador West, Lake Melville, Mount Pearl - Southlands, Waterford Valley with leave and Virginia Waters - Pleasantville with leave.

The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER: .Thank you, Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize a brilliant 24-year-old individual from my hometown Marysvale in the District of Harbour Main.

In April 2020, Brady Ryan graduated from Memorial University with a conjoint honours degree – Bachelor of Science in statistics and a Bachelor of Science in applied mathematics. Upon his graduation, Brady was the recipient of the Medal of Excellence for mathematics, the Medal of Excellence for statistics and the Governor General's Silver Medal, which is awarded to one undergraduate from a university with the highest academic achievement amongst all graduating students for the year.

Brady continued with his masters at the University of Michigan and, upon completion, he was awarded the best performance of any student. He is currently studying at the University of Michigan for his Ph.D. in science with a concentration in biostatistics where he attends the Michigan School of Public Health.

Brady recently presented on his research at a conference of the American Society of Human Genetics in Los Angeles. He has co-authored several published academic papers. His undergraduate degree at MUN and his Ph.D. studies from the University of Michigan are on full scholarships.

Please join me in congratulating Brady Ryan, a young scholar with a very bright future.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE: On the weekend of October 14, Templeton Academy in Meadows hosted the boys triple A slo-pitch provincial tournament and, for the second year in a row, the Templeton Tigers are the provincial champions, winning the final game against Mobile Central High with an 8-7 victory.

Seven teams from across the province took part in the tournament which included Laval High School, Botwood Collegiate, Mobile Central High, White Hills Academy, Leo Burke Academy and Indian River High School.

The Templeton Tigers are a dedicated team made up of 14 players from Grade 9 to 12 that work hard to win, each giving their very best while, most importantly, having fun. Team members include Carter Burton, Evan Janes, Tyson Park, R. J. Ruth, Markus Wells, Ethan Janes, Wade Mullins, Gavin Lovell, Jaden Park, Jordan Blanchard, Dylan Banks, Billy Barrett, Noah Park and coaches, Fabian Lovell and Barry Park.

Congratulations to Noah Park who was named team MVP and Tyson Park who was named most sportsmanship player. Congratulations also to Leo Burke Academy of Bishop's Falls who received the Team Sportsmanship award.

I ask all Members to join me in extending congratulations to the Templeton Tigers and wishing them continued success. Great job, guys.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

J. BROWN: Thank you, Speaker.

I rise today to give recognition to Bill Soper, the regional settlement coordinator for the Association of New Canadians in Labrador West.

Bill Soper, a former teacher in our community, has been making an impact in his new role helping many new Canadians to Labrador West. He's valued by the newcomer population in our community, and he doesn't hesitate to help anyone that needs an extra hand with the various events around.

Last month, a Come Home Year mural was unveiled at the Arts and Culture Centre, which was created by 20 newcomers to Labrador West over the summer. The mural was 20 ceramic pieces depicting the map of Labrador entitled, Home Away from Home.

Bill is a fantastic advocate for our newcomers and I want to personally thank Bill for helping to introduce Labrador to the world and providing a home away from home for so many.

I ask all hon. Members to join me in thanking Bill Soper for being such an important member of our community and advocating for new Canadians.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

P. TRIMPER: Thank you, Speaker.

In September, the Grade 8 class of Ms. Natalie Keith at Mealy Mountain Collegiate sent me 27 letters about the National Day of Truth and Reconciliation and their desire to raise the profile of Indigenous issues. In October, we met to explore three topics.

We started our discussion with their own land acknowledgement to honour the original inhabitants of Labrador, which reads that students should take care of the land and be respectful of the cultures and traditions of those who live here. The school commits to working and learning in the spirit of truth and reconciliation. That means learning about the past and making a better future for all.

Next was the Indigenous-led Moose Hide Campaign, including its affiliation with our own Legislature. Each student received a moose hide pin, joining three million Canadians determined to stand up violence against women and children, creating a safer and healthier Canada.

Our last topic was Orange Shirt Day, recognizing the 150,000 Inuit, First Nations, and Metis children who attended 132 residential schools. This was an emotional topic for Ms. Keith's class, as many of the children sent to residential schools died, never returned home or were emotionally scarred.

I'm looking forward to further engagement, Speaker, with these young role models, as our province continues on the path of understanding and reconciliation.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE: Mr. Speaker, this past June, after a significant hiatus due to COVID-19 restrictions, a number of members of our Mount Pearl sporting fraternity were finally able to physically get together at the Reid Community Centre to celebrate the achievements of some of our finest athletes, as well as a number of individuals who've given their time and talents to the sports scene in Mount Pearl.

Of course, I'm referring to the Mount Pearl Sports Hall of Fame and Athletic Awards induction ceremony. As in past years, it was a great time had by all. The accomplishments were many and the résumés of those honoured were truly impressive.

Congratulations to this year's award recipients: the Peter Halliday Memorial Executive of the Year recipient, Gayle Cave; Coach of the Year, Steve Nolan; Official of the Year, Trent Carter; Dave Holloway Memorial Adult Working with Youth Award recipient, Desiree Simmons; Male Athlete of the Year, Michael Drover; Female Athlete of the Year, Sarah Dawe; and Team Honour Role recipients, the 1989-1990 Pee Wee Major Blades Hockey Team.

Also a big congratulations to this year's Hall of Fame inductees: Kevin Dicks and Kevin Walsh in the builder category; and Ryan Clowe and Dean Blanks in the athlete category.

Thank you all for the significant contribution you have made to sport in Mount Pearl.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley, with leave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Leave.

SPEAKER: Leave is granted.

The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize Mr. Glenn Roil, a global mental health advocate whose personal mission has been to destigmatize mental illness. Mr. Roil has long championed this cause and has participated in numerous conferences and speaking engagements at the provincial, national and international levels.

Mr. Roil has sat on a number of boards and committees, including the Canadian Mental Health Association National, Community Coalition for Mental Health, CHANNAL, PTSD Buddies and the Global Mental Health Peer Network. This network has recently appointed Mr. Roil as co-lead of the Americas region. It is an international lived experience advocacy organization whose objectives are to influence policy and practice, to promote human rights and overall well-being.

In June of this year, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, a US-based mental health organization that is dedicated to building better lives for Americans affected by mental illness, selected Mr. Roil as the recipient of the Lionel Aldridge Champions Award. The award honours an individual with mental illness who demonstrates courage, leadership and service in their work to promote recovery and ensure all people with mental illness, live full lives in their communities.

I ask all Members to join me in congratulating Mr. Roil on his outstanding advocacy work and his most recent award.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters - Pleasantville, with leave.

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

SPEAKER: Leave is granted.

B. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank my hon. colleagues.

Speaker, I am pleased to stand in this hon. House to highlight a resident of my district who has given so much.

Chief Petty Officer Roderick Deon was born in 1921 in Nova Scotia – yes, you heard correctly, 101½ years old.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. DAVIS: In 1942, he volunteered to join the Canadian Navy and served on the HMCS Ottawa H31. His ship was on convoy duty in the North Atlantic and took part in the Normandy invasion in 1944. In 1968, he became the founding and charter member of the Royal Canadian Legion Dambusters Branch 617 in Don Mills, Ontario.

In 2019, CPO Deon attended commemorative ceremonies for the 75th anniversary of D-Day in France, where he was awarded the Croix de Guerre medal of highest honour in France – the medal of war and honour – for his involvement in the liberation campaign.

For his many years of Legion service, CPO Deon is now a life member and has also received the Minister of Veterans Affairs Commendation for his ongoing commitment to his comrades and remembrance.

2022 marks CPO Deon's 54th year of participation in the Royal Canadian Legion annual Poppy Campaign. Absolutely amazing. Each year, I have had the pleasure of seeing photos and hearing many stories that he loves to share with all those that receive their poppy from this true hero.

Speaker, I am honoured to stand here today to thank Mr. Deon for sharing his stories year after year, ensuing the memories of those that paid the ultimate sacrifice are always remembered.

He is truly better than the best.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

I'm going to take a short recess now. Chief Petty Officer Deon will be leaving very shortly so I'll give Members the opportunity to have a few minutes there.

This House do stand recessed.

Recess

SPEAKER: Order, please!

We'll call the House back to session now.

I'd ask Members to take their seats, please.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

In response to a point of order yesterday raised by the Government House Leader, I would like to apologize to the Member for Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune. I withdraw my remark and tell him there was no personal harm intended.

To be totally frank, I couldn't find the word I really wanted to say. So my sincere apologies – honest response.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN: Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is responsible for the running of youth secure custody facilities in the province, and this is a responsibility we take seriously. However, we now know that there were young people at these institutions in the 1970s and '80s that experienced harm. For many, this harm still lives with them today. The abuses that occurred at these facilities were the subject of a class action lawsuit which the province has now settled. It took courage for class members to come forward and bring their stories to light. The class members trusted those who were taking care of them at these institutions and that trust was broken. Not just with the young people who were staying at the facilities, but with their families and communities.

For those individuals who were mistreated, as well as their families and supporters, I, as Attorney General, and on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the people of this province, want to acknowledge the harms that these young people suffered while they were in custody. These abuses should not have happened and no young person should have had to endure what these people endured. For this, I offer a sincere and profound apology.

The goal of youth custody is to deliver programs to assist youth in successfully reintegrating in the community and limit their time in custody. The youth who spent time at our facilities during the class period deserved our support, our respect and our care.

We are committed to learning from the past and ensuring that no other child experiences the trauma that these people lived through. The stories told by survivors are tragic and they compel us to do better. Again, I express our sincere apologies to all those affected. We are truly sorry that you experienced such pain.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER: I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

The Official Opposition recognizes the Attorney General's acknowledgement and sincere and profound apology on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. To the class action members who were young people locked into the secure custody facilities where abuses happened and to their families and communities, it is shocking and unacceptable that these abuses happened. It is shocking and unacceptable that other abuses allegedly happened, even long after the period covered by the class action lawsuit. How unimaginably terrifying and dehumanizing it must have been to be locked into a government-run facility with their abusers, completely at their mercy with no one to protect them and a fear that no one would believe them.

But they did muster the courage to come forward, despite their trauma, and we applaud them for their courage and express our sorrow that their entire lives have been shaped by those hellish experiences. As these and other people come to the fore with their stories of abuse, it is the government's obligation to ensure no such assaults are happening at facilities run by the province today, to be compassionate and believe those who come forward with their stories, to ensure the supports are there for all those who have been traumatized and to ensure justice is done without further injury to those who have suffered so much.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS: I thank the Minister of Justice for an advance copy of his statement.

The people affected by these abuses deserve this apology. To all those affected, I say what happened to you was wrong and should have been prevented. You were failed by the people who were there to protect you and you deserve this apology. We all here are sorry for this failure. We applaud your courage and we hope this apology helps heal your pain.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Are there any further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker, the Premier is continuing to use deflection techniques from his fishing trip with billionaire John Risley. All the Premier has to do is finally be transparent with the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

So I ask the Premier: Will you table your receipts?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

A. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I've said many times in this House and will continue to say, I always follow the rules. I'll continue to follow the rules. In fact, in this case, I set up extra rules in terms of an ethical wall – which is no obligation by this Legislature, but I took the extra step to ensure that that is in place. I've done so with other friends, other colleagues and I encourage other Members of the House to do the same, should they find themselves in a conflict.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

B. PETTEN: Thank you very much, Speaker.

All I can say is that's astounding.

Speaker, will the Premier give this House the full guest list of this trip to the fishing lodge? Who else was with you and Mr. Risley, Premier?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I guess what I'm trying to wonder, at this point, is that we're asking questions about a vacation that the Premier took. That, for any premier, is not an issue. The issue would become: Did it have an effect or were there some ill-begotten gains given to somebody?

In this particular case, the question is being asked about the wind process in this province. So it's not often that somebody in government asks a question, but my question to any Member or anybody outside this House – and I'll say it here and I'll say it outside – is: Is anybody saying right now that anybody was given something as it relates to this process that somebody else was not given? Because my assertion here and outside is that this is a completely fair process, and I would look forward to another opportunity to answer this question.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

B. PETTEN: Thank you very much, Speaker.

I say to the response, it's optics. The Premier is Premier 365 days a year. It's judgment and bottom line, Mr. Speaker, it's the people's House and the people would like to know the answer to that question about the receipts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: We can stay here all day and debate, but that's the bottom line, the people want to know.

Speaker, the Privacy Commissioner says the government has violated the ATIPP act by not consulting with his office on Bill 20. This is a huge, signature piece of legislation of the Premier and the Premier messed up.

So, Premier, will you now stand and apologize to the commissioner and this House for this mistake?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Not to take away from the question that the Member asked, which is important, but I feel would be remiss if I did not address the preamble and let it go unanswered.

The Member mentioned optics, but what I am concerned with and what every Newfoundlander and Labradorian should be concerned with is reality. The reality is: Was there anything given to somebody? Was there an advantage or favour given to anybody, whether they're a friend of the Premier or anybody else? The reality is and the answer is no, unequivocally.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

You can't tell people what they should be worried about. People have a right to be worried about what they want to be worried about. The Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology has no right to tell the people what they should be concerned about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Speaker, the Privacy Commissioner says government has violated the ATIPP Act by not consulting with his office on Bill 20. This is a huge signature piece of legislation for the Premier and the Premier messed up.

So, Premier, this is my second time: Will you stand now and apologize to the Commissioner and the House for this mistake?

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

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I had indicated early this morning to the media, this is not how government like to see things unfold. Unfortunately, it was an oversight by a very, very dedicated, well-qualified individual in the department, Mr. Speaker. Ultimately, I take responsibility, because I am the minister of that department. But this was clearly an oversight, unintentional. We do strive to operate better than that and we have had productive meetings today, officials in my department, JPS and the Privacy Commissioner.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

I respect the minister taking the heat on this, but that bill landed in the Premier's office. I have been around, that bill landed up on the eight floor. He needs to be responsible. He is the Premier of the province and left his office to come down here. He needs to answer those questions, not the Minister of Health.

Speaker, the Premier wants to reimagine our health care system. Health care is the single most important issue facing the people of our province.

Premier, I ask you: If you can't get the details right, how can the people of our province trust you to get health care right?

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

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I have to address the preamble. I wasn't aware that the Privacy Commissioner did not have the legislation. I can't expect the Premier to be aware that he didn't have the legislation, Mr. Speaker. This was an oversight; it was not an intentional oversight but it was an oversight.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

B. PETTEN: Respectfully, that is a very weak response, Mr. Speaker. There are checks and balances in place. I know it, the minister knows it and a lot of Members over there know it. This should never have happened. He's taking the heat. Maybe the Premier needs to focus on getting stuff right in this Legislature instead of his photo ops and maybe we wouldn't have those mistakes happening.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Speaker, the Privacy Commissioner said rushing this bill risks – and I quote – undue harm to the public.

Premier: Do you agree with the Commissioner?

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

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, officials in my department, JPS and Executive Council had dialogue with the Privacy Commissioner today. I understand that dialogue was productive, but we are going back to the Privacy Commissioner with a response. We hope to get a response back from the Privacy Commissioner that will hopefully address the issues that were raised by the Privacy Commissioner in the letter late yesterday afternoon.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

I'll say it again: this rests on the eight floor with the Premier.

Speaker, the Commissioner says he's never seen anything like this in his seven years. The Minister of Health told the media this morning he's never seen anything like it in his 11 years as a Minister of the Crown. So what's the common thread here?

I ask the Premier: Do you agree with your minister that your government is riddled with mistakes?

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

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, this is ridiculous. This was not a political decision to not send this information to the Privacy Commissioner. He should have had it. We agree with that. That was an oversight, Mr. Speaker; he should have had it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

He should have had it. There was a briefing provided to the Privacy Commissioner on Friday of last week. I understand from the official in my office that there were two extensions to the Privacy Commissioner this week to provide further briefings.

It was our understanding that the legislation was delivered to the Privacy Commissioner on Tuesday, when it was delivered to all the Members of this Legislature. For that, we apologize. It was an oversight, Mr. Speaker. It should not have happened.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

B. PETTEN: Speaker, I don't think the minister should be questioning the Commissioner. I think the Commissioner can report right on this. He normally gets at least a week.

I mean, is it incompetence to be out questioning the Commission? I read a letter last night he questioned the Commissioner. The Commissioner made his statement; he's been upfront. That's his role and he wasn't consulted. So I don't know why the minister now is trying to twist it around. They're ultimately responsible and the Premier is responsible. It blows my mind. Speaker, this whole situation is an embarrassment.

How will the Premier assure the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that you won't make any more mistakes and get it right?

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

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I'll say it again just because I want to be absolutely, abundantly clear. It was not a political decision not to provide this information to the Privacy Commissioner. I believed it was delivered on Tuesday. It was an innocent oversight by a very competent, very credible, very qualified and good public servant, Mr. Speaker.

I will take the responsibility for it because, ultimately, I am responsible for the Department of Health and Community Services. But if I believed it was delivered, Mr. Speaker, it's a pretty hard stretch to say that the Premier should have known it was delivered.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM: Thank you, Speaker.

I heard from a lady in my district who called my office saying it cost $2,000 to fill up her oil tank.

I ask the Minister Responsible for Seniors: How does he suggest she pay for it?

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

J. ABBOTT: Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to respond.

I think, as the House knows, the government, really since March, has come forward with quite a number of financial incentives and payments for seniors and others in the province to meet the rising cost of living.

There's an increase in the seniors' supplement. There's an increase in the low-income supplement. There is a rebate for those heating with oil. There is the amount of $500 that will be due before Christmas.

The government is acting and responding to the needs of seniors when and where it can.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM: Thank you, Speaker.

I thank the minister for his answer. All those measures are important, but they're just not enough. Right now, we're about to see another 20 cents a litre added to the cost of home heating fuel because the federal government has decided to implement it. It was only a few short months ago that the Premier's government stood loud and proud in this House and voted for a carbon tax increase.

I ask the Premier: When will he listen to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and stop charging additional taxes?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

A. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm happen to answer this question. As we've said many times in this House, we don't agree with the current position of the federal government with respect to the carbon tax at this time. The inflationary pressures are excessive on Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and, frankly, all Canadians.

That said, we recognize the climate issue is real, that climate change is real, and unlike the Members opposite, I am worried about it, Sir. We are all worried about it, but right now this is not the right instrument at this time and will put significant pressure on the households of this province, Mr. Speaker.

I've made my position public; I've written letters. It's all out there for everyone to see.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM: Thank you, Speaker.

The MP for Avalon seems to get it. After constant pressure from the residents in his riding, he stood with the people rather than his prime minister and said no to the carbon tax.

I ask the Premier: Will you say no to the carbon tax?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

A. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm happy to answer that one. Yes.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL: Speaker, while out in my district last weekend I ran into a lady at the supermarket. She's running up her credit card putting healthy, nutritious food on the table for her and her children. She's already working two jobs, winter is coming and the food, heat and gas bills continue to pile up.

Premier: What do you say to this lady and her family?

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

S. COADY: Thank you very much, Speaker.

It has been a difficult year for people. That is why this government has put in over $430 million back to the people of the province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

S. COADY: Four hundred and thirty million dollars. Speaker, that's a sizeable sum. I think it's one of the largest in the country.

I will say to the Member opposite we have increased the Seniors' Benefit. We've increased the Income Supplement. We've lowered the cost of child care. We've provided a $500 home heat supplement. We are currently in the process of sending $500 cheques to people of the province who earn under $100,000 a year.

We're trying to help where we can, Speaker. We recognize how difficult this year has been.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL: Thank you, Speaker.

The people are still hurting. Speaker, the money that's coming from this government won't cover her bills. Now, the prime minister is preparing to triple the Furey-Trudeau carbon tax. The people of the Ferryland District are feeling the crunch and they soon will feel it even more when they go to the pumps and the grocery stores.

I ask the Premier: When will you give Newfoundlanders and Labradorians a break and scrap the carbon tax?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

A. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm happy to answer this again. It's the same answer as before, Mr. Speaker. This isn't our tax; it's a federal government tax. They'll be collecting the revenues, Sir, and they'll be distributing as they see fit.

We don't agree with it at this time. It's not the right instrument at this time, given the inflationary pressures that are facing families across this province, Mr. Speaker, especially those on home heat.

It's disingenuous for the Member opposite to suggest that this is my tax. It's not my tax, Mr. Speaker; it's a federal government tax, one that we've written and expressed our position opposing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista.

C. PARDY: Speaker, the Premier had mentioned that he indicated this side not believing in climate change. I'm not sure where that arose and from what time that occurred.

In response to poverty and hardship in Newfoundland and Labrador in all our districts, I know in the District of Bonavista that when we do we'll often hear the government list the initiatives that they've had. But if the initiatives have not moved the needle very much in Newfoundland and Labrador with those seniors that we have and those low income, then I would say it's indicative of something that's missing, and it may be planning.

I would ask Bridges to Hope have stated that they've seen more people than ever asking for help.

What does the minister for poverty reduction say to those long lines?

SPEAKER: The Member's time has expired.

The hon. the Premier.

A. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to take the opportunity to address the preamble. I didn't say believe in climate change; I said worry about climate change – and one of the Members opposite said.

So is my worry a carbon tax? No. Am I worried about climate change? No. That's what I said, Mr. Speaker, and that's direct from Hansard.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista.

C. PARDY: Speaker, this province was built on the backs of seniors. Many of them now find undue hardship, as we would all agree.

I would ask the minister responsible for Seniors and Aging: What is your response to an 83-year-old lady in line at a food bank for the first time in her life?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Thank you very much, Speaker.

I want to, I guess, address some of the preamble even from the last question asking about what we're doing in this province. What we're doing for food sustainability – we will reach our target this year. We're gone from 10 per cent in fruits and vegetables to 20 per cent (inaudible) everything else.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

D. BRAGG: That is a big improvement. We are also self-sufficient –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, we're also fully self-sufficient in milk, eggs, dairy products, chicken – we are there, Mr. Speaker. So we are doing our part in this province. Our farmers are hard-working farmers. I encourage everybody to get out this year and buy local and support our farmers, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN: Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker, Fogo Island has been without a family doctor since June. According to the mayor, another doctor attempted to come to the island as a locum and despite, being granted a licence, he faced – and I quote – too much red tape from Central Health.

I ask the minister: Why couldn't this doctor practise in our province, even after receiving approval from the college?

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

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm familiar of the individual that the Member is talking about. When the mayor had reached out to me with those concerns, we reached out to Central Health. I asked them to contact the doctor directly. They did. The doctor had said that they had changed their mind and weren't in a position to come to this province.

Mr. Speaker, we had asked Central Health to ensure that there was no red tape, that the process was expeditious. They agreed to do that. The doctor themselves had changed their mind.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN: Thank you, Speaker.

As the minister alluded there, the individual changed their mind because of the red tape, which has to be dealt with.

Speaker, the people of Fogo Island need a full-time doctor in their community. Two doctors now have attempted to help but have been frustrated by the red tape imposed by government.

I ask the minister: When will Fogo Island get a full-time family doctor?

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

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to address the preamble about getting rid of red tape. We all voted on the Medical Act in this Legislature just a couple of weeks ago, Mr. Speaker. That is intended to get rid of the red tape. We've worked with the College of Physicians and Surgeons to get rid of the red tape. They have been very co-operative in working with us.

We've been working with the College of Registered Nurses and the College of Licensed Practical Nurses to get rid of red tape. They've been working very well with us, Mr. Speaker, and very co-operative on reducing red tape.

We are working at getting rid of the red tape to make it easier for health care professionals to come to Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN: So the question here is: When will Fogo Island get a full-time physician?

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

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know that Central Health have been speaking to a number of individuals in terms of Fogo. We have a number of initiatives and incentives put in place to try to attract physicians. They have been working on this issue.

It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, that Fogo will not have to wait too much longer before they get a physician. But as to exactly when, until a contract is signed, I can't say.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER: On October 13, the Minister of Justice and Public Safety spoke about the First Voice report saying: “I read the report from cover to cover … and we'll continue to work with that group.” Since that time, First Voice has asked the minister for a meeting, but the minister has refused to meet with them until after the House closes. The minister has had the report for a full six weeks.

Why is the minister delaying a meeting with this group on this very important report?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN: Thank you, Speaker.

I don't think the word refused to meet with them until after – we arranged to meet with them after the House closes. Because we all know we have lots of things to do, and First Voice and their report is one of the things I want to address, and I scheduled a meeting with them when the House closes.

On top of that as well, First Voice is not the only group that we want to and we have to consult with on this. There are many Indigenous groups throughout the province that we consult with regularly on issues related to Justice and Public Safety. We want to consult with them on the issue of police oversight as well.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER: Speaker, the First Voice group has been waiting for six weeks for a commitment from the minister.

In his mandate letter to the Minister of Justice the Premier directed the minister to advance the missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls calls for justice.

Why then does the minister refuse to say where he stands on First Voice recommendation to establish a police oversight board?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Women and Gender Equality.

P. PARSONS: Thank you, Speaker.

I will certainly the part in the hon. Member's question regarding the missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls.

I'm happy to say that my office, along with multiple departments across our government, has been working very closely with our Indigenous communities. In particular my office works regularly with Indigenous women's groups across our province. As a matter of fact, just last year I attended a gathering; it's a conference led by Indigenous women across Newfoundland and Labrador for two full days where we listened and heard. We worked with this group. They then presented a report pertaining to the calls to justice, of course, to missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls.

I'm happy to say that we're also planning a second conference coming up actually later this month, me and several of my colleagues. Work is getting done, they presented a report to us and we're working with how we can implement those calls.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS: Thank you, Speaker.

The Member for CBS may be concerned about climate change, but what worries him is the single mom out in CBS that can't keep a container of milk in her fridge, fuel in her tank, gas and her kids warm over the winter. That's what worries him and that's what should worry us all.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

C. TIBBS: On Tuesday, Jeanette Russell, the mother of one of the men lost aboard the Island Lady, said: “… when you look at the distribution of search and rescue assets in the province, you have 11 assets based in Newfoundland, four fast-rescue crafts based in Newfoundland, and you have nothing in Labrador.”

I ask the minister: When will the people of Labrador receive the search and rescue coverage they deserve and need, quite frankly?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

A. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me take an opportunity to address the preamble once again.

First of all, it's incumbent upon all of us to deal with the issues more than just one at a time, Mr. Speaker. We have to deal with complex issues. Some of them intersect. Some of them don't, but we have to be able to deal with multiple issues at once.

The thing that was raised about climate change was – I'll repeat again – so is my worry about a carbon tax? No. Am I worried about climate change? No. I wish we had better weather.

I mean, Mr. Speaker, that speaks to the fact that there's acknowledgement that there's climate change but they're not worried about it. Which is worse, not believing in it or acknowledging it and refusing to do anything about it, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS: Are the people of Labrador who lost their families going to get the support that they deserve?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs.

L. DEMPSTER: Thank you, Speaker.

I was present yesterday morning at the NL Fish Harvesting Safety symposium when the mom of Marc Russell, and Joey his crew member, on the Island Lady when that boat went missing last September and his mom very courageously delivered about a one-hour speech.

She's done an incredible amount of research and she is making it her life's work to push for better services for Labrador. Do Labradorians deserve it? Absolutely, they do.

I believe at the end of her speech, Speaker, there were seven recommendations and some are for DFO, some are for Coast Guard, some are for DND and, Speaker, there was about seven –

SPEAKER: The minister's time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS: Speaker, Russell also said that she wants to see 5 Wing Goose Bay elevated to the status of being the primary search and rescue unit. Something the Official Opposition fully supports and always have.

The federal minister of National Defence does not support this idea. Does the Premier?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs.

L. DEMPSTER: Speaker, when that call came in last year on the Saturday morning in September that the Island Lady was missing, my first call 7 o'clock Saturday morning was to the Premier, which I don't usually call him 7 o'clock Saturday morning. Within 10 minutes, he had made a phone call and directed that all the resources this province had would be put into that search, and there was an exhaustive search

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

L. DEMPSTER: We wanted a different outcome.

Right now, Speaker, this family is lobbying the federal government. We're working with her. Myself and the Minister of Justice, we're actually going to Ottawa with her to lobby the federal ministers for more search and rescue services along the Coast of Labrador. We'll continue to do that. She wants 5 Wing Goose Bay to be a primary search and we support that –

SPEAKER: Order, please!

The minister's time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER: Thank you, Speaker.

Minister, air access continues to plague our province. Fewer flights, higher costs and recently WestJet pulled its direct flights from St. John's. I spoke with a resident flying to Montreal in November, who's paying $956, while his brother, flying out of Halifax for the same destination, is paying $375 on the same day.

Can the minister explain why people in our province are forced to pay more?

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

S. CROCKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the hon. Member for the question. It's a really important question and one that we've been doing everything in our power to address.

Last Tuesday, I was in Montreal and met with Air Canada. I met with airlines now in Europe. I've met with airlines locally. I've met with the Canadian airlines. I was in Vancouver a couple of weeks ago for a federal-provincial-territorial meeting. This is an issue that all Canadian provinces are facing.

We addressed it directly with the federal minister. We have a national flag carrier in this country. There's a responsibility, I think, of that flag carrier and other airlines in our country to make sure that happens.

I can assure the Member opposite, like my colleagues, once this House does recess I do plan on going to Ottawa with another of my colleagues to lobby the federal government, again, for stronger air access for Newfoundland –

SPEAKER: Order, please!

The minister's time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS: Thank you, Speaker.

The Provincial Health Authority Act, as was presented this week, expands the ability of the minister to force disclosure of health information to third parties. The minister will be given broad authority that will expose the health information of the people of this province to political interference to the benefit of commercial entities.

I ask the Minister of Health: Will he remove this bill from the Chamber floor and direct it to be rewritten and remove the risk of political interference over people's health records?

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

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, the characterization of the bill by the Member is completely inaccurate. There will not be disclosure of personal health information as a result of this bill.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS: Speaker, for the first time in a Commissioner's tenure, after repeated requests to exercise their due diligence under the law, this Liberal government has refused to allow the Commissioner to provide input on legislation before it was tabled to the House.

I ask the Premier: Was he a part of the discussions about the Provincial Health Authority Act?

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

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I believe I addressed that issue not only in the media this morning, but earlier in Question Period today.

Mr. Speaker, it was not intentional that the legislation was not provided to the Commissioner. There was a briefing on Friday of last week, which was verbal, absolutely. It was our understanding that the legislation was provided. That was obviously an oversight – an oversight that we are very upset about on this side of the Legislature as well, but, Mr. Speaker, we are working with the Privacy Commissioner on the concerns that they have raised.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS: Speaker, from 2016 to 2020, the Premier was on the board of directors for Sequence Bio, during which time, letters were written by this genetic firm lamenting about the health ethics controls in this province that prevented them from accessing the lucrative bio sector.

I ask the Premier: Which of your friends at Sequence Bio will profit from this government's willful refusal to seek input from the Privacy Commissioner on the drafting of the bill?

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

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, that is a despicable attack on an individual in this Legislature; it is absolutely shameful.

Mr. Speaker –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, that is the worst stretch that I have ever seen, to be quite honest with you, it is absolutely gross.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

J. BROWN: Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker, on top of not seeking the input from the Information and Privacy Commissioner, we know that this government did not seek input from the Federation of Labour, CUPE, NLMA and the Registered Nurses' Union.

I ask the minister: Why did they rush this bill into the Chamber floor without input from health care workers, who will be the ones greatest impacted on this.

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

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The public sector unions were all advised that it was status quo in terms of employees, that there would be no changes to the status of employees or to the unions that the employees were represented by and that all employees would move from the four different health authorities into the singular health authority. Mr. Speaker, that information had been put out to the public sector unions, absolutely.

The issue with the Privacy Commissioner is a different issue, Mr. Speaker. We are dealing with that. There has been meetings today; they were productive. There will be other meetings hopefully later today or tomorrow with the Privacy Commissioner.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

J. BROWN: Speaker, the federal government has announced its intention to introduce anti-replacement worker legislation within their jurisdiction.

I ask the Minister of Labour: Have they reached out to their federal counterparts to develop anti-replacement worker legislation to protect workers in this province?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and Minister Responsible for Labour.

B. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, I'm aware of the anti-replacement worker legislation. I found out about it on Twitter like everybody else in this House of Assembly and most of my colleagues across the federation. Yes, we are working with our federal colleagues on this matter since we found out about it.

Obviously, it's a divisive issue on both sides. We're going to continue to work and we look forward to the consultation that they're going to be doing in the very near future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER: Thank you, Speaker.

I given notice that I will on tomorrow move, in accordance with Standing Order 11(1), that this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, November 7, 2022.

SPEAKER: Are there any further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM: Thank you, Speaker.

The background to this petition is as follows: The undersigned wish to be clear that they will not support the plans for an industrial wind farm proposed near their communities and homes on the Port au Port Peninsula.

They do not support this proposal for a number of reasons including: viewshed impact, shadow flickering, scope of Crown Lands acquisition, impact on fauna and flora, negative health outcomes among other pressing issues, including strain on infrastructure, negative effects on tourism, dangers from ice throw and ice shed, noise pollution, et cetera.

The undersigned call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to not approve this project as the potential negative impacts outweigh any of the positives outlined in their proposal.

Speaker, this is a new industry to our province and has the potential to be a great one. But the problem and the challenges that we've had, of course, is the lack of information and the legitimate concerns of people about the impacts to the environment and the impacts to their lifestyle.

The people of the Stephenville - Port au Port region are all in favour of development and economic development, but what we want to make sure of is that projects are done right. This particular project, along with others – there are 31 applications now, I understand, before the minister in terms of Crown Land applications for development of wind projects, all of which will require Crown lands. We would urge the government not to sell off the Crown lands, but simply to lease them or find another way, because once they're gone, they're gone.

At the end of the day, whether it's this project or any other project, approval of a project should not be based on who you know, but the value of the project itself. As this project moves along in the approval stage, we want to make sure that the people of the region are informed and the impacts – because there will be impacts, but let's make sure those impacts are minimized. Let's make sure that the benefits are maximized to the people of the region and to the province.

Thank you.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology for a response.

A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are a couple of us that could speak to it, but I'm going to speak to it in general. The Member raises a big topic; it's one that's getting talked about all the time. But I am going to take offence at two notions.

Don't get me wrong, I get the environmental side but I'll say this: there's certainly not a lack of information out there. Right now, we are moving to an industry that literally is nowhere else in Canada – nowhere else when it comes to hydrogen conversion right now. We are not there. We are moving in there, we are moving extremely fast, but at the same time trying to establish balances.

I will say this – I'll say it here, I'll say it out there, I'll say it anywhere – if anybody says that these projects will be approved based on who you know, that is garbage – garbage. I'm saying it here now and I'll say it anywhere. If anybody can say anything different, then come show me some proof.

Now, I'm not saying about the Member; he's passing on the concerns of individuals. I get that. But if somebody says that – and, again, it's an insult and I'm not talking about the Member; I am talking about outside. It is an insult.

I have a team in the department that are doing tremendous work on getting us there, getting us as first movers ahead of Nova Scotia, ahead of everyone else. It is an insult to say that they are doing all this just to give it to my buddy or your buddy or someone else's buddy. That is an insult to these individuals.

So what I'll say today to the Member: What you need to bring back is that there will be consultation and there will be information, because me and you have the same concern. We want a project that provides direct product development of it –

SPEAKER: The minister's time has expired.

A. PARSONS: – but also mitigates the environmental concerns that (inaudible).

SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS: I want to thank the minister for giving a response. It's really important. It's great when the ministers do give a response to these petitions.

Residents of Central Newfoundland have been cutting wood for over 100 years. It is a natural resource that we have availed of, relied on and protected for generations. Over the years, it has become more difficult for the people who have been cutting wood for decades to benefit from a resource they feel a right to, while truckloads of wood is cut and shipped out of the region for use elsewhere.

Speaker, John Shearing in my district, has been cutting wood since he was six years old. He is 66 years old and for the first time in his life he cannot get a permit to cut wood in Central Newfoundland and Labrador. It's absolutely disgusting.

I've stood on my feet here before and I'm starting to get pretty sick and tired of it actually, because for this resource not to be intended for the people in my district, who have relied on it for years, and for the first time in six decades it's been taken away from them, is ridiculous. We're all about free enterprise; we're all about big business, that's fine. But when the handful of people in my district would cut into less than 1 per cent of the forest agriculture that's out there that's for use because of the big business, I think there's something there that can be worked upon. I want to make sure John Shearing gets his little permit to cut his little piece of wood that he's been doing for 60 years.

I'm asking the minister if he'll come out to Grand Falls-Windsor and sit down with a few of these people who have had permits their whole lives and figure out a solution so they can continue to cut their little bit of wood, which all combined cuts into less than 1 per cent of what the big business have, which they've been doing for, like I say, over 60 years.

It's the first time in Central Newfoundland they can't get a permit. I have it right here that they've been denied because Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Limited holds the timber rights. They're doing approval applications; they're undergoing a review right now. Well, how long is this review going to take and how long do the people who have been cutting wood for over 60 years have to wait to find out if they can cut their little tiny piece of the pie now? It's shameful. It's absolutely shameful.

I'm asking if the minister will come out, sit down with this handful of people and figure out a solution.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture, for a response.

D. BRAGG: Thank you, Speaker.

I think it's a great time to get out some facts and figures on what he would refer to as a little tiny bit of wood. We have a great forestry operation going on in our province. I just want to give you some numbers.

We have 243,800 tons of paper shipped out, 107 million board feet of lumber produced, 8,224 hectares of land harvested annually, 137,000 cubic metres of firewood, 386 cubic metres of saw logs harvested and 450,000 cubic metres of pulpwood (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

I heard the petition quite well; I want to hear the response.

D. BRAGG: The minister (inaudible) gets a response on this. Number of licences we have commercial cutting: 438 commercial operators in this province, 24,950 domestic licences and 487 sawmill licences. Each and any of those who reach out to our department, who reach out to the area, we meet with. If not, me directly, the management in there.

We have a Forest Management Plan that we go to, that we follow and we are always there to meet with the people in our forestry operation. I thank them every day for the work they do.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

L. PARROTT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I'm sure John Shearing would like a little piece of all of that.

The reason for this petition and the background is as follows: The residents of Random Island are troubled with the unsafe condition of the road and lack of maintenance to the roads that are maintained by Transportation and Infrastructure.

Therefore, we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to repair and maintain the standard that is safe to travel by all residents of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, it's not the first time I've stood and presented this petition for Random Island, the residents that live there and the people who travel that road. The conditions are deplorable. You can drive down through Random Island and you can see a road peppered with orange paint, and I'm sorry but the orange paint just doesn't fill in the potholes. The paint stays there, it gets worn out and there's never any asphalt added to it. On a daily basis we get calls. As a matter of fact, we've gotten calls from people who have lost two tires simultaneously. They've had a blowout on two tires because of potholes.

If you call Transportation and Infrastructure, the response is people need to drive to the conditions of the roads. Well, I'll tell you on Random Island, if you want to drive to the condition of the road, rent a helicopter because you are not going to drive down over those potholes. You are not going to get down over them in a safe manner regardless of the speed.

Now, if the roads are that unsafe, Transportation and Infrastructure should be putting out the signs. They should be going in filling in the potholes. There's lots that they could be doing in order to make it happen and make it safe.

The people of Random Island deserve the exact same treatment as everybody else.

The other thing that always gets overlooked is snow clearing. So we're getting into our winter season now, and the road is deplorable. So we're going to send our equipment down over that road and I can guarantee you the trailing blades on those snowplows, the hydraulic lines, everything costs more money, because the roads are in disrepair and simple maintenance is what's required. That maintenance should happen in the spring of the year, not in the fall.

The responses we get, again on a regular basis, we're waiting for hot asphalt. Well, the hot asphalt comes and the work never gets done. The hot asphalt plant is there in the spring, it's there in the fall. One of the largest contractors in the province happens to be right there in Clarenville, it just doesn't happen. In the meantime, hot asphalt is being trucked 50, 100 kilometres away in other places.

It doesn't make any sense. The people in Random Island deserve these roads to be fixed and while there are lots of roads in my district in disrepair, this is one of the roads that needs to be looked at pretty closely.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure, for a response.

E. LOVELESS: I don't disagree with the Member in terms of Random Island and being treated fair, I agree with that. Certainly, I'll pass that along to the staff, but in terms of the availability of hot ash, he knows the difference in that. The biggest contractor, as you were referring to, was moved out of the area to a different part of the province and just returning now to get much needed work done. That's not on me, that's on the contractor doing their work in various parts of the province. So just to point that out, to be clear, and to be, I guess, clear is the word.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista.

C. PARDY: Thank you, Speaker.

Crown Lands enforcement of the provisions of the Lands Act abolishing squatters' rights against the Crown has created undue hardship for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who honestly, and in good faith, have occupied and developed their lands. Historical title in Newfoundland traces back centuries and people have developed their land for generations based on informal title.

There is a significant disconnect between Crown Lands positions on private land claims and the reality in communities throughout the province.

The District of Bonavista is one of the oldest settled areas of the province and its residents find themselves unable to sell or mortgage or develop their lands because they cannot get clear title.

We, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to make a legislative amendment to allow for a mechanism to resolve existing private land claims on Crown land and revisit the 1976 legislation to abolish squatters' rights against the Crown.

A short time ago, the last time I presented this about Crown land, I spoke about the Diamond family, Pauline and Randy Diamond in Catalina, who are trying to sell their house. The only objection to them selling their house is Crown Lands. No one in the community has objected to it. They even had affidavits for the time frame, but it's ensnarled in the court.

Let me give you a second one in the time that I would have. I would say we've got one in Bunyan's Cove, another district that's before the courts, costing the residents who bring it to court dollars – money in order to have a lawyer represent them against their own government. Their own government is bringing them to court because they're the only ones to contest it.

Children of a deceased individual, the two children went to settle their land. They registered, surveyed it, Registry of Deeds, they probated the will in 1993, the deeds and the surveys of the land in 1994. The intended purchaser requested title to be clear through quieting and the matter put before the court and, of course, Crown Lands objected to the entire parcel. No other objections were received because there were none in the community of Bunyan's Cove. The matter, like the Diamonds, is still before the courts.

In 2015, there was a study done where there were recommendations to change the Crown Lands Act. I would ask the minister, revisit that study back in 2015 and let's do something to help out the people that are before the courts.

SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER: Thank you very much, Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Order 3, second reading of Bill 10.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: I move, seconded by the Member for Baie Verte - Green Bay, to read Bill 10 for a second time.

SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 10, An Act to Amend the Wild Life Act, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, “An Act to Amend the Wild Life Act.” (Bill 10)

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Thank you very much, Speaker.

I was a bit taken aback earlier today when we got in and we had a man come in here, and an old saying come to mind: Today, I had the opportunity to shake a man's hand who shook the world.

I think everybody in this House had that opportunity and I am very grateful for the opportunity to stand in the House for that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

D. BRAGG: But today I want to talk about Bill 10, an amendment to the Wild Life Act. Now, the Wild Life Act for most people in this province basically comes down to moose hunting. I would almost say, and I can use this to show everybody, this is available online, our Newfoundland and Labrador Hunting and Trapping Guide. The number one recreational activity in this province; 94,648 individuals apply for big game licences in this province, annually. This is all about defining residency; being able to donate game meat, in this particular case moose meat; and to make it gender neutral.

So it's not uncommon in this province if you kill a moose, you share with your friends and you share with your family. This gives us the legal means to be able to pass food through food banks. There are an abundance of meats. This came from the Outfitters Association of this province. They needed a way to be able to donate their meat. So they actually put refrigerators in food banks around this province and this bill will make that legal – the actual way – and not only will it make it legal, it will make a paper trail from the licence holder into the food bank and the food bank to the distribution.

So if I went to the food bank and got a couple roasts of meat, they would retain my information as getting two meals of meat and assigned to a licence, the person who picks up the meat will never know whether it is myself or the Member for Corner Brook that might have killed that moose and donated the meat, that doesn't matter. But it is a legal avenue to bring it down through. So the donation of moose meat is very important for this province and being able to do it.

Residency: This is primarily around the Canadian Armed Forces. Active members in this province right now have a right, no matter where they serve around this globe, if they are born and bred Newfoundlander and Labradorian and they've been into the moose draw, as long as they are active members of the Canadian Armed Forces, they get to stay in the pool to advance their number. They actually, I think, use their military number as identification.

The same can be said for active members of the RCMP who would have been residents of this province, moved away for work, deployed to different parts of Canada. They're still able to apply.

So we're defining and going to put into the regulations that sometimes there may be an extenuating circumstance where a member has moved out of the province, and they make it a job, so it gives it then the minister's discretion on that. But we're pretty clear in how this goes. This is a number one recreation for this province and the ability to maintain this resource is of paramount value.

I'm just going to give you some facts and numbers here now. For 2022, for residents on the Island, 23,280 moose licences, 3,930 non-residents. In Labrador it was 345 licences and the not-for-profits is 455. So, Mr. Speaker, we're not reinventing the wheel here right now; we're just looking to make a change in the wildlife regulations to allow for the donation of moose meat, to look at people who served and continue to serve in our forces, whether it's the Armed Forces or the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and we're looking to make it gender neutral.

I could probably go on for hours when you talk about being able to go moose hunting. I was lucky enough this year to have a licence for Area 7 and spent two days or two mornings in which I saw nine animals. I was unsuccessful but it was still nine animals. The ability to get out into the country and enjoy the full recreational activity of moose hunting – and it's not an expensive sport to be involved in. It's been family gatherings over the years. It's been friends who started moose hunting from the time they got their first licence until their retirement and well beyond that.

So it's been group gatherings over the years. The parties have been – and I mean parties of getting together and going moose hunting it's easier now – when we started this, Mr. Speaker, and when you started this, you probably did most of your moose hunting from the back of a pickup; it was only a single-cab truck. But now with the club-cab truck, everybody has –

AN HON. MEMBER: That's illegal.

D. BRAGG: No, not to drive in the back of the truck at that point, it wasn't illegal. But to hunt from the back of the truck was illegal, Mr. Speaker. That has always been illegal. But the ability to get there now, people have better cabins. Years ago, you could almost have a piece of plastic and a tarp and go moose hunting for a night. Instead of that now, people have some chalets that they have built in the backcountry. There are actually accommodations throughout this province in which you can go and stay in some very nice cabins and spend your weekend moose hunting and having a great time with your family.

I just want to look at some of the licences. Fifty-two dollars for your moose licence.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible.)

D. BRAGG: The Member in front of me has practised his moose call, because I can guarantee you right now there are 95,000 people in this province riveted watching at this on TV, because they don't want us to get this wrong. Everybody wants to protect the way we do it.

Another way we do it, Mr. Speaker, is the way that we do our moose management strategy. Bad news for people on the Avalon; good news on the moose. We have the moose to one per square kilometre on the Avalon. That's basically I would think from Clarenville in, but the Avalon in particular.

The reason for that is that the number of moose accidents on the highway have been so high it's a way to control the moose population. There's more population travelling early in the morning, late in the evening around the Avalon. So the moose populations and under the good management – and actually because of the expansion of many of the communities in the area, the habitat has shrunk for the moose.

We manage it to one moose per square kilometre along the highway. There's a corridor from Grand Falls to basically it leads right on into St. John's, three kilometres each side of the highway we know moose hang out there. We're in their country when we're on the road. We have 1.5 moose per square kilometre. Beyond that, we manage the moose to two moose per square kilometre and some hunters may come out and say never saw a thing, then you have hunters like myself who saw nine in about eight hours of hunting, which is great.

It's not all about the hunt; it's about the outdoors, enjoyment of this. This is a resource that we hope to manage to the best way we possibly can. We do moose counts every winter. There are winters that we don't get much snow. Being able to do a survey becomes a problem then, because the more snow, the easier to count moose. Not just because they're stuck; they do what they call yarding up. They would pick a place and they would yard up. It's not uncommon for the people out in the helicopters while they're counting to count 25, 30, 40 moose in a particular area.

We have some great numbers. We have Dr. Blair Adams, who I can't rave enough about, the work that that man does for the wildlife. He's an avid hunter like most of us in this Chamber here today, and he is certainly dedicated to the viability of the moose hunt in this province.

Mr. Speaker, I'll take my place to sit down on this and I look forward to questions when it goes to Committee.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: Thank you, Speaker.

It's nice to hear the minister's knowledge of moose hunting and how to bag a moose.

Anyway, Speaker, in our area, moose hunting certainly is a big event every fall. So this is a good time of year, actually, to be bringing in this legislation, a good time to talk about it. I know there are lots of licences out there. People are still hunting. I think the minister did mention 94,000 licences or somewhere in that range. So there seems to be lot of hunters out there.

I am still a little bit contrary with the minister because I didn't get a licence out of those 94,000; howsomever, there'll be another year coming.

D. BRAGG: It was 94,000 people and 23,600 moose licences.

P. FORSEY: All right, good.

Anyway, it's good to talk on this amendment to the Wild Life Act because I know there are some lot of donations. People get moose and they like to donate it to the food banks. Food banks today certainly are a welcomed sort for any kind of wild meat, any kind of donation that they can get.

For the food banks to avail of the meats that's donated through outfitters, through a person with an individual licence, through non-profit organizations, that sort of thing, it's good to be able to donate that meat to the food bank. We all know today, just the food banks alone, are striving for donations. We're hearing all the time of food banks closing. Food banks have to close their doors. We have people on the streets, people looking to avail of food banks, which don't have any food basically there. So food banks today – with the high cost of living, people can't afford to buy meats basically in the grocery stores. To go to a grocery store to buy meats today, it's atrocious. There are a lot of people have to avail of those food banks.

To be able to make it accessible to go to the food banks and acquire especially wild meat, moose meat, everybody – it's part of a Newfoundland delicacy, moose meat. Today, with the high cost of fuels, the high cost of living, you have a young person, a young family; they can't even afford to go moose hunting. They probably can't even afford to get a licence because of the food bank necessity that they need so for them to be able to go to the food bank and to avail of some that meat; it will be a good thing.

Having said that, yes, I do certainly agree with this amendment today to the Wild Life Act. I'll certainly agree to it. But, having said that, again, it takes time and money to go get the moose. We need to be able to get a moose or a caribou to be able to donate to the food banks because the food banks are well in need of it.

You talk to the food banks everyday and they're asking for donations. They're looking for more donations in every area of the province. Only the other day, I think, the young students out at the university – their food bank was closed. So I'm sure to be able to get food in those places so the young people, elderly, don't matter where it's to, are able to avail of the food banks to get those meats.

In the act it says: to amend the term resident to include Canadian Forces and Royal Canadian Mounted Police who meet the criteria prescribed in the regulations. So that means that anybody – a Canadian citizen who has lived in the province for a period of six consecutive months immediately preceding the citizen's application for a moose licence under the regulations. So a Canadian citizen who has lived in the province for six months can now avail of a moose licence.

A person other than a Canadian citizen who has lived in the province for 12 months can avail of a moose licence. So changing the term resident there to mean that it's given to people, certainly giving them time to apply for a moose licence and be able to get involved with the moose hunt. If they get a licence then, if they feel free, they can donate to the food banks and certainly be able to contribute in their way.

It also says in this document: “… prescribe the documentation to be provided by a person in possession of moose or caribou meat that has been donated to a registered food bank ….” That's good because sometimes when people are donating those meats, how long have they had the meats and that sort of stuff. So having documentation from the person about how they got the meat, when they got the meat and how they cleaned it or whatnot, and to know how that meat was distributed and then back to the food banks. You want to have healthy foods in those food banks, so it's good to show that the person has got the documentation to prove, especially that they have a licence for one thing. As long as they have all the approved documentation and then they put it into the food banks, everything will be on the up and up.

Another good point to it is to “authorize a registered food bank to designate persons to transport moose or caribou meat that has been donated to the registered food bank ….” Also if somebody wanted, from that food bank, to take it to an elderly person or take it somewhere where somebody wanted some meat, they would have the required documentation so they could transport it so when they get there they can prove where the meat came from, how it got there, how old the meat is. People can be satisfied with the meat that they're receiving from the food banks.

“Prescribe the documentation to be provided by a person in possession of moose and caribou meat that was received from a registered food bank ….” Again, that's basically the same that you have to have proof of licence and be able to show what time and how and when and where and how old the meat is, of course. That way it shows the meat is fresh when it's received.

“Prescribe the documentation to be retained by a registered food bank relating to moose and caribou meat that was donated and distributed by the registered food bank ....” That's basically the same again and it's to have that documentation in front of you so that you can have proof of it.

Because then it's: “require persons to provide required documentation where requested by a wild life officer ….” That's a good one, because a wildlife officer can now go into the food banks and check on their meats. That way, they have all the documentation there of where the meat came from, legal meats. I'm sure they'd have their licences and all their documentation of what kind of rifle and ammunition they used, all that sort of stuff. That can be traced if it ever needed to be traced that way.

It gives the officers a more clear view of where the meat came from and how the meat got into those food banks so that you'd have clarity of clear, good meat, that's being obtained by those food banks so that when it goes back out to the individuals or people go in looking for it, they can know that that meat was harvested legally. It was dressed legally. Dressed in a proper manner and packed and back into the hands of the food banks so that the food banks can distribute it out to people that need it. So it's good to have that kind of documentation so that everything is on the up and up and everything can be done as required.

Other than that, that's basically the gist to the documents and the amendments. I certainly agree with the amendments. We need to get this food into the food banks. Anything that we can do to help the food banks acquire the food that they need so people can avail of it, it's certainly a good bill.

So with that, I'll take my seat, Speaker, and we'll have some questions in Committee.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

P. TRIMPER: Thank you, Speaker.

It's a special little honour to speak to this one today, because as we were speaking about moose and so on, there's so much of the reason why I can actually trace my professional career with this animal. I just wanted to tell a couple of little stories that I think my colleagues may find quite interesting.

Back in the late '80s, I was working for Noranda Minerals at Tally Pond in some – I think the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans, he will know this location and other folks. Anyway, Noranda was developing a base-metals mine there and I was doing an environmental assessment baseline study on moose and the distribution around that proposed mine.

Anyway that work, if I could say, was so well done and so on, that we actually were invited to the Soviet Union and a place called Komi Republic back in 1990. A guy named John Roberts who's from Corner Brook, he supported me and so off I go to Russia. Finally get on the other side of the Iron Curtain talking about moose and moose research in Newfoundland and around this proposed mine.

One little story I wanted to tell, and this is for the minister's benefit, because as he's going into second reading and some of our colleagues were teasing him a little bit with their ability to give moose calls. So while we were in this place called Yaksha, which is very much a subarctic environment, there was a moose farm there. And I look at my buddy from Bonavista who always likes to tell good farming stories; well, here is one for you, Sir.

We're at this moose farm and I'm with about 100 moose biologists from all over the world and then yet another 100 from the Soviet Union, so there was quite a few of us all camped at the site. Anyway, we had heard so much about this place because across the former Soviet Union, so much of the north was difficult, as it is in Canada, to provide fresh produce and so on, so they established a series of moose farms to provide a source of dairy.

You had to see this. I have some photos of it and sometime I can show you. We actually went to this moose farm and as we approached the corral, where all the females – there were no males allowed; it was quite a time, I'm told, during the rut. It was probably, I'm thinking, 30 to 40 head of moose that were there. We all approached the corral to all offer up our best moose calls, as the minister was just being tested while he was trying to deliver his remarks. Anyway, every single one of us – and there were people giving calls from all over the circumpolar where there's moose range and not a gig out of these moose.

There were three or four girls that came running up the lane and they yelled out: zdrastyuite loz, greetings to the moose and they went running over to these two girls. It was so funny. They had totally imprinted on humans and they didn't want any part of these moose calls. Just as with the minister, he was ignoring them and the females were ignoring them too. So just a little story. By the way, I was there with a guy from Newfoundland as well, Gene Mercer, who I don't think is with us anymore. Gene was a very well-known wildlife biologist and I wanted to mention his name.

Why this bill is important – and I can recall when I was previously in the minister's responsibility for this, it was often lobbied by Mr. Barry Fordham and some other folks out across the province. Many of the not-for-profits said can we do something about this? I was talking to my colleague for Baie Verte - Green Bay the other day about the importance of bottled meat and all the different ways to serve meat and so on. We've come to, culturally here in Newfoundland, appreciate moose and caribou in Labrador. It's a great way to support and supplement our diet and, by the way, it is extremely healthy.

It's really on this part that I now want to drift a little bit to Labrador because we refer to primarily wild game – traditionally caribou, seal and salmon – as country foods. When you look to the Nunatsiavut Government, NunatuKavut and the Innu Nation and so on, the Indigenous groups have been running a series of what we're proposing here for many, many years. Essentially, hunters are designated in the community; they'll go out, shoot, collect, hunt, fish and bring back this to a community freezer which is distributed to elders. Prior to electricity, that tradition was going on. Very well respected hunter-gatherers were very important to the community because they would provide that source of food. We're just taking that into a modern 21st century perspective.

I also just want to mention, if I can – I've got 15 minutes – I was involved years ago with the Canadian Wildlife Service on what's called long-range transport of airborne pollutants. Some who are a little bit older may remember the big issue which prior to climate change was acid rain. There were a lot of studies going on there. Unfortunately, even though we have these wonderful abundances and resources of wild game, we are still picking up contaminants, frankly, that have travelled from around the world landing in pristine areas and are being consumed and concentrated. We do have warnings out for the consumption, for example, of liver and other organs of animals, including moose. I just want to put that out there because it's the healthier components that we're talking about. It's the meat itself.

There's another element to this bill that I really like a lot and it's the direction of who it is intended for. In addition to the not-for-profits and all the good work they do, I like the idea and the emphasis at the start, being a guy who really came to the province because of moose, but also for the work that was going on at 5 Wing Goose Bay.

I've spoken on this floor many times about the importance of finding ways to support those in service, whether it be the RCMP, another highly mobile group of folks who are providing important services for us across the country, but also our Canadian Forces personnel and their mobile nature. The emphasis here on further supporting and expanding the opportunity for their members to be able to hunt and to be able to enjoy the resources in our province, it's opening up the definition of resident and the abilities.

I wanted to point that out. I know in my last seven years sitting in this House there have been several opportunities, both within the Department of Digital Government and Service NL, but also in other aspects, to see what we can do to make it easier for this highly mobile, highly important workforce which travels around the country so that regardless of the jurisdiction they can be welcome. I'm glad to see that this is an additional welcome mat if you like, Speaker.

Over to the food banks, it was interesting during the briefing that we had that there are some important legalities here around the provision of country food, of moose – big game in this case – and the fact that it needs to be done by a licensed hunter, sort of worked on by a qualified butcher and then delivered to a registered food bank.

So licensed, qualified and registered – I took note of those three words here because that's what we're talking about. We need to make sure that we are not in any way encouraging poaching and other kinds of illegal activities. We have an amazing resource; we take great strides in managing it well. This bill is about ensuring we don't compromise that in any way.

So, again, hunters will be licensed. They could be identified by the not-for-profit for providing the opportunity to go hunt for. Butchers will properly work with the meat itself to ensure that when it goes to the food bank we're not ending up with fallout from poorly managed and handled and very important country foods, such as the big game. Frankly, to also ensure that the food bank that is working with this food – and there's an interesting little stipulation that we discovered in our discussion.

These meats can only be sold in the form of a meal or given after they have been prepared and actually cooked. So you cannot take meat that has been put in packages, that's not been prepared for a meal per se and then sold to someone. This is when you start to get into that slippery slope of selling a hindquarter of a moose, the illegal hunting trade.

I also wanted to make a reference to the fact that, and I heard this earlier today, the minister talked about achieving – this was a private Member's resolution that I carried forward probably about three years ago, and that was on the target of food self-sufficiency, on the importance of trying to push our target. It's great to hear the minister today talk about the fact that we are now at this 20 per cent. I can remember when the target was set and I think it's great to be able to stand here a few years later and say we're at it and we're shooting much further beyond that.

So lots of good things in this bill. My colleague from Exploits was just going through each of the main intentions so I don't need to repeat that. But, again, a good combination of the ability to provide good, nutritious food from the wild resources of our province and that's Newfoundland and Labrador, make sure that we are dealing with licensed hunters, qualified butchers and a registered food bank.

I wish all those not-for-profits all of the success in the world and I thank Mr. Fordham and others who have been lobbying government over the years. It's good to see this come forward.

Well done, Minister, to you and your team. I look forward to the rest of the debate.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm just going to stand and have a few words on this bill that the minister brought forward today. I agree with the concept of helping out the volunteer groups and the non-profit groups in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I know, personally, the minister got involved last year when they had their celebration day for the Qalipu at the Blow Me Down ski trails.

In the last couple of weeks, the minister came through and got them their moose for the whole celebrations for that. So I just want to recognize that and thank the minister for that and for his involvement. I know they were very appreciative and they asked me to pass it on for them.

We hear a lot of times – and I got a good friend who, when they do get the permission to get a moose, goes out and actually kills the moose, cleans the moose and gives it to the volunteer – the Salvation Army does it and they raise money and they do good things with it.

There's not a lot you can say that's wrong with this bill. There are a lot of good things in it and there are precautions there to make sure that people are ensuring that the regulations and the law is being followed with the letters that you've got to write.

Actually, I brought back a gun for someone just a couple of weeks ago for the West Coast. He had to have the lock on it. He had to give me a letter saying I'm transporting it on his behalf. So those are the good things about it, the regulations.

I don't moose hunt myself. I'm a bit of a hypocrite because I do love moose, but I don't moose hunt myself. A lot of my family members do moose hunt on a regular basis.

I know the Salvation Army is another great group that usually get moose, sell the moose soup, use the money for other avenues to help out the people in the province, which is great, and it's just full circle for it.

So I won't spend much time on that. I just think it's a good idea helping out a lot of – but I've got one question for the minister. The minister is also minister of Crown Lands. The minister mentioned earlier about saving the moose and the population. I'd be a bit remiss if I don't stand up and have the opportunity that Area 6 in the Lewis Hills-Serpentine area, over half of it is sensitive area and there are going to be almost 400 windmills put there.

I'm hoping that the minister is going to take that into account when he's thinking about the moose population because in this area it is the sensitive area. This is where the moose calf, this is where caribou and a lot of animals come in and it's classified as a sensitive area. I know the minister probably hasn't been there. I'll take you there, if you want to go, and I will show you the exact area. I'll actually take you there.

The point I want to make to the minister about preserving the moose population for the province, in this sensitive area right now, I say to the minister – he's listening very attentively and making notes on it – just letting the minister know that if the Premier of this province, the highest person in this province, the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the Third Party applied to get a cabin there, not allowed to accept it, but we're allowed to accept windmills.

So this is why I think that the minister should put a stop to this here in the Lewis Hills, Serpentine Valley.

AN HON. MEMBER: He'll speak to that now when he stands.

E. JOYCE: He's there taking notes. I thank the minister for that because I'm sure when the minister stood in his place and talked about we need to preserve the moose population and one of the benefits of that is the habitat and one of the benefits of that is to ensure that we've always got moose for the volunteer groups and for other areas and for the recreation of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

So when the minister stands up – and I am sure he will, because he's over there now with his note. When you accept the applications for Phase I and then you've got Phase II and III, Phase II is the Lewis Hills area which is a sensitive area, where you can't even get a cabin but you are allowed to put up a windmill.

P. LANE: How many?

E. JOYCE: How many? There are 300 and 400 going there.

AN HON. MEMBER: Three hundred to 400?

E. JOYCE: In that area, yeah. And not only that – and I'll just say to the minister also –

P. LANE: Are there any roads going to it?

E. JOYCE: Roads? My blessed Lord –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible.)

E. JOYCE: We don't know anything about that yet. But this is the point that I want to bring up to the minister who is responsible for Crown Lands.

AN HON. MEMBER: You got to wear a helmet when you are on the Ski-Doos.

E. JOYCE: You've got to wear a helmet, yeah.

On a serious note, though, when the minister brought up that we've got to preserve the moose for future generations – and I know the minister is very concerned about it. When you look at the Lewis Hills-Serpentine Valley area and the moose population, they're not even bringing the minister in there.

If the minister of Crown Lands, when this is given to him to say what's available, I will take the minister in there personally. I will take you in there. We can go in. We can hike it in there if you want to. We'll go in a certain area. We can hike it, but this is how serious this is that I'm willing to do that. I've got people here that if any of you want to see that part – and this is to preserve the moose population because it's such a sensitive area. When you get in a sensitive area, when you can't get the ability to put a cabin on it, there is no way in the world you should even entertain anything else in that area.

I just don't want to miss that opportunity to bring that up on behalf of the people of the Humber - Bay of Islands that asked me to represent them.

Again, I'll take my seat. I just think this is a great bill. I think this is going to be well received across the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I'll say to the minister, in closing, I know what you did last year, directly, how the minister last year helped out. This is a great group. It was to celebrate the culture of the Qalipu up at the Blow Me Down cross-country ski trails. It was a great event. The minister was recognized at the event, and I did thank him at the event on behalf of the people that he personally got involved to ensure that.

The Member for St. George's - Humber was there also. You were there also at the event. You were at the Blow Me Down mountains also; you were recognized at the event also. The Member was there also; I'm sure he had some of that moose soup. The minister got involved to help with that and I know you were involved with it also to ensure that they had moose from the earth to help with the celebrations. I just want to recognize that.

So, Minister, I can see you asking me when can we go up on Lewis Hills, Serpentine Valley. I can tell you, the House closes next Wednesday, so any time the minister wants to go to have a first-hand look at the Lewis Hills, Serpentine Valley, I'm offering.

The minister has asked me when am I available to take him. I'll take you any time, Minister, after next Wednesday – you're asking when am I available to go with you. I'll be home next Thursday. Any time after that, Minister, let's go up and let's bring our packsacks and let's go up. I'll take you up on the offer that you want to go up to Lewis Hills, Serpentine Valley to have a look and see the sensitive areas, see what I'm talking about first-hand. I'll guarantee you, you'll be surprised how nice the area, how pristine the area is. That will help you in your goal to preserve the moose population for the province for generations to come. So, Minister, whenever you're available, I'm available to go up and have a look.

Thank you, good job on the bill. A lot of people are going to be helpful with it.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER (Warr): The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

J. DINN: Thank you, Speaker.

I will say that there has been the odd time in my district when moose have indeed wandered through. Whether you can actually catch them or shoot them is another matter, but they have wandered through.

I came by hunting rather late in life and I will have to say that, Speaker, a moose licence in my hands was probably the best conservation technique that you could have and preserve the life of many a moose. But many a year ago, a friend of mine – and I'll give this story as a background – a teacher, he was guiding European tourists, Dutch tourists, up in Labrador. I think there was a central base and they would go out for day trips and come back to that central base. He was telling me, at that time, because there was a newspaper story written up on him, the locals said you had better take a gun along just to protect yourself from the bears.

Speaker, at that time, when he opened up the case there were three shells in it – three bullets in it – and, obviously, he didn't bother to try to test it because he had limited ammunition, but it was the next day, the second last day of the trip, that he could hear one of the Dutch tourists screaming ice bear, ice bear. It hit him what was happening.

When he rolled out of the tent he could see the polar bear pushing in on the tent with the tourists inside pushing out. He then undid the gun case and at that point the bear turned on him. He managed to get the gun loaded and killed the bear. The trouble was he was charged with – I don't know if it was killing the bear out of season or not having a licence, but nevertheless he said he wanted me to come up with him and said you're going to have to get a hunting licence or a possession and acquisition licence in the process. Thus began my career with moose hunting.

I will say that this year, unlike the minister, I actually got a moose. Well, actually, if I am being truthful, it wasn't me. It was my partner who got it while I was on the way back down from the moose hunt. I had a meeting. Nevertheless it counts. He's the one with the rack on his garage door.

I have to say, you're right, it's just the whole being out in the woods, half the time it's just more of an excuse, but it was an enjoyable time. We had another person helping us because the two of us were novices, in the best sense of the word.

But I think I've come to the conclusion that it might actually be a pastime that might actually have been where I broke even or did better because when I look at the price of a pound for a salmon – if I look at the input versus what I get back, it's probably in at a couple of hundred dollars per pound for a salmon or more when you look at what you put into it. But, I think, actually, there's a better cost benefit analysis here with the moose for sure.

Trouble is, now I've got a freezer full of my third of it, and considering my wife won't eat it and I don't know if my children – and –

AN HON. MEMBER: Try your brother.

J. DINN: I will certainly pass it on to my brother, because so far the people I've offered it to don't seem to be particularly interested in it, but nevertheless there's going to be –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible.)

J. DINN: Minister, you never know, I'll bring you in an offering, too. We'll talk.

I will say this: I like the idea. This is a good piece of legislation for the most part. I shouldn't even put that qualifier at the end of it. I like the idea of expanding the licence for those in the service to make it more inclusive. In the end, there's only going to be a certain number of licences issued, so it's not going to impact the moose population.

As for donating moose meat to food banks, excellent idea. I do want to, Speaker, at this time recognize Barry Fordham, his son, Shane, and their organization, Sharing The Harvest, for spearheading this. They were probably the prime movers and shakers in this. Even though at first she didn't want me to mention her name, but his daughter Chloe who came up with this idea, but didn't want the recognition because, well, she probably didn't feel she had done enough, but the idea came from her.

So they lobbied for this long and hard, long before the outfitters. They used to donate moose meat years ago until it became illegal and then Barry pitched the idea to the Newfoundland and Labrador Outfitters Association at their AGM three years before government allowed it, brought them onboard. They agreed but only when government would make it legal and we have the regulations in place and that's the case here.

The NLOA donated four freezers around the province and one in Labrador, Speaker. Barry, I know himself, he secured a large freezer from Leon's.

So, in many ways, I will tell you from being a long-time volunteer with the food bank, you get so much from donations, direct donations. You get some from the Canadian Community Food Sharing Association. You get so much from collections you take up and you get a lot of food from the frugal shoppers who go out and look for the deals.

But I tell you, having moose meat there for people, too, who live in the city who come from other parts of the province where they could have access to moose meat, maybe through family members or neighbours and so on and so forth, that's not always readily available. So here is the opportunity to do this. Fantastic idea.

The only thing as we move forward on it is that for most of the food banks, they are volunteers. Many food banks, they don't have paid staff and there's not one person putting the input and data. I read through the act, there's an onus upon them to – there's paperwork involved. I can tell you for the most part that might present problems when it comes to filling out that paperwork, keeping track of it.

I wonder if there is some way that there could be a system through the department that you could log this in, keep track of it that way. At least a single point, if you will, of contact that would allow for this recordkeeping to take place and take the pressure off the food banks themselves.

I won't belabour this. The only thing I'll say now is that there's a good chance there might be a further donation to the food bank. If my hon. Member for Topsail - Paradise doesn't get some and the minister. Nevertheless, sometime when this is finished up I'm going to try my hand at bottling the moose meat, and if I don't kill anyone in the process through food poisoning maybe there's another career after this.

P. DINN: Then I'll get it.

J. DINN: Then you'll get it.

Thank you.

SPEAKER: Thank you.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista.

C. PARDY: Thank you, Speaker.

I'm here just for a few short words on moose meat. Keep in mind that I've never moose hunted in my life, but at the same time I know that there are many in the District of Bonavista who do have a licence for moose hunting. I'm sure many of them would consider donating some of the meat to one of the local food banks that we have in our district.

So I applaud the bill because it's a good one. It's a good one because it helps out the demand that would be at our food banks. Not only the District of Bonavista is having trouble keeping supplied food banks, but I'm sure it's everywhere. It is an issue we have. This wasn't part of a plan, but it works out at a time where the need has probably not been as high in the past quite a number of years. Any time that we can contribute donated moose meat to our food bank, it's a good day.

The Member for Lake Melville talked of moose farms. Now, I would say who would have thought of a moose farm? I hadn't heard of that before, but most intrigued by it. We know that there are many resources that we have at our disposal that we can help out supplying these food banks to assist people who would be in need.

I immediately go to the fishery. I would go to the fishery to say that we should have a supply of fish at these food banks as well as –

AN HON. MEMBER: Seal meat.

C. PARDY: – seal meat, another excellent idea that would be at our – especially in the District of Bonavista, they love seal in the District of Bonavista.

So the concept is a good one. The demands on the food banks are very high. We've asked many questions in the House of Assembly on the struggle that people have surviving and making ends meet. I've asked them in the District of Bonavista, seniors who reside by themselves in their own homes, those on social assistance trying to make ends meet, living in their own homes and do not have enough financial resources to do away or transfer or convert from oil to electricity.

I would say people find it very tough. I know that government would say that all the things that they would mention they're doing, but if we do look at the data and what we have and the need and the demand on the food banks, then we still know that we haven't done what we ought to be doing. There needs to be a plan to make sure that those out there amongst us on low income, living below the poverty line, those on social assistance, those on social assistance and the low income that are burning oil that can't afford to get off it, then this is one measure, the moose meat at the food bank which can assist, but it's not the plan. It doesn't look after the situation and the hardship that we currently have.

So I would say to government, the data would show that if you've got so much poverty in the province, what has been done to date has not addressed the critical need that has been out there.

So I stand to speak to this, as far as the moose, as far as the participation in the food bank – and my colleague from Exploits is waiting to ask some questions based on it. I just want to touch on two other areas in the short time I've got left. I committed to a certain number of minutes and I'll try to keep to that, to the House Leader, who's got a sharp eye on the timing.

Crown Lands: The moose that we've got, they're going to be roaming on Crown land. I would say to you I know that the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands – but on all these properties that people have lived on for years and years, moose roam on those properties. All those properties that people are going to try to get clear title to are still tied up with Crown Lands as being the only objection to them; costing them thousands of dollars, bringing them closer to the food banks in which the moose is going to be there to help them out.

I would challenge the minister not only to visit Lewis Hills, but fix the Crown lands situation that people haven't got to be tied up in the courts and don't allow Crown Lands to be the only one to object.

The last one I want to say in my closing minute, I would say to you we were challenged on this side today and we know how significant climate change is with the moose hunting. Every one of us believes in climate change in this House. The Premier today challenged the Leader of our Party that he was a climate change denier.

Now, keep in mind – and I speak to the residents of the District of Bonavista – if you weren't watching this past spring, we had three hon. Members stand up and claim that their Member was a climate change denier.

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

C. PARDY: Yes, it happened. So I would say on my concluding point this hon. Member, who was claimed to be a climate change denier – not true. Like the Member for Bonavista, you were wrong then and you're wrong now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

C. PARDY: So I would say here's a man that talks many times in the caucus about our action plan that we had that was released, what our Party released –

SPEAKER (Bennett): Order, please!

I was very, very lenient with the relevance.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista.

C. PARDY: Mr. Speaker, with your permission may I have one concluding comment, not on climate change.

The Member for Humber - Bay of Islands had mentioned he had asked the minister to go to Lewis Hills to see the protected area. Not that long ago, that same Member stood in this House, in this hon. House, and he talked about freshwater turrs, which don't exist. I would say to you, if they are in Lewis Hills, I'd like for you to report back to the House to see if you see any. I invite that hon. Member to come to the District of Bonavista where Wade Chapman in Cannings Cove invited him to come hunt saltwater rabbits in the District of Bonavista.

Either way, Mr. Speaker, thanks for your leniency.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I just want to say that I'll be supporting this bill as well. I am a moose hunter. I don't know if I'm a great one but I'm after getting a few moose over the years. I haven't been successful yet this year. Area 36, I got to say, Minister, there's certainly not the amount of moose in Area 36 that there used to be. I'm sure you guys do your proper counts and so on, but I can tell you that in Area 36 there was a time a number of years ago there would be no problem to get a moose but it's not as easy to get it down there anymore.

I think part of the problem is poaching, it's definitely an issue for sure and I guess there are other factors. Maybe I'm going to have to go with the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands and apply for the Lewis Hills area in the future because he seems to have no problem in his way. He's shown me pictures of moose almost on the daily basis, making fun of the fact that I can't seem to find one anywhere on the Southern Shore.

Anyway, the concept here about this bill, there are a couple of aspects of it, one being the members of the RCMP and veterans and so on ensuring that they're not disadvantaged in the moose draw because they happen to be stationed away from Newfoundland for a period of time.

I think we would all want to support those in uniform whether they be RCMP or whether they be in the military. I would support that.

The other part, really, is we're talking about having all the paperwork and procedures in place for people to be able to donate moose meat to the food banks and that's a great cause. I'm not going to take long but a couple of the points and that's where the Member for Bonavista kind of went before he went off on a number of tangents.

I've got to give him credit. I'm not even sure if he used the word “moose,” but he managed to get in an awful lot of topics here – pretty good.

The idea of the food banks and being able to donate moose meat to the food banks – the only point I just sort of wanted to make along with that, and I agree with the Member for Bonavista, is I think it's great that we have that ability now to be able to donate moose meat to the food bank. I want to acknowledge Barry Fordham and his group who were really the group who were pushing for this to make it happen. I know they've done a lot of work. I've heard Barry and his group on the media for the last number of years, calling on government to do just that.

But I think there's more we could be doing. Wild moose meat, caribou meat and all that, that's all a great start. I see no reason why we can't be looking at expanding that as well. Rabbits come to mind as something that we could be allowing to be donated to the food banks. I think of fish, the fishery. One of the things that really galls me when I think about the fact and I hear people saying about bycatch and you're catching fish and you happen to catch the wrong species or whatever the case might be, and you're dumping it all overboard. So you have all that protein just being dumped, which is absolutely ridiculous.

So I would say to the minister – because it is still the same minister – that's something you should be talking to your federal counterparts about is finding a way, with this bycatch and so on that's currently getting dumped overboard, to be able to take that fish and get it to the food banks. Find a way to be able to get that to the food banks. Maybe we could have a quota. I know everyone is fighting for their quota, but I don't know why there couldn't be a small quota that could be handed over to some sort of a social enterprise and the fish be caught to go into the food banks. It's our fish. It's off our shores. Our people are hungry. It's ridiculous that we cannot utilize some of that fish to help the most vulnerable in our population when it's right there on our shores.

C. PARDY: Tie in research with that.

P. LANE: And tie in research with it, like my colleague says.

Seal meat, I think that's been mentioned. That's another one. Now, I know seal is not everybody's cup of tea. Personally I love flippers and a lot of Newfoundlanders do, but again that's another option.

I also look at things like vegetables that we're growing. Why not take a bit of Crown land – we got all this farmland. Why not try to work with someone to have some sort of a social enterprise? We're always at these projects where we're trying to get people their hours so they can get their stamps for EI and whatever and these different programs. Why not take a piece of Crown land and plant root crops and people can get their hours and all the vegetables go to the food banks? That's another thing we can be doing.

I'm not going to try to get into the complexity of farms and what's involved because I don't really know, but I just think about people who – I know people who have chickens and turkeys and all that kind of stuff. I'm not sure if there's a lot involved in it, but those types of things and eggs. Why can't we have social enterprises that are utilizing government-owned Crown lands getting people training and experience, perhaps topping up their EI, whatever we're doing anyway, and utilizing that to produce food to go to the food banks to help feed our own people with our own resources? It only makes good sense to me.

Speaker, I'm not going to stay at this any longer and I don't want to get too far off topic, but we are talking about food banks. We're talking about giving moose to food banks. While I absolutely support it, I think it's a good move, the point that I want to make is that there are so many other resources we have on land, off the land, wild and domestic, that we could be utilizing through social enterprise, getting people skills training and providing supports in terms of programs that already exist in terms of getting people their EI or whatever the case might be, and at the same time, utilizing our resources to feed hungry people in our own province. It's something that we haven't been doing enough of and it's a direction I think we need to go.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Seeing no other speakers if the hon. minister speaks now, he will close the debate.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Thank you, Speaker.

I would like to thank the Members who came before me. It was the Member for Exploits who's an avid moose hunter, I think, by the sound of it. The Member for Lake Melville seems to be a moose hunter. No good at calling moose like many of us. I was hoping that everybody would give their moose call a good chance.

The Member for Humber - Bay of Islands never moose hunted. All I got to say to the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands – because he sort of went off on a tangent. After we got from Exploits, we sort of went off on tangents, Mr. Speaker.

I got to say the Member for Bonavista talked about climate change. The climate is not changed enough yet that moose have adapted to fly to run into those big turbines. The Member opposite should know that. So I'd like for that to be recorded for the Member opposite – very important.

Food banks seem to be the theme, so I want to be clear on this. The moose meat does not need to be cooked. It can come from any hunter with a legal licence who legally shot a moose, but it needs to be processed and packaged by a butcher shop. So it's cut up in a steak, it's cut up in fries, it's cut up in little pieces, it's packaged and it shows the butcher shops identity.

Traditionally, in this province, you probably would put it in a baggie or a bread bag of some flavour to pass it around and a little note saying, I, Derrick Bragg, licence number such-and-such, hereby give the Speaker a meal of moose. That is legal in itself. But for the food banks, it has to go through a licensed butcher shop and it has to be a registered food bank.

This is not taking away from the traditional hunter who would share his harvest or her harvest throughout their community. This is not taking away from this by any means; this is only making an avenue in which the licensed hunter would donate it to a food bank, have it processed, have it donated and then there's a legal paper trail. Because we don't people driving down the highway – it could be someone from a food bank that's going around with 100 pounds of moose meat and just sort of passing it out here or there. They would have a licence or a letter saying that they are authorized to do that. That's all we're doing there.

I think that was the main theme that we got into, the main thing that I saw coming out of this and our support for food banks. Is moose meat the be-all, end-all for food banks? No, it's not, but it's another avenue. I thank the outfitters of this province who put refrigerators so that they could handle the frozen meat in their facilities. They say it takes a village to raise a child. Well, it takes a whole province to be able to make all this work. Rather than seeing it going to a landfill site or in a refrigerator and thrown away the next year when you get your next licence, this is an avenue where people can actually donate meat, and for a good cause.

The Member opposite talked about seal meat. Fish was mentioned. All good initiatives, but this was an initiative by the outfitters of this province, and I commend these people for what they did. I thank them and I'm glad to have the opportunity to speak on this here in the House today.

A quick thing that I may have forgotten is getting young hunters into this field. It's a great opportunity. As a first time for a young hunter, there's no four-year wait; there's no two-year wait. You do the course and you get assigned, I think it's a bull-only licence, in your area for the next season.

The Member for St. John's Centre compared it to his salmon traps that'll cost him hundreds of dollars a pound. I sort of smile because I cannot count the number of times that hunters have said to me it is cheaper if I bought a cow because they've made that many trips. Because moose hunting works one of two ways: You are very successful or at some point you need to draw out – our old way of doing it – the wits and you shot the wits to break your bad luck, because you could spend days and days and days in the field.

But it's about the experience. Anybody here, I think, as I look around this great House, who has had the opportunity to enjoy the outdoors and they've been involved in a legal moose hunt, I tell you, there's nothing gets your heart beating any better.

Mr. Speaker, thanks for the opportunity to bring this bill into the House today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question?

The motion is Bill 10 be now read a second time.

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

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay.'

Motion carried.

CLERK (Barnes): A bill, An Act to Amend the Wild Life Act. (Bill 10)

SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a second time.

When shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

S. CROCKER: Now.

SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, a bill, “An Act to Amend the Wild Life Act,” read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill 10)

SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture, that this House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 10.

SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that I shall leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into Committee of the Whole.

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

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay.'

Motion 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 now considering Bill 10, An Act to Amend the Wild Life Act.

A bill, “An Act to Amend the Wild Life Act.” (Bill 10)

CLERK: Clause 1.

CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

The Chair recognizes the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: Chair, I just have a couple of questions on this. I guess we'll go right through all the questions, if we can.

Will this increase the number of moose licences?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: No, the management of the moose population in this province will dictate the number of licences and review it every five years. Actually, we do surveys after the moose-hunting season in the year. So, no, this won't add any licences into the field.

CHAIR: Thank you.

The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: What are the initiatives there to control the sale of meat in this process?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: The sale of meat in this – I know there are options for that. You need a permit for the sale of meat. You need to be a licensed hunter. But this process is about donated meat to food banks, that has been the main process here. We have regulations and rules around the other ways you can exchange meat, but today what we're talking about is the donation of moose meat to food banks.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: Has the department considered roadkill? I know at one time the non-profits used to go and retrieve the roadkill and use it for purposes. Has the department considered that?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Thank you, Chair.

No, we moved away from roadkill. Some roadkill meat we use to feed our animals out at Salmonier Line, actually, so we harvest what we can.

If you can imagine sometimes, if anybody here has ever been moose hunting, if you leave it for hours and sometimes half a day, the moose would be spoiled. So we don't have anybody to do that inspection. Most of the accidents that happen – not all accidents – the moose are badly mutilated and, like I said, the only reason we would save any meat would be for the animals out at Salmonier Line.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: To control the hunting regulations and the population of moose, I suppose, what's the government doing about drones?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Thank you, Chair.

Drones are illegal. Drones are illegal. It's the same as hunting from an aircraft. It's treated the same way. It is something that has come to the forefront. I saw some pictures on Facebook a couple of weeks ago where people actually had pictures taken of themselves. You could see the rifle. You could see the packsack. You could see two people on a rock and the picture was obviously from a drone.

The problem with drones is the actual convection. We're going to strengthen our regulations around drones in the coming months, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: There's another issue that's after coming arise and that's the 800 metres for disabled hunter to be within the hunter himself who's retrieving the moose for the disabled hunter. A lot of people feel that this is not adequate especially now with people, I've heard of, with dementia, probably leaving them in a vehicle and then the hunter having to go off in the woods about 800 metres to retrieve a moose and try to get a moose while that disabled person is in the vehicle and can wander off. I've heard that.

So is there going to be another consideration to the 800-metre rule?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Thank you, Chair.

The rule for 800 metres for a disabled hunter. So you would have to apply for a disabled hunter's licence. The question the Member, obviously, asked would be sensitive to say the least. If I had a family member that would wander off I'm sure I wouldn't leave him in a vehicle at any time by themselves. Like you have to use some good common sense when it comes to hunting.

The 800 metres gives you basically a field of view. You can exceed the 800 metres once a moose has been shot and crippled and you're trying to retrieve the animal. So you may shoot it at 200 metres, it could go half a kilometre or over half a kilometre beyond the 800 metres. That person can then go into that area to retrieve that animal. It doesn't say you have to stop, draw a line 800 metres and I shot at a moose, I can't go there, it's 801 metre, it gives people the opportunity.

So when you apply for a designated hunter, you would say then who your, I guess, designated person would be on behalf of your licence, but you need to be in the area, in sort of a field of view would be the rule of thumb. Obviously, that's not always going to be the case because you would have alders and that, but 800 metres has been agreed upon for the last number of years.

We're always in conversations about that sort of thing, but at this time there's no movement to change that.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: Farm meat, the rules for farm meat: Does the farmer still have access to disposing of their own meat?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: I'm not so sure, depends if it's done in a legal manner, Mr. Chair. He would get a permit from the wildlife office to go out and to – I guess a nuisance moose we would refer to that as. The nuisance moose, number one, the first choice for that would be any disabled hunter in any part of the province. So they would register and say I want – the farmers refer to it as a cabbage patch moose, because that is the biggest problem they have. Moose in potato fields doesn't cause quite the same damage as what they do when they go up and take a bite out of a cabbage. So all of these moose are available.

Some farmers have been know to dispatch as many as a dozen moose in a season. So we wouldn't want to see that meat go to waste, we would want to see that go out to designated hunters, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: One more question.

The minister mentioned new hunters, like young hunters just entering the system, which is good, all good initiatives. Do this apply for all new entrants?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Cannot speak 100 per cent on that, Mr. Chair, but I know it's for the young hunters, the ones that are 16 and 17 years old who are just getting into it. I'm not so sure if it applies – it's not like Young Drivers of Canada, I don't think. This is an initiative to get the young hunters involved.

The demographics right now of people applying for big game licences are basically people in their late 50s, 60s and into their 70s. We don't have a lot of people coming up through the system. We need to encourage that and that's why we have the young hunter with an opportunity to go out and do their hunting test and then be able to get, I'm pretty sure it's a bull-only, but I could check and get back to the Member on that.

CHAIR: Shall the motion carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK: Clauses 2 through 26 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 2 through 26 inclusive carry?

The Chair recognizes the Member for St. John's Centre.

J. DINN: Thank you.

Like I said, I have no issue with this bill, but I just want to draw the minister's attention to 11.1, pages 6 and 7. I guess my concern here, Chair, has to do with the record-keeping, since many of the food banks they are – and speaking from experience, it's the record-keeping piece that I'm concerned with. In many cases you don't have an office person hired for that purpose. It's usually multiple users using a system and some may or may not be into using digital technology. You're also talking, in many cases, older people who may not be comfortable with – I know in our case when we're moving to computers, just to be able to log on and keep the information in one place.

I'm just wondering here with this because if you look at 11.1, a person in possession of moose meat or caribou meat, they have to have that proof. Now, depending on who they are, if they come into the food bank and they transfer it, they may not keep it. The person who's designated then to transport the moose meat or caribou meat that has been donated – that's pretty straightforward; you could probably have a little tag there that can designate the official transporter of this.

But I'll stop there for a minute – no, I won't; I'll go on with the rest of it. Then it comes down to on page 7, it has to do with written proof referred to. I'm just looking here. My concern is that this gap – there could very well be gaps in the paperwork, unnecessarily exposing a food bank to prosecution or liability and maybe the people who are getting the moose meat.

I'm just wondering here if there's a way – I don't know if the minister's department consulted with the food banks, but is there a way we could simplify this? Because I would not want a person accessing a food bank to, for some reason, find that they are being charged. I wouldn't want the food bank, which is mostly volunteers and run on a shoestring budget, to be somehow caught in some sort of litigation.

I'm just wondering if the minister could talk a little bit about that, please.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: I couldn't agree with the Member more. Once the meat has been given out, we're not keeping any extra records on site. But we do not want someone to be in possession of a roast of moose and then Wildlife stop them down the road somewhere and they get $1,000 fine for having a roast of moose they just picked up from the food bank. We will achieve doing that at all costs. Nobody – that's not going to happen to anyone.

So it has come from a butcher. I will give my moose or quarter of meat to a butcher who would then process it. The butcher has my information, as the person donating it. Then, the butcher would donate it to the food bank. Then when the food bank gets it, there will be a paper trail saying that this X amount of meat or lot number is assigned to my licence. That way when the moose goes out to the food bank, someone has a letter that can trace that moose back to my licence.

All it gets will be a licence number. We're not going to give out everybody's information out; that is not the intent here at all. We need to protect as much privacy as we can but we also want to protect someone – we don't want our good intentions to go bad, Mr. Chair. We just want to ensure – and that is what we're doing here.

We have talked to the food banks and our staff and this is the best alignment. Will it be tweaked at some point? Maybe when it can be digital. Right now, it is going to be more paper than digital and then it is going to be destroyed at the end of the season. When the meat is all gone, all papers are destroyed. Then the next season you start it again. That is our full intentions.

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

J. DINN: I am glad to hear that. I guess that is my concern, like monitor this, if you – I mean I doubt very much if a Wildlife officer is going to be stopping a person who is accessing St. Vincent de Paul food bank in the centre of the city, for the most part. Nevertheless, I guess my concern is if we could check in, through the Community Food Sharing Association, what are some of the concerns. It is just about the record-keeping – and I understand the need for record-keeping. I truly do and I do support the minister's comment there; you don't want good intentions to go bad. We want this to work.

I'm just concerned here that as we move forward that the benefits, right now, outweigh the disadvantages for sure in this. I think we just need to make sure that these volunteer organizations, for the most part, are protected. Not out of any malice or intent, but just because they don't have the staff.

On page 6, 11.1(2) it talks about: A registered food bank may designate, in writing, one or more persons to transport moose or caribou meat that has been donated to the registered food bank to any of the following: a licensed butcher, the registered food bank and a person receiving the meat.

I'm just curious here with regard to this, unless you actually had to get meat butchered – and I can think of Halliday's, for example, in the middle of St. John's. I'm just wondering would there be a list so that there would be no mistaking it, as opposed to someone who does butchering as a hobby, if you might. I don't know.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Mr. Chair, this would be a licensed butcher shop. I just think about the Cormack, Reidville and Deer Lake area of the province where a lot of moose get processed that come down the peninsula. They are actually butcher shops, abattoirs that would normally do beef, but this time of the year they may do as much as 25 or 30 moose per week. They change their focus.

It can't be because I'm doing it in my basement; it has to be a licensed butcher shop. This is why we want to keep it all – again, this is not taking away from the person that's going to put it in one of those 10-pound bags and give you a big roast. They have to give you documentation, but that's from you to your brother and (inaudible) that you can share yours.

The butcher will give it his or her eye view. If he goes to cut out a quarter of meat, for argument's sake, and it's green or spoiled in their opinion, then they stop it right there. Because that's a qualified butcher who would know meat. That's the idea of the licensed butcher. It is wild game meat; it's butchered in on Crown lands, as the Member reminded me a little while ago. That's the process there.

Like I said, we don't want something good to go bad. We just want to dot our i's and cross our t's on all of this.

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

J. DINN: That's what I'm after. I would assume that there is – I don't know if there's a list or a registry of butchers that would meet those qualifications.

Just out of curiosity – and this may have been answered already – this is specifically about moose meat. Is it possible to donate other forms of wild game? Let's say, trout. The reason I ask that, someone had said they were cleaning out their freezer and I don't know how many dozens of trout they had, but they were vacuumed packed. I said, well, I don't know, you might want to see about donating to a food bank. But I'm just curious.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's not a conversation that we've had. It's something that I can bring to our staff no doubt because people – but it has to come through the process. The idea of the wild game meat, and I say moose, but it's moose and caribou we're referring to, at least a butcher, someone with a trained eye is looking at that meat.

If you vacuumed sealed trout or your salmon from last year that you would have brought home that you didn't eat, my advice is give it to a friend, give it to someone you know, that would be my advice on that. I don't think there are any restrictions on that sort of thing.

But for the purpose of this act, we want to make sure that we have wild game meat that is cared for and transported in the most legal way, or 100 per cent legal way, but at least it sees a smart eye, I'll call it, for lack of a better word, of someone who knows that industry.

So we can have a conversation later on. That could lead into berries. You may have partridgeberries from last year and blueberries from last year. There's no real licence for that but I'm sure there's a friend would love to take them off your hands any given day of the week.

Thanks for your questions.

CHAIR: I'll ask the Clerk to recall the clauses, please.

CLERK: Clauses 2 through 26 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 2 through 26 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, clauses 2 through 26 carried.

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

CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK: An Act to Amend the Wild Life Act.

CHAIR: Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the bill without amendment?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment, carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee rise and report Bill 10.

CHAIR: The motion is that the Committee rise and report Bill 10.

Is it the pleasure of the House 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.

SPEAKER (Bennett): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Baie Verte - Green Bay and Chair of Committee of the Whole.

B. WARR: Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to report Bill 10 without amendment.

SPEAKER: The Chair of the Committee of the Whole reports that the Committee have considered the matters to them referred and directed him to report Bill 10 without amendment.

When shall the report be received?

S. CROCKER: Now.

SPEAKER: Now.

When shall the bill be read a third time?

S. CROCKER: Tomorrow.

SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, report received and adopted. Bill ordered read a third time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER: Thank you very much, Speaker.

Speaker, I would like to advise the House, that with the agreement of the Opposition House Leader, we will debate the resolution for which notice was given by the MHA for Conception Bay South on Tuesday, November 1, 2022, as a government resolution.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER: Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker, I move:

WHEREAS Memorial University was raised by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador as a memorial to the fallen in the Great Wars of 1914-1918 and 1939-1945, that in the freedom of learning their cause and sacrifice may not be forgotten; and

WHEREAS Newfoundland and Labrador's only university, Memorial University, is supported enthusiastically by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador as our living legacy and entrusted with the responsibility of advancing our province to its full potential, facilitating our unique contributions to humanity and promoting our commitment to excellence throughout the world; and

WHEREAS the “Ode to Newfoundland” – written by Sir Cavendish Boyle in 1902 and adopted in 1904 and re-adopted in 1980 as the official anthem of Newfoundland and Labrador – has been sung for more than a century as a celebration to this wonderful place, its people and the fallen soldiers in whose honour Memorial University was named; and

WHEREAS the “Ode to Labrador” – written by Dr. Harry Paddon in 1927 – is a long-honoured anthem celebrating the uniqueness of Labrador that could easily be included by Memorial University together with the “Ode to Newfoundland” to respect Labrador's place of honour in our province; and

WHEREAS both Odes include heartfelt celebrations of the natural beauty of this place and the lyrics that continue to resonate universally; and

WHEREAS with anthems played elsewhere in the world, there are limitless ways for a university and province so famed for their musicianship to be musically creative, modern and free in interpreting such a piece of music; and

WHEREAS the academic autonomy and integrity of the university are in no way undermined by the efforts to influence the current decision makers of the university to revisit and overturn their hurtful and exclusionary decision to discontinue including the Ode at the convocation ceremonies.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House urge Memorial University to include the “Ode to Newfoundland” and the “Ode to Labrador” in all future convocation ceremonies, so that Newfoundland and Labrador's one great university will properly honour the people, the legacy, the beauty, the potential and the fallen of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

S. CROCKER: Sorry, Mr. Speaker, seconded by the Member for Conception Bay South.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

I thank the hon. Government House Leader for that.

I'll say it again, and I think this one here probably got more meaning than any other time, when you're proud to speak for your district that you represent. I think there's not a Member in the House, when you speak about the Ode, don't say it with a lot of pride. I know that there was some debate from the president of MUN and officials when it was brought up and there was some conversation about Labrador. So the Members for Labrador, as we see in this resolution we want to include the “Ode to Labrador” as well.

We believe you don't exclude to include. I think that's one of the most telling comments I heard about this. There was a lot of outrage when MUN refused to play this at the convocation ceremony. I happened to be at the convocation ceremony and that kind of caught me off guard.

Your defence of not having something part of it, that's fair game, but then to just exclude it and say we're not going to have it, so everyone are excluded. I take great offence because – I think we all should actually. As a Newfoundlander and Labradorian, there's a lot of pride in our province. We're one of the few peoples in the world, when we leave we spend the rest of our life trying to get back here. It's a true Newfoundland and Labradorian thing. You move out of this province, no matter where you may be going to greener pastures, you always want to come back home. You always want to come back to retire. You want to come back to visit. It's our uniqueness; it's our culture.

I don't know about anyone else, and I speak for myself and I'm sure I speak for most Members in this House, when the Ode is sang I get shivers. I'm sure I see heads nodding. I get shivers down my spine every time I hear the “Ode to Newfoundland.” It's beautiful. You feel patriotic. It's our anthem and we're asking for that to be included along with the “Ode to Labrador.” People from Labrador, people from all over Newfoundland and Labrador, get pride in all – that's who we are.

So, again, you're excluding to include and it makes no sense. When you go and hear and you see these decisions being made, and I respect MUN officials, their autonomy and they deal with our educational issues and they run this university that we're so proud of, but I guess my question comes back to: Who gives any university, or any group of people of that nature running a facility, the right to not include your anthem? It's kind of appalling to be quite frank with you. It's really appalling.

We're not talking about course loads. Myself and the president of MUN have had some spirited back and forth, in person as well, some debate over MUN spending; I know the Members opposite have.

This is about our anthem. This is about something that is very sacred to us; sacred to the individuals of this province, every resident. So you look at seven or eight people, I heard, made this decision. We represent the entire population of the Newfoundland and Labrador. I would guess every Member in this House were not pleased when they heard that. I know the day that it was announced in the media, the scrum area, out there I know that all of us – I went out, the Government House Leader was out, the Leader of the Third Party was out and we all said the same thing. We didn't agree. We couldn't understand. We were surprised and couldn't figure it out. Then you hear the explanations given. Then you hear people say that we have a lot better things to be at. We have bigger issues out there. Why are we worried about the Ode?

An aspect of that is you kind of stop for a split second and you say, yeah, you're right. But if we forget about our foundations of what we stand for – this university was for fallen soldiers. It is our only university. If we stop standing for what we believe in, of who we are as people, the pride we carry as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians – we don't need to worry about all those other issues. We never should forget who we are. They say never forget where you came from. I am a proud Newfoundlander and Labradorian and as I know every Member in this House are as well. I think we all feel the same way.

It is our anthem and every time the anthem is played, the “Ode to Newfoundland” and we'll add on the “Ode to Labrador” – I think that is a good idea – we all should get cold shivers. I will get cold shivers and as a matter of fact, I would think next week, when this House closes, we're going to finish it off – Mr. Speaker, you brought in with the Ode. Maybe we'll bring in both Odes. I'm sure that would probably be a discussion as to why wouldn't you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: I think that would be a great addition to this House because we are the General Assembly for the House of Assembly for Newfoundland and Labrador and why not. Again, maybe we're doing it the way MUN should have done it. We're being inclusive; we're not being exclusive. I look forward to when that happens.

I look forward to any other time I can stand up and I can hear the Ode played and I hope, when my daughter convocates – because I went on behalf of the party last time. My daughter is convocating from MUN in May and I am going to that university as a proud father and I expect and I sure hope that I will get cold shivers when I sit in the Arts and Culture Centre and she accepts her diploma or degree and I will hear the “Ode to Newfoundland” and the “Ode to Labrador.”

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs.

L. DEMPSTER: Thank you, Speaker.

I am happy to stand here and speak to the motion that my hon. colleague from Conception Bay South brought in. Yes, I think it caught a lot of people off guard, Speaker, when the “Ode to Newfoundland” wasn't sung at the convocation probably about two weeks ago now.

It started an important dialogue around the province. I followed the media closely, Speaker, and one of the things I quickly learned – not surprised; it wasn't new. But people are very, very passionate about the Ode. As a Labradorian, Speaker, in this hon. House, I want to say that I respect people's attachment to the “Ode to Newfoundland.” I have a lot of family from the Island and it's interesting here in this province because we are one small province. We're only just about 500,000 people, yet we're diverse in many ways as well. We know that Labrador, the Big Land that I come from, is a very large landmass. You could take all of the Atlantic provinces and put them down into Labrador and that's where we see that we're very rich in culture.

As we now look at this motion and urging Memorial to get back to singing the “Ode to Newfoundland,” I like the motion that we're going to also urge them to include the “Ode to Labrador.” I shared this with some of my colleagues. I've been in this hon. House. I've been in many sittings. I've sat through many convocations and when the “Ode to Newfoundland” is sung, you can see the connection of people, but I want to tell you it really has never done anything for me. I respect other people, but stand in the arena in Goose Bay at opening night of the Labrador Winter Games and the Ode is sung, and there's just a fire that's lit in your belly.

It's just hard to articulate the feeling of the connection when somebody opens up with the words “Dear land of mountains, woods and snow, Labrador, our Labrador. God's noble gift to us below … Responsive to the woodsman's swing,” our proud resources – and we know that we're so resource rich in Labrador. I travel every single weekend, for a decade now, and the planes are filled with people that are coming back from Labrador to the Island because that part of the province is so resource rich.

I also want to say a couple of other things, Speaker, about the “Ode to Labrador” that was written by Harry Paddon in 1927. I think it's fair to say that maybe the Ode was the first major, symbolic declaration of Labradorian solidarity. It's certainly something that unites us, Speaker. Dr. Harry Paddon wrote it in 1927, but it was in 1990 that Shirley Montague, wanting something that was more inclusive of Labrador's cultures, she added a couple of verses in different languages to the Ode. So there's a verse, when she does it, that's sung in Innu-aimun and there's a verse that she sings in Inuktitut.

If you tune in and listen to Labrador Morning, they start every morning with the Ode. I do believe – I'm looking to my Lake Melville colleague – that it is Shirley Montague's version. I talk many times to my colleague from Labrador West and it's certainly the version that he's attached to and I know the Member for Lake Melville as well.

So there's not a whole lot more that I want to say, Speaker, other than I support the motion that we encourage MUN to get back to singing the Ode at the convocation, the “Ode to Newfoundland,” and that they also include the “Ode to Labrador” as a more inclusive process. If debate continues, maybe somewhere there is a process that we would go through to see, as one province, are we going to continue forward with two Odes, or are we going to have one that is inclusive of all the larger diversity of our province, Speaker.

I thank the hon. Member for bringing forward this motion.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

L. PARROTT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I've said it here before, I'm a proud Newfoundlander but I'm a very proud Labradorian. I'll echo what the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair said. The “Ode to Newfoundland” rings out very special for everyone. As a former soldier, we used to stand and listen to “O Canada” and then you'd hear the Newfoundlanders in the regiment sing the “Ode to Newfoundland,” it was always such a feeling to hear. The “Ode to Labrador” wasn't sang, but I wished it was.

Later in life, I had an opportunity to go to New York City and watch Come From Away. When I watched Come From Away in New York City, it was the very last time that they brought the volunteers in, people who had volunteered in the aftermath of 911 and everything – I was there for the very last showing. Strangely, as I was sat there, the mayor of Gander walked out and he looked out and he said: Oh my God, Lloyd Parrott out in the audience. So I waved and whatever and they stood up and they sang the “Ode to Newfoundland.” In that moment in my life, it was probably the proudest moment I ever had. It's the one time in my life where I said: My God, does everyone feel like this to be a Newfoundlander? But I tell you, I've been in Goose Bay for the Winter Games and I've been in Lab City for the opening of the Labrador Games and I've seen the “Ode to Labrador” sung and you get that same feeling.

Memorial University is our university. It's the university of Newfoundland and Labrador. I have to say last week when they made the announcement that it wasn't sung I was totally, totally flabbergasted and disappointed and had a lot of different emotions and didn't understand the decision. Certainly didn't understand the decision based on where the president of the university comes from.

It was a decision, I think, that was made without thinking about, as my colleague from CBS said, inclusion. We're very guilty of that all the time. We think about inclusion and exclusion in two different sentences, but we need to look at them together all the time. This motion, I believe, does that until we come to some kind of a resolution where maybe it is one anthem. I don't know what the solution is, but I certainly believe the “Ode to Newfoundland” is near and dear to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and the “Ode to Labrador” has the same place in people's hearts.

Many people who live in Newfoundland haven't visited Labrador, don't understand it, but I can guarantee you at that convocation last week there were plenty of young men and women from Labrador there, there's no question. Certainly the school has a presence in Labrador in Goose Bay and Labrador City.

I support this resolution wholeheartedly and I believe it's an extremely important step forward. We're all very proud of where we come from and what we do. When you listen to anthems, no matter what it is, if you think about the Olympics or any games throughout the world, or Canada Games, what happens is the anthems are played for the people who win the medals. It's a battle cry, almost. It's who we are as a people.

I support this resolution, I believe it's great that two parties came together to do this. I strongly urge Memorial to listen to this resolution moving forward. At the end of the day, there are two Odes, for the few minutes that it takes to sing both of them, what's wrong with that? I think it just includes the whole province.

We are a province, we are Newfoundland and Labrador, make no mistake about it. We're a very rich province in every aspect, certainly when it comes to our culture and we should not ever overlook that. I support this resolution wholeheartedly.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

P. TRIMPER: Thank you, Speaker.

I always try to look for the glass as half full. Despite the, I guess I would say, criticism, the backlash of Memorial University's decision to not play the Ode last week, I welcomed it in some ways. Frankly, in many ways. Because born in Nova Scotia, came here 35 years ago, now in my 36th year in this province. I spent most of my life in Labrador.

As my colleague for Terra Nova just said, and he grew up in Labrador, it's been striking for me over this political adventure to come down here and attend those ceremonies. You know, when Brad Gushue wins his curling bonspiel, when other things are happening, when the convocation occurs and that stirring tune comes up, I get it. I understand completely. It is incredible words. The tune is original and it strikes up and you can feel the pride.

I thank everything and all about this experience for really appreciating the Ode. Actually, I've been trying to learn the words and they're coming to me. It's really rewarding to be able to join in with my colleagues who have grown up with this tune in their lives and their parents and so on. It's been generations of development.

As my colleague from Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair said, in Labrador, however, we don't hear the Ode that much. When we do, I think we recognize its beauty, its charm and what it represents; however, we've often felt left out.

I can tell my colleagues here now again why I was happy for this dialogue, because over the last few years when we rise for Christmas in this House, we traditionally sing the “Ode to Newfoundland.” And I been like this: Where's the reference to Labrador? Where's the “Ode to Labrador”? Where's our beautiful land? It's not been there. I've been informed that it's not been officially endorsed as an anthem and therefore it hasn't been sung. So I really welcome this motion. I feel that it's going to get us going in a good place. I'm all about inclusivity.

I want to sort of double down with what my colleague from Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair said in that – and I was pointing out to her that it really is, I believe, Shirley Montague's version that we should be thinking about.

So maybe we don't need to change the words, I think, was the intent here, but I want to again reference what happened in the early 1990s, because Shirley looked at the words and the tune that Harry Paddon developed and felt that it needed an original tune and she felt that it needed to be inclusive. As I said in my Member's statement today, we need to recognize the original inhabitants, in our case, in Labrador: the Innu and the Inuit and their languages.

I did an interview this morning with Labrador Morning. It was really appropriate to be speaking to them this morning about that because at five to 6 every morning for my last 30 years or so – well, it started, I guess, I'm not sure, maybe the mid-1990s. We started the year that it was being played. But I know the musicians, I know the folks that sang in that original version. One in particular, a very good friend of mine, I want to mention his name, Greg Penashue sings the verse in Innu-aimun. It's just lovely to hear his voice He was a very well-respected elder; we have a bridge named for him. Hearing his voice, hearing the other voices on there, it ties us together.

I liked, as I said in my Member's statement, the path that we are on as a province in truth and reconciliation and understanding. Now that the dialogue has been opened, I'd like us to consider looking at this adaptation by Shirley and what she has been able to do. There was a great interview with her and Anthony Germain just last week on this topic, I invite colleagues to have a listen; there is some good direction in that.

I thank everybody in this House for thinking about Labrador and how we can pull it together. I do believe we can find a good way forward.

Thank you very much, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

J. BROWN: Thank you, Speaker, and I thank my colleagues.

I'm sure the Members of this House know that I do love where I come from and I do talk about it a lot because it does mean a lot to me. I am very proud of where I come from in Labrador. I think the Member for Lake Melville is right; it does open a dialogue and talks about the cultural aspect of Labrador and its uniqueness in this province.

As a place, we were so isolated from the world for so long that we created our own culture, our own history and our own way of doing things. We have our anthem, we have our own flag, we have our own coat of arms, we have our own tartan, we have a lot of cultural symbols that actually mean a lot to us and we just want to share it with the rest of the province. We don't want to impose, we don't want to change, we don't want to do any of that, we just want to share and share where we come from as a people and as a culture.

So, with that, I want to read into the record the “Ode to Labrador” into Hansard.

Dear land of mountains, woods and snow,

Labrador, our Labrador.

God's noble gift to us below,

Labrador, our Labrador.

Thy proud resources waiting still,

Their splendid task will soon fulfil,

Obedient to thy Maker's will,

Labrador, our Labrador.

Thy stately forests soon shall ring,

Labrador, our Labrador.

Responsive to the woodsman's swing,

Labrador, our Labrador.

And mighty floods that long remained,

Their raging fury unrestrained,

Shall serve the purpose God ordained,

Labrador, our Labrador.

We love to climb thy mountains steep,

Labrador, our Labrador.

And paddle on thy waters deep,

Labrador, our Labrador.

Our snowshoes scar thy trackless plains,

We seek no city streets nor lanes,

We are thy sons while life remains,

Labrador, our Labrador.

This is the original version by Dr. Paddon in 1927. I understand the Member for Lake Melville talk about Shirley Montague's version, who does incorporate Innu-aimun and Inuktitut into it, which makes it even more special for us, because those are languages that were spoken long before a lot of other people showed up there.

With that, Speaker, I want to say I do support the idea of inclusivity and this motion, but I think we should take a moment and to government's side, too, we need to take back – it says why can't both be recognized in this province and both be respected equally because this is a little piece of Labrador and the other one is a little piece of the Island.

It's no harm to share with the world that we are very distinct place. We're lucky we have two different cultures and two beautiful places that we share together. There's nothing wrong with the idea of double your fun, double your – like the gum commercial. We got two places to share to the world. We have a completely separate entities.

This is why we should be embracing the fact that we have so much different culture to share here. And here's another interesting thing. There are very few places in the world that have the distinction of being we are Newfoundland and Labrador. There are very few places that get to say that they two different entities that came together and work together. So we should very proud of that fact, too.

I want to thank the minister and I support this.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wasn't expecting to be speaking to this this afternoon, but I'm glad that we are.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I just want to say I feel very privileged to live in, what I believe, to be the best country in the world. No doubt about it, Canada is, in my view – you couldn't ask for a better place to live, free democracy, with such abundance of resources and wonderful people and diversity all throughout the country.

I wanted to say that upfront because while I was born a Canadian – and my parents were born Newfoundlanders – while I love this country, I have to say that in my mind when somebody says to me where are you from. I don't say Canada. I say I'm a Newfoundlander, always. I'm sure we all get that. You have travelled, whether it be other parts of the country, down the United States and so on, and people pick up on the accent, and I'll say, gees, I don't have an accent. Because in some ways I don't feel I have a strong accent compared to some of my colleagues, perhaps from – like yourself, Mr. Speaker, from your part. My mother was from Wesleyville in Bonavista Bay. She lost her H in 'Olyrood' and picked them up in 'Havondale,' the same as you, her whole life, and I love that. I think it's what makes us special. I think it's what makes us unique and we have a very rich culture and we have very rich history.

Not everything in our history is great. Like every nation in the world, every place in the world there are things that've happened over the years, years back, things that we're not so proud of. But there are a lot of things that we're very proud of. But we can't change history; we have to move forward. But I think it's always important that we remember who we are, where we come from, embrace our culture and embrace our history.

The Member for Conception Bay South is absolutely right. When the “Ode to Newfoundland” plays you do get – when he said it he was spot on, because I'm the very same. You do get that sort of tingling down your spine; you really do when they play the “Ode to Newfoundland.”

I was very, I'm going to say, disappointed. I'll say disappointed now, but originally I have to say I was pretty angry when I heard that Memorial University had decided, in their wisdom, that they were going to drop the “Ode to Newfoundland” from the convocation ceremony. They said they did it in the name of inclusion, but I don't believe that was an act of inclusion. I think it was an act of exclusion. If they wanted to be inclusive, all they had to do was what's being suggested here in this motion. Instead of taking away, add. That's all that's being suggested here is that we add the “Ode to Labrador.”

If you're someone who's from Labrador, and I understand we have our – we're all one province, but we still have our distinct regions, I'll call it that for lack of a better term. I don't know a lot about Labrador. I've been to Labrador once in my life. I was to a meeting in L'Anse au Clair for a couple of hours. Flew over from St. Anthony, went to a meeting and flew back. Other than that, I've never been to Labrador.

I don't profess to know as much about Labrador as perhaps a lot of Members here would do. But I'm sure if you were born and raised in Labrador that that anthem is very important to you and there's a lot of pride in it. Why wouldn't it be? Any different than the “Ode to Newfoundland” would be special to me and other Members in this House.

It only makes good sense to me that, as opposed to excluding the vast majority of people in this province, that we simply include the people of Labrador, include their anthem in the ceremony so that we have two anthems. What's wrong with that? For the sake of a couple of minutes added on to a ceremony that would mean so much to the students who are graduating from Labrador, to the people of Labrador, makes all the sense in the world.

I really hope that those at Memorial University who've made this decision are going to look at reconsidering it. I don't know if they will just based on what we're doing here today. I hope that adds to their thought process. I certainly encourage people to continue to contact the university. I know I've had a lot of constituents and people from around the province have contacted me, who were outraged by the decision and indicated that they would be contacting the university – and I hope more people do – to let them know how they feel about it. Because this is our anthem. It does celebrate this wonderful place that we all love, our culture, our heritage, everything that is wonderful about this place, I think, is expressed so eloquently in that “Ode to Newfoundland.”

To eliminate it from our institute of higher learning was a big mistake. I think somebody said in this House – I don't know if it was today or yesterday – about some other decision that got made, sometimes you have to sort of step back and realize you made a mistake and own up to it and simply say it was an error in judgment, we never really thought about how this would impact other people, how people would feel and we're going to reverse this decision.

They can do that. I hope they will do it. I want to thank the Member for Conception Bay South, the Official Opposition, who originally brought this motion forward, and certainly the government Members who are supporting it. I think all Members are supporting this. This is not a political issue; this is an issue about us as a people and celebrating this wonderful place that we all love and call home.

Thank you.

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

J. DINN: Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker, we'll support this. But with regard to MUN, could they have done better? I guess they could for certain. I can't fault them overly. I can't get too angry with them. I understand the motivation, but certainly with the number of people who are in the music department, you could easily come up with the words to be more inclusive. I understand that because certainly in our own legislation, we've been trying to come up with more gender-neutral or inclusive language.

Now, it sends shivers up and down my spine when I'm at a Legion event and they'll sing this. I know the words; I'll sing along with it. But I look at the last stanza too, “As loved our fathers ….” – and even when I sing that, I come to that point and I realize there are mothers who love this place as well and who stood in support of this great province. I think, in many ways, it would have been a simple solution. You look at the rest of it, it's about the landscape, maybe the language is a bit archaic but I don't mind that so much.

I had the opportunity way back in 1981 when I was doing my teaching over in England with a backpack around, and I'll tell you seeing the Canadian flag on another person's backpack and that sense of immediate – it didn't matter where you were from in Canada, you automatically gravitated, you had that identity.

Like the Member for Terra Nova, I got to see the Come Home Away in New York, and it does bring – even though I'm not from Gander, it brings that sense of pride because that reflects all of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I might even go with my identity a little bit further. I'm from town; I'm a corner boy. Where I live is not more than a 10-minute walk from where I grew up. So my identity is even narrower than that.

I guess the issue here is, I also don't want to turn this into politics, but I'll tell you this, for the first 21 years of my life, Speaker, the flag that I grew up on, that I got to know was the flag of Newfoundland, it's not here. It's on the flagpole out there, it was the Union Jack. That was the flag of Newfoundland and Labrador.

So let's look, in 1980, it was changed by, then, Premier Brian Peckford and we have the one that's out there now. I can tell you that it does nothing for me, not like when I look at what I came to know. At that time, the Legion and the Opposition Liberals pushed back and they were very upset. We turned this into, I guess, it was a source of nationalism and a debate around that, but we still have the flag out there.

So 40-odd years have passed by and it's become commonplace, but I do remember the controversy at the time. What are we doing? Because it was the Union Jack not the current flag that many of our veterans fought and died under.

In 2001, you might –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask Members to lower the volume a bit so I can hear the speaker.

J. DINN: In 2001, we changed the official name of the province and it required a constitutional change from Newfoundland to Newfoundland and Labrador. So, again, the province that I had known, really, was Newfoundland. The NTA changed its name to the NLTA to become more inclusive. Then, again, in 2006, there was another rebranding by the Conservatives at that time to Newfoundland and Labrador and the big changes that came with that.

So what's my point in this? We have endured many changes, even to the very symbols that represent this province, not just the Ode, but to the flag itself. I will tell you when I would backpack around, it was the Newfoundland flag or the Canadian flag that would draw you.

Now, do I consider it an act of treachery or betrayal that we changed the flag? No, the purpose at the time was to become more inclusive to reflect the history of Newfoundland and Labrador.

So to come back to my point here, I think in many ways, I can't go out and condemn and get too upset over what Memorial has done, when governments, on three separate occasions, have changed or rebranded a symbol – the Newfoundland flag and then changed the name, all in the interests, I would assume, of reflecting our identity. So comeback to that, I have no issue of singing the two anthems but maybe there is a way of making it so that we can incorporate them and have an anthem that reflects the Newfoundland that we have right now and honours the history.

But I can tell you, I guess, for me, it is always going to be the “Ode to Newfoundland” that is what I am going to know. But let's not get too carried away with it at times. I think Memorial can indeed do better. I think we can do better, but I think it doesn't hurt to have an anthem that is inclusive of all, not just the people who were necessarily born and raised here but those who come to make it their home.

Thank you.

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

J. ABBOTT: Thank you, Speaker.

I am just going to speak for just a few minutes on this particular motion. I appreciate the Opposition Party bringing it forward and the fact that the government side have adopted that. I think I can pretty well endorse many of the comments that were made here earlier by the Opposition House Leader, by the Members from Labrador and those from some of the Island districts.

For me, the major point around the “Ode to Newfoundland” in this case is that it shows and represents for me, as a Newfoundland resident and a resident of Newfoundland and Labrador, a sense of culture, pride in place, and that's something that we've celebrated now for over a hundred years. To dismiss that out of hand by any public institution, I think needs to be certainly challenged and questioned.

I'm hoping this is a wake-up call, both to us here in the Legislature, to the government generally and to our public institutions in particular that you're there as a creature really of this House and you need to respect the institutions that we celebrate and that we put into law. The anthem is part of our statute and it's something that we need to consider before you jettison it or any other aspect, whether it's the coat of arms, whether it's our other emblems of our society.

What I would personally like to see is at the end of any public ceremony in this province that the Ode as we have it today and any future Ode is included in those public celebrations. That would be very important to reflect again our pride in place and our sense of culture that is different than our other provinces and other parts of the globe for that matter.

I hope this opens up that type of conversation here in the House and in the province. That we look at how we celebrate and enforce such an anthem. I'm certainly open to suggestions of how we change the words to be more inclusive, either we have part of the Ode that speaks to the Labrador world, or there is a separate Ode for that part of the province. I'm open to either, as long as the Labradorians will be consulted on that.

So hopefully the university is hearing what we are saying here today. The word “urge” is a gentle word, I think, in this conversation. I think that they'll pick that up so that at the next convocation, the Ode will be sung and anything else that they need to do to accommodate our citizens in Labrador.

Speaker, I just want to thank you for the opportunity and to wish all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that we continue to celebrate our distinctiveness by using the Ode in all our public ceremonies.

Thank you.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS: Thank you, Speaker.

First off, I'd like to recognize and thank the Official Opposition for actually bringing this forward and for it to become a motion. Anything that creates discussion around the inclusion of Labrador is good. It's a good motion. It really gets people talking and it's really good to hear in this House, talking about the importance of making sure Labrador is included.

Looking at the motion, there are people there who will not the motion so I just want to read this part here: “THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this Honourable House urge Memorial University to include the 'Ode to Newfoundland' and the 'Ode to Labrador' in all future Convocation ceremonies, so that Newfoundland and Labrador's one great university will properly honour the people, the legacy, the beauty, the potential and the fallen of Newfoundland and Labrador.” It's very, very important.

In actual fact, this is a good motion. This motion is about inclusion. This motion is about ensuring that Labrador is included so they have the Ode there. The “Ode to Newfoundland” doesn't really recognize Labrador, so it's good in that it's inclusion and I appreciate that.

Now, looking at what MUN did. When I look at what MUN did, to understand it, I think what they did is they wanted to make sure that Labrador didn't feel excluded. When we listen to the “Ode to Newfoundland,” it's a beautiful, beautiful, beautiful theme. It really is, and I appreciate how people love it. I know many people, especially our veterans, sing it with pride. We had people in the past sing it with so much pride, so it's important and I do understand that they might feel excluded.

One of the WHEREASes, I just wanted to read this now so Labradorians can truly appreciate some of this talk on the motion, because it's not really a debate. “AND WHEREAS the academic autonomy and integrity of the university are in no way undermined by efforts to influence the current decision-makers of the university to revisit and overturn their hurtful and exclusionary decision to discontinue including the Ode at Convocation ceremonies ….”

I wrote that down, and I recognize the hurt feelings because people grew up singing the “Ode to Newfoundland.” We had Parsons sitting in the House, the former Member for Cape St. Francis, and I used to sit next to him a lot of times and listen to when he'd sing that, he'd sing with the passion. The current Member for Cape St. Francis, when he sings it, it just boots out of him and you can feel the pride.

Just thinking about this, we had Rod Deon here for a Member's statement. I'm sure he feels that same pride. So it's very, very important to recognize that those feelings can be hurt. They're valid feelings of hurt. When people are expecting to hear the “Ode to Newfoundland” sung at the MUN convocation, I could appreciate that they were hurt and they felt excluded. I think Labradorians recognize the true value of “Ode to Newfoundland,” especially to the people on the Island part of this province.

This motion is not about division. It's not about putting the Labradorians against the Newfoundlanders. This motion is about inclusion and making sure we're included, and that's why I support this motion and I truly appreciate where it originated from and your intent. I do really appreciate that. Because we can't live in isolation. We need to come together as a province. I think actually making this – now, I do think that we need to have a provincial recognized anthem that brings us all together. Until then, this motion actually helps. It helps bring us together and, therefore, I can truthfully say I totally support this motion and I thank you for it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Seeing no other speakers if the Member for Conception Bay South speaks now, he will close debate.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

I'll thank everyone for their words. I think it's pretty obvious we're all in total agreement. We all agree that the “Ode to Newfoundland” and bringing in the “Ode to Labrador” is where we need to be. There is a lot of pride, we've all heard. We all take great pride.

I'll read the final clause of the motion, because I think that's ultimately what we're hoping that Memorial University and the president and her officials take this in stride. We are representative of 520-odd thousand people in this province. This House, this is what we stand for. We stand for the voices of Newfoundland and Labrador and I think we're unanimous in our support of bringing back the Ode and, of course, the “Ode to Labrador.”

I think it's pretty evident here today. I hope that President Timmons and her officials take our lead and follow through. I think it would make a lot of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians a lot happier next convocation when that happens.

So I'll read the final clause and that will be my final comment on this: “THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT this Honourable House urge Memorial University to include the 'Ode to Newfoundland' and the 'Ode to Labrador' in all future Convocation ceremonies, so that Newfoundland and Labrador's one great university will properly honour the people, the legacy, the beauty, the potential and the fallen of Newfoundland and Labrador.”

I thank you once again.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay.'

Motion carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I, move, seconded by the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology, that this House do now adjourn.

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

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay.'

Motion carried.

This House do stand adjourned until 1:30 o'clock, Monday.

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