The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The following members' statements will be heard: the hon. the Member for the District of Bonavista North; the hon. the Member for the District of Placentia & St. Mary's; and, the hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.

The hon. the Member for the District of Bonavista North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARDING: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge and commend the efforts of everyone involved with the recent Annual Ceremonial Review of the 2910 Lions Royal Canadian Army Cadet Corps.

The 2910 Corps is based in the New-Wes-Valley area and has been actively serving the region for the past thirty-six years. Mr. Speaker, Captain George Kean, who recently retired after twelve years of dedicated service with the cadets, should be incredibly proud of all that the organization has accomplished.

Throughout its history, the 2910 Corps has received many accolades and individual cadets have realized high levels of personal success. That tradition continued at this year's annual review as three cadets received the Gold Duke of Edinburgh Award. During the next visit of a Royal Family member to the Province, Chief Warrant Officer Hilary Kelloway, Master Warrant Officer Amanda Kean, and Master Warrant Officer Samantha Batstone will be presented with their certificates.

The Inspecting Officer at the event was Captain John Cross, a former cadet and current member of the Armed Forces. After leaving the 2910 Corps, Captain Cross attended the Military College in Quebec where he graduated in 1991 as an Army Logistics Officer. He has had postings in Germany, Ottawa, Calgary, Edmonton, Saint John, and in 2005 was deployed to the Middle East as an Operations Officer. As a cadet, Captain Cross was also a recipient of the Gold Duke of Edinburgh Award and he, like everyone else associated with the Corps, was extremely impressed by the outstanding efforts on display at the review.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join with me in congratulating the 2910 Lions Royal Canadian Army Cadet Corps on the completion of another exceptional year of service.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Laval High School in Placentia.

Laval opened its door in September 1968 to students from Barasway, Point Verde, Placentia, Jerseyside, Freshwater, Dunville, Fox Harbour and Ship Harbour. In keeping with the French connection, Mr. Speaker, the school was named after Bishop Laval, the first Bishop of New France, now Quebec.

The first co-principals of the school were Brother Jake Ratterton of the Irish Christian Brothers, and Sister Chrsytom Brennan of the Presentation Sisters. In 1977, the school came under one administration.

Laval has seen over 7,000 graduates during its forty years of existence, and these students have made their mark all over the Province and the country. The school has a legacy of excellence in academics, sports and the arts that is second to none in the Province.

More than that, Mr. Speaker, Laval High School has been a most significant force in the unification of the communities in the region.

Laval will be replaced by a new high school set to open in September 2009. The community looks forward to the new facility which will be a tremendous addition to the area.

Mr. Speaker, from July 17-20 this year, a huge forty-year reunion of former students and staff of Laval will be held in Placentia, celebrating the school's rich history and legacy. There will be concerts, dances, dinner theatres, outdoor activities, athletic events, and much more. It is much anticipated and I look forward to participating.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Laval High School on forty years of excellence and wish the Laval community all the success in its upcoming reunion celebrations.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this great hon. House today to congratulate the North Atlantic Refining Company located in Come by Chance for reaching an all-time record with respect to No Lost Time Injury. The refinery has reached an all-time high of 1.9 million person hours, which is equivalent to 467 days, as of March 2008. From the period of October 26, 2006 to February 6, 2008, there were No Lost Time Injuries.

The refinery has been a landmark in Come by Chance since 1973, and continues to give back to the surrounding communities, not just economically by providing employment but also to the foundations like the Discovery Health Care Foundation's Ultrasound Unit Campaign.

The North Atlantic Refinery is a recipient of the Memorial University's Employer Partner Award for 2008. This award is from the Division of Co-operative Education and it has recognized the refinery for its outstanding support of co-operative education at Memorial University.

North Atlantic has had a long-lasting relationship with this program, and many of the company's supervisors and managers are graduates of our very own Memorial University Engineering Co-op Program.

I would like to ask this great hon. House to join me in extending a job well done to the workers of the North Atlantic Refining Company in Come by Chance for their No Lost Time Injuries, and to applaud the refinery for investing in our youth and our post-secondary graduates in keeping them in Newfoundland.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to honour a volunteer from this Province who has received a national award for her hard work and dedication to Easter Seals. Eileen Bartlett was one of five recipients of the Today's Parent For Kids' Sake Awards presented in Toronto earlier this month. Eileen was awarded $10,000, which she has donated to Easter Seals Newfoundland and Labrador.

Ms Bartlett has dedicated her talents and countless hours as a full-time volunteer for Easter Seals. She is part of a team of volunteers and staff who work to maximize the abilities and enhance the quality of life for 1,500 children in our Province with physical disabilities through the provision of recreational, social and other therapeutic programs, direct assistance, education and advocacy.

Eileen Bartlett's time, effort, and dedication to these children and their families inspire us all. She gives over thirty-five hours a week to Easter Seals; something if everyone could contribute just a quarter of that time, our communities and non-profit organizations would thrive at a level that would improve the lives of every single one of us.

Mr. Speaker, it is vital to the recruitment and retention of volunteers that we as a government recognize and celebrate their contributions. Ms Bartlett is one of 187,000 volunteers in this Province who contribute thirty-five million hours of valuable unpaid time to their communities and community organizations each year.

As I stand here today to thank and congratulate Eileen, I would also like to express my gratitude to those volunteers around the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador for the work they do to provide a quality of life for their communities.

Our mandate is to develop a relationship between government and the sector that is dynamic, productive and of benefit to communities across the Province. We want to help organizations address the challenges they face in recruitment and retention, governance and other questions of capacity as they wrestle with the effects of a changing society. We, as a government need vibrant organizations like Easter Seals and volunteers like Eileen Bartlett as we work together to provide services and programs to families and children in communities across this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all hon. members join with me today in recognizing Eileen Bartlett for her Kids' Sake Award from Today's Parent. She is truly an extraordinary individual and someone who deserves this award and certainly all the recognition we can bestow upon her.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement today.

We also, in the Opposition, would like to congratulate and thank Eileen Bartlett for the many, many hours that she contributes in her volunteer efforts on behalf of the Easter Seals for Newfoundland and Labrador. I do not know the lady personally, but anyone who has been reading the media in this Province in the last number of years is certainly well aware of her involvement in communities.

Also, of course, there are 187,000 other volunteers in this Province and it is fair to say that they are the backbone of our communities in many cases, whether it is recreational groups, social clubs or fire departments. Like Ms Bartlett, they as well deserve to be congratulated.

So hats off to the volunteers, and I am pleased to see as well that we are now going to have a minister who is actually dedicated to the volunteers and the non-profit sector. We look forward in the future to seeing the minister roll out his plans on how we are going to connect more appropriately and more effectively with those groups.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

I, too, thank the minister for the advanced copy of his statement.

I am really pleased to join with him in congratulating Eileen Bartlett on this award, an award that is definitely worthy of all the work that she has done. I am really pleased too, to see the minister in his statement, in recognizing the work of volunteers, say that he wants to help organizations address the challenges that they face in recruitment and retention.

I would just like to say, just from my own experience, that sometimes one of the things that groups need, especially if they want to get their message out and increase their membership, sometimes a bit of seed money, and it does not take much money.

I remember there was an organization that used to exist, it does not anymore, it was a national church funding agency for volunteer groups for social justice groups or groups that were involved in community economic development, and sometimes the grants were only $2,000 and $3,000 but it was amazing what a community group when it can get a newsletter out and get messages out about their - maybe an AGM and get newsletters out to the community, how much seed money can help them go from there. As a matter of fact, the bakery on Bell Island, which is owned by the co-op over there, started from that kind of an organization with seed money of $3,000.

So, I will just put that out to the minister as another thought of ways in which to support the groups.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, an Assistant Deputy Minister of Health testified yesterday at the Cameron inquiry that briefing notes she had prepared were changed by others within the department without her notification.

I ask the Premier today: Is it an accepted practice within your government that officials are permitted to change briefing notes without advising or checking the accuracy of those changes with the original author within those departments?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, the person the member opposite is referring to is an assistant deputy minister in my department, responsible for board services, and she is testifying before the Cameron inquiry. I think this is her second, if not third, day that she is appearing before the inquiry, and over the course of that period of testimony she is providing her knowledge and insights in terms of the knowledge she had around the issues surrounding the ER-PR testing, the involvement she had on behalf of the department, any functions she may have carried out, whether it is the creation of briefing notes, providing advice to the minister or providing advice to others, and the interaction she may have had with the health authority.

I say, Mr. Speaker, she is on the stand as we speak, and I think she is due to be there again this afternoon, I believe, Mr. Speaker. I think it is important, while she is giving her testimony, it is important to allow her that process, to provide a full picture, a full picture –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

- and, in the spirit of the member's request from last week, allow the inquiry to unfold. When her testimony is completed, then we will have an opportunity to chat with her and others about the information that they did have.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister might note that my questions have nothing to do with the individual in question but have to do with a practice that is ongoing within government departments. Mr. Speaker, there were changes that were provided, that had inaccurate information. That information was given to the minister and, in its essence, provided in the House of Assembly.

I ask the Premier today: What actions are being taken within your government to correct this problematic process and to ensure that inaccurate information is not fed to the House of Assembly on other occasions by your ministers?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I said a moment ago, Mr. Speaker, it is inappropriate for me or anyone else in this House to comment on testimony that is being made as we speak, but I can comment on testimony that I gave, personally, when I was there.

I had indicated very clearly to the commissioner a process that has changed, that changed since last year, I say, Mr. Speaker, the manner in which we sign off on briefing notes. Historically, briefing notes were prepared by officials in the department and they may or may not ever come across a minister's desk.

We have a mechanism now in place, Mr. Speaker, where briefing notes are prepared, they are signed off by - and they may be prepared by anyone in a particular department. They are signed off by a senior official, and they make their way through to the minister's office, and the minister, in fact, now signs off on briefing notes and dates them.

So that is a change we have made as a result of insights we gained last year as we discussed this total issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We know the notes are prepared, we know they are often changed without authorization, and we also know that oftentimes they are not read – but, Mr. Speaker, legislation introduced by government to remove accountability and oversight provisions of the Energy Corporation, including the Access to Information Act, the Auditor General's Act, the Citizens' Representative Act, and the Public Tender Act, is very significant and unprecedented.

I ask the Premier: Did the government consult with the Auditor General for his input before this legislation was drafted?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, what the government has done on this is basically hired the best experts they can, involved the best expertise, looked at jurisdictions throughout Canada, looked at jurisdictions throughout the world, and have developed the best model for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The intent here is to have this Energy Corporation maximize its return, maximize its profits, maximize its dividends, become a very, very profitable asset, owned by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is our sole goal.

The restrictions which the hon. Leader of the Opposition refers to are very, very narrow restrictions, and that is to ensure that this company can be successful, that it can operate in a competitive environment, that it allows itself to enter into partnerships with major corporations around the world who would not enter into these partnerships if not for these provisions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The legislation does override important acts within the House that offer for transparency and accountability.

I ask the Premier if there was consultation with the Auditor General before drafting this legislation. I also ask if there was any consultation taken with the Citizens' Representative as well.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the Transparency and Accountability Act, in fact, applies to this corporation. The Access to Information applies to this corporation. The Auditor General Act applies to this corporation. It cannot only be audited by the Auditor General; it will be audited privately. There will actually be an annual meeting every year. There will be disclosure to the shareholders at the annual meeting. It will operate no different than any other public company on the stock exchange.

That is all consistent with the way corporations operate, and that is all intended to make sure that it is an open and accountable and transparent corporation, but at the same time it has to have a chance. It has to have a chance to survive, it has to have an opportunity to succeed, and I can tell you quite clearly that if these provisions are not there then the Hebron deal would go down, because the equity provision that is in the Hebron deal would not take place if corporations like ExxonMobil and Chevron and Petro Canada and Norsk Hydro had to open their guts to the world.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask again, because the legislation overrides other acts of the House of Assembly that governs things like the Auditor General, the Privacy Commissioner, and the Public Tender Act, I ask again: Did government consult with the Auditor General, with the Privacy Commissioner, Mr. Speaker, with the Chief Purchasing Agent who oversees these acts of legislation within the Province?

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, this act does not override the Transparency and Accountability Act. It does not override the Auditor General. It does not override our ATIPPA legislation. What it does is constrain how commercially sensitive information gets reported.

We are responsible for transparency and accountability to the people of this Province. It is in that matter that we undertook the research that we needed to do to ensure that this company had what it needed to succeed in the marketplace, but at the same time that we were accountable to the House of Assembly and to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and here is where we are going to have the consultation and the debate, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, there was no consultation with any of these individuals.

Let me ask the Premier this question, because under the new legislation the Auditor General's responsibilities will be stifled and he will not be permitted to publicly report certain information related to the energy corporation.

I ask the Premier: Why is it important to stifle the Auditor General and hide information inside of this corporation that should be exposed to the public?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I ask members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Premier

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, there is no attempt here whatsoever to stifle the Auditor General. In fact, what is happening here is the Auditor General can perform the duties that he or she performs under the act under normal circumstances. A complete audit can actually take place.

The only thing, the only narrow issue on which the Auditor General is restricted is on the release of commercially sensitive information. For example, if ExxonMobil have some new technology that allows them to drill 300 miles below the ocean that is proprietary and no other company has it, if that was disclosed in a partnership with us and the Auditor General is aware of it, he is not allowed to disclose that type of information. These are commercially, competitive proprietary pieces of technology that are not allowed to be disclosed. There is an example of the type of situation, what it does not have.

If the Auditor General though, finds that there is a problem and he has concern during his audit, then what he can do is he can disclose to the public that he has a concern, he can make that report to the House of Assembly and then he can go to Cabinet with the specific problem and it can be dealt with at the Cabinet level. So the safeguards are actually in place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I guess it needs to be defined, the commercially sensitive aspects of this, but the reporting mechanism that is available to the Auditor General under this legislation is not consistent with the authority to report on every other government department and agency, or Crown agency. Instead, Mr. Speaker, as the Premier said, the information has to go to the Cabinet. There is no saying the Cabinet can bury this information for up to twenty years if they want to or so choose.

So I ask you, Premier: Is this an acceptable accountability regime under which this energy corporation should operate?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: First of all, this is not a Liberal Cabinet, this is a Conservative Cabinet. So -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: The second distinction that is important here is that this government is about no more giveaways, it is about increasing the value of Newfoundland and Labrador's natural resources. It is making sure that we get the best possible return from those resources and as a result, we have taken it on the chin over the last few years in attempting to get extra royalties and attempting to get equity and a fairer shake from the oil companies. We have fought it head on and we won. This is now -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Yes, sure. We signed a deal a few years ago or perhaps we could have signed the Lower Churchill deal that the crowd opposite wanted to sign, the big Grimes giveaway. They were all party to that and they were all party to Cabinet. So, what we are trying to do is enhance the value of the people's assets in this Province so that the people can get a better return, and this is how we are going to do it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to remind the Premier that laws that are set in this House of Assembly do not only apply to your government but also to successive governments.

Mr. Speaker, the energy corporation and its subsidiaries will also be exempt from the Securities Act. The Securities Act governs private companies, as the Premier will know, and certainly the companies that are involved in negotiations that they deal with.

So I ask, Mr. Speaker, why is it that the energy corporation and its subsidiaries will be exempt from the Securities Act while other private corporations have to comply?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the precedents that we are using here - we have gone all around the world and we have looked at success stories, and we just have to go a little bit west and we go to Quebec and we see the success of Quebec Hydro. Now, you know, part of their success has been done on our backs and, hopefully, over time we will be able to correct that and remedy that and straighten it out.

We have also gone to - looked at Manitoba Hydro. We have gone to Denmark, we have gone to Norway. We are even looking at corporations like Petrobras and Statoil, of course, in Norway. So what we have done is, we have looked at all of these regimes and we want to make sure that we put the best regime in place here that safeguards the interests of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador but allows us to build one of the best corporations in the world. That is really what our goal is here, to make sure that the new energy company, which has yet to have a new name or a new brand, is the very best that it can be so that it brings the very best possible returns to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and becomes an asset and becomes a corporation that we can be truly -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier to conclude his answer.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It becomes an asset that we, as people of Newfoundland and Labrador, can be truly proud of.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the new energy corporation and its subsidiary companies will also be exempt from the Public Tender Act.

I want to ask the Premier today, if he can tell me what is in the Public Tender Act that actually prevents the energy corporation from carrying out its goals of contracting for services and developments in this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this government is very supportive of the Public Tender Act. In fact, until we came to power, Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro did not have to - we brought the Public Tender Act to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. In terms of the nature of the work that the energy corporation will be undertaking, they will all be very large projects. We are talking about oil and gas developments. We are talking about the Lower Churchill. We are talking about big wind development. In these cases, Mr. Speaker, the Public Tender Act does not give us what we need in overall value of the project, ensuring that we have the overall value and the best interest of the development project taken care of. We need to do that.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer.

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are also principles of adjacency that we need to apply, that we will not be able to apply using the Public Tender Act.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is so funny because I would say to the members opposite, they like to support the Public Tender Act when it suits their need because they certainly did not use it when they did the fibre optic deal as well.

Mr. Speaker, the Public Tender Act has several clauses that allows for exemption under certain circumstances.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: I ask the Premier today: Where do you feel that the Public Tender Act is deficient in terms of not being able to meet the business needs of this new energy corporation?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When we are planning to develop a project, the one thing that we have to be absolutely sure of, before we let a contract, is that we have overall value, that the expertise is there, that all of the benchmarks that we require are going to be set and be able to be met by the people who are doing the work. All of that work has to be done beforehand, before we let a contract; not developed after the fact, because that is when we lose control.

In terms of the Public Tender Act, yes, we could apply for exemptions but they are time-consuming. Project after project that we are considering within this Energy Corporation are very large contracts, and if we have to take time to work through exemptions we will cause delays. Delays will cost us millions and millions, if not billions of dollars.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the legislation not only applies to the Energy Corp when it comes to the tendering act, but all of the subsidiary companies will also be exempt. These are companies that have not yet been set up and, Minister, you are asking us to give them carte blanche the opportunity to go out and purchase whatever services and contracts they want without going to public tender.

I ask the Premier: Do you feel it is acceptable that we would give this authority to subsidiary companies that do not even exist at this stage in the Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We understand the scope of work that is going to be undertaken by the subsidiary. In terms of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, we are more than happy for the Public Tender Act to apply. It makes sense in terms of the regular work, the regulated work of that utility, that the Public Tender Act apply.

In terms of what we are doing in our subsidiaries, Mr. Speaker, they are all very large projects. As I said, it is going to be oil and gas development. It is going to be wind development. It is going to be the Lower Churchill development. These are projects costing in the hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions of dollars, where timelines are extremely important.

We need the overall value, so we need to know who is going to do the work, we have to be assured that they are going to be able to deliver, and all of this has to be done in a timely manner.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: I say they should all be accountable to the public, too, Minister.

Any subsidiary companies of this Energy Corporation that may be created will not be set up as Crown agents is what I understand, and therefore will be subject to the guidelines that govern private corporations.

I ask the Premier: If these corporations are supposed to exist to benefit the people of the Province, where is the public control on behalf of the people?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, as I said, the controls are in place. You have to remember that these are all subsidiary companies that will have some overlap on the board of directors. There will be some different control aboard the board of directors from the energy company, the parent company, down to the subsidiary companies. So, the controls are in place to make sure that at the end of the day the top of this pyramid is Ener Co. It is a new corporation, and it has oversight of all those assets, so hopefully there will be a very profitable wind corporation, there will be a very, very profitable Lower Churchill Development Corporation, there will be A, B, C, D and E very profitable oil corporations, there may be E, F, G, H, I, J gas corporations, and then there will be Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro which is already a very successful corporation.

So, it is intended to sort of spread our subsidiary corporations, to spread out the risk as well, but to make sure that there is general oversight in Ener Co., and the shareholder of Ener Co., the Energy Corporation, are the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, we know that government appoints the board of directors for the Energy Corporation. Maybe the Premier can tell me who will appoint the board of directors for each of the subsidiary companies.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, that will be done in conjunction with the advice of Cabinet, and as well in discussions with the CEO of the Energy Corporation, because in these corporations we want to make sure that we can get the best possible people in the world, if possible.

Now, surely we would certainly like to have them 100 per cent Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and if that is the case, and they happen to be the experts in those areas, it will be 100 per cent Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

We are able to draw on expertise, though, from people who are international experts in their field, and they may be sprinkled on these boards to give us the kind of expertise and the kind of knowledge that we need to do the best possible job and get the best possible return at the end of the day.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Back in the early 1990s - and everyone in this Province will remember this - the former Administration considered the idea of privatizing Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro but significant public debate, as you will know, stopped that particular idea.

I ask the Premier today: With the secrecy and lack of accountability that will surround the new Energy Corporation, what protection is there that information will be made to the public should a future government decide to sell off or privatize sections of that corporation, such as one of the subsidiaries or shares that subsidiary might hold?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: I cannot predict what could happen if John Efford was the subsequent Leader of the Liberal Party and eventually took over a government after he ousted the Leader of the Opposition, and I cannot predict what might happen if he appoints Danny Dumaresque as Chair of Hydro at the end of the day. I cannot predict any of that; but, having said that, I can assure the Leader of the Opposition that these corporations are in good hands. This is being done in a proper manner. It is being done to the best of our ability. The safeguards are in place to make sure that the public interest is protected; but, as well, we also have to balance that with the fact that these corporations have to be very, very competitive and have to be in a position whereby they can maximize their returns to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and that is what we are doing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Our concern is that there is public investment dollars within the new energy corporation and we know that some of that money is going to be used to purchase shares in the Hebron deal, if that is a successful negotiation.

Mr. Speaker, we want to ensure that there are accountability measures if some aspect of shares in that subsidiary is being sold off and done so without full public disclosure, and I ask: What provisions are provided for in the legislation to ensure that that does not happen without full public disclosure?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is one shareholder to this company, and it is the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. This company is answerable to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: In terms of transparency and accountability, the Auditor General is in there. We will have consolidated annual reports. We will have consolidated annual, audited statements. We will have a public annual general meeting.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of our consideration, given what the Premier just said, we are building in every safeguard we can, just in going to the ends of our imagination and even considering the fact that John Efford could be Premier and Danny Dumaresque could be CEO, we are making sure that this company is in good shape and (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My next question is for the Minister of Natural Resources as well, and it is on the insurance of water rights on the Lower Churchill River being transferred to the Energy Corporation. I guess my question is that bill extinguishes the rights of individuals or groups on the Lower Churchill River and its tributaries from any compensation or recourse within the courts, is what I understand.

I ask the minister today: How does that impact on those who have traditional rights and historic rights and attachment in and around that river and the tributaries that lead into it?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I can only assume that the Leader of the Opposition is referring to Aboriginal rights, and there is no legislation that we have, that we can pass in this House, that extinguishes Aboriginal rights. The only way that Aboriginal rights can be extinguished is by voluntary surrender or by an amendment to the Constitution of Canada. This legislation does not impact at all anyone who has Aboriginal rights with regard to the Churchill River.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question was not just restricted to Aboriginal groups but to other traditional users or people that would occupy and use that particular river.

I guess my next question to the minister would be: Has there been any consultation with Aboriginal groups or other groups within the Labrador region that would have been traditional users or continued users of those rivers?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides us with a tool, a mechanism to award water rights. That is all it does.

Right now, in terms of all other rivers in this Province, they are governed under the Water Resources Act through the Department of Environment. There is only one exception to that, and that is the Churchill River. The Lower Churchill Development Act gives us the mechanism to award those rights to LCDC, the Lower Churchill Development Corporation Limited, but that is all we can do. We are restricted in that piece.

We have decided that our Energy Corp. is going to provide the lead on the development of the Lower Churchill, therefore we need a mechanism to award them the water rights. All this legislation does is give us the mechanism, the tool to do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

I actually have a question that will follow up directly to the answer that the minister just gave. I recognize that rights cannot be taken away, especially Aboriginal and Treaty rights because they are affirmed in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. However, I think any piece of legislation we have should be very clear about that recognition.

So I ask the minister: Would she be open to making amendments to this act, making it clear that that section is honoured by this piece of legislation?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, we have had this discussion. It is not necessary to amend this legislation for protection of Aboriginal rights. The only way that Aboriginal rights can be extinguished is by voluntary surrender or by a change to the federal Constitution. That is the only way, Mr. Speaker. Amendments are not required.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think I differ with the minister but I am going to wait until the bills come to the floor and we have full discussion. I think there are questions to be asked and I think that the Aboriginal peoples are asking those questions as well.

I would like to come back then to another issue that the minister has already given some answers to, and it has to do with the Public Tender Act. The minister has confirmed what we were told this morning by people from her department and by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro about the act not being flexible enough to deal with mega-projects, and I understand that.

I ask the minister: Was any thought given to mending the Public Tender Act, so that our Public Tender Act could deal with large projects and give the flexibility so that we do not have, even if exemptions have to happen, that we don't have to have costly delays - could amendments be made to the act itself?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, we considered that. We looked very closely at the Public Tender Act. Our government has as its hallmark, openness and accountability and transparency.

The Public Tender Act means something to this government, and so we look for ways to apply it. There are even some pieces of the Public Tender Act now that allow for exemptions. We have looked to see if they would apply, if they could facilitate the kind of work that the Energy Corp. is going to be undertaking, and it cannot, Mr. Speaker.

So we need to have this exemption for this company to function properly and do the work on behalf of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and ensure that it is done using best possible practices which get the best return for the people of the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In the briefing that we were given this morning, we had quite a bit of discussion about the Public Tender Act. The officials there did point out to us that our act is in conflict with some other important things, like our energy plan, like the Atlantic Accord, and things such as adjacency, local benefits, full and fair opportunity, and first consideration for employment and business do not get covered under the Public Tender Act.

So I ask the minister: Isn't it time to bring the Public Tender Act into line with the goals of government for developing our economy according to these principles?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am happy to report that a review of the Public Tender Act has already taken place, by my colleague in the Department of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motions.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that under Standing Order 11 I shall move that the House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, May 29; and further, I give notice that under Standing Order 11 I shall move that the House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 29.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion.

Answers to questions for which notice has been given.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not sure if this is the right spot in the Order Paper to deal with this, but I know yesterday the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile asked a question about whether the provincial government had any funding in Island Aggregates, and I suggested that I would report back to the House as soon as I had an answer. I thought I was going to do it yesterday, but I indicated that I knew we had some funding in there. Should I do it here?

There were two loans to Island Aggregates back in the mid-1990s, 1994 and 1995, one for approximately $50,000 and one for approximately $35,000, and both those loans have been paid back in full prior to 1999.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further answers to questions for which notice has been given.

Petitions.

Orders of the Day.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, it being Private Members' Day I call Motion 1 from the Order Paper as moved by the Member for St. John's East.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUCKINGHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly my pleasure to introduce this motion today, and if I may, I would like to read the motion into the record:

WHEREAS members of the House of Assembly are provided with one paper copy of documents tabled in the House;

AND WHEREAS the Transparency and Accountability Act has greatly increased the number of documents that require tabling and distribution;

AND WHEREAS these circumstances have necessitated an increased amount of paper to meet these requirements;

AND WHEREAS the Legislative Library is the only location where a complete set of tabled documents for each session can be viewed;

AND WHEREAS the government has committed to sound recycling/reduction strategies;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly investigate, in a timely manner, procedures which will reduce the use of paper for tabled documents to a minimum.

Mr. Speaker, the impetus for this private member's motion actually came within the first couple of months of my having been elected as an MHA. I knew that there would be a lot of information to try and wrap my head around, however I was not prepared for the onslaught of reports of various varieties that came to my attention.

As the months went on I noticed that this volume of reports continued to increase to a point where I have a full shelf which is now full of reports. To be honest with you, Mr. Speaker, I have looked at the cover of every report and some of them I have an interest in, particularly with regard to my district, particularly with regard to this region, and there are other reports which, while required, may not necessarily be something that would fall under the purview of being the Member for St. John's East.

As these reports started to mount I asked myself the question: Is there any way to reduce the amount of paper that comes to me as an MHA? When I extrapolated, I realized that not only was I receiving these reports but all of the MHAs must be receiving these reports, and perhaps others also.

I had a discussion with the Minister of Environment and within the space of about two sentences realized we were both on the same – dare I say it – page of being concerned about the amount of paper that comes into this House, and perhaps, if there was a better way.

The Transparency and Accountability Act has had an unintended consequence of requiring increased paper consumption. One of the things that we do by laying out what all of the different arms of government take care of is that in notifying everyone paper is generated. Right now, the distribution list is mandated at a minimum of fifty-four copies. That includes the forty-eight MHAs, the House Leaders, the Clerk's office and the Speaker's office, and those are only minimums, Mr. Speaker. I suggest to you that even more are produced.

One might, for example, look at the annual report for different departments. They not only want to meet their mandatory requirements but also go beyond to schools, libraries, inter-provincial agencies and national agencies. I suggest to you there is quite a lot of paper being produced as a result of being open and transparent.

If we could perhaps do some of the math – and I am being a bit conservative here - there are approximately 165 documents that are required under the Transparency and Accountability Act; a minimum of a fifty-four person distribution list, multiply that by an average of about fifteen pages per document, Mr. Speaker, and we are over 222,000 pages of information that is being sent out. This is, again, conservative.

If you want to do the math on it a little further, this roughly translates into about forty-five cartons of paper. Now, I know that the economy of the Province is not going to rise or fall based on forty-five cartons of paper, but I think what we have here is an opportunity for the House to perhaps set a precedent in terms of standards, in terms of practices, to demonstrate not only that we have a legal authority to talk about reducing, reusing and environmental policies, but I think perhaps we can demonstrate that we not only can say this is what we should do, but I think we can demonstrate that we are prepared to do what we say people should do.

Currently, Mr. Speaker, according to some estimates, only 35 per cent of the documents that are tabled are available online. There is no centralized repository, and there is some concern over the links being degraded over the years as more information gets put into the government websites. Some work has already been started on this issue. Members of the House have been surveyed, just asked their opinion on where they think this kind of an initiative might go and how they might react to it. Initial discussions have also been held with the Legislative Library, with the Clerk's Office, the Speaker's Office, and essentially there seems to be a willingness to investigate where this could go. I think this is the main tenor of this motion, to investigate where this could go.

There are a few things, though, Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out as to what the motion is not. It is not an attempt to eliminate paper copies from the House of Assembly. It is not an attempt to disregard the personal preferences of individual members as to how they would like to receive the information that is very much a part of keeping this House going, the information that allows us to discuss information, to discuss issues in an intelligent rational way, because full information is available.

Mr. Speaker, there are still many questions in front of us in terms of protocols and procedures. Again, this motion does presume to be prescriptive as to what we should do, but we do have to take into account the different realities, whether it be on the government side, the Opposition side, on the operational side or on the public side. We want to move ahead with this. We want to take into consideration concerns, feedback and suggestions.

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to speak for very long on this. I will have an opportunity to clue up debate, but I do look forward to hearing the comments of my hon. colleagues as the beginning of an open process in which to bring about not only efficiencies and savings in the operations of the House but also to establish that this House – and I emphasize the House and all members in it –are serious about participating in sound environmental and economic procedures that will have, I believe, a long-term example being set as to how things can be done.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I will look forward to the future comments.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Are there any further participants in the debate on the private member's resolution today?

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sorry; I was occupied there for a few moments with the Clerk of the House, on some House matters.

We will be speaking very briefly. I think I will probably be, at least for the Opposition, the only speaker. The only comment we would make is, we will be voting in favour of the resolution. It is what we would consider a fairly motherhood statement. In fact, we thought there were far more substantive issues in this Province that would have occupied a private member's resolution, but we will be voting for this. In fact, to our knowledge, we have already had consultations as an Opposition with people in the government and in the House circles as to recycling initiatives that are underway. We did not think we needed necessarily have a specific private member's motion to deal with it. We were already on record as saying - and I spoke to the lady, I do believe, who heads up the Legislative Library, in that regard, and indicated to her that we were certainly in favour of having one hard copy provided to our office and the rest would be on-line so that we would save any duplication costs in that regard. So, we do not have a problem with that.

The only concern we have is that this resolution does not go far enough, if anything; because if the government - not the private member, but if the government - of this Province at the current time were truly serious about recycling, we would have some kind of a provincial recycling program for paper as opposed to the non-existence of that right now.

This is a start, and we are in favour. As we say, we thought there were far more serious matters right now, but we will be voting in favour of it.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can honestly say I did not expect to be up on my feet in the House this afternoon as quickly as I have been. That is the shortest portion of debate I have witnessed in this House thus far.

I do appreciate the opportunity to get up and speak just briefly on the motion that the Member for St. John's East has put forth today, and I am pleased to second that motion. While this may seem like a very narrow, specific issue, I think it is very important to realize what we are really speaking to here is the broader issue and our broader concern, and this government's concern, for environmental issues.

Mr. Speaker, we live in the age of the paperless office, and the reality is that in any offices I have worked in, they have been far from paperless. Particularly in government – first at the municipal level, and now at the provincial level – there is no end to the amount of paper that is required and that is consumed, but I really believe there are many things that each of us can do to improve our environment.

This government has demonstrated its commitment to improving our environment. I also believe that waste reduction is the best waste management option because it means that there is less waste to manage. There are simple things we can do every day to reduce the amount of paper that is being consumed in each of our organizations, and particularly here as Members of the House of Assembly as well.

I certainly applaud this Province's waste management strategy. It encourages reducing waste, reusing and recycling waste products – and paper accounts for the highest percentage, by weight, of waste produced by most office operations, so there is reason to be concerned and there is reason for this government and Members of the House of Assembly to take action.

This motion specifically deals with the amount of paper being used within the House of Assembly, but I think we do need to look broader than that, and we need to adopt some paper-wise practices for reducing paper usage, not only in the House of Assembly but throughout our communities in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that a solid first step is to reduce paper copies of documents and reports wherever and whenever possible. This motion is a positive move in that direction and, coupled with other initiatives that we as a government can implement, I really believe that we can do our part.

There are some simple changes that we can make in our workplace to reduce the amount of waste generated. There are obvious practices, such as purchasing products that are reusable, returnable or refillable, purchasing products with less packaging. We can buy products that contain post-consumer recycled material, such as paper and corporate promotional items, and use recycled toner cartridges, for instance, and send used cartridges for recycling.

So, in keeping with the spirit of this motion today, Mr. Speaker, I think one obvious thing we can do is access reports on-line, and access reports electronically, rather than constantly and always printing hard copies. We can utilize the Legislative Library, that keeps copies of documents that are tabled on hand.

I obviously support printing on recycled paper, and printing and photocopying documents, both double-sided, and government has taken positive steps in this area as well.

Reducing the amount of paper that this government uses will have a positive impact on the environment, but it is just a starting point and there are many other environmentally-focused initiatives that we can implement and continue to be a role model for governments and for organizations everywhere. It is important that we lead by example, Mr. Speaker, by implementing simple, everyday paper waste reduction initiatives, such as printing double-sided, as I mentioned a moment ago.

Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to be involved in paper recycling during my municipal life, as well, and this government, over the last number of years, has provided funding to municipalities to get engaged in recycling, particularly when it comes to cardboard, paper, and fibre products, and there has been quite a bit of success in this area already.

For instance, in the case of Mount Pearl, the program started in October 2005. It was a mandatory curbside recycling program where recyclable materials, fibre products, were picked up at the door, and paper products were stored in clear plastic bags and picked up as part of regular garbage day pickup. To date, almost 2,000 tonnes of fibre product, which represents approximately 11 per cent of all of the household waste for the city, has been diverted from the landfill at Robin Hood Bay - almost 2,000 tonnes.

This is significant, Mr. Speaker, and not only is it good news for the environment; it represents a savings in dollars for taxpayers as well. There has been a savings in tipping fees of $56,000 and there is revenue generated per tonne for the waste materials as well, resulting in another $20,000 in revenue for the municipality.

So this government is certainly very supportive of our recycling initiatives and I believe that, while today we are talking about paper reduction, that is just one of the three Rs: reduce, reuse, recycle. I think that the steps we are taking to further recycling efforts in this Province are quite significant as well.

Mr. Speaker, reducing the amount of paper we use within our government is a great way to start making a positive impact. As a previous speaker alluded to, we are already taking steps within the House of Assembly to move in this direction. It is a great opportunity for all of us to lead by example.

The world has a huge appetite for paper, even in these so-called days of the paperless office. In a lifetime, the average North American will throw away 600 times his or her adult weight in garbage. Here in Newfoundland and Labrador, we generate 400,000 tonnes of waste each and every year, so it is great to see that government is aggressively moving forward with waste management initiatives that will benefit every community in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly, once again, want to reiterate my support for the motion. I think that anything we can do as a government and as Members of the House of Assembly to encourage paper-wise practices is a good thing, and I think that the many environmental initiatives that this government has undertaken over the last number of years are certainly helping to move this Province in the right direction.

I believe that we are demonstrating good citizenship and strong environmental leadership, and I am pleased to second this motion once again.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I am happy to speak to this motion. In some ways it is a motherhood issue. I think that we are all committed to recycling of all kinds, not just fibre recycling, though that is what this motion is particularly dealing with. We are not going to start the investigation here obviously, but there are so many ways in which I think we could have less paper.

You take, for example, the hon. Member for Mount Pearl has mentioned it, so many of the reports that we receive. Our offices are just getting more and more reports. With recent legislation, there are more reports that we are receiving than we ever did before. I do question the need, in particular, for reports to come to us in paper form. I am assuming that there has to be some way in which reports have to be tabled in the House, and maybe that is the kind of thing that could be investigated.

Does the tabling of reports in the House have to mean that the actual report comes to the House or could there be a notification from a department that their report is now on-line on their site for members to read? Maybe that is something that could be looked at because the number of reports that are accumulating, I know in our office, is really almost beyond being able to take care of in terms of space, et cetera. Then, of course, you do not have to keep them because they are on-line and they are also in the Legislative Library. So we get them and we can just recycle them because we do not need them to refer to again. While we can recycle them, and that is good, it is still a whole use of paper ahead of time that is not needed.

The other thing is things even as simple as when we get our bills. I know the other day I was mentioning to the mover of this motion that I had five copies of two bills that we had gotten that day. We have copies up in the office. I have copies here, and then for some reason I have a second copy here. By the time I finished, I had five copies of one bill. So I do not even know why that kind of thing is happening.

I think there are many ways. I think that the motion probably relates to what is already happening in the House of Assembly where the employee who is responsible for this is investigating with regard to recycling. I think it is the reducing that we have to look at here in the House. I think the recycling, in terms of the House of Assembly, is under control or being looked, that is the recycling part, but I think what we have to do here in the House is reduce. I think that is the issue. Even things as simple as when we do our own statements and the ministers do their statements, we could photocopy back to back. Instead of single-sided pages, have double-sided pages. There are all kinds of ways like that that we can reduce.

I think that, again, what is even more important is that we speed up, as much as possible, what is happening in the whole Province with regard to recycling. Again, I know government is doing some things around that but I think there has to be much more done, especially - and I have said this before in the House and I am glad to have this opportunity to say it again - when it comes to helping smaller communities because smaller communities do not have the resources to get recycling programs up and running the way Corner Brook or St. John's or even Lewisporte does. It is the provincial responsibility to aid that. So, I look forward to hearing more from the Minister of Environment and Conservation with regard to the plan for recycling in the Province.

I think that is all the comments that I have to make, Mr. Speaker, and I am happy to have the opportunity to have done it.

Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I want to commend the Member for St. John's East for bringing forward this private member's motion. Mr. Speaker, I happen to believe that this is a very important motion and it is an opportunity for all of us as members in this House, all forty-eight members, to show our leadership in such an important area.

I really appreciate the comments of the Leader of the NDP, and a little later I will speak to your comments about recycling and what we are planning on doing with that.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say, I am little surprised, while I am very appreciative of the Opposition House Leader and his support and the support of the Opposition members opposite, I am very surprised that they have not had something more to say on something of such substance. Certainly, over the past number of months in this House myself and the Minister of Municipal Affairs have been asked a lot of questions during Question Period about recycling and waste management and so on and so forth. So, I would have thought this would have been a really good opportune time to speak to such an important issue.

Mr. Speaker, this is all about sustainability and it is all about making sound decisions for the future generations of this Province and our young people, and who better to set an example for those people than all of us as members in this House. When we are elected as members in our districts, certainly we are looked upon as leaders. Again, I want to commend the member for bringing it forward. I think it is a very valuable and a very worthwhile private member's motion.

So, Mr. Speaker, given the fact that the Opposition members are not going to speak too much to it, I am going to take ample opportunity to use my time. It is not everyday we get an opportunity to talk about the good things that are happening in our department. It seems in government a lot of the negative things get more attention. So, I am certainly going to take my time to speak to it.

Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that little things certainly go a long way. While this motion may seem like a small action in our greater plan for waste management, it is really the sum of those small actions that will get us, as a Province, where we need to be in terms of waste management. The simplest of the individual acts can certainly have great impacts on long-term sustainability in our global society. Anything and everything that we can do as individuals or organizations or businesses or in this case government to protect our environment, and even on such a small scale such as this private member's motion, will benefit generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, when I first became Minister of Environment and Conservation, one of the first priorities that I set for myself was kind of to do a scan of our department and see if there was anything that we could do to change any actions within our department and anyway that we could reduce our environmental footprint. I quickly learned that our department has done a lot of work to green up our office.

For instance, in our office the plastic cutlery is all replaced by the real cutlery. We only use real plates and mugs, and I would dare anybody to come over to the Department of Environment with a Styrofoam coffee cup, Mr. Speaker. We use tea towels instead of paper towel. As you can see from my notes, we use double-sided printing and we certainly encourage people in the office to turn off their lights at night and shut down computers and so on. So, I must say, the staff in the department are very passionate about the environment. They have done a fabulous job and hopefully some of the things that we have said here today other departments can take the lead and do the same in their department.

Mr. Speaker, I soon realized that our department had all of this greening up down pat. So then I said: okay, well our department is doing a fabulous job, so now I am going to take a scan around government and see how we are doing as a whole.

Mr. Speaker, when the former Minister of Environment and Conservation was there, who is now the current Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, he did bring in an anti-idling campaign so that cars would not be idling in front of our government buildings. So, that was certainly a step in the right direction in terms of environmental protection.

Mr. Speaker, I did not have to go too far before I realized that there is something that we really could do to make a significant difference in government. In fact, it was a pet peeve of mine since being elected, which is nearly a little over four-and-a-half years, close to five years now. It is the first time being in this House, and the abundance and the amount of paper that we would go through in this House of Assembly.

I do read all of the documents. Some of them I read in more detail than others, and certainly that is true of all members in the House. There are areas that interest some of us more so than others. I just thought it was excessive, and I agree with the Leader of the NDP. While we do a lot on recycling, this motion is strictly to reduce the number of tabled documents and the paper used in the House.

As the Member for St. John's East had mentioned - who is also the Legislative Assistant to the Department of Environment - he and I had discussed this and, as you can tell from the comments, he has done a lot of work in this area in terms of gathering information from MHAs. I understand the House has put out a survey to MHAs. He has had discussions with the Legislative Library and he has really, really, delved into this project and I commend him for that.

Mr. Speaker, I do want to point out for members of the House, I would not want any Members of the House of Assembly to think that this initiative that we are discussing here today to reduce paper will in any way detract from openness, transparency and accountability, which are all serious focuses for our government. That is not what this motion is about. In no way, by any shape, by any means, are we trying to limit access to government documents. Mr. Speaker, it is really quite the opposite.

Once we go through how we can implement this, in fact, it may just be the opposite in that these documents will be more open, accountable and transparent to the public, but what this is really about is an environmentally-sound initiative and, as I said, it is an opportunity for government to lead by example and just to do our part to protect and preserve the environment.

Mr. Speaker, I believe the Member for St. John's East also alluded to this, but we are certainly cognizant that not every individual in this House may have a comfort level with technology, and some of them may not want to access this through the Internet, and some of them certainly may want paper copies. We are certainly going to work with all members of the House.

The main goal is to reduce the number of paper copies. We certainly will not eliminate them, and we certainly agree that critics and Opposition House Leaders and House Leaders, there are still a certain numbers of copies that we are going to require, but we can move from the 222,000 pieces of paper that come into this House; we can certainly move to reduce that. As I said, we understand there are going to be exceptions to the initiative, but we will certainly gladly accommodate in those situations.

Again, Mr. Speaker, it is about a small step. It is an extra step. It is one of the many steps towards having a sustainable environment. As I said, it is some of those small steps that, at the end of the day, really add up to make a difference.

Mr. Speaker, if this motion is passed, which I am hopeful that it will be, given the support that we received from the other side, and we find a balanced approach to the solution to accommodate the needs of all members, this will be another step in our Let's Get To Half campaign. This campaign is managed through the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board, and the purpose of the campaign is to educate and raise awareness as to the importance of implementing environmentally sustainable and responsible waste management practices.

Mr. Speaker, in this Province it is a time now for a shift from a throw-away society and a wasteful society to a society that is about conserving. Certainly, while we are taking the lead, as a government today, to reduce the number of paper, we certainly encourage businesses and other organizations to do the same.

We live in an age of technology now, where there are a lot of computers and cellphones and all types of e-waste, and certainly our government, with MMSB, is working on the best fit and the best strategy for our Province in terms of e-waste.

Mr. Speaker, in 2005 our government announced the Climate Change Action Plan, and we will be updating that action plan this year. Basically, the action plan in the past was to talk about how to reduce climate change and greenhouse gases, and the next part of that climate change plan now will be to look at the adaptation side. Certainly, that is going to be really important for this Province, being such a resource-based Province.

Mr. Speaker, just over a month or so ago, in Budget 2008, the Department of Environment and Conservation announced a significant amount of money purposely focused towards climate change. We announced $850,000, and that would go towards updating our Climate Change Action Plan. It would also go to outreach projects for groups like the Conservation Corps and Ocean Net, and all the good work that they do.

Some of the money will also go towards a climate change registry where we will, in fact, register the greenhouse gases that we produce here as a Province, and register that into an overall registry. Also, we have $620,000 announced for year one of our $2 million Green Fund. This Green Fund really is an opportunity – and I would certainly welcome all forty-eight members in the House to bring back the message to their constituencies that we are actively pursuing and would like to have applications submitted under this Green Fund – it is an opportunity for communities and smaller community groups, such as the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi had mentioned, what some of the smaller communities could do. This would be an opportunity under that Green Fund to reduce their environmental footprint.

Mr. Speaker, in the global scheme of things Newfoundland and Labrador is a very small contributor to world emissions. In fact, we only account for 1.4 per cent of the Canadian emissions, and Canada itself only accounts for 1.5 per cent of all global emissions. As I said, the impacts on a resource-dependent province such as ours are significant and impacts in terms of forestry, agriculture, wildlife, even the tourism industry, the transportation sector and so on.

So, Mr. Speaker, as I said, this private member's motion today, brought in by the Member for St. John's East, is an opportunity for our government to lead by example. It is a very important initiative in trying to initiate change in our collective way of thinking to become more environmentally responsible. It is important that we, as a government, do our part to lead the way to finding such solutions. As the Member for Mount Pearl mentioned, certainly recycling is one of those other Rs but reducing paper and reducing is certainly a viable means wherever possible, to reduce the impact that we have on our environment.

I see that my time is getting short and I certainly welcome comment, if there is any further comment from the floor but, as I said, this paper reduction strategy can play a significant role in helping us work towards environmental sustainability.

Before I close off, I just want to let all members know that next week is Environment Week, June 1 to the 7, and we will be having a luncheon on Monday to highlight the awards. Some people in the Province have done significant work in local communities and organizations and individuals. I just want to end by saying that we really should work together to create a better place for us to live and to work and to bring up our families, and we should really begin this work right here within our own government.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It gives me pleasure and a privilege to stand for a few minutes and speak on this private member's motion. I will start off by reading: Therefore be it resolved that the House of Assembly investigate, in a timely manner procedures which will reduce the use of paper for tabled documents to a minimum.

I want to start off by congratulating the Member for St. John's East. As my former colleague who just spoke mentioned, the work that he has put into this and some of the research that he is carrying out, he is to be commended for that. I think, Mr. Speaker, all we have to do in order for us to move forward with such an initiative as this, we just have to kind of look back and reflect a little bit as to where we are.

In preparing for this, I jotted down a couple of points. If we look at environmental awareness today, I almost compare it to where smoking may have been a number of years back. Right now, all of our population certainly may not be all environmentally aware, but there is one thing about it, the majority of our society is very much more environmentally aware than they were, let's say, twenty years ago.

I think about the community that I live in, a very small community, a very rural community, a fishing community that I have lived in for thirty years - it will be thirty years this August. I recall going out there and being around the wharf where fishermen were, and whether they were taking out of the cartons the herring that they were using for bait or whether it was the fuel, the oil container that they were putting the oil in their boat, traditionally what they would have done, is once they poured the oil out or once they took the herring out of the bait box, what did they do? They would fling it overboard. Plastic bags were often thrown overboard, but today when I go into that community, it is very much different. On the wharf right now you will see a bin where they can throw their garbage. There is a container where they dump their oil that they are no longer using and a place for them to throw their old containers in. So that kind of thing is very much different.

Again, I was just listening to the radio today and there was a comment on there about the use of generators at people's cabins. We have people now who are investing in technology such as wind energy, or solar energy, to operate their cabins when they are out in the country. Those things are very much different today than they were years ago.

I guess all we have to do every now and then is, especially after the winter, look along our roadsides and we will see that there are still many in our society who choose to roll down the window and throw out the Tim Horton's cup, or they throw out their McDonald's bag, or whatever product they decide to throw out their window, and as a result of it, periodically - I heard this morning on the Trans-Canada, I believe it was between St. John's and Whitbourne, you have a group of people that is travelling the highway, picking up the refuse and the garbage along the way. So, as much as we think that we are becoming more and more environmentally friendly, we still have a segment of the population that we have to convince and we have to encourage them to come onboard with that.

Mr. Speaker, I would say to you, maybe not so much the older teens but I am willing to bet you that many of our younger children that are in school are very much environmentally aware. It is a part of the curriculum that children are exposed to now. As a result of it, you will often hear some parents saying, that as we attempt to move people more towards recycling, it is the children who often lead the way.

I remember a campaign that the Newfoundland and Labrador Fire Chief's Association attempted to do a number of years back when smoke detectors were coming on stream first. They attempted to get people to put smoke detectors into their homes. They went to the adults and tried to get the adults to come onside with it. That did not work, so where did they go to? They went to the primary schools. They went to the Grades 1, 2, 3's and the kindergartens because they knew that if sir or miss said that a smoke detector had to go into the home, it was going to go there, because most of these children went home and said: mom and dad, sir or miss said this has to happen, and it happened. As a result of it, they saw that more homes installed smoke detectors. Sometimes it is a matter of having the youth leading the adults. As we get more and more adults onside, children become more involved and they become more of the people who will preach the message and encourage more recycling, more composting, so on and so forth.

Not only to paper, more and more we are seeing people in the springtime going out around the beaches. It was nothing uncommon to see everything from siding to car wrecks to washers, old washers and dryers, everything, flung on the beaches. Now people are much more conscious of the protection of their environment and they have beach cleanups.

From my department, the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, that is so, so important because now we are establishing walking trails around many of these beaches. We are bragging to tourists about what we have in this Province and that we want them to come and see it. If we are going to encourage them to come and see it, all of this environmental awareness is more and more a part of what we have to get into the people's psyche so that they then become pro-active in making sure that our environment is protected, it is pristine, and when tourists come here and many of our own residents travel around the Province, that they not go to an area that is just totally littered with garbage and so on and so forth.

I guess, back to the motion: this is, as my colleague before me said, an opportunity for us to show leadership in this case. We have technologies before us now, all of us who sit in this Assembly. Whether we like them or not, they are a part of our daily operation. These are our Blackberries. We all have computers in our offices and we receive documents on these.

You know, it is a matter of us becoming leaders. All of us may not jump on board at first but that is usually the trend when you bring forward something that is new. Those who are very much in tune and want to get on with it will jump immediately on side. Others will lag a little further behind, but as they see more and more of their colleagues jumping on and taking part in this initiative then they too will jump on side. I think the leadership that we can show here, through this motion that the Member for St. John's East has brought forward, can set the example - and then through other departments and maybe taking up the cause through boards such as the school boards and the hospital boards, so that it becomes you know an expanded program and a very, very positive initiative.

Mr. Speaker, there are just a couple of other points that I want to make in that regard. This all falls in line with an initiative that is being put forward through Municipal Affairs, certainly very much in conjunction with the Department of Environment and Conservation and in line with all people within this Province, and that speaks specifically to the move towards improved waste management. As we get more and more into recycling this kind of initiative ties right into this.

Mr. Speaker, I do no think there is going to be much issue of getting people to vote and support this. I certainly, again, offer my congratulations to the Member for St. John's East for bringing this initiative forward and I look forward to all of us stepping up to the plate here and showing leadership in this regard.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

If the hon. the Member for St. John's East speaks now he will close the debate on the motion.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUCKINGHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Certainly the comments by all my colleagues on both sides of the House have been well received and I believe that it demonstrates a genuine concern from the House for the environment, a recognition, of course, that small items are really what starts the ball rolling.

The Opposition House Leader started off by questioning whether this was much of a substantive motion, and while the temptation might be there to have some grand scale picture of what can happen, I do not believe it is the role of the House, Mr. Speaker, to again be overly prescriptive and to say this is what we have to do, this is when we are going to have to do it and whether you like it or lump it this is the way it is going to be. Now, in some situations you may end up with that. It is necessary to run the government, but when we are talking about changing attitudes, when we are talking about guiding people in a direction, essentially isn't that what leadership is about, guiding people to a place where collectively we believe we should be.

Often times, individually, we look around and we see something that is wrong, we see something that perhaps could be changed and we say, well, yes, good idea but I do not know if there is anyone else who really thinks the same way I do.

I think this is an opportunity for us to crystallize this idea that recycling and reduction can take place in any area. Whether it be the home, whether it be the school, the House of Assembly, corporations, I think that the leadership is there and I believe the House will demonstrate it today.

The hon. Minister for Tourism was speaking about the impact of the children. Mr. Speaker, anyone who questions whether children have any impact on what happens in a house only has to go to the Christmas season to realize that most of what happens there is influenced by the children. They see things, they see advertising, they see their friends, they see any number of places that will indicate to them, look, here is perhaps how you should think about this. Whether it is a toy, whether it is about how you should treat other people, whether it is about bullying in schools, the children take these things for what they are and they internalize them and go forward.

You only need to look at things like the Fruit and Veggie Challenge which was announced by the Department of Health just a while ago. These children were invited to do two things, one, to eat healthy themselves but also to have their parents join them as they do it. Again, we bring that influence into the house. You look at littering, you look at seatbelts, you look at smoking, all of these were practices that were not in place in the not-so-distant past and yet you see young people now when they see smoking they really have an aversion to it. When they see someone not using a seatbelt they say, where is your seatbelt? It is ingrained in them.

Any opportunities that we can take, from an environmental point of view, to demonstrate that the leaders are committed to environmental practices, to environmental initiatives, which will bring us one step forward, may be not as substantive as some people might think this motion is, but nonetheless are a direct positive step towards what is going to happen.

Mr. Speaker, the technology that is available can allow us to do this. We interact with it every day. The technology will allow us to reduce the amount of paper we use. It will allow us to create good stewardship practices. Also, when we establish best practices, I think as a House we then have the authority, a moral authority I suppose more than a legislative one, to go forward and say, look, you need to adopt these practices within government. Government can bring it out to the general population and that is really the role of this motion today.

We can establish a new culture as to how we deal with information, but again I need to emphasize this is not saying to someone who is not comfortable around computers, either get up to speed or be left behind; not the case at all. In this investigation, and I would insist on this, that we be very sensitive to the different needs that people have, the different comfort levels that they have and probably even send out a small challenge, that if you are not comfortable with technology well perhaps this is a prime reason to do it. Most people, Mr. Speaker, do not adapt to new technologies unless there is a very, very good reason.

I learned how to program computers way back, too far back, and a number of people have said they would love to do it but they do not have a reason, and a number of people have actually tired it without good reason and not been successful. You need a reason to use the technology and to embrace it. I would invite any member, or even anyone who is listening to me today, if you want a catalyst to embrace the technology and to access what we have going here then this would be a great time to do it.

Mr. Speaker, just a quick point. Is this my correct time that is there?

MR. SPEAKER: No, I say to the hon. member, it is not. I think the hon. member probably has another seven minutes left to speak.

MR. BUCKINGHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Perhaps in the interest of reduction, I will reduce my time also. Four minutes sounds good enough. Time, like paper, is also a valuable commodity and I am sure all hon. members will make good use of it.

Obviously, this initiative is going to require buy in. This is just not say that as Members of the House of Assembly we are going to not use paper as much, we have to realize that a lot of the paper that comes here comes from outside agencies. We have to set an example and say to these outside agencies, we will accept your information, we will accept what you have done and that you feel under obligation, either through the act or just because it is a proper and correct thing to do when providing information, that you will be required to provide this in a new format.

This is going to change the way that we do business around here, Mr. Speaker. It is and yet I believe that it is the way that the House should go, that society will go. I think this is the thin edge of the wedge.

I certainly appreciate all the comments by the members and I look forward to being an integral part of the investigation, and hopefully we will have some very concrete results to report when the House sits again in the fall.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Is the House ready for the question?

The question is that the House of Assembly investigate, in a timely manner, procedures which will reduce the use of paper for tabled documents to a minimum.

All those in favour of the motion put forward by the hon. Member for St. John's East?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

The motion is carried.

This being Private Member's Day and the Private Member's Resolution having been concluded, this House now stands adjourned until 1:30 of the clock, tomorrow, being Thursday.

This House does now stand adjourned.