May 6, 2010                        HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS                    Vol. XLVI  No. 17


The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today the Chair welcomes the following private members' statements: the hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi; the hon. the Member for the District of Port au Port; the hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue; the hon. the Member for the District of Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune; and the hon. the Member for the District of St. John's Centre, by leave.

Does the hon. the Member for St. John's Centre have leave to make a private member's statement?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: On a point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre, by leave.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader, on a point of order.

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

I rise on a point of order. It concerns the behaviour of the Minister of Health yesterday in this House, in this Chamber. We have order and decorum rules pursuant to the Standing Orders of this House. I refer in particular to Standing Order 7.

Mr. Speaker, there has been a report in the media today concerning utterances by the Minister of Justice yesterday towards the Leader of the Official Opposition and his use of the word: fool.

Mr. Speaker, I would submit in support of this point of order, reference as well to Standing Order 1.(2). I think it is clear enough in terms of decorum anyway in Standing Order 7, but just in case you need further assurance, I would refer you to Standing Order 1.(2)(a) which deals with the precedents of this House.

With regard to precedent, I would like to submit and table, as well, a copy of our Hansard proceedings dated April 19, 2005 in which case a member of this House used that word and was ruled by your predecessor that it was, in fact, inappropriate and that it should be withdrawn. So, I would submit that in support as well. I also submit in support of that, Mr. Speaker, a copy of the broadcast centre tape of yesterday in which it can easily be heard that the minister did, in fact, utter that word.

I would ask the minister to do the honourable thing and withdraw that remark and apologize to the member.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. Opposition House Leader is well aware of the situation, if there is a disorder that occurs then the disorder should be raised at the time the disorder happens, or at least at the earliest opportunity. To what the hon. member is referencing, if that happened yesterday in Question Period then that particular sitting of the House is over. I did not hear - and this is why I continually ask for members, after they ask questions, to allow the answers to happen, and while the questions are being asked, to allow the questions to be asked.

The Chair has great difficulty hearing what is being said and what is not being said. The Chair did not hear what the hon. member said. The Chair reviewed the written transcript of Hansard and did not see any reference to what the hon. member said, but I say to the hon. member that if the hon. member echoed those words, I ask him to be a hon. member and withdraw the comments.

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I withdraw those comments and I apologize to the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader, on another point of order?

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Probably more, Your Honour, with respect to some direction from the Chair in the future. I realize that under the parliamentary system that we have always operated on and in Ottawa as well, Hansard has been deemed to be supreme, but we have had a number of incidents in this House where Hansard does sometimes pick it up and other times do not pick it up; yet, we also have the official, shall we say, parliamentary proceedings which are broadcast, and quite often the broadcast proceedings picks something up that Hansard did not.

I am just wondering, on a go-forward basis, how we should conduct ourselves in terms of providing the Chair with evidence if something happens because we do not have any Standing Orders to that effect, as I understand it, but I guess it is like the new rules in hockey, sometimes the ref did not pick it up but the video tapes are deemed to be supreme these days. So, just some direction from the Chair would be helpful.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

If there is a point of order, then the point of order should be raised - I think that is what should echo supreme here, that the point of order should be raised when the disorder occurs. I do not think we should be referencing what the media says the following day and be alerted to the point that there was a disorder that occurred. We all sit here in this House and if we recognize that a point of order needs to be raised, then it should be raised at this time. If we go and reference to support the point of order that is being made, we can use Hansard or we can use the broadcast studio. They are all copies of what happens here in this House, so the Chair will accept either or.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I stand in this hon. House today to recognize the 215 anniversary of the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, which resides in the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, and the immense contribution it has made to the country, to Newfoundland and to our Province - I want to rephrase that, Mr. Speaker, because I want it the way it is here: the immense contribution it has made to the country of Newfoundland and to our Province because they began being there for the country of Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, on April 24, I had the honour of attending the presentation of the regimental colours by the Colonel-in-Chief, Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal. It was truly a proud moment for the regiment.

The Royal Newfoundland Regiment has been the recipient of a number of distinguished honours including sixteen battle honours awarded by its service during the Great War of 1914-1918 in which hundreds of Newfoundlanders fought and gave their lives heroically for their country.

Two of these battle honours are particularly noteworthy, Mr. Speaker. The Royal Newfoundland Regiment was the only North American unit to fight during the Gallipoli campaign and is the only unit in the Canadian Army that has the right to carry "Gallipoli" on its regimental colours.

Of course, Mr. Speaker, hon. members know the story of the Battle of the Somme in 1916 where hundreds of men gave their lives at Beaumont Hamel on July 1, 1916. The British Army created a unique honour to mark the Regiment's courage; no other unit in the British Commonwealth has the right to carry "Albert (Beaumont Hamel) 1916" on its colours.

Mr. Speaker, the Royal Newfoundland Regiment continues to serve as an integral part of our Canadian military in missions overseas and at home. After 215 years the Royal Newfoundland Regiment continues to be a source of pride for Newfoundland and Labrador and the country.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating the Royal Newfoundland Regiment on receiving their new regimental colours and for the 215 years of distinguished service to our Province and to our country.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CORNECT: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to congratulate Susan Fowlow, on having her master's thesis published as a book by VDM publishing in Germany, one of the leading publishing houses of academic research, this past fall.

Mr. Speaker, Susan Fowlow's published book is entitled Women and Motherwork: Raising families and communities. Ms Fowlow noticed how women are largely invisible in the history books, so she decided to conduct several focus groups with rural women who raised families from the 1940s to the 1970s. She discovered that these women were the thread that kept these rural communities together with their involvement in churches, schools, community development, and social conscience of the community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members of this hon. House to join with me in congratulating Susan Fowlow for her academic achievement and for raising awareness of the vital roles women have played in the past and indeed fulfill today in creating and contributing to society in both essential and fundamental ways.

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: I rise in this hon. House today to speak of the Trinity Placentia AAA Bantam Female hockey team. In January of this year, the Trinity Placentia Bantam Female team went undefeated in the first Bantam Female tournament this Province has held.

The Trinity Placentia Bantam team has players of the arenas from Bonavista, Clarenville, Marystown, Placentia, Whitbourne, Harbour Grace and Bay Roberts. These thirteen and fourteen-year-old young women had the honour of representing Newfoundland and Labrador in Prince Edward Island during the month of March, where they were undefeated at the Female AAA Bantam Atlantic Championships. They brought us home the gold, Mr. Speaker.

Please join me in congratulating the AAA Atlantic and Provincial Champs, the Trinity Placentia Bantam Female team.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS PERRY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to commend the Girl Guides of Newfoundland and Labrador, and in particular, the Guides and Guiders in Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

2010 is a momentous occasion for the Girl Guide movement in Canada, marking the 100 anniversary of this remarkable leadership organization for women. The Guiding movement is very active in my district, and I commend the leaders, parents, and especially the girls for their commitment to ensuring our youth have the opportunity to avail of the wonderful experiences that Guiding brings.

The Girl Guides of Canada place a special emphasis on leadership, international friendship; and skill development, including the Duke of Edinburgh Award. Having gone through the Guiding movement myself from Brownies through to Junior Leaders, I know first-hand the benefits that can be gained from this organization.

On April 23, two former Girl Guides of my district, Ms Jeanette Barnes and Ms Elizabeth Ingram, were recipients of the prestigious Gold Duke of Edinburgh Award - congratulations to you both.

Mr. Speaker, I know that all members of this hon. House join me in recognizing this outstanding organization, and we look forward to another 100 years of girl greatness.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the members opposite for granting me leave, I appreciate that.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Froude Avenue Community Centre's twenty-five years of community achievement and development. This week, the Centre's staff, volunteers, community residents and invited guests celebrated this milestone.

The Froude Avenue Community Centre was founded on the fundamental belief in community spirit and a positive social environment, and it currently serves a population of well over 200 families. The Centre's mandate is to meet the needs of the community through the provision of recreational, health, educational, social and vocational programs.

With the tremendous efforts of Mr. Bob Dawson, the Centre's Executive Director, along with the hard work of its Board of Directors and the Neighbourhood Enhancement Association as well as the outstanding community support given to the Centre, it is able to provide a wide variety of community-based programs and services to individuals and families in the neighbourhood.

Among these programs and services are breakfast programs, summer programs, play group and after school homework programs for the children, as well as a neighbourhood enhancement association, community clean-up, and recreational gym nights, just to name a few.

As do all community centres in the Province, Mr. Speaker, the Froude Avenue Community Centre provides an invaluable service to the residents of its community, and I ask all members to join me in recognizing and commending the Centre on an amazing twenty-five years.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to announce that our government is providing approximately $600,000 to the Labrador School District to support housing for teachers in two coastal communities - the towns of Postville and Rigolet.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: For remote communities in Labrador, providing living accommodations, Mr. Speaker, is a key factor in the recruitment and the retention of teachers. The recruitment of teachers, of course, is essential to ensure that we continue to offer quality education for students in Labrador.

The school district, Mr. Speaker, will investigate options to purchase existing housing in each community. If there are no viable options available, construction on two new homes will begin immediately. Combined, these houses will provide a minimum of nine new rooms for teachers who work in these two communities for the upcoming school year, Mr. Speaker. Together with the new homes constructed in Makkovik and Cartwright over the last two years for which we invested $345,000, this will result in fifteen new spaces for teachers in Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: This brings our total investment in teacher housing in Labrador, Mr. Speaker, to almost $1 million over the past three years. This, indeed, is great news for the people in these communities, Mr. Speaker. Housing in rural and remote areas can present unique challenges and through this funding, we are working to address these challenges head-on for the benefit of our education system.

Mr. Speaker, our government continues to make education in Labrador a priority. With investment of over $24 million in infrastructure funding for the K-12 and post-secondary systems in Labrador this year alone, we are ensuring that students in this region receive their education in quality learning environments. This includes, Mr. Speaker, $5.36 million to complete construction of a new school in L'Anse au Loup; $7.37 million to complete construction of a new school in Port Hope Simpson; and $11.46 million for the construction of the new College of the North Atlantic campus in Labrador West.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, by the end of the coming fiscal year, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador will have spent more than $2.4 billion in Labrador across all sectors -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: - across all sectors since the first Budget of 2004.

Mr. Speaker, our government's commitment to education is unprecedented. Budget 2010: The Right Investments For Our Children and Our Future will see a record $1.3 billion invested in K-12 and post-secondary education systems this year. With that kind of commitment, Mr. Speaker, everyone benefits – school boards, teachers, and most importantly, our students.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the government is recognizing that housing for professionals has become a real problem across Labrador. Over the last twenty years we have had to build houses right across the North and South Coast of Labrador to accommodate social workers, nurses and police officers.

In the last number of years, especially in the last five years, a lot of our problem with the recruitment and retention of teachers have been linked to lack of housing in many of these communities.

I know, for example, Mr. Speaker, in the Community of Cartwright there was a huge problem going back a number of years in trying to retain teachers in this community because there was no available space for them to live. Fortunately, with some newer accommodations, that recruitment rate has gone up somewhat. Mr. Speaker, in general, in Labrador - and I think the minister knows this - it is very difficult to recruit and retain teachers in many of our communities.

In the Community of Black Tickle, for instance this year, we have had in Grades 4 to 6 three different teachers in that classroom this year. I am not sure today, Mr. Speaker, but there may even be a vacancy again today for those grades where they are having a complete transition of teachers on a regular basis;, bringing in a supplementary, and oftentimes, Mr. Speaker, these children are not getting the quality of education that they should be getting in the classroom.

Mr. Speaker, the other issue that concerns me around these Labrador schools is teacher allocations. Last year, the government opposite made some massive cuts in a lot of rural schools around the Province. One of those schools, in St. Lewis, for example, kids between the ages of K-6 were going to be left in the classroom with one teacher, and, Mr. Speaker, because the parents lobbied against that, the change was made. So I say to the minister, the infrastructure is a huge bonus –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: - but ensure that you have the right number of allocations for all of these kids in these classrooms. Mr. Speaker, when you are dealing with infrastructure -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I say to the hon. member that her time for speaking has expired.

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

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

I thank the minister for the advance copy of –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognized the hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

Once again, I hope he will hear me this time. I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.

It is obviously very good news for the teachers in the Labrador school district, who are teaching in Rigolet and Postville, to be getting this money from the government for housing; and has been indicated by the Leader of the Official Opposition, the practice of providing housing for professionals in Labrador has been long standing and is needed. We need professionals in all areas, and especially in the educational system.

I have been to every single one of the communities along the North Coast of Labrador, including Black Tickle, and I know the situation. I know why housing is necessary but I also want the government to recognize, Mr. Speaker, that we have a housing -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

If the Chair has to stand again to interrupt the hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, the Chair will first point to the members who are causing the disorder here and after that the Chair will take the appropriate action.

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

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

As I was pointing out, while it is really important and it is essential that we have housing for professionals working in Labrador who are coming in from the outside, it is also important that we look at a housing crisis that is going on for people who live in Labrador. I speak specifically of Labrador West, where we have rents going up by two and three times the original rent. It is a serious situation, Mr. Speaker, and I ask the government to respond to the housing crisis in Labrador in particular – though it is elsewhere - by enacting rent control and building more social housing.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, as recognized on Monday by my colleague, the hon. Minister of Health and Community Services, May 3 to May 9 is Mental Health Week 2010. In recognition, I wish to provide information on the Canadian Mental Health Association-Newfoundland and Labrador Justice Project.

Mr. Speaker, in continuing with our response to the independent review of adult corrections, Decades of Darkness: Moving Towards the Light, the Department of Justice, in partnership with Health and Community Services and the Canadian Mental Health Association Newfoundland and Labrador, last year established the Justice Project to improve mental health services at Her Majesty's Penitentiary.

As highlighted by the independent review, many inmates of this facility face complex mental health issues. In response, we are now providing psychological services at all our correctional facilities and also have the CMHA's exciting new endeavour – the Justice Project.

Administered by the Department of Justice, Mr. Speaker, the Justice Project receives $220,000 each year from my department and the Department of Health and Community Services to develop in-service mental health programming to inmates at HMP. The Justice Project delivers counselling and support to inmates along with transitional planning and intensive case management upon release for transition back into the community.

Our goal, Mr. Speaker, is to reduce recidivism by creating more opportunities for programming and rehabilitation, especially for those afflicted with mental illness. Far too often in the past inmates diagnosed with mental illness re-entered the community with minimal supports. These high need individuals often found themselves back behind prison walls continuing the cycle of incarceration.

To successfully reintegrate into the community, ongoing counselling and support is critical for inmates suffering mental illness and already this program has proven to be successful. In keeping with the recommendations of the independent review to avail of community groups' expertise, the Justice Project, Mr. Speaker, has developed effective professional partnerships to deliver this innovative and groundbreaking program.

Mr. Speaker, the Justice Project has recently hired two case managers and has already received twenty-four referrals. The Justice Project is innovative and groundbreaking, and already other jurisdictions across the country have expressed interest and wish to learn more from our experience.

The Canadian Mental Health Association-Newfoundland and Labrador is a strong partner and we are pleased to work with them and the Department of Health and Community Services to provide improved mental health programming for those in custody. This relationship, Mr. Speaker, is a clear indication that change is possible and our corrections services are moving in the appropriate direction.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Of course, mental health services at Her Majesty's Penitentiary have been an issue for quite some time. I guess it was highlighted a couple of years ago when we had the unfortunate death of Mr. Austin Aylward, who died while he was incarcerated there in his cell. Of course, Justice initiated a review there with Justice Robert Wells, who came back also, in addition to the Darkness report, and made some suggestions for improvements. Hopefully, we will see the recommendations that Justice Wells made also implemented, in addition to this program right now called the Justice Project. This, of course, is only one small step as to what is needed to combat the issues and the problems that we have there.

For example, when prisoners enter HMP right now, regardless of the fact that they might be prescribed legitimate drugs by their doctors, the policy is to remove them from the drugs. We have had numerous inmates and parents who have called to say that all of their drugs are removed immediately. There are people who have suicidal tendencies, depression, and bipolar disease. They simply have their drugs removed by the psychiatrist at HMP and they are put in a handling unit until it is decided what to do with him, and it has caused a host of problems there. In fact, the Justice Department are also aware now that the Citizens' Rep. is himself conducting a review based upon some of the horror stories we have heard from what has happened to these inmates because their drugs have been stripped from them and apparently no easy remedy available for them.

Of course, Mr. Speaker, probably the most outstanding one we have is the pre-detention centre in Happy Valley-Goose Bay where that lady was, because we did not have a mental health room there, had her clothes stripped and was put into a cell where she remained for quite some time. That is the other bigger issue we need to address here as well, Mr. Speaker.

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 thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. This program sounds like an excellent program. I am aware of some of the work that has begun at Her Majesty's Penitentiary, for example. It is really essential that we make sure that inmates are taken care of both physically, mentally, emotionally and psychologically when they are incarcerated. This program is a drop in the bucket with regard to the needs that are there. Mental health is an important issue in corrections, we know that, but it is merely one piece of a much larger problem that this government has to continue addressing.

The Minister of Health, himself, spoke in Estimates of the negative effect addictions play in our society and how addictions are behind so much of crime in our Province. There are many dimensions to somebody who has mental health problems in the Penitentiary. The thing though that I think we need to recognize is that the Penitentiary itself here in St. John's is an abomination. The last time I was there staff said to me that programming is negatively affected by the building itself, by that facility. I cannot say how much I believe that we have to take action with regard to that facility. This Province has to move ahead with or without the federal government to make sure that inmates are safely incarcerated in accommodations that would allow them to get better if they have mental health situations.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I raised an issue in the House regarding the dismissal of the only child psychologist at the Janeway. We understand since, from Eastern Health's press release, that this individual was suspended from their position for apparently not having the necessary provisional license to practice.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister today: How long was this individual practicing without a provisional license before his suspension, and did the loss of this license have anything to do with his testimony into a youth mental health case in this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Eastern Health outlines in its news release the issue of why this individual was suspended, and further on states that there is other personnel information that they are not going to get into. So essentially, Mr. Speaker, that is something that Eastern Health will have to address when it comes to the personnel issue.

Mr. Speaker, the one point – and this was raised by the Leader of the Opposition the other day. I want to point out, when you look at what we have done as a government in relation to the Janeway incident that took place in December of 2008, there was $620,000 in funding in 2009-2010, Mr. Speaker. That is for five psychiatric nurses, an occupational therapist, a social worker and a recreational therapist. In the funding for 2010-2011, Mr. Speaker, another $429,916; again, another psychologist, an additional child care worker.

So, Mr. Speaker, in a period of two years, since this incident at the Janeway in December of 2008, we have invested $1.1 million. We have our two new centres which are being built, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: I do not know how much more government can do in such a short period of time.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is a very serious issue, I say to the minister. When you have only one child psychologist out of three positions left on staff at the Janeway, and the individual is suspended saying that they have lost their license, yet no one is prepared to say how long this individual continued to work without a license, why they had lost their license in the first place. Those are the questions I pose to the minister, and I ask you to provide an answer.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am aware – if we are talking about the same psychologist – of the comments that were made by Justice LeBlanc in his decision in the case of the teenager, but, Mr. Speaker, the statistics provided to me indicate that we have fifty psychologist's positions at Eastern Health, and eleven-and-a-half of those are current and new positions, or assigned specifically to mental health, addiction programs, and services for children and adolescents. Of these, seven are filled and recruitment efforts are ongoing. So, it is inaccurate to state that this individual is the only child psychologist in the Province. There are all kinds of people out there, Mr. Speaker, who are also engaged in child psychology, but in terms of Eastern Health, we also had an interdisciplinary team at Unit J4D, which included an art therapist, an occupational therapist, and they are part of the team. So if you read the report prepared by the Acting Child and Youth Advocate, he does not simply talk about one individual being important. He talks about a global approach and the need to have an interdisciplinary team.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the minister just stated, and was stated by Eastern Health yesterday, the interdisciplinary team at the Janeway would provide the services to these children and youth on an in-patient and outpatient basis while all three psychologist's positions remain vacant. However, Mr. Speaker, I have spoken to all three families who were using the services of the recent psychologist that had been let go. They have informed me that their children have not been receiving any treatment in the past month since this doctor has been suspended.

I ask the minister: Why that is the case?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In terms of – I would not know who these families are that the Leader of the Opposition is talking about. If there are concerns, I can certainly pass those concerns on to Ms Kaminski, the CEO of Eastern Health and ask her to look at them.

Mr. Speaker, again, what we are talking about is a psychologist is one part of a team in terms of the interdisciplinary team. Mr. Speaker, for example, with the new facilities that we are building, both in the addictions centre in Grand Falls and the Centre for Youth with complex needs here in St. John's, they are, again, based upon interdisciplinary models where you have, not simply psychologists, you have psychiatrists if needed, you have various types of counsellors, Mr. Speaker. In St. John's, for example, and Grand Falls, there will be dedicated social workers, psychologists, teachers, art music therapists and consulting psychiatrists. So, again, it is part of a continuum of care that is being provided, and if there are issues with the care being provided to children we will certainly take that up with Eastern Health.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would say the minister should be well aware of who some of these families are because he has dealt with them.

Mr. Speaker, how can the minister stand here today and say that these children are receiving care as part of that team, and Eastern Health make those statements publicly yesterday, when three of those families that I have had communications with are stating otherwise?

I ask you, minister, in the case of this psychologist being suspended for what reason we do not know, everyone is refusing to tell us, I ask you again: What treatments are going to be made available to these children?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, over the last number of years this government has invested more than $17.5 million in the mental health and addictions field. If this is an issue of money, in terms of we do not have the people to provide psychologists; I can assure you, that is not the issue. That consulting psychologists can be found and that if there are issues out there, I will personally speak to Ms Kaminski and if we do not have the psychologists to provide, we will hire people. The money will be provided. Money is not going to stand in the way of providing proper health care to the people of this Province.

In our Budget, Mr. Speaker, we talked about this being a youth budget and that is what we are trying to do. So, the Leader of the Opposition raises an issue, I say to her, I will deal with that issue but I do not know the family she is talking about. There are privacy concerns and there are ways that this has to be dealt with, but that is the way it is, Mr. Speaker. I am more than willing to deal with that. We are not going to allow families out there to be without proper medical…

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Unfortunately, minister, you have already left families out there without this service.

Mr. Speaker, the Cabinet unilaterally selected John Rorke as the Acting Child and Youth Advocate after heavy-handedly removing Darlene Neville from that position. They selected Mr. Rorke, Mr. Speaker, without going through any selection process. They chose to pay him $175 per hour, $100 an hour more than any other advocate who has served in this position.

I ask the minister today: Why is government willing to pay such a substantial salary to an individual who refuses to even advocate for children and to even discuss his reports publicly?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province were well aware in September of the chaotic conditions that existed in the Office of the Child and Youth Advocate. The situation down there was in shambles; it was in chaos. Government had to take action. The action of the government was confirmed and verified in the Noseworthy report. We had to do what we had to do in the interest of the children of our Province.

The second piece of that process, Mr. Speaker, was to have somebody go in there in an interim position, an acting position, to do the job, to clean that office up. We did that, Mr. Speaker. We got a person with impeccable characteristics; he has done the job. Contrary to what the Leader of the Opposition says, he has advocated for the children of our Province. He is doing a tremendous job. He has impeccable characteristics. We are delighted to have him there. We put no price tag on him.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Other officials in the House of Assembly, such as the Auditor General, the Citizens' Representative, the Information and Privacy Commissioner, all make less than half of what Mr. Rorke's salary is. While Mr. Rorke is making the equivalent of over $300,000 per year, in this year's Budget the government has only estimated $107,000 for the Child and Youth Advocate salary.

So I ask the minister: According to your own Budget Estimates, one, when will you be selecting a new, substantially lower paid permanent Advocate; and why is there such a discrepancy between what is budgeted for this year and what is being paid to Mr. Rorke at present?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, we make no apologies for the appointment of John Rorke.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: I imagine he is eminently qualified and has done a fantastic job. He has cleaned up a mess. He has cleaned up a mess in a short time. He has advocated for the vulnerable children of this Province. We put no price tag, Mr. Speaker, on his efforts. We are happy with the results. It was one of the best decisions this government ever made to get such great results in such a short time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister: You have no trouble putting price tags on doctors in this Province who are saving people's lives in operating rooms every day.

Mr. Speaker, I did not ask the minister to apologize; I asked him to tell me why they are paying Mr. Rorke as high as they are for the job he is doing.

Mr. Speaker, the Child and Youth Advocate in other provinces speak publicly regarding their reports because they want to explain the methodology used and the recommendations they put forward. They want to clarify all issues within their reports. Even the Citizens' Representative, Mr. Speaker, as early as this morning in this Province spoke out regarding a report and an issue from his own office on the cancellation of the pre-detention facility for Goose Bay.

I ask the minister: Why is there a double standard and a lack of accountability when it comes to Mr. Rorke? Is it because he was hand-picked by your government and you are protecting him?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition was quoted on September 3 in The Telegram as saying that her only concern with the new appointment was that the work gets done, and it gets done in a timely manner. Her concerns have been met, Mr. Speaker, in spades, with Mr. Rorke.

Mr. Speaker, the act that governs the role of the Child and Youth Advocate – he is a member accountable to the House of Assembly, not to any member or any minister or Premier or anybody else. We cannot direct Mr. Rorke to speak to the media. That is up to him, if he wants to do it. His contract - the legislation is permissive legislation. It sets out his rules and duties. It is not prescriptive of what he can do, what he cannot do. If he wants to talk to the media, he can do that on his own. Some officers of the House like to talk to the media, some do not.

There is nothing in this legislation or our control, whether it is me as Minister of Justice, the Premier, or the Leader of the Opposition that can direct Mr. Rorke to do anything like that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When Mr. Rorke was appointed with his big salary, Mr. Speaker, no one in this Province understood that he would be muzzled, that he would never speak out again, that he would just push paper out the door in the Child and Youth Advocate office and not make himself available to talk about the findings and recommendations in his report.

I ask the minister: Does he honestly believe that that is the acceptable behaviour for a Child and Youth Advocate in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, anybody who knows John Rorke, I do not think can say he can be muzzled.

Mr. Speaker, again I repeat, Mr. Rorke took on a position in an acting capacity for a short term, a very highly volatile situation, very public situation, agreed to do it, did a job for government, did it well, and worth every cent he is getting.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When the Opposition reviewed the court decision documents relating to our government's environmental protection orders against AbitibiBowater, we learned that there were environmental assessment reports presented as evidence. Up to this point, no one in the public knew that government had full knowledge of the extent of Abitibi's environmental liabilities.

I say to the minister, to use her own words, we take the issues of the environment very seriously. Minister, officials in our office have had the opportunity to read the reports, and we now realize that government had full knowledge of all environmental liabilities since the fall of 2009, but did not make the public aware of the extent of the damage.

I ask you today: Why did you not tell the people of the Province that you had reports which outlined the full extent of pollution on former Abitibi properties once these reports were in your hands?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we do not have full knowledge. If she understood the difference between Phase I, Phase II and Phase III environmental site assessments, she would know that the information we have is limited information and there is a further piece of work that needs to be done and it needs to be done by Abitibi.

As a part of that work that was done, one of the things that was brought to our attention was that there was immediate health and safety concern in Buchans. That is why, Mr. Speaker, we were very public around that issue. Within days of having the information, analyzing the information, the Minister of Health and myself were out in Buchans. The information was put forward, presented in a very public way - it is, in fact, on the Web site if you want to see it. Our government committed $9 million to clean up the immediate health and safety concern in that area, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, at the same time that the minister had the report on Buchans, you also had the report on Grand Falls mill site which showed that heavy metals and other toxic pollutants exceeding human health guidelines were not only in the soil but discharging into the Exploits River.

I ask the minister: Why did you not bring that information forward to the people of Grand Falls in a timely fashion and on a precautionary basis as you did in Buchans?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, her question is about forty-eight hours too late. Do you know why it is too late? Because under her direction, an e-mail was sent to the Town of Grand Falls stating that there is some very serious health and safety concerns for the people in your community.

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing further from the truth. There are environmental issues there; they are not of immediate health and safety concern. What she did was absolutely, totally irresponsible. Mr. Speaker, I had to pick up the phone and call the Mayor of Grand Falls-Windsor yesterday to reassure the people of that community that there is not an immediate health and safety concern there.

Yes, there are environmental issues; they are on an industrial site, very different than the case in Buchans where we stepped up to the plate. Had there been issues that related to the public in that area in health and safety concerns, we would have done the exact same thing in Grand Falls-Windsor that we did in Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the minister was doing her job, no one else would have to send an e-mail, I say to you, Minister.

In the same press release concerning the Buchans soil contamination, the Minister of Environment and Conservation said, "While this data is preliminary, it allows us to inform the town so appropriate measures can be taken to reduce their exposure while additional testing is ongoing."

So I say to you, Minister: Why were you not equally concerned about the potential health impacts of the sixteen areas of concern that were identified in the environmental assessment of the Grand Falls mill site?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, I am going to give the member a little science and engineering tutorial here now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: There is a difference in terms of a health and safety risk when it is related to an industrial site and a residential site. On an industrial site, such as Grand Falls-Windsor, there is no continuous source. It is not spreading throughout the community, Mr. Speaker. It is an environmental issue that we do want remediated but compare that to Buchans where you have exposed tailings that are spread around the community, that the children have a potential to ingest. There are no children on an industrial site; that is the difference; that is the science difference.

Mr. Speaker, if she has any questions like this before they go fear mongering in the public, I suggest that they certainly call my office and ask me.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the minister put out precautionary notices to Buchans back in the fall. She had the same information on Grand Falls.

I say to you, Minister, do not lay the excuse here today, do not lay the excuse here today that there are no children on a playground in this community when you know that the sixteen areas of concern, noted in the consultant's report, include facility wide concentrations of arsenic in the soil at higher levels than legal guidelines, along with other metal facilities in groundwater, and an asbestos disposal site in which the people who were out there working had to stop digging in.

So I ask the minister: Why did you believe that this information should not be shared with the public, and why did you not conduct further testing and analysis on the residential properties and the public spaces adjacent to the Grand Falls mill site as you did in Buchans?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, last week in this House, the Leader of the Opposition stood up and said that we took over half of Grand Falls when we expropriated that site - fear mongering again. Now, she is back here trying to put fear into the people of Grand Falls-Windsor again. She is making it up as she goes.

The Phase II reports indicate that there are environmental issues in the groundwater and in the soil. Mr. Speaker, there are no children playing in an industrial site; that is the very difference. However, when the issue came to our attention that there was an immediate potential human health and safety issue in the Town of Buchans, Mr. Speaker, we immediately acted. We did sections of a Phase III study in Buchans. That was not necessary in Grand Falls-Windsor because it is on an industrial site. That is the difference, Mr. Speaker.

Again, if she needs some further lessons in Phase I, Phase II, Phase III, and risk assessments, I will gladly give them to her.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The only one who needs lessons here is the Minister of Environment in how to do her job, Mr. Speaker, because she has failed at it miserably.

The consultants also found significant pollution in six logging camps in the Botwood site and the former Stephenville mill site.

Why did you not release this information to the public so that they could take precautions similar to the one encouraged in Buchans? I ask the minister: Will she release all of these reports to the public today and explain the implications of this contamination of human health and environmental safety to the people of this Province? What you should have done (inaudible) –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, this information is public. I have offered it to the member, to come over to my office, and she has sent her staff over. I have offered it to the mayor of Grand Falls –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, talk to the mayor of Buchans, ask him how open and transparent we were when that issue came to the forefront of an immediate health and safety concern. Yes, Mr. Speaker, there are environmental issues in Stephenville, in Botwood, in the logging camps, but we prioritize. When it comes to health and safety and when it comes to children that gets prioritized over groundwater and soil.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: That is exactly why we committed $9 million to the people of Buchans. That is why the tenders are going out very soon. We are going to see work conducted there in June, all complete by the fall, so the people of Buchans do not have to deal with these exposed tailings any further.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Leader of the Opposition to allow her colleague to ask the question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for my protection.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, last week the minister assured us that the Beaumont Hamel will be going back to Bell Island over the past weekend; however, the vessel is still in St. John's Harbour.

I ask the minister today: What is the status on the repairs being conducted on the Beaumont Hamel, and when can the residents of Bell Island expect to see this vessel back in service?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated last week in response to the question from the member opposite the Beaumont Hamel is in for repairs and inspections are ensuing. Certainly, I am not going to rush bringing a boat back until I have the satisfaction that everything is okay, the inspection is continuing. As soon as it is complete and the boat is ready to come back, it will come back.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, I never asked the minister to rush the return of the Beaumont Hamel. It is just that he stated it would be in service last weekend.

Mr. Speaker, we have also heard that when the Earl W. Winsor goes for its annual maintenance that it would be likely replaced also by the Beaumont Hamel. The Beaumont Hamel can accommodate half of the passengers of the Winsor which poses problems for commuters, tourists and the crab fishery. We also cannot forget the residents of Bell Island who also depend on the Beaumont Hamel.

I ask the minister: When the Winsor goes on dry dock, will the Beaumont Hamel be replacing it, or will it return to the Bell Island service?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again, in response to the question, obviously we are trying everything we can - I, as minister and we, as a government - to make sure that services to our islands are at a level that is meeting the needs of the people.

We are working - I, as minister, our department and my officials are working very closely with both committees, both on Bell Island and on Fogo Island. We are certainly working to the best of our ability to provide those services. The Beaumont Hamel, we hope, will be back as soon as possible. It will go back on the Bell Island run. The Nonia then will be going out to Little Bay Islands or Long Island to take care of that and, I believe, on May 25 the Winsor will be coming out of Fogo to go in for three weeks – we hope – repair and during that time we will be moving the Beaumont Hamel out there and the Nonia back to Bell Island.

Again, asking the patience of the people as we try as best we can to manage this particular situation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, our office has also received calls from concerned workers on the Earl W. Winsor, many who are worried that they are going to be laid off while the Winsor goes in for emergency repairs on May 25. We understand that this is going to affect about twenty-two workers and that such layoffs have not occurred in the past.

I ask the minister: Is this a new practice and, if so, what are the reasons for laying off twenty-two workers while the vessel is on refit?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: I say, Mr. Speaker, when I was in Opposition asking questions I always knew the answers before I asked a question. I am sure the member is very much well aware that this is not a new practice. The member next to him got up in the last session of the House and asked a similar question.

As I pointed out, the practice is that when a ship goes into refit that we do make sure that the crew that are aboard go in, usually the captain and engineers, to make sure that the work is completed and completed to satisfaction. Any crew members that are necessary for additional maintenance, they will be kept on, but those that are not needed, that the boat does not need that type of a refit or maintenance, those people will indeed be laid off. It is not a new practice; it is a practice that has gone on now for several years. The crew on the Winsor know it, the people we serve know it, everyone knows it, and I am sure the member knew it before he asked it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, this morning there was a report that the Citizens' Representative was not giving up the fight for the pre-trial detention centre –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: – recommended by his office in 2007.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, yesterday here in this House we debated a government private member's motion on the Violence Prevention Initiative when we spoke about women trying to escape violent situations. Mr. Speaker, the women who get charged with a criminal action are often victims of abuse themselves. Mr. Speaker, it is important that women in Labrador feel safe and secure when they are in the pre-trial situation.

In light of this, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs if she will make a commitment to the women of Labrador to fight for a centre to be put in place before the review of correctional facilities in the Province is completed.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, the Department of Justice and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is well aware of the need of the women and the youth in Labrador as expressed a couple of years ago by the Citizens' Representative. That need has been identified and, as has been said so many times in the last couple of weeks, that need will be considered in the internal review that we are doing of correctional institutions, including Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we are looking at what options are available to us to deal with these particular needs in Labrador, and at the end of the year hopefully we will have some clear direction as to how we can deal with that. That is where we are at the moment. They have not been forgotten. It has not been shelved, as the Opposition has claimed. Mr. Speaker, it is very much a part of our review.

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.

The decision has been shelved, Mr. Speaker, because it has been put on hold. I would point that out to the minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: We have heard the minister give this excuse a couple of times now here in the House. The Citizens' Representative points out in his report that a pre-trial detention centre is not a prison; it should be a stand-alone program - a building, obviously - that has nothing to do with what happens with the correctional facilities in the Province. It is something that is needed in and of itself.

I ask the minister: Why are they determined to revisit this decision, and why not allow this pre-trial detention centre to go ahead?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, we take no opposition to the decision of the Citizens' Rep; and, in fact, we welcome his comments. What we have examined, Mr. Speaker, to date, is a pre-trial detention centre, or some modifications thereof, and that may not well be the answer to the needs in Labrador, as the Citizens' Rep has said. I mean, we might not need a pre-detention centre in the sense of a glorified lock-up or a detention centre where services are given to people who are staying for short terms.

He might well be right; there might well be other options in Labrador that we can look at. There might well be other facilities. We may not need walls and barbed wire in this situation. There are other options we are looking at and that is exactly what we are doing, Mr. Speaker, in our internal review.

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.

Well, reading and listening to what the women in Labrador are saying, and the Mokami Status of Women Council are saying; they believe that this centre is necessary.

I am asking two ministers, the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and the Minister of Justice: Will they go and sit down with the women in Labrador and the women on the coast and hear what they have to say? Because they are saying it is needed, and it is needed now.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, just yesterday we met with the Minister's Committee on Violence Against Women. We have talked to the people in Labrador; we have talked to a number of groups, Mr. Speaker. We recognize that we have to do a whole lot of consultation with the women's groups, the stakeholders on the ground in Labrador, before we make any decisions in this respect.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to say that we are sending officials to Labrador within very short order, to meet with all the stakeholders in Labrador, to get what consultation we can on this issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MS BURKE: I am rising on a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I did not interrupt Question Period to make a point of order, but I would like to bring forward now what I would like to address.

Mr. Speaker, Standing Order 49 of our Standing Orders of the House of Assembly reads, "No Member shall speak disrespectfully of Her Majesty, nor of any of the Royal Family, nor of the Governor or Administrator of the Government of Canada; nor of the Lieutenant-Governor of this Province; nor use offensive words against any Member of this House. No Member may reflect upon any vote of the House except for the purpose of moving that such vote be rescinded."

Mr. Speaker, the section of this Standing Order that I would like to address is the fact that says; "…nor use offensive words against any Member of this House."

During Question Period, Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition spoke about Members of this House of Assembly muzzling the Child and Youth Advocate. Mr. Speaker, that is not true. No one has given any orders that the Advocate cannot speak; that is his choice if he speaks or not. To use the word muzzle and to put those motives on a Member of the House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker, is offensive.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader, to the point of order?

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader, to that point of order.

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I challenge the submission made by the Government House Leader. In no parliamentary dictionary that you would want to refer to has the word muzzled ever been found to be unparliamentary or disrespectful in any manner. It describes the actions that the Leader of the Opposition said this government are ascribing to. It has nothing to do with being disrespectful. It describes their course of action.

If we are going to get down to suggesting that the use of the word muzzled – Mr. Speaker, I can suggest that would do nothing but muzzle the freedom of us, as parliamentarians, to speak our minds here in this House.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, to that point of order?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: A final submission, I say to the hon. Government House Leader.

MS BURKE: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is not so much the word muzzle as the actions that would imply: that Members of this House of Assembly, in some way, have ordered or have indicated that the Child and Youth Advocate is unable to speak publicly.

To indicate that a Member of this House of Assembly has that control over an officer of the House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker, is offensive and certainly gives an impression to the public that, as politicians or members of this House, we indicate when that Advocate is able to speak or not able to speak.

Mr. Speaker, that is what is offensive. We do not take that action. That has not happened, and I think that point needs to be clarified.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Often there are phrases used and there are words used here that members refer to as being unparliamentary, and in some cases they are unparliamentary. It depends on the tone being used, and it depends on the debate that is taking place and the body action of the person who is talking at that particular time as well.

I say to members opposite, it is not the point of the word muzzling being unparliamentary or parliamentary; it is the point of being cognizant and being sensitive to the language that we use here in this House. It is done by both sides of the House and by many members quite often.

I say to members, be a little bit sensitive to the terminology you use, the words you use, because to you or to me it may not be offensive but to others it might.

So I am not going to say whether it is parliamentary or unparliamentary because I do not know if it is either, but certainly members should be guided and be sensitive to some of the words that they use here in this House that might be unparliamentary or unacceptable to other members.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today and present a petition on behalf of the residents, Mr. Speaker, in the Province who are totally appalled and against the decision of the provincial government to relocate air ambulance services out of St. Anthony to Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

Mr. Speaker, these individuals feel that there is a need for a third air ambulance service in this Province. They certainly feel that there is a need to close the gap on air ambulance and the need in Labrador. They do not feel that the government is going about doing it in the right and proper manner, Mr. Speaker. In fact, they feel that the air ambulance service should be kept in St. Anthony and the service should be enhanced by adding a full medevac team in that community, and that Labrador within itself should have its own air ambulance services to provide for the needs of the patients in that particular area. People have felt so strongly about this and have really challenged the government in their decision. They have done it with very few answers and they did it, Mr. Speaker, without being given a lot of time at all.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, yesterday we heard from the Mayor of St. Anthony who tried to bring the points of his community and the views of his community to the government in meeting with the minister. He was absolutely appalled with the treatment and the behaviour and the language that was used by that minister of the Crown, Mr. Speaker, in dealing with his council and this issue which is so important to them. In fact, he felt so strongly about it that he took the opportunity to write to the Premier to express his concerns about the callous remarks and the insinuations that had been put forward by the Minister of Health and Community Services in bringing forward their issue.

Mr. Speaker, this is an individual, a mayor who has always prided himself on his working relationship with government and with the ministers of the Cabinet. Unfortunately, on this particular issue he soon found out how this government really acts and how callous they can really be. Mr. Speaker, that kind of bullying and those kinds of tactics would not be tolerated in our classrooms in our schools, it would not be tolerated from teachers in a classroom, it would not be tolerated from medical professionals, and I suggest it would not be tolerated from lawyers in any other environment.

I think that the minister, at the very least, should not only reconsider the decision that he has made knowing it is the wrong decision, but he should openly apologize to the people in the St. Anthony area, to Mr. Simms and to his council, and give these individuals a fair hearing on getting their air ambulance services back and getting them in place.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Fatal Accidents Act, Bill 15, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: I wonder if I could ask the Government House Leader which bill she is referencing?

MS BURKE: Bill 15, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 15. Thank you.

It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Fatal Accidents Act, Bill 15, and that Bill 15 be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 15 be now read a first time?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Fatal Accidents Act", carried. (Bill 15)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Fatal Accidents Act. (Bill 15)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 15 has now been read a first time.

When shall the said bill be read a second time?

MS BURKE: On tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 15 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Government Services for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Insurance Companies Act, Bill 16, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded that the hon. the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Insurance Companies Act, Bill 16, and that Bill 16 be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to accept the motion that Bill 16 be now read a first time?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Insurance Companies Act", carried. (Bill 16)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Insurance Companies Act. (Bill 16)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 16 has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 16 be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 16 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act Respecting The Regulation Of Certain Health Professions, Bill 17, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded by the hon. the Government House Leader to ask leave to introduce a bill, An Act Respecting The Regulation Of Certain Health Professions, Bill 17, and that Bill 17 be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 17 be now read a first time?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services to introduce a bill, "An Act Respecting The Regulation Of Certain Health Professions". (Bill 17

CLERK: An Act Respecting The Regulation Of Certain Health Professions. (Bill 17)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 17 has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 17 be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 17 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Government Services for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Accident And Sickness Insurance Act, The Automobile Insurance Act, The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act, The Insurance Contracts Act And The Life Insurance Act, Bill 18, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded by the hon. the Government House Leader to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Accident And Sickness Insurance Act, The Automobile Insurance Act, The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act, The Insurance Contracts Act And The Life Insurance Act, Bill 18, and that this bill be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 18 be now read a first time?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Accident And Sickness Insurance Act, The Automobile Insurance Act, The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act, The Insurance Contracts Act And The Life Insurance Act", carried. (Bill 18)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Accident And Sickness Insurance Act, The Automobile Insurance Act, The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act, The Insurance Contracts Act And The Life Insurance Act. (Bill 18)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 18 has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 18 be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 18 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to call from the Order Paper, Motion 1.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that we now revert to Motion 1, the Budget Speech.

I recognize the hon. the Member for the District of Terra Nova.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

It is a tremendous honour to stand in this House today and represent the wonderful District of Terra Nova; a district that I am so extremely proud of, a district that I owe so much to. Allow me to begin by taking this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to the residents for their overwhelming support during my recent by-election.

On November 26 of last year, residents made their way to the polls to cast their ballots. The result was a victory by over 700 votes. This decisive win told us a couple of things. First, it said the voters had the confidence in me as an individual to effectively represent them. Secondly, and just as important, the residents of Terra Nova district agree with the direction this government has taken since gaining office in 2003, and they look forward to the same effective leadership as we proceed into the future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few moments now to pass along some specific words of appreciation; recognizing some very important people that were instrumental in my success.

First and foremost, I give thanks to God for giving me the ability and opportunity to pursue my dreams. I am so grateful for all the good things that have been afforded to me. Mr. Speaker, we are so blessed to call Newfoundland and Labrador home. In a world that often feels like it is full of turmoil and upheaval, we certainly should recognize and appreciate the peace and prosperity we enjoy here.

To my wife, Samantha: Mr. Speaker, if you allowed me all day to talk about this woman, I still would not have time to explain how great she is.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: She knew that it was a dream of mine to become elected to the House of Assembly and –

MR. O'BRIEN: (Inaudible).

MR. S. COLLINS: I would say to the Member for Gander, I have been married now for one year and so far so good, but I do take that under advisement, so thank you.

She knew that it was a dream of mine to become elected to the House of Assembly and she was willing to take on that huge responsibility with me. It is no easy task to be the partner of an elected official and she has thus far taken it all in stride and has been so supportive. I will certainly rely on that continuing support in the days, months and years ahead.

To my mother, Gertie, and stepfather Calvin: you two were always so extremely helpful and supportive, and during my campaign was no exception. Mom, you are by far and away the strongest person I know.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: When Dad passed away, you had so much pressure on you to keep things going and to establish a new normal for our family. While it seemed like an impossible task, your love and strength brought us through. You will never know how thankful and how proud I am to call you Mom.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, while my late father, Dan, is no longer with us, he remains ever present in my mind and heart. Not a single day goes by that his memory is not with me. Many people comment that I am very much like my father, so any accolades I receive are certainly a testament to him. While he passed away shortly after the Premier took the helm as leader, I know he would be so extremely happy with the job that has been done thus far by this government and so extremely proud that I am now part of it.

To my brother Bart and his wife Deanna: a huge thank you for your love and support. Bart, when Dad was taken from us prematurely you stepped in and you stepped up. You provided with me the guidance through my university years and continue to be such a big part of my life. Thank you for your patience and concern. I can always rely on you, and for that I am grateful.

To my campaign team: you people did a tremendous job. Everything ran smoothly because of your organization and planning. I will be forever indebted to you for the help provided during those three weeks.

As a candidate, Mr. Speaker, you are so busy knocking on doors and trying to connect with as many people as possible, you really do not have the appropriate time to participate in the organization and planning. You are left relying on your campaign team, and, Mr. Speaker, I can certainly say that I was able to trust and rely on this group so easily. They were simply amazing.

I must, however, single out my campaign manager, and now my constituency assistant, Ang Chatman. Thank you so much for your effort, commitment, and friendship. We, better than anyone else know how much work was involved in this campaign and getting elected was just the start. We recognize what is needed in our district and we work every day to achieve the many goals we have set out. As each of my colleagues would admit, behind every successful member is a hardworking assistant. Mr. Speaker, anyone who has had the pleasure of dealing with Ang would surely agree she is well suited to such a position, as she is caring, compassionate and very competent. I look forward to working with Ang for many years to come.

I would like to also acknowledge my local PC Association under the leadership of long-time party supporter, Richard Kelly. I knew what the goal was, and you folks were able to get me here. An association such as mine is an incredibly important asset. Thank you for your unwavering commitment.

To my good friends Karen and Paul Oram, I certainly recognize and appreciate all you have done for me. In 2004, Paul gave me the opportunity to get involved with this Administration. I worked as his constituency assistant for three years and then as executive assistant for almost two years. During that time, I had the chance to meet and deal with countless people in the district and in government. Those four-plus years were a tremendous benefit to my growth, both professionally and personally. It allowed me to see, and most importantly, appreciate the various aspects involved with being a member of the House of Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, I am so very thankful for the opportunity and guidance Paul provided me in the years that I worked with him and most recently, in the help given during the by-election. He went above and beyond. Paul was a terrific representative for our district and I can only hope to one day be as good as him. I wish my good friend all the best in the future.

Last, and certainly not least, I would like to thank the Premier and the entire caucus for the support during the by-election, but more importantly, since taking my seat. Upon being elected, I was openly welcomed in the caucus. As a member of this team I am given equal opportunity to pass opinions and participate. The Premier always says that each voice around that table brings a different perspective and therefore should be heard. Our newest voice, the Member for Topsail, will undoubtedly prove to be an invaluable addition to this team. I would like to again welcome our newest member and look forward to working with him in the future.

We have a strong caucus with a clear vision and it is a tremendous thing to witness this group working together. A team cannot be measured on any one individual's ability, and while we have the most dynamic Premier this Province has ever seen, the group around him must also be equal to the challenge. Mr. Speaker, the saying, "No one can whistle a symphony. It takes an orchestra to play it," certainly describes this caucus.

While I singled out a number of individuals and groups, I must also acknowledge the huge number of volunteers that assisted me during the campaign. Right throughout the district, from Bloomfield to Dover and all the communities in between, people came forward to offer their time and support. Whether it was making phone calls, knocking on doors, erecting signs or always making sure we had food at the various campaign headquarters, you folks were terrific. Not only did I gain supporters, I gained many friends, friendships that will undoubtedly last a lifetime.

Now, Mr. Speaker, if I may speak a little about the riding I so proudly represent. Terra Nova district, home to over 13,000 residents spread out over twenty-one different communities. As diverse and dynamic as any district you will find in this great Province, a vibrant and thriving district that has experienced new growth and prosperity under this Administration.

I am quick to brag about my district and to flaunt its many assets. The district includes such industries as three fish processing plants, numerous forestry related operations, a world-class shipbuilding operation, dairy farms, the Province's largest cranberry operation, various manufacturing facilities and many up and coming businesses. We have so much potential and it is safe to say, the best is yet to come.

Mr. Speaker, we all know how important tourism is to our Province and my district plays a large role in its success. We boast such things as the Eastport Peninsula with its gorgeous beaches; the Smallwood Interpretation Centre in historic Gambo; the rugged beauty of Salvage, one of the oldest inhabited communities in North America; Terra Nova River, which any angler would tell you is among the best salmon rivers in the Province; the Burnside Archeological Dig chronicling the vast history of Maritime Archaic, Paleo-Eskimo and Beothuk Indians, and of course there is Terra Nova Park, established in 1957 as the Province's first national park.

The district comes alive with festivals every year, wonderful celebrations of our culture and heritage: Smallwood Days and the Loggers festival in Gambo; the Eastport Peninsula with its Winterset in Summer literary festival; the annual Agricultural Fair and Seafest, and many musical festivals showcasing the area's talent, such as the Glovertown Music Fest and the Accordion Festival. We have so much to offer and we love to show it off.

While all these industries and assets are significant, undoubtedly our greatest resource is our people, made up of generous, compassionate, hardworking women and men. Throughout my life growing up in Glovertown and having spent over four years working for and with the district, I have come to realize just how lucky I am to refer to this place as home. The two years spent teaching and travelling abroad further convinced me that what we have here is so very, very special.

While I spent the majority of the past five years in St. John's working for government, I am happy to say that on Monday, March 22, the groundwork began on my family's new home in the district. You cannot imagine how thrilled I am to once again become a full-time resident of Glovertown.

Mr. Speaker, if I may change gears for a moment: after hearing the maiden speech from my colleague for The Straits & White Bay North, and witnessing the daily rhetoric from the Opposition parties, I feel as though I must address some of the opinions that seem to be continually recycled and reused, but unfortunately not reduced. They talk so much about the supposed doom and gloom that they have witnessed in rural parts of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, allow me to quickly put things into a proper context. My district's largest town has a population of 2,500 people, with the smallest having eighty-two. My district does not have an airport; my district does not have a Tim Hortons; my district does not even have a traffic light. My district is a rural district. It is made up of small rural communities, Mr. Speaker, that are thriving and contributing to the provincial economy. They are not, as the Opposition would have us believe, suffering and on the road to disaster. It actually offends me when I constantly hear the Opposition parties touting that rural Newfoundland and Labrador is in an out-of-control tailspin. Frankly, it is untrue and I would suggest altogether ridiculous.

Why do we see communities in my district performing so well? Why are communities growing? The answer is unwavering commitment by this government. The folks in the Terra Nova district have been given the tools of unprecedented investment and support from this Administration. We are not sitting idly by watching progress pass us by; we are seizing opportunities and making them work for us. This is what we are witnessing right across this great Province.

It is no wonder that employment will grow in the coming year, with employment rates to shrink. It is no wonder that housing starts will again increase; it is no wonder that personal and disposable income will grow; and, Mr. Speaker, it is no wonder that the population is expected to increase once again. The facts and figures speak for themselves.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not foolish enough to think that everything is completely rosy. We have had our difficulties and there will undoubtedly be issues that arise in the future. The forestry sector, for example, has experienced a downturn over the past number of years due to currency issues, supply and global market demand, and we are all aware of the challenges facing the fishery. We, as a government, recognize these issues and are committed to resolving them with sustainable long-term solutions, an idea that seemed lost on the former Administration.

Mr. Speaker, while everyone acknowledges that the oil industry is so vitally important to our economy's bottom line, our traditional industries remain significant, both financially and culturally. We will work hard to ensure their survival and, more highly, their success.

Mr. Speaker, how did this unprecedented support and investment I spoke of early unfold in my District of Terra Nova? In the past four years alone this government has invested over $50 million into the District of Terra Nova; important funding that has touched each and every community and person. This spending included: $6.2 million for education, things such as school construction and renovations, maintenance and upgrades; over $1.5 million into local business and community groups and organizations for start-up, marketing, cultural development and recreation grants; $6 million into natural resources, silviculture initiatives, construction and maintenance of resource roads and agrifood funding; $4 million into health care, including such things as operational expenditures, recruitment initiatives and clinic renovations; over $15 million into infrastructure, road construction, upgrading, maintenance, paving, and wharf and building construction; furthermore, an additional $17 million went into municipal infrastructure, vital projects such as water and sewer work, town roads, and community enhancement initiatives.

While speaking of municipal support given by this government, I would be remiss if I did not praise the foresight and commitment of this Administration in introducing a once unimaginable cost-shared ratio of 90-10 with the provincial government providing the 90 per cent towards capital projects. Since its inception in 2008, the program swung wide open the doors of opportunity for small communities, like the ones in my district, to acquire and maintain crucial infrastructure. Projects that were previously unattainable due to fiscal restraints are now becoming reality.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: A true, real life example of how this plays out, Mr. Speaker, is what it has meant to small communities with regard to the acquisition of fire protection. Mr. Speaker, a fire truck costs in the ballpark of a quarter of a million dollars. In the past, that generally demanded a 50 per cent contribution by a municipality at a cost of $125,000. The same fire truck now costs a community a mere $25,000, a total savings of $100,000. That savings can now be invested into other worthwhile projects, and that is exactly what is happening.

If I may quote my hon. colleague from Baie Verte-Springdale: Why did we do it?

AN HON. MEMBER: Because you care.

MR. S. COLLINS: Yes, because we care.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: This Province suffered from years of neglect under the former Administration. It is so easy for them now to say: It was neglected because we did not have the funds that exist today.

True, they did not have the funds that are available, but the money they did have was mismanaged and squandered. Furthermore, and more notable, the reason we currently have the funds available is due to sound decisions by this government and the persistence, dedication and strength of our Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: Our current prosperity, just as the former neglect, did not befall us by chance. In October 2003 this government was given the responsibility of correcting deficiencies and neglect. That is just what we have done and we will continue to do as long as the people of this Province allow us. Never before have we seen such investment into our communities, particularly rural communities.

Mr. Speaker, while I bragged about the funding in my district, I should clarify: this type of spending was not exclusive to my district alone. Each and every district across this Province has had huge investments into capital projects and programming; and, as I have said, rural Newfoundland and Labrador has been the major beneficiary. Anyone who would suggest otherwise is grossly mistaken. Mr. Speaker, by the very fact that I stand in this hon. House in the overflow section says it all.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: I am surrounded by forty-three Progressive Conservative members, most of whom represent rural districts, and that simply says it all. These men and women, under the leadership of this Premier, work tirelessly for the benefit of the Province. People see and people appreciate this and are overwhelmingly satisfied with the job that has been done, and look forward to even brighter days ahead.

If the members of the Opposition are not convinced, I would suggest they look at the results from the latest opinion polls. Time after time after time after time, the numbers grow and seem to keep getting better.

Never did a time exist in this Province when there has been such a great sense of pride and self-sufficiency. This change in attitude did not simply dawn on us. While everyone knew what they wanted, we struggled to realize it. Scottish Author John Buchan said, and I quote, "The task of leadership is not to put greatness into people, but to elicit it, for the greatness is already there."

The Premier did not give us greatness; he summoned it. It was due to hard work and determination of this government and our Premier to implement a plan, a blueprint for success. As a result of that successful plan, this Province has taken its proper place in Confederation: among the top. It is safe to say that Newfoundland and Labrador has arrived.

I would certainly not label us as arrogant, Mr. Speaker, but definitely we have a new-found swagger. No longer are we perceived as the poor and desolate. We are now seen as leaders and have become the envy of others. As each day passes, more and more Canadians take notice of our prosperity and strong governance and, Mr. Speaker, I think I speak for all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians when I say this has been long overdue.

In conclusion, I am very pleased and greatly honoured to have the opportunity to serve with my colleagues and continue to work for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, more specifically for the wonderful folks of the Terra Nova district. While this position is demanding, I give you my word I am equal to the challenge. Through hard work and dedication I will perform my duties to the best of my abilities, while holding honesty and integrity as my measuring stick for success.

To the residents of the Terra Nova district, you supported me; now allow me to support you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LODER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on behalf of the great District of the Bay of Islands, which I represented since 2007. I would like to take this opportunity to speak on Budget 2010.

Before I go there, Mr. Speaker, I would like to pass on my congratulations to the hon. Member for Terra Nova. I am sure the constituents there, his family and friends are quite proud of him today. I am sure he will pursue their achievements for the district to the utmost - greatest work he will provide. I am really glad to be a part of the team with him involved and I would like to wish now - welcome, sir, to an overflow and you will enjoy it over here during your time in office.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to also bring attention to one little mistake I made during a member's statement two days ago. I was up speaking on behalf of a Mr. Bram and Ada Russell. During the member's statement, I thought I had done a good job right up until the last of it when I got to one particular word. I tried to get it out three times and I could not get it out. I wanted to come public and make an apology to Mr. Bram Russell who is watching today and just to let him know that I wanted to finish that sentence and let everybody know I can say: inspiration.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LODER: Mr. Russell you are an inspiration to the world in the work you are doing, and care and love you are giving to your wife, Ada. I wish you all the best in the future.

Mr. Speaker, when I had the opportunity to speak on the Budget 2010, I did not know what part I was going to speak on because we have so many positive things happening in this great Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. This all occurred, of course, in 2003 when our present Premier took over the leadership of the government.

At 1:54 p.m. on May 3, my mind was made up. I was here listening to the Opposition Leader. She shouted across to the Minister of Health and Community Services to the effect that she said: Give our children half a chance. With that, I was taken aback by that comment because I think that we are going to the top on that particular emphasis. We all realize, Mr. Speaker, the greatest resource we have in Newfoundland and Labrador is our children. This has been mentioned throughout every minister, every district and every part of Newfoundland and Labrador of the most important resource that we do have in Newfoundland and Labrador, of course, our children.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start this off and be able to explain fully how this approach was taken by our government. I go back to when the Minister of Finance got up and provided us with Budget 2010. The Budget, Mr. Speaker, consists of thirty-seven pages; thirty-seven pages of positive things happening in Newfoundland and Labrador. I am not going into all the pages starting off with this speech here today; I just want to take the first paragraph of those thirty-seven pages, an introduction to Budget 2010.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote the hon. Minister of Finance. He states, "Mr. Speaker, we have no greater responsibility, we have no finer purpose, we have no higher priority, than to ensure our children's future is rich with opportunity and secure." That is what Budget 2010 covers; it is our young people.

Again, going back to the Opposition Leader's comments, I want to bring up some points of what we are doing for our young people. I cannot go into it all, of course, because it is so in depth, but I wanted to go into the education part and give some highlights on what we have done in 2010 Budget. Of course, that did not just start at 2010 that started at 2003 when we took possession of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I would just like to list a few items here. It highlights there in our Budget book: Investments in Children and Youth. Right off the bat, we are saying here there is $1.3 billion - with a "b" - in education spending - $1.3 billion. What an enormous amount of money. Also, we have $167 million for the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services. This is a new program to safeguard our kids, our young people; the hiring of twenty-seven new personnel - another great opportunity to safeguard our children.

Also, of course, we are going in with new technology and we are investing $400,000 in the first phase of new computerized case equipment which will allow our social workers to monitor the situations and to do their job more responsibly. I am sure they are doing a wonderful job now, but to make their job much easier and spend more time basically, I do not know, probably out in the field or whatever. It is a great investment.

Another investment in the millions of dollars, Mr. Speaker, is $21.8 million to cover the cost of residential services for at-risk children and youth, another item which is very important to our young people.

Of course, another one there - I will not go on too much longer with the investments, but again, you could just stay here all day if you wish. We do have another investment of over $500,000 to commence extensive further work to develop early childhood programming. I understand the North Shore Early Childhood group is a recipient of some of that money and will enhance the program in that area.

Mr. Speaker, our investment does not stop at children and youth. It goes up to the secondary stage, when it comes to high school, and then it goes on to the second level of secondary education. Of course, two items there that stand out in my mind would be the investment of the construction of a 200-bed residence at the Corner Brook campus of Memorial University. We also have $13 million going to the construction of a new academic building at Memorial's Corner Brook campus also. So there is a great lot of opportunities there for our students, for secondary education.

Of course, years ago when young people graduated from high school, the first discussion that would take place was: What part of Ontario are you going to live? Mr. Speaker, we do not even hear that from our young people now. Their discussion is now whether they are going to go to a university, College of the North Atlantic, or an independent school, private school like Academy Canada. So there are great opportunities there, and they are going throughout the Province, of course, taking advantage of the education schools that are provided to them.

Mr. Speaker, I am just going to stop there for a moment. I would like to speak on behalf of areas that involve young people in my district of the great Bay of Islands. Of course, the great Bay of Islands does take in a portion of Corner Brook. I just wanted to make sure people are aware of that.

We will start off - on February 22, of course, that was Olympic Day in Newfoundland and Labrador. One of the schools that was picked throughout Newfoundland and Labrador to be involved in that celebration was St. Peter's Academy. I had the occasion of going down to St. Peter's and spending the day with the students and the families and the teachers. I was so impressed with the discipline, the involvement of all the family members. My hat goes off to the organizer, Mr. Gordon Casey, and the Principal, Carol Anne Eldridge. They did a fine job, Mr. Speaker.

Also, Mr. Speaker, I have to go back a few days before that. On February 16, I would like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, for taking the Speaker's outreach program on the road. For the benefit of the people who are not aware of that, being rural Newfoundland and Labrador, of course, students in our areas do not get an opportunity to come to this fine building here and be able to listen, to understand what happens in the House of Assembly. So the Speaker - Mr. Speaker, you took it upon yourself to start a program, and it takes, basically, the House of Assembly on the road.

We had the pleasure, Mr. Speaker, of having you come out on February 16. First of all, we travelled to the Town of Meadows and we visited Templeton Academy, which by the way is the biggest K-12 school in Newfoundland and Labrador. At that time we had the occasion of having Levels I, II and III come to the gymnasium to which you, dressed up in your garb, explained the responsibilities of the House of Assembly and the Legislature. There were several questions, several interests; much interest, I must say, by all students involved. I think one of the most important questions, as they thought, was: How much do you make? So, again, we thank you for passing that information on; which was available of course to anybody. That was so much appreciated.

From there, Mr. Speaker, we travelled across the other side of the bay to the South Shore Highway and travelled to St. James All-Grade School in Lark Harbour and we met the principal of course, Penny Sheppard, and she arranged to have her high school students, Levels I, II and III come out to the gymnasium. Again, you placed your comments and gave the explanation of how this House operates. It was so educational, even for me, Mr. Speaker, because you went so in-depth. There were things that I learned on that same education procedure. So, that is another thing that we took on the road. Mr. Speaker, that is another item which I am very proud of to take to the district.

Of course, we cannot forget the Forest Fair which took place in Corner Brook on February 23. We had children from the West Coast go to the Pepsi Centre and look at all the forestry products, look at the people working there, the loggers, the truck drivers and the equipment used by these people. They showed the items that are being manufactured here in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and it was great to see so many young people from all schools within the Bay of Islands, Corner Brook region, Humber Valley to come and witness this great show.

Another item that I took pleasure in taking part in would be the DARE program at J.J. Curling Elementary School. This DARE program, for the people who are unaware of this program, it is a Drug Awareness Resistance Education program. It was put off by Constable Bobby Edwards of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. During that time of the ceremony, they had a graduation ceremony. I think it was sixty-one who started off, I think fifty-seven actually graduated. I think it is a ten-week program, but what a program it was. We had these young people, ready to go into high school next year, being taught of what to expect, the challenges they will meet when it comes to peer pressure, and major decisions they will have to make when it comes to drugs, alcohol or anything of that sort.

It was well attended, and I must say, there were about 120 people there, including family members. I would like to congratulate Principal Brian Higdon, Constable Edwards, the school staff, the parents, the school district, (inaudible) club – apparently, the gentleman there was one of the people who brought that program to the West Coast. Of course, I would like to thank them all for so much interest in our young people. I will continue on there. I have been in contact with the RCMP which controls the other two sides of the bay. I am hoping next year to expand that program and take it to the other three schools.

Mr. Speaker, also looking at different programs, I did have the occasion last weekend of attending the fiftieth anniversary of the 4-H program in the Town of Summerside. Summerside, of course, is part of the town of Irishtown, Summerside. I remember, Mr. Speaker, fifty years ago when this Mr. George Graskie guy came to the community and was trying to start the 4-H program. I remember being there with all the parents and young people, and he was explaining what the program entailed. I was standing up by the potbelly stove that heated that particular school at the time and was quite content in looking forward to joining that program. I was quite happy, but the one sentence that he remarked there which upset me terribly and that was: You have to be ten years old to join. Of course, I was not ten years old. I had to wait an additional two years for that to come about so I could actually join that group. When my time was up, I joined the group, Mr. Speaker, and we continued on with that program for the last fifty years as a result of involvement of every parent and probably every child in the community of Summerside at the time. It is a great program, it teaches leadership ability, citizenship; it gives you the opportunity to get up and speak in public. I have so many positive things to say about the 4-H program.

The initial people who started off the program - I think of the first six leaders, there is only one left and that is a lady by the name of Mrs. Olive McAuley. She was there that night to celebrate with us; I think there were 120 people there of past members of that group, including myself.

We had the honour of having the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Minister Responsible for the Volunteer and Non-Profit Sector to accompany me. He was quite enthused and impressed with the program and the people that were involved. I thank you, Mr. Minister, for showing up with me, accompanying me and celebrating this much important event.

I am looking at my time here and I have several notes, several comments to make when it comes to volunteering organizations. Before I go to that, I would like to give a few words on the Community Youth Network. That is a new program that we brought into the Bay of Islands area last year. It consists of two field workers – two young ladies that we hired; one for each side of the bay.

A follow up with this program is having such major success. Apparently, we do have seventy young people involved in the program. We have about an equal share – thirty-five from the South Shore, thirty-five from the North Shore. These people meet during classes. They are given violence awareness education. They do have social nights where they go out and go to a movie. In some cases if the participants request guitar lessons, then somebody there can teach them; they can do that. They are taught cooking, they are taught friendship, leadership - again, another great organization responding to the needs of our young people.

Mr. Speaker, we cannot forget the –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): Order, please!

The Chair is having some difficulty in hearing the member recognized to speak. I would ask for the co-operation of all members.

MR. LODER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to go on to other organizations which shed some light and gives a great compassion to our young people. One, of course, would be the Lions Club. I happened to be a speaker at the Lions Club International District N-3 Annual Convention and International Banquet at the Legion April 24. I could not believe how much devotion goes by the Lions Club on a local level and a provincial level.

I had two Lions Clubs; they came from Curling and one from Summerside participating in the convention. At one point I met a gentleman representing the director of the international group, Mr. Ed Lecius. He was quite impressed with Newfoundland and Labrador to point that he is coming back again.

I would like to give an example of much compassion they have there at one point -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time for speaking has expired.

MR. LODER: By leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member has asked for leave. Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

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

MR. LODER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

They actually called for people who had any sponsors there to participate in the Max Simms camp. Mr. Speaker, they came like that, within ten minutes they had over $27,000 to go towards the running of the Max Simms camp. The next question they put out to the membership: Does anybody have any donations towards the K9 or guide dogs? Mr. Speaker, within ten minutes they had over $12,000. That is going to be able to buy two guide dogs for our people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I am saying young people - that is the way I understand where the money will be going.

Mr. Speaker, I go on, if I can, and explain another organization throughout rural Newfoundland and Labrador and that is the local fire departments. Mr. Speaker, the fire departments in my district are so much involved in training, but there was some concern there a while ago, I think a couple of years ago, about lack of young people getting involved. I can say now, Mr. Speaker, every fire department in the district has full membership and actually has some applications unhand. This does not involve just men, we involve women. I just recently had the occasion of witnessing the fire department – one fire department had a scene, and I cannot believe how much compassion, educated - compassion, I will repeat that again - and expertise they presented fulfilling their obligation.

Mr. Speaker, I do have a lot more but I realize we have other business to attend to. I thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak on the great people of the Bay of Islands, and I wish them all well.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, before I get into talking about the Budget that was presented here a while ago by our government, a very fiscally responsible Budget, I must say, I want to congratulate my colleagues in the House of Assembly on their maiden speeches: the hon. Member for Terra Nova, and the hon. Member for Topsail.

Mr. Speaker, it is quite interesting and quite invigorating to hear the compassion, the compassion which they have for the positions in which they were elected. The compassion that they have for the people who elected them. Also, for their dedication and commitment to the policies of this government and what we laid down before us, before the people of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, it speaks very well of our caucus and our government to have such fine, distinguished gentlemen within our midst, and they will only add –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: - to the power and the commitment of this government to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I thank both of them very much.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to talk about my district. I have not done a lot of talking about my district. My district takes in half of Mount Pearl. I am in Mount Pearl South, and my hon. colleague is Mount Pearl North, and part of it comes into Topsail district.

Mr. Speaker, over the last number of years, there has been a significant amount of infrastructure gone into our districts because we are all collectively part of what Mount Pearl is – those three people I just mentioned: South, North and Topsail. Mr. Speaker, there has been a significant amount of money gone into there, and the credit goes back to the three members, and also to this government. The money gone into those districts, Mr. Speaker, it is more than any other government has put in its history.

When you look at what is happening in Mount Pearl, there is a new arena being completed as we speak - hopes to be open in December. There is a new extension of the recreation complex in Mount Pearl, with regard to the Reid Centre, with a swimming pool and an arts theatre added to it, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: Which minister is from Mount Pearl?

MR. DENINE: I cannot tell you who the minister is from Mount Pearl; that is a $64,000 question. Mr. Speaker, that is a significant amount of infrastructure.

Also, there has been - I do not know if I mentioned it because I was interrupted by my colleague. In that facility there will be a swimming pool. Also, Mr. Speaker, not only did that happen, but we also have new soccer facilities within the City of Mount Pearl and the provincial government was instrumental in putting them there. There were a number of phases that went through to that soccer facility. One was the soccer hut in which we contributed to it and the late member of this House of Assembly, Mr. Byrne, who passed away. He was Minister of Municipal Affairs, he was the one who gave us money for that and he was very, very generous to the City of Mount Pearl, I must say.

Also, Mr. Speaker, there was another phase, which was lights in that section of the field. Then last year we were instrumental in putting the artificial turf down. So, Mr. Speaker, when you look at the recreational complex of the City of Mount Pearl, all these things have been very, very valuable and very, very well-received. Again, that goes back to the credit of this government and the MHAs which represent that district.

Mr. Speaker, also there has been a significant amount of road work. One avenue was Park Avenue that runs from Dunn's Lane right up to Commonwealth Avenue, which was a significant investment for both the City of Mount Pearl and the provincial government. There was a significant amount of water and sewer lines that had to be put in prior to the paving of the street and the sidewalks and last year it had its first pavement done. It will be completed this year and finished off in its entirety. It was a significant project and well over a couple of million dollars to make that happen.

Mr. Speaker, when you talk about - and there were a number of things that happened within our districts that this government has contributed to, and Mount Pearl has gotten a fair share of what was put out by this government, and we are certainly thankful. I know I get compliments from our residents daily of what this government has done for our districts. I know my colleague from Mount Pearl North and the Member for Topsail, who is a newly member, have had those compliments come forward and a lot of thanks given to them.

Mr. Speaker, also, the support of this government to our Seniors Independence Group has not gone unnoticed. We have a very vibrant Seniors Independence Group that I go back a number of years - that when they first started out only had twenty, thirty, forty members. Today, Mr. Speaker, we have significant numbers in that Seniors Independence Group, and let me tell you, the amount of knowledge, the amount of enthusiasm and the amount of support that they give to all of our three MHAs is immeasurable, Mr. Speaker, immeasurable. They do a tremendous amount of work with their outreach programs and getting people out of their homes and providing entertainment and activities for them, and exercise programs, et cetera, and the list goes on and on. So those people in the Seniors Independence Group in Mount Pearl, I want to say a special thank you to all of them for doing that.

Mr. Speaker, I want to move on to a couple of other things that were very relevant to me as a minister over the last month or so. Mr. Speaker, we just finished up Volunteer Week, and I represent the Volunteer and Non-Profit Sector. I visited significant parts of this Province over the Volunteer Week, and I shook hands with probably over 2,000 people. Now people say: 2,000 people – I see the hon. member over there saying - oh, yes, my hands were raw, but I tell you, Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed every single minute of it.

I was down in Garnish - and I have to be careful now because I cannot leave a place out. I was down in Garnish with my colleague, the Minister of Education, and what a community.

Pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you meet Tony Ducey?

MR. DENINE: Yes, I did. I met Tony Ducey. I said hello to Tony. Hi Tony, how are you, if you are listening today?

Mr. Speaker, when I walked into the hall, there were over 200 people there – 200 people there, Mr. Speaker – to greet myself and the Minister of Education there. What a night we had. The people were enthusiastic, very positive, very energetic, and I have to tell you, the hospitality was second to none. I know there are people down there today listening to this and I want to say a special thank you for the warm welcome that was given to me and to the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Mr. Speaker, I also went to Botwood. Botwood included Peterview and Northern Arm. I was the guest speaker there, and there were over 200 people there, Mr. Speaker. Now, when I tell you there were over 200 people, that was representative of the groups that they represented. So there were a significant number of people being represented by the people there. Mr. Speaker, they gave out awards, over eighty-odd awards there, and I was glad to be part of it.

Also, Mr. Speaker, I was in Port Union and over 260 people were there, from all over the Burin Peninsula. I am sorry. The Bonavista Peninsula, I am sorry. I got my geography wrong there. My GPS went down, no doubt about it. That was the Bonavista Peninsula. Mr. Speaker, that was my second time there, and I have to tell you again, the hospitality was second to none there. They showed their hospitality with open arms and really made me and my staff feel very welcome. The people I spoke to there were very enthusiastic, very, very energized.

Mr. Speaker, I also went to Gander. I was in Gander twice, actually. Once at the Lions convention the week before, I went to the volunteer thing, and I went over there to sign a proclamation for the Lions as they declared Lions Day in Newfoundland and Labrador. I was only too glad to help support the Lions Club and all the things that they do for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and to all the communities which they support.

Then I also went back to Gander, Mr. Speaker, and I spoke to the volunteers there. The hon. the Minister of Government Services was there, he came with me to that function. We had another warm welcome and a lot of people came out to see us.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in those groups that I met with, they were very, very complimentary to this government. Very complimentary, very enthusiastic and very positive about what is going on here in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I also spoke to a search and rescue group out in Holyrood. They were absolutely phenomenal, absolutely fantastic; do a lot of great work. Now, I mentioned all of these places in which I visited because I want to give you a picture of the feeling that is out there in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. The feeling of positive energy out there, the energized people who are willing and see the efforts of this government, the vision of this government and where we are going into the future.

Mr. Speaker, again, I say thank you to all the people that I met, and thank you for such a warm reception and thank them for the kind remarks that they had about this government and about what vision we had for this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I also had the privilege of launching the first URock Awards here in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The URock Awards are awards to recognize young people in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador through their contribution, thirty and under. Mr. Speaker, when we sent out the request for nominees we had sixty-five nominees. Now let me tell you, they were sixty-five very well deserving nominees, very exceptional young people from the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, there was one group. Let me mention the group first, because then I will go into the individuals. There was an Allied Youth group of Newfoundland and Labrador who do tremendous work on leadership and self-awareness and interpersonal skills; a great organization, in a lot of high schools in Newfoundland and Labrador, and very well attended in their annual meeting in Gander, and they do a lot of great work. They were recognized as a group that does work with youth thirty and under.

Mr. Speaker, we also had seven other individual recipients: Kayla Carroll from St. Lunaire-Griquet, a very fantastic young individual, always involved, always doing things; Kendra Warford from Point Leamington, a volunteer for the Hugh Twomey health care centre in Botwood, a tremendous volunteer; you listen to what people had to say about her, absolutely exceptional.

Mr. Speaker, we have Kristina Roche from Torbay, a tremendous individual, an individual with tremendous leadership and tremendous potential. Mr. Speaker, we also had Maggie Hynes from Dunville, another outstanding individual, an individual who does not know the meaning of the word no, when it comes to volunteering. William Short from Marystown, another fantastic individual, and when you speak to him, what a fine gentleman he is, and what a fine volunteer he was.

Mr. Speaker, we had a lady, Andrea Andersen, from Makkovik; and, let me tell you, the energy that young lady demonstrated at the URock awards was absolutely phenomenal. She energized the whole show, and the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs was certainly proud to see her there.

Last but not least, Mr. Speaker, was Emily Elliot from St. John's. It is a good thing I left her until last, because she was a very shy individual. She said: I do all of this work because I want to, not because I want to be recognized.

She was kind of embarrassed that she was being recognized here, so it is probably an honour, the fact that she was the last one I mentioned.

Mr. Speaker, these are a sample of all our young people in Newfoundland and Labrador. They are very, very positive, very, very energized individuals, and individuals that I think hold the future of our Province. I said at the URock Awards, if the sixty-five nominees for the URock Award are an example of our youth in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, I am confident, this government is confident, that the future of Newfoundland and Labrador is in good hands.

Mr. Speaker, time is moving on and I want to move into something else. I talked about our education in previous speeches, I talked about municipal infrastructure, and I talked about health. Today I want to stay with health, because that is a very important topic. In our last Budget, Mr. Speaker, we had a total investment of $2.7 billion, a record investment of health operations and more than 10 per cent greater than the previous years. Mr. Speaker, that is a phenomenal amount of money.

Now, when you go down through the list of what we are going to do as a government for health care in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, it is unparalleled with the amount of infrastructure, the amount of money spent, and the amount of emphasis on the health care system within our Province of Newfoundland and Labrador; not only St. John's but all over Newfoundland and Labrador: $7.9 million for the redevelopment of the Central Regional Health Centre in Grand Falls-Windsor, $7.9 million; $11.8 million for the continued construction of the new hospital in Corner Brook; $9 million for the continued construction of the new regional hospital in Labrador West. Mr. Speaker, those are three significant investments in the health care system within our Province. These structures are now getting old, and trying to maintain them is very difficult. We need new modern infrastructure, new modern facilities, so that the health care system can be protected within our Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what we did, Mr. Speaker. That is what we are doing. We are reinvesting in the people through the health care system.

Mr. Speaker, one thing was $6.3 million for site preparation for the installation of a new PET scanner in St. John's. Now that is going to be an instrument - I am not a medical person, but I have watched a number of shows on it - that is going to be a tremendous instrument or piece of machinery within the Province, and to be able to have that machinery or device in our Province will certainly be rewarding.

Mr. Speaker, we also have $5 million for the new health care clinic in Flower's Cove; $3.2 million for the ongoing redevelopment of the James Paton Memorial Hospital in Gander.

Mr. Speaker, when you look at all the investments that I just mentioned, the infrastructure that is needed, these are some of the things that are needed. They are needed to make sure that the health care system is protected and is cared for, because the health care system is very, very important. This government has shown it, and this government has shown - not only put your money where your mouth is, we are doing it, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there are a number of other investments in the health care system and they are: $4.4 million for a new MRI machine at St. Clare's Mercy Hospital; $3.5 million for a CT scanner replacement in Carbonear, approximately $3 million for new laboratory replacement equipment; $2.7 million for the cardiac care program; and $2.1 million for the purchase of new ultrasound machines around the Province. Mr. Speaker, that is significant.

I want to look at one of the things that we doing, that we have done over the last number of years since I have been here as part of this government with a tremendous amount of vision, is the investment of $1.1 million to establish new dialysis sites in Labrador City and Port aux Basques. Mr. Speaker, that is in addition to all the dialysis machines that we have already put in since we have been in government.

Those machines are very, very important to our people who have to travel for dialysis, because that can be very, very tiring, and very, very taxing on our people, and it can certainly wear them out. We are trying to put them as strategically as possible to help alleviate the travel and the pain which they have to go through, Mr. Speaker, and that is a significant amount of investment.

We are also putting money into drugs, Mr. Speaker, money into prescription drugs for our people, to add to all of what we have already done: cancer drugs that we already had put in, in previous years. We are actually increasing the number of drugs that would be there for the health care program.

Mr. Speaker, that does not preclude our dental program that we introduced for our people, the dental program that we had for our young people. We also have insulin, the insulin program, Mr. Speaker, for diabetics, and also that it be expanded up to the age of twenty-five. We had it up to the age of eighteen; now we are going to include it from eighteen up to twenty-five. Mr. Speaker, that is a significant amount of investment, a significant amount of money being spent on our health care system.

Mr. Speaker, in wrapping up very, very quickly - I know my time is up - I look at my district, I look at the volunteer sector within our Province, I look at the money that we invested in health care in our Province, and, unlike the Opposition, there is a positive attitude out there, and that positive attitude is coming from this government to our people and is also returned in kind. I am very, very proud of a government that has the vision that we have.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With that, Mr. Speaker, we are going to conclude the debate on Motion 1 for the afternoon.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to call Order 11, second reading of Bill 14.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Education, that Bill 14, An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act, be now read a second time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 14, entitled, An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act". (Bill 14)

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to get up and speak in regard to the amendments that I am bringing forward to this hon. House today in regard to the legislation entitled the Private Investigation and Security Services Act.

I do not know but I should actually go for a change in regard to the title of that act and probably rename it the Republic of Doyle bill or something of that sort in reflection of the great program that is currently on CBC I believe and aired weekly. I have not been able to follow all of the episodes myself, but it all has to do with private investigations. I reflect on the amendments that I am bringing forward and I hope that it will not have any effect in regard to the programming and cause any changes in regard to the way they produce and direct that particular program.

I also want to just mention that a person from Gander, a young man from Gander, I think his first name is – I am not really sure because there is a couple of brothers – I think it is Robert Blackie is one of the directors of that particular show. I would like to congratulate him on that at this particular time.

Also, when I have the chance that I am in my place in the House of Assembly and on my feet speaking to this piece of legislation, I would like to congratulate the two newest members that we have – the Member for Topsail and the Member for Terra Nova – in regard to their maiden speeches. They were very researched and very well delivered in this House of Assembly. It shows the people and the constituents they represent how well they are going to represent them in the future, especially that we are going to hold government until at least 2090 for sure, if they can live that long.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I will get to the bill in question. As I say, it reflects and addresses some of the issues surrounding private investigations and security services. Before I get into the amendments themselves, I have to reflect how important this is to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, especially the businesses in question. It gives clarity to how they run their business, how they transact their business.

There are various times during a lifetime, and a business's lifetime, or a person's lifetime for that matter, that they might want to avail of a private investigator to do some work that they need done, that they cannot get the actual information they want at a particular time, it could be in any kind of a sort of an application. Some of them, we do not want to be subject to them at various times in our lifetime, but sometimes they are absolutely needed.

When a private investigator goes out into the field and does this type of work for a particular individual or business, well then he has to have an act. That particular business has to have an act that governs their activities and also protects the consumer in regard to what they expect to get from that particular business and that particular industry when they need.

The same thing also applies to the security companies that transact business in the Province. We have various ones across the Province that do some great things for the Province in regard to security. They transport anything from money to private documents and important documents across Newfoundland and Labrador at various times during the business day. We see them on our provincial roads and the Trans-Canada Highway at times in regard to armoured vehicles and that kind of stuff, which is a necessary thing that we have in our society that people avail of at particular times.

This act also governs the people who work within these industries, private investigation and security services. I am not really sure how many people actually work within the total system itself, but I am quite sure there are quite a few Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who work in that on a daily basis and providing a good service to the people, but also it is a place of employment for them.

I know I have a number of them working out of Gander. I have a private security services business there - a good friend of mine. He provides services to government, he provides services to various businesses and he also provides services to people in general. Then we have another business which is a national firm that the Central region is centred out of Gander. They have a number of places of business there that they store their equipment and also their vehicles themselves. They employ people from the area, not only in my district, but the outlying districts as well who work with those various companies.

This act is a really important act. It was first enacted in 1981. It governs the licensure of private investigators, security agents, security agencies, burglar alarm companies, security consultants, armoured vehicle guards and couriers. All of those services and all of those types of things that this act governs are absolutely needed by society. Sometimes you reflect and you wish we lived in a crime-free society, but that is not the way it is, that is not the society - and that really is unattained anywhere in this world, and I suppose it was never to be attained in the world from the beginning of time.

When you talk about burglar alarm companies, people now, especially in the regions of St. John's and our cities, a lot of people have alarm systems in their private residences, and I witnessed that. We do not have as many in Gander, but I think it is an increasing type of business out there, but I certainly witnessed it when I campaigned with the hon. Member for Topsail. As a matter of fact, I made a remark to him one day that just about every home that I came up to had a private alarm system installed. So that is a very important thing too, and we have to have legislation governing that particular piece of work and businesses in Newfoundland and Labrador and we have to give clarity in regard to how they transact the business.

I said, Mr. Speaker, this act came into being in 1981, but, as well, it did not lie in my department either for a long period of time. As a matter of fact, it was housed by the Department of Justice and only recently, in 2009, this particular piece of legislation was moved over to Government Services. It was decided by Cabinet, decided by government that it was better suited for the Department of Government Services than it was in Justice. It is in my department, so we reviewed the legislation when it was first passed over to the department and we saw some amendments. We consulted with the industry itself, we saw some amendments and that is why I am here today in regard to tabling these amendments for that piece of legislation.

One of the pieces in this legislation that we saw that was amended is that there is a discrepancy between this piece of legislation and the Corporations Act. In the Corporations Act it requires that at least 25 per cent of the directors of a corporation should be a resident of Canada. In this piece of legislation it actually says that to be "…eligible to hold a licence to carry on the business of an agency unless …a majority of the members of the board of directors are Canadian citizens or persons lawfully admitted to Canada for permanent residence or ordinarily resident in Canada." So, we are going to bring in an amendment that will repeal that section 10.(1)(b) from the act and then we will have that the board requirement will now be governed by the Corporations Act and under that provision. So that harmonizes this act in regard to the other acts that I have housed in the Department of Government Services, some 150 pieces of legislation that governs the transaction of business and also protects the consumer in regard to the transactions of that type of business, and all types of business in Newfoundland and Labrador at any given time. So, to be clear, now the requirement would be at least 25 per cent of the directors. So, no lower than 25 per cent of the directors of a corporation will be a resident of Canada; and that will be the provision.

Also, Mr. Speaker, the other piece of the act that we will look at is in regard to operating an office in the Province. There is an inconsistency in the act in regard to an office as compared to an address. Under my Registry of Deeds, the requirement and the interpretation of any piece of legislation is that a place of address is the criteria in regard to registry. We will register a business on an address. So, to remove the inconsistency within the act we will leave the place of address as the requirement in regard to operating a business and also obtaining a permit to operate that business. That brings it into harmonization with my other pieces of legislation within the House of Assembly, or in my department, such as the Consumer Protection And Business Practices Act, and the Insurance Act and the Collections Act.

I also want to say in this House, too, as I opened up my remarks and mentioned that there were a number of people, a number of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians employed in regard to these particular industries and businesses, that a lot of them - as a matter of fact, most of them are national type bodies or international type businesses. The place of head office and that kind of stuff would be somewhere else, maybe Toronto, Vancouver, or somewhere in the United States or wherever, but the thing I want to make very, very clear, is that because of the nature of the business itself, a private investigator, or security services, the people on the ground have to be here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

So, there is employment involved in this. The place of address is quite fine in regard to the registry of a company to transact business in Newfoundland and Labrador, and require the various permits that is needed to do that kind of business. In that regard, we are not losing any employment or anything like that. We are just harmonizing the piece of legislation. Not only does it harmonize the piece of legislation to the other acts within my department, it actually harmonizes the legislation to other jurisdictions as well. On a cross-jurisdictional scan we wanted to be consistent with their pieces of legislation as well to allow these companies to transact their business and hire Newfoundlanders and Labradorians without any red tape, or as less red tape as we possibly could provide them.

One of the other pieces is the appeal process. Right now, as the act states, the appeal goes to the minister. We considered that, and I agree with that. My department advised me that this is redundant. It creates an unnecessary means to the appeal and it creates a perception of bias, because I as the minister of the department make the decisions, the ultimate decisions within the department. Then, if somebody has an appeal process they are actually appealing to the person who actually made the decision in the first place. That is not right, so we decided we would repeal that section, section 37 of the act, and we will pass that in the proper process to the court appeal.

To be clear, if there are any types of appeals or any type of actions on behalf of the industry people themselves, then it would not come to the Minister of Government Services. It would come to the court appeal process. We consulted with justice, they agreed that was the proper appeal process that would be transacted and takes away that bias and redundant nature that the minister would give to that particular piece of the act.

The other piece is concerning section 38, which requires a person appealing to the judge of the trial division serve a written notice of intent to appeal to the Deputy Minister of Justice. That was okay, I guess, probably added on later - that was not needed at the time, but still it was there in the act at the time when it was housed by the Department of Justice. Now that the actual piece of legislation is housed in the Department of Government Services, under my responsibility at this particular time, this is no longer needed because the Deputy Minister of Justice is in his own department and not in my department. So that is not needed.

Mr. Speaker, that is pretty well – I am just kind of scanning over and remembering all of the different areas that I am up here today in the House of Assembly in regard to this piece of legislation and the amendments that we bring forward. Again, as I said a couple of days ago when I was up in the House on another bill, that sometimes the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, constituents of mine even, would say: Well, what does that mean to me in regard to what you are doing there in amendments and legislation?

When I was elected in 2003 I did not have a real appreciation of the various pieces of legislation in government and how it affected the lives of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, the businesses and the business world and various other groups and organizations on a daily basis.

With that, Mr. Speaker, these amendments are very, very important to the people, very important to anyone who would transact business in Newfoundland and Labrador. Again, it is a part of my process as the minister responsible for the Department of Government Services to have a continual process of review in regard to the 150-odd pieces of legislation that we have in Government Services.

During that review which we do, we find that amendments are needed. Even though we might have amended or tabled a piece of legislation, passed a piece of legislation only a year or two before, there is always a continuous process of review. Also, the business is actually evolving, or whatever is governed by that piece of legislation changes over a period of time. So to keep up with it and to keep current – also, I found since I have been the Minister of Government Services, that some of my legislation had not been reviewed for twenty, thirty years and does not reflect the current business practices, the current climate that we find ourselves in and the current practices that are governed by that particular piece of legislation that we have.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will welcome any comments by my hon. members across the House. I know they are going to support these amendments full-heartedly because they realize, as I do, how important they are to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and the people and the businesses in the way they transact businesses. We have consulted with the industry itself and agree with them. Justice has agreed as well in regard to our consultation process with them that these amendments are warranted. It is a great piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker.

With that, I will take my place in the House of Assembly and listen intently to any comments by my hon. members across the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

It is a pleasure to be able to stand today and have a few comments with regard to Bill 14. I want to go back to the opening remarks made by the minister that probably he should rename this bill The Republic of Doyle. If it is the episode that I saw, I would not want a bill enacted on the episode I saw with regard to The Republic of Doyle, as good as it was.

Mr. Speaker, according to the Explanatory Notes in Bill 14, and as has been stated, it would amend the act to update and streamline the appeal process and make that process more consistent with the Consumer Protection and Business Practices Act. It would also remove the requirement for a corporation applying to hold a licence under the act to have a majority of the board of directors of that corporation be Canadian citizens.

Further, Bill 14 would go on, it would require that the corporation have an address for service in the Province rather than requiring the agency to operate an office in the Province. It is based on this, Mr. Speaker, that I will make a few comments; because under section 10.(1)(b) which is being repealed, this requires the majority of the board of directors of a licensed company to be Canadian citizens, and this has been stated as being inconsistent with the Corporations Act, and there is no need to have reference to the board of directors. I notice from the minister's comments that under the proposed amendment now it would just take 25 per cent of the directors to be from Canada.

Under 10.(2) it is noted where it requires a place of business in the Province being repealed, and replaced with a requirement for an address for service in the Province. It goes on to state that there would be no need for an office, just an address to lay a complaint or a charge; which is consistent, in my understanding, with other legislation in the department and the Agreement on Internal Trade.

Mr. Speaker, under section 37, this full section is being repealed. This is the part where it entitled - the appeal process would be to the minister. That has been changed, as explained by the minister. We know all too well that there are many times in the Province when consumers, regardless of what phase they are looking at, whether it is under the EI Commission, the EI Act, Workers' Compensation or CPP, people are often given the opportunity to appeal, and that is a wonderful opportunity offered to them.

I know that the minister said this is taken away because of a bias by the minister, but we have heard in recent times, by Chief Justice Green and other judges, that they have concerns with the level of appeal that is being mentioned here today.

Number one, no doubt this is a good idea but the issue that has been put forward is the time consumed and the cost that would be in relation to it. Because I know, from attending appeals on behalf of constituents, under the EI Act, many times you go to the first level of appeal, which is the board of directors. If you happen to be unfortunate enough to lose your case there, then you go before the umpire. I can tell you, many people cannot afford to go to that level; because, once you go to the umpire and you go before the judge, it is a totally different ball game. Many of those people are not prepared. Number one, they do not have the time, they do not understand the process, they cannot afford to get a lawyer, and many of them just let their process fall by the wayside and they will not go to that next level of appeal. That is one of the concerns I have here, and I am sure the minister, in his closing remarks, will address and probably explain further why this has been looked at rather than the appeal process that was used before.

Even though I said no doubt this is a good idea, I have concerns on behalf of the residents who would be forced to go, as it states in section 38. This deals with the appeal to the courts. This section is updated to reflect current practices, but then again, Mr. Speaker, it is a time when people are placed in an awkward position, where they have to go before the judge of the Trial Division and many of them, as I have stated before, go there in regard to if a licence has been suspended or what have you – or any issues – and they find it very difficult going that route.

Mr. Speaker, the act provides for special regulations of private investigation agencies, security guard agencies, security consulting agencies, burglar alarm agencies and so on. We know that throughout our Province in many areas this is very important. We know that under the act it also includes for oversight by the administrator and deputy administrator which would be appointed by the minister. Persons carrying on the business of such agencies are required to be licensed so as to ensure qualifications, and have the public interest at heart.

Many times, legislation comes in through the Department of Government Services and it is very tied to consumer protection – many aspects. I know last year there were several pieces of legislation that came forward. The changes were made to protect the consumer and, from all indications, what we are hearing each day now, there are many other pieces of legislation that will be coming forward this year and no doubt many of them are along the same line.

Mr. Speaker, this also is to streamline the appeal process and make the process more consistent with the Consumer Protection and Business Practices Act. I guess it appears that this will be done by removing the direct appeal to the minister provided under section 37, but it raises the question, I think, of why the appeal process under this act should match that of the Consumer Protection And Business Practices Act, because that act deals with the licensing of direct sales and credit reporting agencies.

These are very different than the agencies that we reference under the Private Investigation And Security Services Act. Then again, I guess the department, in their wisdom, feels that those changes should be made for that particular reason. The proposed removal of the direct appeal to the minister makes it more costly, as I have already said, Mr. Speaker - more costly to people seeking a licence - to appeal a refusal to issue a licence. Like I said, maybe this is something that the minister can have another look at.

Also regarding the proposed changes to the requirement that an agency have an office in the Province, this may have an impact on the administrator's ability to properly oversee those licensed under the act, including, in certain circumstances, investigating them pursuant to section 25 of the act.

Mr. Speaker, we know that the agencies have to have an address, not necessarily an office, and for liability purposes this is important, no doubt about it. We need some point of contact. The only thing that I was thinking about with an office, with an actual office in the Province, it seems like it would be more applicable than probably someone just trying to trace down an address to someone on the mainland or in another country or what have you. I am sure the minister will respond to that in due course.

The other thing, by not having an office here, and I do not know if it affects employment as much as I am looking at it, because if there was an office here, I can see staff being in the office, outside of the people who would be out in the field. Maybe it is not to the extent that I would see it, but I do think that employment would be factor. So, the reality is that there could be some job loss, or job increase, I guess, if you had an office here for this particular company, rather than just the people on the ground. The other thing, I guess, the government wants to streamline the act to make it more like the Consumer Protection Act, and this states very clearly not to have an office in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, having said that, we have an act place stating that this type of business requires special oversight for those agencies. As it states in the act, you have to be licensed. So the act provides for an overseer of the industry. You apply for a licence from the person, and they monitor the licence. So one of the key things that I see with this is the overseer has investigative powers, and I am wondering if those powers would be weakened by just having a contact with the main office by phone or e-mail, or what have you, versus having the actual facility here in our Province.

Having made those comments, Mr. Speaker, some of the issues that I am sure the minister will respond to that I have is with regard to the jobs and if that would be a factor or not. Having an office in the Province, if there was an office here - taxation issues - there are probably more revenues coming into the Province versus just having someone on the ground here and a contact from outside.

We all know the importance of having offices. We have an office in Ottawa to deal with our issues; I know it is not a business issue. I heard the Premier say a few years ago when he was talking about the EU and the seal issue, he thought it was very important to have an office. I guess from that perspective that is where I am coming from. I think it would be better to have an office here in the Province.

I also mentioned that it probably would weaken the investigative powers probably just by contacting someone outside. It is not like if you had to go to the actual residence where they were located here to deal with them. The key one that I think is the appeal process. Like I said, I am not saying that it is a bad idea but I think it probably would be more costly and timelier for individuals who would want to go through the appeal process.

Having made those few comments, Mr. Speaker, overall, I think it is a good thing but I just have a couple of questions there that I am sure the minister will respond to.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will take my place.

MR. SPEAKER (Kelly): The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is with great pleasure that I rise in this hon. House today to speak to yet another important piece of legislation. Earlier this week I had an opportunity to participate in a lively debate on a bill related to the consumer protection – an act respecting consumer protection. The legislation that I am speaking to today, Mr. Speaker, is also about protection. It is about protecting people's sense of security. That is obviously a very critical and important issue that this government takes incredibly seriously.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the hon. Member for Terra Nova for an incredible maiden speech today. I, too, sit near the hon. Member for Terra Nova in the section that will now forever be referred to as the overflow section thanks to my hon. colleague.

Mr. Speaker, it is not just overflow in perhaps the typical or traditional sense that one would think. We are overflowing with pride, we are overflowing with confidence, we are overflowing with the sense of support that we have from the people of this Province. This overflow is something that I think is symbolic of the prosperity and the success that this government has brought.

Certainly, Mr. Speaker, it was a passionate maiden speech. I think the way that the hon. member expressed his pride in his family, in his community, in the district that he represents and in this great Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, it is commendable. I have certainly enjoyed the number of weeks that I have been working with the hon. member since he was sworn in. I know that he is going to be an active member of this caucus and of this party.

In fact, I think it is a really positive sign to see the hon. Member for Terra Nova, now the youngest Member in the House of Assembly - only by several months, mind you, but the youngest member in the House of Assembly stepping forward. There is a youthful energy in this government and in this party and I think that is going to bode well for the future and for the people of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, given that this bill that I am speaking to today, Bill 14, which relates to the Private Investigation and Security Services Act, it is all about security. For that reason, I would also like to make mention of the changing of the guard at the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. I certainly want to express my sincere congratulations to past Chief Joe Browne on his retirement. He had an incredible career and over the years, through my involvement in community life, I have had numerous opportunities to work with him and interact with him, and he did provide some considerably strong leadership for the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary over the last five years. I wish him well in his retirement.

I am also thrilled with the appointment of the new Chief, Chief Bob Johnston, who has now assumed his duties and his new office. He is a strong leader, a gentleman, someone that has Mount Pearl roots, I might add, Mr. Speaker, and someone who has family on the very street that I grew up on and live on. I first worked with Chief Johnston through a community committee during the International Year of the Family quite a number of years ago. He has always been passionate about our communities and our Province. I know he will do a great job providing leadership to the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary.

Mr. Speaker, I think the minister did a great job providing a very clear and comprehensive overview of this bill that we are addressing today. I also appreciate the comments from the hon. Member for Port de Grave. I noted they both referenced the Republic of Doyle, so I would remise if I did not do so. Mr. Speaker, I think it is a great honour for Newfoundland and Labrador to see such a high quality production with so many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians involved. It does relate to private investigation so I think it is timely and appropriate that I make mention of that fantastic production that is getting attention right across the country, which is great for Newfoundland and Labrador, great for our arts and our cultural community.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, back to the matters at hand, it was just last night, as I was preparing my notes and reviewing the legislation that we are speaking to today, I was chatting with one of my friends, Scott, and he was asking: What is going on in the House of Assembly this week? I talked to him about the Budget Debate and the consumer protection bill that we dealt with earlier in the week and I talked to him about this act respecting private investigation and security services. It led to quite a lively discussion on the use of private investigators, the role of private investigators and the potential impact that private investigation services could have on people's privacy. We live in an age where the concerns around privacy are more prevalent than ever before. I think that my friend, Scott, took some comfort in the fact that there is legislation like this in place to ensure that people's best interests and people's rights are indeed protected and that there is good governance in place to provide oversight for these industries that are affected by this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, it was just a number of years ago that my own home, my own family residence was broken into, and I remember the impact that had on my own sense of security. I remember the impact that had on my family. I remember the impact that had on my neighbourhood. It was not about the thousands of dollars of belongings that we lost as a result of the break in; there were things lost that could never be replaced, things that had sentimental value and things that meant something to myself and to loved ones. Again, it speaks to the importance of people's own sense of security and the need for security services and the role that private security agencies play in supporting law enforcement agencies in our community and in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, Bill 14, it speaks to a number of industries in this Province. It speaks to airport security, for instance. It affects private security companies, companies with armoured vehicles such as Brinks or Securicor as examples that we see coming to and from banks and ATMs in our communities. This bill addresses the role of private investigators and also companies that provide home security systems, burglar alarms.

So, Mr. Speaker, it is clear when you look at what this bill and the piece of legislation in question here is all about it is really about ensuring the safety of our residents and that is not only important, Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely necessary.

I think every member of this House and the people of this Province would agree that people have a right to feel safe. People have a right to feel secure in their homes. People have a right to feel safe and secure in their communities. People have a right to feel safe and secure wherever they choose to call home.

I am proud to say that we live in one of the safest places in the world. Yet, Mr. Speaker, I think we need to be mindful of the fact that the world around us is changing and there are many more security concerns that exist in this global community than ever before. All one has to do is go to an airport and take a flight to get a sense of the kind of security measures that now exist to protect people and to protect their safety.

So, Mr. Speaker, in terms of security, it was only earlier this week that we heard about a potential disaster that was averted in New York City right in Times Square. There was a potential act of terror that was planned involving a car bomb. I think it serves as an important reminder that we should never take our safety and security for granted.

Since 9-11, we have been forced to live in a different world. The rules have changed. It is a world that has us constantly looking to improve and increase the protection of our people that we have in place. I think we need to be vigilant. I think we need to be persistent with our dedication to security and protection of our Province and protection of our people. That, Mr. Speaker, is really from my perspective what Bill 14 and the act in question, the Private Investigation And Security Services Act, is really all about.

How do we make people feel more safe and secure? How can we ensure that we have legislation in place that ensures that people feel safe and secure in their homes and in their neighbourhoods and in their communities and in this great Province of ours? Well, Mr. Speaker, I think we can do it by ensuring that we have proper and responsible legislation and regulations in place for industries like those that I have mentioned here this afternoon.

We do need to increase security in high-risk areas, and that cannot be done through only our public law enforcement agencies. We need partners like airport security, like private investigation services, like home security services, to ensure that we have all elements of security services addressed in any given community. We have certainly seen a need for increases in security at airports and in other ports of travel. Being on an Island in the North Atlantic as we stand here today - which really is an amazing gateway for people to connect with the rest of North America - we, too, have to be concerned about the safety and security around our ports, for instance.

Mr. Speaker, we have to be concerned about security at our banks and other financial institutions. Certainly, as individuals, we have to protect ourselves and our families by having appropriate security measures in place at our homes and in our businesses as well. There is also a need for private security services, like the ones that are addressed in this legislation, in highly frequented public areas, like shopping centres and malls.

Mr. Speaker, I can tell you with confidence that our residents protection and safety is of the utmost importance to this government. I certainly comment the minister and the Department of Government Services for proposing these improvements to the Private Investigation And Security Services Act. We need to continue to ensure that the laws that regulate safety and protection in this Province are the best they can be, are as strong as they can be, are as current as they can be, and are as relevant as they can be. That is our responsibility as a government, Mr. Speaker. This is an area where if mistakes are made, there are serious and perhaps even fatal consequences. We take that responsibility very seriously.

While the world economy appears to be facing some continued uncertainty, we are very fortunate to have fared well during this world recession that we are experiencing. However, there are certainly some drawbacks to that newfound wealth. You only need to speak to any law enforcement agency in this Province to know that with wealth and with prosperity, quite frequently comes an increase in crime rates as well. That is why this government has made responsible investments in policing, and in safety and in security. That is why we take pieces of legislation like this very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, I refer to my own example of a home robbery. We often hear in the news about armed robberies, I believe there was one on a convenience store on LeMarchant Road last night or the night before. We hear about home invasion and I think it is incredibly important to the people who we represent in this hon. House that people feel that their home is safe and secure. This is reinforced with the addition of home security systems and they are also addressed as a result of this legislation.

This act speaks to regulations surrounding home security and agents who provide these kinds of important services. There is nothing more important to me than protecting my loved ones. There is nothing more important to us than protecting the people we care about, our families. Having the added security of a home security system or a surveillance system, an alarm system, does give a certain piece of mind that people need in order to truly enjoy their home environments. This, of course, is equally as important when people are outside of their homes. We often get caught up with the hustle and bustle of family, and work and community commitments. If we can go about our business without having to worry about threats to our homes while we are away from them, I think that is a good thing for all of us, Mr. Speaker.

Home security systems have become very affordable and they are accessible to many homeowners today. It is something that I recommend if you can afford it. It does provide an added sense of security, but having a system in place is not enough, of course, Mr. Speaker.

In terms of police and private security, it is more important than ever that our government ensure that we have policies in place to handle safety and security of our residents. Our provincial police forces do a great service to this Province, but they are complemented by private security companies who monitor and maintain the safety of travellers, shoppers, homeowners, business owners, and the list goes on and on. Without private security companies, like some of the ones that I have mentioned earlier today – some of them do have offices and places of business in my own district, Mr. Speaker. So without all those enterprises that operate here in this Province, I would expect our police forces would be overtaxed. The relationship between these agencies is not only an important one but it is a necessary one, Mr. Speaker.

It is only through open lines of communication and a co-operative relationship that both government-based law enforcement and private security companies and agencies can really maximize their efforts in protecting our people and our communities in this Province. We have to protect people wherever they are. We often take our freedoms for granted, especially in an amazing place to live like Newfoundland and Labrador. The freedom to walk through a mall on a Saturday, shopping at will. The freedom to walk into a bank feeling secure and safe to deal with our money matters. The freedom to go to work; at all of these locations, although we may not even notice, Mr. Speaker, we are most likely being protected by some form of security, and it may be some form of private security. Security cameras, security guards, security companies who handle the protection and security of our well-earned money, and of our personal safety as well. Without these services, whatever form they may come in, we would certainly not be able to live in the safe and amazing society that we enjoy in this wonderful place that we call home.

So we need to respect these agencies, and more importantly, we need to assist them by making sure we have sensible legislation, modern legislation, relevant legislation that actually works. The updates that we are making to the Private Investigation And Security Services Act are all about making sure that the legislation is as practical and as current, and as clear as it possibly can be. That is why I am pleased to rise today, Mr. Speaker, and speak to Bill 14 and to talk a little bit about the important changes that we are making to the Private Investigation And Security Services Act.

As previous speakers have indicated, the act covers a lot of ground. It is legislation that is now, I guess close to thirty years old, but it has been amended countless times over the years to ensure that it remains relevant as possible. So the act itself covers how businesses, like the ones I have talked about, are administered, how they are licensed, how these industries are overseen and governed and regulated. The act addresses issues like ensuring that proper background checks are done on people who work in the security industry. It covers issues like ensuring that people working in this industry have proper uniforms when they are conducting their activities. It covers issues like the use of firearms and restricts the use of firearms. It covers issues related to home alarm systems and the use of such, and the use of such systems have become way more prevalent in recent years.

Mr. Speaker, in the few minutes I have left and, unfortunately, I wish I had more time because –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. KENT: I hear my colleagues are already talking about leave, and I still have a few minutes to go. It is absolutely imperative that we talk about issues that affect people's safety and people's lives and this act, this bill, certainly is important in doing so.

I think the minister articulated quite well what this bill is all about. It is all about updating and streamlining the appeals process and making the processes as consistent with the Consumer Protection and Business Practices Act - we spoke on a bill earlier this week related to that very act, and it is another issue which I am incredibly passionate about and one that I am really happy to have a chance to speak about.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about private investigators, we are talking about airport security, we are talking about armoured vehicles that provide service to our banks, we are talking about security personnel that we see in our malls, in our shopping centres, we are talking about the companies that provide home alarm systems. This bill will remove the requirement for a corporation applying to hold a licence to have a majority of its board of directors to be Canadian citizens. The minister articulated quite well the logic behind that. I am going to go into some of these clauses in a little more detail if time permits.

I should say, Mr. Speaker, that the department and the minister really developed these amendments on its own initiative and, in doing so, consulted with industry, consulted with the Department of Justice to make sure that we were making the right changes and the right updates for precisely the right reasons.

Mr. Speaker, in the first section of this bill that we are debating in this House today the particular clauses in the first part of the bill is not new. The language is exactly the language that is in the current act; however, what we have done and what we are proposing to do through this bill is take out the references that have existed in the past to the board of directors. The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is that this act like many other acts that we are responsible for as a government, the act currently does not comply with the Corporations Act and the existing language was not needed. So, we need to bring it in line to ensure the appropriate consistency.

Mr. Speaker, then I look at the second section of the bill here today, and I know the hon. Member for Port de Grave expressed some concerns. I have no doubt that the minister will address those concerns in his closing remarks today, but I can honestly say that having researched this bill and having researched this act, I do not share the concerns of the hon. Member for Port de Grave.

The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that all other Government Services legislation requires an address for service. This is an acceptable practice and an acceptable standard and the minister talked about 150 pieces of legislation that his department would have reason to deal with and be responsible for.

So practically, Mr. Speaker, if a business has an address for service in Newfoundland and Labrador – and quite often these companies are going to continue to have some kind of office in Newfoundland and Labrador. With an address for service, if you wanted to file a complaint or if you wanted to take legal action, then you have the ability to do so right here in Newfoundland and Labrador. The process that is proposed –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair reminds the hon. member that his time for speaking has expired.

Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly appreciate the leave and I will not abuse that leave. I feel that this is an important matter, and I certainly would like to take a moment to speak about a couple more clauses in the legislation.

As I was saying, to address the address for service issue, I think that what is proposed is consistent with dozens and dozens of pieces of legislation that we have in this Province and the reality is that people can file a complaint. They can take legal action and sue a company and it can all be done right here in Newfoundland and Labrador if necessary.

People may be wondering why section 37 of the act is being repealed, and I know that the Member for Port de Grave had some concerns about that as well. What we are doing is trying to continue to live up to our commitment to be open, to be accountable and to be transparent. Mr. Speaker, it is not just about being transparent; it is about being perceived to be transparent. I think that that is what we are trying to address in this particular piece of legislation today.

What we are doing by repealing section 37 is removing the ability for someone to appeal to the minister and the minister alone. Now, Mr. Speaker, those of us in this House know that our current minister is a great guy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: I am a little surprised that is the only thing I have gotten applause for this afternoon, Mr. Speaker; nonetheless, he is a great guy and he is capable of making good decision and he is capable of being objective and he is capable of demonstrating sound judgment – certainly most of the time.

What we do here by repealing section 37 of the act is eliminate any perception that could exist of bias. I think that is really important. In an age where accountability and transparency is so very, very important to this government and to the people we represent, it is absolutely essential that our legislation reflects that in all respects.

Mr. Speaker, just to address the final piece of this bill, the process that is being put in place here for appeals through the trial division is direct, it is efficient. It removes that possible perception of bias and removes that appeal to the minister.

The current legislation makes reference to having to serve on the Deputy Minister of Justice. Mr. Speaker, it is outdated, it does not reflect current practice, it does not reflect reality, and I think this is an incredibly relevant, current and timely piece of legislation. We are making these changes because we are actively reviewing every piece of legislation to ensure that it is as current and as meaningful and as appropriate and responsible as possible.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Port de Grave raised the concern around cost of having such a process in place. Mr. Speaker, democracy comes with a cost and it is a cost that I am prepared to defend. Transparency and accountability comes with a cost. Those are also costs that I am prepared to defend. I think we do have a responsibility to make sure that we are clear, transparent and accountable.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, I am so proud, once again, to have an opportunity to rise and debate in this House this week to talk about issues that matter in people's lives. What we are talking about here is people's safety and security. That is something that I have always been very passionate about. I commend the minister for ensuring that we have relevant and appropriate legislation. I offer my full, unequivocal and wholehearted support for Bill 14.

I thank members for the opportunity to conclude my remarks.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUCKINGHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure, diminished somewhat by having followed two excellent presentations already on this piece of legislation. I shall do my best to not repeat anything that has been said, although a very high likelihood that that may happen, but also maybe to bring a little bit of a different perspective on what has been said so far.

I would like to, first of all, as some of my other colleagues have done, take the opportunity to congratulate the Member for Topsail and the Member for Terra Nova on making such inspirational maiden speeches. I had occasion - because we have seen two this week - to review my own from 2007. It is very heartfelt, the same sort of sentiments that were expressed by those members, when you come into government, you realize what you have ahead of you and you bring forward the different ideals that perhaps you think are going to carry you, that brought you into this situation in the place and here we are – I can say to both hon. members, that two-and-a-half years later those kind of inspirational things that motivated me to say the things I said are still in place. The support for the government, support for the leadership, the type of direction that this government is taking makes me still very, very proud and very, very much in anticipation of what is going to happen down the road as we move forward.

One of the things about a bill like this, as it says, An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act, and one of the things that we come to recognize in the House of Assembly is that we do a lot of housekeeping, a lot of tinkering, a lot of fine tuning on legislation. In many ways it is very easy just to sort of dismiss it and run it through, not really take too much look at what these different provisions are saying, not looking at why they have come into effect. It is very easy just to dismiss it and say, oh, someone somewhere in the halls of government has decided this needs to be changed and they bring it forward for our consideration. However, I think that if you do take the opportunity to not only look at what is happening, in many cases it is very obvious why the wording is being changed, whether it be harmonization with some national legislation or some inconsistencies, or perhaps some - even typos could be the catalyst for legislation to come to this floor. If you do look at what is going on here it provides you with an excellent opportunity for any member of government to just experience a bit of a slice, just a little small tidbit of the totality of what governments are involved in.

Mr. Speaker, in our day-to-day lives we interact with government in many, many different ways but certainly it is only when you get into the role here as an MHA that you start to realize just how many parts of our lives that government does touch. Whether it be in the fisheries, whether it be in health care, whether it be education, whether it be regulations around your chiropractor who is going to straighten out your back, or the funeral director who is going to put you in the ground, we have a part in that. Again, it is a question of making sure that those services – and make no mistake, Mr. Speaker, they are services that are provided to the consumer.

It was mentioned earlier that this piece of legislation has been moved from Justice to Government Services, and some people might look at private securities or private investigations as perhaps more legal than it really needs to be, but let's look at what exactly is provided here. This is, in no uncertain terms, a service. A service which someone is free to go and purchase, a service which someone is free to go out and find and then use to their own ends for whatever it is, but the question is: As a government, do we protect the consumer from perhaps people who might try and take advantage of what they are asking someone to do?

Security, which has been mentioned earlier, is a very important part of our lives. In many ways we may be given to reveal a bit too much of ourselves in order for security to happen. To do that and provide that information to a group who are off the radar, who have no presence in the community, who have no regulations governing what they can and cannot do, what they can do with the information that they have – I will allude to that a little later – is really sort of a scary proposition. So, it only makes sense that the Department of Government Services would take this under its wing to make it part of the full suite of services that we provide for consumer protection. The minister certainly is responsible for a lot of the legislation that comes to the House, and again, it is about protecting the rights of individuals as they move forward.

Licensing can only go so far though, Mr. Speaker. As has been evidenced in this House over the past number of years, many, many services are licensed but that is as much as we can do as a government. We can legislate, we can ask for licences, we can establish codes of practice, codes of behaviour, but ultimately, Mr. Speaker, it comes down to the consumer. As was mentioned the other day in the Consumer Protection Act, it comes down to the consumer to be aware of what exists, to be aware that the service you are intending to contract - is it licensed? Does it need to be licensed? Is there a – and many times we will see an ad in the paper, for example, the following people are registered members of, whether it be the physiotherapist association, or the psychologist association, and we have a duty on ourselves as consumers to make ourselves aware that these services are out there.

Some people can perform them without a licence, and if, as a consumer, you do not take the time to check that out, then really a lot of the blame just falls right back on you. If you do provide a service and maybe they do something to injure you physically, or they do something to injure your reputation, or they do something to damage your bank account and you have not checked to see if they have a licence, if you have not checked to see if they have a place, an address of service where you can, or through the government you can find where these people are and how they should be contacted. So, again, this legislation in no way abdicates the responsibility of the consumer when they go to contract a service, no matter whether it be something covered here in the Private Investigation And Security Services Act, or anything else that you might want to get into.

Now, Mr. Speaker, one of the parts about doing some research to get ready for this is, is inevitably you do learn a lot more than when you went into the process. I just looked at this, when it was first presented, private investigation and security services really had not given any consideration to what it fully involved. So I am very happy to perhaps take some time today to expand the horizons of people who might not consider that certain services will, in fact, fall under this act.

One of the things that are in the definitions is an agency. Those agencies actually fall under four different categories. One is private investigation, another one is security guards, another one is security consulting, and finally, burglar alarms. Now, these are probably all things that we might be familiar with, if not through our real life experience, then certainly through the make-believe world of television, where, obviously it is to be entertained but a lot of times people do not quite make the transition between the fantasy of television and the reality of day to day life. One could certainly look at the Republic of Doyle and what is accomplished in an hour is certainly, truly, wonderful stuff, but I suspect, Mr. Speaker, that if you were to take similar situations in a real world milieu, that it would, in fact, be a lot longer and probably a lot less entertaining.

One of the things about private investigator, it says that it investigates and provides information; it "searches for and provides information as to the personal character or actions of a person…" So in other words, I can contract a private investigator to go out and see what kind of a person you are. Are you the kind of person that I want to be friends with? Are you the kind of person that I want to employ? Are you the kind of person that I want to do business with? Are you the kind of person I want my daughter to go out with? Probably not the last one, as a father it would not be a good idea to go that route.

You can search for offenders against the law, often may be known as bounty hunters. Again, a lot of television fantasy done up around that; anyone who has seen that ridiculous show, but again, I run the risk of offending those people who like it. You can search for missing persons. You can search for missing property, and you can perform shopping functions. Now this seemed to be awfully strange, but in fact, they can perform functions to report on the conduct, the integrity and the trustworthiness of employees. If, as a business operator, I suspect that as I go through my annual reporting, that my inventory is lower than expected, perhaps my cash is not balancing, perhaps I suspect there have been some sweetheart deals extended to certain customers, I can contract a private investigator to go in and to determine if those types of things are a reality in the business that I have.

When we talk about security guards, they fall under a broad category. Certainly one of the most visible ones are the mall security guards who are in uniform, but again, those are people who are in uniform, they are visible, they provide not only the security services, but also the deterrent for potential shoplifters to know that if they look over their shoulder and they see the uniform, perhaps they are thinking twice about it. So in many ways, it is a reasonable investment by the retail operations to have the money that they may spend on security guards may, in fact, be saved by lower shoplifting, pilfering, or as they say in the industry, shrinkage, which I think is a bit of a neutral term to say the same thing as shoplifting.

Another branch is called the security consultant, and obviously this person consults. Well what I found interesting about this particular one, I will bring this forward – again, this might not be something that people might consider if they had known about it, but this person can also inspect your premises for devices capable of intercepting private communications. Now, Mr. Speaker, I was over in England a number of years ago and happened to run across a shop, it was called the private detective shop. When you went in, it was amazing how you could go in and buy right off the street, right off the storefront, devices that could be used to tap phones, to listen, bugs, whether it could be parabolic devices that could listen to words across the hall. Now, granted, in this room, Mr. Speaker, it is not a problem to hear any of the comments from across the whole distance, and some of them maybe you would not want to hear, but for the most part, they are all worthwhile hearing, and unfortunately, they do not always make it to Hansard.

When you dig down through some of the other sections it talks about those people who can conduct the investigations, but it also talked about the people who are not required, in the course of investigating, to fall under this act. So you may look at this and say, hold on a second now, this particular person should not be doing that. I do not believe they are covered under the act. Here are some of the groups that are exempted from this particular act. First of all, lawyers and their employees, in the course of coming or arriving at the truth or building a case, they are not required to fall under this act.

Anyone who does a background check, whether it be financial, employability suitability, or for issuing of bonds, they are not under this act. Obviously, peace officers are not covered. Insurance adjusters, again, a lot of investigation is required. Any of us who have been in a car accident realize that that level of investigation, while annoying, is very, very necessary.

One of the other groups, oddly, that I found that are exempt from this act, are The Canadian Corps of Commissionaires. Now, Mr. Speaker, it should be noted, and I would like to take this opportunity if I could perhaps go off on a bit of a tangent, The Canadian Corps of Commissionaires also are represented here in the House of Assembly. In fact, they provide security for us and they monitor all of the comings and goings in and out of the House of Assembly, they monitor the galleries. In fact, just last week, Mr. Speaker, they were called upon to clear the galleries when a group of individuals decided they were going to make their case known to the House. Even though it was very clearly, after multiple admonitions by the Speaker, that they should keep their tongues and that the public gallery is not a place to be shouting down opinions or certainly things that are probably less palatable than just opinions, and in due course, once the Speaker directed, The Corps of Commissionaires were responsible for clearing the gallery. So again, just a tribute to all of those ladies and gentlemen who are involved with this.

The act is very clear about who can and cannot do this. It says very, very clearly that no one may represent themselves as a private investigator without a licence. Again, it comes back to the consumer. If you are going to engage people in these services, check to see if they have a licence. If someone presents themselves as being a representative of an agency, again, check to see the licence. Someone who does have a licence, however, is not permitted to be a bill collector, which I found somewhat interesting. One would think that that the two are probably somewhat in tandem, but according to the act, that is not the case at all.

Section 29 of the act very expressly prohibits the use of the words private detective. Now, I wish I had known this about six months ago as the Republic of Doyle was coming on, because I do not know how the characters in the show present themselves, but it would be interesting, Mr. Speaker, that if in some episode they did represent themselves as private detectives, they could probably expect a visit from the Minister of Government Services. I suspect he would be a very good addition to the show. Certainly not in a cameo role, but certainly as a guest role. If one were to witness perhaps some of the performances that he has put on here in the House of Assembly, one could very much come to the conclusion that he would be able to hold his own in front of the cameras and under the lights. Again, just a suggestion, however I would ask the minister that if such an occasion occurs, I think I am eligible for a small cut on the proceeds.

Other people who are not able to act as private investigators would be a peace officer such as RNC, RCMP, or municipal enforcement officers. As the Member for Mount Pearl North alluded to, any person who is an agent may not carry or use a firearm, unless, and this is where the flexibility in the legislation comes in, unless the minister or the administrator for this particular act gives express permission for the carriage or use of a firearm. So again, as you can see, Mr. Speaker, while these amendments that we are speaking to here today provide us with a very, very narrow snapshot of what goes on in this act, there is quite a lot in there that people would be benefited by understanding what is going on there.

Certainly, and this is one that I find very comforting in a lot of ways, section 36 is actually one of the larger sections in the act, and it talks about disclosure of information. Now let's face it, if we are engaging a company to investigate, whether it be to investigate another person, whether it be investigate practices, whether it be investigate behaviour, disclosure of that information is very, very tightly controlled. It is very clear that if, as a consumer, I contract a company to acquire a certain body of information, that information, as the customer, is my property and the act is very clear on this. So again, that provides a very high element of consumer protection there.

Anyway, just to finish off, in terms of the actual part of what we are dealing with here today, certainly the reference to the Corporations Act has been deleted. Again, it is part of the integration of legislation. There is no need to be redundant, and in fact, we do not want to create a situation where we have conflicts between different pieces of legislation. So the whole business of going to the Corporations Act and making that the presiding act, I suppose, over anything that could be done, certainly does make sense.

As the minister suggested earlier, a lot of the words, a lot of the phrases in here have not been updated for a while. So when we look at the whole ability of Newfoundland companies to operate on the mainland and vice versa, by removing those barriers, we allow mainland companies to operate here, we have to take into account the multicultural nature of Canada and also of Newfoundland and Labrador. So it deletes the words landed immigrant status, and replaces it with permanent resident, which is a pan-Canadian definition, and it only makes sense that we should become involved with that. Subsection (b) talks about a person who can only manage the business if they are in the Province. Again, we have to say in Canada, because again, it allows Newfoundland companies, by removing those barriers, to bring their business elsewhere. One does not have to look very far to realize there a lot of Newfoundland companies who are very good at what they do, and the ability to export that knowledge or their products to the mainland certainly makes an awful lot of sense.

In terms of the address for service; again, it makes a certain amount of sense that companies cannot always provide a physical presence, as much as they might like. So the address for service, because it is registered, provides a location where as an individual, and particularly if you are an individual with a complaint, you have a mechanism by which you can reach this company. Now one of the parts of this, Mr. Speaker, is that even though a person may not be there, the address for service indicates there is a place you can mail your complaint to. In this case, it states very specifically in the act, if you send a registered letter it will deem to have arrived at that location after three days that it has been sent. Any company that is not here to deal with it will have to come up with some sort of a methodology where they can react to it, or the consequence is that they are in violation of this and the act will take care of it from there.

Very quickly, section 37, the appeals to the minister. Personally, I thought that section put the minister in a very awkward situation where if he were to go against his staff advice, it seems - it is very difficult for the staff to know which way things are going to go down the road. On the other side, if he sides always with the staff, then the confidence is lost that perhaps the objectivity is there.

Finally, section 38 –

MR. SPEAKER (Kelly): Order, please!

The Chair reminds the hon. member that his time for speaking has expired.

MR. BUCKINGHAM: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, leave to say thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave to clue up.

MR. BUCKINGHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to my colleagues for providing me leave, and I will clue up.

Section 38 deals with the appeal process. Once it has bypassed the minister, once this act has passed and goes directly to the court, it strengthens and streamlines the procedures that anyone can use. Quite honestly, Mr. Speaker, anyone who is in the marketplace does really appreciate the direction that you need to appeal or to provide remedy to a situation that you do not feel is right, if it is strengthened and streamlined and more understandable, from a consumer's point of view, that is the best we can ask for.

Again, my thanks to the minister and his staff for bringing all this forward, I certainly think it – I am not used to having leave, Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat put off here. Anyway, it does provide consumers with protection and comfort to know that the minister and his staff are on this total file, not just here, but the total bank of consumer protection legislation.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. Minister of Government Services speaks now he will close the debate.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Minister of Government Services.

MR. O'BRIEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very happy to get up and close debate in regard to the Private Investigation And Security Services Act and the pertaining amendments that are on the floor of the House of Assembly for consideration by the hon. members who sit in this House.

First off, I welcome the comments in regard to the member of the Opposition who spoke to this piece of legislation and the amendments, but I also want to compliment the MHA for Mount Pearl North and the MHA for St. John's East, they did a commendable job in regard to the research they have done. They have certainly shown that they have researched the actual piece of legislation. They know exactly what it does for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, they know exactly what it does for the businesses that transact this type of business in Newfoundland and Labrador and it only shows their constituents how hard they are working on their behalf in this House of Assembly because each and every piece of legislation is very important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Just before I close debate and take my seat in the House, and hopefully go to Committee stage in regard to this piece of legislation today and others pieces of legislation that we have already spoken to in regard to second reading, the hon. member in the Opposition brought up two points that I wanted to address, and I will do it very quickly. Number one was the appeal process currently under the current act goes directly to the minister. He raised a concern in regard to if it would slow down the process or it would cost more. First off, I would like to say that I am pretty sure, I am not 100 per cent sure but I am 99.9 per cent sure that there has not been an appeal, as of yet, in regard to this particular business and this particular piece of legislation, and we do not anticipate any.

As well, I also want to say that the appeal process, as it exists today, is very awkward for me as the minister, the current minister, or any minister that will come after me in that the appeal process is coming to a minister who actually made the decision in the first place. So, you are really appealing your own decision. That is not the way it should be. That is not in the best interest in regard to the people and businesses that this piece of legislation governs. We want to change that and go to the Court of Appeals. I think as Justice supported, that is the proper and right thing to do regardless, and that is the cost of doing business, if it costs any more than the current process. I would like to say again that there has not been an appeal in regard to this piece of legislation to date since 1981.

The address for service; there are two aspects of that. There are private investigation and security companies, Newfoundland and Labrador established companies, that transact business in Newfoundland and Labrador and they do have an office of business. We certainly cannot expect national, international firms that provide security services across Newfoundland and Labrador, across this good nation of Canada, to have a head office in each and every jurisdiction that they might transact business. We do not expect that. That is the reason why we interpret the legislation in regard to registration as being an address for service to cover off each aspect of it. You are covering off the Newfoundland and Labrador companies that want to do business and you are also covering off the national and international businesses as well.

I think I have answered those questions at this particular time. I do not think there is anything else that I could say on the bill. I think it is a very good piece of legislation. I welcome the remarks that were made by my colleagues, as well as the hon. member in the Opposition.

With that Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat in the House of Assembly and we will go to Committee stage.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): The hon. the Government House Leader.

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I assume that the bill has now been read a second time and we shall refer it to the Committee?

MR. SPEAKER: My apologies to the hon. the Government House Leader.

The bill has now been read a second time.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Carried.

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act. (Bill 14)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 14, An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act has been read a second time.

MS BURKE: It will be referred to the Committee of the Whole now.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act", read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill 14)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Health and Community Services that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bills 5, 12, 13 and 14.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the said bills.

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

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

Carried.

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

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Kelly): Order, please!

We are now debating Bill 5, An Act To Provide Liability Protection On Portions Of Pedestrian Trails.

A bill, "An Act To Provide Liability Protection On Portions Of Pedestrian Trails". (Bill 5)

CLERK: Clause 1.

CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK: Clauses 2 to 5 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 2 to 5 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clauses 2 through 5 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 Provide Liability Protection On Portions Of Pedestrian Trails.

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.

MS BURKE: Bill 12, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Order, please!

We are now debating Bill 12, An Act To Amend The Grand Concourse Authority Act.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Grand Concourse Authority Act". (Bill 12)

CLERK: Clause 1.

CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK: Clause 2.

CHAIR: Shall clause 2 carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clause 2 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 Grand Concourse Authority 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.

MS BURKE: Mr. Chair, Bill 13.

CHAIR: Order, please!

We are now debating Bill 13, An Act To Amend The Consumer Protection And Business Practices Act.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Consumer Protection And Business Practices Act". (Bill 13)

CLERK: Clause 1.

CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK: Clauses 2 to 6 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 2 to 6 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clauses 2 through 6 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 Consumer Protection And Business Practices 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.

MS BURKE: Mr. Chair, was that Bill 12 or Bill 13?

CHAIR: That was Bill 13.

MS BURKE: Okay, Bill 14.

CHAIR: Order, please!

We are now debating Bill 14, An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Private Investigation And Security Services Act". (Bill 14)

CLERK: Clause 1.

CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK: Clauses 2 and 3.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 2 and 3 carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clauses 2 and 3 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 Private Investigation And Security Services 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.

MS BURKE: Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

CHAIR: The motion is that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, ‘nay'.

Carried.

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

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Humber Valley and Deputy Chair of Committees.

MR. KELLY: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to report Bills 5, 12, 13 and 14 carried without amendment.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair of the Committee of the Whole reports that the Committee have considered the matter to them referred and has directed him to report Bill 5, Bill 12, Bill 13 and Bill 14 carried without amendment.

When shall the report be received?

MS BURKE: Now, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

When shall the said bills be read a third time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

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

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

MS BURKE: With that, Mr. Speaker, I move seconded by the hon. Minister of Health and Community Services that this House do now adjourn.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is properly moved and seconded that this House do now adjourn.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

This House now stands adjourned until 1:30 of the clock tomorrow, being Monday.

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