The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Today the Speaker would like to welcome some special guests. The Chair would like to welcome sixty-seven Grades 7 and 8 students from Stephenville Middle School. The students are from the District of St. George's-Stephenville East and the District of Port au Port. They are accompanied today by their Principal, Mr. Truman Greenham, teacher Paul Harris, a number of chaperones and their bus driver.

Welcome to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would also like to welcome thirty, Grades 7 to 11 students from Dunne Memorial Academy from the District of Placentia-St. Mary's. The students are accompanied today by Vice-Principal, Arlene Fagan; teachers, Josephine Squires and Clair Guest, as well as their bus driver.

Again, welcome to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The following members' statements will be heard: the hon. the Member for the District of Exploits; the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Windsor-Green Bay South; and the hon. the Member for the District of Lewisporte.

The hon. the Member for the District of Exploits.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to congratulate Botwood Collegiate on their success at the Skills Canada Competitions in St. John's.

Mr. Speaker, on April 1, the Senior Robotics team from Botwood Collegiate came in first place receiving a gold medal. Members of the team were: Amber Best, Tyler Mills, Ryan White, and Cody Diamond. They will now travel to Quebec City May 31 to June 3 to represent Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, on April 15 and 16, Botwood Collegiate Junior Robotics team finished first in the Robotics Skills Competition at the Marine Institute competing in a field of twenty-six schools and scored full points for their work underwater.

Mr. Speaker, team members were: Daniel Pope, Glen Dawe, Benjamin Hoyles, Patrick Loder, Joshua Chippett, Brandon Pelly, and their coaches Brian Antle and Brian Ball.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating the Senior and Junior Robotics team of Botwood Collegiate on winning gold at this year's provincial Skills Canada Competitions.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Windsor-Green Bay South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate Woodland Primary in Grand Falls-Windsor for winning the honour of a visit from famous author and illustrator Ms Jan Brett.

The favourite American author among Kindergarten to Grade 3 students posted a contest on her Web page. The winners would receive a visit from Ms Brett, who would meet with the children, read from her books and conduct a workshop on illustrations.

Woodland Primary won out over 5,700 schools and libraries from over twenty countries worldwide. They won with 2,241 votes and Ms Brett will be visiting in the 2011-2012 school year.

I am very proud to stand here today to congratulate Woodland Primary with 410 students, thirty-seven teachers and staff who outvoted the world on their quest to have Ms Brett visit. It just goes to show how rural Newfoundland and Labrador can do anything.

I ask my hon. colleagues of the House of Assembly to join with me in congratulating Woodland Primary for being a little school in Grand Falls-Windsor, Newfoundland, who could and who did.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to recognize a very talented Grade 12 student, Andrew Gale, son of Brian and Cheryl Gale of Lewisporte. Andrew recently participated in the forty-sixth Annual Central Newfoundland Kiwanis Music Festival in Grand Falls-Windsor.

Amazingly, Andrew brought home six major awards from the festival. The awards Andrew won are: the Bernice Edwards Memorial Award for Best Piano Performance; the Cater Memorial Rose Bowl for Best Solo Performance; Kiwanis Club of Grand Falls-Windsor Scholarship; Transcontinental Media Award for most outstanding performance of the whole festival; the Windsor Pharmacy Award; and the Kelly Family Award. Mr. Speaker, along with trophies and plaques, Andrew's monetary winnings totalled $3,850.

Mr. Speaker, hard work pays off. Andrew's dedication, through thousands of hours of practice, paid dividends and, as such, he is a very worthy recipient of these awards.

I ask all Members of the House of Assembly to join with me and with Andrew's family in congratulating Andrew on these tremendous musical accomplishments.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, with the Victoria Day long weekend upon us, I rise before this hon. House to recognize Canada Road Safety Week which runs May 16 to May 23.

For many, this coming weekend marks the official beginning of summer and people across the Province will hit the highway headed for their favourite weekend getaways with families and friends.

During Road Safety Week and always, motorists are encouraged to be mindful of their surroundings. With warmer weather, those of us driving passenger and commercial vehicles must remember that we are sharing the road with other users such as pedestrians and cyclists. Motorists are reminded to keep a watchful eye out for wildlife that might enter the roadway unexpectedly.

The provincial government and our various enforcement agencies work hard to keep the motoring public safe through building and maintaining road infrastructure, inspecting vehicles, enforcing the rules of the road, and through public education.

Mr. Speaker, drivers must do their part as well through such measures as driving defensively and according to road conditions; avoiding unnecessary distractions; keeping both hands on the wheel; and reducing speed at night, during other times of reduced visibility, and when road surfaces are wet.

Through Budget 2011 Standing Strong: For Prosperity. For Our Future. For Newfoundland and Labrador., $216.4 million in provincial government funding is provided for road and bridge improvements throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. This amount will be supplemented by an additional $35.2 million in federal government funding, providing for a total road and bridge investment for 2011-2012 of $251.6 million. This funding includes $2 million for the Province's brush clearing program which helps to enhance visibility along our highways.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, the Department of Transportation and Works will spend more than $20 million this year on summer maintenance activities including line painting, the installation and maintenance of highway signage, and guide rail and road repairs.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure all hon. members will join me in imploring motorists across our Province and, indeed, our entire country to be safe on our roads, not just during Canada Road Safety Week but every time we get behind the wheel.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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 his statement. We certainly join with the government in marking Canada Road Safety Week, which is a national campaign to make all Canada's roads the safest in the world.

Mr. Speaker, believe me, on this side of the House, we know important it is. Over the past weekend, my colleague, the Member for The Straits & White Bay North, was coming home Friday night from Conche, from an event in his district, and he ended up with two flat tires on the Conche highway because it is in bad condition. My colleague, the Member for Burgeo & La Poile, was in Burgeo this weekend, came out of Burgeo, you cannot even drive the speed limit on that road because there are so many potholes. In my own district, in the Labrador Straits, there are some potholes once you hit them, you do not know when you are going to surface again, that is how bad it is.

So, Mr. Speaker, we are happy to see the government committing to safety on our highways because safety starts with having good highways to drive over. It starts with ensuring that when people put themselves on the highway, they have a good highway, a safe highway in which to be able to travel over.

I am sure there are many members in the House of Assembly who have road issues in their own district, and there will be lots of competition for the money that you have announced in the Budget, and we certainly hope that it will be spent to ensure that the best possible, the best and safest highways can be done all across the Province.

Mr. Speaker, whether you are a driver, a pedestrian, or a cyclist, road safety is an important issue that faces all of us. In 2008, there were 559 pedestrians and cyclists who were killed and 3,275 seriously injured in traffic crashes all across Canada. So, Mr. Speaker, it is imperative that no matter how you travel over our highways, that you do so in the safest manner as you possibly can, and we will look forward to seeing how the money is going to be distributed for roads in Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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. It is especially important to be speaking about road safety going into one of the busiest long weekends of the year and all the points that minister made are good points, Mr. Speaker. One of the most important things that have to be said is that people, when they are out in the vehicles, are on roads and highways and those roads and highways need to be kept in good condition, Mr. Speaker.

After Hurricane Igor, there is still a lot of damage around our highways and our roads that need ongoing maintenance and constant repair work. We should be enhancing this year the maintenance of our roads because they are in such poor condition in many places, especially in the areas where Igor hit badly, Mr. Speaker.

The other thing that I think I have to say is that we also need a 911 emergency service in this Province throughout the Province so that when people are involved in accidents, as much as we hate that to happen that, they have access to the emergency help that they need immediately.

Thank you very much, 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, I rise today in this House of Assembly to recognize May 15 to May 21 as National Police Week.

Both the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary will be hosting a series of events across the Province dedicated to increasing community awareness of policing services while at the same time strengthening the close bond between policing and communities. These events include a National Police Week showcase being held at Canadian Forces Station St. John's, where the public are invited to talk to a police officer and learn about careers in policing and the military. Other events such as open houses and displays will be held at various venues during the week.

On Wednesday, the annual International Police and Peace Officer Memorial Service will take place at the Seventh Day Adventist Church in St. John's. This is a moving ceremony that remembers and honours those officers who have died in the line of duty. This service recognizes the role peace officers have in keeping all of us safe and acknowledges that they often work in dangerous situations.

Mr. Speaker, just a couple of weeks ago, I attended the graduation ceremonies of Troop 11 at the RCMP "Depot" Division in Regina, Saskatchewan. This was my first time attending this graduation and it certainly will be one that I will not soon forget. It was my pleasure to review the troops on parade and offer the new members best wishes as they embark on their new careers. In addition, I had the opportunity to visit the RNC headquarters and annex a couple of weeks ago to look at the renovation work which is ongoing there. This work will provide the RNC with much needed space as they provide valuable service to our constituents.

Mr. Speaker, the provincial government is committed to the support of our police forces in Newfoundland and Labrador. Since 2004, we have added 144 uniformed police officers to the police forces and have increased policing budgets by almost $47 million. Budget 2011 Standing Strong: For Prosperity. For Our Future. For Newfoundland and Labrador., provided funding for an RCMP crime analyst in the Crime Reduction Strategy to be located in the Trinity-Conception District and a Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Officer for the Child Exploitation Unit in Corner Brook to build on the force's capacity to address the exploitation and harassment of children.

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Justice proudly supports the men and women of the RCMP and the RNC. I want to take this time to thank them for the difficult work they do every day and encourage everyone to participate in the many activities planned for National Police Week.

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. It is indeed a pleasure. We also would like to recognize National Police Week and we extend our thanks to both police forces, the RNC and the RCMP in this Province, of course, for the hard work their members undertake.

These officers are, of course, an integral part of our communities and it is important that they be recognized as such, not only between themselves and community members. There are groups in society as well – I was at Burgeo this Saturday night and noticed the close links between the RCMP in that particular community and the fire brigade. They are all there for protective purposes of course, maybe from different angles, but it was great to see how closely they work together.

It is also good to see that the RNC has greatly increased its recruiting efforts and that the training is now done here at Memorial University through the Diploma in Police Studies. Years ago, most of our recruiting and training was done in PEI, but it is great to see that it is being done here. Of course, our police men and women exemplify some of the soundest characters to be had in our communities and we all should be very proud of the work that they do.

We look forward as well to taking part in the events that they are hosting this week as part of National Police Week, and we hope that these occasions and these events that they are sponsoring will both raise awareness of the fine work that they do as members of our police forces, but also will continue to encourage our young people to become involved in police services as a worthy profession.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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. I am happy to join with him and the House Opposition Leader in congratulating the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and the RCMP on the efforts they have put into National Police Week and thank them for their ongoing work in the Province.

Holding career awareness sessions to give students an opportunity to find out about the work that is involved in policing is a really important thing to do. For the most part, young people very often only see the police through the media and what they see may not always be the full picture of what the work is all about. One of the things the RNC has been able to do with more money and staff is implement more aspects of community policing which benefits everybody.

I would, though, urge government to consider something that has been established in many places in the country and that is foot patrols for the RNC, especially in urban centres. It obviously would not work in the rural centres so much but in the urban centres. We see the positive effect of the Mounted Police, the police who actually ride the horses, when they are around; it really draws them into the community. Foot patrols do the same thing, Mr. Speaker. They are one of the best ways to establish community relations and they are also having been proven elsewhere in the country to be extremely effective in deterring drug and property crimes.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this past weekend I attended the Newfoundland and Labrador annual Breast Cancer Retreat. There were over 200 women and one of the key concerns at the conference was breast screening for women under the age of fifty in Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr. Speaker, just last week Ontario moved their screening age from age fifty to thirty. This is the seventh province in Canada to have reduced the screening age to less than fifty years of age.

I ask the minister: What is the status of reducing the screening age below fifty and are you prepared to reduce it for the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

As the hon. member knows we have invested approximately $125 million in cancer prevention and treatment over the last seven years. In fact, Mr. Speaker, earlier this year the member opposite brought forward on Private Members' Day, March 23, a motion to lower the age for breast screening. At that point in time, Mr. Speaker, the motion was amended so that we would send it to the cancer advisory council and they would look at the recent reports and scientific data and make a determination as to how we should proceed.

Mr. Speaker, I indicated at that point in time that the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care had outlined certain guidelines. I am aware of the recent Ontario report and we are waiting for the further details to come out and we will make a decision then.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are 378 women in Newfoundland and Labrador diagnosed with breast cancer each year. We still have one of the highest mortality rates in the country, and we are one of the provinces that have not committed to screen early.

I ask the minister: What is preventing you and your government from making this commitment to the women in Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

During the debate on Private Members' Day it was recognized there is conflicting evidence and literature out there as to the age for breast screening. Mr. Speaker, in this Province, if a women under the age of fifty feels the need to have a mammogram, she will discuss the request with her family physician, and he will assess her health status and potential risk factors, and make a recommendation.

Utilizing our model of screening in this Province, almost 60 per cent of the women between the ages of forty and forty-nine have had at least one mammogram. Mr. Speaker, in provinces where they are self-referring – and these are BC, Nova Scotia, and PEI – for example, statistics for the uptake of their annual screening programs are at 33 per cent, 34 per cent, and 19 per cent, respectively, lower than what we have in this Province.

So, Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated to the member opposite, this is something we take very seriously, and considering all the steps we have made in cancer prevention and treatment, we will do whatever is in the best interests of the public of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In the House last week, the Minister of Finance said that Nalcor will make $500 million a year off Muskrat Falls. At the joint review panel, they have noted, and as Nalcor has admitted, there is no revenue from the free block of power going to Emera, as well, there are no forward contract sales that have been signed with other customers, and the only identified paying customers are the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

So I ask the Premier today if she can clarify exactly where the $500 million in profit will come from, and will she confirm that it is going to come directly out of the pockets of electricity users in Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I think everyone in the Province knows that for any hydroelectric project, the power is paid for by the people that use it. The ratepayers will pay to the company, for Muskrat Falls, the costs of operating, the cost of the debt, and the interest on the debt, and will pay a regulated return, all of which will go to Nalcor. Nalcor being owned by the people of the Province, profits therefore being owned by the people of the Province. The government of the day will utilize those profits and put the money back to the people of the Province through things like possibly lowering the hydro rates, possibly building hospitals, possibly introducing progressive social policies, but the money will go back to the people of the Province. Just as it did when the hon. leader opposite was in government and they went to Nalcor and took the profits out of Nalcor to use to spend on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador through general government programs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Under the Muskrat Falls scheme that your government is proposing people will pay double the cost of electricity. Can you explain how this is going to be a benefit to the people of the Province, to the businesses of the Province, all so that Nalcor can earn a profit of $500 million a year?

I ask you, Minister, to explain to the House why it is acceptable for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to foot the bill to ensure that Nalcor earns a profit.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, again, the member opposite has indicated what I would consider to be erroneous information, the fact that the rates are going to double. That is not correct. We have said in this House before that the rates have been increasing about 37 per cent, 38 per cent over the last ten years or so. We anticipate between now and 2017 that the rates will continue to increase, somewhere around 36 per cent, 37 per cent, between now and 2017.

What the Lower Churchill project, Muskrat Falls will do is it will stop that steady increase in rates as we move past 2017. That is the point that the members opposite do not seem to get. The rates are increasing, nothing to do with Muskrat Falls. What Muskrat Falls will do is it will level out and decrease the amount of increase from 4 per cent to 6 per cent a year to less than 1 per cent per year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand to be corrected, because the rates will probably more than double, I say to you, Minister, under this scheme. They will probably more than double so that you can ensure that Nalcor gets a profit of $500 million as opposed to putting that money back to subsidize the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador. If the only paying customer that you have identified for Muskrat Falls power are the people living in the Province and we know that Nalcor will make $500 million a year off the backs and out of the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, well we also know that Emera Energy, a private corporation in Nova Scotia, has one-third of the cuts of all the power sales to the Island.

I ask you to tell us today, how much will Emera Energy make out of the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians on this Muskrat Falls deal?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, let's talk about the rates, because I think it is important for the people of the Province to have an opportunity to understand what has happened to our rates over the last ten years, what is going to happen between now and 2017, and what will happen after 2017.

Mr. Speaker, I went to the power company and got my rate for the last ten years to see what the increase was. I happen to be in the same residence for over the last ten years, in the same house, and with the same number of children in my family. So, I looked at what my rate was. It increased 37 per cent. We have been saying 36 per cent to 38 per cent. My personal bill increased 37 per cent. I encourage every other member in the House to do it; I encourage the people of the Province to look at what their increase has been.

Rates are going up without Muskrat Falls. We anticipate, based upon what happened in the past, they are going to continue to go up between now and 2017. If you are currently paying, for instance, $291 per month, you will pay up to $400 a month in 2017. If we do not do Muskrat Falls, people will continue to pay ever-increasing rates. Muskrat Falls is the solution, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the minister likes to predict things, as if he has a crystal ball in terms of knowing what is going to happen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, when we stand in the House of Assembly and we question the government on their numbers, the first thing they say is: We do not have a crystal ball and we cannot really define that.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I think there is a lot of Dunderdale economics in this deal and that is the reason, Mr. Speaker –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: – that what we are going to see is a deal that is going to see money out of the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians go to Emera Energy simply because they have shares in our transmission capacity.

I ask the Premier today: Tell us how much money Emera Energy will make as a result of the shares that they have in this deal.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, I will finish my thought that I did not get to finish the last time.

If the rates are going to continue to increase, as they will if we do not bring Muskrat Falls on-stream – and it is not a crystal ball, Mr. Speaker, that I am using.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SKINNER: I am using past history. The past history has shown us what has happened, and we use that to help us predict the future. That is what we are doing, Mr. Speaker.

The bill that you are paying $291 a month now will be up to $400 in 2017, nothing to do with Muskrat Falls. After Muskrat Falls, Mr. Speaker, if we do not build Muskrat Falls, by 2025 your $291 bill will be up to $455. If we do Muskrat Falls, Mr. Speaker, that bill will be $415, a decrease of $40 a month.

That is what Muskrat Falls is doing for the people of the Province. It is keeping their power bills reasonable, keeping money in the pockets of the people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

People in the Province can look at their own light bills and they can see that in the last five years, Mr. Speaker, their average increase has been around 2.5 per cent annually in the rates they pay. It has not been a 50 per cent increase in the rates that they pay, which is what your government is proposing to do, 50 per cent, 100 per cent, and even more. Mr. Speaker, more importantly as well, the government has given away 29 per cent of the shares in the transmission capacity in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I ask you today: How much will Newfoundlanders and Labradorians pay to Emera Energy as a result of that giveaway of shares?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, let me say it again, Emera Energy is putting money into this project. There is nothing being given away. There is $1.2 billion being put into this project to help with transmission costs, there is $600 million being put into it in terms of upgrades of infrastructure, $1.8 billion in total. It is a $6.2 billion project, Mr. Speaker. The people of the Province and the government of the day are investing in the future of the people.

As I have indicated, and I encourage - as the hon. member has said by the way, across the way – people to look at their bills because I am telling you, I have looked at mine and it has gone up 37 per cent in the last ten years. I hope people who are out listening to us will do what I did, just to verify the numbers.

What we are doing is investing in the future of the Province to ensure that people have long-term, stable, least-cost power. That is what we need to heat our homes, that is what we need to run our businesses, and that is what we need to attract people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The government refuses to answer the question because they know it is a sweetheart of a deal for Emera corporation. They know, Mr. Speaker, that Emera corporation will earn a profit out of the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, just like Nalcor corporation will. They will not stand in the House today and provide the people of the Province with that answer. Mr. Speaker, last week the Minister of Finance would not say how much the interest charges are going to cost on Muskrat or whether that will be in addition to the $6.2 billion construction cost.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister to confirm for the House today that the cost will be some-$900 million and that it is on top of the construction costs. I ask the minister why he would not provide the information to the House of Assembly because Nalcor did confirm it about a month ago.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I can tell the Leader of the Opposition that interest rates change every day; they change every hour. We will not know what interest rates we are going to pay until we go to market, and then I will be able to tell you exactly what the interest is going to be.

If the federal government gives us the guarantee, as the Prime Minister has committed, the interest rates will go down approximately by about 2 per cent, that will lead to an 8 per cent decrease in electricity prices to the people of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we are doing this project for one reason and one reason only: to lower the electricity costs to the people of the Province. If we do not get off oil - electricity costs are going through the roof and if we listen to what the Leader of the Opposition has said, our people are going to have to freeze in the dark and we are not going to let that happen, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

They are going to freeze in the dark, Minister, because they are not going to be able to afford to pay for this power. That is the reason they are going to freeze in the dark. Their income is not going to double up but their cost of electricity is going to double up, that is the difference, Mr. Speaker.

This deal is not about guaranteeing fair prices and low energy to consumers in Newfoundland and Labrador, it is about guaranteeing a profit to Nalcor corporation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker the only people who are going to make money is Nalcor and Emera Energy.

Mr. Speaker, the estimates of $900 million in interest charges comes from Nalcor and is based on an interest rate of 7 per cent on borrowing –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member if she has a question if she would pose it now.

MS JONES: Yes, indeed I will. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is based on an interest rate of 7 per cent on borrowing and I ask the minister –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to pose her question.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the minister if he can confirm that this is the cost that Nalcor is basing the deal on and if that rate is higher, how will that affect rates.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, what has been happening in the market is that we can see rates going from 4.5 per cent to 7 per cent. Again, we will not know what the rate is until we actually go and draw down the funds. They change daily, they change every hour. When the funds are booked, that is when we will know exactly what the interest rate is going to be.

Mr. Speaker, Emera are putting $1.2 billion into this project to build a Maritime Link and all we have to give them is one terawatt hour of power. We are going to have five terawatt hours of power. We are going to give Emera one. We are going to pump the other two into Nova Scotia, free. We are going to send it through Nova Scotia into New Brunswick and down in the United States, and we are going to sell it for the benefit of the people of the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in the House last Thursday I provided photos to the Minister of Fisheries –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DEAN: - to expose the fact that the plant in New Ferolle was not even close to being ready for processing as he was misled to believe. On Friday, the minister stated on The Fisheries Broadcast he would have an update on his attempt to get the facts straight on this important issue.

In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, the fishing season is in full bloom. I ask the minister today: Has he had his staff visit New Ferolle, can he update us on what is taking place there now, and when can we expect to see the plant in operation?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I have indeed had staff follow up. Just to give a little chronology of where it was: On March 30 we spoke to the owner; April 4 we visited the site; April 6 we spoke with Mr. Mullowney; again on April 11, we visited the site; April 14 we were at the site; April 20 - and, Mr. Speaker, I have recent photos and I am certainly willing to sit down and share them with the member opposite that shows that work is progressing. We have not been given a definite time frame when the plant will open, but we expect that the plant will be in production.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, condition six in the agreement between the government and Mr. Mullowney states that the snow crab licence shall be cancelled if the facility is not fully operational for crab processing by April 1, 2011. I suggest to the minister that it cannot get much clearer than that.

I ask the minister: Now that six weeks has passed since that deadline, when will you announce that for this particular valuable licence that it will be rescinded?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, that statement has been the most threatening and damaging potential to the operations of New Ferolle. Mr. Speaker, the crab licence, officially, could have been rescinded as of the end of March. We have given the operator the opportunity to do that. Mr. Speaker, we have a licensing board that is independent of government. If I were to go and retract that licence, it has to go back to the licensing board, and if we follow the trend of the licensing board, that statement has put the final nail in New Ferolle as it relates to crab processing. We do not want to go there, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, probably he can tell us why that would be the case. I am assuming he has the power to put the licence back into the community and give it to the people. I am not suggesting the licence leave New Ferolle; I am suggesting that it go operational.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, he is playing games with the people of New Ferolle, as he has been doing here in this House for the last number of weeks.

Given the two-year use it or lose it regulation that is in place respecting a licence, can the minister clarify what other species besides crab are currently attached to that licence in New Ferolle? Also, can he tell us what the thresholds are for each of these species?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, he just again repeated the exact fact. The reason we established the licensing board was that we remove government from it, that political decisions would not be made, and that decisions would be made by a licensing board in the best interest of the industry.

Mr. Speaker, if we follow what the hon. member just outlined for us, we would have taken that crab licence back and as of this point it would be inactive. We have been working –

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JACKMAN: We have been working with the operator, Mr. Speaker, attempting to get him to have processing going on there. Attached to that facility are also licences around pelagics and groundfish. The exact thresholds, I cannot be certain of; but if need be, I will provide that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, these are very simple questions that are being asked and questions that I would think the Minister of Fisheries should be able to answer in this House. Again, I come back to the point that we are not talking about taking the crab licence out of New Ferolle, we are talking about making it available to someone who wants to use it, someone who wants to put workers to work in New Ferolle. Mr. Speaker, that is a totally different thing.

Yes, I would ask the minister if he could table for us or provide me, whatever the case might be, with the species that are attached and the thresholds also that are attached to these particular licences as well.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask him this: Can he inform the House if any species have lapsed from the licence - that is very important - that is owned by Mr. Mullowney at this point?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Not that I am aware of, Mr. Speaker, but I will certainly check into that.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, the people of New Ferolle are trying to get work. Government is raising expectations. We really do not where it is going.

I would ask the minister: Is he willing to go and sit down with the people in the community and to really, once and for all, try to resolve this issue? Mr. Speaker, a visit to the plant and a visit to the site and so on just is not doing it any more. Will he commit today to visiting with the people and sitting down trying to understand what a path forward is here in this case?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, the photos would indicate that people are in the plant getting the plant ready, and we would hope that this facility will be operational.

I want to make it very clear, from a legal perspective, we cannot expropriate the facility. Mr. Mullowney owns it, and thus, we cannot do anything with the particular facility. Mr. Speaker, I would like to give Mr. Mullowney another little while just to see if he can get that up and operational.

In regard to meeting with the people, I met with a delegation from the Northern Peninsula just a little over two weeks ago. I have no issue with meeting with them again, but in terms of somebody by the name of Mr. Payne, who intends to play politics with this, I have absolutely no interest in playing politics with it, nor will I meet with him because of political grounds, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

In March, the Minister of Environment and Conservation denied that the number of moose-vehicle accidents in the Province last year was in the range of seven hundred. He called those numbers, and I quote, totally inaccurate, and said the problem was that they were generated by an RCMP computer search of accident reports. At the time, the RCMP said the only way to be sure of the numbers was to do a manual search. That search has been done, and indeed, it has proven to be more than was originally anticipated. The number came in at 783. In order to make your decisions, Mr. Speaker, you need facts, and the minister obviously does not have the facts.

I ask the minister: Why do you have no idea how many moose-vehicle accidents occur in the Province each year? Now that the numbers have been proven accurate, what actions do you intend to take to curb this most serious problem?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: The member will recall my comment in the House that day. I had indicated very clearly the source of the information was the RCMP themselves. The RCMP had said, and had written us, actually, as a government, and said that the information they had supplied earlier was inaccurate. What I was doing in the House, Mr. Speaker, was clarifying something on the strength of a letter from the chief superintendent of the RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: His numbers were inaccurate, so what I had said, Mr. Speaker, was we did not know at that particular time. We were relying on information that was provided by both police forces in the Province, and now we had one major police force saying that information we had disclosed publicly was inaccurate, and we now need to correct that piece.

So, my comment earlier was, we cannot act on information that is not accurate. I was clarifying for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that the information was in fact accurate, as reported by the RCMP, Mr. Speaker. They are not my facts, they are not my survey results; they are the RCMP's own figures.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, on May 11, the Phase II report from the Voisey's Bay Industrial Inquiry Commission was released to the public. Workers at Voisey's Bay have said they are disappointed there was no mention of anti-scab legislation in the report. This type of protection legislation would have prevented the strike at Voisey's Bay from going on as long as it did. Mr. Speaker, a worker's right to strike is fundamental to any collective bargaining process and by allowing the use of replacement workers government undermine that right.

I ask the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment: Will government finally introduce anti-scab legislation as it promised during the 2007 election campaign to prevent long drawn out strikes such as the one in Voisey's Bay from ever happening again?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think first of all on the Voisey's Bay inquiry, I was very clear last week in my comments to the public that we have received the report and I, as minister, reserve any comment on whether we will accept or reject any or all of the recommendations. I do await public feedback and I look forward to what people have to say.

The member opposite would also be aware that we did bring forward some legislative changes not long ago respecting labour in this Province and we also talked about the points she has raised today. She will be well-aware, having participated in the debate, that the matter is now before a committee that is doing a piece of work for us on that. We will speak to it further when they finish their work.

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 minister is talking about getting public input with regard to the recommendations in this report. As he has indicated there is a tripartite committee in place that is reviewing the Labour Relations Act.

The minister seems to be talking about consulting with the public as well. Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister to please clarify what he is talking about. Is he going to be holding public meetings to discuss these labour relations issues?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Maybe, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite might want to clarify on a follow up question whether she sees it as a good thing to consult with the public or whether she shares the view of the Opposition Leader who does not think it is worth the time and the money to consult with the public on issues of such significance to the Province.

Mr. Speaker, what I have said very clearly is that I am prepared to listen to the public. I am not engaging in a public consultation process, but I have said now that I have the report I will take some time to read it. My officials will do an assessment of the report and we will also listen to what people have to say, Mr. Speaker. Unlike many of the members opposite, we want to hear what the public has to say and how they feel about views such as this that are so important to the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I wish the minister would make up his mind about who is important when it comes to talking about labour relations. When I bring these issues up I am told there is a tripartite committee and now that is not enough, now he wants to go out to people who are not directly involved. Mr. Speaker, I would like to know where the minister stands.

Mr. Speaker, Vale was able to refuse –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: - to settle with Voisey's Bay –

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: – workers for eighteen months because there was no provision in the Labour Relations Act to impose a collective agreement when the traditional collective bargaining model broke down. The recommendations for strengthening the Labour Relations Act are very important for workers who strike against multinational companies especially in remote areas.

Will the minister, without any nonsense, stand and commit himself to accepting these recommendations like they do with other reports that come to this floor, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, there is no need for the member opposite to be insulting and derogatory in her comments towards me. I answered the question as she asked it. If she does not like the answer that is unfortunate but I am prepared to say again that the report has been tabled. I think I have said it three times in the last thirty-six hours; the report has been given to me. I will take some time to review it and I will do due diligence, Mr. Speaker. I am not prepared to stand up in this House and get on with theatrics like the member opposite just for politics. That report has a number of significant recommendations, Mr. Speaker, that have great consequences should we adopt them in this Province. I am not prepared to rush and to make a public statement on that today for that member or any other member in this House until I give it due diligence.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

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

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in fulfilling government's commitment of being transparent and accountable to the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador, it is my pleasure to table the audited, Consolidated Financial Statements for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro for the year ended December 31, 2010.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to table the Business and Financial Report for Nalcor Energy. This report provides an overview of key activities of Nalcor and its subsidiaries during the year 2010.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion.

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

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

I am pleased to give the following notice of motion as part of the private member's motion for Wednesday, May 18. I will be moving that:

WHEREAS 47,000 people in Newfoundland and Labrador have a diabetes diagnosis as of 2010, which is 9.3 per cent of the population, the highest rate in Canada; and

WHEREAS the number of people with diabetes in the Province may double in the next ten years without effective prevention; and

WHEREAS unless properly managed diabetes leads to kidney and heart failure, disability and early death; and

WHEREAS dialysis machines are in demand because more diabetes cases are progressing to kidney failure, but if the disease is properly managed people do not end up on dialysis; and

WHEREAS diabetes costs our health care system about $41 million a year for doctor visits, hospitalization, drugs, and medical supplies, a cost that could double in ten years without better prevention and management; and

WHEREAS diabetes requires frequent daily glucose testing with expensive testing strips, which is a hardship for most people who do not have private insurance or government assistance; and

WHEREAS many people who need glucose testing strips are going without because they cannot afford them, thus endangering their future health and placing an added burden on our health care system;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this House urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to cover the cost of glucose testing strips for all diabetics in the Province under MCP;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that government place the highest possible priority on releasing the chronic disease prevention and management strategy.

Seconded by the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to present a petition on behalf of women in the Province. It reads:

WHEREAS breast cancer is the most common cancer amongst Newfoundland and Labrador women, excluding non-melanoma skin cancer, with approximately 370 women to be diagnosed with breast cancer in Newfoundland and Labrador this year; and

WHEREAS we have one of the highest mortality rates from breast cancer and breast cancer in young women tends to be more aggressive; and

WHEREAS the benchmark for Newfoundland and Labrador's organized breast screening program is age fifty; and

WHEREAS women aged forty to forty-nine are not eligible to participate in Newfoundland and Labrador's organized breast screening program, while women aged forty to forty-nine are eligible in the provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories, and the Yukon; and

WHEREAS there is evidence that routine mammography screening of women in their forties can reduce mortality from breast cancer by at least 24 per cent, but Newfoundland and Labrador still does not have women in that age group to self refer into their breast screening program;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to allow women aged forty to forty-nine to be eligible for breast screening to begin at age forty and that all women be able to self refer through Newfoundland and Labrador's screening program.

Mr. Speaker, I present that petition on behalf of women from all across the Province. There will be other petitions coming in that they have made me aware of. As they come in, I will be presenting them in the House of Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very important petition because it is one that could save the lives of people in Newfoundland and Labrador if government was to enact this legislation. It is relative. Just last week the Government of Ontario came forward to be the next Province in Canada to reduce the benchmark for breast screening of women. Mr. Speaker, they not only reduced it to age forty, they reduced it to age thirty, which is very different and, actually, one of first provinces across the country to do that.

Mr. Speaker, they are calling upon the government. They are well aware of the fact that government has referred this to a committee to look at, but most people feel there is already a lot of evidence out there, a lot of studies that have been done. One of the most recent studies by a Dr. Yaffe, a renown scientist out of Toronto General Hospital who is recommending, very strongly, that the benchmarks for Canadian women be reduced from age fifty to at least age forty. There are all kinds of evidence there that already supports this particular request.

Mr. Speaker, I attended a conference this weekend and it was astounding to be in the room to realize how many women in this Province, who were in that room were diagnosed this year, but more importantly, the number of young women, the number of women under the age of fifty and even under the age of forty. Actually, one of the youngest women there was twenty-nine years old and being diagnosed with breast cancer. I think it is a small measure; it is a small commitment for any government to make to ensure that we can save lives of people in Newfoundland and Labrador, and they are asking the government to strongly consider this.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Before the Chair calls further petitions; petitions are delivered here as part of our Standing Orders daily routine. I think we have made a decision in the past that we would read the prayer of the petition and we would vet all of the petitions to the Table before they are presented. The Chair is reluctant to get up and interrupt when important petitions are delivered, but I ask all members for their co-operation in the future.

The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased again to be able to stand and present a petition in the House of Assembly. I would like to read that petition into the House for the record.

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

WHEREAS the shrimp industry is in crisis for both harvesters and processors; and

WHEREAS previously there was protection for Gulf shrimp plants and plant workers through a regional processing restriction mechanism called ("the cap") which prevented landed shrimp from being trucked for processing beyond the region where it was landed; and

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the government to:

Reinstate the regional processing restriction ("the cap") in order to preserve the principal of adjacency for shrimp processing, and to ensure that employment opportunities are protected for plant workers and the overall viability of communities in the region.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this petition covers a very important topic, one that has great significance to, I would suggest, the people of the Northern Peninsula, but also, I am sure, people of other regions of the Province as well, where they see their raw material, the raw resource, the fishery and different species coming into their communities. It is a very common sight to see a vacuum truck, if we want to call it that, or a vacuum operation that basically just removes all the fish from the particular vessels. It is put in fish tubs, it is put on trucks, and within a very short time, what can be a great employment opportunity in the area is now leaving and heading into another plant. As Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, certainly none of us have an issue with sharing wealth, none of us have an issue with each other getting gainful employment, but the problem comes, Mr. Speaker, when it is leaving a town where there is no employment.

I see that first-hand on the Northern Peninsula, in my district and in the district adjacent to mine, where these fish plants are located, where these petitions are coming from. The difference between driving into Anchor Point and seeing a fish plant processing shrimp, or driving into Anchor Point and seeing a plant shut down, Mr. Speaker, it is the difference between life and death, so to speak.

I spoke with a lady just yesterday who last week worked sixty-six hours in the fish plant, made herself $900-and some odd, was very excited to have gotten that type of week's work, all because the raw resource was kept in the region. It is not to suggest that none went out as well, but certainly, if this restriction is not put back in place, if there is not some control so that regionalization of the raw resource, of the material is brought into play, then, Mr. Speaker, we are uncertain from one week to another as to what employment opportunities there will be.

We are in the heart of this fishing season. The crab fishery is going well, the shrimp fishery is going well in the Gulf, in particular, and it is just so important that it is managed properly and that no more leaves the region than absolutely needs to, to secure the well-being and the financial well-being of the residents.

So, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to stand again today to put this forward. It is not my petition; I am presenting it on behalf of members, some in my district - quite frankly, most of them are in the Member for St. Barbe's district, yet they are asking me to come in here today and present this petition in this House. I know that as of yesterday many more signatures were being gathered on the highway, I saw it. Two RCMP vehicles were providing escort to two ladies, standing in the rain, gathering signatures to go with this petition. Mr. Speaker, it is an issue and I trust it is one that we will see action on very soon.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

The hon. the Opposition Leader.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to present a petition on behalf of the people in Labrador. It says:

WHEREAS the Trans-Labrador Highway is a vital transportation lifeline for the Labrador communities, providing access, generating economic activity, and allowing residents to obtain health care and other public services; and

WHEREAS Route 510 and connecting branch roads of the Trans-Labrador Highway are unpaved, in deplorable condition and are no longer suitable and safe for the traffic volumes that travel this route; and

WHEREAS Labrador cannot afford to wait years or decades for upgrading and paving of their essential transportation route;

WHEREUPON the petitioners call upon the House of Assembly to call upon the government to provide additional funding for much-needed improvements to Route 510 and connecting branch roads of the Trans-Labrador Highway.

Mr. Speaker, this section of highway - as I have been saying day in, day out in this House of Assembly - is critical to the people of Labrador, it is critical to the people who have to travel that highway right from Labrador West right to Blanc-Sablon. People have to travel there for work, for personal reasons, for a hospital, for all of the things that you require transportation for of goods and services; it all happens over this section of road.

So why is it that the government is not taking seriously the fact that sections of this road desperately need to be repaired? At the very minimum, Mr. Speaker, they need to have crushed stone. At the very minimum, they need to have some resurfacing. That is the bottom line if you are going to expect people to transport over that road for the next number of months.

Mr. Speaker, the ideal thing for people in that area is to have a paved road. Everyone else in the Province who has to travel over a Trans-Canada Highway has a paved Trans-Canada Highway. Well, not in Labrador; our Trans-Canada Highway in Labrador is a gravel road and it is a road that the government is not committing to pave. That is what has people so irate. That and the fact that every day they are hitting potholes, they are losing tires, they are beating up their vehicles trying to get to work, trying to get to a hospital, trying to deliver goods into the communities. That is unacceptable.

Mr. Speaker, this road is going to be critical in more ways than one. Just this last week, the Quebec government announced $300 million over the next five years to complete the road on the Lower North Shore joining the road from Montreal, Quebec City right on into Blanc-Sablon. In five years, we will be able to drive from Labrador directly into that part of the country, yet the government in Newfoundland and Labrador does not see fit to start laying pavement to bring that highway to the standard that it needs to be. Well, that is not good enough. Thousands of people use that road every day - thousands of people. Thousands of people depend upon it and it is not good enough when you have grader operators out there saying: Yes, we have the graders on the road, but you can hardly sit in the machine because you are hitting so many rocks that it is protruding through the gravel road that you are getting jolted. I have talked to grader operators who have been off work with bad necks and bad backs trying to maintain that road because it is in such a deplorable state at this time.

They are asking the government and the minister to take their issues seriously and to address those roads sooner rather than later.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

Orders of the Day.

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The main business we will do today will be the Budget again; however, before that, we will do some first readings.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Finance and the President of Treasury Board, for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000, Bill 31, 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 Income Tax Act, 2000, Bill 31, and that Bill 31 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 Finance and President of Treasury Board to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000", carried. (Bill 31)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000. (Bill 31)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 31 has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 31 be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 31 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 Finance and President of Treasury Board, for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An Act To Amend The Revenue Administration Act No. 2, Bill 33, 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 Revenue Administration Act No. 2, Bill 33, and that Bill 33 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 Finance and President of Treasury Board to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Revenue Administration Act No. 2", carried. (Bill 33)

CLERK: A bill, An Act To Amend The Revenue Administration Act No. 2. (Bill 33)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 33 has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 33 be read a second time?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 33 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 under Motions, Motion 1.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1, the sub-amendment as put forward by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It is my understanding that the hon. the Leader of the Opposition has already spoken and moved the sub-amendment.

Is the House ready for the vote on the sub-amendment?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of the sub-amendment as put forward by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: The sub-amendment is lost.

On motion, sub-amendment lost.

MR. SPEAKER: The House is now ready for a debate on the amendment, the non-confidence motion, as put forward by the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

If there are no further speakers, is the House ready for the vote on non-confidence motion as put forward by the hon. the Opposition House Leader?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of the amendment, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: The amendment is lost.

On motion, amendment lost.

MR. SPEAKER: Now we will revert to the main motion.

The hon. the Opposition Leader.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am rising today to speak to basically the Budget, which is the main motion we are talking about on the Order Paper in the House of Assembly today. Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of points I want to make. There may be a little more than a couple, but I will see how many I can make in the amount of time I have.

Mr. Speaker, one of the first things I want to talk about is the actual Budget itself. There have been a number of issues raised around the actual Budget in terms of where government is going with their spending, what has been happening in the Province, and so on.

I remember, Mr. Speaker, on Budget Day or the day after there was an editorial actually in The Telegram. In the editorial, it compared the Tory Administration in terms of what they have spent and how they have increased the cost of programs and services to the people of the Province and, indeed, increased the cost of other things. Mr. Speaker, they talked about the fact that overall government cost has increased by $3.56 billion, which is an increase of 83 per cent in just eight years.

They were talking about the fact that this year's Budget was called, Standing Strong: For Prosperity. For Our Future. For Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr. Speaker, the editorialist took the opportunity to point out to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that with the kind of spending that you are seeing from the Administration across the way, and where they are putting this money, Mr. Speaker, where they are laying down the money belonging to the people of this Province, that you are going to see some very different titles on the Budgets in the years to come.

For example, they said in 2013 you are going to see a Budget Speech that says, "We can't afford all this." That will be a sad, sad day, Mr. Speaker. It will be a sad day to know that the government currently has mismanaged and wasted so much of the money that we have earned as a Province at a time when we have earned the greatest revenues in our lives. To know that they would have wasted and misspent so much of it that in 2013 we would have to have a Budget that basically says we cannot afford everything that we have today.

Mr. Speaker, in 2015 they said the title of the Budget would be, "Too bad we spent like drunken sailors back then." Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of people out there in the Province who are saying that today. There are a lot of people out there in the Province today who are saying that the current government is spending like drunken sailors. There are a lot of people out there saying that, Mr. Speaker.

In addition to that, you know what else they are saying? They are saying that even though the government is spending like drunken sailors we are not feeling the wealth; we are not feeling the benefit. Why is that, Mr. Speaker? It is because the spending is not balanced and the spending is not necessarily on people, it is not necessarily on you. That is why you are not feeling it.

They said the 2017 Budget will probably say, "It's their fault." Mr. Speaker, again unfortunate – unfortunate that today at a time when we are supposed to be a have Province, at a time when we are earning the greatest return on our oil industry – deals done by previous governments in the oil industry –when we are earning a profit on deals that previous governments did with mining companies. When we are seeing a greater rate of return in both of those particular industries and we are designated as a have Province, Mr. Speaker, the commentary should be a whole lot different.

In fact, people should be leaving a different message, and not a message that we cannot afford where this government is going. Not a message that the government is spending like drunken sailors. Not a message of blame and whose fault it is. It should be one that is more optimistic. It should be a prediction on the positive things that can be inflicted on communities and people all across Newfoundland and Labrador. It should be on growing the industries, growing our renewable industries. It should be on bringing our debt down. It should be on Newfoundlanders and Labradorians feeling more wealth than they ever have in their lives.

Well, Mr. Speaker, those are the kind of things that we want to see. We want to see a greater return for the people of the Province, and we want to see that return in their bank accounts. We want to see it in their homes. We want to see them have the opportunity to be able to decide for themselves where they invest that return. Whether it is into their children, into further education, into building their families and building their properties, into building businesses, Mr. Speaker, that should be their prerogative to make those decisions.

Mr. Speaker, this year, there was a lot of talk about government reserves, and what government would do with the reserve. The reserve, I think, is at $1.9 billion right now, and maybe that is a little lower, I am not sure, but it is somewhere in that vicinity. What is happening with the reserve? Mr. Speaker, where is government going to direct that, or are they going to keep it in reserve for the people of the Province, or are they going to invest it somewhere? Are they going to put it all down on the Muskrat Falls project? These are the things we do not know. We do not know that. Did the government take any money out of the reserve this year to go into the Budget? Was there money that came out of the reserve to prop up the Budget. Did they use $200 or $300 million to be able to that?

We would like to know that. We would like to know whether that is the case, because we live in a period where there are windfall revenues. We live in a period where there are windfall revenues, and Mr. Speaker, we are wondering if we need to even be dipping into reserves at this stage. I do not know if the government calls it reserves, I call it reserves, Mr. Speaker. I call it a reserve. So, we will see what title they have on it, but I am sure the minister knows exactly what I am talking about.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly do not believe –

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

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

MR. MARSHALL: I say to the hon. Leader of the Opposition, I do not know what she is talking about – the $1.9 billion in reserves. I am not familiar with the concept. Maybe if the hon. the Leader of the Opposition would elaborate then I could properly respond when it is my opportunity.

I apologize for interrupting but I would like to know. I would really like to know.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe the Minister of Finance should ask the Premier. She made the comment in the media that they have something like $1.9 billion and they could possibly use that revenue to invest in the Muskrat Falls Project, or they could leave it in reserve. I do not know what bank account it comes out of or where it falls, but, Mr. Speaker, I am sure the Minister of Finance could talk to the Premier and find out what her statement was in the media, and what pot of money she was alluding to. Maybe when he is doing that, he could also let me know if any of that money was drawn down this year towards the current Budget, because it would be interesting to know if there was any money drawn out of that pot. Also, Mr. Speaker, we think that is important.

Mr. Speaker, also I wanted to speak about the unfunded pension liabilities. I know that the government says: oh well, we invested money in the unfunded pension liabilities. Yes, and they did and that has been recognized. Does that fix the problem? No, it does not. It is still an issue out there. Maybe, Mr. Speaker, when we were a Province that was generating budgets of $2.5 billion and $3 billion a year, before we had the oil industry, before we had the cash cow, the big lottery, Mr. Speaker, maybe then it was excusable, but now it is not, it is not excusable any longer, because now we need to ensure that we protect pension funds for the public service in this Province, and we need to do it at a time when we have the revenue to do it. Again, it becomes making decisions, Mr. Speaker, around where monies need to be invested. Mr. Speaker, we see these things as issues that the public are concerned about.

Last week, in the House of Assembly, I asked the Minister of Finance about increasing the net provincial debt. He stood in the House and he said: oh, we have not increased the provincial debt in the Province. We have not increased it. We are the government that paid it down. Mr. Speaker, the provincial net debt increased by $400 million from last year to this year. That happened in a year, again, when we had windfall royalties. Mr. Speaker, to say that we are bringing the debt down is not good enough. It is leaving a false picture for the people in the Province, because people know the difference. People know that in the last year, even though you had a surplus Budget, even though, Mr. Speaker, we had a record amount of money coming in to the people of the Province, that your government still increased the net debt by $400 million. That is unacceptable, Mr. Speaker. People expect more fiscal prudence. They expect it because they know the oil revenues are not going to be there forever, and that is the fear that is out there.

It is all right for the government currently, Mr. Speaker. It is okay for them to spend like drunken sailors. It is okay for them to be able to go out and toss money wherever they want. It is okay for them to write cheques for nearly $400 million out of this Budget, $378 million and march it down to Nalcor Energy and pass it over the desk to the people down there. It is okay, Mr. Speaker, for the government to go out and spend $20 million and $30 million to drill a hole in the ground to look for oil and come up with nothing on behalf of the people. It is okay to spend money on trying to organize parties and celebrations so they can showcase themselves in the Province and they never go ahead with the party.

Mr. Speaker, this is where the people's money is going. If you combine that with other things - look at the Department of Business, a department that their Administration created to do what, Mr. Speaker? The Department of Business has never seriously contributed to business growth and opportunity in this Province. It has contributed to an extra ministerial salary for an MHA in the Tory caucus. It has contributed to another travel budget, for another minister to travel around and see the country and see the world, but what has it really delivered in business? It has not delivered, Mr. Speaker.

You have the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development or industry trade and technology, or renewal and technology, whatever they call themselves these days, so why do you need the Department of Business? Tell me why you need it, other than to make space for one of the many caucus members you have to sit in the Cabinet. Go back through the record over all the years and see the money that you have spent in that department on behalf of the business people of the Province, in addition to what you have brought in for business.

Let's talk about the Rural Secretariat, Mr. Speaker, which probably could have been a great idea, which probably was a concept within itself that had some real opportunity to flourish in Newfoundland and Labrador, but what have we seen? We have seen $1 million, $1.5 million a year, probably about $10 million now under your Administration, going into a board and a committee to do what? No one out there in rural Newfoundland and Labrador knows what they do. No one out there today knows what they do. The people in Port Union whose plant has closed down do not see the Rural Secretariat as an option to be the launch pad for their new economy, I can tell you that.

Where has the money gone? Other than the fact that they have spent some time in Humber Valley Resort in the big cottages holding meetings, Mr. Speaker, where has the money gone? Where has it been spent? How are the people in rural communities benefitting as a result of it? How is it, Mr. Speaker, that the people down in Summerford are seeing something drastically progressing in their community because of the work of the Rural Secretariat? How is it in Lewisporte that they are seeing that? They are not, Mr. Speaker, they are not.

Most people in the Province - I would say 75 per cent, 80 per cent of the people today in rural Newfoundland and Labrador do not know there is a Rural Secretariat, do not know what they do, and do not know how much money they spend. I can almost, Mr. Speaker, say that with tremendous, tremendous certainty. That is the kind of stuff you have seen, and I could go on and on but, Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about some other issues for a minute.

I want to talk first of all about the Muskrat Falls piece for a minute. Today I think it was very revealing in the House of Assembly, and I guess I get a little bit irritated, I get somewhat irritated that we are giving a private corporation in Nova Scotia ownership of a transmission capacity in Newfoundland and Labrador. Something I never thought I would see, Mr. Speaker, after the 1995 revolution, I will call it, in Newfoundland and Labrador where people were totally against the privatization of hydro. I thought I would never see the government giving away shares in our transmission capacity to a company from Nova Scotia.

Mr. Speaker, I suppose the reality really hit home for me when I read the annual report for Emera Energy. I looked in the annual report, and one of the key planks in their annual report is their new partnership in Newfoundland and Labrador, their new partnership with Nalcor and how they are going to make money for the shareholders of Emera Energy. That is what they talk about, Mr. Speaker. They talk about making money out of the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for an energy corporation in Nova Scotia.

Now, Mr. Speaker, why is it that someone on the other side of the House, someone in the Dunderdale government, does not see that there is something wrong with that picture? Why is it they do not see that it is not acceptable for a family in Appleton, Burlington, or Baie Verte to have to pay more for their electricity so that Emera Energy can derive a profit for their shareholders on the backs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians? I see something wrong with that, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair was hesitant to interrupt the hon. the Leader of the Opposition while she was in the thrust of her speech, but I would remind all hon. members that it is unparliamentary to refer to a member by their name. You should refer to them by either their portfolio or their district.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am just a Newfoundlander and Labradorian. I am just a person who wants to see benefits, Mr. Speaker. I am just an ordinary person in this Province. I do not expect anything more or less than anybody else, Mr. Speaker. I do not expect that there should be more privilege for one than there is for the other, but I can tell you, when I pick up this report from Emera Energy, I say to the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor, because you should pick it up and read their annual report, the key plank is about their new deal with Newfoundland and Labrador. It is about how they are going to make money for the shareholders of Emera corporation in Nova Scotia.

How are they going to make that money? This is the key point and this is what we were asking the government today in Question Period and nobody wanted to answer. The Minister of Natural Resources did not want to answer, the Minister of Finance did not want to answer, and the Premier did not answer. Why? Because not one of them wants to stand up and admit that Emera corporation is going to make money off the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is the problem. They do not want to stand up and admit it. They know it is true. They know that when you give somebody 29 per cent of something and you are going to charge a rate for that, you know there is going to be a return. That is how it works. That is exactly how it works.

Mr. Speaker, what we would like to know is: How much is that profit going to be to Emera Energy? The government has already admitted now that the profit that is going to be paid to Nalcor is going to be $500 million. We would like to know now what the profit is going to be to Emera corporation. We want to know how deep Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are going to have to dig into their pockets to pay those bills to ensure that two corporations in this country, Nalcor and Emera Energy, earn a profit – because that is the only thing that is guaranteed under this particular deal; the only thing that is guaranteed.

The government likes to talk, Mr. Speaker, with a lot of fancy language when they speak about the profits that are going into Nalcor. Now, they ridiculed us as a government because we took some profits and dividends out of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, which leads me to believe that they will not be taking any profits or dividends out of Nalcor Energy. How can you talk out of both sides of your face, Mr. Speaker? How do you talk out of both sides of your face? How do you stand up in the House and say it was wrong for one government to take dividends and revenues out of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, but to think that for you, as a government, it is perfectly alright, and whatever profits we make we are going to take them out of Nalcor?

So, Mr. Speaker, I can only draw the assumption that that is not on, and that is not the case. Unless someone over there stands up and says: oh yes, we are going to take dividends and revenues out of Nalcor, just like other governments did in the past. We do not see any problem with that. Well, we have never heard that, we have heard a very different story. We have heard a story, Mr. Speaker, and the story is like this: as a result of the people's money that today is being invested in Muskrat Falls, and as a result of that project, the people in this Province will pay double the cost for their electricity. I would go as far as to say, maybe more than double, Mr. Speaker, because we do not know what the overhead costs are going to be. We do not know what the interest rates are going to be. We do not know all of those variables, Mr. Speaker, so we are only just making a prediction based on what we do know. So it may even be more than that.

The other thing we know is that two companies will make a profit, and while they are making a profit, the people in the Province will pay dearly. We have said to the government before, this is not a good deal. It is not acceptable to do that. If you are going to develop a resource in this Province, you need to ensure that the people of the Province get fair treatment. They get fair treatment. They get priority in terms of what needs to be paid.

I listen to members opposite, because I doubt if very few of them have even read the agreement to date. There might be a half a dozen over there who have actually read the agreement, because I have never heard any of them talk about it.

Mr. Speaker, when you look at it in this context – and I have raised this before because many of them think it is okay for other people in other parts of Atlantic Canada to buy their power cheaper than us. They think it is okay for them to sell the power cheaper into the US markets than they sell it to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Well, I have a problem with that. I am going to tell you, you cannot justify that by saying that the rates are going to go up anyway.

It was only a few months ago when the Premier was speaking up in Goose Bay – and I had the newspaper clip there earlier, I was reading it – when she said it is too early to tell. It is too early to tell what the rate is going to be. Now, all of a sudden, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources has a crystal ball and he is forecasting where the price of gasoline and diesel is going to go over the next twenty-five years. Based on that, Mr. Speaker, he can justify a project for power development in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Well, that is not good enough. That is not good enough, Mr. Speaker, nor should it be good enough for the people of the Province. The only thing the people in Newfoundland and Labrador should accept is a deal that gives them a reasonable rate in the same context of every other buyer of Muskrat Falls power, which gives them a reasonable rate. Mr. Speaker, there is nothing wrong with asking for that.

How does government achieve that? How do they make that happen? They have to make some changes in their deal for one thing; secondly, Mr. Speaker, they have to make sure that any return on other power purchase agreements goes back to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to offset their cost of electricity.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance referred to that today. He is the first one, the only one to ever refer to that on the government side in the House of Assembly, because the Premier will not say those words. She will not say those words. What she has said is: it will be up to the governments of the future. She says that the money will be used for schools and hospitals. I guess, Mr. Speaker, they are going to take money from Nalcor as well, although they criticized other governments for doing it but we will have to wait and see.

Mr. Speaker, there has been no commitment on behalf of the government opposite to ensure that the rates are maintained at the lowest rate possible for the people in the Province. That is a fundamental problem with this deal.

There are many other issues as well. The fact that we are giving away free power to Nova Scotia through Emera Energy, the fact that we are giving away nearly 30 per cent of the ownership in the transmission capacity, and the fact that there are no benefits in this for the people of Labrador. Mr. Speaker, these are all huge issues and they need to be dealt with as well.

If the government wants to do a deal that is successful, the success of any deal starts with ensuring that you protect the people of the Province first and that you serve them right and that you do right by them in this deal. That is what is omitted here, that is not what is included. Government needs to take a long hard look at where they are going in terms of the fairness to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and a good hard long look at the fact that they are setting a precedent by selling off and giving away a portion of our public utility in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, the people in Labrador to my knowledge have never been against the development of the Muskrat Falls project. Maybe some people who have individual issues or maybe some people who have some concerns around the river which of course I have gotten e-mails and heard from as well. Generally, people have never been opposed to that development. Labradorians are very pro-development, by the way. In fact they are very pro-development. In fact if they see opportunity to create jobs, if they see opportunity for future growth, if they see opportunity for new industry they are all for it. They are all for it, Mr. Speaker.

As you know they have been a strong component, Mr. Speaker, of seeing the mining industries developed in the Province and so on. Mr. Speaker, they also believe and they know a fair deal when they see one. They also know that there is more that they could see coming out of Muskrat Falls for Labrador than the government is currently prepared to give.

Even the Member for Lake Melville, Mr. Speaker, would support that. He made a big speech back a few years ago saying that more had to be given to the people of Labrador. Well now today you do not hear him open his mouth on the issue, Mr. Speaker, he does not talk about it now. He does not talk about the fact that he felt that more should go to the people of Labrador. Today he is just prepared to say: we will take the jobs, we will take the business opportunities, that is great, that is perfect for us. Why is he not out saying we need a rate on industrial power for Labrador? Why is he not saying that we need protection for industrial customers in Labrador? Why is he not saying that we need to build the transmission capacity for Northern Labrador and Southern Labrador to ensure that they have fair, cheap, competitive power like the rest of the Province? Why is it, Mr. Speaker, that the Member for Lake Melville, who is today the minister, has taken a whole different turn, a whole different turn, Mr. Speaker? He has switched around 380 degrees in terms of what his position used to be and where it is today.

MR. WISEMAN: Three hundred and eighty degrees? (Inaudible).

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think I went a bit overboard on the degrees. I went a bit overboard on the degrees, but he spun around that quick, I tell you, I thought he went that fast. Anyway, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Member for Trinity North there for his attentive listening skills in correcting me today on that point.

Mr. Speaker, to get back to the serious point that I was trying to make before I did the spin with the Member for Lake Melville: If you believe in something and you believe that there is a better way, a stronger position and that more can be gained, why would you not carry forward with that? I believe that is the case. Do you know something? I believe that the government can deliver. I believe that they can deliver in the context of this deal. It is a matter of wanting to; it is a matter of establishing it as a priority. If they do that, Mr. Speaker, they can deliver and they can ensure that all the people in the Province, no matter where they live, get a fair benefit under this regime.

No where in the world, Mr. Speaker, are people expected to get 40 per cent of something and pay 80 per cent of the cost. That is what the government is asking the people of this Province to do today. They are saying that if we develop this project, we will bring 40 per cent of the power to the Newfoundland Island grid, 40 per cent of the electricity – that is if we use that much because the argument is that we will only use 20 per cent of it. Even if we use the 40 per cent of it, why should we have to pay for 80 per cent of the cost?

That is the fundamental question. Why is it that the deal has to be paid for and balanced on the backs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians alone? Why is it that we are not going to just pay for what we use? Why is it we have to pay 80 per cent of the cost for a project that we are only going to use maybe 20 per cent of the power, a maximum 40 per cent of it, over the term of the agreement?

Those are a couple of the points that I wanted to make. I think they are very critical points, Mr. Speaker, because they affect a lot of people in this Province, they affect a tremendous amount of people. The other issue I want to talk about today is what is happening out around the Province. I want to talk about the unemployment rate. I think that this is a government that has gotten themselves wrapped up in what has been happening with the economy in St. John's and they have failed to see what is happening right across the Province. They have failed to see what is happening in all of the other areas.

Mr. Speaker, it is easy to do. I am sure it is easy to do. They are not the first government to have their heads locked inside the overpass. They are not the first government to have experienced that particular syndrome.

Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing today should be a cause of tremendous concern for every single member in this House of Assembly. Do you know what is happening today, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: What is happening today is that while the unemployment rate is being reduced in St. John's and the metropolitan area, the unemployment rate is soaring everywhere else across the Province. They talk about an 8.2 per cent unemployment rate on the Avalon Peninsula. Well, let's compare that with everywhere else across the Province. What you will find is that the average rate in every other region is 19.5 per cent and over, as high as 23.1 per cent.

In every other region, what you are seeing is an unemployment rate of over 20 per cent in Newfoundland and Labrador. Now, surely the members opposite, the members of the government, must see this in their own districts. They must see this when they are travelling around the Province and when they are out there talking to people. They must see that the unemployment rate in almost all of their districts, bar none, outside of the Avalon Peninsula is over 20 per cent.

That should cause them to be concerned because it is obvious that the industries that are fundamental in these regions of the Province are not able to grow. It is obvious that the opportunities are not being felt on the doorsteps of all of these communities. It is obvious, Mr. Speaker, that people in these areas of the Province are not providing a better living for themselves today than they were yesterday. That is what is unfortunate about this.

When you look at the fact that the statistics should be going down, they are going up and that is not acceptable. Mr. Speaker, maybe there are members here who think that is fine. Maybe they think that is perfectly acceptable for their districts, but I certainly do not see it as being perfectly acceptable. What I see is a government who does not have a vision for industry development and survival of areas right across this Province. What I am seeing is a government that has no solutions for those areas. I see a government that is not investing in those particular regions, and that is why their lot in life is not improving at the same rate that it is on the Avalon Peninsula and in the St. John's area. I think government needs to be concerned about that.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, people need infrastructure. If you are going to build industry, you need to have the infrastructure to do it. That means transportation and information technology. These are key components to the twenty-first century industry in this Province - very key components.

Why is it today, in Newfoundland and Labrador, that there are still communities that do not have high-speed Internet? Why is it today, in this Province, that you have communities on the main highway that still do not have services, communities that cannot ring a credit card through in their businesses because they have a dial-up Internet service? This government came into power with a commitment that they were going to bring Newfoundlanders and Labradorians into the information technology age; they were going to look at things like high-speed Internet and broadband services.

Mr. Speaker, what did they do? They went out and spent millions and millions and millions and millions and millions - and I can say it fifteen times. They spent millions and millions into fibre optics in the Province. That was supposed to be the solution. The sell on fibre optics was this: Government is going to put the money in with a private company. We are going to get a fibre line. We are going to get a line. We are going to get one line of fibre or so many lines of fibre - I cannot remember now. I know it was the former Member for St. Barbe who used to be up talking about it every day; he even talked about keeping the fibre lines together with duct tape. So, it is no wonder they never got any further than where they did.

Anyway, so much of this fibre was going to be allocated for Newfoundland and Labrador. This was the sell job. This was the sell job that the government put on the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador. Once the fibre optic cable is done, we are going to connect all of the communities; we are going to make sure everybody is going to be connected. We are going to do a study now, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to see how much it is going to cost to bring this line into all the communities so that people are coming into the twenty-first century, so that people have the technology they need in their communities to be able to grow and develop the regional economy.

Mr. Speaker, that was the big sell job. Do you know how long it took to do the study? It took well over two years; well over two years. I think they had it for a year after that before they even released it. I do not even know if they ever released it, but they turned it down. They did turn it down at the end of the day. They turned it down, saying: Oh, too much money, we cannot do anything with it. That is where it is today. That is where it is today; yet, there are communities out there all over the Province that are still on dial-up services.

There are communities, Mr. Speaker, with high-speed Internet that has run out of capacity. Large centres, even like in Happy Valley- Goose Bay, where they ran out of capacity. It is happening in communities all over my district. It is happening in communities all over the Province, small communities, but even in larger communities they are running out of capacity. If you are moving into a community today in this Province and you are asking to get high-speed Internet, you are being told by the provider: Sorry, we cannot help you. We cannot help you; we are maxed out. We cannot connect anybody else in your community. That is what people are being told.

This is what we are dealing with in the Province today. How can you have a vision for Newfoundland and Labrador going forward that does not include having people connected with the technology that they need to be able to grow? It does not work that way, Mr. Speaker.

The minister likes to stand up and say we are 70 per cent this and we are 80 per cent that, and we have connected this and we have connected that. Well, that is all fine, it is all numbers. There is a reality check that the minister needs, too, Mr. Speaker. It is a reality check. It is the reality today of moving into a community in Newfoundland and Labrador and being told: Sorry, there is no Internet access; or going into a community and being told you can only get on a dial-up service. That is the reality.

Where are the broadband initiatives, Mr. Speaker? Where are the broadband strategies that are supposed to bring communities into fast, zoom kind of technology that gets us there in a minute and gets us there in seconds that makes us connected with the world in a flash, Mr. Speaker? Where is all of that? All of that, Mr. Speaker, went out the window with a study that the government did and every now and then they will sink a few dollars into broadband if they can partner with the federal government or partner with industry federally, Mr. Speaker, or partner with a local provider. Is there a plan? No, there is not. Is there a strategy? No, there is not. Is there a time frame when Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are going to be able to click their fingers and launch themselves into the world of technology as we know it today? No, there is not, Mr. Speaker, and that is where the government is lacking. You can pay lip service to it but you need to see results.

In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, let's look at transportation. The minister today talked about $270 million going into roads in the Province this year. That is great. It is great, Mr. Speaker, because we need it. I can tell you that I have a district today that needs it probably more so than ever before. I am going to explain it to you now because every day I present a petition here in the House of Assembly talking about the roads in Southern Labrador. I tell you, the roads up there are so bad right now, the main highway itself, that as I said before there are now Facebook sites, there is Twitter going on, there are pictures being documented all over the Internet, Mr. Speaker, of people who are travelling that road and what they have had to go through.

Mr. Speaker, let me tell you some more about it. Let me just start in a couple of communities. You talk about spending money and balancing where money is invested in different areas of the Province. There are certain communities in this Province today that have gravel roads that have not seen a cent of money spent on their roads in the last eight years that this government has been in power. They have never once put a cent of money into roads in certain communities in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I do not have a list of all of them but I know some of them because one of them I know very well, it is in my own district in Black Tickle. There has not been any money spent on the local road in that community since this government came into power. Then you talk about balancing things out, it is a gravel road. It is only going to be maintained for so long and that is the way it is.

Look at other sections of the highway, like the Labrador Straits, for example, Mr. Speaker. I want to talk about this because we hear of all these paving and resurfacing programs. You are looking at pavement in this area that is like thirty years old. After a while things start to wear out. Do you know something? What we have done is it not 3,000 people in that area using this section of road anymore; it is 20,000 and 30,000 people using this section of road. Now that should cause some members to start thinking, well, when you put that kind of traffic on a road that is already thirty years old, it is going to need to have some real work done. Real work does not mean patching the potholes, Mr. Speaker. It means resurfacing the road in sections where it is very, very bad. That is what people are asking the government to do and that is what they expect them to do.

More importantly, Mr. Speaker, the people of Labrador expects the government to make a firm commitment on paving the entire section of the highway. So they should make that commitment, they should make that commitment. These people in Labrador who use this road are as important and their safety is as important as anywhere else in this Province. They need to be able to know that there is a strategy; there is a vision for our road and somebody is going to make a commitment to look at this and to deal with it in the long term. That is what they want to see, Mr. Speaker. That is the kind of commitment they want to see that they are not getting. Why is that? It is because the government opposite does not have a real vision for that part of the Province. That is the problem, Mr. Speaker. If they did, they would be out there today reconfiguring the marine services in those areas.

We are in a situation right now on the Strait of Belle Isle, Mr. Speaker. This is the situation we are in. We are moving into our peak period of operation, we are moving into a period where we are going to have the most traffic that we have in the run of a year on that service, and what is going to happen? The ferry has to come out of commission. The ferry has to come out, it is going to have to go back on dry dock, and it is going to leave 25,000 people in Labrador who depend upon that service stranded. Stranded, to do what? Like they did a few weeks ago, having to put their vehicle on a cargo boat and hope that it is not too foggy to get a flight across to pick up their vehicle? That is unacceptable in this day and age.

The government knows we are going into our peak period. They know the Apollo is going to have to come out service again. People are expecting to see a solution that will work for the area. How can you build industry? How can you bring people in? How can you promote a region?

Those are great tourism ads on Labrador, by the way; great tourism ads right across the Province. One thing I have to say is the marketing firm put their heads to work and did some good advertising in tourism. When people come to those areas of the Province, Mr. Speaker, they do not want to land in St. Barbe and find out there is no ferry for them to get on. That is not what they want. They want something long term. They want a commitment from the government. This was a government that one time committed to even build a fixed link across the Strait of Belle Isle.

They do not talk about that any more, but they should be talking about it because that is the reality of what is to come for this Province. That is the reality of what is to come for this Province. Even now, you have the Quebec government committing to spend $300 million over the next five years to bring the road down the Quebec North Shore and into the Labrador Straits. That is the kind of traffic that we are going to add in the next few years to this section of road, and we have a government that does not see it. We have a government that does not have the vision for it, does not understand what the real contribution to the Province can be if you do this right and you do it properly. Mr. Speaker, we will keep talking, we will keep trying to bring them there, where they need to be.

It is just like on the North Coast of Labrador. We have been talking for years about ferries that are inadequate and not working to address the needs of the people in Northern Labrador. What has the government done about it? Absolutely nothing. Absolutely nothing is what they have done about it. Where was all the talk from the members that there was going to be a new configuration of marine services in Northern Labrador, that we were going to look at a ferry that could transport people and cargo and all the rest of it? It never ever happened. Eight years later, and what are they doing? They are still out scrounging to find a ship to be able to meet the needs of the people in Northern Labrador. Ships that is inadequate and falling far short of the kind of service that the people on the North Coast of Labrador should be able to get and should be entitled to.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I know that the members do not want to hear this. It is all right for most of them, they do not use that service on a daily basis like other people have to use it. They do not have to depend upon that service like the people in Makkovik, Hopedale, Black Tickle, Nain, Natuashish, Rigolet, Postville, and all these communities that have to depend upon it. They do not have that kind of dependency. They do not have to get on that coastal boat and go to the Northern region of Labrador. They do not have to try to get their goods shipped in and out of there, Mr. Speaker. That is the fundamental difference. It is just like the ferry on the Strait of Belle Isle. They do not have to get aboard of it. They do not have to use it. That is why they are not making it the same priority, the priority that it should be for the people of that area, to give the people real opportunity to grow their regions and to be able to do something concrete.

No, Mr. Speaker, that is not the kind of priorities that this government is choosing. This government is choosing priorities where they are wasting money, choosing priorities where money is just going out the door, and nobody knows where it is going.

Let's talk about the chronic disease management plan that the government has been committing to do. We live in a Province where we have the highest rate of chronic disease in Canada. When you talk about things like cancer, diabetes and heart disease, we have the highest of anywhere else in the country. We live in a Province today, not only do we have the highest rate of disease but we also have a very high mortality rate. We also live in a Province where all of the dependency on health care and those health services is happening right here in the capital city. We have people all over Newfoundland and Labrador who are being referred here for health treatments every single day. We need to ensure that they can afford to access those services.

I have heard so many horror stories, I would not even be able to stand here and repeat them because there are just too many. Too many stories of people who cannot afford to access our health care system at the current rate because it has become all centralized in St. John's. Mr. Speaker, maybe that is the best thing for the providers, maybe it is the best thing for quality care, but it is very difficult for the people who have to access it here.

Do any of them mind coming here? Absolutely not. They do not mind going anywhere they have to go to get the treatment they need for the kind of illness they have, whether it is cancer, or heart disease, or diabetes, any of those things, respiratory disease or whatever the case may be. They do not always have the ability to do it financially and that is where the tough part comes in. I get calls all the time, Mr. Speaker, from people who are in here and cannot afford to get home. They need to be able to fly back to – especially in Labrador West, I have had a number of calls from Labrador West from people who end up in here in hospital, they get discharged, they have to go home, and not everyone in Labrador West have medical coverage, not everybody have insurance programs to take care of it. It is a pretty hefty airline bill to do that.

I get the same thing from my own district in Labrador where they are raising money all the time to get people out to hospital and get them back. Not only there, Mr. Speaker, all the other areas of the Province as well. There is not one area of this Province that you will go into today where you will not see communities trying to raise money for people who have to go to hospital. That should not be the case, Mr. Speaker. It is a matter of where the money is going in health care. It is a matter of spending priorities and that is why this government has to get a handle on what has been happening. The health of the people is too important to be neglected. The health of the people needs to be first and foremost in the government's platform, and we are not seeing that.

So, why is there not being a full review in health care? Why are we not looking at how to get a better bang for the money we are spending? Why is it that even people all across Canada and reports are pointing out to us that we are spending the most money per capita and we have the worst health outcomes of anywhere else in the country? That is critical. That should be a wake-up call for the government opposite. When you get that kind of statistic that we have the worst service of any other health care providers in the country, it should be a wake-up call. When people in their communities have to be raising money to get themselves to a hospital, that should be a wake-up call. When people are being put on wait-lists for critical services and they cannot get them, it should be a wake-up call.

I dealt with a case today, Mr. Speaker, of a person who flew from Labrador into St. John's yesterday for a doctor's appointment this morning. They get here and it is cancelled. Guess what? This is the third time the appointment was cancelled. People do not have that kind of money to jump on an airplane to come to a doctor's appointment, get here and find out that the specialist had to cancel the appointment on them.

Mr. Speaker, these things should be a wake-up call for the government that there needs to be changes in our health care system. Nobody out there today should have to be on these long wait-lists. I talked to someone yesterday who had a family member who is diagnosed with prostate cancer. They cannot even get on the list in Newfoundland and Labrador. They have to go to Nova Scotia now. They have to go to Nova Scotia to get some kind of treatment because we are not able to handle them here in the Province.

We are talking about the health of people. When we are talking about the health of people, we are talking about ensuring that people have longer lives, that people can battle the illnesses they have, and that they have every opportunity at the first opportunity to be able to do so. Mr. Speaker, these are things that need to be looked at and they should be on the very top and front of government's radar. When they hear statistics like we are spending the most money and have the worst outcomes of health care in the country if that is not a wake-up call, then nothing ever will be for the government members opposite in dealing with our health care system today.

In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, look at the growing population of seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador. By 2025, one in every four will be of senior's age in Newfoundland and Labrador. Already today we are dealing with critical issues around personal care, around long-term care, around home care. We are already dealing with critical issues in trying to provide for our senior population and we are not able to do it. We are not able to do it. You look at where the predictions are going; we are an aging province and we cannot ignore that but we do have to deal with it.

It is not being dealt with right now. In fact, Mr. Speaker, when we asked the government in Estimates about the long-term care strategy, the minister said: well it is complex, it is not finalized. We are doing things but we do not have a plan yet. This is the kind of stuff that we are getting back. That is not good enough. You have had eight years, you have had eight years and you know where the trend has been going. You know where the trend has been going for seniors in our Province and you have not dealt with it.

The minister stood up today and he said: people are going to be in the dark in the Province if we do not do Muskrat Falls. Well, Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of seniors in our Province today who are already in the dark. There are many seniors out there today on fixed incomes in this Province who cannot afford, Mr. Speaker, to keep going their homes and pay their electricity bills.

In fact, the other day when I was in the House of Assembly and I raised this issue I had two or three seniors call me after and even a couple sent me e-mails and they told me about their own personal situations. I would say they are a small fraction of what is out there in terms of being able to meet all of their costs and their commitments.

We all have seniors in our districts; look at all the seniors who have been in the House of Assembly this year through the seniors clubs. I think it is great that they are out and they are active and they are involved, but do not ignore the fact that they still have a lot of critical issues that they are dealing with. Many of them are on fixed incomes and many of them are seeing their cost of living going up.

It is the same, Mr. Speaker, for families out there that are seeing their cost of living going up because it is happening. When we stand in the House and we say to the government: you have to look at where your priorities are, you have to look at where you are funnelling money into things like Muskrat Falls, which is going to increase the cost of electricity for people – why has that become a priority as opposed to the many people that are out there today, Mr. Speaker, having a tough time? Why are you going to contribute to that? Why are you going to contribute to increasing the amount of money they pay out of their pockets as opposed to putting more money back into their pockets?

That is what we are dealing with in this Province, Mr. Speaker. I know that you cannot meet all expectations. I know that, but there is a fair expectation today in Newfoundland and Labrador that if we are a prosperous Province and we are a have Province then we should be have people. We should be have communities. We should feel that wealth. This is what they saying: they are not feeling it. The balance is not there. I have proven that today just by the unemployment rates alone across this Province that the balance is not there. It is up to the government, Mr. Speaker, to strike that right balance for the people of the Province and it is not happening. In addition to that, there has been no vision, no vision, Mr. Speaker, to deal with the critical needs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians as we move into the twenty-first century, to deal with the critical issues out there that face people in every single community right across this Province, and every single family.

We will continue to hold the government accountable, and we will continue to argue cases on behalf of all of these people, Mr. Speaker, because we believe that they have a right to have something better, and we will continue to push for better for them.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I, like all others who have had opportunity to stand in this House, consider it to be a privilege to offer comment on this Budget.

Mr. Speaker, unlike some of the criticism that we have been hearing by members opposite, what I am hearing when I am out in communities, and what I am hearing when I travel my district, and, in fact, when I travel this Province as I did a little on Friday, is that many people in this Province are delighted with this Budget, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Many people in this Province, Mr. Speaker, are talking about the wonderful initiatives that will make true differences in their lives as a result of the diligence done in preparing this Budget.

The Budget booklet that many have seen – I know it has been circulated – highlights to some degree some of those particular initiatives. It talks about the economic performance for 2010 and that is important because people of the Province want to know how did we stack up, Mr. Speaker. They want to know how we did over the last year. The highlight book also talks, Mr. Speaker, about many of the wonderful outlooks that we have in years going forward, but in particular for 2011.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to take a couple of minutes of my time, because I want to talk in detail about the initiatives found in the Budget. I also want to take a look at some of the highlights for those people out there who have not yet had opportunity to digest much of what the Budget has already presented.

Some of the highlights, and I am not going to look at them all because we do not have time, but some of the ones that I want to focus on in terms of highlights really show where we have placed ourselves in terms of a Province in this federation, Mr. Speaker. We, bar none, have done better than other provinces within the federation of Canada. In one of the areas, real gross domestic product, Mr. Speaker, the GDP is estimated to have grown by 5.6 per cent. That is the highest among provinces in this country, Mr. Speaker. I think that is an amazing accomplishment given the economic circumstances of the time particularly.

Mr. Speaker, investments in this Province grew by 32 per cent. Now stop and think about that. Investments grew, not by 5 per cent, 10 per cent or 15 per cent but by 32 per cent in this Province, Mr. Speaker, to over $6.5 billion - $6.5 billion, the highest in the country. Why is that, Mr. Speaker? Because investors around the world, around the provinces, around the country believe in Newfoundland and Labrador just like we do, Mr. Speaker; they absolutely believe in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, in other areas: employment. We just heard the member opposite speak about employment. Here are the facts; employment grew by 3.3 per cent, Mr. Speaker, reaching 219,400 people who managed to find jobs – the highest that we have seen, Mr. Speaker. Yet we hear contradictory comments from across the room. Employment growth in this Province was among the highest of all provinces in Canada.

The unemployment rate declined by 1.1 percentage points, Mr. Speaker. That is an amazing accomplishment considering the economic times. Our average weekly wages grew by 4.5 per cent and that is supported by the work that we did in terms of minimum wage increases, public sector wage increases, general wage growth in the private sector and so on. Our personal income tax rose by 4.2 per cent, again due to both the wage gains and the employment growth and so on. Mr. Speaker, there is so much that we have to be proud of in the sense of accomplishments already made by this government.

One of the other areas that is a real strong indicator, Mr. Speaker, of how well we are doing: retail sales grew by 3.7 per cent to $7.4 billion. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is driven by employment. That is driven by those income gains and by the solid consumer confidence that we have here in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, one of the initiatives that we hope to be able to make progress on, we can now report that we have made considerable progress on. The Province's population, Mr. Speaker, has grown. It has grown by 0.3 per cent. The first time we have been able to boast about that has been over the last year and a half, the first time in a long time, and that is progress, Mr. Speaker. It is incremental; we know it is going to increase.

In my own district, Mr. Speaker, I am able to see evidence of this other accomplishment I want to highlight. That has to do with housing activity. Housing activity remained exceptionally strong in Newfoundland and Labrador in 2010. Residential construction investment increased 20.7 per cent to $1.73 billion, Mr. Speaker. I have seen that in my own district. As soon as areas are developed, the land is sold. Houses are going up, Mr. Speaker. It is an incredible indicator of the confidence in our economy here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Other areas where we are able to see some improvements, aquaculture production has increased and the value of our mineral shipments. Again, I am seeing, feeling, and experiencing that in my own district, Mr. Speaker. The value of our mineral shipments has increased by 90 per cent. I did not say 19 per cent; I said 90 per cent due to higher production that is taking place in this Province, and of course the commodity prices as well and the improvements we have seen there.

The number of travel and tourism visitors to the Province has grown, Mr. Speaker. We can go on and on, and of course people will take opportunity to do that as well when they get opportunity to review the booklet that was prepared for residents of Newfoundland and Labrador. They can see not only some of the initiatives that we have implemented for this year in the Budget, but also the highlights, the results, the outcomes that we are able to see.

Mr. Speaker, these positive results, I believe are based on strong fiscal management. They are based on strong leadership, Mr. Speaker. I believe that we will continue to see more of the same over the next four years and the next four years as we continue to govern, and govern very well, this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, in the fiscal framework our economy, we are able to see, is continuing to be strengthened, and it is being strengthened in a number of different areas. Our surplus of $485 million, it is the fifth surplus in six years. If you look at the fiscal framework, our net debt is expected to be $8.2 billion. Mr. Speaker, that is a decrease of 31 per cent; 31 per cent since 2004-2005. It is down from $12 billion. Again, what a wonderful accomplishment. What it does, as well, is that we have a surplus that allows us to continue investing in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, and that is what we are doing.

Some of that is done from the perspective of new taxation. We reference, for example, the residential energy rebate of 8 per cent. Mr. Speaker, I do not know if you are hearing the same as I am, but I am sure you have to be. Wherever I have travelled in this Province since this Budget has been released I have heard people say how thrilled they are about that 8 per cent reduction in the residential energy rebate, the heating rebate. That, Mr. Speaker, has been something that people of the Province had hoped for, but never thought in Newfoundland and Labrador there would be opportunity for that to be a realization. Yet, Mr. Speaker, in this Budget we were able to reduce those rates by 8 per cent; which is in addition to the percentage that has always been there.

Mr. Speaker, some of the other taxation areas that people have told me they are very happy about – and I heard this in my own district, particularly in the Buchans region, where people said to me how delighted they were about the volunteer firefighters tax credit. I would like to thank the Minister of Finance for that, because he listens. When he went around this Province he heard that, I am sure, in community after community and he listened to that, and we are able to bring forward that particular tax credit. I know when I spoke to people in Buchans not too long ago when I was there, that was one of the things they highlighted. That was one of the things they heard in the Budget, because it said to them, we appreciate you. We appreciate what you do for us. We are thankful for what you do for us. We now are in a position where we are able to do something for you, and this is one of the things we are going to do.

The payroll tax exemption; Mr. Speaker, in my former portfolio in Human Resources, Labour and Employment, having to do particularly with the labour side, I heard time and time again of how we needed to do something in terms of the payroll tax. Well, Mr. Speaker, in this Budget we were able to do that. I know businesses are pleased with that particular reform that we have made there, in terms of an increase in the payroll exemption to the threshold to $1.2 million from $1 million. That, of course, is retroactive as well. Mr. Speaker, within the fiscal framework as well, people of Newfoundland and Labrador have lots to be happy about.

Mr. Speaker, I want to address some of what I heard this afternoon, particularly in relation to infrastructure here in this Province. We could not agree more with the statement made by the member opposite when she talked about the importance of investment in infrastructure, Mr. Speaker, because that is what we do. Even through the difficult times we have, in this Province, over the last two years invested in infrastructure. Let me give you the numbers on that. In the year 2009-2010, our government invested $677 million of our surplus into infrastructure. Last year, Mr. Speaker, in 2010 we invested $843 million in infrastructure. What we hear around the Province from residents, is we hear again, gratitude for infrastructure that they are able to see. Health care, particularly. Education is another area where people are saying to us on a regular basis that they are pleased with the investments we have made in infrastructure, Mr. Speaker.

Not only from our residents are we hearing about the value of what we are doing in terms of infrastructure, Mr. Speaker, but we are hearing it from senior economists as well. I reference the senior economist from the Bank of Nova Scotia - and I do not recall her name but I do remember hearing her and seeing her on television one night - when she said that infrastructure spending is very important because it is the foundation of future economic development, Mr. Speaker. What we are doing is precisely what this particular economist believes and espouses; this senior economist at the Bank of Nova Scotia, and we have heard it in many other fronts as well.

We are investing in the future when we invest in infrastructure, Mr. Speaker. Again, this is something that we are proud to be doing. People say you have a surplus, what are you going to do with that? They think it is money in the bank. No, it is money that we invest in Newfoundland and Labrador, and we invest well in Newfoundland and Labrador. We talk about being able to increase our own budgets, Mr. Speaker, within our line departments.

In health care, $2.9 billion will be invested this year, not cumulative, Mr. Speaker; $2.9 billion in health care this year; in education, $1.4 billion in education. In all of those monies, a fair chunk of that goes into the building of infrastructure, the maintenance of infrastructure, Mr. Speaker.

One of the other areas that we are able to continue our investment in and where we are making a huge difference is in the area of poverty reduction: $140 million again this year. While I could go down through all of the initiatives within the Poverty Reduction Strategy – well, I would not be able to, not in the little bit of I have here. Twenty minutes would never take me through all of those investments, but I am sure as others get up and speak, they will have opportunity to reference some of those as well. Mr. Speaker, we have made, I would think, inroads in all of those areas, in health care, in education, in our social policies and so on, in terms of what we do with our surplus and in terms of how we invest in infrastructure.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a few minutes this afternoon to address something that the member opposite talked about when she stood to speak. She talked about our investment in broadband. Now, Mr. Speaker, she talked about investment in broadband as if all we had done was waste our money. She said millions and millions - and I talked across the House as I know we are not supposed to do, but I told her the amount of money.

AN HON. MEMBER: I heard you.

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you.

We put in $20.6 million as an investment in broadband. Let me tell you what we got for that $20.6 million that we did invest in broadband infrastructure, Mr. Speaker. I am glad to see that members opposite are listening carefully to me. For that particular $20.6 million, we were able to leverage close to $100 million of investment. Now, $100 million of investment in broadband is not nothing; $100 million of broadband infrastructure is something that is quite significant – quite significant, Mr. Speaker. To say that we still do not have anything is really not fair.

She dismissed our numbers and said they are not important. Well, I believe that for the 80 per cent of the Province that is connected to broadband and the 95 per cent of Labrador that is connected to broadband, Mr. Speaker, I believe those are significant numbers.

Now, we recognize that there is still a deficit, Mr. Speaker. We have never once stood here and said there is no deficit. We have never once said we have our work done, Mr. Speaker. What we have said is that we have done work, this is the result, Mr. Newfoundland and Mrs. Newfoundland, of that $20.6 million we invested and we want to move forward. The result is clear and not to be disputed: 80 per cent connected, 95 per cent in Newfoundland and Labrador connected.

Mr. Speaker, where once there were only 114 communities connected, there are now 400 communities connected, I say. As well, partners in our Innovation Strategy will tell you that they continue to invest. I can tell you - and I do not mind sharing this information - EastLink alone has invested more than $80 million in the Province in broadband infrastructure in the last three years - just the last three years, Mr. Speaker.

We also have much more balanced competition as a result of our investments, Mr. Speaker. Memorial University and the colleges, the College of the North Atlantic, their various campuses, they have all secured better contracts for services at lower rates as a result of the investments that we have made. Our commercial enterprises and our residents have greater selection of services. TELE Greenland is able to recognize the good work that we have done in terms of broadband. TELE Greenland has chosen Newfoundland and Labrador - and perhaps not everyone in the Province is aware of this - as its gateway into North America's communications industry and it erected a $4 million facility in the Town of Milton.

Yes, progress has been made, Mr. Speaker, in terms of broadband, but do we recognize the deficits? When the member opposite stands and talks to us about the deficits on the Northern Peninsula, he has never once heard me say that is not true. Because he is right, there are deficits. We are working towards solving those issues as well.

Mr. Speaker, we need to recognize that a lot of those issues are the result of our very dispersed population, small populations dispersed around the Province in areas that geographically are very difficult to bring that particular fibre in. That is a challenge and that is something that we are trying to address.

Mr. Speaker, in this Budget we have just announced an investment of $8 million to continue our work in broadband, so we have made a commitment again. Remember the $20.6 million, now we are doing another $8 million. If $20.6 million leveraged for us close to $100 million, we are hopeful that the $8 million is going to leverage a fair number of dollars for us as well as we move forward.

Over the next days and weeks, Mr. Speaker, I hope to be able to comment and talk about what it is that we are going to be able to do in a more concrete fashion, but right now in an area that is heavily regulated by the federal government, by Industry Canada, we are working forward. We are speaking with our industry partners; we have already invited them to the table. We are having the conversations that will help us find that way forward again in terms of broadband in this Province, and we very hopeful that the investment that we have put upfront, or the announcement that we have made in the Budget of $8 million will make a difference in terms of those underserved and un-served regions of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, there are many other issues that we could talk about here in terms of this Budget, but I want to point out that for my district, whenever I have travelled it, and for other areas of the Province in which I have travelled, there has been a lot of support for this Budget, a lot of wonderful initiatives. I know that the people on this side of the House are going to stand when the time comes in the next little bit of time and they are going to say: Yes, we are supportive of all of these initiatives in this Budget. It is unfortunate that the people on the other side of the House are going to stand and say: No, we do not want to see that $8 million in terms of investment in broadband. It is unfortunate that they are going to stand and say that 8 per cent rebate is not good enough. It is unfortunate that they are going to stand on any number of issues that are good initiatives in this Budget and say: No, we do not want them. So, we are going to stand and we are going to say: No, thank you very much; we do not want those investments in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the leadership on this side of the House is going to show something different. We did that when we stood and we tabled this Budget. We are standing by the Budget because this Budget is good for Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Kelly): The Chair recognizes the hon. Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

I am very happy to have the opportunity to speak to the main motion with regard to the Budget, a Budget that the government keeps presenting here in this House, and publicly, as being the be all and end all when it comes to Budgets.

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to recognize that this Budget has some good things in it. I have said that before, and I do not mind saying that. As I have also said before, the Budget continues to do what this government does, and that is present bits and pieces without a plan. I want to speak to some of that this afternoon. I want to look at a couple of major issues, look at how they are presented in the Budget, and the fact that they are presented without a plan and, therefore, people do not know where this government is going, where this government is going with regard to affordable housing, for example, where this government is going with regard to energy retrofitting - which is part of having affordable housing - where this government is going in terms of what their goals are, what are their goals with regard to Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, what are their goals with regard to retrofitting, what are their goals with regard to even having a housing plan. These are the issues that I would like to speak to.

The first one that I want to take up is energy efficiency and how it relates to the housing issue, Mr. Speaker. According to the 2006 census, there were 197,180 dwellings in this Province; 8,000 more than in 2001. If we had the latest figures, which we cannot have until the next census is done, we know that the number of dwellings will have gone up even more. The new homes are not the problem, Mr. Speaker, because the new homes now are being built with a concern for energy, with a concern for energy efficiency and therefore, with a concern for lowering the costs of people who are going to live in the new homes.

We have an awful lot of people, Mr. Speaker, both in rural and urban Newfoundland and Labrador, who are living in older homes, older homes that have no insulation, older homes that have poor window structures, older homes that cost a lot to heat. These homes are found all over the Province, not just in one place or another, but all over the Province.

So what did the government do this year, Mr. Speaker? It has allotted $4 million for retrofit programming. We know from the past when the government had retrofitting and allowed $4 million, Mr. Speaker, that before you could turn around the applications for retrofitting ate up the $4 million long before the fiscal year was over. Here is government once again putting in an inadequate amount of money for energy retrofitting, Mr. Speaker.

What is the government's goal? If the government's goal is to enable everybody in homes that require energy efficiency to be able to do the retrofitting, then have an ongoing program with money that is rolling over continually so that the retrofitting can always be done. Do not say to people we have a retrofit program, then all of a sudden three or four months into the year, or five months into the year, you get a notification: well no more applications please because there is no more money. Let's try making the cloth fit and that is what this government does not do because it does not present plans, Mr. Speaker, and that is what really bothers me – it does not present a plan.

We are really concerned that people really want to do retrofitting but they cannot do it because inadequate money is being put in. Mr. Speaker, what is the sense of having that? What is the sense of saying we have a retrofit program we cannot even in one year adequately take care of the needs of people? The problem is, Mr. Speaker, they do not even get put on a waiting list, they have to start all over again when they do not get it in a year.

It is not acceptable the way in which the program has been run, Mr. Speaker. We should have a constant funding with a continuous top-up of the Budget as the need arises and plan that way. The Budget can be planned that way, Mr. Speaker, so that retrofitting is always happening.

We know that energy costs are really high, Mr. Speaker. The government is continually talking about it. They keep saying themselves that one of their reasons for wanting to develop Muskrat Falls is to try to keep power rates down because power rates are going to go up so much. They are claiming that Muskrat Falls is going to bring them down.

Well, that is laudable, Mr. Speaker. Whether or not that is going to happen I do not know. It is laudable they want to do that, but we cannot wait for Muskrat Falls. We have to look at things that can be done here and now in the present, Mr. Speaker. We have to do things that are going to help people here and now with their energy costs.

Right now, Mr. Speaker, consumers pay 9.7 cents a kilowatt hour. That is the cost right now of electricity. In 2000, heating oil cost the consumer twenty-seven cents a litre; this past winter, heating oil averaged $1 a litre, more than that in the St. John's area, and upwards of $1.20 in Grey River on the South Coast.

Heating costs are extremely high, Mr. Speaker, already. We have seen it. Even the Minister of Natural Resources today in the House talked about the change in his electricity bill over the past five years. We have all seen that, Mr. Speaker. Costs are going up continually for our heating, whether it is electrical or whether it is heating oil – these two in particular. We are not dealing with it adequately. We are not looking at it seriously.

What does that increase in cost mean for the person on a fixed income, for the pensioner, for the elderly person on a fixed income, and for people who are on income assistance, which is woefully inadequate, Mr. Speaker?

This government has a Poverty Reduction Strategy that is not working when it comes to the cost of living for people. They have a tremendous heavy cost of living and they are living in poverty. So they are receiving assistance from government and living in poverty, still having to go to food banks and still filling food banks on a regular basis. It seems to have dropped off the agenda, the number of food banks we have in the Province and the rate at which they are trying to feed people because the cost of living is so high that people cannot buy food. They need to heat themselves and they know they can get the food at a food bank, so their money goes into the heat, which it should, and into their rent, which it has to. They have no choice. Then they go to food banks because they are living in poverty.

We brought the minimum wage up to $10 an hour, and now that is off the table. Well, it cannot be off the table, because the cost of living is continuing to go up. So we have to look at how we are going to be able – what are the different ways in which we can help people who are on low income, on fixed incomes, Mr. Speaker, how we can help them continue to live with dignity, with heat, with food, with light in their homes; how that can be enabled. One of the ways to do it, Mr. Speaker, is to really help with energy efficiency, creating energy efficiency, especially in the older homes. Creating energy efficiency through retrofitting.

Energy costs, Mr. Speaker, are forecast to outstrip the growth of wages, that will see people who cannot afford the added artificial inflationary cost of energy. People just will not be able to pay. When I hear that in so many years time we will not be paying $200 a month for electricity, but $400 a month for electricity, I have to ask, well what is that going to mean to people on a fixed income, because there is no indication that this government is taking them into consideration when we are looking at the cost of electricity.

We are entering, Mr. Speaker, an energy emergency where costs outstrip many people's ability to pay for it. This is an emergency that is just not going on here in this Province, but this is where we live, and this is where we have to deal with it. We are getting calls all the time in our offices – if I am getting them in my constituency office, I know other MHAs are getting them as well – where people cannot afford to pay the heat.

Now, they did a get a break in this Budget, by the provincial portion of the HST being taken off home heating fuel, and that is essential. They are getting a break because the government, at the same time, is keeping, as I have asked, and the government has done it, keeping the low income rebate – but that is still only part of the problem, Mr. Speaker. I worry about low income earners, I am sure we all do. I worry about seniors who are on a fixed income, I worry about pensioners, and I worry about the single parent family. We have to look into the future and we have to take care of them.

Part of wanting to keep seniors in their own homes is affordability. A lot of seniors, both urban and rural, live in older homes. They are the ones who live in older homes. A good energy efficiency program could really help keep them in their homes in a more affordable way, because if we retrofit their homes, and their heating costs drop significantly, then they will be able to afford to stay in their homes, and not have to go into long-term care facilities, Mr. Speaker, or into senior residences. They will be able to stay in their own homes, and as they advance and need care they can still stay in their homes with home care. Of course, that is if we had a really good home care program, Mr. Speaker, which is another whole issue. I will not deal so much with that today, but that is another whole issue.

We should want to try to keep older people in their homes and in those homes that are old. When I am saying old, we do not have to talk about houses that are 100 years old because most of the houses built in this Province, even in the 1950s, were not built with sufficient insulation, some with no insulation. We are talking about here in St. John's, because this is where my own district is, houses that were built in the 1950s and 1960s need retrofitting. We are not just talking about the houses that were built like ninety and one hundred years ago. We are talking about houses even built thirty and forty years ago, and maybe even not as old as that, do not have adequate insulation, Mr. Speaker.

There is a big job to be done here. It is a job that is the responsibility of the provincial government, and the provincial government should not just be sitting and waiting to see how much they can get from the federal government to make it happen. I absolutely agree with the federal responsibility and I agree in cost sharing but there are sometimes a province has to move forward, Mr. Speaker, even without the federal government. This is what we have to be doing, and other provinces do that. We have to do it as well, Mr. Speaker.

Let's look at some of the energy efficiency programs that are happening in Atlantic Canada, not elsewhere but just in Atlantic Canada. In New Brunswick, Mr. Speaker, their program allows for residential, commercial, and industrial energy efficiency programming; all three levels, residential, commercial and industrial. They have residential programs. They have just upgraded their residential programs to include up to $10,000 in grants and incentives for homes needing retrofitting, Mr. Speaker. They have commercial incentives that provide up to $3,000 toward identification of potential upgrades. In other words, giving up to $3,000 to figure out what the commercial site might need or the commercial building might need. Then, up to $50,000 for the actual cost of doing the retrofitting. They also have industrial programs which covers small, medium and large industrial users of energy. The programs change according to whether it is a small, medium or large company when it comes to industry. Little New Brunswick, Mr. Speaker, has all of these programs. We do not have these programs, Mr. Speaker.

Let's look at Prince Edward Island; little Prince Edward Island, not only smaller than we are in size but in population as well. Their energy efficiency goes further. They include renewable energy efficiency initiatives for the farming industry to encourage the use of Biomass, solar, wind generation and bio-gas. They throw up to $1,500 towards an audit and then $50,000 towards project costs. This is PEI that has a much, much smaller population than we do and do not have access to revenue like the offshore oil that we have; nowhere near the wonderful revenue that we have coming in from offshore oil. All the more reason for us to be putting money into energy efficiency, when you look at the fact that we are making money from a non-renewable resource, Mr. Speaker. This is the whole issue, a non-renewable resource that is going to run out. So we should really be looking at retrofitting an energy efficiency that is not going to depend on that non-renewable resource, Mr. Speaker.

PEI has nowhere near the revenue we have coming in from oil in our offshore, and here they are putting money into industry and putting money into farming with regard to energy efficiency. They have imagination. Where is the imagination in our Budget, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to covering energy efficiency? Do we have anything in there for industrial? I know industrial is not a big thing here in Newfoundland and Labrador but we do have industry; we do have industry that depends on energy. Do we see anything in our Budget with regard to agriculture? No, and we have a pittance, a mere pittance of $4 million towards retrofitting the residential sector, Mr. Speaker.

The same way with Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia's program covers everything from low-income users – and these might be people who have their housing subsidized – right through to people who own their own homes wanting to change the type of energy used in their home. Their program, Mr. Speaker, covers quite a gambit, way beyond what we cover. It also covers water conservation, as they do in Prince Edward Island. Getting into conserving water, getting into using water wisely is also something that is considered in the programs, in both PEI and Nova Scotia, Mr. Speaker.

What do we have? We have nothing in the industrial sector. What are we saying to the agricultural industry? What are we saying to the fishing industry? Nothing, we are leaving them on their own, Mr. Speaker; yet, we need to be building both of these areas. If we had a plan for the future, if this government was looking at the future and had a plan for diversifying our economy they would be finding ways to help these industries become more efficient in their use of energy so that they can employ more people, so that more money can be coming out of these industries. We have to build these industries for our future, Mr. Speaker, because we are so dependent right now on revenue that is coming from a non-renewable resource. These are the issues that I put forward, Mr. Speaker, and these are issues that people talk to me about.

I heard the Minister of ITRD talking about people talking to her about the Budget. Well, people speak to me about the Budget, too. These are the kinds of things they speak to me about: the things that we do not have in this Province; the things that our government does not seem to have a vision about, Mr. Speaker. A good, effective, energy efficiency program can help people live in their homes, and it can help industry, it can help agriculture, Mr. Speaker.

Let's look at the housing in particular, and housing in this year's Budget. Obviously, I was really quite disappointed in this year's Budget when it came to housing. First of all, Mr. Speaker, we see the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing budget decreasing by $3.5 million this year. At the same time, we see only four new public housing units, Mr. Speaker. I am really happy that Hopedale has their new units; $1.2 million, that is all that has gone into building new units this year, for four units in Hopedale, when we have a waiting list for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing in the St. John's area of about a thousand. You are not even putting money into new units in this area here, Mr. Speaker.

The other thing is that we do not have enough money going in for them to do the changes to the units that are here that they need to change. I do not know if the MHAs here drive down Empire Avenue or Anderson Avenue, what you see are units closed, and closed because NLH does not have enough money to do all the units at the same time. We also have some empty lots that have been created, at a time when we need more units, Mr. Speaker, at a time when we have people on a regular basis looking for affordable housing. Again, probably - well not only probably, I know it is the number one issue that we get calls on in our constituency office, Mr. Speaker. The number one issue is people with issues around housing. No place to live, or the place where they are is not adequate, or they are in a rental unit that they have to get out of because it is in such a sorry state and they have nowhere to go.

At a time, Mr. Speaker, when this Province enjoys so much money in oil royalties and the economy is booming, I have to ask the question, why have the number of housing units been reduced before new construction begins? Do not close down units; get these units fixed so that people can be in them and not walking by and seeing units closed up while they themselves do not have a place to live.

We also need, Mr. Speaker, a plan. I have been asking for this. We have to have a plan for housing and we need a department of housing. We need a unit that deals with affordable housing, Mr. Speaker. Even the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing and Homelessness Network has asked the government to take a stronger role in creating a housing division within government.

It is absolutely essential that we have policy with regard to housing, Mr. Speaker, and we do not have policy with regard to housing. We have Newfoundland and Labrador Housing which has its own mandate. Yet, as a government we do not have a vision and we do not have a policy. Vision comes from policy, policy comes from vision – the two things go together. When you see a government without even a department, without even a unit in government that is dealing with the housing issue, you have to say this government does not take the issue of lack of affordable housing seriously, Mr. Speaker. That is my major concern.

I see my time is up, Mr. Speaker. I will get a chance during Concurrence to speak again to some of these issues. What I want from this government, Mr. Speaker, is a plan with goals so that people have an idea that there is some hope out there because right now they have no hope with regard to the issues I have raised here this afternoon.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Lewisporte.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure for me to get up this afternoon to speak about the Budget. Budget 2011 Standing Strong: For Prosperity. For Our Future: for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians; that is what our Budget was about. There are many areas of the Budget that you could zero in on and this afternoon I want to spend the time I have allotted talking about the importance of fiscal responsibility.

What I see as the measures that we have taken as a government, not only in this past year, not only going forward but the measures that we have taken since we have taken office in 2003 in the areas of fiscal responsibility; the sound measures we have taken to ensure that we have had economic growth over the last number of years and to ensure that we have a bright and prosperous future. That is what I want to zero in on in the next fifteen or so minutes.

Mr. Speaker, there is a group called the Concord Coalition. It is an American based grassroots organization that is dedicated to connecting and working with the public. "The symbol of The Concord Coalition is an American minuteman, a patriot standing watch over a small child. This symbol reflects our belief that fiscal responsibility is as much of a moral duty as it is an economic concern."

"Fiscal responsibility is essential to creating a better, stronger, and more prosperous…" province or country "…for the next generation." We are not just looking at ourselves and our own children, but for the next generation, Mr. Speaker – our children's children. The choices we make today, or those that we fail to make, will determine what kind of future our children and our grandchildren will inherit in twenty, thirty, or forty years from now.

Our country's "economic future and fiscal responsibility are directly linked. There is a tie between budget deficits today and what society can enjoy tomorrow. Eliminating the deficit is an important first step." I use that quote and I use that little excerpt there because I think it parallels the path our government has taken over the past eight years. I believe that we have recognized the importance of being fiscally prudent, the importance of spending wisely, the importance of living within our means, the importance of planning for the future, the importance of paying down debt, and also the importance of allowing our citizens to be able to plan for their own future on an individual basis, while at the same time being able to enjoy a sensible standard of living.

As evidence of our sound fiscal management and policies, I do not think we need to look any further than the strides we have taken towards debt reduction. If you look at the charts of the way things were going prior to 2003 you could see deficits climbing year after year after year. When we took office you saw the surpluses climbing year over year over year as deficits came down. In seven of the last eight years, Mr. Speaker, we have been able to bring in Budgets in this Province that have been surplus Budgets; Budgets in which we have not had to borrow any money; Budgets that we did not have to add to our net debt.

The net debt is the total money that the Province owes on an ongoing basis whereas the deficit is just basically the money that you may owe on any given year following an annual Budget. In seven of the last eight years we have been able to have surplus Budgets. What that has allowed us to do, is that we had about a $12.1 billion debt and that debt right now has gone down to somewhere around $8 billion. Really, if you look at it, $12 billion down to about $8 billion – and I am using approximate figures here, not exact numbers – that is a reduction of about $4 billion in our net debt.

Mr. Speaker, if you take and try and bring that $4 billion which is a really large number down to a number that we can grasp; there are about 500,000 people in Newfoundland and Labrador give or take again for the purpose of round figures; $4 billion divided by 500,000 – that is a decrease of about $8,000 for every man, woman, child in this Province. We have been able to decrease that debt. A family of four means a $32,000 decrease in net debt. Mr. Speaker, that is an example of how we have turned this Province around, a Province that was growing in debt. A Province that was growing closer and closer and closer to bankruptcy and we have been able to turn that around and now we have been able to bring that debt down year over year over year all because of the sound fiscal policies that have been brought in to fruition through government since 2003 through our former Premier, Premier Williams, and through our current Premier who continues to build on that sound fiscal management.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a little bit about this Budget in particular. Last year, we projected a deficit of about $194 million. That is when we looked at last year, when we said we could have made a decision at that point in time to maybe slow down spending a bit, but we said no, we are not going to do that. There is still a lot of economic uncertainty in this country. While as a Province, we have been able to shield ourselves somewhat from that economic uncertainty and the volatility of the markets and everything, while we have been able to shield ourselves from that, and some people would advise that maybe then you would sort of slow down your spending, we said no we are not going to do that, we are going to ensure that this Province continues to grow. We are going to ensure that this Province continues to prosper. What we are going to do is we are going to continue to ramp up spending. We invested majorly in the different departments and infrastructure spending, in particular, spending in health and education and the social sector just to give our economy a boost. In doing that, we said we would run a deficit last year of $194 million.

As it turned out, the Province did so well and things came around and things happened even better than we had predicted, better than the Minister of Finance had predicted. Instead of having a $194 million deficit last year, when the figures came in we had a $485 million surplus. Mr. Speaker, that is almost a half a billion dollar surplus last year. Yes, oil royalties were a large part to play in it. Yes, the mining tax was up. Yes, corporate income tax was up. Yes, the personal income tax was higher. Why were corporate income taxes higher? I would argue it is because the businesses did better, they had a greater return. Why was the revenue that came in through personal income tax last year larger than we had anticipated? I would say it is because our people did better than we even expected. Our economy, as the Minister of Finance has been quoted as saying, has been sizzling. Our economy is doing well. More people are working. Employment numbers are higher, unemployment numbers are lower. Therefore, the revenues that we took in were higher.

There were economies, Mr. Speaker, over the last number of years that have been literally brought to their knees as a result of the global economic uncertainty, but this has not happened in Newfoundland and Labrador, and I believe it has not happened because of the budgetary principles, the sound fiscal management decisions that this government has made over the last seven and eight years to ensure that we continue to grow as a Province.

Mr. Speaker, I heard the Minister of Finance – I read an interview that he had given, and something that he said really stuck out in my mind. He said Newfoundland and Labrador is the only province that will not have to borrow this year to balance its books. Newfoundland and Labrador is the only province that will not have to borrow this year in order to balance its books. Folks, that is a source of pride. Folks, that is something to really, really be excited about. We are in a position that in Canada we are the only province that does not have to borrow in order to balance its books. A senior economist with Scotiabank, in talking about our Province and the decisions that we have made, in reference to the Budget, says Newfoundland and Labrador is one of only two provinces that are solidly in the black, the other being Saskatchewan. Mary Webb says while the net debt is forecasted to increase, the reason it is going to increase slightly this year is because of our investment in infrastructure spending.. The word that we get is that if you are investing in infrastructure, you are investing the future of your province, you are investing so that there is room for growth so that your citizens and companies can continue to grow because of your sound infrastructure that you have in place.

Mr. Speaker, again, we have seen countries collapse in the last number of years because of the global uncertainty. We have seen major manufacturers, like the auto companies and the forest industry, face tremendous challenges. Things over the last few years, from a global perspective, have not looked that good. Again, we have been able to isolate ourselves a little bit from that; not only a little bit from it, significantly from it because of the budgetary policies of this government.

The budgetary policies, I might say, that members opposite have condemned. As a matter of fact, members opposite have introduced not one but two resolutions to this Budget: one non-confidence motion and one a sub-amendment to it that basically tears strips off the Budget. They have not supported the Budget. They have not supported the sound budgetary decisions that this government has made. They have not supported the growth that we have made over the last number of years. Mr. Speaker, I find that actually kind of ironic because these are people who ask us time and time again to do things that will cause the Province to grow, to invest in infrastructure, to invest in the social sector, to invest in health, to invest in education, and we have done it. When we have done it, Mr. Speaker, they get up and they say we cannot vote for this Budget because it does not have there what we want. Well, go figure, Mr. Speaker.

I want to talk a little bit, Mr. Speaker, about some of the things that have happened more particularly in the last couple of years, since 2009-2010. Labour income has increased by 4.2 per cent. That is the second best performance of any province in the country. Our housing starts have been up. Retail sales, an indication of consumer confidence when people go out and spend more of their money; it went up by 2.6 per cent, the strongest performance in the country. We were the top in the country in terms of retail sales growth, only one of two provinces to show a positive retail sales growth.

In terms of personal income, how are people doing with personal income? Well again, when we talk about taxes and what we have done in the last number of years and the tax structure that we have introduced, in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador last year our personal income grew by 3.9 per cent; disposable income grew by 4.7 per cent. Why did it happen? It happened because people are making more money. It happened because the tax structure that we have introduced has enabled us to have one of the lowest personal income tax structures in the country, the lowest in Atlantic Canada.

Last year, Mr. Speaker, we predicted that the GDP would grow by 4 per cent. When the Minister of Finance brought in his Budget last year, we said the Gross Domestic Product would grow by 4 per cent. After all the numbers came in and when he brought in this year's Budget, he said it did not grow by 4 per cent last year. In actual fact, it grew by 5.6 per cent, Mr. Speaker. That is the highest in the country – the highest Gross Domestic Product in the country.

So, Mr. Speaker, a lot of things have happened that are good. A lot of things continue to happen that are good. Again, it comes from the sound fiscal decisions that we have been able to make in terms of budgeting and planning for the future.

I only have a couple of minutes left and there are a couple of things I want to allude to, in particular in the Budget, again in terms of my own district. We had an infusion of monies in the Budget in terms of Municipal Operating Grants. This year, we saw towns of less than 1,000 people have their Municipal Operating Grants increased by 50 per cent. What does that mean in terms of real dollars? Well, a small town like Baytona last year had an MOG of about $8,000. There are only about 275 or 300 people there. That increased from $8,000 to $12,000. That is $4,000 to a small town, Mr. Speaker, for them to operate. I am sure they are very pleased with it. If I look at a town like Embree, for example, just a town of 700 people, last year had an MOG of about $30,000, this year it is gone up to $45,000. To these small towns, that means a lot.

I have gone to pre-Budget consultations now several years following, and every year there I hear from towns all over Central Newfoundland, whether it is Grand Falls-Windsor, Lewisporte, Gander, or some of the other municipalities, the smaller ones. I have heard them ask the Minister of Finance for increases to the MOGs. It is nice to see this year that it is there. I am sure the municipalities are happy to see it is there.

There are many other things in the Budget. I really like the piece around firefighters, the investment in education, and the investment in child care. Again, being able to do all these things, being able to decrease people's light bills by 8 per cent, being able to take the tax off home heating and not only the heating fuel but the electricity or however you heat your home, being able to do all these things, being able to invest in poverty reduction, being able to keep the Home Repair Program and all of these wonderful, wonderful things, being able to do them and still forecast a surplus again this year of $59 million. Mr. Speaker, this government under this Premier is continuing to make very, very sound fiscal decisions that are not only good for where we are but also for where we are going.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an honour and a privilege again to be able to stand and speak to the main motion. The Member for Trinity North, I believe, reminded me that I was the last Opposition member to speak on the main motion. I spoke on the amendment and the sub-motion, as others have, and I count it a privilege to be able to stand this afternoon and share a few comments. I will say what else he said. He also said to say something sensible. I assure the minister that when I speak, everything I say is sensible. It might not be what he might agree with in terms of what he would like to hear, but the words in the next few minutes will certainly at least be sensible.

Mr. Speaker, the Budget that has been put forth by the government first of all, I would acknowledge that there obviously are good things in the Budget. For my district, we have lobbied for a number of months to have extra dialysis units put into the St. Anthony hospital. It is important to the constituents in my district, those who are here in St. John's who are receiving dialysis at this point in time from the city, others who know that they are going to require those services in months and probably the next year or two to come. To see that acknowledgement by government and the investment there to help create more units in St. Anthony is obviously a good thing.

There is investment for municipal infrastructure. Even though at this point we do not know where it is going, we do not know what districts are going to get it, but at some point or another the Minister of Municipal Affairs will put it out and we will understand exactly what that investment is going to be and who is going to benefit. I am assuming and certainly trusting the minister to be fair and appropriate in terms of the funding to the applications that are in from the District of The Straits & White Bay North; funding for road construction, the same. Again, the needs are great across the Province. We realize that it is never enough to meet the needs; yet again, when you look at the need in terms of what is necessary to be done and so on, then I am sure that I would trust the Minister of Transportation to be fair and equitable in terms of distributing the funds on behalf of the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the Member for Lewisporte as he was speaking there a moment ago, and I really have to respond to some things that he said. Basically, I believe, he used something like they have used sound fiscal policies to put this Province in a much better position than it was eight years ago when they took government. Mr. Speaker, I have been back living in St. Anthony in the District of The Straits & White Bay North and very active there for the past twelve years. I can assure you today in this House of Assembly that district and other districts around this Province that are really rural districts, in particular, are not better off today than they were eight years ago. I will say it again so that I am certain that I am being heard. These districts are not better off today than they were eight years ago. As a matter of fact, existence has become a real issue in a lot of these rural communities across Newfoundland and Labrador. Again, I am speaking particularly to my district and the efforts of the government of the day for the past eight years, having a minister in the Cabinet for six-and-one-half of those years; I want to assure you that we are not better off.

Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing today are things that we have seen years ago when people have to take to the roads, they have to demonstrate, they have to tie up traffic and so on just to see if the government is willing to put in a system whereby they can exist, a system whereby they know tomorrow there is going to be food on their table, a system whereby they can be sure that as the summer fishery unfolds - right on their doorsteps - they are going to have a meaningful gain from it. One, whereby they are going to be able to ensure that they receive their insurable earnings, each week they get a decent salary, that these salaries will go out over a period of time that will allow them to take advantage of the Employment Insurance program that they have paid into over the years, that has been a way of life for them, that has allowed them to be sustained for decades and decades in the past, and surely into the future.

Mr. Speaker, rural Newfoundland is not better off. I listened to the Minister of ITRD as she spoke. I have spoken several times on broadband in this House in terms of presenting petitions, mostly for the St. Barbe district - actually, for my friend, the member there, from his constituents. Yet, every time I speak, it seems like it touches a soft spot with the government, a nervous spot, if you will.

Mr. Speaker, one of the key things today to show whether we are progressing, whether we are regressing, or whether we are better off is the access to communication. Mr. Speaker, communication today is just so vitally important. We take a lot of things for granted in the urban centres of our Province. I spend four or five days in here when the House is open, as do all of the hon. members. It is so nice to go to your office in the morning, pick up your copy of The Telegram that was just printed two or three hours prior to you arriving. You get the news from the evening and you get the events of the day. You get your weekender that you can go through all of these things. Mr. Speaker, that is not available in rural Newfoundland. Again, I am talking about my district. It is not carried there.

Those who want to be in tune with the news, Mr. Speaker, when they get up in the morning they do not go to the local corner store and pick up their copy of The Telegram and they do not go to their little yellow basket or whatever that is on the pole in the driveway, that kind of thing, and pull out their newspaper. What they do is go on-line. Mr. Speaker, it is a great service. They go on-line and they read their papers basically the same as if they were reading the hard copy of the paper that you and I would be reading here this morning.

Mr. Speaker, probably 20 per cent, 30 per cent, or more of the towns in The Straits & White Bay North cannot go on-line and read the newspaper because they are using a dial-up system. Mr. Speaker, it is very unfortunate that that is where it is, but it is where it is. We want to toss it back at the federal government. We want to say that it is their responsibility and so on. We want to brag about the little bit of money we put into it. Still, Mr. Speaker, the problem remains the same. While we see piecemeal investment from year to year in different programs like broadband, it really has not corrected the problem. If it continues to have the attention it has and the investment it is getting today, Mr. Speaker, I suggest it is going to be a lot of years, way past 2015 I would suggest, before we see it all in place.

The other big issue in terms of communication in rural Newfoundland and along the Northern Peninsula is cell phones. For example, I live in St. Anthony, the biggest community on the Northern Peninsula, when I leave St. Anthony and I am two kilometres away from a town, I lose my cell phone service.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, you do not have that availability.

Now, the minister is asking me, Mr. Speaker, when I was in Conche on Saturday and got a flat tire: Did I use a cell phone? No, Mr. Speaker, the people of Conche do not have the privilege of being able to use a cell phone. It is one of the worst pieces of road in this Province. It is one of the most isolated roads you can travel. It is a terrible road to drive.

Mr. Speaker, when you leave Roddickton and you get about three, four kilometres out past that turn, there is no cell phone coverage, I can assure you. If the hon. member would like to go up just to be certain, I would not mind taking him down there someday, and probably he could help me change the two flat tires that I had on Saturday trying to go to a graduation like he did in his own district, as well.

Mr. Speaker, those are things that are not all that important to some people in this House of Assembly –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DEAN: – but I can assure you that it is important here, and it is important to me, as the member for the area, and those are things that I will continue to put forward.

Mr. Speaker, communication is one thing, but transportation as a whole. I mentioned the road in Conche, it is deplorable. You look at the road in Croque, you look at places like Boat Harbour, you look at the road that connects the 430 across country, for example, it is not fit to drive on, Mr. Speaker. It is driven by hundreds every day. It is one of the worst roads in this Province, and they have had eight years to do something with it. We are hoping something might take place this year.

If you go down to Flower's Cove, Mr. Speaker, you are driving on one of the worst roads. As the saying goes, it would make you seasick to drive over ten or twelve kilometres of road. Today, to be able to stand in the House of Assembly and brag about how good things are, and to brag about all we have done, and brag about all we are going to do and so on, Mr. Speaker, and we have those kinds of situations in the rural parts of our Province, I think is very, very unfortunate.

I heard the Member for Lewisporte talk about the good, prudent fiscal responsibility that his government has shown, and I believe he mentioned sound net debt reduction. Mr. Speaker, I have a copy of the Budget, as does each member, and I cannot find sound net debt reduction in that Budget. As a matter of fact, what I do see is that including this year, for the past four years, there is actually net debt increase. If you go back over a period of twelve years, the Province today owes more net debt than it did twelve years ago. Now, granted, it may be a better percentage in terms of its comparison to GDP, but the net debt has not improved. Again, this year, we are suggesting that the net debt will increase. When we talk about being financially prudent, when we talk about having good fiscal restraints and so on, Mr. Speaker, you would expect to see your debt going down at those same kinds of times.

Mr. Speaker, the important industry, and I am the critic for it, and I asked to be the critic when I was elected to the House of Assembly because of the importance to my district. That crucial industry is the fishery. Mr. Speaker, every day we bring the issues here and I have watched the change in the fishery, as I am sure many of the members here today have watched. I know what it is like to have been out in a fishing boat back twenty-five years ago, when there was an abundance of codfish and we just took it all for granted, and we did well, we lived well and so on. We realize what has happened with that and where it is since the moratorium.

Mr. Speaker, the responsibility of government is to decide what is going to be the future of those communities. When you go into a community such as Englee, as this government did five years ago, and close down the fish operation that was there, take away the licence, take it and move it somewhere else, and today, that fish plant still remains in shambles. It is abandoned, it is rundown, it is a hazard, it is an eyesore; it is demoralizing to the community. Mr. Speaker, this government really does not have a plan. Again, in this Budget, it is very sad to see that it was not there. There is no intention to really decide that this is a responsibility of this government to go in and to tear it down, to try and revitalize the land, to give them an opportunity to diversify that and look for a way into their future.

Mr. Speaker, when I look at things like that, that does not tell me that it is good, prudent planning, that it is fiscally responsible governance when we do those kinds of things. One of the main issues right now that we are seeing is the shrimp fishery. We are having protests. I passed through yesterday, and two RCMP cars were stopped, one going in each direction that were stopped, and there were two ladies standing in the middle of the road. They were stopping all the traffic coming each way and they were asking for signatures on a petition to reinstate the shrimp fishing cap on the Northern Peninsula of Newfoundland. Now, Mr. Speaker, they are not out there because they enjoy being out on a Sunday afternoon in the rain, when it is about one or two degrees.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is having some difficulty hearing the hon. member recognized to speak.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am having trouble hearing myself, too, to be honest. I usually sit back and listen to other people speak, and I would think it is not too much to ask the same respect when I am speaking.

Mr. Speaker, this cap was put in place by a previous government at a time when they recognized there needed to be some control, in terms of the resource, in terms of adjacency, that those in the regions around the Province deserve the first opportunity to make a living from the resource that they were bringing ashore. Mr. Speaker, the decision was to implement a cap. Basically, to allow - and I do not know the numbers, although I certainly can find them out. It does not really matter I guess at this point, but the principle of the issue was that the four or five fish plants that were in a particular region, or one fish plant or two fish plants, depending on the region around the Province, would have the opportunity to make a living in their own region, from their own resource.

Mr. Speaker, when the debate began in 2006 on the RMS, the Raw Material Sharing plan, a proposal that was put forth at the time, that cap was lifted. Since then, the Northern Peninsula fish plants, the shrimp plants in particular, have suffered because of the cap being lifted. The restriction is no longer there, so instead of 100 million pounds of shrimp, or 50 million pounds, or whatever the numbers might be, being shipped off the Northern Peninsula, it is probably double. Mr. Speaker, our Minister of Fisheries does not even know what the numbers are. I have asked him, and he really does not have any idea.

So, the difference of it being off and on is like night and day. I passed a couple of fish plants this weekend when I was home in my district, and it was so good to go and see that everyone is at work. They were getting more shrimp because of the focus that was brought to this issue, and that is all they are asking for. They are not asking for someone else's industry. They are not asking to be able to participate in the oil industry that is on the Avalon, to bring some of that North. No, all they are asking is that the resource that is there, that has fed them and their families, and has provided a living for them for a number of centuries, that somehow, this government put in place a mechanism that allows them to participate in it in the future. Mr. Speaker, I do not think that is a bad thing, by any means, any stretch of the imagination.

We have had the opportunity to have our Estimates meetings in the past two weeks here in the House of Assembly in the morning before the House opens, or in the evening after the House is closed, and to be able to bring in the minister from certain departments and his or her staff, and really go through the numbers for last year, and the Estimates for this year, and kind of probe and understand and just dive into the details of a particular department.

Mr. Speaker, one of the departments that I did this week was the Department of Education. There are a lot of good things going on in the Department of Education, I would suggest, Mr. Speaker. A lot of good programming, a lot of good changes have been made that I would commend the minister and her staff for what has been taking place.

Mr. Speaker, at the same time, as I was getting ready for Estimates meetings, and doing some financial analysis of my own, in terms of the numbers of the Budget, because it is one of the larger departments for this government today – we are spending $1.3 billion on education, and we know that we have basically flattened, in terms of enrolment. There may be a little spike here or there, but for all intents and purposes, we certainly are nowhere near where we were ten or fifteen years ago or so.

What was interesting to see was the way that some of these budgets have ballooned. Some of them for good reason, I am sure, but I would question whether it is all for a good reason, whether it is really prudent fiscal management of the monies of our government and so on. One of the things that I found a little glaring and I wondered about was the school board operations budget. As we understand, the school boards are the same numbers they were six or seven years ago; basically offering school services, education services to the same number of students as they did six or seven years ago, Mr. Speaker. Yet, what we find in the Estimates is that in 2004, the school board operations budget was $138 million, and the Estimate going forward in 2011, is $191 million. Mr. Speaker, that is $53 million more for the school boards of this Province to do their job, in terms of administering the education programs throughout the Province, as they would have done six years ago.

If you put that in percentages, it is approximately 42 per cent, somewhere in that range, of the increased cost of school boards in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to get into the details of that, but I would suggest if we are looking for areas where our costs seem to have really escalated, and thus not allowing us to pay down our net debt, that in our larger departments, Mr. Speaker, there would be a lot of lines, if you will, in our Estimates that may be participating in causing that.

Student testing in Education, Mr. Speaker; in 2004 we spent $700,000 in salaries – we are talking about – in student testing and evaluation. This year, we are spending $1.4 million. So I do not know how the evaluation and testing process has changed, but what it does tell us is that in order to do the same job we were doing then, with the same number of students, Mr. Speaker, that we have had to increase our salaries 100 per cent.

Mr. Speaker, I looked at the Centre for Distance Learning and Innovation, and again I see that in 2004, salaries there were $280,000 in that particular part of the department. The salaries for this year will be $676,000. Again, nearly $400,000 more, about 40 per cent or so more than what it was before. Mr. Speaker, while it is good to see more people working in the civil service – we all want to see that – but it is not about creating more jobs, it is about delivery of programs. If it is the same program, if you have 10,000 students ten years ago, I am not sure why we would need to double our salaries to offer pieces of education to 10,000 students, ten years later. I am not talking about student tuitions, Mr. Speaker, I am not talking about programming; I am talking about salaries within particular parts of a department.

So, Mr. Speaker, there is plenty in the Budget. When you have $8 billion to spend, there is no trouble to spend money, but you are not always being overly prudent with the funds, as the Member for Lewisporte would have suggested. The ministers do not like to hear this, Mr. Speaker, but that is the reality of where it is, and they are responsible for it, they are their departments, and the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador expect us, as House of Assembly members, them, as government and as ministers, to ensure that the monies are spent on the best things, that they are spent in the best interests of the people. Mr. Speaker, today I would suggest that more than being prudent in spending, we can find lots of examples where it is not.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the privilege to be able to stand. My time is gone, and I will take my seat. Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for the District of Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for the applause.

It is indeed a privilege to get up today to represent the beautiful District of Cape St. Francis. Mr. Speaker, this is the time when an MHA like myself finally gets up to say a few words and can speak on the Budget, and we can speak on a broad array of different things that we want to bring up as a member of the House of Assembly.

First of all, Mr. Speaker, I never did have the opportunity to welcome the newest member to the House, and I am going to do that today – the hon. Member for Humber West. He has been up a few times in the House here, and I tell you, Hansard has no problem communicating what he has to say, because there is no need of a speaker or anything with him. He does a fantastic job, and I am sure that the residents and the District of Humber West will be very proud of the work that he will do for their district.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, it is also the first time that I have had the opportunity to say a few words, and to say how proud I am to be part of history. The part of history that I speak about is to be part of the first female Premier of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, a lot of people in my district, you go to different events, and the very first thing they ask you, so how is it going with the new Premier, and how do you compare Premier Williams to the new Premier that we have. I always tell them it is like we are a team – and I played a lot of hockey over the years, and had the opportunity to play on a lot of winning teams. Teams that won four Herders, and by winning four Herders, I had three different captains. So, Mr. Speaker, their roles are a little different, their ways of doing things are a little different, but the idea they have is the same. What they are looking for is the best that we can do as a team for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and for all of its residents. Like again, I say I am very, very proud to be part of the team that this Premier leads here today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, this session started with a Throne Speech. Usually what happens in the Throne Speech, we usually get a good overview on where government wants to go to, where the vision is for government, how we see things in the future, and what we want for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the very first part that was in this year's Throne Speech, the first headline, was: The Power to Grow. That is what I want to just touch on a little bit first before I really get into my Budget speech. The Power to Grow, we were talking about the Muskrat Falls proposal. This is the most attractive energy project in North America. Mr. Speaker, it is 98 per cent carbon free.

We have a generating station in Holyrood, some estimates are that it produces 10 per cent of our electricity, some years you look and, I think, it was up to 23 per cent or 24 per cent of the needs of the Province that came out of Holyrood. Now, we look at that plant that we do have in Holyrood and oil is how it has generated its power. The price of oil affects the cost of Holyrood. So today, we look at oil prices all over the world, they are up, they are down, and they are everywhere. I think if Gaddafi sneezes, the price of oil will go up. So, there are so many different factors in the price of oil. What we need to do is to someway stabilize those rates.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we look at Holyrood, and we have been told by Nalcor that scrubbers and precipitators will need to be replaced at a cost of approximately $600 million to $800 million. We are also told that facility, eventually, is going to need to be replaced at a cost of $3.2 million. Mr. Speaker, if we look at Holyrood, we look at the cost of maintaining what we have in Holyrood, we look at the cost of oil, the rising cost of oil, which has an effect on the rates, so we have no way of stabilizing or keeping a fixed rate for the electricity payers of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I look at Muskrat Falls and I look at it as our future. I look at it as a future that we need to do today, we need to invest in today for our children and our grandchildren - and someday, please God, I will have grandchildren.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Not too soon now, mind you. There is no rush for it, to tell you the truth, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, today, we look at most of the revenues that we have here in our Province and we are doing fairly well, this Province is doing really well, but most of our revenues are based on the price of oil and oil is a good thing, in some cases, when it does go up because we generate more revenue for our Province.

Mr. Speaker, we need to change that a little bit. That is a non-renewal resource, so we need to be focused on our renewal resources, and Muskrat Falls is a part of the renewal resources, Mr. Speaker. That is a river that will flow forever. It is money and it is good, clean electricity that will be supplied to everyone in this Province for years to come.

I look at the fiscal and economic importance of Muskrat Falls. As you know, like I just said, we could be a warehouse in the future for hydro projects. We have Muskrat Falls, we have Gull Island, and in 2041 we will have the Upper Churchill back. Mr. Speaker, we are the envy of the rest of Canada basically with what we can do with hydro. Hydro again is a resource that we can use and can keep our Province going, with the prosperity that we have here today, for years and years to come. We hope sometime that we do find more oil reserves out there off the Grand Banks. We hope we find more oil reserves off Labrador, but in case we do not, we need to build our economy so that hydro becomes a very important part of our economy, so that we have a resource that will flow money to the Province for years and years to come.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, when you look at Muskrat Falls, just look at some of the figures there, not only is it important for our children and not only important for our grandchildren but if you look at the person years of work, 8,600 direct person years of employment. That is what that is going to generate, and 5,400 of that is going to be in Labrador. The people of Labrador obviously, in the recent federal election, they spoke and they told the people: Listen, we want this project and it is a great project for Labrador.

It is going to benefit this Province. It is going to benefit all of the different industries all over Newfoundland. It is also going to benefit companies in Ontario, companies in Quebec, companies in New Brunswick, companies all over Atlantic Canada. Mr. Speaker, you can see that Muskrat Falls is very important for everyone.

Mr. Speaker, every day we come here to the House - and I am sure the Premier must have a little button along side of her because she is asked always the same question day after day after day after day, and she gives the same answers about the great benefits of Muskrat Falls. The reason we are doing Muskrat Falls is simple. We are doing Muskrat Falls so that our energy rates right now - the hon. Minister of Natural Resources explained today that our rates are going up and up and up and up. The reason we are doing Muskrat Falls is to stabilize our rates.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: To stabilize so the future will be that these rates will not be going up 5 per cent or 6 per cent. This will stabilize it so it goes up less than 1 per cent per year. Mr. Speaker, we are doing Muskrat Falls because we want to clean up Holyrood. We want to clean up what we have out in Holyrood to make sure that we have the cleanest electricity in the world, carbon free. Mr. Speaker, we are doing Muskrat Falls because it is going to produce jobs for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

If you look at the financial part of this, the Province will get $1.4 billion in income on this project.

I listened to the Minister of Finance the other day. My mother and father always watch the House, and when I went home they said he did some job the other day; he explained it so well. I just want to touch on a few things that he talked about the other day. He talked about the need to stabilize the rates, but then he also talked about how it will benefit the Province in order to attract industry to Labrador. If there is a smelter or whatever, we will have enough power there so that we can be attractive - whether they want to put a smelter in Brazil or they can put it in Labrador, we will be attractive enough that Labrador will be an attractive place to do industry; not only in Labrador, also for the Province.

Mr. Speaker, he also spoke about the surplus power that we have that we do not use in our own Province. He spoke about we can let the water flow out the river or we can take that water and we can put it on the link that Emera are building for $1.2 billion. The Opposition just cannot get that at all because they do not say they are getting it for nothing but they are investing $1.2 billion. What that does, Mr. Speaker, is open up markets. It will open up markets in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, PEI. The transmission lines are there. We can explore it. We have use of their transmission lines and that is why Emera are investing and that is why it is good investment for this Province.

Mr. Speaker, the last note I am going to say about Muskrat Falls is that Muskrat Falls is for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. It is to benefit all of the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a little bit about the Budget. This year's Budget was probably one of the best Budgets this Province has ever seen. We look around the world, if you look and listen to CNN and you listen to all of the newscasts all over the world, they talk about the economy. This weekend they were talking about the economy in Ireland, Spain, and Germany and how they are not bouncing back like they should. We look at the economy in the US where foreclosures are still a major problem down there with the housing. Then, we look at the rest of Canada. Canada is doing okay. Canada's economy is coming along, but the number one province in all of Canada is Newfoundland and Labrador. We are doing great.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Our GDP grew last year by 5.6 per cent, Mr. Speaker, the highest in all of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, investment in this Province last year went to $6.5 billion. Mr. Speaker, you talk about diversifying the economy and making investments, and one of the big investments this government has made is in tourism. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Tourism is doing such a fantastic job. I look at his slate and he is all over the place. Tourism is such a huge industry in this Province and it is a way that we will diversify our economy.

If you look all over the world, like I said, the economy is down in most places. Last year, we had 518,500 non-residential visitors to this Province. Mr. Speaker, that put $800 million into our economy – $800 million.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, it employed some 14,000 people.

If you listen to the news you hear talk of Stephenville airport, Deer Lake airport, Gander, and everyone, they are all saying we are up; everything is up in the airport. I am sure it is the same thing down in Labrador. In Goose Bay everything is up. That is because people are coming here to visit because they love the beautiful area that we all live in. They love rural Newfoundland. They love St. John's.

A lot of my friends watch the Republic of Doyle. The investment this government has made in the Republic of Doyle is unbelievable because the return we are getting from that alone is millions and millions of dollars, to invest a few million dollars. The one thing they notice is how beautiful Newfoundland and Labrador really is.

Mr. Speaker, people in our Province are spending money. Retail sales last year grew 3.7 per cent to $7.4 billion. Mr. Speaker, the people here are buying cars, they are buying trucks, they are investing in their homes, and they are buying new homes. It is huge how much confidence the people of Newfoundland and Labrador have in what we are doing here as a government.

Mr. Speaker, housing starts last year were up 18 per cent. That is the highest in thirty years. Mr. Speaker, in my district, the Town of Bauline, which is the smallest town in my district, in the last five years has grown by 25 per cent. The Town of Torbay is the second fastest growing town in the Province. Mr. Speaker, the towns of Logy Bay, Middle Cove, and Flat Rock are all seeing great growth. That is great for the towns because that is how they get their taxes.

Mr. Speaker, if you look at the Budget this year there is another surplus. We forecasted that there might have been a deficit, but this year is the fifth in six years. Mr. Speaker, we talk about paying down our debt. We know how important it is to pay down the debt. Since 2004-2005, we have paid down 31 per cent of our debt. Mr. Speaker, in paying down our debt we are also investing in our future, in spending on schools, hospitals, you name it. We are spending money on rural Newfoundland and urban Newfoundland. We are spending money all over this Province.

Mr. Speaker, some of the highlights of this year's Budget, when you look at it, is the residential energy rebate of 8 per cent. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is so important because that is going to put 8 per cent of normally what the HST is back in everyone's pocket. The big thing about it all, it is everyone. It does not make any difference who it is, everybody is going to get benefit from this and that is very important.

Mr. Speaker, the other tax credit that I really wanted to talk a little bit about today is the tax credit for the volunteer fire departments. Mr. Speaker, that is huge because as we all know through Igor and any other things that happened in our towns, that the fire departments are the number one people who will come out and do support. They handle it; they are there twenty-four seven. I am very proud to be part of this government that is showing them that we appreciate what they do. Like I said, they are there day and night. It does not make any difference what it is. Any events in the town, they are usually the people who are involved in it. So it is very good that this government is investing in our firefighters.

Mr. Speaker, infrastructure spending, this year again, $1 billion. That is $5 billion over the last five years. Mr. Speaker, that is how our economy is growing, that is how we are keeping the economy growing, and we are making great investments through infrastructure.

Mr. Speaker, I look at investments like Torbay road bypass, and this year I am hoping that the road will be open. I am almost there now to say we are almost sure, but it is a great investment that this government is making. Also, while I have a chance, I would like to thank the people for their patience because I know with construction zones in different areas, that there are delays. The people in my area are very patient people and I really thank them for their patience. They can go down around a different route but most of them are there and they have been very, very patient.

Mr. Speaker, the Team Gushue Highway is another huge investment we are making this year. That will link the east to the west part of St. John's, which is huge for different areas. Mr. Speaker, we are making investments in bridges.

Mr. Speaker, I happened to listen to Open Line this morning and a lady from St. Brendan's happened to call in. What she had to say about the Minister of Transportation was something else, Mr. Speaker. I have to mention the member too, but the Minister of Transportation, she thought he was a fantastic guy, that he was a great guy. He came out last weekend to a celebration they had for their new ferry. She also said she had the best MHA in the Province in the Member for Terra Nova. So, Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of happy people in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, another part of this Budget which is huge investments that we are making is in health care. Last year I was looking at the news releases going through and I said that the Minister of Health, every weekend it seemed like he was off to one of the hospitals making investments, whether it was CAT scans or dialysis machines and whatnot in our local hospitals. I think that with $2.9 billion investments our hospitals are doing really well. We are trying to supply the best health care that we can to our Province. This is 40 per cent of our Budget.

Mr. Speaker, there are some great investments in health care; improvements for mental health and addictions. This year the minister announced some extra enhanced improvements for autism and great investments that we are making there. Mr. Speaker, $3.1 million for dialysis enhancements to Burin, St. John's, Stephenville, St. Anthony, Labrador City and Harbour Breton. Mr. Speaker, these are great investments. There are six new drugs being added to the drug program.

Mr. Speaker, we are also making huge investments in education. Education is the key to everything because the investment we are making is in children. Mr. Speaker, children are the future of our Province. This year we are making $4.1 billion on infrastructure spending in the Department of Education. We have fourteen new schools that have either been built or are being built and, Mr. Speaker, that is huge. That is where we have to spend our money; we have to spend our money to make sure that we do have the best schooling anywhere in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I look at my own district and we just opened a new school at Holy Trinity. How proud I was to be down there that day when we did the opening ceremonies to see the children and the teachers and the people in the area; how proud they were to walk into the state-of-the-art school that they did. What a beautiful school, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have one more little thing I would like to talk about here in our Budget – the Municipal Operating Grants that were given to our towns. I am very happy, I know I spoke to several mayors in my district and they are extremely pleased with the extra investments that are being made by Municipal Affairs in their towns. I would like to thank the minister and they told me to make sure that I do thank the minister for them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I am going to clue up with a little story. Mr. Speaker, I have neighbours who are fantastic people, two of the greatest people I have ever met to tell you the truth. They babysit my two children, took them from infants right on through and I could not ask for two better people to have than them.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman now is seventy-two-years-old. He was a bricklayer all of his life, worked very, very hard. Many years he had to work through – as you know bricklayers are outside – conditions with the weather like it is and through hard times. Sometimes, a lot of years he was concerned about the number of hours he could get to make sure that he had unemployment and whatnot but he worked very, very hard over the years and he always provided well for his family.

Mr. Speaker, he came along and at the time Bull Arm came along. The Hibernia project came along and he got a secure job and got to work in Bull Arm. What Bull Arm did for him was unbelievable. It gave him some security and he started to make investments, Mr. Speaker. He invested in his house. He did his roof, he put windows, siding, and he replaced different things inside of his house. He paved his driveway. He built a new shed out back, a nice big shed with a fridge in it and everything else. He kept going and they were great investments. He bought a new car.

Mr. Speaker, I am getting to my point. Mr. Speaker, he made investments when times were good for his future. He made investments for his future and that is the same thing we are doing here as a government. We are making investments today. We are spending on our schools, we are spending on our hospitals, and we are spending on our roads because we want a better future. He is living very comfortable in his house today because of the investments he made in his future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Before I give a motion to adjourn, I would just like to remind the hon. members that at 6:00 p.m. we will be having the Social Services Committee meet in the House to review the Estimates for the Department of Justice and Attorney General, and tomorrow, Mr. Speaker, at 9:00 a.m. the Social Services Committee will meet in the House to review the Estimates of the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, the Status of Persons with Disabilities, Labour Relations Agency, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, and Youth Engagement.

Mr. Speaker, with that I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, that this House do now adjourn.

MR. SPEAKER: It is 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 Tuesday.

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