June 18, 1996 HOUSE

OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol .

XLIII No. 31

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Before we begin the routine proceedings, the Chair would like

to welcome, on behalf of all members, fifty Grade V students from St. Peter's

Elementary in the district of Port de Grave, accompanied by their teachers, Mr.

Winston Lynch, David White, Ms. Debbie Williams, and Ms. Marguerite Mercer,

Vice-Principal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: As well, I would like to welcome to the

House today Mr. Clayton Ledrew, the Mayor of Summerford.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to inform hon. members that government has

reached an agreement with the Salvation Army for the purchase of the Grace

Hospital properties. The purchase price for the acquisition of properties is

$4.765 million, payable over the next six years at an interest rate of 9.38 per

cent.

This agreement was negotiated over the past year and reflects

principles similar to the agreement signed between government and the sisters of

Mercy for the purchase of the St. Clare's properties. Under the agreement,

government will reimburse the Salvation Army for buildings and lands as well as

cash contributions to the Grace Hospital.

The presence of the Salvation Army will continue while the

Grace Hospital remains in operation. In addition, two board members nominated by

the Salvation Army will continue to serve on the board of the Health Care

Corporation of St. John's. The Salvation Army will play a key role in ethical

issues through the Health Council, which will continue to advise the Health Care

Corporation Board on such matters.

While services at the Grace Hospital will be transferred to

other sites, the Health Care Corporation plans to operate ambulatory clinics at

the existing nurses' residence.

The acquisition of both the Grace and St. Clare's properties

was necessary in view of the new board structure. Now that ownership of all

properties rests with government, restructuring in the St. John's area can move

forward.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to pay

tribute to the service provided by the Salvation Army to the people of this

Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: The Salvation Army's commitment to the

provision of quality health care is greatly appreciated by government and by all

of the citizens of the Province. As Minister of Health, I look forward to the

continued presence of the Salvation Army in the context of the overall health

and social sectors.

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am glad today to rise in response to the minister's

statement. It is certainly good news to see that finally this part of the Grace

Hospital has come to conclusion. I guess over the next while we will certainly

be looking to the minister to find out exactly what we are now going to do with

this building and, of course, we are very, very anxiously awaiting the

minister's plan for the overall health care of the people in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, and especially now as it relates to the closure of

the Grace Hospital.

As well, Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House would like

to join with the minister in congratulating and thanking the Salvation Army in

Newfoundland and Labrador for not only their work in the hospital industry for

years, and years, and years, but for their involvement in all phases of

community life in our Province. We certainly join with the minister today in

congratulating and thanking the Salvation Army and we look forward to their

continued good work in our Province for many years to come.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Vidi.

Does he have leave?

By leave.

MR. HARRIS: I would like to just briefly respond to the

statement by joining in thanking the Salvation Army for its work over many years

in providing medical services in the Province through the Grace Hospital.

Obviously, this is part of a large plan which we hope will improve health care

in the Province and not see it deteriorate, and we will be watching carefully to

see what further plans the minister has.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the hon. Minister of

Tourism, Culture and Recreation who is on her way with the Premier opening up

another project, and who expects to be here shortly, I would like to give the

following Ministerial Statement.

I rise today to advise the hon. members that the three

outstanding projects from the federal-provincial agreement on Gros Morne

National Park will be actioned. The projects, totalling more than $5 million,

include: cross-country ski trails; Trout River campground upgrade; and (most

significantly) the construction of a Discovery Centre for Gros Morne National

Park.

Mr. Speaker, Gros Morne National Park is a key tourism

generator for the Province and a cornerstone of the Viking Trail and Labrador

Straits tourism initiatives. The Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation

has been working closely with Canadian Heritage on the Discovery Centre project,

a project which will improve the region's overall tourism potential. The

proposed facility will have interpretative, educational and scientific

capabilities, and outreach potential that will have both national and

international appeal.

Mr. Speaker, the federal and provincial governments have made

significant individual and collaborative investments in developing the West

Coast into a quality tourism destination. This project is indicative of a highly

successful partnership between Parks Canada, the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador, Memorial University, Sir Wilfred Grenfell College, West Viking

College, the Centre for Forest and Environmental Studies, Gros Morne

Co-operating Association, Joint Council of Bonne Bay South, and five West

Coast/Northern Peninsula school boards.

Mr. Speaker, Gros Morne National Park became Canada's tenth

World Heritage Site in 1987, and the nomination was based on the park's

geological wealth, its spectacular glacier-carved scenery, its Arctic and boreal

fauna, its amazing floristic diversity, and its 4,500-year history of human

habitation. The aforementioned projects are being funded by the Government of

Canada with non-financial support being provided by the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, we received today good news on behalf of the tourism

department. It is good to see that the present Provincial Government are putting

such effort into developing tourism within our Province as this will be a key

industry in the Province over the next number of years and, I am sure, into the

new millennium.

The development of the cross-country ski trails, Trout River

campground upgrade and the construction of the Discovery Centre announced for

Gros Morne Park is indeed good news and I applaud the government on behalf of

their efforts.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Vidi. Does he have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a very welcome announcement, the improvements to Gros

Morne Park, and the new Discovery Centre really assists in making Gros Morne

Park more of a great tourist site than it has been before. It is, Mr. Speaker, I

think, one of the great wonders of Canada and perhaps one of the biggest, best

kept secrets, as it were, throughout the Province. When I visited there a couple

of years ago, people from across Canada who were there, were amazed at what they

saw and amazed how little people in the rest of Canada knew about it. One hopes

that the improvement of facilities there will make it better known and an even

more attractive destination for travellers from both inside and outside of

Newfoundland.

MR. SPEAKER: Before we get to Oral Questions, I would

like to acknowledge the presence of a former member of the House of Assembly,

the former Member for Torngat Mountains in the person of Mr. William Andersen

III.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Minister of Health.

Will the minister confirm that because of a shortage of rooms

and beds in our hospitals, people admitted to hospital for treatment are forced

to spend long periods of time on stretchers in Emergency or in hospital

corridors waiting for a room or a bed?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

No, I cannot confirm that that is in fact happening in any

and/or all of our facilities. I do know, however, that from time to time on a

temporary basis, when people come in on an emergency basis or while they are

waiting for patients to move in and out of rooms, that situation might occur,

but it has not been brought to my attention by any of the health care boards, by

any physicians or by anybody else, including the general public, that this is a

problem in any of our institutions. To the contrary, I would suggest it is not.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: What does the minister say to the family of

a man who was rushed to St. Clare's Emergency at six o'clock on Friday evening

with a serious condition, was admitted to hospital for treatment by the doctor

who saw him, was forced to wait on a stretcher in Emergency from Friday night

until early Sunday morning before being moved to the surgical day care unit to

wait until Sunday afternoon, when he was finally able to get a bed, later on

Sunday?

Now, several others were in Emergency awaiting beds at the

same time. I ask the minister: What does he have to say about a patient with a

serious condition demanding treatment, having to wait for two days after being

admitted to hospital before being able to get a bed?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, if there is one person in the

Province who sees a doctor, goes to a hospital or otherwise seeks health care

services and he, for some reason, is not or cannot be attended to in the most

expeditious manner, government regrets that. It is not government's intention to

see anybody to be unduly or negatively impacted upon in terms of health care

services by any circumstance in any part of our health care system.

If the hon. member is prepared and wishes me to specifically

investigate or check out a specific situation which, heretofore, I have not been

made aware of, I will be most pleased to do that in the interest of his

particular concern, but more importantly, in the interest of the health care

concerns of all of the people of the Province.

We intend, we are committed to and we have every intention of

delivering the highest quality of health care in the most expeditious manner at

the most appropriate point of delivery and in the most cost-effective manner and

I think, the decisions of this year's Budget clearly indicates the commitment of

this government to health care on the highest priority basis, and in the most

quality-conscious and safest health-care-conscious manner.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I inform the minister that the patient to whom I referred

finally had his diagnostic surgery on Monday, was given the drug Valium prior to

surgery, was returned to his room on Monday afternoon.

What would the minister say to this man's daughter who was

driving down LeMarchant Road last night on the way to the hospital with a

friend, when she spotted her father in pyjamas and slippers walking down the

sidewalk by Caul's Funeral Home, I say to the minister.

Now, how dare the minister tell people like that, and this

man's daughter, that government cutbacks are not having any effect or minimal

impact on staffing levels and patient care and attention at our hospitals.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, health care, illnesses,

sickness, all of these sorts of things do cause stress on individuals. It is not

the intention of this government, and I don't think it is the intention of the

hon. member, to highlight a situation or a circumstance that might be

inappropriate.

The member indicated that the man apparently received good

health care on Monday, had procedures administered to him, was appropriately

being administered to, and then in the same statement says that the man was seen

walking down LeMarchant Road in his pyjamas. I'm not sure what the connection

is, the one between the other. I would suggest this: That the health care

services of the Province are not responsible for people doing inappropriate

things on an unauthorized basis. If, for some reason, somebody leaves the

facility on an unauthorized basis - that does unfortunately happen from time to

time.

Again, if there is any suggestion, if there is any

allegation, if there is any thought, the mere thought, that deficient health

care services were responsible for a person being outside of the institution

when he should be otherwise inside, I would ask the hon. member to bring it to

my attention immediately. I will in the most expeditious manner ensure that his

concerns are addressed. If there is anything untoward happening we will ensure

that it is corrected post-haste.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If spending two days on a stretcher is appropriate standards,

it is time to change the standards, I say to the minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: When this woman and a security guard got

her father in a wheelchair after taking him back to the hospital, it was there

that the daughter discovered, to her shock, when they brought him back to the

sixth floor, that the staff hadn't even been aware her father had gone missing.

This isn't the first case, Minister, and recently, too, of patients wandering

from a hospital without being noticed or missed. How can a minister keep telling

us that staffing levels at our hospitals are adequate when there are patients in

serious condition, some of them tranquillized after surgery and very vulnerable,

who can just wander off and leave hospital without anyone realizing they are

gone?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member tries to

create a circumstance that gives the impression that there are either

insufficient numbers of staffing levels on at the hospitals, or that the staff

at our hospitals are inattentive, or uncaring, or otherwise not doing their job

properly.

I take the greatest of issue with that type of suggestion by

the hon. member. I want to tell the hon. member that the people I have met who

work in the health care system in this Province give us, in terms of value for

dollar spent, probably the best service of any public servants in the Province.

We have health care workers in this Province in all our institutions every

moment of every day who give 110 per cent to ensure that patient care is of the

highest level.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Having said that, let me say to the hon.

member that I will undertake today to check with Sister Elizabeth Davis, the CEO

of the Health Care Corporation, to see, not if, in fact, there is validity to

the hon. member's statement about where people may have been seen at an

inappropriate time - I don't doubt the facts of some of the things he is putting

forward - but I do take great exception, on behalf of the health care workers of

the Province, that they are not doing their job. I would challenge the hon.

member to compare his record and his employment with that of the health care

workers of this Province, and I think I know who would come out on top, or at

least equal to or as good as.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, the minister is trying to put his own twist on it to try

to get away from his responsibility.

A former representative and head of the nurse's union, said

they are understaffed and overworked - a member of your own Cabinet - and the

minister is trying to deny that. Does the minister realize that hospital - that

even after that person was brought back, he was not even put on around-the-clock

observation in hospital even after this incident happened last night. Can't the

minister see that his government's cuts have gone so deep that families can no

longer trust government to properly observe their loved ones and protect them

from bringing harm upon themselves while they are under the government's care?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. member

that innuendo or overt suggestions with respect to health care, and how it is

delivered, and the competency of the people in the system, serves no purpose in

terms of bringing in improvement to the system or care specific to any person

who might be in the hospital at the moment.

Let the hon. member put forward to me, as Minister of Health,

anything that he believes is happening in the health care system with respect to

one individual, with respect to many individuals, with respect to one

institution or any part of our health care delivery system. Let him put forward

to me anything that he feels needs to be addressed because it is either

inappropriate, inefficient, or not doing the job otherwise as it should, and I

will undertake to investigate fully and take appropriate action if I find that

action needs to be taken.

Unless and until that type of information comes forward to

me, I am not about to participate in an exercise that brings suspicion, that

brings reproach possibly on our health care system and among the workers in the

system who are doing yeomen service under sometimes difficult circumstances,

day-in-and-day-out, providing health care in this Province that, by virtue of

the review of an independent body like the Fraser Forum in July of 1995, told us

that we have, on balance, the best health care system of any province in Canada,

the shortest on average waiting list of any province in Canada for procedure,

and if the hon. member wishes to debate that let him rise on another

supplementary and we will talk about really where we are in terms of health

care, and the quality of health care in this Province.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister is spending too much time listening to people

outside of our Province, and not the real people in this Province who are being

hurt by the system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: That is the problem, I say to the minister.

He keeps telling us that funding for health care has not

suffered when, in fact, in real terms, that is not the case. Government, this

year alone, cut 125 positions directly in this year's Budget, not counting the

hundreds more who are going to be laid off by health care boards in hospitals

around this Province, and virtually every day we are hearing stories about

overworked nurses, understaffed hospitals, deteriorating health care, when

hundreds of highly-qualified nurses cannot find work in this Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister: When is this minister

going to stop denying that there is a health care crisis here in this Province,

and start doing something to address the serious problems that he is pretending

are not even there?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not sure if the hon. member is living in the real world.

This year the government of this Province prioritized as its number one single

public service priority, health care in the Province. We put our money where our

mouth was. We committed $903.3 million to the operational side of health care,

an increase of $2.3 million. And we made a further commitment that that funding

level would be maintained, allowing that the system would have predictable and

sustainable funding for the next three years so that into 1998-'99 the system

knows where it is going.

Anything that I have heard from the system, Mr. Speaker,

since then, has been nothing but positive and complimentary toward the

commitment of this government to quality health care services in the Province.

If the hon. member can specifically identify areas where there are gaps in the

service, as I am sure there are in certain areas gaps in certain types of

service, we do not deny that, but I would say that we are committed to do yeoman

service in terms of ensuring they are addressed, met, filled, and that the

people of the Province will continue to have high-quality health care services

as they have at the moment, on balance.

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

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Social Services. More

than three years ago, on March 4, 1993, the Liberal Administration of Premier

Wells promised a consultation process on a new Strategic Social Plan. We have

had two general elections since then, and in February of this year the present

administration promised they would unveil their Social Plan within sixty days.

On May 28 in the Legislature the minister said that the printing process was

holding it up.

It is now 117 days and we have had two elections since then,

and twenty-one since the minister promised it. When, Madam Minister, will you be

unveiling your Strategic Social Plan?

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

MS J. M. AYLWARD: I am happy to say that on day 118 we

will be announcing the Strategic Social Plan consultation process. There will be

a press conference held tomorrow when we will be outlining the details of that,

and the printing is finished.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader, on a

supplementary.

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister that is, of course, twice as long as

the government had committed. We are delighted, but however, would have liked to

have seen it when the House was open. I want to ask the minister how long will

the consultation process take? Will there be public hearings in all parts of the

Province? On tomorrow will she be naming the people who will be participating in

the public hearings. When can we expect the process to be complete because in

your Red Book you made commitments to have the program ready for implementation

by early 1997? Will that target date be filled, or will you again be twice as

long as you had promised you would be?

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

MS J. M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The details of the plan will be announced tomorrow. In fact,

it is not a plan, it is a consultation process in order to develop a plan. We

will be identifying it very clearly tomorrow. We will be identifying the time

lines. We will also be identifying the chairperson, and we expect it will be

twice as good because we waited twice as long.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Education. The minister

has heard numerous complaints and representations made by professionals,

parents, and the public at large with respect to the discontinuation of a

highly-acclaimed and preferred Kindergarten program referred to as Literacy

2000. Will the minister reconsider this decision with respect to the

implementation of this program for the school year commencing in September 1996?

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

MR. GRIMES: Unfortunately the answer is, no. In the

Department of Education, the government would have preferred not to have delayed

implementation of this program for a year, which is what we have announced.

There are other programs as well that have been tested in the field. Materials

have been made available and we would like to continually make alterations in

the curriculum in the schools of the Province so that the students have the best

possible materials available.

We understand as well, and it has been debated in this House

through petitions and other questions, that the program now in question, the

Literacy Program in Kindergarten has been in use for almost twenty years and has

been supplemented by materials from teachers themselves and in other areas.

Just one example, Mr. Speaker. While some people protest the

decision, as is happening again today, in other areas of the Province - I was in

a school last week where the materials were piloted in the last year or so. The

parents themselves and the teachers in that school wanted that information and

wanted that particular material available so badly that rather than organize a

protest they went through a fund-raising campaign and raised the money so that

they would provide the materials in the schools themselves.

The point of the matter is that with respect to some of the

decisions that are made, there are a number of them in Education that we would

have preferred not to have made but we are not in a position to reverse the

decision with respect to the curriculum materials any more than we are with

other decisions in Education.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St.

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Elitist

education, that is what my response is to that comment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Despite the recommendations and the

wording of a consultation paper on the senior high school program referred to as

Directions for Change , and its strong language recommending the need for

standardized testing, and in view of student, school and teacher protest from

across the Province, will the minister re-institute a public examination system

for high school students for the academic year 1996-1997?

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

MR. GRIMES: No, Mr. Speaker, that is certainly not the

plan at this point in time. We are reviewing information again from other

provinces. In areas for example like Manitoba, where it is widely acclaimed that

they have a public examination system, the public examination system in Manitoba

consists of one examination in one subject each year for purposes of testing. In

this Province we have a very good system of checking for standards by doing

evaluation and criterion referencing testing in grades III, VI and IX. We did a

writing test last year which is now in the process of being corrected. Those in

the view of the government are much more instrumental because they identify

areas of inconsistency that might exist in program areas in the Province in time

for them to be corrected and addressed while the students are still in school,

rather than depend upon a school exiting examination as the only standardization

criterion in the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St.

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Let's continue, Mr. Speaker. School

busing has been arbitrarily discontinued for many students around the Province.

Parents have voiced their concerns in large numbers. Particularly in recent date

representations have been made to the minister by parents of children in and

around the City of St. John's. The minister has indicated that he will take a

second look at what he refers to as special cases. Does the St. John's region

meet his definition of a special case, and will busing be re-instituted for

children of areas such as Shea Heights, Brophy Place, just to mention two

examples?

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If it is identified

in the meetings that are still ongoing, and the most recent set of meetings were

held again yesterday with respect to school board officials in the capital city

region, Metrobus officials and officials from the Department of Education. It is

certainly not the intent of the Department of Education to see students to the

point where they are unable to attend school,. That won't occur. There are other

questions as to whether or not people can afford one system of public transit

over another system of transportation, being the yellow school buses. That is a

non-related issue with respect to the general principle.

There has been a long-standing policy with respect to St.

John's that was introduced by a former administration over fifteen years ago

when a Progressive Conservative government led this particular Province that

indicated that where there is public transport available there should not be

school busing also available. It is that policy that is being implemented now in

all neighbourhoods of the city. If there are exceptional cases that are in fact

validated they will be dealt with, Mr. Speaker.

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for

the Minister of Health and has to do with the operation of the provincial drug

program. Pharmacists are now charging an extra billing fee directly to social

assistance recipients using drug cards. Is the minister prepared to outlaw this

practice as a form of extra billing, and at the same time reinstate a proper

prescription filling fee for pharmacists?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We don't intend to

outlaw something that we don't regulate. The question of a dispensing fee is

something that is set by market forces. Dispensing fees as charged by

pharmaceutical dispensaries, or drug stores if you like, range all the way I

understand from $1.98 up to - the latest figure I heard this morning from one

caller to open line was $8, $9. We have no intention of interfering in the

marketplace in terms of setting what a pharmacist can charge as a dispensing

fee. The question of whether or not that will be appropriate is - the answer to

that question is that it would not be appropriate for us to interfere with the

setting of a dispensary fee.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The minister knows

that he has total control over who accepts drug cards and what drug cards are

used for and can certainly control that. Mr. Speaker, he also would know that

from the calls that he has received - I am sure on Open Line and that all

members have received - is that there are great hardships being caused by this.

One individual called me today, he has ten or eleven prescriptions because of

serious health problems for months and is being asked to pay out $30 over a

month from their own resources -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I would ask him to get

to his question.

MR. HARRIS: - is the minister not prepared to take this

question seriously and do something about this problem? He knows he has the

power. He can control the use of these drug cards and what filling fees

pharmacist are charging for these. Why doesn't he do something about it?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The question of

setting a dispensing fee and the question of issuing drug cards are two totally

different issues. The government does, for the Department of Social Services,

determine who is eligible for a drug card. There are two basic populations, the

seniors of the Province, who pay their own dispensing fee, have always paid

their own dispensing fee, so there is no issue or question involved there. The

other population that gets a drug card are social services recipients and we do

control and we know who gets those cards.

The situation is this, that last year out of a drug budget of

$54 million we spent $31 million servicing clients of the Department of Social

Services. Of that $31 million that we spent for social service client

prescription drugs last year, a full $8 million plus was spent on a dispensing

fee only. Our proposition and our interest, Mr. Speaker, is to ensure that we

put the maximum amount of that $31 million into ingredient costs so that people

will have access to pharmaceutical products on a basis that is appropriate for

their usage and put the minimum amount of money into the cost of providing it

which is the $8 million or 33 per cent or 34 per cent. At the moment, Mr.

Speaker, we have made provision for our hospitals through our clinics to provide

pharmaceutical products to anybody who is on a drug card and there will not be

any co-pay or any up-charge or any additional costs to them. In addition to

that, there are all sorts of opportunities in the market place for people to

access products -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the minister to complete his answer.

MR. MATTHEWS: - at dispensing fees less than $3.50

thereby not attracting any additional costs.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my

question today is for the Minister of Environment and Labour.

Mr. Minister, summer is upon us and we see now a particular

summer tradition taking place and commonly referred to as gravel pit camping. I

have received a number of calls from people concerned that they may lose another

Newfoundland tradition. Does the minister see this as a serious environmental

issue? Is he seriously considering closing down these areas?

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

Labour.

MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, this is one minister and

this is a government that recognizes Newfoundland and Labrador tradition but at

the end of the day we are looking at all policies in the Province. We are

looking at policies in tourism and the Minister of Tourism, Culture and

Recreation is evaluating and in environment we are evaluating policies in

environment. We have had concerns expressed to us from the parks in the

Province, private park owners and so on and we have also had concerns expressed

to us from communities that are near sites where we have campers on the side of

the highways and so on. They have asked us to look at and evaluate the different

options. We are looking at different options. We are evaluating what are the

possibilities. We are looking at the different regulations that maybe we can

look at to make sure that we protect rivers where campers go near rivers and so

on. There is this whole situation that we are looking at but we have made no

conclusions on it. We are still looking at it and still evaluating.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I say to the

minister, I am not a gravel pit camper but I know a number of people who are and

they take great pride in their areas and locations and they keep them very, very

clean. If there is a demonstrated need to clean up certain areas within the

Province, with respect to gravel pit camping, does the minister believe that it

is necessary to penalize all for the sake of a few?

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

Labour.

MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, this minister does not

believe in penalizing anybody or this government as a matter of fact. What we

are hoping to do, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. K. AYLWARD: Concerns have been expressed, Mr.

Speaker, to our department and to a number of departments. We are evaluating the

concerns and then in due course the government will decide whether or not we

need a policy, we will also decide whether or not we need further regulation

and, Mr. Speaker, no one wants to attack anybody or do anything else. We are

just looking at a policy potentially, and it will be certainly discussed with

the public.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker,

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, on

a supplementary.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My final supplementary is for the Minister of Tourism,

Culture and Recreation.

In 1995, we saw the 1995 Budget increase provincial park

rates; we saw a number of parks, provincial parks, being privatized. Isn't

government using the environmental issue to force people to utilize provincial

and private parks and will she see that this smoke and mirror excuse is parked

where it belongs, in the garbage.

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

and Recreation.

MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, I would certainly like to address

that issue by saying that there are many concerns as the Minister of Environment

and Labour pointed out about gravel pit parking.

One of the concerns I had this year actually, in addressing

the issue of rates in the parks, was that, while we were raising rates in

previous years for weekly and overnight campers that there were no day-use fee,

and it was getting to be a very common practice that people were parking in

gravel pits in the night time to camp but coming into the parks to use the

facilities of the park during the day so that only overnight campers, weekly and

monthly campers were paying for that privilege, so there are many issues to be

addressed here.

MR. J. BYRNE: A back-door approach.

MS KELLY: It is certainly not a back-door approach and

one that we have put considerable thought into. We want our parks to be

available to everyone, we want people to be able to enjoy them.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS KELLY: That's right.

Just today for instance, two park facilities in Gros Morne,

Lomond and Trout River, are being considerably upgraded to be state-of-the-art

campers' parks in this Province. We wish that for all of our parks but if our

people don't stay in the parks and stay in the gravel pits, what is the point of

having wonderful parks developed for just tourists outside of the Province? We

have parks and we truly believe in our parks system, and want people to use them

and really respect the environment.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

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

Labour.

MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to table two reports today: The Annual Report of

the Labour Relations Board for 1995 and also, the Workers' Compensation Review

Division and the Report.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I also would like to table two reports today. A report on

Administration and Expenditures related to the Income Support Program of the

Department of Social Services for the fiscal year, 1995-96; and a report on the

Administration and Expenditures related to the Family and Rehabilitative

Services of the Department of Social Services for the fiscal year 1995-96.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MS BETTNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to table the report of the Public Tender Act

Exemptions for the months of April and May.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would like to table the Annual

Report of the Commissioner of Members Interests for the year 1995-96.

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In response to a question that was posed some time ago by the

hon. the Member for Conception Bay with respect to the number of permanent and

other employees at the Health Care Corporation on a year-over-year basis since

restructuring, I apologize as I did to him the other day for taking a little

long to get the information, but I am now pleased to provide it to him today:

April 1, 1995, there were 4,672 permanent employees with the Health Care

Corporation of St. John's; April 1, 1996, one year later, there were 4,538

permanent employees, for a reduction of 134 permanent employees. In addition to

that, there are approximately, on an ongoing basis, 2,000 casual employees

working for the Health Care Corporation of St. John's, which makes up a labour

force of approximately 6,672. And, for the information of the hon. member, most

of the positions have come about as a result of attrition, retirements, and/or a

consolidation of services.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today I rise to present the following petition: To the hon.

House of Assembly in legislative session convened, the petition of the

undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, that:

WHEREAS the Food and Livestock Show contributed to

heightening the awareness of the agricultural industry in our region; and

WHEREAS the Food and Livestock Show contributed directly to

the increase of sales in the agricultural industry; and

WHEREAS the Food and Livestock Show contributed greatly to

the local economy;

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that your hon. House

may be pleased to request the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to

reinstate the Food and Livestock Show immediately for the fall of 1996, and as

in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, during the recent Budget as announced by the

Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, there is a small

section

under the

section of Forestry Resources and Agrifoods that shows an allocation

dealing with agricultural shows and exhibitions. Now, the Member for Windsor -

Springdale, being the former Minister of Agriculture, certainly would know the

importance of the agricultural industry to this Province. It is a huge industry;

it employs thousands of people each and every year. However, I think this year

the Minister of Forestry and Agrifoods, in attempting to balance a budget, in

attempting to achieve cost savings of 10 or 12 per cent, went a little far when

he looked at the Food and Livestock Show for St. John's.

Mr. Speaker, it is a huge event, one that is looked forward

to by the agricultural industry each year, one that is looked forward to by food

producers in this Province each year, and one that contributes greatly not only

to the success of the industry but to increased sales for the industry, and

heightens the awareness of people within our community and within our Province

about agriculture in our region, and the importance it plays - the vital role it

plays - to the local economy.

Mr. Speaker, on page 156 dealing with agricultural shows and

exhibitions in the Budget, when we look at what government really saved, or what

they axed the Food and Livestock Show for, they did it, and what they achieved

was a $44,000 saving. For the sake of $44,000 the Food and Livestock Show, which

was a huge event, participated in by many people throughout the Province, not

only stakeholders within the industry from dairy farmers to agricultural

farmers, but the people who produce sods, what they did, in attempting just to

save $44,000, I think they did not look at other alternatives. I am sure that

the minister could have looked at the impact, and how they could have realized

another $44,000 to revenue without eliminating the Food and Livestock show.

What could government have done? Maybe government could have

looked at an overall fee per person coming in. Maybe government could have

looked at upping the fees for booth space, but $44,000 is not a huge sum of

money when you look at the type of show, how long it has been in existence, and

the impact, the terrific impact, that it made to agriculture not only in our

region but totally in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we have heard other ministers in this House over

the past several weeks stand and announce initiatives that we have called into

question from this side. We have seen government decisions go - on the one hand

made one day and changed the other, particularly, I say to the Minister of

Agriculture, when it comes to the Department of Education.

Now, I think the minister has an opportunity, and I pledge to

him today that if he is willing to commit, and if we can realize or find that

$44,000 saving elsewhere, that I commit to help him try to find it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: He can laugh all he wants. I would commit -

not within government. I'm talking about within the private sector, I say to the

minister. Forty-four thousand dollars is not a lot of money to raise. I believe

it can be raised. I believe that the food and livestock show can go ahead. I

believe that the continuous contribution this show made to the agricultural

industry in this Province, and in particular in this region, can be realized

again this year if and only if the political will is there to address it. Thank

you very much.

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

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to

support the petition offered by my colleague for Kilbride, and to say to the

government, in echoing his words, sometimes we have to make choices. Sometimes

these choices send out messages that I'm sure the minister wouldn't want to send

to the people in this Province who pursue the business of agriculture. Some of

whom are sitting in the public galleries this afternoon.

I endorse the petition. Forty-four thousand dollars may seem

to be an insignificant amount of money to some people but I can assure you that

that amount of money has put forward one of Atlantic Canada's first-rate

agricultural shows in the great numbers of years now. It is regrettable that we

are sending that kind of a message to the farmers of this region and in fact

throughout the entire Province.

I endorse the petition. I've been associated for many years

with many of the people who are in the agricultural business in this region,

particularly some of my friends in the District of Kilbride, and the Goulds

area. On their behalf and on behalf of the entire region I say to the minister

that he should reconsider, that this shows government's commitment, and that the

show has encouraged the agriculture in this area. Also it has been a great

learning experience for many of the students who have gone to that particular

show year after year. It lets them know a little bit about the industry. It has

been a great marketing exposition.

I say to those people involved in tourism, people have come

from all parts of the Province to visit that particular show, and all parts of

Canada. We talk about bringing people in for the great show we are going to put

on in 1997. Yet we won't spend $44,000 to continue a project that has been here

in this region for a long time. It seems as if it is fine if you are coming from

Bristol or New York or somewhere like that. We haven't any money to spend on our

own right here in this Province. I ask the minister to reconsider. Maybe he can

find the money to have this exposition put back where it should be which is in

this region, and a chance to show all of us what is happening in the agriculture

business and to show commitment by the government to those who pursue

agricultural endeavours in our Province. Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER: Before recognizing the hon. Member for St.

John's East I would like to welcome to the public galleries today the Mayor of

Burin, Mr. Jerry Appleby and councillor Barry Keating, along with town manager

Lou Bailey.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I believe the hon. the Government House

Leader would like to speak to the petition presented by the Member for Kilbride.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, just very briefly to that

petition. The Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods takes everything into

consideration. I think the hon. gentleman has already heard me say in this

House, and a good many times, that we would take a look at the - see if we could

- we recognize that there is a value in this show, in this exposition. We have

committed ourselves to trying to get some people in the private sector to do

this. We may not even get it done this year, I don't know. But we will certainly

be taking a look at it. In the spirit of cooperation, sweetness and light we

will take everybody's advice into consideration.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I stand to

present a petition to the House this afternoon with respect to an issue that was

raised earlier in proceedings this afternoon, and that is on concern with

respect to the discontinuation of a kindergarten program referred to as Literacy

I have just spoken with my colleague on this side of the

House, the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi, and together we have in our

possession some names in excess of 4,000 representing parents, educators and

members of the public at large who are concerned about the fact that this very

important and preferred - and as I indicated earlier - a claimed program known

as Literacy 2000 has just been arbitrarily withdrawn from the proposed

curriculum for September 1996, with respect to the kindergarten classroom. This

particular program has been scrutinized by primary school teachers and by the

primary teachers council of the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association.

It has received overwhelming support and preference by teachers who are in the

classroom on a day to day basis and see the need, Mr. Speaker, for this type of

program as part of the primary school curriculum. As I indicated, Mr. Speaker,

jointly there are some 4,000 names and when you have a petition of this size

dealing with a kindergarten program, that in and of itself says something.

Obviously it is hoped, as part of bringing this petition, that members on the

Opposite side view the importance of it and take seriously the spirit of what

this petition is all about.

Last week, Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to attend the

public meeting and there was some symbolism which I think is important to relate

to the House at this time. At that public meeting which was attended by parents,

teachers and school principals, who are obviously concerned about the fact that

this program has been withdrawn, there were three chairs at the front of the

gymnasium. One had what has been in existence for the past sixteen or seventeen

years, namely a program which for all intents and purposes, Mr. Speaker, is

ineffective. In fact, teachers have refused to use it and in fact, primary

school teachers today, kindergarten teachers, they devised their own

programming. They bring their own programs and materials to the school. That

whole archaic program was on one chair.

The other chair, Mr. Speaker, was the very program that I am

referring to, a program which has received overwhelming support by educators and

parents in the Province. The third chair, Mr. Speaker, was what in fact this

government provides for primary school teachers, particularly in the

kindergarten area, as a means to help in curriculum development and in the

providing of what is essential for young children at this time. Mr. Speaker,

what in fact was located on that chair and situated on that chair was absolutely

nothing and that is the state that we find ourselves in at the present time.

This government does not provide an adequate curriculum for the kindergarten

program and not only do they not provide it but they had the opportunity to in

fact commence a program which has received widespread support throughout those

in the know.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present this petition on behalf

of those who are concerned about the curriculum which is being offered for young

five year olds throughout our Province. I am pleased to join in part with my

colleague to my right, who has also a number of petitions as well on the same

topic. I can only endorse what these petitioners are saying and I thank you, Mr.

Speaker, for the opportunity to do so. Thank you.

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of

the petition presented by the Member for St. John's East and to present an

additional number of petitions including some 4,000 names of citizens of this

Province who are concerned about the government's decision to stall

implementation of the new kindergarten program.

The petitioners, Mr. Speaker, are concerned about the quality

of education in this Province and are concerned literacy development being an

important goal from which all of society derives benefits. They are concerned

that the existing program, existing for kindergarten children in the Province,

is outdated and antiquated in terms of philosophy and methodology. It states

that the lack of action by the provincial government of Newfoundland and

Labrador in implementing the recommendations of the Department of Educations

kindergarten advisory committee will impact on the quality of education

experience. What the petitioners want, Mr. Speaker, is to reverse the budgetary

decision pertaining to the purchase of program resources for kindergarten

students and re-instate the program recommendations of the Department of

Education.

Mr. Speaker, this is an issue which strikes deep in the

hearts of people in this Province who are very concerned about the quality of

preparation that their children get in school. It is so important, Mr. Speaker,

that, for example, in the community of Change Islands, where there are, I am

told, some only 200 people above the age of eighteen, 197 people signed this

petition, Mr. Speaker, indicating how concerned people are in this Province that

their children and the children of their communities have access to the best

quality education.

We have been told, and the minister himself admits that the

program materials in use are up to twenty years old. I saw materials today that

were published in 1977. Mr. Speaker, these materials are seriously, seriously

outdated. One book that I was shown today was to teach the children about

colours. Well if you open the book, Mr. Speaker, it was all in black and white,

there were no colours in the book at all except for the cover on the outside.

Mr. Speaker, I am told that some of those books are so

outdated and so useless for the modern curriculum, that some of them have not

even been ordered in as many as ten years or more. It is fifteen years, the

Member for Waterford Valley says, as a man with experience in Education he would

know better than I, this is a serious defect in our education for young children

in this Province, Mr. Speaker, and the government, by delaying the

implementation of this, for how long, we don't know, is impairing the ability of

our children to overcome the educational difficulties that we know our children

face in this Province.

We are going through a great turmoil in this Province in the

hopes of improving our education system with respect to educational reform and

streamlining administrative costs, but, Mr. Speaker, here is a reform at the

program level, at the school level, at the child level that is necessary and

long overdue and government, instead of proceeding with this plan to put in

place the new curriculum is delaying it and putting our children at risk.

Mr. Speaker, the petitioners are adamant in their concerns

about what is going on in the education system; they want to see program change;

they want to see reform but they don't want to see this government sitting on

its hands when the needs of the children of this Province are at stake. I think

it is time, Mr. Speaker, that the government listen to the concerns of the

people when they are dealing with issues such as this, and go ahead and forge on

implementing new programs so that our children will not suffer from the lack of

decent programs that will allow them to develop the literary skills that they

need to do well in school.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of residents all

across this Province I say, Mr. Speaker, from just about every district. I think

it is a total of something like 400 names and the petition reads:

We, the undersigned oppose the establishment of private

fishing zones on the rivers of Newfoundland. It is our inherent right as

Newfoundlanders to use these waters in a respectful manner -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I wonder if the hon. member could just let me interrupt him

for a minute. I want to welcome to the galleries today members of the P.T.A. of

the St. Agnes School in Pouch Cove, accompanied by the Principal of that school,

Mr. Ed. Waite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is not the right of a few (inaudible). Regarding the

waters of Terra Nova, there is no part of that water system remote. Beware,

Newfoundlanders, our rights are once again, about to be trampled on, this time

by our worst enemies, ourselves. If it happens on this river, it happens all

across Newfoundland. Newfoundlanders object.

The fee structure proposed by these associations or

outfitters will effectively discourage the average Newfoundlander from enjoying

one of its favourite pastimes and drive them from these waterways thus giving

the outfitter complete control, something for which these associations have

always lobbied for. If changes are coming to Newfoundland waters, the provincial

government must be the sole proprietor, those who are duly elected by the vast

majority, not by special interest groups.

Mr. Speaker, this is a petition that has been circulated by

some people who are very concerned over the possibility that the federal

government might be in the process of passing responsibility for Newfoundland

rivers down to the Province, and the Province in turn, not having the financial

resources to control these particular waterways might pass them along - the

great fear is that it might pass them along to some special interest groups in

particular areas.

Mr. Speaker, the area I think those people are particularly

concerned about is the Freshwater Bay-Alexander Bay ecosystem area. It is, I

suppose, the headwaters of the Terra Nova River which probably my colleague for

Terra Nova knows much more about than I do. It is a situation where this

particular interest group, the Freshwater-Alexander Bay Ecosystem Association

put forward a form to be filled out, a questionnaire getting people's advice,

and getting people's info and input into the possibility of their association

being responsible for this inland waterway and also some particular waterways in

that area.

They have also suggested the amount of money they may be able

to charge those people who enjoy the act of going salmon fishing. Right now,

from what I understand, in order to purchase a salmon license, a sportsman

salmon license, it will cost you $20 a year, but those particular people are

looking at charging, in addition to the $20 a year, a fee of $10 per person per

day, and $15 per day for family. Naturally, anybody who enjoys the sport of

salmon fishing for the most part will not be able to - a lot of them, especially

our local residents, will not be able to afford to put out that $10 a day for

themselves or $15 as it relates to a family if they enjoy that particular sport

fishing.

Mr. Speaker, all too often we have seen the rights of

Newfoundlanders taken away from them, things that we hold dear, being able to go

out and jig a cod fish. We cannot do that anymore, and now it is a situation

where the fear of those salmon fishermen is that they will not be able to afford

to be able to go on their favourite salmon river and fish for salmon. Or, if

they can afford it, Mr. Speaker, it will be a situation where they will probably

have to go to somebody else to seek advice or to seek permission, if you would,

to be able to go in the woods and go on that particular river in order to fish.

This is a grave concern to many of those individuals and what

they are saying in this petition is, that we would like to be held responsible

by the people we duly elected, Mr. Speaker, by the politicians of the day, by

the government of the day. Those are the people who should control the inland

rivers and the inland waterways, and should be responsible for the ecosystems

and not special interest groups that are there today probably to be an

association that are totally funded, I suppose, from their own revenue, be

nonprofit, but tomorrow it will be a situation that they fear will become

profitable, and the profits will be coming from the pockets of individual salmon

fishermen.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly support those individuals that have

put forward this petition. Their concerns are very real. It was a petition that

was circulated right across Newfoundland and Labrador, and many of those people,

even though their numbers may not be great, but the people each and every one of

them, who have been asked to sign the petition, have taken part and expressed

grave concerns.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: I ask the government, realizing that my

time is up, in conclusion, I ask the government if they would support this

particular group of salmon fishermen and leave the status quo as it exists today

so that they might once again be able to go and fish in their favourite fishing

holes.

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: I rise today in support of the petition

presented by my hon. colleague. I think we have to be very careful as to what we

do with our rivers and lakes around this Province in that we do not make our

traditional salmon fishing industry for a lot of our fly fishermen around this

Province just for a very select few.

I think that would certainly be a shame. There are many

people, not only from around the Province but in my own district who every year

like to go to their favourite rivers right from this end of the Island right

into Labrador to salmon fish. I think, Mr. Speaker, it would be a crime if we

don't do something about this now. It is great now to say: That will never

happen. But I guess we have seen lots of things in this House that we said: No,

these things are never going to happen. All of a sudden out of the blue they

appear. This is probably just another one that will one of these days just

automatically appear. Just bango it will be in here, and people will be

wondering exactly where it came from.

I support this petition, Mr. Speaker, and hope that it never

does come to this in this Province where we are going to have designated parts

of rivers and lakes laid aside for a chosen few. Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Orders of the Day

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

MR. TULK: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Order Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

and 8.

On motion, the following bills read a third time, ordered

passed and their titles be as on the Order Paper:

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Law To Give Effect To Certain

Recommendations Of The Commissioner For Regulatory Reform" (Bill No. 1);

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Portability Of Pensions Act"

(Bill No. 13);

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Provincial Parks Act" (Bill No.

7);

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Legal Aid Act" (Bill No. 12);

A bill, "An Act To Establish The Memorial University

Foundation" (Bill No. 16);

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Internal Economy Commission Act"

(Bill No. 18); and,

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Packaging Material Act"( Bill

No. 17).

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

AN HON. MEMBER: Number 8 (inaudible).

MR. TULK: We will wait until about 4:00 to do that one.

Bill No. 11, Order No. 10, Mr. Speaker, second reading of a

bill, "An Act To Amend The Public Accountancy Act."

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Public

Accountancy Act". (Bill No. 11)

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

and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Public

Accountancy Act established a licensing board that consisted of seven members

appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council. Five of those members were

members of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Newfoundland. The Chairman

is a member of the Law Society and the other member is a public accountant who

is not a chartered accountant, thus the Institute of Chartered Accountants

effectively controls that board. There are three other professional accounting

groups operating in the Province, each with its own active incorporation and

these are the Certified General Accountants and the Certified Management

Accountants.

Mr. Speaker, in 1994 a Select Committee of the House of

Assembly was struck to deal with the review of this particular act. Public

hearings were held in February 1994, in which the Select Committee received

presentations from the Association of Chartered Accountants, Certified General

Accountants and Certified Management Accountants. The witnesses which were

represented were thirty-six and these were from these three accounting groups.

The Select Committee completed its report on June 9, 1994,

and that report indicated that the committee was not persuaded that the CAs are

the only accounting professionals who are capable of engaging in public

accounting. The CGAs and the CMAs should be permitted to apply for licenses,

that the licensing of qualified CGAs and CMAs as public accountants would

enhance competition without compromising the public interest provided the

appropriate legislative controls were in place. Mr. Speaker, in British Columbia

only CAs and CGAs may practice public accountancy but in Alberta, New Brunswick,

Manitoba, Saskatchewan, the Yukon and the North West Territories, CAs, CGAs and

CMAs practice public accountancy.

Mr. Speaker, Bill No. 11 basically adopts the recommendations

of the Select Committee indicating that the board would be changed and would

have representation from the CAs, CGAs, CMAs as well as public representation

and the board would set the standards required to be met by members of the three

accounting associations. The board will then license members meeting those

standards. Mr. Speaker, Bill No. 11 does not attempt to establish these

standards rather it is left up to the board to do so. Also the bill deals

specifically with licensing. There may be other areas which should be addressed

such as the definition of public accountants, structure and forms of public

accounting firms, professional liability insurance, levying of fines, et cetera.

When the new board is in place it should review all of these matters, adopt

policies where it has the authority to do so and to make recommendations to

government for legislative changes where considered necessary.

Mr. Speaker, the amendments to Bill No. 11 would change the

composition of the Public Accountancy Board. Terminating effective control of

that board by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Newfoundland and it

creates further standards which if met, would permit individuals from the

accounting designations of Chartered Accountants, Certified General Accountants

and Certified Management accountants to be licensed to practice public

accountancy.

Mr. Speaker, subsection 3(2) would be repealed and the board

would consist of seven members appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council.

Of those seven members:

"(

a) one member shall be nominated by and shall be a member

of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Newfoundland; (

b) one member shall

be nominated by and shall be a member of the Certified General Accountants

Association; (

c) one member shall be nominated and shall be a member of the

Society of Management Accountants of Newfoundland; and (

d) there shall be 4

other members who are not affiliated with a professional accounting association,

including (

i) one member from the banking community who is a user of audited

financial statements, (ii) one member of the business community who is a user of

audited financial statements, (iii) one member of the business academic

community, and (iv) a chairperson who shall be a member for the Law Society of

Newfoundland and who has completed at least 8 years in practice as a member."

It is further amended in

section 3 to indicate that: "6. Four

members shall constitute a quorum of the board." It is further amended in

section 5 to indicate that:

"

(6) Nothing in the

section shall diminish or enlarge the

powers of the administrative bodies of the professional accounting designations

of Chartered Accountants, Certified General Accountants, and Certified

Management Accountants to discipline in respect of its own members."

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to have a

few comments at the second reading here. Any further detail and comments I will

do in Committee

Overall, I guess certainly my concern is to ensure that we do

have adequate standards to protect the public interest when we have audits done

here in this Province. Whether it is done by chartered accountants, CMAs or

CGAs, it needs to be ensured that the mechanisms are in place that people who

are entrusted with this position that is a very responsible position, one that

is going to ensure that the public interest is served. There has to be every

indication that is going to be done.

There was a select committee - I think it was supposed to be

Bill No. 42. I don't think it ever got to draft form. I don't recollect at the

time. Maybe the minister -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, the minister might be able to indicate

this. I think it was tabled in first reading, but it never did come in draft

form in second reading as Bill No. 42, if I recall.

It went to Committee and the Committee did recommend - and I

would like to hear afterwards when the minister comments too, if it is addressed

here in those particular recommendations - that legislation be introduced to

admit to the practice of public accounting, in addition to members of the

Institute of Chartered Accountants, CGAs and CMAs, basically. It indicated:

Those that are found qualified by their respective bodies and approved by a

joint standards directorate.

It went on to say: That directorate should comprise one

member appointed by each of these three accounting bodies, between five and

seven other members appointed by the minister on a pro rated basis from each of

the organizations, and three members of the public, also appointed by the

minister. I'm not sure - maybe the minister when he has an opportunity to

respond - if that recommendation is complied with on the recommendation of the

committee that looked at that here, the select committee on the practice of

public accountancy that reported on June 9 1994.

Certainly I can say that my concern is getting appropriate

standards to have a board in place to go in to ensure that the appropriate

standards are there, and the appropriate training to reflect standards. Because

the final result is not who does it, it is that the public interest is going to

be protected. Not whether large corporations - banks and numerous institutions

have their own mechanisms by which to be able to ensure that they get what they

need. The average person on the street may not have access to a particular

resource, has to ensure that they are protected and that they are going to be

able to know - and that is the key - when they get an audit - I would want to

know that I get what I ask for and that there is a consistency and a standard,

and I think it is incumbent certainly upon government to ensure that there are

sufficient standards established, and mechanisms in place, to be fully certain

that is going to happen.

We will have a further opportunity, I am sure, at committee

stage of the bill to look at any other specifics there, and I would certainly be

interested in hearing what the minister has to say with reference to the

recommendations of the select committee, and whether they are addressed here, if

there are any variations from that, or what the general intent and thrust,

because many times in legislation we know, and we have seen it before - we have

seen Term 17; I don't have to tell anybody about what Term 17 states; everybody

has a copy of that - and what happens after the specifics get down, and we have

seen legislation can be interpreted in different ways, and different regulations

can be enacted after the legislation, of course, to be able to deal with those

specific things. So we need to know the thrust of where government is going,

what their intentions are, rather than going ahead blindly without having any

specifics because, like most legislation, it has the generalities but does not

have all the specifics that are dealt with by regulations within a Cabinet that

we never see here in the House of Assembly.

We know all too well, if you look at Bill 1, how many

regulations and so on government has - there are eighty-five clauses here in

Bill 1 just to amend the law to give effect to certain recommendations of the

Commissioner for Regulatory Reform, and we know that we have been regulated to

death in instances, but there are purposes served by regulations, and

regulations that don't serve a purpose should be eliminated, are obsolete,

duplication in the system, but the regulations are there for purposes, to ensure

the best interests of all people in the Province, and our concern, as

legislators here, is to ensure that the public interest is served, not any

specific interest, whether it is CGAs, CMAs, or the Institute of Chartered

Accountants - public protection - and we have an obligation to ensure that is

going to get done, and that is incumbent upon the minister to ensure that does

happen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to speak on this bill at second reading,

although I have to confess I am surprised that it is being called today, because

I had been assured, and in turn had assured others who had contacted me, that

the bill was not going to be called this session. I received a number of

interventions and submissions from people interested in this bill, people who

had seen the bill and were surprised at some of the contents it had

representations to make. As I say, I am surprised we are seeing it now because I

had been informed that the matter was not going to be dealt with, and in turn

informed -

AN HON. MEMBER: Who told you that?

MR. HARRIS: I was informed by the Government House Leader

that the matter was not going to be dealt with, and I, in turn, informed the

people who had made representations to me that the matter was not going to be

dealt with, and there was going to be plenty of time for them to -

MR. TULK: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

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

point of order.

MR. TULK: The hon. gentleman is standing out there saying

that I advised him that we were not going to deal with this bill. I did no

such... nonsense.

MR. SPEAKER: I think we have a disagreement between two

hon. members.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On a number of occasions I was informed of that, and passed

that information on to people who had made representations to me, so I am

surprised to have to speak to it now but I am quite prepared to do so at second

reading, and the principle of the bill I have no difficulty with. I, in fact,

have from the beginning of this issue being brought forward, had representations

made by people interested in the issue and were concerned that the Public

Accountancy Act established only a single standard for public accountancy, and

that only CAs were being able to be given licences under the Public Accountancy

Act. In fact, they were automatically being given licences, and there was

provision for non-CAs to get licences but only if they complied with standards

that were set by the Institute of Chartered Accountants.

What is interesting is that since 1967 when those who were

engaged in public accountancy were given grandfather status, no other person

other than a CA has been granted the right to practice public accountancy under

the Public Accountancy Act, so this certainly bespeaks of a de facto if not

legally a monopoly for Chartered Accountants to practice public accountancy in

the Province.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we have, you know, gone through a process

that is designed to open up the public accountancy to practice from other

accountancy designations and I think that is a very good thing. The

representations that were made to me by the CGA Association, and I had a number

of them, Mr. Speaker, were to the effect that they did not believe that any

person with a CGA designation ought to have an automatic licence as a public

accountant, any more than a CA should have an automatic licence of a public

accountant but that there should be a standard that apply to all, and that if

there were a standard that was there, people who had a CGA designation or a CNA

designation, if they met that designation then they would be given an

opportunity to have a licence to practice public accountancy.

The issue, as the Leader of the Opposition has pointed out,

is the protection of the public and of those third parties who rely on the audit

statements from accountants stating that the financial statements that are

presented meet with accepted standards to the accounting profession, and that

these are relied on by third parties, by government, by banks, by investors, not

only investors within the Province but investors from outside the Province, in

establishing a basis for a decision that might be made whether to loan money to

a corporation or to an entity or to invest money in an entity; and there has to

be an established standard that gives a recognition to the value of an opinion

letter issued by an accountant in the circumstances.

Now, Mr. Speaker, since the legislation has been published,

there have been, some might say, predictable reactions from the CAs, the CAs are

not very pleased with the legislation. I have had a number of conversations, as

perhaps other hon. members have as well; they have been under the impression

that before the legislation was actually debated in the House, they would have

an opportunity to consult on the wording of the legislation and they advised me,

that has not happened. They asked me, Mr. Speaker, if I would make

representations and they wanted to make representations to me concerning the

issues that they see in the legislation and they feel that despite the fact -

and I made it very clear to them - that if what they are concerned about is the

monopoly position that the CAs have had, then they will have no support from me.

But there were a number of issues that they raised in their representations with

respect to whether or not there will be a single standard or whether there will

be three or more standards for public accountancy in the Province.

It is not apparent from the legislation, Mr. Speaker, but one

of the concerns that was raised was: Is it possible that this board could

automatically give CAs, CGAs or CMAs a licence, the same way as the CAs were

given, automatically, a licence in the past? It is not clear from the

legislation, but that, presumably is one outcome. It is not an outcome that

would be desired by the CAs, and I don't think it is in the public interest that

there be two or three or four more standards; so that is open for debate and,

there is not even anything in the legislation that requires - I think the

minister, in introducing the bill, indicated the hope that the new board would

get together and see what regulations they can make within their powers with

respect to the setting of standards.

I don't see any power for them actually to do that in the

legislation.

Section 11 of the current Public Accountancy Act is repealed and

that is the legislation that establishes the standard and establishes the power

of the board to set a standard to determine whether or not a licence should be

granted. So I have some difficulty with the legislation in that regard.

Presumably, there will be time to consider these issues in Committee but there

does not seem to be any empowering provisions in the bill that would allow, or

require, indeed, the new Public Accountancy Board to establish the standards

that would apply to all people applying for licenses.

Mr. Speaker, I see that as a weakness in the Act and

something that has been brought to my attention by people interested in the Act.

I know that the Act is the culmination of a process that took place over a

lengthy period of time, but I would have hoped that in these circumstances it

would not be attempted to be rushed through.

MR. TULK: It is not being rushed through.

MR. HARRIS: Well, I guess we are going through second

reading today and third reading some other time. If the member has a problem

with that, I am only telling him what he told me and what I told people in

return.

MR. TULK: I did not tell (inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, it doesn't seem we can have a

sensible debate here without intervention, so I ask the Speaker if he could give

me some protection here.

Mr. Speaker, the legislation before the House in principle is

very good in that it at least provides for the possibility of broadening the

scope of public accountancy rules and allows more people to participate in

public accountancy, and I support the principle contained in the bill. I

understand there are some difficulties that have been raised by one of the

accountancy groups with respect to whether or not there is power of the board to

set a single standard that would apply to all groups. They have also raised

other concerns which the minister has referred to, and that is whether or not,

for example, there ought to be a requirement that all those given a license to

practice public accountancy have a requirement of being insured. I understand

that is the case with some of the groups but not all of them.

The setting of conditions of that nature it is not clear that

the board has that power or that obligation. Other issues have been raised as

well, and I think one may be peripheral to this whole issue of public

accountancy licensing, but whether or not firms can incorporate, or the

organization of firms, I think that is an issue that may be of interest to all

of the accountancy groups, but as far as this legislation goes, I don't think it

is directly affected by it.

I do say that I support the principle in the bill and have

supported the efforts of groups other than the CAs to have access to licensure

under the public accountancy rules. I hope, Mr. Speaker, that the difficulties

in legislation as it reads now can be overcome and that hon. members would at

least have an opportunity to hear the specific concerns that have been raised

about those issues before passing on the legislation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to speak very briefly at this time with respect

to "An Act To Amend The Public Accountancy Act." It largely endorses what has

been stated by the leader of our party and many of the comments as indicated by

the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi VIdi. It has to do with the issue of

standards, and I think that is primarily the area of concern by professionals

who have spoken with me and who have voiced their objection to Bill No. 11

dealing with the incorporation of basically CGAs, CMAs, and CAs acting in a

consolidated fashion throughout the Province.

One suggestion that comes to mind, and could address some of

the concerns that have been raised is, rather than referring to the board as

simply a licensing board, it could be referred to as a license board or a board

of standardization, and that incorporates many of the concerns which have been

expressed largely by Chartered Accountants here in the Province. Because they

see this legislation, Mr. Speaker, as

an Act which does not allow for

appropriate standards being applied to ensure that the public interest is being

protected.

Mr. Speaker, the issue of standards amongst various

professionals is -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - is essentially the issue that I wish

to raise during second reading. And, as indicated, perhaps by referring to the

licencing board as a board other than just licencing, as a body which could, in

fact, apply certain standards to the profession, may be a way to address the

issues which have been raised.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand to make some comments dealing with Bill No. 11, An

Act To Amend The Public Accountancy Act.

As a member of the Committee that was struck that looked at

the notion of public accounting for the Province - and the mandate that it was

given is clear. I would like to just say for the record, this is an issue that

has received significant representations from those people who are Chartered

Accountants and those people who are Certified General Accountants. It is an

issue that has been debated in this Legislature for some time, albeit a new

issue to the new government. But it was a significant issue, and the decisions -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. the Government House Leader and the Member

for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi that right now their behaviour leaves a lot to be

desired in terms of the decorum of this House. I have recognized the hon. the

Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: I thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I sat silently and listened to the comments made by the

Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi, and I expect the same courtesy from all

members, I guess.

In terms of this piece of legislation, this has been studied,

there have been significant representations made to the Select Committee dealing

with this issue. It is an issue that comes down, in my opinion, as a member of

the Committee that submitted its recommendations and findings - and I may add

that the report of the Select Committee on the Practice of Public Accounting,

June 9 1994, which was submitted to this House, was a unanimous report. There

was no minority report emanating from the Committee.

It was clear from our point of view as a Committee, in

beginning our work, and going through the mountains of documents, I can say

honestly, that were provided to all Committee members, and the some forty

witnesses who appeared before our Committee, that changes need to take place.

The Act that deals with the practice of public accounting was

first instituted in 1966. Since that time, very few changes have been made. The

practice of public accounting was exclusive to one profession, Chartered

Accountants. The real issue, the real question for the Committee, was the notion

of standards for public accounting. Because, after all, it is the public that we

are here to protect, it is the practice of public accounting that we have to

administer from a legislative point of view, and whether it is a CGA, CMA or CA

is not necessarily the question. The question is: What are the standards that

this Legislature expects, what are the standards that we wish to maintain, and

what are the standards that we wish to impose, or the process by which we wish

to impose them?

During the hearings I have to say it was clear that animosity

on this issue was evident. It was far less than professional, in my opinion, the

animosity that was clearly demonstrated in the cases presented by CAs and by

CGAs. The Committee tried to look at the issue of public accounting. We heard

many stories. One in particular comes to mind of a CGA who had a B.Comm., did

the CGA practice, basically eight years of post-secondary education, I believe

all of the qualifications in terms of standards, owns a large accounting firm in

this Province, and has two or three CAs, I believe - some other members may be

able to assist me, I don't recall directly, but I do recall the specific

incident - and was not allowed to practice public accounting. On the other hand,

on the other side of the coin, we heard of real-life situations where people who

had the CA designation, who had never practised public accounting within their

field, fifteen to twenty years, had come out of service, I think in one case it

was with the provincial government or federal government, I am not sure which,

but it was with the public service at either the provincial or federal level,

and who immediately went out then and received the designation to go and

practice public accounting. Now, intrinsic in that -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I am just drawing two examples that show a

discrepancy, and that I think demonstrate a need for reform.

The need clearly is that we need a set of standards for

public accounting that are rigorous, that are intense, and that are of the

highest quality, and that no matter if a CMA, a CGA or a CA, whatever the

designation, if those individuals in those categories, or in those professions,

or in any other profession for that matter, can write and meet that standard,

pass the litmus test, then that individual should be allowed to go ahead and

practice public accounting.

The recommendations of the committee were clear and succinct,

and as a committee member I have to say that, in looking at the bill before us,

the board that is recommended seems to be exactly what the committee

recommended. Let me say it for the record.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Your committee therefore recommends...

because it is a very important issue. I would say personally I met with close to

forty people in my office outside of the committee hearings. Of late I have had

representations, correspondence, beginning again because the legislation was

forthcoming, so it is important, I think, for all hon. members who wish to speak

to this issue, and in particular myself as the Member for Kilbride, because I

sat on the select committee dealing with this issue, that the committee's

recommendations were clear - legislation be introduced to admit to the practice

of public accounting, in addition to members of the Institute of Chartered

Accountants and Registered Public Accountants, members of the Certified General

Accountants Association and the Society of Management Accountants found

qualified by their respective bodies on the one hand and approved by a joint

standards directorate.

There are two hoops that must be passed for an individual

before - this was the committee's recommendation - that one, their own

professional designation must qualify that person for themselves to say they

are, by their experience, by their educational background, and by their

academics overall, they must, unto themselves, their own bodies must qualify

them, and then and only then, once their own society qualifies them they must go

to the joint standards directorate, as was recommended by the committee, for

another level to be approved, to ensure that the highest standard is met, to

ensure that public accounting and the standard that we expect in this House,

this Legislature, and the standard that the public must have, is also met.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)).

MR. E. BYRNE: One second, I say to the Government House

Leader.

The second recommendation was that the directorate comprise

one member - the committee was clear on its recommendations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. E. BYRNE: I will grant the hon. members leave if they

wish to debate.

The second recommendation from the committee was that the

directorate be comprised of one member appointed by each of the accounting

bodies, between five and seven other members. That is what this bill says here,

if I am not mistaken, "(

a) one member shall be nominated by and shall be a

member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Newfoundland; (

b) one member

shall be nominated by and shall be a member of the Certified General Accountants

Association; (

c) one member shall be nominated by and shall be a member of the

Society of Management Accountants of Newfoundland." That is exactly what the

committee recommended, Mr. Speaker, exactly.

Another one, that there will be - from those three there

would be between five and seven other members and I believe the legislation is

fairly clear, that there be four other members. So there is a minor change and

when we get to committee it may be my intention to keep it in line with what the

committee recommended. There shall be four other members, maybe five - one

person, five or seven it says. I am not sure but it is a question I have when we

get into the committee debate.

Another recommendation, Mr. Speaker, that the director be

empowered to conduct or oversee practice reviews to determine whether standards

are being met. We put within the directors hands the ability to set standards,

the ability to ensure there is a highest quality of standard. That has been put

into place by the professional bodies that are involved in accounting. That each

body be required to carry out practice inspection of its members - fair enough -

that persons engaged in the practice of public accounting be required to carry

liability insurance, that provision be made for disciplinary procedures for

professional misconduct and for penalties for violation of the statute including

practising without a license and that each body be empowered to license its own

members, subject to the approval of the standards director.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we felt, as a committee, we deliberated

long and hard on this issue. We had many, many conversations amongst ourselves,

many meetings but we felt ultimately that there was time for a change. We felt

strongly enough, based upon the evidence put forward to us, that there were

other designations within the Province right now and other individuals holding

those designations within the Province right now who could meet the standards,

who could practice public accounting in the public interest. What we have

attempted to do or what the select committee attempted to do is to provide an

opportunity for those people who; (1) are qualified by their own professional

organization and (2) who meet the standard by a standards directorate that they

can in fact practice public accounting. Those were the recommendations of the

committee -

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder would the hon. gentleman

permit a question at this point (inaudible)?

MR. E. BYRNE: Sure.

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

MR. TULK: Why did the committee recommend five people be

- from other than one or two professionals, does he recall that?

MR. E. BYRNE: Pardon me?

MR. TULK: You recommended five people as opposed to four?

MR. E. BYRNE: As soon as I get to the recommendation, I

can answer that in a second.

MR. TULK: Can you tell me why?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Just let me get to it here, we said between

five and seven other members appointed by the minister on a pro rated basis from

each of the organizations and three members of the public also appointed by the

minister. So there is a change here - there is no doubt there is a change in the

bill. I don't know why you have not done that but when we get to committee stage

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: One second, I wanted to get to that. I can

get back to that in a moment because it is the only change from this to this and

that is the question I want to get to in a moment.

What we attempted to do, if I can get back to what I was

saying, was to ensure that there were standards in place, that those who met the

standards would be able to practice public accounting. Mr. Speaker, all of that

or almost all of that is contained within Bill No. 11. There is a change and

there is a change that I am concerned about and it deals with the appointment of

the board. While this part of the debate, Mr. Speaker, on second reading is to

deal with generally the applications of the bill, when we get into - I guess for

the information of people in the gallery - committee stage of the bill is when

we debate

section by

section of the bill and we have an opportunity here to

recommend changes and to make amendments to the bill as we see fit and then to

be put before the House for a vote.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Well I understand that but we cannot get to

committee today without consent of all members.

The only difference, Mr. Speaker, in this piece of

legislation as I see it as a committee member and who sat on and worked for a

significant number of hours on this document in dealing with this issue is that;

(1) it says that there shall be four other members who are not affiliated with a

professional accounting association including one member from a banking

community, one member of a business community who is a user of audited financial

statements, one member of the business academic community and a chairperson who

shall be a member of the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador. I am not

completely clear as to why that change in that

section was instituted, and it

deviates, to a great degree, I would suggest to the minister, from the

recommendations of the committee in terms of the composition of the board, what

the committee recommended and actually what is here.

AN HON. MEMBER: You will find out (inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Well, I would like to find out, and when we

get to Committee stage - I will put the minister on notice now and say that

there may be amendments suggested to the composition that would clearly reflect

what the Select Committee recommended on the practice of public accounting, to

ensure that what we recommended, in its entirety, is also contained within Bill

11, in its entirety.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to make a couple of brief comments.

I have heard this afternoon that maybe somebody is trying to

ram something through or maybe somebody is trying to push something through.

I worked with some accounting people some years ago, Mr.

Speaker, and I guess I go back, probably into the Peckford days, when, a certain

designated group were then making submissions to government to have this

particular Act changed. I kind of get the impression from my House Leader here,

that this bill may not pass this afternoon. If it doesn't, Mr. Speaker, I think

it is a shame. I think it is time that we moved forward in this particular area

and that this bill, this afternoon gets passed, that this legislation gets done.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) fault.

MR. FRENCH: Well, I don't know. Hopefully, it is nobody's

fault. We have debated this, by the way, in our own caucus, and I think the time

has come, Mr. Speaker, for this particular bill to be passed once and for all. I

think it is time it was done and it should be done today so that the legislation

can be enacted, so that the committee can be put in place. We are all for checks

and balances, I don't need to go into that, three of my hon. colleagues have

already covered that, and I think it is time that this bill gets passed.

It is a bill that has been studied to death and has been on

the go for more years than anybody probably cares to remember, so I think today,

Mr. Speaker, we should do it and finally get it over with. Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. minister speaks now, he closes

the debate.

The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just a few comments in closing the debate.

We have had many representations from the CAs in the last

little while, but most of the things that they have been asking will not be

changed by amending this piece of legislation. Most of the concerns that they

have will be dealt with by the board once the board is put in place.

I would say to the hon. House that a number of CAs have made

representation to us indicating that they have not had a chance publicly to

debate these changes. I have to say to the House that we have had a Select

Committee hold public hearings, the CAs met, following that with the P and P

Committee, they made representation to the Minister of Justice of the day and

they have also met on a number of occasions with us just recently, indicating

their concerns over the amendments to the bill. But I would say, Mr. Speaker,

that the intent of the bill is not to diminish standards by any stretch of the

imagination, by any means.

The intent of the bill is to change the make-up of the

licencing board so that other jurisdictions such as CGAs and CMAs can be

licensed as public accountants. So I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that I move second

reading of Bill No. 11.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Public Accountancy

Act", (Bill No. 11) read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the

Whole House presently, by leave.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Penney): Order, please!

Bill No. 11,

An Act To Amend The Public Accountancy Act.

CHAIR: Shall clause 4 carry?

MR. E. BYRNE: A point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Kilbride, on a point of

order.

MR. E. BYRNE: If I may ask leave of all members, I know I

just spoke to the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: We moved along while I was just speaking

about the bill behind so I never had a chance to get up and make a few comments

on clause 2.

With respect to the composition of the board, in my opening

comments dealing with clause 2, dealing with the composition - and we

highlighted the discrepancy between what is in the bill and what the Committee

recommended. I just want to be clear for everyone's information here that what

the Select Committee recommended was this: that a directorate be comprised of

one member appointed by each of the accounting bodies - that is there; between

five and seven other members appointed by the minister on a prorated basis from

each of the organizations, which would be from the three bodies - the discretion

would be left to the minister on how many, but between five and seven; and then,

three members of the public, also appointed by the minister.

I don't know if the Government House Leader or the minister

would like to make a comment on that, because I, personally, see it as a

significant change.

AN HON. MEMBER: You do?

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes I do, in terms of what the Committee

recommended and the logic behind the Committee's recommendation. Because all

that is in the bill, it allows just for one member of each of the organizations

to sit on a seven-member board. What it says here in the Committee's findings

was that the Committee made allowance for one member from each of the CAs, CGAs

and CMAs, and then said that there would be between five and seven other members

from those organizations. CAs, for example, may have three members, CGAs may

have two members on the board. But it made allowance for more than just three

representatives and, what was most important to the Committee, allowed the

standards that would be set by the standards directorate to be fully within the

voting control of the licencing bodies: CAs, CGAs and CMAs.

If we move in this direction, what we are doing is taking the

voting control away from the professional bodies and putting it into the hands

of four other members of the board who really are not in the practice of public

accounting, who may be users of it on the one hand, but who are not into, or

would not have the detailed knowledge of the rigorous standards that the

Committee wanted to achieve. They would not have it. That was the allowance.

That is why we recommended the composition of the board to be the way it was. It

is a significant change, I say.

If it is appropriate here, I would like to move an amendment

to clause 2 that would achieve just that, that would achieve what the Select

Committee on Public Accountancy recommended. Because it is very important. The

composition of that board was paramount, and I do not see just this clause of

the legislation achieving that. It takes the control of professional standards

away from professional associations where we wanted them to be and puts them

ultimately in the hands of a majority on the board of four persons who really

have no intimate knowledge of public accountancy.

Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to move an amendment to Clause 2

that would read, beginning subsection 3(2): the board shall consist of -if I can

just take a moment - `one member shall be nominated by and shall be a member of

the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Newfoundland.' That is fair enough.

`one member shall be nominated by and shall be a member of the Certified General

Accountants Association,' That is fair enough. `one member shall be nominated by

and shall be a member of the Society of Management Accountants of Newfoundland

and Labrador.' That is fair enough. But then, and we will strike out everything

thereafter, from

Section (d), (

i) through (iv) and substitute it with, `and that

between five and seven other members be appointed by the minister on a prorated

basis from each of the organizations, and three members of the public also

appointed by the minister.'

That is an amendment I am prepared to move and that would

bring this piece of legislation and this clause in line with what the -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Let me see. We have about eleven,

depending, because the minister has discretion in either appointing five or

seven, nine or eleven, one or the other, so it would be ministerial discretion

given by the Select Committee.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, given the fact that seems to be

in line - of course, if we want to make another amendment later we can always do

it, but given the fact that seems to in line with the consultations, the

committee and so on, we have no objection to moving that amendment, to passing

it.

I am sure the hon. gentleman will (inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Fair enough.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Not to belabour the point, but just to say

that I appreciate moving that amendment because it is paramount to what the

Select Committee tried to determine, and put the control of what the standards

would be into the hands of the professional bodies that would be practising

public accountancy.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would just like to make a few remarks on Clause 2 of the

bill now under debate and the amendment proposed by the Member for Kilbride. The

principle of the amendment I have no difficulty with. I think if we are dealing

with the accountancy standards, the people who know most about what those

standards are, are the people who are in the profession. One of the principle

concerns that anybody in this House would have with respect to this legislation

ought to be how are the public to be protected?

The amendment seems to be consistent altogether with what the

report of the Select Committee says, but I think the four other members here - I

guess what the amendment does not say is it takes away all the particulars of

that. So, I say to the Member for Kilbride, I guess you are not proposing that

one be as particular designation of the banking community or one from any other

community. Are they going to be out altogether? Are you suggesting that there be

no one other than accountants on the board? Is that the idea?

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

No, I am not suggesting that. What the clause says right now,

it only allows for three, one CA, one CGA, and one CMA. What I am asking for is

to do what the Select Committee recommended, that there be three automatic, then

either five or seven, depending on the discretion of the minister, to be

appointed from those organizations, and then, three members of the public also

appointed by the minister, outside of the designation, so three members of the

public outside. It is pretty explicit in the recommendations which I am wording

here now for the amendment for the Clerk. But it would be from the public and

not from those designations.

MR. HARRIS: The result, then, would be that the

accountancy group, shall we say, have a majority of that directorate, or the

board, and they can decide the standards. I think that is certainly important,

and I know, the member, in making his intervention on the bill, has quoted

sections of the report which require - which (inaudible) in the legislation -

that people practising public accountancy have insurance. Perhaps the minister

can deal with this issue because if we are talking about a requirement that

there be insurance for people practising public accountancy, that seems to be

absent from this legislation. There doesn't appear to be any requirement that

there be insurance in place.

I am looking at

Section 10 of the Act and I note we haven't

gotten to Clause 4 of the bill yet. Clause 11, which sets a standard under the

current Act as the Chartered Accountant standard, is being repealed, and what

the board is then left with is

Section 10 of the current Act which states as

follows: That a person who applies to the board and pays the prescribed fees is

entitled to be licensed as a Public Accountant, where the board is satisfied

that he or she is a resident of Canada, possesses the educational, personal and

moral qualifications that the board requires and has passed the examination that

the board recognizes or prescribes. It certainly does not seem to allow the

board to set any other conditions upon people who desire to have a license to

practice public accountancy.

That seems to me, Mr. Chairman, to be a defect in the

legislation. If the legislation is intended to mirror what has been recommended

by the Select Committee, it seems that there ought to be as well, when we get to

the repeal of

Section 4 of the Act, an amendment to

Section 10 to allow the

board to prescribe conditions on those obtaining a license; such as the

recommendation of the Select Committee prescribes, that there be a requirement

of insurance.

I know, the minister, in introducing the bill at second

reading, indicated that perhaps the board could make such rules as are within

their power. It seem to me, Mr. Chairman, that under the legislation as it would

be amended by this bill, there would not be any power in the licensing board to

set conditions such as the requirement of there being insurance in place in

order to protect the public.

I think that the amendment is desirable from the point of

view of having the accountancy control of the standard, but the legislation is

defective in not giving the board the power to also set conditions as well as

those required in the current

Section 10 of the Act, which require the board to

allow the board to establish educational requirements, and also the passing of

examinations; but not any other conditions, such as perhaps meeting a particular

standard in one designation or having a period of apprenticeship for articles as

they have in some professions or meeting some other experiential guidelines in

order to receive a license. I think that putting the standard in the hands of

the professionals themselves is appropriate and I would support the amendment,

but I would look for another amendment later on to make sure that the board has

the power to establish standards.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The House is familiar with the proposed amendment to Clause

(2). Are you ready for the vote?

On motion, amendment carried.

On motion, Clause (2) as amended, carried.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would just like to speak to -

CHAIR: Debating Clause 4?

MR. HARRIS: Clause 4, Mr. Chairman.

I think this is an appropriate place to deal with the issue I

just spoke about.

Section 11 of the Act is repealed and

Section 11 is the

section that allows the board to licence people other than CAs. That is being

repealed. As I just mentioned, by repealing that Act it doesn't allow the board

to establish any other conditions other than those contained in

Section 10.

The old

Section 11 is the one that gives exclusive right to

the CAs - or not the exclusive right, but gives the CAs the automatic right, and

that is being repealed, which is appropriate. I would ask that Clause 4 in

addition to

Section 11 state that

Section 11 of the Act is repealed - add to

that that

Section 11 of the Act is repealed, and substituted by the following:

That in addition to the powers of the board set forth in

Section 10, the board

shall have the power to establish conditions or requirements for applicants who

apply for a licence under this Act.

Do you have that, Mr. Chairman? That

Section 11 of the Act be

repealed and substituted by the following: That in addition to the powers set

forth in

Section 10, the board shall have the power to set conditions on

applicants who seek a licence under the Act.

The purpose of the amendment is in keeping with the concerns

raised by the minister in introducing the bill, and the issues raised by the

Member for Kilbride in discussing the issue of the Committee's recommendation

that all those practising public accountants be required to have insurance. That

isn't in the Act, it isn't in the amendment that we have before us, and there is

no provision in the existing Act which gives the board the power to set

conditions for applicants.

Section 10 of the Act now reads as follows: That a person who

applies to the board and pays the prescribed fees is entitled to be a licensed

public accountant where the board is satisfied that he or she is a resident of

Canada, possesses the educational, personal or moral qualifications the board

requires, and has passed the examination that the board recognizes or

prescribes.

That seems to limit the powers of the board to only deal with

issues as to whether or not they meet certain moral or educational standards or

pass examinations, but does not give the board the power to set any other

conditions, such as, for example, as the Select Committee had recommended, to

require that licensees have insurance. That, Mr. Chairman, is the purpose of the

amendment and I urge its acceptance by hon. members.

CHAIR: If it meets with the approval of the House, we

will get to Clauses 3 and 4 in a moment. Can we call Clause 5?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Is Clause 3 carried?

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: No. It is the understanding of the Chair that

Clause 3 would have to be amended because of the quorum.

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Chairman, I think we should repeal

Clause 3, take it out altogether. I am not sure that we even need it. Because

under the

interpretation Act it clearly sets out: that where a board, commission

or other body in this

section called a board - which would apply to this - is

constituted under

an Act, a majority of the board is a quorum, and the

chairperson of the board has an equal vote with the other members. It is already

implicit in law that governs us and governs boards set out by government what a

majority is, so we don't need that. So I move that we delete Clause 3, Mr.

Chairman.

On motion, amendment carried.

On motion, Clause 3 as amended by deletion, carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi,

on a point of order.

MR. HARRIS: Some of the members were asking for a copy of

the amendment that was proposed. Has the amendment been further discussed or

voted on?

AN HON. MEMBER: It was passed.

MR. HARRIS: It was passed, was it?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Was the amendment passed?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

CHAIR: Yes.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Public Accountancy Act." (Bill

No. 11)

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill with

amendment, carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee rise,

report substantial progress, and ask leave to sit again.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask

leave to sit again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Lewisporte.

MR. PENNEY: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have

considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to report that Bill

No. 11, "An Act to Amend The Public Accountancy Act", has passed with amendment,

and ask leave to sit again.

On motion, report received and adopted.

Amendment to Bill No. 11 read a first and second time, bill

ordered read a third time presently by leave.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Public Accountancy Act". (Bill

No. 11)

On motion, Bill No 11 read a third time, ordered passed, and

its title be as on the Order Paper.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, it is 4:30 p.m. and I think we

should take a recess for eight or nine minutes, but before we do that it is with

some - I cannot say it is with pleasure that I rise to do what I am going to do

now but I do want to congratulate and extend best wishes on behalf of the

government to Mr. John, or as he is otherwise known, Jack Oates, who is

presently the audio equipment director for us here. I wonder if he could be

allowed to stand up and take a bow?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: Mr. Oates was born in Bay Roberts and started

his career with Atlantic Films and Electronics Limited where he learned the

skills needed to operate and maintain sound and recording equipment. Before

joining the audio/visual division of the Department of Education, 1961, he was

involved with the planning and technical organization for the sound and

recording system, the newly constructed House of Assembly Chamber on the ninth

and tenth floors of the tower. When that Chamb