PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version (Night)

October 19, 2021

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. L No. 23

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

SPEAKER (Bennett):

Order, please!

Before

we start today's session, I'd like to just introduce our Pages here today.

Returning this year is Olivia Pendergast. Olivia is from St. John's and she's

studying political science at Memorial University.

Our new

Page today is Andrew Dogurga. Andrew is originally from Turkey and moved to St.

John's when he was the age of 11. He is also studying political science at

Memorial University.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

SPEAKER:

Today, we will hear Members'

statements from the hon. Members for the Districts of Cape St. Francis, Baie

Verte - Green Bay, Exploits, Labrador West and Harbour Main.

The hon.

the Member for Cape St. Francis.

J. WALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, throughout Canada, October marks Autism Awareness Month; a time to

celebrate difference and reflect on the importance of awareness, acceptance and

understanding in all aspects of our community. We have the opportunity to share

the importance of learning about autism and for everyone to take their own

measures to raise awareness of those with Autism Spectrum Disorder.

In our

province, one in 57 people are diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder,

annually, the highest incidence in the country.

In my

former career, I had 27 years of experience working with individuals with autism

and have always admired their strengths, supported their challenges and praised

their accomplishments.

On a

personal level, my godson, Kip Chalker, was recently diagnosed with autism. A

smart, happy boy in kindergarten who has a positive future ahead of him, thanks

to a loving, supportive and inclusive family to help guide Kip along his way.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all hon. Members to join me in recognizing October as Autism

Awareness Month, to advocate for those living with autism and applaud the family

members who provide the care, safety and security to their loved ones.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Baie

Verte - Green Bay.

B. WARR:

Mr. Speaker, today, I

recognize the late Diane Noble of Baie Verte.

On June

27, 2021, the communities of Baie Verte and Nipper's Harbour said goodbye to one

of its dearly loved and respected residents, Diane Noble, at the tender age of

Diane

had a keen sense for politics and always looked forward to the broadcast from

this hon. House of Assembly as well as the broadcast from the Nation's capital.

Like her

mother, Greta, regardless of where you saw Diane, at home, in a vehicle, or at a

convention, the knitting needles and a ball of wool would be not too far away.

Whenever you were in the company of Diane you knew she would have you smiling; a

very warm-hearted and fun-loving lady.

Our

thoughts are with her twin sister, Debbie; her parents, Warrick and Greta

Osborne; brother, Dennis Noble; and all who knew her, including a large circle

of extended family and many, many friends.

I ask

hon. Members to join me in offering condolences to the Noble and Osborne family.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, on Friday, October 15, I attended the funeral of an icon and community

leader in the Town of Bishop's Falls, Mr. Oliver Rose.

Oliver

started his teaching career of 30 years in Bishop's Falls and during this time,

he also served both as councillor and mayor for the town. Oliver also dedicated

45 years volunteering his time in many capacities, including president of the

Bishop's Falls Lions Club and chair of the board of directors of the Lion Max

Simms camp. He was a dedicated Lion who worked tirelessly to ensure that the

Lions Club remained successful.

Following Oliver's retirement, he suffered a devastating stroke. Lo and behold,

Oliver adapted to his limitations and continued to serve his community in any

way he could.

The Town

of Bishop's Falls would not be where it is today without the contributions of

Oliver Rose.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all hon. Members to join me in saying farewell to my teacher,

councillor, fellow Lion and friend, Mr. Oliver Rose.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I rise

today to acknowledge Marty Byrne from Labrador West. Marty is a Labrador West

ceramic pottery artist who opened up an exhibit called Labrador Erratics at the

Craft Council of Newfoundland and Labrador gallery this year.

Marty's

work reflects Labrador and the beauty of the land and the northern lights. Marty

has also a small pottery business based out of his garage called Byrne'n Mud. We

beautiful ceramics he's created and to see the ceramics painted by people from

the community who have attended one of his many events.

Marty is

a major supporter of many local artists, encouraging them to exhibit their

works. In July, Marty held the third annual Art Wander show, where artists in

the community exhibit their works along the Tanya Lake Trail. This show has

grown to be a community favourite and a platform for artists in the community to

showcase all their works.

I ask

all Members to join me in thanking Marty Byrne for showing us his beautiful

works and encouraging many other artists to do the same as him.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today in

this hon. House, I would like to congratulate the winners and nominees at the

recently held Premier's Athletic Awards ceremony here in St. John's.

These

athletes are recognized for their outstanding accomplishments in sport and I am

extremely proud of the fact that two athletes from the Harbour Main District

were honoured and recognized for their success and achievement.

I would

like to congratulate Halle Joy of Harbour Main for her dedication, hard work and

excellence in the sport of softball, and Drew Sheppard of Seal Cove for his

commitment and endurance in the sport of ball hockey.

It takes

a lot of passion and commitment to excel in any sport, but it also demands

perseverance and stamina. These athletes and all athletes have certainly done us

proud as a province.

I ask

all hon. Members of this House of Assembly to join with me in congratulating

Halle and Drew and all the award winners and nominees of the Premier's Athletic

Awards on their invaluable achievements in sport.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

provincial government's Seniors of Distinction Awards celebrate the

contributions, achievements and diversity of older persons and seniors in the

province.

I had

the pleasure of announcing the 2021 Seniors of Distinction on October 1 as part

of marking National Seniors' Day and the United Nations International Day of

Older Persons, and today I am pleased to recognize these five remarkable

individuals in this House.

This

year's award recipients are Rose Andrews of Carbonear, Patrick Moore of Corner

Brook, Clyde Russell of Stephenville, Dorothy Mary Senior of Paradise and Paul

Smith of Conception Bay South.

Each of

these individuals has demonstrated extraordinary commitment in the service of

others and each is making a positive difference in the province and beyond.

Rose

Africa.

Patrick

Moore is a long-serving search and rescue volunteer who has contributed to many

community service events and is known for his compassion and generosity.

Clyde

Russell is a retired Canadian Forces colonel who has dedicated much of his

career to counter-terrorism and special operations, and continues to serve his

community through various initiatives.

Dorothy

Mary Senior is a dedicated patient advocate who maintains an ongoing role in

improving patient services.

And

last, but certainly not least, Paul F. Smith is a long-time community volunteer

and dedicated builder, coach and executive in the sport of softball.

Speaker,

I invite all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and all Members of this House to

join me in congratulating the 2021 Seniors of Distinction.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I

would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

Friday,

October 1 is recognized as National Seniors Day and the United Nations'

International Day for Older Persons. Days like these are important because we

get an opportunity to recognize our seniors who have helped grow and shape

families and communities all across our great province.

I join

the minister in acknowledging and congratulating this year's recipients of the

provincial government's Seniors of Distinction awards. A special thank you to

this year's recipients – Rose Andrews, Patrick W. Moore, Clyde Russell, Dorothy

Mary Senior and Paul F. Smith – for all their contributions to their communities

and our province.

It's

important we continue to recognize community leaders like this year's

recipients, but we should also consider obtaining better support systems for

seniors that live in poverty or suffer from elder abuse. It's important that we

continue to recognize the value of seniors in all communities while ensuring

they continue to live happy and healthy lifestyles. No senior should have to

struggle in making a decision on whether to heat their home or put food on the

table.

Congratulations to all the recipients of the 2021 Seniors of Distinction and

thank you for all that you continue to do for our province.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker, and I,

too, thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

The

Third Party would also like to take this opportunity to recognize the

achievements of Ms. Andrews, Mr. Moore, Mr. Russell, Ms. Senior and Mr. Smith.

These exemplary individuals are pillars of their communities and have

demonstrated an extraordinary commitment to this province through their selfless

work and tireless dedication.

More

broadly, National Seniors Day is an opportunity to reflect on the contributions

that our elders have made to secure the quality of our life and the society that

we enjoy today. In return, we call upon government to repay the debt and make

sure that they continue to work to ensure that seniors across this province can

afford the necessities of life. We also call upon government to improve the

quality of publicly funded seniors care so that those who raised us can age in

peace and dignity.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today

The Telegram published the story of a

man with complex health care needs who, between him and his spouse, made 500

phone calls to try and find a family doctor. Mr. Speaker, 500 calls.

I ask

the Premier: Is this story, which is the experience of countless others,

acceptable in Newfoundland and Labrador?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

certainly empathetic and sympathetic to that gentleman and his family. We all

know that there is a problem in health care, and that is why we have taken this

opportunity to launch, a year ago, the Health Accord. We know that there are

also short-term solutions while we're reinventing the health care system for the

future and for a sustainable future for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. That

is why the minister yesterday announced some short-term solutions.

recognize that this isn't going to solve all the woes. But if you look across

the country, every single jurisdiction is having a problem with health care.

We're ahead of the curve by recognizing that this is a paradigm shift and we

need to elevate ourselves to recognize the debate and discourse that is

happening in the public because they want change for the future – a sustainable

future for health care in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

realize we recognize it now and the government has – six years too late, for a

lot of people who are having to make 500 calls to try to get access to a family

physician.

Mr.

Speaker, imagine how many thousands of people are facing the same situation in

our province today. Without a family physician, continuity of care is

impossible. It means issues go unchecked and symptoms linger for longer without

treatment. It is a snowball effect that cost lives, not to mention adding

pressure to our health care crisis.

I ask

the Premier: How many family doctors are taking new patients today in

Newfoundland and Labrador?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again,

we know that there is a problem with family medicine in the province; I have

seen it first-hand. I know, from the experience of some of the family doctors

themselves, the problems in the system itself. But I challenge everybody in this

House that this is an opportunity, every sitting of this House – this noble

House, has a rendezvous with history. Ours happens to be pivoted firmly in

health care.

I ask

everyone to have the courage and the imagination to come with solutions, not

just single off-the-hand complaints that we all know exist. We are all tasked to

be bold, be imaginative and recreate this system for the future of our province,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker, when we have

loved ones who need access to health care, we expect our health care system to

be able to provide it for them. They can't do that if they don't have the

adequate resources, and that's up to the government to be able to find it. We'll

work with anybody to find those solutions to make it better for people in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker, the people in my

home District of Conception Bay East - Bell Island, as well as communities all

across this province, are desperately trying to find a family doctor. These

people need a family doctor, while the Health Minister issues an RFP for health

care recruitment six years too late. A clear admission this government had no

plan to address the crisis.

How can

someone in Newfoundland and Labrador find a family doctor today, Premier?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Again, Mr. Speaker, we've

recognized that this was a problem. One of the first things I did after becoming

Premier was to announce the Health Accord NL, involving all stakeholders – it

doesn't matter about political stripe or where they are coming from. We want all

options on the table so that we can create solutions, not just one-off

solutions.

understand and appreciate and am completely empathetic to Bell Island and people

in the district who can't find a family doctor, but this is bigger. We need to

think bigger about how to create solutions for the entire province so that we're

not back in this Legislature next year or the year after, five years from now,

having one-off issues with particular jurisdictions and areas across the

province. That's what we've been tasked with, that's what we're set out to do

and that's what we will accomplish, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

Premier finally acknowledged yesterday that for the 100,000 Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians without a family doctor it is a crisis. But the health care crisis

runs deep. Right now, there are hundreds of empty long-term care beds in our

province due to government's failure to recruit nurses.

I ask

the Premier: Do you recognize the long-term care crisis unfolding in

Newfoundland and Labrador?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and

thank you for the opportunity to answer that question.

Certainly, we do and that's why it was part of the Health Accord to look at how

we – we recognize that not only is it a problem now, frankly, and we could come

up with a quick solution to make the Opposition's questions go away; we realize

that with the aging demographics that there will be significant pressure on the

system well into the future.

So we

need to make sure that we're looking at systems and structures in place to

accommodate our aging population. That's why the Minister of Health has been

working with the stakeholders to ensure that we're increasing enrolment and

graduation throughout nursing schools so that we can provide those much-needed

resources to our aging demographic, Mr. Speaker.

That's

not just a problem for today; it's a problem for generations and years to come.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians do not have access to long-term

care beds.

So I ask

the Premier: How many long-term care beds are sitting empty in this province due

to the failure of this government to recruit and train enough nurses?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

issue of access to long-term care is as much about the challenges of acute care

as it is long-term care. I do not have a precise number, but I'll certainly get

that for the Member opposite and bring that back to him.

The

issue is fundamentally around recruitment and retention. I think one of the

things we really need to do here is collectively work together to sell this

province as a good place to work and a great place to live. Yesterday was the

day we changed the dial on that channel, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can

say, honestly, that myself and the minister finally agree that recruitment and

retention is the key objective here. It's unfortunate for the last six years it

hasn't been done. That's why we're in the state we are right now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

This government has two

long-term care facilities in Central Newfoundland that can't even open their

doors because of a shortage of nursing staff.

I ask

the Premier: Will these facilities be open by January 1, 2022?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Those

facilities are fully staffed. They cannot open because of issues that have not

yet been resolved between the contractor and TI. It is a matter of taking

possession of the building before we can occupy it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information, our family medicine

physicians are the lowest paid in the country.

I ask

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board: How are we going to

recruit family physicians with the lowest pay in the country?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

appreciate the question. We have been negotiating and discussing these very

issues with the NLMA for a number of months now. As a matter of fact, on

September 29 of this year, a little less than a month ago, we had presented a

full proposal, full package to the NLMA regarding payment

schedule review, leave

benefits, rural retention bonuses, all retention and recruitment issues so that

we could really get to the heart of what the Member opposite is talking about.

We do

spend over half a billion dollars a year for about 1,332 doctors. We are very

anxious to have NLMA return to the table so that we can continue to discuss

these very important issues.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland

and Labrador Medical Association thought so much of that offer on September 29

that they walked away from the table. While our family doctors continue to be

paid the lowest in the country, the cost of all physicians in our province is

actually 8 per cent below the national average per person.

I ask

the minister: How do we attract family physicians if our compensation packages

are not competitive?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

issue of compensation is as much about the way the association chooses to divide

the money that government provides for physician services as it is about

anything else, Mr. Speaker. The door is open for negotiations.

understanding is the NLMA have stepped away to consult with their membership,

and that will not happen, at the earliest, before tonight. So I would suggest

the Member opposite has kind of mischaracterized the situation a little bit.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Mr. Speaker, I don't think

I've mischaracterized it at all. The fact of matter is our physicians are paid

less. Our family physicians make less than anywhere else in the country. Our

total compensation package for physicians is 8 per cent lower per capita than

the entire country. And, at the same time, the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical

Association were told by the Minister of Finance that there will be zero – zero

– new investment in the Physician Services budget to improve the province's

recruitment and retention.

So I ask

the minister: Is this the first step in implementing the Greene report's 25 per

cent cut in health care spending?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

While I

appreciate the question concerning the negotiations that are happening between

the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the NLMA, I can certainly say

that we are working very hard at the table to discuss the issues that are being

raised.

As I

said, we are discussing, for example, family practice renewal funding, blended

payment models. We are discussing the issues – the issues – that make up the

concerns around retention and recruitment, Mr. Speaker.

So I

would say to the Member opposite the best we can do right now is await the

consultations that NLMA wish to have with their members, and hopefully very

quickly they'll come back to the table for further discussions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

So, Mr. Speaker, the minister

acknowledges that there's zero new investment in the Physician Services budget.

I'm not sure if that's what I heard. That sounded like what I heard, which

causes grave concern when you think about the fact that our family physicians,

as I said, are the lowest paid in the country.

Mr.

Speaker, with the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association walking away

from the table due to the strong-arm negotiating tactics, I ask the minister:

What is government's plan if physicians decide to take strike action?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

I think it's important at

this point, Mr. Speaker, to point out, yesterday, we announced packages that

total $30 million.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

J. HAGGIE:

That is slightly over 4 per

cent, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's

great to hear the minister talk to the $30 million in the package, because

collaborative care clinics are an excellent model for addressing this. And I

have to commend the minister on reading our Blue Book.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

P. DINN:

However, they are only good if there are enough family physicians in the

province.

So I ask

the minister: How many new physicians will be added to the staff for these four

clinics?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I'd like

to congratulate the Progressive Conservative Party for reading the Canadian

Medical Association's discussion on this subject back in 2011.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

J. HAGGIE:

In the question, Mr. Speaker,

is a flaw. The resources, from a human resource point of view, are magnified by

teams. It is not the question that a family physician or a nurse practitioner or

a community nurse has to work in isolation and carry the entire load. The work

can be distributed.

We have

spent time, over the last six years, enhancing the scopes of practice of every

one of those people there. We're looking at RN prescribing, we have freed nurse

practitioners to work autonomously and, by putting them together in teams, each

of them works to their best scope and shares the load in a way that makes it

better for all.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Recruiting doctors for these new clinics have to come from the local pool of

doctors. So it means taking these doctors away from their practices. It will

replace one group of orphaned patients with another.

I ask

the minister: Where will these new family doctors come from?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Family

physicians graduating from residency programs lately have chosen to spend

significant portions of their time not doing family medicine. We presented them

with an opportunity, through the new, collaborative team clinics, to return to

that.

And,

certainly, in metro, there is absolutely no shortage of physicians who want to

go back to what they trained to do, which was good, high-level primary care. By

supporting them properly, we can use them to their best efficiency and we make

the best of our nurse practitioners, our midwives, our social workers, our

mental health and addictions counsellors, our diabetic educators and our

community nurses.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would

assume, if the minister knows where the graduating doctors are not going, he

should know why they're not going there and should be dealing with that issue.

It's not just about doctors. Collaborative care clinics will be staffed with

family doctors but, as well, nurse practitioners and registered nurses.

Where

will these new nursing staff come from?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

An excellent question, Mr.

Speaker. The family medicine residents want to work in these environments. We

employ pretty well every nurse practitioner graduate that we make in this

province, and I'm looking to try and expand that. So, to feed that pool of nurse

practitioners, we will be expanding the Bachelor of Nursing program with seats

in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Gander and Grand Falls-Windsor, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

L. PARROTT:

I have nurse practitioners in my district that aren't working as nurse

practitioners.

In the

last sitting, I spoke of a doctor who immigrated to my district and is unable to

practice medicine because of the lengthy runaround to have his credentials

recognized in our province.

I ask

the minister: What is being done to address multiple hurdles and lengthy delays

faced by newcomers who are qualified and just want to practice medicine here in

Newfoundland?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

That's an excellent question, Mr. Speaker.

The

paperwork that people have to do to become licensed in this province is

generated by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Newfoundland and

Labrador. If I have spoken to them once on this issue, I have talked until I'm

blue in the face. They are an independent group set up by legislation to control

the standards of practice and, rightly or wrongly, I cannot interfere in that.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

L. PARROTT:

I'm sure the minister can introduce legislation to control it.

Mr.

Speaker, in the last 10 months in my district, and specifically the Bonavista

Peninsula and Clarenville area, we have had seven doctors leave in 10 months.

Not one – not one – new doctor has been recruited to come back in the last 10

months.

I ask

the minister: How long can the people of Clarenville and the Bonavista Peninsula

expect to wait before this situation is – not resolved, before you even begin to

address it?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The last

part of the question is already answered. We began to address that years ago and

yesterday you saw some more steps around recruitment and retention.

Retention in rural areas has always been a challenge, Mr. Speaker. It really has

and will continue to be. It is not something any one group can fix by itself:

the association, the college, government. When you're attracting a physician,

you are attracting a family. It needs to be a community-based effort. It needs

to be a university-involved effort. It needs all parties to work together and we

need to get this sorted out. That is why we have set up a provincial

office of recruitment and retention that will address this issue, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last

October in the House of Assembly, the Minister of Transportation responded to my

concerns about the inability to medevac services after dark in Nain by saying:

“… there cannot be a fixed wing that will come in after dark, but the sources of

search and rescue would come into assistance, should we ever need them ….”

I ask

the Minister of Health: Is it acceptable that a heart-attack patient in Nain was

forced to wait until daylight recently to be medevacked and are others at risk?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I can't

speak to the technical issues around aviation and why Nain has no lights at

night.

What I

can say, very clearly, is that decisions about timing of medevacs are clinical;

they are based on the discussion between the referring practitioner and the

receiving practitioner. Should those discussions indicate that a nighttime

evacuation is necessary; that will be provided, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

From 3

a.m. until daylight being told that the chopper was coming, then to be told: No,

we're waiting on a fixed-wing. Am I going to have to wait another year to get

the same answer again? In the process, somebody will die with a heart attack,

Mr. Speaker.

77-year-old woman in Hopedale fell and broke her hip and was not medevacked,

although the weather was clear; the medevac could have come in. She was told she

had to stay at home and would fly out on the regular-scheduled patient flight

the next day. When the patient finally arrived in Goose Bay, three days later,

she had to be medevacked to St. John's for surgery.

I ask

the minister: Is this an acceptable level of health care for service in my

District of Torngat Mountains?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

That

certainly is a concerning issue. I'm not sure if that's been raised with my

department, but I would be happy, if it hasn't, to look into it. But, certainly,

Labrador-Grenfell Health will have a role around that.

I can't

comment any further because I have insufficient details and insufficient

background about which to do so. So with appropriate consent and documentation,

I'd be happy to do that and get back to the Member opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

actual fact, there's an investigation going on now.

Yesterday, I received a call from a dialysis patient in Goose Bay who was told

that all treatment was cancelled for the day just because there wasn't a

registered nurse available. No registered nurse available, so no dialysis for

the day. Later, she went in for blood work and was told, depending on the

results, she may have to go to Lab City or St. Anthony for dialysis. This is

exactly what she told me.

I ask

the minister: Why are we forcing dialysis patients to miss their scheduled

treatments and why are they exposed to the additional stress of maybe having to

travel elsewhere to receive critical health care?

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Of my

time in the department, the Kidney Program is moving towards home dialysis. It

is much safer for patients than people would have you believe. It is also much

more convenient, and we do have examples of this in rural Labrador where

patients receive home dialysis.

In terms

of the specifics of this case, staffing challenges, particularly in

Labrador-Grenfell, are more acute in some respects than in other areas, and

particularly on the North Coast. I would loop back to my comments about

recruitment and retention; that is the longer-term fix.

In the

meantime, we have limited number of dialysis centres and in the event that one

cannot perform dialysis, others cover. That is an unfortunate situation but, at

the moment, is the only recourse we have.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Trepassey recently lost its second ambulance and we already know incidents where

the region was in red alert.

I ask

the minister: Will he commit to consulting with the people of Trepassey to

ensure that they are not left behind?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

There

were three ambulances between two communities run by one operator. The number of

people in the Trepassey area has dropped by around 60 per cent in the last 10

years and the number of calls in the other end of the district had increased by

at least 20 per cent.

What we

have done is allowed the request of the operator to reposition one of the

furthest line rigs into the busier area. We have also committed to what we call

dynamic dispatching, so in the event that one ambulance leaves Trepassey another

one will be moved into a more convenient position to cover and we will monitor

dispatch and arrival times.

That is

the standard that we now use and we'll work with the operator to make sure

they're met, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you. Mr. Speaker.

This is

not about cost. This is about distance and geography. That is the issue in the

area, so the minister should have his department look at that and get back to

the people of Trepassey.

Yesterday, the Premier acknowledged that people who cannot find an ambulance are

in a health care crisis. It is time for this government to step up and address

the ambulance crisis in Trepassey.

I ask

the minister yet again: Will he reposition a second ambulance at the Trepassey

base? If so, when does he plan to do it?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I think

it's really important, given the load on our health care system, particularly

our front-line operators, that we use our resources wisely and effectively. This

was at the request of the operator, we will reposition ambulances if required

and, at that point, we will certainly have some –

AN HON. MEMBER:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

J. HAGGIE:

We will keep an eye on the

information around dispatch times.

This has

hardly got off the ground yet so I am not aware of any challenges, as yet, with

meeting the standard dispatch time.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

We know

the thoughtful, consultative, comprehensive work being carried out by Health

Accord NL. The Minister of Health and Community Services has said, “The

long-term plan is essentially going to be the Health Accord …. That will be our

road map ….”

I ask

the minister: Will he commit to implementing the recommendations of the report

when it is released in the new year?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

What I

actually said was that our long-term plan will be heavily informed by the Health

Accord NL. Certainly, we will be delighted to see what has been a really

significant body of work that's already been done, and we will look at that and

we will see the recommendations in the light of the realities of the day.

But I am

really optimistic that this is going to produce the transformative change that

myself and the Premier want.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Actually, what I quoted was from a news report in CBC. Either way, the answer

doesn't sound very committal.

Now, the

Premier had no problem endorsing the PERT report sight unseen. In his September

2020 mandate letter to the Minister of Finance, he asked her to – and I quote –

“work with me to oversee and implement recommendations of the Premier's Economic

Recovery Team.” Long before the report was released or he knew what the

recommendations would be.

Considering the fact that infinitely more thought and consultation has gone into

drafting the Health Accord NL than his PERT report, I ask the Premier: Will he

commit to implementing the recommendations of the Health Accord NL?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and

thank you for the question.

Certainly, what we said was – there was no “all” in that mandate letter, first

of all. We said recommendations and we did commit to a consultation process,

which I'm happy to say has been undertaken over the summer and is being

formulated now and in analysis.

With

respect to the Health Accord, this is a large body of work that is shifting the

paradigm of how we deliver health care in this province. I think we'll be

national leaders on this. We're recognizing that we are the first jurisdiction

to really undergo a transformational change within health care because we know

we need to.

It will

be informed by evidence, which we gathered, collected, and opinions based on and

delivered through the Health Accord, Mr. Speaker. We look forward to working

with them to see how we can best implement. Perhaps there's something in there

that we're unaware of that we may not be able to implement, but it certainly

will be a working road map.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

SPEAKER:

Mount Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

He's not that lucky.

Mr.

Speaker, a few months after the onset of the pandemic, government held a weekly

conference call with elected representatives of both Opposition parties, as well

as a representative of the independent Members, in order to provide updates on

matters related to the management of the pandemic, as well as to provide an

opportunity for Members to provide feedback and to ask questions to the minister

on behalf of their constituents.

These

meetings were very cordial and served as a very useful tool for information

sharing between all Members. Unfortunately, since the provincial general

election and the government's subsequent change in status from minority to

majority, these meetings have ceased to occur.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

P. LANE:

I ask the minister: In the

spirit of co-operation, will he reconvene these weekly discussions and, if not,

why not?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Those

meetings did go on and I think, if memory serves me beyond the election and the

change of minority status, quite frankly they stopped because nobody turned up

again. From our point of view, if the Member opposite has some issues about

COVID-19, which he did earlier on, he can do what he does: Come over here and

I'm happy to chat with him any time, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure who

didn't show up; I certainly did every time.

Mr.

Speaker, despite the minister's assertion that all is well at motor vehicle

registration, speak to the average citizen, particularly our seniors, and they

will tell a very different story. Unanswered phone calls, no return phone calls,

long lines outside in all kinds of weather, unacceptable wait times for

appointments is the order of the day.

While

nobody in this Legislature is averse to the concept of maximizing the

utilization of technology, where appropriate, through government, its end goal

should be service improvement, not the creation of chaos and frustration.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

P. LANE:

I ask the Minister of Digital

Government and Service NL: Will she finally admit that what she has created at

motor vehicle registration amounts to an experiment gone wrong and, more

importantly, will she open the doors to motor vehicle registration and Service

NL offices across the province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Our

offices at Motor Registration across the province are open. As for before the

pandemic, there's a system where, in more than half of our offices, you can make

an appointment that week. Members of the public reach out to me telling me how

happy they are with the appointment system. They can get in and out really

quickly.

I've

also said that if you have a need that's urgent or you can't wait for an

appointment, you can walk in. Across the province, Mr. Speaker, we have an

average walk-in rate of 26 per cent. So 26 per cent of our attention to clients,

Mr. Speaker, is walk-in.

believe, at the moment, we kind of have a hybrid system, and we're always

monitoring to see how we can make improvements for the people of the province.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I give notice of

the following motion:

WHEREAS

the Commissioner for Legislative Standards presented a report,

The Joyce Report , October 18, 2018;

WHEREAS

the report was presented in the House of Assembly and concurred by the majority

of the House of Assembly;

WHEREAS

the findings were that I violated Principle 10 of the Code of Conduct;

WHEREAS

the complainant was the MHA for Placentia - St. Mary's, an elected official;

WHEREAS

Principle 10 states, “Relationships between Members and government employees

should be professional and based upon mutual respect and should have regard to

the duty of these employees to remain politically impartial when carrying out

their duties.”

WHEREAS

the Commissioner for Legislative Standards stated in the report: “In the manner

in which he dealt with the Complainant, and particularly during the call on

April 8th …. Relationships between Members and government employees should be

professional and based upon mutual respect and should have regard to the duty of

those employees ….

“I find

that the conduct of MHA Joyce is a violation of principle 10 of the Code of

Conduct…. I find that the manner in which he addressed this issue was

unprofessional and showed a lack of mutual respect towards members of the public

service ….”

WHEREAS

it is very obvious that the Commissioner for Legislative Standards defined the

complainant, an MHA, as a public sector government employee, contrary to

Principle 10. This was a deliberate and malicious attempt to mislead the House

of Assembly by the Commissioner for Legislative Standards, Mr. Bruce Chaulk;

WHEREAS

former MHA, Dale Kirby, appealed to the Information and Privacy Commissioner in

December 2018 for a copy of the Rubin Thomlinson report;

WHEREAS

testimony in the report by the Information and Privacy Commissioner is as

follows:

The

Commissioner for Legislative Standards reversed his position and gave testimony

that Members are not government employees, less than two months after he

presented The Joyce Report to the

House of Assembly;

The

Clerk of the House of Assembly gave testimony that Members are not government

employees;

The

Information and Privacy Commissioner's ruling states Members are not government

employees, Report A-2019-004.

WHEREAS

other evidence to support the position that MHAs are not government employees

are:

The

letter from the Law Clerk who stated Members are not government employees;

November 2, 2018, former Speaker and Member of Lake Melville, in his letter

stated: Members of the House of Assembly are elected officials. They are not

employees;

The

former Speaker's statement was before the debated occurred in the House of

Assembly on November 6, 2018, and he was Chair of the Management Commission;

The

Commissioner for Legislative Standards reversed his position again, contrary to

what he presented in the House of Assembly, in a letter dated November 27, 2020,

to the hon. David B. Orsborn – and I quote – “… members of the House of Assembly

are not employees ….”

Supreme

Court of Newfoundland and Labrador Justice Francis J. Knickle stated in a ruling

on June 10, 2021: The appellant, Mr. Dale Kirby, MHA, is neither an employee in

the traditional sense;

WHEREAS

the Executive Council of the Liberal government mandated public sector employees

to be fully vaccinated;

WHEREAS

Members of the House of Assembly are not government employees, the government

introduced a resolution on October 18, 2021, in the House of Assembly that all

MHAs must be fully vaccinated;

WHEREAS

the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador distinguished by mandating public

sector employees to be vaccinated, and the motion of October 18, 2021, that

Members of the House of Assembly are not government employees of the public

sector and must be vaccinated by bringing for the motion. This is an admission

by Premier Furey and the government that MHAs are not government employees,

contrary to the findings of The

Joyce Report of 2018;

WHEREAS

the House of Assembly, by concurring with

The Joyce Report of 2018, has established that Members of the House of

Assembly are government employees, which now the government is admitting was a

wrong conclusion;

WHEREAS

former Premier Dwight Ball stated on August 23, 2018, to the media in a public

statement: There's no room for political interference in the reports, said Ball,

I've not received any information from the Commissioner neither have I went

looking for any;

WHEREAS

the Commissioner for Legislative Standards stated on many occasions: I am an

independent officer of the House and these reports are independent;

WHEREAS

in a letter dated May 31, 2019, Dwight Ball stated: I can confirm there were

limited occasions whereby my office contacted the Office of the Commissioner for

Legislative Standards;

WHEREAS

the Commissioner for Legislative Standards made false and misleading findings in

The Joyce Report ;

WHEREAS

the Commissioner for Legislative Standards was not independent and had political

influence, which he did not declare in the House of Assembly.

I call

upon the House of Assembly to rescind The

Kirby Report of October 3, 2018, and

The Joyce Report of October 18, 2018;

FURTHERMORE, I call upon the House of Assembly to ask for an independent review

of the process and make recommendations on how to strengthen the

House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act

to ensure that all Members will have confidence in the process.

SPEAKER:

Any other notices of motion?

Answers

to Questions for Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS

there are many hopeful mothers and couples in this province dealing with

infertility issues and require medical assistance to conceive; and

WHEREAS

the costs associated with out-of-province fertility treatments, specifically in

vitro fertilization, is extremely cost prohibitive; and

WHEREAS

there are doctors in the province trained in in vitro fertilization and have the

desire to set-up an in vitro fertilization clinic in the province; and

WHEREAS

the province is dealing with an aging population and serious population growth

challenges.

THEREFORE we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to establish a fertility treatment clinic within the

province providing full fertility services, including in vitro fertilization for

hopeful mothers and families, and, in the interim, provide financial assistance

to access out-of-province fertility treatment and services.

Mr.

Speaker, this has been an issue that has been ongoing for quite a long time. The

Premier actually committed to enabling IVF treatments in the province during

this past election, eight months ago. The Minister of Health months ago had

indicated there would be a travel package within weeks, and people are still

waiting. There's nothing done. There are hundreds of young mothers or women in

this province and couples who want to have a family, but the barriers that are

created here are preventing that. That's only the ones we know of, there are

many that just gave up hope and we're not aware of.

We have

doctors here that are willing to take up a clinic and start it here. The

minister will say: Well, there's not enough demand and they won't keep up their

skills. They beg to differ. We have to be looking at the residents in this

province, the young women and the young couples that want to have a family. We

need to do this as soon as possible because time is ticking for them.

I look

at the mandate letter from the Premier to the Minister of Health and I quote:

“Together, we will deliver on our promises to the people of this province.” This

was a promise made and should be a promise kept.

Further

on in the letter, they want to ensure “that the voice of lived experience is

heard ….” I hear it loud and clear every day from the young women and the young

couples who want to start a family here in this province and want to stay here

in this province, but to this point in time they've heard nothing. They have the

clock ticking against them, literally. The time is to act now.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister

Responsible for Women and Gender Equality.

P. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I

thank the hon. Member, of course, for raising this very important issue.

I want

to state on the record, Mr. Speaker, our government supports people who want to

have children. I'm happy to say we know that commitment has been made and I'm

happy to say that there's work under way. Currently, there is a subsidization

program being developed to provide funding for eligible residents who will

travel out of province for fertility services.

Also,

our government will certainly commit to a full review of the fertility services

here in our province. It is certainly a very important commitment. I myself, as

an MHA, and I'm sure many of us have heard from constituents about this very

issue. But let it be known – and I can't emphasize enough, it is certainly a

commitment and I am happy to work with my colleague, the Minister of Health and

Community Services as the Minister Responsible for Women and Gender Equality.

Again, I will be happy to report some updates and good news when that becomes

available.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

reasons for this petition:

WHEREAS

individual residents have spoken to the serious concern about the shortage of

doctors in the District of Harbour Main;

WHEREAS

many of the residents are without a family doctor or have a family doctor where

they have to travel more than 30 kilometres to see. For some residents to get an

appointment to see their family doctor at times can take up to three to four

weeks.

THEREFORE we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to immediately take the necessary steps to implement a

plan to have more family doctors in the province so that people can have access

to the care that they need.

Mr.

Speaker, this is affecting real people. This is a crisis that is affecting

people; it is hurting people. Yes, we've heard that there are over 100,000

people in the province without a family doctor and the Harbour Main District is

no exception. Constituents in the district have been reaching out desperately to

get help with securing a family doctor.

I'll

give you two real-life examples. One couple in South River recently retired home

here from Ontario. They have been trying ever since to get a family doctor,

which includes calling over 30 doctor clinics. Mr. Speaker, they have reached

out and said that it has taken – they live in the Avalon area and there are no

doctors – the office that they call will not even put them on a waiting list

because they say the waiting list is up to 800 people on a waiting list – 800

people.

Mr.

Speaker, this is an example of a couple who have spoke – and I'll quote, they

have sent email to me, I've met with them, they sent an email to the Premier as

well in early October; two weeks later there was a response – a generic response

I might add.

The

couple had said – they're in their late 60s and they said: We have since spoken

to many, and I mean many medical people and citizens. Medical people want to

leave the province and so do citizens.

Mr.

Speaker, we need to understand and be mindful of the serious problem that exists

here. After 20 years living away, they hope to retire. They said: We cannot find

a doctor close by. When calling around to numerous medical facilities for over a

month, they either don't answer the phone or the message states their mailbox is

full.

I have

another couple from Clarke's Beach – I can go on and on. I'll give these two

examples. Clarke's Beach, another couple in the district have to travel – they

are seniors from Clarke's Beach – all the way out to CBS at least 40 minutes to

a clinic to see a doctor because they cannot find one locally. They are senior

citizens. These are people who are hurting, Mr. Speaker. We need action now –

not rhetoric, action.

SPEAKER:

Your time has expired.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Lake

Melville.

P. TRIMPER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'm very

pleased to present this petition. I'll read it and then make a few comments.

While

there has been substantial progress in providing mental health support in recent

years, there is a financial hurdle for longer term counselling in Newfoundland

and Labrador.

Federal

tax credits are available for people with physical and mental impairments

seeking psychological support; however, upfront financial support for those in a

lower income are lacking.

The

counselling programs available through our health care system are short-term

solutions, for example, Bridge the gapp, DoorWays, CHANNAL. Financial support

for residents seeking counselling therapists is desperately needed. Please note

that New Brunswick and Nova Scotia both provide long-term assistance.

Therefore we, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to include mental health counselling as

a medical expense for those who can pay privately, and cover it entirely for

those who require extended assistance but cannot afford to participate. We

cannot afford as a province to not provide this critical support.

Each

person, each MHA in this House, will have received an email from Ms. Kristi

Allan back in the spring outlining her own personal challenges with her

situation as she has sought longer term counselling. She articulated in an

amazing email – I know we all receive a lot of correspondence and so on. I

started reading this and I said, wow, we have to reach out to her, and I'm very

glad that our office has done that. We continue to talk and learn much from

someone who is really struggling with the system and offering great suggestions.

So that

petition is based on so much of what she's been very concerned about. I'm

pleased to present it here. For those of you watching, activists like Ms. Allan,

she's been in front of this House of Assembly now for getting close to a year.

She's here, usually by herself, but she's a silent, consistent, persistent voice

and hopefully conscience for us to suddenly do something.

I would

like to quote from her in that email that we all received, because, of course,

people watching and Hansard will not have had the benefit of the email that we

received as MHAs.

Here are

some of the words she said: “I had the credit to access therapy in 2020. This

saved my life that year. I understand we have Doorways, Same Day Walk-in, and

perhaps the most accessible– Wellness Together. However, all of these are

short-term and not permanent options. Trauma and chronic mental illness can't be

fixed in one, two or even six sessions– treatment needs to be regular and

continuous. Preventative and continuous care needs to be an option. I felt

privileged to access therapy via increasing my debt.”

She also

goes on to talk about how we, as a government now, are supporting people with

physical health support, but we do not do this for mental health support. So I'd

ask government to please consider this long-term counselling therapy on behalf

of so many people who are asking for it.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

These

are the reasons for this petition:

Eastern

Health has recently repositioned one of the ambulances from the Trepassey area

to the Cape Broyle area. This has left one ambulance in the Trepassey area.

Residents of Trepassey and the surrounding area are at least two hours from the

nearest hospital.

Therefore, we petition the House of Assembly as follows: We, the undersigned,

call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and

ambulance in a time of an emergency by repositioning a second ambulance back

into the Trepassey area to ensure the safety and the well-being of local

residents and to meet the national standard for response times.

Mr.

Speaker, I've spoken on this on many occasions. The ambulance in Trepassey was

taken away on June 19. I saw a Facebook message while driving back across the

province. I called the minister; his reason was that the numbers of calls are

down in the area and less population. But there's more to that than just the

number of calls and population; it's geography. There are 70 kilometres of

barren land in that country. If you live in that area and you have to drive to

St. John's – so when you get a call for an ambulance, by the time the ambulance

gets there, it takes two hours to drive to St. John's.

You

could come out here like happened last week or the week before or recently.

There was a person on the ambulance that went to the hospital and due to COVID

precautions – they weren't sure if she had COVID or not, which she didn't – but

in all they had to stay in the ambulance until they determined that she didn't

have COVID. Besides the two hours' drive, they're sitting in an ambulance for

three to four hours and then two or three hours to get back. So the ambulance is

out of the area with no ambulance from eight to 10 hours, and that's not

acceptable.

If you

call an ambulance and you get into a red alert in that area and he said dynamic

dispatching – when I asked, they couldn't tell me where that next ambulance was

situated, which I know it was probably in Cape Broyle. If you make a call to get

an ambulance, you're now an hour and a bit, maybe an hour and 10, 15 minutes

away for that ambulance to get to Trepassey, let alone come back to town again.

It's not acceptable that they just look at the cost.

Listen,

I know there's a cost involved in all this and they're trying to save money, but

that is wrong in every sense of the word. They are 200 kilometres away and it's

probably the longest drive in the province, on the Island, away from a hospital.

It's not acceptable that they not go back and look at this for the residents in

that area.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

present this petition again today on behalf of the people who contacted our

office and signed the petition about Motor Registration and the closing of the

offices for regular hours for people.

Mr.

Speaker, I'll just read something that was sent to a person and he sent me a

copy of it. For the minister saying that the office doors are open, but it says

here: by appointment only. That's what's being sent out to people: by

appointment only. Here's his note: If you have any accommodation and require

communication supports, please let us know. They can't even get to speak to

anybody – they can't even get to speak to anybody.

The

minister yesterday in the response to the petition – and this is just

mindboggling. She stated: 34 per cent of the people who register cancels. There

are 34 per cent of the people who calls in for an appointment cancels; doesn't

that tell you something? That there's 34 per cent of who is phoning that could

be fitted in.

I hear

the minister on a regular basis – and I don't mean to be harping on the

minister, but I'm standing up for the people of the District of Humber - Bay of

Islands, Corner Brook and out towards Baie Verte, Stephenville that way also.

AN HON. MEMBER:

The whole province.

E. JOYCE:

The whole province – yes, a

few people are saying the whole province. But here's the point: The minister is

saying the doors are open. Here's someone from Cox's Cove or from Lark Harbour –

I'll just use my own district here now – drives one hour to go up to that

building to get in the little corner, hopefully somebody is going to cancel out

so they can get in – hopefully.

I have

yet to hear the minister or anybody in this government stand up and explain why

it was changed. Speak to the staff. They have no problem putting it back to the

normal procedures. Every person in this province is not a computer whiz; every

person in this province doesn't have a computer. Every person in this province

will have complex issues about registering their vehicle. We had one who tried

to get a vehicle from Alberta, couldn't get in.

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

E. JOYCE:

I hear someone over there

chirping, you want to chirp, stand up and say something. Stand up if someone

wants to chirp, stand up.

Mr.

Speaker, I can tell you the reason why this was changed: It was ill advised, it

was never thought through. I can tell you with the pandemic going on with COVID,

and for a minister to say, well, it worked well during COVID, when everything

else the government is doing, they're blaming it on COVID.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask the minister to change this back. Put it back the way it was

because you're causing so much stress and havoc and what happens if someone

drives in an hour or an hour-and-a-half and they can't get in. They'd be sitting

in a corner, waiting all day to register a vehicle. They have to drive back home

and come back in.

I urge

the government to reconsider this ill-thought-out decision.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The

Member's time has expired.

The hon.

the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Background to this petition is as follows: In the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador, there are over 75 patients who live with cystic fibrosis. CF is a

genetic disease that causes severe damage to the lungs, digestive system and

other organs in the body. Unfortunately, as of now, only the symptoms of CF are

being treated.

In June

2021, Health Canada approved Trikafta, a triple combination precision medicine

that targets the basic gene defect that causes CF. Trikafta has been proven to

result in life-changing health improvements. And there are a number of examples

here in the petition of those improvements, which I did read yesterday, Mr.

Speaker.

I guess

the bottom line here, Mr. Speaker, what it comes down to is that as of Friday –

I do believe, so I was told at least – every single province in the country have

either already added Trikafta to the drug formulary or in the case of, I think,

Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and PEI, last week the Premiers or health ministers

of those provinces all publicly came out, committed and said that it was going

to be added. Newfoundland and Labrador, to my understanding, is now the only

province in the entire country that is not providing this life-altering drug for

an absolute deadly disease.

We all

know the statistics as it relates to cystic fibrosis, the life expectancy. I'm

sure everybody in this House of Assembly probably has a constituent or someone

they know who's impacted. I know that I do. It's one of the most heartbreaking

diseases that you can think of when you think of young people and what they have

to go through and the shortness of their lifespans as a result of this. If there

is a drug that has been approved by Health Canada, which it has, and has now

been approved by all the provinces, then I cannot see for the life of me why

Newfoundland and Labrador would be any different.

certainly encourage the Minister of Health and Community Services and the

government to please, on behalf of the families that are impacted here in

Newfoundland and Labrador, I urge you to please have this drug added to the

formulary.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Orders of the Day, Mr.

Speaker.

Orders of the Day

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader, for leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Coat Of Arms Act, Bill 20, and I further move that

the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the hon. Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To

Amend The Coat Of Arms Act, Bill 20, and that the said bill now be read a first

time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs to introduce a bill,

“An Act To Amend The Coat Of Arms Act,” carried. (Bill 20)

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Coat Of Arms Act. (Bill 20)

SPEAKER:

The bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 20 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL, for leave to

introduce a bill entitled,

An Act Respecting Off-Road Vehicles, Bill 22, and I

further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that the Government House Leader shall have leave to

introduce a bill,

An Act Respecting Off-Road Vehicles, Bill 22, and that the

said bill should now be read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL to introduce a bill,

“An Act Respecting Off-Road Vehicles,” carried. (Bill 22)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting

Off-Road Vehicles. (Bill 22)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 22 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL, for leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Automobile Insurance Act, Bill 23, and I further

move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce the bill,

An Act To

Amend The Automobile Insurance Act, Bill 23, and that said bill be now read a

first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL to introduce a bill,

“An Act To Amend The Automobile Insurance Act,” carried. (Bill 23)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Automobile Insurance Act. (Bill 23)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 23 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL, for leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Corporations Act, Bill 24, and I further move that

the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To

Amend The Corporations Act, Bill 24, and that said bill be now read a first

time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL to introduce a bill,

“An Act To Amend The Corporations Act,” carried. (Bill 24)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Corporations Act. (Bill 24)

SPEAKER:

The bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 24 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Deputy Government House Leader, for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An

Act To Amend The Management Of Information Act, Bill 25, and I further move that

the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To

Amend The Management Of Information Act, Bill 25, and that the said bill be read

a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL to introduce a bill,

“An Act To Amend The Management Of Information Act” carried. (Bill 25)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act to Amend the

Management of Information Act. (Bill 25)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 25 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice and Public Safety, for

leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Licensed Practical

Nurses Act, 2005, Bill 26, and I further move that the said bill be now read a

first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To

Amend The Licensed Practical Nurses Act, Bill 26, and the said bill be now read

a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services to introduce a bill, “An

Act To Amend The Licensed Practical Nurses Act, 2005,” carried. (Bill 26)

CLERK:

A bill, “An Act To Amend The

Licensed Practical Nurses Act, 2005.” (Bill 26)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 26 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology, for leave to introduce a

bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Pharmacy Act, 2012, Bill 27, and I further

move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To

Amend The Pharmacy Act, 2012, Bill 27, and that the said bill be now read a

first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services to introduce a bill, “An

Act To Amend The Pharmacy Act, 2012,” carried. (Bill 27)

CLERK:

A bill, “An Act To Amend The

Pharmacy Act, 2012.” (Bill 27)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 27 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Deputy Government House Leader, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend Various Acts Of The Province Respecting The Publication Of A

Summary Of A Decision Or Order Of An Adjudication Tribunal, Bill 28, and I

further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To

Amend Various Acts Of The Province Respecting The Publication Of A

Summary Of A

Decision Or Order Of An Adjudication Tribunal, Bill 28.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services to introduce a bill, “An

Act To Amend Various Acts Of The Province Respecting The Publication Of A

Summary Of A Decision Or Order Of An Adjudication Tribunal,” carried. (Bill 28)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Various Acts Of The Province Respecting The Publication Of A

Summary Of A

Decision Or Order Of An Adjudication Tribunal. (Bill 28)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 28 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Minister of Finance, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act

Respecting The Requirement For A Balanced Budget, Bill 30, and I further move

that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act

Respecting The Requirement For A Balanced Budget, Bill 30, and that the said

bill be now read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to introduce a

bill, “An Act Respecting The Requirement For A Balanced Budget,” carried. (Bill

30)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting The

Requirement For A Balanced Budget. (Bill 30)

SPEAKER:

The said bill has been read a

first time.

When

shall the bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 30 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Minister of Finance for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act

Respecting A Future Fund For The Province, Bill 31, and I further move that the

said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the hon. Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act

Respecting A Future Fund For The Province, Bill 31, and that the said bill be

read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to introduce a

bill, “An Act Respecting A Future Fund For The Province,” carried. (Bill 31)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting A

Future Fund For The Province. (Bill 31)

SPEAKER:

The said bill has been read a

first time.

When

shall the bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 31 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Finance, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend

The Liquor Corporation Act, Bill 32, and I further move that the said bill be

now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act, Bill 32,

and that said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the

pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to introduce a

bill, “

An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act,”

carried . (Bill 32)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act .

(Bill 32)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 32 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Finance, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act , Bill

33, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act, Bill 33, and

that said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the

pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to introduce a

bill, “

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act, ”

carried. (Bill 33)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act . (Bill

33)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 33 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Education, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997 , Bill 34,

and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997, Bill 34, and

that said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the

pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Education to introduce a bill, “ An

Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997,” carried . (Bill 34)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997 . (Bill

34)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 34 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Education, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Memorial University Act ,

Bill 35, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To Amend The Memorial University Act, Bill 35,

and that said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the

pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Education to introduce a bill, “ An

Act To Amend The Memorial University Act,” carried . (Bill 35)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Memorial University Act .

(Bill 35)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 35 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Deputy Government House Leader, for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An

Act Respecting The Office Of The Auditor General And The Auditing Of The Public

Accounts Of The Province, Bill 36, and I further move that the said bill be now

read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the hon. Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act

Respecting The Office Of The Auditor General And The Auditing Of The Public

Accounts Of The Province, Bill 36, and that the said bill now be read a first

time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Government House Leader to introduce a bill, “An Act Respecting The

Office Of The Auditor General And The Auditing Of The Public Accounts Of The

Province,” carried. (Bill 36)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting The

Office Of The Auditor General And The Auditing Of The Public Accounts Of The

Province. (Bill 36)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 36 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, for leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act Respecting The Conduct Of Municipal Officials, Bill 37, and I

further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the hon. the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill, An

Act Respecting The Conduct Of Municipal Officials, Bill 37, and that the said

bill be read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs to introduce a bill,

“An Act Respecting The Conduct Of Municipal Officials,” carried. (Bill 37)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting The

Conduct Of Municipal Officials. (Bill 37)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 37 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development, for leave to introduce

further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act

read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development to introduce a

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 38 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development, for leave

to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Adoption Act, 2013, Bill 39,

and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To Amend

The Adoption Act, 2013, Bill 39, and that the said bill be read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development to introduce a

bill, “An Act To Amend The Adoption Act, 2013,” carried. (Bill 39)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Adoption Act, 2013. (Bill 39)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 39 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development, for leave to

introduce a bill entitled,

An Act Respecting The Protection Of Adults, Bill 40,

and I further move that the said bill be read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the hon. Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act

Respecting The Protection Of Adults, Bill 40, and that the said bill be now read

a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development to introduce a

bill, “An Act Respecting The Protection Of Adults,” carried. (Bill 40)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting The

Protection Of Adults. (Bill 40)

SPEAKER:

The said bill has now been

read a first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 40 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Deputy Government House Leader, for leave to introduce a bill entitled, An

Act Respecting A Province-Wide Service For The Reporting Of Emergencies, Bill

41, and I further move that the said bill be read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce

An Act Respecting A

Province-Wide 911 Service For The Reporting Of Emergencies, Bill 41, and the

said bill be now read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety to introduce a bill, “An Act

Respecting A Province-Wide 911 Service For The Reporting Of Emergencies,”

carried. (Bill 41)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting A

Province-Wide 911 Service For The Reporting Of Emergencies. (Bill 41)

SPEAKER:

The said bill has now been

read a first time.

When

shall the bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 41 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, for leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Law Society Act, Bill 42, and I further move that

the said bill be read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the hon. Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce

An Act To Amend

The Law Society Act, Bill 42, and that said bill be now read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety to introduce a bill, “An Act

To Amend The Law Society Act,” carried. (Bill 42)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Law Society Act. (Bill 42)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the said bill be read a second time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 42 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

We have a lot of work to do

tomorrow.

The hon.

Deputy Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper, Order 2, Bill 6.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL

S. STOODLEY:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, that Bill 6,

An Act

Respecting The Protection Of The Health Of Persons Exposed To Radiation And

Respecting The Safety Of Persons In Connection With The Operation And Use Of The

Electrical And Mechanical Components Of Radiation Producing Equipment And

Associated Apparatus, be now read a second time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 6 be read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act Respecting The Protection Of The Health Of

Persons Exposed To Radiation And Respecting The Safety Of Persons In Connection

With The Operation And Use Of The Electrical And Mechanical Components Of

Radiation Producing Equipment And Associated Apparatus.” (Bill 6)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am

pleased today to speak to amendments to Bill 6,

An Act Respecting The Protection

Of The Health Of Persons Exposed To Radiation And Respecting The Safety Of

Persons In Connection With The Operation And Use Of The Electrical And

Mechanical Components Of Radiation Producing Equipment And Associated Apparatus.

In this act, Mr. Speaker, we are enacting the

Radiation Health and Safety Act, 2021 and repealing the

Radiation Health and Safety Act that

exists today.

This was

a commitment from my mandate letter. We're striving to further improve the

safety of workers and residents in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. It is

also a recommendation outlined in Advancing a Strong Safety Culture in

Newfoundland and Labrador: A Workplace Injury Prevention Strategy document.

Our

department – we inspect food premises; we respond to environmental incidents. We

enforce occupational health and safety requirements. We do school bus

inspections. No matter what we do, health and safety is the forefront of what

we're concerned about, particularly for residents and workers in our province,

Mr. Speaker.

The

Radiation Health and Safety Act

governs the protection of health safety of those exposed to radiation and those

who operate equipment which produces ionizing radiation. I'm not an expert,

honestly, in ionizing radiation. I know we have some experts here in the

province. But really, what we're talking about are kind of X-ray machines. We

have X-ray machines everywhere. If you break your arm, you go and you get an

X-ray. If you are visitor in the Confederation Building here or you have a

visitor, they go through an X-ray machine when they come in the building

downstairs. If you're flying, your devices go through an X-ray machine and,

depending on the security option you go through, you can go through a human

being X-ray machine.

These

are the types of machines and equipment that we're talking about, Mr. Speaker.

In the province, as of two days ago, we have 875 pieces of radiation equipment

that this act would apply to. They're mainly held by the university, hospitals,

the airports and a lot of kind of commercial manufacturing organizations.

The act

and associated regulations were developed in 1977 and we have made some

amendments over time, but the legislation has not been reviewed in its entirety

since it was first created, so we are doing that today, Mr. Speaker.

We did

hold consultations in 2018 on the owners, users, sellers and maintainers of this

equipment that produces the ionizing radiation. Their feedback was considered as

a part of the review of the act and the changes we're introducing today will

help both modernize the legislation and address stakeholder input.

A lot of

what we are bringing in today, Mr. Speaker, aligns with the practice of the

industry. So we're kind of catching the legislation up from the safety

perspective to match the practice. We don't anticipate significant changes for

the industry, Mr. Speaker.

Changes

will help clarify the roles and responsibilities regarding its sections, focus

on the safety of individuals exposed to ionizing radiation, change the current

appeals process and change the requirement for a radiation health and safety

committee.

According to the standard occupational health and safety practices, it is the

responsibility of the employer to ensure testing, monitoring and assessment of

equipment used in a workplace. So specific sections of the regulations set out

the responsibilities for suppliers and owners to have radiation surveys

performed on X-ray equipment. This has been owners' and suppliers'

responsibility since the act initially came into force in 1977.

What

we're bringing in today introduces clarifying regulatory roles and

responsibilities and also helps ensure residents of the province understand

these requirements. So the amendments bring the act in line with current

practices surrounding radiation equipment.

We've

also added language that clarifies the roles and responsibilities of inspectors

to ensure that there is a clear understanding of the safety regime moving

forward. In previous years, Mr. Speaker, the

Radiation Health and Safety Act fell

under the mandate under the former Department of Health. It now falls under the

Occupational Health and Safety Division of Digital Government and Service NL.

Our

occupational health and safety team will continue to work with Health and

Community Services as it develops new radiation health and safety regulations to

ensure that workers, patients and the public are protected, and most of the

radiation equipment used in the province is kind of used in a health setting. So

it's important that we work with the Department of Health on that, but also

we're protecting the health of the workers and residents of the province when

they encounter radiation equipment, whether in their health or their work or

their day-to-day lives.

A high

level of expertise is required to determine appropriate radiation and diagnostic

procedures in clinical settings. As such, amendments to the legislation of

regulations will now focus on all of those who work near such equipment and its

safe operation.

So I

want to thank my colleague, the Minister of Health and Community Services, and

his teams and their staff as well as the occupational health and safety staff in

my department for their valuable contributions regarding patient safety

components and the overall development of the amendments that we have brought

forward today.

The act,

currently today, has the requirement for the establishment of a standing

radiation health and safety committee. In our work in radiation health and

safety, Mr. Speaker, this committee has not been active since 2002. We haven't

needed to engage them. So, as such, we have amended the act to provide the

Minister of Digital Government and Service NL the authority to establish a

radiation health and safety committee, if and when required. A Standing

Committee is not deemed necessary, and we also have radiation expertise on our

Occupational Health and Safety Committee, which kind of oversees this as well,

so that's also important to keep in mind.

If the

Occupational Health and Safety Division requires professional or technical

advice, our proposed approach would be to consult experts in the radiation

field. We would bring together a committee of experts to advise on a specific

issue, if we needed to, Mr. Speaker.

routine matters, the proposed amendments will allow advice to be sought through

the mandate of the larger Occupational Health and Safety Committee, which I

mentioned who does have expertise in radiation health and safety. When advice is

needed on technical matters, advice would be sought from Health Canada Radiation

Protection Bureau. We follow all of the federal Health Canada standards and

guidelines for working with radiation. Then, if local technical advice is

needed, a radiation health and safety committee could still be formed.

We're

proposing a new appeals process that has been added to the act to deal with

inspector decisions. This aligns with the same processes we currently have under

the Occupational Health and Safety Act

for complaints and inspections for occupational health and safety.

Appeals,

we're proposing will go the assistant deputy minister rather than to the

minister of the department. This will translate to more effective and efficient

appeals mechanisms for any complaints or appeals that may arise.

Mr.

Speaker, public safety is at the forefront of our government's priorities. This

was in my mandate letter so I'm very pleased to bring forward this today.

The

radiation and the protection of the public from radiation, Mr. Speaker, falls

within federal legislation, specifically the Radiation Protection Regulations

include anything nuclear. Anything nuclear falls under the

Nuclear Safety and Control Act , which is mandated by the federal

government.

These

changes clarify the regulatory roles and responsibilities related to the act,

help ensure a common understanding of the mandate and help bring current

practice in line with the act.

I'm

looking forward to discussing these with my colleagues and I'm happy to answer

any questions in Committee.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Speaker.

First of

all, let me start off by thanking the department for the briefing, I'm going to

say in our last session that we had. This is the third attempt, I think, to push

this through and get the legislation done, so it's been pushed back far enough.

I thank them, again, for their information.

First of

all, Bill 6 will enact the new Radiation

Health and Safety Act, 2021 , and repeal the current

Radiation Health and Safety Act . The

Radiation Health and Safety Act and regulations are under the

purview of the Digital Government and Service NL.

As the

name suggests, the act and regulations set out requirements regarding radiation

emitting equipment such as X-ray machines, CT scanners, mammography machines,

security baggage scanning devices, scientific analysis equipment and various

other industrial testing devices such as hand-held equipment used by welders.

According to department officials – and the minister just acknowledged – there

was 875 pieces that are currently radiation-emitting equipment currently

registered with Occupational Health and Safety. As expected, the majority of

this equipment is owned by dental clinics, veterinarian clinics and health

authorities, but also by those using equipment for industrial materials and

analysis and testing. Owners include agencies performing baggage screening, the

police for explosive devices, as well as educational facilities including

Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic.

The

Radiation Health and Safety Act and

regulations govern the installation, use, maintenance, inspection and the

registration of this equipment. Owners, sellers, service companies and the users

of this equipment are governed by this legislation to ensure the safety of

workers, patients and others where the equipment is used.

The act

came into force in 1977 and that is over 40 years ago, so I think it is high

time that we certainly look at it and go through some of those changes.

In April

2018, following a commitment made in a joint five-year injury prevention

strategy in WorkplaceNL, government announced it was reviewing the

Radiation Health and Safety Act and

holding public consultations to modernize the act to reflect regulator practice

and make it consistent with Occupational

Health and Safety Act and regulations.

Typically, changes to this legislation are made through amendments to

an act.

Rather than proposing amendments, Bill 6 will repeal the current

Radiation Health and Safety Act and enact a new

Radiation Health and Safety Act, 2021 .

Department officials explained that the proposed changes are being made because

the current act is dated, lacks detail and contains sections that are often

misunderstood, particularly regarding owners responsibilities. Safety codes are

explicitly stated and the appeals process required revision.

Officials also noted that many of the items now outlined in the new act are

being safely addressed through the Occupation Health and Safety Regulations, but

the new Radiation Health and Safety Act will now capture it all in one piece of

legislation rather than two.

Under

the registration process – there is different categories, I think there are 12

categories and I will just go through them briefly and some of the points on

them – owners have to register equipment with the OHS Division of the Department

of Digital Government and Service NL and be issued a certificate of

registration. New owners have to register the equipment within 30 days upon

receipt and registration must be renewed on an annual basis, typically every

September.

Owners

are also expected to notify the director of the Occupation Health and Safety

Division of the department within 30 days when the equipment is taken out of

service or they cease ownership. The registration can be revoked for

non-compliance, officials note that while this has not been an issue it was not

specified in the current act and they wanted the ability to revoke a

registration should an issue arise.

Under

the owners' responsibilities, officials noted that there was a high level of

co-operation from owners and employers as people are aware of the potential

hazard associated with this equipment. The

section outlining owners'

responsibilities, however, have been commonly misunderstood and officials stated

it now provides clarity.

There's

an added detail on how the owner will have to install, maintain, modify, operate

and dispose of their equipment. This includes detail of ensuring low exposures

to people in the room with the equipment but also in the adjacent rooms. There's

a requirement that the radiation protection surveys be provided to the

department every two years. Owners are also expected to notify the director of

the Occupational Health and Safety Division of the department of any incidents

when the equipment is taken out of service.

Under

deviation from the regulations, a deviation refers to a request by owners to act

outside the legislative requirements. Officials noted that such requests have

been infrequent and the current director stated that he hadn't had such a

request in six years in that position.

Under

the proposed amendments, a deviation request would be granted if it was

demonstrated that an equal or a greater level of safety would be maintained and

it could be revoked at any time or amended at any time.

Under

the inspections and inspectors section, the proposed amendments will make

investigation powers consistent with those outline in the OHS Act. Inspectors

have the power to enter any workplace, unannounced, and can inspect radiation

equipment, take photographs, copy documents, conduct tests and interview

radiation workers, et cetera, whatever it takes. Again, officials noted there

was very good co-operation from the owners, employers and workers related to

these inspections.

Under

orders, when an issue of non-compliance is detected an inspector can issue an

order to address the issue and specify a time frame to do so. Officials noted

that while inspectors also have the authority to issue stop-work orders, they

have been infrequent and, again, they could recall any being issued in the last

six years. So doing those briefings there was a lot of information that the

departments certainly passed on and it was good information.

Under

search warrants, officials noted that powers relating to obtaining search

warrants will now parallel these outlined in the

Occupational Health and Safety Act and other legislation, and the

search warrant will be required if an inspector believes a charge could be laid.

Telewarrants will also be permissible under the new act. In the briefing, the

director noted that while officers are trained regarding search warrants, none

has been used in the terms for the last six years.

Under

protection from liability, the ADM, director or OHS inspectors are not liable

for anything done or omitted to be in good faith while performing these duties.

Again, the amendments regarding the protection of officers from liability are

consistent with those outlined in the OHS Act and other legislation. Officials

noted that inspections are carried out by officers with a high level of training

and there have not been any issues.

Under

the Appeal section, this

section establishes the process for people to appeal

orders or directives issued by either inspectors or the director of OHS Division

of that department. If owners disagree with an order or directive, they have

seven days to appeal in writing to the assistant deputy minister of the

department and the ADM must begin a review of this

section within 24 hours. The

ADM can decide whether to confirm, revoke or vary the decision or order of the

director or inspector.

The

person can appeal the decision of the ADM to the Supreme Court of Newfoundland

and Labrador within 30 days of getting their decision. Again, officials know

that these amendments are consistent with those outlined in the current OHS Act

and stated there are no appeals to date.

Under

the ministerial advice and recommendation, the minister can refer matters that

are of general nature regarding safety of radiation to the Occupational Health

and Safety Advisory Council. Officials stated that this council consists of a

balance of employer and labour representation, and that currently the labour

representative is actually a radiation equipment technician.

radiation health and safety advisory committee, comprised of experts on a

specific topic, can be formed to provide advice and recommendations on

particular technical matters. Under regulations,

section 25 specifies a lengthy

list of topics on which Cabinet can make regulations. On

section 26, it outlines

the minister's authority to make regulations regarding the establishment of the

radiation health and safety advisory committee.

Under

the Offences and penalties,

section 28, the penalties have increased

significantly in the new act. The current act states that a fine cannot exceed

$5,000. The new act states a fine will not be less than $500 and not more than

$250,000. In addition, the court may impose an additional fine of $25,000 for

each day the offence continues.

Under

section 12, there are other major and minor amendments relating to the

transition from the old act to the new one and also to ensure that the wording

in the legislation is updated to reflect the enactment of a new act.

I'm

going to say some of the key messages. Changes to the

Radiation Health and Safety Act and associated regulations will help

modernize and address the stakeholder input. The changes will help the roles and

responsibilities regarding inspections and focus the act on the safety of

individuals exposed to ionizing radiation, change the current appeals process

and change the requirement for a radiation health and safety committee.

In 2018,

consultations were launched to gather information and recommendations on issues

of priority from owners, users, sellers and maintainers of equipment that

produce ionizing radiation. The feedback gathered during these consultations

with professional stakeholders in the medical, dental and veterinary fields who

use X-ray equipment were included as part of the review of the legislation.

The act

also was amended to provide the authority of the Minister of Digital Government

and Service NL to establish a radiation health and safety committee, if and when

required. A new appeals process has been added to the act to deal with the

inspector decisions and aligns with the same processes under the

Occupational Health and Safety Act .

The OHS Division will continue to work with the Department of Health and

Community Services, as it develops new radiation and health safety regulations

to ensure workers, patients and the general public are protected.

That's

just our outline on that. Hopefully, when we get to the general part, we have

some questions that we need answered and we'll certainly go from there.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER (Warr):

The hon. the Member for

Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, it's great to speak on this bill about radiation health and safety.

Today's industry, of course, safety is paramount. I know the Member for

Ferryland mentioned a lot of things there so if I can take a quote from the

Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands, I won't take up much time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

P. FORSEY:

Anyway, this act was enforced

in 1977. Any bill that goes back to 1977, of course, needs some changes. It

needs review because health and safety is now paramount. I'm sure, since 1977,

the technology and the usage has become more and more important and more

advanced so yes, changes definitely need to be made in that.

Workplace is priority today, especially using radiation and the way it's used.

Getting rid of the wastage of radiation certainly needs a lot more attention and

needs a lot more changes to be done.

There

are a lot of things in this act – those changes in this act – that I do agree

with. I think, at the end of it, I will certainly be in agreement with the

changes that are going to be made to this act.

There

are many uses. It's used for the radiation equipment. The Member for Ferryland

did mention a few. I'll just reiterate a bit. Those radiation units are X-ray

machines, CT scanners, security baggage scanning devices and other industrial

uses. Welding equipment also is another usage for the radiation. It shows in the

industry that radiation has really advanced and certainly changes need to be

made to the act.

In some

of the changes – registration of equipment, that's very important. Every piece

of equipment, of course, needs to be registered so that we know where it's

placed, we know the whereabouts and know how it's disposed of and the radiation

equipment can be traced and know where it's to at all times so that it don't end

up in the wrong areas that it's supposed to be. So those changes definitely need

to be made.

Other

things – there's non-compliance implications there. There can be licences

revoked. There could be hefty fines. I'm sure all the stakeholders involved, all

the industry would be in favour. I'm sure they are of those safety aspects, Mr.

Speaker. Safety is the paramount issue here and it certainly needs to be

addressed. The compliance to the act is another great thing because the

exposures to radiation, it's dangerous; we all know that. So the usage of it

needs to be addressed and changed. I'm sure, again, all the stakeholders

involved would be in favour of all the compliances that's placed on there.

Inspectors are another great addition to enforce the operation and provide

additional safety, to enforce that everything is registered, everything is

working the way it should, everything should be in place where it's to, know

where it's to at all times, do inspections when they can, surprise visits

probably – which is there in the act – to the areas that have the radiation

equipment. That would be, again, great for a safety aspect and that would be

acknowledged by all stakeholders, I'm sure, all uses of it.

Again,

the fines and penalties have increased since 1977. I'm sure all the fines would

be increased since then, and it needs to be done so that everybody adheres to

the radiation equipment that's been in use. Plus, an advisory committee put in

place that's comprised of experts and they're able to address specific topics

and particular technical matters because I'm sure there's not only changes in

the regulations, but there's been changes in the systems, changes in the

technology itself over the years since 1977.

So the

changes in this act are really needed, especially on the safety aspect of

workers. The safety aspect is paramount and we need to acknowledge all that.

I do

agree with a lot of changes that are being made there. Other than dragging it

out too long, Mr. Speaker, I would say that I will be in favour of those

changes, and thank you for your time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER (Trimper):

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's a

good thing to see that the changes are now coming down from this. I can relate

to a story from when I still worked in industry. Actually, it was one of my

first days on the job as an apprentice welder. I was doing a work stint with IOC

and we were in a facility called a pellet plant, one of the last stages of the

iron processing process in Labrador.

During

one of our on-the-job safety orientation to show my area and stuff like that, we

walked by an area that was barricaded off with chain and only authorized

personnel. In there were actually two radiation devices attached to a conveyor

belt that monitored the ore and stuff coming in through a processing thing

called flotation. My supervisor at the time said: This is a radiation area, you

have to be trained to go in here. It kind of just stuck to me today speaking

about the importance of radiation safety and stuff like that. It is everywhere

in our work sites, industrially, too.

Like I

said, I was trained as a welder and one of the aspects of welding is also

welding inspection, which uses hand-held radiation devices to inspect your welds

on high-pressure pipe welding. Actually, when my grandfather was a welder,

towards the end of his career, that was just a new thing coming out then. That

was in the '80s, so even then we started seeing radiation devices coming into

the industrial world and into the workplace.

Now, if

you look at it, we have different types of medical devices, more than just the

common X-ray. Now, we have a lot more medical devices that use ionizing

radiation in our workplaces and so we obviously have to be mindful of the safety

of it, mindful of the equipment and the processes and the maintenance and stuff

like that.

Remember, we have this equipment there for people to use in their day-to-day

workplaces, but there is also people who have to repair this equipment as well

and we have to make sure that there is adequate protection and guidance for

those people who have to actually take these things apart and work on them.

There are different layers of it, too, that we have to be absolutely mindful and

we have to make sure that these individuals have to be protected as well.

You

think about it, every time we – especially myself, flying back and forth from

Labrador, every other day you walk through a metal detector and they also have

the full-body scanner and then your bags are scanned by X-rays. It's everywhere

present in our day-to-day lives and we have to be extremely mindful of that. We

have to make sure that everything we do, we protect the individuals who use the

equipment, individuals that repair the equipment and individuals who are

operating the