June

9, 2010 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVI No. 35

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today the Chair welcomes the following private members'

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

North, the hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands, the hon. the

Member for the District of Bay Verte-Springdale, and the hon. the Member for the

District of Ferryland.

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

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday afternoon I had the pleasure of attending the annual

ceremonial review of the 774 RCACS St. Anthony Cadet Corp. and I rise in this

hon. House today to recognize the efforts of these cadets, their commanding

officers and the organizers of this fantastic event.

Commanding Officer, Captain Beverly Scott is extremely dedicated to the cadet

movement in St. Anthony and works hard for the young people that participate in

the program. This dedication is evident when you see the number of special

awards that were distributed during the afternoon's celebration and the cadets

of St. Anthony are to be commended for their hard work in the program as well.

Along with the special awards that were presented, Warrant Officer 2,

Kimberly Green received the RCMP Cadet of the Year Award and the Commanding

Officer Award. The RCMP Cadet of the Year Award is presented to a senior cadet

that has excelled throughout the year and has successfully taken on leadership

roles in the squadron. The Commanding Officer Award is presented to a senior

cadet who has shown outstanding dedication and deportment throughout their cadet

career.

Ms Green was also selected to participate in an international exchange

program where she will be travelling to the United Kingdom with twenty-one other

cadets from across Canada, an experience that no doubt will enhance her training

and abilities with the cadets. Another young lady, Chelsea Sexton, received the

Master Corporal Kirk Noel Scholarship. This is a $1,000 award given to a cadet

that has excelled in the area of aircraft survival during a squadron

competition.

During the afternoon's celebrations, displays were performed by the drill

team, band and flag bearers, and what a fantastic job was done by all those

involved, a highlight of the afternoon's event.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in

congratulating the 774 RCACS St. Anthony and extend sincere best wishes to them

for their continued success.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LODER: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize a

bright young man with a very promising future, Mr. Scott Wight from the Town of

Gillams.

Mr. Speaker, Scott is a Level III student of Templeton Academy in Meadows. I

am pleased to stand and report today that Scott recently was awarded the

Memorial University Alumni Entrance Scholarship valued at $25,000, which would

be one of the highest scholarships ever won by a student at Templeton Academy.

Mr. Speaker, Scott will be attending Memorial University, Corner Brook

campus, beginning in September and will be starting his studies which will lead

him to a career as a mechanical engineer. Mr. Speaker, this young man is the son

of Paul and Sherry Wight.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask all members here today to recognize Scott as another

young Newfoundlander and Labradorian who will provide our great Province with

education to keep us successful in such exciting years ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Verte-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am delighted to rise in this hon. House today to congratulate Springdale

Foodland for being the proud recipient of two significant awards. The two

awards, Foodland Store of the Year and the Community Service Award is a

testament to the standard of excellence achieved by the business.

Mr. Kerry Butt, Manager of the store, and his entire staff, are to be

commended for their outstanding commitment to serving the general public.

Moreover, Mr. Speaker, they are to be applauded for providing outstanding

leadership. For many years, Springdale Foodland has contributed to the local

school system by donating to the school breakfast program, and to the

scholarship fund. They have recognized and accepted their corporate role and as

a result their business is an important asset to the community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. colleagues to join with me in delivering

accolades to the manager and staff of Springdale Foodland for earning the title

Foodland Store of the Year and also for receiving the Community Service Award. I

wish them many more successes as they continue to serve the people of the area.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize and congratulate

Justin Miller, from the Goulds, on his outstanding performance at the Canadian

Powerlifting Union Championships held in Quebec City from April 7 April 11,

Justin is nineteen years of age and in his competition in Quebec City he was

a perfect nine for nine in his lift attempts, which included a best squat of 275

kilograms in the junior male division.

The competition allowed Justin to show his true athletic ability and drive by

setting fourteen new Canadian records. He set nine new records in the junior

ranks and five new records in the men's open division. His impressive results

allowed him to be named junior lifter of the meet. He also set a new CPU Wilks

formula record with 563.51 points on the second day of competition, but saw that

mark bested on Saturday. Justin, however, now stands as a national junior best

in his field.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join with me congratulating Justin

Miller from my district on his successes to date in the sport of powerlifting

and wish him well in future competitions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, yesterday marked the beginning of a three-day

North American road check blitz for the commercial trucking and motorcoach

business industries. Continuing through to Thursday, enforcement officers with

our Motor Registration Division are joining local police forces in twelve-hour

shifts to check compliance of trucks, buses and their drivers with road safety

rules.

Enforcement officers in Canada, the United States and Mexico have set up more

than 1,500 locations to conduct comprehensive roadside inspections. Officers are

looking for mechanical deficiencies, overweight vehicles, unsecured loads and

general driver errors such as seat belt violations.

Mr. Speaker, although enforcement activities take place every day on our

roads and highways, this blitz raises awareness of how important it is for all

vehicles to operate safely. This campaign places a spotlight on commercial

vehicle safety and on the thousands of highly-trained professional inspectors

and officers across North America who help ensure that motorists on our highways

reach their destinations safely.

The Department of Government Services is responsible for ensuring that

commercial traffic using our roads and highways comply with weight and dimension

regulations, are being operated by qualified and safe drivers, and that the

vehicles transporting cargo and passengers in this Province are mechanically fit

and comply with federal and provincial legislation. These roadside inspections

of commercial vehicles are conducted in accordance with nationally developed

inspection criteria.

Mr. Speaker, our government has demonstrated a strong commitment to improving

our highways. As a part of Budget 2010, the Department of Government Services

and the Department of Transportation and Works will establish a new fixed weigh

scale in Labrador

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: to be located at the Labrador West end of the

Trans-Labrador Highway. Six new weigh scale inspectors will be hired to staff

this weigh scale and conduct portable scale patrols.

The installation of this fixed weigh scale, Mr. Speaker, is an important

proactive measure to enhance commercial vehicle and highway safety in Labrador,

and protect the tremendous investment of this government in the Trans-Labrador

Highway against damage caused by overweight vehicles.

These initiatives and the ongoing highway safety activities of my department

and our partners in Transportation and Works, the Royal Newfoundland

Constabulary and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, are all helping to make our

highways safer for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and the visitors to

our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement and to know

that I think this is a wonderful thing, the North America road blitz, which

entails enforcement officers in Canada, the United States and throughout Mexico.

Mr. Speaker, from the information I have - like the stats for last year -

there were some 72,255 trucks and buses that were inspected, that were performed

last year. It was one of the best compliances that they ever had. When it comes

to the operations of the vehicle, they were 80.4 per cent compliant, and with

regard to the drivers themselves, it was 95.71 per cent.

So, Mr. Speaker, we are always in favour of any enforcement with regard to

safety on our highways and to see that this promotion is ongoing. It is good to

note that the minister mentioned the Trans-Labrador Highway and the new weigh

scale for that area. We would also suggest that probably they should consider

the one on the other end where most of the transport trucks are entering on that

highway.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, we know we are talking about inspections of

larger vehicles here, but they are many other issues when it comes to safety on

our highways. We hear so much about the moose situation. We hear talk of the

safety by not using snow tires. So I thought it was good opportunity to get that

in again. I know there about 70 per cent or 80 per cent of the people in our

Province using snow tires, but I suggest to the minister that he should work

very closely with the other 20 per cent or 30 per cent.

We hope, Mr. Speaker, even though the drivers had notification of this blitz

coming up, we hope that any drivers who are on our highways will be caught and

that issue will be resolved.

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

Vidi.

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

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

initiative like this one is a good one, and it certainly makes sure that it

gives drivers a sense of, I think, security that things are being checked with

regard to these huge vehicles that they are driving. We need this kind of thing

happening more frequently, Mr. Speaker. It is good to have a blitz, but we need

to make sure that we have regular, daily almost, random checks going on so that

safety measures are really enforced and well-maintained.

I am glad to see the new weigh scale for the Labrador Highway. If we are

going to have a highway, it has to be safe. Of course, we do know that it is a

difficult highway yet to drive. It does not have blacktop and the regular

inspections will be really important because it is harder to keep vehicles

well-maintained driving over that kind of a highway.

The big issue though, I think, is having adequate weigh scales across the

Province and adequate staff so that the weigh scales can be open when they need

to be open to make sure that we have safe vehicles, because where all kinds of

vehicles are on the highway, certainly maintaining these large commercial

vehicles is extremely important, both for the drivers and the drivers of other

vehicles.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on May 25, the Minister of Health stated in the House of

Assembly that it could take up to a year before a medevac is stationed with the

air ambulance in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. It appears, however, that the minister

forgot to advise the people of Labrador.

I ask the minister: Has anyone been recruited to fill these positions, how

long will it take to complete the necessary training and when will the medevac

teams be stationed on the ground with the plane in Happy Valley-Goose Bay?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think when government made the announcement that the airplane would be

moving from St. Anthony to Happy Valley-Goose Bay that coincided with an

announcement in this year's Budget, that a new medical flight team would be

added to the service this year as a part of this budgetary process, Mr. Speaker,

and that is exactly what will take place.

The plane is now moved to Happy Valley-Goose Bay. The staff associated with

that plane and that service that was in St. Anthony are now relocated to Happy

Valley-Goose Bay, and the process of recruiting that team has started, I say,

Mr. Speaker. So, there will be a process embarked upon where the paramedics and

the nurses will be recruited and the appropriate training will be provided. When

that is concluded, they will be in place and they will be stationed in Happy

Valley-Goose Bay where the plane is currently located.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the government has failed to give us is some dates and timelines around

when that will happen.

Mr. Speaker, over the weekend there were medical emergencies in Labrador that

required the air ambulance in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. Because there was no

medevac team in place the St. John's air ambulance flew to Labrador to pick up a

patient while the other air ambulance sat on the Tarmac in Goose Bay.

I ask the minister: If your plan was so well-thought-out, why is it that the

plane in St. John's is required to travel to Labrador for emergencies while the

Goose Bay air ambulance sits on the Tarmac?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, one of the things that are really important to

understand here is that the service that was in St. Anthony has now been

relocated to Happy Valley-Goose Bay. The plane is now located in a different

location. How the service operates, has not changed.

The Opposition is trying to make a story as if we have done something to

Happy Valley-Goose Bay that did not exist in St. Anthony. All we have really

done is moved the plane from St. Anthony to Happy Valley-Goose Bay, a more

strategic location.

Mr. Speaker, while the plane was in St. Anthony over the last number of

years, the same method of operation existed. Any time that the medical flight

team was needed for a flight out of St. Anthony, the plane came from St. John's

to St. Anthony with the team, and if not, the plane from St. Anthony flew in to

St. John's to pick up a team. The method of operation has not changed, Mr.

Speaker, has not changed at all.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister knows that in relocating the aircraft without the support

services, you have set this system up to fail but, more importantly, you have

set up a system that will fail the people who need it, I say to you, Minister.

Mr. Speaker, the minister rushed out with a poorly thought-out decision to

move the air ambulance, and I can only say it is like cutting off your nose to

spite your face. Today, if the air ambulance is needed in my district, that

plane would have to fly an hour and forty minutes to St. John's to pick up a

medevac team, fly an hour back to Blanc-Sablon, fly fifteen minutes to St.

Anthony to drop off the patient, fly an hour back to St. John's to drop off the

medevac team and fly an hour and forty minutes back to Goose Bay. Mr. Speaker,

this does not include the (inaudible)

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the minister: How does this convoluted flight plan make any sense and

how does it contribute to improving air ambulance services in this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, one thing we can feel pretty comfortable about,

the member opposite is not doing the scheduling for that service.

You can take math and you can make it sound like anything, but one of the

things that is very important to understand, Mr. Speaker, not every single time

an air ambulance flies does the medical flight team need to fly with it.

In fact, when this service operated out of St. Anthony last year in 2009,

Mr. Speaker, out of St. Anthony - only 50 per cent of the time did that flight

leave where a medical flight team was necessary. That is the first thing. That

is one statistic, Mr. Speaker, she did not share.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, only 3 per cent of the time, only 3 per cent of the

time last year did the aircraft have to leave St. Anthony and come into St.

John's to pick up the medical flight team. We have no reason to believe that

those numbers will change very much because it flies out of Happy Valley-Goose

Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not know even how the government can stand and defend that decision. I

say to the minister, it is not about the math, it is about people's lives and it

is about real cases. Let me share with you a real case, minister. Let me tell

you what happened yesterday on the Coast of Labrador, in my district.

Eight o'clock yesterday morning, Mr. Speaker, there was a patient who needed

an air medevac flight. That patient, Mr. Speaker, was waiting for an air medevac

aircraft out of St. John's that happened to break down in Gander with the

medevac team onboard. Then they had to send another aircraft, the one out of

Goose Bay, Mr. Speaker, to pick them up. Then they brought the medevac team into

Goose Bay. Then they got onboard a twin-engine aircraft and they went

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that Question Period is not a period of debate. If

she has a question, I ask her if she would pose it now.

MS JONES: I will, Mr. Speaker and that patient got medevaced out around

6:00 or 6:30 yesterday evening.

I ask you, Minister: Is this an acceptable service for patients in this

Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, one of the things that is really important to

understand here, the member opposite it is very important when the member

opposite stands that she is reasonable, she is balanced in her commentary, and

her questions are based on fact.

The fact is, Mr. Speaker, any comparisons made to the services being provided

now need to be made between the service provided out of Happy Valley-Goose Bay

versus the service provided out of St. Anthony. In this case, Mr. Speaker, if

the plane was stationed in St. Anthony, that would not have changed the plane

breaking down. That would not have changed the need to have the medical flight

team travel out of St. John's, because that is exactly what used to happen when

it was in St. Anthony. So any commentary made by the member opposite needs to be

balanced, Mr. Speaker. Needs to be said in the context of what has actually

changed by virtue of moving the plane from St. Anthony to Happy Valley-Goose Bay

and that is the only thing she needs to be focusing on.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, but I am not going to get into a debate

of pitting one against the other. This is a debate about providing, Mr. Speaker,

good air ambulance service to the people of this Province. Minister, I am trying

to get you and your government to open your eyes to what you have done to the

people of this Province. Moving the air medevac to Goose Bay without a medevac

team adds an hour and forty minutes each way to that service.

I ask you again, minister: Can you stand in your place today and tell these

people three cases I know of over the last two days that that is an

acceptable service that they are receiving?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: When the member opposite raises a question about what this

government has done to improve air ambulance service in Newfoundland and

Labrador, she fails to recognize and fails to acknowledge that it was this

government who has purchased a new plane, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: It was this government who has committed to a second plane,

Mr. Speaker. It is this government who has committed to, in this year's Budget,

a second medical transfer team, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: When we start talking about this government's commitment to

improve air ambulance service in this Province, you only need to look at those

three commitments in the last two years, Mr. Speaker, that our government has

made. So there is no need to stand in this House and lecture this government

about whether or not we have a commitment to improve air ambulance services.

That is what we have done in this particular case here, Mr. Speaker. We have now

more strategically located an ambulance that is now in Happy Valley-Goose Bay

and we have one in St. John's. Any time a plane flies it is only sixty minutes

from any destination in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister knows it does not matter where you relocate that aircraft in the

Province; without a medevac team, that particular service is not going to

effectively serve the people of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we understand that St. John's air ambulance

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: is down for service due to a broken windshield. That means

the Goose Bay plane is now serving the entire Province.

I ask the minister: How long will the St. John's plane be out of service and

what additional delays will now be added to the response times for the Island

portion of the Province as well?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: The member opposite, in her

preamble, made probably the most

accurate statement that she has made in this entire Question Period, when she

said: It does not matter where the air ambulance is located, if the medical

flight team is not there, it changes how you deliver the service. So the reality

of it is, as of today there is no difference whether that ambulance is in Happy

Valley-Goose Bay or in St. Anthony. When we have the medical flight team in

place it will improve the service. We all know that. That is why we made the

commitment to do it, Mr. Speaker.

So for members opposite to stand in this House and criticize our government

for moving it from Happy Valley-Goose Bay, or from St. Anthony to Happy

Valley-Goose Bay as being an inappropriate decision or a poorly timed decision,

the member opposite just acknowledged, it is not the location that will improve

the service. It is the location - part of the process. Have it in a more

strategic location, enhance the services of the flight team, and that is exactly

what we are doing, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The only problem with all of that is that it is not necessarily the best

strategic location. We need two aircraft, and the minister knows that. We need

one in Labrador, we need one on the Northern Peninsula and we need medevac teams

in this Province if the system is going to operate properly. The minister knows

that, Mr. Speaker

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: - and he has not answered my question about how long the plane

in St. John's is going to be down.

I ask him again: The plane is out of commission, how long is she out of

commission for, minister?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Business.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would not want the member's last statement to go unchallenged, because what

she has suggested is that if we need three planes in this Province they need to

be in St. Anthony, and they need to be in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and they need

to be in St. John's.

I want to remind the members of this House, that the recent evaluation that

we had conducted talking about the location of air ambulances in this Province,

Mr. Speaker - the operation was in St. Anthony, the recommendation was to move

it to Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and we have done that. If and when we were to add

a third, it will be located in Deer Lake and not in St. Anthony.

For the member opposite to stand and start a process or start making public

commentary to suggest that a third might potentially be in St. Anthony is

irresponsible on her part, establishes an unrealistic expectation that they

would deliver that, Mr. Speaker, because that is not going to happen. We have

been abundantly clear about that from the beginning. Our commitment, from the

very beginning, Mr. Speaker, is to improve air ambulance services to all of the

residents of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The only thing irresponsible here is the government in neglecting to provide

an appropriate air ambulance service for the people of this Province. Mr.

Speaker, what is even more appalling is that I have asked the minister twice now

why the second air ambulance is broken down in this Province and how long it is

going to be down for. Obviously, the government knows nothing about it and has

no answers because they have not provided any.

Mr. Speaker, Corey Banks, the Director of Air Ambulance Program, recommended

that there be a three to five year phase in period of moving the aircraft. Mr.

Speaker, by moving the plane prematurely, the proper infrastructure and human

resources are currently not in place as is evident over the last couple of days.

I ask the minister: Why did you ignore this recommendation in Corey Banks'

internal report but yet accept all the other recommendations he put forward to

your government?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: I would not want the member opposite to stand and accuse me

of not answering her question again. So let me go back to her earlier question

around the repair of the aircraft.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, aircraft have mechanical problems periodically,

but the critical thing is how we respond to that. If you look at the history of

our government, any time that planes have had a mechanical failure, which will

happen, it is a mechanical device, it will happen

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: Any time that we have done that, Mr. Speaker, we have had a

backup plan. The backup plan is we have arrangements to lease planes. We have

arrangements with private airlines to be able to provide a charter for us so we

can lease planes. We always, Mr. Speaker, in knowing and recognizing that planes

will have mechanical problems we need to have a backup plan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: So it is not whether or not planes breakdown, Mr. Speaker,

the important thing to understand and recognize is: Do you have a backup plan?

The answer is: Yes, we do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the minister again has not answered the question. The question,

of course, is that the internal documents in the Department of Health said that

this phase-in period for the relocation of air ambulance could take up to three

to five years in order to do it appropriately. So, we have no explanation as to

why they did not follow that, but they followed all of the other

recommendations.

Mr. Speaker, also we are still waiting for the Department of Health to

provide documents related to the air ambulance move. The timelines have already

passed. We do not understand why we are not receiving the documents other than

the fact that the Minister of Health has refused to sign off on the information

and release it to the Opposition.

I ask the minister today if that is what is happening here.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, it is interesting how the member opposite

stands day after day, her and her colleagues, talking about reports and internal

reports and external reports. We have had criticism of Corey Banks and the Corey

Banks report. We have had criticisms of the Drodge report and the

recommendations. Then, the next day talked about how the recommendations are the

same and similar.

So I say, Mr. Speaker, what is fundamental here is that there has been a very

in-depth critique of the air ambulance service in the Province and a couple of

different individuals, one - not with the Department of Health I might add, but

Eastern Health has made some recommendations and made some observations as a

person responsible for that service, as did the independent study we had done.

Some of them had similar recommendations, Mr. Speaker. There were similar

recommendations from both individual's perspective and one kind of reinforces

the validity of the other.

What we have done, Mr. Speaker, is we have moved forward to implement the

recommendations that will see an overall improvement in air ambulance services

within this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To say the recommendations were similar is an understatement, as my colleague

said it was more like a photocopy, I say to the minister.

Mr. Speaker, the federal government has announced that they are going to

dispose of surplus lighthouses in the Province including some very well-known

and historically significant properties. There are already delays in opening the

provincially operated historical site at Point Amour, due to an agreement

between the federal and provincial governments that have not yet been ratified.

I ask the Minister of Tourism today: What is the nature of the negotiations

that have taken place around these lighthouses and associated properties in

transferring them to the Province, especially on provincially owned sites?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Well, Mr. Speaker, let me first say that we are certainly

very interested in the Point Amour Lighthouse, and we are in a process of

negotiating now for the turnover of that lighthouse to the Province. I think

last year they had over 5,000 visitors, and we certainly realize the tourism

potential and how much that means for the tourism product in Labrador in itself.

Mr. Speaker, there is also the Bonavista Lighthouse that is also one of our

provincial historic sites, so certainly that would be of grave interest to us,

should a devolution of lighthouses take place in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, the reality of it is that the federal government has over, I

believe, 100 lighthouses in this Province, of which forty or fifty of them are

not even active. Mr. Speaker, outside of several of the lighthouses, as a

government certainly, we would never be in a position, nor would we or could we,

to take over 100 lighthouses in this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Can the minister confirm for me today that there is a negotiation or an

agreement to take over the lighthouses at Point Amour and Cape Bonavista, or are

they just on a lease agreement between the Province and the federal government?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, this is very important, and a very important

question indeed. We talk about the Point Amour Lighthouse - just as recently as

before I came to the House, there were conversations had from my department with

the people who are involved with the Point Amour Lighthouse. If the hon. member

opposite would pay attention and stay in her own district and ask a few

questions, she might very quickly find out where we are to with that, Mr.

Speaker.

I will give you a prime example of how out of touch she is with the Point

Amour Lighthouse and the people of Point Amour. Last week in the Northern Pen ,

she was chastising government for not doing what we should be doing - chastising

us that we were not doing anything right when it came to the lighthouse in Point

Amour. However, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman that runs the group down there, the

local historical society, says he is not concerned at all. I quote him, "It

hasn't suffered at this point" - and I will keep quoting him, "Both governments

I think are doing the right thing at this moment as it all takes time"

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister and other members to refrain from quoting documents

while asking or answering questions.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister is all too aware that I have talked to people in my district and

I have talked to him on two or three occasions about the lighthouse in Point

Amour and what the status is. In fact, Mr. Speaker, up to an hour ago, I talked

to people who are affiliated with the lighthouse properties. They are telling me

they are still locked off the site. They cannot access the site.

We are two weeks into the tourism season. We understand that any agreement

between the federal and the provincial government to take over the properties

are now off the table.

I ask you, Minister: Will there at least be a licence to occupy or a lease

agreement in place in the next few days so that this site can open?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I chatted with the member opposite the week

before last and I told her to assure she brought to my attention that people

were worried and concerned in her area. I respect that, Mr. Speaker, and I told

her at that time to go back to her district and tell them not to worry.

It is in hand, Mr. Speaker, it is going to happen. We realize we are a little

bit late this year because the federal government has decided to do business a

little different than last year. To paraphrase, Mr. Speaker, to paraphrase the

local gentleman down there on the ground: I am confident I am confident, he

repeated - that this Province will be able to take it over before too long.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Other than the Point Amour Lighthouse, which we have no indication from the

minister at this stage if they will be taking it over and when they will be

taking it over, Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask also about other lighthouses at

properties in Cape Spear, Red Bay

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is having great difficulty in hearing the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition pose her question. I ask members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am straining my voice here to ask the question. The lighthouses at Cape

Spear, Red Bay, Rose Blanche and Ferryland are also other tourism attractions

that need to be protected.

I ask the minister: Has the Province looked into taking over control of any

of those lighthouses, and if so what criteria will be used to determine which

ones in the Province are taken over?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, as minister of this department, we certainly

realize the importance of our provincial historic sites around this Province, of

which some of them have lighthouses.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: So obviously, Mr. Speaker, as I assured the member opposite,

the Point Amour Lighthouse is a significant piece of history, something that has

significant potential for attraction to Labrador, to the opposite member's

district.

Mr. Speaker, again, I say

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask members, for the final time, for their co-operation, and to allow the

hon. minister to provide his answer.

The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, here we are now with a federal government that

is devolving of over 100 lighthouses. We have hundreds of historic churches in

this Province, Mr. Speaker. There is no possible way that this government could

take over every lighthouse that the federal government has devolved of in this

Province. However, Mr. Speaker, we certainly will look at the ones that are

important to our historical background in this Province. Mr. Speaker, I will be

totally frank here now, totally frank with the people in this Province, there is

no possible way that this government can take over 100 lighthouses.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Gulf turbot fishery opened in 4RSP last Thursday and closed

at 8:00 p.m. on Saturday. Immediately following the 8:00 p.m. deadline to have

nets out of the water, DFO launched an investigation into charging upwards of

twenty-five fishing enterprises in the 4R area, simply for going a few hours

beyond the catch close or time limits. These fishermen are stating that

inclement weather and insufficient off-loading sites delayed them getting back

on the water to retrieve their fishing gear.

I ask the minister: If he is aware of these potential charges, and if he or

his department is investigating the allegations put forth by the fishermen of

the Northern Peninsula, and have you been in contact with DFO or even the

minister on resolving this matter?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, yes, I am aware of the situation. I do not know

if the hon. member saw my news release that went out this morning, but I am

meeting with Minister Shea on Saturday. Mr. Speaker, I intend to raise that

particular issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The time frame allocated to this fishery is only forty-eight hours for some

eighty to 100 boats. The steam line is up to five hours and there are some that

are using up to 200 nets and so on. Inclement weather and off-loading and so on

obviously are additional challenges for the harvesters. Given these factors

which hamper fishermen getting the gear out of the water in this forty-eight

hour time frame, I ask the minister: What do you intend to request from the

federal counterpart when you meet with her in this meeting that you just

mentioned?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, prior to the opening of the House this session,

I travelled around the Province quite extensively and met with a number of

people. I met with some people on the Northeast Coast, with the member from that

area, and this was one of the issues that was raised. This turbot fishery, it is

a very viable, lucrative fishery for a very short period of time. The fishermen

on the ground believe that there could be an increase in quota and science is

saying that it is sustainable at its present levels.

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that we certainly have to relay to our federal

counterparts speak specifically to science, to ensure that we have accurate

science and that proper decisions, correct decisions are made to the benefit of

all involved and, in particular, Mr. Speaker, the resource.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, we certainly support aiding other parts of the world in an

emergency, yet we must also ensure we do not leave ourselves scrambling at home

in the event of our own emergency. Mr. Speaker, since booms are critical to

contain oil from a potential spill in the ocean and since we have learned from

media reports that Coast Guard has shipped some of our boom south to assist

cleanup in the Gulf of Mexico, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Environment

and Conservation if she knows whether or not the plans for containment of an oil

spill in Placentia Bay are adequate for keeping oil from hitting the Province's

shoreline?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, if the member had not asked me, I was certainly going to rise on

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given, because I committed

yesterday that I would contact the Coast Guard and I had done that, Mr. Speaker

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JOHNSON: - and they informed me that they did deploy 600 metres of

boom. There is still 750 metres of boom remaining. There is also a single side

sweep booms of 500 metres and there is also 8,000 metres of thirty-six inches of

inshore boom available. So they have assured me that the capacity is available

within the Province to respond to a spill should there be one here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, I do thank the minister for coming up with those

answers today. It is important information that we need to have.

What I would like to know though now, as a follow-up to that: Is she, in her

department, going to meet with these agencies to discover whether or not in

general - not just now at this moment, but in general - what they have in place

is adequate if an oil spill happened in the Placentia Bay? Is what they have in

place adequate to keep oil from reaching our shorelines, taking into account the

wave movement in that bay, the islands in that bay et cetera?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

As I said yesterday, while it is not in the jurisdiction of the Department of

Environment, I also said that we certainly consult with our counterparts on the

federal level, at the Coast Guard, at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans,

Mr. Speaker, and certainly Transport Canada. The oil spill plans are certainly

in place. They have required times. Certainly, the oil companies are required to

have a certified oil spill response organization in place and they are also

required to have oil spill emergency plans and contingency plans in place. There

are very stringent rules. It is a very strict regime.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JOHNSON: There are certainly timelines involved in terms of tier one,

tier two, and tier three responses.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the exercise and the training that is done, I am

told that in every instance they have certainly exceeded the timelines required

to address an oil spill.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, one of the greatest treasures of this Province is our marine

wildlife. Recently, experts have been raising the alarm that the oil spill in

the Gulf of Mexico will have dire effects on our migratory bird population which

could devastate, for example, Cape St. Mary's Ecological Reserve.

Mr. Speaker: Will the minister immediately strike a committee of independent

experts to monitor and make recommendations on what we can do to save what we

can of our natural heritage in the face of this growing environmental disaster

now spreading throughout the Atlantic?

MS JONES: A good question.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I do agree with the Leader of the Opposition who just shouted it

was a good question, and it is a very good question. We are all concerned about

the environment, not only people in this House but people outside this House. We

see what is happening in the Gulf right now, and, Mr. Speaker, it is an absolute

disaster and one that we hope we would not want to see here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, we meet regularly with the federal government.

We participate on REET, which is the Regional Environmental Emergencies Team,

Mr. Speaker. The Canadian Wildlife Service has an oil spill response plan in

place, and, Mr. Speaker, as part of the REET organization they can draw on

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, if I could have the opportunity to continue.

This is a very serious issue and the Leader of the Opposition continues to mock

me when I say that the environment is of a serious concern. It certainly is of a

serious concern.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Leader of the Opposition for her co-operation.

The Chair continually rises here and asks for co-operation. The Chair is

going to have no other choice but to start naming members who continue to shout

while answers are given or for members to continue to shout while questions are

being asked.

I will give fair warning right now that the Chair will not be standing any

more and giving four or five warnings, but will ask the hon. members who are

causing disorder to immediately apologize or the Chair will not recognize the

hon. members who are causing the disorder until they apologize to the House.

Gone are the days that the Speaker is going to ask people to leave the Chamber.

It is playing into the political hands of the people who are causing the

disorder, but the people who are causing disorder will remain invisible to the

Chair until there is an apology issued.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. minister to kindly continue with her answer.

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we see, time and time again, that the Leader of the Opposition

tries to make this political, and this should be so far from any political

stripe. Every single political party should be concerned about what is going on

in the Gulf. We certainly are, in this government. I can assure the member, the

Leader of the Opposition, that we do meet regularly. REET is an excellent

organization.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is reluctant to do this. The Chair just rose and asked the hon.

member for her co-operation. The hon. member continues to shout disorder. I ask

the hon. member to immediately apologize to the Chair for causing disorder in

the House, and I ask the hon. member to do it now.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I apologize for any disorder I may have caused in the House.

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

now conclude her answer.

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just to conclude, I want to assure the Leader of the Opposition that we do

meet regularly. There is a lot of consultation that goes on with the federal

government, the Coast Guard, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Mr.

Speaker. We take it very, very seriously. It is an issue that we do not want to

see happen here, and (inaudible)

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for questions and answers has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees

Tabling of Documents

Notices of Motion

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given

Petitions.

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Day

MR. SPEAKER: This being Private Members' Day, the Chair will now hear the

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

his private member's resolution.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my privilege this afternoon to be able to rise and share this private

member's motion on an interim fishery compensation and support program.

WHEREAS there is a crisis in the fishing industry of our Province; and

WHEREAS government's focussed strategy to address these escalating problems

has been to sign a Memorandum of Understanding, referred to as MOU, with only

two key players in the industry; and

WHEREAS it has been nearly a year with no significant and practical progress

on this MOU and there are concerns about its ultimate effectiveness; and

WHEREAS the process does not include a community voice or the federal

government; and

WHEREAS the Province failed to allocate any funding to launch strategies of

the MOU process; and

WHEREAS restructuring is occurring now, including fish plants closing and

license transfers occurring, affecting people's livelihoods and the economic

viability of rural communities;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly encourages the

provincial government to launch an interim program and action plan that would

assist fish plant workers and communities affected, which would include an Early

Retirement Package, a Workers Adjustment Program and a Community Investment

Initiative to assist in this transitional process.

Mr. Speaker, there was a quote that I saw online, actually, in a little

briefing. It was from an Open Line show caller back in April who said that the

fishery really is about people. Certainly, that is a true statement. It is all

about our people, and that is why this afternoon I am pleased to be able to

stand on behalf of the Official Opposition to present to the Members of the

House of Assembly this private member's motion.

The troubled 2010 fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador is a puzzle that

really begs to be fitted together with the smartest pieces to ensure that its

short-term survival and long-term future is evident for the benefit of people

and of our communities, not only today but also into our future.

The 2009 fisheries Year in Review report that was presented by the government

revealed that there was close to a 22 per cent decline in total production from

2008-2009. That is a statistic that we obviously are concerned about, and this

statistic alone should be a wake-up call for both federal and provincial

governments, really, to take a more bold and a more holistic approach to fishery

recovery and to really reshaping the industry as is warranted today.

The annual turmoil in both the snow crab and the shrimp fisheries in this

Province also highlight the need to really tackle this evolution head on and

with all guns blazing, so to speak. The fact is that there has been a

significant loss of people since 1992, in the collapse of our cod fishery, with

very few of them coming back. The truth is that rural Newfoundland and Labrador

continues to decline, and it should also heighten our sense of urgency to

address this complex issue.

In response to the announced closure of the Jackson's Arm plant just a few

weeks ago, I challenge the Minister of Fisheries in the House of Assembly on

what government is prepared to do to help communities like Jackson's Arm. It is

just an example, really, of what is going to happen in our Province, and how

they deal with plant closures in the lead-up to the MOU being actualized. The

people and community of Jackson's Arm epitomize those who really will fall

through the cracks while government hangs on to the hat of the MOU agreement, so

to speak.

These plant workers have lost their plant this season, and they are fearful

that it will be a permanent closure and I realize that we do not know the

outcome of that yet, but that is their fear - and there is no meaningful

transitional support to help them make the leap to the future, so to speak.

The most common response that we have received as we have questioned the

Minister of Fisheries, when questioned on the issue of investments in

communities and so on, like Jackson's Arm, I quote from Hansard on June 1, when

the minister said, "The industry players that are involved in the MOU, those

being the FFAW, the ASP and government, are instrumental in bringing about

reform in this fishery." I agree with that in principle. He was quick to suggest

that the Opposition may not have full faith in the process, but he was certain

that, as a minister and as a government, we do.

So, all government can retort to at this point, as far as we can see, is that

they have faith in the MOU process, hoping that it will bring about some

long-term stability and that it will bring about a better livelihood for the

people who are involved in this industry.

Well, Mr. Speaker, the Official Opposition hopes that the MOU will bring

about some long-term stability as well. We support in principle what is trying

to be accomplished here; however, we have no idea how it is going to play out.

It really does not show itself. We do not see it unfolding before us as we reach

almost the anniversary date that the minister speaks about sometimes being just

a month or so away. As a result of that, as an Opposition party, we do not

believe, nor can we accept, that this government should sit back and wait for it

to unfold. That would just not be acceptable for those who are facing

devastation as it comes down the road.

The reality is that it may take years for this process to unfold. We really

do not know that today, so we cannot simply sit back and allow these workers and

allow these communities, like Jackson's Arm and other places, to be at the mercy

of restructuring without the benefit of adequate support and without the benefit

of long-term strategies.

Fish processing and the workers involved in that industry are within the

Province's jurisdiction. Because of that we are under obligation to look after

them as a government, and they deserve such without really having to protest it.

In my district, the plant at Englee, for example, closed back in 2004. While

there was some investment into work-making projects and so on, there really has

been no investment by the government to entice other industries to the town to

see what can be done to help that community recover. I can tell you that today

Englee is reeling on its heels as it tries to understand its future and it tries

to deal with the devastation of the closing of this all-important industry that

it has enjoyed for decades.

The plant in New Ferolle is still not in start-up mode. It has been down

since last year; it is into this year with nothing happening. Again, the people

are asking the same kind of questions: What is the future of my community? What

is the future of me, as an individual, of my family, and my ability to earn

income in this community, as I have done for so many years?

If you look at Anchor Point, another community that is in my district and one

that is of concern to me and I am sure it would be of concern to all of us in

the Province, operating at a considerable reduced capacity compared to last

year. As a matter of fact, they just opened on June 3. It used to employ 150

people. Now, 150 people do not sound big in St. John's, but in Anchor Point 150

people are pretty important to the economy of the town.

Well, today there are approximately 100 people working at Anchor Point. That

means one-third of its workforce has gone by the wayside in the past two years.

Thirty-five or forty people, or so, of these are basically out of that

particular sector, if you will, they are out trying to find other work and so

on.

In the first year, three years ago when this new processor took that plant

over, these people enjoyed thirteen weeks of work. Last year, they were able to

get ten weeks work. This year, last week was the first time that they worked,

and I will say what was shift A and shift B. Shift A had twenty-six hours work

last week and shift B did not get any. This week, Shift B has nineteen hours

work and Shift A will get thirteen hours.

Now, that concerns me, and I am sure it concerns each one of us here this

afternoon. Where do we go with that? As we wait for the MOU process to unfold,

what does that mean for the people of Englee and other communities like it and

so on?

So, one of the shortfalls that I have noted, and we have noted as an

Opposition, in this whole MOU process is that there is no community voice at the

table. There isn't anyone really lobbying for the community of Anchor Point and

the community of New Ferolle and the community of Jackson's Arm and so on. That

voice isn't really there in a very strong fashion. If the MOU process holds the

future of those communities, as we believe it does, then I believe that as we

await that plan, I believe that they have a right to have their voice heard as

that process unfolds rather than having their voice heard once the process has

unfolded.

Now, there is no doubt that there are some tough decisions that will have to

be made in the fishing industry, and we acknowledge that as an Opposition. It is

important for those communities to be part of the dialogue that leads to reform

and not just the receivers of information once the reform and the decision have

been done. These cuts are coming basically in rural Newfoundland and Labrador,

and they are happening now. Government needs to be to honestly acknowledge this

to get a plan in place as they roll, so to speak, towards the MOU process.

Mr. Speaker, the motion that I put forward today by the Official Opposition

called for an interim program. It called for an action plan that would assist

fish plant workers and assist the communities in which they live, and this

program basically would include three things. I want to speak to them just for a

moment.

The first thing that we have asked for in this motion is an early retirement

package. Mr. Speaker, this House ought to know by now, I am sure, that we have a

large number of our 60 plus clubs, if you will, working at our local fish

plants. Quite frankly, they have done an honourable job all of their lives in

really helping that industry be what it has been, and helping support this

Province in terms of its economy. Mr. Speaker, this group of individuals now

find themselves in a situation where they literally do not know where their next

dollar is coming from. Their plants are closing, and the question is: Will they

have to uproot and move on, and if so, where will they go? Where does a person

go at sixty-two years of age who has worked at the local fish plant for the past

forty-five years or whatever the case might be? The options are very limited to

them. If you try and retrain them, realistically, what can we retrain them to do

for the next three or four years?

I have mentioned before, and I will mention again, during the by-election,

visiting Englee, one of the things that really remains in my memory, so to

speak, and entrenched in my mind, as I recall the by-election process and the

excitement and just going through that whole thing, was visiting Englee and

going to the municipal building there and visiting a classroom that was set up

in the basement, if you will, where they were retraining displaced plant workers

to do carpentry work. I spoke to a lady who was sixty-two years of age. For the

very first time in her life, she was trying to introduce herself to a

carpenter's square, to the basics of doing carpentry and so on. She was very

distraught, quite frankly. Her self-esteem was not as high as it was when she

worked in the fish plant and so on. So, we are asking that for people who fit in

that category, if you will, that there has to be something that helps them to be

honourably introduced to early retirement.

It is not a new thing. If you look back I have a news release here, back in

June of 2004, when the then Minister of Fisheries, Trevor Taylor, who was the

MHA in my district, as you all know, he talked about the aging plant workers for

Newfoundland and Labrador at that time, and the fact that fish stocks were

declining and so on. The quote in his news release is this, it said, "The

outlook for plant workers is unclear given that technological innovations

continue to reduce the labour demands of the fishing industry." So, that is six

years ago that this government has known that there is an issue, in terms of the

aging population of plant workers.

We could on from there, in 2007, Premier Williams, during the election

campaign or coming close to the election campaign, he expressed concern about

the Province's fish processing industry. He said that the industry would

collapse in five years due to an aging workforce and younger workers moving west

and so. At that time, the Premier said that in the absence of an early

retirement program, there would be a serious problem to the industry. So, he

expressed to the federal party leaders at that time for the need for an early

retirement initiative, obviously trying to get the federal government on side,

and we know that the pleas for that basically fell on deaf ears. That means that

the onus then falls back on this government to try to understand what it is that

we are going to do with these displaced fish plant workers. I think that an

early retirement package is a must in terms of what we do as we get ready for

the MOU. We know what is going to happen. We know that there are going to be

drastic cuts and things that we probably do not like and we do not need to sit

back and wait for that to unfold.

A second thing that I have mentioned in this private member's motion - I am

trying to rush a long a little bit because my time is running out - is a

workers' adjustment program. Again, I saw that last year during the by-election

as well. A workers' adjustment program, looking at displaced older workers, it

kind of sheds some light on what the current status of the situation and so on

is. Basically, while we have find programs, it is important that these programs

are meaningful. It is important that they are not programs - and while it is

good to cut brush by the side of the road and it is good to do other things that

really keep the face to our Province and so on, I think we need to look for ways

that really help it to be more meaningful, if you will.

Also, probably the more important piece of that is the time frame in which we

do it. We know, this year, that long before December comes that there is going

to be a need for that type of work. So, rather than wait until September and

October to try to get for ready, these programs need to be ready for August. We

know that an adjustment program is going to be necessary and we can have that in

our back pocket, so to speak, have it ready to roll out, give people an

opportunity to have their income boosted for that year to where it needs to be

and just let it happen.

The last thing that we have mentioned in this private member's motion is that

of community investment initiative. That can take the form of many things but it

is important, whether it is investment into a business that may be able to hire

four or five of these people who have been displaced by the fishery, or whatever

the case might be, it is important that that is allowed to happen.

A couple of examples that I could use, Mr. Speaker, in my district in Shoal

Cove there is a seal tanning place there where basically they are doing great

work and so on. In the midst of doing a community enhancement investment,

probably that is a type of business, if you will, that can be expanded with the

help of government with funding available to support these displaced fish plant

workers, it can be used to expand that process and so on. So there are many

things.

I am pleased this afternoon to present this private member's motion, and I

look forward, Mr. Speaker, to our debate on it in the next little while.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not suppose there is enough time in this session, and probably for the

next two or three weeks, for all of us in this House to get up and debate and to

speak about our thoughts on the fishery and where it should head. There are

about 500,000 people in the Province, Mr. Speaker. I swear to God, in the last

five months I have heard 250,000 different opinions as to how this fishery

should be restructured, but with it comes much challenge.

The hon. member who just spoke mentioned that this is about our people.

Anybody who I do not suppose anybody, I think everybody. Everybody in this

Province has a strong connection to the fishery, whether they are a banker,

whether they are a teacher, whether they are a welder, whether they are a fish

harvester or a processor, a plant worker. We all, in this Province, have an

attachment to the fishery; we have an attachment to the water. Mr. Speaker, it

is in our blood, and anybody who comes to this Province and travels to this

Province knows exactly that. In my former portfolio, I remember someone saying

that when people come to the Province to visit, they do not come so much to see

the urban parts of our Province, the bigger centres. They want to get out and

see what is happening in our rural communities and see the fishing equipment and

see how that is carried out.

Mr. Speaker, for all of us, we find this issue around the fishery a very,

very troubling one. Since I have been involved in this portfolio and in this

process called the MOU, there are two questions I have asked people over and

over, and I think everybody in the Province should reflect on them a little bit

carefully. Question number one: Why is it that we as a Province it seems that

we are the only jurisdiction in the fishery who have what I will call a snarl

every spring with the opening of the season. Alaska, who is in the crab fishery,

Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, P.E.I., Quebec, that are in the waters adjacent to

our Province, they start every spring without any issue. So people need to ask

themselves: Why is that? The second thing I think people need to ask themselves

is: Why is it that the price of our crab seems to be generally lower than in

other jurisdictions?

Now, Mr. Speaker, if you can get to the bottom of those two questions, we

will not have a snarl in our fishery every season. Mr. Speaker, we have to move

with something that is going to change the shape of this fishery in the

Province. There are two things that are involved. I will agree with the member

that we do need measures that get people through this particular stage.

My hon. colleague, the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment

will speak to some of those issues shortly. Because in the case of Jackson's Arm

that the hon. member mentioned, we had started on that anticipating that

something was going to happen in Jackson's Arm. The Member for Humber Valley and

the minister and I met this morning, as to what it is we need to do to get in

there and support these people immediately. Mr. Speaker, that is the short-term

thing and the second thing is the longer term.

Mr. Speaker, we have people working in our plants that I do not know how they

survive on the income that they make; a total income of $12,000 to $15,000

annually. That is what they have to operate their households. That is what they

have to operate their vehicles, just the ordinary day-to-day operations of

living. Mr. Speaker, these people in some ways are, I suppose, ransomed by the

situation that they are in. As soon as I say this, that we have too many plants,

there is somebody out there who will react and send me an e-mail and say you are

wrong.

So, Mr. Speaker, we have to invoke a process whereby the parties, the key

players in this game have to come up with the action plan to resolve this. To

say that there has been inaction, Mr. Speaker, is wrong. I will not say that

they are lying or anything like that, but, Mr. Speaker, we have made progress.

Meetings are continuing.

I will tell you, Mr. Speaker, in one of the amendments they said that the

government did not support this financially. Mr. Speaker, we put $800,000 into

this last year to get this process carried out. We have gone through that

process. We have hired two firms to do financial analysis of the harvesting and

processing sector. Just this past week, Mr. Speaker, we provided more support to

look at some possible scenarios and have that individual work with the MOU

participants, the working groups, to let's find our way forward here.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased, because there were a couple of times in

Question Period this week I wondered if the Opposition were in agreement with

the MOU. I am glad to see - and I had to go back to Hansard to get the hon.

member across the way, I swear to God, I said that I do not think they want to

see this process working. Well, he rose to say: Let me say first of all,

certainly we do hope the MOU process brings us a good solution. I have said that

before and I will say it again. In the same session, he repeated the same thing.

So, Mr. Speaker, I am very much pleased that the Opposition supports this

process.

I will be bringing forward some amendments to the hon. the member's motion. I

did not hear him today, but somebody told me he said on Open Line that he hoped

that we did not water it down. Mr. Speaker, we have no intention of that. In

fact, Mr. Speaker, I think what we are going to put in here will strengthen the

resolve of the MOU and will allow us to

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, if the Opposition will support us with those

amendments, it will show to the people of the Province that we are coming

forward with an MOU motion that will come out of this House today showing that

everybody is committed to making this a stronger process.

I issued a news release this morning that indicated I would be meeting with

Minister Shea on Saturday. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that is certainly top

on the agenda is to inform her of the status of the MOU because, again, Mr.

Speaker, I have said on a number of occasions, it is not much point in us going

to Ottawa if we in this Province do not agree with what we are bringing forward.

That is what this MOU process is about. It is about the partners sitting at this

table, walking away from this MOU process and saying the FFAW, the ASP - we as

a government saying: All three parties agree, federal government, and we are

bringing this forward to you. We think it is reasonable. We think it is

workable. We know it is long-term and we expect your support in that regard.

Mr. Speaker, I have indicated in this House and I have indicated in the media

that the anniversary is fast approaching. July 11 was the announcement of this

and I have asked the chair, in conjunction with the groups, that I want a

progress report by the anniversary, and that shortly after that I would like to

have a written report, an agreement of what we can present to Ottawa.

So, Mr. Speaker, the onus is on us. We are the people engaged in this

process, so the onus and the responsibility to the people of this Province, the

fishery, the plant workers, the harvesters, the deckhands, the processors, all

of us involved in that, the onus is on us to put forward that plan. Mr. Speaker,

that is going to mean some very, very, tough stands. It is going to mean the

opening up of the various parties to say that I am going to have to let go of

this to make this happen. There will be challenges. There will be communities

everybody seems in agreement that there has to be some kind of restructuring

here; that is, Mr. Speaker, until it hits their community. That is very tough.

There is no doubt about that, that is tough. Anybody who has sat in government

and has had an industry close down in their district will tell you, it is one of

the toughest things that we have to deal with as government members. So, Mr.

Speaker, that will require a challenge on everyone's part.

Mr. Speaker, I will propose an amendment to the motion, seconded by the

Member for The Isles of Notre Dame: To move that the private member's resolution

currently before the House be amended:

(1) by deleting, in the first recital clause, the words "is a crisis" and

substituting therefore the words "are challenges";

(2) by deleting, in the second recital clause, the word "only" and

substituting therefore the word "the";

(3) by deleting the third recital clause;

(4) by deleting, in the fourth recital clause, the words "does not" and

substituting therefore the word "will" and deleting the word "or" and

substituting therefore the word "and";

(5) by deleting, in the fifth recital clause, the words "failed to allocate

any funding to launch strategies of" and substituting therefore the words

"invested $800,000 to launch";

(6) by deleting the sixth recital clause; and

(7) by striking out the resolution clause and substituting the following

therefore:

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly encourages the

provincial government to continue its ongoing programs and action plans for

worker adjustment and community development to assist fish harvesters and plant

workers through the transitional process in communities affected by fishing

industry challenges; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this House encourages the provincial government -

upon completion of the important collaborative work of the government, the Fish,

Food and Allied Workers and the Association of Seafood Producers under the MOU -

to work with the federal government to implement measures to ensure the economic

sustainability of the Province's fishing industry.

As I have said, Mr. Speaker, this is seconded by the Member for The Isles of

Notre Dame.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, the Member for The Straits &

White Bay North, have you had a chance to see the changes to this resolution?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member has asked that we recess to give you time to

look at the resolution and make commentary after.

This House will now take a brief recess to allow for that action to take

place.

This House is now recessed.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition if they have had an opportunity to

review the amendment, and if there is any commentary?

MR. DEAN: No, no commentary.

MR. SPEAKER: No commentary.

The Chair has also had an opportunity to review the amendment as well, and

the Chair provides that the amendment as put forward by the hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture and seconded by the hon. Member for The Isles of Notre

Dame as being in order.

Further commentary on the private member's motion?

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

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

It is a pleasure to be able to stand today and have a few comments with

regard to the private member's motion that was put forward by my colleague, and

it was a pleasure to be able to second that private member's motion.

Mr. Speaker, just some opening comments with regard to the amendment that was

put forward. I want to say from the outset, maybe some of the minor changes that

were made in this amendment I could agree with but the THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED

that was listed in the private member's motion that was put forward, where it

was to encourage the provincial government to launch an interim program and

action, that has been taken out and the word "continue" put there.

So, Mr. Speaker, based on that, as well as the BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED in the

amendment, where it states "that this House encourages the provincial government

- upon completion of the important collaborative work of the government, the

Fish, Food and Allied Workers and the Association of Seafood Producers under the

MOU - to work with the federal government to implement measures".

Mr. Speaker, I guess that is another reason why I think something should be

done now, because the fishing industry in this Province is so important. I know

the word "crisis" has been removed and exchanged with "challenges" but I have to

say, Mr. Speaker, from the people that I speak with, not only in my district but

throughout this Province, many people think the fishery is in a crisis

situation. So, Mr. Speaker, based on that, I want to advise the hon. minister

that I personally will not be supporting the amendment that was put forward.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to go back over a period of time when we talk about

the fishery in this Province. I understand fully the position that the minister

finds himself in, and I can assure you, many ministers before him found

themselves in very difficult positions because it is a situation that cannot be

resolved very easily.

I want to go back, Mr. Speaker and I know how important the fishing

industry is not only to my district, even though we have one of the, I suppose,

most prominent and richest resources that we have there in the Town of Port de

Grave, as well as all of the surrounding area in my district. We have to go back

quite some time, many years. We always find ourselves in a crisis with the

fishery within our Province. I can go back to a very early age, my father being

a fisherman who would spend the summers in the trap fishery and would have to go

away in later years on the draggers. Prior to that, he would have to leave his

Province because of the downturn in the fishery and take

part in the dory

fishery out of Lunenburg, Nova Scotia.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take you back to 1985, when our party was in

Opposition at the time. The Conservatives were in power. There was a major,

major issue that came forward from the fishers around this Province. It was not

only totalling around the crab fishery because at that time the crab fishery was

not what it is today; it was more or less along the lines of the cod fishery. I

know there was a committee put in place that travelled throughout this Province.

They went to places like Port de Grave, Port Rexton, Summerford, Fogo, St.

Barbe, Triton and many other areas. They sat down and they listened to what the

fishermen had to say, the people who knew what was going on. They came back with

staggering comments about what was happening in the fishery.

Mr. Speaker, that was twenty-five years ago. The message of that day that the

fishermen of this Province put forward fell on deaf ears. Regardless of who was

in power, it had nothing to do with it; both federal and provincial governments

did not listen to what those people were saying. All of a sudden we ended up

with a moratorium, which was a tremendous downturn for the economy of this

Province and to the people who were involved in the fishery. It only this week,

I read an

article - because I think many times, all too often if we do not come

together and listen to what those people are saying, we are heading for a very

serious situation with the fishery in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to reference the capelin fishery, which is a

component of this fishery. We are wondering why the cod stocks are not returning

as they are. I read an

article the other day where the capelin fishery in the

North Pacific, which is shared between Japan and Russia, and what they do they

are the very people who come here and buy our capelin. They take them back to

use as they want. They do not catch their own capelin. They leave them in the

ocean so that the cod fish and the other species have a food supply for them.

Maybe that is one of the problems that we have when it comes to our

groundfishery. I know that is not as prominent as what it was a few years ago.

Mr. Speaker, in 2005 there was a document put out through Memorial University

in conjunction with the Harris Centre, and it was called: Memorial Presents

Fishery Policy and Rural Revitalization. Some of the key things that they

brought up in that report, under one component was the human resource crisis.

How they mentioned - and the minister mentioned it in his opening comments,

about how the plant workers income was some of the lowest in this country. How

the reliance on EI, they were becoming dependent upon it, and how the youth of

our Province are not interested in the industry. Many of them are getting away

from the industry. Each and every week I have someone who is trying to retrain

to get away from the fishing industry.

Mr. Speaker, the other comments that came out of that report was the

uncertainty of the resource. We know today, and I hope this figure is correct, I

think it is somewhere around 75 per cent of the value of our fishery today has

to do with crab and shrimp. No doubt about it, some of the fishermen will tell

you that there are areas where they see a decline now in the crab fishery. There

have not been any major significant replacements in the cod stocks and we wonder

why. Even though science will tell us that there is a slow return of the cod but

many fishermen will tell you that they see, in different areas of our Province,

more cod than they ever witnessed before.

Only last week we heard the minister, and I hope our minister will speak with

the federal minister when she arrives here for the meeting on Saturday, about -

I think it was in the Gulf, where they are going to have a cull on the grey seal

because of the damage they believe it is doing to the stocks. I hope the

minister will encourage her to look at a cull with the harp seal in our waters

because we can only imagine what 6 million seals, or that is the estimated

number, are doing to the cod stocks. Only this year we had a report saying that

when the seal hunt was on, and I cannot verify this but it was a legitimate call

on it, saying that the seals were now even eating the younger crab.

So, Mr. Speaker, the minister is correct, and I believe my hon. colleague

when he brings it forward. The present structure cannot last the way it is. The

fishery cannot continue in its present format. If we think that the industry is

going to depend upon the crab solely into the future, I think we are sadly

mistaken. We cannot continue, and fishermen will tell you that it is fine now,

it is a very lucrative fishery even though it is not what it used to be but

something has to be done. I believe that there has to be a joint venture between

the provincial and federal governments to deal with this issue. I know the

minister stated in his amendment that once they carry out the work that the MOU

has to do, they are hoping to then present it to the federal government. I

believe that the federal government should have been involved in day one because

they play a very important

part in the fishery of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, the fishers have been speaking out for years, and I know it is a

very difficult situation. My fear is - another thing that we hear from the

fishermen around this Province - that once the small processors and we heard

the minister say there is going to be major changes, and that is why I am very

fearful about the MOU, what will come at the end of the day, even though we are

hoping that this will resolve the problems that we encounter in the fishery. My

fear is that by eliminating the small processors and the buyers the small boat

fishermen will be unable to sell the small quantities of the very species that

they have to sell. That is a concern that they are expressing on a regular

basis.

Then, we get to the moratorium of a Memorandum of Understanding, Mr. Speaker.

We know this started, and the minister said the anniversary date is July of this

year, I hope that the parties can come together with a situation that will

resolve it, not only for this year, the short term, but something can come out

of this for the long term. I believe, sincerely, that the federal government

should be involved. We always hear when we talk about environmental issues,

well, that is a federal issue. I can tell you the fishery is also very important

when it comes to the federal involvement, and I think they should have been

involved.

The other thing I believe, Mr. Speaker - and I know the FFAW is involved and

I do not want to take anything away from the union, but I believe that the

harvesters should have representatives there as well. Even though the FFAW

represents them, they also represent the plant workers. Mr. Speaker, those are

the people and I have had people say to me in the district: Look, we are

hoping that this is going to work. We hope that there will be no problems. What

is happening? They are having meetings; we do not know what is going on. We are

represented by the union, but there is nobody reporting back to us the way that

we believe that it should be reported back to us.

Mr. Speaker, we have heard so much in recent years. We have had a summit on

the fishery. We have had major issues when it came to the raw material sharing.

We have had meetings where the Premier and others went to the EU countries. We

have had numerous private members' motions down through the years. I know the

first one I did was back in 2001. We have had them both provincially and

federally, but, Mr. Speaker, it seems like all of this falls on deaf ears. I

think now that we have the opportunity, whether we wanted to call it the MOU, or

whatever it is, I believe that everybody should be at the table: the voice of

the community, the federal government and, as I said before, representatives

from the harvesters, even though they are represented by the union.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but bring up the comment, and I think it was

during one of the very first caucus meetings that this government had in 2001, I

believe it was I am sorry, 2003, that is when you formed the government. My

apologies for putting you there a lot longer than I wanted you to be there.

Anyway, there was a meeting that was held, a caucus meeting. I think it was on

the Bonavista Peninsula, if I am not wrong, and I could not find the

article I

have it somewhere where the Premier made a comment. Now, whether it was a slip

of the tongue or what, I do not know, but he said: We have to get away from the

involvement that we were always used to with the fishery. I can understand where

he was coming from, that changes have to be made, but if we are going to get

away from the fishery of the past, because one of those days and it is not

going to be too long, I hope it never happens, but we are going to see where the

shrimp and the crab fishery will not be what it is today. The fishers around

this Province in all the small outlying communities now who that rely on the

small quantities of cod that they are allowed to catch, they are going to have

an opportunity to be able to say: I hope that is going to be there for me.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that is what we have to do to try to protect what is

left of this fishery. I know, as I stated before, I was EA to the Minister of

Fisheries, it is no easy task. Whoever sits in that position, Mr. Speaker, I can

assure you, have their hands full. From the time you have to deal with the

processors, the union, and everybody involved, it is not an easy situation. We

have seen situations that became very explosive here in this Province. I

remember seeing as high as sixty constabulary officers here in the lobby of the

Confederation Building dressed in riot gear because there were 1,000 or 1,500

fishermen parading up the road coming to this building. Mr. Speaker, we do not

want to see that any more.

I hope that when the minister meets with the federal Minister of Fisheries

that all issues, regardless of what they are, will be laid on the table. I

believe that he has to lay them there strong and firm because the federal

government, I believe, is getting away from their responsibilities.

Mr. Speaker, just to say, as stated in the amendment, that once the work is

done, I believe something has to be done now in the interim, because in a very

short time, we are going to be hearing right throughout this Province, each and

every one of us who represent the districts, wondering if there are any programs

going to come down this year. What is going to happen when my plant closes? We

have to put something in place that those people still can live in the

communities that they were born in and carry out the livelihood that they were

always used to, and that is their involvement in the fishing industry.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): The hon. the Minister of Human Resources,

Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to stand today and speak to this amended motion.

Though my district certainly does not lend itself to fishing, being Grand

Falls-Windsor-Buchans, I think the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture hit it

on the head when he said that the fishery and our oceans and our way of living

are aspects of our identity that are part of who we all are as Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians. So, it is absolutely my privilege to stand and to speak to

this particular amendment and this motion.

Mr. Speaker, whilst fishing is not a particular concern in my District of

Grand Falls-Windsor-Buchans, we certainly have known the effects, however, of

industry loss, of downturn, of downsizing of industry, and so on as it relates

to the mining sector, as it relates to the pulp and paper and the forestry

sector. So, I can certainly understand the concerns of people in our fish

plants, people in the fisheries itself, because those are issues that are near

and dear to my heart as well.

Mr. Speaker, I heard the member opposite who spoke just in advance of me make

some comment about he was fearful of what might happen to the MOU process and

where it might go and where it might take us. Mr. Speaker, I just have to

comment that from my observations from sitting around the tables that I sit

around, from the discussions that I have been involved with, I think that this

Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture is perhaps one of the most dedicated, one

of the most determined, and one of the most unrelenting ministers

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: that we have seen as it relates to trying to find

solutions, not simply identifying problems, Mr. Speaker, but seriously looking

at trying to find solutions as it relates to the fisheries. Mr. Speaker, I have

every confidence that the MOU process that he is part of will make progress. In

fact, I think we have reason to be happy with the progress that has already been

made in terms of fisheries restructuring in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: The minister has certainly requested and received many

proposals on industry restructuring and rationalization and marketing from

various participants of the MOU process. He has received particular information

from ASP, from the FFAW, and from others who are not directly participating in

the process: for example, the Newfoundland and Labrador Inshore Shrimp Fleets,

the Newfoundland and Labrador Independent Fish Harvesters Association and so on.

He has also involved the Department of Fisheries and Oceans in these discussions

and, as he mentioned today in the House, and several times during Question

Period, he is in regular contact with our federal counterpart, the Minister of

Fisheries and Oceans, the hon. Gail Shea, as well, as this MOU process moves

forward. So I have every confidence, Mr. Speaker, that through the process,

through the MOU steering committee that is put in place, through the various

working groups that are engaged in this particular process, that the analysis

that will be needed and the industry restructuring that we hope to see is a

process that is well underway, that is well in hand, Mr. Speaker. Independent

consultants, as well, Mr. Speaker, have been involved in this process. So,

basically, I think all of the players have been put in place to deal with the

particular issues.

The success of the MOU, as the minister has alluded to on many occasions,

however, rests in the hands of the participants in the process, rests in the

leadership, the true leadership that those participants are able to show as this

particular MOU and the process itself works forward. Of course, I, like everyone

in this House, and like all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, we all look

forward to the completion of the process and being able to see exactly the

results of this particular Memorandum of Understanding.

Mr. Speaker, what I would like to address today, as well, is something that

pertains to my department specifically, my Department of Human Resources, Labour

and Employment, and that has to do with what we do to support people affected by

a downturn in the economy, by people who are affected by closures of particular

industries, by people who are affected by industry adjustment and so on. So I

would like to speak to the particular suite of programs that we put in place to

ensure the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that this government is there for

them, that this government will hold on, will find a way to help them through

these difficult times in their lives; because certainly the loss of a job,

certainly the closure of an industry, all of those events are difficult times,

not just for the workers involved but, Mr. Speaker, as well for their families.

Through my department, and through the Department of Municipal Affairs, as

well as INTRD, we have a number of supports that we put in place. In particular,

I would like to make reference to one of the programs that is in place through

the Department of Municipal Affairs, and this particular program is referred to

as the Fish Plant Worker Employment Support Program, and that focuses on

creating short-term employment for workers from fish plants designated by

government as permanently closed.

When we are speaking about Jackson's Arm, of course, that is not a fish plant

that has been permanently closed, but in any case that is a program that has

been in place that has benefited many of our fish plant workers in the past.

Hopefully, that is not the scenario here, but if it were to come to pass then

that, too, is a program that people can avail of.

As well, through Innovation, Trade and Rural Development there is another

program, the Fish Plant Workers Employment Assistance Program for Small- and

Medium-Sized Enterprises, Mr. Speaker. It is another well-known program, and a

program that does well in terms of supporting our workers who have lost

opportunities to continue to work in their traditional means of employment. This

program provides new entrepreneurs in expanding small businesses with funding to

employ fish plant workers negatively affected by the closure of a fish plant. We

have seen those kinds of employment opportunities work, and work very

successfully, in the past. In fact, anecdotally I have heard of a situation just

recently where there has been an employer who has taken advantage of that type

of a program to employ some fish plant workers.

Mr. Speaker, within my own department there are a number of programs, a

number of services that we are able to offer. I would like to point out that we

have been very proactive on this file, particularly in terms of Jackson's Arm.

Notice was given by the company last Friday, Mr. Speaker - June 4 was when the

notice was given - but I would like to point out that my department has been on

the ground, has already made contact with the workers, the fish plant workers,

with the management people as well in that particular fish plant about two weeks

ago now. What we intended to do was to be proactive, to make those initial

overtures, to speak to people in the fish plant to say we have a suite of

programs and, should you need our assistance, we will be there for you. Our

government's priority is to support employees but also their families, all of

those who will be impacted by a plant not reopening, or a plant closing, or a

plant downsizing.

As a result of our previous experience working with individuals affected by

industry downsizing, we have determined that the most important thing that

people want in a situation like this is that they want access to information,

Mr. Speaker. They want access to the programs that are available to them. They

want access to the services. They want an opportunity to ask questions generally

or questions that are specific to their own circumstance.

Mr. Speaker, we are currently in the process of working with other local

service providers to see that we put that access to information in place for the

workers of Jackson's Arm. When I talk about other service providers, Mr.

Speaker, I am talking about other governmental departments as well: the

Department of Education, through the industrial education piece; the Department

of Municipal Affairs; we are talking about partnering with the College of the

North Atlantic; we are talking about our own EAS offices our Employment

Assistance Services offices, Mr. Speaker. We partner with Service Canada as well

for the EI

Part I expertise that we need in offering that access to information.

What I started to say as well is that in doing that we will provide

information sessions for the people once they have given us the indication that

they want those particular sessions. We will work out dates with them. The

information can be provided to them in a group setting or we can provide

individual sessions for those particular workers as well. Some people have

individual questions they want to ask, they have privacy issues, and they often

ask us for individual counselling sessions or individual information sessions.

We are happy to provide either, Mr. Speaker.

We have many programs in place to provide a wide range of supports to workers

a suite, in fact, of labour market adjustment supports - to respond to the

needs of displaced workers. We have some very professional staff as well.

Through our fourteen Career Work Centres across this Province we have offered

those supports many times in many areas.

So, depending on the needs of the individual workers, Mr. Speaker, these

supports may include one-on-one career and employment counselling by group

workshops, or, as I indicated earlier, individual consultations, if an

individual so desires. Up-to-date labour market information, as well, is

provided to people. As well, we would help people with wage subsidies. If they

have opportunity to go to work some place else, but that particular employer may

need a wage subsidy in order to employ them, then we have particular programs

that may be of benefit to them. Again, one-on-one or in a group session, we are

able to counsel them with regard to wage subsidy programs that they may be able

to access.

As well, there are training opportunities that we are able to provide service

for, Mr. Speaker. Now, I know that the proposer of the bill in the first place

talked about that, and seemed to indicate that training is not a route to go,

that people do not want education. Well, Mr. Speaker, that has not been my

experience, particularly in Grand Falls-Windsor where we had a major, major,

loss in the closing of the AbitibiBowater mill. Mr. Speaker, I should like to

point out to the member opposite that the training opportunities that we

provided were very highly regarded by the workers in Grand Falls-Windsor and

surrounding areas. Many of them have taken advantage of that, many of them have

found employment opportunities as a result of that.

Now, Mr. Speaker, certainly we are not saying that is the answer for

everybody. I just listed other opportunities and other things that we might be

able to do. Certainly, training is an aspect that people do truly want to look

at when they are facing situations of this magnitude.

Mr. Speaker, in reference to Jackson's Arm as well, I do not know if the

member opposite is aware of the age, he talked about older workers not

particularly wanting to go back to school. I have seen some of the statistical

information already with regard to Jackson's Arm. The average age there is a lot

younger than we would anticipate. So, these people certainly would be

interested, I would believe, in training opportunities that would help them to

up-skill or re-skill or find opportunities to transition to other jobs within

the labour force here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

So, that is part of the current suite of labour market initiatives that we

offer, and I think it is one that will be very well-received out there. Again,

it is not for everybody, but is certainly one of the initiatives that we are

able to put on the table to offer to the people in the area. Upgrading their

employment skills better prepares many of them for emerging employment as well.

As we have new megaprojects coming on stream here in Newfoundland and Labrador,

we certainly know there will be opportunity, particularly in the skilled trades

area. So, opportunity at this particular point in their lives to take advantage

of that training may well be something that they would like to be involved in.

HRLE has a partnership already established in the Jackson's Arm area with the

White Bay South management committee, Mr. Speaker, to deliver these programs and

services through the Employment Assistance Services office, which is also known

as the Career Assessment Centre in Pollards Point, Mr. Speaker, so that access

to those services should be fairly easy for the employees in question. We also

have been in touch with Service Canada. Service Canada is located in that same

office. So once again, we are able to facilitate the ease of information

transfer because people are working out of the same office, and because we have

a very good partnership organized between or among all of those particular

partners.

Our services will be available, Mr. Speaker, to all of the impacted plant

workers. That would include the unionized workers, the non-unionized workers,

and the management employees. There are a number of initiatives that we are

prepared to offer, and we would be prepared to offer them to all of the impacted

plant workers.

Mr. Speaker, this is not the first instance where the Department of Human

Resources, Labour and Employment had to become engaged in offering these kinds

of services, and not particularly to fish plants either. We have provided

supports to Englee, to Marystown, to Fortune, to Port aux Basques and most

recently in Trouty, where fish plants have closed permanently. So, we have some

expertise in this area, Mr. Speaker. We are happy to be involved. We will offer

whatever support we possibly can to the workers in this area.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to speak to this motion today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to rise today to support the original motion that was put

forward by my colleague, the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.

Mr. Speaker, the motion was put forward to support the fishery in this

Province and to provide support for those individuals today who are finding

themselves being displaced in an industry that they have been a part of for a

very long time.

Mr. Speaker, I do not think it is any secret what has been happening in the

fishing industry, even over the last couple of years in Newfoundland and

Labrador as we continue to see quotas decline to a certain extent, we continue

to see enterprises being amalgamated, and all of this affects the onshore

production in plants. In the last couple of years, we have seen a number of

plants downsize to half the workforce that they once had. We have seen their

production levels cut, some of them, in some cases, by ten and twelve weeks in a

year. We have plants today, Mr. Speaker, that one time would provide sixteen

weeks of employment where workers are having a very tough time just trying to

get ten weeks of employment out of those particular plants.

So it has not been easy. It has not been easy for any of these individuals

who are dependent upon the fishing industry. Whether, Mr. Speaker, you are an

owner in the industry, in the processing sector, or whether you are a harvester

or whether you are a plant worker, all of these sectors have been challenged in

many ways.

Mr. Speaker, I guess the real alarm always comes when we see closures. I go

back a few years ago when we saw the plant in Englee close down. It was absolute

devastation is what it was; there is no other way to describe it. Whenever you

walk into a rural community across Newfoundland and Labrador, a community whose

entire economic base had been founded around the fishing industry, a community

of hundreds of individuals who got up every day, put on their fish plant clothes

and went to work, whether that was through the groundfish days or whether it was

through the shellfish days or a combination of both. Mr. Speaker, all of a

sudden, you are getting up this morning and that industry is not there for you

any more. That job does not exist in your community. How devastating is that?

Not just in the fishery, but in any industry. That is what happened to the

people in Englee, Mr. Speaker. That is what happened to the people in Englee.

That is what happened to the people in Stephenville when the mill closed down

out there, and that is what happened to the people in Grand Falls just a couple

of years ago when their pulp and paper mill closed down. What a horrible,

devastating blow to a community and to individuals when those things happen.

What happened in Englee since their plant closed, Mr. Speaker? Of course,

government moved in with the suite of programs that the Minister of Human

Resources, Labour and Employment likes to talk about today. They moved in with

those programs, and there is nothing wrong with those programs, Mr. Speaker. Do

not get me wrong. In the years I have been in this House, I have pushed for

programs like that, and I think they are valuable. When there is an opportunity

that people can retrain, when there is an opportunity that you can provide some

kind of supplements and supports to people who want to be able to look at

re-entry into the job market in a different field, those things are fine, there

is absolutely nothing wrong with them, Mr. Speaker, but are they the solution

for every industrial crash that we see in the Province? No, they are not. Are

they the measures by which every person will be saved in terms of employment

opportunities and career plans and changes? No, they are not, Mr. Speaker.

In fact, I am going to go back to Englee again, because let me tell you what

happened in Englee. Those programs were all available, and guess what? Make-work

projects were available as well - job creation. The same programs every year,

Mr. Speaker, I come begging and fighting and lobbying to the government for to

get money for workers in my district, because I know that without those

programs, many of those workers are going to end up on social assistance, or

forced to move out of their communities because the industry no longer gives

them the amount of seasonal employment that they need to be able to sustain a

year-round income.

Mr. Speaker, those things are temporary measures. They are not the

replacement of an industry. They are to supplement industry when industry is in

a stagnant period, or is in decline. That is what those programs do. They help

get people through a transition. They are not a career, they are not an industry

and they are not an economic base for a community. Mr. Speaker, that is the

difference. That is what happened in Englee. When all of the industry collapsed

there, the plant closed down, the government went in and they did the

responsible thing. They provided employment programs to people in that

community. They were responding to a decline in an industry and a closure of a

fish plant. What came behind those job creation programs, Mr. Speaker? What came

behind them? There was no economic development agenda for the community. There

was no infrastructure money. There was no task force to work with the community,

Mr. Speaker. There was no investment with the town in economic development to

bring new industry in to attract people into that community, to attract

something to replace the 150 jobs they had just lost in this one region of the

Province.

So once the job creation ran out, once the bump of the closure of the plant

was done, there was nothing left. There was nothing left. What happens in a

community, Mr. Speaker, when you do not have an industry? People eventually are

forced into living on lower incomes. They are forced into either having to move

out of the area or settle for low-income wages. That is the options that they

are left with. Is that where we want to see rural Newfoundland and Labrador? Is

that where we want to see communities in this Province that have hit a bump in

the fishing industry, or end up with the most devastating result, and that is

one of their plants closing. I do not think that is a good enough response.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, that was not how the government responded when the pulp

and paper industry collapsed under their watch in this Province. Even though

they said there would never be a mill close on their watch, we had two close. We

had nearly 800 or 1,000 people in this Province who were affected as a result of

that, but there was more than a retraining allowance and a job creation

initiative to get them through that particular cycle, Mr. Speaker. There was a

task force of Cabinet ministers who went into those communities, who organized

other task force groups in the communities of local leadership to go out and to

come up with ideas. They put money into the towns, millions and millions of

dollars into the towns to build infrastructure, to create an economic

development strategy, to entice new business to come in. Did we ever see that in

a fishing community when there has been 150 jobs gone in this Province? No, we

did not. No, we did not, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Harbour Breton.

MS JONES: Well, the minister says we did in Harbour Breton. Maybe he can

tell me about Harbour Breton because we certainly did not see it in any of the

other communities, Mr. Speaker. We did not see it in the other communities and I

can guarantee you that we did not see it

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I was already ruled today for causing disruption

in the House and now I cannot hear myself speak again, and I ask for your

protection.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sure we will hear about Harbour Breton. I know the government did, at

the time, put some money into Harbour Breton because they held a number of

announcements and they also invested in aquaculture. I do not know if that

directly went into Harbour Breton or went into that area. Mr. Speaker, I can

tell you that there were no programs like that in the area of Englee that was

affected by all of this.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we are dealing with another situation in Jackson's Arm. I

have heard members say that Jackson's Arm is only temporary; it is a one-year

thing. I hope they are right, but I do not see anybody putting that in writing,

that we are only going to be closed in Jackson's Arm for one year. The reasons

that the company has given for closing Jackson's Arm is the 30 per cent

reduction in shrimp, which I do not see changing in the next twelve months, and

the issue of trucking product in and out of the area. I do not see that

changing.

Ever since the plant opened, Mr. Speaker, in Jackson's Arm in 1999, when the

licences, in fact, the minister complains about that were given out I think at

that time, because there was a number of shrimp licences in the Province that

were given out for onshore processing. They talk about the new licences issue,

but what you have to realize, Mr. Speaker, is that shrimp was all done by

factory freezers offshore, and if you did not give it a licence to do it

onshore, I guess it never would have gotten done onshore. Anyway, that is

another issue for another day.

Mr. Speaker, since production in Jackson's' Arm has occurred there has been a

trucking component to the industry. So that was nothing new. What I am saying is

that the reasoning the company is giving today for closing that plant, those two

reasons in particular are not going to change in the next twelve months.

What we are asking the government to do, Mr. Speaker, in the motion that we

presented today, we are asking the government to respond to fishing communities

in this Province the way that they have been responding to other industrial

communities that have lost their industry. We have not seen that consistency

applied in the fishing industry in any way, shape or form, I say to government

members. We have not seen it. In fact, it seems like wherever government is

going to invest money, the fishery is at the bottom of the scale. It is always

the lowest on the rung in terms of investment. That is not just words from me.

That is being felt by the industry across this Province. That is being felt by

the pundits who listen and talk to the people there. It is being felt by the

people who live in these communities, by the fishermen who work in the industry,

and the plant workers who work onshore.

Mr. Speaker, they all have televisions, they have radios, they have

newspapers, and they keep up with what is going on. They see this government

every day developing land in mining that private companies should be doing. They

see them drilling holes in the ground for oil, which oil companies should be

doing. They see them buying equity in offshore oil projects, Mr. Speaker, when

they should be collecting royalties instead. They see them putting money in and

writing off money for failed companies in this Province who could not pay their

debts to the government. They see all that. They see the standard that the

government has set for investing in communities that have lost industry in the

pulp and paper sector, Mr. Speaker, but they are not seeing the same consistency

applied in their communities, their rural communities, I say to government

members. Rural as rural can be is where the fishery is based in this Province.

Not that there isn't any in other areas, Mr. Speaker, not that there isn't a

full fleet of boats down on the Harbour Front in St. John's. Do not get me

wrong, there is lots of that, Mr. Speaker. There is lots of fishery goes on in

urban areas as well, but the economic impact is felt in rural communities, Mr.

Speaker. The economic impact is felt in these rural communities just like it is

going to be felt in Jackson's Arm when 150 paycheques is taken out of that

community this summer and the impact that will be in that community.

Mr. Speaker, our motion today was asking the government to do the right thing

by these workers, to step up and not just ensure that there are employment

programs which should be ready to go within a couple of weeks, not within four

months but also to ensure that there are long-term strategies and plans in

place, that there is money being invested so that the communities can look for

other industry, so that the infrastructure related to the fishery remains within

the communities and not be owned by some processors forever who want to put the

locks on the door. Can communities buy that infrastructure? Of course, they

cannot. Most of them have a tax base, Mr. Speaker, of less than $100,000 a year.

They do not have the money to buy out that kind of infrastructure. Workers, Mr.

Speaker, who are over the age of fifty-five or sixty I think fifty-five is the

standard set in this Province for early retirement in the industry. Why is

that not being afforded to individuals? While Jackson's Arm is a relatively

young workforce, Mr. Speaker, there are other areas that are affected where

workers would be able to make a transition to early retirement if it was offered

to them.

All of these things we see as important in responding to crises in the

fishing industry; however, they are not on the table, and government's response

is always the MOU. Well, Mr. Speaker, they made an amended motion here today

that guts everything I have just said and says that, as a government, we will do

nothing only go talk to the federal government once we have an MOU with

processors and the union.

Well, that is not good enough, Mr. Speaker. If they were really serious in

doing their job, the federal government would be the first key player at the

table for any MOU. There would be four signatures to that MOU, I say to the

minister, and the federal government would be one of them. To bring a motion

here to go lobby them after you have an agre