Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Statements by Ministers; Oral Questions — 26 March 1997 (43rd General Assembly, 2nd Session, Vol. XLIII No. 9)
1997-03-26
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
March 26,
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. XLIII No. 9
The House met at 2:00 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave of the House to
pass along special congratulations to a member of this Province.
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
MR. TULK: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, for the last eighteen months,
Mobil, Chevron and Murphy Oil, based out of Calgary, has had a representative
who travelled across Canada, in particular the Northern communities, to select
two people to christen the two boats that are being built to bring the oil
ashore from Hibernia. I am pleased to say that Ruth Flowers of Makkovik,
Labrador has been selected, and in July, she will embark, along with her
husband, to Seoul, Korea, where she will christen the boat called the Komatik.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, Ms Flowers has made an
outstanding contribution in my riding of Torngat Mountains. She was the first
female Mayor of both communities of Makkovik and Hopedale. She has received
several awards including an award from the Status of Women. She is the founder
of TIA - the Innuit Women of the Torngats. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the mighty
riding of Torngat Mountains and their people, I pass along congratulations to Ms
Flowers on a well-deserved award.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We, on this side of the House, join with the member in
extending congratulations to Ms Ruth Flowers, who has been recognized for her
exemplary role in her community and in the district. It is indeed appropriate
that from time to time we stand in this House and recognize those citizens of
our Province who have played leadership roles and are model citizens for their
communities and for the entire Province. Mr. Speaker, we join with the member in
offering our sincere congratulations.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi
Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to join with the Member for Torngat Mountains
and the Opposition House Leader in congratulating Ms Ruth Flowers on the
recognition of her contribution to her community and to women. It is not the
first award she has received and neither will it, I suspect, be the last, Mr.
Speaker. She has an exemplary record of public service in this Province.
MR. SPEAKER: Before we get into the routine business of
the day, I would like to welcome to the gallery today fifteen Levels I to III
students from Mount Pearl Central High, accompanied by their teacher, Claude
Bishop.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Ministers
MR. A. REID: May I have leave for just a second, Mr.
Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.
MR. A. REID: A member's mother has died. Anna Thistle's
mother, Mrs. Chesley Penney from Carbonear, died last night. The lady, in her
eighties, had a stroke recently, and was in the hospital. It has come as a bit
of a shock to the people of Carbonear, in particular, because Mrs. Penney has
been involved with the church, ladies' auxiliaries and groups for a number of
years. I would ask the House if the hon. the Speaker, could send our condolences
to the Penney family which is scattered all over the Province. I am sure most of
us know Ches' mother and a number of the boys from Central Newfoundland.
I think it would be nice if we could send our condolences to
the family, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We, on this side, want to join with all hon. members in
extending to Anna Thistle, the Member for Grand Falls - Buchans, our sincere
condolences. I spoke to the member just a couple of days ago and knew of the
problems that her mother was encountering. Her mother, up until a few days ago,
was in excellent health. We extend sincere condolences and will be thinking
about the family in the days ahead.
Thank you very much.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi
Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to join with the Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs and the Opposition House Leader, in asking Your Honour to
send the condolences of all members of the House to the Member for Grand Falls -
Buchans and to her family, in the loss of their mother.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services
and Lands.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, our Government Services Branch provides one-stop
shopping for processing various permits, licences, approvals and inspections.
During the past year, the branch has addressed many inefficiencies in the system
and has eliminated duplication of services. The branch has also taken steps to
dramatically improve delivery of government services throughout this Province,
and during the coming year it will continue to explore innovative measures to
improve delivery of services.
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of Government Services and Lands and
Minister Responsible for Labrador, I am pleased to announce today that a new
Government Service Centre will be in operation in Labrador West by the end of
September.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. McLEAN: Government will call tenders this week for
approximately 5,000 square feet of leased space.
The Government Service Centre in Labrador West will provide
space for a number of departments and agencies which provide walk-in services
and information to the general public and businesses. These departments and
agencies include the Department of Government Services and Lands - Motor Vehicle
Registration -; the Department of Development and Rural Renewal; the Department
of Tourism, Culture and Recreation; the Hyron Regional Economic Development
Board and the Labrador West Tourism Development Corporation.
Over the next few months, government officials will meet with
the town councils of Labrador City and Wabush and other groups to determine if
there are any additional services in Labrador West that might be offered through
this centre.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Perry Canning, the Member
for Labrador West, for his efforts leading up to this announcement.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for sending
me a copy of his statement before the House sat today.
The minister talks about one-stop shopping. These centres are
good in theory, but I certainly question the efficiency of the ones that are
existing today across the Province. Maybe they should be called taxed-to-death
stops. I don't know if I would want one in my district, but I am sure the people
in Labrador West will be pleased to hear that they will have a one-stop shopping
centre or taxpaying centre in Labrador West. Although the area itself is 5,000
square feet, I question the size of the area that needs to be leased for that
centre.
The minister talks about how officials of his department will
be meeting with the councils of Wabush and Labrador City. That is a good idea.
Finally the minister and the government on the other side will have some
positive consultation process put in place.
I have one other comment, and that is concerning... The
minister thanked Mr. Perry Canning, the Member for Labrador West. Well, I expect
the Member for Labrador West needs all the help he can since he lost the smelter
in Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today
are for the Minister of Health.
Cutbacks in our health care system are being felt everywhere.
There is $11 million less in the acute care hospital budget and long-term care
budget in this upcoming year, and this effect is being felt in the operation of
ambulance services. Even though there are five ambulances here in St. John's,
only four are used in the day; three for four hours in the evening; only two
from eight in the night until eight in the morning, and only two on all
weekends; only two ambulances to service from Cape St. Francis now to the Tors
Cove area, from where the ambulance has been recently removed. Because
ambulances are not available, I say to the minister, the fire department is
called upon more and more not only to respond but to transport people to
hospital, which was never ordinarily done.
I ask the minister: Is it his plan to curtail or eliminate
ambulances and have fire departments perform this service?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The number of
ambulances that we have operating in the St. John's metro area has been the same
number, four, for the last fifteen years. Nothing has changed. We have two
operating in the evenings. When the ambulances are tied up, obviously, the
second responder being the emergency response vehicles at the fire department
are dispatched. Last year, for the information of the hon. member, we had 12,000
calls for ambulance services through the 911 system at the Health Sciences. Of
these we only had to use the secondary response, the emergency response
vehicles, for 211. I think the record of the ambulance services in this area is
an exemplary one and one that we can be pleased with and proud of.
Obviously from time to time there will be circumstances
where, because of multiple occurrences at a given time, we may be pressed to
meet the need. For the most part our ambulances, plus our back-up emergency
response vehicles at the fire department, are providing an adequate and an
appropriate and a very competent level of service.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It was only a
couple of months ago that your government passed legislation here in this House
to eliminate liability respecting fire-fighters responding to an emergency. I
ask the minister: Was this your sneaky way to avoid the growing need of
ambulance services by having the fire departments respond?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MR. MATTHEWS: We have not changed, Mr. Speaker, the level
of ambulance response service in the St. John's metro area in recent time. The
number of vehicles we have on a daily basis and the number of vehicles
responding in the evening are the same as they have been for many years. I
repeat again, for the benefit of the House and the hon. member, that on average
and for the most
part it is a completely appropriate number of response
vehicles. Of 12,000 calls last year only 211 needed to be responded to by the
emergency response vehicles because the two ambulances might have been tied up.
I stand by that record on behalf of the Corporation and/or the fire department
who are in tandem responsible for responding to 911 calls.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The fire department
is responding increasingly more to such accidents, I say to the minister. You
have increased the fire department's responsibility regarding emergency service.
You have legislation that was on the books this past fall to prove that. Why at
the same time has your government announced in their Budget this year the
elimination of fire-fighting to our cities?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The hon. member tries to put forth a proposition which would
necessitate one to make a quantum leap in terms of the connection he is trying
to make. We are providing adequate and a timely responsive ambulance service in
this city. The 911 system is a system that incorporates responses on behalf of
three levels of service, the fire department, the police department, and the
Department of Health through the hospitals in the area. I say again that the
response level is adequate, and it is appropriate.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)
MR. MATTHEWS: I agree, and I have seen myself during the
last two or three weeks on a couple of occasions where there has been a
multi-car accident and they have had to press into service the emergency
response vehicles. But I remind the hon. member that the emergency response
vehicles are part of the system for just that very reason, for just that very
purpose, to respond when they are needed to respond as either a secondary
responder behind an ambulance because they need the jaws of life or something,
or because an ambulance might not be readily available.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member to conclude his answer.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition on a supplementary.
MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, they changed the legislation
this Fall to remove the responsibility, the liability, and then you have down
loaded on municipalities and cut their grants in the process. Is this a
preconceived plan and you had to do that, I ask the minister, and if it is it is
being deceitful? Because of the shortage of ambulances routine calls are not
being attended to, and even people who are transported from the Miller Centre to
the hospitals here in the city for x-rays and other medical procedures and
services are often left waiting on a stretcher at those institutions for up to
six hours before they can be transferred back to the Miller Centre.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I remind the hon. member that he is on a supplementary and
ought to get to his question.
MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister if he thinks this is
acceptable?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MR. MATTHEWS: I had occasion yesterday morning or the
morning before to meet with some ambulance operators from the Province. As a
matter of fact they represented about 60 per cent of the private capacity in the
Province, and I shared with them this, and I will now share it with the House
and with the hon. member. Of all the issues I have had to have particular
concern about, of all the issues that have been brought forward to me since I
have been in Health for almost three years now, the one service that I have had
almost zero complaints about is the road ambulance service in the Province.
We have a road ambulance service in this Province that to
some extent as an extension of the institutions, as in Corner Brook and as in
the Health Care Corporation, we have the private ambulance operators, we have
the community based service.
I can tell the hon. member that the road ambulance program in
this Province and the road ambulance program that we have operating in the St.
John's metro area is again at an appropriate level to get the job done day in
and day out, and it is responding appropriately. The hon. member reads the
Telegram in the morning and he finds that is the source, he thinks, of a
potential question for the day. I applaud him at least for reading the
Telegram . But I have to tell him that -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. MATTHEWS: - there are a lot of more serious -
MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. member to conclude his
answer.
MR. MATTHEWS: - problems in our health care service than
the road ambulance service.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That is
disgraceful. One year ago you made tax collectors out of ambulance operators and
drove up the rate by 50 per cent. He tries to tell this House here they are
happy. They are far from it, I say to the minister. Do you think it is
acceptable for eighty- and ninety-year old people to stay on a stretcher for six
hours at the Health Sciences, people with broken hips and other injuries,
waiting to get back to the Miller Centre again? Is it acceptable, minister?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MR. MATTHEWS: I would simply respond and answer, Mr.
Speaker,the hon. member's question this way. If he has a specific incident, or
knows of instances where that has happened, I would ask him to provide the
information to me and I would be the first one to undertake to check it out. I
have no such knowledge that that has happened on one or more instances. I don't
deny that it could happen, but if it has happened I'm not aware of it. If he has
an instance, let him bring the information forward and we will check it out and
do the appropriate thing. If he doesn't want it....
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have always
responded -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. SULLIVAN: I've always responded with names to the
minister. I gave names to the Health Care Corporation this very week of people
who have been in that situation. You speak to the staff there, speak to the
senior people there! I've given them names that I didn't raise in this House.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, this past weekend in my
district there was a terrible auto accident. Five people, including two children
and three adults, were transferred and transported to hospitals. There was one
ambulance on the scene which transported three people at one time. One was an
elderly lady -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to
his question.
MR. SULLIVAN: - with broken ribs and a punctured lung who
is now in intensive care, and two others were able to walk on their own. The
other people, two kids -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member to get to his question.
MR. SULLIVAN: The other two kids were transported by a
fire department vehicle. Minister, what are you going to do when there is
another serious accident that happens and there aren't enough ambulances to deal
with the people who are injured? Are you going to continue to jeopardize
people's lives?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, it isn't the intention to do
as the hon. member propositions. Quite the contrary. Rather than jeopardize
people's lives in this Province we are trying to provide a health care system
which, as best can be done, meets the needs of the people of this Province. I
would say to the hon. member it is not very appropriate. I think it is rather
disgusting that the hon. member, who sits over there, who has been elected by
the people of this Province and who has attained the rather important position
of leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, to be trying to score cheap
political points on the backs of the people of this Province by putting forward
scaremongering propositions -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. MATTHEWS: - that are not realistic and that should
not be done. I think it is despicable and I think the responsibility should be
to -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is not fearmongering, I say to the minister. Every single
case I bring up is a real, human, life situation, people with stress on their
families because of that minister's actions!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary.
MR. SULLIVAN: I find it reprehensible that -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary.
MR. SULLIVAN: - Mr. Speaker, that this government would
want to muzzle the media and not permit cases to come out in the public. I find
it unacceptable.
Now I ask the minister, fire department officials and EMAs
work in very stressful and high pressure situations. Now we had concerns just
recently on a 911 call that was in the media today. Now is your government,
minister, asking professionals when faced with emergencies - let's say four
emergencies, all critical - to eliminate one over another?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, the health care system works
this way, when people present themselves for service or when people call to have
service go out to them, such as an ambulance service, the dispatching is done or
the service is rendered on a basis of relative severity and seriousness as is
determined by the health care providers who are in charge of the health care
system on an operational basis. I don't play the role of a doctor in the system
or of any other health care professional. We leave the judgement as to who gets
served - when there are a number of people calling for service or presenting for
service - to the people who are best to make that judgement in terms of
rendering service and that is the doctors, the nurses and the other health care
providers. That will not change, Mr. Speaker, because that is the appropriate
way to do business in health care.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, my question today is for the Minister of
Municipal and Provincial Affairs. Last weeks Budget imposed severe cuts to the
MOGs, 60 per cent over three years. These cuts will impose many hardships on
municipal councils and in turn will cause cuts in service and/or rise in taxes.
My question is: is your plan and the plan of government to financially strangle
the municipalities to force people to accept a loss of local decision making and
to force amalgamation through the back door?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs.
MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, the answer I suppose to the
question is no. I could say no and sit down but to answer my hon. colleague, Mr.
Speaker, I think I would have to go into a long dissertation about what we
actually did last week and the fact that we are contributing $10.5 million to
some of the hon. ministers and certainly some of the hon. speakers communities
to help them cope with the downturn in the economy and problems that really
cannot be attributed to inadequacies in the community on the part of councils. I
personally feel, Mr. Speaker, that I can now stand in the House and hold my head
high and say that this government is doing everything we possibly can for rural
Newfoundland communities.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. A. REID: And if, Mr. Speaker, there is some harm done
to the larger municipalities I am certainly sure that the majority of people
living in those municipalities realize that we have 150 rural communities out
there that are in dire straits and need assistance. I don't think that the
people of St. John's or Mount Pearl or Corner Brook or Gander or Carbonear or
anywhere else in the Province want to see our fellow sons and daughters and
sisters and brothers out there suffering because of what is happening in this
Province, so I take great pride, Mr. Speaker, in saying that this government is
doing the right thing in this Province for municipalities not the wrong thing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, Oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, on a supplementary.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister knows full-well that the $10 million he is
putting to the municipalities will, in the long-term, take the financial burden
off the Province more so than off the municipalities.
Mr. Speaker, the minister has publicly stated that funding
under the capital works and infrastructure programs may not go to towns which
need it most but rather, to towns which are financially better off. What
benchmarks will the department use to determine financial stability?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs.
MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I have one community in the
Province and listen carefully, Mr. Speaker, to what I am going to say to you. I
have one community in this Province, Mr. Speaker, that has debt charges that
amounts to 116 per cent of their total revenues.
MR. SULLIVAN: It sounds like you were the mayor.
MR. A. REID: No, it happens to be in a Tory district by
the way. Now, Mr. Speaker, if you can figure that out
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, if you can figure out that they
are paying out 116 per cent more money in debt charges than they are collecting,
then you are a smart person because I cannot do it. I cannot do it, Mr. Speaker.
We have 150 communities out there that are paying in excess
of 50 per cent of their revenues this year for debt servicing, and this hon.
member gets up and asks me, what the criteria for future funding - what is our
criteria as a government for future funding, for those types of municipalities?
Not one cent, Mr. Speaker, until they get their houses in order with my help,
and at that point in time, when they get their houses in order and they can show
this government and future governments that they can afford the services they
are asking for, then we will consider providing them with capital funding to do
servicing or put in services.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, a
supplementary.
MR. J. BYRNE: Of course, Mr. Speaker, the minister did
not answer the question and a lot of municipalities in the Province today are
finding themselves in situations put there by this administration with
downloading and increased debt retirement.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the minister indicated in a press release
on the 20th March, 1997, that the towns assisted through the long-term debt
retirement may not be eligible for funding under a municipal-capital works
project. The minister is encouraging refinancing through the chartered banks.
Wouldn't the minister agree that the towns could suffer in
the long-term if interest rates rise and in fact, the Province is off-loading
its financial burden to the towns, and to make the Province's bottom line look
better, Mr. Speaker. Is elimination of the Newfoundland Municipal Financial
Corporation next? Are they going to eliminate the Newfoundland Municipal
Financial Corporation?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs.
MR. A. REID: I think the hon. Member for
Waterford-Kenmount might be able to get up and contradict his colleague in the
House and say he does not know what he is talking about again.
We have refinanced in this Province up to yesterday $50
million in communities, Mount Pearl being one that came in to this government
and said: We want to refinance our debts that we have to NMFC, and in doing so,
Mr. Speaker, they have saved, am I correct in saying, almost $1 million over the
next two or three years? Will the hon. member for that area shake his head, will
he give me a `nod', will he blink and say that his colleague is wrong in the
comments that he made? No, Mr. Speaker, absolutely not.
I am not encouraging communities to go to banks; I am not
encouraging communities to go to financial institutions to refinance. I am
encouraging communities around the Province to get their act together, with my
help, with the $10.5 million that I have, so that I can put them on a good
financial basis whereby, if we need to spend capital dollars or need to assist
those communities in the future with water or sewer or capital works or whatever
it may be, then they will be in a position to contribute at least something to
the cost. So I say to my hon. friends -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister to finish his answer.
MR. A. REID: - through this, Mr. Speaker, please, go out
and ask some of the communities who have already been financed.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, a
final supplementary.
MR. J. BYRNE: Will the minister agree that the towns are
being encouraged to do the refinancing to get away from the Newfoundland
Municipal Financial Corporation to get lower rates at this point in time, and in
actual fact it is the department that is putting the towns in the position they
are in today. Will you agree to that?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs.
MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador
Financial Corporation is losing money. With every community that refinances
their loan, the Newfoundland Financial Corporation is losing money. These are
long-term debts that the government of the Province - not only this government
but previous governments - have incurred on the bond markets around the world,
and those just cannot be paid off. There are large penalties that are being
inflicted, if I can use that word, on these municipalities who are trying to
refinance because Newfoundland Financial Corporation would, at the end of the
day, rather keep the St. John'ses and the Mount Pearls and the Deer Lakes and
the Corner Brooks on their books. They want to keep those places, so for the
hon. member to say that it is a plan to download from the Newfoundland Financial
Corporation onto communities is totally incorrect.
The gentleman does not know where to find something other
than what he has been asking me, and I do appreciate the fact that since last
Thursday this is the first question I have had in the House. I have been begging
the hon. member, and begging the members on the other side, to ask me a question
down here because I have been bored since last Thursday in not being asked a
question on the Budget.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for
the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation regarding discussions that the
minister has had with tourism groups concerning the privatization of provincial
parks and the issue of gravel-pit camping. I ask the minister: What commitments
were given to tourism groups about changes to gravel-pit camping?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture
and Recreation.
MS KELLY: I am not sure to which tourism groups... I have
met with one group, and I suppose within that group there were two. It was
Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador, and within that group there were some
private operators of campgrounds, and they presented some concerns that they had
about gravel-pit camping.
I did not give them a commitment about anything. What we did
agree at the end of the meeting is that they would present their concerns to me
on paper, and also that we would address it in the discussion paper that we are
putting together.
As you know, I have stated many times over the past several
weeks that this government is not planning a ban on gravel-pit camping. We do,
though, have concerns which I understand the hon. member, the Opposition Leader
and others, have stated very publicly that they are also very concerned about
the environmental aspects of this problem, and also public safety concerns. But
we are not in any way advocating a ban on gravel-pit camping or public camping
on public land in our Province.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South, a
supplementary.
MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I ask the minister: Is it true that this tourism group was
led to believe there would be major changes made to gravel-pit camping once the
provincial parks are privatized?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture
and Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell my hon.
colleague, through the Speaker, that I did not give any commitments to this
group about either before or after the privatization of parks. I have outlined
to you that they agreed that they would put their concerns on paper and we would
hold further discussions. I very clearly outlined that we were not going to ban
what we call gravel-pit camping, but we did have concerns both about the
environment and public safety issues, which I think all of us would concur that
we ought to, as a government, be addressing.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South, a
supplementary.
MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I ask the minister if she is prepared to tell the House today
what changes she is planning to make regarding gravel pit camping.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture
and Recreation.
MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell my hon. colleague
what changes we are going to be making because we do not know if we are making
any changes at all. I have outlined the process to you. I think you could concur
with my hon. colleagues, the Minister of Government Services and Lands and the
Minister of Environment and Labour, who were present at the meeting, that at the
end of the meeting we agreed to receive a written brief from the group we were
meeting with.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is to the Minister of Development and Rural
Renewal. Thirteen months from now the Atlantic Groundfish Strategy runs out of
money and in excess of 15,000 will be left with no job, no income, and no
federal aid. Would the minister inform the House what her department is doing to
respond to this major catastrophe that is about to happen in this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Development and
Rural Renewal.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, we are in constant discussions
with the federal government. We recognize there is a problem here and we really
do want to make sure that something happens to accommodate the fishermen who are
going to find themselves in desperate straits when TAGS runs out. Clearly, the
federal government have taken the decision that 1998 will be the last year, and
at this point we have gotten no further with them other than to recognize that
fact.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South, on
a supplementary.
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Minister, a few years ago fishery workers were told they must
retrain or lose their TAGS compensation. Today government has abandoned many of
them midway through courses and programs. I ask the minister if this is the
right way to prepare displaced fishery workers to pursue future employment
opportunities?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Development and Rural
Renewal.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, no, it is not the right way and we
are pressing that point with the federal government. We are as concerned as
anyone with what is going to happen with these people. Clearly the decision has
been taken with respect to the ending of the TAGS program. The number of people
who took up that program were more than could be accommodated with the money
that was available. It is a federal program, as you know, and all we can do is
impress upon the federal government our concerns with that program ending a year
before it was scheduled to do so.
In terms of what is available to people coming off TAGS,
there are employment programs. We have just announced a Labour Market Initiative
that we are going to make sure they can take advantage of as well. There are
other things that these people can avail of, but like you we are concerned. We
do not want to see these people left without anything to access or carry them
over the lurch.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South, on
a supplementary.
MR. FITZGERALD: Minister, I say when those fishery
workers and fish plant workers were given commitments by your cousins up in
Ottawa they knew full well the number of people who were on this particular
program. The entire TAGS program has been undermined by your federal cousins in
Ottawa right from the very beginning. Written commitments such as the TAGS
program duration are being broken. People plan their lives around those
commitments.
Would you, as the provincial minister responsible for the
Fisheries Compensation Program, commit today to speak up and represent the
fishery workers of Newfoundland and Labrador to have Ottawa continue the TAGS
program until 1999 as was committed in the past?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Development and
Rural Renewal.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, let me put it this way, I will
continue to make representation to the federal government. I have never stopped
doing that. We are concerned about what is happening to the people in this
Province, particularly the people coming off TAGS, and when you talk about the
federal government knowing how many people were going to access the program, ask
Mr. Crosbie if he knew how many people were going to access that program. It was
hard to gage and I will stand by that any day.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi
Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Minister of Finance. Last Thursday the
minister tabled his Budget and with it a booklet called Departmental Salary
Details which are said to be, in the introduction, the salary allotment of each
department broken down in detail in accordance with the 1997-98 Estimates
showing the number of employees, job classifications, and the projected salary
expenditures.
Mr. Speaker, this shows some 6,765 permanent positions in the
public service, but if you take your magnifying glass and look very, very
closely at a footnote in a print smaller than an eyelash, it says: Positions to
be abolished during 1997-98 are not yet removed from Salary Details.
Mr. Speaker, why did the minister table such a deceptive
document along with his Budget? Was he trying to fool public servants into
thinking that their jobs were not gone? Why did he do that at great expense,
obviously, to the treasury?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board.
MR. DICKS: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I take it that
the hon. member is referring to the first several pages that are unnumbered. Is
that correct?
MR. HARRIS:
Schedule I (inaudible), footnote three.
MR. DICKS: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. The departmental
estimates are put forth each year. What we are concerned about is until we know
what the final results of bumping are, until all the people have been given
their notices and we see how it works its way through the service, it didn't
seem appropriate to us at this stage to start eliminating the positions. So what
this is, in essence, as I understand from my officials, is a general breakdown
of the salary estimates by departments and positions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I
suspect it to some extent reflects some of the changes that have been made in
ongoing....
MR. SPEAKER: Question period has ended.
The hon. the Minister of Social Services.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I stand today on
a point of privilege.
As Minister of Social Services, in an effort to fulfil an
undertaking I gave to the House yesterday, concerning information that was
alluded to being released by my colleague the critic for social services - he
alluded that information had been released by staff or through some other
inappropriate means. I think this has certainly alarmed the disabled community,
it has challenged the credibility of my front-line staff, and clearly it has
added stress to the workforce.
Here we are some twenty-four hours later, Mr. Speaker. I have
no information on which I can act upon, and I urge the member to put forward the
information so I can fulfil my undertaking to the House and investigate this
very serious allegation.
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair will take the point that the hon.
member has raised under advisement and report back to the House tomorrow.
Presenting Reports by
Standing and Special Committees
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and
Transportation.
MS BETTNEY: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table the
Public Tender Act exemptions for the months of November, December, January and
February.
Answers to Questions
For which Notice has been Given
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and
Labour.
MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In response to a
question asked by the environment critic for the Opposition a day or so ago,
some fees that will be introduced will be similar to the ones that were there up
till 1990. For municipal waterworks, $50 to $250 was the fee at the time; a fee
of $50 to $250 for municipal sewer works. It was also there based on population.
These fees were eliminated in 1991. We are looking at reintroducing them in the
Budget this year. We haven't decided on the final numbers. That will be done
shortly through government and Cabinet. Also, these fees will not be charged to
domestic household septic systems, they will not be charged there. There are no
fees for septic systems or well water testing in this Budget. Thank you.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. K. AYLWARD: Anyway, Mr. Speaker. contrary to what the
Opposition said, they weren't there in the first place, and they aren't going to
be there.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
AN HON. MEMBER: Read Hansard! Read Hansard! Read your
answer the other day (inaudible)!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi
Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to
present a petition on behalf of a number of residents of the Province who are
petitioning the House of Assembly to direct government to establish a universal
comprehensive school lunch program for every school in Newfoundland and Labrador
to help end child hunger and give our children a better chance.
These petitioners come from Happy Valley, Labrador, from
Corner Brook, Carbonear, St. John's, Clarenville, Marystown, Burin, Torbay,
Mount Pearl, Hillview. These are petitioners from a variety of places in the
Province, all of whom are calling upon the government to recognize the affects
of poverty on the ability of children to have a proper nutritious diet and to
learn properly in school.
We do have a volunteer based school lunch program which has
done excellent work in laying the groundwork in how to present a stigma free
school lunch program in schools. A number of schools have been able to adopt
that model because there have been in their communities a group of individuals,
whether it be a service group or a new volunteer group, which has taken it upon
itself the job of implementing such a program.
However, that is only satisfactory for some places and some
schools. There is a very huge shortfall, a very huge gap. It is not being
filled, will not be filled and cannot be filled by this type of volunteer
effort. Mr. Speaker, we have learned - in fact, last night I was watching a
panel discussion on the cable channel here in St. John's, where several
panellist were educators, school board, home and school association
representatives, Dr. Patricia Canning herself - the author of the report,
Special Matters - were all participating in a panel discussion on the
report, Special Matters , in which part of the discussion had to do with
child hunger. Mr. Speaker, it has become a very important issue around our
Province as to what we do, as a people and as a government, to help those
children who are unable, by reason of poverty, to fully participate in the
learning experiences that are available at school.
Now, there are other ways of dealing with some of the
problems that young children encounter in school. There are pre-school programs,
there are early intervention programs that have been highlighted. There are many
other types of things that can be done, but there is one here, Mr. Speaker, that
can directly be implemented as part of a schoolboard program in each and every
school in the Province that will go a long way in providing an opportunity for
schoolchildren to enjoy a good solid, nutritious meal at least once every school
day so that they can enjoy a lack of hunger at least for that period of time,
Mr. Speaker. They can enjoy the school period, not be distracted, not have a
loss of attention, not be concerned and worried about whether or not they have a
proper meal or whether they have to run and hide at lunchtime because they have
no lunch or get on a school bus and go home to no lunch, which is a very sad
experience that happens in this Province.
At least, Mr. Speaker, in a program such as this, there would
be camaraderie, with children in a school participating together in a school
lunch program that can be afforded. Because we have embarked on a great project
for several years now of restructuring and reforming our school system to make
it a little bit more efficient, so that there is not duplication of effort, so
that there is not money spent on things it ought not to be spent on. That money
can be spent on the child and on the educational experience. What better way,
Mr. Speaker, to enhance the ability of hungry children to benefit from the
educational experience than to ensure a school lunch program for each and every
school in the Province. This can only be done if government does it. It cannot
be left to the volunteer sector.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. J. BYRNE: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Member for
Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Environment
and Labour was just on his feet a few minutes ago and made a statement to answer
a question I asked the other day. You said - and I think he may have been
unintentionally misleading the House. I just want to correct it. I asked the
question: `Is this new fee for the people building new homes with a well and
septic system and/or a new charge for existing homeowners who want their well
water tested?' The answer that the minister gave is this - and this was from
Hansard on Monday: `Yes, it was a practice in the past that there was no charge
for a lot of work done by the officials. We have decided there will be a charge
for it.' Now, the minister is over there now saying he did not say that. It is
in black and white in Hansard.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
To that point of order, the hon. the Minister of Environment
and Labour.
MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, there is no point of order,
but I was responding in general to a general question. I indicated that I would
get back with the details, Mr. Speaker, and that is what I did today, I got back
with the details and corrected the misinformation that the Opposition is trying
to spread.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order. It is a disagreement between two
hon. members as to the allegation of facts but no point of order.
Orders of the Day
Private Members' Day
MR. SPEAKER: It being Wednesday, this is Private Members'
Day. It is not quite 3:00 p.m. but if there is no other business we will go to
Orders of the Day.
Motion No. 6. The hon. the Member for Topsail.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
It is indeed with pleasure that I rise today to seek the
support, the full support, I might add, of this hon. House towards this petition
which reads:
WHEREAS workers in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador
living near the Quebec/Labrador boundary have sought equal employment
opportunities for many years; and
WHEREAS there are restrictions which in the Province of
Quebec apply in the hiring of construction trades people from other provinces;
and
WHEREAS Quebec and Ontario have recently come to an agreement
on labour mobility between their residents;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that the Government of Newfoundland
and Labrador initiate discussions with Quebec to achieve a similar labour
mobility agreement.
Mr. Speaker, most of us are aware -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has recognized the hon. the Member for Topsail.
MR. WISEMAN: Most of us are aware, Mr. Speaker, that the
Government of Quebec regulates the conditions of employment, including residency
conditions and local preferences in hiring for all construction trades in the
Province of Quebec.
This regulatory regime which exists in the Province of Quebec
has divided the Province into eleven different regions. Now, the regulations
state that employers must hire all available workers in any given trade in that
particular region before the employer can hire anybody from outside that region
or from another province.
Mr. Speaker, the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and
all other Provinces of Canada and the Territories, are generally open to -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member, of course, has a right to be heard in this
House uninterrupted. I ask hon. members to allow the hon. member to be heard.
MR. WISEMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I can understand the position that the members opposite are
in. It is a difficult position, and I suppose they get some recognition from
shouting across the House, but I do not want to be too harsh on them. I
understand their dilemma.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. WISEMAN: I do, Mr. Speaker, have a lot of compassion
for people. The people opposite are no exception. Also, Mr. Speaker, I am
looking for their support on this motion and it would certainly go well to send
out the message.
As I was saying, Mr. Speaker, the Province of Newfoundland
and Labrador, and all other provinces and territories, are generally open to all
sectors of workers, both unionized and non-unionized, with the notable
exception, of course, in our Province with respect to the offshore petroleum
sector under the auspices of the Atlantic Accord.
Mr. Speaker, I understand from speaking to my colleagues from
Labrador that this issue certainly raises some concerns for their constituents.
I know, of course, that my friend and colleague, the Member for Torngat
Mountains, will certainly be standing in this House shortly to express his
concerns, as only he can. I am certain that my friend and colleague, the Member
for Labrador West, if he were here today, would be up speaking on this
particular resolution because it is closer to him, I suppose, than to any of us
who sit in this House, since the border of Quebec borders on his district. And I
am certain that my colleague, the Member for Lake Melville will be on his feet
this afternoon expressing his views. So you see, Mr. Speaker, it not only
affects the people of Labrador, it affects all of the people of the Province.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. WISEMAN: The Member for Torngat Mountains now is
reminding me, what about him? I have already mentioned that he would be
speaking. We all know the interest that the Member for Torngat Mountains puts
into his specific area. Every time he goes down he has a bundle of money to take
down to get things fixed. I am certain that he will be involved in this up to
his ears, as we say, trying to get an agreement. I am sure that he will be
approaching the Minister of Environment and Labour encouraging him to try to
talk to the Government of Quebec to try to reach a solution.
As I said, the Member for Labrador West, unfortunately, could
not be here because of urgent needs in his district that he had to attend to.
But, Mr. Speaker, I can imagine being a construction trade worker living in
Labrador, especially in Labrador West, and wishing to work in neighbouring
Quebec, in the Quebec mines or with the Quebec North Shore Railway, the Labrador
Railway.
As we all know, this railway serves the mines of Labrador
West, yet all the hiring is done in the Province of Quebec. It is done
accordingly under the Quebec labour law, preference given to residents of Quebec
when job opportunities arise. We all know, of course, with the development of
Voisey's Bay, that the importance of this issue is certainly going to increase
significantly. We know that construction trade workers from the Province of
Quebec will certainly be able to work in Voisey's Bay and other construction and
mining projects in the Province while our trade workers, notably those in
Labrador, are not afforded the same opportunity of access to work in Quebec on a
comparable basis.
Mr. Speaker, the members of this House are well aware that
the option of enacting the restrictions on Quebec construction trade workers
similar to what is exercised in Quebec is not feasible or appropriate. I suppose
what we are saying is that this House is aware that the agreement on internal
trade prohibits provinces from instituting new trade barriers of this nature to
restrict in any way the free movement of labour from one province to another. We
know that this all came about when we got into the negotiation on the trade
agreements between provinces. We all know that this kind of action would not
provide employment opportunities for residents of this Province. That is the
overriding objective at this time. We want in every way possible to create an
opportunity for the people of this Province, the trade union workers of this
Province, an equal opportunity to work anywhere in Canada that they choose.
I am sure that this government with the support of this
House, a little nudge along the way, will try to speed up the negotiations, or
try to make contact to start negotiations. In order to get agreement we have to
have dialogue. We know full well that this very capable government is quite able
to reach an agreement with the Province of Quebec. We know that the government
recognizes the negative impact Quebec labour laws are having on construction
workers in this Province, and particularly those workers who live in Labrador.
As I said earlier, it is pretty difficult to live in, let us
say, Labrador West -
MR. FITZGERALD: You have never been there. How long have
you lived there? When did you ever live in Labrador West, and how long?
MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Bonavista South
again tries to attract attention to himself. I do not think it is me. I don't
think he is concerned about my profile or what attention I might get. I think,
Mr. Speaker, he is trying to attract attention to himself. But I should tell the
hon. member that I have travelled across this country many times; I have been to
Labrador West, I have travelled to every community in Labrador, and I have been
to the Torngat Mountains, Mr. Speaker. I know that the previous Tory government
went to the Torngat Mountains too, but they did nothing. This government has
certainly put its money where its mouth is, and certainly stood up and helped
the people of Labrador.
Now, Mr. Speaker, this issue is not unique to this Province.
The Provinces of Ontario and New Brunswick face similar problems. Mr. Speaker,
Ontario has formally resolved its problem.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. WISEMAN: As I was saying, Mr. Speaker, that rich
Province of Ontario has solved its problems with the Province of Quebec by
signing a bilateral labour of mobility agreement. They now make it possible for
their workers to travel across the border of Ontario into Quebec and work where
there is work available.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this motion today is to urge the
government to move on with the job of looking after the employment of our
people, and they certainly are doing a good job. Even the Opposition has said
so, Mr. Speaker, and that is very encouraging, to know that the Opposition Party
in this House admits that the government is doing a wonderful job.
Now, Mr. Speaker, when the Province of Ontario can have the
Province of Quebec recognize certificates out of Ontario - says that Quebec will
recognize a broader range of Ontario's certificates which means that Ontario
workers who previously had to re-qualify in order to work in Quebec, will now be
able to work without further examination. This includes broader recognition for
several categories of workers in twelve Ontario construction jobs.
As I was saying earlier, Mr. Speaker, when you are into a
kind of situation where you set up a region that will only accept workers from
that region or workers from the province, like in Quebec where those regions
exist, then it is impossible for construction-trade people from this Province to
obtain work in the Province of Quebec. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that the Province
of Quebec will sit down with the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and
negotiate a fair and equable agreement so that no barriers would exist.
We all know, Mr. Speaker, that Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians have travelled around the world seeking employment, and they have
been very, very successful at it, I might add. I always like to say that
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are the most successful people in the world.
Wherever you may travel in the world, Mr. Speaker, you will find a
Newfoundlander or a Labradorian. Mr. Speaker, it is a little bit difficult to
comprehend that in our own country Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are
restricted from working because one of our sister provinces has brought in
legislation to restrict themselves.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said, I believe that this government
will talk to the Government of Quebec, or I would like to think that after today
the Minister of Environment and Labour will make contact with his counterpart in
the Province of Quebec, so they can sit down and begin discussions on how this
thing can be -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I won't take up too much of the
House's time. I know that we have other speakers on this side and I understand
that the House Leader from the other side has other speakers.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my government to initiate discussions
with the Province of Quebec so that our workers can have a reasonable access to
construction jobs in Quebec as Quebecers currently are enjoying working in the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Let me say, first of all, that we on this side of the House
have no hesitation supporting this resolution, but I would like to add, Mr.
Speaker, that I hope the Member for Topsail is not part of the negotiating team
that is going to negotiate some bilateral arrangement with Quebec in the
construction industry.
MR. J. BYRNE: Why?
MR. E. BYRNE: He talked about the kind of situation that
exists. Now, if he cares to stay in the House I will inform him of the kind of
situation that exists in this Province with respect to trade between the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Province of Quebec.
Last year, some $15 to $20 million worth of tenders within
the business that our hospital does were bid on by firms from Quebec and won by
firms from Quebec, but medical companies, Mr. Speaker, going into the Province
of Quebec, wanting and wishing to bid on contracts there were not allowed. While
this motion is not a difficult motion to support we need to look more at
expanding the type of principles that are contained in this.
For years, Mr. Speaker, people from many provinces in Canada
have come to this Province to work and for many years, as well, people from the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador have gone to many other provinces to work.
There is nothing wrong with that. It is part of being a country, it is part of
being Canadian. The sooner, Mr. Speaker - I applaud the member in some of his
statements - the sooner we move on and enter into bilateral negotiations, the
sooner we do that the better off we will be. But, Mr. Speaker, we must move a
little bit further in the first instance, that until such arrangements can be
made, until such negotiations are complete, until an agreement is reached that
the rule that Quebec applies to its own workforce than we should apply to our
own workforce as well, that where people from this Province who have skills, who
can work, who can take the jobs, that if there are provinces that are shutting
us out from possible work opportunities and employment opportunities then they
should not be allowed across the Straits to come in here and work themselves.
That is what we should be doing until negotiations on this matter are complete.
Hundreds of Quebec companies operate in this Province every
year, bidding on contracts and winning contracts, supplying goods and services
to the people and businesses of this Province. Mr. Speaker, it has to be said,
and it must be said loudly, that a reciprocal sort of relationship does not
exist where it should exist, not only in the construction industry but in all
sectors of our economy, whether it be in the resource industry, whether it be
with business, whatever you care to wish to name, Mr. Speaker, that same sort of
relationship exists.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I think that the deal is already done. The
agreement is just about close. It is close to being made. In typical fashion,
Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing is government getting out in front of itself,
knowing a decision is being made, to try to create some sort of spin about what
we have done so wonderfully for the people of the Province and to make an issue
out of it. Fair enough! That is government's, I suppose, prerogative to go ahead
and do what they wish, but we on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, have no
hesitation whatsoever in moving this motion.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to move that we vote on
this particular resolution right now.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Unless there are other members who wish to
speak, the Chair is ready to put the motion.
The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to the
motion put forward. With regard to remarks made by my colleague across the way,
I hope that there is a deal that is going to be made pretty soon.
Mr. Speaker, for many years we have seen a lot of companies
travel into Labrador, bringing in their own personnel, their own equipment and
their own labour force. Many times we have spoken out against it, all to no
avail.
For example, up in my riding and elsewhere in Labrador, there
have been several companies from Quebec who have brought in brush cutters, and
when companies from Labrador have contacted these companies they have given us
the run-around. So, Mr. Speaker, I fully support the motion put forward.
I can understand the concern of the people in Labrador West,
because they border very closely with Quebec. The minerals that border on our
side of this Province and on the other side of Quebec, no doubt during the years
will come to a great debate. Unless we have an understanding between the two
provinces for the workforce, I feel that this Province will lose out on a lot of
jobs.
Mr. Speaker, I am not going to prolong the debate much
longer. I fully support the motion, and I look forward to the time when the
agreement will be signed, when the people in this Province will be given an
equal opportunity to work side-by-side with their counterparts from the Province
of Quebec. The sooner we sign some form of agreement, Mr. Speaker - I anxiously
await that time. I support the motion fully.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER (Barrett): Is the House ready for the
question?
All those in favour of the motion, `aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye!
MR. SPEAKER: Against, `nay'.
Carried.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that the
House do now adjourn.
MR. FUREY: Yes, Mr. Speaker. We are adjourning until 9:00
a.m. tomorrow by unanimous agreement?
AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, that is correct.
On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow,
Thursday, at 9:00 a.m.