PDF Version

October 31, 2018

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 34

The

House met at 10 a.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just

having a great chat about democratic reform with my colleague across the way.

Mr. Speaker, I call from the Order Paper,

Order 5, second reading of Bill 28.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.

MR. BROWNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Happy

Halloween to all, and to all out there who are watching at home and

trick-or-treating and whatnot. I wish them all the best and a safe evening, and

watch out for the children, of course. We don't want any goblins or ghouls

running into any issues, Mr. Speaker, as they make their rounds tonight.

I'm

certainly pleased to rise here today to speak to an amendment to the

Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council Act .

As the minister said yesterday in the opening of the debate, this amendment is a

routine matter intended to align this legislation with that of other Crown

corporations and agencies of the provincial government, by removing

section

14(1) of the Arts Council Act , which

is a reference to the Financial

Administration Act .

Mr.

Speaker, today I will talk about our government's commitment to the arts in our

province. Our government remains committed to the arts community in the

province, and values the important role ArtsNL plays in providing arts funding.

I am proud of our government's commitment to enhancing the recognition and

support of artists throughout Newfoundland and Labrador through our

Status of the Artist Act .

This

legislation acknowledges the important contributions that artists make to our

province, and government's role in supporting the creation of that work. It

means a commitment from government to develop written contracts for professional

artists, including work descriptions, terms of payment, dispute resolution

mechanisms and rights agreements. It means honouring scale agreements and

improved working conditions, Mr. Speaker – very important – and it means a

continued dialogue on matters relating to culture with artists in this province.

further build on the Status of the Artist

Act , we are also committed to strengthening our support of culture by

renewing the cultural plan. We've had a number of consultations; I believe it's

14 now have been held across the province, public consultations, targeted

stakeholder engagement consultations. The minister and I have made a point to

attend as many as we possibly could. It's very important – we haven't had a

renewal of our cultural plan, Mr. Speaker, since 2006, so it is time, and those

consultations have been well attended and well received within our cultural and

arts communities.

renewing our cultural plan this will offer further opportunities to explore

government programming and funding mechanisms and offer ways to improve

opportunities for artists in Newfoundland and Labrador.

In fact,

Mr. Speaker, it was just last evening I had the great pleasure to attend a

concert by the Ennis Sisters last night with the support of other artists,

Kellie Loder, Aaron Collis, Matthew Byrne, and it was all in support of mental

health, the 100th anniversary of the Canadian Mental Health Association. It was

a wonderful, wonderful performance, Mr. Speaker, and showcases not only our

gifts of music, but our gifts of kindness. You'd find that anywhere throughout

our artistic community, which is why it was so important to strengthen the

Status of the Artist bill, why it's

important now to make the necessary corrections to the

Arts Council Act .

I also

had the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, on Sunday evening to attend a concert at Holy

Heart by the Les Ms. Women's Choir, who will be travelling to New York next

spring to Carnegie Hall. That concert along with other choirs, including the

Holy Heart Alumnae Choir, those choirs came together to support the Bliss Murphy

Cancer Foundation and provided some $6,200 to them.

Mr.

Speaker, we have a very strong artistic community who not only keeps our culture

alive, but also supports many important causes, whether that be cancer research

or mental health and all of the other causes. We're very proud to support our

vibrant, artistic and cultural community.

developing the new Cultural Action Plan the provincial government consulted, as

I've alluded to, with various representatives of the arts community. Fourteen

sessions, as I also alluded to, were held throughout the province, with

representation from visual arts, craft and music, to literary and publishing, to

dance, theatre and film. And we spoke to each sector, which was terrifically

important.

We were

very encouraged by the feedback, discussion and dialogue from the cultural

community, and our government believes this is a time for bold and forward

thinking to look at our cultural assets and how we can enhance them. We have a

truly vibrant arts community in Newfoundland and Labrador that consistently

punches above its weight on the national scene, and one that makes a significant

economic contribution to the province.

To recap

the changes to the Arts Council Act ,

this again will put into practice how the Crown entity has operated since its

inception. This is a technical change, remediating a

section of the act that

probably should've been amended quite some time ago to bring them in line with

other entities across government.

So, Mr.

Speaker, it's a routine amendment, but certainly an important one as we continue

to work with our cultural and artistic communities to support the great work

that they do.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

The hon.

the Leader of the Third Party.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I'm

happy to stand and speak to Bill 28, which calls for an amendment to the

Arts Council Act . The amendment – in

some ways, this is a bit of a housekeeping issue. It doesn't significantly

change anything about the Arts Council, which is now called ArtsNL.

They

launched, a little over a year ago, a new logo and a new title for the

organization. One that we are all extremely proud of, and have every reason to

be proud of the work that the Arts Council is doing, and every reason to be

proud of the arts and the culture community that has been such a major part of

putting Newfoundland and Labrador on the map, both nationally and

internationally.

And we

can never underestimate the incredible benefits that our arts and culture

workers bring to the province, to every community in this province, to every

person in this province. Because the role of the artists in our community is not

just to make pretty things, but it's to challenge us, to help us see who we are

within our own communities, who we are within our nation, who we are as global

citizens. But it is also to challenge us, to dare to ask us to look at who we

are, where we are going, where we could be going and how we are doing that.

It's

also part of entertainment. Something that lifts us out of our daily lives, and

then brings us into a realm of possibilities that we often do not consider.

That's the role of the artist as well: to elevate us all, to bring us to a space

that we might not, as just regular people, go to; but, it's also that role of

the artist to look at possibilities that we may never have considered.

So the

amendment we are debating here today changes the wording in the clause that is

meant to require an annual audit of the council's books by the Auditor General.

Now, some people might think, oh, my goodness, the Auditor General hasn't been

auditing the books, or people may feel this is being done because there's an

uncertainty about how the funds are being treated. Not at all, Mr. Speaker. None

of that at all is in consideration of this particular amendment.

Currently, the clause says that the council must comply with the

Financial Administration Act , and it has. It has fully complied with

the administration act. But what was meant by that in 1980 the council tells us,

is that it must have an annual audit by the Auditor General, which they have

done. The council has done this every year since 1980.

Again, I

cannot stress enough, Mr. Speaker, this is not being done because of concerns of

irregularities. This is not being done because of concerns about how money is

spent or how reporting is done. That is not at all in consideration in this

amendment; but, as we know, the Comptroller General recently found that a

wording – it's a bit strange because the act in the present day refers to

departments and has onerous requirements.

Crown

agencies are able to carry money over from one year to the next. They can manage

their own projects and they have autonomy in many other ways. That's very

important for the Arts Council, and because of that – I'll tell you why

specifically it's important for the Arts Council; to be able to carry money over

to next fiscal years because the Arts Council – we heard from the Arts Council

that the original wording from 1980 probably had to do with the council seeking

charitable status so that it could be tax exempt when it receives donations,

charitable donations that it engages in fundraising.

This is

something that government wanted the Arts Council to be able to do; to provide

opportunities for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to donate or bequeath

money to the Arts Council, to enlarge the fund of money that's available to our

arts community. Again, because the people of the province are so proud of the

work of our artists and our cultural workers and they want to be part of

supporting it.

So what

the Arts Council sought was a charitable status so that they could, in fact –

also which helps in fundraising – issue charitable receipts, tax exempt

receipts.

The fact

that this outdated and inapplicable phrase that we are removing should remain so

long in this legislation for a Crown agency, it speaks to the fact that the

Arts Council Act probably needs to

undergo a review in the next few years. That maybe we need to really relook at

the whole active thing. Again, as we know, our acts should be living pieces of

legislation that respond to the reality of the lives of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Arts

Council again is now called ArtsNL, and it is at the hub of an extensive –

people think of arts as perhaps a frill or a privilege, but not a necessity.

background, I have come from the arts community. For 30 years I was a

documentary filmmaker. Myself and my colleagues in the arts community so often –

the projects that we have, whether it be the

Republic of Doyle , whether it be

An Audience of Chairs, the incredible feature film that has just

recently won awards, almost every film – whether it be a commercial endeavour,

whether it be an experimental film, whether it be documentary, whether it be a

series, whether it be a feature film that is produced in Newfoundland and

Labrador – more often than not, started with a small grant from the Arts

Council, because we know that films start with the word.

It's

often a writer working in their particular studio or at their kitchen table with

a small Arts Council grant that is the beginning, the seed of projects like

An Audience of Chairs, like

Maudie , an incredible film that was

produced and released last year that has won multiple awards all over the world,

started with a small idea and a small grant from the Arts Council. So we know

how very important ArtsNL is to the arts and cultural community.

Again,

it's not a frill. Arts is not a frill. It's a very important part of our

community, of our society, of our lives. ArtsNL is at the hub of an extensive

labour intensive sector. The cultural industries – I'm so proud to be able to

say this, Mr. Speaker. The cultural industries are economic generators in

communities throughout the province. They account for up to – imagine, Mr.

Speaker, this industry, this cultural industry accounts for up to $400 million

and more than 5,000 jobs in the provincial economy.

So not

only is it often that small bit of money that an artist starts a project with,

not only does it help them get rolling, but often the money from ArtsNL helps

our artists and our cultural workers leverage other funds. Whether it's

leveraging money from Canada Council, a federal arts funding organization,

whether it leverages money from television stations, whether it leverages money

from other foundations, often it's the first bit of money that also allows our

artists and our cultural workers to seek funding from other potential funders.

It is a

vote of confidence from the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who say to an

artist, a project or a group of artists, we believe in what you are doing. We

believe it is important. We believe it is important to commit the money, the

hard-earned money of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, to your project.

It is saying that we the people of Newfoundland and Labrador – because this

money is allocated by a jury process of peers, and those people on juries who

are allocating the funds are people from all over the province, also

representing their communities. By allocating those often small bits of money,

are saying we believe that what you are doing is important and we support you

and we commit to this work.

So every

dollar of government investment in culture and heritage generates $3 in spending

on goods and services, and that's even more in the case of a national TV series.

That's an investment, Mr. Speaker. Where else, what other industry or what other

kind of investment where you can see that every dollar generates an additional

$3? That's an incredible investment.

We know

the important role that our arts and culture industries play in tourism, in

hospitality, and we have seen the impact of the work of our artists in a number

of communities all over the province, whether it be Trinity, whether it be

Bonavista, whether it be Cow Head Theatre Festival, whether it be on the West

Coast in Corner Brook, in Stephenville – the arts festival there – whether we

see what's happening in many communities in Labrador, again, the impact of our

artists on the economy and on the pride of the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador. So ArtsNL plays a crucial role in the arts community throughout the

province. It is the chief source of provincial money for artistic creation,

which is the research and development phase of the cultural sector.

Mr.

Speaker, it's also important that these funds and these resources are committed

to projects that are not commercially viable, that is not their intention, that

we invest money in those projects that are really on the edge, that really

challenge us as a people. Those are important as well.

everything from the blockbuster movies, to the TV series, to the independent

short film that was never intended to be commercially viable, but a piece of

art, to our visual artists, to our dancers and choreographers, to our novelists.

Often the great novels that we have seen come out of this province started again

with a small grant that enables the writer to put food on their table and pay

their rent while they sit at their kitchen table or while they sit in their

studio and write for four months. It's those kinds of investments that really we

see flourish. And it's only when we support our artists in that research and

development phase, in that initial phase, that we will see the benefits.

We know

how important the arts and cultural industry and community has been to our

province, but the grant for ArtsNL has remained the same since it was reduced in

2016 from $2.1 million to $1.9 million. So we see as well – I have been on a

number of juries for ArtsNL before I was elected to this House, and how

difficult it is – again, we are a jury of peers – to see that perhaps there is

$100,000 that we have to allocate in that particular session, but the number of

applications from brand new artists, from established artists, might be $400,000

or $500,000.

To see

juries see incredible, absolutely incredible applications for projects that are

not only really interesting, but you know would be a benefit to the communities

that the artists reside in, and to say what do we do? They're asking for $4,000,

but do we give them a thousand dollars, because there are so many really, really

good projects, or do we fund fewer projects that are also so very good projects?

And it's

interesting, Mr. Speaker, because our private industry does not invest in

individual artists in the beginning phases of a project because that's the

riskiest time; again, that's that research and development. So it's important

that we do this work. It's crucial. It's crucial to the well-being of our

people, to the well-being of our cultural workers, to the well-being of our

province.

But

those funds, because of our pride in our arts community, in what has been

accomplished by our arts community, we are encouraging more and more young

people to get involved. By doing so, we have a greater pressure on funding from

ArtsNL, because we're saying this is a viable career for you and we, as a

province, support it.

So we're

encouraging people to come in, young people; we're encouraging diverse

communities to come in and we're also saying to our established artists – and

again, when we look at some of our established artists who do not make a lot of

money – many of our artists are among the highest educated and among the lowest

earners in the province. So they also, again, for the beginning of their

projects, go to ArtsNL for support.

But

their funding has not increased from 2016, so we have more people applying, we

have the cost of living having gone up, the cost of supplies, the cost of

renting studios, the cost of paying for other cultural workers to work on your

project, all that has gone up. So the pressures on the Arts Council to be able

to fund the projects that are so important to our community, the pressure is

growing and mounting.

So in

the ArtsNL, $1.6 million is spent on programs and $300,000 on administering

them. Not a lot of money for administration. So I would like to just

congratulate and commend Mr. Reg Winsor who's the executive director of ArtsNL

and his staff for doing an incredible job, again under incredible pressure, for

the arts community of Newfoundland and Labrador. They have so little money. Such

a small percentage of their budget goes to administration, and these folks work

hard because they know how important this is.

I'd also

like to commend those who sit on the board of ArtsNL. Those are not paid

positions. Those are people from all over the province, from Labrador, from

Burin, from Central, from Western, from the Avalon, from all over the province

who come together to do the work of the board on behalf of the artists of

Newfoundland and Labrador and on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Only

about half of the eligible applicants for artistic creation grants are approved.

I would think that maybe even that's a bit of a generous amount; I believe that

it's even less than that. The average grant is $4,000. Sometimes that's the only

amount of money, the only amount of grant, that a writer may have to write the

first draft of their novel, and we know that's months and months and months of

work.

That

amount is well behind the amounts other provinces give their artists for

artistic creation. Again, what we're talking about often is that beginning phase

and that phase of research and development. So, for a province, a province that

is so proud of the work of our cultural workers, a province that gains so much

from their work –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MS. ROGERS:

– why would we be a province

that is well behind other provinces in those initial grants? I would hope, Mr.

Speaker, that this government would see through how important these investments

are, how valuable they are to the economy, to our well-being as a people and to

the arts community.

It's

been proven; it's not up for dispute. I would hope that this province, once

again, will take a look at the budget for the Arts Council and realize that they

can do better.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you to the Member.

The hon.

the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

MR. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

certainly not going to take very long. I do thank my colleague here for the

passionate speech. She certainly has a strong connection to the arts. She's

contributed herself significantly over the years, and I know it's something she

feels very important about – as I think we all should, Mr. Speaker.

This

particular bill, just to get to what it's all about, as has been said, it is

sort of somewhat of, I suppose, a minor change but it basically allows a little

more flexibility from a financial point of view in terms of ArtsNL not being

restricted with government's fiscal year end and giving them the ability to plan

for multi-years, giving the ability to carry over funding from year to year and

so on to better align with the needs of the organization, to better align with

the needs of the artists.

Built

into that, while it does provide that flexibility, this change does, at the same

time it also ensures appropriate oversight through the Auditor General, which

they were doing anyway. They were doing it anyway. It's just basically outlining

it here, putting it so there's no ambiguity.

It's

here in this piece of legislation that they will be subject to audits from the

Auditor General. As my colleague said, not because there's been any sense of

anything being done untoward, not being done properly, but simply to ensure it's

enshrined in the legislation and that people have the confidence that its money

– because it is the people's money – is spent appropriate in this entity, the

same as it would be in any other government entity.

We've

seen issues, as we all know, with the school board. That unfortunate incident

that has arisen recently. We can see how things can get out of control and how

things can go wrong if the appropriate checks and balances and measures are not

put in place. It just sort of buckles that piece up. As I said, at the same time

provides a little more flexibility to ArtsNL in terms of how they plan their

year, being able to plan multi-years and being able to work better with the

artists and the needs of the artists and the projects as they come. So I will be

supporting this bill in that regard.

Without

belabouring the point on that, I think it is important that we do whatever we

can as legislators to support ArtsNL. I know that not everybody in the province

– it depends on who you speak to. There are a lot of people that have this

attitude that money put towards the arts is not a priority compared to other

things like health care and education and so on.

understand where some people come from, but I think it's also important to

realize that there has to be a balance when we're funding different entities,

different organizations, that there's more to living in a province, living in a

community, than simply covering off the basic needs and services, and things

like the arts are what make it a community. It's what turns it – it's the

difference between a city or a town versus a community. It's really the arts

that contribute to the community piece, the enjoyment of living in a particular

community. Whether that be through the visual arts or whether it be through

music, through acting and so on, all these things contribute to the fabric of

our society.

Certainly, we have a very unique culture, a very unique heritage here in

Newfoundland and Labrador. Depending on what part of the province you go to,

there are different cultures. Obviously, there's heavy influence from the

culture and French influence. Of course, our Indigenous peoples as well, and

very rich cultures there.

As I

said, you go around different parts of the province there are different

dialects, there are different expressions. It's interesting, because some people

– which is kind of sad when you hear your own people sometimes being critical of

ourselves because of our various accents and dialects. I think it's wonderful. I

think it's what makes us unique. I think it's something to be proud of,

something to be celebrated. Those dialects, those expressions, it's what makes

us unique.

Anything

that we can do to enhance our culture, to enhance our history, I think we should

be doing it. These are not always – unfortunately, these are not always

commercially viable projects. A lot of the projects that get funded for the arts

are not commercially viable, but –

MS. ROGERS:

They weren't meant to be.

MR. LANE:

And they were never meant to

be. But how nice is it, when you think about it, when you go for a walk around

Quid Vidi Lake or you go for a walk through Bowring Park, or through Bannerman

Park, or any of those areas, if it wasn't for programs like this you wouldn't be

able to go through there to see all those beautiful statues and stuff like that

that are there, that really add to the ambiance and speak to our history.

Even

here in this building, on the grounds outside of our building, much of the

history is captured through art, whether it be statues or murals or paintings or

different things like that, and I think it's important to do that. It's

important for our younger people growing up to understand where they come from,

what their culture is all about and to celebrate that culture.

All of

these things are culminated, really, through ArtsNL. That's the organization

that's driving the bigger picture, if you will. Obviously, there are individuals

throughout the province who do their thing, but the bigger picture is driven by

that organization. It's important that we support them, provide them with the

funding they need to do it; and, in this case, provide them with the

flexibility, through this legislation, to be able to more effectively operate

that entity for the benefit of us all as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

So with

that said, I'll take my seat. And, as I said, I will be supporting Bill 28.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

If the

hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation speaks now he

will close debate.

The hon.

the Minister of Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like

to thank the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands for his contribution to debate,

recognizing the arts that exist in Mount Pearl, and certainly very vibrant; as

well as the Member for Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune for her very relevant and

eloquent speech that was given in support of this legislation; the Leader of the

Third Party for highlighting the importance of ArtsNL as an organization and

highlighting the contribution of the arts to Newfoundland and Labrador.

And the

Member for Placentia West - Bellevue, who is also the parliamentary secretary

for Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation, and all of his commentary and

contribution around the efforts we have been making as a government to consult

with the arts community through renewing our cultural plan and how we have

elevated and passed legislation for Status of the Artist, because the Leader of

the Third party talked about remuneration, and it's important that we recognize

and remunerate artists for the work they do. That is very important to have fair

and equal pay for the work that is being done.

This

amendment, as everybody has highlighted, is about removing a reference in the

act to the Financial Administration Act ,

but it's not removing any financial accountability to the Arts Council. They

will still be audited annually by the Auditor General, and they have been

operating in this form since its existence in 1980. So this a matter of being

able to ensure that the act itself complies with how the Crown entity is

operating.

ArtsNL

is a very important organization to our province, Mr. Speaker – I think it has

been relayed by all Members who contributed to the debate – in terms of what

they do to support dance and film, multi-disciplinary work, music, theatre,

visual arts and writing, and how they do their engagement. ArtsNL, they have a

very good team of employees there. They have an independently appointed board

that went through the Independent Appointments Commission, that's representative

and reflective of the artistic community and the professional disciplines. They

do a lot of incredible work.

I want

to highlight that the work that they do to contribute to a $450 million cultural

sector that employs more than 5,000 people in the province is certainly not done

alone or done without the support of governments across all levels. ACOA is a

big contributor to support the artist; the Canada Council for the Arts, another

big supporter. The City of St. John's is a very important contributor to support

artists here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Our

Cultural Economic Development Program within the Department of Tourism, Culture,

Industry and Innovation; Canadian Heritage provides significant funding; the

Foundation Assisting Canadian Talent on Recording, FACTOR; MusicNL provides

funding; the Film Development Corporation; SOCAN Foundation; and Telefilm. There

are many partners, both public and in the private sector that supports the arts.

One

thing I disagree with the Leader of the Third Party is on private sector

investment. We have a tremendous business community out there that is supporting

the artist. We have Business and Arts, led by Pete Soucy there who is the

executive director, that's doing incredible engagement to connect business and

artists and to provide value and support them.

We also

see where a number of banking institutions, financial institutions are

supporting big literary prizes, like the Giller Prize. There are so many things

that's been done from the oil and gas sector. When I was attending the St.

John's International Women's Film Festival – one of the longest International

Women's Film Festivals in the world – you'd see the investment from the oil and

gas, from the mining, from others in the community. There's a tremendous amount

of people who are supporting.

When I

go to events at the LSPU Hall, from local law firms to individual businesses,

people are supporting the arts and making these smaller productions possible.

Because in Newfoundland and Labrador people believe in helping each other, and

our business community and the private sector are stepping in every way, shape

and form to support the arts. I certainly commend them in what they're doing.

We have

seen more funding go into arts and arts organizations to support this. So ArtsNL

has the decisions of the council as to how they wish to spend and allocate their

funding. If they wish to spend it in sustaining funds to larger organizations,

or in terms of in the creation of art, or how they leverage and work with their

partners.

We have

done an incredible amount of work to make our Arts and Culture Centres

available; to work with The Rooms and make The Rooms available to work with

artists to do exhibitions and displays and residencies; and support for our

visual artists, to work with VANYL-CARFAC; to work with neighbourhood dance

work. I was at the Festival of New Dance and seeing the type of dance that's

happening here and brought here from all across the country. It is so amazing to

see that.

I was at

RIAC – an organization downtown – and seeing their gallery space that they have,

and they've opened up an atelier for sewing classes to teach people the basics

of sewing for free. These are people who came as refugees or immigrants or

people in the community that want to be involved and learn that talent, to learn

textiles, and they're going to have a fashion show.

This is

what's really interesting, because I was at the LSPU Hall for the Anna Templeton

Centre, College of the North Atlantic textile program, and seeing the type of

work that artists, like Bruno, has done. They've been able to bring in and

showcase – when I sat there – and I've been at other fashion shows – I said:

This is what you'd expect in Montreal, but this is happening right here in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

It was

the same thing when I was MusicNL, which we give them $350,000 a year. But we

also do other initiatives in the department to support them, and to support

exporting artists, and to do other things.

We had,

down on the Burin Peninsula, Live at Heart. To see that activity and seeing

people from Sweden and other parts of the world, and bringing that talent – Los

Angeles, top producers and people being connected. Things are happening all over

this great province. Whether we're looking at the Grand Bank Theatre and what

it's doing; the Cupids Theatre, Perchance; looking at Rising Tide that has been

doing this for 40 years; looking at Persistence which is focused on the feminist

movement – we were one of the first people, our Department of Tourism, to

support Persistence, to get them moving.

Then if

we look at Carbonear and what's being done with the Princess Sheila NaGeira

Theatre to focus on the importance of space, to give artists the venues, to see

towns encourages and engaged, to want to make sure that the venues – and this is

all about municipalities. The Rotary Arts Centre in Corner Brook and what David

Smallwood and their group is doing. You have the same thing, as I said earlier,

in Mount Pearl. There's vibrancy in the arts in Newfoundland and Labrador. We

have it at all the Arts and Culture Centres.

Television and film, we have invested as a government, during very difficult

times, we've been able to see the equity program for film go from $2 million to

$4 million in last year's budget, and it remained at $4 million in this year's

budget. Actually, last year, we saw so much uptake and interest in film, what

did we do? We put another $1.4 million through Investment Attraction.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. MITCHELMORE:

$5.4 million to deal with the

activity and production, so it doesn't have to be just from one single funding

partner where the arts is being supported. It is a holistic approach that is

taken. That is why when we're renewing our cultural plan, we are taking very

much a holistic approach as to what exists and what supports in government.

The

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development is doing significant

work when it comes to the Cultural Connections program, Touring Program and

getting culture into schools. So, I have to commend the minister on that.

When we

look at film, because we are just off the heels of the St. John's International

Women's Film Festival, then we have to look at where have we come in film. In 21

years since the Newfoundland and Labrador Film Development Corporation has been

created half a billion dollars in production work has happened in those 21

years.

So if

you look at the last three years alone, since we formed government, the last

three years, almost $140 million in production work, of that half billion. It is

growing significantly. There are 600 full-time equivalencies. We have a

full-time film crew – the talent that exists – and a secondary crew, we're

building that capacity and we're looking at all the ways in which we can invest

and grow that. These are well-paying jobs that exist, Mr. Speaker.

When you

look at film and you look at the talent that exists, there are people that are

earning good salaries here in Newfoundland and Labrador. I want to get the

message out there that in Newfoundland and Labrador you can be an artist, you

can be a musician, you can do all sorts of creative work and you can make a good

living.

I want

to just dispel the disbelief, I guess, of the Member opposite, the Leader of the

Third Party saying that artists are earning – they do not make a lot of money.

Some artists do not make a lot of money, but that is not the case for the 5,000

people that work in the arts sector. There would be no way that the value of

that sector would be where it's at. It's $450 million to GDP. There are some

tremendous benefits that are happening in film, television and music, and

government is doing everything that it can to support the arts and see it grow

all over Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. MITCHELMORE:

It's quite tremendous.

You

know, to see what's going on in the Stephenville Theatre Festival, 40 years in

operation and what they've done, the volunteers and the committee, just

phenomenal work.

Cow

Head, the Gros Morne Theatre Festival, they are expanding. They're building a

multi-million dollar theatre project, being led as a patron – Brian Tobin,

former premier, is supporting this and doing a capital fundraising campaign of

millions of dollars to support this. Our government, the Premier has already

announced a half-million dollars towards this project and their new home.

When

Jeff Pitcher got up and said, we've been doing this – the artistic director,

we've been doing this for so long. But this is about respect. This is about

respect for the artist, and that is so important. For the professionalism and

everything that is happening in Newfoundland and Labrador, that these artists

have that respect, and they are getting it in Gros Morne National Park.

That

pristine product that is being offered will be there, because government is

working heavily and closely with ArtsNL, with the arts organizations and with

communities all across Newfoundland and Labrador to raise the Status of the

Artist, to raise the profile of the profession to encourage more people to

become artists and to enter artistic fields and creative fields because we can

do this here in Newfoundland and Labrador, and we are doing it right here.

Mr.

Speaker, I've had opportunities when I've been in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and

seeing the great synergies that exist in your particular district, where the

arts community is engaging the North Coast – for the Member for Torngat

Mountains – where art is being shared between Indigenous artists and being

placed on display.

There

are a lot of things that's happening at the O'Brien Centre for the Arts. Then we

look at what's happening in Lab West at the Arts and Culture Centre and the

different programming and supports that are being put into place to look at how

we add more theatre, more productions.

I want

to put a little point around the importance of engagement and interfacing our

artists throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. I'd be remiss if I didn't

highlight The Rooms as being one of those key pillars that has been working with

ArtsNL, working with artists and working with communities and organizations;

having a Cultural Ambassador program that has been bringing in and engaging

artists, writers. They had a book club. They would bring in writers like Rick

Mercer or Mark Critch and others.

We had

singers, musicians like Amelia Curran come to The Rooms and hold small

performance series. This is a whole new level of engagement that The Rooms is

doing to raise that profile of making sure that it has a broad connection with

the arts community from all levels. They've opened up their theatre to show

films. There's so much more capacity from ArtsNL to look at people who are doing

those scripts, those small developments, to be able to have space and to have

capacity at organizations.

We can

only have the success if we're willing to work with all parties and work with

the community, and that is what I've been doing as minister. I've been very

engaged, going around Newfoundland and Labrador meeting with all these groups,

these organizations, these committees.

My staff

at TCII, a very small but mighty team, have been doing tremendous work in

culture, heritage and art to make sure that artistic endeavours are front and

centre, that our programs match and align, that we're connected and we do great

work to support artists here in Newfoundland and Labrador and give them that

ability. Because the beauty of having the Department of TCII is around the

innovation that exists in the arts and the export potential that exists in the

arts.

somebody can come with an idea, but like the Leader of the Third Party, somebody

who does something in writing, maybe your next film, and that might then end up

being exported all around the world. It may be played at the Cannes Festival.

We've had people travel to international festivals and do signings, and the same

thing with music. We're going to continue to do that great work because

synergies exist.

This is

not about just one budgetary line item within the department as to what our

government supports and invests in the arts. On a per capita basis, our

province, if it is not number one, it is number two in supporting the number of

artists here in Newfoundland and Labrador with the value we provide artists. We

are a tremendous province that has supported artists throughout Newfoundland and

Labrador, and we will continue to support our artists here.

I hope

that everybody supports the amendment and continues to support the good work

that ArtsNL does.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the

question?

The

motion is that Bill 28 be now read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

The

motion is carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Arts Council Act. (Bill 28)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

second time.

When

shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

MS. COADY:

Now.

MR. SPEAKER:

Now.

motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Arts Council Act,” read a second time,

ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill

28)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation, that the

House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 28.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the

Whole to consider the said bill.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

The

motion is carried.

motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, the Speaker

left the Chair.

Committee of the

Whole

CHAIR (Warr):

Order, please!

We are

now considering Bill 28,

An Act To Amend The Arts Council Act.

A bill,

“An Act To Amend The Arts Council Act.” (Bill 28)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

Sorry,

the Chair recognizes the Member for Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We don't

have a lot of questions for the minister this morning but there are a couple

we'd like to ask.

Did the

department consult both the Auditor General and the Comptroller General on this

change?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This was

a recommendation coming from the Comptroller General, was to either amend the

legislation to remove this FAA, that was an option, or the alternative would be

to have ArtsNL comply with FAA. We had gone down the road that this is in

compliance with all other agencies, boards and commissions in terms of how they

are meant to operate. So removing the FAA reference only fits in terms of the

compliance. So it meets the requirement of the Comptroller General.

The

Auditor General would certainly not be passing a particular comment on this

matter. The Auditor General would be reviewing the financial statements and

ensuring there is compliance and would put an opinion at that time, should there

be non-compliance or not in terms of the role of the Auditor General. So this

was a request that came forward based on a report of the Auditor General and

that the Comptroller General recommended that this take place, we're complying

with what the Comptroller General had asked, that's why this bill is before the

House, and just for that reason only.

The

alternative would be if ArtsNL were to comply with FAA, they would have to

follow departmental structure. As Members opposite had talked about, if they had

tried to pursue multi-year funding or projects if there was some additional

funding left over in their budgets, that would be dropped and would have to be

returned to the Treasury, should it not be disbursed or expended.

So this

can allow them to make better decision making for artistic projects and

start-ups, rather than rushing to certain fun things just to get things to

happen unnecessarily. So based on the flow of when people are putting

applications in and things like that, it only makes sense that it would go this

route. That is the sole reason why this legislation has been put forward.

Thank

you.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Minister. So

that's actually a good prelude to my next question. The current practice of the

Arts Council wasn't in line with the current legislation. Is there any kind of

penalty for their non-compliance, or we're just going through this process here

now to rectify things?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

(Inaudible), so yes, as we

talked about in 1980 when the Arts Council

Act came into place, this is not a fact of a new issue. The ArtsNL, based on

this reference in the legislation, they would have not been in compliance for

the last 28 years. What happened in a review, this was picked up through the

Comptroller General to either align the legislation or amend the legislation. If

we aligned ArtsNL, which was set up as a Crown entity, to be able to support the

arts with its annual grant, it would have implications on their ability to do

the multi-year funding or to carry over funds to support arts projects, and may

lead to some decision making at ArtsNL to just expend funds.

They

haven't been doing that; they've been operating out of practice of the

Financial Administration Act , because

when it was set up it wasn't intended to do so. Right now, because this has been

brought forward and has been picked up by the Comptroller General and finding

out that the law has not been adhered to, we have to correct that matter as

legislators in the House of Assembly and ensure that ArtsNL, as to how they're

operating, is in compliance.

On a

go-forward basis, they will be able to still continue to operate as they have

been, and they will now be in compliance with the passage of that legislation.

So there is no formal penalty, to my understanding, on this for the past 28

years of their operations.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank

you, Minister. This is my last question. In the briefing, we were told that when

officials found out that the current legislation contained reference to the

Financial Administration Act , it came

as a surprise.

So, have

you reviewed the other legislation to see if there are other acts of

corporations which reference the Financial

Administration Act that will also need to be brought forward for

housekeeping?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, and that's a very

good question by the Member opposite, because we certainly want to make sure

that all of our entities within the Department of TCII are compliant with the

legislation. When this matter came forward, based on the Comptroller General, we

had to address this immediately, and we have been doing a review of our other

entities, and certainly we know that the Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and

Labrador also has this reference.

So this

is a matter that we will be working through for the Heritage Foundation of

Newfoundland and Labrador as well, because it'll be a very similar matter in

terms of ensuring compliance, although an audit of the Heritage Foundation has

not produced that reference. We will be taking proactive measures, as well, to

seek legislation to be drafted and to correct it as well for Heritage.

It's

just good, standard practice to ensure that all of our Crown entities are in

compliance with how they should be operating, and the Heritage Foundation, very

similarly, they support our heritage structures throughout the province. I think

in the past they may have supported some projects down in your particular

district, like Sunny Cottage and the restoration, where they would do 30 per

cent of funding. Some of their concerns are is that once you issue a grant, and

if the work is not completely done in that fiscal year and it becomes a drop

balance, if they were to operate by FAA, then they would be depending year over

year on what their budgetary allotment is.

They're

set up a little bit differently in the fact that they have the ability to go

raise money through their foundation privately as well, and what they do across

the country. But that is something that we need to address as well for that

particular matter, and we will be taking proactive steps to do so.

Thank

you for that question.

CHAIR:

Shall the motion carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

Those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

Be it enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor and House of Assembly in Legislative

Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR:

Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

Those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK:

An Act To Amend The Arts Council Act.

CHAIR:

Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR:

Shall I report the bill without amendment?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having

passed the bill without amendment, carried.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

MS. COADY:

One moment, thank you.

I move,

Mr. Chair, the Committee rise and report Bill 28.

CHAIR:

The motion is that the Committee rise and report Bill 28.

Shall

the motion carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report

progress and ask leave to sit again, the Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Reid):

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for Baie Verte - Green Bay.

MR. WARR:

Mr. Speaker, the Committee of

the Whole have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to

report Bill 28 without amendment.

MR. SPEAKER:

The Chair of the Committee of

the Whole has reported that the Committee have considered the matter to them

referred and have directed him to report Bill 28 passed without amendment.

When

shall the report be received?

MS. COADY:

Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, report received and adopted. Committee ordered to sit again on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Order 6,

second reading of Bill 29.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that Bill 29,

An Act To Amend The Forestry Act, now be

read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act To Amend The Forestry Act.” (Bill 29)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BYRNE:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the hon. Member for Fogo Island - Cape Freels, Bill 29, amendments to the

Forestry Act – the moment we've all

been waiting for. This is the moment that this House has been looking to amend

Bill 29, but this is not the original Bill 29 which is so conjured in people's

minds. This is a good news story. This is a story about progress.

Actually, this is the antithesis to Bill 29. This is fixing a problem

proactively. This is not having the House being forced to fix a problem. Before

I get too, too wrapped up in my hubris, this is an important act because it

allows us to modify, to reduce red tape, to allow further benefits to our

forestry industry which is a very, very important industry to our province. It's

an industry that is valued at over $380 million in economic activity annually.

It employs 2,300 people directly and employs indirectly 5,000 people.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, Bill 29 is

an act of good news because what we're doing is we're

reducing red tape. We are reducing the burden on businesses and getting

decisions made faster. I will say upfront, and I think the consensus by all

Members of this House, I suspect there will be unanimous support for this

particular piece of legislation.

What

this is, is simply reducing red tape. It's taking that which we do and do

routinely, which has been overly complicated as prescribed by the original act,

and now allowing for it to occur in a more streamline fashion. It simply removes

the requirement for the Lieutenant-Governor in Council to approve that which has

been routinely done for many, many years under this act.

Let me

explain what this act is not. This is not an additional tax. It is not an

additional revenue item. It is not an additional burden on our forestry sector.

It is simply taking that which has already been done, collecting a reasonable

compensation for forestry protection activities conducted by the public, by the

public purse, and collecting that money for those land holders that have

acreages or land bases over 120 hectares in size. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I think

we will all consent that 99.99 per cent of this tax really applies to one single

land holder: Corner Brook Pulp and Paper.

Corner

Brook Pulp and Paper currently has land tenure over a significant volume of

Newfoundland and Labrador's forest, the Island of Newfoundland's forest.

Therefore, given the fact that there is a public good to the public purse

providing certain forest protections to that land base, it is only reasonable

and consistent with our international trade obligations that that practice

continues to collect a benefit for the public purse for the administration of

those public fees.

With

that said, Mr. Speaker, what Bill 29 does is it simply removes the requirement

each and every year for that land tax to be determined, to have it approved or

authorized by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council. It grants the department and

the office of the Minister of Fisheries and Land Resources the ability to do

that. There is no change to the structure of the formula on which the fees are

based. It simply modifies it to allow that elimination of that red tape

requirement.

Mr.

Speaker, what a valuable opportunity it is for me to talk a little bit about our

forestry sector with relevance to this act, because this act is about providing

protections for our forestry industry, our forest resources. As a government, we

have directed considerable resources at improving our forest practices.

Everything from improving access to security of fibre through our amendments to

our forest land tenure arrangements, our permitting structure. We now have

operational ability, greater ability, to enter into five-year forestry

management agreements, 20-year agreements.

We've

modified how allocations are made to ensure that wood fibre is allocated by

those who are ready, willing and able to use it. We have a tremendous amount of

fibre that is sitting allocated but unused that is preventing economic activity

from occurring. That is an important consideration that we addressed with a

Cabinet Committee on Jobs, Mr. Speaker. We have identified forestry as key

component to our economic growth and we have directed a working group to develop

strategies, plans and actions – more specifically actions – to be able to

enhance our forestry output.

We have

made very ambitious goals but realistic goals that when you put your shoulder to

it, you can achieve ambitious goals and make them reality. We are going to

increase our fibre allocations, our fibre production by 20 per cent. We're going

to increase our employment in the forest industry, all through difficult times.

Now,

what else this act is not, Mr. Speaker – I said it's not an additional tax. It

is not like the tariffs that the US Commerce department put in place against our

paper industry, our newsprint industry. That was a very difficult situation for

our newsprint industry. This government, we were faced with a challenge, we rose

to the challenge and we fought back against these unfair tariffs and we were

successful as a government.

Mr.

Speaker, it goes without saying that these were very challenging times for our

newsprint industry, facing taxes, tariffs, upwards of 32 per cent – tariffs of

upwards of 32 per cent. The industry was feeling as though it was bunkered, it

was surrounded and it needed a helping push.

The

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, this government, we were there. We

provided the basis. We assisted our federal counterparts, which were leaders in

this initiative. But given the fact that the Newfoundland and Labrador newsprint

industry was very uniquely under assault under the US Commerce department's

tariffs on uncoated ground on newsprint, we really took a very deliberate and

very serious effort to make sure that we did everything in our power to ensure

that the US Commerce department and the tribunal, which ultimately decided, had

the full facts. Mr. Speaker, we were successful.

While we

recognize that the industry has to be competitive, that it needs a land tenure

system which is competitive, it needs an operating environment which is

competitive, we are supplying all of that. We are making sure that forest

tenure, access to security of supply is enhanced, is improved and strengthened

for a longer term benefit. That's the changes that we made when we met just

recently in Grand Falls with the hon. Members from Central Newfoundland and the

Premier making those announcements with me. We improved our forest fibre tenure.

We've improved the operating environment and we will continue to make

improvements.

One of

the things that I'll note is that during the course of the tariff arrangements,

the tariff decisions that were made by the US Commerce department, one of the

things we noted was that some of the ammunition, some of the reinforcement, that

the complainant company used to suggest that the Newfoundland and Labrador

forest industry, the newsprint industry, was not abiding by international trade

commitments, they used the very words of the former PC government. They used the

words of the former PC government in suggesting that the Corner Brook Pulp and

Paper was bankrupt.

They

used those words publicly, which was then taken by the complainant company to

say in the course of their complaint, the complainant company, Northwest Paper,

said that in order for any assistance to a private company to be legitimate, it

has to be made on business terms, on commercial terms, and the overall

creditworthiness of the company is to be a factor in whether or not that

assistance was on commercial terms.

Mr.

Speaker, when the former PC government made statements that the company itself

was bankrupt or verging on bankruptcy, the US company that was the complainant,

that created the basis on which the US Commerce department established a 32 per

cent, in part, a 32 per cent tariff on Canadian newsprint, and in particular on

Newfoundland newsprint, they used the words of the former PC government against

the Newfoundland industry.

Because

when the former government said that Corner Brook Pulp and Paper was on the

verge of bankruptcy, that's what was picked up by the company who said, how can

a company that their own government – their own government – says is on the

verge of bankruptcy, how can that company be creditworthy? And so the very words

of the PC government of Newfoundland and Labrador were weaponized against Corner

Brook Pulp and Paper.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, you talk about a challenge, because we knew that not to be true. We

said at the time of the loan to Corner Brook Pulp and Paper that was not true;

that was not accurate. We supported that because it was on business terms. I

have no idea why the former government said what they said, because Corner Brook

Pulp and Paper is a solid, viable company that will be around for many, many

years to come –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BYRNE:

– and it will be supporting

jobs in Newfoundland and Labrador.

But what

I do know, our challenges as a government that we have today, is trying to fix

the mess that was left by the previous government, not just on Muskrat Falls,

but on things like the tariff arrangements that the US Commerce department

imposed because a US company weaponized the words of the former government to

say that that loan, that assistance that was provided to Corner Brook Pulp and

Paper was not given on commercial terms because the company was not

creditworthy, and the company was not creditworthy.

Do you

know how they tried to indicate that or show that or even prove that? They said

listen to the words of the former premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, Kathy

Dunderdale. Listen to the words of the former minister of Natural Resources.

Listen to the words of the former minister of Natural Resources and the premier

of the province who said that company was on the verge of bankruptcy. Those

words were weaponized and a 32 per cent tariff, in part, was imposed on a

Newfoundland company because of the words of our own government. You talk about

having a challenge in front of you.

So what

did we do, Mr. Speaker? We had to fight the legacy of the former PC government

to support forestry workers in Newfoundland and Labrador and employees of Corner

Brook Pulp and Paper, both inside the gate and outside the gate. We had to fight

back against the US Commerce department, against the complainant company; we had

to fight back against those ridiculous tariffs which were untrue, and to prevent

that from going forward. The only way we could do it was to prove, as we said

back then, as we said now, as we will continue to say, Corner Brook Pulp and

Paper is a viable company, it is an important company, and it will be here for

many, many years to come because they have a government that supports the jobs,

the 5,000 jobs in the forestry sector.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BYRNE:

So what we did, Mr. Speaker,

is we proved that the original statements of the former PC government were

incorrect, were not based on fact and should be dismissed. And we were

successful in doing exactly that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BYRNE:

That's an important component

of the legacy of the tariff situation against our newsprint industry which has

never really been told, that the own words of the PC government were weaponized

against Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, against the 5,000 employees of our forestry

industry. The very own words of the former PC government were weaponized and

potentially cost 5,000 jobs.

Why do I

say that, Mr. Speaker? Because our sawmills are so integrated, our forestry

sector is so integrated that the existence, the operations of Corner Brook Pulp

and Paper are synergistic with the operations of our sawmills, with the

operations of our firewood industry – and what an industry that is. All of our

forestry operations are so synergistic that when one link in the chain falls

weak, all of the links of the chain fall week. So what we do, what this

government on this side does, we strengthen all links of the chain.

So, Mr.

Speaker, it is so important to understand where you have been before you can

develop a path to the future. That is so important because everything we do in

our forestry sector, we take a look at what the consequences may be on tariffs,

on our commercial, our trade environments with those who we trade with. It's so

important to understand when you raise funds, when you distribute funds it has

to be within the lens of what is acceptable and appropriate within an

international trade context. It is tough enough when you abide by the rules but

it's even tougher when the own words of our own former PC government are

weaponized, weaponized against our own industry. And that's exactly what

happened.

Mr.

Speaker, these amendments to the Forestry

Act , let's explain again what they are not. They are not an additional tax.

They are not a modification of the tax. It is still equally as transparent as

what it was in the past. What it simply is, it's simply reducing red tape. It's

reducing red tape on what is basically a pro forma exercise of establishing what

would be the cost, or what would be the appropriate fee provided to the public

purse for the administration of lands and public protection provided to those

lands.

Corner

Brook Pulp and Paper – the reason why I emphasize this – is the single entity.

There is one other entity which is a smaller land holder, which I'm sure the

Opposition has already appreciated, is not of significant consequence to this,

but it's really about one company and the forest protections that we provide to

the company on company lands, and the remuneration that we get through the

public purse in return.

It's a

very uncomplicated piece of business because where it's red tape reduction, I'm

confident it will meet with the unanimous support of all Members of this House.

What this conversation can and should be about this morning is how do we do more

things like that, how do we make sure that we increase the profitability, the

competitiveness of our forest industry.

Mr.

Speaker, one thing I will guarantee to be true is we will not let the actions of

this government be weaponized against our own industry as the PC government, the

former PC government, did which nearly cost our province 5,000 jobs. And if

anyone – including our colleagues in the higher Chamber – would like any

information on that, I'd be more than happy to provide it.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

Yes, thank you.

Your

Honour, it gives me great pleasure to stand and speak to Bill 29. Yes, this is a

big part of reducing the red tape in the forestry industry and throughout

government. I'd like to remind everybody in this hon. House that I believe it's

compliments of this red tape that we've seen three very, very good projects that

were scheduled for Central Newfoundland go by the wayside and the Abitibi stand

still stands there over-maturing and depreciating in value. So it is essential

to remove the red tape. I don't know, given the content of the minister's

speech, there seemed to be a fair bit of off-topic content in it. So I would

hope that he would be able to get to the point and make a decision quicker, when

it comes down to it, seeing that it will be in his hands.

The wood

fibre allocation – the minister had referred to the excess wood fibre allocation

not being used, yet we see three projects walk away from this province and look

to set up elsewhere – for that very reason, that there was no wood fibre

supposedly to be allocated to them.

Why is

this continuously happening? You look at the Wooddale Nursery. I guess I got to

stand and tout both roles at this time. The Wooddale Nursery now has split roles

and split responsibilities and a split focus. It is now agriculture and

forestry. If we are to look at expanding our forestry and keeping the high level

of product and resource intact, we need the same commitment from government to

focus on forestry. Yes, it's important to focus on agriculture, but forestry is

also a resource.

Resources – and I'm going to quote an unnamed mentor right now, and I apologize

if I misquote him. Basically, he says: If we cannot manage our resources for the

future of our children, we have failed them. As it stands right now, we are

failing our children. The forestry industry needs to be improved; it needs to be

overhauled.

And yes,

in certain areas of our province, the forestry industry is being managed very

well; largely in part to a public advisory set-up that Corner Brook Pulp and

Paper has, in which there are volunteer members on the board that oversee the

practices and implementation of the practices in the forestry industry. Our

forestry resources are being managed well under their direction, but that's just

one specific geographic area, and one specific participant in the forestry

industry.

The

intent of this tax collection – through the briefing, I have learned – is

largely related to the protection and provision of fire services. Given our

climate is changing, and we see worldwide – I've recently seen, from space,

generation of our planet about how much of our world is actually on fire at this

very point, and it's absolutely astounding when you look at across the globe how

much of our planet is in flames at this moment, and it's largely due to climate

change.

We're

having drier summers, we're having hotter summers, we're having less snow in the

winter so we don't have that moisture content in the plant material, in the

environment. So I would think that in addition to tax collection, which

basically goes into the general revenue, we should start building a reserve for

the years that we do have excess fire, excess need for protection, rather than

having to burden that participant in the industry which is, again, Corner Brook

Pulp and Paper, with the whole 100 per cent of an extraneous year of fire and

resulting service requirement.

You

know, we really need to start to squirrel away a portion of the excess money

into an account or into a reserve that basically they can expect their insurance

that the forest resources of the province are going to be protected. The cost of

that generally stays the same; we don't see any disastrous increase. That's why

I brought up in the briefing that, yes, I support the initiative of taking the

responsibility out of Cabinet and putting it into the minister's hands, but we

need a time frame as to when the minister has to make the decision.

In the

agriculture industry, well, we've seen big delays in program implementation, and

maybe there were other reasons, but I guess when you're at the top all those

responsibilities fall to you; and being the minister, that wasn't very

favourable that programs were slowly implemented. We need to know, the client

being Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, they need to know what they're paying in tax

in order to create a sustainable business model for that year.

So I

think that we have to also implement a fixed date when the minister has to do

decide on what rate of tax he will be assessing, and then those involved in the

industry will know how much they're dealing with as they progress through the

year, and it won't catch them off guard on December 31.

relation – and I know this is very much straying off the bill and the intent of

the bill, but because the minister commented on it so passionately, I think that

in only fairness I have to reply to it, but not replying to it as a Member of

the former administration, but as a member of the public, and that is the

$40-million loan that was given to Corner Brook Pulp and Paper.

wonder, does the minister think that that loan should not have been extended to

Corner Brook Pulp and Paper? And if it was not, the financial model that they

were in at that time depicted that there would be no Corner Brook Pulp and

Paper, so there would be no need for this bill today because they would not be

in existence. Where would those 5,000 jobs be today?

And

further to that, the reference and quote of the company was bankrupt, I ask the

Member opposite: What kind of effect is our own Premier's words saying the

province is bankrupt? What kind of effect is that going to have on our credit

rating? How much more are we going to have to pay? That's a question I have to

ask. I think unanimously, as a House, we should ban the word “bankrupt” from

this House of Assembly because every time we say it, over and over again, people

remember.

Government has to intervene. It has to be a calculated approach of intervention

in business. Basically we want to make sure that there is a viable future in a

business. We can't just keep throwing cash at it. If we have to keep throwing

cash at an industry or a business, that's a dead-end for our money and it's not

a good investment for our province or our children.

When you

look at a strategic investment of $40 million that facilitated the ongoing

operations of a company which basically is the cornerstone of the forestry

industry, I think that's a very good investment. I'm sure the 5,000 people, the

people of Central, the people of Western and all people of this province would

concur on that.

Another

concern that I had in the briefing was, as this tax is applied, I did have a

concern with the agriculture industry. Basically 120 hectares is around the size

of an average farm in Newfoundland and Labrador. With this 64,000 acres up for

development, which by the way have always been here, there will be several

farmers and several agricultural enterprises which will be taking advantage of

this more than 120 hectares, so they will also be subject to the tax. My

understanding from the department is that because it's part of an agricultural

initiative, that they will be exempt.

While

the minister may stand to correct me on that, I do appreciate that, as do all

the producers of the province and of course all the people of the province

because food security is topmost and, with an empty belly, we have difficulty

doing anything.

We need

to take the model of the public advisory committee and apply it more to a

proactive approach in our forestry. You know, they have a great system of

co-operation between lumber mills, pulp and paper and fibre, be it for firewood

or pellets or whatever it may be, and that kind of co-operation is really

advancing our forestry industry, but again it's in a very small geographic area.

Once

upon a time, even in my lifetime, we had three very large paper mill operations

and now we're down to one. If you look at the ratio of that, basically we have

one-third of our forestry resource being actively harvested and managed, again

largely due to the public advisory committee and the initiative of the

harvester, and the end-user being Corner Brook Pulp and Paper. Wood fibre and

forest resources are not something that is going to be there, such as oil,

underneath the seabed.

The

reality is it's a living organism that we have to manage for the benefit of the

people of this province, and that's not happening. We need more leadership from

the government; we need more encouragement for businesses such as the three

projects that walked away from Central Newfoundland. We need more co-operation

for them so that, you know, starting a business – and forgive me if I insult

anybody in particular – but starting a business is kind of foreign to a lot of

people.

understand that when you run up against a brick wall of bureaucracy, and you can

see the way around it, government and bureaucracy really has to have their ears

open and listen because we need to use these resources, we need to manage them.

If not, Mother Nature will manage them for us, and that will be in the form of a

forest fire, and that will add a further burden to the people of this province.

So,

generally, we are supportive of this bill. I can say that I'm not supportive of

many of the positions that the minister took in his straying from the topic, but

I look forward to continuing this discussion. I'm sure my email will be flooded

with people now with suggestions as to how this government can do better.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

MR. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm only

going to take a couple of moments. Obviously, this is somewhat of a housekeeping

matter. It is a reduction in red tape. It's not changing anything in terms of

the current system, how the system currently works as it relates to fees charged

to the production of our forest and the landowners and so on. It just simply

puts it in the hands of the minister versus having to go through the Cabinet.

That's really what it's doing. I have no issue with that, as there's no big

change, and I'll obviously be supporting the bill.

Before I

sit down, I would say to the minister I did enjoy his commentary. He's quite the

thespian I have to say and maybe one of these days if he gets out of politics,

he might decide to go in REVUE or something like that because, if nothing, I

find him very entertaining. I find him very entertaining. I don't always agree

with what he says. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't but there's definitely some

entertainment value there for sure.

The only

point I would make in one of the points the minister did make about the $40

million and so on and the support that did go to Corner Brook Pulp and Paper is

that, to my recollection, I believe all Members of the House unanimously

supported what was done. Also to my recollection, I do believe the local MHAs

who were Members of the other party at the time were actually involved in the

discussion with the mill and the government of the day in doing it and actually

supported the government in the House of Assembly and spoke to it at the time.

I think

if anything was done, whether it was done right or wrong or what was said or

wasn't said, anyone who was here, we all supported it. I think we all supported

it for the right reasons because nobody wants to see that industry shut down and

nobody wants to see those jobs lost. It doesn't matter what party or what side

of the House you're on, I think we all would agree with that.

Anyway,

with that said, in terms of the nuts and bolts of this bill which, like I said,

there's not a whole lot to it, but it does make sense, it does reduce red tape

and I will be supporting it.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Fogo

Island - Cape Freels.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAGG:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an

honour today to stand and speak on Bill 29,

An Act to Amend the Forestry Act.

It's great to follow the minister's lead I guess in his galvanizing introduction

of the bill to us and the importance of this. This will be a red tape reduction

bill. It's going to take it from the Cabinet to the minister's position, so it

should expedite it.

understanding of the bill is it's developed over a five year –it's a five-year

cycle. It has to do with anybody who has a harvest area of over 120 hectares

and, from all indications, there is only one currently in the province right

now, being Corner Book Pulp and Paper.

This is

definitely not a new bill; it's just a way to expedite the other bill. The

importance of this bill is providing protection for the forestry, and I would

the think the biggest protection would be fire safety. A portion of the funds

from this bill will go to purchase water bombers. Each water bomber, in my

understanding, is about $30 million for a water bomber. So it's not a cheap

thing to purchase a water bomber, the maintenance ongoing of all that.

In my

district, I think I have six harvesters that continue to work in the woods to

this day. I'm sure they must feel pretty safe in knowing that the province is

providing the protection under this bill so that they can go in and operate

safely in the woods and should something go wrong, know there's something to

come back.

I have a

gentleman who I guess he's been in the forestry for a number of years; this man

is the heart of soul of what I would think a forester would be. I think his

allotment is somewhere around 2,000 cubic metres, Minister, if that makes sense,

for a small permit.

This

gentleman gets out of his house, every morning gets out of his bed, takes his

truck, drives about two hours to his site where he cuts. He goes in on his

harvester, he uses all his equipment necessary, he brings it back to the road –

it's a one-man operation who works hard in this industry. This guy could know

that we are providing safety to his sector and to his job site, I'm sure it

gives him great relief. Because for me, a person single-handily going in the

woods and doing that kind of work, he got to be committed to this industry. I

look forward to this gentleman's continued years of success in the forest

industry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAGG:

So I really support this

bill. It's really important, I assure the minister, and when he clues up in his

preamble, when it's all said and done, that you just can't ignore the importance

of anything when it comes to safety and protection to anybody that works in any

industry.

So,

Minister, I wish you all the success in this bill, and I thank you for the

opportunity to speak here today.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East – Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I'm

happy to stand this morning and speak to Bill 29, which is

An Act to Amend the

Forestry Act. As has been pointed out, the bill itself is pretty simple because

it's putting into the act the formulation needed with regard to the annual tax

rate that is put on the forest land that is productive in the province. The bill

itself is basically a series of mathematical equations, so put our brains, going

right back to high school, in action, in looking at these mathematical

equations.

The

important thing is the tax itself and the fact that right now it's Kruger,

Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, who has the lease that is affected by this. It's

important that Corner Brook Pulp and Paper and any other company that might be

put in place pay its way through a fair tax with regard to helping government

cover the cost of fire suppression and insect control, which this is about.

actual fact, Corner Brook Pulp and Paper shows itself as a good, corporate

citizen. It realizes its role in paying for the services, such as fire

suppression and insect control. I'm sure the government and the people of the

province thank them for that, for being good, corporate citizens.

I note

that we have not heard how much CBPP pays each year with regard to this annual

tax. If the minister had that figure, it would be a good one to know, as a point

of interest for us as we pass this bill. Obviously, I will be voting for this

bill, as will my colleague in our caucus.

The red

tape

part is not a big one, but the fact that decisions do not have to go

through Cabinet, Executive Council, and could go straight to the minister

certainly makes it more efficient with regard to decision making. I think that's

the important thing because the way in which legislation – authority didn't rest

in the minister but it rested in the Executive Council could mean a lag in time,

for example, with regard to approval of the annual rate. Now, that won't happen

and I think that's efficient, efficient for government and it's efficient for

the corporation that pays the tax as well.

It's

important that we do raise this money because it is important that we do protect

our forest land. The insect control services and fire suppression are essential

pieces of work, and government is doing the right thing in taking tax from the

corporations for that.

We have

always wanted, in this province, a sustainable forest industry. Protecting the

land through insect protection and insect control and also offering good forest

suppression services and the preventative side that goes with forest fires that

becomes extremely important as we maintain a sustainable industry.

We have

many opportunities still in front of us with regard to the diversification of

the forest industry in this province. Right now, we are facing challenges. There

have been things that have happened that I think have been setbacks. The fact

that we have the Abitibi land sitting there not being exploited, not being used,

that's bad. I want to hear better plans with regard to those lands. We've seen a

number of false starts regarding the potential for biofuel industry in Central

Newfoundland and on the Northern Peninsula of the Island. And we have government

paying the insurance bill on the mothball Holson wood pellet mill in Roddickton.

A lot of things just sitting there, no money being made from them, no growth

happening in these areas.

We do

have some good things going on, small, in the sawmill in part of the industry,

for example. We do have a number of commercial mills, but the majority of the

province's lumber production, which was just over 60 million board feet, is

produced by seven larger mills. Most of the other mills are pretty small,

generally with fewer than – no, I'm sorry; that stat is wrong. My eye went too

far down my page.

The

domestic sawmills are extremely important to the industry. They're producing a

maximum of 6,000 board feet of lumber annually, but they have little impact on

overall lumber production. Generally, those domestic mills combined produce

about 2 to 5 million board feet of lumber each year. So, nearly one-half of the

lumber produced in this province is sold to markets in Mainland Canada and in

the United States. We hope that continues, that trade with the US will continue

allowing that to happen, with the remainder sold in the local market. So, these

sawmill industries are important, but they're a small piece of the pie.

We also

have value-added products, which are important. We have wood manufacturing going

on in the province and we have about 100 companies producing an array of

products. A lot of people don't know this. I didn't know it myself really until

I sat down and read about it. Then I realized yeah, I know it; I do know that we

have small companies in the province producing, for example, kitchen cabinets

and doors, exterior and log siding, custom furniture, stair treads, roof

trusses, so we do have a fair bit of value-added production going on.

Again,

these companies are generally small in size – now I'm getting my statistic

correct – with fewer than 15 employees each and they're located in both rural

and urban centres. They're very important. Some of the companies are linked to

local sawmills where they utilize local species such as white and yellow birch,

black spruce, and eastern larch in their manufacturing process.

Others

utilize exclusively imported species or a combination of local and imported. So,

we actually do have a lot of things going on that sort of slip under the radar;

we don't really pay attention to what at the time is going on all around us. For

that reason, it is so important that we protect our forest land so that not only

these industries continue, but that we can increase industries. I would like

hear from the minister about new plans with regard to diversification, new plans

with regard to increasing the opportunities that are there and certainly hoping

that we haven't given up on the whole issue of biofuels.

The

recent volatility of the oil prices and the desire to reduce carbon-neutral

fuels has led to a new interest in the development of new wood fuel products,

and people in the province especially facing Muskrat Falls are looking at the

desire to use wood products as well for heat.

The

industry hasn't really gotten off the ground yet, but we all remain hopeful that

this industry can be further developed in a sustainable manner, and that is the

important thing: in a sustainable manner. So, all the more reason why government

is bringing this bill forward, making sure that we continue to raise taxes on

the lands that are productive and continue to protect our lands so that we can

support what's happening right now and increase what we need.

I would

point out that looking at the biofuel sector is a really important one. I'll be

happy to vote for this, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you, very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources, if he speaks now, he will close the debate.

MR. BYRNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

delighted to receive such strong endorsement from all Members of this House to

the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador's forestry activities. This is a

welcomed pronouncement of the strong support that the House holds to our Way

Forward, to our strategy of developing not only our agricultural industry, our

aquaculture industry, but another key component of my department, which is the

forestry sector.

I heard

very strong endorsements from Members of how important the forestry sector is,

but also in their questions they acknowledged the good work that is occurring.

They acknowledged the structural impediments that existed in the past, they

acknowledged that we have identified those structural impediments, and they

acknowledged that we are working to resolve them.

For

example, a question was asked about whether or not we have fibre that's readily

available; can we get that fibre out into the hands of those who would use it?

Mr. Speaker, what I informed the House was that we recognized that incumbent

forestry permit holders, the vast majority of which utilize their permits to

their full extent, have variations within a particular season given to

circumstances, marketplace circumstances, production circumstances, repairs and

maintenance issues that they may experience. The vast majority of forest

harvesters harvest their timber allocations; some, however, do not.

What

that does is creates a pool or a bank of forest of fibre that is unavailable for

those that would otherwise use it. So we've made a modification effective

January 1. We're going to modify our permitting system. It's really based on a

use-it-or-lose-it philosophy, which has been endorsed by the forestry sector,

those that want to have access to forest resources. Because part of the

challenge here is that while – and it's been rightfully pointed out – we have a

surplus of fibre in Central and on the Northern Peninsula and in Labrador and

other places, but while we have a surplus of fibre, we have impediments to

getting that fibre permitted and out into the hands of those that will use it.

One of

the issues that were raised is whether or not we can really bring home a major

new user of our forest industry. One of the projects that I've been involved in

is just exactly that. I would note that while unfortunately there were some that

did not meet with immediate success, and that was highlighted by my Official

Opposition critic, I would also have to point out to my Official Opposition

critic that before me stands a list of applicants and proposals for forest-fibre

allocation and utilization that have fallen short.

Vattenfall, for example, in 2010-11, requested a 500,000-ton pellet plant in

Central Newfoundland. That fell flat. Holson Forest Products wanted a new pellet

plant in 2011 in Stephenville. That fell flat. Holson Forest Products looked to

revitalize the Roddickton pellet plant, which never got off the ground itself.

That fell flat in 2012.

J.D.

Irving came to Newfoundland in 2015. The former PC administration was

unsuccessful in soliciting J.D. Irving to the come to province. EURO INVEST

looked to Roddickton to establish a pellet plant in 2013; that did not meet with

success.

We had

River Basin Energy. We had several companies, prospective companies – in fact,

Mr. Speaker, between 2007 and 2015, I'm looking at a list of 14 failed efforts

for major forest fibre companies to utilize –

AN HON. MEMBER:

How many?

MR. BYRNE:

Fourteen failed efforts

between 2007 and 2014-2015, which really is quite remarkable. So for them to

stand up and use, as a bridge, as to what needs to happen then let's look at

Roddickton – a $20 million project to which the government gave $10 million.

AN HON. MEMBER:

How much?

MR. BYRNE:

Ten million dollars and

couldn't figure out – with a $10 million shortfall after having awarded $10

million to a known project that would cost $20 million to develop, they gave

upfront $10 million, and they never bothered to say: So what about the other $10

million? And they couldn't figure out why the project didn't succeed.

That is

the benchmark that we are dealing with from the Opposition. So with that said, I

will say nothing further except to voice the infamous word: Rentech. Rentech

looked for a pellet plant and sawmill in Central Newfoundland in 2013 and 2014.

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. Member – if the former PC government would like to

explain to this House: What the heck ever happened to Rentech? I'd love to hear

the explanation.

So with

that said, Mr. Speaker, we conclude this second reading. I appreciate the hon.

Members comments, the attention over the House to this important issue. Bill 29

is about improving forestry practices, improving forestry administration and

management in this province, and I'm delighted to hear, as I think I've heard,

unanimous support for the government's initiative.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the

question?

The

motion is that Bill 29 be now read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Forestry Act. (Bill 29)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

second time.

When

shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

MR. A. PARSONS:

Now.

motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Forestry Act,” read a second time, ordered

referred to a Committee of Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill 29)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Minister of Fisheries and Land Resources, that the House resolve itself

into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 29.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of

Whole to consider the said bill.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, the Speaker

left the Chair.

Committee of the

Whole

CHAIR (Warr):

Order, please!

We are

now considering Bill 29,

An Act To Amend The Forestry Act.

A bill,

“An Act To Amend The Forestry Act.” (Bill 29)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

The

Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

Given that the costs of these

protection services are largely unpredictable, how is government going to

calculate the projected cost and how will they make up the shortfall if, indeed,

we do have an erroneous year or forest fire or insect infestation?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Chair.

What

industry, all industries, always seek is safety, security and consistency. They

need certainty in their operations. So one of the things that have been

established in the Forestry Act for

quite some time for the forestry tax is a formula; it is not based, necessarily,

on an individual year's circumstance. In fact, it has been rounded out in the

past. But I will point to the amendment, which the annual tax rate will be based

on, which is clause 63.1 where it points out that:

T = (C fj

+ C ij - R fj )

N x L

You got

that?

AN HON. MEMBER:

Yes.

MR. BYRNE:

That's good.

So, with

that as the explanation, Mr. Chair, I will concede that the objective here is

not to balance specific costs in any one specific year, but to determine what

the normal course of action is for forestry fire protections, various

protections and to apply that as a fair rate to apply on a hectare-by-hectare

basis for those that utilize the resource.

With

that said, Mr. Chair, that consistency is important, and that is what exactly

this amendment supplies.

Thank

you.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

I thank you for that

mathematical explanation, but am I understanding correct that the participants

in the industry, largely Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, they are 100 per cent

responsible for the coverage of services for the whole entire Island? Is that

correct?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

No, Mr. Chair, the hon.

Member has it wrong. They're required to pay on a basis of the hectarage that

they currently occupy, which they have tenure over. It's non-public lands.

That's the purpose of the forestry tax. Of course, we have stumpage fees on

Crown lands, so this only would apply to those land tenure holders that have

land tracks greater than 120 hectares. Therefore this is unique to this, so it's

an application of a fee which, by and large, estimates or is appropriate that

this is what the costs would normally be.

Is it an

exact figure? Is it precise to what the costs are on a hectare-by-hectare basis?

No, it is not. Is it precise on what the exact costs are on an annual basis? No,

it is not. But over the course of several decades if not generations, if not

centuries of forest practices in Newfoundland and Labrador, we have determined

that and the companies agree, and I think the hon. Member would agree, that the

former government agreed and this government agrees, that this formula meets the

test of what a reasonable fee would be for public resources to be used for the

protection of private interests, and that's what this act is all about.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

I believe everybody in this

House recognizes that our climate is changing so drastically and that's going to

put increased pressure on both insect and possible forest fire. Are there

thoughts of putting a contingency from one year to the next so that our industry

wouldn't be overburdened by excessive tax?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

I'm not sure exactly what the

hon. Member is requesting because if it's the official position of him and his

party that what we should do is collect a surplus fund from the industry on the

basis that there may be some expenses in the future, I think it would be argued

by the companies, by those that would be so impacted by a hypothetical surplus

contingency fund to be used in the case of a potential eventuality, they would

suggest that that would make the company uncompetitive.

So, what

we would rather do is apply a fee, a tax, the compensation, based on what we

know to be historical reality, based on our historical experience, and

reflecting on the fact that yes, the hon. Member does make a good point that

climate change is impacting our environment, our forest resources, and could

potentially have an impact on increased volatility and vulnerability to forest

fires.

I would

note though, however, that in the example of this past year, forest fires were

actually down. I think that what we have built in, the contingency that we've

built in, is already reflected in this formula.

If the

Member is advocating putting in place a separate, higher contingency fee to be

applied against the forestry industry on the basis that there might be a future

demand, I think if he consulted with the forest industry he would find that that

would be negatively viewed by the industry because it would be a hypothetical

fee and would make the industry somewhat uncompetitive.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

The minister just

acknowledged that in the past couple of years we've had less forest fires than

normal. That would mean that the tax that was assessed on that land was in

excess of what was needed to provide these services, so those funds just went

into general revenue.

Given

the fact that we're operating on a very tight budget, a zero-based budget,

what's going to happen when we return to normal levels? Where is that money gone

that was collected that wasn't needed?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

Mr. Chairman, the Member

makes a false premise in his statement. He said that he is aware and he has

concluded that there was a surplus of funds that went into general revenue. I'm

not sure exactly how he based that, that assertion. I know that there was a

question that he asked during the course of the briefing as to whether or not,

in any particular year, if the fees that were collected, if they were in excess

of what was spent, what would happen to the surplus money. The answer is, yes,

it would go into general revenue.

There's

a core point or a critical point that needs to be made here: We are spending the

money. We need silviculture activity. He highlights catastrophic events as being

the driver of this, and of catastrophic events, the number of catastrophic

events on the Corner Brook Pulp and Paper land tenure in any one particular year

is reduced, how does this impact on the overall consequence to the envelope, to

the amount of money that's collected and spent. What I suggest to the hon.

Member is that our efforts toward silviculture, road building, other public

services, public goods that are supplied, we are rarely, if ever, in a situation

where we actually have a surplus. We spend the money because it's good for

forestry.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

In the briefing I did pose

the question to the individuals present in reference to agricultural

development. Many farmers will actually go out and clear and harvest more than

120 hectares of timber each year in their initiative to expand agricultural

production, and it was indicated at that time that farmers would not be subject

to that tax.

Could

the minister confirm or correct me on the position?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

As seized by the hon.

Member's questions that I am, I may have missed a bit of a nuance, but I'll

answer this. Mr. Chair, farmers' agriculture, as the Member is aware – he's

probably received some benefits from this himself at some point in time, which

is rightfully so – we supply a significant amount of money for land clearing. If

land is cleared for agricultural purposes, the landholder, which receives the

land at a very, very preferential rate of close to $4 a hectare, they have the

opportunity to be able to sell any of that timber on that land itself

(inaudible).

As the

hon. Member knows, we supply potentially up to $3,000 per hectare for land

clearing and if there is an expense to be incurred there, please, we all need to

bear in mind that the amount of assistance that's provided by public resources

for land clearing for agricultural purposes, I think the hon. Member would agree

is available.

MR. CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

My actual question was: Will

the farmers who are clearing more than 120 hectares of timber, thus harvesting

the timber, will they be assessed the same tax under this forest protections

initiative?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

Mr. Chair, if that is the

case, that there are 120 hectares of land which is cleared in any particular

year, the fee will be applied if there are forest practices that occur on that

tenure.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

One word only, are they

exempt or not, famers?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

If there was forest

mitigation measures that are applied by the public for that tenure, under the

regulations there will be an applicability. I'm not aware that that is the case

under this particular regulation.

CHAIR:

Shall the motion carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK (Murphy):

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Clause one we did.

CLERK:

Okay.

Clause

CHAIR:

Shall clause 2 carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, clause 2 carried.

CLERK:

Be it enacted by the

Lieutenant-Governor and House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as

follows.

CHAIR:

Shall the enacting clause

carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Forestry Act.

CHAIR:

Shall the title carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, title carried.

CHAIR:

Shall I report the bill

without amendment?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

that the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment, carried.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Deputy House

Leader.

MS. COADY:

I move, Mr. Chair, that the

Committee rise and report Bill 29.

CHAIR:

The motion is that the

Committee rise and report Bill 29.

Shall

the motion carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, the

Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Reid):

The hon. Member for Baie

Verte - Green Bay.

MR. WARR:

Mr. Speaker, the Committee of

the Whole have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to

report Bill 29 without amendment.

MR. SPEAKER:

The Chair of the Committee of

the Whole reports that the Committee have considered the matters referred to

them and have directed him to report Bill 29 carried without amendment.

When

shall the report be received?

MR. A. PARSONS:

Now.

MR. SPEAKER:

When shall the bill be read a third time?

MR. A. PARSONS:

Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, report received and adopted. Bill 29 ordered read a third time on

tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, Mr. Speaker, given the time, I would move that we recess until 2 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER:

In accordance with paragraph 9(1)(

b) of the Standing Orders the House is

recessed until 2 o'clock this afternoon.

Recess

The

House resumed at 2 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):

Order please!

Admit

strangers.

Today I

would like to welcome, and it is truly my great honour, the Chief Justice of

Newfoundland and Labrador, the Honourable Deborah Fry, who will be recognized

today in a Ministerial Statement.

A great

welcome to you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today for Members' statements

we will hear from the Members for the Districts of St. George's - Humber, Baie

Verte - Green Bay, Lewisporte - Twillingate, Fogo Island - Cape Freels and St.

John's Centre.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

George's - Humber.

MR. REID:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Earlier

this fall I had an opportunity to join a group of volunteers organized by the

Nature Conservancy of Canada, as they did a beach cleanup on Sandy Point, on the

province's West Coast.

The

Nature Conservancy of Canada is Canada's leading land conservation organization.

They secure properties and manage them for the long term. They lead and inspire

others to join in creating a legacy for future generations by conserving

important natural and biologically diverse areas. For the past five years, the

Nature Conservancy has been leading an annual beach cleanup on Sandy Point,

where they own 67 acres.

Sandy

Point was once a thriving community, but when the peninsula became an island due

to coastal erosion, the people of Sandy Point resettled to nearby communities.

Remnants of Sandy Point's history can still be seen today, including

foundations, cemeteries and the old dock and breakwaters.

conclusion, I congratulate the group of volunteers on the work that they have

done on Sandy Point and the Nature Conservancy of Canada on the work they are

doing in this province and indeed throughout Canada.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Baie Verte - Green Bay.

MR. WARR:

Mr. Speaker, to quote a

its people,” could probably best describe most, if not all communities, that we

have the privilege to represent.

June 27,

2018 the community of La Scie said goodbye to one of its most cherished

residents who personified the heart of their community, Neil Ward. Neil lived a

remarkable and rewarding life full of incredible memories that he shared with

his wife Dana; children Zachary, Shelby, Chelsea; and granddaughter Ashlynn.

Neil

gave freely of his time and energy to anyone who needed it, without exception.

He coached minor sports, as well as president of the Minor Hockey Association.

He served on the Town Council of La Scie, the Harbour Authority, the Recreation

Commission, and various other committees.

Neil was

passionate about many things: golf, his love of nature and hockey. His proudest

moment was raising the Herder Memorial Trophy in 1993-94 as a member of the La

Scie Jets. He was a family man and shared his work life with is brothers Roy,

Doug and Terry, operating RNDT Fishing Enterprise until his exit from the

fishery.

His

legacy as a good friend will be remembered by all those who were fortunate as I

was to call him a friend.

I ask

all hon. Members in joining me in offering condolences to the Ward family.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Lewisporte - Twillingate.

MR. D. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

spirit of community and volunteering is very evident in the Town of Birchy Bay.

Over the past few weeks, I had the opportunity to participate in two great

community events. On October 13, the community hosted the 24th annual fall fair

which included a street parade, craft fair, an auction, duck race, along with a

variety of fun activities for young and old.

Like

most community events, including fall fairs, they're never complete without a

delicious spread of home-cooked meals and desserts prepared by outstanding

volunteers. The fall fair was greatly supported by residents and visitors who

all had an amazing time.

Then, on

October 27, the town celebrated the vast contributions of their volunteers with

an appreciation night. Volunteer committee members from the firemen and

firettes, sport and recreation, multi-purpose facility, fall fair, and Over the

Top Museum committees were treated to a dinner, entertainment and presented with

gifts of appreciation for sharing their hard work and dedication which makes all

communities thrive.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all Members to please join me in congratulating the Town of

Birchy Bay and thanking all volunteers in their community and throughout our

great province.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Fogo Island - Cape Freels.

MR. BRAGG:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you for the opportunity to rise and inform this House of the great things that

are happening in my district. A few years ago, a group of friends got together

and went for a game of golf. What started out as a single outing grew into an

annual tournament.

This

idea stemmed from the sad passing of one of the organizers, Guy Perry, who

passed away from cancer. After Guy's passing, the other organizer moved to PEI

where he continued to host the tournament.

I'm

happy to say the tournament came home to New Wes Valley this year. The Perry

Cup, named in memory of Guy Perry, is home to stay. To make this event even more

remarkable, a $10,000 scholarship was donated by family and close friends and

was created for Pearson Academy. A portion of this money will be awarded

annually to a student who best demonstrates Guy's community spirit.

I would

like to thank Guy's wife Phyllis, Jeff Burry, Kevin Howell, Reg Tulk, Terry

Stagg and Steve Gillingham for keeping this tradition alive.

I ask

all Members to applaud these people who turned a day out into a lifelong

dedication.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Before I introduce the next

Member, I would like to recognize that in the public gallery today we have

Justin Tobin and members of the MUN Hillel Jewish society who have joined us for

the following Member's statement.

The hon.

the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Monday

evening I attended a candlelight vigil in Bannerman Park to honour the victims

of the horrific shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh last

Saturday. It claimed the lives of 11 Jewish people and wounded six while at

their place of prayer on the Shabbat.

The MUN

Hillel Jewish student group led us in the lighting of candles and chanting of

prayers. People from all walks of life gathered with members of the Jewish

community under the leadership of the MUN student Hillel group. It was a solemn

gathering of solidarity.

Today

and every day, we must all resist and challenge anti-Semitism, Islamophobia,

racism, hate and violence in all forms. We must ensure our classrooms, our

workplaces, and all parts of our society cultivate acceptance and inclusion.

commend the work being done here in our own community by anti-violence

coalitions, the anti-racism coalition, our teachers, our unions, human rights

activists, and faith communities who work hard to make our communities inclusive

and safe for all. It is what we all must do.

To our

Jewish community here in Newfoundland and Labrador: we mourn with you, dear

friends, and pledge our support. Shalom.

I ask

all Members to stand together now in a moment of silence.

(Moment

of silence.)

MR. SPEAKER:

I thank all Members.

Thank

you.

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety and Attorney General.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, on June 22 of

this year, this province welcomed its first female Chief Justice of Newfoundland

and Labrador, the Honourable Deborah E. Fry.

Justice

Fry built her career in the Newfoundland and Labrador public service, serving in

many roles, including as Clerk of the Executive Council. She was a Supreme Court

Justice, most recently serving as senior administrative Justice of Family

Division prior to being appointed Chief Justice for the province. Having served

in several roles in the justice system throughout her career, she brings a

wealth of knowledge and experience to the Court of Appeal bench.

Mr.

Speaker, this is an important occasion, not only for the legal community but

also the entire province. The role of Chief Justice is held in high esteem in

our justice system, and Justice Fry will be a source of inspiration to young

women and girls who aspire to work in law, and who hope someday to rise to the

position of Chief Justice.

independent and impartial judiciary has always been one of the cornerstones of

our democracy. I am confident Chief Justice Fry will bring the same

professionalism and thoughtful approach to the role of Chief Justice as she has

had to the numerous positions previously held in both the public service and in

the legal system.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all hon. Members to join me in congratulating Chief Justice Fry

on this prestigious and well-deserved appointment.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

certainly don't need prepared written remarks to respond to that, having had the

advantage of knowing the Chief Justice for quite a number of decades. I can

certainly be the first to say that all the sentiments and accolades expressed in

the minister's statement are entirely appropriate and well-deserved by the Chief

Justice, and I join the rest of the House in expressing my appreciation at her

appointment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

I am

delighted to congratulate the Honourable Deborah Fry on her appointment as Chief

Justice of Newfoundland and Labrador. She is not only an inspiration to women

and girls who want to practice the law, but to every woman and girl in the

province.

Chief

Justice Fry brings a wealth of experience to this crucial role. I am sure I

speak for all of us in this House when I say we have every confidence she will

fulfil her position with thoughtful and just rulings.

Thank

you, and bravo, Chief Justice Fry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

The hon.

the Minister of Service NL.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, earlier this

month the provincial government launched SkillsPassNL – free online training

courses to help increase employability, productivity and regulatory compliance.

As the regulator, Service NL's goal is to help individuals and businesses gain a

better understanding of their requirements, in an effort to help them better

prepare for inspections.

Courses

in food services and tobacco and vapour retail industries are currently

available. Individuals currently employed in these areas will be able to make a

more positive contribution at their place of employment through the knowledge

and skills they will gain through this online training.

For

people seeking employment, the completion of the online training will provide

them with industry-specific knowledge that should help increase their

employability. For employers, the courses will provide a better understanding of

the regulatory environment under which they operate, allowing them to