PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version (Night)

May

9, 2016

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 24

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Osborne):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

Today I

would like to welcome to the Speaker's gallery a personal friend of Mr. Terry

Fox, Donna Ball.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

As well, in the public

gallery today we have His Worship, Mayor Daniel Veilleux of the Town of Lushes

Bight-Beaumont-Beaumont North. That's on Long Island in the District of Baie

Verte Green Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

On Thursday last week I had

informed the House that Raylene was moving on. We have a new Page today, Sabrina

Andrews. Sabrina is a third-year political science student at Memorial

University. She's from Grand Falls-Windsor.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

For Members' statements today

we have the Members for the District of Labrador West, St. John's East Quidi

Vidi, Harbour Main, Cape St. Francis, Harbour Grace Port de Grave and Fortune

Bay Cape La Hune.

The hon.

the Member for Labrador West.

MR. LETTO:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

today in this hon. House to recognize an athlete extraordinaire Dana Martin

Kelly of Wabush.

Dana has

participated in seven national and international marathons, including the

Canadian Arthritis Society's Joints in Motion in Switzerland; the Disney Dopey

Challenge; Jamaica Reggae Marathon; the Goose Bay Trapline Marathon; the

Montreal Rock n' Roll Marathon; and, most recently, ran the New York City

Marathon in November, 2015 in the time of three hours and 25 minutes and the

Boston Marathon just a few weeks ago in three hours and 43 minutes.

Because

of her athletic achievements both at home and abroad, Dana was recognized as the

Labrador West Senior Female Athlete of the Year and a recipient of the Town of

Wabush Outstanding Achievement Award.

Bodybuilding is another passion for Dana, finishing third at the NLABBA

bodybuilding event in St. John's in November. In June, she will be competing in

the Figure Short and Grand Masters Figure categories in Moncton at the CBBF

World Qualifiers.

Dana

wears her Labrador colours very proudly and is always happy to represent

Labrador on the world stage. Her motto: Do what you love, love what you do.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in congratulating Dana on her athletic achievements.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

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.

This is

Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month. The MS Society of Canada funds research for

an eventual cure, and works hard to enable people affected by MS to enhance

their quality of life.

Newfoundland and Labrador, the work is done by volunteers. Powerhouse volunteer

Zita Kavanagh-Taylor has chaired the NL MS Avalon

Chapter since 2011. She

created Paws for MS, the only dog walk for MS in Atlantic Canada, three years

ago, leads a monthly support group and does phone support for MS patients in

rural areas.

The NL

MS Avalon Chapter, as the only active

chapter of the society in the province,

makes contact with and sends information to MS patients everywhere in the

province. As Zita Kavanagh-Taylor says, No one has to go through MS alone. We

are here for everyone.

The

chapter hosts education sessions, fundraisers and social events for MS patients

and their families.

Zita

Kavanagh-Taylor and the volunteers of the NL MS Avalon

Chapter are dedicated to

finding a cure for multiple sclerosis and enabling people affected with MS to

enhance their quality of life.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in acknowledging the good work they do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

MS. PARSLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to celebrate the accomplishments of Jeremy Lewis, a

student at Roncalli Central High in Avondale. Jeremy received the Young Citizens

Award at the Heritage Fair held earlier this year.

Jeremy's

Heritage Fair project was called Root Cellaring, a look at some of the rural

food storage methods used throughout our history. For his winning project,

Jeremy built an impressive root cellar filled with vegetables. He demonstrated

for the judges his extensive knowledge of root cellars in this province. For

this, the judges also awarded him the Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and

Labrador Built Heritage Award.

The

Heritage Fair has been held since 1997, with the goal of fostering a greater

sense of history and place among young people in our province's schools. This

year's theme was Service and Sacrifice: Shaping our Culture.

Nine

participants from the Avalon Heritage Fair will participate in a Trail of the

Caribou tour of the First World War battlefields in France and Belgium this July

as part of the Ambassador Program launched in 2015.

I ask

all Members of this hon. House to join me in congratulating this year's

participants.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I stand

in this hon. House today to recognize a group of grade six students from Holy

Trinity Elementary in Torbay. I had the pleasure to attend, as a judge, at their

public speak off, along with Colleen Tapper, a school council member, and Ms.

Charlotte Barrington, former principal of Holy Trinity Elementary.

The ten

finalists in the speak off were: Mackenzie Parrell, No More Homework, Please;

Halle Fleming, Keep Torbay Library; Gabe Brown, The Benefits of Hockey; Jack

Waterman, Keep the Seal Hunt; Emily Mahon, Learn a Second Language; Brianna

Squires, Why Smoking Should Be Banned; Chantelle Peyton, Rid the World of Joseph

Kony; Andrew Gosse, Why all Pre-Teens Should Have a Cellphone; Perry Cahill,

Don't Drink Pop; and Matthew O'Driscoll, Kids Should Play Minecraft.

It was a

very difficult contest to judge. They were all very good. Perry Cahill took

first place. Second place went to Gabe Brown and Jack Waterman taking third.

Standing up in front of your fellow students and family is not easy. They did a

fantastic job.

I ask

all hon. Members to join with me in extending my congratulations to the grade

six students at Holy Trinity Elementary.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Grace Port de Grave.

MS. P. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am

excited to stand here today to recognize an outstanding citizen and friend, Gary

Bishop of Coley's Point. Gary is 35 years old and attends more community events

in the Town of Bay Roberts than anyone.

He has

completed secondary school and enjoys keeping up with politics. When he's not

busy with civic events, he's keeping a close eye on the House of Assembly and

Parliament. Gary lives with a disability which is classified as global delay

which encompasses physical and intellectual challenges, but this condition does

not hold him back.

He's

been involved in Special Olympics for over 20 years, and is one of the original

members. He's a top-notch bowling champ and has been the lead fundraiser for the

club or the past two consecutive years. During spring and summer, you'll see him

zipping around town in his motorized wheelchair collecting pledges for the

annual law enforcement Torch Run. It is dedication and contribution like Gary's

which helps enable the club to provide local sports programming.

I am

sure we'll soon see him travelling around town during winter months, if he

manages to find snow tires for his wheelchair.

Colleagues, please join me in honouring Gary Bishop of Coley's Point.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House to thank Mr. Frank Collier for 37 years of dedicated service

to the St. Alban's Volunteer Fire and Rescue Department, with 12 years serving

as Fire Chief.

Mr.

Collier's professionalism and commitment to his community is very much

appreciated. On behalf of residents, I would like to extend him a sincere thank

you and wish him the best of luck in his retirement.

Over all

the years, Frank has been a model of strong community spirt, hard work, and an

excellent example of selfless service to others that will serve the members of

the Volunteer Fire Department in great stead. Frank's volunteerism and

fundraising efforts also aided tremendously in the great success of their annual

telethon, which are essential in acquiring the funds necessary to purchase

equipment and to ensure the communities' and firefighters' safety.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in congratulating Mr. Collier for his years of

outstanding dedication and protecting our residents' safety. True to his

character, he remains a steadfast supporter of volunteer work in the community.

We are very grateful to him for always lending his talent as a musician to local

fundraising events, particularly for the fire department.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

The Commemoration

of the First World War and the Battle of Beaumont-Hamel

MR. SPEAKER:

For Honour 100, today we have

the Member for the District of Harbour Grace Port de Grave.

MS. P. PARSONS:

I will now read into the

record the following 40 names of those who lost their lives in the First World

War in the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, the Royal Newfoundland Naval Reserve, or

the Newfoundland Mercantile Marine. This will be followed by a moment of

silence.

Lest we

forget: James John Maher, Leo Joseph Maher, Arthur E. W. Maidment, Robert Lewis

Maidment, John Thomas Major, Augustine J. Manning, Michael Mansfield, Alfred

Manuel, Samuel Manuel, Chesley Marks, Levi Marks, Joseph Marsh, Walter Marsh,

William L. Marsh, Alexander Martin, Eric Shannon Martin, Henley Arthur Martin,

James J. Martin, Richard B. Martin, Stephen Martin, Stephen A. Martin, Sylvester

Martin, William John Martin, Joseph Martret, William Masters, John May, Charles

McCarthy, Bernard McDonald, Michael P. McDonald, Walter G. McDonald, Joseph

McGrath, Ronald B. McGrath, Thomas White McGrath, William McGrath, Patrick John

McKay, William McKenzie, Scobie McKie, James McLaughlin, Clem McManus, Donald

Fraser McNeil.

(Moment

of silence.)

MR. SPEAKER:

Please be seated.

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister

Responsible for Fire and Emergency Services.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I rise to

recognize an important partnership among the Newfoundland and Labrador

Association of Fire Services, the Lions Clubs and the Autism Society of

Newfoundland and Labrador. They are providing first responders with the training

they need to recognize and assist individuals with autism in an emergency

situation.

First

responders must be ready for any type of emergency at a moment's notice. That is

why the Autism Society developed a training session to help first responders

better understand the complex needs of people with autism who are involved in an

emergency. In such cases, one response may not fit all.

After

receiving the training, the Association of Fire Services recognized the need to

make it available to its membership province-wide and to others that might

benefit. Since the association has been involved, the demand for the training

has doubled and s growing daily.

Mr.

Speaker, training has already taken place on the Northern Peninsula, and the

Autism Society's training team delivered three sessions in the western region

last week. There are plans to deliver training elsewhere on the Island and in

Labrador.

I ask my

colleagues in this House to join me in recognizing the leadership of the

Association of Fire Services, the Autism Society and the Lions Clubs, in

providing these important training opportunities. I encourage others who see

value in this training to contact the Autism Society to see what opportunities

may be available.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement today. We, too, join with

government in recognizing and congratulating the Association of Fire Services,

the Autism Society, and the province's Lions Clubs for this fantastic training

program.

The

Autism Society in Newfoundland and Labrador strives for a province where people

with autism and their families are respected, and where they receive services

and supports based on their individualized differences, needs and preferences.

This new training program for first responders will help create some of those

additional and specialized supports for individuals with autism in emergency

situations should they arise.

I'm glad

to hear the training has commenced and it will eventually be offered throughout

all areas of Newfoundland and Labrador. This is a great example of how community

groups can work together to deliver creative and useful programming.

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 thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement. This partnership is good

news. Training which helps our first responders prepare to provide emergency

services to members of the public in need is essential. If only government was

as forward looking as the associations the minister is applauding today.

The

Autism Society and parents of children with autism have been asking government

for years for more supportive training and programs for children and adults with

autism but have yet to see the changes they need.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Attorney General.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, it is with

tremendous pride that I rise today to welcome a wonderful friend to Newfoundland

and Labrador, and to the district I represent, Burgeo La Poile.

Terry

Fox's brother, Fred Fox, is in the province to spend a week visiting school

children and thanking residents for their continued support of Terry's cancer

research achievements.

When

Terry Fox began his journey in St. John's on a cold, wet April morning in 1980,

he dreamed of raising $1 million.

After

the first 25 days and with growing encouragement from residents along the way,

Terry stopped in Channel-Port aux Basques where that town alone raised $10,000.

Mr.

Speaker, the generous response from people in Port aux Basques fired his

imagination and a new fundraising goal was set. Terry is known to have asked,

If they can raise a dollar for every citizen, why can't we raise a dollar for

every Canadian?

Today,

Terry's great wish for people to realize how dreams are made possible if you

try is more alive than ever with more than $650 million having been raised

worldwide in his name.

His

legacy is so significant that our government anticipates bringing forward a

private Member's motion during this sitting of the House of Assembly to formally

proclaim the second Sunday after Labour Day each year as Terry Fox Day.

I ask my

fellow Members to please join me in welcoming Mr. Fred Fox back to Newfoundland

and Labrador where Terry Fox began his Marathon of Hope and where an amazing

donation by an incredible community helped Terry realize his goal and gave his

dream a momentum that endures.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement today. We join the government

in welcoming Mr. Fred Fox back to our province and also Terry's friend, Donna,

as well today.

As we

all know, Terry Fox has touched this province and our country in a most profound

way. It was mentioned by the minister since its inception, the Terry Fox

Foundation has raised over $650 million for cancer research. Continuing research

has created new treatments, new processes, new drugs and new opportunities for

those who have been afflicted by cancer.

We're

thankful for Terry and his gift for us, and we're also very thankful for the

continuing legacy and the positive impact on people around the world.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, I thank the

minister for an advance copy of his statement. I remember that cold, wet

morning. It was pretty desolate down there. My father was a commissionaire at

the old fishery building at the harbour. Dad was working that morning and met

Terry, and that night he told me about this young guy who was going to run

across the country and only had one leg. Dad said: Geraldine, you never know

what the human spirit can do.

Thank

you, Terry, for your dream, for all you have done to advance cancer research and

instilling hope and defiance. And thank you to the Fox family; you never know

what the human spirit can do.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, in the budget this year government made choices. Those choices included

cuts to health care delivery in Labrador by about $850,000. Now we've learned in

recent days that government is spending almost the same amount $750,000 to

hire a consultant to do another study on the likelihood of building a tunnel to

connect Labrador with the Island.

I ask

the Premier: While you're cutting health care to Labradorians, how can you

justify such a study?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

the former premier is indeed right. There were some difficult choices that were

made in budget 2016-2017. As a result of that and when you look at opportunities

to actually replace revenue in our province, you need to explore what options

you have available to us.

The

fixed link, I would say to the former premier, is just not about Labrador

although Labrador residents would see a substantial benefit, if indeed a project

like this could occur. There are benefits here for all of Newfoundland and

Labrador. When we look at the transportation system within our province, having

a fixed link in place would mean you had more certainty in the transportation

system without delay, and it would bring a huge amount of economic activity just

in the social and the economic benefits that such a link if indeed it can

happen in our province.

Before

you make decisions on long-term commitments you have to make to things like

ferry services, having this information is critical to that decision.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

People

who earn between $25,000 and $36,000 a year will pay $300 for the Liberal levy.

Now, that means about 2,500 of them almost the same number of people who

visited the front of the Confederation Building here on Saturday will be

paying for the study for a fixed link between Labrador and the Island of

Newfoundland.

I ask

the Premier: What's your justification for taxing people to pay for yet another

study when you've made a commitment to reduce hiring consultants for the

province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of

all, I would just like to remind the former premier the information he just

mentioned there about paying $300 for a levy for someone between $20,000 and

$30,000 or $35,000, whatever he just mentioned there, is actually not the case.

Someone, as an example, at $21,000 it is taxable income. It's not total

income. Someone at $21,000 of taxable income would actually pay $60, I say to

the former premier. We need to get those facts out here.

We've

put in place a very substantive Income Supplement program to help people on low

income and those with disability and our seniors. I remind the former premier,

if you want to consider the facts, make sure you put them all out here.

The

fixed link in Newfoundland and Labrador would be a big social and economic

driver to the future of our province. Making this investment so you can make a

decision on how you supply services to Labrador and the services to our province

is critical at this time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That

means an even higher number of hard-working, low-income and middle-income

families will be paying for the study on the fixed link, Mr. Speaker. That's

what

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I'm

resetting the clock for the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That

means, based on what the Premier

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That

means based on what the Premier just said a much higher number of hard-working,

low-income Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will be contributing to this

consultation process to hiring a consultant to do this study; a study that has

already been done.

I ask

the Premier: While you're doing a study, is the province in a position to pay

for a fixed link today, if the study came back and said it's going to cost $2

billion or $3 billion or $4 billion? Are you even in a position to consider

paying for a link today?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

evidence is quite clear where the former premier stands. It was his

administration who actually took the RFP for the updated ferry system off the

Straits and in the North Coast of Labrador. So it's very clear where he stands

in supplying services to people in Labrador.

Mr.

Speaker, when you look at economic diversification within our province, having

certainty around a transportation system, a fixed link, is something we need to

be able to answer. How could you ever make a commitment in terms of a ferry for

the next 20-25 years in our province without having the one question that

everyone that I would speak with in Labrador, they want answered is a fixed

link available for the next generation of Labradorians, for the next generation

of Newfoundlanders? It's a question that deserves to be answered. It would have

an economic impact and a social impact on Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder

what the people in Labrador are thinking about when they're cutting health care

to Labradorians. That's what we've heard from people over the last few days, is

that they're cutting health care to Labradorians. People who live in remote and

small populations which have great expense to achieve health care and to obtain

health care, and the cost is going to get higher for them now, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, while the Justice Minister declined comment when he was asked by the

media, perhaps the Premier can let the people of the province know his

intentions regarding the $32,000 recommended pay increase for provincial court

judges?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Attorney General.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am

certainly happy to stand here and speak to the recommendations made by the Wicks

tribunal, which, as most people should know, was submitted to my office in

December; a resolution tabled in this House in March; and we have 30 sitting

days of the House in which to propose the resolution on whether we accept,

reject or change the recommendations made by the tribunal.

Now,

everybody should know that this is an independent process that's done, and we

talk about judicial independence. Certainly we have some serious concerns about

the tribunal's recommendations but, again, we will be factoring everything in,

looking at what's going on in other provinces as well, and we'll certainly be

tabling that resolution for debate by all Members in this House before June 1.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

the budget is top of mind for people in the province today.

So I'll

ask the Premier this: Does your budget include an amount that would budget the

increased pay that's been recommended by this report? Is that included in your

budget? Is there retroactive pay included in the budget? How are you going to

pay for this?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Attorney General.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again,

we are standing here speaking to the recommendations made by an independent

tribunal. I know there is obviously serious concern out there, people hearing

this and wondering about it. And sure, the Leader of the Official Opposition has

expressed his concern, but what I find interesting is that the work that was

done in this tribunal and the submission was made was actually done in May of

So my

question for the Leader of the Official Opposition is: If you were so concerned,

why did you offer a 5 per cent raise back in May of 2015?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

question was have they budgeted this year for this increase? The minister hasn't

answered it. If they've budgeted for it they've made a decision to give the

increase. If you haven't budgeted for it, the question would be then how are

they going to pay for that.

minister, maybe you can try again: Have you budgeted for this increase? If you

haven't and the increase is passed by the House, how do you intend to pay for

it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

happy to stand here and speak to these recommendations, which the hearings were

held back in May of 2015. We obviously have a concern here. This is something

that's done by an independent tribunal, as has been done in the past. Again,

depending on the resolution that's put forward here and I will express the

fact that we have serious concerns about the tribunal's recommendations and

we'll put forward a resolution knowing full well, though, that we have to take

everything very seriously.

Again, I

say to the Member opposite, he's very concerned now but it was his government

that provided a 27 per cent increase in judicial salaries over the last 10

years, not including the 5 per cent raise that he recommended in May.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, we know that the intensive core French program for grade six students

will be reduced in many schools: Mary Queen of Peace, Holy Trinity, Beachy Cove

and others.

I ask

the minister: What do you say to children who won't be able to participate in

the intensive core French program in September because of your budget choices?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, according to the

Schools Act in this province, we have

a responsibility for ensuring that students have all of the courses that are

needed by them to meet graduation requirements. Intensive core French is an

optional program; an optional program that I would say that many of the Members

in the House of Assembly, many of the students in their districts have no access

to at all. It's not a program that's universally offered in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

As a

they will no longer be providing partial teacher allocations for

part classes of

the optional intensive core French program.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

So the minister doesn't see

the value of core French, and it's his decisions that have forced administrators

into that corner where they had to make decisions around the quality of

education.

What do

you say to families of Vanier and other schools whose music and gym programs

will be reduced because of your budget choices? Are parents' concerns the

nonsense you've spoken about?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, What I've said

longer be providing a full teacher allocation for partial classes of the

optional intensive core French program.

The

optional intensive core French program is not accessed by many of the children

in Newfoundland and Labrador represented by Members in the House of Assembly

here. It is an optional program that is not part of the core graduation

requirement.

MR. K. PARSONS:

(Inaudible . )

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KIRBY:

If the Member for Cape St.

Francis doesn't want to hear the answer than don't ask the questions, I suggest.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker, from what I

understand from the minister, because we can't offer the program to everybody,

nobody should have it. That's the intent of the minister over there. That's how

he views education.

What do

you say about the fact that upwards of 32 elementary children may be in an

elementary classroom in September? Are these concerns of parents nonsense also?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, I see no

evidence of what the Member is speaking at all. Nothing has come across my desk

to indicate that there are that many students going to be in a class.

This

year, the class-size cap for kindergarten is staying as it was 20 students.

The class-size cap for multigrading for combined grades is staying as it was,

18. The class-size cap is not changing for grades one to three either. That is

to protect those early years of education where it's most important for young

children to have a smaller ratio where major concepts are learned.

I don't

know where the Member would get all of what he just said out of that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

excess of 2,000 teachers, nurses, students and concerned citizens converged on

Confederation Building this past Saturday. As we know, Premier Ball has

campaigned on a promise of listening. If you can't listen, you can't lead.

Will you

now take the concerned citizens up on their offer to hit reset on this budget

and really consult with them to make better choices and finally start listening?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As you

know, prior to the budget we did a series of government renewal initiatives

across the province where we had many submissions that were made by

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Many of the decisions that you've seen in this

year's budget were as a result of that initiative, and we will continue to

listen to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

I just

wish that the Member opposite had done some listening to Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians for the last 10 years then we would not have been in this situation

with $25 billion of oil royalties and $4 million in tax decreases in 2007 to the

wealthiest in our province. That is who you listened to. You decreased their

taxes back then. As a result of that, we are left to clean up the mess that you

have left us with and the mess that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians now have to

deal with.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Opposition House Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Mr. Speaker, I say to the

hon. Premier, we did lay out plans for people and we did listen. We were out in

front and we were able to explain what the budgets were in the past. Unlike this

government right now, the Minister of Finance and the Premier, no one knows out

there. No one knows what the budget is all about. They can't explain it. It's

everybody else's problem. It's the media's problem. It's the Opposition's

problem. They can't even explain their own budget.

I say to

the Premier to think about that and get out and let people know what's going on

in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS:

People are saying they're

listening. They have stated that people don't understand the budget, as I've

just said. In fact, they blamed everyone in the province except them, that they

don't know how to explain the budget.

I ask

the Minister of Finance: What is your plan to address the thousands of people

who are protesting and looking for change in your budget? When will you start

listening and when will you try to make them understand what you're doing with

this particular budget that's devastating Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm glad

the former minister actually talked about the plan that they laid out to

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians last April in our province because in less than

one year, Mr. Speaker, the plan that they laid out missed their mark by three

times the amount. They predicted last year that it would be less than $900,000.

In actual fact, it was $2.7 billion.

In the

last 66 years, $12.5 billion in debt. That would have doubled in the next five

years under your plan. It wasn't affordable. You didn't tell Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians. We were at a situation with debt servicing outpacing education.

That is your plan for Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The

level of noise in the Legislature during questions and answers is getting to an

unacceptable level. I ask the Member in particular for Conception Bay South to

be respectful.

The hon.

the Opposition House Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'll

tell you what we didn't do. The hon. Premier last year cancelled the HST, which

cost the people of the province $80 million to $100 million. That's in excess of

what the Liberal levy is going to charge. That's certainly about making good

decisions. That's certainly about being in touch with Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians, I say. Terrible!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Mr. Speaker, recently the

Finance Minister in a CBC interview was asked why she didn't choose a junk food

tax as opposed to taxing books. She claimed the administration of cost to

implement the junk tax was too much.

I ask

the minister: If you found a way to administer tax on books, can you clarify why

a junk food tax couldn't be administered as well?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, the taxes that

were changed as part of this year's budget were focused on taxes that we could

collect through the mechanisms that are already in place. As the Members

opposite would know, Canada Revenue Agency provides those services to provinces

throughout the country and personal income tax, as well as the temporary levy,

as well as federal taxes are all collected through CRA. It is the intention of

this government to make sure that when we implement things that we do so in a

very efficient way. Certainly using an existing mechanism like CRA provides a

very efficient model for collecting tax, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Municipal leaders are clear and unified on their displeasure with this Liberal

budget. Municipal operating costs will increase due to gas tax increases,

insurance, snow clearing just to name a few. None of these increased costs are

covered in their existing budgets.

So I ask

the minister: How will you help municipalities to address these rising costs,

and where do you expect them to get the money?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

earlier discussions with MNL, they asked for several things in the budget. One

was to keep the cost-shared ratio the same, the second one was to ensure that

the MOGs didn't change, and third was to increase the amount of funding for

municipalities for water and sewer special services in the districts. Everything

was provided that MNL asked for in the budget.

The

president, Karen Oldford, was out publicly supporting the budget. I just find it

ironic, Mr. Speaker, that the Member opposite is here asking questions about the

budget when he stood himself in the House and was so pleased what this

government has provided to the services for Municipalities Newfoundland and

Labrador for all the municipalities in the province. So I just find it strange

he's asking questions last week he was out supporting the budget.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, but, Mr.

Speaker, the minister did brag. He said this Liberal budget, that MNL will be

happy. But I don't know if his saw the news release this weekend from MNL.

They're not very happy.

Also, he

said they would be very thankful, but the Minister of Education says the

libraries should be downloaded to municipalities. Municipalities feel that this

is just the beginning. They say they had no consultations.

So I ask

the minister: How many more services will be downloaded to communities, and

where does he expect them to pay for it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Once again, Mr. Speaker, I

stand and I have to correct the premise of the statement. There is no one on

this side of the government

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Just answer the question.

MR. JOYCE:

Here's the former minister

saying answer the question. He's the same minister who wouldn't sign the $34.9

million fund from the federal government. So you can keep talking you keep

talking. You should at least do your duty as the minister

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, the premise is

false. There is no one on this side of the government and I'm the

minister who is going to be dealing with municipalities has said you have to

take over the libraries. That is absolutely, categorical, positively false, and

the Member knows that's false .

What we

said we would do, there are 24 libraries in municipalities, we would work with

the municipalities to see who would take them over, what we can do to help

sustain the libraries. That is the premise of the argument that we will work

with municipalities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

(Inaudible) an understanding that you're going to give the municipalities the

monies to keep the libraries open. Thank you very much, I really appreciate

that, and I know the municipalities do appreciate it.

The news

released by MNL about the decisions that government have made said it's going to

throw small communities in chaos. Community leaders have suggested that the bulk

would be passed off to councils to deal with. And that's their release. They're

not very happy.

I ask

the minister: What did you say to the municipal leaders, and have you consulted

with them because they said you haven't?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, once again I say

to the Member, you're an hon. Member, but don't stand in this House and say I

said I'm going to give money to municipalities. That's not what I said. You

should not be saying things that are not true in this House of Assembly. You

shouldn't be saying it. It's just absolutely Hansard will show that I did not

say that. I said I will work with municipalities.

Mr.

Speaker, I'll say one thing, when we were in the lockup, before the lockup, when

we sat down with Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador they were very

pleased. They were exceptionally pleased. In actual fact, they were shocked that

the items that I mentioned, the MOG, the cost-shared, forget about the $340

million capital works that is going to be spent, combined with the federal

government going to be spent, forget about the over $500 million infrastructure

money that is going to be spent in the province they were very pleased with

it, Mr. Speaker.

I will

continue to work with all municipalities in Newfoundland and Labrador and if the

Member is going to make a statement, make sure it's correct, please.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

understand in Newfoundland and Labrador that 18 forest fires have been reported

in the first week of forest fire season which began May 1.

I ask

the minister: Have the full complement of forest firefighters been called back

to work as is normal for this time of year?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

Forestry and Agrifoods Agency has a complement of permanent staff which deals

with the forest incident management and forest fires. We certainly will be

calling back and have all of our staff ready to call back on May 16, but we have

called back an RFP early for defensive firefighters to be involved and get the

appropriate training. But we do have the equipment and staff on the ground to

deal with our forest fires and we did put out a precautionary release.

So we

are well equipped, we do have our staff, and this is the normal protocol and

procedure.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, it's not a

normal protocol and procedure. Normally in this province our forest firefighters

are called back to work on May 1. The minister just acknowledged that this year

it's May 16.

I ask

him: Why is that? Why is there a delay this year in calling back much-needed

forest firefighters?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Minister Responsible for

the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I

said previously, we have permanent staff. We have an incident management team.

We have the appropriate equipment and protocols to deal with the forest fires

that have taken place in the past week.

We have

issued our call backs to our entire complement of our firefighters that will be

dealing with forest fires throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. We are well

equipped.

We would

encourage a message to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to be extremely

cautious, to get the proper burning permit that is required and to be

responsible when you're looking at forest fires in Newfoundland and Labrador,

given that the situation has been dry.

We were

thankful we've had a significant amount of rain that's happened over the last

little while, mitigating some of those consequences of how a fire could take

place.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, he admits it's

been dry. He admits people should be extra cautious. Yet, he's delaying the call

back of firefighters that are much needed.

It gets

worse, Mr. Speaker. We also understand a number of firefighting related

positions will not be filled and some firefighting depots in this province will

close this year.

I ask

the minister: How many positions in fire services will be eliminated? How many

and which depots will be closed? When will you be upfront and tell people in

Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister

Responsible for the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

happy to answer the Member opposite's question. I want to point out that the

forest fire season has not begun in Labrador because of the significant amount

of snow that has taken place.

This is

a normal procedure of calling back our firefighters in Newfoundland and

Labrador. We have a number of positions that have been vacant for quite some

time under the previous administration that we are no longer going to be

filling. The Member opposite had ample time in Estimates to ask those particular

questions.

We have

no anticipation, at this point, that any office, forest depot, will close in

this particular season. I would say to the Member opposite, I don't know where

you're getting that particular information.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North, for a very short question.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, how will

response times be impacted by these expected cuts to firefighting positions and

also cuts to depots to protect the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister

Responsible for the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will

say that during this particular fire season there is no anticipated cut to any

particular depot, that we will continue to operate our forest firefighters and

operations as per normal, and we're monitoring the situations and ensuring we

have the adequate supports in place to ensure that our forests and our resources

and our people are well protected. So I will say we do have resources on the

ground, and I would say to the Member opposite to stop fear mongering.

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.

Students

are worried the introduction of forgivable loans as a part of student financial

aid is the thin edge of the wedge and, in future, non-forgivable loans will be

part of the loan package de rigueur, driving up student debt, and students out

of the province.

I ask

the Premier why government made this major policy shift when we need students to

stay in our province and help rebuild our economy.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education and Skills.

MR. BYRNE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I want

to thank the Member for the question, and as well for the exchange we had this

morning in Estimates about this topic. As we spoke to each other this morning, I

explained that with the student financial assistance envelope Newfoundland and

Labrador will still be offering our students one of, if not, the most generous

student financial assistance packages in the country. With grants now eligible

for lower income students, middle income students, 30 per cent over the cost of

tuition, and with other supports available, we are still the envy of the

country.

Now,

within addition to that, we'll still have a loan portfolio that as a student

progresses through their academic studies and passes is fully forgivable.

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.

The

minister repeated what I said.

This

morning we also heard in Estimates that government says it is working on a new

Population Growth Strategy.

I ask

the Premier: What part of that strategy is going to deal with the continued

exodus of our young people with high debt loads?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education and Skills.

MR. BYRNE:

Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and

Labrador students have one of the lowest student debt load portfolios anywhere

in the country. In fact, one of the keys here about having a low student debt

load is that we have the lowest tuition rate in all of Canada.

Statistics Canada was able to provide that information, and we're continuing on

with that program of providing an opportunity for MUN and for CNA to continue on

with a very, very low tuition through the tuition freeze offset.

We're

now investing well over $52 million this year in maintaining the tuition freeze

opportunity, and we think that's going to help very much with student debt

loads.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, the Finance

Minister is boasting she listened to hundreds of people before bringing down her

disastrous budget. She's now saying she's listening to the thousands and

thousands who are protesting here and across the province.

I ask

the Finance Minister: Will she prove she is actually listening and change her

unfair and regressive budget to make it one that actually stimulates the economy

and creates jobs?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, we recognize

that this budget is impacting people throughout the province and as individual

as their circumstances are, that's as individual as the impacts.

What I

can say is that we are concerned about all people in this province. We are

concerned about our children and that we are now paying more on debt expenses

than we are on actually educating our kids. We are concerned about vulnerable

residents, and that's why we lessened the impact of this budget through the

Newfoundland Income Supplement. We are concerned about the burden of increased

debt and what the potential inability to borrow might mean to future services,

Mr. Speaker. Those are the things that we are very concerned about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, the minister has

ground this economy to a halt. She is stifling it. She is smothering the economy

here in Newfoundland and Labrador. She is not bringing us forward at all.

The

municipalities are outraged at government downloading more on their already

cash-strapped towns. They've written government and they said they don't have

the resources to run libraries on their own.

I ask

the Minister of Education: Did he even consult with municipalities before he so

offhandedly said they could run these libraries that he is closing?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Once

again, I say to the Member, before you make statements in the House, you should

see if they are accurate. The statement she is making in this House is

fundamentally, factually wrong. What we have said is that there's a one-year

reprieve on the libraries that are in municipal buildings. I will consult with

municipalities to see how we can work this.

You're

here asking why don't the minister consult, here's the minister saying we'll

consult with the municipalities and you're saying no, it's wrong. If you're

going to make a statement in the House, make sure it's fundamentally correct.

Because

what we will do, we will work with municipalities to see how we can provide

those services in those areas, Mr. Speaker. There has been no heavy-handed

tactics taking place here. There has been no tactic to say you have to do it.

That is fundamentally wrong, so please do your research.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Presenting Reports

by Standing and Select Committees

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Baie

Verte Green Bay.

MR. WARR:

Mr. Speaker, the Resource

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

report that they have passed without amendment the Estimates of the Department

of Advanced Education and Skills; the Department of Business, Tourism, Culture

and Rural Development; the Department of Environment and Conservation, and the

Office of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency; the Department of Fisheries and

Aquaculture; the department of Forestry and Agrifoods; the Department of Natural

Resources, and the Office of Public Engagement.

Mr.

Speaker, I'd certainly like to thank all the departments and their staff and the

Members of the Resource Committee. I respectfully submit the report.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further reports?

Tabling

of Documents.

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

MR. LETTO:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I moved,

seconded by the Member for Torngat Mountains:

WHEREAS

Wabush Mines pensioners have experienced a reduction in pension benefits of 25

per cent for the non-unionized pension plan members and 21 per cent for the

unionized pension plan members; and

WHEREAS

those reductions have happened because of Cliffs Natural Resources entering

bankruptcy protection under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, better

known as CCAA, and given relief in contributions to the pension plans resulting

in a significant unfunded liability in the plans; and

WHEREAS

many pension plans across Canada are experiencing significant unfunded

liabilities and could meet the same fate as Wabush pension plans;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador

support the efforts of the federal Members of Parliament, led by the MP for

Labrador, in seeking amendments to the CCAA to ensure pensioners are given

priority on the secured creditors' list during the bankruptcy protection

process.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant

to Standing Order 63, the private Member's resolution just entered by the Member

for Lab West is that one that will be debated this Wednesday.

Further

to the Standing Orders, specifically Standing Order 11, I give notice that this

House do not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 10.

further give notice, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that this House do not

adjourn at 10 p.m. on Tuesday, May 10.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

Answers

to Questions for Which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

the Deficit Reduction Levy is an extremely regressive surtax, placing a higher

tax burden on low- and middle-income taxpayers; and

WHEREAS

surtaxes are typically levied on the highest income earners only, as currently

demonstrated in other provinces as well as Australia, Norway, and other

countries; and

WHEREAS

government states in the 2016 provincial budget that the personal income tax

schedule needs to be revised and promises to do so; and

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House

of Assembly to urge government to ensure that the Deficit Reduction Levy be

eliminated and any replacement measure be based on progressive taxation

principles, and that an independent review of Newfoundland and Labrador's

provincial income tax system begin immediately to make it fairer to

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners pray.

Mr.

Speaker, these are signatures from Lab City, from Stephenville Crossing, from

Wabush, from Robinsons. They're from all over the province from St. John's,

Flat Bay. The whole province is represented. We have put in hundreds of

signatures, and we're getting hundreds every day into our office. People who

have bothered to download that petition, get it signed, and then send it to our

office. That's because they believe it's so important. What it's calling for is

for government to stop the levy and to do a review of taxation for fair and

progressive taxation.

Mr.

Speaker, the budget this government has delivered is not a progressive budget.

It doesn't create jobs. It doesn't stimulate the economy. As a matter of fact,

the Minister of Finance

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

As a

matter of fact, what the Minister of Finance has done in this budget is that she

has stifled the economy. She has ground it to a halt, and the fact is people are

waiting for the one-two punch for September, for six months down the road. Why

did she do that? Why did she prolong that? That means people are sitting on

their wallets. People are cancelling their summer holidays because they don't

know, come September, whether or not they're going to have a job.

That is

not stimulating the economy. That is not what propels us forward. That is not

what is good for this province. We need jobs, we need diversification, we need

leadership and we need hope. This budget contains none of that. As a matter of

fact, it's exactly the opposite and it stifles our economy.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

the people of Fortune Bay Cape La Hune need to have access to adequate health

care; and

WHEREAS

the local clinics in rural areas are the main source of medical assistance for

our people; and

WHEREAS

the government has reduced funding and closed the Hermitage clinics and

downgraded services in the Coast of Bays region;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House

of Assembly to urge government to reinstate the services to the health care in

rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr.

Speaker, it was a devastating day for us in the District of Fortune Bay Cape

La Hune when we heard news that we were having significant cuts to health care

in the region, the closure, complete closure of a clinic in Hermitage.

Mr.

Speaker, for any of you who have travelled to my district, you would know that

we are geographically very widespread. The weather is such that in the

summertime, in the months of June, July and August, it's nothing unusual to have

40 or 50 days straight of fog and you can't see two feet in front of you. I've

experienced that myself.

We have

a growth in the aquaculture industry. The roads are narrow roads and there's a

heavy volume of transport traffic on that road. Seniors are nervous driving at

the best of times, let alone having to flee across in an ambulance when they

haven't been stabilized at a clinic.

It is

absolutely deplorable to see these types of services being downgraded. We have

to do everything to reverse it. I am sure that Central Health can take a second

look and find other areas of fat besides the front line services. If something

has to be cut, trim the things that are non-essential but front line services

are absolutely essential.

People

coming from McCallum and Gaultois, they land in Hermitage off the ferry. There's

no taxi for them to call to get to Hermitage, so how are they going to get

there? If they are a senior or if they are on income support, Mr. Speaker, then

that cost falls to government because the cost of that taxi ride or the cost of

that ride once they find someone to bring them, because there is no taxi. So

they're going to have to see if there's somebody available in the community who

can help them when they get off the boat to get to Harbour Breton. It is

absolutely outrageous what is happening here.

implore the minister to go back, take a second look. Ask Central Health to take

a second look at where some of the excess fat can be trimmed and restore those

services to the front line. We also lost our dialysis, Mr. Speaker, and we lost

visitation once a month to Hermitage and McCallum.

I'll be

back to speak about more. We are absolutely devastated and we will not stop

until we see these services restored.

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.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

the Deficit Reduction Levy is an extremely regressive surtax placing a higher

tax burden on low- and middle-income taxpayers; and

WHEREAS

surtaxes are typically levied on the highest income earners only as currently

demonstrated in other provinces as well as Australia, Norway and other

countries; and

WHEREAS

government states in the 2016 provincial Budget that the personal income tax

schedule needs to be revised and promises to do so;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House

of Assembly to urge government to ensure that the Deficit Reduction Levy be

eliminated and any replacement measure be based on progressive taxation

principles and that an independent review of the Newfoundland and Labrador

provincial income tax system begin immediately to make it fairer to

Newfoundlanders an Labradorians.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Once

again, Mr. Speaker, I'm honoured to be able to stand and present these petitions

that are coming into us on a regular basis. I encourage the Members across the

way to listen because they may find some of their own constituents have signed

these petitions.

I have

people today not just from St. John's, from Coomb's Cove, from Wreck Cove, from

from Mainland, from the whole area in the Stephenville area. We have signatures

from Corner Brook as well, Mr. Speaker.

People

are contacting us from all over the province. I'd like to point out in the House

too that it's not just people, it's not just where they're contacting us from

the government might think that it's only people who are going to be impacted by

the budget who are sending in petitions, and I want to tell them that's not the

case.

Yesterday I had a doctor come to me and say: Lorraine, we know I have a lot of

money; we know I'm in the top tax bracket in the province but they shouldn't be

doing this. Hit me harder because I have the money to give. Don't hit low-income

people and seniors.

I've had

more than one person in that position come to me and share that. So even top tax

earners in our province who are making the highest salaries are coming and

saying this is the wrong way to do it. This levy is wrong. As this person said

to me yesterday, you know a lot of it upset me but then when that levy was on

top of everything else, I said they don't know what they're doing.

I really

suggest that the government not just hear what's being said but listen to it.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I sat down

purposely so I could let the lady get up before me, the gentleman that I am.

Mr.

Speaker, a petition to the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

the federal government cannot justify discriminating against Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians when determining the dates of the recreational food fishery;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House

of Assembly to urge government to be vocal in calling for the Government of

Canada to extend the recreational ground fishery to Newfoundland and Labrador to

promote fairness, safety and tourism in our province.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, every time we get up here in the House of Assembly and we present

petitions, we're presenting petitions from Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

because we want the government to listen to what they're saying. I really don't

know if they are or not because I know all these petitions that are here

presented today are important to the people that we present them for.

I just

want to talk a little bit about the fishery because I really don't know if the

federal government is paying attention. I know that right now a lot of people in

my area are waiting to see what the quotas are going to be on groundfish. The

people in recreation are waiting to see what's going to happen with the tag

system this year that they're talking about now. I heard this weekend that the

tag system is going to cost too much money so they're going to scrap it.

People

want to know what's on the go. Apparently they're our cousins in Ottawa that are

up there working, all six of them are up there working hard on the fishery for

Newfoundland and Labrador. Well, the fishermen don't think so and people in this

province don't think so because they're not hearing anything. They need to hear

something because it's getting close; we'll soon be in the middle of May

especially our fishermen, our fishermen are really concerned with what they're

hearing about quotas this year. They don't know what the quotas are going to be.

People

need to be prepared. A lot of this fishery is done through gillnetting and stuff

like this so people have to get their gear ready before they go on the water,

get the boats ready and stuff like this.

Again,

with our recreational fishery, it's very important that we let the people know

that we're not going to do what we did in the past. In the past we put people

out. My biggest concern over the recreational fishery is when people go out that

they have a safe day to be able to go out on the water. It's so important. We've

lost lives. Every year we've lost lives and lives that should never be lost.

People

just want to know that they can go out and they can catch the fish for their

families. They can bring it home. Their friends, neighbours, people can get out

and catch a few fish, something that we're all accustomed to, something that

makes us who we are as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. It's so important that

this get done, but it's getting dragged out. Now is the time. People want to

know.

I've

been presenting this petition since we started. I don't think we're any further

ahead. I've talked to people and they really don't know what's happening. I call

upon the Minister of Fisheries to call on the Premier to talk to your cousins in

Ottawa and start thinking about our fishery.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm glad

to have an opportunity to rise again today to present another petition to the

House of Assembly.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

an extension is urgently needed at St. Peter's Primary school in Mount Pearl in

order to accommodate full-day kindergarten and the growing school population;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House

of Assembly to urge government to clarify its position and plan so that St.

Peter's Primary and other schools in Newfoundland and Labrador can properly

accommodate students when full-day kindergarten commences in September 2016.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, I've had some productive discussions recently with the Newfoundland and

have been raised by parents directly to the school board and make some

suggestions about possible solutions that could improve upon a bad situation

over the next couple of years.

We now know the extension won't be ready until the fall of

2018. So for the next two schools years, there are things that can be done to

make a really bad situation a little better. That's all we're asking for. Class

sizes are a real concern. Admission into the French immersion kindergarten

classes has now been capped. No additional students are being accepted or added

for September. There are some minor modifications being made to the existing

kindergarten classrooms to allow for a little more space by eliminating cloak

rooms; not ideal, but at least some improvements are being made.

We've now learned only two modular classrooms can actually

be accommodated on the school site. There's a water line that runs behind the

property that does pose a practical challenge in that regard. Additional

portables would definitely improve the situation.

Because of the construction that's upcoming, the playground

at the school will be impacted, which is a real concern for parents. We don't

want children trapped in an overcrowded building all day long. When the weather

co-operates it's good for the kids to have a chance to get outside. There is an

opportunity, potentially, to move the playground to the other side of the school

with the co-operation of the neighbouring church. I'm glad that's been explored.

I've asked the school board to make that a priority as well.

Given the complexity of the situation and the overcrowding

and the number of students with special needs at St. Peter's, but mainly due to

the overcrowding and the size of the school population, we've also asked that

consideration be given to the addition of a second vice-principal position at

the school which we think would help address some of the concerns that will

inevitably arise in the fall as well.

A number of parents are expressing interest in bringing the

school lunch program to St. Peter's. I recognize that needs to be initiated at a

school level. I hope that

school officials will be pursuing that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, we're going to

have six vacant classrooms at Mary Queen of the World in the fall. Creating a

French immersion stream at Mary Queen of the World would solve this long-term

problem. It won't solve it completely, but it will make a real difference. I

hope to have a chance to address more points related to this issue the next time

I get to speak.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further petitions?

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

MS. COADY:

Mr. Speaker, Order 6, second

reading of Bill 25.

Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services that

Bill 25,

An Act To Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act, be now read a second

time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 25, entitled

An Act To Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act be now read

a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act.

(Bill 25)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

Hearing Aid Practitioners Board of Newfoundland and Labrador is established

under the Hearing Aid Practitioners Act .

It is the regulatory body responsible for registering hearing aid practitioners

and for regulating the practice thereof, the fitting and selling of hearing aid

devices across the province.

currently has 21 hearing aid practitioners licensed to practise in the province.

As with other self-regulating health professions in Newfoundland and Labrador,

the statute governing the practice of hearing aid practitioners, the

Hearing Aid Practitioners Act ,

contains provisions which establish a disciplinary process to deal with

complaints about the conduct of a hearing aid practitioner.

A part

of that disciplinary process may result in a complaint being referred to an

adjudication tribunal for a hearing. The individuals that sit on an adjudication

tribunal are selected from a panel, and that panel is made up of a pool of

members of the profession, along with other members who represent the public

interest.

Once

appointed, an adjudication tribunal holds a hearing regarding the complaint made

against a practitioner, it hears evidence and submissions, it makes a decision

as to whether the conduct of the practitioner in question is deserving of

sanction, and it may also therefore impose sanctions accordingly. If an

individual is found guilty of conduct deserving sanction, the practitioner's

licence could be suspended or conditions or restrictions could be placed on his

or her ability to practise.

As a

self-regulating profession, hearing aid practitioners are accountable to the

members of their own profession, as well as to the public. It is the

responsibility of the board to ensure that only those hearing aid practitioners

who carry on the profession in accordance with all applicable standards of

practice be permitted to practice in the province.

important principle of self-regulation is being judged by one's own peers.

Appearing before peers for unprofessional conduct acts as a significant

deterrent for practitioners. It also ensures that a practitioner's conduct is

examined from the professions point of view.

Currently, under the act an adjudication tribunal must consist of two

practitioners licensed to practice in this province and one public member. Given

the broad authority of tribunals to impose sanctions and the potential impacts

of those, the hearing process much be fair and be seen to be fair. One way to

ensure a hearing is fair is to have tribunals consist only of members who have

no personal interest in the outcome of the hearing.

It's

important that members of the tribunal have an open mind and not be influenced

by improper considerations when they make a decision. It's also important

there's no perception that the member has a personal interest in the outcome of

a hearing.

If a

member has a personal interest in the outcome of a hearing, he or she may become

a biased decision maker. Actual bias exists when a decision maker has a closed

mind or a personal, business or other material interest in the hearing outcome.

However, it's not necessary to show actual bias. It's only necessary to show a

reasonable apprehension of bias exists.

Bias

exists where a reasonable person, knowing all of the facts surrounding a

tribunal member, suspects that the member may be influenced by improper

considerations that may result in him or her favouring one side over another in

the hearing. If a tribunal member is biased, this takes the decision that's made

by an adjudication tribunal as a whole and the bias could potentially lead to

the tribunal's decision being overturned.

A bias

decision maker would not be viewed as impartial and must therefore be

disqualified from sitting as a member of the tribunal. If it is determined that

a reasonable apprehension of bias exists, it would then be necessary to appoint

a new adjudication tribunal that does not contain bias members and the hearing

process would have to start over.

In the

recent past, the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal overturned a decision

of an adjudication tribunal appointed under the

Hearing Aid Practitioners Act. The tribunal imposed sanctions on a

licensed hearing aid practitioner. The court overturned the tribunal's decision

based upon a finding that a reasonable apprehension of bias existed. This

reasonable apprehension of bias was created as a result of business and personal

relationships between the tribunal members and the hearing aid practitioners.

Given

the small number of hearing aid practitioners available to be appointed to a

tribunal, Bill 25 aims to expand the categories of individuals who can sit on a

disciplinary panel and ultimately on an adjudication tribunal where there is an

allegation that a tribunal member is biased.

The

proposed amendments to Bill 25 would be, firstly, the authority to appoint

hearing aid practitioners licensed in other provinces to sit on an adjudication

tribunal where necessary, and the authority to appoint a lawyer to sit on an

adjudication tribunal when necessary.

Currently, an adjudication tribunal appointed under the

Hearing Aid Practitioners Act must contain three members. Two

hearing aid practitioners licensed in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador

and one person who represents the public interest.

Bill 25

provides that hearing aid practitioners from another province and a lawyer may

be appointed to adjudication tribunals where necessary. This provides a

disciplinary panel with the discretion to appoint those individuals where it is

unable to appoint a tribunal made up of two hearing aid practitioners who are

licensed in this province. We know of one circumstance in which this discretion

may be exercised is where there is a reasonable apprehension of bias.

The

amendments contained in Bill 25 would apply only if it's not possible to

constitute a tribunal with two hearing aid practitioners who are licensed in

this province. To ensure professional expertise is available to address any

practice issues which arise during the process, it will be necessary for there

to be at least one hearing aid practitioner, whether licensed in this

jurisdiction or another, to sit on any adjudication tribunal established under

the act.

department has consulted with the board on the proposed amendments throughout

the drafting process and the board is supportive of Bill 25.

conclusion, Mr. Speaker, hearing aid practitioners provide a valuable, important

service. It's important that as a self-regulating profession, the practitioners

board has the tools it need to ensure a high-quality service by skilled and

competent practitioners and that it continues to be offered to the people of

this province.

suggest that Bill 25 will assist the board in fulfilling its mandate, and I

would ask that all hon. Members of this House join me in supporting Bill 25.

Thank

you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER (Dempster):

The hon. the

Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I'm

pleased to have an opportunity to rise and speak to Bill 25 today,

An Act To

Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act.

As the

minister outlined quite well in the last few minutes, this bill would amend the

Hearing Aid Practitioners Act to

enable the board to appoint a disciplinary panel or the chairperson of a

disciplinary panel to appoint to a adjudication tribunal a person other than a

hearing aid practitioner licensed in this jurisdiction where it is necessary to

do so.

sounds far more complicated than it is. I recall this issue coming up during my

time in Health and Community Services. I think this is a good piece of

legislation and I think the department and the minister are making some changes

that make good sense and are necessary. While the amendments are small, they are

necessary amendments.

As the

minister indicated, it really was inspired by a case back in 2011 that

highlighted the potential of bias influencing decisions. These amendments we're

making here today if this bill passes, and I suspect it will, aim at providing

options to mitigate chance of bias influencing decisions.

I'll

just briefly comment on a few of the sections of the bill, the amendments to the

act. I'll just make a few general comments on why I believe this to be a good

piece of legislation.

section 1, it actually extends the definition of licensed hearing aid

practitioner from one that is licensed exclusively in this province to now

include hearing aid practitioners licensed in other provinces. What the

department is doing through this change is expanding the pool of possible

candidates for the disciplinary panel. Given the small number of practitioners

in our province, this is a logical and responsible thing to do.

section 2, building on that, it allows a more diverse group of individuals to be

appointed to a disciplinary panel. Past legislation restricted the panel to five

hearing aid practitioners that were licensed in Newfoundland and Labrador. This

amendment will make it more flexible as required, when necessary, to include

hearing aid practitioners that are licensed from other provinces, as well as

lawyers from Newfoundland and Labrador, as the minister indicated.

Notwithstanding, the disciplinary panel must have at least two hearing aid

practitioners appointed to it; however, neither practitioner from outside

Newfoundland and Labrador or a lawyer can sit as chair. So despite these

changes, the chair must still be a hearing aid practitioner within our province.

In addition, two members of the panel must not be hearing aid practitioners.

Those individuals represent the public interest and they will be appointed by

the minister.

section 3 of the bill, we are talking about the adjudication tribunal. This

framework remains the same in the proposed act with three persons being named to

the adjudication tribunal. The members of the adjudication tribunal will be

chosen from the disciplinary panel. However, past legislation restricted the two

hearing aid practitioners to having to be licensed in Newfoundland and Labrador.

So that's now expanded with various options if, in the opinion of the chair of

the disciplinary panel, it's necessary to appoint.

There

are a number of possible combinations here, for instance, a licensed hearing aid

practitioner in the province and a hearing aid practitioner licensed from

another province, one from Newfoundland and Labrador and a lawyer, a licensed

hearing aid practitioner from another province and a lawyer, two hearing aid

practitioners licensed from another province. Plus, in all cases, there will be

a third person appointed that will represent the public interest.

The

chairperson of the disciplinary panel will appoint either a licensed hearing aid

practitioner from Newfoundland and Labrador or from another province to be the

chairperson of the adjudication tribunal. Madam Speaker, it's relatively simple

but also important for the profession. There are practical reasons why this

legislation makes a lot of sense.

I should

note as well that the last adjudication, from what I understand, was back in

2008. Very few matters actually make it the adjudication stage, which is why

perhaps there hasn't been a lot of urgency associated with this. These are good

changes that needed to be made at some point. I know it has been in the works

for a little while.

I think

it's a proactive step to avoid future issues as well. There are currently 21

licensed hearing aid practitioners in Newfoundland and Labrador. That's a

relatively small group when you compare it to other professions, particularly

health care-related professional fields. This kind of problem is not uncommon.

When you have small groups, it does present challenges when selecting

disciplinary panels because of issues concerning bias. So these changes through

this bill will help address that.

Madam

Speaker, a good piece of legislation is being brought in for the right reasons.

It's one on this side of the House that, at least in speaking for the Official

Opposition, it's one that we're prepared to support.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Virginia Waters Pleasantville.

MR. B. DAVIS:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I'm just

happy to see the support from my hon. colleague for Mount Pearl North on this

bill. Disciplinary provisions are an important aspect of any self-regulating

health profession legislation. The primary mandate of any self-regulating health

profession is one of public protection; that is ensuring that the qualified

health professional provides service to its clients and that it's top notch.

In order

to fulfill this mandate, it is important for the self-regulating health

profession to have a process in place to deal with complaints made about conduct

of those health professionals. Under the

Hearing Aid Practitioners Act , after a complaint is received regarding the

conduct of a hearing aid practitioner, the board registrar may attempt to

resolve the matter. However, if the matter is not satisfactorily resolved by the

registrar, the matter is referred to the complaints authorization committee.

This committee is comprised of at least three members of the board, including at

least one person appointed to represent the public interest.

Madam

Speaker, the committee has a number of powers, including the ability to refer

the matter back to the registrar for investigation or alternate dispute

resolution, conduct an investigation itself, appoint a person to conduct an

investigation on its behalf, or dismiss the matter altogether. However, if the

complaints authorization committee is of a view that there is reasonable grounds

to believe the hearing aid practitioner has engaged in conduct deserving of

sanction, the committee may do a number of things, including cautioning that

practitioner, instructing the registrar to refer the matter to a disciplinary

panel.

Madam

Speaker, the chair of the disciplinary panel is then responsible for appointing

an adjudication tribunal from its members. This tribunal is responsible for

conducting the hearing and making the determination as to whether the

practitioner has engaged in conduct deserving of any sanction. During the

hearing, the parties can call witnesses, present evidence and make submissions.

The adjudication tribunal has a broad authority to impose sanctions, including

the ability to suspend a practitioner's licence and impose other conditions and

restrictions as necessary.

Madam

Speaker, it is imperative that the regulatory body act in an expeditious and

thorough manner in addressing any complaints received regarding a professional's

conduct which may require the engagement of a disciplinary process.

Madam

Speaker, Bill 25 is a short bill, but it is an important one, as my colleague

and the Minister of Health and Community Services already brought forward.

Having a robust disciplinary process is important for protecting the public, as

well as protecting the rights of individuals that have been alleged to have done

something wrong.

Madam

Speaker, the public needs to feel confident that the disciplinary matters

involving a regulated health professional will be handled appropriately. As

well, a health professional who is subject to any complaint must have access to

a disciplinary process that is fair, open and transparent. The amendments to the

Hearing Aid Practitioners Act

contained in Bill 25 will help ensure that an adjudication tribunal may be

constituted in all instances where a disciplinary process is required.

It's not

expected that these amendments will be utilized in all instances. It is

anticipated that the hearing aid practitioners from the province will be able to

sit on many of these tribunals; however, the amendments will follow the hearing

aid practitioner's licence, licensed in other jurisdictions, and/or lawyers to

be appointed to sit on this adjudication tribunals, where necessary.

Without

the amendments contained in Bill 25, it is possible that an adjudication

tribunal could never be formed in certain instances such as where a reasonable

apprehension of bias exists, as was mentioned in the remarks of the Minister of

Health and Community Services on this bill. This will prevent the disciplinary

process from proceeding and could result in a complaint against the hearing aid

practitioner never being adequately resolved. Preventing a disciplinary process

from proceeding is not in keeping with the public protection mandate of

self-regulating professions.

Madam

Speaker, I'm asking all Members of this hon. House to join me in supporting Bill

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Madam

Speaker.

I'm

happy to speak to this bill this afternoon, Bill 25,

An Act to Amend the Hearing

Aid Practitioners Act. I'm not going to explain the whole act; I think the

Minister for Health and Community Services did that and my two colleagues who

have spoken ahead of me have done a good job of doing that. Just to say that

it's obviously

an act that is needed and it's a good sign because it's a sign of

an area of health care delivery in our province becoming more and more

professional. I think that's very important.

This

deals specifically with hearing aid practitioners. I'd like to point out this

is not being critical of anybody; it really isn't. It is just that any time

lately that I've been saying hearing aid to people I know who are involved in

the profession whether as practitioners or audiologists, they correct me.

Apparently the new term and the term that they prefer is hearing instrument.

It's not hearing aid anymore; it's hearing instruments.

As a

matter of fact one day I said to a cousin of mine about six months ago about his

new hearing aid. He said, excuse me, it's my hearing instrument. But it is the

professional term now. Maybe down the road we'll see a bill coming to the floor

where the name of the act will be changed to the hearing instrument

practitioners act.

The

importance of this bill, however, is that it's giving a structure to the

organization and to the practitioners; a structure to help them deal

professionally with issues that may arise. In particular, of course, it has to

do with giving them an instrument to use dealing with conflict resolution. This

is extremely important because with any profession professions both internally

or people from outside can have problems with any professional and there has to

be a way of dealing with those problems.

If, for

example, a problem comes up, and there's a conflict that comes up and conflict

resolution or alternative means of conflict resolution do not seem to work, then

you can have what is now being put in place, an adjudication tribunal. The

tribunal, of course, for this group is going to be composed of three people.

They will be selected from a larger disciplinary panel that is appointed ahead

of time.

The

amendments are very, very straightforward. They give the directions for how the

panel and the committee should be set up. It allows for even having to find

somebody from outside of the province, if need be, to serve on the adjudication

tribunal if it ever has to be set up.

What's

important, though, on that adjudication tribunal is that the chair much be a

hearing aid practitioner, but if, for whatever reasons may arise, they cannot

come up with a hearing aid practitioner in this province to be on the

adjudication tribunal, then somebody can be brought in from outside of the

province. That person would have to be, I think, a licensed hearing aid

practitioner as well recognized by this province.

One of

the things I would like to ask the minister is to speak to the issue of the cost

of an adjudication tribunal like this if an hearing aid practitioner, one or

more, had to be brought in to be on the tribunal, for example, would their cost

be covered and how would that cost be covered. I think it would be interesting

to know that.

This

bill does bring to mind, though, some concerns that are out there among people

involved in the profession. I put it out as something for the minister to think

about, not in light of passing this bill but of future work that needs to be

done.

As I

said, I do know people who are practitioners and I also know audiologists. There

is a concern out there that we do not have enough specifics in our province with

regard to not with regard to regulations or licensing, licensing happens, and

there are regulations with regard to licensed practitioners but the need to

differentiate between audiologists and hearing instrument practitioners, and

some concern that it would be really good to have very clear things put in place

defining the real scope of practice of hearing aid practitioners and the scope

of practice of audiologists. Just like there's a difference between teachers and

teacher aids, there's a difference between dentists and denturists.

It's a

piece of work that certainly I think is required. I really did not know until

speaking to some of these professionals that that wasn't in place. It was this

bill that got me to ask questions of some people, what are concerns that you

have, and this is what they have raised. I think it's extremely important.

I don't

know if it's because awareness has increased in the province, but more and more

I am meeting people who are needing and wearing hearing instruments. I think it

is important for them to know that sometimes you may go to a licensed

practitioner, but that person may not have the skills that are needed to help

you understand not understand what's going on with your ears, but actually be

able to diagnose problems with the ears. It's not clear all the time that it's

not just a practitioner that one may need to go to; one may need to go to an

audiologist.

The

recognition of the different scopes of practice of those two groups is

important, and that wouldn't be in the act, of course, the

Hearing Aid Practitioners Act , but their scope of practice could be

in the Hearing Aid Practitioners Act.

So I just put that out for the minister to think about as we continue down this

road of being concerned about people in this profession.

Having

said that, Madam Speaker, obviously we will be voting for this bill here in our

group and happily doing so. I do encourage the minister to think about the

points I've raised with regard to helping professionalism increase in the whole

area of hearing aids.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burin

Grand Bank.

MS. HALEY:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I'm

pleased to rise in this hon. House today to speak in favour of Bill 25,

An Act

To Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act.

It's an

important piece of legislation because it strengthens and modernizes the

Hearing Aid Practitioners Act which

was a vital step in recognizing hearing aid practitioners as professionals,

Madam Speaker.

Let me

first speak to the importance of professionalization in an industry like this.

Our hearing aid practitioners provide a valuable and critical service in our

province. They help people. They give people back the gift of independence which

is a very empowering thing that deserves to be celebrated.

Hearing

loss is a disability that affects a very large number of Canadians, Madam

Speaker. Nearly 25 per cent of adults in Canada report suffering from some form

of hearing loss, though it is much like 10 per cent who actually report some

form of deafness.

Four in

every 1,000 babies born in Canada, Madam Speaker, will be born with some degree

of hearing loss or will develop early progressive childhood hearing loss.

Hearing

loss is the third most prevailing chronic condition in older adults and it's the

most widespread disability in Canada. By the time people reach the latter stages

of their life, between the ages of 45 and 87, some 46 per cent of Canadians

suffer some degree of hearing loss.

The

number one contributor to hearing loss is aging. Here in Newfoundland and

Labrador, we have the fastest aging population in Canada. We're aging fastest

for a number of reasons, but primarily because we lost so many young families to

the outmigration during the economic downturn in the 1990s. All the younger

people that left during that time have had families, but they've had families

somewhere else, Madam Speaker.

With

unmanaged hearing loss, older adults can become withdrawn and socially isolated

leading to the breakdown of support networks and the onset of depression.

Unmanaged hearing loss places people at a greater risk of developing cogitative

decline and disorders such as Alzheimer's disease.

Hearing

loss also increases the risk of falls, which can have a devastating impact on

our seniors, Madam Speaker. It is estimated that 90 per cent of people with

hearing loss can improve their communication with a properly fitted hearing aid;

90 per cent, Madam Speaker, that's a staggering percentage.

Anyone

operating within compliance of guidelines is therefore deserving of public trust

and confidence, as well as the recognition of their peers. That's a very

important goal and it's one that we see in many other professions.

The

legal profession is bound by a similar set of regulations and for the same

reason. These rules are meant to protect lawyers, the legal profession and

consumers of legal services alike. That is the real value of

professionalization, Madam Speaker; it protects all stakeholders by providing a

system of checks and balances that ensure confidence and adherence to best

practices.

So the

Hearing Aid Practitioners Act , written

into law in 2005, was a vital step in legitimizing this essential service,

provided by well-trained practitioners. What we are debating today in this hon.

House is a set of amendments that will strengthen and modernize that original

piece of legislation.

The

Hearing Aid Practitioners Board currently oversees a professional membership of

21 hearing aid practitioners who are licensed to practise in our province. These

are the professionals that help the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. They

are the people who are helping our seniors retain their independence, Madam

Speaker. These 21 practitioners are worthy of professional protection just like

any other health care practitioner in our province, and that's why the act was

such a necessary and important piece of legislation.

The

amendments in Bill 25 mostly concern the disciplinary process, which is an

important aspect of professionalization. This is an absolutely critical

mechanism for preserving both public confidence in the profession and confidence

in practitioners of the profession themselves.

The

disciplinary process recognizes that there is a code of ethics and a

professional standard that must be upheld by all licensed members of the

profession. The disciplinary process adds weight and consequence to the code of

ethics and the professional standards, Madam Speaker. There are similar

processes for other self-regulating health professions in our province.

If a

member of the public or a fellow practitioner wishes to lodge a complaint

against someone licensed under the Hearing

Aid Practitioners Act then the board can appoint a disciplinary panel. It's

necessary that various stakeholder groups are represented on a disciplinary

panel. Bill 25 stipulates that two members of the board should represent the

public interest.

This is

important because the public's confidence in the integrity of a profession's

standards is absolutely vital, Madam Speaker. The public must at all times be

made to feel they can place trust in the professionals who are offering them

their service. Requiring that the disciplinary board feature two members looking

out for the public interest is therefore an important addition to the

legislation and it recognizes that the public is a key stakeholder in any

professional regulating body.

Ultimately, what Bill 25 does is ensure we have the best legislation possible on

the books to look after our hearing aid practitioners, Madam Speaker. It

strengthens the professional regulating body that governs hearing aid

practitioners; it strengthens the disciplinary process which is crucial to

ensuring the confidence of major stakeholders in the profession, including the

public and practitioners themselves. It allows the profession to self-regulate

even more effectively.

Bill 25

will empower hearing aid practitioners in our province to operate in a

professional capacity with confidence there is a regulating body looking after

their interest and the interests of the public. I am very pleased to speak in

support of Bill 25.

Thank

you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services, if he speaks now he will close the debate.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Madam

Speaker.

It's

heartening to hear support from all sides of the House for this fairly modest

piece of legislation, and I would urge the House to vote in favour of it.

Thank

you very much.

MADAM SPEAKER:

Is it the pleasure of the

House that the said bill be now read a second time?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MADAM SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK (Ms. Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend

The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act. (Bill 25)

MADAM SPEAKER:

The bill has now been read a

second time. When shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

AN HON. MEMBER:

Now.

MADAM SPEAKER:

Now.

motion, a bill,

An Act To Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act, read a

second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by

leave. (Bill 25)

MADAM 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.

MADAM SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

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

Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the

Whole

CHAIR (Dempster):

Order, please!

We are

now considering Bill 25,

An Act To Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act.

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act. (Bill 25)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

The hon.

the Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Madam

Chair.

Just one

question that I asked sort of throughout second reading, and I hope the minister

can answer at this time. It has to do with the cost of the adjudication

tribunal. For example, the cost, period, if they had to bring a practitioner

from outside of the province to be on the tribunal, would they have their costs

covered? Who would cover that? Maybe it's covered by the professional

association, but I don't know. I'm just putting the question out there so we'll

have clarity.

Thank

you.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE

Thank you, Madam Chair.

It is my

understanding that all the self-regulating professions or each of the

self-regulating professions under the

Health Professions Act is responsible for collecting fees as part of its

licensing requirements. Those fees are used to offset any costs for tribunals

and disciplinary processes.

As part

of the sanctions imposed, they can actually insist the practitioner found worthy

of sanction would actually be responsible for defraying some of the costs of the

hearing as well. So there are mechanisms; my understanding is it's entirely an

internal process.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Just to address another point that was

brought up about scopes of practice now the hon. the House Leader has

returned, the pressure at the time is gone. The issue of scopes of practice, my

understanding is it is defined under the regulations and that is part and parcel

of the role of professional board in its licensing is to determine scopes of

practice.

This actually arose

from a case that was appealed to the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador

Court of Appeal back in 2008. The members of the panel turned out to have close

enough ties to the person who was being adjudicated upon. The Appeal Court judge

felt that was a reasonable apprehension bias on several occasions. So it

proposes a hierarchy.

You would firstly

try and populate the tribunal with folk from the province, licensed in the

province. If you couldn't find a practitioner or the right number of

practitioners licensed within the province, you would look for practitioners

licensed in another jurisdiction. And in the event there was still a gap on the

professional side, a lawyer would be your default safety net, if you like, based

on their ability and training in fair process and adjudication approaches.

That's the logic

behind this. If there are any more questions, I'd be happy to try and answer

them.

CHAIR:

Seeing no further speakers, I'll ask shall clause 1 carry.

All those in

favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, clause 1

carried.

CLERK: Clauses 2 and 3 inclusive.

CHAIR:

Shall clauses 2 and 3 inclusive carry?

All those in

favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, clauses

2 through 3 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.

On motion, enacting

clause carried.

CLERK:

An Act To Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners Act.

CHAIR:

Shall the

long 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 Bill 25,

An Act To Amend The Hearing Aid Practitioners

Act carried 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 Government House Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

I move, Madam Chair, that the Committee

rise and report Bill 25.

CHAIR:

The motion is that the Committee rise and report Bill 25 carried without

amendment.

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, Mr.

Speaker retuned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Osborne):

The hon. the Deputy

Speaker.

MS. DEMPSTER:

Mr. Speaker, the Committee of

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

report Bill 25 carried without amendment.

MR. SPEAKER:

The Chair of the Committee of

the Whole reports that the Committee have considered the matters to them

referred and have directed her to report Bill 25,

An Act To Amend The Hearing

Aid Practitioners Act, carried without amendment.

When

shall the report be received?

MR. A. PARSONS:

Now.

MR. SPEAKER:

Now.

When

shall the said bill be read a third time?

MR. A. PARSONS:

Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, report received and adopted. Bill ordered read a third time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I call from the

Order Paper, Order 4, second reading of Bill 3.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Natural Resources, that Bill 3,

An Act To Amend The

Parliamentary Assistant Act And The Parliamentary Secretaries Act, be now read

the second time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 3 entitled

An Act To Amend The Parliamentary Assistant Act And The

Parliamentary Secretaries Act be now read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Parliamentary Assistant Act And

The Parliamentary Secretaries Act. (Bill 3)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

happy to stand here today in this House of Assembly and speak to this new piece

of legislation. I guess it's not a new piece of legislation, but it's certainly

one that's offering fundamental changes to the parliamentary secretaries and

parliamentary assistants piece of legislation. I'm happy to do so, on behalf of

our Premier. This is what I would consider a following through of a promise and

a commitment that the Premier made some time ago.

Before I

get into it, I want to provide some background to individuals who may be

watching, to give them some context on what a parliamentary assistant or a

parliamentary secretary is. Again, I know there are speakers from other sides

who will also give commentary and some, in fact, may speak more coherently or

more eloquently than I, but I'll try my best to get across the crux of the

matter here.

In our

system we obviously have a Cabinet made up of a number of ministers. The number

of departments can go up or down depending, and we've seen that over time. Some

of these departments and this has been legislated have parliamentary

secretaries. These are individuals, legislators, parliamentarians, Members of

the House of the Assembly usually on the government side, obviously, who serve

as a parliamentary secretary to the minister of a particular department.

In our

case right now as I speak here, we have five parliamentary secretaries in the

House of Assembly. We have the parliamentary secretary for the Department of

and I may get this acronym wrong I think it's BCTRD. It seems like it's

AN HON. MEMBER:

BTCRD.

MR. A. PARSONS:

BTCRD, it switches. I call it

the department of acronyms sometimes. It's changed over time but it's Business,

Culture, Tourism and Rural Development it's changed, but I think people get

the idea. It's close enough.

AN HON. MEMBER:

Culture.

MR. A. PARSONS:

And Culture, yes.

We have

the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services which is also combined with

the Department of Seniors, Wellness; we have the Department of Health and

Community Services; the Department of Municipal Affairs, which in this case

operates with a minister that also is responsible for Service Newfoundland and

Labrador; and also, we have the Premier's office, which also has not a

parliamentary secretary, but a parliamentary assistant. We've seen this over

some time. These individuals are quite busy. In many cases they do a lot of the

same briefings, activities and events, legislative and otherwise, for the

ministers.

A lot of

these portfolios are very large. Just look at Health for instance; it's a huge

portfolio, a huge budget expenditure, a number of events, a number of

activities, maybe a number of pieces of legislation going on at any particular

time. The fact is that you need someone to assist the minister when it comes to

handling the obligations and responsibilities of that particular portfolio.

I think

we all recognize the good work that parliamentary secretaries do and

parliamentary assistants. This has been operating for some time. I would also

note that it's not exclusive to this jurisdiction. It is something that we see

in other jurisdictions as well and with good reason.

One of

the things we've identified though, obviously, is that we're in a situation

where we have a negative fiscal situation in this province. There's no surprise

to that. It's something we've been talking about in this House for some time now

over the last number of weeks and months and, certainly, before the House was

reconvened, we were speaking about it right then. That's no surprise.

Back

prior to the campaign, one of the commitments that the Premier made is that we

think what we need to do here is that these parliamentary secretaries, we need

them to continue to do the work that they are doing. However, what many people

don't realize is that they are paid a remuneration which is set out by the

legislation. I think it actually works out to and I may be wrong, somebody can

quote me $27,000 per individual. So it's not a small amount of money when

you're looking at the average salary of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. So in

this case what we are saying and what we are proposing in this piece of

legislation is that the remuneration aspect be removed from the parliamentary

secretary.

Now I

don't think for a second it's meant to convey that the work done is not

valuable, there's no doubt about that, and I don't think you're going to get

that argument from anybody in this House. The work they do is extremely

valuable. The situation, though, is we have a province right now that's facing

an unprecedented fiscal mess that we've inherited.

One of

the things we can do and there are some large measures we can take, there are

some small measures we can take. The fact is what we are trying to do here is

twofold. Number one, we're suggesting the remuneration be removed and that these

people continue to do this work; but, again, there would be no extra

remuneration on top of an MHA's regular salary.

The

second thing we are suggesting is that in fact we be able to increase the number

of parliamentary secretaries that any government has. Now, the fact is one would

say, well, what is the downside of doing that? I would suggest there is no

downside to having individuals who are willing to take on an increased role in

making sure our government operates as efficiently and as well as possible.

The fact

is you have another individual, an elected Member, that's willing take on this

responsibility for another particular department that the Premier sees as

necessary. I think that's a positive move. I think it shows fiscal

responsibility. I think it shows that again, we've got five, but there are

other departments where, do you know what, there's a significant workload. I

think you can ask any minister, and I don't think that's just on this side. I

think it is previous ministers, previous governments.

The fact

is being a member of Executive Council, being a minister, there's a significant

amount of work that comes with it. The fact is that somebody you can have on

your side with you ensuring your department is running as efficiently and as

smoothly, and as well, as functional as possible, is a step in the right

direction. I don't think there's any doubt. The fact is we've been very lucky on

this side to have a number of people who have been doing this since December 15,

doing this role.

Now I

would note for those who are out there listening, we are basically legislating

what we've already done in practice. What we've done in practice is the fact

that none of our parliamentary secretaries or assistants have been remunerated

for this extra work since they began. That's a significant change from previous

administrations.

There is

no extra pay for these individuals, even though they've agreed on behalf of the

people they represent, and on behalf of the province, to take on this role. They

do it because they know it is the right thing to do. It's the best thing to do

to make sure that we have a fully effective and functioning government.

This is

not a surprise. This is something the Premier announced in this House, I

believe, as late as last year. He might have done it the year before. It

certainly was a part of the commitment going forward and this is our opportunity

now to put this legislation forward. Notice was given, we've had first reading.

believe Members on the opposite side, including Members of our own caucus, were

given an opportunity to be briefed and to discuss this. I look forward to the

opportunity as we move forward this debate to again, Members will have their

opportunity to contribute their say, as well as to ask questions during the

committee phase.

The fact

is government is a significant entity. There's a huge amount of work that's

happening on a day-to-day basis. I don't think anybody in this House disagrees

with the fact that we need to be doing the best work we can because at the end

of the day we're here on behalf of the people. We expend the taxpayers' money on

behalf of the people.

So the

fact that we have (

a) people who are willing to take on this work; (

b) we're

willing to increase the size of those people, the number of people, the

complement of people who can make our departments run smoother, more

efficiently; and finally, there will be no increased cost. In fact, we're going

to decrease the cost to the taxpayers of this province by taking away that pay

component. Again, it has nothing to do with the work. It has everything to do

with the situation that we find ourselves in.

I'm sure

I'll get an opportunity during the Committee stage I know Members on the other

side may have an opportunity to ask questions. I'll certainly endeavour to

answer them as fully and completely as possible. I think I've covered off the

main aspect.

anybody were to actually look at this piece of legislation, it's not significant

in size per se. In fact, there are only six sections that are actually being

changed. So it's not a tremendous effect on the currently existing piece of

legislation.

I would

note for the record that I believe other provinces may have the same system but

in other provinces, I think New Brunswick in particular, they actually do the

same thing already. There's no pay for the extra administrative and

parliamentary role that these individuals take on.

The fact

is we see a number of them are quite busy. I know the parliamentary secretary

for Health and Community Services is constantly on the move. When you take a

department that is as significant in size and importance as Health and Community

Services, the fact is that one minister simply cannot be in every place that he

has to be at the same time.

A lot of

times, too, it's important work when you're talking about dealing with and

consulting with stakeholders. For instance, I know the parliamentary secretary

actually attended an event today on behalf of, I think it was multiple

sclerosis. There was a flag raising, and in fact talked to a number of people.

It was great to see that.

This is

just one aspect of the work they do. They meet with these important gro